Events Before the Tribulation: The Empire of the Beast

Our movies are littered with types or pictures of the coming Antichrist and his empire. StarWars has Darth Vader. Toy Story has Lotso the bear. The Chronicles of Narnia has the White Witch and The Lion King has Scar. Even our political arena makes allusions to it. Ronald Reagan galvanized the country by calling the Soviet Union the “Evil Empire.” Our subconscious minds are prepared for what is coming by our culture, but if we aren’t looking in the correct sector of the world we might miss it when the empire of the Beast truly arises.

And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many. And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.” (Matt. 24:4-7 NRSV)

We have been “camped out” on these four verses for the last three posts learning about the events foretold to occur before the tribulation. Author Mark Davidson calls these “signposts” that lead to the unmasking of the Antichrist.

In this post we will show how spiritually deadly the deception will be when Antichrist arrives on the scene. It is essential that the church understands the pre-tribulation prophecies. We will then be able to identify the Antichrist when he comes and resist him. This is one of Jesus’ commands for this period: don’t be deceived. His other command is don’t be troubled. He follows that second command with these words: “for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.”

God is working all things together for good. This horrible war between the Shia and Sunni Muslims is foretold by God. All the political and economic chaos that will ensue is also foretold. God will hold us in his hand during that period. Knowing God works all things together for good; let us review the final fourth “signpost” of pre-tribulation prophecy with firm resolve and anticipation of the coming of our true king.

Where Will the Antichrist Arise?

We have already overcome the misconception that no major prophetic events will happen before the tribulation or rapture. The church needs to overcome another of the major misconceptions if we are going to see this signpost coming. Now we must overcome the misconception that the Antichrist arises out of a revived Roman Empire. This is one of the most deeply held tenets of the end times. It is almost equivalent to scripture in the minds of many. I am looking at my Bible right now, Daniel chapter 2, and there at the bottom of the page is a picture of Nebuchadnezzar’s metal statute. The legend clearly states that the legs of iron are Rome. I bet all the commentaries in your library say the same thing. How can my NASV be wrong? How can all your commentaries be wrong? Well, only the legend attached to a picture in my NASV is wrong. The Word of God given to Daniel is precisely perfect. It’s the seal God placed on Daniel that has led to this misconception.

Now that Daniel is unsealed, let us look at what scripture really says with fresh eyes.

Nebuchadnezzar's metal statue
Nebuchadnezzar’s metal statue

There are two passages in Daniel in particular that have led historic Christian expositors to believe the Antichrist will arise from a revived Roman Empire. If we are able to prove these passages apply to Islam not Rome, we will have undone the second misconception. Here is the first passage from Nebuchadnezzar’s vision of the metal statue.

And there shall be a fourth kingdom, strong as iron; just as iron crushes and smashes everything, it shall crush and shatter all these. As you saw the feet and toes partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, it shall be a divided kingdom; but some of the strength of iron shall be in it, as you saw the iron mixed with the clay. As the toes of the feet were part iron and part clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly brittle. As you saw the iron mixed with clay, so will they mix with one another in marriage, but they will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with clay. And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall this kingdom be left to another people. It shall crush all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever.” (Dan. 2:40-45 NRSV)

 What About the Revived Roman-Empire Model?

In the second century AD, the bishop Hippolytus, living in the pagan Roman Empire stated that this fourth kingdom had to be Rome. From that moment on over a period of eighteen centuries, Christian teachers and Bible scholars have agreed. Hal Lindsay’s runaway bestseller Late, Great Planet Earth cemented this revived Roman Empire model in the minds of most modern Christians. You may have read the book yourself.

Daniel referred to Nebuchadnezzar himself as the head of gold of the statue. This led all early historic Bible scholars to conclude this passage referred only to historic kingdoms, Babylon being the first. It was also easy to follow history and deduce that Persia was the second kingdom, Greece the third, and Rome the fourth. Since the Roman Empire later was divided into an Eastern Roman Empire (called “Byzantine” only after it fell 1,000 years after the west) and a Western Roman Empire, there were enough similarities to Rome in the passage for expositors to overlook the contradictions. Once the Reformation occurred, Protestant Christians were only too happy to see the Catholic Church based in Rome in all sorts of end-time scenarios. This prejudice continues to this day.

The entire, amazing history of how the theory that the Antichrist will be Roman grew from a supposition to almost equal with the canon of scripture, centered on the interpretation of Daniel 2:40. It can be found here online in Appendix A to Mark Davidson’s book, Daniel Revisited. It is a fascinating read.

The first and most important contradiction that proves that Rome is not the fourth kingdom occurs in Daniel 2:40 where God says through the prophet that the fourth kingdom“shall crush and shatter all of these.” That word for “crush” can also mean “pulverize” which is equal to turning something into a pile of bits that are unrecognizable from the pre-crushed state. By “these” the verse refers to the three earlier kingdoms. The most obvious problem with Rome as the iron empire is that Rome never conquered Persia let alone crushed it.

Islam on the other hand defeated and conquered Babylon, Persia and Greece. Islam did not settle to simply conquer these other kingdoms, but pulverized them by instituting their religion, writing, language, laws and culture on the subdued people. Rome allowed conquered peoples to retain their own cultures. Islam never did, so Islam is a perfect match with this scripture, not Rome.

The second contradiction that Rome is not the fourth kingdom involves the toes of the statue that are partly iron and partly clay—mixed. First, it is extremely interesting to note the Hebrew word for “mixed” is arab. God’s word is always so specific.

Returning to the toes, Bible interpreters have identified these as ten nations. When the European Union expanded to ten nations, champions of the revived Roman Empire model cheered. When it then further expanded to twenty-eight nations, these champions did not revise their model. Nor do they have a suitable explanation for the toes being made of iron and clay. Islam on the other hand has been broken up into many political nations. The Islamic realm is composed of many peoples from Morocco to Pakistan. There are Arabs, Persians and Turkic peoples, not to mention all the political divisions. So the toes and feet are partly strong from being united by a common religion and culture, but partly weak from being politically and ethnically divided.

The third contradiction can be found in Revelation. “And the beast that I saw was like a leopard, its feet were like a bear’s, and its mouth was like a lion’s mouth.” (Rev. 13:2 NRSV). The beasts imagined here should be very recognizable to everyone who has read the last several posts. The leopard is the four-nation Sunni confederation that has not yet formed. The bear is Iran and the lion is Iraq. This passage shows that the coming beast empire of the Antichrist will incorporate these previous beasts. This does not sound like a European Empire. It sounds like a Middle Eastern Islamic empire to me. The fourth kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue is clearly Islam.

If you are or were a believer in the revived Roman Empire prior to this post, I am sure your mind is racing to Daniel 9:26, the last great hope for that theory. But in that verse is actually the fourth contradiction to the iron empire being Rome.

And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; and the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. (Dan. 9:26 NRSV)

This famous passage is from Daniel’s prophecy of the “seventy sevens.” Nearly all Bible scholars identify the “prince who is to come” as the Antichrist. It is a known historic fact that the Roman army under the command of general Titus destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70. Believers in the Roman Antichrist theory consider this conclusive evidence they are correct. And so it was believed for almost 2000 years.

Understanding how this particular passage in Daniel was sealed requires knowledge of history and a realization of what “am” means, the word behind the translated word “people.” Not only was the general who oversaw the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in AD 70 not Italian, but from the Balkan Peninsula, but his soldiers were not either. The Roman legions at that time were made up of citizens and mercenaries. The Roman citizens from Syria and Egypt populated at least two if not three of the Roman legions that sacked and destroyed Jerusalem and the temple. These legions also had auxiliaries of Syrian, Egyptian and Arabian soldiers who did not have citizenship but were promised it.

After breaching the walls of Jerusalem, Titus gave an order that the temple was not to be destroyed. A fire was lit in the temple however by two unnamed soldiers. In the ensuing chaos, more soldiers joined in the melee and the temple was a ruin. You can read all about it in the writings of Josephus.

We need to carefully consider the makeup of the Roman forces at that time. They were Moesian, Celtic, Syrian, Egyptian and Arabian. Which nationalities would have an agenda to destroy the temple against orders (which was highly risky)? Which nationalities might hate the Jews enough to want to pulverize the symbol of the worship of God? Only those from the neighboring countries with a contempt that dated back to Ishmael would have motivation. The verse that was the last great hope of those favoring a revived Roman Empire has been shown to favor Islam. Probably the capstone of all this argument for Islam is what Mohammed says about his god: “Allah is the best of deceivers.” Our Bible states this god is the “Father of Lies” or Satan himself.

There is no biblical support for a Roman Antichrist. We have disproved the second major misconception of the end times!

If the church is made aware that the Antichrist is Islamic and knows what “signposts” to look for, it will be able to identify him and resist him. This is the purpose of the pre-tribulation prophecies. They are not academic arguments. This is where end-time prophecy becomes mainstream. Prophecy = saved souls.

If you have purchased Joel Richardson’s book Mideast Beast , all the data behind the make-up of the Roman legions is contained in chapter 7. I recommend you read this section of Joel’s book if you need clarification. Mark Davidson’s book, Daniel Revisited also discusses this in chapter 2 .

An interesting side note here is that after the fire in 70 AD, the gold that lined the walls of the temple melted. All the remaining stone walls were pulled down to get this gold. This was to fulfill what Jesus told the disciples immediately before the Olivet discourse, “I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another that shall not be thrown down.” Jesus’ prophecy that not one stone would be left upon another is proof that the famous mosque, the Dome of the Rock, is not built on the site of the ancient temple. It is built with part of its foundation being the Western Wall (or Wailing Wall.) If all the stones were torn down this wall cannot be part of the ancient temple. It is thought that the Western Wall is actually part of the ancient Antonio Fortress or Roman garrison headquarters where Jesus was tried on the day of his death. The site of the temple must be elsewhere! This has prophetic significance because the temple must be rebuilt. If it can be rebuilt elsewhere and coexist with the Dome of the Rock, politically this is much easier to accomplish.

What is the Empire of the Beast?

Let us return to studying the empire of the Beast. If we are going to properly identify the Antichrist, we need to know the kingdom he will rule. Four chapters in scripture testify to the formation of this empire: Daniel 2, 7, 8 and Revelation 13. Let’s look at what they say:

The fourth kingdom shall be as strong as iron, inasmuch as iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything; and like iron that crushes, that kingdom will break in pieces and crush all the others. Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay. And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile. As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay. (Dan. 2:40-43 NRSV)

A fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, exceedingly strong. It had huge iron teeth; it was devouring, breaking in pieces, and trampling the residue with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns. I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots. And there, in this horn, were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking pompous words. (Dan. 7:7-8 NRSV)

Then I wished to know the truth about the fourth beast, which was different from all the others, exceedingly dreadful, with its teeth of iron and its nails of bronze, which devoured, broke in pieces, and trampled the residue with its feet; and the ten horns that were on its head, and the other horn which came up, before which three fell, namely, that horn which had eyes and a mouth which spoke pompous words, whose appearance was greater than his fellows … The fourth beast shall be a fourth kingdom on earth, which shall be different from all other kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, trample it and break it in pieces. The ten horns are ten kings who shall arise from this kingdom. And another shall rise after them; he shall be different from the first ones, and shall subdue three kings. He shall speak pompous words against the Most High, shall persecute the saints of the Most High, and shall intend to change times and law. Then the saints shall be given into his hand for a time and times and half a time.” (Dan. 7:19-20, 23-25 NRSV)

Therefore the male goat grew very great; but when he became strong, the large horn was broken, and in place of it four notable ones came up toward the four winds of heaven. And out of one of them came a little horn which grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the Glorious Land.” (Dan. 8:8-9 NRSV)

As for the broken horn and the four that stood up in its place, four kingdoms shall arise out of that nation, but not with its power. And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors have reached their fullness, a king shall arise, having fierce features, who understands sinister schemes. His power shall be mighty, but not by his own power; he shall destroy fearfully, and shall prosper and thrive; he shall destroy the mighty, and also the holy people. (Dan. 8:22-24 NRSV)

I saw a beast rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name. Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion. The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority. And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast. So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?” (Rev. 13:1-4 NRSV)

These verses of scripture are remarkably similar. They all speak of ten horns that shall be ten kings or rulers that will coalesce into a ten-nation empire. Historically, Islam has been ruled by a caliph, part religious leader and part king; and the kingdom was known as a caliphate. These empires existed without interruption from AD 650 to 1924 when the new Turkish Republic, rising from the ashes of the old Ottoman Empire after WWI, officially abolished the caliphate. The Bible shows how it will rise again with ten nations.

What the exact nations might be is pure guesswork at this time, but they should come from the Islamic nations. When the great Sunni Confederacy breaks apart into four nations at the end of the third signpost, those four nations which do not exist today will be part of the ten. Rounding out the ten will most likely be nations like Sudan, Libya, Algeria and central Asian nations. This is assured by scripture. Davidson explains the candidate nations in chapter 12 of his book, Daniel Revisited. Most importantly, we are to also look for the rise of the Antichrist. We must identify him so as not to be deceived as Jesus commands.



60 thoughts on “Pulverized!”

  1. Gentlemen, please consider the entirety of what is being said. Don’t avoid what is staring you in the face.

    Daniel 2: 42
    “And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.

    Now here we can mull over differing mixes of religion, customs, financial strength etc…

    Daniel 2:43
    And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay”

    Not there though! Who are they that mingle themselves with the ‘seed’ of men? What is meant by this statement? It can’t be about religion or customs etc. That was already dealt with in verse 42.

    Don’t forbid discussion of a subject that God has opened. Not if you want the Holy Spirit to give revelation to your studies.

    1. Phil, Although I had planned to not address this issue on this website, since you bring up this particular verse, I think I owe you and the readers my take on it. It will take much more than a comment answer however. I’ll write a blog post on it. Look for it in the next few weeks.

  2. Nelson I think I understand your reluctance to consider this matter. However, as you have put up the the challenge Rome or I_______ and have presented a passage from Daniel 2 and have made some assessments as to wha that statue might mean might thought would be are you trying to get a clear picture of the matter or make a quick assessment of the matter without a thorough review? I wanted to be a little more thorough here and bring some more background info from someone who can present the matter a little better than myself.

    I realize that what I am suggesting challenges the M_______antichrist hypothesis to a significant degree seems to depend on the thought that the ac kingdom is a regional one. Do those who embrace the MEB hypothesis have an answer from the scriptures for this matter?

    In the church we have some time to examine and discuss these matters and then to consider a scriptural response to them in order to be of service to the church.

    1. The ethnicity and religion of the AC don’t depend on whether his kingdom is regional or global politically. It can be either. In all cases he will be king of a billion Muslims world-wide in all countries. The newest article alludes to this.

      As far as the identity of the ten kings and the nations/regions they represent, the articles you present are speculations. They may be true and may not. There are a lot of speculations I choose to not put on this website. I prefer to start with the solid Word of God and then look outward to evidence in the earth. I have yet to see one satisfactory theory about the toes being iron and clay mixed. I know Joel Richardson and Mark Davidson say this is Sunni/Shia. I no longer agree with them. If Iron is Islam, then clay must be something other than Islam AND must be a Biblical symbol supported by the Word. No one has shown me an acceptable answer to this. That is where theories of the ten kings must begin IMO, not with maps and speculations.

  3. Greetings: Earlier I posted a name Dr. Michael Coffman and made a reference to a map he had apparently derived from a book regarding the deciding up of the world into ten regions. Well, here is a link to a map derived from another source (scroll down to the lower left side of the web page). Dr Gavin Finely MD has also presented his reasoning and some scripture for his thinking.


    My thinking is somewhat parallel to he has reported regarding the segmentation of the ten regions first based on economics. I recall some feedback earlier that such thinking was unscriptural. Well, the dividing of the nations is occurring as we have this electronic conversation. It seems that the groups of nations are gathering together after the same pattern that the EU did: gathering according to trade and then becoming more united as time goes on. I have been following this matter of the nations gathering like this for several years and it appears to continue on as time progresses.

    1. Joseph, There are several topics this website isn’t designed to discuss, Nephilium, Democrat/Republican politics, and this topic of breaking the world up into 10 sections.(there are others as well) This doesn’t mean that these subjects don’t deserve discussion, its just there are other websites for that purpose.

  4. I think one of the things we should pay attention to in the Antiochus IV scenario is the historical time spread. The ten kings didn’t just arrive there during the life time of Antiochus. This was a generational happening.

    So we should be looking for a group of ten kings/princes, which have arisen over a period of time that spans generations. That group (as in the case of Antiochus) should have family connections to the AC.

    And there should be a period of time when the final ten’s ancestors had power, because you can’t be a king/prince if there never was a kingdom or principality. And there must be a period of time they are without power, because they receive that power during the last hour. Rev 17:12

      1. Nelson, I don’t think you completely understood what I said. I didn’t say the final ten are a succession of kings.

        The ten are now established in their kingdoms. But they lack the power. “One hour” doesn’t detract from the fact that they will have a history that goes back to the Seleucids and beyond. They are of a bloodline (seed) that began as recorded in Genesis 6.

        All men are sinners. But that man (AC) is said to be “of sin”.
        Q. What sin?
        A. That sin recorded in Genesis 6.

        What we see in historic fulfilment as a foreshadow, isn’t necessarily exactly what we should expect in the final outcome.

        1. First Phil, in regard to Seleucid bloodlines, this is possible but not specified in the Bible to my knowledge. Do you have a reference to this or is it an educated guess? One blood line is specified, Genesis 3 where enmity is placed between the seed of Satan (your seed) and the seed of the woman.

          You are correct we are all sinners, but once we are redeemed we no longer habitually practice sin (1 John 5:18), we are new creations, we were dead in sin but are now alive IN Christ.

          In regard to the “Man of Lawlessness” there is an element here that suggests sin enters this man, that there is an incarnation of sin or a procession by sin, that this man has something unique about him than other sinners. (possessed by Satan much as Judas was) The Hebrew version of “man of lawlessness” is a title given to Adam. It is Adam’s sin not something in Gen. 6 (are you thinking some kind of man/fallen angel hybrid? I don’t agree with that interpretation at all). The sin of Gen 3 is in view: “Surely God did not say” and “you shall be like God knowing good and evil.”

  5. Perhaps you are referring to Irenaeus about looking for the ten kings first. However, I think that there is some value to discussing these matters. I think that the difficulty with this matter is if we try to name names which is what some have been doing in the church for quite some time.

    The reason that I think that this matter is helpful is that there is a growing indication that some of the themes of the end times that are seem to be coming to a point of development that they could unfold into a fulfilled state in a rather short season.

    Discussing the theme of the ten kings and who they might be and where the man of sin might arise and several other symbolic images from Revelation will possibly either sharpen our faith or we could find our faith moving in an unhealthy direction.

    There have been several bible prophecy teachers who have said that it is OK for a believer to take the mark of the beast and have eternal life, which, it is clear from scripture that is not the case. It will separate the one who does it from Christ forever. Having an understanding of where the man of sin might arise can be helpful in measuring the progress of endtimes events so that we might not be caught off guard.

    I have come to a realization here that with respect to considering where to look for where the man of sin might come from, who the ten horns are, who the harlot is and who the scarlet beast is depends to a certain degree on how quickly one constructs their paradigm of scripture proof texts to arrive at a conclusion as to what to expect. If one starts in Daniel and assembles a model there first and then moves on to Revelation with a model in hand to interpret scripture according to the model, then it might be possible to overlook some parts of the text of scripture that might otherwise help bring some clarity.

    1. It is so clear that those who receive the Mark of the Beast burn it is frightening to believe anyone could teach otherwise.

      Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed [f]in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.” Here is the perseverance of the saints who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus. (Rev. 14:9-12 NASB)

  6. Phil: The info that you presented appears to be fairly close to the info from the link I found. I think the idea that Atiochus was a usurper to the throne seems to be evident and the same characteristic seems to be implied with the case of the man of sin when compiling the scripture account.

    Revelation 13:1 seems to suggest that the ten horn kingdom will arise and then the man of sin will follow. Daniel 7:8 seems to indicate that the little horn then pulls up three out of the ten from the roots. However, back to Revelation 17:12–13 there seems to be a connection between the ten horns and the man of sin that initially joins them to him and then he pulls the horns or usurps their prerogative to lead.

    1. Joseph, Daniel 7:24 shows that the “little horn” arises after the 10 kings. They come first. That is why looking for the AC now is wasteful and distracting. When we see the 10 kings, then we should begin looking for the AC IMO. This is a good discussion.

    1. Antiochus’s father, Antiochus III, “gave” Antiochus IV as a hostage to Rome after the father’s defeat at their hands. Needless to say there was jealousy and bitterness from this time in Rome. His brother who became king after Antiochus III died surrendered his own son to release Antiochus IV. A usurper to the throne killed Antiochus’s brother and Antiochus took the throne from the usurper. After assuming the throne he later killed another of his brother’s sons. Not a lot of gratitude in Antiochus’s heart.

  7. There is nothing to show he is an Assyrian by nationality. Ezra 6:22 proves that the king of Assyria can be any nationality. In that instance he is Darius, a Persian king: Ezra 6:15. When Alexander conquered the Medo-Persian Empire, he became the king of Assyria. Plus, there is no prophetic foreshadow that involves Assyrian nationals conquering Daniel’s holy city (Jerusalem)

    What are these references to Esau and Ishmael? The only prophetic references I can think of that point to the tribal origins of the Antichrist, point to the tribe of Dan.

    You say “Links to Europe are few, scattered, and never related to the AC.”

    Antiochus IV came from Rome, where he was held hostage, and fulfilled the prophecy regarding the uprooting of three horns. Best to look to his family progeny.

    1. You are correct Phil that Assyrian doesn’t necessarily mean ethnically Assyrian. The Bible gives him that title. Ethnically we aren’t told what he is. The Esau (Edom) and Ishmael references are all throughout the Bible as the people who persecute the Jews in the end time. I have a post about Bozrah that a posted a few months ago. There is some Esau info there. It is an interesting Bible study to find all the sons/grandsons of these two and trace them through the Bible. Maybe I will do a post on that someday.

      Antiochus was sent to Rome as a political hostage. He wasn’t Roman. He was exchanged for a nephew I believe, returned to Syria and then overthrew his brother to get the throne. Understanding Antiochus is important because he foreshadows the AC.

  8. Interesting thoughts. I think the characteristics that are relevant to the man of sin will be relevant to the time in which he is revealed. The gods issue could be a reference to the Greek pantheon of gods as that would have been what Atiochus IV was involved with. It seems that it might be tempting to redact any characteristics of Antiochus IV in considering the man of sin that might reflect anything that would place the man of sin coming from the Macedonian Empire side of Alexander’s empire.

    1. That would eliminate the references in Isaiah and Micah that show he is an Assyrian, and all the references to Esau and Ishmael as the people of the AC. The links to Islam are all over the Bible. Links to Europe are few, scattered, and never related to the AC. Antiochus IV however, is one of the very best foreshadows of the Antichrist. Looking at life and traits might be a useful exercise.

  9. Yes, some commentators believe “the desire of women” to be a title for a goddess, just like I said!

    Daniel 11:38

    Strong’s Concordance: Original language

    maoz or mauz or maoz or mauz: a place or means of safety, protection
    Original Word: מָעוֹז
    Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
    Transliteration: maoz or mauz or maoz or mauz
    Phonetic Spelling: (maw-oze’)
    Short Definition: stronghold

    Strong’s Concordance: Greek

    machomai: to fight
    Original Word: μάχομαι
    Part of Speech: Verb
    Transliteration: machomai
    Phonetic Spelling: (makh’-om-ahee)
    Short Definition: I engage in battle, fight, strive
    Definition: I engage in battle, fight; hence: I strive, contend, dispute.

    We have a clear and reasonable translation without sifting it through other languages. But even if we decide to sift it through Greek. The strength of argument is in favour of the European kings who spread their kingdoms and religion (a goddess religion) by the use of both force and fortresses.

  10. Baal worship morphed it’s way across Europe and can be seen in Norse mythology.

    As for the “desire of women”. Well even Freud admitted he didn’t know what women wanted:) But there is a serious connection with Egyptian goddess worship here. Nothing to do with the birth of the Messiah. That has already happened nearly 2,000 years ago by the time the Antichrist comes on the scene. So that desire is obsolete, and therefore not worth mentioning in prophecy!

    As for a god of fortresses. There is no obvious connection between Islam and fortresses. But there certainly is a connection between European pseudo-Christianity (Roman Catholicism) and the way it was spread by the use of castles and monasteries, both of which were fortresses.

    1. The “Desire of Women” is a title. Of course it can be applied to OT. Jewish women held giving birth to messiah as their greatest desire in Daniel’s day as well.

      “Fortresses” is a bad translation of the word in Dan 11. The Greek word in the Septuagint is MACHOMAI from which we get “macho.” It means “fighting” “engaging in battle” and “striving.” NT uses of this word are found in Acts 7:26, James 4:2, etc. It is a perfect word to describe ISLAM, the religion of war and bloodshed.

  11. One further thought here as we consider the scriptures and what the man of sin might be like, here is a portion of Daniel 11:36-39

    “Then the king shall do according to his own will: he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, shall speak blasphemies against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished; for what has been determined has been done. He shall regard neither the God of his fathers nor the desire of women, nor any god; for he shall exalt himself above them all. But in their place he shall honor a god of fortresses; and a god which his fathers did not know he shall honor with gold and silver, with precious stones and pleasant things. Thus he shall act against the strongest fortresses with a foreign god, which he shall acknowledge, and advance its glory; and he shall cause them to rule over many, and divide the land for gain.

    What I see in the above scripture if it is indicative a prophetic of the man of sin as some suggest, is the following*
    1) The fathers of the man of sin are polytheists
    ( in account Atiochus IV ) the noun for God speaking of the God of his fathers is a plural noun and as some have suggested I______is monotheistic.
    2) The tradition of I______ is passed from father to son within M______ areas and countries. So, if the man of sins fathers or where he is from is polytheistic, he is not from a traditional M________ country and certainly not from the ME if the god of fortresses is a foreign god.
    3) Even though the man of sin exalts himself above all gods, he gives honor to a god his fathers did not know, a foreign god.
    4) He does not regard the desire for women. This could be indicative of not acknowledging a god that women desire, or it could mean something else. A M________ would not be a part of that something else and remain a M_______.

    It’s possible with the above scriptures that the man of sin will appear to be a M______ in order to accomplish his own objectives and it is perhaps with these scriptures we may also have some common thinking.

    1. Joseph, the “gods of his fathers” are the Baals. The “desire of women” is Jesus. Giving birth to the Messiah was the desire of all Jewish girls. The foreign god who is a God of “fortresses” or “war, strength, etc.” is Allah. Hope that helps. As you can see this absolutely doesn’t fit with a European AC but fits perfectly with Islamic AC

  12. Great info here. Far be it from me to attempt to persuade the unpersuadable. I am primarily trying to present some developments that appear to be occurring that may have a fulfillment in with respect to the Daniel 2 statue. You are free to decide how to process them.
    Here is another link to a development that occurred since 2008 that is referred to in the above link about the Union for the Mediterranean. Take note of the map that portrays the member countries and the number of M___________ countries that are joined to European ones to form this union.

    Compare that with Daniel 11:5-45 and the relationship with the king of the North and king of the South.
    Perhaps we might agree here that the earlier version of the king of the North was the leader of the Selucid Empire and the king of the South was the Potolomiac Empire. However, those empires are no more. Are the co presidencies of the Mediterranean Union a fulfillment of bible prophecy?

    1. Joseph, These world-wide alliances are interesting but not necessarily biblical. They might be, they might not. I tend to try to keep this ministry focused on just what the Bible says and interpret it as best as I am able. There are plenty of other sites that attempt to surmise what might be occurring to line up with scripture. You will notice very few current events on this website. It is not my calling.

      My view on the ten kings is the same as several other issues that are not clearly defined. We are to “watch” as our Lord commands. I am sure we will know the 10 kings when we (alert, bible-knowing Christians) see them. They will be “iron and clay” mixed. That will be the sign for me.

  13. Hi Nelson.

    I totally agree with what you say about “ideas” needing to align with scripture.
    We see a foreshadow of the ten king prophecy in the history of the Seleucid empire.
    We might see a modern day fulfilment of it in the Electoral College of a revived Holy Roman Empire.

  14. Here is a link to a web page that presents the matter of the 10 regional unions a little better than I am able to. I first came across this matter on a web site of Dr. Michael Cofmann who presented a map of the world decided up into ten regions from a book entitled “Limits to Growth” by the Club of Rome published in about 1973. The current deciding up of the world into ten regions is not exact to the map but is nevertheless occurring. I had been following the development of ASEAN for several years now outside the context of bible prophecy and had been amazed at its continued development.


    To all those who may challenge the thought of a revived Roman Empire I would invite you to consider the development of the Union for the Mediterranean which appears to be the overlapping of three of ten of the unions of nations.

    1. Again, for all the Biblical reasons I gave earlier, the empire of the AC will NOT consume the entire world. All these “ideas” about the 10 kings must align with scripture.

  15. Nathan: Without repeating what I have written, I would like to provide a an interesting list of Nations:

    1. Brunei
    2. Cambodia
    3. Indonesia
    4. Lao PDR
    5. Malaysia
    6. Myanmar
    7. Philippines
    8. Singapore
    9. Thailand
    10. Vietnam
    What do the above nations have in common? They are part of a group of nations known as ASEAN. ASEAN seems to be modeled after the EU and is slowly seeking greater opportunities for economic integration and free trade. You may recognize Indonesia which is said to be the single most populated state with M_____ in the world. Consider the M_____ populations of Malaysia and Brunei as well. Cambodia, Lao PDR and Vietnam might be considered socialist while Thailand is a question and the Philippines might be called democracy. This grouping of nations appears to be in a pattern that seems to be occurring world wide as various nation sates join together to form unions. Some unions are more advanced than others but it seems as if this is a world wide occurrence.

    I would humbly suggest that ASEAN is possibly one of the toes of
    Daniel 2 along with the African Union, the EU, Mediterranean Union, the North American Union and others.

    If the above mentioned nations are not part of the toes and of the ten horns then, I would expect that to become clearer as time continues.

    1. all of this is possible. Unlikely I believe, but possible. IMO I don’t believe the AC will have a world-wide empire. He attacks the strongest fortresses during the Great Tribulation and the Kings of the East come to attack him when the Euphrates dries up. I do believe however, that the ACs empire will be more than just Islamic.

      1. Hi Nelson,

        I know I made this point in an email to you, but you didn’t reply.

        You say: “I have answered why Rev. 17:9 says “mountains” and not “hills” in twenty comments on this site. IT IS NOT HILLS, has nothing to do with hills. It is a reference to Daniel 2 and means Kingdoms. That’s what I believe. You will not convince me otherwise on that point. I have an open mind but not about something I am that sure of.” (end quote)

        The problem I have with your belief that mountains refers to kingdoms, is that requires the angel’s explanation to have introduced a second metaphor. #1.heads means #2.mountains means kingdoms

        “And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.”

        The angel is explaining the meaning of the seven heads as being seven mountains/hills on which the woman sits. The explanation finishes there. To then say the mountains are metaphors for kingdoms is to add something that’s not been said.

        What’s the difference between a hill and a mountain?
        Unfortunately, there is no universally accepted standard definition for the height of a mountain or a hill although a mountain usually has an identifiable summit. In the United Kingdom, a mountain must be over 600 meters (1969 feet) or over 300 meters (984 feet) if it’s an abrupt difference in the local topography. However, some hills can be called mountains and some mountains can be called hills – it’s just a matter of the original name given to the relief. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill

        Seven kings have a repetitive connection with Rome.

        1. Okay, this is the very last comment I will field on this subject.

          1. Remember the seven mountains are seven heads. Heads are a symbol of authority and power like a KINGDOM. Not like a mound of dirt. This is THE MOST important proof that the 7 heads can’t be 7 hills. There is no connection between 7 authorities and 7 mounds of dirt.
          2. The entire section about the heads of the Beast is a reference to Daniel 2 and the statue where 4 of the 7 heads are detailed. That is one reason that “mountain” is used to symbolize kingdom. It is John’s way of referring us back to Daniel 2 where mountain = kingdom plainly. As a writer John is all about references. There are more OT references in Revelation than in the rest of the NT combined. If you miss the references you don’t understand Revelation.
          3. The second reason “mountain” is used instead of “kingdom” is to differentiate these 7 special kingdoms used by Satan to try and defeat God’s plan of redemption. This is to prevent us from thinking China, Mongolia, or Brittan are one of these special Kingdoms. The 7 heads are the “mountains.”
          4. Babylon is called a corrupting “mountain” in Jer. 51:25. This is a DIRECT reference to Mystery Babylon and its destruction. Notice in Jeremiah how the mountain becomes a “burnt mountain.”
          5. “mystery” in the NT means something that was not understood previously. Notice John says it will take wisdom to understand the 7 heads. It takes zero wisdom if he is telegraphing that it’s Rome via 7 hills.
          6. 7 mountains have to be a symbol for something. They aren’t 7 random mountains. They are either a symbol for Rome or for Kingdoms or even for something else. They aren’t simply any old mountains. Thus by definition they are a symbol.

  16. I am suggesting here that I_____ is not a form of apostate Christianity or Judaism for that matter. Whether I_____ is an offshoot of Christianity does not necessarily factor into an interpretation with the Daniel 2 statue but does appear to factor in regarding the Babylonian harlot of
    Revelation 17.

    I____ holds to several significant beliefs that appear to disqualify it from being the harlot. A harlot we would conclude was at one point earlier not a harlot. I______ has never been connected with a belief in the gospel, the work of the cross, the atonement by the blood of Jesus, the deity of Christ and the triune Godhead. It has always denied the relationship of the Father (God) and His Son Jesus.

    If then we identify the harlot a city on seven mountains and seven hills then we can identify the scarlet beast. If we can identify the scarlet beast we may gain an insight regarding the identity of the ten horns or kings and by implication the ten toes of the Daniel passage.

    I am not suggesting the ten toes or ten kings are from the two legged kingdom of iron. The inclusion of clay with iron in feet and the toes seems to imply a kingdom of slightly different territory and stature than the legs of iron.

    To recognize the gold of the statue of Daniel 2 as an empire and perhaps the silver as an empire and the bronze as an empire not segmented according to religion and then to recognize the legs of iron according to religion and then to use religion to arbitrarily choose ten nation states as part of a kingdom with religion taken into account and not account for any other of the religions of the world seems seems somewhat arbitrary.

    1. Very long comment Joseph, Let me take in order:
      1. Islam is definitely an apostate form of Judeo/Christian monotheism. We simply and strongly disagree.
      2. I have never commented on who I think the Harlot is because I don’t know yet myself.
      3. I have answered why Rev. 17:9 says “mountains” and not “hills” in twenty comments on this site. IT IS NOT HILLS, has nothing to do with hills. It is a reference to Daniel 2 and means Kingdoms. That’s what I believe. You will not convince me otherwise on that point. I have an open mind but not about something I am that sure of.
      4. You are correct about iron and clay mixed. IMO it implies more than the iron of Islam. I am still trying to figure this out as well and not ready to comment yet. I do not agree with my friend Joel Richardson or Mark Davidson who say this is Sunni/Shia. I think it is more than that.
      5. Iron is a Kingdom. Islam is not just a religion but under the caliphates were a mighty kingdom as well ruled by a caliph

  17. I think you have been misinformed about this matter. My understanding about this goes back to some comments from a college professor in a religion class a long while ago. the matter of the epistemology of I______ is perhaps still a matter of discussion but, it seems that the founder of I_______ apparently borrowed from multiple traditions of belief in forming I______. That certainly wouldn’t qualify the result as representative of any one of those traditions.

    1. I agree Joseph that Islam had multiple different influences: Judaism, Christianity, Babylonian, and other apostate and animistic cults. The same can be said for all other apostate monotheistic religions that are offshoots of Judaism and Christianity: Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Kabala, etc. Islam is just another apostate, heretical branch. I guess I’m not getting your point on this.

  18. At the end of the day. It seems that I___ didn’t exist as a defined religion during the writing of the scriptures. The religion of I___ seems to be equated with the worship of a moon god of the Arabian desert.

    1. Muslims don’t believe Allah is the moon god. They view him as the creator and the God of our bible. They are wrong but that is how they view him. They are definitely an apostate version of Judeo-Christian traditions. Islam is a demonic inspired religion with influences from pagan Arabic culture, Christianity, Judaism, and their own beliefs as well.

  19. I would like to offer a few thoughts on the above discussion as there seems to be a preoccupation with trying to make the end times beast empire one that fits a religion that didn’t exist during the time of Daniel, Atiochus IV or even John the Apostle. The religion of I—-did not exist for multiple centuries from the writing of the book of Revelation.

    1. Interestingly Joseph, I view Islam as a radical apostate form of Jewish monotheism. Although we don’t believe that Allah and YHWH are the same, Muslims do. They also believe in a heretical form of Jesus. The Quran is a “rewritten” form of our scriptures; rewritten to match their heretical views. They believe Abraham is their “father” just as we do. When Jesus said “many will come in my name” it doesn’t just mean apostate Christian false prophets. Muslims are awaiting Jesus’s return as well. Just not the real one.

  20. You say
    “Islam on the other hand defeated and conquered Babylon, Persia and Greece. Islam did not settle to simply conquer these other kingdoms, but pulverized them by instituting their religion, writing, language, laws and culture on the subdued people. Rome allowed conquered peoples to retain their own cultures. Islam never did, so Islam is a perfect match with this scripture, not Rome.”

    Daniel’s vision is of kingdoms. Islam isn’t a kingdom, it’s a religion/political ideology. It’s original language is Arabic. Persians have their own language, writing, laws, and culture. So do the Greeks. And both of those kingdoms still exist. So in what way could they be described as pulverised?

    The Roman empire was never destroyed. It went through various transformations, and will eventually conquer Persia/Iran in its fulfilment of Jeremiah 49:35-39

    1. Phil thanks for reading and commenting. These are important questions so we know what area of the world the Antichrist will come from. These are questions worth debating.

      Islam is an empire expressed through various caliphates, the last of which was the Ottoman Empire which conquered the Eastern Roman empire in the 1400’s. This empire received the fatal head wound in 1924. We are seeing the caliphate rising from the abyss as we speak. Although I look for it’s final form to be a revived Ottoman Empire not ISIS. IMO this will be the empire of the Beast.

      The Catholic Religion is a papacy and a religious system, not an empire. It is a candidate for the harlot (I don’t believe it is) but not for the Beast. BTW, Jer. 49 doesn’t mention Rome. It discusses the defeat of Elam (Persia) and then Elam fortunes rising in the last days. The rising fortunes of Persia is happening now. Iran will fulfill the first part of Daniel 8, invade the middle east, become “great,” then be crushed by Turkey (Ottoman Caliphate) as per Daniel’s prophecy. IMO, Rome has very little to do with end time prophecies.

      1. Hi Nelson,

        I think it fair to say you are making informed guesses. But what if your information is incorrect?

        You said:
        “Not only was the general who oversaw the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in AD 70 not Italian, but from the Balkan Peninsula, but his soldiers were not either.”

        That statement is totally wrong! Titus was born in Rome, and his father was Italian, born in a village north-east of Rome called Falacrinae.

        The legions responsible for the destruction of the temple: V Macedonica, XII Fulminata, XV Apollinaris and X Fretensis were all Roman legions. Check it out – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_(AD_70)

        The Catholic religion is an empire in every sense you attribute that status to Islam. What was the Holy Roman Empire if not the equivalent of what you claim the Ottoman Empire to have been?

        1. Phil, You are correct that all of us need to loosely hold our end times views.

          But, in regard to the make up of the Roman legions, the fact that Syrians actually are the people (Hebrew word “am”) that destroyed the temple is well documented in history. There are several great references that will help you. This article on this blog is a couple pages, the book The Coming Bible Prophecy Reformation by Rodrigo Silva (400 pages) contains dozens of original historic documents that clearly show the make-up of these legions. I recommend this book whose primary purpose is showing how the Beast Empire will be Islam.

          Other books are listed in the article, Mideast Beast by Joel Richardson and Daniel Revisited by Mark Davidson. Mark’s Appendix A to his book is online and a link is provided in this article. This Appendix details how the mistaken view that Rome will be the Beast arose to become the dominant view until Joel’s landmark interpretations within the last 15 years overturned this thinking.

          Obviously you have a great deal of interest in this subject matter. I suggest you reference these books, then follow up with additional questions, rather than me trying to recreate this material in the comments section. I pray the Holy Spirit assists all of our searches for the truth.

          1. Hi Nelson.

            I have already looked at Joel Richardson’s ideas. He builds his views on the foundational misinterpretation of Babylon being the first beast of Daniel chapter 7. He, like so many, missed the fact that verse 17 of that chapter states that these beasts “shall arise” (future tense). Which means none of them can already be in power at the time of Daniel’s vision.

            I think I already debated with the guy who calls himself Mark Davidson. It’s difficult to know for sure with people who use pen names. If he is the same, he argues that the beasts of Daniel 8 are yet to find any prophetic fulfilment. He said that we couldn’t see them in history because we didn’t have their names given in scripture. I pointed out that means nobody will ever know the identity of the Antichrist.

            Using his phrase “Hidden In Full View”. Think Islam = False Prophet. Not Antichrist.

          2. Phil, I am very aware of Dan. 17:7 as is Joel Richardson. Like you and Mark Davidson, I used to believe that this verse showed the Beasts were yet future to Babylon. This was based on the Hebrew translation. Unfortunately Daniel 2 thru 7 were originally written in Aramaic. Verse 17 in particular is an Aramaic idiomatic phrase meaning “rise from the earth” and it does not convey a future meaning, it is present tense. I had a personal conversation with Joel Richardson at a prophecy seminar we both spoke at about this very phrase. Joel had the opportunity to speak to several Aramaic scholars about the translation of Daniel 7 prior to writing Mideast Beast and they felt the meaning of this phrase could easily encompass Babylon within the tense of the words.

            My current thinking is Daniel 7’s first three beasts are historic and are parallel to the first 3 metals of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue. Daniel 8 is clearly future. Read my recent post IS IRAN ABOUT TO FULFILL DANIEL 8? on this site for more details. Joel and Mark agree with me about Daniel 8. My change of thinking on Daniel 7 is a reason we must all loosely hold our ideas and be willing to change when new and better information is available.

            As far as the identity of the Antichrist. He is revealed by sitting in the Temple of God and declaring himself to be God (at the Abomination of Desolation.) Only this wicked sign will completely identify him. I suspect Christians may be wrong a couple times about his identity until he is finally revealed at the midpoint of the tribulation.

            What we do know is he is Assyrian from Micah 5;5 and that he rises from one of the four divisions of the ancient Hellenistic empire from Dan. 8. From Daniel 11 he is identified as the King of the North so we know this will be the Seleucid empire (Syria, Iraq and eastern Turkey.) For detailed information on this read Rodrigo Silva’s book The Coming Bible Prophecy Reformation which goes into more detail on these factors. (400 pages more)

  21. Ok Nelson I’ll keep reading I like you believe end time is revelatory , progressive , but if Isreal is not involved in the tribulation then why the distinction in revaluation 12 the women Isreal and her offspring who hold to the testimony of Jesus this can only be the church. It is true also Isreal and the church are both witnesses of the of God and remember although Isreal Wil not recognize Jesus till his 2nd coming from the vantage point of the evil one he will seek to destroy them even though they don’t know the Lord as Jesus because the evil one knows the plan of the Lord so Isreal will be saved Zachariah 12. When I think of the two prophets, witnesses I see it as symbolic and the two witnesses of God are Isreal and the church and so the evil one try to destroy both revelations 12

  22. The thought of Daniel and John occurred to me as I was reading your post. I may research it myself. ….. And how about ISIS relative to the red horse of war, the second horse?

  23. Could the Prophet Daniel and the Apostle John be the Two Witnesses to come during the 70th week? Their books are direct prophecies and words of Jesus Christ, one book corroborating the other. Both books are bearing witness to the events leading to the second coming of Jesus. There is no proof of either of their deaths. Early Christian legends have both being taken directly to heaven, as Ezekiel and Enoch.

      1. The 2 witnesses , the two candlesticks to olive trees are represented by God’s two witnesses in the history of the world are clearly Israel God chose Isreal to be a witness to his glory
        … the other group of people that witness to the Glory are the church. Ephesians chapt. 2 tell of the two groups becoming the Commonwealth of Isreal . Romans 11 talks of the two groups gentiles through the church and that Isreal is the first olive tree the church the 2nd also I think it’s Ezekiel it’s talks of the two candlesticks in contrast the scripture says those who were not called by my name shall suddenly be called by my name. Also the churches in revelation are represented as candlesticks .. will there be two literal persons called prophets , not sure one prophet suggested was Moses who was the deliverer of the Israelite s the other was Elijah Moses turning the seas red and Elijah who had power over the rain . Plus it was heard Elijah was to come again . John the Baptist was thought to be Elijah and the new testament says John would come again in the Spirit of Elijah .. whether they are two prophets who actually are Moses and Elijah two that will be like him or just Isreal and the church idk but definitely I believe Isreal and the church are two as revelations 12 confirms the beasts go after the women Isreal and God protects them and the dragon being wroth with the women went off to make war against the saints who are the seed of the women ( Isreal ) And those who have the testimony of Jesus this can only be the church..

        1. Michael thanks for reading. I am unsure of the identity of the witnesses and as of yet, haven’t tried to identify them. In the OT, the two olive trees are Joshua and Zerubabal. A problem with the theory they are Israel and the church is that they perform miracles of sending plagues and defending themselves with fire. It seems highly unlikely the entire nation of Israel (who hadn’t recognized Christ yet) or the entire church would be given these powers. It seems most likely they are individuals. You can read the post Midpoint of the Tribulation: Earth’s Perspective on this site to learn a bit more about them.

  24. Well, I must admit, being a STRONG supporter of Israel, this was a hard read. Having been to Israel, prayed at the Western, wailing wall, this has given me pause. But, we must follow the teachings of scripture and not the traditions of men.

    Thanks, I march on.

Tell us what you think