Who Or What Is The Antichrist?

[JohnnyRudick]

Help me...is it commonly assumed that N. Americans/Europeans are of the tribe of Dan?

Actually many of us think Joseph.

Genesis 49:22 Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough

by a well; whose branches run over the wall:

[many of us think this not only relates to some of the American Indian but

most who came over the ocean separating himself from the rest of his brethren.]

Genesis 49:23 The archers have sorely grieved him, and shot at

him, and hated him:

Genesis 49:24 But his bow abode in strength, and the arms of

his hands were made strong by the hands of the mighty God of

Jacob; (from thence is the shepherd, the stone of Israel:)

[prophetofdoom]

I believe that the Anti-Christ may be an actual person. He would be the equivalent of a "Prophet" to his followers and underlings. I believe that this individual to have immense wealth and political power. He is running the secret combinations that are moving the US government to shred the sacred rights in the constitution.

[JohnnyRudick]

I believe that the Anti-Christ may be an actual person. He would be the equivalent of a "Prophet" to his followers and underlings. I believe that this individual to have immense wealth and political power. He is running the secret combinations that are moving the US government to shred the sacred rights in the constitution.

Ya think you will be here with the rest of us next week?

[Traveler]

Help me...is it commonly assumed that N. Americans/Europeans are of the tribe of Dan?

Just a note from my thinking. We know that the 10 tribes of Israel were taken to the north where they become lost in history. The Inuits peoples reside in North America and North Asia. I do not know very many LDS that connect these peoples to Israel. However, this is interesting because many of the native Americans genetically can be traced back to these peoples but that connection goes back to between 20,000 and 40,000 years ago. This is a big problem for the 6000 year old human population people or 6,000 years to Adam and Eve crowd.

As far as the tribe of Dan - there is some feeling that there is a Scandinavian connection with Israel. I have speculated this as well. A German once told me that the ancient root to the term Saxons can be roughly translated to Jacob’s sons.

Many “white” peoples are sometimes called Anglo-Saxons and I understand this is a better racial term than Caucasian. In modern LDS History our enemies have claimed that among the Mormons was a group of assassins of Scandinavian nationality that called themselves Dainties or of the Tribe of Dan.

The Traveler

[rameumptom]

I believe the tribe of Dan, living on the coast, was absorbed by the Sea Peoples (Phoenicians or Philistines). They no longer exist as a people. I also do not believe they exist as a tribe any longer, as the gathering of the 144,000 mentioned in Revelation does not mention the tribe of Dan. Now, will there be some LDS members adopted into that tribe? Perhaps. But that is very different than being a DNA genetic tribe of Dan.

Whether there is a single person as the Prophet of the Beast, or whether it is an organization, does not matter to me. My focus is on building and establishing Zion. Anyone who opposes the Zion we build will be Anti-Christ, as the Zion we build will be built not only by LDS, but also by other righteous peoples who seek to build a righteous society and refuge.

[JohnnyRudick]

I believe the tribe of Dan, living on the coast, was absorbed by the Sea Peoples (Phoenicians or Philistines). They no longer exist as a people. I also do not believe they exist as a tribe any longer, as the gathering of the 144,000 mentioned in Revelation does not mention the tribe of Dan. Now, will there be some LDS members adopted into that tribe? Perhaps. But that is very different than being a DNA genetic tribe of Dan.

Whether there is a single person as the Prophet of the Beast, or whether it is an organization, does not matter to me. My focus is on building and establishing Zion. Anyone who opposes the Zion we build will be Anti-Christ, as the Zion we build will be built not only by LDS, but also by other righteous peoples who seek to build a righteous society and refuge.

I seems to stand to reason that the Anti-Christ will be just as literal as the "Lord's Christ".

[RescueMom]

A friends PB states she is from the tribe of Dan, so there are some that are from the the tribe of Dan. Yes I read it, she was freaked out when she got it.

[rameumptom]

But there is a difference between those announced of Dan in a patriarchal blessing, and the literal line as a group being among the anti-Christ.

[Blackmarch]

This is the short version of a lesson I recently offered on the topic.

TWO VIEWS OF THE ANTICHRIST

1. He's an individual who will rule during the end times, and is mentioned in Daniel 7:8, 23-25, 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4, and in Revelation 13:1-10.

2. It (or they) are theological or doctrinal heresy (error) that has, does, and will continue to occur. See 1 John 2:18, 22; and 2 John 1:7. In particular, the Docetist heresy, that Jesus only apparently suffered--not in actuality, is considered an antichrist teaching (see 1 John 4:1-3).

Personally, both of them seem possible. There will be a capital-A Antichrist during the end times, and there are teachings that are so heterodox as to be considered small-a antichrist in nature.

Questions: Your views on the identity of the Antichrist? If he's a person, what should we look for to be ready? If it's false teaching, what would raise a doctrine to the level of being considered antichrist?

On a general level I generally lean towards the anyone who dedicates themselves against the teachings of chrisst as an anti-christ, I also see anyone who slips in and takes upon them the teachings of christ in word to lead away others from christ as well.

As for the Anti-christ as a singular person, I'd like to point out that for the one described in Daniel and 2nd thess, there isn't a time set for when he would arise beyond at some point after the apostles have gone.

I'd also like to note that in second thess he sets himself in the temple of God- what does this mean? that he will either take over or come from Gods church (or what was once God's church). This really narrows it down for me. Personally I think this has already happened in the past, but if someone believes it hasn't happened yet then all they need to do is look toward the christian sects that build temples to God.

Question PC; do catholics still build cathedrals?

Edited May 18, 2011 by Blackmarch

[JohnnyRudick]

On a general level I generally lean towards the anyone who dedicates themselves against the teachings of chrisst as an anti-christ, I also see anyone who slips in and takes upon them the teachings of christ in word to lead away others from christ as well.

As for the Anti-christ as a singular person, I'd like to point out that for the one described in Daniel and 2nd thess, there isn't a time set for when he would arise beyond at some point after the apostles have gone.

I'd also like to note that in second thess he sets himself in the temple of God- what does this mean? that he will either take over or come from Gods church (or what was once God's church). This really narrows it down for me. Personally I think this has already happened in the past, but if someone believes it hasn't happened yet then all they need to do is look toward the christian sects that build temples to God.

Question PC; do catholics still build cathedrals?

John writing in 1st John speaks of the Anti-Christ and also separately

speaking of many anti-Christs, so I believe as he did that there were/are

many anti-Christs in the world and that he Anti-Christ shall come.

[rex8499]

I always figured that the anti-christ would be an actual person who is a widely loved political figure who ushers in peace world wide, or at least in the middle east. He would unite most of the world under one government and become powerful. Eventually he would turn on Christians.

I can't say specifically where those ideas come from. Just a general thought pattern that developed over time I guess. I might well be wrong.

[JohnnyRudick]

I always figured that the anti-christ would be an actual person who is a widely loved political figure who ushers in peace world wide, or at least in the middle east. He would unite most of the world under one government and become powerful. Eventually he would turn on Christians.

I can't say specifically where those ideas come from. Just a general thought pattern that developed over time I guess. I might well be wrong.

Could be.

Able to set up a 7 year treaty. Lot of power.

Course we could do that:cool:

[curtishouse]

I'll just go off what the Bible says about the antiChrist.

Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ.

Such a man is the antichrist--he denies the Father and the Son. - 1John 2:22

This could be anybody. There are plenty of antiChrists out there. There isn't just one antiChrist.

Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in

the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver

and the antichrist. - 2John 1:7

[JohnnyRudick]

I'll just go off what the Bible says about the antiChrist.

Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ.

Such a man is the antichrist--he denies the Father and the Son. - 1John 2:22

This could be anybody. There are plenty of antiChrists out there. There isn't just one antiChrist.

Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in

the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver

and the antichrist. - 2John 1:7

Yes, I understand the spirit that John is referring to here.

I take this and what Paul had to say about a future despot

and the referral to Jesus made by David and used later by Luke

("Acts 4:26 The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were

gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ.")

and figure that if God has a "Christ" so might the Devil.

I am not hard and fast on this idea but at this point in my life of

being concerned with such things for the last 40some years I just think it could be.

Edited May 19, 2011 by JohnnyRudick

[apexviper13]

I've always felts that the anti-Christ wouldn't be one person, but rather the body of all those that are against Christ with Satan being the leader.

[JohnnyRudick]

I've always felts that the anti-Christ wouldn't be one person, but rather the body of all those that are against Christ with Satan being the leader.

Because of all the things the Scriptures hint at,

Makes me feel that the world is full of "runner-ups"

and we have had a few "dress rehearsals".

Many have made a run at it including the likes of

Charlemagne, Napoleon, Hitler, Mussolini but one day

the One that a lot of people including the Muslims looking

for their Ammadi or Mahdi or Maitreya or who ever possibly

will come.

And he is not Jesus.

[Blackmarch]

John writing in 1st John speaks of the Anti-Christ and also separately

speaking of many anti-Christs, so I believe as he did that there were/are

many anti-Christs in the world and that he Anti-Christ shall come.

there are many antichrists to come I agree... however if there is to be one that tops them all to be an anti-christ with a capital A, and John, daniel and paul are all talking about the same individual... I really believe that individual has already come and past before Christ restored his church (the signs of the second coming started before the apostles died I'd like to note here), otherwise if we are to suppose that the LDS church is God's church and that the Antichrist (capitol A) hasn't come yet, then when he does - he will rule/preach from an LDS Temple; "Who aopposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."... I don't see that happening without having the modern church falling into apostacy. And from what I understand the second coming is to happen either before that happens. Edited May 20, 2011 by Blackmarch

[JohnnyRudick]

there are many antichrists to come I agree... however if there is to be one that tops them all to be an anti-christ with a capital A, and John, daniel and paul are all talking about the same individual... I really believe that individual has already come and past before Christ restored his church (the signs of the second coming started before the apostles died I'd like to note here), otherwise if we are to suppose that the LDS church is God's church and that the Antichrist (capitol A) hasn't come yet, then when he does - he will rule/preach from an LDS Temple; "Who aopposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."... I don't see that happening without having the modern church falling into apostacy. And from what I understand the second coming is to happen either before that happens.

Good point.

Could it be referring to a Jerusalem Temple?

There is a lot of stuff going on today.

Seems like the prophecies of Zechariah (Zechariah 12:4. ...)

and others are about to come through if not soon maybe

in about 7 or 8 years.

Possibly a Temple dedicated without the Church could be

set up.

I don't know!!!

Just speculatin' amongst some of the brightest people on the planet

hoping to learn something here:cool:

[spartanhero]

looking back on history and current events, it makes me wonder about the anti-christ. i feel that the anti-christ will be seated in power that is least likely to be expected. if Christ opens our eyes to the truth then the anti-christ will blind our eyes to it, and people will blindly follow him in the name our father i think that is what the anti-christ is or has tried to get humanity to do, shed blood, waged war, and taken countless lives in the name of our father. looking back at history and not just christianity but many religions; how many wars have been waged in the name of our father? war still continues today. The crusades is a perfect example of great blood shed, many innocent people died for the holly land. was that our fathers will or the will of man? i dont claim to be an expert in anything but i try to research things that i have questions about, one being the anti-christ, and history proves that man is capable of twisting the word of our Father for his/her personal gain.

Edited May 22, 2011 by spartanhero

[Blackmarch]

Good point.

Could it be referring to a Jerusalem Temple?

There is a lot of stuff going on today.

Seems like the prophecies of Zechariah (Zechariah 12:4. ...)

and others are about to come through if not soon maybe

in about 7 or 8 years.

Possibly a Temple dedicated without the Church could be

set up.

I don't know!!!

Just speculatin' amongst some of the brightest people on the planet

hoping to learn something here:cool:

Very good question.

and this is completely IMO by the way...

One thing to recognise about this verse (in 2 Thess)- who is being talked to? If it's to the jews, then it would be something that they or their descendants would consider to be a legit throne of God (not necessarily a house of worship). Likewise with the early church.. or if it's to God's church in modern times then it will be something that the LDS (or fallen LDS perhaps) consider a legit throne of God.

So if it were to be a temple in jerusalem, if the message was to the jews I think there would be quite a bit of support for that, however I don't think thats the case given that the message was to the early church (which I believe it was directed to more than anyone else, especially as previous verses are referring to the falling away of the church)... Which would mean that there would have to be a temple in Jerusalem that they or the fallen church would consider legitimate, especially after the apostles were gone (supposing it was to be at jerusalem).

If it was directed to us in modern times then it will have to be a temple there that the LDS or former LDS consider legitimate.

It certainly is directed to God's people, and it seems ones who will be facing apostacy.

One other possiblity to think about that temple might refer to the organization more than a place (altho I think it's more the latter than the former).

My premise in regards to a singular antichrist to eclipse other antichrists is built on the assumption the individuals stated in John, Second thessalonians, and daniel are the same person.. if it isn't the same person then it's back in the air, and there might very well yet to be a one thats greater than all the others to come.

However my fear is not a singular great antichrist, but rather that people will miss all the smaller snakes in their vigilance for some huge monster that might not exist (or even if it will exist).

Edited May 23, 2011 by Blackmarch

[JohnnyRudick]

. . .

However my fear is not a singular great antichrist, but rather that people will miss all the smaller snakes in their vigilance for some huge monster that might not exist (or even if it will exist).

That is what frustrates me a little.

So many looking for the Anti-Christ when there

are so many amongst us in out schools of lefter learning

and in our government institutions around the world.

[frankreid]

I would say that an antichrist is any person, thing or movement which goes against the teachings of Christ and his church.

You are right! As the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints points out in its Bible Dictionary:

"A word used by John to describe one who would assume the guise of Christ but in reality would be opposed to Christ (1 Jn. 2:18–22; 4:3–6; 2 Jn. 1:7). In a broader sense it is anyone or anything that counterfeits the true gospel or plan of salvation and that openly or secretly is set up in opposition to Christ. The great antichrist is Lucifer, but he has many assistants both as spirit beings and as mortals. See 2 Thes. 2:1–12; Rev. 13:17; Jacob 7:1–23; Alma 1:2–16; 30:6–60." :)

[Speakzeasy]

The Anti-Christ can be an interesting from the point of scripture.

". . . therefore he shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation against the holy covenant: . . ." (Daniel 11:30)

and

" . . . he shall even return, and have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant." (Daniel 11:30)

point to:

"And he had power to give life unto the image of the [head of the] beast, that the image of the [head of the] beast should both [be spoken and reverenced], and [he causeth] that as many as would not worship the image of the [head of the] beast should be killed." (Revelation 13:15)

which leads to:

And arms shall stand on his part . . . (Daniel 11:31)

which leads to:

"And they worshipped the [great red] dragon which gave power unto the [head of the] beast: and they worshipped the [head of the] beast, saying, Who is like unto the [head of the] beast? who is able to make war with him" (Revelation 13:4)

brings us to:

". . . the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;" (Daniel 7:21)

which equals same time period as:

One individual:

"And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time." (Daniel 7:25)

A second individual:

"And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.

"And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.

"And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations." (Revelation 13:5-7)

(Note the verses above are closely ordered by subject and event.)

Daniel and John are speaking of two different people. It is difficult to separate them from the story as it s written. However, there are two people involved:

". . . was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the [head of the] beast and the false prophet are, . . ." (Revelation 20:10)

1. [head of the] beast

2. the false prophet

Chapter 13 in the Book of Revelation is divided into four time periods that are not in order they appear in the chapter:

Revelation 13:1-3 ("And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: . . .", (first part verse 3)) represents the first time period. (Time period of John's Ten horn's in Revelation 17:12. Also, Daniel 7:23-"And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: . . ." (Daniel 7:24) relates to the events during this time.)

Revelation 13:11-13 represents the second time period. (Time period John's seventh king in Revelation 17:10. Also, Daniel 7:8 relates to the events during this time.)

Revelation 13:14-18 represents the third time period. (This is the wound to the head of the beast in Revelation 13:3. Also, Daniel 7:24 ". . . and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.")

Revelation 13:3 (". . . and all the world wondered after the beast.", (last part verse 3)) - 8 represents the fourth time period. (Time period of John's eighth king Revelation 17:11. Also 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 is during this time period.)

(Note that verse 3 is divided between the first and fourth time periods. There are other cross references relating to the above time periods in Daniel, etc. There is nothing close to exhaustive about the above information.)

These are the "last days." We speak and we don't understand. We are guessing about what is to happen. These Anti-Christ are alive today, all of us know at least one of them by name. The other is very well known to most of us by name. However, we guess at who the Anti-Christ(s) might be because we do not have a clear picture of how prophecy is applied to history and relates to our own time period.

By clear picture I mean a chronological structure of events and characters that lead to the present moment. These events can only be found through studying prophecy about the events and characters in prophecy that apply to the last days from Bible and Book of Mormon (include prayer and fasting, connecting with G_d). Applying third party information (anything that is written or stated by any man/woman) will distort the written word in these two books. Let these two books stand on their own merits, without anyone to tell the story within them. Then will the prophecies become more clear.

There are people with attitudes that view prophecy in a general or round about way ("could mean anything that we what to apply it to, as long as it looks as if it as something in common"). Attitudes will distort things so that they are seen incorrectly. Sticking to the story and not getting off the narrow path goes along way. Prophecy is a story with meaning, organization and purpose. Prophecy leading to the last days are progressive events in history and applied to specific people and events in time. Viewing prophecy from an abstract position or trying to apply events to multiple events in time, rather then the correct one, diminishes everything about the prophetic stories.

Edited March 12, 2014 by Speakzeasy
Clarity