Does Dispensationalism Require the Antichrist?

[Douggg]

The text in Revelation was meant to be vague. The THREE BEASTS being a Part of the Seven Headed Beast is a dead giveaway, especially since the SEVEN KINGS are spoken of in Rev. 17 as her SITTING ON THEM, which means they represent the SEVEN HEADED BEASTS HEADS that she also SIT ON.

It is not correct, your statement.... that 7 mountains as being 7 kings.

The 7 heads are 7 mountains on which the woman sits.
The 7 mountains are 7 kings. <<<<<<wrong

The 7 heads are 7 mountains on which the woman sits.
The 7 heads are also 7 kings. <<<<<<right

 

[Revealing Times]

The woman rides a beast singular. It is not beasts (plural) heads. It is 7 heads on the beast (singular)

LOL....come on. The Church is singular also, but every Christian is a part of the body of Christ. The Woman in Rev. 12 was Singular, but she represented ALL ISRAEL.

You guys get hung up, as I have stated before on here, on minutia. The Beast represents every Kingdom that conquered Israel. God in Rev. 17 via an Angel explained THE BEAST and did it by using SEVEN KINGS....Now you tell me, if the Beast isn't Seven Kingdoms why would the Angel use Seven Kings ? Here is what I see with Christendom, too many people want to cling to THEIR IDEAS and traditional understandings, and are not will to receive the Holy Spirits teachings. Just I stated in my Babylon thread, I wrote a blog stating I believed Rome was the city mentioned in Rev. 17:18, BUT....Notice the I in my sentence. There is a difference between I and Gods truths.

The Angel Explains the MYSTERY:

7 And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.

9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.

The Angel explains the Beast right here, it is SEVEN KINGS, Five have Fallen, ONE IS (ROME). What were Beasts in Daniel ? Countries or Kingdoms that Conquered Israel. The Last Beast is what ? A man who comes to power via the 10 Horns who are 10 Kings.

The Last Beast IS A MAN, not a Seven Headed Beast. He is the one that is NOT YET COME !! This is the truth of God, and it is not going to change just because it doesn't fit OUR IDEAS.

 

[Revealing Times]

It is not correct, your statement.... that 7 mountains as being 7 kings.

The 7 heads are 7 mountains on which the woman sits.
The 7 mountains are 7 kings. <<<<<<wrong

The 7 heads are 7 mountains on which the woman sits.
The 7 heads are also 7 kings. <<<<<<right

Geezzzzeee......Rev. 17:3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.

9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.The word used for Mountain is oro.

#3735
probably from an obsolete oro (to rise or "rear", perhaps akin to
G0142, cf G3733); TDNT - 5:475,732; n] a mountain (as lifting itself above the plain):

If you don't get that the Seven Mountains are the Seven Kings then you will never get my understanding. Seven Mountains = Seven Kings that RISE UP above all. The very next verse doesn't just start speaking about Kings for no reason, and SEVEN KINGS at that.....

 

[Douggg]

9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

The woman sits on seven mountains. She is not sitting on seven heads.

 

[Douggg]

If you don't get that the Seven Mountains are the Seven Kings then you will never get my understanding. Seven Mountains = Seven Kings that RISE UP above all. The very next verse doesn't just start speaking about Kings for no reason, and SEVEN KINGS at that.....

It is not talking about mountains "rising up", otherwise it would have said so in the text.

The Seven mountains do not equal Seven Kings. It is the seven heads that represents both seven mountains and seven kings.

Just as the ten horns represents ten kings.

 

[Douggg]

Now you tell me, if the Beast isn't Seven Kingdoms why would the Angel use Seven Kings ?

The beast, as far as representing a kingdom, is the fourth empire, the Roman empire.

In Daniel 7 there are ten horns on the beast. Those ten horns are ten end times kings that the little horn will rise up among.

The are no 7 kings in the Daniel 7 fourth beast (no looking back to Assyria and Egypt), because those are in Revelation 17, spread out across history of the fourth empire. At the time of John, five of those 7 are fallen, one is, and one is to come. The 7 kings are kings of the Julio-Claudian family.

Assyria and Egypt are not part of the picture.

 

[stephen583]

Does the term "anti-Christ refer to a single individual ? Like in the Hollywood movie the Omen, or the "Left Behind" series of books and movies ? Yes and no. It depends on the context and how it's used specifically in a particular prophecy. John 2:18 speaks of a single Antichrist figure who comes at the Time of the End, and numerous antichrist figures already at work in the Early Church. The term "antichrist" refers to a single individual (Also referred to as the Abomination of Desolation in Matthew 24) and multiple antichrists at the same time in this single verse.

If you believe as I do, the "End Times" began soon after Christ was crucified and resurrected.. and today is merely a continuation of those times.. then it seems plausible John 2:18 says there will be a specific Antichrist figure, (spoken of by the prophet Daniel and other prophecies), as well as "multiple" antichrists at the Time of the End, in which we are currently living.

The Revelation seems to say the same thing. It mentions both an antichrist figure referred to as the Beast and another called the False Prophet. I don't believe these two figures are one in the same, because the Scripture says they are both cast alive together into the "Lake of Fire" at the Final Judgment. Obviously, according to this description, they can't possibly represent a single individual.

BTW. The term "Beast" is also used in the same dual sense in Bible. It can refer to the Antichrist as a person, or it can refer to the kingdom of the Antichrist. In the prophecies of Daniel, you'll invariably see where the term "beast" relates to a kingdom, or a system of government. It's also used in the same context in certain verses in the Revelation, but not in every case. Sometimes the Revelation distinctly refers to the "Beast" as a person. So the correct definition in a particular verse of Revelation can be a matter of controversy and is entirely open to interpretation.

I believe this clarifies the "controversy" you expressed in the OP. Do I believe there will be "multiple" antichrist figures at work at the time the Revelation Prophecy is fulfilled ? Yes.. absolutely. Do I believe there will be a specific individual figure who will fulfill the prophecies of the "Abomination of Desolation" ? Yes.. absolutely. So in my view it's not a case of either, or.. but a case of both being true.

 

[Revealing Times]

The beast, as far as representing a kingdom, is the fourth empire, the Roman empire.

In Daniel 7 there are ten horns on the beast. Those ten horns are ten end times kings that the little horn will rise up among.

The are no 7 kings in the Daniel 7 fourth beast (no looking back to Assyria and Egypt), because those are in Revelation 17, spread out across history of the fourth empire. At the time of John, five of those 7 are fallen, one is, and one is to come. The 7 kings are kings of the Julio-Claudian family.

Assyria and Egypt are not part of the picture.

I understand, you can't grasp it. Carry on.

 

[Douggg]

I understand, you can't grasp it. Carry on.

It is not that I don't grasp what you have written. I am saying that your rationale is flawed. You have reasoned the woman is sitting on seven heads - but the text doesn't say, imply, or support your rationale.

Then to make matters worse you take the seven heads which represent "kings' in the text, and make those into kingdoms - then make the individual kingdoms into beasts themselves (citing Daniel 7's four beast), adding Assyria and Egypt - and then make those into mountains, as being kingdoms - each being its own beast head - so you end up with the woman sitting on seven heads, each a beast unto itself as a series of six kingdoms with the last beast head, not a kingdom but a indivdual man.

By which, you violate your own rationale by saying the last king (which you call the last beast) in not a kingdom - like the other six kings (kingdoms to you, beasts) - but a individual human being.... here, as I quote you....

The Angel explains the Beast right here, it is SEVEN KINGS, Five have Fallen, ONE IS (ROME). What were Beasts in Daniel ? Countries or Kingdoms that Conquered Israel. The Last Beast is what ? A man who comes to power via the 10 Horns who are 10 Kings.

The Last Beast IS A MAN, not a Seven Headed Beast. He is the one that is NOT YET COME !! This is the truth of God, and it is not going to change just because it doesn't fit OUR IDEAS.

No-one is talking about a Last Beast, but you. There are no six other beasts in the text. None of the six other heads are beasts or beast kingdoms.

Your interpretation is of the kings is .....

1. Egyptian empire - a beast head (????)
2. Assyrian empire - a beast head (????)
3. Babylonian empire - a beast head (lion)
4. Medo-Persian empire - a beast head (bear)
5. Greek empire - a beast head (leopard)
6. Roman empire - a beast head (?????)

7. Not an empire, but a man

While the text says 7 kings - you have elected to make six of those kings as empires.

In Revelation 13, none of the heads are described as those of any kinds of beasts, showing your idea to be flawed on that account as well.

The problem: you are trying to work the Egyptian and Assyrian empires into the vision in Revelation 17, 12, 13....
which it plainly does not fit.

The seven kings are all men. None of them are kingdoms. Six of the kings are not kingdoms/with the seventh being a man, as you are trying to make you interpretation fit - but it doesn't fit.

 

[Revealing Times]

It is not that I don't grasp what you have written. I am saying that your rationale is flawed. You have reasoned the woman is sitting on seven heads - but the text doesn't say, imply, or support your rationale.

Then to make matters worse you take the seven heads which represent "kings' in the text, and make those into kingdoms - then make the individual kingdoms into beasts themselves (citing Daniel 7's four beast), adding Assyria and Egypt - and then make those into mountains, as being kingdoms - each being its own beast head - so you end up with the woman sitting on seven heads, each a beast unto itself as a series of six kingdoms with the last beast head, not a kingdom but a indivdual man.

By which, you violate your own rationale by saying the last king (which you call the last beast) in not a kingdom - like the other six kings (kingdoms to you, beasts) - but a individual human being.... here, as I quote you....

Like I said, you can't grasp it. Also in Daniel, when the Angel interprets the "Vision" Daniel had he said this: Daniel 7:17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.

So the Kings spoken of in Rev. 17, are just as I said, BEASTS or in Rev. 13 and 17 they are Heads of this ONE BEAST. It is very simple, it is not complex, imho, you have that "human problem" you just can't get past "your own ideas". A lot of people have this problem, they are entrenched in their own ideas and just can't see revelation from God, that is ok, I only explain what God reveals, I do not try and force anyone to grasp it.

No-one is talking about a Last Beast, but you. There are no six other beasts in the text. None of the six other heads are beasts or beast kingdoms.

Your interpretation is of the kings is .....

1. Egyptian empire - a beast head (????)
2. Assyrian empire - a beast head (????)
3. Babylonian empire - a beast head (lion)
4. Medo-Persian empire - a beast head (bear)
5. Greek empire - a beast head (leopard)
6. Roman empire - a beast head (?????)

7. Not an empire, but a man

While the text says 7 kings - you have elected to make six of those kings as empires.

In Revelation 13, none of the heads are described as those of any kinds of beasts, showing your idea to be flawed on that account as well.

The problem: you are trying to work the Egyptian and Assyrian empires into the vision in Revelation 17, 12, 13....
which it plainly does not fit.

The seven kings are all men. None of them are kingdoms. Six of the kings are not kingdoms/with the seventh being a man, as you are trying to make you interpretation fit - but it doesn't fit.

This Last Beast is a mere MAN not a group of Kings or a group of Kings that form an Empire with successive Kings in the link.

 

[DennisTate]

The Antichrist and his indentity seems to be a recurring debate with Christianity, particularly with dispensationalism.

Lately, I've been convinced that John's use of the word Antichrist does not refer (at least not necessarily) to a single individual, though I won't rule that out as a possibilty, but a group of people who deny the truth.

I've always leaned towards dispensationalism (the progressive kind, anyway) because I agree with it's view of Israel and the Church, but I don't see a compelling reason to take the Millennium as a literal thousand years, as the only place that it occurs (AFAIK), is in Revelation, which is a highly symbolic book. Now I'm questioning the dispensationalist view of the Antichrist.

So does dispensationalism require the belief that an individual will rise up, take over the world and persecute Christians?

Could the most relevant anti-Christ person that DennisTate has to worry about
be my own old man of sin........ the ego, Dennis Tate, who continually attempts to
take over the throne of my own heart and mind where Messiah Yeshua - Jesus should be
crowned..... and should rule....... but obviously doesn't yet????????

Aren't all Christians kind of like Barabbas / Bar Abbas who was a notable criminal who went free
as Messiah Yeshua - Jesus was taken to his death.

 

[Douggg]

Like I said, you can't grasp it. Also in Daniel, when the Angel interprets the "Vision" Daniel had he said this: Daniel 7:17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.

So the Kings spoken of in Rev. 17, are just as I said, BEASTS or in Rev. 13 and 17 they are Heads of this ONE BEAST. It is very simple, it is not complex, imho, you have that "human problem" you just can't get past "your own ideas". A lot of people have this problem, they are entrenched in their own ideas and just can't see revelation from God, that is ok, I only explain what God reveals, I do not try and force anyone to grasp it.

There are 7 heads representing 7 kings in Revelation 17. Not 4 kings. You are grabbing something out of context in Daniel 7:17 to make kings into beasts - and applying that to Revelation 17, without basis.

This Last Beast is a mere MAN not a group of Kings or a group of Kings that form an Empire with successive Kings in the link.

There is no last of 7 beasts - because the heads are not beasts to begin with. What is so incredible in your rationale is that you say 6 of the kings are kingdoms - but the 7th is not, but just a man.

 

[Douggg]

Could the most relevant anti-Christ person that DennisTate has to worry about
be my own old man of sin........ the ego, Dennis Tate, who continually attempts to
take over the throne of my own heart and mind where Messiah Yeshua - Jesus should be
crowned..... and should rule....... but obviously doesn't yet????????

Aren't all Christians kind of like Barabbas / Bar Abbas who was a notable criminal who went free
as Messiah Yeshua - Jesus was taken to his death.

Dennis, you are not the Antichrist, you are not the man of sin, nor any similitude, thereof. What you are - is a new creation in Christ.

As long as we are in these bodies of ours, we are always in a struggle between the new man - that is to say being in Christ - and the old man of us, in ourselves.

When we receive our new redeemed bodies - all conflicts internally will be over.

 

[Revealing Times]

There are 7 heads representing 7 kings in Revelation 17. Not 4 kings. You are grabbing something out of context in Daniel 7:17 to make kings into beasts - and applying that to Revelation 17, without basis.

Once again, you just can't grasp it. There are not four Kings in Daniel but Five, and the Fifth is spoken of later, after the Four Beasts are shown to be Four Kings. The Fifth King arises out of the Fourth Beast, BUT in the LATTER TIME, he is the Little Horn, and he arises at the END TIME and Daniel 7 tells us that Story very plainly.

Daniel showed Nebuchadnezzar HIS DREAM, and the Dream was about HIS KINGDOM, until the END OF TIME. God being silent on things already passed when speaking to Nebuchadnezzar or Daniel MEANS NOTHING. God knows all, if the Dream had Kings before or higher that Nebuchadnezzar he may have killed Daniel, we do not know everything God knows. What we do know is every BEAST mentioned in Daniel CONQUERED ISRAEL. And we also know Egypt and Assyria CONQUERED ISRAEL, now you can say whatsoever you please, and believe as you like, but I just so happen to understand Gods small still voice and have for 30 Years. This is simple to me.


The Anti-Christ is the BEAST...See Rev. 20:10 which I have showed you countless times.

 

[Douggg]

Once again, you just can't grasp it. There are not four Kings in Daniel but Five, and the Fifth is spoken of later, after the Four Beasts are shown to be Four Kings. The Fifth King arises out of the Fourth Beast, BUT in the LATTER TIME, he is the Little Horn, and he arises at the END TIME and Daniel 7 tells us that Story very plainly.

The Four King are Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, Alexander, the little horn.

Daniel showed Nebuchadnezzar HIS DREAM, and the Dream was about HIS KINGDOM, until the END OF TIME. God being silent on things already passed when speaking to Nebuchadnezzar or Daniel MEANS NOTHING. God knows all, if the Dream had Kings before or higher that Nebuchadnezzar he may have killed Daniel, we do not know everything God knows.

God has to be silent because of Nebuchadnezzar? Have you read Daniel 4, what happened to Nebuchadnezzar?

 

[Revealing Times]

The Four King are Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, Alexander, the little horn.

Well, the Fourth Beast was Rome not the Little Horn, the Little Horn came at the END OF TIME.

God has to be silent because of Nebuchadnezzar? Have you read Daniel 4, what happened to Nebuchadnezzar?

That (madness) happened to Nebuchadnezzar AFTER DANIEL had been elevated to a very high position and ESTEEMED GREATLY throughout Babylon, we are speaking about what MIGHT have happened at the time Nebuchadnezzar first dreamed the dream, not after he had HIGH ESTEEM throughout Israel.

The facts are the facts, the Dream was about Nebuchadnezzar being the HEAD until the END TIME................

That is why you don't get it, you don't use simple logic and understand that these SEVEN KINGS in Rev. 17 stand for SEVEN BEASTS because a BEAST is seen as one that CONQUERS ISRAEL. Too me it is easy, to others, maybe they are just not given to understand such things, it is what it is. I no doubt have things I have not been given an understanding to also. That is God, He gives that which He will to who He will, He is all powerful.

 

[Douggg]

The facts are the facts, the Dream was about Nebuchadnezzar being the HEAD until the END TIME................

That is why you don't get it, you don't use simple logic and understand that these SEVEN KINGS in Rev. 17 stand for SEVEN BEASTS because a BEAST is seen as one that CONQUERS ISRAEL. Too me it is easy, to others, maybe they are just not given to understand such things, it is what it is. I no doubt have things I have not been given an understanding to also. That is God, He gives that which He will to who He will, He is all powerful.

You argument fails on that point as well. Babylon did not conquer Israel but the Kingdom of Judah the southern two tribes, Medes and persians were occupiers of the area, as well as the the greeks. None of those really fought the Kingdom of Israel because the Kingdom of Israel had been broken up following Solomon's death.

The beast in Revelation is not just about conquering Israel anyway, but the entire world. It says the same in Daniel 7,

23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

The seven kings in Revelation 17, the seven heads on the beast, are kings of the fourth empire that will devour the whole earth. It is not just about Israel.

 

[toLiJC]

The Antichrist and his indentity seems to be a recurring debate with Christianity, particularly with dispensationalism.

Lately, I've been convinced that John's use of the word Antichrist does not refer (at least not necessarily) to a single individual, though I won't rule that out as a possibilty, but a group of people who deny the truth.

I've always leaned towards dispensationalism (the progressive kind, anyway) because I agree with it's view of Israel and the Church, but I don't see a compelling reason to take the Millennium as a literal thousand years, as the only place that it occurs (AFAIK), is in Revelation, which is a highly symbolic book. Now I'm questioning the dispensationalist view of the Antichrist.

So does dispensationalism require the belief that an individual will rise up, take over the world and persecute Christians?

the antichrist is the devil himself, as for human antichrists, there have been millions of such antichrists since the day of the original sin(Fall)

now on the main topic of the thread, every heresy may allow antichrists to have some power over worshipers that follow it, so if there is some unrighteousness in dispensationalism, then it is certain there is a heresy therein

Blessings

 

[Revealing Times]

You argument fails on that point as well. Babylon did not conquer Israel but the Kingdom of Judah the southern two tribes, Medes and persians were occupiers of the area, as well as the the greeks. None of those really fought the Kingdom of Israel because the Kingdom of Israel had been broken up following Solomon's death.

There you go again, trying to get technical, when you conquer any part of Gods people you are seen by God as A BEAST......Most all of these people CONQUERED JERUSALEM. Egypt on ENSLAVE the Israelite's for 400 Years. Just because Israel and Judah divided their Kingdoms, doesn't mean God saw them as DIVIDED KINGDOMS. So my argument fails nothing, that is a silly argument.

The beast in Revelation is not just about conquering Israel anyway, but the entire world. It says the same in Daniel 7,

If it conquered all the world, and not Israel, it would not be a Beast to God, because the Bible and its Prophecies are about Israel. This is why the USA is not a BEAST, the biggest POWER in History. Or the USSR, Ottoman Empire, British Empire etc. etc. THE RULES ARE THE RULES.

23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

This is a common mistake here, and why I warn people about the English Translations, you have to go back and to ROOT WORD Searches to understand these things, the Fourth Beast is Rome, maybe this is WHY you misconstrue this, you think they have to conquer the whole world so you see the Fourth Beast as having to be END TIME, when that is not what it actually says.

The word used for Earth is ARA which can mean Ground instead of EARTH....And in this instance does, because that root word came from this Hebrew Word, ERETS which means.................

1b) land
1b1) country, territory
1b2) district, region
1b3) tribal territory
1b4) piece of ground
1b5) land of Canaan, Israel
1b6) inhabitants of land

Now notice below the difference in the Two.....

23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

24 AND the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

Do you not get this ? The FORTH BEAST is Rome, it was Different from Babylon, Persia and Greece in that it allowed SELF RULE but required only Taxes as long as the locals did not try and rebel. They brought forth a COMMON LANGUAGE, Koine Greek, thus all roads lead to Rome. They allowed locals to worship their own God(s).

Now FAST FORWARD.........AND the 10 Horns will ARISE, and another will rise after them, he shall be different than the FIRST (Romes First Kingdom). This is Two Different Time Periods.

The seven kings in Revelation 17, the seven heads on the beast, are kings of the fourth empire that will devour the whole earth. It is not just about Israel.

NOPE......It is not about the Whole Earth, that is just an "ENGLISH" thing. I have read large essays on that WHOLE EARTH thing, its common knowledge, because you can find the same word used throughout the OLD TESTAMENT, when speaking about things in the OLD WORLD. So it is not the Whole Earth, but the Whole Land/Ground being spoken about, thus it was Europe.

 

[Revealing Times]

the antichrist is the devil himself, as for human antichrists, there have been millions of such antichrists since the day of the original sin(Fall)

now on the main topic of the thread, every heresy may allow antichrists to have some power over worshipers that follow it, so if there is some unrighteousness in dispensationalism, then it is certain there is a heresy therein

Blessings

Revelation 20:10 shows that is not the case. After Satan is released from the 1000 year pit, and deceives the world, he is cast into Hell where the BEAST awaits him.

REVELATION 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.