The temple you are referring to no longer exists. Although it was destroyed in 70AD it ceased to be the temple of God when Christ declared it desolate(Mat23:38) which was then reconfirmed when the curtain was rent in twain (Mat27:51), approximately 40 years before it’s destruction. Do you believe that a building Christ Himself declared was desolate is really the temple of God? Is the temple of God a desolate building?
Ridiculous at best, even a well mannered dog knows better then to relieve itself on the floor of any building.
Your argument is not with me but with the man who told us about the man of sin. Remember it was that same man who also told us that the temple of God is the body of the believer (1Cor3:16-17, 2Cor6:16) or the corporate body of Christ (Eph2:19-21). Why one would assume that in this case Paul ignores the definition that he himself gave for the temple of God in favor of a building that Christ Himself said was desolate is beyond reason. I can understand how a Jew that has been given the spirit of slumber would believe a man made building can be the temple of God, but as Christians we should be able to recognize we have a new temple (Heb8:1-2) and a new covenant (Heb8:13).
Paul defined the temple of God as shown above. Like I said before if you want to find the man of Sin look in the true temple of God. You won’t find him in some man made building that God does not dwell in.
Beat that dead horse all you want but we only heard once that antichrist shall come. Show me from the only 4 verses that use the term antichrist or antichrists where we heard of the one John was referring to when he said “this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world”
1Jn 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time
1Jn 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1Jn 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2Jn 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
Notice the bolded parts of 1John2:18 and 1John4:3 there is your answer my friend.
In the KJV the word antichrist is not selectively capitalized, and there was no upper/lower case in the original Greek. Clearly, from the verses above, antichrist is a SPIRIT, or THE spirit, that lives in the heart of anybody that denies that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, or denies that Jesus Christ IS come in the flesh, or denies that Jesus is the Christ (anointed one). Every man that denies the Son has not the Father and is antichrist, and also is an antichrist.
Since there are billions of antichrists - and no shortage from John's day forward - it would seem there cannot be a single antichrist - not in John's day - not today. An individual antichrist can only be just ANOTHER antichrist.
The following verse is sometimes understood to suggest an individual past or future "Antichrist", but Scripture shows us how to understand this verse perfectly:
1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
How could the above verse make any sense if the first use of the term antichrist were supposed to be an individual person as "The" "Antichrist", when six words later we learn there are many antichrists? This is the only verse of those above that is generally construed to indicate a single individual as such. Let's develop our understanding by looking to another verse that also uses the term antichrist in a singular fashion:
1 John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that [spirit] of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
You can see the singular "that", "spirit", "it" in this sentence and singular "antichrist", just like the singular "antichrist" in 1 John 2:18. The translators gave us a little extra push in 1 John 4:3 by inserting the word [spirit] a second time, further clarifying that the spirit of antichrist is this singular entity. Now look at how this makes the "little children" verse make perfect sense if, when you get to the first use of term antichrist, you understand it as THE SPIRIT OF antichrist:
John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard thatantichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
Finally look also at how beautifully parallel these two verse snippets are:
"ye have heard that antichrist shall come"
"ye have heard that it should come"
Remember the point isn't to defned one's doctrine at any cost, but instead to search for truth. Why not address the questions I actually ask? Is it because if you answer honestly based on Scripture actually says (not your interpretation) you would have to put down your whip and change your doctrine?
