COGWriter Makes Correct Assessment on “Man of Sin”

Woodcut from Luther’s translation for Revelation 17

Dr Bob Thiel, founder of the fairly new Continuing Church of God, opens “CCOG, RCG, UCG, LCG, and PCG on the ‘Man of Sin,’ which is biblically correct?” with:

Because of the new insistence of one Church of God (COG) group on the identity of the ‘man of sin’ in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 earlier this Spring, we in theContinuing Church of God put together a YouTube video on it, which you can view titled Who is the Man of Sin?

He goes on to quote ministers within RCG, UCG and LCG that give a confusing mish-mash of how the false prophet will cause the world to worship the first Beast, but he will set up himself as God so he will be worshipped.

It is just not logical.  The Man of Sin will exalt “himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped”!  He cannot do this and cause others to worship the first Beast at the same time!  We cannot call ourselves teachers of truth if we are reinterpreting clear Scripture!

Perhaps most disturbing was this quote allegedly from Roderick C Meredith of LCG (underlining mine):

For those of you who understand prophecy, it becomes obvious that this great “man of sin,” or “man of lawlessness,” ties in directly with the “second beast” of Revelation 13.

As obvious as the false prophet would be working against himself by setting himself up higher than the being he is causing others to worship?  As obvious as the “I am right about every little detail” sort of arrogance that turns others away from the truth about the bigger picture to begin with?

Truth requires honesty.  Honesty requires humility.  Humility requires acknowledging our weaknesses, which includes occasionally being wrong.

Because, in the end, only God is never wrong.

10 thoughts on “COGWriter Makes Correct Assessment on “Man of Sin”

  • John from Australia

    The next step for cogwriter is to realize that the first beast/the man of sin is the Antichrist; if he does so then he will be where Ron Dart was over thirty years ago, if my date for Ron’s audiotapes on the Antichrist (1981) is correct.

    The beast-person is “an opponent of Christ; that which sets itself in the place of Christ, which appears as Christ in opposition to Christ…” (E. W. Bullinger, A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament, p.56).

    It appears that the stumbling block for those who support the false prophet as the man of sin is:

    Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

    If the head that is “wounded to death” is identified as the Roman Empire so that the Roman empire is the first beast (the system) then it could lead to the false prophet (a person) being identified as the Antichrist.

    Rev 17:11 The beast who once was, and now is not, is an eighth king. He belongs to the seven and is going to his destruction.

    But the “wound to death” is the killing of the representative leader of the seventh head – who when he comes back to life – is then the ‘eight’ head – who then completes the second half of his ‘week’; and when that is completed then Christ returns to complete His second half of his ‘week’.

    “In John’s description of the beast, there are numerous parallels with Jesus that should alert the reader to the fact that John is seeking to establish…a theological characterization…: Both wielded swords; both had followers on whose foreheads were inscribed their names (13:16-14:1); both had horns (5:6; 13:1); both were slain, the same Greek word being used to describe their deaths (sphagizo, vv.3,8); both had arisen to new life and authority; and both were given (by different authorities) power over every nation, tribe, people, and tongue as well as over kings of the earth (1:5; 7:9; with 13:7; 17:12). The beast described here is the great theological counterpart to all that Christ represents…” (Alan F. Johnson, Revelation, EBC, Vol.12, p.527).

    Dt 18:18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him.

    While Moses was the prophet that mediated the Old Covenant – the type for The Prophet that mediates the New Covenant; he was also a ‘god’:

    Ex 7:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

    “…Biblical usage confirms the concept of the prophet as an announcer: for example, when God sent Moses to Egypt He explained, “See, I have made thee as God to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet: thou shall speak all that I command thee, and Aaron thy brother shall speak unto Pharaoh” (Ex 7:1-2). To this, then, corresponds the basic meaning of the Greek word profetes, one who speaks forth, in behalf of another; in classic culture, one who interprets the will of some deity” (J. Barton Payne, Encyclopaedia of Biblical Prophecy, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1996), pp.4-5).

    Ex 4:16a And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people… (AV).
    Ex 4:16b and it will be as if he were your mouth and as if you were God to him. (NIV).

    Moses and Aaron provide a positive example of a relationship between a god and a prophet (Exodus 4:16 & 7:1; cp. Acts 14:12), while the beast and his spokesman provide a negative one.

    A modern example of the negative relation would be Adolph Hitler and Joseph Goebals. Joseph Goebals on assuming the position of Minister of Propaganda “began to create the Fuhrer myth around the person of Hitler and to institute the ritual of party celebrations and demonstrations that played a decisive role in converting the masses to Nazism” (Joseph Goebals, Britannica, CD-99 Multimedia Edition ©1994-99, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc).

    Mt 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs [pseudochristos], and false prophets [ pseudoprophetes], and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

    Whereas Joseph Goebals was a secular prophet the coming false prophet will be a religious one in the sense that he sets up the religious system, that replaces the Catholic Church, and worships the Antichrist as god.

    Heb 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.
    Heb 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:

    Jn 19:19 And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.
    Rev 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings.
    Rev 19:19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him [Christ]…

    “There are at least two predominant ideas in the use of this term antichristos. The first is of a rival to Christ, who claims to possess all the power and ability of Christ. The second is of opposition to Christ, deliberately standing over against Jesus and his righteousness and truth. The antichrist is thus a usurper, who, under false pretences, assumes a position to which he has no right, and who resolutely opposes the rightful owner of that position, Christ…” (David Jackman, The Message of John’s Letters, BST. p.69).

    • John D Carmack
      John D Carmack Post author

      John from Australia wrote: “The next step for cogwriter is to realize that the first beast/the man of sin is the Antichrist;”

      Unless I’m misunderstanding something, he already does.

      For example, he recently wrote: “There are over 800 million Hindus. And most of them in India. Does the Bible teach that they will likely support the Beast and False Prophet/Antichrist? What do some Hindu writings suggest?”

      The COG has traditionally shied away from the term “antichrist” because it is not just a single individual.

      1 John 2:18 “Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.”

  • John from Australia

    “the Beast and False Prophet/Antichrist”

    I think your quote actually argues against your position where the False Prophet and Antichrist are connected by the forward slash; from cogwrtier:

    “If the Antichrists helps make many prosper, is Pope Francis setting this up?” (June 14, 2013):

    “Notice one passage that the Antichrist is associated with:

    “16 He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. (Revelation 13:16-17)

    “The “He” above is the two-horned beast (Revelation 13:11), also known as the False Prophet (Revelation 16:13), and Antichrist (1 John 4:1-3).

    “The Antichrist will promote the Beast and the Beast’s Babylonian system…”

    You highlight “many antichrists” but you could have highlighted “antichrist”.

    At least, it would appear that John’s audience had heard that the antichrist was coming

    “… this is the first occasion in the New Testament – or indeed in the Greek Bible – where this term exists. John is the only biblical writer who uses it;… It must not be inferred that his readers had heard something unknown to readers of the earlier new Testament letters or to those who listened to our Lord’s teaching; the word “Antichrist’ may be peculiar to John’s letters in biblical literature, but the idea expressed by the word is not” (F. F. Bruce, The Epistles of John p.66).

    “The word antichrist is used in the NT only in the Johannine letters (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7), although the idea appears in Paul description of the “man of lawlessness,” whose revelation is expected to coincide with “the day of the Lord” (2 Thess 2:1-12). The use of antichrist without a definite article here suggests that, by this time, the term was in current use as a proper name…

    “At no point outside the letters of John, however, in either the OT or the NT, is the leading opponent of God’s messianic purposes identified as the “antichrist”; and indeed, the writer himself may have coined the actual term…” ( Stephen S. Smalley, 1,2,3 John, WBC, p.98).

    If this is the case:

    The COG has traditionally shied away from the term “antichrist” because it is not just a single individual.

    This is fraught with danger; how many then in the COG understand that the Antichrist gets assassinated half way through his week? Could some who attend the COG then be deceived by the resurrected beast?

    • John D Carmack
      John D Carmack Post author

      John from Australia wrote: “This is fraught with danger”

      That’s immaterial, as it does not make it incorrect. It is a fact that John used the plural more than once. Am I supposed to believe you or the Bible?

      The way I read COGWriter’s statement, assuming the context that there are many antichrists, is that either one could be labeled an “antichrist”. If that is not what he meant, then he is not just incorrect but inconsistent. He would be defeating his own argument.

  • John from Australia

    There were two interesting quotes to this topic:

    “For those of you who understand prophecy, it becomes obvious that this great “man of sin,” or “man of lawlessness,” ties in directly with the “second beast” of Revelation 13”;


    “Am I supposed to believe you or the Bible?”

    • John D Carmack
      John D Carmack Post author

      Those quotes are not only out of context, but you make it seem like they are both mine. If you have a logical point to make, please make it. However, if you are going to just carelessly throw around quotes and make it seem like someone else said them, then perhaps you need to reconsider your motives.

      For the record, the first quote is from Roderick C Meredith, which is sort of the point after all. LCG has recently taken a leap further into illogic on a couple of issues, which is why Thiel left them.

      So, should I believe RCM or the Bible?

  • John from Australia

    Sorry John if in my last post that the juxtaposition of the two quotes seemed like that they were both yours – it was never intended to have that effect. I would like to say more but my inability to communicate effectively may cause an unintended offence.

    • John D Carmack
      John D Carmack Post author

      Sorry I came off that harsh. I guess I need to be less sensitive about being misquoted. I freely admit, though, I’m not sure how we went from a discussion of what is commonly referred to as “the Antichrist” to RCM’s quote. He carefully chooses to not use that term, which is what I meant by the COG traditionally avoids that term. I assume, though, that RCM would consider it False Prophet = Man of Sin/Perdition = “The Antichrist”, which would still be wrong regardless of what you label it.

      The final antichrist figure desires worship, so does the first Beast. The False Prophet causes the world to worship the first Beast, so if there is any final “The Antichrist”, it would be the first Beast power.

      Again, if Thiel is saying, which I am not reading that way, that the False Prophet is the final “The Antichrist” figure but not the Man of Sin/Perdition, then his entire argument falls apart. That really is trying to have it both ways.

      Having said that, both the Beast and the False Prophets would be considered “antichrists” (small ‘a’), and that would be more consistent with John’s writings.

      18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.” ~ 1Jn 2:18

      John identifies “many antichrists” even in his day. He further defines what he means by antichrist:

      22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.”

      Denial can come in many forms, but is it really an antichrist that totally rejects even the name of Christ? Or, is it one who appropriates the name of Christ and pastes it upon idolatrous practices? I would argue the latter.

      5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.” ~ Mt 24:5

      Christ isn’t saying that people would necessarily stand up declaring, “I am Christ.” No, He is talking about people who will point to Him and say, “He is Christ,” but they will teach something completely different.

      22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

      23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” ~ Mt 7:22-23

      Those too are a form of antichrist. “Anti” simply means against or opposed to. Not everyone is necessarily against or opposed to Christ, at least actively (passively, yes the entire world is). However, since these people did all those things “in thy name”, they should have known better!

  • John from Australia

    Hi, John

    I am not that concern by being somewhat harshly spoken to but I am concerned that I do not reply in kind (cp. Proverbs 15:1).


    I noticed on Bob Thiel’s website his introduction to his latest sermon. In it he asks this question:

    Could the Beast be a ‘false christ’?

    Intrigue I followed the link, after listening for around five minutes I jumped to the end and found two comments, that appear to be a qualified Yes.

    One of these comments about the great monarch/beast:

    “in a sense he is going to be a false Christ”.

    These two comments may be heard from 1 hour and five minutes into the sermon.

    From reading his post, over a number of years, I see this as a concession – leading to full recognition?

    “… the preposition anti is often employed to designate a substitute. This is, in fact, a very common use of it in the classic writers. For instance, anti-basileus, he who is the locum tenens of a king, or as we now would say viceroy: anti having in this case the force of the English term vice. He who filled the place of consul was antihupatos, pro-counsul. He who took the place of an absent guest at a feast was styled antideipnos. The preposition is used in this sense of the great Substitute Himself. Christ is said to have given Himself as an antilutron, a ransom in the stead of all. Classic usage does not require us to give only one sense to this word, and restrict it to one who seeks openly, and by force, to seat himself in the place of another, and by violent usurpation bring that other’s authority to an end” (J. A. Wylie, “The Papacy Is the Antichrist A DEMONSTRATION,” (1888),, p.8).

    While I disagree with his title he has this cogent comment:

    “The reader sees that the term is a composite one, being made up of two words anti and Christ. The name is one of new formation; being compounded, it would seem, for this very enemy, and by its etymology expressing more exactly and perfectly his character than any older word could” (ibid.,).

    The last sentence is why I prefer to use the word Antichrist than beast.

    Rev 13:3a And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded [Greek: sphagizo] to death; and his deadly wound was healed…

    Rev 13:8b … the Lamb slain [Greek: sphagizo] from the foundation of the world.

    I would also say that, using your terminology, the Papacy is “a form of antichrist”.

    “The Apostle also says of the Antichrist, that he denies both Father and Son, but here again the word “deny” does not necessarily mean direct repudiation of all belief in the Father and Christ. The false teachers who, as professing believers in Christ, perverted the truth, and turned the grace of God, or the Gospel, into lasciviousness, or freedom from restraint in sin, are also said to deny the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ (Jude 4), because of their heresies, they repudiated the whole teaching of the Word of God… So also professing Christian who fail to take their cross and follow Christ are equally implied to deny Him (2 Tim, ii. 11, 12)” (Colonel Garner, Great Pyramid: Its Builder & its Prophecy (1905), (Whitehish: Kessinger Publishers, 2002, p.143).

  • John from Australia


    Unfortunately commentary on world events, etc., by the COG’s too often relies on conventional wisdom, not wanting to pick too much on him, but Bob Thiel comes to mind.

    Therefore I would like to recommend a secular blog for those who are not aware of it.

    With a name like [Martin] Armstrong you would have to give it a try

    We may not agree with all he says, and needs a proof reader, but I think he helps to put a helpful perspective on the present and the future.

    Below is the latest post, without the pictures, which may prove or disprove my support for his blog.

    * June 22, Rising Tide of Civil Unrest:

    Around the globe people are rising up as Socialism is collapsing. All the promises of a better life have allowed governments to grow like mold in a closed bag of bread. The youth have no future for as government continue to hunt down any money as the G8 leaders pledged to hunt down anyone who finds a dime in a parking lot at fails to declare it. Leaders of the G8 nations have signed an agreement to crack down on the “scourge” of tax evasion at the end of a two-day summit in Northern Ireland…

    The Marxist hunt for taxes has led to the collapse in liquidity that is still off by 50% from 2007 levels. This is alarming! Trading volumes are down substantially and that means capital is not investing. Americans have been thrown out of Europe. HSBC will not accept any accounts from an American outside the USA including in Asia. All of this to hunt down taxes. Our political governments are infested with lawyers who know how to write and prosecute laws, but are braindead when it comes to creating an economy. They have ZERO skills in the creation department This is the same disease that kills corporations. It is the entrepreneur who creates the entity from his vision (Henry Ford, Steve Jobs), but then the company is taken over by the accounts and lawyers who dominate the board. People like Steve Jobs are thrown out for they can only create, not manage. Then bureaucratic corporations, like government, are incapable of creation and this causes them to take over start-ups paying a fortune to kids who can create because the board of directors lack those skills. Eventually, the corporation dies void of any creative skills. Government follows the same exact path to extinction. In ancient history it was called becoming Byzantine. Over-regulation to the point the cost of government was so oppressive the economy simply died. The same pattern emerged in Venice as the state wanted to own everything. When Florence because a corrupt bureaucracy, the same fate awaited it in the dawn. Genoa rotated the office of the Doge on an annual basis. That prevented an infestation of bureaucrats and allowed Genoa to outlast both Venice and Florence. Hence – term limits are ESSENTIAL!

    These Marxist governments that mascaraed as Democracies cannot see that they are killing the future. They are merely the same corrupt Republics that compelled Julius Caesar to cross the Rubicon. The governments infested with lawyer-bureaucrats are writing laws contrary to human nature and then prosecute anyone who dares to try to defend themselves. Government then fights the shadows in their mind fearing their loss of power like a cornered rat.

    This is part of the process why I have been warning it ain’t HYPERINFLATION – it is massive DEFLATION that must be concerned about as these government destroy the very economic engine that create a coherent society. The corruption has risen to a level of intolerance beyond belief and this is just getting started as we head into 2014. The G8 hunt for taxes is causing the collapse in the world economy. They cannot see what they are doing because they only think about retaining power – never reform.

    The degree of civil unrest is so widespread it is only a question of time before it hits the USA. The amount of people on the streets in Brazil one would think in a Democratic government of the people, leaders should pay attention. NEVER! Instead, the government has declared outright war against its own people. The key as to when will this wave of civil unrest hit the USA is tied to the economic downturn in 2015.75. People do not rise up until they have no choice. We will see government launch an all out war against the people and blood will flow in the streets precisely as we see in Brazil. This is what Homeland Security is all about – protecting American from Americans – buying 1,6 billion hollow point bullets that are illegal in war and buying tanks for DOMESTIC use. They do not need tanks for terrorists. There just aren’t that many who would need to be confronted on the streets.

    Brazil was once one of the so called economic wonders that many touted would compel the US dollar to collapse. ALL of these claims about the dollar’s demise are completely ignorant of how these things unfold. The death of civilization always begins from the periphery and moves to the core or heart and then the body dies. This is NOT my OPINION – its FACT based upon studying each event WITHOUT predetermine expectations. The object is to discover how these things happen, not convince anyone that one opinion is better than another. Just the facts! We will be publishing this study on the rise and fall of Empires, Nations, and City-States so there can be no question about opinion – only facts are acceptable – nothing else. What we see in Brazil, is human nature on display and that is NO DIFFERENT than what we will see in the USA.

    If you think this cannot happen in America, the land of the free and home of the brave, I suppose you also believe in Santa Claus, Eastern Bunny, and Tooth Fairy as well. If so, go back to your bubble and pretend everything if nice there. Don’t worry – Be Happy. This is what civil unrest needs. People who ignore the trend and wait until it is too late. Then they are shocked at the events.

    Remember what Martin Niemoller (1892-1984) had to say about the German Nazi. Nobody stands up until it is too late, for then there is no one left to talk to.

    The United States called out tanks and Calvary on those who fought in World War I when the Bonus Army marched on Washington DC in 1932. It was this outrageous behavior of an “elected” government against the veterans that when World War II came, government was forced to pass the GI Bill because who in their right mind would fight for a country and then government sends in fresh troops against its own veterans when they asked for their pay that had been promised? Separating government from power or a penny is like an average man trying to part the Red Sea.

    This is the whole purpose behind creating killer robots that scientists are now protesting against. They fear that troops will not fire upon citizens in a revolution – machines will.

    Martin Armstrong mentions 2015.17 which is a turning point in his Economic Confidence Model (ECM).

    This ties in with my thinking in an article entitle “The Greatest Bubble – And the Next Great Depression” – – my Anglo-American Hegemonic Cycle – – is a poor cousin to his ECM.

Comments are closed.