A small thanks to the resident Theists..

[catfish]

You did not "read the passage" or else you would have understood the sentence structure.
"For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.

(Many) deceivers are the subject(s), not unbelievers.
These many deceivers are the ones (who) confess not... (still deceivers here, no magical leap to unbelievers)
This is a deceiver and an antichrist. (the deceivers who confesses not...)
See? Nowhere in your verse does it say unbelievers are the anti-christ.

Check mate, now slink away...
God this is too fucking easy.

Or, consider for a moment how sentences are actually structured: Deceivers are the subject, confessing not of Jesus is the action that- in this case- marks them as deceivers.

Rather: there are deceivers in the world. What is the quality of these deceivers that makes them so? Not confessing that Jesus has come.

The absolute best that you can say, fishy, is that the sentence applies equally to both of our positions. But since mine relies on just my claim being true, and yours relies on mine being false- and it isn't- then the checkmate is mine.

Or you could keep cherry picking. I imagine you're good at it by now. Just don't expect those of us with working brains to be fooled by your selective reading.

No, the absolute "best" I can say is "thank you for the ammusement", the rest will just be painful for your fragile ego.

"Confessing not.." doesn't mark them as deceivers, they were already deceivers as noted by the following verse which you posted. "This is a deceiver and an antichrist"...
See? Still a deceiver and an anti-christ (that's the proper understanding of the word "and", just so you know).

---

What did you expect? I asked earlier if you claimed to know the context to which you answered "no".
I showed you your response to my direct question about whether or not you'd read the entire chapter. You claimed to have and that nothing in the context blah blah blah.

I wanted to know if your denial of knowing the context and your incorrect/incomplete information about it was an honest mistake, stupidity or a lie.
Your response makes me think stupidity, but my gut say liar...

What's sad is that in or out of context, the result is the same. There really isn't any context in that passage that would change the meaning. The writer did not point to any known group, he simply stated that many deceivers have gone out in to the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. He then says those people are deceivers and antichrist. Anyone who grasps the English language should understand this. With the exception of yourself of course.

But you want context? Sure, here's some: the writer uses the term "antichrist" more than once.

1Jn_2:22 Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son.
1Jn_4:3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already.

Now if you do read more than just those verses, it does appear that the writer is speaking of someone specifically, however, you can see a running theme of identifying "antichrist" with those who basically deny Jesus is Christ and is from God. How many atheists do you know that actually confess those things?

It seems there are Christians out there who agree with this. For example, http://doverchurchofchrist.info/wp-conte...2-John.pdf for instance, where the writer identifies Muslims, atheists, agnostics and even Catholics (among others) as these "deceivers".

So one has to ask, do atheists fit into the category of "those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh", yes or no? Such a simple question to answer, let's see if you can do it.

Did you answer that bolded part yet?
Anyways, it's funny how you bring two more verses that are warnings about false teachers also.