OT-LAW.filter - rwp antichrist:

rwp@Info_1John @ GNOSTICISM The Epistle is not a polemic primarily, but a letter for the edification of the readers in the truth and the life in Christ. And yet the errors of the Gnostics are constantly before John's mind. The leaders had gone out from among the true Christians, but there was an atmosphere of sympathy that constituted a subtle danger. There are only two passages (1John:2:18f.; strkjv@4:1-6|) in which the false teachers are specifically denounced, but "this unethical intellectualism" (Robert Law) with its dash of Greek culture and Oriental mysticism and licentiousness gave a curious attraction for many who did not know how to think clearly. John, like Paul in Colossians, Ephesians, and the Pastoral Epistles, foresaw this dire peril to Christianity. In the second century it gave pure Christianity a gigantic struggle. "The great Gnostics were the first Christian philosophers" (Robert Law, _The Tests of Life_, p. 27) and threatened to undermine the Gospel message by "deifying the devil" (ib., p. 31) along with dethroning Christ. There were two kinds of Gnostics, both agreeing in the essential evil of matter. Both had trouble with the Person of Christ. The Docetic Gnostics denied the actual humanity of Christ, the Cerinthian Gnostics distinguished between the man Jesus and the \aeon\ Christ that came on him at his baptism and left him on the Cross. Some practised asceticism, some licentiousness. John opposes both classes in his Epistles. They claimed superior knowledge (\gnsis\) and so were called Gnostics (\Gnstikoi\). Nine times John gives tests for knowing the truth and uses the verb \ginsk\ (know) each time (1John:2:3,5; strkjv@3:16,19,24; strkjv@4:2,6,13; strkjv@5:2|). Some of the leaders he calls antichrists. There are stories about John's dread of Cerinthus and his unwillingness to be seen in the same public bath with him. The Apostle of love, as he is, is a real son of thunder when Gnosticism shows its head. Westcott thinks that the Fourth Gospel was written to prove the deity of Christ, assuming his humanity, while I John was written to prove the humanity of Christ, assuming his deity. Certainly both ideas appear in both books.

rwp@1John:2:18 @{It is the last hour} (\eschat hra estin\). This phrase only here in N.T., though John often uses \hra\ for a crisis (John:2:4; strkjv@4:21,23; strkjv@5:25,28|, etc.). It is anarthrous here and marks the character of the "hour." John has seven times "the last day" in the Gospel. Certainly in verse 28| John makes it plain that the \parousia\ might come in the life of those then living, but it is not clear that here he definitely asserts it as a fact. It was his hope beyond a doubt. We are left in doubt about this "last hour" whether it covers a period, a series, or the final climax of all just at hand. {As ye heard} (\kaths kousate\). First aorist active indicative of \akou\. {Antichrist cometh} (\antichristos erchetai\). "Is coming." Present futuristic or prophetic middle indicative retained in indirect assertion. Songs:Jesus taught (Mark:13:6,22; strkjv@Matthew:24:5,15,24|) and so Paul taught (Acts:20:30; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3|). These false Christs (Matthew:24:24; strkjv@Mark:13:22|) are necessarily antichrists, for there can be only one. \Anti\ can mean substitution or opposition, but both ideas are identical in the word \antichristos\ (in N.T. only here, strkjv@2:22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7|). Westcott rightly observes that John's use of the word is determined by the Christian conception, not by the Jewish apocalypses. {Have there arisen} (\gegonasin\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. {Many antichrists} (\antichristoi polloi\). Not just one, but the exponents of the Gnostic teaching are really antichrists, just as some modern deceivers deserve this title. {Whereby} (\hothen\). By the fact that these many antichrists have come.

rwp@1John:2:19 @{From us} (\ex hmn\) {--of us} (\ex hmn\). The same idiom, \ex\ and the ablative case (\hmn\), but in different senses to correspond with \exlthan\ (they went out from our membership) and \ouk san\ (they were not of us in spirit and life). For \ex\ in the sense of origin see strkjv@John:17:15|, for \ex\ in the sense of likeness, strkjv@John:17:14|. {For if they had been of us} (\ei gar ex hmn san\). Condition of second class with \ei\ and imperfect tense (no aorist for \eimi\). {They would have continued} (\memenkeisan an\). Past perfect of \men\, to remain, without augment, with \an\ in apodosis of second-class condition. {With us} (\meth' hmn\). In fellowship, for which see \meta\ in strkjv@1:3|. They had lost the inner fellowship and then apparently voluntarily broke the outward. {But they went} (\all'\). Ellipsis of the verb \exlthan\ above, a common habit (ellipse) in John s Gospel (1:8; strkjv@9:3; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@15:25|). {That they might be made manifest} (\hina phanerthsin\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \phanero\, for which verb see strkjv@John:21:1; strkjv@Colossians:3:4|. See strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3| for the personal construction with \hoti\ as here. {They all are not} (\ouk eisin pantes\). Not just some, but all, as in strkjv@2:21; strkjv@3:5|. These antichrists are thus revealed in their true light.

rwp@1John:2:20 @{Anointing} (\chrisma\). Old word for result (\mat\) and for the material, from \chri\, to anoint, perhaps suggested by the use of \antichristoi\ in verse 18|. Christians are "anointed ones," \christoi\ in this sense, with which compare strkjv@Psalms:105:15|: "Touch not my anointed ones" (\m hapssthe tn christn mou\). These antichrists posed as the equals of or even superior to Christ himself. But followers of Christ do have "the oil of anointing" (\to elaion tou chrismatos\, strkjv@Exodus:29:7|), the Holy Spirit. This word in the N.T. only here and verse 27|. Later the term was applied to baptism after baptismal remission came to be taught (Tertullian, etc.). {From the Holy One} (\apo tou hagiou\). They receive this anointing of the Holy Spirit from the Anointed One, Jesus Christ (the Holy One). Cf. strkjv@John:6:69; strkjv@Acts:3:14|. {And ye know all things} (\kai oidate panta\). But the best MSS. read \pantes\ rather than \panta\, "Ye all know it." This anointing is open to all Christians, not just a select few.

rwp@1John:2:22 @{The liar} (\ho pseusts\). The liar (with the article) _par excellence_. Rhetorical question to sharpen the point made already about lying in strkjv@1:6,10; strkjv@2:4,21|. See strkjv@5:5| for a like rhetorical question. {But} (\ei m\). Except, if not. {That denieth that Jesus is the Christ} (\ho arnoumenos hoti Isous ouk estin ho Christos\). Common Greek idiom for \ouk\ to appear after \arneomai\ like redundant \m\ in strkjv@Luke:20:27; strkjv@Hebrews:12:19|. The old Latin retains _non_ here as old English did (Shakespeare, _Comedy of Errors_ IV. ii. 7, "He denied you had in him no right"). The Cerinthian Gnostics denied the identity of the man Jesus and Christ (an \aeon\, they held) like the modern Jesus or Christ controversy. {This is the antichrist} (\houtos estin ho antichristos\). The one just mentioned, Cerinthus himself in particular. {Even he that denieth the Father and the Son} (\ho arnoumenos ton patera kai ton huion\). This is the inevitable logic of such a rejection of the Son of God. Jesus had himself said this very same thing (John:5:23f.|).

rwp@1John:2:24 @{As for you} (\humeis\). Emphatic proleptic position before the relative \ho\ and subject of \kousate\, a familiar idiom in strkjv@John:8:45; strkjv@10:29|, etc. Here for emphatic contrast with the antichrists. See strkjv@1:1| for \ap' archs\ (from the beginning). {Let abide in you} (\en humin menet\). Present active imperative of \men\, to remain. Do not be carried away by the new-fangled Gnostic teaching.

rwp@1John:4:3 @{Confesseth not} (\m homologei\). Indefinite relative clause with the subjective negative \m\ rather than the usual objective negative \ou\ (verse 6|). It is seen also in strkjv@2Peter:1:9; strkjv@Titus:1:11|, a survival of the literary construction (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 171). The Vulgate (along with Irenaeus, Tertullian, Augustine) reads _solvit_ (\luei\) instead of \m homologei\, which means "separates Jesus," apparently an allusion to the Cerinthian heresy (distinction between Jesus and Christ) as the clause before refers to the Docetic heresy. Many MSS. have here also \en sarki elluthota\ repeated from preceding clause, but not A B Vg Cop. and not genuine. {The spirit of the antichrist} (\to tou antichristou\). \Pneuma\ (spirit) not expressed, but clearly implied by the neuter singular article to. It is a repetition of the point about antichrists made in strkjv@2:18-25|. {Whereof} (\ho\). Accusative of person (grammatical neuter referring to \pneuma\) with \akou\ along with accusative of the thing (\hoti erchetai\, as in strkjv@2:18|, futuristic present middle indicative). Here the perfect active indicative (\akkoate\), while in strkjv@2:18| the aorist (\kousate\). {And now already} (\kai nun d\). As in strkjv@2:18| also (many have come). "The prophecy had found fulfilment before the Church had looked for it" (Westcott). It is often so. For \d\ see strkjv@John:4:35; strkjv@9:27|.

rwp@1John:5:1 @{That Jesus is the Christ} (\hoti Isous estin ho Christos\). The Cerinthian antichrist denies the identity of Jesus and Christ (2:22|). Hence John insists on this form of faith (\pisteun\ here in the full sense, stronger than in strkjv@3:23; strkjv@4:16|, seen also in \pistis\ in verse 4|, where English and Latin fall down in having to use another word for the verb) as he does in verse 5| and in accord with the purpose of John's Gospel (20:31|). Nothing less will satisfy John, not merely intellectual conviction, but full surrender to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. "The Divine Begetting is the antecedent, not the consequent of the believing" (Law). For "is begotten of God" (\ek tou theou gegenntai\) see strkjv@2:29; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@4:7; strkjv@5:4,18|. John appeals here to family relationship and family love. {Him that begat} (\ton gennsanta\). First aorist active articular participle of \genna\, to beget, the Father (our heavenly Father). {Him also that is begotten of him} (\ton gegennmenon ex autou\). Perfect passive articular participle of \genna\, the brother or sister by the same father. Songs:then we prove our love for the common Father by our conduct towards our brothers and sisters in Christ.

rwp@1John:5:16 @{If any man see} (\ean tis idi\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \eidon\ (\hora\). {Sinning a sin} (\hamartanonta hamartian\). Present active predicate (supplementary) participle agreeing with \adelphon\ and with cognate accusative \hamartian\. {Not unto death} (\m pros thanaton\). Repeated again with \hamartanousin\ and in contrast with \hamartia pros thanaton\ (sin unto death). Most sins are not mortal sins, but clearly John conceives of a sin that is deadly enough to be called "unto death." This distinction is common in the rabbinic writings and in strkjv@Numbers:18:22| the LXX has \labein hamartian thanatphoron\ "to incur a death-bearing sin" as many crimes then and now bear the death penalty. There is a distinction in strkjv@Hebrews:10:26| between sinning wilfully after full knowledge and sins of ignorance (Hebrews:5:2|). Jesus spoke of the unpardonable sin (Mark:3:29; strkjv@Matthew:12:32; strkjv@Luke:12:10|), which was attributing to the devil the manifest work of the Holy Spirit. It is possible that John has this idea in mind when he applies it to those who reject Jesus Christ as God's Son and set themselves up as antichrists. {Concerning this} (\peri ekeins\). This sin unto death. {That he should make request} (\hina ertsi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with the first aorist active subjunctive of \erta\, used here as in strkjv@John:17:15,20| (and often) for request rather than for question. John does not forbid praying for such cases; he simply does not command prayer for them. He leaves them to God.

rwp@2John:1:7 @{Deceivers} (\planoi\). Late adjective (Diodorus, Josephus) meaning wandering, roving (1Timothy:4:1|). As a substantive in N.T. of Jesus (Matthew:27:63|), of Paul (2Corinthians:6:8|), and here. See the verb (\tn planontn hums\) in strkjv@1John:2:26| of the Gnostic deceivers as here and also of Jesus (John:7:12|). Cf. strkjv@1John:1:8|. {Are gone forth} (\exlthan\, alpha ending). Second aorist active indicative of \exerchomai\, perhaps an allusion to the crisis when they left the churches (1John:2:19|, same form). {Even they that confess not} (\hoi m homologountes\). "The ones not confessing" (\m\ regular negative with the participle). The articular participle describes the deceivers (\planoi\). {That Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh} (\Isoun Christon erchomenon en sarki\). "Jesus Christ coming in the flesh." Present middle participle of \erchomai\ treating the Incarnation as a continuing fact which the Docetic Gnostics flatly denied. In strkjv@1John:4:2| we have \elluthota\ (perfect active participle) in this same construction with \homologe\, because there the reference is to the definite historical fact of the Incarnation. There is no allusion here to the second coming of Christ. {This} (\houtos\). See strkjv@1John:2:18,22; strkjv@5:6,20|. {The deceiver and the antichrist} (\ho planos kai ho antichristos\). Article with each word, as in strkjv@Revelation:1:17|, to bring out sharply each separate phrase, though one individual is referred to. The one _par excellence_ in popular expectation (1John:2:22|), though many in reality (1John:2:18; strkjv@3John:1:7|).

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:3 @{Let no man beguile you in any wise} (\m tis humas exapatsi kata mdena tropon\). First aorist active subjunctive of \exapata\ (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb \apata\) with double negative (\m tis, mdena\) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:11| rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in strkjv@Mark:13:15| (\m katabat\). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes "tricks" of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion. {For it will not be} (\hoti\). There is an ellipse here of \ouk estai\ (or \gensetai\) to be supplied after \hoti\. Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of verse 4|. The meaning is clear. \Hoti\ is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2|. {Except the falling away come first} (\ean m elthi h apostasia prton\). Negative condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of determination and the aorist subjunctive. \Apostasia\ is the late form of \apostasis\ and is our word apostasy. Plutarch uses it of political revolt and it occurs in I Macc. strkjv@2:15 about Antiochus Epiphanes who was enforcing the apostasy from Judaism to Hellenism. In strkjv@Joshua:22:22| it occurs for rebellion against the Lord. It seems clear that the word here means a religious revolt and the use of the definite article (\h\) seems to mean that Paul had spoken to the Thessalonians about it. The only other New Testament use of the word is in strkjv@Acts:21:21| where it means apostasy from Moses. It is not clear whether Paul means revolt of the Jews from God, of Gentiles from God, of Christians from God, or of the apostasy that includes all classes within and without the body of Christians. But it is to be {first} (\prton\) before Christ comes again. Note this adverb when only two events are compared (cf. strkjv@Acts:1:1|). {And the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition} (\kai apokaluphthi ho anthrpos ts anomias, ho huios ts apleias\). First aorist passive subjunctive after \ean m\ and same condition as with \elthi\. The use of this verb \apokalupt\, like \apokalupsin\ of the second coming in strkjv@1:7|, seems to note the superhuman character (Milligan) of the event and the same verb is repeated in verses 6,8|. The implication is that {the man of sin} is hidden somewhere who will be suddenly manifested just as false apostles pose as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:13ff.|), whether the crowning event of the apostasy or another name for the same event. Lightfoot notes the parallel between the man of sin, of whom sin is the special characteristic (genitive case, a Hebraism for the lawless one in verse 8|) and Christ. Both Christ and the adversary of Christ are revealed, there is mystery about each, both make divine claims (verse 4|). He seems to be the Antichrist of strkjv@1John:2:18|. The terrible phrase, the son of perdition, is applied to Judas in strkjv@John:17:12| (like Judas doomed to perdition), but here to the lawless one (\ho anomos\, verse 8|), who is not Satan, but some one definite person who is doing the work of Satan. Note the definite article each time.

rwp@Info_Epistles-General @ IMPORTANCE OF THE GENERAL EPISTLES Without them we should be deprived of much concerning three outstanding personalities in early Christianity. We should know much less of "James, and Cephas, and John, they who were reputed to be pillars" (Galatians:2:9|). We should know less also of the Judaic (not Judaizing) form of Christianity seen in the Epistles of James and Jude:in contrast with, though not opposed to, the Pauline type. In Peter's Epistles we see, indeed, a mediating position without compromise of principle, for Peter in the Jerusalem Conference loyally supported Paul and Barnabas even if he did flicker for a moment later in Antioch. In the Johannine Epistles we see the great Eagle soar as in his Gospel in calm serenity in spite of conflict with the Gnostics who struck at the very life of Christianity itself. "The only opposition which remains worthy of a Christian's consideration is that between light and darkness, truth and falsehood, love and hate, God and the world, Christ and Antichrist, life and death" (Plummer). Songs:we can be grateful for the preservation of these little Epistles which reveal differences in the development of the great Christian leaders and the adaptation of the gospel message to changing world conditions then and now. Info_Epistles-Pastorial

rwp@John:5:43 @{In my Father's name} (\en ti onomati tou patros mou\). Seven times Jesus in John speaks of the "Name" of the Father (5:43; strkjv@10:25; strkjv@12:28; strkjv@17:6,11,12,26|). See strkjv@1:12| for use of \onoma\ (Luke:1:49|). {And ye receive me not} (\kai ou lambanete me\). "And yet ye do not receive me," as in verse 40|, "the Gospel of the Rejection" (1:11; strkjv@3:11,32; strkjv@12:37|) often applied to the Fourth Gospel. {If another come} (\ean allos elthi\). Condition of third class (\ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\). Note \allos\, not \heteros\, like \allon Isoun\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:4|. Similar prophecies occur in strkjv@Mark:13:6,22| (Matthew:24:5,24|), all general in character like Antichrist in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:8-12|. There is no occasion for a reference to any individual like Barcochba (about A.D. 134) as Pfleiderer and Schmiedel hold. These Messianic upstarts all come "in their own name" and always find a following. {Him ye will receive} (\ekeinon lmpsesthe\). "That one," whoever he is, as Jesus said. Future active indicative of \lamban\. Credulous about the false Messiahs, incredulous about Christ.

rwp@Revelation:7:4 @{The number of the sealed} (\ton arithmon tn esphragismenn\). Accusative case object of \kousa\ and genitive of the perfect passive articular participle of \sphragiz\. He did not see the sealing or count them himself, but only heard. {A hundred and forty and four thousand} (\hekaton tesserakonta tessares chiliades\). Symbolical, of course, and not meant to be a complete number of the sealed (or saved) even in that generation, let alone for all time. The number connotes perfection (Alford), 12x12x1000 = a hundred and forty-four thousands (\chiliades\, strkjv@5:11|). Nominative absolute, not agreeing in case either with \arithmon\ (accusative) or \esphragismenn\ (genitive). Songs:as to the case of \esphragismenoi\. {Out of every tribe of the children of Israel} (\ek pss phuls huin Isral\). There are two opposite views here, one taking the sealed as referring only to Jews (either actual Jews as a remnant or just Jewish Christians), the other including Gentiles as well as Jewish Christians, that is the true Israel as in strkjv@2:9; strkjv@3:9ff.| and like Paul in Galatians and Romans. This is the more probable view and it takes the twelve tribes in a spiritual sense. But in either view there remains the difficulty about names of the tribes. The list is not geographical, since Levi is included, but Dan is omitted and Manasseh put in his place, though he as the son of Joseph is included in Joseph. Irenaeus suggested that Antichrist was expected to come from the tribe of Dan and hence the omission here. There are various lists of the tribes in the O.T. (Genesis:35:22f.; strkjv@46:8ff.,49; strkjv@Exodus:1:1ff.; strkjv@Numbers:1:2; strkjv@13:4ff; strkjv@26:34; strkjv@Deuteronomy:27:11f.; strkjv@33:6ff.; strkjv@Joshua:13-22; strkjv@Judges:5; strkjv@1Chronicles:2-8; strkjv@12:24ff.; strkjv@27:16ff.; strkjv@Ezekiel:48|) and given in various orders. In strkjv@1Chronicles:7:12| both Dan and Zebulon are omitted. Joseph is given here in place of Ephraim. The distribution is equal (12,000) to each tribe.

rwp@Revelation:11:7 @{When they shall have finished} (\hotan telessin\). Merely the first aorist active subjunctive of \tele\ with \hotan\ in an indefinite temporal clause with no _futurum exactum_ (future perfect), "whenever they finish." {The beast} (\to thrion\). "The wild beast comes out of the abyss" of strkjv@9:1f|. He reappears in strkjv@13:1; strkjv@17:8|. In strkjv@Daniel:7:3| \thria\ occurs. Nothing less than antichrist will satisfy the picture here. Some see the abomination of strkjv@Daniel:7:7; strkjv@Matthew:24:15|. Some see Nero _redivivus_. {He shall make war with them} (\poisei met' autn polemon\). This same phrase occurs in strkjv@12:17| about the dragon's attack on the woman. It is more the picture of single combat (2:16|). {He shall overcome them} (\niksei autous\). Future active of \nika\. The victory of the beast over the two witnesses is certain, as in strkjv@Daniel:7:21|. {And kill them} (\kai apoktenei\). Future active of \apoktein\. Without attempting to apply this prophecy to specific individuals or times, one can agree with these words of Swete: "But his words cover in effect all the martyrdoms and massacres of history in which brute force has seemed to triumph over truth and righteousness."

rwp@Revelation:13:3 @{And I saw} (\kai\). No verb (\eidon\) in the old MSS., but clearly understood from verse 2|. {As though it had been smitten} (\hs esphagmenn\). Perfect passive participle of \sphaz\, as in strkjv@5:6|, accusative singular agreeing with \mian\ (one of the heads), object of \eidon\ understood, "as though slain" (so the word means in seven other instances in the book). There is a reference to the death and new life of the Lamb in strkjv@5:6|. {And his death-stroke was healed} (\kai h plg autou etherapeuth\). First aorist passive indicative of \therapeu\. "The stroke of death" (that led to death). Apparently refers to the death of Nero in June 68 A.D. by his own hand. But after his death pretenders arose claiming to be Nero _redivivus_ even as late as 89 (Tacitus, _Hist_. i. 78, ii. 8, etc.). John seems to regard Domitian as Nero over again in the persecutions carried on by him. The distinction is not always preserved between the beast (Roman Empire) and the seven heads (emperors), but in strkjv@17:10| the beast survives the loss of five heads. Here it is the death-stroke of one head, while in verses 12,14| the beast himself receives a mortal wound. {Wondered after the beast} (\ethaumasth opis tou thriou\). First aorist passive (deponent) indicative of \thaumaz\, to wonder at, to admire, as in strkjv@17:8|. For this pregnant use of \opis\ see strkjv@John:12:9; strkjv@Acts:5:37; strkjv@20:30; strkjv@1Timothy:5:15|. "All the earth wondered at and followed after the beast," that is Antichrist as represented by Domitian as Nero _redivivus_. But Charles champions the view that Caligula, not Nero, is the head that received the death-stroke and recovered and set up statues of himself for worship, even trying to do it in Jerusalem.

rwp@Revelation:19:11 @{The heaven opened} (\ton ouranon neigmenon\). Perfect passive participle (triple reduplication) of \anoig\. Accusative case after \eidon\. Songs:Ezekiel (1:1|) begins his prophecy. See also the baptism of Jesus (Matthew:3:16; strkjv@Luke:3:21|, but \schizomenous\ in strkjv@Mark:1:10|). Jesus predicted the opened heavens to Nathanael (John:1:51|). In strkjv@Revelation:4:1| a door is opened in heaven, the sanctuary is opened (11:19; strkjv@15:5|), angels come out of heaven (10:1; strkjv@14:17; strkjv@18:1|), and sounds come from heaven (19:1|). {Behold, a white horse} (\idou hippos leukos\). Nominative case because of \idou\, not \eidon\. Cf. strkjv@6:2| for \hippos leukos\. The emblem of victory in both cases, but the riders are very different. Here it is the Messiah who is the Warrior, as is made plain by "Faithful and True" (\pistos kai althinos\), epithets already applied to Christ (1:5; strkjv@3:7,14|). Cf. also strkjv@22:6|. {In righteousness he doth judge and make war} (\en dikaiosuni krinei kai polemei\). See strkjv@Isaiah:11:3ff|. The Messiah is both Judge and Warrior, but he does both in righteousness (15:3; strkjv@16:5,7; strkjv@19:2|). He passes judgment on the beast (antichrist) and makes war on him. Satan had offered Christ a victory of compromise which was rejected.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ EMPEROR WORSHIP AS THE OCCASION FOR JOHN'S APOCALYPSE There is no doubt at all that the emperor cult (emperor worship) played a main part in the persecution of the Christians that was the occasion for this great Christian apocalypse. The book itself bears ample witness to this fact, if the two beasts refer to the Roman power as the agent of Satan. It is not possible to single out each individual emperor in the graphic picture. Most would take the dragon to be Satan and the first and the second beasts to be the imperial and provincial Roman power. The Roman emperors posed as gods and did the work of Satan. In particular there were two persecuting emperors (Nero and Domitian) who were responsible for many martyrs for Christ. But emperor worship began before Nero. Julius Caesar was worshipped in the provinces. Octavius was called Augustus (\Sebastos\, Reverend). The crazy Emperor Caius Caligula not simply claimed to be divine, but actually demanded that his statue be set up for worship in the Holy of Holies in the Temple in Jerusalem. He was killed in January A.D. 41 before he could execute his dire purpose. But the madcap Nero likewise demanded worship and blamed in A.D. 64 the burning of Rome on the Christians, though guilty of it himself. He set the style for persecuting Christians, which slumbered on and burst into flames again under Domitian, who had himself commonly termed _Dominus ac Deus noster_ (Our Lord and God). The worship of the emperor did not disturb the worshippers of other gods save the Jews and the Christians, and in particular the Christians were persecuted after the burning of Rome when they were distinguished from the Jews. Up till then Christians were regarded (as by Gallio in Corinth) as a variety of Jews and so entitled to tolerance as a _religio licita_, but they had no standing in law by themselves and their refusal to worship the emperor early gave offence, as Paul indicates in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3|. It was \Kurios Isous\ or \Kurios Kaisar\. On this very issue Polycarp lost his life. The emperors as a rule were tolerant about it, save Nero and Domitian, who was called Nero _redivivus_, or Nero back again. Trajan in his famous letter to Pliny advised tolerance except in stubborn cases, when the Christians had to be put to death. After Nero it was a crime to be a Christian and all sorts of slanders about them were circulated. We have seen already in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3ff.|, the man of sin who sets himself above God as the object of worship. We have seen also in strkjv@1John:2:18,22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7| the term antichrist applied apparently to Gnostic heretics. One may wonder if, as Beckwith argues, in the Apocalypse the man of sin and the antichrist are united in the beast.