study a NT book

[GTM]

modus.irrealis

I apologize for not responding to your posts. My internet connection was down in the area and we just got it up and running.

GTM

[modus.irrealis]

There's no need to apologize. I just hope we keep the discussion going .

[GTM]

modus.irrealis

You sure posted a few questions. Maybe we should attempt to work through this one, verse by verse, if that is possible.

Question you asked:

2) Do τεκνία (= παιδία?), πατέρες and νεανίσκοι refer to different people or to the same people but in different functions? In either case, the three labels aren't ordered by age, so why this ordering? I thought that you maybe have τεκνία ~ sins forgiven (~ baptized) >>> πατέρες ~ knowledge of God (~ chrism?) >>> νεανίσκοι ~ victorious over Satan (~ ?) as sort of a progression in faith. But what do the labels mean?

12 γράφω ὑμῖν, τεκνία, ὅτι ἀφέωνται ὑμῖν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι διὰ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ.

I lean towards the idea that the shift in use from παιδία to τεκνία might suggest new Christians. This is just an idea that I am throwing out there just to get some response. Here is the reason for this idea. ἀφέωνται in verse 12 is in the perfect tense which seems to carry a different idea from that of 1 John 1:9. 1 John 1:9 speaks of continual forgiveness. That isn't the case in 2:12. He seems to focus more on the act of forgiveness which seems to speak of conversion. I may be wrong but hey it is a starting point.

GTM

[GTM]

I am not sure who to contact, but I know a Gentleman who has attempted to join this forum twice and hasn't heard back . Who do I speak with on this matter?

GTM

[Bert]

I am not sure who to contact, but I know a Gentleman who has attempted to join this forum twice and hasn't heard back . Who do I speak with on this matter?

GTM

Probably William Annis.

[GTM]

Bert

Thank You for your post

GTM

[GTM]

modus.irrealis

I have been thinking about your question.

Do τεκνία (= παιδία?)

What are your thoughts on that? Do you sense that the whole Christian community was being addressed here including more mature or older children?

GTM

[modus.irrealis]

modus.irrealis

I have been thinking about your question.

Do τεκνία (= παιδία?)

What are your thoughts on that? Do you sense that the whole Christian community was being addressed here including more mature or older children?

He does use both τεκνία and παιδία to address his readers elsewhere in the letter, so I think the terms can be applied to the entire community, although I'm not sure if they do so in these verses here.

About your earlier post, I think you're right about the use of the perfect there, but do you think he's addressing just converts there or is he addressing everyone in their functions of having been converts?

[GTM]

modus.irrealis

you asked:

About your earlier post, I think you're right about the use of the perfect there, but do you think he's addressing just converts there or is he addressing everyone in their functions of having been converts?

As I ponder verse 12

12 Γράφω ὑμῖν, τεκνία, ὅτι ἀφέωνται ὑμῖν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι διὰ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ.

that is a good question. Before I attempt to answer it, I might need some clarification from you. Could you define function as you have presented it in this question?

GTM

[GTM]

modus.irrealis

I think that I see a theme in these verses (12-14)

Is it possible that in verse 12 John is speaking of new Christians and not necessarily childern?

here is my thought

Γράφω ὑμῖν, τεκνία, ὅτι ἀφέωνται ὑμῖν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι διὰ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ.

As baby Christians we need to be reminded that it is by His name and His only that we are saves. Also as I have already mentioned , there is the use of the perfect tense for ἀφέωνται which clerly points to the instantaneous act of salvation.

In verse 13 we see
13 Γράφω ὑμῖν, πατέρες, ὅτι ἐγνώκατε τὸν ἀπ' ἀρχῆς.

This verse points to the idea that whoever this group is, they have ἐγνώκατε τὸν ἀπ' ἀρχῆς.

Now if I were to take a guess at this I might conclude that it takes years of walking with Him to really know Him. Maybe I am wrong here.

Γράφω ὑμῖν, νεανίσκοι, ὅτι νενικήκατε τὸν πονηρόν

Who is the one that usually has the most difficulty with τὸν πονηρόν?
Young men are faced with many worldly temptations, more so than an old man.

Well lets see if anyone throws rocks at me for this one.

GTM

[modus.irrealis]

that is a good question. Before I attempt to answer it, I might need some clarification from you. Could you define function as you have presented it in this question?

What I mean is not so much an official function but simply an aspect of being part of the community. That's probably not any clearer, but what I'm trying to get at is can someone be a τεκνίον and a πατήρ at the same time or are they necessarily one or the other.

[modus.irrealis]

Is it possible that in verse 12 John is speaking of new Christians and not necessarily childern?

I think so -- at least I've understood it as being more metaphorical and not referring literally to age.

Who is the one that usually has the most difficulty with τὸν πονηρόν?
Young men are faced with many worldly temptations, more so than an old man.

I see what you're saying but it seems odd then that the order would not go τεκνία, νεανίσκοι, πατέρες. Maybe I'm putting too much emphasis on the order but I want to read νεανίσκοι as being the next step after πατέρες.

[GTM]

modus.irrealis

You said:

I see what you're saying but it seems odd then that the order would not go τεκνία, νεανίσκοι, πατέρες. Maybe I'm putting too much emphasis on the order but I want to read νεανίσκοι as being the next step after πατέρες.

That is probably a valid point. It would seem that what you suggested would be the logical succession. I think we should dig into this one a little more. maybe there is some Greek construction that would give us clues.

GTM

[sid4greek]

I apologise for not sending any replies until now, but I have been rather busy...
However, I have just read the messages needed to pick it up from here, so I hope I can keep up with you!

[sid4greek]

after reading your comments plus the text (1 John 2: 12-14), here is what I have found:


a) according to the grammars, "oti" can be either a conjunction introducing the subjective opinion of the writer; "because, for, since"; or a marker for direct discourse (direct speech).

b) (i) in the English NIV translation we find "because"
(ii) in the Latin translation we have "quia/quoniam" = because
(iii) in the Catalan translation we find that they have chosen to take "oti" as a direct discourse marker.

WHEN READING THE DIFFERENT TRANSLATIONS, I CAN FIND DIFFERENCES...AT LEAST IN THE EFFECT ON TH READER...

c) as for the different age groups referred to in the text, the writer may be encouraging each group with facts that they should bear in mind...I think that a Christian, regardless of "spiritual/non-spiritual age", has:

- been forgiven of their sins.
- known God from the beginning.
- overcome the evil one.

Perhaps each group needs to be reminded of these aspects in the christian life....


cheers

sidney

[Bert]

after reading your comments plus the text (1 John 2: 12-14), here is what I have found:


a) according to the grammars, "oti" can be either a conjunction introducing the subjective opinion of the writer; "because, for, since"; or a marker for direct discourse (direct speech).

b) (i) in the English NIV translation we find "because"
(ii) in the Latin translation we have "quia/quoniam" = because
(iii) in the Catalan translation we find that they have chosen to take "oti" as a direct discourse marker.

WHEN READING THE DIFFERENT TRANSLATIONS, I CAN FIND DIFFERENCES...AT LEAST IN THE EFFECT ON TH READER...

The NET (www.bible.org) takes it as direct discourse. Doesn't it make more sense that way as well? I am writing that your sins have been forgiven, rather than, I am writing because your sins have been forgiven.?

[sid4greek]

I think so too, Bert!

[GTM]

sid4greek

you said:

as for the different age groups referred to in the text, the writer may be encouraging each group with facts that they should bear in mind...I think that a Christian, regardless of "spiritual/non-spiritual age", has:
- been forgiven of their sins.
- known God from the beginning.
- overcome the evil one.

I think that you have made a very good point.

Thank You.

GTM

[sid4greek]

I've been reading 1 John 15-18 and I have a question:

what had the writer in mind when talking about "the antichrist" (verse 18)? the writer seems to distinguish between "the antichrist" and "many antichrists" of a lesser kind....

cheers

[GTM]

sid4greek

I've been reading 1 John 15-18 and I have a question:

what had the writer in mind when talking about "the antichrist" (verse 18)? the writer seems to distinguish between "the antichrist" and "many antichrists" of a lesser kind....

18Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.

Παιδία, ἐσχάτη ὥρα ἐστίν καὶ καθὼς ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἀντίχριστος ἔρχεται καὶ νῦν ἀντίχριστοι πολλοὶ γεγόνασιν, ὅθεν γινώσκομεν ὅτι ἐσχάτη ὥρα ἐστίν.

I believe that the key is in the phrase ἐσχάτη ὥρα ἐστίν which speaks of tumultuous times prior to the coming of the Anti Christ.
Those who reject Christ are in a real sense Anti Christs. I believe that through out Christian history they existed and are recognizable by life style.

GTM

[modus.irrealis]

I notice that the first ἀντίχριστος has no article, so I'm not sure that it refers to the Antichrist. For the latter case, I'd except it to occur with the definite article. Compare the term Χριστός which always seems to take the article (apart from it's usage in Jesus Christ). From the Greek, what I understand is that he's saying that you heard that an antichrist is coming (without any emphasis on there being just one), but now many have come, which is evidence that this is the last hour.

[GTM]

modus.irrealis

you said:

I notice that the first ἀντίχριστος has no article, so I'm not sure that it refers to the Antichrist.

That is an excellent point. I will have to go back to that and check it out. But you idea makes perfect sense.

GTM

[jaihare]

sid4greek

18Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.

Παιδία, ἐσχάτη ὥρα ἐστίν καὶ καθὼς ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἀντίχριστος ἔρχεται καὶ νῦν ἀντίχριστοι πολλοὶ γεγόνασιν, ὅθεν γινώσκομεν ὅτι ἐσχάτη ὥρα ἐστίν.

I believe that the key is in the phrase ἐσχάτη ὥρα ἐστίν which speaks of tumultuous times prior to the coming of the Anti Christ.
Those who reject Christ are in a real sense Anti Christs. I believe that through out Christian history they existed and are recognizable by life style.

GTM

In a more generic sense, John seems to indicate that "antichrist" is anyone who became Christian and then "de-converted" and since denied Jesus in some way.

1 John 2:22
Τίς ἐστιν ὁ ψεύστης εἰ μὴ ὁ ἀρνούμενος ὅτι Ἰησοῦς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ Χριστός; οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἀντίχριστος, ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱόν.
"Who is the liar, except the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ/Messiah? This one is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son."

1 John 4:3
καὶ πᾶν πνεῦμα ὃ μὴ ὁμολογεῖ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν· καὶ τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου, ὃ ἀκηκόατε ὅτι ἔρχεται, καὶ νῦν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ἐστὶν ἤδη.
"And every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not from God: and this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world."

2 John 1:7
ὅτι πολλοὶ πλάνοι ἐξῆλθον εἰς τὸν κόσμον, οἱ μὴ ὁμολογοῦντες Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐρχόμενον ἐν σαρκί· οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ πλάνος καὶ ὁ ἀντίχριστος.
"Because many deceivers have gone out into the world, the ones who do not confess Jesus Christian coming in the flesh: This is the deceiver and the antichrist."

The author, however, makes it clear that those to whom he was referring had once been Christians, when he says:

1 John 2:19
ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐξῆλθαν, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ ἦσαν ἐξ ἡμῶν· εἰ γὰρ ἐξ ἡμῶν ἦσαν, μεμενήκεισαν ἂν μεθ᾿ ἡμῶν· ἀλλ᾿ ἵνα φανερωθῶσιν ὅτι οὐκ εἰσὶν πάντες ἐξ ἡμῶν.
"They went out from us, but they were not from us; for if they had been from us, they woul dhave remained with us; but so that they might be made evidence that they are not all from us {they went out}."

According to this definition, there have indeed been many antichrists in the world. These are people who were once Christians but later abandoned Christianity and their teachings about Jesus and now live quite apart from Christianity and perhaps even work to convince people that Christianity isn't true.

I won't comment about any such person's "life styles" since that's quite outside the scope of where this forum should go. I think the administration of the forum would appreciate if we didn't make this a personal issue. Believe what you want – we're here to discuss the Greek language, not to spread Christianity.

And many of us antichrists (that is, former Christians who now live quite apart from our former beliefs) would much appreciate if we kept the discussion limited to what the text means rather than aiming religious indignation at people who live outside of our own perspectives.

Best regards,
Jason

[jaihare]

I notice that the first ἀντίχριστος has no article, so I'm not sure that it refers to the Antichrist. For the latter case, I'd except it to occur with the definite article. Compare the term Χριστός which always seems to take the article (apart from it's usage in Jesus Christ). From the Greek, what I understand is that he's saying that you heard that an antichrist is coming (without any emphasis on there being just one), but now many have come, which is evidence that this is the last hour.

I think that this is tied with what is written in chapter 4:

1 John 4:3
καὶ πᾶν πνεῦμα ὃ μὴ ὁμολογεῖ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν· καὶ τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου, ὃ ἀκηκόατε ὅτι ἔρχεται, καὶ νῦν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ἐστὶν ἤδη.
"And every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not from God: and this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world."

It's not just a "person" of antichrist that he was talking about but the whole "spirit of antichrist." What do you think?

[GTM]

jaihare

you said:

In a more generic sense, John seems to indicate that "antichrist" is anyone who became Christian and then "de-converted" and since denied Jesus in some way.

The author, however, makes it clear that those to whom he was referring had once been Christians, when he says:

1 John 2:19
ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐξῆλθαν, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ ἦσαν ἐξ ἡμῶν· εἰ γὰρ ἐξ ἡμῶν ἦσαν, μεμενήκεισαν ἂν μεθ᾿ ἡμῶν· ἀλλ᾿ ἵνα φανερωθῶσιν ὅτι οὐκ εἰσὶν πάντες ἐξ ἡμῶν.
"They went out from us, but they were not from us; for if they had been from us, they would have remained with us; but so that they might be made evidence that they are not all from us {they went out}."

This is quite an interesting idea. Would you say that they were actually apart of this group and then abandoned it or that they participated in this group and when they got bored, they went out and caused discord.

ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐξῆλθαν ἀλλ' οὐκ ἦσαν ἐξ ἡμῶν

This seems to say that though they participated in the religious ritual they weren't, in their heart, a part of it in a spiritually connected manner.

I would like to hear more of your thoughts on this. Can one be involved in something and yet not be a part of it?

GTM

[jaihare]

jaihare

This is quite an interesting idea. Would you say that they were actually apart of this group and then abandoned it or that they participated in this group and when they got bored, they went out and caused discord.

ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐξῆλθαν ἀλλ' οὐκ ἦσαν ἐξ ἡμῶν

This seems to say that though they participated in the religious ritual they weren't, in their heart, a part of it in a spiritually connected manner.

I would like to hear more of your thoughts on this. Can one be involved in something and yet not be a part of it?

GTM

One interesting thing about Christianity is that many within it simply cannot believe that someone can change their mind and choose to reject what they had previously believed. Since John Calvin (Institutes of the Christian Religion) the "Perseverance of the Saints" has been a basic principle in many churches, which states in simple terms: "Once saved, always saved."

This seems to be the kind of idea that John is putting across in his letter. If they had really been Christians (that is, if they had really belonged to the following of the apostles), they would have stayed. The fact that they left is a tell-tale sign that they were never genuine. This is what John is alluding to, and it is still repeated today.

When I tell someone that I was a Christian (sincere and intense) from age 12 to age 20, they don't believe my own confession because I tell them at age 20 I rejected Christianity. After all, if I left Jesus, then I must never have truly believed in him (though I believed with all my heart and soul). I can't get into my reasons for my choices here, but let me say that it has nothing to do with someone's "lifestyle" or "bad character." If coming to Jesus is a rational choice, then leaving him is a rational choice as well.

Either way, hope the text makes a bit of sense the way that I've explained it. I haven't read the NT much in the last nearly ten years, but I used to read it avidly and feel that I still have a good grasp on it.

All the best,
Jason

[GTM]

jaihare

Thank You for your post.

I have always struggled with the Calvinist and Arminian views. I see support for both ideas. But like you said, this discussion is about the Greek. Your posts are certainly food for thought.

GTM

[GTM]

Just a quick question concerning 1 John 1:1!

περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς Concerning the word the life. Does the use of the article τῆς before ζωῆς help us to understand what life means? In other words is this speaking of human life or is it speaking in a more spiritual sense or is there some other idea that we need to understand here?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

GTM

[modus.irrealis]

I think that this is tied with what is written in chapter 4:

1 John 4:3
καὶ πᾶν πνεῦμα ὃ μὴ ὁμολογεῖ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν· καὶ τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου, ὃ ἀκηκόατε ὅτι ἔρχεται, καὶ νῦν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ἐστὶν ἤδη.
"And every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not from God: and this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world."

It's not just a "person" of antichrist that he was talking about but the whole "spirit of antichrist." What do you think?

I was thinking of 2:22, where he identifies the antichrist with those who deny the father and the son, and it seems to me, with those who left the community. There's also 2 John 1:7 which seems to express the same idea. With 4:3, though, I'm not sure what to think -- there is a contrast drawn between τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ and τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου, which suggests to me an interpretation of the antichrist as person, and in the whole section, πνεῦμα seems to mean person in some sense. Perhaps you even have "spirit of the antichrist" a round-about way of meaning "antichrist", with the definite article just being used in its generalizing sense and not referring to a specific the Antichrist. Both πνεῦμα and "spirit" are words with a wide range of meaning and I don't think they overlap perfectly so I'm really not sure what to think.

Going another way, there are similar contrasts between θεός and διάβολος in 3:10 for example. I'm thinking that ἀντίχριστος in this letter only has its literal meaning of anti-christ and is simply an adjective that can describe individuals who reject Christ as in 2:18 and perhaps refer to the preeminent antichrist, the devil, in 1:7.

[modus.irrealis]

περὶ τοῦ λόγου τῆς ζωῆς Concerning the word the life. Does the use of the article τῆς before ζωῆς help us to understand what life means? In other words is this speaking of human life or is it speaking in a more spiritual sense or is there some other idea that we need to understand here?

I don't think the article can support such a distinction -- my feeling here is that the article here is pretty much automatic in this context and would not be dropped no matter the precise meaning of ζωή. Do you have any examples in mind where the article's presence/absence would make such a distinction?

[GTM]

modus.irrealis

There is no other text in the NT that uses this form. Philippians 2:16 is the closet thing that we have to it and the article doesn't exist.

λόγον ζωῆς ἐπέχοντες εἰς καύχημα ἐμοὶ εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ, ὅτι οὐκ εἰς κενὸν ἔδραμον οὐδὲ εἰς κενὸν ἐκοπίασα.

GTM

[modus.irrealis]

So you meant the article with λόγος as well? But about examples, I didn't mean exactly this phrase, but any analogous phrase, not necessarily with ζωή, where the article could make such a distinction. I'm a little unclear on how the article could play into this.

[sid4greek]

I think that this is tied with what is written in chapter 4:

1 John 4:3
καὶ πᾶν πνεῦμα ὃ μὴ ὁμολογεῖ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν· καὶ τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου, ὃ ἀκηκόατε ὅτι ἔρχεται, καὶ νῦν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ἐστὶν ἤδη.
"And every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not from God: and this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world."

It's not just a "person" of antichrist that he was talking about but the whole "spirit of antichrist." What do you think?

I was thinking of 2:22, where he identifies the antichrist with those who deny the father and the son, and it seems to me, with those who left the community. There's also 2 John 1:7 which seems to express the same idea. With 4:3, though, I'm not sure what to think -- there is a contrast drawn between τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ and τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου, which suggests to me an interpretation of the antichrist as person, and in the whole section, πνεῦμα seems to mean person in some sense. Perhaps you even have "spirit of the antichrist" a round-about way of meaning "antichrist", with the definite article just being used in its generalizing sense and not referring to a specific the Antichrist. Both πνεῦμα and "spirit" are words with a wide range of meaning and I don't think they overlap perfectly so I'm really not sure what to think.

Going another way, there are similar contrasts between θεός and διάβολος in 3:10 for example. I'm thinking that ἀντίχριστος in this letter only has its literal meaning of anti-christ and is simply an adjective that can describe individuals who reject Christ as in 2:18 and perhaps refer to the preeminent antichrist, the devil, in 1:7.

I am still thinking that there are two referents when using "antichrist" in the "1 John 2: 18-22" passage:

- the Antichrist as in Revelations (....is coming....as in v.18)
- minor antichrists (say, a belief system) who deny Jesus as defined by John in v.22 in line with 1 John 4:3

[sid4greek]

1 John 2:20

"you know the truth" in verse 20 is rendered in the Catalan version as "you have the knowledge" (which is a bit like the gnostic gospels philosohy)

in Latin> nostia omnia
in Greek > oidate pantes

knowledge = truth?

[sid4greek]

back to the Antichrist issue:

how come John says that we know that this is the last hour because of the antichrists leaving the christian community as explained in verse 19??

[GTM]

sid4greek

"you know the truth" in verse 20 is rendered in the Catalan version as "you have the knowledge" (which is a bit like the gnostic gospels philosohy)

Is it possible that we can differentiate between having knowledge and have revelation? In other words, knowledge saves no one. It is the Revelation of God that saves. They were among us but they weren't apart of us.

GTM

[GTM]

sid4greek

how come John says that we know that this is the last hour because of the antichrists leaving the Christian community as explained in verse 19??

Good question. Could it be referring to a great falling away?

I was reading in another forum, a post by a gentleman, who claimed to have been a Christian once but now believes that the trinity is not true. He now preaches a gospel that is against the Deity of Christ. I often times wonder if this is just an event that happens in history or is this a sing that this is actually the last hour. His story is just one of many that I have read.

GTM

[sid4greek]

sid4greek

"you know the truth" in verse 20 is rendered in the Catalan version as "you have the knowledge" (which is a bit like the gnostic gospels philosohy)

Is it possible that we can differentiate between having knowledge and have revelation? In other words, knowledge saves no one. It is the Revelation of God that saves. They were among us but they weren't apart of us.

GTM

is then "knowledge" in the Catalan translation not as good a rendering as "truth" in the English version?

[jaihare]

sid4greek

how come John says that we know that this is the last hour because of the antichrists leaving the Christian community as explained in verse 19??

Good question. Could it be referring to a great falling away?

I was reading in another forum, a post by a gentleman, who claimed to have been a Christian once but now believes that the trinity is not true. He now preaches a gospel that is against the Deity of Christ. I often times wonder if this is just an event that happens in history or is this a sing that this is actually the last hour. His story is just one of many that I have read.

GTM

I think this is exactly right. Cp. 2 Thessalonians 2.

[jaihare]

I am still thinking that there are two referents when using "antichrist" in the "1 John 2: 18-22" passage:

- the Antichrist as in Revelations (....is coming....as in v.18)
- minor antichrists (say, a belief system) who deny Jesus as defined by John in v.22 in line with 1 John 4:3

What makes you think that the beast in the Revelation (chapter 13 and following) is "the Antichrist"? The book itself never says that, and there's no indication that in the first century this was the teaching. "Antichrist" is simply one who opposes Christ — or Christians. What makes you think that it refers to a single individual at all? This may have been the teaching in the second Century, but what gives you the impression that it was taught in the first?

Let me clarify as an edit. I mean that the name "Antichrist" was not used of the one who is said to come at the end. Paul used the name "man of lawlessness" (ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας) and "son of perdition" (ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας, a name also applied to Judas Iscariot).

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4
μή τις ὑμᾶς ἐξαπατήσῃ κατὰ μηδένα τρόπον· ὅτι ἐὰν μὴ ἔλθῃ ἡ ἀποστασία πρῶτον καὶ ἀποκαλυφθῇ ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας, ὁ ἀντικείμενος καὶ ὑπεραιρόμενος ἐπὶ πάντα λεγόμενον θεὸν ἢ σέβασμα, ὥστε αὐτὸν εἰς τὸν ναὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καθίσαι, ἀποδεικνύντα ἑαυτὸν ὅτι ἔστιν θεός.

Whereas it was taught that there would be a major bad guy, this major bad guy was never called ὁ ἀντιχριστός. I don't think John was intending that at all. When he said, "You have heard that ὁ ἀντιχριστός is coming," I think he was still referring to that spirit of anti-Christianity that would lead to a large-scale walking away from the faith (ἀποστασία) and opposition to the teachings of the apostles.

That's my opinion, anyway.