End Times Anti-Christ Theory

ewq1938

I love you three.
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Supporter
Nov 5, 2011
44,413
6,797
✟915,391.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
The Apocrypha in the 1611 KJV was placed in its own separate section, and was recognized as non-canonical, because the canon had been defined and established over 1,000 years previously.

If the presence of the Apocrypha in the 1611 KJV could invalidate the rendering of Daniel 9:26, then why could it not also invalidate the rendering of any other verse or passage in Scripture?

My point clearly was there are issues with the 1611 that later versions fixed.



But in short, capitalization is inconsistent and therefore inconclusive.

I only mentioned it to show that the translators were showing a difference between the two princes.


Another better way to answer the question, "Who is the prince in Daniel 9:26", can be seen grammatically by referring to the closest clarifying antecedent. That is unquestionably the prince in Daniel 9:25, who is unquestionably Messiah.

It is very questionable actually. These bad people are not the people of the Messiah. Also, the Messiah is killed in verse 26 so how exactly is he able to confirm a covenant in the next verse? I think what is unquestionable is that there is a second prince here.
 
Upvote 0

jgr

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟783,467.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
My point clearly was there are issues with the 1611 that later versions fixed.

The presence of the non-canonical Apocrypha did not invalidate canonical Scripture.

I only mentioned it to show that the translators were showing a difference between the two princes.

The translators' use of capitalization was inconsistent and inconclusive, and cannot be a basis for sound exegesis.

It is very questionable actually. These bad people are not the people of the Messiah. Also, the Messiah is killed in verse 26 so how exactly is he able to confirm a covenant in the next verse? I think what is unquestionable is that there is a second prince here.

If the Holy Spirit had intended the prince in Daniel 9:26 to be antichrist, He could easily have inspired the writer to precede the word "prince" with the prefix or word "anti" or "against".

But He didn't, and the words translated "prince" in both verses are identical in the original, and in the translation.

And as such, the evidence grammatically and exegetically is conclusive that they refer to Messiah.

This was also the understanding of a clear majority of the historical true Church for over eighteen centuries.
 
Upvote 0

ewq1938

I love you three.
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Supporter
Nov 5, 2011
44,413
6,797
✟915,391.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
The presence of the non-canonical Apocrypha did not invalidate canonical Scripture.

That's a strawman fallacy.



The translators' use of capitalization was inconsistent and inconclusive, and cannot be a basis for sound exegesis.

Not the version of the KJV we have today especially in regard to Daniel 9.

If the Holy Spirit had intended the prince in Daniel 9:26 to be antichrist, He could easily have inspired the writer to precede the word "prince" with the prefix or word "anti" or "against".

The HS could have given the exact day and time the AC would appear with a drawing of him too.



But He didn't, and the words translated "prince" in both verses are identical in the original, and in the translation.

The word being the same word doesn't prove there is one prince. I have already shown that one prince died and the other prince was alive to confirm a covenant with living people.

And as such, the evidence grammatically and exegetically is conclusive that they refer to Messiah.


Impossible. Once the Messiah died he bodily went to heaven. He did not confirm a covenant with many for one week. That's what the AC does.


This was also the understanding of a clear majority of the historical true Church for over eighteen centuries.

That's another logical fallacy known as the appeal to authority.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

jgr

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟783,467.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
That's a strawman fallacy.





Not the version of the KJV we have today especially in regard to Daniel 9.



The HS could have given the exact day and time the AC would appear with a drawing of him too.





The word being the same word doesn't prove there is one prince. I have already shown that one prince died and the other prince was alive to confirm a covenant with living people.




Impossible. Once the Messiah died he bodily went to heaven. He did not confirm a covenant with many for one week. That's what the AC does.




That's another logical fallacy know as the appeal to authority.

Our readers now have sufficient evidence to draw their own conclusions.
 
Upvote 0

Bible2+

Matthew 4:4
Sep 14, 2015
3,001
375
✟91,195.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
jgr said in post #52:

Which Hebrew word in Daniel 9:24-27 is then presumed to refer to antichrist?

Note that Daniel 9:24-27 can refer to both Christ and Antichrist (see the "Daniel 9:26" part of post #25 above). For a Bible verse can include two different meanings at the same time. For example the "son" in Hosea 11:1b referred to the nation of Old Covenant Israel (Exodus 4:22) and its Exodus from Egypt. Also, at the same time, the "son" in Hosea 11:1b foretold an event in the life of Jesus Christ at His first coming (Matthew 2:14-15,19-21).For another example of dual meaning see the "abomination of desolation" part of post #19 above.

*******

jgr said in post #58:

If antichrist is a prince because Satan is a prince, then antichrist must also be prince of this world, as well as everything else ascribed to Satan. Which he isn't.

Note that the future Antichrist will rule the world by the power of Satan (Revelation 13:4-18). And the Antichrist's reign will be legal, for it will be part of Satan's legal reign over the earth (Luke 4:5-7). For Revelation 13:2b refers to when Satan (the dragon, Revelation 12:9) will give the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of Revelation's "beast") Satan's own earthly throne (seat) and power, so that the Antichrist will have power over all nations (Revelation 13:7). This is what Satan offered Jesus Christ, if He would worship Satan (Luke 4:5-7). In the first century AD, Satan's earthly throne was in the city of Pergamos (Revelation 2:12-13), also called Pergamum (in what is now western Turkey). Satan's earthly throne could be the Great Altar of Pergamum, also called the Pergamon Altar, which in ancient times was sometimes included as one of the seven wonders of the world.

It may not be just a coincidence that shortly after the Pergamon Altar was moved to Berlin around 1900 AD, both World Wars were started from Berlin, or that "the Nazi-era architect Albert Speer used the Pergamon Altar as the model for the Zeppelintribüne, 1934-37. The Führer's pulpit was in the center of the tribune" (Pergamon Altar - Wikipedia) (quote has been deleted for some reason). When the future Antichrist is given power over the whole earth (Revelation 13:7), his throne could be located in the center of the actual Pergamon Altar, which he could move from Berlin to a main temple to himself (and to Lucifer/Satan) in the literal, rebuilt city of Babylon (in Iraq). For a temple to "wickedness" will be built in Shinar (Babylonia) (Zechariah 5:8,11; cf. Daniel 1:1-2), and the Antichrist is called "that Wicked" (2 Thessalonians 2:8). Also, the dragon has been the god worshipped in the city of Babylon since ancient times.

jgr said in post #58:

If antichrist is a prince because Satan is a prince, then antichrist must also be prince of this world, as well as everything else ascribed to Satan. Which he isn't.

Note that if Ezekiel 28:2 has application to future events because of its similarity to the never-fulfilled 2 Thessalonians 2:4, then the prince of Tyre could be the future human ruler commonly called the Antichrist (Daniel 11:36, Revelation 13:5-18). If that is the case, then the king of Tyre (Ezekiel 28:12) could be Lucifer (Satan, the dragon), who will empower the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of Revelation's "beast") (Revelation 13:4, Revelation 12:9; 2 Thessalonians 2:9). Lucifer, before his fall and Adam's fall, could have been placed as a covering cherub over Eden (Ezekiel 28:13-15).

There is a curious correlation between the prince and the king of Tyre on the one hand (Ezekiel 28), and the use of the name "Hiram" in the mystical teachings of a worldwide secret society which ultimately teaches Gnostic Luciferianism, also called Satanism, at its highest degree of initiation. For Hiram was the name of the human king of Tyre at the time of the building of King Solomon's temple (1 Kings 5), about 966 BC. Also, Hiram was the name of another person from Tyre, the human master workman who helped Solomon build the temple (1 Kings 7:13-14). If the king and prince of Tyre addressed in Ezekiel 28 are Lucifer (Satan) and the Antichrist, then the name "Hiram" would be a perfect code name (not the actual name) for both of them, a name by which their identity within the Gnostic Luciferian (Satanist) teachings of the worldwide secret society could be kept secret from all but its highest-level initiates. Just as the human workman named Hiram built a temple to God in which the world was to worship (1 Kings 8:41-43), so the Antichrist will bring the world into the conscious and open worship of Lucifer (Revelation 13:4) when the Antichrist gains power over the earth (Revelation 13:7).

The Antichrist's future, Luciferian rule over the earth could be pictured by the most common, publicly known symbol for the worldwide secret society, in which a drafting/measuring compass, an instrument shaped like the two legs of an "A" (as in "Antichrist"), is sometimes shown standing on top of a globe of the earth. And beneath, as in support of, the "A" is a drafting/measuring square, an instrument shaped like an "L" (as in "Lucifer"). Also, found within the "L" is the letter "G", which could ultimately stand for the (false) "Gnosis" (knowledge) of Gnosticism (compare the original Greek of 1 Timothy 6:20b), which the secret society (mistakenly) thinks can be found in Lucifer. The Antichrist will teach the ancient Gnostic lie that YHWH God is evil (Revelation 13:6, Daniel 11:36), and the ancient Gnostic lie that Christ is not in the flesh (1 John 4:3). The Antichrist will also deny that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 2:22).

Also, there is a major corporation today which has a picture/symbol which is uncannily like the symbol for the secret society.
 
Upvote 0

Bible2+

Matthew 4:4
Sep 14, 2015
3,001
375
✟91,195.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
ewq1938 said in post #57:

. . . the AC is Satan whether him literally or a person Satan is controlling.

Regarding the AC being Satan, note that Satan (the dragon, Revelation 12:9) is not the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of Revelation's "beast"), but the one who will empower the Antichrist (Revelation 13:4; 2 Thessalonians 2:9) and who will be worshiped along with the Antichrist (Revelation 13:4). The Antichrist will be cast into the lake of fire over 1,000 years before Satan is cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 19:20 to 20:10). The Antichrist and Satan are shown to be separate persons also in Revelation 16:13. But Satan could spiritually enter the man who is the Antichrist, just as Satan spiritually entered Judas (Luke 22:3).

*******

ewq1938 said in post #60:

[Re: The AC]

In one passage he is a prince of bad people who do bad things, in another he is called the little horn . . .

Regarding the little horn, are you referring to Daniel 7? If so, that chapter could indeed include reference to the future AC. For the first three beasts (Daniel 7:3-6) represent the ancient empires of Babylon (lion), Medo-Persia (bear), and Greece (leopard). And the fourth beast, or fourth "king"/"kingdom" (Daniel 7:17,23), represents the ancient Roman empire. And the ten horns/kings which come out of it (Daniel 7:7,24) could represent ten major kingdoms/nations today which came out of the former territory of the Roman empire, which consisted not only of Western Europe, but also the Middle East and North Africa. These ten nations could be Germany, the U.K., France, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Algeria, and Syria. The ten part-iron/part-clay toes of Daniel 2:42 could represent the same thing as the ten horns of Daniel 7:7. The Europeans could be the iron, and the Arabs and Turks could be the clay. In Daniel 2:43 the inability of the iron to mix with the clay could represent how, for example, there are many Turks living in Germany, but they remain separated in ghettoes within German cities. Similarly, there are many Arab Algerians living in France, but they remain separated in ghettoes within French cities.

But despite this social separation, which could endure indefinitely, the people of Western Europe on the one hand, and the people of the Middle East and North Africa on the other, could still one day put aside their political separation and become united into one federation. For Daniel 2:42 refers to the ten as a singular "kingdom". The person who will bring this about could be the future Antichrist.

The arising of the "little" horn (Daniel 7:8, Daniel 8:9) which is "diverse" from the ten major nations (Daniel 7:24) could mean that the future Antichrist will arise from a little country. And the little horn arising from "among" the ten major nations (Daniel 7:8) could mean that the Antichrist's country's territory used to be part of the Roman empire. And before that, it was part of one of the four Diadochian Greek kingdoms which succeeded the Greek empire of Alexander the Great (Daniel 8:8-9,21-25). The territory of these four kingdoms stretched from Greece over to Iran, and down into Egypt. So the Antichrist could come from the Middle East. He could be an Arab who will come from the little country of Lebanon, from the modern city of Tyre (Ezekiel 28:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:4).

The Antichrist could start out by claiming to be a Baathist. After becoming the leader of Lebanon, he could peacefully gain control of a Baathist federation of three of the ten major nations (Daniel 7:24): Egypt, "toward the south" of Lebanon (Daniel 8:9), and Iraq and Syria, "toward the east" of Lebanon (Daniel 8:9). This federation could also include the minor nation of a United Palestine, that is, a defeated Israel, "the pleasant land" (Daniel 8:9).

This Baathist federation could be put together in our future by an Iraqi Baathist General (the future Antichrist's precursor) who could completely defeat and occupy Israel and Egypt with a huge Iraqi Army (Daniel 11:15-17; in verse 17 the original Hebrew word translated as "daughter" is "bath"), but who could then mysteriously disappear (Daniel 11:19) shortly before the Antichrist arises on the world stage (Daniel 11:21-45). Years later, when the Antichrist gains control of all ten of the major nations, he could appoint kings over them (Revelation 17:12) who will defer to him (Revelation 17:13), like how when Napoleon gained control of different nations, he appointed kings over them who would defer to him.
 
Upvote 0

jgr

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟783,467.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Note that Daniel 9:24-27 can refer to both Christ and Antichrist (see the "Daniel 9:26" part of post #25 above). For a Bible verse can include two different meanings at the same time. For example the "son" in Hosea 11:1b referred to the nation of Old Covenant Israel (Exodus 4:22) and its Exodus from Egypt. Also, at the same time, the "son" in Hosea 11:1b foretold an event in the life of Jesus Christ at His first coming (Matthew 2:14-15,19-21).For another example of dual meaning see the "abomination of desolation" part of post #19 above.

You've evaded the question, so here it is again:

Which Hebrew word in Daniel 9:24-27 is presumed to refer to antichrist?

Or, does that word not exist?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

keras

Writer of studies on Bible prophecy
Feb 7, 2013
13,559
2,480
82
Thames, New Zealand
Visit site
✟290,690.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Our readers now have sufficient evidence to draw their own conclusions.
Yes, and it's plain to me and most people I know that:
Daniel 9:25 refers to Jesus the Anointed Prince.
Daniel 9:26 refers to Titus, who destroyed the city and Sanctuary....
Daniel 9:27 is for the end times; the 'beast' of Revelation 13:5-8, known as the Anti-Christ, as Jesus confirmed in Matthew 24:15.
 
Upvote 0

ewq1938

I love you three.
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Supporter
Nov 5, 2011
44,413
6,797
✟915,391.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
You've evaded the question, so here it is again:

Which Hebrew word in Daniel 9:24-27 is presumed to refer to antichrist?

Or, does that word not exist?


Argument from silence fallacy.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

jgr

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟783,467.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes, and it's plain to me and most people I know that:
Daniel 9:25 refers to Jesus the Anointed Prince.
Daniel 9:26 refers to Titus, who destroyed the city and Sanctuary....
Daniel 9:27 is for the end times; the 'beast' of Revelation 13:5-8, known as the Anti-Christ, as Jesus confirmed in Matthew 24:15.

There is no word for "antichrist" in ancient Hebrew.

Which word in Daniel 9:27 is presumed to refer to antichrist?
 
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,685
3,404
Non-dispensationalist
✟356,691.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
If the Holy Spirit had intended the prince in Daniel 9:26 to be antichrist, He could easily have inspired the writer to precede the word "prince" with the prefix or word "anti" or "against".
jgr, when the person comes as the prince who shall come - he is not the Antichrist at that time. He is actually the king of the Roman empire of the end times. The little horn person. He is the prince of the people who destroyed the city and sanctuary.

It is not until he is anointed the King of Israel (by the false prophet), as the Jews will think he is their messiah, that he becomes the Antichrist.

I show this on my chart.
296145_35c687d6d098f7f74754a071430682a2.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

jgr

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟783,467.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
jgr, when the person comes as the prince who shall come - he is not the Antichrist at that time. He is actually the king of the Roman empire of the end times. The little horn person. He is the prince of the people who destroyed the city and sanctuary.

It is not until he is anointed the King of Israel (by the false prophet), as the Jews will think he is their messiah, that he becomes the Antichrist.

I show this on my chart.
296145_35c687d6d098f7f74754a071430682a2.jpeg

Douggg, if he's anyone other than prince Messiah, then he doesn't match the Scriptural narrative.

Dispensationally (which I'm aware you disavow), as you're well aware, the claim is that he is antichrist, even though there is no word for antichrist in the ancient Hebrew vocabulary.

Nor is there anywhere in the entirety of Scripture where the "nagid" ("prince") of Daniel 9:25-26 refers to antichrist.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: parousia70
Upvote 0

keras

Writer of studies on Bible prophecy
Feb 7, 2013
13,559
2,480
82
Thames, New Zealand
Visit site
✟290,690.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
There is no word for "antichrist" in ancient Hebrew.

Which word in Daniel 9:27 is presumed to refer to antichrist?
Daniel 11:21 refers to the Anti-Christ [obviously a name used only after Jesus' Advent] as a vile person...who obtains the kingdom by flatteries and smooth words.
Why are you making such an issue about it?
It seems you have a special agenda. What is it?
 
Upvote 0

jgr

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟783,467.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Daniel 11:21 refers to the Anti-Christ [obviously a name used only after Jesus' Advent] as a vile person...who obtains the kingdom by flatteries and smooth words.
Why are you making such an issue about it?
It seems you have a special agenda. What is it?

Daniel 11:21 and the associated descriptions found explicit fulfillment in Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

I consider discerning the difference between Christ and antichrist to be an issue and agenda of quite some significance. Don't you?
 
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,685
3,404
Non-dispensationalist
✟356,691.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Dispensationally (which I'm aware you disavow), as you're well aware, the claim is that he is antichrist, even though there is no word for antichrist in the ancient Hebrew vocabulary.
As I have been saying for several years here, it is an almost universal error that people refer to the person as the Antichrist too broadly - not taking into account that the person is only in the Antichrist role for when he is the illegitimate King of Israel.

You will commonly hear and read commentators say that the Antichrist goes by several names (titles) in the bible. In their thinking, they organize it like this...

the Anitchrist

the little horn
the prince who shall come
the man of sin
the beast

When, to be correct, they should be thinking and speaking in this manner...

the person, the main villain of the end times

the little horn
the prince who shall come
the Antichrist
the revealed man of sin
the beast

So for dispensationalists, and others, such as historists, and futurists, to call the prince who shall come person the Antichrist - it is an almost universal error. The person will actually be in the role of being the King of the Roman Empire (of the end times) when he comes to Israel and the middle east.
________________________________________________________

As far as in the Hebrew and Aramaic, there being no word for Antichrist is not a disqualifier because the greek for christ means messiah, which in turn goes back to hebrew for anointed. And I am pretty sure that there are hebrew words which express the concept of being against and instead of.

Even in the KJV english translation - the word Antichrist does not appear in the old testament either. The reason is because the emphasis is on the person being in the role the King of the Roman empire (the fourth kingdom of Daniel 7) throughout the old testament, and not as the illegitimate King of Israel.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Kaon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2018
5,676
2,349
Los Angeles
✟111,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Celibate
In the end times there will be a counterfeit Trinity because Satan tries to counterfeit God. There will be 3 persons, The Anti-Christ, Satan, and the Spirit of the Anti-Christ. (The False Prophet, The Beast, and the Dragon). All will be claiming to be God, and claiming to be the Trinity of God.

The Anti-Christ is going to be a deceiver, he isn't going to yell and point at himself claiming to be the anti-christ. The Beast isn't going to end up being a red devil with hrns. Satan isn't that obvious. He masquerades as an angel of light. He used to be the light bearer, the one in charge in worship before he was kicked out of heaven.

There is the Son of God, who is Jesus Christ.

And there is the Son of Perdition, who is the false prophet in the end times that will be revealed. Or he is something else.

This antichrist entity is going to follow a very specific entity - who is only mentioned in the Gnostics. However, that entity in the gnostics is also called the God of Forces - as per Daniel 11:38. This antichrist entity will also know who forsakes the covenant of the Most High God, and who doesn't - partly because its father is a spiritual entity.

Part of the reason why most all people will worship this entity known as antichrist is because all of the information about it and its genesis has been removed from the layperson's easy grasp.
 
Upvote 0