Mistaken Identity
"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; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." (II Thess. 2: 3-4)
Who comes first, Christ or Antichrist? Obviously, according to these words of Paul, Antichrist comes first. When Christ comes, Antichrist is already present. Said Paul further:
"And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming." (vs. 8)
Christ destroys the Antichrist when he comes, thus Antichrist comes before Christ.
If Christ comes in Rev. 19, then Antichrist does appear first. Antichrist appears in Rev. 11 (or even earlier if in 6: 2 the rider is Antichrist) where he kills the Lord's "two witnesses."
If Christ comes in the rapture in Rev. 4:1 (believed by many), then Christ comes in the rapture before Antichrist. If Christ's coming is in two stages, the first will precede the Antichrist and the latter follow.
So, just when in the Apocalypse does the "man of lawlessness," or "son of perdition," or "Antichrist," first show up on the scene?
The rider on the white horse in 6:2 cannot be Antichrist because he does not appear on the scene till the opening of the sixth seal, where he kills the two witness prophets.
Rev. 11: 7 says:
"And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them."
But, if the beast is in the abyss, or bottomless pit, until the the time when the pit is opened under the seventh seal and the fifth angel blows his trumpet, then he could not be the one who comes on the scene in 6:2. The pit is not yet opened in Rev. 6:2.
It is a reading into the text of 6: 2 the idea of Antichrist, for there is nothing in the context to indicate it is the vision of a false Christ.
The arguments that the white horse rider cannot be Christ in 6:2 were all based primarily on the fact that there are certain things different about the description of the rider in 6:2 with 19:11-15; And as I have shown, they are not cogent or sound. They are so baseless that one must stand bewildered with those modern interpreters who insist on seeing the Antichrist in the rider of 6:2. This insistence exists and persists in spite of the fact that there is no contextual reason at all for doing so and is also against the prima facie case for it being Christ, as I have been demonstrating.
But, there is another argument used by those who insist on making the white horse rider to be Antichrist. It argues that the rider cannot be Christ because of the evils that follow under the red, black, and pale horses. Such things, they argue, would not follow the appearance of Christ on the white horse (as in Rev. 19) and ergo the 6:2 rider must be a counterfeit, i.e., the Antichrist.
Those who argue this way will be easy prey to the interpretation that the Antichrist will give for the things that will have occurred under the previous seals and trumpets. He will no doubt argue that the true God and the true Christ are not causing these things (judgments on the world up to Rev. 11:7) but an evil God/Christ; And that the world must unite around him in order to save themselves from further judgment coming from the heavens.
Further, it seems strange to me that any bible teacher who would make such an argument for it plainly shows ignorance of the scriptures. The opening of the seals begins the day of wrath and judgment. And, vengeance and awful tribulation and death and suffering are connected with the end of the age. The coming of the Lord Jesus is described as coming to bring retribution as well as restoration.
This rider knows no defeat
How then can it be Antichrist?
This appearance of the white horse rider with his "toxon" (bow) and victor's crown going forth in repeated victory at the opening of the first of the seven seals is not the second coming of Christ but that which marks his inauguration of it. It is the beginning of "that day" as viewed from heaven. He does not fully arrive in the clouds of the lower air, nor set his feet upon sea and land, until all the seals have been opened and the trumpets have all sounded. At that time his being seen on the white horse will by the inhabitants of earth.
Obviously the rider's arrows precede the rider! The red, black, and pale horse riders may be viewed as poisoned arrows shot from the Almighty victor's bow at the "beginning of the end" of the day of judgment.
Or, by another figure, they may be viewed as things "conquered" by the rider on the white horse. Those killed under these three horses are enemies of God and righteousness, and enemies of his people, both among Jews and Christians, and God comes to kill them as he promised to do in the day of wrath and vengeance.
If the work and purpose of the red, black, and pale horse riders is to kill wicked people (and it is) then he is successful or victorious in that conquest.
The movement of the white horse rider (from the words "go" and "see") represents his first advance towards our world.
To me it is a case of "identity theft" to make the victorious rider on the white horse to be Antichrist.
No comments:
Post a Comment