WILL THE REAL ANTICHRIST PLEASE STAND UP

[davy]

I mean really, there's so much crazy false speculation out there that leaves the actual written Bible Scriptures about the identity of the coming false one at the end of this world, that it is impossible for the Biblically illiterate to know what's really going on. And one should not be surprised that Biblically illiterate includes many pastors over many churches today. I know, because I've gotten emails from them when I covered this subject on a old website I had years ago.

Get Up And Walk Away Situations:
1. anytime one claims there is no singular Antichrist
2. anytime one claims the coming Antichrist is already here, or already happened.
3. anytime one claims there exists many antichrists only
4. anytime one claims a pope is the Antichrist
5. anytime one claims a city, group, or nation is the Antichrist
6. anytime one claims the the image of 'man' always means one who is flesh-born
7. anytime one claims the Antichrist will arise from a Christian nation, like the USA or the EU.
8. anytime one claims the 666 number applies to Rome and/or a pope.

I could probably think of more 'excuses' like the above that many of the seminaries and fleshy thinkers come up with to try and pin the Antichrist label on, simply because they leave Bible Scripture with not realizing how wrong they are. All the above ideas are design to get you off track of the actual Bible Scripture meanings about the coming Antichrist at the end of this world.


1. In 1 John 2:18, that verse contains 2 objects involving the idea of Antichrist. The first phrase John mentioned was how the brethren there had already heard that "antichrist" shall come. That is about a SINGULAR Antichrist figure. Then John said that there were "many antichrists" already at work, and that 2nd phrase is about the idea of... yeah, that's right MANY antichrists, plural. Now we cannot simply move that latter "many antichrists" object and replace the singular "antichrist" with it that John mentioned in his 1st phrase, yet that is what some church systems and their deceived, or play-along pastors do, just to keep their jobs.

That Biblical Truth is confused by those who fail to study all their Bible. Early on in the history of the children of Israel, pagans crept in among the children of Israel, especially among the tribe of Judah (Jews). Judges 2 & 3, Joshua 9, 1 Kings 9, Ezra 2, Ezra 9, etc., show a flowing history of how Israel failed to destroy the specific nations of Canaan which God had commanded destroyed, and instead Israel allowed those leftover Canaanites to dwell among them. The Kenites represent one group of Canaanite peoples and 1 Chronicles 2:55 reveals those Kenites became the scribes of Israel in charge of keeping the letters of God's written Word. These scribes would side with those Pharisees who wanted Jesus killed, and no wonder, they were Canaanites that had crept into Moses' seat of the law. Thus the "many antichrists", and the "tares" in Lord Jesus' Matthew 13 parable, and Apostle Paul's "mystery of iniquity" (see Jude 4).

That mystery is one of the major themes of Old Testament history. God simply did not flat out tell you those 'crept in unawares' that were ordained to the condemnation of working against The Father and His Son, would be one of the major problems throughout Israel's history, and throughout world history. Just as God had hardened Pharaoh's heart in the days of Moses, likewise those 'crept in unawares' are here to work the negative side of God's Plan of Salvation through His Son Jesus Christ. This matter is a bitter pill most do not want to take, yet it is the bitter in the belly part that Apostle John felt when he was told to 'take' the Book and eat it. Christ's disciples are to understand both the sweet part and the bitter part. That is one of the ways The Holy Spirit keeps us from being deceived. Like Apostle Paul said, "Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices." (2 Cor.2:11)

Summary: God's Word reveals the existence of both... a singular Antichrist figure, and plural many antichrist workers. The "many antichrists", or "mystery of iniquity", began long, long ago, back in Old Testament history. One could even include Cain in that "many antichrists" group, since Cain killing his brother Abel would work for Satan's plan to destroy the bloodline that Christ Jesus would be born through. Satan made many later attempts to destroy the lineage of the "woman" of Genesis 3, even down to the time of Baby Jesus when king Herod issued a decree to murder all the firstborn in hopes of including Jesus.

For the time being, think about those items in that above list, how they are designed to deceive you away from Bible Scripture as written about the real... Antichrist that is coming at the end of this world.

[Oscar_Kipling]

hm, How does replacing the Antichrist with many antichrists (antichristissimo?) help them keep their jobs?

[Fenris]

That Biblical Truth is confused by those who fail to study all their Bible. Early on in the history of the children of Israel, pagans crept in among the children of Israel, especially among the tribe of Judah (Jews). Judges 2 & 3, Joshua 9, 1 Kings 9, Ezra 2, Ezra 9, etc., show a flowing history of how Israel failed to destroy the specific nations of Canaan which God had commanded destroyed, and instead Israel allowed those leftover Canaanites to dwell among them. The Kenites represent one group of Canaanite peoples and 1 Chronicles 2:55 reveals those Kenites became the scribes of Israel in charge of keeping the letters of God's written Word. These scribes would side with those Pharisees who wanted Jesus killed, and no wonder, they were Canaanites that had crept into Moses' seat of the law.

New conspiracy theory just dropped.

[RabbiKnife]

That Biblical Truth is confused by those who fail to study all their Bible. Early on in the history of the children of Israel, pagans crept in among the children of Israel, especially among the tribe of Judah (Jews). Judges 2 & 3, Joshua 9, 1 Kings 9, Ezra 2, Ezra 9, etc., show a flowing history of how Israel failed to destroy the specific nations of Canaan which God had commanded destroyed, and instead Israel allowed those leftover Canaanites to dwell among them. The Kenites represent one group of Canaanite peoples and 1 Chronicles 2:55 reveals those Kenites became the scribes of Israel in charge of keeping the letters of God's written Word. These scribes would side with those Pharisees who wanted Jesus killed, and no wonder, they were Canaanites that had crept into Moses' seat of the law.

New conspiracy theory just dropped.

That Biblical Truth is confused by those who fail to study all their Bible. Early on in the history of the children of Israel, pagans crept in among the children of Israel, especially among the tribe of Judah (Jews). Judges 2 & 3, Joshua 9, 1 Kings 9, Ezra 2, Ezra 9, etc., show a flowing history of how Israel failed to destroy the specific nations of Canaan which God had commanded destroyed, and instead Israel allowed those leftover Canaanites to dwell among them. The Kenites represent one group of Canaanite peoples and 1 Chronicles 2:55 reveals those Kenites became the scribes of Israel in charge of keeping the letters of God's written Word. These scribes would side with those Pharisees who wanted Jesus killed, and no wonder, they were Canaanites that had crept into Moses' seat of the law.

New conspiracy theory just dropped.

🎤 🤐


And here I thought the Kennites intermarried with the Barbieites…

[tango]

That Biblical Truth is confused by those who fail to study all their Bible. Early on in the history of the children of Israel, pagans crept in among the children of Israel, especially among the tribe of Judah (Jews). Judges 2 & 3, Joshua 9, 1 Kings 9, Ezra 2, Ezra 9, etc., show a flowing history of how Israel failed to destroy the specific nations of Canaan which God had commanded destroyed, and instead Israel allowed those leftover Canaanites to dwell among them. The Kenites represent one group of Canaanite peoples and 1 Chronicles 2:55 reveals those Kenites became the scribes of Israel in charge of keeping the letters of God's written Word. These scribes would side with those Pharisees who wanted Jesus killed, and no wonder, they were Canaanites that had crept into Moses' seat of the law.

New conspiracy theory just dropped.

From the thread title I was wondering the Antichrist would turn out to be Slim Shady or something...

[Athanasius]

That Biblical Truth is confused by those who fail to study all their Bible. Early on in the history of the children of Israel, pagans crept in among the children of Israel, especially among the tribe of Judah (Jews). Judges 2 & 3, Joshua 9, 1 Kings 9, Ezra 2, Ezra 9, etc., show a flowing history of how Israel failed to destroy the specific nations of Canaan which God had commanded destroyed, and instead Israel allowed those leftover Canaanites to dwell among them. The Kenites represent one group of Canaanite peoples and 1 Chronicles 2:55 reveals those Kenites became the scribes of Israel in charge of keeping the letters of God's written Word. These scribes would side with those Pharisees who wanted Jesus killed, and no wonder, they were Canaanites that had crept into Moses' seat of the law.

New conspiracy theory just dropped.

From the thread title I was wondering the Antichrist would turn out to be Slim Shady or something...

Will Smith don't gotta cuss in his raps to sell records 

[Athanasius]

I mean really, there's so much crazy false speculation out there

I KNOW, right?!

...those Kenites became the scribes of Israel in charge of keeping the letters of God's written Word. These scribes would side with those Pharisees who wanted Jesus killed... (see Jude 4).

See? This is what you're talking about. Suggesting the Kenites were that consistent across ~2,000 years is bonkers.

[Oscar_Kipling]

I mean really, there's so much crazy false speculation out there

I KNOW, right?!

...those Kenites became the scribes of Israel in charge of keeping the letters of God's written Word. These scribes would side with those Pharisees who wanted Jesus killed... (see Jude 4).

See? This is what you're talking about. Suggesting the Kenites were that consistent across ~2,000 years is bonkers.

That aspect of Davy's post really seems to have struck a chord with folks here. From my perspective it is not especially exceptional, but that is probably because I lack a nuanced understanding of...whatever this is.

Which brings me to the question, what were the consequences of failing to successfully cleanse the world of Amalekites, Canaanites and Gibeonites, and are any of those consequences spiritual in nature and long term? At the heart of my question is that I do not really understand what distinguishes Davy's assertions from what is commonly believed and arguably asserted by the bible.

[Athanasius]

At the heart of my question is that I do not really understand what distinguishes Davy's assertions from what is commonly believed and arguably asserted by the bible.

The assertion I'm speaking to, is the one that suggests the Kenites effectively survived millennia in whatever form, to side with the Pharisees in Jesus' day in their role as scribe, having been "[keepers of] the letters of God's written Word" since time immemorial (or at least the time of Chronicles). It's that particular I'm pointing to as absurd.

What this view implies, of course, is that the whole of Judaism and the Jewish Scriptures is corrupt. This is obviously absurd within its own narrative, given the authority Jesus et al place upon those very same Scriptures. It begs the question: why could we not assume that despite Joshua et al failing, those peoples were brought to faith over time regardless? If they're "keeping the letters of God's written Word" for that long, then what, is God's written Word that powerless? But Jesus validates the "Old Testament". There are no Kenites to shake our fists at given this.

If we'e going to assume "corruption", then I think that would have happened eventually even if Joshua et al been successful in genociding the ANE. Give it 2,000 years et voila, similar if not the same problems happen. Ignore the *ites of the ANE, and the ancient Israelites take up Ba'al and Asherah and whatever all the same, all by themselves. Killing the people doesn't kill the idea, and the idea was always the deadlier problem. Some people are all, "if only ancient Israel had massacred the ANE Israel would have X, Y, Z", but you know what happens after everyone else is dead? Israel starts killing itself if it wants to maintain religious and ideological purity. It was never going to happen.

And the big baddie Pharisees. Do you know what happens if Jesus incarnated today instead of ~2,000 years ago? We get to be the "Pharisees".

"Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Episcopalians, the Evangelicals got together. One of them, an expert in the Law, tested [Jesus] with this question: ‘Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?"

That's enough waffling for now.

[Fenris]

Which brings me to the question, what were the consequences of failing to successfully cleanse the world of Amalekites, Canaanites and Gibeonites, and are any of those consequences spiritual in nature and long term? At the heart of my question is that I do not really understand what distinguishes Davy's assertions from what is commonly believed and arguably asserted by the bible.

Those orders were given long ago and are no longer in effect.

It's the irony of those orders that make them astonishing to the modern ears. Because they're in the same body of work that gave the world western values.

So why did God order the Israelites to purge the land of Israel of the pagan Canaanites? One could postulate that at the time, ethical monotheism, the idea that one God exists and has expectations of moral behavior from humanity, was a radical new idea. It needed time and space to take root. If the pagans were allowed to remain in the land, perhaps it never would have, and we would be witnessing child sacrifice to Moloch even until today. So they had to be eliminated, to the best of the Israelites ability. And because of that we have the values that we do.

[Oscar_Kipling]

Which brings me to the question, what were the consequences of failing to successfully cleanse the world of Amalekites, Canaanites and Gibeonites, and are any of those consequences spiritual in nature and long term? At the heart of my question is that I do not really understand what distinguishes Davy's assertions from what is commonly believed and arguably asserted by the bible.

Those orders were given long ago and are no longer in effect.

It's the irony of those orders that make them astonishing to the modern ears. Because they're in the same body of work that gave the world western values.

So why did God order the Israelites to purge the land of Israel of the pagan Canaanites? One could postulate that at the time, ethical monotheism, the idea that one God exists and has expectations of moral behavior from humanity, was a radical new idea. It needed time and space to take root. If the pagans were allowed to remain in the land, perhaps it never would have, and we would be witnessing child sacrifice to Moloch even until today. So they had to be eliminated, to the best of the Israelites ability. And because of that we have the values that we do.

The question of why the orders were given and perhaps even less so, was it justified--is unrelated to what I was asking, although I do appreciate you taking the time to answer.

I'm asking more about God as 'God who works through history', supernaturally. That is, is it so peculiar to suggest that the Canaanite diaspora maintained a thread down through to the scribes, carrying with them some deleterious spiritual fallout or corruption that expressed itself in the Pharisees' heresies. A bit like Final Destination, you cannot cheat death, the spiritually tainted chickens always come home to roost even if the path to get there is convoluted and difficult to prove by just observing with natural eyes (like isn't that in part the kind of thing the bible is meant to elucidate?).

Or maybe to put it another way, Did Joshua's unauthorized treaty with the Gibbionites lead directly to Saul's misfortunes by mundane subsequence that only had the appearance of spiritual significance--or was there some very literal spiritual stream that flowed from one series of events to the other? Either way, I've seen it commonly characterized as the latter, and if the spiritual residues of an incomplete genocide can topple a future king, then I have trouble seeing why it is unthinkable that those residues didn't darken the doorstep of ancient Hebrew academia.

[Oscar_Kipling]

At the heart of my question is that I do not really understand what distinguishes Davy's assertions from what is commonly believed and arguably asserted by the bible.

The assertion I'm speaking to, is the one that suggests the Kenites effectively survived millennia in whatever form, to side with the Pharisees in Jesus' day in their role as scribe, having been "[keepers of] the letters of God's written Word" since time immemorial (or at least the time of Chronicles). It's that particular I'm pointing to as absurd.

I mean, I think you were clear about your suggestion from the beginning, but perhaps I wasn't clear about mine. Generally speaking the idea that choices that people made in the past have very literal spiritual eternal existential consequences in the future seems to lie at the heart of many folks interpretation of events depicted in the bible. I mean, its not like I'm defending the whole enterprise as not absurd, but like, I don't understand why you guys think this crosses the line into absurdity.

What this view implies, of course, is that the whole of Judaism and the Jewish Scriptures is corrupt. This is obviously absurd within its own narrative, given the authority Jesus et al place upon those very same Scriptures. It begs the question: why could we not assume that despite Joshua et al failing, those peoples were brought to faith over time regardless? If they're "keeping the letters of God's written Word" for that long, then what, is God's written Word that powerless? But Jesus validates the "Old Testament". There are no Kenites to shake our fists at given this.

I might make the exact case you are making, if it served my question...In this case though lets handwave it away by saying that the scripture need not be corrupt, only the interpretation. For my money, this is the insidiousness of heart hardening and the like, God needn't change anything about reality, just the target's perception of it. Or perhaps put another way, he could change the incentive structure to stimulate preexisting paradigms of motivated thinking.

If we'e going to assume "corruption", then I think that would have happened eventually even if Joshua et al been successful in genociding the ANE. Give it 2,000 years et voila, similar if not the same problems happen. Ignore the *ites of the ANE, and the ancient Israelites take up Ba'al and Asherah and whatever all the same, all by themselves. Killing the people doesn't kill the idea, and the idea was always the deadlier problem. Some people are all, "if only ancient Israel had massacred the ANE Israel would have X, Y, Z", but you know what happens after everyone else is dead? Israel starts killing itself if it wants to maintain religious and ideological purity. It was never going to happen.

Honestly I might have written this myself when I'm feeling particularly cogent, but I feel like I've gotten sidetracked. I saw Davy's post and thought it seemed par for the course theologically...and I really do get all of your objections, its just that--and I hate to keep repeating myself, but like why this? Like with a few mad-libs style replacements, in my eyes your objections here are the framework for why most of the bible doesn't hang together. so why this? 

And the big baddie Pharisees. Do you know what happens if Jesus incarnated today instead of ~2,000 years ago? We get to be the "Pharisees".

"Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Episcopalians, the Evangelicals got together. One of them, an expert in the Law, tested [Jesus] with this question: ‘Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?"

But isn't our need for Jesus the consequence of earlier (arguably the earliest) human blunders that polluted the river of human history with sin all the way back at the mouth? The question isn't if the kind of world where spiritual fallout through history can exist given the logical consequences of that fallout, it is, What are the consequences if any of the failed Canaanite genocide and were they spiritual and long term? Or maybe its, what precludes the consequences from being this.

I guess you did answer though, continuing to do this will probably just be an exercise in repeating ourselves..I mean unless it isn't, not saying I don't want to read em if you got em.

That's enough waffling for now.

meh whatever, I liked reading it.

[IMINXTC]

Interesting topic in the sense that the process of preparing for the eventuality of that final enclave is patently manifest in the world at large today, lest one should be fooled into thinking Antichrist surprises an innocent world.

[Fenris]

I'm asking more about God as 'God who works through history', supernaturally. That is, is it so peculiar to suggest that the Canaanite diaspora maintained a thread down through to the scribes

Over a period of more than 1,000 years? Including an exile to Babylon and a return to Judea? It seems to strain credibility. If someone suggested that there was a secret group that was present at the signing of the Declaration of Independance and has been working to undermine it over the last 250 years, you'd think you were reading the latest Dan Brown book or something.

So far as a "God working through history", there is a modern day state of Israel, in the same location as the biblical state, populated by the descendants of that state, speaking the same language, practicing the same religion- and it was promised by God via His prophets, more than 2500 years ago. Is that "God working in history" or nah?

carrying with them some deleterious spiritual fallout or corruption that expressed itself in the Pharisees' heresies.

I do not believe that the Pharisees were heretical, but rather the intellectual and spiritual descendants of the prophets. Jesus believed that too. Matthew 23: "The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So practice and observe everything they tell you."

 

Or maybe to put it another way, Did Joshua's unauthorized treaty with the Gibbionites lead directly to Saul's misfortunes by mundane subsequence that only had the appearance of spiritual significance--or was there some very literal spiritual stream that flowed from one series of events to the other? Either way, I've seen it commonly characterized as the latter, and if the spiritual residues of an incomplete genocide can topple a future king, then I have trouble seeing why it is unthinkable that those residues didn't darken the doorstep of ancient Hebrew academia.

I don't believe in "spiritual residue".

[Oscar_Kipling]

Over a period of more than 1,000 years? Including an exile to Babylon and a return to Judea? It seems to strain credibility. If someone suggested that there was a secret group that was present at the signing of the Declaration of Independance and has been working to undermine it over the last 250 years, you'd think you were reading the latest Dan Brown book or something.

So far as a "God working through history", there is a modern day state of Israel, in the same location as the biblical state, populated by the descendants of that state, speaking the same language, practicing the same religion- and it was promised by God via His prophets, more than 2500 years ago. Is that "God working in history" or nah?

As I understand, it is a common and reasonably well accepted belief amongst believers that the modern state of Israel actually is an example of God working through history.

From my perspective all of it strains credulity, and this is precisely why It struck me as odd that there was such a strong reaction to Davy's proposition.  If there is some supernatural component to the story of Adam and Eve for instance, and that component has spiritual implications and literal effects that defy mere natural explanation, and those implications and effects are extant and germane to humanity today--then the sins of the Canaanites, or of the Israelites failing to eliminate the Canaanites having long lasting, specific and not especially logical (from a purely naturalistic evaluation) influence over events a many hundreds of years down the line is no less plausible a connection than that of Adam to Oscar or Ancient Israel to modern Israel.

Again, it is my understanding of the position of at least some non-trivial fraction of believers--that the bible is a record of history meant in part to illuminate the the spiritual threads that connects the beginning to the present to the end- Including the direct hand of God. 

I do not believe that the Pharisees were heretical, but rather the intellectual and spiritual descendants of the prophets. Jesus believed that too. Matthew 23: "The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So practice and observe everything they tell you."

I mostly said 'heresies' because it rhymed, so you can disregard that as I don't think it affects the thrust of my point. 

 
I don't believe in "spiritual residue".

I can't tell if you are rejecting the idea of literal supernatural/spiritual effects and consequences that can influence events and people over the course of time, or if you just think calling it spiritual residue was too glib.  Do you believe that supernature interacts with nature to cause things, and can it cause things over time? If so then that is all I mean by spiritual residue-- supernatural effects that can have an effect over some arbitrary period and scope.... or maybe its better said to have an effect over some period and scope that is permitted or mandated by God.  If you don't believe that , I'd love to hear what you do believe.