Answering Objections to the Identity of First Beast
Posted by Cory Tucholski on May 18, 2009
There are three basic objections to the idea that the papacy is the Antichrist. The first is easy to answer from Scripture, the second is a legitimate point that isn’t as easy. The third is complicated to explain. The first objection is that Scripture clearly refers to one man of sin, a future personal opponent of Jesus Christ. The papacy is an institution, not an individual. The second objection is that the pope is often an example of moral living, and generally does no evil. The final objection is that, because Catholicism is Christian, the pope is not denying that Jesus Christ came in the flesh.
The first objection is easy to answer. Scripture does not, in fact, refer to one man of sin. The clues from Scripture indicate that the Antichrist will be many men, and these people will come from within the Christian Church. The reason that many people read Scripture as if one future Antichrist will arise is because of their traditions, and for these traditions we must thank men like Tim LaHaye and Hal Lindsey.
Author of The Late, Great Planet Earth, Hal Lindsey is the one who popularized the idea of futurism. One of the main tenets of futurism is one Antichrist, yet future, who will rise up and become a dictator on planet earth. He will rise from outside the church and oppose the church. People will worship him or they will die by beheading.
This is a bleak and unscriptural picture of the Antichrist. If we refer to the verses in Scripture that talk about the Antichrist, we find a very different picture:
- 1 John 2:18: Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour.
- 1 John 2:22: Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son.
- 1 John 4:2-3: By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already.
- 2 John 7: For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist.
A careful reading of the above texts shows that the Antichrist is not just one, but many individuals. Though proponents of the one, future Antichrist theory distinguish between the Antichrist (one) and the spirit of antichrist (many), Scripture draws no such distinction.
To be fair, there are other texts that refer to the Antichrist. They refer to “him” as the man of lawlessness (2 The 2:3), which seems to support the idea of just one man. But is that necessairly the case? What about 2 Timothy 3:16-17? “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.” Is this verse talking about just one man of God?
No, of course it isn’t. It is talking about a succession of men who are godly. So it can also be with referring to the Antichrist as the “man of lawlessness”–meaning a succession of men who are lawless.
As for the second point, that the popes (especially the last two) are very moral individuals who do a lot of good things, this is a good objection to raise. The problem is another one of tradition. We see the Enemy as being opposed to everything that Christ supports. That is actually an unbiblical tradition. The Enemy isn’t opposed to good moral living, he is opposed to Jesus Christ. The devil doesn’t care how we live our lives, only that we live our lives in opposition to Christ.
Immorality is one way to live a life in opposition to Christ, but it isn’t the only way. The carnal mind is not subject to God’s law, nor can it be. We have a carnal mind so long as we are in the flesh. Only by being born again of the Spirit are we able to please God and live in harmony with his will. However, the devil can keep us from being born again through any number of tricky means, and that means that we can never live a life pleasing to God by definition. The Enemy wins, and we lose while living a perfectly moral and upstanding life.
Such is the case with the popes. In order to be a good lie, it should be about 90% true. By denying that being born again is solely the work of God and we don’t cooperate with it, the papacy has been spreading a lie that keeps people from getting saved. It is true that good works flow from salvation, but it is not true that we somehow cooperate in earning that grace from God. Grace is solely unmerited favor. It is not given in sacraments; it is given by God to those whom he chooses from eternity.
First John 4:2-3 and 2 John 7 spell out one requirement for the Antichrist: He must deny that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. Does the papacy do that? They do in a very, very subtle way.
First, we have to define what sort of “flesh” that Jesus came in. According to Paul, God sent Jesus in the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom 8:3). Even though Jesus had the same sinful flesh that we have, he remained “holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners. . .” (Heb 7:26). He was tempted in all ways as we are, but remained without sin (Heb 4:15). Jesus came in the same flesh as we have, that is, sinful flesh.
The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception says that Mary was preserved free of sin from the moment of her conception. According to official Catholic sources, when Jesus was born, he took this sinless nature from Mary, a flesh unlike our own. Cardinal Gibbons said it this way:
In other words, we affirm that the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity . . . by being born of the Virgin, [took] to Himself, from her maternal womb, a human nature of the same substance with hers . . . a true human nature of the same substance with her own.
That means Christ took on a perfect nature, not a fallen one. The Bible teaches that Christ had the same sinful flesh that we have, as outlined above. This amounts to a denial that Jesus came in the flesh!
So there it is, submitted for your approval. If this makes sense to you, and you would like to learn more about historicism as a viewpoint, visit www.historicist.com.
rey said
“A careful reading of the above texts shows that the Antichrist is not just one, but many individuals. Though proponents of the one, future Antichrist theory distinguish between the Antichrist (one) and the spirit of antichrist (many), Scripture draws no such distinction.”
I think your very statement here proves its opposite. When John says in 1st John 2:18 “Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist (singular) shall come, even now are there many antichrists (plural); whereby we know that it is the last time” he is clearly distinguishing between these many antichrists and one antichrist. It is this very passage that convinces me that the numerous antichrists are merely precursors to one bigger badder antichrist. This doesn’t mean, however, that the one bigger badder antichrist could not be a pope. I have always believed that the antichrist will be a pope worse than all that have preceded him.
rey said
As to your comments on the Immaculate Conception, Cory, I find this very interesting!
Why? Because Calvinists ALWAYS teach that Jesus’ flesh is different from ours. Because they believe we all inherit original sin from Adam, and that original sin makes us totally depraved or totally disabled, they can’t have Christ inheriting this malady! After all, if Christ were totally disabled, we’d be in big trouble since he was coming to save us! Plus, by inheriting Adam’s sin, he would be born sinful, and hence disqualified from being the perfect spotless, sinless lamb of God. He could not take away the sins of others if he had sins of his own, and therefore if he inherited Adam’s sin, we’d all be without hope. So the Calvinist always DENIES that Jesus took on the same type of flesh as us. In fact, the Calvinist uses the very passage that Cory cites in proof that Jesus did take on our flesh in order to prove that Jesus did not take on our flesh, latching on to the Docetic tendenz (i.e. tendency) in Paul, the Calvinist interprets “God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh,” (Romans 8:3) as meaning that Jesus only came only in the “likeness” of our flesh and did not actually take on our flesh. “Nay!” they say “He took a pure and spotless flesh from the Virgin!” just like the Catholics say.
Essentially, Cory has just denied that we inherit the guilt of Adam’s sin or a total depravity from him and Cory has just interpreted the sinfulness of our flesh as nothing more than a bent or tendency to sin or a predisposition which can be overcome by the will. Otherwise, by saying that Jesus took on the same “sinful flesh” as ourselves, he would be disqualifying him from being the perfect sacrifice. Cory has just anhhilated the entire Calvinist system by making one glorious mistake from which the truth shines through like the son in all its glory! Calvinism is dead. Augustinianism is dead. The doctrine of inherited guilt from Adam is dead. Welcome to Pelagianism, Cory!
Now, the Catholics have invented the immaculate conception of Mary in order to make Christ born without original sin. The Calvinists also have invented the theory that original sin is passed on exclusively by males, i.e. by sperm, so that Jesus would be born without original sin by virtue merely of the virgin birth. Of course, their own favorite proof texts is Psalm 51:5 “in sin my mother conceived me” which disproves this very theory, for if this verse teaches the passing on of original sin at all then it also teaches that it is passed on by the mother, and hence Mary would pass it on to Jesus! So, the Calvinist view that the virgin birth itself kept Jesus from being born with original sin fails, and something like the Catholic view of an Immaculate conception is necessary to guard Jesus from inheriting original sin (if anyone inherits it at all).
Basically, the only way to believe in inherited original sin (i.e. that we inherit Adam’s sin) without saying that Jesus was born guilty of Adam’s sin, is to believe in the Immaculate Conception. The virgin birth could not shield Jesus from original sin, because if Psalm 51:5 does indeed teach original sin, then “in sin my mother conceived me,” that is, original sin can be passed on by a virgin mother. Psalm 51 mentions no father in verse 5, “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.” Mother only!
And doesn’t it make sense that women by themselves would pass on original sin, since “Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression”? (1st Timothy 2:14) If Adam is off the hook, and the woman is the only one who was “in the transgression” (as Paul is clearly saying) then only women should pass on original sin. Hence, Mary would have passed original sin on to Christ even as a virgin!
You must either believe in the Immaculate Conception, or deny original sin altogether, or find a way for Christ to be born guilty of Adam’s sin and yet be an acceptable sinless sacrifice for us anyway! Perhaps you could say that his original sin was washed away in John’s baptism! (LOL!)
But in my view, Psalm 51:5’s “in sin my mother conceived me” is the response of the unborn child in Bathsheba’s womb to David’s lie in verse 4 “[Lord] against you only have I sinned” and David responds in verse 6 praising God for the miracle of the unborn child rebuking him for God is teaching David wisdom “from the hidden part.” Also, per Ezekiel 18:20 and Romans 7:9 it is clear that we do not inherit Adam’s sin, but are born spiritually alive. Our own personal sin results in our spiritual death, Adam’s sin only resulting in our physical death. Christ was born without original sin, just like the rest of us.
The difference between us and him is in his perfect will, not in his having been born with a different type of flesh! That is clear by Paul saying that “[Jesus] was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin” (Heb 4:15) rather than as chapter 8 of the Westminister Confession says “[Christ did] take upon him man’s nature, with all the essential properties and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin: being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost in the womb of the Virgin Mary.” Note how Paul makes Christ’s sinlessness a matter of WILL while the WCF (the standard Calvinist confession) makes it a matter of BIRTH.
You’re a fugitive like Douglas Wilson now, Cory! Watch out for your fellow Calvinists when you cross the street!
Yeshua is the Lord of Glory said
Hello Cory
Perhaps the Apostle John in 1 John 2:18 and Revelation 13:18 was referring to this particular individual,who was not only anti-christ,but was also a brute ” beast ” who was apart of the Emperial or Emperor system.If Julius Caesar is to be counted as part of this system,then Nero Augustus Caesar,was the 6th emperor of Rome,and the one who was reigning when the book of Revelation was written.
So then five had fallen,Rev.17:9-11.Which means that Galba was the one who was to come and would continue for a short space. Galba reigned as emperor of Rome for six short months,before his death.If Nero is to be counted as the fifth emperor who had fallen,who in along with unbelieving Jews and other Pagans persecuted and murdered Christians in A.D 64,the first century.Then Galba was the one reigning when Revalation chapter 17 was written.
Galba was followed by Otho and Vertellus (spelling?),Vespasian, Titus and Domitian.So the late date theory of the writing of the book of Revelation is debunked… It was certainly written before the destruction of the Temple,that took place during the reign of Vespasian,who son Titus and his armies destroyed the temple in A.D.70.
Nonetheless,Nero was the man beast of Rev.13:18.He was a type and part of a system,of the future coming of the true ” beast ” and his system? The one with seven heads,ten horns and seven crowns,the prince of this world? Otherwise known as the red dragon,the devil,and Satan,Perhaps so.
http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2007/042207PM_FirstGreatPersecution.html
Though i am an orthodox/partial Preterist,i cannot deny that orthodox Futurism holds truth as well.Revelation 12:7 Daniel 12:1 and Matthew 24:21,22 is my the proof,that there is yet a “greater” fulfillment of the persecution and murdering of believers than that which took place in the first century and is “presently” happening in our day.However,it will someday be world-wide,persecution,including here in America.
This future persecution of the ” nations ” of believers and likely the “nation” (the State)of believing Jews and Israelis,who come to faith,before the Lord returns.Is what will call for Michael the arch angels to stand up and fight,to cut the days of persecution short,Daniel 12:1.
Otherwise,the words of our Savior and Messiah,in Matthew 24:21,22 speaking of “great tribulation” and that NO flesh would be saved,but for the elect’s sake,which means “All Israel” the Lord will cut the days of persecution short.Surely the Lord did not say that this would happen in the first century,or did he?
For the abomination of Desolation(gentile armies)which destroyed Jerusalem and the temple was not,tribulation and persecution for believers of that generation.They escaped the siege of Jerusalem.The abomination of desolation,was the punishment of a “nation” of disobedient,faithless,Covenant breaking,New Covenant denying, unbelievers of the same generation.Those who put their only means of salvation to death.God’s Son,their very own Messiah.
From the annoiting of the Messiah,and his ministry,Matthew 3:15-17 Luke 3:23 and Mark 1:15…To the destruction of the temple in A.D 70,Israel the whole nation,was given (forty years) to repent of sin,which they did not do.
From the birth of their Messiah,his death at their hands,and the destruction/desolation of(their house)the temple,was 70 years.The same length of the captivity in Babylon,Daniel 9:1,2.
Further,and most important of all is that Jesus is without sin and was born sinless…Where as we are born sinners.Jesus is the seed of the woman Genesis 3:15.God is his Father,therefore he did not inherit the willful sinful NATURE of Adam.It is a fact of scripture that Adam was not deceived,but WILLFULLY and willingly disobeyed God,1 Timothy 2:14.We are semenally of Adam.He is the Father of mankind,period.So it is by our very nature that we are his children.
Jesus the Son of God is neither,willful or willingly disobedient to God.He is a son of Adam,because Mary,a human being is his mother.However,he does not have the nature of Adam.The nature of a man or woman is said to comes from their father.So Jesus is holy and separate from sinners.For God is his Father.He does not have two natures,he has the one and the same nature as God,his Father.Jesus did indeed take on the likeness of sinful flesh.The difference between Jesus and us,the children of Adam,is that we have to be born again.Only then do we become spiritually partakers of the Divine and sinless nature of God and his Son.
As for Calvinism.No one can deny that there was and still is a ” corporate” election or predestination of the church…Not of individuals,but of a whole body of believers.Who individually through faith and trust in Christ,become God’s elect.There are no chosen or predestined individuals,in the body.Only those who do not resist the grace of God,that comes before his gift of faith in Jesus…Abel the son of Adam who was neither Jew nor Gentile was likely the first member of this corporately elected body of believers.Though it is possible that Adam and Eve were redeemed as well.
How else would Abel have offered a more perfect sacrifice then his brother Cain? and his person accepted by God.Where as Cain,or his sacrifice was not accepted by God.The answer is that Cain went about to make his own righteousness or work,apart from the grace of God that came and comes before his gift of faith and so apart from faith,in the promise of the coming of the ” seed ” of the woman, God’s Son.The Lamb,who takes away the sin of the world.
John C said
Hey Yeshua,
Yes, there is much truth in your understanding, of which came from the spirit who leads us and guides us into all truth.
Concerning two natures, its important to understand that once we are “in” Christ, while it may “appear” as if we still have two natures, a duality, the truth which resides in the unseen, heavenly realm is now our only reality. Now we no longer “judge by appearance” by what our natural eyes tell us, but with righteous judgment from the unseen and there is no sin in the true, heavenly realm. This is where we move into a Oneness, our union life in fellowship of the spirit in the very same way Christ lived in heaven (the heavenlies) while He was yet in the body on the earth.
It’s a progressive liberty if we will dare believe for the highest, the greatest emancipation ever. Complete victory in Christ and dominance over the lower (dead adamic) nature which is what Christ took with Him to the cross.
Truth & Light,
JC
Yeshua is the Lord of Glory said
Thanks John,Well said!
Kekeuh said
I think antichrist is just one man show. There is just one AC. Others called as “many ACes” are just AC followers.