Nowhere in Scripture do we find a singularized capital A Antichrist. In the passages in
1 John 2,
1 John 4, and
2 John 1 in which the word appears, it is decapitalized, in recognition that it does not refer to a singularized individual. This is reinforced in
1 John 2:18, which speaks of many antichrists. The remaining passages in 1 John and 2 John describe the characteristics whereby an antichrist can be recognized.
Nevertheless, professing dispensationalists virtually universally subscribe to the doctrine of a singular Antichrist. What remains conspicuously untold is the history of the doctrine's origin and proliferation.
Into the second half of the 16th century, the Protestant Reformation was experiencing notable success in casting off the spiritual chains characterizing the papal Roman, i.e Roman Catholic (RC), empire’s Dark Ages. Two of the foundational proclamations upon which said success rested were: (1) The just shall live by faith; and (2) The papacy is an antichrist. For these, particularly the latter, multitudes of Reformation leaders and followers ultimately paid with their lives. Evidence for the latter was recognized from prophecies in Daniel and Revelation; from the RC church’s own arrogated title for the pope, VICARIVS FILII DEII (Latin for Vicar of the Son of God); and for the pope’s own direct claims (Pope Pius XI, “I am God on the earth.”).
Notable also is the sum of the Latin numerals in VICARIVS FILII DEII of 666, which may or may not be considered to be of significance.
The RC church’s own foundations were crumbling under the Reformation onslaught, and the necessity for a counter strategy was being exigently recognized. Francisco Ribera (1537-1591), a priest within the RC order of the Jesuits, was commissioned with the task. He responded by producing a 500 page commentary which speculated upon a single future Antichrist who would abolish Christianity, claim to be God, and conquer the world. This was the beginning of the counter-Reformation doctrines of futurism which became intrinsic to contemporary dispensationalism.
Ribera’s futurism was further disseminated within RC ranks by Italian cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621), and became official RC dogma.
For a further two centuries, however, only the RC church subscribed to the futurist position. Then in 1826-1830, Samuel Maitland (1792-1866), librarian to the Archbishop of Canterbury, became the first Protestant to adopt it. Disbelieving that the papacy was in the prophecies, he was contemptuous of much of the Reformation.
James Todd (1805-1869), professor of Hebrew at Trinity College in Dublin, became a subsequent ecclesiologically prominent adherent. Others began to follow.
Concurrent with these developments were the appearance and rise of Darbyism and the doctrines of modern dispensationalism originated by its founder John Nelson Darby. Futurism was recognized as being a fully compatible and welcome addition, and was quickly integrated. The result was an interpretive system overwhelmingly oriented to futurized speculation and conjecture, with minimal to no regard for the historic prophetic wisdom and sacrifices of the Reformers of old.
This system ultimately spread globally, and prevails in evangelicalism today.
Historical Reformation prophetic fulfillment is anathema to dispensational futurized speculation. Until historical Reformation truth is recognized and reclaimed, the delusion and deception of a futurized singularized Antichrist will continue to be perpetuated.
