And the Survey Says . . . The Antichrist Is . . .
Saturday, June 3, 2006 at 06:50PM 
In a recent survey on sermonaudio.com (h.t. to Paul and Luann), people gave the following answers to the question, "who is the Antichrist?" Over four hundred people voted. Here are their answers . . .
| • | A Future Man to Be Revealed  52% · 268 votes |
| • | The Office of the Pope 24% · 122 votes |
| • | An Invisible Yet Known Presance 3% · 18 votes |
| • | All of False Religion 10% · 54 votes |
| • | The Anti-Christ Has Come and Gone 4% · 21 votes |
| • | No answer. Skip this survey, I do not care to vote on this topic. |
In my book, The Man of Sin, I attempt to make the case that the church has faced many "antichrists" from the days of the apostles (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7).
I also contend that the beast from the land is imperial Rome (Revelation 13:1-10) and the beast from the sea is the emperor cult in Asia Minor (Revelation 13:11-18) when John was given the vision we now know as the Book of Revelation, about A. D. 95. The dragon empowers the state and its leader (the false prophet) to turn on all those who confess "Jesus is Lord." To confess "Jesus is Lord" is to simultaneously confess that "Caesar isn't!"
John implies that what is represented by the beast (a satanically energized state waging war on the church) will reoccur throughout the course of this age (Revelation 17:9-18), and will finally culminate in a great apostasy and out-pouring of evil at the end of this age (Revelation 20:7-10), when Satan is released from the Abyss, only to go to his final destruction.
Paul's discussion of the "man of sin" (lawlessness) in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12, fits with this as well. Paul speaks of someone in the church (the temple of God--which I believe is not a reference to the temple in Jerusalem, either in AD 70 or in the future), who proclaims himself God, demands worship, and deceives many through Satanic power. Paul likewise ties this to a final apostasy (2 Thessalonians 2:3). While image of a deceiver in the church surely fits with the papacy (which is an antichrist institution), Paul ties the revelation of this particular individual to the time of the end (2:8). The appearance of the man of sin and the final apostasy are harbingers of the end.
So, how would I vote in the poll? Because there is a certain sense in which Antichrist is a past, present, and future phenomena, if I could, I'd say "yes" to points 1, 2, and 4, and "no" to point 5, "the Antichrist has come and gone."
Kim Riddlebarger
Thanks to Drs. Ligon Duncan and Derek Thomas for the nice plug over on the Reformation 21 blog! Click here: Reformation21 » Reformation 21 Blog
Reader Comments (29)
Idealist/Amills do not believe that there will necessarily be climactic chaos prior to Christ's return, but we do believe that there will be a general apostasy from (or within) the Church immediately prior (2 Thess 2). I have no doubt that Kim's book addresses this.
The duration of this apostasy is unclear, and we ususually refer to it as "the great apostasy" rather than "tribulation," since we see the tribulation as comprising this whole age.
We will live in some form of consumer society until Christ's return. However, the trumpets, bowls, and seals are happening all around us right now. They are word pictures of "the wrath of God being revealed" (Rom 1) right now, manifested in all the naval disasters, famines, etc. of the age. The unbelievers of the world are blind to the fact that these events are the warnings of God and therefore they do not repent. (Rev 9:20-21, 16:9)
Does this help?
Thanks for the answer, I will cease from the Global Warming agenda, which I don't believe in anyway, the die-off I am referring to occurs from vital resource depletion.
Kbennet -
Thanks for the answers. This has been an interesting debate. On a further note I believe Tim Lahaye to be a false prophet, by definition. His movies are nothing like events described in the Bible, and Nicolai Carpathia is not the AntiChrist.
Dr. Riddlebarger - Why were you and Mr. Wilken so sof on him yesterday ? A false prophet is a false prophet...
I don't know if this is joke site or not, but an interesting one nonetheless. Kim, I know how much you like to feature the absurd... and this definitely is!
http://www.nonraptured.com/
You might try Scott Hahn's book, The Lamb's Supper. Dr Hahn, who studied at Gordon-Cromwell, had a breakthrough in understanding concerning the Book of Revelations.
An introductory audio file is here:
http://www.ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/resolve.asp?rafile=lamb01.ra
Warning - This may be too Catholic for some...
(Change the number for more audio files from the series.)
(27) And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
After listening to Wilkens EDITED interview and looking again at Daniel 9, it appears to me v.27 is speaking of the same person v.26 is speaking of. The he in v.27 is the prince that shall come.
Is this correct ? And is this the main difference between the two camps ? The way it reads (to me) It's the JEWS that will be participating in the temple sacrifice and the prince that shall come will cause it to cease.
His statements about Jesus reinstating sacrifice are (again) Strawman Arguments designed for mudslinging. And he spends more time talking about Heavenly Rewards than the topic at hand.
Help me out here guys, I am starting to see a pattern here...
You need to go to Kims web site at www.christreformed.org and listen to ALL of his sermons on audio of the book of Revelation. It'll be well worth it for you.
Clueless is making some very good comments, I wouldn't want to step in.
Dear RIDDLER, :),
Beale is good, period. Not the best.I will follow you up on Johnson and Bauckham. BTW, you almost sound like LaHaye when you talk about these signs. I'll have to listen to the sermons on REV. on that specified website.
You are correct re; Daniel 9. The Jews are the ones involved in the sacrifices, Christ is the one who both cut the covenant (cross), and put an end to sacrifices and offerings (temple veil rent in two).
The disagreement between the dispensational and covenantal camps on Daniel is whether or not this prophecy was fulfilled in the first century as He promised, or if it was postponed due to Christ's rejection by the Jews; i.e. can man frustrate God's plans or not?
Todd Wilken said at least three times in his interview with Lahaye that JESUS was the one (Dispenationalist's say) are going to reinstitute temple sacrifice.I have never thought that, and I have never heard that from anyone I've listened to.
Is Todd Wilken a spokesman for Amils ? Or a confused sheep ?
I really don't see that our beliefs are altogether that disimiliar. We both believe in a rapture, just disagree on the timing. I have my own scientifically based thesis (not global warming) for a final catstrophic Rev. 18 tribulation scenario that I won't share on this blog, but would like your opinion on if you could give it to me, but I would need to email you the information directly or post it at another blog. I want to respect Dr. Riddlebarger's request to cease from my agenda.
Another thing that confuses me is the 144 thousand Jews from the twelve tribes that have a special purpose of proclaiming Christ - That seems like special treatment to me. And there are still orthodox Jews that don't acknowledge Christ wanting to re-institute the OT temple sacrifice. Until that is ended and the chosen Priesthood bows to Christ, in that sense God is not finished with Israel (not the nation-state). This will occur one way or another, correct ?