Friday, February 20, 2015

What does the apostate antichrist believe about Jesus?


1 John 4:2-3: By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God. This is the spirit of antichrist, of which you heard that it was coming, and now it is in the world already.

2 John 7: For many deceivers have gone out into the world, men who will not acknowledge the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh; such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist.
(RSV)

The phrase "the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh" refers to Jesus' birth on earth (Galatians 4:4), not to his future coming. The NET Bible in its footnote concurs, saying: "This is the same confession as in 1 John 4:2 except the perfect participle used there is replaced by a present participle here. It is not clear why the author changed from a perfect participle in 1 John 4:2 to a present participle here. The perfect participle suggests a reference to the incarnation [Jesus' birth and life on earth] (past). The present participle could suggest a reference to the (future) second advent, but based on the similarity to 1 John 4:2 it is probably best to take it as referring to the incarnation [Jesus' birth and life on earth]." Thus, the point of 1 John 4:2 and 2 John 7 is the same: Denying that Jesus was human in his earthly life and ministry is apostate and of the antichrist.

Yet, some still say that 2 John 7 refers to Jesus' future coming in the flesh, thus (unwittingly?) disagreeing with the scholar(s) behind the NET Bible footnote.

Update : Hi XXX! Thanks for contributing. Well, as the NET Bible footnote said, it is probably best to take it as referring to Jesus' birth and life on earth. This agrees with the NWT-Reference footnote, which says in part: "referring to Christ’s past coming. It refers to past time, as in the case of the Gr. participle in 3Jo 3."

Regarding the two scriptures you used for support for 'dual time reference,' let me point out that "man" in 1 Timothy 2:5 would naturally refer to Jesus' experience as a man on earth during his ministry. Colossians 2:9 merely confirms that Christ's diety or divine nature exists or dwells in bodily form. Thus, all this is conveying is that Jesus' divine nature has a body. So these really do not contribute to the idea that Jesus has a physical human body outside of earth's life-sustaining atmosphere. Spirit beings such as angels and God dwell in what Jesus Christ called "the above" or "realms above" at John 8:23, a transcendent realm that Jesus said humans cannot enter at John 8:21.

Both the NET and NWT footnotes noted above harmonize with John's use of Greek, as well as with the laws of physics.

XXX asks: "Did not ALL of Jesus' miracles attest to the fact that he was above and outside of (not subject to) the laws that govern our physical universe?" Not one. Just a manipulator. [What I clearly meant by this is that Jesus was not breaking the laws of physics with his miracles, but he was temporarily manipulating mater as he used the power from his Father and God, including resurrecting others like his disciples later did.] Retaining a human body in outer space that Trinitarianism teaches per Chalcydonian dyophysitism does indeed mark a clear violation of the laws of physics that the Trinitarian Jesus must now continue to violate in micromanaging his physical human body for all eternity, just to make the Trinitarians feel all warm and fuzzy. :-) Also read Psalm 115:16 that Jesus Christ agreed with: human bodies belong on earth in accords with both the will of God and with the laws of physics that God established. Thanks for playing.

Best Answer
Asker's Choice

BAR- ANERGES

Greetings,

First, what is interesting is that even if Trinitarians apply these verses to the future coming, they cannot save themselves from being identified as Antichrist and deceivers. Because these verses clearly would apply to any religion which claimed that Jesus was both "God and man," or holding a "dual nature" instead of only "flesh"!!


Yes, there are some scholars who think 2Jn7 refers to both the past and future comings. But, as you point out Greek scholars generally agree that this refers to Christ's *past* coming:

"Jesus Christ coming in the flesh. Present middle participle of erchomai...because there the reference is to the definite historical fact of the Incarnation. There is no allusion here to the second coming of Christ."–Robertson’s Word Pictures

"Naturally this cannot refer to the coming of Jesus Christ at his future parousia, since that is not a coming en sarki [in the flesh], but en doxe [in glory] (cf. Heb 4:13, etc.). Rather, the present tense of erchomenon [coming] is a timeless characteristic of Jesus (as the one sent by God into the world), as in Jn 3:31; 6:14; 11:27.—Rudolf Bultmann, A Commentary on The Johnannine Epistles, p. 112.

The word "coming" is a participle, so even though it is the "present tense" form it doesn't inherently have a tense but is dependent on the main verb (cf. 3 Jn 3).

Theologians who use this verse in an attempt to support their personal theology that Christ will return in the flesh require their hearers to be ignorant of the original Greek and the context of Scripture.


Here are some edited statements from various articles:

From these verses, we can see that the antichrist is a liar and a deceiver, bent on destroying a person’s relationship with Christ and with God.

“Antichrist” means ‘against (or instead of) Christ.’ So in its broadest sense, the term refers to all who oppose or lyingly claim to be the Christ or his representatives. Jesus himself said: “He that is not on my side is against me [or is antichrist], and he that does not gather with me scatters”(Lk 11:23).

The words of both Jesus and John plainly indicate that the antichrist is not a single person but is made up of many individual antichrists. Moreover, because they are false prophets, one of their main objectives is religious deception.

John specifically mentions apostates as among those of the antichrist by referring to those who "went out from us," abandoning the Christian congregation. (1Jo 2:18, 19) It therefore includes "the man of lawlessness" or "son of destruction" described by Paul, as well as the "false teachers" Peter denounces for forming destructive sects and who "disown even the owner that bought them" (2Th 2:3-5; 2Pt 2:1).

Kingdoms, nations, and organizations are similarly shown to be part of the antichrist in the symbolic description at Revelation 17:8-15; 19:19-21.-Compare Ps 2:1, 2.

From those words it is evident that the antichrist, the apostate man of lawlessness is Satan's masterpiece. It is an imitation of organized Christianity and so an opposer of it. As a replacement of true organized Christianity, it finds its expression in present-day Christendom.

The word "Christendom" is a compound word meaning "Christ's domain" or "Christ's jurisdiction." Christendom has claimed this and has sent out missionaries to pagan lands in an effort to convert all the earth to become the territory of Christendom. Their missionaries have had a part, knowingly or unknowingly, in advancing the political control as well as the commercial control of Christendom in many of these countries.

This was directly contrary to Christ's words: "My kingdom is no part of this world," and "they [Jesus' disciples] are no part of the world."—John 18:36; 17:14.


Apply this basic evidence to what happened in both world wars and current conflicts. People of the same religions met on battlefields and slaughtered one another because of nationalistic differences. Each side claimed to be Christian, and each side was supported by its clergy, who claimed that God was on their side.

But, the definition of a "Christian" is "one who does what Christ would do": WWJD (1Pt.2:21). That slaughter of "Christian" by "Christian" is rotten fruitage. It is a denial of any claim to being the true Church (cf. Mt.26:52). It is truly an identification of the Antichrist!

Apostate Christianity has neither the spiritual strength nor the support of God's holy spirit to motivate people to follow the truthful teachings of Jesus Christ. For this reason, the result in Christendom is not true Christianity but in actuality antichrists, "weeds" unfit for the Kingdom (Mt13:24ff).


Yours,

BAR-ANERGES

Source:


Asker's rating & comment
Thanks, that was my thought too that the Trinitarian Jesus being 100% God on earth is in accords with the teaching of the Antichrist. Yet, Trinitarians try to say that Jesus not coming in the flesh from outer space is in accords with the teaching of the Antichrist. Irony of astronomical proportions!

Posted by at
Labels:

Trinitarians, do you see the flawed reasoning of "I AM" in John 8:58?


Trinitarianism teaches that "I AM" is a divine name, and that it is used at John 8:58, where Jesus said according to many translations: "Before Abraham was, I am." As one apologetic Trinitarian explained:

"This is a very important verse to Trinitarians because it is one of the places we use to show that Jesus is God. We maintain that Jesus attributed the divine name of God ("I AM" from Exodus 3:14), to Himself."[1]

Now this claim can be easily tested by replacing "I AM" with another divine name or designation, like God, and observing the results.
[test]
"Before Abraham was, God."
[end of test]
This declaration as it stands is nonsensical. To make sense, it needs the words "I existed as" or "I was", or something similar: "Before Abraham was, I was God."

Does that make sense? If so, please continue reading.

The same is true with "Before Abraham was, I am." It needs more words to be complete, like "Before Abraham was, I was I AM." But, the Greek text does not say that. Therefore the Greek words 'ego eimi', translated according to many translations as "I am," are part of the sentence and should be translated likewise. "I am" is an interlinear translation or a hyper-literal translation, therefore not completing the translation process. If a Bible says something like "I have been,"[2] it shows an attempt to do just that, complete the translation process into a literal translation.

So can you see how flawed and ridiculous Trinitarian teaching is on John 8:58, regardless of its popularity?

Footnotes:
[1] Slick, Matt. John 8:58 and 10:30-33, "I am." http://carm.org/religious-movements/jehovahs-witnesses/john-858-and-1030-33-i-am

[2] The 1996 ed. New Living Translation has “Jesus answered, ‘The truth is, I existed before Abraham was even born!’” It places “I am” in a footnote. (Seen here.)

Another test in context:
Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, Lord.

Best Answer
Asker's Choice

Ginosko92

The is probably one of the lamest "proof text" that trinitarians use to prove the divinity of Christ!

To make a connection between Ex 3:14 and John 8:58 is beyond ridiculous!

First of all the correct rendition of Ex 3:14 is "I will be what I will be" as the footnote in the NIV correctly states. Ex 3:12 uses the same verb "eh·yeh" and is translated "I will". I AM THAT I AM is not the correct meaning of the divine name, it's not static as if God were waiting to do something. But God is ALWAYS in action and maneuvering things according to his will.

Second the Greek LXX (septuagint) renders Ex 3:14 as "ego emi ho on" or "I am THE ONE or THE BEING". The same vs adds that "THE ONE or THE BEING", not "I am" as trinitarians lamely argue, "has sent you"!

So to connect Ex 3:14 with John 8:58 is pure fiction and desperation to prove a man made doctrine!

Asker's rating & comment

Thank you! I'm sorry to report that no Trinitarians addressed my question. The Trinitarian use of John 8:58 is alarmingly unsophisticated, as were the Trinitarian responses. If you think Trinitarianism uses John 8:58 correctly, then you need to study this question.

Posted by at
Labels:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)