The Relationship Of Antichrist To The Two Beasts

I. The Relation Of Antichrist To The Two Beasts.

II. Details. 

A. The word antichrist appears only in the Epistles of John. It is used in 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; and 2 John 7. A study of these references will reveal that John is principally concerned with an immediate doctrinal error, “the denial of the person of Christ.” The emphasis is not on a future revelation of an individual, but rather on the present manifestation of false doctrine. To John antichrist was already present. The question arises then as to the relation between the “antichrist” of John’s epistles and the beasts of Revelation. The prefix “anti” may be used either in the sense of “instead of” or “against.” 

1. The solution of the problem of the identification of Antichrist would seem to depend upon whether light can be thrown on the question of whether he is primarily the great enemy of Christ or whether he is a false Christ. 

2. The preposition has two primary usages: first, over against or opposite to; and second indicating an exchange, instead of or in place of. A study of the five usages of antichrist in John’s epistles seems clearly to indicate the idea of opposition rather than exchange. John’s words seem decisive that resistance to Christ, and defiance of Him, this, and not any treacherous assumption of his character and offices, is the essential mark of the AntiChrist; is that which, therefore, we should expect to find embodied in his name, and in this sense, if not all, yet many of the Fathers have understood the word. 

3. The word antichrist seems to be contrasted with “false Christ” in Scripture. This word is used in Matthew 24:24 and Mark 13:22. On the contrast between the words: the [Pseudochristos, false Christ] does not deny the being of a Christ; on the contrary, he builds on the world’s expectations of such a person; only he appropriates these to himself, and blasphemously affirms that he is the foretold One, in whom God’s promises and men’s expectations are fulfilled. The distinction, then, is plain [antichristos, antichrist] denies that there is a Christ] [Pseudochristos, false Christ] affirms himself to be Christ.

B. It would seem that John has the idea of opposition in mind rather than the idea of exchange. This idea of direct opposition to Christ seems to be the particular characterization of the first Beast, for he sets his kingdom against the kingdom of the Son of God. If antichrist must be identified with one of the two Beasts it would seem to be identified with the first. It may be, however, that John is not referring to either of the two Beasts, but rather to the lawless system that will characterize them (2 Thess. 2:7). Since he is emphasizing the danger of a present doctrinal defection, he is reminding them that such teaching is the teaching of the antichrist philosophy of Satan that Paul held was already working (2 Thess. 2:7). Without doubt this antichrist philosophy of Satan, referred to by John, will culminate in the Beasts in their corporate ministries, where the first Beast will be in direct opposition to Christ as one who falsely fulfills the covenant to give Israel their land and, the second Beast will assume the place of leadership in the religious realm which rightly belongs to Christ. But John is not trying to identify either of these Beasts as antichrist, but to warn any who would deny the person of Christ that they are walking in that system which eventually would culminate in the manifestation of the lawless system in the activities of both Beasts. They, in their corporate unity, culminate lawlessness.  

III: Study References.

Study References for all my articles can be found in my Page, “About My References.”

IV. Correction Of Previous Article.

In my previous Article, “The Person And Ministry Of the False Prophet, The Religious Leader,” I have made a correction in the words of Section II, Details. Please go down to A., and scroll down to subparagraph (10), and notice below it  “(11), (12), and (13”) for my correction of the text.