The Biblical argument that the Pope is the Antichrist

Introduction

A previous article noted that all Protestants once agreed that the pope was the Antichrist. Now it is rare to find a Protestant church that believes this. Some Reformed churches will teach he is an Antichrist. Others might argue that one pope might be an Antichrist, but other “better” popes are not. But most deny the papacy is THE ultimate Antichrist, as the Westminster Confession of Faith teaches.

Some writers claim that Roman Catholic persecutions drove Protestants to rashly conclude that the pope was the Antichrist. They ask, “How can the pope be the Antichrist, when Scripture teaches that there are many antichrists?” Others object more strongly: “The pope can’t be the Antichrist, because he believes in Christ’s true humanity, and the Apostle John says that antichrists deny this.”

The following gives a basic explanation of the verses about the Antichrist in the first epistle of John. See this article about Paul’s teaching regarding the man of sin and son of perdition in 2 Thessalonians 2. When both passages are correctly understood, we will see that they are completely fulfilled in the papacy.

No doubt the outline below could be improved. Readers wanting a better understanding of these passages should study Francis Turretin’s Seventh Disputation, “Whether it can be Proven that the Pope is the Antichrist” and Patrick Fairbairn’s book on Prophecy.

What “Antichrist” means in John’s Epistles

1Jn 2:18-19: “Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist (Greek: the antichrist) shall come (Greek: is coming), even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.  They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.”

This passage teaches the following:

• Two types of antichrists exist: (1) the “many antichrists” already existing in John’s lifetime, and (2) THE antichrist yet to arrive. A specific, definite, ultimate antichrist – much more powerful than all the antichrists at work in John’s lifetime – would yet arise.
• This antichrist “is coming.” He had not yet arrived, but he was on his way. The antichrist was developing, but would not fully manifest himself until sometime after John wrote these words.
  • Note: According to Donald Guthrie, most scholars date John’s epistles after 90 AD.
  • Therefore, as of 90 AD, the ultimate antichrist had not yet arisen.
• Antichrists arise in the church and then apostatize: “They went out from us” – that is, “from the church that we apostles instrumentally founded”. The church is founded upon the inspired writings of the apostles and prophets (Eph. 2:20). According to the Apostle John, some people in the Church hear the inspired writings of these apostles but then depart from them, becoming antichrists in the process.
• Therefore, antichrists are not enemies that attack the Church from without, but enemies that arise from within.
• “Antichrist” literally means one who takes the place of Christ; one who comes into His domain and pretends to act for Him. 
  • The preposition “anti” is found in Mark 10:45, “For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for [anti] many.” In other words, Christ came to give His life in the place of many.
  • The antichrist is therefore not a pagan or an atheist, but one who claims to be a Christian, and opposes Christ by taking His place.
• “Antichrists” usurp Christ’s authority. They teach doctrines that put Christ out of His rightful place. They either take on a role that belongs to Christ alone, or teach a doctrine that they claim is Christian, when in fact it undermines and opposes Christ.
• Antichrists refuse to confess that Christ came in the flesh (1 John 4:3) to be a propitiation for sins (1 John 2:2).

How “The Antichrist” ultimately applies to the Pope

Antichrists, John says, deny Christ’s humanity. Does this mean that the pope is not an antichrist, because he believes that the Son of God became man? No. People can deny that He came in the flesh in subtle ways.

Ask yourself, why did Christ come in the flesh? Why did He become incarnate? Answer: so that He could offer up Himself as a sacrifice for sins, fully satisfying the justice of God, securing forgiveness and “eternal redemption” for all who trust in Him. If Christ’s obedience to the law and His atoning death in human nature completely satisfied God’s justice, then the believing sinner does nothing to satisfy His justice.

But this is what the Roman Catholic Church persistently denies! “Yes, the Son of God became man and died to appease God’s wrath,” the pope says. “But you must still do something to completely satisfy God’s wrath against your sin. You must join the Catholic Church, you must confess your sins to the priest, you must do penance, and you must go to mass. Finally, you must endure the torments of purgatory before your sins can be fully and eternally forgiven.” What is the pope essentially saying?  “Christ did not come in the flesh to fully satisfy the justice of God!”

Conclusion

Since the pope (and Romanist teaching in general) denies that Christ came in the flesh in the way John meant, he is antichrist.  He claims to believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came in the flesh. But he rejects the true meaning of that statement. He therefore “denies” (rejects) the Son. Since the Son is the express image of the Father, the pope denies the Father as well (Heb. 1:3, 1 Jn. 2:22). The pope’s denial of Christ’s purpose in becoming man is so subtle, and so persuasive, that he is rightly called, “THE Antichrist.”