Nice try Jan but you should look for your boogieman somewhere else. Donald Trump may have the ability to win the Presidency of the United States even with all the opposition he is getting from the major media worldwide, but he will never be allowed to be President. The move to a world government is very near and Donald Trump, whether you hate him or love him is the direct opposite of a globalist. He is the arch enemy of the globalists and they will assassinate him or disrupt the politics on the earth so much that Barack will call Marshall Law and remain as the President (he has that power ). No, Donald is not your man, Start looking elsewhere!
It doesn't matter to me who the "antichrist" of this world is. I am not in this world. My citizenship is in the Kingdom of God and I put my trust in Jehovah God, so no matter what fool is elected or fraudulently put into place, I don't give a rat's ass. Can I be any clearer?
Who cares who becomes the antichrist in the world? I don't! He has no hold over me. I have put my trust in Jesus/Michael and Jehovah God and I don't care if Joseph Stalin comes back from the dead to be the antichrist. Besides, whoever does arise as the antichrist their body will have long been possessed by Satan. When he gets thrown down here, and I believe he already has been, he will possess the person who he sees as having the best opportunity to rise to the very top of the pecking order. No doubt he (the man spoken of in the "sower and the seed" will already have planted his "seed" in this man's heart to prepare the way for his possession of his body. Also, the rest of the rebellious angels will do the same, because whent they are cast out of heaven they lose their angelic bodies so they have to possess someone. My guess is they will possess the most powerful and politically connected of the people who have no time for God or for his will. Jehovah will protect me, of that I am sure of. If you are not, why not?
Hi Joshua: Spirit anointing or "sanctifiecation" is completely different from recieving the Holy Spirit. You are "sanctified" by the angels from heaven, but you recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit later when your sanctification is "sealed". They are two separate things on two separate occasions. The same as the appointment to the Kingdom happens on first fruits day, but the actual administration of the Kingdom happens 7 sabbaths and a day later on Pentecost. The MOL is a member of the GB of Jehovah's Witnesses. He is an imposter. He has always been an imposter. He was never "sanctified" as someone who is "born again" and never will be. Doubtless he has the seed of Satan within him instead of the "seed" of Christ, just like Judas did in the first Century. You are correct, Judas was never "sanctified" or anointed by Jesus, but he certainly was by Satan, that's why Jesus called Judas a Devil, he was carrying the Devil's seed. The Devil is "the man" who follows Jesus and oversoww the field with false seeds. They don't grow in true Christian hearts but they do grow in imposters hearts very well. Satan is a Jesus imposter all the way, a Jehovah imposter as well, or he wishes to be. Jesus chose Judas, or Jehvovah and the Holy Spirit chose Judas knowing that he would betray Jesus so the scriptures would be fulfilled. They knew that Judas was bad seed when they chose him for that purpose and Jesus did not reject him as a choice for the same reason. He knew that in the end someone righteous would take Judas' place in his bride. As far as who is the MOL in the World, I don't care. You deal with that. I couldn't care less who that turns out to be. Oh, by the way, his name is not in the Bible, so why are you speculating anyway. Didn't you chastise me for doing the very same thing in your mind?
I don't believe that Trump has denied Jesus as the Christ. Although, I wouldn't put it past him. Let’s say, “Once and for All”, there is no: “The Antichrist”, speaking of ONE individual. “Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.” ( 1 Joh 2:18 NASB ) Another translation directly from the Codex Sinaiticus: “Little children, it is the last time, and as you heard that antichrist comes, even now many antichrists have risen: whence we know that it is the last time.” ( 1 Joh 2:18 NASB ) This statement is followed by: “They went out from us, but were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but that they might be made manifest that they are all not of us.” (1 Joh 2:19 Codex Sinaiticus ) In the plural indicating more than One. John says, “even now many antichrists have appeared”, indicating that back in the first century, soon after the resurrection of Jesus Christ, there were “many antichrists”. How were they identified? “Who is the liar, but he that denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist that denies the Father and the Son.” ( 1 Joh 2:22 Codex Sinaiticus ) This Greek word, antichristos (an-tee'-khris-tos) is only used by John. Anti = against, opposite, opposed, + christos (Christ) = anointed, chosen. The only place it appears in the bible is in the first and second letters written by John. It is used 3 times in 1 John, and one time in 2 John. “For many deceivers have gone out into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh: this is the deceiver and the antichrist.” ( 2 Joh 1:7 Codex Sinaiticus ) This word, antichristos, does not appear in Revelation, or anywhere else in the bible. It is not any of the beasts, it’s not some single ignoble person! It is anyone who denies that Jesus is the Christ, that he came in the flesh, was killed and put in a tomb, and was resurrected to life again. He lives again as the second most powerful person in creation. He will rule the New Heavens and Earth.
According to the NWT there will really come a singular distinguished Antichrist, "the antichrist", in addition to smaller and of much lesser antichrists. "Young children, it is the last hour, and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared,..." 1John 2:18
Jan, let me ask you a question The Antichrist is associated with the second beast with two horns of Rev 13 right? Are not beasts and horns used to denote nations? Rev 19:20 "And the wild beast was caught, and along with it the false prophet that performed in front of it the signs with which he misled those who received the mark of the wild beast." Rev 13:13 "And it performs great signs, even making fire come down out of heaven to the earth in the sight of mankind." Have you noticed the similarities between the beasts in Rev 13 and those of Dan 7? It's not a difficult leap to imagine the second beast in Rev 13 is the fierce beast and little horn of Dan 7.
Many on our forum here, as well as others connect the Antichrist of Revelation with the "son of destruction" of 2Th 2 as if it is common sense these two are the same, I am not so sure, and would like to discuss it. We know many false prophets will arise in the "last hour", whether we are talking about just before 70CE or in our future, or both, that is irrelevant to my post, but is this Antichrist as mentioned in Rev the same as the son of destruction of 2Th 2? “For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will perform great signs and wonders so as to mislead, if possible, even the chosen ones.” Mth 24:24 I believe many associate these "great signs" back to the Antichrist mentioned in Rev 13 and the signs it is permitted to preform. “And it performs great signs, even making fire come down out of heaven to the earth in the sight of mankind.” Rev 13:13 Is it the case that since many false prophets will perform great signs just as the Antichrist is described mean they are the same? Besides, does not the prophecy say "many false prophets and not just a singular man? Can it not be said that this is in fact an idea of denying the Christ and not just one man and that it takes on many forms? What about the teaching of Evolution, does it not deny Christ? What about all those religions that do so, people, atheists, do they not all deny Christ originates from God? False prophets brought in sects and diversions into the early congregations such as what John was speaking of; “For first of all, I hear that when you come together in a congregation, divisions exist among you; and to an extent I believe it. For there will certainly also be sects among you, so that those of you who are approved may also become evident.” 1Cor 11:18,19 These sects are allowed so that those who are approved will be made manifest, but still, do those who cause divisions and sects as false prophets qualify them as the Antichrist of Rev 13, or are we talking about an idea here, a cancer within the truth and not a singular person? “I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among you and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves.” Acts 20:29,30 Again above, an idea has penetrated the early congregations, a cancer. Now let's look at Johns words here; “Young children, it is the last hour, and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared, from which fact we know that it is the last hour.” 1Jhn 2:18 John connects the word "Antichrist" to these ones in the first century who were causing division, but was this a singular person? No, in fact John says there were many, at least in his day. But again, does that mean there would be a singular man in the last hour whom this represents, whether that be in Johns last hour, or ours? John certainly didn't mean a singular man in his last hour. So, how did John define the "Antichrist"? “But every inspired statement that does not acknowledge Jesus does not originate with God. Furthermore, this is the antichrist’s inspired statement that you have heard was coming,and now it is already in the world.” 1Jhn 4:3 "For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those not acknowledging Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist." 2Jhn 1:7 Many do this today, just as I've mentioned, the teaching of evolution, atheists, etc... Even the trinity itself can be seen as the Antichrist. If you deny Jesus, or say Jesus came as a God not as a man, you could say the trinity denies Jesus came in the flesh. In like manner, this denying Jesus can take many forms, and this is the identifying factor of the Antichrist, of which there were many, going back to Johns day. Now how about the "son of destruction" in 2Th 2? “because it will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed, the son of destruction.” 2Th 2:3 This "man of lawlessness" is described as "the son of destruction". This term is found only one other place in scripture; “When I was with them, I used to watch over them on account of your own name, which you have given me; and I have protected them, and not one of them is destroyed except the son of destruction, so that the scripture might be fulfilled.” Jhn 17:12 Now Judas was a close associate of Christ Jesus and his brothers, being one of the original twelve, but does 2Th 2 say the son of destruction denies Jesus originates with God? No, it says he is part of the "lawlessness". Does this connect him to the Antichrist? I don't think so, it's at that point you have to connect the "signs" mentioned and then you are two steps out from a true connection. I don't believe the word "sign" is enough to connect these two, let alone lawlessness vs denying Christ originates with God. Yes the false prophets had begun to creep in, and the lawlessness had already begun to show itself in the first century; “True, the mystery of this lawlessness is already at work,” 2Th 2:7 But there is one thing that is very important to remember about Rev 13. The beasts in that chapter take us directly to Dan 7 and the beasts in that book. It can be very strongly argued that these two chapters are 1:1 with the second beast in Rev 13 representing the fierce beast and little horn of Dan 7. Therefore we are talking about governments, not individual men. Yes men run these governments, but the Antichrist is a government. We know this Antichrist will shout blasphemous words toward God's people, just as shown in Rev 13 but of those in Dan 7, 8 and 11. But does this make the Antichrist a singular individual, or a government that as a collective denies Christ, not only by its internal beliefs but also by it's coming against Gods people and blaspheming his name? To deny Christ, and to deny he came in the flesh could be any number of things, and in my opinion does not need a singular man, for it is a government that comes against Gods people. To me (and again, this is my opinion) this all still verifies that the little horn in that of the Holy See is the Antichrist that comes against Gods people blaspheming his name, and they are the culmination of the definition of denying Christ originates with God, because the trinity teaches Christ is God and had no beginning, and that Christ came as a God, not flesh, therefore could not sin.
Joshua, as I pointed out earlier Apostle John indeed told " the antichrist". So he spoke of a specific antichrist and logically he is also the man of lawlessness. And I have no difficulty imagining Donald Trump, as he is a narcisist to exclaim to be God and Savior after he will have made some good things for USA after he becomes president. And your reasoning that prophecies can not talk about individual rulers is not correct either because for example a horn of one of the beasts in Daniel was about Alexander The Great. Sorry for that.
In a manner of speaking the horn represented Alexander the Great, only because he was ruling at that time. In reality once the four came up they replaced the one, meaning the kingdom or kingdoms them self. In Daniel 8 we see once the goat takes down the ram it's single horn is broken and four come up instead of it. It's not the intention of the four to represent the four individuals who would rule, but rather the four kingdoms that remained after Alexanders death. As far as prophecies are concerned, it talks about kingdoms rather then men, the men are inconsequential to the ongoing battle of north and south, "the first king" represents Greece more so then Alexander himself in prophecy. As well, did you read my post #30? I don't see any way to connect 2Th and the MOL with the Antichrist, unless you can point it out to me.
As an old wise elder said, “When I learned English I realized it was a trick. You could use the same thing a hundred ways. What was important to Indian people was saying something the best way. In English you had to learn to say things a hundred ways. I never heard anything like it. I still watch white people talk and I’m surprised at all the words. Sometimes they will say the same thing over and over and over in different ways.” (Neither Wolf Nor Dog: On Forgotten Roads With An Indian Elder by Kent Nerburn, pg. 163) So, . . . . if I said, “The horse coming”, which horse am I talking about? “The”[stressed th ee; unstressed before a consonant th uh; unstressed before a vowel th ee] according to the Dictionary is a definite article. 1. (used, especially before a noun, with a specifying or particularizing effect, as opposed to the indefinite or generalizing force of the indefinite article a or an): the book you gave me; Come into the house. 2. (used to mark a proper noun, natural phenomenon, ship, building, time, point of the compass, branch of endeavor, or field of study as something well-known or unique): the sun; the Alps; theQueen Elizabeth; the past; the West. Antichrist noun, Theology. 1. a particular personage or power, variously identified or explained, who is conceived of as appearing in the world as the principal antagonist of Christ. 2. (sometimes lowercase) an opponent of Christ; a person or power antagonistic to Christ. 3. (often lowercase) a disbeliever in Christ. 4. (often lowercase) a false Christ. Pay attention to number 2, 3, & 4. This is important because, Hebrew and Greek lack capital/upper case letters in writing words. They also lack punctuation marks. Antichrist in Culture Antichrist definition A person mentioned in the New Testament as an enemy of Jesus, who will appear before the Second Coming and win over many of Jesus' followers. The Antichrist is often identified with a beast described in the Book of Revelation, whom God destroys just before the final defeat of Satan. Note : Since the New Testament was written, people have frequently tried to prove that an individual human being was the Antichrist. Some of the candidates have been the Roman emperors Nero and Caligula and the modern dictators Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin. (The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition Copyright © 2005 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.) Antichrist in the Bible against Christ, or an opposition Christ, a rival Christ. The word is used only by the apostle John. Referring to false teachers, he says (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 1:7), "Even now are there many antichrists." (1.) This name has been applied to the "little horn" of the "king of fierce countenance" (Dan. 7:24, 25; 8:23-25). (2.) It has been applied also to the "false Christs" spoken of by our Lord (Matt. 24:5, 23, 24). (3.) To the "man of sin" described by Paul (2 Thess. 2:3, 4, 8-10). (4.) And to the "beast from the sea" (Rev. 13:1; 17:1-18). (Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary)
Hi Jan: Young children, it is the last hour, and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming,+ even now many antichrists have appeared,+ from which fact we know that it is the last hour.19 They went out from us, but they were not of our sort;*+for if they had been of our sort, they would have remained with us. But they went out so that it might be shown that not all are of our sort.+20 And you have an anointing from the holy one,+and all of you have knowledge.21 I write you, not because you do not know the truth,+ but because you know it, and because no lie originates with the truth.+ 1John 2 The first thing to keep in mind is the wording of John's statement "and just as you have heard the antichrist is coming". When John says "just as you have heard" suggests that this teaching is an "oral" teaching of the Jews and not necessarily an idea that comes right from the written word of scripture. Now, although the Jews had a high reverence for "oral" tradition, many times those oral traditions did stray a little from literal scripture and took on "personal opinion", some more than others. That is why I think the Apostle John clarifies what is really meant when he says, "even now many antichrists have appeared." The way I read this verse, the Apostle could have very well written "although you have heard that the antichrist is coming (in oral tradition and teaching) in fact "there are many antichrists". Also, John does not suggest that "the antichrist" or antichrists would appear or come from outside the Christian congregation. He further says,"They (not he) went out from us (so they originated within the congregation), but they were not of our sort;*(just as Judas was not of the sort of the other apostles but was the seed of the devil)+for if they had been of our sort, they would have remained with us. Judas was an imposter apostle, he was never genuine and was only chosen so that the scriputres about him betraying Jesus would be fulfilled. These "antichrists" are the same. After Jesus, presumably from heaven went and scattered his seed of regeneration into the hearts of those that were chosen to be humans who would be "born again" and be a part of Jesus Bride, another one, a man went behind him and re-sowed or over sowed the same field (the earth) with his seed of demonic regeneration in the hearts of those humans that showed a propensity to have the natural tendency to do the will of the Devil. When Jehovah's Witnesses started to gather up those who had the seed of Jesus within them, others with the seed of the Devil also came into "the Truth" and represented themselves as Jesus seed like Judas (the son of destruction) did. They are counterfeit Christians. These are the ones that John is calling "antichrists". Anti means against and can mean to oppose and Satan is the great opposer and his "seed" are as well. They are antichrists that have infultrated not only the "Truth" but also all the other religions in order to pervert their teachings as well. I don't believe that there will be ONE Antichrist, but that the antichrists will be all those who have been sown with the seed of the "man" that came behind Jesus and sowed his "counterfeit" seeds in the "field" of mankind. Jehovah's Witnesses have them in their midst and are also some of the members of high rank including but not limited to the Governing Body. Also, every religion on the earth in the "field of mankind" has the same problem. Which may be why they have such a hard time seeing and understanding teachings of 'Truth'.
Genuine Wheat never turns into a weed and weeds never turn into genuine wheat. You are what you are from the start. Remember this is talking about people who are chosen to be a part of Christs bride and the counterfeits that Satan plants to corrupt those that are true. I am not talking about all Christians. They can change. They have not been chosen by Jesus (or his parents) to be a part of his Bride.
The following is one of many Biblical Scholars: Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament. (1992) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Burton_Coffman 1 John 2:18 KJV “Little children, it is the last hour: and as ye heard that antichrist cometh, even now have there arisen many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last hour.” It is the last hour ... The apostles had asked Christ to tell them when the end of the world was coming, when the temple would be destroyed, and when the Christ would come. To these three questions, Jesus gave a composite answer (Matt. 24), but not distinguishing for them the fact that these events would not all occur simultaneously; however, Jesus did deny them altogether any answer as to the time of his Second Coming ( Matthew 24:36,42 ). It is therefore the height of presumption to construe John’s words here as meaning that Christ was coming soon. “The last hour” here has no reference whatever to the Second Coming and must be referred either to the destruction of Jerusalem or the end of the world. Significantly, since Jesus failed (purposefully) to distinguish for his apostles that those two events (the end of all things and the destruction of the city of Jerusalem) would be separated in time by thousands of years, it may be legitimately supposed that the apostles might have thought they would come at the same time; but, even more significantly, no apostle ever said so. There is not a line in the New Testament that has any such declaration in it. However, in the providence of God, the destruction of Jerusalem was foreordained to be a type of the overthrow of the entire world; and in giving the signs that would precede the first event, Christ of necessity gave in those very signs the sign of the end of the world; but it was necessary for Christ to make the signs of Jerusalem’s overthrow plain enough for the Christians to be forewarned and to enable them to escape from the city before its destruction. Otherwise, Satan might have accomplished the total destruction of the church itself in that disaster. Heeding those signs which Jesus had given, John here prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem (perhaps supposing also that the end of the world was at hand, a supposition that he did not state, even if he thought it). And what sign did he stress? That there were antichrists who had already appeared. This was the very sign that Jesus had definitely connected with the destruction of the temple (involving also, of course, the overthrow of Jerusalem): “There shall arise false christs and false prophets” (Matthew 24:24). It was also indicated by Christ as being a signal for the “elect” to “flee out of Judea” (Matthew 24:16), to avoid “the end of the world”? Certainly not! To avoid the destruction of Jerusalem? Of course! Thus it is absolutely certain that John in this passage was not warning the Christians to get ready for the end of the world, but to get ready to flee the city of Jerusalem. That this is exactly what John and the other apostles did in such statements as this is proved by the fact that the Christians did flee Jerusalem, not a single one of “the elect” losing his life in the holocaust that overthrew the city in A.D. 70. Despite the fact of “antichrist” being popularly understood as “a personal opponent of Christ at the end of time,” and also being identified with Paul’s “lawless one” (2 Thessalonians 2:8), there is absolutely no authority for such views. The “antichrists” in this passage are plural; the “lawless one” is singular; Christ associates the antichrists, or false christs, with the need for the “elect” to flee out of Judea (Matthew 24:16); whereas, Paul associated the “lawless one” with the “coming of the Lord,” an association that John refrained from making here. Neither the “man of sin” nor “the lawless one” of Paul’s writings has any connection whatever with what John wrote here. It was long after John wrote that “the name of antichrist was appropriated to that great adversary of Christ ‘the man of sin’ (2 Thessalonians 2:3).” John’s antichrist “falls far short of Paul’s ‘son of perdition.’” ( Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament. (1992)) One more point that I would like to add here. “Little children, it is the last time, and as you heard that antichrist comes, even now many antichrists have risen: whence we know that it is the last time.” (1 John 2:18 Codex Sinaiticus ) There is no definite article “the”, although some translations do add “the” to the sentence. “the antichrist is coming,” ( See NWT, 1 John 2:18 ) “the antichrist is coming,” (NIV), “that the antichrist is coming”. (AMP) “Who is the liar, but he that denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist that denies the Father and the Son.” (1 John 2:22 Codex Sinaiticus ) The definite article is included here because “antichrist” is the subject introduced in the question of “Who is the liar,”. It could not be written as, “This is antichrist that denies Father and Son.” “and every spirit that confesses not Jesus is not of God; and this is the spirit of antichrist, of which you have heard that it comes, and now is in the world already. (1 John 4:3 Codex Sinaiticus ) Notice how this sentence is written. It mentions “the spirit of antichrist”, then refers to “it” as the subject being spoken of. "It", being the spirit of antichrist." This sentence does not include the definite article "the" because it is not necessary.
Thank you... This is the correct understanding of the Antichrist vs Man of lawlessness. They are not the same, and in no way is the Antichrist depicted as a singular individual, while the MOL is.
Similarities are one thing, direct scriptural connections are another. Don't forget how the society gets to 1914, similarities...