Signs of Christ's Presence  

THE MAN OF SIN—ANTICHRIST

 Antichrist Must be Developed, Revealed and Smitten Before the Day of   the Lord—A Contrary View of This Subject Considered—Prophetic   Delineation—Antichrist’s Birth—His Rapid Development—The Historic   Picture and the Bible Description Agree—His Kingdom a Counterfeit—His Head and Mouth Notable—His Great Swelling Words of   Blasphemy—His Blasphemous Teachings—His Wearing Out of the   Saints of the Most High—His Millennial Reign—Antichrist Smitten   with the Sword of the Spirit—His Final Struggle and End.

                “Let no man deceive you by any means; for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that Man of Sin be revealed, the Son of Perdition.” 2 Thess. 2:3

            In view of these pointed words of the Apostle Paul, showing that a character which he designates “The Man of Sin” must precede the coming of the Day of the Lord, which we have proved has already begun to dawn, it is important that we look about, to see if such a character has yet appeared. For if such a character as Paul and the other apostles so carefully describe has not yet come, the above words should be understood as Paul’s veto to all the other testimony concerning the Lord’s presence and the setting up of his Kingdom now.  And that veto must stand as an unanswerable argument until this Man of Sin shall be recognized, corresponding in every particular to the prophetic description. 

            It is clearly stated, not only that this Man of Sin must first rise, but that he must develop and prosper, before the  B_page 268 Day of the Lord comes.  Before Christ’s day the prosperity and influence of this power will have reached their climax and will be on the decline; and it is to be by the bright shining of the Lord’s presence at his second advent that this Man of Sin shall be utterly destroyed.  These foretold circumstances we must observe, in order to see whether this caution to the Church in Paul’s day is still applicable in our day.  Now, after eighteen centuries, the claim is again made that the day of Christ has come; and the important question arises, Does anything which Paul said in correcting the error of the Thessalonians stand as an objection to this claim now? 

            From the Apostle’s exhortations to the Church, to watch for the Lord’s return, taking heed to the sure word of prophecy, and from his care in pointing out the signs of Christ’s presence, the character of his work at that time, etc., it is evident that he was quite as anxious that the Church should be able to recognize the Lord’s presence when he should come, as that they should not be deceived into the error that he had come, before the time of his presence. A fall into the latter error, in the early part of the age, exposed those who embraced it to the deceptions of the Antichrist principle which was even then working; while a failure to recognize the Day of the Lord, and his presence in the day when his presence is due, exposes those failing to recognize him to the continued deceptions and false doctrines of Antichrist, and blinds them to the grand truths and special privileges of this day.  Hence the Apostle’s anxiety for the Church at both ends of the age, and his warning—“Let no man deceive you by any means.”  Hence also the exact description of the Man of Sin, in order that he might be recognized in his time. 

            While Christians in this end of the age are inclined to forget even the promise of the Lord’s return, and, when they  B_page 269 do remember it, to think of it only with dread and fearful forebodings, the early Church looked for it anxiously, and with joyful anticipation, as the fruition of all its hopes, the reward of all its faithfulness and the end of all its sorrows. Consequently, the believers of that day were ready to hearken diligently to any teaching which claimed that the Day of the Lord was either very near or present; and hence they were in danger of being deceived on this point unless they were careful students of the teachings of the apostles on the subject. 

            The Church at Thessalonica, impressed with the erroneous teachings of some, to the effect that the Lord had come again, and that they were living in his day, evidently supposed that the idea was in harmony with Paul’s teaching in his first epistle to them, wherein he said (1 Thess. 5:1-5) that the Day of the Lord would steal on quietly and unobservedly, as a thief in the night, and that, though others would be in it unawares, the saints would be in the light concerning it.  Learning of the serious error into which they had fallen, of supposing the day of the Lord’s presence to have already come, Paul wrote them a second epistle, the central thought of which was the correction of this error.  He says: “Now we beseech you, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together unto him, that ye be not readily agitated in mind nor troubled; neither by spirit, neither by word, neither by letter as from us, as though the Day of the Lord [enestemi] is present. Let no man delude you, by any means; because the falling away [apostasy] must first come, and there must be revealed that Man of Sin, the Son of Destruction, the Opposer, exalting himself above all, being called a god [mighty ruler] or that receives homage—so as to seat himself in the Temple of God, openly displaying himself that he is a god.  Remember ye not that while I was yet with you I told you these  B_page 270 things?  And now ye know what interposes, in order that he [Christ] may be revealed in his own [due] season.  But insubordination [to Christ] is already working, only as a secret thing, until the now hindering one shall be out of the way; and then shall that insubordinate one be revealed, whom the Lord shall kill with the spirit of his mouth and annihilate by the bright shining of his [parousia] presence.” Paul could write thus positively of the development of the Man of Sin before the Day of the Lord, because of his study of Daniel’s prophecy, to which our Lord also referred (Matt. 24:15); and probably because Paul himself, in his “visions and revelations,” had been shown the great havoc which this character would work in the Church. 

            It should be observed that Paul did not use arguments such as some today are disposed to use against the claim that the day of the Lord has begun.  He did not say, O foolish Thessalonians, do ye not know that when Christ comes your eyes shall behold him, and your ears shall hear a dreadful sound of the trump of God? and that you will have further proof of it in the reeling tombstones and the rising saints?  Is it not evident that if such a criticism had been proper, Paul would have been quick to avail himself of an argument so simple and so easily grasped?  And moreover, is not the fact that he did not use this argument a proof that such an argument is not, and could not be, founded on the truth? 

            From the fact that Paul, in his energetic effort to correct their error, offered but this one objection to their claim, he thereby evidently endorsed as correct their general ideas of the Day of the Lord—that it could be commenced while many might be in ignorance of it, that it could come without outward demonstration to mark it.  But the only ground of his objection was, that there must first come a falling away, and, in consequence of that falling away, the development of the Man of Sin—which, whatever it may be  B_page 271 (whether a single individual, or a great Antichrist system which he thus personifies), must rise, flourish and begin to decline—before the day of the Lord’s presence.  So, then, if this one objection which Paul offered be no longer in the way—if we can clearly see a character in actual existence whose history corresponds in every particular to the prophetic description of the Man of Sin, from the beginning of his existence down to the present time—then Paul’s objection, which was well taken in his day, and his only one, is no longer a valid objection against the present claim that we are living in the Day of the Lord, the day of the Lord’s presence. And, further, if the Man of Sin can be readily distinguished, if his rise, development and decline are clearly seen, then this fact becomes another corroborative proof of the teaching of the preceding chapters, which show that we are now in the Day of the Lord.

 His Prophetic Delineation

             The student of prophecy will find that the Man of Sin is distinctly noted throughout the sacred writings, not only by giving a clear description of his character, but also by showing the times and places of his beginning, prosperity and decline. 

            This character is very forcibly delineated even in the names applied to it by the inspired writers.  Paul calls it “That Wicked One,” “The Man of Sin,” “The Mystery of Iniquity,” “The Antichrist,” and “The Son of Perdition”; the Prophet Daniel calls it “The Abomination that maketh desolate” (Dan. 11:31; 12:11); and our Lord refers to the same character as “The Abomination of Desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet” (Matt. 24:15), and again as a “Beast” (Rev. 13:1-8).  This same character was also prefigured by a little horn, or power, out of a terrible beast that Daniel saw in his prophetic vision, which had eyes, and a  B_page 272 mouth that spoke great things, and which prospered and made war with the saints, and prevailed against them. (Dan. 7:8,21)  John also saw and warned the Church against this character, saying, “Ye have heard that Antichrist shall come.”  He then advises how to escape Antichrist’s influence. (1 John 2:18-27)  The book of Revelation, too, is in large part a detailed symbolic prophecy concerning this same Antichrist—though this we shall merely glance at here, leaving its more particular examination for a succeeding volume. 

            These various appellations and brief descriptions indicate a base, subtle, hypocritical, deceptive, tyrannical and cruel character, developed in the midst of the Christian Church; at first creeping in and up very gradually, then rapidly ascending in power and influence until it reaches the very pinnacle of earthly power, wealth and glory—meanwhile exerting its influence against the truth, and against the saints, and for its own aggrandizement, claiming, to the last, peculiar sanctity and authority and power from God. 

            In this chapter we purpose to show that this Man of Sin is a system, and not a single individual, as many seem to infer; that as the Christ consists of the true Lord and the true Church, so Antichrist is a counterfeit system consisting of a false lord and an apostate church, which for a time is permitted to misrepresent the truth, to practice deceit and to counterfeit the authority and future reign of the true Lord and his Church, and to intoxicate the nations with false claims and assumptions. 

            We hope to prove, to the satisfaction of every conscientious reader, that this great apostasy or falling away mentioned by Paul has come, and that this Man of Sin has been developed, has sat “in the temple of God” (the real, not the typical), has fulfilled all the predictions of the apostles and  B_page 273 prophets concerning his character, work, etc., has been revealed, and now, since A.D. 1799, is being consumed by the spirit of the Lord’s mouth (the truth), and will be utterly destroyed during this day of the Lord’s wrath and revelation with flaming fire of retribution, already beginning. 

            Without any desire to treat lightly the opinions of others, we nevertheless feel it necessary to point out to the reader a few of the absurdities connected with the common view concerning Antichrist, that thereby the dignity and reasonableness of the truth on this subject may be properly estimated, in contrast with the narrow claim that all which the Scriptures predict concerning this character will be accomplished by some one literal man.  This man, it is claimed, will so charm the whole world that in a few short years he will secure to himself the homage and worship of all men, who will be so easily imposed upon as to suppose this man to be God, and, in a rebuilt Jewish temple, to worship him as the Almighty Jehovah.  All this is to be done at lightning speed—three and a half years, say they, misinterpreting the symbolic time, even as they misinterpret the symbolic “man.” 

            Tales of fiction and the most absurd imaginations of childhood furnish no parallel to the extreme views of some of God’s dear children who are stumbling over a literal interpretation of Paul’s language, and thereby blinding themselves and others to many precious truths, which, because of error on this subject, they are unprepared to see in an unprejudiced light.  No matter how much we may sympathize with them, their “blind faith” forces a smile as they seriously tell over the various symbols of Revelation which they do not understand, misapplying them literally to their wonderful man.  In this, the most skeptical age the world has ever known, he will, they claim, in the short space of three and a half years, have the whole world at his feet, worshiping him as God, while the Caesars, Alexander, Napoleon,  B_page 274 Mahomet and others sailed through bloody seas and spent many times three and a half years, without accomplishing the one thousandth part of what is claimed for this man. 

            And yet those conquerors had all the advantages of dense ignorance and superstition to aid them, while today we live under conditions most unfavorable to such a development of deceit and fraud: in a day when every hidden thing is being manifested as never before; in a day when fraud of the sort claimed is too preposterous and ridiculous for consideration. Indeed, the tendency of our day is toward a lack of respect for men, no matter how good, talented and able, or what offices of trust and authority they may occupy.  To such an extent is this true, as never before, that it is a thousand times more likely that the whole world will deny that there is any God, than that they will ever worship a fellow human being as the Almighty God. 

            One great obstacle to many, in considering this subject, is the contracted idea generally entertained of the meaning of the word god.  They fail to note that the Greek theos (god) does not invariably refer to Jehovah.  It signifies a mighty one, a ruler, and especially a religious or sacerdotal ruler.  In the New Testament, theos is seldom used except in referring to Jehovah, because, in their discourses, the apostles spoke rarely and little of the false systems of religion, and hence seldom noticed their sacred rulers or gods; yet in the following texts the word god (theos) is used to refer to others than the one supreme being, Jehovah—viz.: John 10:34,35; Acts 7:40,43; 17:23; 1 Cor. 8:5. 

            Recognizing the breadth of the Greek word theos, it will be seen at once that the Apostle’s statement concerning Antichrist—that he will seat himself in the temple of God, showing himself to be a god—does not of necessity mean that Antichrist will attempt to exalt himself above Jehovah, nor  B_page 275 even that he will attempt to take Jehovah’s place.  It simply implies that this one will exhibit himself as a religious ruler, claiming and exercising authority over and above all other religious rulers, even to the extent of exalting himself in the Church, which is the true Temple of God, and there claiming and exercising lordly authority as its chief or authorized ruler.  Wherever in the Greek the word theos is used in any sentence where its meaning would be ambiguous, it then is preceded by the Greek article, if it refers to Jehovah; as if in English we were to say the God.  In the texts above, which refer to other gods, and in this text (2 Thess. 2:4), which refers to Antichrist, there is no such emphasis. 

            With this seen clearly, a great stumbling-block is removed, and the mind is prepared to look for the right things as fulfilments of this prediction: not for an Antichrist claiming to be Jehovah and demanding worship as such, but for one claiming to be the chief, supreme religious teacher in the Church; who thus attempts the usurpation of the authority of Christ, the divinely appointed Head, Lord and Teacher. 

            Strangely enough, too, they who take this literal view of the Man of Sin are generally those who are believers in the Lord’s premillennial coming, who are looking for and expecting the Lord to come “at any moment now.”  Why cannot all see the Apostle’s meaning, when he positively declares that the Day of the Lord (the Day of his presence) cannot come and should not be expected until after the Man of Sin has been revealed?  It required over forty years to build the former Jewish temple, and it would surely require at least ten to twenty years to build, with more than former magnificence, the new temple at Jerusalem, where they expect a literal Man of Sin to be installed and worshiped as God. Why then should those who believe thus expect the Lord to  B_page 276 come at any moment now?  Such a view is out of harmony with reason as well as with the Apostle’s prophecy.  Consistency demands that they should either give up looking for the Lord at any moment, or else give up their expectation of a future Man of Sin; for the Day of the Lord’s presence cannot come until the falling away (the apostasy) has taken place, and until the Man of Sin has been developed and revealed out of that apostasy. 

            But when we get a correct view of the Apostle’s words, together with correct ideas of the manner of the Lord’s coming, we find no such discrepancies and contradictions, but a convincing harmony and fitness.  And such a view we now present.  Its Scripturalness the reader must prove. 

            The various titles applied to this system are evidently symbolic.  They do not refer as names to a single individual, but as character delineations to a corrupt religious and civil combination, developed within the nominal Christian church, which, by its subtle opposition to Christ, the Head, and his true Church, his body, well earns the name Antichrist. Such a system could fulfil all the predictions made concerning the Antichrist, or Man of Sin, though an individual could not.  It is evident, moreover, that this Antichrist system is not one of the heathen systems of religion, such as Mohammedanism or Brahminism; for the Christian Church has never been under the control of any such system, nor did any of these systems originate in the Christian Church.  They now are, and always have been, independent of the Christian Church. 

            The system which fully answers the description given by inspiration must be professedly Christian, and must contain a large majority of those who claim to be Christians. And it must be one having its start as an apostasy, or falling away from the true Christian faith—an apostasy, too, which was secret and stealthy, until circumstances favored its assumption  B_page 277 of power.  Its stealthy beginning was in the days of the apostles—in the desire of some teachers to be greatest. 

            We need not look long to find a character fitting all the requirements perfectly; one whose record, written by secular historians as well as by its own deluded servants, we shall see agrees exactly with the prophetic delineations of Antichrist.  But when we state that the one and only system whose history fits these prophecies is Papacy, let no one misunderstand us to mean that every Roman Catholic is a man of sin; nor that the priests, nor even the popes of the Church of Rome, are, or have been, the Antichrist.  No man is “the Antichrist,” “the Man of Sin,” described in prophecy.  Popes, bishops and others are at most only parts or members of the Antichrist system, even as all of the Royal Priests are only members of the true Christ, under Jesus their head, and in the same manner that these in their present condition are together the antitypical Elijah, though no one of them is the Elijah or the Christ foretold. Notice, further, that the Church of Rome as an ecclesiastical system only is not the “Man of Sin,” and is never presented under any figure of a man.  On the contrary, a woman is always the symbol used for a church separate from its head and lord.  The true Church is symbolized by a “chaste virgin,” while the apostate church, which has fallen away from primitive purity and fidelity to the Lord, is symbolically called “a harlot.”  As the true “virgin” Church continues to be such to the end of the age, when she is to be united to her Lord and take his name—Christ—so the apostate church was not the Antichrist, or Man of Sin, until she united with her lord and head, the pope, the claimed vicegerent of Christ, and became a religious empire, falsely styled Christendom—which signifies Christ’s Kingdom. 

            Papacy is the name of this false kingdom; and it was built upon a misapplied truth—the truth that the Church is  B_page 278 called to be kings and priests unto God and to reign on the earth.  But the time for reigning had not yet come: the Gospel age was not appointed for that purpose, but for the selection, development, discipline, humiliation and sacrifice of the Church, following in the footprints of her Lord and patiently waiting and enduring until the time appointed for the promised exaltation and glorious reign—the Millennial age. 

            The Lord foresaw that nominal Christianity would spread over the world, and that, becoming popular, it would be embraced by many who would appreciate the form without entering into the spirit of its institution.  He foresaw that as numbers of this sort would identify themselves with the Church, the worldly spirit, which is the opposite of the spirit of self-denial and self-sacrifice, would come in with them; that selfishness and a desire to be great and to rule, thus coming in, would not have long to wait until they could seize an opportunity; and that thus the Church would seek to dominate the world before the time—or, rather, that the worldly element which would enter the Church would make its influence felt, and in the name of the true Church would grasp the civil power of earth which God had given over to the Gentiles, and which cannot pass fully into the hands of the true Church until the close of the Times of the Gentiles, A.D. 1914. 

            And thus it actually transpired: the nominal church began to fall away as it increased in numbers under the teaching and example of ambitious men whose ideas grew more and more favorable to the power and worldly influence which numbers and wealth brought with them.  Gradually the spirit of the Church became worldly, and the things of the world were coveted.  The suggestion of ambition was—“If the great Roman Empire, with all its power and influence,  B_page 279 its armies and wealth, were only to support the Church, how honorable and noble it would then be to be a Christian!  How speedily then would heathen persecutions cease!  Then it would be in our power not only to overawe them, but to compel their adherence to the Church and cross and name of Christ.  It evidently is not God’s design that the Church should forever be subject to the world and persecuted by it: the Apostle’s words, ‘Know ye not that the saints shall judge the world?’ as well as our Lord’s promises that we shall reign with him, and the many prophecies which refer to the reign of the Church, indicate clearly that such is God’s plan.  True, the Apostle wrote that our Lord would first return and exalt the Church, and exhorted that we should ‘wait’ for the Lord; but several centuries are now past, and we see no sign of the Lord’s coming.  We must understand that the apostles were to some extent in error.  To us it seems clear that we can and should use every means to obtain a hold upon civil government and conquer the world for the Lord.  It must be, too, that the Church should have a head—one to represent the absent Lord and to represent the Church before the world—one who would receive the homage of the world, exercise the authority of Christ, and rule the world with a rod of iron, as the Prophet David predicted.”  Thus gradually by a slow process of reasoning covering centuries, the real hope of the Church for exaltation to rule and bless the world—namely, the second coming of the Lord—was lost sight of, and a new hope took its place: the hope of success without the Lord, under the headship and lead of a line of popes.  And thus, by collusion, intriguing and exchange of favors with the world, the hope of the Church became a false hope, a delusive snare by which Satan led from one evil and error to another, both of doctrine and of practice.  

B_page 280

             The point at which the apostasy developed into the “Man of Sin” was when the Papal hierarchy exalted itself under the headship of an arranged line of popes, and claimed and attempted the rulership of earth in the name of, and pretending to be, Christ’s Millennial Kingdom.  It was a false, fraudulent claim, no matter how thoroughly some of its supporters believed it.  It was a fraudulent, counterfeit kingdom, no matter how sincere some if its organizers and supporters may have been.  It was Antichrist’s, no matter how much they claimed and believed it to be the true Christ’s glory and kingdom and power upon earth.  It is a mistake to suppose that to be conscientious is always to be right.  Every system of error doubtless has as many conscientiously deluded votaries as it has hypocrites, or more. Conscientiousness is moral honesty, and it is not dependent upon knowledge.  The heathen, misinformed, conscientiously worship and sacrifice to idols; Saul, misinformed, conscientiously persecuted the saints; and so, too, many papists, misinformed, conscientiously did violence to the prophecies, persecuted the true saints and organized the great system of Antichrist.  For hundreds of years Papacy has not only deceived the kings of the earth as to its power and claimed divine authority, and ruled over them, but even in the Church, God’s Temple, where Christ alone should be recognized as Head and Teacher, it has seated itself and claimed to be the only teacher and lawgiver; and here it has deceived all, except the few, by its phenomenal success and boastful claims.  “All the world wondered”—were astonished, deceived, bewildered—“whose names were not written in the Lamb’s book of life,” and many whose names are written as saints of God were seriously perplexed.  And this deception is the stronger because of the very gradual formation of these ambitious designs and their yet more gradual realization.  It extended  B_page 281 over centuries, and, as an ambition, was already secretly at work in Paul’s day.  It was a process of little by little adding error to error—the supplementing of one man’s ambitious declarations by those of another and another farther down the stream of time.  Thus, insidiously, did Satan plant and water the seeds of error, and develop the greatest and most influential system the world has ever known—Antichrist. 

            The name “Antichrist” has a twofold significance.  The first is against (i.e., in opposition to) Christ: the second significance is instead (i.e., a counterfeit) of Christ.  In the first sense the expression is a general one, which would apply to any enemy opposing Christ.  In this sense Saul (afterward called Paul), and every Jew, and every Mohammedan, and all the Pagan emperors and people of Rome, were antichrists—opposers of Christ. (Acts 9:4)  But it is not in this sense of the word that the Scriptures use the name Antichrist. They pass over all such enemies, and apply the term Antichrist in the sense given above, as now its secondary meaning, viz.—as against, in the sense of misrepresenting, counterfeiting, taking the place of the true Christ.  Thus John remarks, “Ye have heard that the Antichrist shall come. Even now there are many antichrists.” (1 John 2:18,19) [The Greek distinguishes between the special Antichrist and the numerous lesser ones.]  And John’s subsequent remarks show that he does not refer to all opposers of Christ and the Church, but to a certain class who, still professing to be of the Christ body, the Church, had left the foundation principles of the truth, and were therefore not only misrepresenting the truth, but were, in the eyes of the world, taking the place and name of the true Church—hence really counterfeiting the true saints.  John says of these, “They went out from us, but they were not of us:” they do not represent us, even though they may deceive themselves and the world on this subject.  In the same epistle John declares  B_page 282 that those he mentions as many antichrists have the spirit of the Antichrist. 

            Here, then, is what we should expect, and what we do find in Papacy: not an opposition to the name of Christ, but an enemy or opponent of Christ in that it falsely bears his name, counterfeits his kingdom and authority, and misrepresents his character and plans and doctrines before the world—a most baneful enemy and opponent indeed—worse far than an outspoken foe.  And this is true, be it remembered, even though some of those connected with that system are conscientiously astray—“deceiving and being deceived.” 

            With these intimations as to the identity and characteristics of the Man of Sin, and when, and where, and under what circumstances, to look for him, we shall proceed to an examination of some of the historic evidences, proving, we think beyond reasonable question, that every prediction concerning the Antichrist has been fulfilled in the Papal system, in a manner and to an extent which, with the enlightenment of this day taken into account, all must admit could never be repeated.  Space obliges us here to confine ourselves to a mere outline of the great mass of historic testimony. We have also confined ourselves to historians of recognized accuracy, in many instances going to Roman Catholic writers for their testimony or admissions.

 The Circumstances which Gave Birth

to the Man of Sin

             A GREAT FALLING AWAY.  We first inquire, Does history record a fulfilment of Paul’s prophecy of a great falling away from the original simplicity and purity of the doctrines and life of the Christian Church, and of the secret working of an iniquitous, ambitious influence in the Church, prior to the development of Papacy, the Man of  B_page 283 Sin—i.e., prior to the recognition of a pope as the head of the Church? 

            Yes, very clearly: The Papal Hierarchy did not come into existence for several centuries after the Lord and the apostles had founded the Church.  And of the interval between, we read*: 

————— 

*Fisher’s Universal History, page 193. 

            “As the church grew in numbers and wealth, costly edifices were constructed for worship; the services became more elaborate; sculpture and painting were enlisted in the work of providing aids to devotion.  Relics of saints and martyrs were cherished as sacred possessions; religious observances were multiplied; and the church under the Christian emperors [in the fourth century], with its array of clergy and of imposing ceremonies, assumed much of the stateliness and visible splendor that belonged to the heathen system which it had supplanted.” 

            Says another,⁺ “Contemporaneously with the establishment [of Christianity as the religion of the empire in the fourth century] was the progress of a great and general corruption which had arisen two centuries before.  Superstition and ignorance invested the ecclesiastics with a power which they exerted to their own aggrandizement.” 

————— 

⁺White’s Universal History, page 156.  

            Rapin observes that, “In the fifth century Christianity was debased by a vast number of human inventions; the simplicity of its government and discipline was reduced to a system of clerical power; and its worship was polluted with ceremonies borrowed from the heathen.” 

            Mosheim, in his “History of Christianity,” traces the falling away of the Church from its original simplicity and purity, step by step, down to its deep degradation which culminated in the development of the “Man of Sin.”  Whether or not he recognized the Antichrist does not appear, but in a masterly way he has traced the workings of the “Mystery of B_page 284 Iniquity,” in the Church, down to the beginning of the fourth century—when his work was suddenly cut short by death.  From his excellent and voluminous work our space does not here permit quotations, but we commend the work entire as highly instructive in its bearing on the subject. 

            We quote, from Lord’s “Old Roman World,” a brief and pointed sketch of the Church’s history during the first four centuries, which shows clearly and concisely its gradual decline, and its rapid degeneracy after the hindrance referred to by the Apostle was removed.  He says:

                “In the First Century not many wise or noble were called. No great names have been handed down to us; no philosophers, or statesmen, or nobles, or generals, or governors, or judges, or magistrates.  In the first century the Christians were not of sufficient importance to be generally persecuted by the government.  They had not even arrested public attention. Nobody wrote against them, not even Greek philosophers. We do not read of protests or apologies from the Christians themselves.  They had no great men in their ranks, either for learning, or talents, or wealth, or social position. Nothing in history is more barren than the annals of the Church in the first century, so far as great names are concerned.  Yet in this century converts were multiplied in every city, and traditions point to the martyrdoms of those who were prominent, including nearly all of the apostles.

               “In the Second Century there are no greater names than Polycarp, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Clement, Melito and Apollonius, quiet bishops or intrepid martyrs, who addressed their flocks in upper chambers, and who held no worldly rank, famous only for their sanctity or simplicity of character, and only mentioned for their sufferings and faith.  We read of martyrs, some of whom wrote valuable treatises and apologies; but among them we find no people of rank.  It was a disgrace to be a Christian in the eye of fashion or power.  The early Christian literature is chiefly apologetic, and the doctrinal character is simple and practical. There were controversies in the Church, an intense religious life, great activities, great virtues, but no outward conflicts, B_page 285 no secular history.  They had not as yet assailed the government or the great social institutions of the empire.  It was a small body of pure and blameless men, who did not aspire to control society.  But they had attracted the notice of the government and were of sufficient consequence to be persecuted. They were looked upon as fanatics who sought to destroy a reverence for existing institutions.”

 [Organized for Power]

                “In this century the polity of the Church was quietly organized. There was an organized fellowship among the members; bishops had become influential, not in society, but among the Christians; dioceses and parishes were established; there was a distinction between city and rural bishops; delegates of churches assembled to discuss points of faith or suppress nascent heresies; the diocesan system was developed, and ecclesiastical centralization commenced; deacons began to be reckoned among the higher clergy; the weapons of excommunication were forged; missionary efforts were carried on; the festivals of the church were created; Gnosticism was embraced by many leading minds; catechetical schools taught the faith systematically; the formulas of baptism and the sacraments became of great importance; and monachism became popular.  The Church was thus laying the foundation of its future polity and power.

               “The Third Century saw the Church more powerful as an institution.  Regular synods had assembled in the great cities of the empire; the metropolitan system was matured; the canons of the Church were definitely enumerated; great schools of theology attracted inquiring minds; the doctrines were systematized [i.e., defined, limited, and formulated into creeds and confessions of faith].  Christianity had spread so extensively that it must needs be either persecuted or legalized; great bishops ruled the growing church; great doctors [of divinity] speculated on the questions [philosophy and science falsely so called] which had agitated the Grecian schools; church edifices were enlarged, and banquets instituted in honor of the martyrs.  The Church was rapidly advancing to a position which extorted the attention of mankind. 

B_page 286

                “It was not till the Fourth Century—when imperial persecution had stopped; when [the Roman Emperor] Constantine was converted; when the Church was allied with the State; when the early faith was itself corrupted; when superstition and vain philosophy had entered the ranks of the faithful; when bishops became courtiers; when churches became both rich and splendid; when synods were brought under political influence; when monachists [monks] had established a false principle of virtue; when politics and dogmatics went hand in hand, and emperors enforced the decrees of [church] councils—that men of rank entered the Church.  When Christianity became the religion of the court and of the fashionable classes, it was used to support the very evils against which it originally protested.  The Church was not only impregnated with the errors of Pagan philosophy, but it adopted many of the ceremonies of oriental worship, which were both minute and magnificent. The churches became, in the fourth century, as imposing as the old temples of idolatry.  Festivals became frequent and imposing.  The people clung to them because they obtained excitement and a cessation from labor.  Veneration for martyrs ripened into the introduction of images—a future source of popular idolatry.  Christianity was emblazoned in pompous ceremonies.  The veneration for saints approximated to their deification, and superstition exalted the mother of our Lord into an object of absolute worship. Communion tables became imposing altars typical of Jewish sacrifices, and the relics of martyrs were preserved as sacred amulets.  Monastic life also ripened into a grand system of penance and expiatory rites.  Armies of monks retired to gloomy and isolated places, and abandoned themselves to rhapsodies and fastings and self-expiation.  They were a dismal and fanatical set of men, overlooking the practical aims of life.

               “The clergy, ambitious and worldly, sought rank and distinction.  They even thronged the courts of princes and aspired to temporal honors.  They were no longer supported by the voluntary contributions of the faithful, but by revenues supplied by government, or property inherited from the old [pagan] temples.  Great legacies were made to the B_page 287 Church by the rich, and these the clergy controlled.  These bequests became sources of inexhaustible wealth.  As wealth increased and was intrusted to the clergy, they became indifferent to the wants of the people—no longer supported by them.  They became lazy, arrogant and independent. The people were shut out of the government of the Church. The bishop became a grand personage who controlled and appointed his clergy.  The Church was allied with the State, and religious dogmas were enforced by the sword of the magistrate.

 “An Imposing Hierarchy Was Established, of

Various Grades, which Culminated

in the Bishop of Rome

                “The Emperor decided points of faith, and the clergy were exempted from the burdens of the state.  There was a great flocking to the priestly offices when the clergy wielded so much power and became so rich; and men were elevated to great sees [bishoprics], not because of their piety or talents, but their influence with the great.  The mission of the Church was lost sight of in a degrading alliance with the State. Christianity was a pageant, a ritualism, an arm of the State, a vain philosophy, a superstition, a formula.”

             Thus the great falling away from the faith, predicted by the Apostle Paul, is an established fact of history.  All historians bear witness to it, even those who approve the assumption of power and eulogize the chief actors in the scheme.  We regret that our space limits our quotations to some of the most pointed expressions.  The falling away, covering a period of centuries, was so gradual as to be much less noticeable to those who then lived in its midst than to us who see it as a whole; and the more deceiving was it because every step of organization, and every advance toward influence and authority in the Church and over the world, was taken in the name of Christ, and professedly to glorify him and fulfil his plans recorded in Scripture.  Thus was the great Antichrist developed—the most dangerous, most  B_page 288 subtle and most persistent opponent of true Christianity, and the most fiendish persecutor of the true saints.

The Hindrance Removed

             The Apostle Paul foretold that this iniquitous principle would work secretly for a time, while some opposing thing stood in the way, until, the hindrance being removed, it could have a free course, and progress rapidly to the development of the Antichrist.  He says, “Only he that now hindereth will hinder, until he be taken out of the way.” (2 Thess. 2:7) What does history have to show in fulfilment of this prediction?  It shows that the thing which hindered a rapid development of Antichrist was the fact that the place aspired to was already filled by another.  The Roman empire had not only conquered the world and given it politics and laws, but, recognizing religious superstitions to be the strongest chains by which to hold and control a people, it had adopted a scheme which had its origin in Babylon, in the time of her greatness as ruler of the world.  That plan was, that the emperor should be esteemed the director and ruler in religious as well as in civil affairs.  In support of this, it was claimed that the emperor was a demigod, in some sense descended from their heathen deities.  As such he was worshiped and his statues adored; and as such he was styled Pontifex Maximus—i.e., Chief Priest or Greatest Religious Ruler.  And this is the very title claimed by and given to the pontiffs or popes of the Roman Hierarchy since this Antichrist obtained “the power and seat and great authority” of the former ruler of Rome. Rev. 13:2 

            But ancient pagan Rome and Babylon had only a mere skeleton of sacerdotal power as compared with the complex and elaborate machinery and contrivances of doctrine and practice of Papal Rome, the triumphant successor to their scheme, who now, after centuries of cunning and skill, has its power so intrenched that even today, when its power is  B_page 289 outwardly broken and it is shorn of civil dominion, it rules the world and controls kingdoms secretly, under cover, more thoroughly than the Roman emperors ever ruled the kings subordinate to them. 

            To their credit be it recorded that not one of the Roman emperors, as Pontifex Maximus or Chief Religious Ruler, ever exercised the tyranny of some of their successors on the Papal throne.  On this point Gibbon says:* “It must be allowed that the number of Protestants who were executed in a single province and a single reign, far exceeded that of the primitive martyrs in the space of three centuries and of the [entire] Roman empire.”  According to the custom of their day they did favor the most popular gods, but wherever their armies went, the gods and worship of the conquered people were generally respected.  This was illustrated in Palestine, in which, though under Roman control, religious liberty and freedom of conscience were generally respected by the imperial Pontifex Maximus, who as religious ruler thus showed his clemency toward the people, and his harmony with all the popular gods. 

————— 

*Vol. II, page 85.  

            So, then, we see that what hindered the early development of Antichrist was the fact that the coveted seat of spiritual supremacy was filled by the representatives of the strongest empire the world had yet known; and that for any to have attempted an open display of ambition in this direction would have exposed them to the wrath of the masters of the world.  Hence this iniquitous ambition at first worked secretly, disclaiming any intent to gain power or authority, until a favorable opportunity was presented—after the nominal Church had become large and influential and the imperial power was shattered by political dissensions and was beginning to decay. 

            The power of Rome was rapidly failing, and its strength B_page 290 and unity were divided among six claimants to the imperial honors, when Constantine became emperor.  And that, in part at least, he adopted Christianity to strengthen and unify his empire, is a reasonable supposition.  On this point history says: 

                “Whether Constantine embraced it [Christianity] from conviction of its truth, or from policy, is a matter of dispute. Certain it is, that this religion, though receiving from the Roman power only silent obloquy, or active persecution, had extended among the people, so that Constantine strengthened himself in the affection of the soldiers by adopting it....Worldly ambition pointed to the course which the emperor pursued in declaring himself a Christian, and not the spirit of Christ, who said, My kingdom is not of this world.  Constantine made it the religion of the empire, and thenceforth we find its influence sullied with earthly things....No particular bishop was regarded as head of the whole Church, but the emperor was such in point of fact.  In this capacity he called the Council of Nice, having in the controversy between Athanasius and Arius taken sides against the latter.  The council agreed with the emperor.”*

————— 

*Willard’s Universal History, page 163. 

               “Whatever advantages might be derived from the acquisition of an imperial proselyte, he was distinguished by the splendor of the purple, rather than the superiority of wisdom or virtue, from the many thousands of his subjects who had embraced the doctrines of Christianity....The same year of his reign in which he convened the Council of Nice was polluted by the execution of his eldest son.  The gratitude of the Church has exalted the virtues and excused the failings of a generous patron who seated Christianity on the throne of the Roman world.”⁺

 ————— 

⁺Gibbon, Vol. II, page 269.  

            Here, then, under Constantine’s reign, the opposition of the empire to Christianity gave way to favor, and the Imperial Pontifex Maximus became the patron of the professed but really apostate Church of Christ; and, taking her by the B_page 291 hand, he assisted her to a place of popularity and splendor from which she was able afterward, as the imperial power grew weak, to put her own representatives upon the religious throne of the world as Chief Religious Ruler—Pontifex Maximus. 

            But it is a mistake to suppose, as many do, that the Church at this time was a pure (virgin) church, suddenly lifted into a dignity and power which became her snare. Quite the contrary is true.  As already stated, a great falling away had occurred, from primitive purity and simplicity and freedom into creed-bound, ambitious factions, whose errors and ceremonies, resembling those of the pagan philosophies, garnished with some truths and enforced and clinched with the doctrine of everlasting torment, had drawn into the church a vast horde, whose numbers and influence became valuable to Constantine and were respected and used accordingly.  No such worldly man ever thought seriously of espousing the cause of the humble, Christlike “little flock”—the truly consecrated Church, whose names are written in heaven.  The popularity with his soldiers, mentioned by the historians, is very different from popularity with real soldiers of the cross. 

            In proof of this let us here quote from history, regarding the state of religious society under Diocletian, the predecessor of Constantine, who, toward the close of his reign, believing that Christians had attempted to destroy his life, became embittered against them and persecuted them by ordering the destruction of Bibles, the banishing of bishops, and finally by decreeing the death of such as opposed these enactments.  Gibbon* says of this era: 

————— 

*Vol. II, page 53 and 57.  

                “Diocletian and his colleagues frequently conferred the most important offices on those persons who avowed their abhorrence for the worship of the gods, but who displayed abilities proper for the service of the state.  The bishops held B_page 292 an honorable rank in their respective provinces, and were treated with distinction and respect, not only by the people, but by the magistrates themselves.  Almost in every city, the ancient churches were found insufficient to contain the increasing number of proselytes; and in their place more stately and capacious edifices were erected for the public worship of the faithful.  The corruption of manners and principles, so forcibly lamented by Eusebius, may be considered as not only a consequence but a proof of the liberty which the Christians enjoyed and abused under the reign of Diocletian.  Prosperity had relaxed the nerves of discipline. Fraud, envy and malice prevailed in every congregation. The proselytes aspired to the episcopal office, which every day became an object more worthy of their ambition.  The bishops, who contended with each other for ecclesiastical pre-eminence, appeared by their conduct to claim a secular and tyrannical power in the church; and the lively faith which still distinguished the Christians from the Gentiles was shown much less in their lives than in their controversial writings.

              “The story of Paul of Samosata, who filled the metropolitan see [bishopric] of Antioch while the East was in the hands of Odenatus and Zenobia, may serve to illustrate the condition and character of the times. [A.D. 270]  Paul considered the service of the church a very lucrative profession. His ecclesiastical jurisdiction was venal and rapacious: he extorted frequent contributions from the most opulent of the faithful, and converted to his own use a considerable part of the public revenues.  [It is claimed by critics, says Gibbon, that Paul held the office of Imperial Ducenarius, or procurator, with an annual salary of two hundred Sestertia—$77,000.]  By his pride and luxury, the Christian religion was rendered odious in the eyes of the Gentiles.  His council chamber, and his throne, the splendor with which he appeared in public, the suppliant crowd who solicited his attention, the multitude of letters and petitions to which he dictated his answers, and the perpetual hurry of business in which he was involved, were circumstances much better suited to the state of a civil magistrate than to the humility of a primitive bishop.  When he harangued his people from B_page 293 the pulpit, Paul affected the figurative style and the theatrical gestures of an Asiatic sophist, while the cathedral resounded with the most extravagant acclamations in the praise of his divine eloquence.  Against those who resisted his power, or refused to flatter his vanity, the prelate of Antioch was arrogant, rigid and inexorable, but he relaxed the discipline and lavished the treasures of the church on his dependent clergy.”

             Thus under Constantine’s reign all hindrance was finally removed, and, as we shall find, the organization of Papacy—the church nominal under the headship of the bishop of Rome as pope—was speedily effected.

 Rapid Development of Antichrist

             The rapid development of the Papal Hierarchy after the accession of Constantine is a very remarkable feature of its history.  “The prince of this world” was true to his promise to give power and dominion as a reward for worshiping and obeying him. (Matt. 4:8,9)  By the edict of Milan, Constantine gave legal security to the possessions of the Church, and Christians recovered lands formerly forfeited.  A second edict, A.D. 321, granted the liberty of bequeathing property to the Church, while Constantine himself set an example of liberality and lavished wealth upon the Christian clergy unsparingly.  This example of the Emperor was followed by thousands of his subjects, whose offerings during life and whose bequests in the hour of death flowed into the ecclesiastical treasury.  White says:* 

————— 

*White’s Universal History, page 155.  

               “The church of Rome began early to assume authority over the others [over the churches of other cities and countries] as well from the numbers and wealth of its converts as from its position in the capital city.  Many circumstances concurred to augment the influence of its bishop, although his usurpation and ambition were for a time vigorously repelled. The transference of the seat of power [by Constantine, B_page 294 from Rome to Constantinople, A.D. 334] increased the power of the western church by conferring the chief magistracy on the bishop.  To this must be added the sanction given by Gratian and Valentinian to the custom of appeals to Rome, and the frequent pilgrimages to the tombs of St. Peter and St. Paul and other martyrs.”

            After the death of Constantine the varied fortunes of the Roman Empire seemed to cooperate for the advancement of the apostate church and the development of Antichrist; for a union under one head or pope, esteemed the representative or vicegerent of Christ, had not yet been effected.  The emperors succeeding Constantine, down to Theodosius, continued to regard themselves as the heads of the Church, in whom centered divine authority.  Though no one of the eighteen hundred bishops of the empire was yet prepared to demand recognition as the head, or pope, several had their eyes on that prize, and the emperors were shown the shallowness of their claims to the title Pontifex Maximus, in the argument that since they worshiped dead saints they owed a similar respect to their living representatives—the bishops.  Nevertheless, the emperors in their edicts repeatedly referred to the empire as a divine hierarchy and to themselves as divine personages.* 

————— 

*See Gibbon, Vol. II, page 108.  

           The power and headship of the bishop of Rome came on apace: within fifty years from the time Christianity was legally established, his wealth and dignity, as the bishop of the capital and chief city of the world, were very great.  Ammianus, a contemporary historian, describing his wealth and ostentation, says, “He surpassed kings in splendor and magnificence, rode in the stateliest chariots, was arrayed in the finest attire, and was distinguished by his luxury and pride.”  The removal of the seat of empire to Constantinople, the exposure of the city of Rome to the invasion of the barbarians from the north, the continual B_page 295 changes of generals and governors in the now fast falling empire, left the bishop of the church at Rome the most permanent and most honored official there; and his gradually increasing prestige was heightened as well by the removal of the rival splendors of the imperial court to Constantinople as by the reverence attaching to the very name of Rome, among all the peoples of the world. 

            As an illustration of this, we note that when, in A.D. 455, the city of Rome was invaded and plundered by the Vandals, and all around was distress and desolation, Leo, the bishop of Rome, improved the opportunity for impressing upon all, both barbarians and Romans, his claim of spiritual power.  To the rude and superstitious barbarians, already greatly impressed by what they saw about them, of Rome’s greatness and wealth, Leo, arrayed in his pontifical robes, exclaimed: “Beware! I am the successor of St. Peter, to whom God has given the keys of the kingdom of heaven and against whose church the gates of hell cannot prevail; I am the living representative of divine power on the earth; I am Caesar, a Christian Caesar, ruling in love, to whom all Christians owe allegiance; I hold in my hands the curses of hell and the benedictions of heaven; I absolve all subjects from allegiance to kings; I give and take away, by divine right, all thrones and principalities of Christendom.  Beware how you desecrate the patrimony given me by your invisible king; yea, bow down your necks to me and pray that the anger of God may be averted.” 

           The veneration for the place and name was actively taken advantage of by the bishop of Rome, who soon claimed a superiority to all other bishops, governors and rulers.  Soon he claimed not only ecclesiastical dominion of the world, but also civil dominion: that the right to crown and uncrown, to make and degrade any and all rulers of the old Roman Empire was the right and inheritance of the Church of Rome, which, it was claimed, God had thus invested  B_page 296with the dominion of earth.  These claims were made repeatedly, and repeatedly denied by opposing bishops, so that to fix an exact year as the date of its beginning would be impossible.  As for itself, Papacy claims that it was organized in the days of the apostles, and that Peter was the first pope; but this is not only without proof, but it is most positively contradicted by all history, which shows that though the iniquity of ambition worked secretly for a long time, it was hindered from developing into Antichrist, and from making such open claims, until the Roman Empire began to disintegrate. 

            Henceforth we deal with the Antichrist, whose gradual development and organization from secretly working ambition are a fitting prelude to the terrible character displayed after the coveted power had been grasped—from 539 A.D. to 1799 A.D., 1260 years.  Of this period the first three hundred years mark the rise of this temporal power; the last three mark its waning under the influences of the Reformation and civilization; and the intermediate period of seven centuries embraces Papacy’s glory-time and the “dark ages” of the world, full of frauds and deceptions in the name of Christ and true religion. 

            A Roman Catholic writer fully corroborates our findings on this subject, and we present his words regardless of their gloss, as corroborative testimony.  Giving, with glowing enthusiasm, a description of the rise of the Papacy to temporal power, describing it as a plant of heavenly origin, and therefore of rapid growth and high exaltation in the world, he says: 

                “The rise of the temporal power of the Popes presents to the mind one of the most extraordinary phenomena which the annals of the human race offer to our wonder and admiration. By a singular combination of concurring circumstances a new power and a new dominion grew up, silently B_page 297 and steadily, on the ruins of that Roman Empire which had extended its sway over, or made itself respected by, nearly all the nations, peoples and races that lived in the period of its strength and glory; and that new power, of lowly origin, struck a deeper root, and soon exercised a wider authority, than the empire whose gigantic ruins it saw shivered into fragments and mouldering in dust.  In Rome itself the power of the successor of Peter grew side by side with, and under the protecting shadow of, that of the emperor; and such was the increasing influence of the popes, that the majesty of the supreme Pontiff was likely ere long to dim the splendor of the purple.

               “The removal by Constantine of the seat of empire from the West to the East, from the historic banks of the Tiber to the beautiful shores of the Bosphorus, laid the broad foundation of a sovereignty which in reality commences from that momentous change.  Practically, almost from that day, Rome, which had witnessed the birth, the youth, the splendor, and the decay, of the mighty race by whom her name had been carried with her eagles to the remotest regions of the then known world, was gradually abandoned by the inheritors of her renown; and its people, deserted by the emperors, and an easy prey to the ravages of the barbarians whom they had no longer the courage to resist, beheld in the bishop of Rome their guardian, their protector, their father. Year by year the temporal authority of the popes grew into shape and hardened into strength, without violence, without bloodshed, without fraud, by the force of overwhelming circumstances, fashioned, as if visibly, by the hand of God.”

             While Roman Catholics thus represent the rise of the Papacy on the ruins of Pagan Rome as a triumph of Christianity, those who are acquainted with the true spirit of Christianity look in vain to see any trace of that spirit in the prostitution of the Church and her unholy alliance with the world.  Neither can the true Christian see in the advantages furnished by ignorance, superstition, calamities, and the  B_page 298 various circumstances of the times of which the Church of Rome took advantage, any evidence of divine interposition in her favor.  Nor yet can they discover, in the exaltation of the Church of Rome to earthly power and glory, any verification of the Lord’s promise to the true Church, to exalt her in due time—after the Antichrist has come and gone; for the exaltation of the true Church is not to be to a blood-stained and crime-polluted throne, such as the throne of the Papacy has been from its very beginning: neither will the true Christ ever need to call upon earthly kings to establish or defend his power.  The marks which distinguish the counterfeit from the real kingdom of Christ are easily recognizable by those acquainted, through the Scriptures, with the real Christ and his body, the true Church, with the principles upon which his kingdom is to be established, and with the object for which it is to be set up. 

           But let no one suppose that the real Church of Christ, even in those corrupt times, was either extinguished or lost sight of.  “The Lord knoweth them that are his” in every age and under every condition.  As wheat they were permitted to grow in the midst of a field overrun with tares; as gold they were in the furnace, being tried and purified and “made meet for the inheritance of the saints in light.”  True, the course of the multitude, who called themselves Christians, occupies the most prominent place on the pages of history; but undoubtedly a faithful few through all the persecutions, and in the midst of all the deceptive arts of the Mystery of Iniquity, walked worthy of their high calling, were laid to rest and recorded of God as heirs to the crown that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for them. 

            Thus, clearly, on the pages of history, the fact is pointed out that this Man of Sin, Antichrist, was born in Rome; and, though at first opposed, he gradually raised himself up to power; or, as expressed in Daniel’s prophecy, as “a little horn,” it came up out of the head of that old Roman beast,  B_page 299 that “great and terrible beast,” for which Daniel could find no name, which had such power to hurt and to destroy. And, as we proceed, we shall find that Antichrist’s history corresponds exactly, not only with Daniel’s prophecy, but with all the prophecies recorded concerning him.

 Antichrist’s Character in History

             Having located Antichrist, we next proceed to compare the character of Papacy with the prophecies recorded, descriptive of the character and deeds of the Antichrist or Man of Sin. 

           Some may query whether it be right to pass over the emperors of Rome (who claimed to be Supreme religious rulers), without calling their system Antichrist, and to apply that title complete and entire to the organized Papal system.  We answer, This is certainly right; and we refer the reader again to the definition of Antichrist already given, as used in the Scriptures, viz., in the place of, instead of, i.e., to be a spiritual empire: it must claim to rule the kingdoms of earth by this spiritual authority; it must thus be not only an antagonist but a counterfeit, misrepresenting and pretending to be Christ’s kingdom, and exercising what will in God’s due time be the authority of the true Christ, the church glorified and complete under the only true Head and Lord—the real Pontifex Maximus. 

            Not only does Papacy claim to be the glorified kingdom of Christ promised by the Lord, the apostles and the prophets, but it applies to itself and its successive heads (the popes, who, it claims, take the place of Christ, as Pontiff, Chief or King of this kingdom) all those passages of the prophets which describe the Millennial glory of the Christ. And, “deceiving [others] and being deceived” themselves (by their false theories, developed slowly by sinful ambition for greatness, during centuries), the popes have piece by piece arranged the titles of all associated in the hierarchy,  B_page 300 their gorgeous clothing, their imposing ceremonials, their grand cathedrals with solemn, awe-inspiring services, on a scale to correspond as nearly as possible with their claims—the gorgeous surroundings and clothing and ceremonies matching, as best they can make them match, the glories and grandeur portrayed by the prophets. 

            For instance, Psalm 2:12 reads, “Kiss the Son, O ye kings of the earth, lest he be angry, and ye perish by the way, when his anger is kindled but a little.”  This is not a command to kiss literally, but to yield willing, cheerful submission to our Lord, and applies to the present hour, when, preparatory to the great and true Millennial reign of the true Christ, the kings or great ones of earth, politically, socially, financially and ecclesiastically, are being tested by their willingness or unwillingness to bow to the righteous regulations now due to go into operation.  Those who resist righteousness resist the scepter of this King of glory, and all such shall be overthrown in the great time of trouble which ushers in the Millennial reign of the new King: all who would not have him reign shall be slain. (Luke 19:27)  “His enemies shall lick the dust”—be vanquished. 

            Misapplying this prophecy to his counterfeit kingdom, Antichrist’s representative head, the pope, in the palmy days of his prosperity caused kings and emperors to bow before him, as before Christ, and to kiss his great toe—applying the same as the fulfilment of this prophecy. 

            Claims like these are very generally passed over lightly by prophetic students and writers, while they search out and specially notice immoralities; but herein they greatly err, for criminalities have been plentiful enough in every age, and would need no such special, prophetic delineations as are given of Antichrist.  Could it be proved that those connected with the papal system have been very models of morality, it would be none the less identical with the character  B_page 301 noted in Scripture as the great Antichrist—the counterfeit which has arrogated to itself the titles, privileges, powers and reverence belonging to the Lord’s Anointed.  As a counterfeit, it has also misrepresented the plan of God with reference to the selection of a “little flock,” or Church, in the present time; and it has entirely set aside the real hope of the Church, and the Lord’s provision for the blessing of the world during the Millennial reign of Christ—which it represents as fulfilled in its own reign. 

           The ill effects of such perversion and misrepresentation of God’s plan can scarcely be estimated.  They have been the direct source from which sprang all the corrupt doctrines which, one after another, were introduced to support the claims and add to the dignity of Antichrist.  And though the Reformation, three centuries ago, ushered in an era of Bible study and liberty of thought, and led to the rejection of many evils and errors, yet the counterfeit was on so elaborate a scale, so complete in all its parts and arrangements, and had so thoroughly deceived the whole world that, even after Luther and many others had recognized Papacy as the outcome of the great falling away—the Antichrist of prophecy—they, while denouncing it as a system, held firmly to the false theory which led to its peculiar errors of doctrine and practice.  To this day the great majority of Protestants of all denominations support the theory of Antichrist, that Christ’s Kingdom has been set up.  Some have endeavored to do as Papacy did—to organize their church under some one person as its head—while others supply the place of this head with a council or synod; but all are under the delusion imposed by the false and misleading interpretations of Scripture doctrines started by Antichrist—that now, and not at a future time, is the reign of Christ’s Kingdom; and, denying the coming age, as the Antichrist does, they, like that system, are careless of the full development of holiness  B_page 302 among believers and are zealous rather for the accomplishment now of the work of the next age (the conversion of the world)—so much so, that they are often willing to misrepresent God’s plan and Word, and to invent theories to frighten and drive the world into a profession of godliness; and willing also to resort to questionable and worldly methods to add to their attractions, to make their various systems the more enticing to the unconverted, whom they, like Antichrist, are willing to count in for pride’s sake and to make a good showing. 

            Such find it difficult to see that Papacy is Antichrist. How could they, while faith is not yet free from the poison, and reason is still greatly blinded by the very essence of Antichrist’s error.  The greatness, the grandeur and the necessity of Christ’s Millennial Kingdom and its work of blessing all the families of the earth must be seen, before the greatness of the Antichrist counterfeit can be appreciated, or its havoc to the truth and its desolating and defiling influence in the nominal church or temple of God can be rightly estimated. 

            None need be surprised at the completeness of this counterfeit, when we reflect that it is Satan’s workmanship, and has been patterned after the types and illustrations of future glory presented in the Scriptures.  Seeing that the time for the selection of the Church had come, and that the truths planted by the Lord and the apostles had gained rapid headway against all the heathen religions, seeking out the meek wherever it went, the great adversary sought to destroy the purity of the Church and to turn into other and false channels that which he could not stop.  Thus the triumph of Antichrist, as well as its present power, has really been Satan’s success.  But here we behold the wisdom of God; for while the success of Antichrist seemed to presage the defeat of God’s plan it was really, though unwittingly,  B_page 303  cooperating to insure the success of his plan; for by no other means could the truly consecrated have been so thoroughly tried, and their faithfulness to God’s Word so thoroughly tested, as by the permission of this great counterfeit. 

            The accompanying table will serve to show how complete has been the counterfeit of the future organization of Christ’s kingdom in Papacy, and how it was drawn from the Jewish typical priesthood. 

B_page 304