Why the World Needs the Anti-Christ, and Why There Will Never be One

[Gatekeeper]

Everyone:

The planet could really use an anti-Christ right now. Someone that humanity could focus all of its hatreds on. Someone truly evil to focus on and utterly destroy, leaving humanity standing triumphant.

That, of course, is why there will *never* be an anti-Christ. Think about it. If you're actively seeking the destruction of humanity, the world seems to be doing just fine on its own without an anti-Christ to further stir things up. We maim and kill each other with ease. We take power and ground those with lesser power into dust. We fulfill our every carnal desire, be they of flesh or of spirit. In the end, we're a fallen species. In a manner of speaking, aren't we already doing the work of evil to each other? So, why destroy a good thing by introducing an anti-Christ who would probably end up having to face a unified humanity. Right now, we're so disunited and at each other's throats that, if there was a Satan, it'd be laughing its ass off about right now.

So, the world could use an anti-Christ about now, but one will not be forthcoming. It'd derail Satan's plans, you see.

Gatekeeper

[aneeshm]

The character of the Anti-Christ is an inherent part of Christ himself. They are the same.

[Nikolai]

Originally posted by aneeshm
The character of the Anti-Christ is an inherent part of Christ himself. They are the same.

Excuse me?

Gatekeeper: The anti-Chirst is not one the world can focus its hatred on. It's one that will unite the world with promises of peace and harmony. Which will be the case for a short while, until he shows his real colours.

[Robert]

The Anti-Christ won't try to destruct humanity, won't be hated by all people.
The Anti-Christ is the incarnation of mans believe in man.
It'll bring peace, join the nations, and bring the golden age of humanity.

[Nikolai]

...for a while that is.

[Robert]

Originally posted by Nikolai
...for a while that is.

Well, I believe that the Golden Age of Man is a death-end road.
In the end we still die. And even if there's peace, I still believe there will be pain, sickness, arguments, divorcing, etc.

[Lazerus]

Gatekeeper: The anti-Chirst is not one the world can focus its hatred on. It's one that will unite the world with promises of peace and harmony. Which will be the case for a short while, until he shows his real colours.

I believe that's what the new testament says isn't it ?
With peace reigning and suffering minimalized by a man, then what need will men have of God ? That's the way i'd see it going, subversion rather then outright destroying.

[BeBMan]

Bah, Anti-Christ. It's nothing against teh Anti-Frog who is mentioned in the ancient scrolls of Heresson.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Nikolai

Excuse me?

It means that though they are opposites, the Christ's coming, and the anti-Christ's coming, would have had (and actually have had) the same consequences.

[General Ludd]

Have you read The Story of B, CyberShy?


It sounds like your take on the anti-christ is very similiar to what that book is about. It's a good take on the subject.

EDIT: Hm, well maybe your point of view isn't that much like it afterall. Still I'd recomend the book to anyone interested in the Anti-Christ.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Nikolai


Excuse me?

Gatekeeper: The anti-Chirst is not one the world can focus its hatred on. It's one that will unite the world with promises of peace and harmony. Which will be the case for a short while, until he shows his real colours.

aneeshm is eastern you see

[Kidlicious]

Re: Why the World Needs the Anti-Christ, and Why There Will Never be One

Originally posted by Gatekeeper
Everyone:

The planet could really use an anti-Christ right now. Someone that humanity could focus all of its hatreds on. Someone truly evil to focus on and utterly destroy, leaving humanity standing triumphant.

That, of course, is why there will *never* be an anti-Christ. Think about it. If you're actively seeking the destruction of humanity, the world seems to be doing just fine on its own without an anti-Christ to further stir things up. We maim and kill each other with ease. We take power and ground those with lesser power into dust. We fulfill our every carnal desire, be they of flesh or of spirit. In the end, we're a fallen species. In a manner of speaking, aren't we already doing the work of evil to each other? So, why destroy a good thing by introducing an anti-Christ who would probably end up having to face a unified humanity. Right now, we're so disunited and at each other's throats that, if there was a Satan, it'd be laughing its ass off about right now.

So, the world could use an anti-Christ about now, but one will not be forthcoming. It'd derail Satan's plans, you see.

Gatekeeper

The anti-christ will come when the world already has a common enemy. The anti-christ will unite them against that enemy and make himself the worlds leader.

[Robert]

Originally posted by General Ludd
Have you read The Story of B, CyberShy?


It sounds like your take on the anti-christ is very similiar to what that book is about. It's a good take on the subject.

EDIT: Hm, well maybe your point of view isn't that much like it afterall. Still I'd recomend the book to anyone interested in the Anti-Christ.

The story of B? Never heard of it.
What's the difference with my take on it?

With peace reigning and suffering minimalized by a man, then what need will men have of God?

To end all evil.
The end death.
To end sickness and pain, fights and hate.

There's peace in Western Europe for 50 years now, but I promise you, it's still not paradise.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by CyberShy


The story of B? Never heard of it.
What's the difference with my take on it?

In all honesty, I can't remember the details to well. But I belive the anti-christ in that book was a sort of mesiah figure, who preached teachings that would bring the downfall of religous followings and current societal structures, while open ing people's eyes to primitive ways of life, and a more animistic spirituality. In the case of the book, the anti-christ's roll was not to bring about a "golden age of humanity" but to prepare people for life after civilization, or in other words, life after the "golden age". (that's a terrible term to use like this, though, as it has such unshakeble positive connotations that come with it)

Another way of looking at it, would be that he is trying to make a return to the garden of eden, which had been left 10,000 years ago when humans set off on the bender known as civilization.

Daniel Quinn is the author.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by CyberShy

Well, I believe that the Golden Age of Man is a death-end road.
In the end we still die. And even if there's peace, I still believe there will be
pain, sickness, arguments, divorcing, etc.

You can put me down as a supporter of the anti-christ then. In fact, given what I linked in the other Jesus thread, you can probably put Jesus down as an anti-christ (if he existed and is responsible for the statements in question).

On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that the anti-christ is Sir Alex Ferguson...