However, regarding the coming antichrist, Bible teachers have followed different interpretations. For instance, in his reference Bible, Dr. Scofield says that the antichrist will be the second beast in Revelation 13, the beast from the earth: “The ‘many antichrists’ precede and prepare the way for the Antichrist, who is ‘the Beast out of the earth’ of Rev. 13:11-17, and the ‘false prophet’ of Rev. 16:13; 19:20; 20:10. He is the last ecclesiastical head, as the Beast of Rev. 13:1-8 is the last civil head. For purposes of persecution he is permitted to exercise the autocratic power of the emperor-Beast.” In contrast to Scofield’s understanding, other Bible teachers say that the first beast of Revelation 13 will be the antichrist and that the second beast will be the false prophet. But Scofield says that the second beast, the false prophet, will be the antichrist. This means that Dr. Scofield says that the false prophet will be the antichrist.
The New Scofield Reference Bible in its note offers a somewhat different interpretation: “Many identify the ‘beast coming up out of the earth’ as the Antichrist....If the ‘beast coming up out of the earth’ (vv. 11-17) is the Antichrist, he is the same as the ‘false prophet’ of 16:13; 19:20; 20:10. Because the word ‘antichrist’ is never directly applied to him, however, some have considered the term ‘antichrist,’ defined in the sense against Christ, as applying to the first beast (vv. 1-10), who is the political ruler.” It is clear, therefore, that Bible teachers have different interpretations in the matter of to whom the title “antichrist” should be applied.
We have considered this matter in order to point out that there will not be just one antichrist. I do not think that any Bible teacher would dare to say that only the coming man of lawlessness, the son of destruction, is the antichrist. We should not be so definite as to teach that there will be only one antichrist and that before the coming of this one there will not be any other antichrists. But due to traditional teachings, many Christians have the concept that only one person will be the antichrist.
Bible teachers often speak about the antichrist, giving the impression that antichrist is a proper noun referring only to one person. However, according to John’s use of this term in 2:18, 22; 4:3; and 2 John 7, this is a general title, a title referring to a category of persons. It is not a unique, proper title referring to one particular person. Therefore, the title “antichrist” is different from the title “Christ,” for there is only one Christ and anyone who claims to be Christ is either a false Christ or an antichrist. But we should not use the word antichrist as if it were a proper noun.
Regarding this, translators of the Bible hold different opinions. For example, in his translation Wuest capitalizes antichrist, thus making it a proper noun. The Berkeley version does the same thing. However, J. N. Darby does not capitalize this word in his New Translation. Likewise, the word antichrist is not capitalized in the King James Version, the American Standard Version, or in the New American Standard Version.
It is not scriptural to say that there will be only one antichrist. But it is also wrong to say that the man of lawlessness, the son of destruction who exalts himself above all that is called God, is not an antichrist. That person should definitely be regarded as an antichrist.
In Matthew 24 the false prophets are of one category, and the false Christs are of another category. In Matthew 24:24 the Lord Jesus clearly speaks of both false Christs and false prophets. But in John’s Epistles the false prophets are antichrists. As we have pointed out, some Bible teachers say that the first beast in Revelation 13 will be the antichrist. But Scofield and others say that the second beast, the false prophet, will be the antichrist. According to Scofield’s interpretation, the antichrist is in the same category as the false prophets.
What conclusion should we draw from all these considerations? Should we regard the false prophets and the antichrists as two different categories? In a sense, we may understand them as two distinct categories. Eventually, however, the false prophets and the false Christs are all anti-Christ, against Christ, and hence are all antichrists. In the following message we shall consider the principle of antichrist.