The decision of the film-making industry to produce a wave of movies with apocalyptic themes has resulted in resurgent interest in the physical nature of the antichrist, his origin, and the timing of his appearance.

Although readers typically turn to many different passages to describe the antichrist, the Greek term ANTICHRISTOS itself only appears four times in the New Testament. At 1 John 2:18, the author reminds his readers that the "last hour" is coming and the presence of not just a single antichrist, but many antichrists are a sign of the final days. Significantly, the author goes on to describe these antichrists as persons who used to belong to the local Christian community (possibly in Ephesus) to whom he writes (v.19). Despite knowing their origins, and possibly more details about their identity and beliefs, the author says little about these persons whom he regards as the epitome of evil, except to say that (from his perspective) they deny that Jesus is the Christ and thereby deny the Father and the Son, vague statements that to his readers were probably less ambiguous than to modern interpreters (2:22). More information about the author's opponents appears later in the letter at 4:1-6. From the author's injunction to "test the spirits," we learn that the opponents are "false prophets" who probably claim to speak and teach under the power of God's Spirit, but deny the belief held to be absolutely central to the author and his readers, namely the confession that "Jesus Christ has come in the flesh" (v.2). Denying that conviction, one that seems so basic to the Christian faith today, but was actually a point of debate for centuries among many groups who understood themselves to be Christians, the author insists that his opponents speak not from the power of the Spirit of God, but from the "spirit of the antichrist" (4:3). A second letter to the same community (in Ephesus) makes similar observations about these former members: they have gone out from the community "into the world" and deny that "Jesus Christ has come in the flesh" and the author calls any such person a "deceiver" and an "antichrist" (2 John 7). The author warns that such persons should not be shown the customary hospitality afforded other Christian travelers and teachers (2 John 10; see also 3 John 5-8; Romans 12:13; 15:23, 24; 16:1,2).

The Emergence of the Lawless One

In 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12, a different figure, the "lawless one" emerges. He will oppose God and the people of God just before the triumphant return of Christ. Like the antichrist of the Johannine letters, this figure represents the personification of evil who opposes God and God's authority. Unlike the antichrist, however, this figure does not come from inside the Church but from outside; he seems to be both an example of a political leader who oppresses God's people during the calamitous events of the final days and a religious figure of some sort who blasphemously claims divine honor for himself. The references to this "lawless one" are obscure to the extreme, though it seems the author clearly expected his audience to know of whom he was speaking even though he was not being very explicit. Some scholars suggest that the infamous Roman Emperor Caligula, who once tried to put a statue of himself in the Temple in Jerusalem, may be in mind as a model of the lawless one's behavior and position. Unlike the antichrist figure of the Johannine letters, the "lawless one" is also explicitly linked with the "working of satan," which is especially manifest in deceptive signs and wonders (2 Thessalonians 2:9,10). Working as a deceiver, the "lawless one" leads his deluded followers ultimately to their destruction (vv.10-12). Paul, (or someone writing in his name as some scholars argue) like John, clearly sees this group as outside the bounds of the true community of faith and he also envisions the conclusive destruction of all opposition to God and Christ upon the latter's return which will include the annihilation of the "lawless one" (v.8).

False Prophets and False Christs

Still other New Testament texts speak of "false prophets" and "false christs" (PSEUDOCHRISTOS in the Greek) who are similar to both of the above-mentioned figures. In Mark's Gospel, Jesus tells his disciples that among the signs of the last days will be such figures who "produce signs and omens to lead astray, if possible, the elect" (13:21, 22). Like John and Paul, Mark highlights the deceptive powers of those who claim prophetic or even messianic authority as implicit rivals of Jesus. Again, we are given very little detail about their origin or teaching, although in this instance "false prophets" and "false christs" do not appear to be wayward believers in Mark's church. As some scholars have plausibly argued, Mark is referring specifically to Jewish leaders who formed part of the popular rebellion against Roman rule in the years 66-70 CE, the time when most scholars believe Mark wrote his Gospel. Some of the rebels during this war, often described as the First Jewish Revolt, claimed to be God's messiah, the anointed one who would cleanse the land of foreign imperial powers and restore Israel's sovereignty and righteousness. Mark, then, sees these popular leaders as rivals to Jesus who might persuade and deceive some of his audience to believe that God's rule will be established through their leadership and through open rebellion against Rome.

The Mark of the Beast

The most elaborate description of the antichrist figure is found in the Book of Revelation. Combining references to Old Testament prophecy in Daniel 7 with contemporary references to the Roman Empire, and especially the imperial cult so prevalent in several of the cities to which he writes, John the seer envisions nothing less than the Roman Empire itself as the demonic manifestation of opposition to God and God's people. The sea beast (see Rev. 11:7; 13:1-10; 16:12-16; 17; 19:20, 21) with its seven heads, one of which has been healed of a "mortal wound" (13:3), represents the collective empire for "the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated" (17:9), that is the seven hills upon which the city of Rome itself sits. The head which was wounded, but healed is probably a reference to Nero, who committed suicide by stabbing himself in the neck, but who according to popular legend in the first century was expected to return from the east to avenge his death. Like Christ, the "lamb who was standing as if slain" before the throne of God in heaven (5:6), the sea beast has "died" and been "resurrected" in a demonic parody of the true death and resurrection of Jesus. The second beast, the land beast (13:11-18; 16:13; 19:20,21), represents the official imperial cult, the worship of Roman emperors, usually dead ones but sometimes living ones as well. This beast "makes the earth and its people worship the first beast" and "performs great signs" and "deceives the people of the earth" into worshiping idols of Roman emperors (13:12-14). For John then, "the number of the beast," the sign of its true identity as the one who mocks and opposes God, is "666," which when converted into Hebrew letters spells the name "Nero Caesar." Nero represented the epitome of both personal and political oppression of Christians since he is the first recorded Roman persecutor of the early church. And, just as the "lawless one" is ultimately a tool of satan, so too are the "beasts" in Revelation (see 12:3, 9; 13:4, 11). Again, like the "lawless one," the beasts along with satan himself will ultimately be destroyed upon the triumphant return of Jesus (19:20, 21).

Clearly, the notion that the antichrist mimics Jesus is largely based on elaborate interpretations of the sea beast in Revelation 13, readings that over time expand to incorporate more and more aspects of Jesus' life and work. Claims that the antichrist must be a Jew go back to at least the third century. Yet even a quick review of the New Testament texts above shows no indication that the antichrist must be a Jew because Jesus himself was. Figures like the "lawless one" and the sea beast do not imitate the physical or personal aspects of Jesus of Nazareth, but rather his public accomplishments (miracles, preaching, resurrection). They are not clones of the Aramaic-speaking Galilean woodworker, but imitators of the crucified Messiah, the Son of God.

Avoiding Speculation and Stereotypes

Speculation about the identity of the antichrist, which has gone on for millennia, understandably turns to specifics, however, including specific physical descriptions, because the clues in the New Testament itself are quite vague. Yet, historical study shows that any attempt to describe, name, or predict the coming of the antichrist, is problematic at best. The history of such prognostications is a history of errors. Nobody got it right, which casts huge doubts on anybody's ability to ever get it right. More importantly perhaps, the effort to describe and define the antichrist and to warn against his works serves more than one purpose: writers, ancient or modern, preoccupied with the antichrist, are concerned not only with resisting the antichrist, but resisting people in their community with whom they disagree. Defining the antichrist is often an exercise in labeling, which includes labeling others, often in the most damning terms by identifying them with absolute evil. This is especially true with respect to Jews. Ancient Christian writers reasoned the antichrist's Jewish origins on analogy with Jesus himself, but they went far beyond this simple identification. They stereotyped Jews as a people who were immoral, impious, arrogant, and the enemies of both God and Christians. Based on such stereotypes, if one suspects the antichrist is a Jew, then by definition all Jews come under suspicion in a way that other people or individuals, regardless of their actions, are not. Ancient Christian writers identified the antichrist with Jews in part because they were attempting to define, to label the true followers of a God to whom both groups claimed allegiance. As young religions, both Judaism and Christianity sought to clarify their differences, mark off their distinctive identities, and often they did so in less than friendly ways. Attempts to discern the presence of the antichrist by defining his character traits or appearance more completely will likely not stop. Being aware of how those definitions and predictions relate to other important issues, like Christian self-definition in an uncertain and sometimes hostile world, however, is an important lesson to be drawn from a historical approach to the antichrist in the New Testament.