Who is the Antichrist

Well, that might be correct for the letter 'J' in English*, but not e.g. for the German "J" - which is nearly exactly pronounced as the Hebrew "Y" (I wasn't trained at all in Biblical, Rabbinical and Modern Hebrew, but only took some [history/Yiddish] courses at the Center [University] for Jewish Studies Heidelberg.)

* In English, it wasn't before the 17th century that there was a clear grammatical difference between "I" and "J" - in written English, at least.
(Even the Frech influenced Latin writings on the Bayeux tapestry used "I" instead of "J", although "J" was already used in Old French at that time as well.)

On that we can agree. The argument is about the name currently used for the character in the Bible. As far as I know, 'Jesus' as pronounced in English, is used almost everywhere today, albeit with various accents.

The point I’m trying to get to is that He was never called that in his day or in the days when texts that eventually became the Bible were written. My English tongue probably can’t pronounce it correctly but 'Jesus' is not even close.

The story of how 'Yeshua' became 'Jesus' is available if you Google it. Too long for a forum post.

Actually, I don't need to google it - had to learn such in religious classes at school decades ago. (But those lessons helped me at university.)

Not so preposterous in the context of the OP.

In the context of the Bible, it says that the Antichrist will appear as an 'Angel of Light'. Organized religion does portray Jesus just that way - Perfect, sinless, mysterious and unknowable. An 'Angel of Light' might be appealing in that way but it is not an approachable and inviting Jesus that one could personally know and love.

The Jesus proclaimed by organized religion seems nothing like the actual Son of God spoken of in the Bible. He said himself that many false messiahs and prophets would come in his name before he returned. That ticks yet another box in the prophecy if they are the Antichrist.

Hya Leadfoot! For a start what a anti Christ would be like? What would such character entail? There are plenty of Sociopaths out there already!

None of the Four, Canonical, gospels were signed - Their authorship is 'prescribed'.
Luke was a 1st Century Doctor.
Mark was Peters' understudent.
Mathew is an Exact rewrite of Mark with 2nd half 1st Century narrative-additives (To suit Isaiac and Danielic prophetics).
John is also 'adulterated' (All but last chapter is original) Last chapter (1ST-Person) was added, and fake.

Gnostic (Non-canonicals) are genuinely signed.

Shame the Nicean Council were tosspots.

There is No Antichrist.
When John scribed his revelation, on Patmos - He was illuminating Nero's intent.

And Patmos is reknowned for its abundance of .. Magic Mushrooms - Tasty in a casserole, with added benefits.

Actual Number of Beast is 616.

So Jared Kushkush buying 666, 5th ave for 3x asking price 1.8 billion (3x 600 mill) IS a distraction... Coz he's a prick who adores attention, perhaps.

Let's assume - The NT is contrived, narratively...

And All fits into place - For - When we Paint A Pretty Picture - To embelish/enhance the 'directive' (Jesus) - What, exactly are we doing?

We are 'surrounding' the 'truth' in order to enhance its impact.

Consider this - Bob said 'Wake before slumber ails thy appetite.'.. Means Buggerall - Until I paint Bob as the ultimate grandmaster of slumbericity (New word) with a history of charity, honesty and enigmatic transbolluxism unto all.

Nag Hamadi and Kumran (Qumran) - Were great insightic finds - Baalbek, even better.

So - No. Jesus (Immanuel) isn't the antichrist - Yet.

Have a Lovely Day

Yes, but as I said, if the Bible is correct, the Antichrist will appear to be the opposite of a sociopath, at least at first. It also says that Antichrist will be clever enough to deceive 'even the elect'.

Just trying to see what adds up and what doesn’t as far as the book goes.

What reference point are you coming from? I assume you give no credence to the book.

I assume there was all sorts of skullduggery involved in the adoption of the Bible. My working assumption is that an interested God would see to it that the message he wanted to get across would make it into the final cut, even if it had to be invisible to the editors and others who wanted it purged.

The Bible isn't a 'book'. It's an anthological collective of writings.
The OT is a portion of judaic texts (That the Nicean council deemed relative to progressive spiritual teachings)
The NT is a miniscule gathering of 'suitable' texts (embelished) and fashioned to manipulate the masses.

Have a Lovely Day

How can you assume Gods' intent?

(You can, btw, For it is your own)

We are All God - God is All, after All.

Have a Lovely Day

There is a Mass of relative reading within the bibles' pages - I'm not knocking its value - Just its compilation.

Have a Lovely Day

Any and all things related to religion and/or the bible, is subject to individually created thoughts.

Just about every religion has been altered from where they began.
There are hundreds (probably more) versions of the bible.
How can anybody really know, without limitation,what is or is not true or false? Just try being a decent person and stop getting mind-warped from terminology.

As I said, it’s a working assumption. Gotta start somewhere. Where do you start?

I think it was Hedda Hopper.

I already considered her. Clever girl, invented the technology in use today in spread spectrum communications, but no, she didn’t have the molecular biology or acting chops to pull off All This.

The Bible clearly states that the Antichrist (if there is such a person) will claim to be God.

The doctrine of the trinity which states that a certain man, Jesus, was once God, facilitates the claim of the Antichrist.

So yes, it is Jesus, as worshiped today by most of the modern religions, who clearly paves the way for the Antichrist to rise.

But it should be noted that people claimed to be God long before Jesus.

But all the Antichrist has to do is impersonate Jesus and the religious freaks will fall to their knees muttering gibberish and worship him AS GOD.

(Except the Muslims who do not believe in the Trinity.) [Enter travel ban]

It says the Antichrist will be followed by "LYING signs and wonders". "Fake news"

He(or she) will exalt himself/herself above all that is called God and sit in the throne as God.

The Jesus as perceived today and the Trinity make the claim of the Antichrist believable.

Many serious biblical researchers believe that the first century church was strictly against the deification of Jesus as God.

The trinity did not crop up until at least 100 years after the new testament was written. And the verses that seem to vaguely elude to the trinity in the new testament were forgeries added later.

Many times Jesus is referred to as the son of God but never is he called "God the son". Jesus of the scriptures claims to be merely man and that only God is worthy to be called father. Jesus is not the "God head" but "God is the head". (another erroneous translation to suit the Trinitarian doctrine)

Now the doctrine of the Trinity seems harmless and actually mysteriously alluring until you consider that it facilitates the egregious claim that a person can be God and rule humanity as God. This would certainly be a terrible time for humanity, society, civility and the church.

Numbers 23:19
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent:

These next three scriptures are talking about the Antichrist.
2 Thessalonians 2:39
Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; [the Antichrist]

2 Thessalonians 2:4
who opposes and exalts himself [the Antichrist] above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

2 Thessalonians 2:9
Even him [the Antichrist], whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,


The Bible warns us about making men/women God but will religious fanatics listen to the clear warnings?

The devil tempted Eve with "Ye shall be as gods and your eyes will be opened."

The Bible says Adam and Eve believed they could be God.

This lie is likely to be repeated on a much larger scale... Oh the arrogance of the human ego...

Romans 1:25
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature [creation] more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Kudos for taking the question and hypothesis seriously.

The things you pointed out do indeed tick off a lot of boxes on the Antichrist checklist. I rejected organized religion a long time ago but only recently came to the idea that they are teaching the Antichrist. But it is fully compatible with what I saw them doing.

And @Glitter, if you were wondering what 'All This' meant, Cobbler summarized it pretty well.

That may be literally True, but it does not offer any illumination on the OP.
And not to slander the Truth, but it only confuses when reduced to a meme.

We are God's masterpiece...

Whether if God is mother earth or the sun or some black hole or a volcanic deep sea fissure which spewed out DNA and plasma particles, or an imageless spirit, who really knows?

But, "what if God was one of us"? Just a stranger on the bus... lol

We did not create ourselves and Jesus was not his own father and Jesus was not talking to himself on the mount of transfiguration. He did not get his mother pregnant so she could give birth to him.

But if you add a tiny bit of doubt, and you confuse things with abstract math and fractions where one part of the pie equals the whole thing well then, presto you have human divinity. Perhaps there is a holy trinity, but it is a big stretch from that to proclaiming one's self as the supreme God of all that is.

Humans creating themselves and no one above them (or below) to judge or guide them in morality is a recipe for disaster and a conscience killer.

The bible was not a very moral guide anyway though.

But can we trust an infallible human without a quorum of democratic ideas and err, "science"...

Rome tried that and it ended disastrously for Julius Caesar.

Humans need each other and the humility of knowing that out of one higher power greater than any of us came many blessed souls.

The Antichrist is anti humanity, anti democracy and anti life. Life is the union of two not one.

Consider the dire warning of the first century church. No human is God...

We may have the divine in us but so does a cat or a cow.

We may drink from the fountain of living waters but the fountain itself is something much bigger than our own finite existence.

Just as the sun, moon, earth and universe will long outlive our brief existence.

Perhaps with every ending there is also a new beginning but that remains to be seen. Life is a circle and a cipher and and riddles and parables, the occult and astrology and suddenly we find ourselves in the midst of chaos and in slavery to those who seek only their own glory and power.

It is a slippery slope from humanity to divinity... There will always be those gullible enough to believe it.

The mother of God, God the Son and God in you...

2 Corinthians 5:19
To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself...

Comment: How was God in Christ?

God was in Christ in will and purpose, not in person.

(not my will but thine be done)

But if you believe the latter, then God can be in anyone and anyone can be God.

That's very kind Leadfoot, I wasn't wondering what 'All This' meant. But I do appreciate the rehash of arguments that have been made over many many years. I always loved those stories.