It seems like Brian Simmons, author of The Passion Translation, does whatever he wants to the meaning of the Scriptures, whenever he wants, and however he wants.
“There is no reference to the Antichrist in the book of Revelation.” (The Passion Translation footnotes, l. Rev 13:18)
Yet, according to the Book of Revelation:
5 There was given to him a mouth speaking arrogant words and blasphemies, and authority to act for forty-two months was given to him. 6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemies against God, to blaspheme His name and His tabernacle, that is, those who dwell in heaven.
7 It was also given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them, and authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain. (Revelation 13:5-8)
Brian Simmons– Well, it’s obvious that five times John uses the phrase antichrist. He never uses the definite article ho in Greek ho, the Greek definite article. The antichrist is not in the Bible. The never occurs with antichrist. It’s either a spirit, or the one who denies that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is antichrist.
So, we’re convinced, although there are other interpretations we make obvious room for, but I’m personally convinced that the antichrist is everything in us that is yet to be brought into submission, the subduing influence of Jesus, that opposes Christ. (16 minutes 30 seconds in video)
According to the footnotes in The Passion Translation (l. Rev 13:18):
There is no reference to the Antichrist in the book of Revelation. The beast is equated to the nature of humanity. The number 666 is the number of man; not an incarnation of the devil, but human nature. The number six is always equated with man, for man was created on the sixth day. The wild beast rising out of the ground (which man was made from) is the sin of man that wars against our souls and prevents the image of Christ from emerging in fullness within believers. The number 666 cannot be literal, for a literal number would need no wisdom to interpret. Both the mark of the beast and the mark on the foreheads of God’s faithful followers is a metaphor of the character of the beast revealed by thoughts (foreheads) and by actions (the hands).
Brian Simmons– So you’re not mad I took away your Antichrist? It’s really amazing, Americans, you take away their rapture and the Antichrist and they, like, whuh whuh buh buh buh buh buh. (34 minutes in video)
2 Thessalonians 2 states:
3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4)
Obviously, fake Bibles such as The Message and The Passion Translation are the devils’s strategy to keep people from the (real) Word of God.
Your word is a lamp to my feet And a light to my path. (Psalm 119:105, NASB)
The Bible guides us in matters of wisdom. Strength. Love. Forgiveness. Obedience. Salvation. Sanctification. Correction. Knowledge. And so much more. It’s been said many times that if you really want to hear from God, open the Word of God and start reading. If you really want to know God, open the Word of God and start reading. And, no, this is definitely not referring to The Passion Translation.
And, finally, thanks to Andrew Chapman, who offers this correction to Brian Simmon’s alleged translation concerning antichrist:
Simmons at 16.34ff in the Patricia King video: ‘five times John uses the phrase antichrist. He never uses the definite article, h o in Greek ho (ὁ), the Greek definite article, ‘the’ antichrist is not in the bible. ‘the’ never occurs with ‘antichrist’.’
EXCEPT IT DOES! in 1 John 4.3b – ‘.. καὶ τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου..’ ‘and this is the [spirit] of the antichrist – τοῦ is the article in the genitive case. ὁ is the article in the nominative case.
Also Greek doesn’t have an indefinite article (a, an in English), so it’s not actually correct for Simmons to say that John doesn’t use the ‘definite article’ ὁ. But that’s a relatively minor point.
If Simmons had actually translated 1 John from Greek he would know this. I wonder if he was looking for ὁ and couldn’t see it and didn’t know that the article declines? He doesn’t know basic Greek, and in reality is cobbling together a new English fake ‘translation’ from real translations, adding and changing things to suit his purposes and predilections.