Who Else (Non-KJVO) Does Not Believe There Will Be An Antichrist?


Well-known member
They [SDAs] have their own re-written Bible called The Clear Word Bible.
Not surprisingly, you have misrepresented the issue because you don't have all the facts.

From The Seventh-day Adventist Church and The Clear Word by Jud Lake, Th.D., D.Min. --

This Bible should in no way be considered an official Seventh-day Adventist Bible, nor did Dr. Blanco [the sole author] intend for it to be considered as such.
In an interview with author Jack Blanco shortly after The Clear Word Bible was released, he was asked, “Do we now have an Adventist Bible?” He responded in the following way.

No! That certainly wasn’t the intention. And if anybody said this is an Adventist Bible, I would feel most hurt (Bruce Manners, “Do We Now Have an Adventist Bible?” Record, October 15, 1994).​

Lake lists 8 points proving The Clear Word is NOT an official SDA Bible. It is a devotional paraphrase, written by one man. Did you even bother reading the preface before making your ridiculous claims?

  1. The production and promotion of The Clear Word belongs to the Review and Herald Publishing Association, not the world Seventh-day Adventist Church.
  2. Seventh-day Adventist Church leaders have been up front from the beginning regarding the status of The Clear Word in the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
  3. The author’s Preface states clearly that The Clear Word is not a study Bible.
  4. The author’s Preface also clearly states that The Clear Word is for private devotional purposes only.
  5. The Clear Word was the enterprise of one man rather than a committee of Adventist translators.
  6. The Clear Word is not cited in official SDA Publications.
  7. The Clear Word is not recommended for use in Seventh-day Adventist pulpits or Sabbath School classes.
  8. The Clear Word is not used in Seventh-day Adventist college and university Bible classes.

We have seen that multiple lines of evidence support the fact that The Clear Word has no official (or unofficial) endorsement from the SDA church as an Adventist translation of the Bible. It is one man’s interpretation and should not be treated in any sense as a Bible. While the advertising campaign has been a problematic issue, those who focus on this to the exclusion of the other seven facts are ignoring the big picture.


Well-known member
No, that is Biblical doctrine and has been and is still held by Christians. It is your person decision to teach otherwise.
The words of the bible are clear: man of sin at the end of the age, and antichrist (the refusal to confess Christ) at the beginning. It is your issue to confound the two. I fear you are playing the hypocrite in purporting to champion the KJV but then departing from what it actually says.

And there is a substantial distinction, because it seem to me that the "man of sin" will confess Christ, just in order to gain entrance to the temple of God.

The verse that I shared gave you the correction, and you could grasp that even more by prayerfully reading the full context, but you have opted to ignore and reject it. Too bad.
I have not rejected it. That is your invention and imagination. I have rejected your attempt to confound the man of sin and the spirit of antichrist.

We might can discuss the topic of the Antichrist, much more in-depth, in the Theological section. Feel free to go start a thread there if you like and post the link here. :)
I see little point in any discussion at this point, because I don't think I will benefit from it. I've already studied these verses closely, in relation to the Old Testament scholarship. In fact there is a very good article on it that you might want to read, if you're interested in theology:
OF 2 THESS 2:6-7
Roger D. Aus
JBL 96/4 (1977) 537-53


Well-known member
I do know all there is to know about Seventh Day Adventists. That fact is not "self delusion".

More ego and self delusion. I don't say that with any malice. I say it because you need to hear it. The idea you know everything there is to know about SDAs is demonstrably false. You didn't know their history enough to know they were KJVOist in their ranks. This contradicts your claim.... Yet, you still insist you do. That is self delusion. It sad to see such a thing in anyone. My brother in Adam, I ask you be reasonable with the information before you.

Thank you for answering the question. I really do appreciate that. Christians can know the fullness of truth, provided that they don't quench The Holy Ghost and implicitly trust, by FAITH, what is written in The King James Bible 1611 with fervent prayers to the Lord for the gifts of understanding, knowledge, wisdom, and discernment, that only come from Him.

Yeah.... Yeah.... Yeah.... I know. If you I were to be like "YOU" then I would understand. Do you not realize that you just "patted yourself on the back"?

Speak for yourself. My mind is not beguiled; I completely believe and trust God and what is written in The King James Bible.

Yeah... More of that.... "BE LIKE ME".... stuff. Paul appealed to information that he preached to them while he was THERE. He wasn't repeating himself in the letter. That is WHY HE APPEALED to his teaching while he was WITH THEM.

Have you forgotten what is written in 1Timothy? Do you know where the verse is where Apostle Paul wrote, by inspiration of The Holy Ghost, that this is a faithful saying that Jesus Christ came to save sinners, wherein Apostle Paul identified himself as being the Chief of sinners? God saves sinners and uses them! He is the One that calls whosoever He will to be a Pastor, Deacon, Elder, Teacher, and so forth.

It is evident that all men struggle with sinfulness after salvation. You are no different. They are no different. However, you don't get to take the credentials that Paul personally gave to others and claim them for yourself. There is no different today in how the average IFB handle recognizing such position than those who teach apostolic session. You point to verse that do not explicit reference yourselves and pretend they speak of you. Which is ridiculous. You CHOOSE your leaders. God sits on the sidelines watching your games.

There is a lot of slander, out there, against King James. I don't believe any of those lies.

He was drunk. He believed he was the head of the Church of God over which he physically ruled as King of England. Have you not heard of the "Church of England"?

That's more hocus pocus nonsense.

No just facts. You might want to learn a little more about how various denomination treat the Eucharist.

No they did not, because they USED The King James Bible. Aside from that, the very vast majority of REWRITTEN Bibles didn't come into existence until after that event.

It is silly to claim that the KJV is being abandoned when it "fits your narrative", and then abandon that claim when it doesn't.

Many public institutions are abandoning ANY/ALL version of the Scriptures. They're not preaching while they're having kids at drag shows.


Well-known member
You have already made your position known as to where you stand concerning the Great Whore and her harlots.
No, actually I haven’t….mainly because this isn’t the forum in which to discuss it.

You are bearing false witness.

You’ve taken 3 words that I used only in passing while responding to one of your posts in another thread (not understanding my meaning at all), and with those 3 words you’ve lumped me into the SDAs, JWs, RCC and all manner of what you deem to be “devil worshipping” heretics (a word you have yet to define, and we all know why),……all for the sin of not wanting to follow you into the weeds in this forum.

You don’t get to decree what I believe just because I won’t answer your off-topic questions.

You know nothing of my eschatological views, because I haven’t told you what they are.
Last edited:


Well-known member
In fact, the Seventh Day Adventists are not KJVO
A few more KJVO books written by SDAs --

Bible Versions: Does It Matter Which One? (2016), by Ronald Fleck

In this book, I’ll share some of the strong points from Dr. Benjamin George Wilkinson’s book, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated. I will also try to outline some of the main points of Battle of the Bibles (1993), by H. H. Meyers. These are excellent books, some of my favorites in my personal library. Finally, we’ll look at the reasons why so many Seventh-day Adventist Christians and other Christians see great danger in the modern Bible versions. (pg. 3, Kindle edition)
Battle of the Bibles (1993), by H. H. Meyers

The purpose of this book is to simply demonstrate that, fundamentally and historically, there are only two differing Bibles and that their New Testaments issue from two basic streams of manuscripts. One, reflecting God's will for man, has been guarded and handed down to us by the Apostolic Churches; the other, has been polluted by a super power which has used its corrupt Bibles in a relentless effort to achieve global domination through total spiritual and political control. (pg. 2)
Our Authorised Bible has withstood the attacks of scoffers, sceptics and self- styled scientists. It has been challenged by numerous "newer and better" translations, yet it has remained the standard to which succeeding translators aspire and by which all are judged. (pg. 9)
Last edited:


Well-known member
By the way, they are not KJVO( - They have their own re-written Bible called The Clear Word Bible.

From the Preface of The Clear Word:

As has been stated in previous editions, The Clear Word is not a translation, but a devotional paraphrase of Scripture expanded for clarity. It is intended to build faith and nurture spiritual growth. It should not be considered a study Bible. Excellent translations of the Scriptures are available for such purposes. This paraphrase provides my personal insights into the gracious and long-suffering character of God, the loving ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ and the struggles of the church from its inception to the last days.
This paraphrase began as my own devotional journey in seeking a deeper relationship with the One who loved me and gave His life for me. It was simply an extension of what I had been expressing over the years in pastoring, teaching, and in helping people better understand the Word of God by making it more relevant to their lives. (Jack Blanco, sole author of TCW, pg. 13, Kindle edition)
Last edited:


Well-known member
Why do you hold to the common false prophet doctrine that there will be no Antichrist? The denial of the Biblical Antichrist is heresy and teaching such a thing, as the false prophet groups is propagating a teaching a doctrine of devils......
There are many Cult False Prophet Groups that teach against The King James Bible and that there will be no Antichrist, such as the Seventh Day Adventists

Having sufficiently proven that the author of the OP hasn't a clue what he's talking about regarding SDAs and KJVOism, as well as the SDAs and their so-called "re-written Bible," I could just as easily show how far from the truth he is regarding his ridiculous claims that the SDAs "don't believe in the antichrist."

But I won't. Not in this forum. Just know that the SDAs DO believe in the antichrist (and again, I am not SDA. But I am familiar with what they believe about eschatology).

For those interested, see the works of Uriah Smith, Alonzo Jones, Leroy Edwin Froom, and others. To claim SDAs don't believe in the antichrist is to admit to having buried your head in the sand.

The take away here is that the author of the OP seems to take great pleasure in making false claims against SDAs, JWs and other groups, but can't back up any of those claims with facts.