Anti-Christ From Old Roman Empire?

[firestormx]

In the verses below are where people get that the anti-christ has to come from the old roman empire. In the first set of verses it states that, the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Now history tells us very clearly that the romans did this in 70 AD. but who is this prince it speaks about. well thats why I posted the other verses, they are talking about what is briefly described in daniel 9:27. It shows his charcter, that he is vile and evil. I firmly believe it is clearly talking about the Anti-christ. So the people of the prince to come that destroyed the temple and the city are the people of the anti-christ. Since the people who destroyed the temple and city were the romans, then the Anti-christ has to come from the Old roman empire. What i want to know is, Are there any other verses to back this up? Do you think I have misinterputed the verse? Where will the Anti-christ come from?

Daniel 9:26-27 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Daniel 11:19 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.

Daniel 11:23 And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people.

Daniel 11:31 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

[kevinsball]

In the verses below are where people get that the anti-christ has to come from the old roman empire. In the first set of verses it states that, the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Now history tells us very clearly that the romans did this in 70 AD. but who is this prince it speaks about. well thats why I posted the other verses, they are talking about what is briefly described in daniel 9:27. It shows his charcter, that he is vile and evil. I firmly believe it is clearly talking about the Anti-christ. So the people of the prince to come that destroyed the temple and the city are the people of the anti-christ. Since the people who destroyed the temple and city were the romans, then the Anti-christ has to come from the Old roman empire.

Top Bible Prophecy teachers conclude that the Antichrist will come from a revived Roman Empire.

Joel Richardson and Walid Shoebat are 2 of the main proponents for the Antichrist coming from a revived Islamic (Turkish) Empire.

Neither are 100% correct. A major problem with the "Roman End-Time Paradigm" is:

• they deny the Islamic connections.
  
  Dr. David Reagan states in the above link: "Richardson wraps up his arguments with the observation that the Antichrist must be a Muslim because Islam is the most perfect incarnation of the antichrist spirit.³⁷ He makes this assertion because Islam denies the Trinity, rejects Jesus as the Son of God, and repudiates the crucifixion of Jesus, arguing that someone else was killed in His place. I do not agree with this observation. To me, the most perfect incarnation of the antichrist spirit is, and always has been, Humanism in all its various forms. Islam points people toward a god, even though he is a false god. Humanism encourages people to worship Man. God is denied. Man is exalted. And I believe the rejection of God, together with the exaltation of self, is the ultimate antichrist spirit."
  
  Where in the Bible does Satan ever deny that God exists? Nowhere. In fact, Scripture records that the Antichrist will honor a god which his fathers knew not: "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.Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory:" (Daniel 11:38-39)
  
  Dr. David Reagan continues: "The first is the fact that the Bible states that in the middle of the Tribulation, when the Antichrist goes to Jerusalem and desecrates the Temple, he will declare himself to be God (2 Thessalonians 2:4). Richardson says this is possibly the strongest argument that can be made against his thesis since it is inconceivable that any Muslim would ever claim to be God. Nonetheless, he argues that the Muslim Antichrist will become so self-absorbed that he will do so, and he claims that when it happens, the Muslims will be too embarrassed to confess that they have been deceived!³⁸ I'm sorry, but I find this very hard to believe. To me, that is like saying that the Muslims would be willing to agree that night is day and day is night. There is a limit to deception. A person would have to cease being a Muslim in order to believe that any man could be God.I believe the bizarre behavior of the Antichrist described in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4, where it states that he will proclaim himself to be God, rules out any possibility that the Antichrist might prove to be a Muslim. "
  
  There are sects of Sunni Muslims which teach that Allah has a body, and this body is represented as Muhammad and the Mahdi (they teach that the Mahdi is the physical manifestation of the spirit of Muhammad - The Most Glorious One who is the perfect Adam who pre-existed before Adam). - Ibn Taymiyah
  
  Even Iran's Shite leader Ahmadinejad has claimed that the Mahdi is God. - youtube/ watch?v=SgsaSCkcqF4
  
  So to say that the Muslims would reject the incarnation of Allah in the physical form of the Mahdi is not true in some sects of either Sunni or Shite theology.
  • ()
    
    A major problem with the "Islamic End-Time Paradigm" is:
    • they deny the historical biblical interpretation of the Roman connections.
      

    Dr. David Reagan continues: "Joel Richardson came out with a new explanation of Daniel 9:26, undoubtedly in response to the withering criticism that the previous explanation had received.⁴⁹He begins his new interpretation by pointing out that the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus in 70 AD did not fall within the first 483 years of Daniel's 490 year prophecy. Rather, it occurred 40 years after the close of that period. Thus, he surmises that the prophecy concerning the Temple's destruction most likely points to the last seven years of Daniel's prophecy — the period of the Tribulation when he believes the Temple will be destroyed by the Mahdi. He admits that the Scriptures do not specifically state that the Temple will be destroyed during the Tribulation, but he says the destruction is implied in Revelation 11:1-2 where it states that the Gentiles "will trample on the holy city for 42 months." He also points to Luke 21:20 where it is stated that Jerusalem will experience "desolation," but that verse clearly applies to the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.⁵⁰ So Richardson has gone from completely ignoring Daniel 9:26 to arguing that it was not the Romans who destroyed the Temple in 70 AD to now stating that the prophecy probably relates to a future destruction that is yet to occur during the Tribulation." - (Richardson's rebuttal)

    [*]they use inferior maps of the Roman Empire to prove their thesis.

    http://bp3.blogger.c.../Roman Parthian

    "If we take the time to study these maps, we can very clearly see that the Roman Empire never conquered more than half of any of the three empires and never even reached the primary geographic stronghold of the Persian Empire. While the ancient city of Babylon, (the actual location that the dream was given), in A.D. 116 under Emperor Trajan was taken by the Roman troops, within months Trajan died and the troops withdrew. All things considered, the Roman Empire, at the time of its greatest eastward expansion, was only able to conquer the western portions of all three of these empires. However, if we look to the Scriptural criteria given to us to identify the fourth empire, we can clearly see that only the Islamic Empire conquered all three of the previous empires. Today, Babylon (Iraq), Medo-Persia (Iran) and Greece (Turkey) are all Islamic territories. The evidence is staring us in the face, yet most have missed this obvious reality. The Islamic Empire meets the Biblically defined geographic description of Daniel 2:40 but the Roman Empire does not."

    They should use more inclusive maps of the Roman Empire such as:

    

    Whatever "End-Time Paradigm" is used, it MUST include both EAST and WEST - ISLAMIC and ROMAN.

    Do you think I have misinterputed the verse?

    No. However, we must finalize the complete the thought of Scripture (that the Antichrist will come from the western part of the Roman Empire to the eastern part of the Islamic Empire).

    Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Behold, I will save my people from the east country , and from the west country; (Zechariah 8:7)

    In that day will I make the governors of Judah like an hearth of fire among the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf; and they shall devour all the people round about, on the right hand and on the left: and Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place, even in Jerusalem. (Zechariah 12:6)

    That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past. (Ecclesiastes 3:15)

    Where will the Anti-christ come from?

    He comes from the west to the east.

[firestormx]

Starting in Daniel 11:21, (reading the whole chapter helps with context and understanding on the King of the North) through the end of the chapter, is some of the most discribitive parts of the bible on the anti-christ. my Question is in that part of the bible, it keeps calling him the King of the North. How does that fit in with what you have said here?

[kevinsball]

it keeps calling him the King of the North. How does that fit in with what you have said here?

The Antichrist is not the "king of the north".

"And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind," (Daniel 11:40)

"But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many." (Daniel 11:44)

If he is the "king of the north", then why does the "king of the north" come against him?

If he is the "king of the north", then why do tidings "from the north" trouble him?

The "king of the north" is the ruler of Syria.

Even the Islamic Hadith's corroborates this:

Abu Hurayrah has narrated that the Prophet said:

A man will emerge from the depths of Damascus. He will be called Sufyani. Most of those who follow him will be from the tribe of Kalb. He will kill by ripping the stomachs of women and even kill the children. A man from my family will appear in the Haram, the news of his advent will reach the Sufyani and he will send to him one of his armies. He (referring to the Mahdi) will defeat them. They will then travel with whoever remains until they come to a desert and they will be swallowed. None will be saved except the one who had informed the others about them. (Mustadrak Al-Hakim)

The term "Sufyani" is a term referring to his descent from the progeny of Abu Sufyan. He will be one of many Muslim tyrants that the Mahdi will have to face in the Middle East. The Sufyani is not the Dajjal. The Ahadith regarding the Sufyani specify that he is a tyrant who will spread corruption and mischief on the earth before the Mahdi. He will be such a tyrant that he will kill the children and rip out the bellies of women. The Sufyani will murder those from the household of the Prophet and will rule over Syria. When he hears about the Mahdi, he will send an army to seize and kill him. However the earth will swallow this army before it even reaches the Mahdi. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sufyani

Edited August 8, 2012 by kevinsball

[firestormx]

I've never heard that before, but then again, thats why I started this post, I've always heard and believed the anti-christ was from the old roman empire, and the king of the north in those verses, esp, since he is the one who commits the aboniation of desolation in daniel 11:31. Thanks for the posts, I've really enjoyed reading them, and will take it to GOD in prayer.

[kevinsball]

I've always heard and believed the anti-christ was from the old roman empire, and the king of the north in those verses,

He is from the old Roman Empire.

Just to show that the "king of the north" is the "king of Syria" is not only my interpretation, top Phd. Bible Prophecy teachers conclude:

Dr. Thomas Ice recounts this matter: "The final use of King of the North is found in the future context of verse 40. John MacArthur says, "Here is the last great battle with the final army from the N retaliating against the attack of the final southern African power. Antichrist will not allow this without striking back and winning, defeating both as recorded in v. 41ff. Thus, the King of the North is not likely the Gog led invasion of Israel from Ezekiel 38 and 39. The "king of the North" is just not the same expression as "from the remote parts of the north" (Ezek. 38:6), especially since the other six uses of "king of the North" clearly refer to Syria." - http://www.pre-trib....rt-27#_ednref10

Arnold Fruchtenbaum says: "...it is wrong to identify the king of the north of Daniel 11:40 with Gog of Ezekiel 38:1–39:16. Throughout the Book of Daniel references are made to the king of the south and the king of the north. Consistently, the former is applied to Egypt, including the reference in verse 40. The latter is consistently applied to Syria...context and consistency would demand that the reference apply to Syria." - http://www.pre-trib....rt-27#_ednref11

Dr. David Reagan states: "The nations in the Middle East will be led by the "king of the North" (most likely Syria) and the "king of the South" (Egypt). The Antichrist responds by invading "the Beautiful Land" and subduing all the area except Jordan." - http://www.lamblion....ribulation1.php

It makes things 100 times easier when you understand the "doctrine of the unholy godhead".

Jesus bless.

[Bold Believer]

In the verses below are where people get that the anti-christ has to come from the old roman empire. In the first set of verses it states that, the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Now history tells us very clearly that the romans did this in 70 AD. but who is this prince it speaks about. well thats why I posted the other verses, they are talking about what is briefly described in daniel 9:27. It shows his charcter, that he is vile and evil. I firmly believe it is clearly talking about the Anti-christ. So the people of the prince to come that destroyed the temple and the city are the people of the anti-christ. Since the people who destroyed the temple and city were the romans, then the Anti-christ has to come from the Old roman empire. What i want to know is, Are there any other verses to back this up? Do you think I have misinterputed the verse? Where will the Anti-christ come from?

Daniel 9:26-27 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

There is only one prince mentioned in verses previous to Daniel 9:26: Messiah the Prince. (He isn't a king because he hasn't been crowned.) It is Jesus who confirms the covenant with many (not all, many, this is significant: he only confirms the covenant with those who believed in it when when it first was inaugurated) and it is the death of Jesus which causes the sacrifice and oblation to cease in terms of their sufficiency. There was no need for type and shadow when the reality had come. Messiah made Jerusalem desolate for the overspreading of abominations (one of which was bloodguilt for all the prophets from righteous Abel to Zechariah), and even unto the consummation (i.e. the ending of the prescribed punishment) and that determined (destruction and exile) was poured out upon the desolate (the Jews who refused to believe on Him and remained in apostasy).

The antichrist is never mentioned because:

1. Antichrists didn't arrive on the scene until roughly AD 90 when John wrote of them (not him).

2. No single 'antichrist' exists as a man.

It is Jesus who allows the abomination of desolation to occur; it is judgment from God in fulfillment of all that had been previously written.

The vile person is Nero. Nero's name equals 666. But Nero is not 'the antichrist'. Modern teachers have managed to muddy the waters here. Nero obtained the kingdom (Rome) by flattery. He became strong with a small number of people behind him. Nero also made a league with apostate Israel against the true people of God (righteous Israel). Paul himself was a part of it, until God changed him.

'Antichrist' doesn't even figure in here. Look no further than Nero for Mr. 666, but don't confuse him with antichrists, they are totally different.

[other one]

Where is the Roman Empire today?

Just a thought.... did you know that the ten square miles of our capitol is not legally part of the United States of America since 1982..... an it has it's own legal system. that system is known as Lex Fori which is the old Roman Law. The Roman Empire today is centered In and operates from Washington D.C.

[Montana Marv]

To All

There are only 4 world empires/kingdoms (Nebys dream) and only 4 beasts (during Belshazzars reign) mentioned in Daniel. The fourth beast is the final beast or kingdom. There is no 5th kingdom mentioned by Daniel.

The first world empire/kingdom is under Nebuchadnezzar (Babylon) (Dan 2:36-38) and its description of this beast in Dan 7:4.. The Second world empire/kingdom is Medo-Persia (Dan 2:39) and its corresponding beast in Daniel 7:5. The third empire/kingdom is Greece (Dan 2:39) and its corresponding beast in Dan 7:6. The fourth empire/kingdom is Rome (Dan 2:40-42) and its corresponding beast in Daniel 7:7.

Looking further at this 4th beast Daniel (Dan 7:19-25). The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom (Rome) [the countries that have the euro].

Islam is defeated in the war of Ezk 38 and 39. Israel is attacked, armies from the far north also attack Ezk 39:2. Israel buries the dead for seven months, the birds of the air and the wild beasts eat their flesh.

This last world leader comes out of Rome. Islam is out of the scene.

In Christ

Montna Marv

[Bold Believer]

To All

There are only 4 world empires/kingdoms (Nebys dream) and only 4 beasts (during Belshazzars reign) mentioned in Daniel. The fourth beast is the final beast or kingdom. There is no 5th kingdom mentioned by Daniel.

The first world empire/kingdom is under Nebuchadnezzar (Babylon) (Dan 2:36-38) and its description of this beast in Dan 7:4.. The Second world empire/kingdom is Medo-Persia (Dan 2:39) and its corresponding beast in Daniel 7:5. The third empire/kingdom is Greece (Dan 2:39) and its corresponding beast in Dan 7:6. The fourth empire/kingdom is Rome (Dan 2:40-42) and its corresponding beast in Daniel 7:7.

Looking further at this 4th beast Daniel (Dan 7:19-25). The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom (Rome) [the countries that have the euro].

Islam is defeated in the war of Ezk 38 and 39. Israel is attacked, armies from the far north also attack Ezk 39:2. Israel buries the dead for seven months, the birds of the air and the wild beasts eat their flesh.

This last world leader comes out of Rome. Islam is out of the scene.

In Christ

Montana Marv

Your understanding of the 4 kingdoms is correct. Your understanding of Ez 38-39 isn't though. This is one mistake pre-mils make all the time.

The Second War of Gog and Magog doesn't occur until AFTER the millennium. The FIRST Gog and Magog is historically recognized as the Scythian invasion of Israel.