And the Antichrist is...

If yesterday's verses are the only one's that use the term 'antichrist' (and in so doing, seem to speak of the antichrist as a 1st century denial of Christ), then why have we been looking for a Super-Powerful, Super-Political, Modern-Day man?

It seems the contemporary investigation has combined a whole bunch of bad-guy verses into 1 composite bad-guy. Here are some examples:

Daniel 9:26-27
From this passage, modern day interpreters find a 'prince' who will make a 7 year covenant with Israel, but go back on his word half-way through (by the way, this is the ONLY place in the Bible that they clearly see a 7 year tribulation). Nearly every historical commentator takes the OPPOSITE interpretation of verse 27. It's not the 'prince' who makes the covenant, it's the Anointed One (Jesus). He doesn't break the covenant half-way through, He is crucified as a once and for all sacrifice.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4
From this passage, modern day interpreters find a 'lawless' one who will proclaim himself to be God right from God's temple. But they seem to miss the fact that the mystery was 'already at work', was being restrained in the 1st century, and that the Thessalonians knew what was holding him back. The man of lawlessness was almost certainly a 1st century individual.

Revelation 13:18
From Revelation 13, modern day interpreters find a 'beast' that will recover from a fatal wound and somehow be associated with the number 666. But they seem to ignore both the time indicators of Revelation (soon, near, quickly) and the fact that the beast is most likely a kingdom, not merely 1 king. It seems the best candidate for the fatal-wound/666 combo, then, is Nero (one of the heads of the Roman beast). Nero Caesar, in Hebrew, adds up to 666 and when he died it put the Roman beast into a year of turmoil, but it recovered under Vespasian.

It may be fun to combine the 'prince' the 'man of lawlessness' and the 'beast' into 1 Super-Villain (and steal John's term 'antichrist' since it's a dramatic name), but it almost certainly isn't hermeneutically correct.

So who's the antichrist? I think instead of pointing fingers at newspaper headlines, purple dinosaurs, former Presidents, rich nerds, giant Austrian's, and fictional characters...maybe we should let the Bible speak for itself. Antichrist is ANYONE who denies Jesus was exactly who He said He was and is, especially those who did so in the generation after He ascended.