Absolutely not! The idea of a Muslim Antichrist is both un-biblical and illogical. I have written extensively and in detail about The Muslim Antichrist Theory, but I will dispense of it here with four brief points.
1. The concept of a Muslim Antichrist is unbiblical because Daniel 9:26-27 says that the Antichrist will come from the people who will destroy Jerusalem.
The devastation spoken of in this passage took place in 70 AD, and it was done by the Romans. So, the Antichrist will come out of the area of the Roman Empire and will be Roman by descent.
The leading advocate of the Muslim Antichrist idea did not even mention this verse in his first book! Either he did not know about it, or he simply decided to ignore it. When it was brought to his attention, he and his followers responded by claiming that the Roman armies that destroyed Jerusalem were conscripts from the Middle East, where Islam developed some 500 years later. First, this is not true, and second, even if it were true, it would be irrelevant. The fact is that the armies were under the control of a Roman general who was taking orders from the Roman Senate in Rome.
Later, the proponents of the Muslim Antichrist theory began arguing that the destruction of Jerusalem referred to by Daniel is the destruction that will occur during the Tribulation at the hands of the Antichrist. There are two problems with this argument. First, the context of Daniel’s prophecy clearly indicates that the destruction of Jerusalem he is talking about will occur at the end of 483 years of his 490 year prophecy — and that would place it in 70 AD. Second, the Antichrist is not going to destroy Jerusalem during the Tribulation. Zechariah 14:1-9 says that just as the armies of the Antichrist start to close in on Jerusalem, the Messiah will return to the Mount of Olives and will supernaturally destroy both the Antichrist and his military forces.
2. The idea of a Muslim Antichrist is illogical because the Scriptures say that the Tribulation will begin when the Antichrist signs a treaty with Israel that will guarantee that nation’s safety.
What Muslim would guarantee the peace and safety of Israel? What Israeli leader would put his trust in a Muslim leader, knowing that Muslims make “peace” treaties only for the sake of convenience?
3. The Muslim Antichrist concept is absurd when you consider the fact that the Scriptures teach that the Antichrist will go to Jerusalem in the middle of the Tribulation, enter the rebuilt Jewish Temple, and declare himself to be god.
No Muslim would ever declare himself to be God. This would violate the most basic tenets of Islam. And if he were to do so, he would be immediately killed by Muslims!
4. The rise of a Muslim Antichrist would be impossible because no Muslim armies will exist in the Middle East when the Tribulation begins.
The war of Psalm 83 between Israel and its surrounding Arab nations with whom it has a common border will result in an overwhelming victory for Israel (Zechariah 12:6-8), and will likely result in the total devastation of Damascus (Isaiah 17:1-14 and Jeremiah 49:23-27).
The subsequent Russian invasion of the Jewish State, together with a coalition of Muslim armies from the outer circle around Israel — portrayed in Ezekiel 38 & 39 — will result in God Almighty destroying all the invading forces upon the mountains of Israel (Ezekiel 38:18-23 and 39:1-6).
I believe the Scriptures indicate that both of these wars will occur before the beginning of the Tribulation. Thus, when the Tribulation begins, the Muslim nations of the Middle East will be in shambles, devoid of any military power.
When the Roman Antichrist takes over, he will launch a military campaign to conquer the world. The Bible says that in the process one-half the world’s population will die in the first three and a half years of the Tribulation as the war morphs from a traditional one (Revelation 6) into a nuclear one (Revelation 8-9).
The people most likely to strongly resist the European Antichrist and his one world religion would be the Muslims outside the Middle East — the Muslims of Indonesia, India, Bangladesh and Pakistan — who constitute the majority of Muslims in the world. Thus, I believe God will use the Antichrist to pour out His wrath upon the Muslim world — another reason why I do not believe the Antichrist will be a Muslim.
6 CommentsLeave a Comment
Hello, I watched one of Chuck Missler's teachings on Revelation recently, where he mentioned that the Roman Empire extended east past Europe into Turkey and Syria etc. In the scripture, the antichrist is referred to as "the Assyrian," and it was actually Syrian troops, as part of the Roman Empire, that destroyed Jerusalem. I am paraphrasing here, and I may not be getting all of this correct, but Chuck's suggestion is that the antichrist may be an Assyrian (Assyrian meaning the old Assyria, a combination of modern day Syria and Iraq). The Moslems believe there will be a Mahdi coming, maybe the antichrist will use some of the "lying wonders" to deceive those that are left in the former Moslem world to accept him and to accept his authority to "change the times and seasons." Interestingly (to me at least, I never knew this) Chuck mentioned that the Greek word for antichrist really means, in so many words, fake substitute for Christ, rather than against Christ like "anti-" would imply in English. He also mentioned the scripture from Zechariah 11:7, which I never realized before says "woe to the idol shepherd" not "idle" shepherd. It also refers to a wound which is consistent with the wound the antichrist will be healed from. On the part of Israel, remember that Jesus said, "another will come in his own name, and him you will receive." So this antichrist will trick most of them too. Incidentally, I am a messianic Jew. Very, very interesting. Thank you for your commentary and your faithfulness to God's word, David's program has uplifted my spirit. Maranatha!
So good to hear that "Christ in Prophecy" has been a blessing to you!
Daniel 9:26 tells of the origins of the Antichirst – "The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary." In other words, the Antichrist will arise from the people group that destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple. That occurred in 70 AD when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem.
Some like Sid Roth, Joel Richardson, and Walid Shoebat teach the current fad "Beast from the East" view, that the Antichrist will be a Muslim and the Mahdi, the Islamic messiah. The whole theory of a Muslim Antichrist is based on the incorrect historical account of what groups of people made up the Roman legions who destroyed the Temple in 70 AD, a full 530 years before Islam came into existence.
The Roman army that destroyed the Temple is 70 AD were those of the Legio X Fretensis, Legio V Macedonica and Legio XV Apollinaris, under the command of Roman General Titus Vespasianus. The soldiers of Legio X were Italians from the region of the Straits of Messina; Legio XV from the mixed Illyrian-Celtic people of the region of Pannonia along the Danube River, and Legio V were of the Thraco-Illyrian people in the region of the lower Danube formerly known as Moesia. In sum, the "people of the prince" were Europeans and Roman citizens (see this article.
The Jews of the First Century would have recognized the destroyers of the Temple to be orchestrated from Rome and so recognize "the people" then as Romans. It's possible that the Romans could have been lumped into the larger unbelieving Gentile world, but the text is pretty specific about the people group – Romans (not Syrians).
There are quite a number of other flaws with this theory. The Ezekiel 38-39 Gog-Magog Battle would eliminate the need for Israel to make peace with the Muslim world, so most likely the peace covenant is between the Antichrist's empire and the nation of Israel. For more on this battle, please see this article.
For more on the Muslim Antichrist theory, check out this article.
Those who fight tooth and nail over origins, though, tend to hold to a Post-Tribulation Rapture view, so they are deeply concerned that they have to be able to recognize who the Antichrist will be so as not to be deceived.
I believe the Pre-Tribulation Rapture, though, is the best argument for the timing of the Rapture (see this article and this article.
The antichrist is already here waiting to become satan incarnate!. He is indeed from the old roman empire by birth, as well as a Jew, and a muslim! This watchman breaks it all down in his new viral youtube video. Yes and this watchman also proves the Rapture is Pre-Tribulation. https://youtu.be/1Y0ntMM9TGs
For Nathan, I am the original poster and thank you, what you are saying makes sense and for whatever it's worth I think you are right. At the same time, I think the Hebrew scriptures do refer to an Assyrian. There are many references to Messiah in the Hebrew scriptures, and I'm sure some of them seemed contradictory to B.C. scholars, for example, he will be a Nazirite, he will be born in Bethlehem, out of Egypt I have called My Son, etc. And yet they were all fulfilled in one person. I am sure that all of the references to antichrist will be fulfilled just as exactly, in ways that we cannot fully grasp now. The important thing is to ask the Spirit to use us to reach his sheep to help them "flee the wrath that is to come" before we are snatched away. Thank you for your part in doing just that.
Just had a quick comment about the the Daniel 9:26-27 and the antichrist will come from those who destroyed Jerusalem and that was the romans. However the commander of the Roman army in Jerusalem tried to stop the men from destroying the temple but the hatred was too deep and this is in the records of Josephus who part of the AD70 revolt and then changed sides and became historian for Rome.
It was not by the commands of Rome that the temple was destroyed it was by the anti semitic hatred. When Titus was told about the fire in the temple he rose up and told his army to quench the fire and they did not obey
You know i have always believed the antichrist would come from Rome but if you read with an open mind about a Muslim anti christ it makes sense. The entire 7 years is focused only on the middle east.The Bible when it mentions the people and where they come from is always big on bloodlines and if you review the Hebrew that is used it does not mean an empire but a people. I do not mean to offend you by my questions and I hope you will review and let me know what you think, Too many times I have noticed if someone disagrees with their version of the rapture and tribulation there is a lot of unforgivable words (hateful at times) spoken. I have read your magazine and do not believe you are like that so that is why I am asking…My son died two years ago and I knew then that the rapture was going to occur sooner than i thought. I have never been closed to my Lord and Savior and I think it is he that has given me this understanding. Have a great day.
While Israel is located in the Middle East and so therefore the focus of the Tribulation is there, the judgments of God are on the entire world. In reading Revelation's judgments, you'll see the scope is the whole world and not just the Middle East.