Being a Deceiver and an Antichrist:
An Introduction
G.D.O'Bradovich III
July 20, 2022
1
I say this because 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. 2 John 1:7
|
An ancient tradition of the universal church is that Jesus Christ was fully God and fully man without contradictory natures and the act of redemption is consistent with this teaching, otherwise said, only God could sacrifice himself, through an act of submission, to himself to redeem humanity from the curse of the Law [Gal 1:13].
There are two reasons one might question if Christ was manifested in the flesh [1 Tim 3:16]: Firstly, if one believes that Jesus was not God, then he could neither speak authoritatively on the new covenant [Strong’s Number H1285] with Israel and Judah [Jeremiah 31:31]. Jeremiah does not indicate that the new covenant will include the seventy two nations of the Gentiles. Secondly, if Jesus did not exist, then his life as described in the Bible is a fictional account that could function, when properly interpreted, as an allegory.
Jesus was addressed as “Teacher” on at least three occasions in differing circumstances [Mark 10:51, John 2:2, John 20:16]. In the last example, Mary Magdalene is startled when she realizes she is inquiring of the gardener, but Jesus. Mary’s address to Jesus as “Teacher” manifests itself in this emotional situation: there was no forethought in her address to Jesus- it was habitual. There is no reason to believe that Jesus did not publicly teach or offer instructions to listeners and was recognized as a teacher by the public and by at least one Pharisee [John 3:1-2]. Therefore, it is certain that Jesus had a physical body.
The quoted Epistle passage at the introduction of this essay commences with someone denying Jesus’ material body and immediately concludes that they are an Antichrist, however, at least one intermediate conclusion is omitted.
The result of denying Christ in the flesh is that he would be incapable of providing Christian teachings, as a physical body is required to pronounce the words for instruction and edification. To reject the physical existence of Jesus is to deny any teachings from Christ himself and, as a result, the concept of Christian teachings, the words of the Savior, could not have existed. Of course, not only could Christian teachings not exist, they never existed, as Christ never existed in physical form. Therefore, anyone who denies oral Christian instruction, that is, the teachings as spoken by Jesus and understood by the Apostles, is rightly considered to be an antichrist, where we interpret “antichrist” as being “against” or “opposite” Christ.
To correctly understand what an antichrist is, all mentions of antichrist [Strong’s Number G500] in the New Testament are listed [2]:
There are two reasons one might question if Christ was manifested in the flesh [1 Tim 3:16]: Firstly, if one believes that Jesus was not God, then he could neither speak authoritatively on the new covenant [Strong’s Number H1285] with Israel and Judah [Jeremiah 31:31]. Jeremiah does not indicate that the new covenant will include the seventy two nations of the Gentiles. Secondly, if Jesus did not exist, then his life as described in the Bible is a fictional account that could function, when properly interpreted, as an allegory.
Jesus was addressed as “Teacher” on at least three occasions in differing circumstances [Mark 10:51, John 2:2, John 20:16]. In the last example, Mary Magdalene is startled when she realizes she is inquiring of the gardener, but Jesus. Mary’s address to Jesus as “Teacher” manifests itself in this emotional situation: there was no forethought in her address to Jesus- it was habitual. There is no reason to believe that Jesus did not publicly teach or offer instructions to listeners and was recognized as a teacher by the public and by at least one Pharisee [John 3:1-2]. Therefore, it is certain that Jesus had a physical body.
The quoted Epistle passage at the introduction of this essay commences with someone denying Jesus’ material body and immediately concludes that they are an Antichrist, however, at least one intermediate conclusion is omitted.
The result of denying Christ in the flesh is that he would be incapable of providing Christian teachings, as a physical body is required to pronounce the words for instruction and edification. To reject the physical existence of Jesus is to deny any teachings from Christ himself and, as a result, the concept of Christian teachings, the words of the Savior, could not have existed. Of course, not only could Christian teachings not exist, they never existed, as Christ never existed in physical form. Therefore, anyone who denies oral Christian instruction, that is, the teachings as spoken by Jesus and understood by the Apostles, is rightly considered to be an antichrist, where we interpret “antichrist” as being “against” or “opposite” Christ.
To correctly understand what an antichrist is, all mentions of antichrist [Strong’s Number G500] in the New Testament are listed [2]:
Little children, it is the last time and as ye have heard that antichrist G500 shall come, even now are there many antichrists; G500 whereby we know that it is the last time. 1 John 2:18
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist G500 that denieth the Father and the Son. 1 John 2:22 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God and this is that spirit of antichrist, G500 whereof ye have heard that it should come and even now already is it in the world. 1 John 4:3 For many deceivers are entered into the world who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. G500 2 John 1:7 |
The word antichrist does not appear in the Revelation of Jesus Christ nor is it used as a title, “Antichrist”, for an individual. Many people identify the “beast” with the Antichrist and, while this interpretation is reasonable, it may be false, as the reasonableness of a conclusion is not evidence that it is true.
The Epistles of John create three categories for deceivers and antichrists:
The Epistles of John create three categories for deceivers and antichrists:
1. Those who deny that Christ has come physically. [2 John 1:7]
2. Those who deny that Jesus is the Christ, [1 John 2:22] 3. Those who deny the Father and the Son, [1 John 2:22] |
If one denies that Christ has a physical body, then Jesus could not be anointed with oil and could not be the Christ. To reject Christ is to deny that he came by the will of the Father into the world for the salvation of many [“pro multis”, “περὶ πολλῶν”]. Those denying the Father and the Son reject the doctrine of the Trinity. The existence of many antichrists is evidence to John that it is “the last time”, as the “spirit of antichrist” is in the world [1 John 2:18, 4:3]. Therefore, we agree with the author that there are many antichrists in the world: those who deny Jesus existed, those who deny Jesus is the Christ, and those who deny the Trinity.
The belief that Christ must possess physicality seems obvious to the modern Christian and it may present challenges for them to envision a theological scenario wherein a body is unnecessary. Yet, most Gnostic Christians teach that Jesus was only a spirit and unable to be crucified. Jesus appeared to have a body and the thoughtful Gnostic is expected to draw the correct comparisons between the suffering of Sophia in the material world and the passion of Christ on the cross.
In the totality of recorded human experiences, there are few reliable examples of individuals willingly professing being an Antichrist and the various reasons for these omissions are beyond the scope of this essay. Although explicit identifications of being an Antichrist are lacking, there are indications of Antichristian behaviors through history and into the modern age.
Antichrists can be readily identified by their denying the words, the instructions, of Christ himself. The authorized version of the Bible has 783,137 words; the Gospel of Luke, 25,640 words; and Jesus’ discourses contain 31,426 words [1]. Since the total number of words that Jesus speaks is approximately a quarter more than Luke’s Gospel, there is no reason the modern Christian cannot be familiar with Jesus’ teachings, although one should not expect to understand all of his teachings [Mark 4:34]. In conclusion to this part, only one parable is explained by the Master [Mark 4:10-12] and the Biblical Reader is left to his own imagination and ability to determine, firstly, why the majority of the parables consist of a “lost and found” theme and, secondly, the reason Jesus only spoke in parables [Matthew 13:34], a form of communication fraught with potential misunderstandings.
The belief that Christ must possess physicality seems obvious to the modern Christian and it may present challenges for them to envision a theological scenario wherein a body is unnecessary. Yet, most Gnostic Christians teach that Jesus was only a spirit and unable to be crucified. Jesus appeared to have a body and the thoughtful Gnostic is expected to draw the correct comparisons between the suffering of Sophia in the material world and the passion of Christ on the cross.
In the totality of recorded human experiences, there are few reliable examples of individuals willingly professing being an Antichrist and the various reasons for these omissions are beyond the scope of this essay. Although explicit identifications of being an Antichrist are lacking, there are indications of Antichristian behaviors through history and into the modern age.
Antichrists can be readily identified by their denying the words, the instructions, of Christ himself. The authorized version of the Bible has 783,137 words; the Gospel of Luke, 25,640 words; and Jesus’ discourses contain 31,426 words [1]. Since the total number of words that Jesus speaks is approximately a quarter more than Luke’s Gospel, there is no reason the modern Christian cannot be familiar with Jesus’ teachings, although one should not expect to understand all of his teachings [Mark 4:34]. In conclusion to this part, only one parable is explained by the Master [Mark 4:10-12] and the Biblical Reader is left to his own imagination and ability to determine, firstly, why the majority of the parables consist of a “lost and found” theme and, secondly, the reason Jesus only spoke in parables [Matthew 13:34], a form of communication fraught with potential misunderstandings.
2
[Jesus taught the eleven (v.33) that]... repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations… and ye are witnesses of these things. Luke 24:47-48
Whose soever sins ye [the disciples, v.19] remit, they are remitted unto them and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. John 20:23 |
From these two passages it is obvious that the eleven, or the Disciples, have the power to remit and to retain sins when they bring the Good News to the world. The Bible does not state if this authority is limited to the Apostles or if their power over sin can be conferred upon others, as taught by both the Roman and the Greek Churches. The oral tradition of priests remitting sins predates the creation of the Bible, while protestantism depends entirely upon the Bible and Biblical interpretation for its theology of salvation.
Through tradition, the two ancient Churches recognize Christ’s authority in his person and his teachings. Apostolic succession is not explicitly mentioned in the protesent Bible, as everyone is his own priest, that is, the sincere believer can remit his own sins either through belief or through repentance [G3341, changing one’s opinion]. It is understandable why protestants do not earnestly inquire into the theological reasons that the power to remit sins existed outside of Christ with his Apostles. Even if Apostolic authority to remit sins is acknowledged by protestants, they will suggest it was limited to the Apostles and could not be delegated throughout history to current bishops. Neither by theology nor from history, but by necessity, is the authority to remit sins by priests denied by protestantism.
Through tradition, the two ancient Churches recognize Christ’s authority in his person and his teachings. Apostolic succession is not explicitly mentioned in the protesent Bible, as everyone is his own priest, that is, the sincere believer can remit his own sins either through belief or through repentance [G3341, changing one’s opinion]. It is understandable why protestants do not earnestly inquire into the theological reasons that the power to remit sins existed outside of Christ with his Apostles. Even if Apostolic authority to remit sins is acknowledged by protestants, they will suggest it was limited to the Apostles and could not be delegated throughout history to current bishops. Neither by theology nor from history, but by necessity, is the authority to remit sins by priests denied by protestantism.
Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
1 Corinthians 11:27-29 |
Saint Paul does not explain the reason anyone could “unworthily” eat bread and drink wine, so much so that they will be guilty of “the body and blood of the Lord”. Nor does he elaborate on the reason one should “examine” oneself before eating the communion meal, but not before a typical meal. From these passages, the careless reader may conclude that Saint Paul teaches that communion is the actual blood and real body of Christ, not a symbolic “meal” as believed by protestants.
And as they were eating, Jesus took bread and blessed it and brake it and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take. Eat. This is my body.” and he took the cup and gave thanks and gave it to them, saying, “Drink ye all of it, for this is my blood of the new testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” Matthew 26:26-28
|
Although parallel passages are found in Mark 14:22-24 and in Luke 22:19-20, there is no mention of communion in the fourth Gospel. The skeptic may state that an omission is an intentional act and suggest that the omitting of communion is a denial of its significance.
Jesus states that the bread is “my body” and the wine is “my blood” and there is no evidence that his words should be interpreted as symbolic, or as “a thing that represents something else, especially a material object representing something abstract.” Of course, crucifixion is not an abstract concept, as it consists of a wooden cross and a body, so to offer a symbolic interpretation of Jesus’ words, one must offer a reasonable explanation that does not involve the passion of the cross.
The Last Supper was not a one time event for the benefit of the Apostles, as Jesus instructed them to “do this in remembrance of me.” Yet, one could suggest that communion was only for the Apostles to perform during their lifetimes, similar to the idea that the authority to remit sins is limited to the Apostles. Although there is no explicit statement from Christ that this ritual should continue indefinitely for those who are not Apostles, we note that no mainline protestants offer this valid interpretation of Scripture.
In the modern age, one can self identify as a Christian, based on one’s beliefs, and, paradoxically, be an Antichrist, by denying the Redeemer’s teachings. As always, the Gentle Researcher is invited to evaluate the supposed contradiction of being a Christian and being an Antichrist.
Jesus states that the bread is “my body” and the wine is “my blood” and there is no evidence that his words should be interpreted as symbolic, or as “a thing that represents something else, especially a material object representing something abstract.” Of course, crucifixion is not an abstract concept, as it consists of a wooden cross and a body, so to offer a symbolic interpretation of Jesus’ words, one must offer a reasonable explanation that does not involve the passion of the cross.
The Last Supper was not a one time event for the benefit of the Apostles, as Jesus instructed them to “do this in remembrance of me.” Yet, one could suggest that communion was only for the Apostles to perform during their lifetimes, similar to the idea that the authority to remit sins is limited to the Apostles. Although there is no explicit statement from Christ that this ritual should continue indefinitely for those who are not Apostles, we note that no mainline protestants offer this valid interpretation of Scripture.
In the modern age, one can self identify as a Christian, based on one’s beliefs, and, paradoxically, be an Antichrist, by denying the Redeemer’s teachings. As always, the Gentle Researcher is invited to evaluate the supposed contradiction of being a Christian and being an Antichrist.
He that saith, “I know him [Jesus Christ, v.1]” and keepeth not his commandments is a liar… 1 John 2:4
|
footnotes and appendix
Footnotes
[1] The total number of words spoken by Jesus is 31,426, omitting duplicate texts. https://synopticgospel.com/blog/how-many-words-of-jesus-christ-are-red/
[2] https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g500/kjv/tr/0-1/
[2] https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g500/kjv/tr/0-1/
Appendix
The following information is from the BlueLetterBible.org:
Ψεύστης G5583 pseustēs masculine noun
The KJV translates Strong's G5583 as: liar (10).
The KJV translates Strong's G5583 as: liar (10).
If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar G5583 and his word is not in us. 1 John 1:10
He that saith, “I know him”, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar G5583 and the truth is not in him. 1 John 2:4
Who is a liar G5583 but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son. 1 John 2:22
If a man say, “I love God”, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: G5583 for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? 1 John 4:20
He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; G5583 because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. 1 John 5:10
He that saith, “I know him”, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar G5583 and the truth is not in him. 1 John 2:4
Who is a liar G5583 but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son. 1 John 2:22
If a man say, “I love God”, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: G5583 for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? 1 John 4:20
He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; G5583 because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. 1 John 5:10
Ἀρνέομαι G720 arneomai verb
The KJV translates Strong's G720 as: deny (29), refuse (2).
Who is a liar but he that denieth G720 that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth G720 the Father and the Son. 1 John 2:22
Whosoever denieth G720 the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. 1 John 2:23
Whosoever denieth G720 the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. 1 John 2:23
Πλάνος G4108 planos adjective
The KJV translates Strong's G4108 as: deceiver (4), seducing (1).
The KJV translates Strong's G4108 as: deceiver (4), seducing (1).
For many deceivers G4108 are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver G4108 and an antichrist. 2 John 1:7