The "Misplaced" Antichrist of the Seventh Day Adventists

The "Misplaced" Antichrist of the Seventh Day Adventists

A religious group called 'The Seventh Day Adventists (SDA)' is one of the most ardent ‘expositor’ of the Papacy-Antichrist Theory. On expounding on this issue however, they mistakenly designate the first beast of Revelation 13 as the Antichrist, and the second beast, surprisingly, they say is the United States of America.

The placing of the Antichrist as the first beast of Revelation 13 is a big blunder.  The descriptions of that first beast matches with that of the descriptions given to the fourth beast of Daniel 7.  And the fulfillment of that fourth beast is the Roman Empire which the SDA themselves accept.

Note Revelation 13:1 and Daniel 7:7

“And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.” (Revelation)

 “…and behold a fourth beast [from the sea.v.4]…and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns…”(Daniel)

Note the point of origin "sea" and the "ten horns" of the fourth beast of Daniel and the first beast of Revelation is the same.  If the fourth beast of Daniel is the Roman Empire, then the first beast of Revelation must be the Roman Empire.


Early Protestant belief designated the Roman Empire as the first beast, and the second the Papacy.  Martin Luther wrote:

"Here, then, are the two Beasts. The one is the [Roman] Empire. The other, with the two horns, is the Papacy."*

Even the Catholic Church, in their notes in the New American Bible, believes that the Roman Empire is the first beast.*

Mere analogy alone points to the second beast as the Antichrist.  To the second beast John said it has "two horns like lamb, but speak like a dragon" (cf. Rev. 13:11).  It will preach ‘devilish doctrine’ despite its ‘Christ-like’ appearance. Since Christ is the greatest prophet, the second beast–false Christ will be a false prophet, and therefore the Antichrist!  And it is very absurd to point to the president of the United States as the false prophet, because he is not a preacher.

Note again that the second beast will coexist and ‘work hand in hand’ at some point time with the Roman Empire as shown by the following passages from the bible, and this actually had taken place between the Roman Empire and the Catholic Church. Thus:

"And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast…” Rev. 13:17

And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him,…” Rev. 19:20

The SDA in believing the Papacy as the fulfillment of the prophesied to Antichrist,  is "constructively" correct. They however promoted false 'theology' in designating 'it' as the first beast of Revelation, and the United States "unfairly" designated as the second.

The Catholic Church is the Fulfillment of the Antichrist

History proves that the Catholic Church position as to the fulfillment of the Antichrist is inconsistent. From the time of the so called Early church fathers up to the present time, their explanation on the matter have not cleared the issues, but in fact had made it more muddled up.

For example, the identities or the fulfillment of the four beasts of Daniel 7 is crucial in the identification of the Antichrist, Because the” little horn” generally believed as the Antichrist, appeared on the scene in the reign of the fourth beast. So if the fourth beast is the Roman Empire, the Catholic Church would fall into the time frame when the “little horn-Antichrist” appeared. A finger of suspicion is aimed at them as being the Antichrist.

Indeed the fourth world ruling kingdom is the Roman Empire according to history. This historical fact, and as being the fulfillment of the four beasts of Daniel 7, was supported by a famous English Catholic Bishop Richard Challoner. According to him, these four world kingdoms were “the Chaldean, Persian, Grecian, and Roman empires.” This definitely places the Catholic Church in the time frame of the emergence of the Antichrist. This is the “authorized interpretation “ of the Catholic Church during those times, 17th Century.

To avoid this, the Catholic Church released its “latest authorized” interpretation as to these four beasts or empires. According to this latest interpretation, the alleged chronological succession is as follows: Babylonian, Median, Persian, and Grecian Empire— the fourth beast is not the Roman Empire anymore. The “little horn-Antichrist” therefore was fulfilled to another personality or kingdom. To Antiochus Epiphanes.

But they cannot avoid the truth. The first beast of Revelation 13 according to them is the Roman Empire, and the second beast obviously refers to the Antichrist. This Antichrist, according to the same chapter, had come into contact and collaborated with the Roman Empire (first beast). What Church has had this opportunity? There is only one and one alone. It is none other than the Catholic Church.

To the readers: Everyone is welcome to ask questions, to give their comments on this subject or to any subject in this blog.

थे कैथोलिक चुर्च इस थे अन्तिच्रिस्ट

The False Prophets

For more than two thousand years, everyone was trying to solve the mystery of the false prophet. Is he now living in our midst? Or is he still to come in the future? Does he possess a superhuman nature as other so called bible scholars portray him? There are many questions and many answers given. In any event, the would-be-existence of this false prophet is foretold in the bible. It gives descriptions on how to spot this false prophet. Though many of the identifying marks given therein are in figurative or symbolical in nature, the bible itself gives meaning to these symbols.



For example, Christ Himself warned, “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves (Mat.7:15 KJV). Of course this is figurative, otherwise it would be impossible to recognize false prophets and false preachers, the only thing they would have to do is to avoid wearing wool or clothing made of literal sheep's coat.  The description that 'inwardly they are ravening wolves', establishes the fact that the verse is figurative. This passage though is complemented by another bible verses, and that will bring us a step closer to the identity of this false prophets, and eventually to the identity of the Antichrist.



The bible refers to Christ as a lamb and sheep (Isaiah 53:7; Acts 8:32). No one would argue that in our Lord’s time here on earth, the dress was a long one. Even artists’ representation commissioned by any religious institutions rendered the general appearance of our Lord’s clothing was a long one. In Revelation, John described it : “clothed with a garment down to the foot “. (Rev.1:13) The expression “down to the foot” simply means long robe or garment. Christ’s warning therefore means that false prophets will imitate his clothing, or will be similar to his.



Some think, preachers donning long garment is a good sign, because Christ and the apostles wore that style of clothing during their time. We have to disagree. In fact it is one of the ways in recognizing the false prophets. One doesn’t have to search hard that Catholic priests up to the Pope wear this kind of clothing. It is a prescribed outfit to identify them as preachers or ministers of their church. Preachers from some other religious organizations also wear the same get up. The latter must have had the same feeling that having similar clothing with our Lord gives a pious and godly appearance.



Christ said: “but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits.” The whole passage in fact is a warning to coming false prophets. The disciples were given identifying signs, “sheep’s clothing”, “ravenous wolves” and “by their fruits”. Since these are false preachers, the fruits being referred to must be the nature of their teachings. It must be false teachings. Paul’s letter to the Ephesians says: “For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth” (9:5). So their teachings are not in line with the truth or the Word of God.



The ravenous wolves is the grievous wolves mentioned by apostle Paul, “ For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.” (Acts 20:29).  Paul’s departure means his death. (vv.36-38, 2 Tim.4:6,7). These wolves in sheep’s clothing will not spare the flock, which is the church (v.28) And these wolves says Paul “will come in among YOU”. The pronoun YOU refers to whom Paul was speaking to at the time, they are the "overseers" and "feeders" of the church (v.28) Douay Rheims renders “overseers” as “bishops”. Therefore, Paul was speaking to bishops at that point in time.This means the savage wolves will find its place among the ranks of the bishops in the church and “will not spare it.” And from the ranks of the bishops, Paul prophesied, “ Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, [ “you shall know by their fruit”, remember?]to draw away disciples after them.” (v.30).



After the death of the apostles, history proves that from the ranks of the bishops in the church arose the so-called “Apostolic Fathers” and then came the “Church Fathers”. Gradually, the primacy of the Bishopric of Rome over all the bishoprics, including the Bishopric of Jerusalem, was developed and proclaimed. And centuries later the Title Pope was exclusively appropriated to the Bishop of Rome.



A clothing similar to our Lord, in our own standard, if worn by a preacher, would give the appearance of godliness and piousness. But our thinking is different from the Lord. His standard should be our standard in trying to be just before Him. And that should be the TRUTH. Though it is somewhat hard to find , because of our limited capacity, and considering also our prejudice brought about by the belief inculcated in us during our youth on, an open mind from this point onwards would be of help.



As to the appearance of godliness, here is Paul’s warning, “having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.” (2 Tim.3:5)


Here are some points of identification of the false prophet: He is also the antichrist; he is referred to in the bible as the beast; he is referred to in Revelation 13 as the man having the number 666. This is just to name a few.



This is not to advocate for nor support any specific religious organization or church. This is independent.  The motive here is to share the truth, and to enlighten the world, if possible. Any similarity of my findings to the teachings of any specific religious organization is either unintentional or accepted here as biblical.

Papal-Antichrist theory: An Argument in favor of the Roman Church?

        I found this on the net:"...some of Cardinal Newman's critical remarks on the question" concerning the Antichrist are quoted below, we will then give our thoughts about it.

    "If any part of the Church be proved to be antichristian, all of the Church is so, the Protestant branch inclusive."

        Cardinal Newman has a point here.   But to disprove the papal-antichrist theory by arguing that it would also include “all of the Church” including the “Protestant branch” is not a sound argument [assuming I have understood his message].  It’s like saying “since the Catholic Church is of the Antichrist, then all churches are of the antichrist, all destined to go to hell.” 

       We said he has a point there, since the antichrist is associated with "Babylon the great " (Rev.17.4), which  in turn is described as a harlot (woman=church, therefore, evil woman= evil church) and mother of harlots, that is,  daughters that are harlots (evil women=evil churches).  The crux of the matter is that, the Cardinal did not disprove the theory.  He just confirms it.  In few words.

   "The Papal-Antichrist theory was gradually developed by three historical bodies: the Albigenses, the Waldenses, and the Fraticelli, between the eleventh and the sixteenth centuries: are these the expositors from whom the Church of Christ is to receive the true interpretation of the prophecies?"

        The cardinal’s question of course is rhetorical.  Cardinal Newman only means that the Albigensis, Waldenses, and all schools of thought pointing to the pope as the Antichrist are not the authorities to give us the true interpretation of the prophecies, but the Catholic Church.  But the problem with that is what if the Papal-Antichrist theory is correct?  The result is obvious.  The world would be deprived of knowing the true identity of the Antichrist.  

        The Catholic Church as of yet, has not given us a concrete and complete interpretation of the prophecies.  The most that they have done so far is to point to a future Antichrist.   And then they also give us some interpretation, though unsure, saying that the Antichrist could be Nero, since, with out-of-thin- air calculation, the name adds to 666.  Through it all, the official church declaration is in effect, there is no antichrist yet.

        But isn’t it clear from the bible that the spirit of the Antichrist was already working during time of the apostles? (1 John 4:2)  That from the ranks of bishops of the first century church “shall men arise, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them” (Acts 20:29-30)?  Wasn’t the church can be traced back from then?  These are just some valid observations that place the Pope as the prime suspect of being the Antichrist.

    "The defenders of the Papal-Antichrist theory have made several signal blunders in their arguments;..."

        I agree. But their several blunders do not automatically make the theory false.

    "Protestants were driven to the Papal-Antichrist theory by the necessity of opposing a popular answer to the popular and cogent arguments advanced by the Church of Rome for her Divine authority"

        Hmmm.   What are those popular and cogent arguments advanced by the Church of Rome?  That Nero could be the Antichrist?  That the church of Rome could not be where the Antichrist is, because the church’s timeline could be traced back to the time of the apostles?  Well, here is something for that timeline: Paul said, “after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock." (Acts 20:29).  The flock is the church. (v. 28)  As to the latter claim: Of course anyone can claim Divine authority. But proving it is another story.

   " Warburton, Newton, and Hurd, the advocates of the Papal-Antichrist theory, cannot be matched against the saints of the Church of Rome."

Another claim, that is, that there are saints in the church of Rome.

    "If the Pope be Antichrist, those who receive and follow him cannot be men like St. Charles Borromeo, or Fénelon, or St. Bernard, or St. Francis de Sales."

        Why, who are these saints? Apostles?  Prophets?  Who made them saints, anyway? The words of God or the Pope through the process of beatification and canonization?  Why cite these "saints" in belying the "papal-antichrist theory" even to non-Catholics? 

To the readers:  Everyone  is welcomed  to ask questions, to give their comments on this subject or to any subject in this blog. 

(Quotes are from http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm)

The False Prophet, the Second Beast

The bible gives many identifying points for us to recognize the the False Prophet.  One of them is in their  clothing.  In the book of Revelation, a great deal is given about  this false prophet. Because of this, several interpretations were proposed and advocated.  Many of them are dismally out of sync with the truth, and many of them, though have concluded correctly as to the fulfillment, they however twisted several truths in the process.  Some gave a bit of truth but failed or refused to give the specific fulfillment.

In The New Testament edited by Catholic Scholars, in its footnote for Revelation 19:20, this is what they say about the false prophet :

" The False Prophet: the second wild beast of chapter 13." (Copyright 1947 by Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, p.471).

The second beast of Revelation 13 as written:"And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as dragon." (v.11)


Note the symbolism. The Lamb symbolizing our Lord Jesus Christ(I Pet. 1:19), and the dragon symbolizing the devil (Rev.12:9). The second beast, though having similarities with Christ, will speak like the devil, an unmistakable characteristic of a false prophet. So we have to agree with Catholic scholars cited in their interpretation.


But notice the expression "like a lamb, and spake as dragon" and compare it in "in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves." in Mat.7:15; these are expressions that virtually have the same meaning!  Elsewhere in this blog is discussed the false prophets in sheep's clothing. click here.


This false prophet despite speaking as a dragon was able to attract several followers and believers:  "And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:"(Rev.13:16).  But how could these false prophets attract so many followers when in fact he speaks like the devil? As stated he will have similarities with the lamb.  He will have an appearance of piousness as that of our Lord.  Also he will speak lies (John 8:44) and deception.(Rev.13:14).


Yes, The False Prophet and the the second beast of Revelation is one and the same.