Beginning of a video, a Catholic and a Protestant - About Antichrist and End Times

Why just the beginning, that I comment on? I'll give the Catholic the benefit of the doubt to be defending the Eucharist and other things adequately, even before hearing Glen Gauer.

Did the Holy Spirit reveal the anti-christ to a catholic priest?
The Glen Gauer Podcast, 23 March 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rg9cR1ErXd4

5:02 stop this "working behind the scenes" nonsense!
Please!

Fr. Blount said the Antichrist is a world leader - if he's right, this means we have seen him on TV.

The idea "the Antichrist is working behind the scenes" is a perfect excuse for keeping someone in media obscurity, and, for a writer also poverty. You know, the fear "if we gave him or him or him a platform" (but I think that attitude rains down on me a lot), "'we would help the Antichrist seduce people, we would hasten his victory" (and therefore it becomes vital to keep this person who's obscure, obscure).

The honest thing to do if one believed Antichrist were still somewhere behind the scenes would be to treat it like Antichrist hasn't arrived, we have no idea who it is, we can't pinpoint anyone even secretly. But some are not honest. I had a few years ago to interact under a German video with someone who considered me a probable candidate for Armilus or Antichrist. He arguably was Protestant with lots of Jewish learning in the background.

Ergo, he asks me to repent. Some people think they could just possibly save the Antichrist from actually becoming the Antichrist (i e irredeemably the enemy of Christ's people) by second-guessing me as a probable candidate, and so, they have to keep me away from the bigger public. And lots of that for Protestant reasons, which wouldn't normally be persuasive with a Catholic. Like my saying Swedish social democracy is more evil than the early years of Mussolini or all of Franco, like my saying Jesus founded one Church and it's not a Protestant denomination, like my saying yes, the Catholics who were Inquisitors and for instance burned Tyndale were probably in a state of grace, as this was not a miscarriage of justice, or like saying Jews aren't formally the people of God, Catholics are. B U T then we have lots of "Catholics" doing ecumenism with these Protestants and helping them out for that reason, and other ones who have their own reasons (like Jacques Arnould's heavy support for Theistic Evolution and as heavy disdain for Creation science).

There are lots of things that do look like many aspects of the Illuminati conspiracy in our world today, but "someone else behind the scenes" is not the most plausible part of it.

The Antichrist is not hidden in the depth of Illuminati conspirators, like Christ was hidden in God before March 25 1 BC. Those guys like to admire well known and powerful guys. Yes, they may like discretion, and overall as a person Klaus Schwab is more discrete as in less visible than Vladimir Putin, but given Vladimir Putin has overall more opportunities to act, he also has more opportunities to act in discrete ways. And one of the ways in which such guys are discrete is doing things that will be seen through by only a few and counting on the few being ridiculed. Antichrist being more secret than Klaus Schwab doesn't remotely make sense. He's not Moriarty or Doctor Doom.

5:16 And again, stop the "he knows the answers" nonsense too!

Being a polyhistor is not a good qualification for being the Antichrist. It gives you an admiration from a few geeks, not of the masses.

Keeping someone back because he is knowledgeable, has unexpected answers and could sway some masses, well, that simply means neutralising the opposition we could have against the Antichrist.

The actual words are not admiration for someone's knowledge or solutions, it's admiration for someone's power:

And they adored the dragon, which gave power to the beast: and they adored the beast, saying: Who is like to the beast? and who shall be able to fight with him?

Not a word of admiration of the type a geek would be extending to a more knowledgeable geek.

Case in point: Per Albin Hansson of Sweden was not the politician with the best solutions, he was the one who got elected by flattering false hopes, which are since then dashed (as were some of his threats, like the threat of forced sterilisation).

5:25 I actually saw the video, and I do remember. Yes, he said it was precisely a world leader.

6:41 The late Rob Skiba II went through seven post-Flood Antichrists.

1) Nimrod
2) Pharao of the Exodus
3? King of Tyre?
4?) Sennacherib
5) Antiochus Epiphanes
6) Nero
7) Hitler

Mentioning the Antichrist will be the eighth, one of the seven - as in a repeat of one of the seven.

I tend to disagree with his choices for 6 and 7, preferring Domitian and Lenin over Nero and Hitler.

He thinks or thought that Antichrist would be Nimrod (aka Osiris and Gilgamesh) resuscitated from suspended animation. I would tend to be more apprehensive of a Lenin bis ... what was his first name again? Vladimir? Muscovy has a Vladimir II right now ... (all the Vladimirs of Kievan Rus were ruling from elsewhere than Moscow - no grand duke of Moscow and no Czar was named Vladimir).

7:11 Stop that too.

There are two orthodox or at least moderately so scenarios for "end times"

a) the millennium starts with a spiritual resurrection of believers in AD 33, and "at the end of the thousand years" = when the chapters prior to 20 start taking place, meaning the "Church Age" = the Millennium. A saint who was dead to the body in 1033 would be ruling with Christ for close to exactly 1000 years, and that would be the medium length of rule extending between 2000 and zero years, for St. Stephen and for someone martyred just before Christ returns, and when He does, the resurrection of the flesh will happen;
b) the millennium is upcoming after Christ returns, and the resurrection of the flesh happens in two stages, before and after.

The idea that there will be some kind of "new era" parallel to the New Covenant in importance before Christ comes back, on the clouds, in glory, is a horrible error.

I will not vouch for scenario b being fully orthodox, but neither say it is totally condemned.