The anti christ is anyone who stands in oppsition to Christ.
1 John 2:22-23 "Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also."
Are you saying that he who denies Christ would be anti-Christ, or he who stands in opposition to his teachings?
I'm just wondering if you and I are thinking along the same lines.
Oops...see...you quote the Gospel of John.....so I feel the need to go off on another tangent!
You mention John, and I have to bring up the Gospel of Thomas. I was reading a novel, "Map of Bones," by James Rollins, and part of his story caused me to research several gospels, as well as the Gnoticism of early Christianity.
1. In the early years, Christianity was an outlaw religion, and secrecy was required, surreptitious meetings in caves and crypts. As a result of isolation and separation of the various Christian groups, practices and philosophies began to differ. As could be expected, numerous gospels were producedÂ…and they differed in marked ways.
2. The gospels included Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, but also the Secret Gospel of James, of Mary Magdalene, of Philip, the Gospel of Truth, the Apocalypse of Peter, and a number of others.
a.
The Gospel of Thomas. The opening lines of this gospel say that it contains "secret sayings" of Jesus, and that anyone who discovers their true meaning "will not taste death". The gospel then gives 114 of these sayings, most of them introduced by the words "Jesus said"Â…. the only surviving complete copy is a Coptic translationÂ…. many scholars consider it to be the most important surviving non-biblical gospel.
b. The early gospels...Thomas is earlier than John....incorporated the idea that the realisation of Gnosis (esoteric or intuitive knowledge), is the way to salvation of the soul.
3. As a result of the number, and kinds, of gospels extant, several with a Gnostic bent, there was the very real danger of the young Christian church splintering into different religions.
In the second century, the bishop of Lyon, Saint Irenaeus, in the second century, wrote the five volume “Against Heresies,” (called “The Destruction and Overthrow of Falsely So-called Knowledge”) designed to remove Gnostic beliefs out of the Christian religion, and to limit it to the four-fold Gospel canon. All the others were deemed heretical.
a. “Three of the Gospels- Mathew, Mark, and Luke- all tell the same story. But John relates a very different history, even the events in Christ’s life don’t match the chronology in the others. But there is a reason why John was included in the standardized Bible.” Rollins, “Map of Bones,” p.168.
b. The reason was John's fellow apostle, ThomasÂ…
Doubting Thomas. In JohnÂ’s version, Thomas is a dull-witted and faithless disciple;
the others revere Thomas. John sought to discredit ThomasÂ….and by extension, any followers of Thomas- who were numerous at the time. The gospels of Thomas and John were so different that only one could survive.
4. As John offered a more orthodox path for salvation, it offered a simpler and more easily replicated model for the young church, and showed a way to bring the disparate elements into one. ThomasÂ’ idea that each had an innate ability to find God within required no particular worship.
a. So, there is JohnÂ’s orthodox faith, and ThomasÂ’ Gnostic tradition.
I went off the track again, didn't I.
Thought it might interest you.
This might not make us very popular in here.
I don't think there should be any shame in recognizing the intolerance of fundies for any other belief. The stronger their belief that others who don't believe as they do are the anti-Christ, or any other evil entity, the more dangerous and unpredictable they are.
