Could it be that Antichrist will be a woman?

Question

If yes, why?
If no, why?

I'm just thinking: what if Antichrist is a woman, and we are all expecting a man.

Actually, this is only theoretical and theological question.

No, I'm not thinking about Hillary. I'm from Europe, so I'm not right wing nor I have any interest about your election campaign. Also, I don't hate women!

Another thing. I don't think Nero was the Antichrist. He might have been an antichrist, but not THE! First of all, Revelation was written near the end of 1st century, and Nero died in AD 68.

In the Bible, we read of Antichrist and antichrist. So, there will be one Antichrist!

Also, I don't think Antichrist will be American, cause its clear that Roman empire will be revived - and it can only be in Europe.

Caroline, I think that Roman cesar was only a type of the Antichrist. So, there is definitely a future fulfilment of Revelation prophecy!!!

Answer 1

Hi Good question.
This scripture speaks of a 'man' of lawlessness:
"Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God."--2 Thes 2:3,4.

Could 'he' be an antichrist?

The apostle John tells of antichrist's in the 1st century:
"Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrist's have appeared; from this we know it is the last hour....Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son--1 Jo 2:18; 22,
Then in 1 Jo 4:3; "and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God, this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard it is coming, and now it is already in the world."
Again in 2 Jo 7, "For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist."

Does this only apply to the first century Christians or is there a further fulfillment which has a greater meaning? What do you think?


PS: Your additional details: I too agree with your observations on this point. C

Answer 2

I think, "babydoll" above me is right.

The "Anti-Christ" is not necessarily one person but a group of people who deny that Jesus is God. Note: Muslims do believe in Jesus, but they deny the trinity. Therefore, chances are, the false prophet mentioned in the Bible will be the muslim Mahdi. For more on this, please refer to this website: http://www.wzsn.net/prophecy1.html

It's very interesting that both muslims and Christians expect some supernatural person to arrive. The only difference is that muslims call him the Mahdi, the Messiah, and Christians refer to him as the Anti-Christ or false prophet.

When this person arrives, there is no doubt that Islam and Christianity will collide head on (unless Christians are taken from the earth before the Mahdi comes). This is called the rapture which is mentioned in the Bible: One person will be left on the earth, and the other will be taken up into heaven. Two will be sleeping in bed. One will be taken, the other will be left. Isn't that interesting?

Answer 3

In truth it could be either but the writers were men. Anti has several meanings one is rivaling and that seems to be the one that the Bible is using. There is one that mean oppose and if they are using it then the Antichrist is a woman.

Answer 4

Would the partisans of Christ have set out deliberately to lie? Were they such barefaced charlatans that they concocted falsehoods and deceits merely to advance themselves and their designs? By their own admission, YES they were. They may well have been believers, in that they held to a certain faith. On this was built the fanaticism either to die, or to kill others, for that faith. But faith absolves the believer from any fidelity to objective truth.

False accreditation was another much used method, common practice during antiquity. Most of the texts in both the Hebrew bible and the New Testament were forged in the names of their authors to give them ‘authority.’ This merely helped others recognise 'the higher truths' presented to them. Who could argue with Solomon, say, or Apostles of the Lord?

Revelation is the outpouring of a Jew seriously embittered by Roman imperialism. This fevered Jewish mind invokes retribution for his enemies from that old, vicious god of Hebrew scripture, who rips into humanity with poetic abandon. Thus, in a whole series of ‘Ends’, God releases seven ‘vials of his wrath’ (blood, plague, sores, fire, drought, etc.); sets loose four horsemen (at the head of an army of 200 million!) ‘for to slay the third part of men’ (9.15). He has his ‘demonic locusts’ torment unbelievers for five months; etc., etc. Kings, captains, false prophets and ‘the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great’ are eaten by fowls that fly and are cast alive into a lake of ‘fire and brimstone.’

For over a century scholars have known that Jewish numerology or ‘gematria’ resolves the name of Nero Caesar, as it appears in Hebrew (without vowels), into the number 666. Unlike the English alphabet, all the letters of Hebrew have a numerical equivalent, which opens the door to all sorts of esoteric or ‘mystical’ use. Engels credits a fellow German with the resolution of the riddle of Revelation thus:

"This solution was given by Ferdinand Benary of Berlin. The name is Nero. The number is based on [Hebrew] Neron Kesar, the Hebrew spelling of the Greek Nerôn Kaisar, Emperor Nero, authenticated by means of the Talmud and Palmyrian inscriptions. This inscription was found on coins of Nero's time minted in the eastern half of the empire. And so -- n (nun)=50; r (resh)=200; v (vau) for o=6; n (nun)=50; k (kaph)=100; s (samech)=60; r (resh)=200. Total 666. If we take as a basis the Latin spelling Nero Caesar the second nun=50 disappears and we get 666 - 50 = 616, which is Irenaeus's reading." – On The History of Early Christianity, III.

Answer 5

The Bible clearly states it's a man.

Rev 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast:

for it is the number of a man;

and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

Answer 6

Well, personaly I think he was a man. I believe that if you really look at passages refering to the anti-christ from the context of the original readers you can see that they most likely refer to Nero. Though there will be many anti-christs (I believe somewhere in Jude it talks about anti-christs in the plural - those who oppose Christ) throughout history, The Anti-christ has already come and gone.

Answer 7

If any, then yes...simply because seeing the faces of those who expected a dude would be hilarious.

Though in my opinion the book of revelations has past, and is done with

Answer 8

No, the bible says the number 666 is the number of a man. Not a woman.

Answer 9

I'm sure the Hillary-haters will adapt that stance, if they haven't already.

since the "antichrist" is a myth, it can be applied to anyone.

In my lifetime, I've met Christians who have conclusively "proven" it to be Gorbachev, Qaddafi, the European Union in general, Arafat, Putin, Hussein, and anyone else they didn't like. I'm sure Bill Clinton made the list at one point.

Answer 10

No, from that part of the world, women are only given half the voice of men.......so no, it will have to be a man.