How Might Anti-Christ Arrive?

[Michie]

​

s in the late ’40s. It starts with the nuclear bomb blowing up the world, and obviously, you need a one-world government to stop it — one world or none. And the Christian framing, which in some ways is the same question, is: Antichrist or Armageddon? You have the one-world state of the Antichrist, or we’re sleepwalking toward Armageddon. “One world or none,” “Antichrist or Armageddon,” on one level, are the same question.

Now, I have a lot of thoughts on this topic, but one question is — and this was a plot hole in all these Antichrist books people wrote — how does the Antichrist take over the world? He gives these demonic, hypnotic speeches and people just fall for it. It’s this demonium, Ex-Machina —
I want to suggest a middle ground between those two options. It used to be that the reasonable fear of the Antichrist was a kind of wizard of technology. And now the reasonable fear is someone who promises to control technology, make it safe and usher in what, from your point of view, would be a universal stagnation, right?

Thiel: Well, that’s more my description of how it would happen.

Douthat: Yes, but you’re saying the real Antichrist would play on that fear and say: You must come with me to avoid Skynet, to avoid the Terminator, to avoid nuclear Armageddon.

Continued below.

How Might Anti-Christ Arrive? | Spirit Daily Blog

s in the late ’40s. It starts with the nuclear bomb blowing up the world, and obviously, you need a one-world government to stop it — one world or none. And the Christian framing, which in some ways is the same question, is: Antichrist or Armageddon? You have the one-world state of the...

spiritdailyblog.com

 

[Jamdoc]

​

s in the late ’40s. It starts with the nuclear bomb blowing up the world, and obviously, you need a one-world government to stop it — one world or none. And the Christian framing, which in some ways is the same question, is: Antichrist or Armageddon? You have the one-world state of the Antichrist, or we’re sleepwalking toward Armageddon. “One world or none,” “Antichrist or Armageddon,” on one level, are the same question.

Now, I have a lot of thoughts on this topic, but one question is — and this was a plot hole in all these Antichrist books people wrote — how does the Antichrist take over the world? He gives these demonic, hypnotic speeches and people just fall for it. It’s this demonium, Ex-Machina —
I want to suggest a middle ground between those two options. It used to be that the reasonable fear of the Antichrist was a kind of wizard of technology. And now the reasonable fear is someone who promises to control technology, make it safe and usher in what, from your point of view, would be a universal stagnation, right?

Thiel: Well, that’s more my description of how it would happen.

Douthat: Yes, but you’re saying the real Antichrist would play on that fear and say: You must come with me to avoid Skynet, to avoid the Terminator, to avoid nuclear Armageddon.

Continued below.

How Might Anti-Christ Arrive? | Spirit Daily Blog

s in the late ’40s. It starts with the nuclear bomb blowing up the world, and obviously, you need a one-world government to stop it — one world or none. And the Christian framing, which in some ways is the same question, is: Antichrist or Armageddon? You have the one-world state of the...

spiritdailyblog.com

I believe that the bible tells us how he arrives.

The primary agreed upon passage regarding him will be Revelation 17:

8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

Now "beast" is not always an individual, it can also be the kingdom led by a particular individual and they are considered Synonymous, like Babylon was considered synonymous with Nebuchadnezzar II, and Persia synonymous with Cyrus the Great, Greece synonymous with Alexander III.
But look at the language used:
Was: this beast existed in the past.
is not: this beast does not currently exist (this is important)
and shall ascend/and yet is: it will rise up again in the future.

So this beast is something that existed in the past in John's time, does not currently exist, but will exist again in the future. This is very important because a very popular interpretation violates this.

9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

Mountains are a common symbol like beasts, for a nation/empire, in Obadiah the Mountain of Esau, to identify Edom, Mount Zion for Israel, etc. It can again, also be synonymous with a particular ruler of that empire. Here we have it said to be seven mountains, then seven kings.
5 fallen, remember from verse 8.. "was"
one is, that currently exists, remember from verse 8, the beast is not, that means the beast is not current, unlike the current king.
and one is not yet come, that will rise up in the future.

Now.. 5 empires that were occupiers of Israel in the past from John's perspective:
Egypt
Assyria
Babylon
Persia
Greece
all of those had been defeated or at least shrunk back to where they no longer occupied Israel by John's time

One is, the current Empire, Rome.

and one yet to come. Historically, it'd be the Islamic Caliphate, the last Dynasty of being the Ottoman Empire.

11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

So the beast of concern, is not the 7th king, but after the 7th king, but is from the first 7 kings, at least one of them perhaps multiple. "of the seven" just means one or more.

However.. is not... and one of the kings "is" and that would be Rome.
In essence, the Angel just eliminated the Roman Empire as being the beast. Because the beast "is not" it did not currently exist. But had in the past "was". That means it has to be one of the 5 fallen empires. Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, or Greece.
Babylon itself is kind of involved as the harlot RIDING the beast, that is she controls it until the 10 kings (later in the chapter) revolt and destroy her. I'd say that means the beast is not Babylon.
That'd mean Egypt, Assyria, Persia, or Greece.

12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

So 10 kings that did not have a kingdom in John's day, but would receive power as kings during the end times. Since it's only for "one hour" it's a short time, meaning they do not exist yet.
This is something I need to remember myself because I am guilty of trying to identify who the 10 kings are, thinking Charles might be one, the King of Jordan, MBS, etc. They can't be, because they only receive power as kings shortly before turning it over to the beast.

13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.

Now we get to how the Antichrist actually rises up, he's appointed by 10 new kings.

14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

So the beast and the 10 kings that rose him to power, make war against Jesus, and Christians.

15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the harlot sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

So the harlot controls many nations, IE, global control.

16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the harlot, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.
17 For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.

The 10 kings that gave power to the beast/Antichrist revolt against Babylon, which had been controlling them. The important thing of note is that Babylon arises and controls the world first, it rides the beast and controls it until they revolt and put their own guy in power.

18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

Whether this is a literal Babylon in Iraq (which I kinda doubt because of Revelation 18's descriptions of it being visible from ships at sea), or a Euphemism of another entity, like say the UN, or the American Hegemony (I've heard these at least) is a matter of interpretation and could all fit with varying degrees of probability.
But 2 of the possibilities do involve the US, as the UN HQ is in New York City, and Washington D.C. would be the head of our Hegemony.
It's possible but it is speculatory.

But outright, I can say: It's not Rome. Rome fails the "is not" test in verse 8.


I'll jump into another book I believe connected next.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

The traditional name from mythology of a beast with woman riding it is "Europa"

The prophet of the beast will probably be a Euro-Trash music announcer.

Joking about the second sentence.

 

[JulieB67]

I believe he will arrive as "an angel of light" and proclaim to be God. And it's by the miracles and wonders he performs that he's able to have the world wonder after him. People will believe it. That's what the gospel armor is for -to be able to fight against the 'wiles/trickery of the devil and be able to stand in "the evil day". By peace he will destroy many. Souls that is. Christ tells us that if someone is here during that time to patiently possess your souls. We are to wait on the true Christ and not fall away to the fake. Sadly 1st Thes 5 tells us they will be saying peace and safety and then bam destruction, the true Christ returns. That's the analogy of the thief in the night. The shock will be so complete because most of the world will think their savior has returned.

II Corinthians 11:14 "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light."

Ephesians 6:11 "Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil."

Ephesians 6:13 "Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God that ye may be able to with stand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand."

Revelation 12:9 "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Sa'-tan, which deceived the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Revelation 12:10 "And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night."

Revelation 12:11 "And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death."

Revelation 12:12 "Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time."

Deception is his MO and always has been. I don't put any stock into any books written on him about that time.

 

[Jamdoc]

Next up, will involve unlearning interpretations you may have learned in the past about the book of Daniel.
Many people believe the prophetic passages of Daniel are about historic events. They are not, they are intricately linked with End Times prophecy.

Daniel 8:

16 And I heard a man's voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.
17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision.
18 Now as he was speaking with me, I was in a deep sleep on my face toward the ground: but he touched me, and set me upright.
19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.

to put it bluntly, the Ram and the Goat vision, is explicitly stated to be end times, not something that happened before Christ. Alexander may have foreshadowed it, but it is not the primary fulfillment.
Daniel is a sealed book, or at least was. Historical interpretations should be called into question and not rested upon, because it is interpreting a sealed book.
Daniel 12

4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

Sealed until the time of the end.

8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?
9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

once more for emphasis, Daniel is sealed until the time of the end. It could be unsealed now, it could be sealed still to where we do not fully understand it. So historical interpretations should not be relied upon, because they absolutely were still interpreting a sealed book in the past.

Now with that all in mind, I believe Daniel tells us a lot about the Rise of the Antichrist, particularly in Daniel 11, but Daniel 7, 8, and 9 also refer to him, and Jesus told us to understand Daniel, in particular the Abomination of Desolation in Matthew 24:15. So we really want to read, reread, prayerfully, to understand Daniel.

Daniel 7:

2 Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea.
3 And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another.
4 The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it.
5 And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.
6 After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it.
7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.
8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.

So we see in here some familiar symbols that are also used in Revelation 17, and Revelation 13, using beasts and horns.
Revelation 13 in particular is an interesting depiction:

1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

Lion, bear, and leopard, like the beasts Daniel describes in Daniel 7. This is related. This beast has parts of all of them, a chimera, or amalgamation of the previous beasts.

Back to Daniel 7:

16 I came near unto one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things.
17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.

so here we see that the symbols of the beasts are explained to be kings, which is again, synonymous to the empires they control. This interpretation is also applied to Revelation's beast: an empire and it's king.

Daniel then goes on to ask about the 4th beast, the angel explains:

23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.
24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

So the little horn is the Antichrist, and he rules the entire Earth for 3.5 years (42 months just as in Revelation)
But we learn a detail, there's the 10 kings, they prop up the little horn, but the little horn turns around and subdues 3 of the kings.

Next.. details from Daniel 8

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Many people believe the prophetic passages of Daniel are about historic events.

Based on the events of Daniel 11 this is declaring the next kings in history.

The events of Daniel were fulfilled when Jesus Christ was on the Earth. Jesus even identified the Roman Empire as the iron foot with clay toes, this was when He identified Himself as the stone that crushes it to Powder. The pharisees who later said "our only king is Caesar" took offense when they found out Jesus was talking about crushing them to powder.

Revelation is a different prophecy compared to Daniel. It looks similar but it also has a chapter which speaks of the birth and resurrection of the savior. Comparing the two can sometimes lead to erroneous conclusions since "this is this, and that is that."

Daniel is about the past. Revelation speaks of the future, but assisting fortunetelling is not the purpose of the book.

 

[Jamdoc]

Daniel 8, which again, explicitly is stated to be end times. Not history.

3 Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last.
4 I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and became great.

First the Ram, which is later explained to be Persia, it has 2 horns... at the same time. One of the horns is greater and it came up later than the lesser horn.
Horns we know represent kings from the previous vision, and is later confirmed in this chapter. So Persia, has 2 kings at the same time, and the greater king rose up last. This will be an important thing to remember when we get to Daniel 11.

5 And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.

So the goat, which is later explained to be Greece (though it should be remembered that Western Turkey was considered part of ancient Greece and were in the Ionian league), and it has 1 great horn. Single king, as opposed to the ram's co-ruling kings.

6 And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power.
7 And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.

Greece/Turkey conquers Iran/Persia, yes, Alexander the Great prefigures this.

8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.

It becomes a great Empire, then it is broken up into specifically 4 pieces in cardinal directions.

9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

So the little horn, just like Daniel 7. In this we learn a detail: he comes from one of the splintered parts from that Greek/Turkish empire (the actual Hebrew word is "Javan" btw, it gets translated to Greece, but that is kind of an interpretation)

10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.
11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of the sanctuary was cast down.
12 And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered.

So this is the Abomination of Desolation that Jesus refers to in Matthew 24: it involves ending the daily sacrifices. For those sacrifices to end, they need to be happening.

Now I quoted the part where Gabriel was charged with explaining this vision in another post, but Gabriel explains it's an end times vision, then explains the symbols.

20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

Alexander III was the 23rd King of Macedonia, so the actual king being talked about will be the first king of that Ionian region empire. Speculation but I believe it will be a Caliph.

22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

That last part is important, the empire gets broken up will not be ones that he would choose, Alexander was succeeded by his generals, those are people that were under Alexander's dominion. This is saying that they will be people chosen that did NOT belong to this first King's dominion, outside leaders, or raised up from local people, but not people from this specific Empire that conquered.

23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

and this explains the little horn, coming out of that shattered kingdom, who then goes after the holy people (makes war on the saints in Daniel 7 and Revelation 17). He stands up against Jesus and gets destroyed.

Antiochus never stood against Jesus.

 

[Jamdoc]

Based on the events of Daniel 11 this is declaring the next kings in history.

The events of Daniel were fulfilled when Jesus Christ was on the Earth. Jesus even identified the Roman Empire as the iron foot with clay toes, this was when He identified Himself as the stone that crushes it to Powder. The pharisees who later said "our only king is Caesar" took offense when they found out Jesus was talking about crushing them to powder.

Revelation is a different prophecy compared to Daniel. It looks similar but it also has a chapter which speaks of the birth and resurrection of the savior. Comparing the two can sometimes lead to erroneous conclusions since "this is this, and that is that."

Daniel is about the past. Revelation speaks of the future, but assisting fortunetelling is not the purpose of the book.

Wrong.
Gabriel outright says that Daniel 8 is about the end times.

This is what I'm talking about. People lean in on these historical interpretations... despite an Angel ordered by Jesus to explain the vision saying it was about the end times!

Your pastor, "great theologians" of the past, THEY say it's history.
JESUS said the Abomination of Desolation was something to watch for in the future from the first century, therefore it CLEARLY could not have been history from the first century point of view.
and an angel charged by Jesus to explain the vision said it was end times.

Why is that important?
Because without Daniel to tell us how the end times will play out, if Daniel is all historic.. we go into the end times half blind we are left with nothing but speculation on these events.

With Daniel being prophecy rather than history? We have a road map, we know where Antichrist will come from, we know the events that will precede his rise to power that is much clearer than Revelation alone.

 

[Jamdoc]

and the events that most clearly explain the rise of Antichrist, is Daniel 11:

2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.
3 And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.
4 And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.

So this is like Daniel 8, explaining that Persia will rise up, with a 4th great leader which if we apply the 2 horns .. rules at the same time as the 3rd. (there were more than 4 Persian kings between Darius I and Alexander III)
and again, the kingdom is divided in cardinal directions in exactly 4 way split, and not according to the King's posterity (no heirs), nor his dominion (IE none of his direct subordinates, IE not Alexander's generals). His kingdom will be plucked up. That is, taken control of and divided by an outside power (Mystery Babylon? That is speculation)

What follows is a war between the king of the north and king of the south kingdoms out of this split. There's a lot of detail, political intrigue, a political marriage it seems? Some of these details I'm less clear on than others, it's a lot. So I don't break it down verse by verse as I have been doing with other passages that I feel I understand better.
These are passages I'm still praying about.

But here is where I can pick up and follow and feel I understand it better again, when the King of the North is lost (or dies):

19 Then he shall turn his face toward the fort of his own land: but he shall stumble and fall, and not be found.
20 Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom: but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle.
21 And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.

So here we have a chain of succession. The King of the North is either lost or killed. The first successor is a raiser of taxes, but he dies shortly after, seemingly by deception/subterfuge, perhaps something like poisoning.
The next successor is the one of note for this topic: the Antichrist.

key characteristics here:
1. Does not have the right to the kingdom, he's not an heir.
2. Does not take the kingdom by force or violence, he comes in peaceably, he's appointed the king even though it is not by a normal means of succession. It's done by flatteries.

22 And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.
23 And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people.
24 He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers' fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches: yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strong holds, even for a time.

So at first he's promising peace, the Prince of the covenant, that I'm not 100% sure about but it could be the covenant referred to in Daniel 9 that Antichrist confirms in essence there's a covenant made with many, the Vile person deposes who initiated that covenant, but then confirms that covenant. I believe it is also referred to in the league made with him that he begins to work against deceitfully.

Now the next part is more war campaigns against the south.

But here's where we find another important detail we've seen in previous chapters, linking these events and giving timing:

31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

So the abomination of Desolation... so this is all tied into a sign that Jesus told us to watch for and understand. This is NOT Antiochus if Jesus said it'd happen post 30AD.

35 And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.

This is outright also an end times passage

36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.
37 Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.
38 But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.
39 Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.

So details:
1. Magnifies himself above God. (as Paul says in 2 Thessalonians 2)
2. He'll prosper until the return of Jesus and the wrath of God.
3. Whatever god his ancestors worshiped, won't be his god
4. The desire of women, while, it could be that he's homosexual, it's not necessarily true, I hear some think it's along the lines that the "desire of women" was to bear the Messiah Could be either or.
5. Doesn't regard any god, which is admittedly a hard detail for me because I normally associate the Antichrist as the Islamic Mahdi, many other details fit, this one admittedly, does not.
6. Divides the land. ties in with Joel 3.

Most the rest is back to the war against the South, but one last detail needs to be discussed:

45 And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.

Antiochus did not die in Jerusalem in the glorious holy mountain.

 

[Jamdoc]

So that is how I feel Antichrist rises to power, using Revelation and Daniel primarily. Micah 5 also refers to someone called the Assyrian which is taken down by Jesus, and the Assyrian would fit with it being the Northern fragment of an Empire started by Greece/Turkey.

So I do hold to a Mid East Beast rather than "Revived Roman Empire" Because in Revelation 17, the beast cannot be the Roman Empire because that Empire was current in John's day, and the Angel explained the beast was not current, but used to exist, and would again in the future. Assyria is one of those fallen empires.

another logical deduction using all those books:
Egypt: Not it, as they go to war with him.
Assyria: where I lean, because the other possibilities get eliminated and Micah 5 refers to Antichrist as the Assyrian.
Babylon: Not it, as they ride the beast before Antichrist and the 10 Kings destroy her.
Persia: Not it, gets destroyed by Greece prior to Antichrist's rise
Greece: Not it, precedes and gets broken up.
Rome: Not it, was current in John's day and thus eliminated by the stipulation that the beast was not current but used to exist and would again in the future.
Ottoman: Not it, because it didn't exist prior to John's day, and the Beast "was"

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Wrong.
Gabriel outright says that Daniel 8 is about the end times.

Not so, when the NT was written we were already in the end times.

Heb 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

1Jo 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

Daniel is fulfilled. Revelation speaks of things yet to come.

 

[Jamdoc]

Not so, when the NT was written we were already in the end times.

Okay, but , the events being referenced pre-dated the writing of the NT in history. Alexander was NOT end times.

Heb 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

1Jo 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

Daniel is fulfilled. Revelation speaks of things yet to come.

Neither is fulfilled because Jesus said that Daniel was yet future from His time.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Okay, but , the events being referenced pre-dated the writing of the NT in history. Alexander was NOT end times.

Neither is fulfilled because Jesus said that Daniel was yet future from His time.

The events related to the beasts and statue with gold head, silver arms, bronze legs, iron feet & clay toes is fulfilled.

The fall of the Roman empire happened later. The early Christians were experiencing the end of the World represented by that body of nations.

The beasts in Revelation are totally different. One imitates the structure of the red dragon and is made of iron like a bulldozer or automobile.

There is also a beast that seems to be a mixture of all the first three Daniel beasts. Since the beasts are nations, this combination of nations would imply a progression of time compared to the Daniel prophecy.

Since it was later on in the time line, the events were more clear from that vantage point.

Also there's another beast not part of Daniel's prophecy, the lamb with two horns that speaks like a dragon. It is obvious the point of reference for Revelation is in the future compared to Daniel.

Things can be learned from Daniel such as "the beasts are nations." However, Revelation speaks of more current events.

Furthermore, the reference to two "3.5 times" in Daniel is mimicked in Revelation by the two last witnesses witnessing for 3.5 years then lying dead without burial for 3.5 days ending with a resurrection of the witnesses. So the idea of using the two 3.5 times for the "political interpretation" seems to go outside the text and appears to be completely made up.

 

[JulieB67]

Daniel is fulfilled

These verses have not been fulfilled-

Daniel 12:1 "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book."

Daniel 12:2 "And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Daniel 12:3 "And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever."

When was every person delivered? "Every one that shall be found written in the book? When did verse two happen?

Verse one definitely mirrors Christ's teaching

Matthew 24:21 "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."

 

[Gregory Thompson]

These verses have not been fulfilled-

Daniel 12:1 "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book."

Daniel 12:2 "And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Daniel 12:3 "And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever."

When was every person delivered? "Every one that shall be found written in the book? When did verse two happen?

Verse one definitely mirrors Christ's teaching

Matthew 24:21 "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."

See post 13.

 

[RandyPNW]

​

s in the late ’40s. It starts with the nuclear bomb blowing up the world, and obviously, you need a one-world government to stop it — one world or none. And the Christian framing, which in some ways is the same question, is: Antichrist or Armageddon? You have the one-world state of the Antichrist, or we’re sleepwalking toward Armageddon. “One world or none,” “Antichrist or Armageddon,” on one level, are the same question.

Now, I have a lot of thoughts on this topic, but one question is — and this was a plot hole in all these Antichrist books people wrote — how does the Antichrist take over the world? He gives these demonic, hypnotic speeches and people just fall for it. It’s this demonium, Ex-Machina —
I want to suggest a middle ground between those two options. It used to be that the reasonable fear of the Antichrist was a kind of wizard of technology. And now the reasonable fear is someone who promises to control technology, make it safe and usher in what, from your point of view, would be a universal stagnation, right?

Thiel: Well, that’s more my description of how it would happen.

Douthat: Yes, but you’re saying the real Antichrist would play on that fear and say: You must come with me to avoid Skynet, to avoid the Terminator, to avoid nuclear Armageddon.

Continued below.

How Might Anti-Christ Arrive? | Spirit Daily Blog

s in the late ’40s. It starts with the nuclear bomb blowing up the world, and obviously, you need a one-world government to stop it — one world or none. And the Christian framing, which in some ways is the same question, is: Antichrist or Armageddon? You have the one-world state of the...

spiritdailyblog.com

As interesting as some of this is, the rise of political leaders is not a process that requires a lot of imagination. There is always a vacuum with the need for political leadership. If Europe is fragmented and facing an external threat, from China or even from within its European orbit, then a political leader must unite Europe and successfully face these threats.

It is clear that energy still plays an important role in Europe, along with modern weaponry. Unity comes through the technology, while all vestiges of Christian morality and spirituality seem to ebb away. People are robotic and pragmatic already. And they crave religious guidance.

Antichrist will harness this spiritual thirst towards himself, as all dictators do, directing Europe into a new superpower status, as I see it. It will be much more powerful than the British Commonwealth ever was, and just as widespread.

 

[JulieB67]

See post 13.

I did. Every name that's in the book has not been delivered yet.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I did. Every name that's in the book has not been delivered yet.

Indeed, but Daniel was a prophecy told further back, so it has less perspective than Revelation.

It is like that Isaiah prophecy that talks about the return of the Lord, a certain aspect of the prophetic utterance was not fulfilled. Thus the Jews did not accept Him, because he did not become that kind of Savior.

Furthermore, there is the matter of Jeremiah 8:8, so it's best to take the 1st Thessalonians approach. If it happens, then it happens. If not, not an issue. God remains faithful.

 

[Jamdoc]

The events related to the beasts and statue with gold head, silver arms, bronze legs, iron feet & clay toes is fulfilled.

That's not the same as Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12. Those are different. Daniel was terrified by the visions in the later chapters and did not understand them.
Daniel DID understand the vision in Daniel 2.

They are not the same.

The fall of the Roman empire happened later. The early Christians were experiencing the end of the World represented by that body of nations.

The beasts in Revelation are totally different. One imitates the structure of the red dragon and is made of iron like a bulldozer or automobile.

There is also a beast that seems to be a mixture of all the first three Daniel beasts. Since the beasts are nations, this combination of nations would imply a progression of time compared to the Daniel prophecy.

Since it was later on in the time line, the events were more clear from that vantage point.

Also there's another beast not part of Daniel's prophecy, the lamb with two horns that speaks like a dragon. It is obvious the point of reference for Revelation is in the future compared to Daniel.

Things can be learned from Daniel such as "the beasts are nations." However, Revelation speaks of more current events.

Furthermore, the reference to two "3.5 times" in Daniel is mimicked in Revelation by the two last witnesses witnessing for 3.5 years then lying dead without burial for 3.5 days ending with a resurrection of the witnesses. So the idea of using the two 3.5 times for the "political interpretation" seems to go outside the text and appears to be completely made up.

Let's listen to Jesus:

Matthew 24

15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

Now Jesus did not know WHEN these events would happen. He professed He did not know and only the Father knew.
So Jesus did not give a time, Jesus gave signs to watch for.
The principle definitive sign He gave, that believers would see, is the Abomination of Desolation, He even specified that it was spoken of by Daniel.
It is in Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12.
It is NOT in Daniel 2's dream.
That means that from the first century, from Jesus' point of reference, Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 were yet future prophecy. They had not been fulfilled hundreds of years before His birth.

Daniel 2 was being fulfilled, but Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 were yet future. They are not the same things.
Had Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 been fulfilled in 334BC-150BC, Jesus would not tell the Apostles that they would see the Abomination of Desolation.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

That's not the same as Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12. Those are different. Daniel was terrified by the visions in the later chapters and did not understand them.
Daniel DID understand the vision in Daniel 2.

They are not the same.


Let's listen to Jesus:

Matthew 24


Now Jesus did not know WHEN these events would happen. He professed He did not know and only the Father knew.
So Jesus did not give a time, Jesus gave signs to watch for.
The principle definitive sign He gave, that believers would see, is the Abomination of Desolation, He even specified that it was spoken of by Daniel.
It is in Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12.
It is NOT in Daniel 2's dream.
That means that from the first century, from Jesus' point of reference, Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 were yet future prophecy. They had not been fulfilled hundreds of years before His birth.

Daniel 2 was being fulfilled, but Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 were yet future. They are not the same things.
Had Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 been fulfilled in 334BC-150BC, Jesus would not tell the Apostles that they would see the Abomination of Desolation.

Yes, let's listen to Jesus. He said at the beginning of acts that inquiries of this nature are not for us to know.