reply to post by shaneOmac
actually shane. reading the current king james version of the bible would not be credible to determine that the Antichrist is made up.
it was added to the bible as a way to control the masses. each generation thinks someon is the Antichrist, and they are always wrong. why? because the
council of nicea
People of every generation think someone is the antichrist... here are some examples.. all from wikipedia
Jerry Falwell addressed a pastors' conference in January 1999, stating in a sermon on the Second Coming that the Antichrist was probably alive on
earth, and certainly a Jewish male. He subsequently clarified that "[t]his is simply historic and prophetic Orthodox Christian doctrine" and had
no anti-Semitic roots.
Some of the Spiritual Franciscans considered the Emperor Frederick II a positive Antichrist who would clean the Church from riches and clergy.
Polycarp warned the Philippians that everyone that preached false doctrine was an antichrist. 
Irenaeus speculated that it was “very probable” the Antichrist might be called Lateinos, which is Greek for “Latin Man”. 
John Chrysostom warned against speculations and old wive's tales about the Antichrist, saying, “Let us not therefore enquire into these things”.
He preached that by knowing Paul's description of the Antichrist in 2 Thessalonians Christians would avoid deception.
Augustine of Hippo wrote “it is uncertain in what temple [the Antichrist] shall sit, whether in that ruin of the temple which was built by Solomon,
or in the Church.”
Hippolytus of Rome held that the Antichrist would come from the tribe of Dan and would rebuild the Jewish temple in order to reign from it. He
identified the Antichrist with the Beast out of the Earth from the book of Revelation.
By the beast, then, coming up out of the earth, he means the kingdom of Antichrist; and by the two horns he means him and the false prophet after
him. And in speaking of “the horns being like a lamb,” he means that he will make himself like the Son of God, and set himself forward as king.
And the terms, “he spake like a dragon,” mean that he is a deceiver, and not truthful.
Pope Gregory I wrote in A.D. 597, “I say with confidence that whoever calls or desires to call himself ‘universal priest’ in self-exaltation of
himself is a precursor of the Antichrist.”
Arnulf of Rheims wrote in A.D. 991, "What do you estimate this to be, reverend fathers? When you see him sitting on a lofty throne glittering in
purple and gold, what do you estimate this to be, I say? Without a doubt, if he lacks love, and is only swelled up and lifted up, must he not be the
Antichrist, 'sitting in the temple of God, and also showing himself as God'?"
an Paisley, MEP and the leader of the Free Presbyterian Church, loudly denounced then-Pope John Paul II as the Antichrist in 1988 while the pontiff
was giving a speech at a sitting of the European Parliament in Strasbourg.
The German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche called himself the Antichrist, going so far as to write a book called The Antichrist. In his famous first
book, The Birth of Tragedy, he wrote: "As a philologist and man of words, I baptized it, taking some liberties (for who knew the correct name for the
Antichrist?), after the name of a Greek god: I called it the Dionysian."