Page 20 - BV16

20 The Antichrist Most Definitely Is Not a Person!

Ambrose said the Roman Empire was that which was holding back the appearance of
Antichrist and that “after the failing or decay of the Roman Empire, Antichrist would appear”
(Newton, op. cit., p. 463).

Just like Chrysostom, others knew the Roman Empire would fall and on its ruins and “out of
the church of Christ” one would rise who would feign himself to be the Messiah and “seize the
power of God and man.” Now WHAT power was it that actually did step into the vacuum left by
fallen Rome and with the name “Roman” sit in the church? What power SEIZED THE
AUTHORITY OF YEHOVAH AND MAN, then pluck up three states or kingdoms and dominate
all other seven for hundreds of years? Does the reader need a clearer picture of the past to name the
Antichrist? These brethren of the past gave us this clear picture before it happened!

Later Writers

Later writers were under no illusion regarding the Antichrist -- they knew exactly WHO ful-
filled this role.

John Foxe. Noted author of Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, John Foxe gives a list of learned men be-
tween 1331 and 1360 who contended against the false claims of the Pope. One of these, Michael of
Cesena, who had numerous followers, declared the Pope “to be Antichrist, and the church of Rome
to be the whore of Babylon, drunk with the blood of the saints” (Foxe, op. cit., p. 445).

John Wyclif. This noted English reformer taught that the persecuting little horn of Daniel had
found fulfillment in the Papacy which arose out of the fourth kingdom, Rome. “Why is it necessary
in unbelief to look for another Antichrist?” he asked. “In the Seventh Chapter of Daniel, Antichrist
is forcefully described by a horn arising in the time of the fourth kingdom...wearing out the saints of
the most high” (Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 2, p. 55). His book, The Mirror
of Antichrist, is filled with references to the Pope as Antichrist.

John Huss. Born in Bohemia, Huss was a well-educated man who came under the influence of
Wyclif’s writings which caused him to break ranks with the church of Rome. He labeled the Pope as
the Antichrist of which the scriptures had warned. His writings constantly refer to Antichrist as the
enemy of the church -- not as a Jew, a pagan, or a Turk -- but as a false confessor of the name of the
Messiah.

Martin Luther (1483-1546). While still a priest of the Roman Catholic Church, Luther disagreed
with the practice of selling indulgences. As he grew in the knowledge of Yeshua, he clearly saw that
reform within the church would be impossible, so he decided to “come out of her.” Being loosened
from the bondage of this system, Luther began to wonder if the Pope was the Antichrist. Eventually
this belief became pronounced.

Luther’s friends, fearing for his safety, begged him to suppress his book To the German
Nobility. To this he replied on August 18, 1520: “We here are of the conviction that the Papacy is
the seat of the true and real Antichrist...personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience
than that to Antichrist” (ibid., p. 256). Two months later, Luther’s book, On the Babylonian Cap-
tivity of the Church, was published. In this he spoke of the Papacy (the system, not the individual

The Berean Voice July-August 2002