Saturday, May 9, 2015

the identity of the antichrist

all kinds of theories now and have existed regarding the
antichrist. The word in Greek means "instead of Christ"
the word in English means "opposed to Christ," but it adds
up to the same thing. The Apostle John in his first Epistle
refers to many antichrists as well as the main one, and
seems to say that the former are precursors to the latter.

In general, especially since the protestant revolution,
writers read their own political (or in these days geopolitical)
concerns into Revelation. Usually the technique with this
or any of the Prophetic books of the Old Testament, is to
"spiritualize" or declare merely symbolic whatever doesn't
fit, and read literally what does. Of course they often don't
agree on which to spiritualize and which to take literally.

The Roman Catholic Church as Babylon the Great and pope
as antichrist idea is a nonstarter. The Vatican does not sit
on ANY of the seven hills of Rome, and is outside the city
limits of both old and modern Rome. No pope has even
tried to control commerce to limit economic activity to those
who were RC members, let alone demand latreia full on
worship of himself or his image in return for which one
receives a tattoo indicating one has done so.

(RCC has serious problems but this is not one of them.)

Perhaps it is the details which rule Rome out as antichrist
that was why Luther wanted to throw Revelation out of The
Bible, though his entire pope as antichrist idea depends on
elements in it, but only some. The general idea of antichrist.
The details given rule the pope and roman church out.

Obviously "the beast" is a symbol not a talking vicious
animal. But what does it refer to? Beasts are prophetically
kingdoms and sometimes specific kings. They are always
predators that are feared by the people addressed with such
prophecies. The antichrist's number is the number of a man,
an individual, so this beast is an individual.

The idea that he will come in with flatteries be a man of
peace and all that is highly dubious, depends on a single
verse in Daniel, and might perhaps apply briefly to how he
gains power local to himself, or not. Because this passage
is part of a larger picture which was already fulfilled in
all details in the days of (and leading up to) Antiochus
Epiphanes. However, the early church writers considered
him a prototype of the antichrist. They knew all the stuff in
Maccabbees and Josephus but still expected the antichrist
to appear later, never mind Nero who was dead and gone.

Therefore some, though not necessarily all, of these points
will be replayed again.

Daniel 7 shows four beasts that interpreters have traditionally
(from protestant times at least) seen as a rehash of the statue
dream. But the statue dream of Nebuchadnezzar, which
Daniel interpreted for him, was about four empires including
Babylon, while the beasts represent four that would arise
after Daniel's time.

Grab your KJV or similar Bible and read that chapter through
carefully. Don't ignore a single thing.

the statue dream ends with the Roman empire, which was
indeed divided into east and west, and which tried to prop
itself by strategic marriages and allowing all sorts of people
to become citizens and filling the ranks of its legions with
locals until the typical Roman legion was mostly of people
of the ethnic group it was near. This is what the toes and feet,
mixed clay and iron weak and strong, and trying to mix with
others but it wouldn't work refers to. And its over and done

Forget the statue. No nephilim, no ten nation revived Roman
empire in Europe (if such a thing does happen not one of the
members need be in Europe, since the Roman empire spanned
Europe, Asia and north Africa.)

The research regarding such issues is not worthless however,
because the old dream of a unified Europe and a Holy Roman
Empire or equivalent, or reviving Roman glory does exist
and has driven many efforts in the past and now.  These
efforts will always fail, but while they are being attempted
they will do various things that should be kept track of. But
that is just pragmatism and geopolitics, nothing to do with

Daniel lived through the time of the first element of the statue
(Babylon) into the time of the second (Persia). The four beast
dream was given during the reign of Babylonia, and the angel
said they were four kingdoms that WOULD arise. This
doesn't fit being a rehash of the statue dream, and it would be
a redundancy.

Also the statue dream ends with the Eternal Kingdom being
set up, which was done at the Incarnation, Crucifixion and
Resurrection of Jesus Christ, Who will bring it into power
when He comes back. The four beasts dream ends with the
Ancient of Days coming and ending the persecution by the
fourth beast against the Christians, and shows the Last
Judgement, so clearly this is the Second Coming. (Revelation
adds more details.)

Daniel is told that the people of the prince who is to come
would destroy the city (Jerusalem) and the sanctuary, and
this was done under Roman emperor Titus by the Legio X
which was Syrian. Titus ordered the city destroyed but not
the Temple and tried to stop its destruction but was
unable to control the legion made up of people who hated
Israel. Titus esteemed it for its beauty.

Some argue therefore that the antichrist will be a Syrian,
others answer that what they did was under Roman orders,
so it qualifies as Roman action, so the antichrist will be
Roman. But the sanctuary was not destroyed on Roman
orders but against Roman orders, by Syrians.

Yet both destructions are mentioned in one breath by the
angel as by the people of the prince to come.

So it might well be that the antichrist will be of both Roman
(or rather Latin, or perhaps Italian in general, which includes
several ethnic strains) and Syrian descent. This doesn't rule
out speculations about the tribe of Dan, but all the records
except priestly family identity traditions being lost, of Jewish
descent since the Diaspora began, this would have to be
something that is hidden and probably remains so.

In my other blog,
I explain all this in detail in various posts. basically (and
reasons for this are at the blog) the Eagle winged lion is
Britain-America and probably American puppet NATO, the
bear is Russia, the four headed four winged (but not eagle
winged) leopard is mostly likely China, and the fourth
beast is an empire that does not exist yet.

if this is a reconstructed Roman ten nation thing, it will be
from those modern countries once held by Rome in north
Africa, and without serious partitions I don't think there
are enough for that.

The last empire comes from the south. So it is from Africa.
Could be Islamic (the Islamic antichrist theory people are
onto something, but it isn't what they think it is and not
exactly for the reasons they think it is.) BUT MIGHT NOT

This empire will crush and make tributary to it the other
kingdoms, that of Britain-America-NATO, Russia and
China (or whoever). And the antichrist will come from this
last great empire at its end, displacing three rulers perhaps
a triumvirate and taking over.

That means the antichrist and the mark of the beast and all
that will not arise, until AFTER an African empire has
conquered Britain-America-NATO, Russia, and China (or

So all the hysteria and speculation are wrong, but the issues
they address are not wrong to fight or be wary of, because
they are usually dangerous in and of themselves. RFID chips

The antichrist is not the archer on a white horse in Revelation,
or any of the beasts, unless the rider of the pale horse
represents the tribulation, which seems unlikely given what
happens immediately next. Most likely it is the rise of the
Islamic empire.

the biggest error of all the prophecy interpreters, is to focus on
Europe or worse yet, America. Because you don't get mentioned
in prophecy except maybe as a half sentence aside, unless you
are in the Middle East or a major player in it. The Britain-America
thing certainly qualifies, because Britain shaped the present
Middle East scene incl. giving the Balfour Declaration and
America has been Israel's mainstay among the nations of the
world. So although America certainly is a player there, and
apparently Russia and China will become so and are moving in
that direction, the rise of totalitarianism in America is not in
itself indicative of the antichrist or the tribulation. America as a
political entity and world power would not be affected by this.

In arguing against the Islamic antichrist theory, antipas ministries
writes: "The same problem occurs when you consider Revelation
17:10-11. In this passage the Apostle John is told that there are
seven kings or empires to be considered in world history and that
"five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; and when he
comes, it must remain for a little while. And the beast which was
and is not, is himself also an eighth, and is one of the seven, and
he goes to destruction."

"At that point in history, the five fallen would have been Egypt,
Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece. The one existing
would have been the Roman. The one to come would be the
revival of the Roman, out of which the eighth and final empire,
the worldwide kingdom of the Antichrist would arise."

Of course there was the Chinese empire, but it played no direct
role in the Middle East, nor did any pre Islamic Indian related
empires or the Aztec or Inca or whatever.

Now, in one sense Rome never really fell. the classic date for
the fall of Rome was just a crisis resulting in a sharp decline.
Present day languages, cultures, legal systems, technology and
the phenomenon of major road systems (which Rome borrowed
from Persia) all derive from Rome. America is the spawn of
Europe and fan of Rome, which was spawn of Rome. Middle
Eastern cultures had Roman impact on them to some extent,
even in the form of islam itself a hodge podge of arab paganism
and Christian heresies and a few dabs from Judaism, it is a
product of a multicultural panasiatic culture that could not have
existed without Rome and Greece. And Russia owes its very
identity to its start to Byzantine Christian influence and a case
can be made that it is, theologically, the Third Rome.

China moving into the Middle East will by that time be itself
the inheritor of Rome, in the form of all the "modern" influences
and technology development, from nations and lines of
development that track back to Rome. Even its self identity and
ideology and directions it has taken though informed at times
by its pre western contacts nature is western, i.e., Roman.

The fourth empire will be totally different.
Though the beast is described in Revelation as having the feet
(someone pointed out these are weapons) of a bear (Russian
weaponry) the body of a leopard (Chinese infrastructure) and
the mouth of a lion (speaks English and/or has some british
or American ideology, economy or mystic royal pretensions
or something) somehow it will be distinguishable from being
yet another spawn of ancient Rome.

It may be that this is the picture it will present when it has
accomplished its conquest, and taken over the things of these
other kingdoms and absorbed them, and perhaps the triumvirate
that may rule and be displaced by the antichrist will be an anglo,
a Russian and a Chinese. But its origin and self image and
culture will not be so easily identifiable as descended from
Rome. it may even claim to be a continuation of some earlier
African empire. But that would not be Egypt (though Egyptian
culture and political concepts shaped African tribal culture,
unless they originated in such) because then it would be a
revival of Egypt. There is a pagan look to the Babylon the
great figure, and the false goddesses associated with lions
or tigers are the most vicious and depraved cults and violent
including that of durga in India, which was the false god of
the thug cult. Something of this nature may develop.

No comments:

Post a Comment