The Antichrist's identity?

[EJM]

I found this online today;
https://wordoftheirtestimony.wordpress. ... ntichrist/

If we were to put the leaders of the Lutherans, Presbyterians, Scotch Presbyterians, Anglicans, Baptists, & Methodists in a room and ask them “who is the Antichrist?”, do you think there would be a consensus?

Let’s closely examine the founders of these denominations and see if they used to agree.

Martin Luther (1483-1546) (Lutherans): “We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist.” The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, by LeRoy Froom. Vol. 2., pg. 121.

John Calvin (1509-1564) (Presbyterians): “Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt… I shall briefly show that (Paul’s words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy.” Institutes of the Christian Religion, by John Calvin.

John Knox (1505-1572) (Scotch Presbyterian): John Knox sought to counteract “that tyranny which the pope himself has for so many ages exercised over the church.” As with Luther, he finally concluded that the Papacy was “the very antichrist, and son of perdition, of whom Paul speaks.” The Zurich Letters, by John Knox, pg. 199.

Thomas Cranmer (1489-1556) (Anglican): “Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons.” (Referring to prophecies in Revelation and Daniel.)Works by Cranmer, Vol. 1, pp. 6-7.

Roger Williams (1603-1683) (First Baptist Pastor in America): Pastor Williams spoke of the Pope as “the pretended Vicar of Christ o­n earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not o­nly above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself…speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws; but he is the son of perdition (II Thess. 2).” The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, by Froom, Vol. 3, pg. 52.

The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647): “There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition that exalteth himself in the church against Christ and all that is called God.” Taken from Philip Schaff’s, The Creeds of Christendom, With a History and Critical Notes, III, p. 658, 659, ch. 25, sec. 6.

Cotton Mather (1663-1728) (Congregational Theologian): “The oracles of God foretold the rising of an Antichrist in the Christian Church: and in the Pope of Rome, all the characteristics of that Antichrist are so marvelously answered that if any who read the Scriptures do not see it, there is a marvelous blindness upon them.” The Fall of Babylon by Cotton Mather

John Wesley (1703-1791) (Methodist): Speaking of the Papacy, John Wesley wrote, “He is in an emphatical sense, the Man of Sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled the Son of Perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers… He it is…that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped…claiming the highest power, and highest honour…claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone.” Antichrist and His Ten Kingdoms, by John Wesley, pg. 110.

A Great Cloud of Witnesses: “Wycliffe, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin, Cranmer; in the seventeenth century, Bunyan, the translators of the King James Bible and the men who published the Westminster and Baptist confessions of Faith; Sir Isaac Newton, Wesley, Whitfield, Jonathan Edwards; and more recently Spurgeon, Bishop J.C. Ryle and Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones; these men among countless others, all saw the office of the Papacy as the antichrist.” Taken from All Roads Lead to Rome, by Michael de Semlyen. Dorchestor House Publications, p. 205. 1991.

There seemed to be quite an agreement on the identity of the Antichrist, even up until as recent as 200 years ago. What has changed? Did the Scriptures change?

Here’s one question to leave you with to ponder: if the Antichrist resembles Christ, talks like Christ & sounds like Christ, who should we expect his followers to be? That’s right, Christians.

[temporal1]

This is a BIG kettle of fish!

My first questions were, who wrote this piece, from what perspective?
On the Mission Statement page, in Comments, i found, “Brandon, a Seventh-Day Adventist Christian.”
https://wordoftheirtestimony.wordpress.com/about/

Then, scratching my head, wondering, what is the Anabaptist view?
i went to GAMEO, searched for, Antichrist:
https://gameo.org/index.php?search=anti ... arch&go=Go

When i read Comments on different Catholic pages, it’s clear, many Catholics believe
Luther is THE Antichrist.

i see a pattern of, “the Antichrist is he/those with whom i strongly disagree.”

i believe there is an Antichrist.
i believe “we” are very bad at identifying him, or, it.
seeing others’ conflicting conclusions, i do not attempt it. i pray the Lord keep us safe from it.

an aside.
could you help me understand what “Catholic,(not Roman)” means?

[RZehr]

So did those guys believe the Antichrist to be a single person? If so, then they are not in agreement since they were not talking about the same pope because there was many popes spanning that period from 1483 to 1791.
Are they saying the Antichrist was a position? A position that has been around for over 1,000 years?

No question there was massive corruption and sin in the Catholic church. I suppose it was so degenerate that tor these guys to look at the evil behavior of the Catholic church and pope, and then look at the Bible, it would be understandable to think the Antichrist was the pope.
But I don't put any importance to pointing at someone or something and saying "That is the Antichrist that is mentioned in Revelations". The list of Antichrists named over the years is long, as the op shows. That is also a reason not to get side tracked by the issue.

[EJM]

This is a BIG kettle of fish!

My first questions were, who wrote this piece, from what perspective?
On the Mission Statement page, in Comments, i found, “Brandon, a Seventh-Day Adventist Christian.”
https://wordoftheirtestimony.wordpress.com/about/

Then, scratching my head, wondering, what is the Anabaptist view?
i went to GAMEO, searched for, Antichrist:
https://gameo.org/index.php?search=anti ... arch&go=Go

When i read Comments on different Catholic pages, it’s clear, many Catholics believe
Luther is THE Antichrist.

i see a pattern of, “the Antichrist is he/those with whom i strongly disagree.”

i believe there is an Antichrist.
i believe “we” are very bad at identifying him, or, it.
seeing others’ conflicting conclusions, i do not attempt it. i pray the Lord keep us safe from it.

an aside.
could you help me understand what “Catholic,(not Roman)” means?

cath·o·lic (kăth′ə-lĭk, kăth′lĭk)
adj.
1. Of broad or liberal scope; comprehensive: "The 100-odd pages of formulas and constants are surely the most catholic to be found" (Scientific American).
2. Including or concerning all humankind; universal: "what was of catholic rather than national interest" (J.A. Froude).
3. Catholic
a. Of or involving the Roman Catholic Church. ( Not me)
b. Of or relating to the universal Christian church. (Me)
c. Of or relating to the ancient undivided Christian church.(Me also)
d. Of or relating to those churches that have claimed to be representatives of the ancient undivided church
Or more simply, one of the true bride of Christ, washed in His blood and going to live with Him forever, along with all true believers that obey Him.

[Valerie]

I have heard many implications during my life as to someone "possibly" being THE. Anti-Christ. Granted, the concern that the masses will be deceived & led astray will result on Christians taking a "Watchman" position- to be able to warn. That being said, it has been revealing how deceived the elect can be by assuming- .my own father turned away from Church due to this (& really, other issues in his life) when our pastor implied Henry Kissinger may be the anti-Christ (this was in the 70's)- that was enough for Dad. It can be harmful to try to name the anti-Christ, even with the best intentions

[temporal1]

EJM:
cath·o·lic (kăth′ə-lĭk, kăth′lĭk)
adj.
1. Of broad or liberal scope; comprehensive: "The 100-odd pages of formulas and constants are surely the most catholic to be found" (Scientific American).
2. Including or concerning all humankind; universal: "what was of catholic rather than national interest" (J.A. Froude).
3. Catholic
a. Of or involving the Roman Catholic Church. ( Not me)
b. Of or relating to the universal Christian church. (Me)
c. Of or relating to the ancient undivided Christian church.(Me also)
d. Of or relating to those churches that have claimed to be representatives of the ancient undivided church
Or more simply, one of the true bride of Christ, washed in His blood and going to live with Him forever, along with all true believers that obey Him.

ok. thank you.
i’d guessed this was your direction, the capital “C” made me uncertain.
this forum has an active plain Catholic member, he has explained some about plain Catholics.
so, i wondered.
when i’m with my family, i attend Catholic Church with them. i’m learning, but expect to never have a very good understanding.

.. It can be harmful to try to name the anti-Christ, even with the best intentions

yes. it’s of the most serious nature, has resulted in brutal deaths.
Catholics used this against Protestants, Anabaptists, and others, and, those returned the favor.
i’m sure, many with the best and strongest convictions. but, humans fail.

possibly no faith group has never been so accused.

the GAMEO page linked above has a lot written on it.

overwhelmed by it, i pray the Lord keeps us safe from it, that He is with us when evil presents.

RZher:
.. The list of Antichrists named over the years is long, as the op shows.
That is also a reason not to get side tracked by the issue.

the OP list is long, and interesting to read, but it is an abbreviated list.
focus is best on the one, the way, Jesus Christ.

[Dan Z]

Antichrists from my lifetime (that I remember):

• Any Pope
  Obama
  Reagan
  Kissinger
  Gorbachev
  JFK
  Juan Carlos of Spain
  Javier Solana of the EU
  Prince Charles

This Antichrist picking feels like a similar end-time exercise to picking the date of Christ's return, and represents an abuse of prophetic Scripture. At the end of the day, the rubbish heap of false prophets just continues to pile up.

Let's have our lamp's trimmed and ready, and be about the work of the Kingdom - if we are faithful, I'm confident we will know what we need to know at the appointed time. He will never leave us or forsake us - to the very end of the age.

[Valerie]

Was reading 2 Thessalonians this morning (our sermon was out of 1 Thessalonians yesterday)

2 Thessalonians 2:12

Now brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. Let no one deceive you by any means, for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they may all be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

With this passage, I am not sure how any of those named as possibilities, could have been 'the' lawless one- or antichrist.

Question-
If he is to sit as God, in the temple of God- how does that happen?

My understanding from the Orthodox (and then I read it in David Bercot's Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by church writers/fathers (I think I did) ) is that the antichrist is supposed to be from the tribe of Dan-
This present day fixation on Israel and the 'temple' supposed to be rebuilt makes me wonder about this- so many Christians are excited about Israel and what may happen there- but if this is correct, about the anti-Christ coming from the tribe of Dan- IF the temple is rebuilt- as some are saying will happen- well- I don't know- just pondering.

[JimFoxvog]

Antichrists from my lifetime (that I remember):

Any Pope
Obama
Reagan
Kissinger
Gorbachev
JFK
Juan Carlos of Spain
Javier Solana of the EU
Prince Charles

No reason to limit it to one:

[bible]1 John 2,18[/bible]

But I doubt most of these qualify, nor even the current president.

[Valerie]

Antichrists from my lifetime (that I remember):

Any Pope
Obama
Reagan
Kissinger
Gorbachev
JFK
Juan Carlos of Spain
Javier Solana of the EU
Prince Charles

No reason to limit it to one:

[bible]1 John 2,18[/bible]

But I doubt most of these qualify, nor even the current president.

Many antichrists, but one AntiChrist- the 'man' of lawlessness- who will sit in the temple of God, as God-(2 Thessalonians 2)