Article by: Kenneth J. Ester
The Antichrist
The word "antichrist" is only used in the Bible (NASB version) four times. All four are in 1st and 2nd John. They refer to those who are unbelievers and have an antichrist spirit. Let me be clear from the start. This is not how most Christians use the word "antichrist".
It is a common, yet ridiculous argument that some will make. They say that the antichrist is not real because the word is never used in the Bible to refer to someone who comes in the end times and rules the world. This argument is basically in the same lines of saying that the rapture does not happen because the word "rapture" is not in the Bible. These arguments stand solely on the belief that if the word is not in the Bible, it cannot be used. Christians cannot give something in the Bible their own name they refer to it by. As I have said, this is a ridiculous argument to make.
Though the word rapture is not in the Bible, the event that Christians have come to call the "rapture" is definitely in the Bible. Likewise, even though the word "antichrist" is never used to refer to a particular individual, the individual Christians today call the "antichrist" is in fact, in the Bible.
Prince who is to come
In Daniel 9, the antichrist is called the "prince who is to come". Now many will try to argue that the prince who is to come is the Messiah, but that is impossible. It clearly says that it is the people of the prince who is to come who destroys the city. Everyone knows it was the Romans who destroyed the city. If this was the Messiah, it would have to be either the Jews or the Christians who destroyed the city. Because it was the Romans who did so, it is impossible for the prince who is to come to be the Messiah.
Some will try to make the argument that it was the Jews fault the city was destroyed because they are the ones who rejected Jesus and killed Him. Except Daniel never says it is the fault of the people that the city is destroyed. He clearly says they are the ones who destroy it. This argument is nothing more than someone trying to twist scripture to fit their beliefs rather than change their beliefs to fit what scripture clearly says.
The "prince who is to come" is absolutely not the Messiah. So we know it must be someone else. It says the 70th week, which is the Seven year Tribulation period, will begin with him confirming a covenant with many.
Preterists will try and argue that this prince who is to come, already came and it was the Roman Emperor Nero. However, they always ignore something very important here. In Matthew 24, Jesus refers to this scripture in Daniel. He says that after the Abomination of Desolation is set up in the Temple, there will be a great tribulation, the likes this world has never seen nor ever will see. The only possible way Nero could be the one who confirms the covenant with many is if the events of 70 AD were the worst tribulation this world has ever seen. Since the Holocaust is considered worse by every scholar, we know that 70 AD is not the Tribulation Jesus was speaking of. Thus, Nero cannot be the one Daniel is speaking of.
Since the people who destroyed the city were Romans and not Nazis, we also know the prince who is to come could not have been Hitler either. So the only logical understanding is that the "prince who is to come", who confirms a covenant with many and is behind the worst Tribulation this world will ever witness, must be someone coming yet in the future.
The only other point I will make on the "prince who is to come", is that Daniel refers to him as a person. He says "he" will confirm a covenant with many. Not "it" but "he". This is clearly referring to a person and not a group or organization as some try to believe the antichrist will be.
Man of Lawlessness
In 2 Thessalonians 2:3, we have Paul talking about the "man of lawlessness". In this letter, the church of Thessalonia is upset over some news they received, as if it was from the apostles, that the "day of the Lord" was at hand. Many try to say the day of the Lord is the rapture. Some try to believe it refers to the Second Coming. Both are wrong. If you look up the term "day of the Lord" in the Bible, in every usage of it, it refers to Gods anger or God's wrath. It never refers to either the rapture or the second coming. Adding to the confusion is that the KJV Bible doesn't use the "day of the Lord". It uses the "day of Christ". Which indeed would be referring to the rapture or second coming. However when the KJV was translated 411 years ago, all of the oldest manuscripts they had used "day of Christ". So they were right to use that. Since 1611, we have found literally thousands more ancient manuscripts and some of them much older. All of the oldest ones we have now, use "day of the Lord". The only logical reason for this is that at one point a copyist changed it from day of the Lord to day of Christ, not knowing he was changing the meaning of the passage. Today, the only scholars who hold to "day of Christ" as being correct, are KJV Only Purists who have a biased agenda.
Another reason they think it is the rapture or second coming, is because in verse 1 it clearly tells us that this is in regards to the coming of the Lord and our gathering to Him. There mistake is believing that because the main point of subject is about that, that everything mentioned there in must be referring to it as well.
The reason we know for certain that the day of the Lord is not referring to the rapture or second coming, other than the way it is used in every other instance in the Bible, is that the church of Thessalonia was so upset that it was at hand. Whether it be the rapture or the second coming, the Bible always refers to them as days we should be looking forward to. Events we long for. Never something any believer should dread. If the church was upset that either the rapture or second coming was at hand, Paul would have corrected them for being upset over that. Yet he does not. He instead corrects them that the day of the Lord is not actually at hand.
Since the day of the Lord is referring to Gods anger or Gods wrath, and not the rapture or second coming, this passage has a completely different understanding that fits perfectly with the Pre-Tribulation rapture. The church had received a letter pretending to be from Paul or one of the apostles that the day of the Lord (Gods Wrath) was at hand. Because they believed the rapture would happen before Gods Wrath, this upset them greatly. It would mean they had missed the rapture and now would have to live through the worst seven years the earth has ever witnessed. So Paul had to write a letter to them to settle them down. He tells them in regards to the rapture, do not let this false information upset you that Gods Wrath is upon us. Didn't I tell you that before Gods Wrath comes, that first the apostasy would happen and that the man of lawlessness would be revealed? Since these things have not happened, we know the day of Gods Wrath is not at hand, and therefore you have no reason to fear that you have missed the rapture.
The man of lawlessness mention here is clearly a specific person. A Character that will come in the end days. First, it clearly says in the title that he is a "man" of lawlessness. Not a group, organization or movement of lawlessness. Secondly, Paul tells us that the man of lawlessness is also called the "son of destruction". Another reference to a particular individual. Thirdly, Paul tells us he will exalts himself above every false god and takes a seat and claims to be God. In every way Paul speaks of him, he does so as an individual.
The Beast
In Revelation 13, we have two beasts. The first beast rises out of the sea and the second beast rises out of the land. The first beast is the one most Christians refer to as the antichrist. The second beast is the false prophet who will deceive the world into worshiping the first beast.
This Beast is written with a lot of imagery, so there is no choice but to do a lot of interpretation. For this reason, it is understandable that some might see this as being more than a single individual. As I have shown with the Man of Lawlessness and the Prince who is to come, we know this is not the Catholic church or anything like that. It is an individual. When interpreting scripture, you still have to interpret it to fall in line with all other scriptures. Yo do not get to interpret it to any understanding you think works and ignore other scriptures.
In Daniel 7 & 8, he speaks of the seven horns, but he gives us more detail. He also tells us of the little horn that will uproot three of the other horns in his rise to power. The ten horns I believe were kingdoms but the little horn is clearly an individual who rises to power.
Here in the first beast who rises out of the sea, we have those ten horns referenced, but again, it begins referring to him as an individual again. In Rev 13:4 the people dont ask who can wage war against it. They ask who can wage war against "him". From that point on, it refers to the beast as "him" or "he".
In Revelation 16:13 it refers to the dragon and the beast and the false prophet as individuals.
Then we have Revelation 19:20. Here it clearly makes the beast out to be an individual as the beast and the false prophet are seized and thrown alive into the lake of fire. This cannot logically be an entire organization or movement that is thrown alive into the lake of fire. These are two individuals.
In Revelation 11, we have the Two Witnesses. It is the beast that comes out of the abyss that will make war with them and kill them. This beast is the devil, for it comes out of the abyss. However, we know that it is the devil (dragon) who gives the first beast his power. Most eschatologists agree that the devil will possess a world leader in the end times and that will be the antichrist. As the antichrist, he will defeat the two witnesses and kill them. Unless you think the devil himself will fight two men and the world wont think anything weird of it.
We know from scripture that the false prophet will deceive the world to worship the first beast. We know that there will be a mark issued and anyone who takes it will go to hell. Anyone who worships the beast will go to hell.
We know that the beast will be powerful and undefeatable in this world. At least until Jesus returns.
We know he will persecute Christians and have many killed.
The Antichrist
The antichrist according to scripture is one with an anti-christ spirit. But there is another in scripture whom Christians refer to as the antichrist today. The Bible refers to him as the "Man of lawlessness", the "prince who is to come", "Son of Destruction" and the "Beast". All are names one would refer to an individual. To not see this as a single individual who will come into power in the end days is to ignore what scripture plainly states and look to interpret it to your liking instead.
In Daniel when speaking of the prince who is to come, it mentions the abomination that causes desolation. In Mathew 24, Jesus clearly makes a reference to Daniel's prophecy and mentions the abomination of desolation. He tells us that when we see him standing in the Holy place, to run and leave everything behind. Paul speaks of the man of lawlessness who will enter the Holy Temple and claim to be God.
The connection between these is too clear to ignore. Daniel, then Jesus and then Paul all speak of the same individual. The same event. Revelation has a lot to say about a character called the "beast". It mentions three different beasts all together. One of them is the beast that will rule the world. There is no doubt this is the same man the others talk about. Daniel mentions him as the Little Horn that rises up from within ten horns and removes three of them. In Revelation there are the ten horns mentioned again in connection with the beast.
When comparing these names, there is no doubt that they are all the same person. To believe they are different characters or not even men at all, is nothing more than to be looking to twist Gods Word to fit what you want to believe rather than accept what Gods Word says as the truth.
The antichrist will be a world leader who will be a part of a ten nation coalition. He will remove three of the leaders in his rise to power. (Daniel 7:8)
He will be set on conquering the world. (Revelation 6:2)
He will be extremely powerful, to the point the people will see him as impossible to defeat. (Revelation 13:4)
At one point he will confirm a covenant with many. When he does this, it will be the start of the 7 year tribulation. (Daniel 9:27)
In the midst of that 7 years, he will put an end to sacrifices when he enters the Holy Temple and claims to be God. (Daniel 9:27 & 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4) I believe he commits the same abomination of desolation committed by Antiochus when he entered the temple and slaughtered a pig on the altar.
He will make war with the Two Witnesses, whom also the people will believe is invincible, and kill them. (Revelation 11:7)
He will try to wipe out the Jews but when they escape his clutches, he will turn his attention on the Christians and persecute them. (Revelation 13:7 & Revelation 12:13-17)
The antichrist will be a man possessed by the devil himself. (Revelation 13:2)
The world, all but those who are God's, will worship the beast. (Revelation 13:8)
In the end, the beast will be caught and thrown into the lake of fire. (Revelation 19:20)
It is a common, yet ridiculous argument that some will make. They say that the antichrist is not real because the word is never used in the Bible to refer to someone who comes in the end times and rules the world. This argument is basically in the same lines of saying that the rapture does not happen because the word "rapture" is not in the Bible. These arguments stand solely on the belief that if the word is not in the Bible, it cannot be used. Christians cannot give something in the Bible their own name they refer to it by. As I have said, this is a ridiculous argument to make.
Though the word rapture is not in the Bible, the event that Christians have come to call the "rapture" is definitely in the Bible. Likewise, even though the word "antichrist" is never used to refer to a particular individual, the individual Christians today call the "antichrist" is in fact, in the Bible.
Prince who is to come
In Daniel 9, the antichrist is called the "prince who is to come". Now many will try to argue that the prince who is to come is the Messiah, but that is impossible. It clearly says that it is the people of the prince who is to come who destroys the city. Everyone knows it was the Romans who destroyed the city. If this was the Messiah, it would have to be either the Jews or the Christians who destroyed the city. Because it was the Romans who did so, it is impossible for the prince who is to come to be the Messiah.
Some will try to make the argument that it was the Jews fault the city was destroyed because they are the ones who rejected Jesus and killed Him. Except Daniel never says it is the fault of the people that the city is destroyed. He clearly says they are the ones who destroy it. This argument is nothing more than someone trying to twist scripture to fit their beliefs rather than change their beliefs to fit what scripture clearly says.
The "prince who is to come" is absolutely not the Messiah. So we know it must be someone else. It says the 70th week, which is the Seven year Tribulation period, will begin with him confirming a covenant with many.
Preterists will try and argue that this prince who is to come, already came and it was the Roman Emperor Nero. However, they always ignore something very important here. In Matthew 24, Jesus refers to this scripture in Daniel. He says that after the Abomination of Desolation is set up in the Temple, there will be a great tribulation, the likes this world has never seen nor ever will see. The only possible way Nero could be the one who confirms the covenant with many is if the events of 70 AD were the worst tribulation this world has ever seen. Since the Holocaust is considered worse by every scholar, we know that 70 AD is not the Tribulation Jesus was speaking of. Thus, Nero cannot be the one Daniel is speaking of.
Since the people who destroyed the city were Romans and not Nazis, we also know the prince who is to come could not have been Hitler either. So the only logical understanding is that the "prince who is to come", who confirms a covenant with many and is behind the worst Tribulation this world will ever witness, must be someone coming yet in the future.
The only other point I will make on the "prince who is to come", is that Daniel refers to him as a person. He says "he" will confirm a covenant with many. Not "it" but "he". This is clearly referring to a person and not a group or organization as some try to believe the antichrist will be.
Man of Lawlessness
In 2 Thessalonians 2:3, we have Paul talking about the "man of lawlessness". In this letter, the church of Thessalonia is upset over some news they received, as if it was from the apostles, that the "day of the Lord" was at hand. Many try to say the day of the Lord is the rapture. Some try to believe it refers to the Second Coming. Both are wrong. If you look up the term "day of the Lord" in the Bible, in every usage of it, it refers to Gods anger or God's wrath. It never refers to either the rapture or the second coming. Adding to the confusion is that the KJV Bible doesn't use the "day of the Lord". It uses the "day of Christ". Which indeed would be referring to the rapture or second coming. However when the KJV was translated 411 years ago, all of the oldest manuscripts they had used "day of Christ". So they were right to use that. Since 1611, we have found literally thousands more ancient manuscripts and some of them much older. All of the oldest ones we have now, use "day of the Lord". The only logical reason for this is that at one point a copyist changed it from day of the Lord to day of Christ, not knowing he was changing the meaning of the passage. Today, the only scholars who hold to "day of Christ" as being correct, are KJV Only Purists who have a biased agenda.
Another reason they think it is the rapture or second coming, is because in verse 1 it clearly tells us that this is in regards to the coming of the Lord and our gathering to Him. There mistake is believing that because the main point of subject is about that, that everything mentioned there in must be referring to it as well.
The reason we know for certain that the day of the Lord is not referring to the rapture or second coming, other than the way it is used in every other instance in the Bible, is that the church of Thessalonia was so upset that it was at hand. Whether it be the rapture or the second coming, the Bible always refers to them as days we should be looking forward to. Events we long for. Never something any believer should dread. If the church was upset that either the rapture or second coming was at hand, Paul would have corrected them for being upset over that. Yet he does not. He instead corrects them that the day of the Lord is not actually at hand.
Since the day of the Lord is referring to Gods anger or Gods wrath, and not the rapture or second coming, this passage has a completely different understanding that fits perfectly with the Pre-Tribulation rapture. The church had received a letter pretending to be from Paul or one of the apostles that the day of the Lord (Gods Wrath) was at hand. Because they believed the rapture would happen before Gods Wrath, this upset them greatly. It would mean they had missed the rapture and now would have to live through the worst seven years the earth has ever witnessed. So Paul had to write a letter to them to settle them down. He tells them in regards to the rapture, do not let this false information upset you that Gods Wrath is upon us. Didn't I tell you that before Gods Wrath comes, that first the apostasy would happen and that the man of lawlessness would be revealed? Since these things have not happened, we know the day of Gods Wrath is not at hand, and therefore you have no reason to fear that you have missed the rapture.
The man of lawlessness mention here is clearly a specific person. A Character that will come in the end days. First, it clearly says in the title that he is a "man" of lawlessness. Not a group, organization or movement of lawlessness. Secondly, Paul tells us that the man of lawlessness is also called the "son of destruction". Another reference to a particular individual. Thirdly, Paul tells us he will exalts himself above every false god and takes a seat and claims to be God. In every way Paul speaks of him, he does so as an individual.
The Beast
In Revelation 13, we have two beasts. The first beast rises out of the sea and the second beast rises out of the land. The first beast is the one most Christians refer to as the antichrist. The second beast is the false prophet who will deceive the world into worshiping the first beast.
This Beast is written with a lot of imagery, so there is no choice but to do a lot of interpretation. For this reason, it is understandable that some might see this as being more than a single individual. As I have shown with the Man of Lawlessness and the Prince who is to come, we know this is not the Catholic church or anything like that. It is an individual. When interpreting scripture, you still have to interpret it to fall in line with all other scriptures. Yo do not get to interpret it to any understanding you think works and ignore other scriptures.
In Daniel 7 & 8, he speaks of the seven horns, but he gives us more detail. He also tells us of the little horn that will uproot three of the other horns in his rise to power. The ten horns I believe were kingdoms but the little horn is clearly an individual who rises to power.
Here in the first beast who rises out of the sea, we have those ten horns referenced, but again, it begins referring to him as an individual again. In Rev 13:4 the people dont ask who can wage war against it. They ask who can wage war against "him". From that point on, it refers to the beast as "him" or "he".
In Revelation 16:13 it refers to the dragon and the beast and the false prophet as individuals.
Then we have Revelation 19:20. Here it clearly makes the beast out to be an individual as the beast and the false prophet are seized and thrown alive into the lake of fire. This cannot logically be an entire organization or movement that is thrown alive into the lake of fire. These are two individuals.
In Revelation 11, we have the Two Witnesses. It is the beast that comes out of the abyss that will make war with them and kill them. This beast is the devil, for it comes out of the abyss. However, we know that it is the devil (dragon) who gives the first beast his power. Most eschatologists agree that the devil will possess a world leader in the end times and that will be the antichrist. As the antichrist, he will defeat the two witnesses and kill them. Unless you think the devil himself will fight two men and the world wont think anything weird of it.
We know from scripture that the false prophet will deceive the world to worship the first beast. We know that there will be a mark issued and anyone who takes it will go to hell. Anyone who worships the beast will go to hell.
We know that the beast will be powerful and undefeatable in this world. At least until Jesus returns.
We know he will persecute Christians and have many killed.
The Antichrist
The antichrist according to scripture is one with an anti-christ spirit. But there is another in scripture whom Christians refer to as the antichrist today. The Bible refers to him as the "Man of lawlessness", the "prince who is to come", "Son of Destruction" and the "Beast". All are names one would refer to an individual. To not see this as a single individual who will come into power in the end days is to ignore what scripture plainly states and look to interpret it to your liking instead.
In Daniel when speaking of the prince who is to come, it mentions the abomination that causes desolation. In Mathew 24, Jesus clearly makes a reference to Daniel's prophecy and mentions the abomination of desolation. He tells us that when we see him standing in the Holy place, to run and leave everything behind. Paul speaks of the man of lawlessness who will enter the Holy Temple and claim to be God.
The connection between these is too clear to ignore. Daniel, then Jesus and then Paul all speak of the same individual. The same event. Revelation has a lot to say about a character called the "beast". It mentions three different beasts all together. One of them is the beast that will rule the world. There is no doubt this is the same man the others talk about. Daniel mentions him as the Little Horn that rises up from within ten horns and removes three of them. In Revelation there are the ten horns mentioned again in connection with the beast.
When comparing these names, there is no doubt that they are all the same person. To believe they are different characters or not even men at all, is nothing more than to be looking to twist Gods Word to fit what you want to believe rather than accept what Gods Word says as the truth.
The antichrist will be a world leader who will be a part of a ten nation coalition. He will remove three of the leaders in his rise to power. (Daniel 7:8)
He will be set on conquering the world. (Revelation 6:2)
He will be extremely powerful, to the point the people will see him as impossible to defeat. (Revelation 13:4)
At one point he will confirm a covenant with many. When he does this, it will be the start of the 7 year tribulation. (Daniel 9:27)
In the midst of that 7 years, he will put an end to sacrifices when he enters the Holy Temple and claims to be God. (Daniel 9:27 & 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4) I believe he commits the same abomination of desolation committed by Antiochus when he entered the temple and slaughtered a pig on the altar.
He will make war with the Two Witnesses, whom also the people will believe is invincible, and kill them. (Revelation 11:7)
He will try to wipe out the Jews but when they escape his clutches, he will turn his attention on the Christians and persecute them. (Revelation 13:7 & Revelation 12:13-17)
The antichrist will be a man possessed by the devil himself. (Revelation 13:2)
The world, all but those who are God's, will worship the beast. (Revelation 13:8)
In the end, the beast will be caught and thrown into the lake of fire. (Revelation 19:20)