ANTICHRIST AND HIS ILK

Satan is the prime mover behind the forces opposing God throughout the Bible. But there appear to be certain human personalities, especially during the Last Days, whom he inspires in a special, supernatural way in an attempt to accomplish his will. The main problem in identifying these people is that we are given very limited descriptions of them. In addition, there is the possibility that although different labels are attached to them, they may just be different ways of describing one powerful personage.

It is impossible for me to canvass this subject adequately since whole books have been written on the subject. For example, Beale devotes 50 pages of his excellent commentary on the Book of Revelation just discussing the Beast of chapter 13. And there is no way I can even begin to list all of the religious and political personages over the years who have been “identified” as the Antichrist. But let us look at what little we are told in the New Testament about this (or these) person(s).

False Prophets

Watson believes that the whole concept actually can be traced back to Deuteronomy 18:18-22 in which God says through Moses that there will be a future “prophet like Moses” who should be listened to instead of any false prophet who either represents another god or whose prophecies do not come true. In the New Testament, John the Baptist was felt by some to be this predicted prophet like Moses (John 1:25), but then it is revealed that Jesus is actually that person (John 7:40; Acts 3:22; 7:37). Thus, by inference, prophets who oppose Jesus were first predicted in Deuteronomy.

The Contemptible Person

The next time this arch-rival of God appears is in Daniel 7-11 where he goes by various names: little horn (7:8; 8:9), contemptible person (11:21), and king who acts as he pleases (11:36). Almost all scholars agree that the original historical prototype here is Antiochus IV. He tried to exalt himself above all gods and desecrated the Jerusalem temple. Jesus later alludes to this event when he references the “Abomination of Desolation” (Daniel 9:27) in Matthew 24:15, referring this time to the coming destruction of Jerusalem. But a yet future personage and event is felt by some to be in view here.

Man of Lawlessness

This mysterious person only appears in II Thessalonians 2. There is some textual variation in v. 3 since a few early manuscripts read “man of sin” instead. But there is little difference between the two designations since, according to I John 3:4, “everyone that does sin also does lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.” In light of this dual error, Abraham Smith is correct in summarizing the situation: “some identify him as a false prophet or an emperor.” And even more specifically, John Stott says, “Paul calls him both 'the man of lawlessness (3) and 'the lawless one' (8). Presumably this means that he will be defiant of all law, both the moral law...and the civil law...”

Brauch notes: “This depiction of 'the lawless one' within the context of a rebellion against God has affinities with related concepts in Judaism and early Christianity.” Taken in chronological order, some of them are given below:

Daniel 11 predicted that a future ruler would exalt himself above all gods and desecrate the temple. The closest fulfillment of that prophecy was undoubtedly the leader Antiochus IV, as mentioned above, who did that very thing in 168 B.C.

Then there is the intertestamental Jewish composition The Martyrdom of Isaiah in which Satan is called 'the angel of lawlessness.'”

In AD 40, not long before Paul wrote II Thessalonians, Emperor Caligula attempted to place a statue of himself in the Jerusalem but was prevented from doing it.

The Roman general Pompey captured Jerusalem in 63 B.C. and desecrated the temple by entering the Holy of Holies.

“For Christians in subsequent decades who endured persecution at the hands of Rome and its emperors, the spirit of antichrist, if not the antichrist himself, was seen as personified in the persecuting Caesars.” (Brauch)

One would expect that the specific mention in v. 4 about this person sitting himself down in the temple of God would narrow down the possibilities considerably, but as Marshall says: “No specific temple is in mind, but the motif of sitting in the temple and claiming to be God is used to express the opposition of evil to God.” Stott agrees with this position.

Leon Morris states, “This passage is probably the most obscure and difficult in the whole of the Pauline writings and the many gaps in our knowledge have given rise to extravagant speculations.” A whole catalog of political and religious leaders over the centuries is provided by Stott in his commentary on I-II Thessalonians for those who are interested. But Brauch summarizes, “These attempts to discover the lawless one along the stream of history have clearly not been successful, revealing that such undertakings are likely presumptuous and futile.”

Stott summarizes the situation: “Yet all of these, together with other evil leaders down the centuries, have been forerunners or anticipations of the final 'man of lawlessness', an eschatological yet historical person, the decisive manifestation of lawlessness and godlessness, the leader of the ultimate rebellion, the precursor and signal for the Parousia...And whether we still believe in the coming of Antichrist will depend largely on whether we still believe in the coming of Christ.”

Parenthetically, the present restraining of the man of lawlessness until he is revealed can be closely related to the temporary binding of Satan followed by his release to deceive the nations, as mentioned in Revelation, especially if one subscribes to the amillennial view of the end times.

Antichrist (antichristos)

Note that in the above quote, Stott simply assumes that the 'man of lawlessness' is identical to the Antichrist. And he may be correct in light of the similar biblical descriptions of the two.

    Both personages are associated with the last days (II Thessalonians 2:3 and I John 2:18).

    Both deny God and Christ (II Thessalonians 2:4 and I John 2:22).

    They are deceivers (II Thessalonians 2:9-10 and II John 7).

    They, or their spirits, are already at work prior to their revealing (II Thessalonians 2:7 and I John 2:18;4:3).

    True believers will not be swayed by them (II Thessalonians 2:13-15 and I John 2:21,23-25).

The term “antichrist” only appears in the epistles of John (I John 2:18,20; 4:3; II John 7). But, as F.F. Bruce points out, “the idea expressed by the word is not.” He sees the same concept n II Thessalonians 2:1-12; Mark 13:13-14; and Revelation 13.

Grayston suggests that Judas may have been the Antichrist since John 17:12 calls him “the son of perdition,” a description of the Antichrist in II Thessalonians 2:3.

False Messiah (pseudochristos)

This Greek word only appears in Matthew 24:24 and its parallel in Mark 13:22, both times in the plural. These people are associated with false prophets, perform signs and miracles to, if possible, deceive the elect. Kauder contrasts antichrist, which “indicates a fundamental, dualistic opposition” with false messiah, which “gives the word the ethical connotation of being false or deceptive.”

But Marshall points out that antichrist may mean one who opposes the Messiah and/or one who actually claims to be the Messiah. Thus, there may be no fundamental difference between an antichrist and a false Christ. C.H. Williams lumps together both categories of people as “usurping Jesus' own claim to authority.”

The Beasts

Finally, we come to the beasts from the sea and land described in Revelation 13. The first of these symbolic beings combines much of the imagery associated with the creatures found in Daniel 7. He, or it, worships the dragon (i.e. Satan), is seemingly brought back to life miraculously, blasphemes against God, is given great worldly authority, persecutes the saints, and is worshiped by others. The beast from the land appears to be more like a false prophet who convinces people to worship the first beast through the execution of various miracles. It is this second beast who has the mysterious number 666 attached to it, over which much ink has been spilled over the years.

Various calculations using the Hebrew concept of gematria (where letters are each assigned numbers) have been utilized to identify the beast with Nero or other Roman emperors. But in light of the highly symbolic use numbers have throughout Revelation, it is probably more likely that 666 is meant to signify a “trinity of imperfection” (Adam was created on the 6^th day, and the number 6 is one shy of the number 7, standing for perfection): in other words, an attempt of a person to raise himself to the status of the Trinity.

One or Many?

It is not really an easy question to answer as to whether the entities above are all different from one another for two reasons: (1) there could be a whole succession of such personages over time, each one a type of a culminating opponent of God; and (2) some of the references above contain two such paired beings present at the same time (i.e. false prophets and messiahs in Matthew and Mark as well as the two beasts of Revelation 13).

On the other hand, the numerous evangelical sources I consulted all devoted considerable time demonstrating the many close correspondences in descriptions between the categories above. The sum total of such observations, some of which are given below, leads one to believe that there will be only one culminating being, known under different titles and perhaps accompanied by his prophet, appearing in the Last Days:

    Beale on the beast of Revelation 13: He feels that the “view of a multiple, trans-temporal, yet final appearance is supported by the 'already-but-not-yet' concept of that figure in the Johannine epistles and by 2 Thess. 2:1-12.”

    Kauder's entry on “Antichrist” in the Dictionary of NT Theology actually combines a discussion of this word from John's letters with the similar personages in II Thess. 2, Dan. 8, Mark 13, and Rev. 13.

    Similarly, Leon Morris' article on “Antichrist” in New Bible Dictionary relates the Antichrist of John's letters with Paul's man of sin in II Thessalonians, the personage described in Daniel 7, and the beast of Revelation. He summarizes, “It is not our purpose here to identify any particular one with the antichrist, but simply to point to the fact that this book too knows of one empowered by Satan who will oppose Christ in the last days. This may fairly be said to be characteristic of the Christian view of the last days.”

I will quote Marshall at some length because he also does a good job of summarizing the situation. “Such persons are clearly opposed to Jesus as the Christ, but here they appear to be either prophets who declare untruths or persons who falsely claim that they themselves are Messiah. We may compare the imagery of the beast and the false prophet in Revelation 13; 19:20, where the false prophet promotes the worship of the beast. But this passage in Revelation leads us to the second possible root of John's language [in I John 18-27] in the expectation of one particular arch-opponent of Christ, the Anti-Christ par excellence. This expectation is reflected in the coming of the 'man of lawlessness' in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 and possibly also in 'the abomination that causes desolation' in Mark 13:14. These figures stand in a succession of such pictures in Jewish and Christina writings which portray the final opponent of God.”