Does Daniel 9:26 prove that the Antichrist is Islamic?
Joseph Farah, editor of World Net Daily, posted something trying to teach that it was Arabs and not Europeans that destroyed the Temple in 70 A.D. Here is some of what he posted:
Temple? What Temple? The one Arabs destroyed
Who destroyed the Temple in A.D. 70?
The Temple was destroyed by the forces of Rome, but, interestingly, according to the historian Josephus, not at the command of Rome or the people of Rome.
Did you know that? You do now.
By A.D. 70 the Roman armies in the Middle East were made up largely of men who were not from Europe, not from Italy. They were comprised of provincial soldiers from Syria, Arabia – local forces. While they were under the command of Roman officers, they were not ordered to destroy the Temple. In fact, they were ordered to stop the destruction by Titus, who would later become emperor.
First let me quote from the Roman historian Tacitus who meticulously described the forces that sacked Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple.
“Early in this year Titus found in Judea three legions, the 5th, the 10th and the 15th,” he wrote. “To these he added the 12th from Syria and some men belonging to the 18th and 3rd, whom he had withdrawn from Alexandria (Egypt). This force was accompanied by a strong contingent of Arabs, who hated the Jews with the unusual passion of neighbors.”
Now, I stopped the article here to point out that the quote above has been truncated and parts left out. Here is the full quote of this section from Tacitus:
[5.1] EARLY in this year Titus Caesar, who had been selected by his father to complete the subjugation of Judaea, and who had gained distinction as a soldier while both were still subjects, began to rise in power and reputation, as armies and provinces emulated each other in their attachment to him. The young man himself, anxious to be thought superior to his station, was ever displaying his gracefulness and his energy in war. By his courtesy and affability he called forth a willing obedience, and he often mixed with the common soldiers, while working or marching, without impairing his dignity as general. He found in Judaea three legions, the 5th, the 10th, and the 15th, all old troops of Vespasian’s. To these he added the 12th from Syria, and some men belonging to the 18th and 3rd, whom he had withdrawn from Alexandria. This force was accompanied by twenty cohorts of allied troops and eight squadrons of cavalry, by the two kings Agrippa and Sohemus, by the auxiliary forces of king Antiochus, by a strong contingent of Arabs, who hated the Jews with the usual hatred of neighbours, and, lastly, by many persons brought from the capital and from Italy by private hopes of securing the yet unengaged affections of the Prince. With this force Titus entered the enemy’s territory, preserving strict order on his march, reconnoitring every spot, and always ready to give battle. At last he encamped near Jerusalem. (The Histories by Publius Cornelius Tacitus. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/txt/ah/tacitus/TacitusHistory05.html accessed 08/13/17)
So, while there were Arabs, they were only part of the conquering force, and there were many troops brought from Italy and Rome.
As far as those Roman legions go, I looked up information on each of the above legions and they all appear to have been initially begun by Romans. Romans did include others in their military, but these tended to be peoples from Europe, not mainly Arabs. Consider also the following:
Up to about 88 BC the legions were made of citizens of Rome and surroundings and colonies. Thereafter also the allies were Roman citizens, the legions were recruited from Italian males. In the professional army created by Augustus the legions were filled with citizens, more and more recruited also in the provinces. The auxilia units were made of non-citizens from all places in and beyond the frontiers. After the proliferation of the citizenship to almost all male inhabitants of the whole empire by Aurelius Severus (Caracalla) the distinction between legions and auxilia vanished. The preferred recruitment was local. So people from all the empire served. From the late third century onwards more and more “barbarians” from outside the empire served in the army as individuals. In the later fourth and the fifth century a big part of the army was made of such foreigners, perhaps up to 30 percent … (http://historum.com/ancient-history/108044-ethnic-composition-roman-legions.html accessed 08/13/17)
During the reign of Augustus and Trajan the army became a professional one. Its core of legionaries was composed of Roman citizens who served for a minimum of twenty five years.(Ancient Roman Military. http://www.crystalinks.com/romemilitary.html accessed 08/13/17)
Presuming the above is correct, then in the first century, the vast bulk of the soldiers were Roman citizens. Most of which would have been ethnically European (Italian, Greek, etc.).
Anyway, Joseph Farah then brings in the first century Jewish historian Josephus:
Josephus reports in his own words: “The multitude of the Arabians, with the Syrians, cut up those that came out as supplicants, and searched their bellies (looking for gold they had swallowed). Nor does it seem to me that any misery befell the Jews that was more terrible than this, since in one night’s time about 2,000 of these deserters were thus dissected.”
Finally, after the Romans and these Middle Eastern provincial forces of Rome broke through the city walls and captured the Temple, it was set on fire.
Here’s Josephus’ account: “Now a certain person came running to Titus, and told him of this fire … whereupon he rose up in great haste, and, as he was, ran to the holy house, in order to have a stop put to the fire; after him followed all of his commanders, and after them followed the several legions, in great astonishment; so there was a great clamor and tumult raised, as was natural upon the disorderly motion of so great an army. Then did Caesar, both by calling to the soldiers that were fighting, with a loud voice, and by giving a signal to them with his right hand, order them to quench the fire.”
In other words, Titus had no desire to see the Temple destroyed. Rome loved its treasures of conquest, and this Temple was one of the greatest prizes ever. The emperor’s son didn’t order the Temple destroyed. He tried desperately to stop it.
Why didn’t that work?
Josephus explains: “Titus supposing that the house itself yet be saved, he came in haste and endeavored to persuade the soldiers to quench the fire. Yet were the regards they had for Caesar, and their dread of him who forbade them, not as hard as their passion and their hatred of the Jews, and a certain vehement inclination to fight them. … And thus was the holy house burnt down, without Caesar’s approbation.” http://www.wnd.com/2017/08/temple-what-temple-the-one-arabs-destroyed/
Now, although it is true that Titus himself preferred to not destroy the Temple and the above seems to support Joseph Farah’s view of Arab destruction, this is only partially what Josephus wrote.
Notice more of what Josephus wrote:
1 … But when Titus perceived that his endeavors to spare a foreign temple turned to the damage of his soldiers, and then be killed, he gave order to set the gates on fire. (Wars of the Jews, Book VI, Chapter 4, section 1)
5. So Titus retired into the tower of Antonia, and resolved to storm the temple the next day, early in the morning, with his whole army, and to encamp round about the holy house. But as for that house, God had, for certain, long ago doomed it to the fire; and now that fatal day was come, according to the revolution of ages; it was the tenth day of the month Lous, [Ab,] upon which it was formerly burnt by the king of Babylon; although these flames took their rise from the Jews themselves, and were occasioned by them; for upon Titus’s retiring, the seditious lay still for a little while, and then attacked the Romans again, when those that guarded the holy house fought with those that quenched the fire that was burning the inner [court of the] temple; but these Romans put the Jews to flight, and proceeded as far as the holy house itself. At which time one of the soldiers, without staying for any orders, and without any concern or dread upon him at so great an undertaking, and being hurried on by a certain divine fury, snatched somewhat out of the materials that were on fire, and being lifted up by another soldier, he set fire to a golden window, through which there was a passage to the rooms that were round about the holy house, on the north side of it. As the flames went upward, the Jews made a great clamor, such as so mighty an affliction required, and ran together to prevent it; and now they spared not their lives any longer, nor suffered any thing to restrain their force, since that holy house was perishing, for whose sake it was that they kept such a guard about it.
6. And now a certain person came running to Titus, and told him of this fire, as he was resting himself in his tent after the last battle; whereupon he rose up in great haste, and, as he was, ran to the holy house, in order to have a stop put to the fire; after him followed all his commanders, and after them followed the several legions, in great astonishment; so there was a great clamor and tumult raised, as was natural upon the disorderly motion of so great an army. Then did Caesar, both by calling to the soldiers that were fighting, with a loud voice, and by giving a signal to them with his right hand, order them to quench the fire. But they did not hear what he said, though he spake so loud, having their ears already dimmed by a greater noise another way; nor did they attend to the signal he made with his hand neither, as still some of them were distracted with fighting, and others with passion. But as for the legions that came running thither, neither any persuasions nor any threatenings could restrain their violence, but each one’s own passion was his commander at this time; and as they were crowding into the temple together, many of them were trampled on by one another, while a great number fell among the ruins of the cloisters, which were still hot and smoking, and were destroyed in the same miserable way with those whom they had conquered; and when they were come near the holy house, they made as if they did not so much as hear Caesar’s orders to the contrary; but they encouraged those that were before them to set it on fire. As for the seditious, they were in too great distress already to afford their assistance [towards quenching the fire]; they were every where slain, and every where beaten; and as for a great part of the people, they were weak and without arms, and had their throats cut wherever they were caught. Now round about the altar lay dead bodies heaped one upon another, as at the steps going up to it ran a great quantity of their blood, whither also the dead bodies that were slain above [on the altar] fell down.
7. And now, since Caesar was no way able to restrain the enthusiastic fury of the soldiers, and the fire proceeded on more and more, he went into the holy place of the temple, with his commanders, and saw it, with what was in it, which he found to be far superior to what the relations of foreigners contained, and not inferior to what we ourselves boasted of and believed about it. But as the flame had not as yet reached to its inward parts, but was still consuming the rooms that were about the holy house, and Titus supposing what the fact was, that the house itself might yet he saved, he came in haste and endeavored to persuade the soldiers to quench the fire, and gave order to Liberalius the centurion, and one of those spearmen that were about him, to beat the soldiers that were refractory with their staves, and to restrain them; yet were their passions too hard for the regards they had for Caesar, and the dread they had of him who forbade them, as was their hatred of the Jews, and a certain vehement inclination to fight them, too hard for them also. Moreover, the hope of plunder induced many to go on, as having this opinion, that all the places within were full of money, and as seeing that all round about it was made of gold. And besides, one of those that went into the place prevented Caesar, when he ran so hastily out to restrain the soldiers, and threw the fire upon the hinges of the gate, in the dark; whereby the flame burst out from within the holy house itself immediately, when the commanders retired, and Caesar with them, and when nobody any longer forbade those that were without to set fire to it. And thus was the holy house burnt down, without Caesar’s approbation.
8. Now although any one would justly lament the destruction of such a work as this was, since it was the most admirable of all the works that we have seen or heard of, both for its curious structure and its magnitude, and also for the vast wealth bestowed upon it, as well as for the glorious reputation it had for its holiness; yet might such a one comfort himself with this thought, that it was fate that decreed it so to be, which is inevitable, both as to living creatures, and as to works and places also. However, one cannot but wonder at the accuracy of this period thereto relating; for the same month and day were now observed, as I said before, wherein the holy house was burnt formerly by the Babylonians. Now the number of years that passed from its first foundation, which was laid by king Solomon, till this its destruction, which happened in the second year of the reign of Vespasian, are collected to be one thousand one hundred and thirty, besides seven months and fifteen days; and from the second building of it, which was done by Haggai, in the second year of Cyrus the king, till its destruction under Vespasian, there were six hundred and thirty-nine years and forty-five days. (Wars of the Jews, Book VI, Chapter 4, sections 5-8)
So, Titus did not want to destroy the Temple, but he and his troops did so.
Josephus also wrote:
5. And now Titus, upon consideration that the alacrity of soldiers in war is chiefly excited by hopes and by good words, and that exhortations and promises do frequently make men to forget the hazards they run, nay, sometimes to despise death itself, got together the most courageous part of his army, and tried what he could do with his men by these methods. “O fellow soldiers,” said he, “to make an exhortation to men to do what hath no peril in it, is on that very account inglorious to such to whom that exhortation is made; and indeed so it is in him that makes the exhortation, an argument of his own cowardice also. I therefore think that such exhortations ought then only to be made use of when affairs are in a dangerous condition, and yet are worthy of being attempted by every one themselves; accordingly, I am fully of the same opinion with you, that it is a difficult task to go up this wall; but that it is proper for those that desire reputation for their valor to struggle with difficulties in such cases will then appear, when I have particularly shown that it is a brave thing to die with glory, and that the courage here necessary shall not go unrewarded in those that first begin the attempt. And let my first argument to move you to it be taken from what probably some would think reasonable to dissuade you, I mean the constancy and patience of these Jews, even under their ill successes; for it is unbecoming you, who are Romans and my soldiers, who have in peace been taught how to make wars, and who have also been used to conquer in those wars, to be inferior to Jews, either in action of the hand, or in courage of the soul, and this especially when you are at the conclusion of your victory, and are assisted by God himself; for as to our misfortunes, they have been owing to the madness of the Jews, while their sufferings have been owing to your valor, and to the assistance God hath afforded you; for as to the seditions they have been in, and the famine they are under, and the siege they now endure, and the fall of their walls without our engines, what can they all be but demonstrations of God’s anger against them, and of his assistance afforded us? It will not therefore be proper for you, either to show yourselves inferior to those to whom you are really superior, or to betray that Divine assistance which is afforded you. And, indeed, how can it be esteemed otherwise than a base and unworthy thing, that while the Jews, who need not be much ashamed if they be deserted, because they have long learned to be slaves to others, do yet despise death, that they may be so no longer; and do make sallies into the very midst of us frequently, no in hopes of conquering us, but merely for a demonstration of their courage; we, who have gotten possession of almost all the world that belongs to either land or sea, to whom it will be a great shame if we do not conquer them, do not once undertake any attempt against our enemies wherein there is much danger, but sit still idle, with such brave arms as we have, and only wait till the famine and fortune do our business themselves, and this when we have it in our power, with some small hazard, to gain all that we desire! For if we go up to this tower of Antonia, we gain the city; for if there should be any more occasion for fighting against those within the city, which I do not suppose there will, since we shall then be upon the top of the hill and be upon our enemies before they can have taken breath, these advantages promise us no less than a certain and sudden victory. As for myself, I shall at present wave any commendation of those who die in war, and omit to speak of the immortality of those men who are slain in the midst of their martial bravery; yet cannot I forbear to imprecate upon those who are of a contrary disposition, that they may die in time of peace, by some distemper or other, since their souls are condemned to the grave, together with their bodies. For what man of virtue is there who does not know, that those souls which are severed from their fleshly bodies in battles by the sword are received by the ether, that purest of elements, and joined to that company which are placed among the stars; that they become good demons, and propitious heroes, and show themselves as such to their posterity afterwards? while upon those souls that wear away in and with their distempered bodies comes a subterranean night to dissolve them to nothing, and a deep oblivion to take away all the remembrance of them, and this notwithstanding they be clean from all spots and defilements of this world; so that, in this ease, the soul at the same time comes to the utmost bounds of its life, and of its body, and of its memorial also. But since he hath determined that death is to come of necessity upon all men, a sword is a better instrument for that purpose than any disease whatsoever. Why is it not then a very mean thing for us not to yield up that to the public benefit which we must yield up to fate? And this discourse have I made, upon the supposition that those who at first attempt to go upon this wall must needs be killed in the attempt, though still men of true courage have a chance to escape even in the most hazardous undertakings. For, in the first place, that part of the former wall that is thrown down is easily to be ascended; and for the new-built wall, it is easily destroyed. Do you, therefore, many of you, pull up your courage, and set about this work, and do you mutually encourage and assist one another; and this your bravery will soon break the hearts of your enemies; and perhaps such a glorious undertaking as yours is may be accomplished without bloodshed. For although it be justly to be supposed that the Jews will try to hinder you at your first beginning to go up to them; yet when you have once concealed yourselves from them, and driven them away by force, they will not be able to sustain your efforts against them any longer, though but a few of you prevent them, and get over the wall. As for that person who first mounts the wall, I should blush for shame if I did not make him to be envied of others, by those rewards I would bestow upon him. If such a one escape with his life, he shall have the command of others that are now but his equals; although it be true also that the greatest rewards will accrue to such as die in the attempt.” (Wars of the Jews, Book VI, Chapter 1, section 5)
So, Titus ordered the destruction of the city and said his troops were Roman. And notice further that the Romans had been waging war against the Temple according to Josephus:
7. In the mean time, the rest of the Roman army had, in seven days’ time, overthrown [some] foundations of the tower of Antonia, and had made a ready and broad way to the temple. Then did the legions come near the first court, and began to raise their banks. The one bank was over against the north-west corner of the inner temple another was at that northern edifice which was between the two gates; and of the other two, one was at the western cloister of the outer court of the temple; the other against its northern cloister. However, these works were thus far advanced by the Romans, not without great pains and difficulty, and particularly by being obliged to bring their materials from the distance of a hundred furlongs. They had further difficulties also upon them; sometimes by their over-great security they were in that they should overcome the Jewish snares laid for them, and by that boldness of the Jews which their despair of escaping had inspired them withal; for some of their horsemen, when they went out to gather wood or hay, let their horses feed without having their bridles on during the time of foraging; upon which horses the Jews sallied out in whole bodies, and seized them. And when this was continually done, and Caesar believed what the truth was, that the horses were stolen more by the negligence of his own men than by the valor of the Jews, he determined to use greater severity to oblige the rest to take care of their horses; so he commanded that one of those soldiers who had lost their horses should be capitally punished; whereby he so terrified the rest, that they preserved their horses for the time to come; for they did not any longer let them go from them to feed by themselves, but, as if they had grown to them, they went always along with them when they wanted necessaries. Thus did the Romans still continue to make war against the temple, and to raise their banks against it. (Wars of the Jews, Book VI, Chapter 2, section 7)
9. In the mean time, the Jews were so distressed by the fights they had been in, as the war advanced higher and higher, and creeping up to the holy house itself, that they, as it were, cut off those limbs of their body which were infected, in order to prevent the distemper’s spreading further; for they set the north-west cloister, which was joined to the tower of Antonia, on fire, and after that brake off about twenty cubits of that cloister, and thereby made a beginning in burning the sanctuary; two days after which, or on the twenty-fourth day of the forenamed month, [Panemus or Tamuz,] the Romans set fire to the cloister that joined to the other, when the fire went fifteen cubits farther. The Jews, in like manner, cut off its roof; nor did they entirely leave off what they were about till the tower of Antonia was parted from the temple, even when it was in their power to have stopped the fire; nay, they lay still while the temple was first set on fire, and deemed this spreading of the fire to be for their own advantage. However, the armies were still fighting one against another about the temple, and the war was managed by continual sallies of particular parties against one another. (Wars of the Jews, Book VI, Chapter 2, section 9)
1. NOW as soon as the army had no more people to slay or to plunder, because there remained none to be the objects of their fury, (for they would not have spared any, had there remained any other work to be done,) Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and temple, but should leave as many of the towers standing as were of the greatest eminency; that is, Phasaelus, and Hippicus, and Mariamne; and so much of the wall as enclosed the city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to lie in garrison, as were the towers also spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valor had subdued; but for all the rest of the wall, it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind. (Wars of the Jews, Book VII, Chapter 1, section 1)
Getting back to Joseph Farah, he also wrote:
Why is it today that so many Christians believe that the future Antichrist will be from Europe, from a revived Roman Empire?
If you think about it, and correct me if I am wrong, all of our theories about a Roman Antichrist start and pretty much end with the interpretation of Daniel and Revelation, with the cornerstone being Daniel 9:26. That verse reads: “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.”
“The people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.” The prince that shall come is the Antichrist. So, naturally, many have concluded that since Rome destroyed the Temple, a Roman prince would have to be the Antichrist.
Yet, Roman authority did not seek to destroy the Temple. It sought to avert it. And the people who destroyed it were not Romans either. They were Arabs whose anti-Israel passions were inflamed. They even disobeyed direct orders from Rome to stop the destruction.
And notice how carefully Daniel’s prophecy is written: “The people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.” http://www.wnd.com/2017/08/temple-what-temple-the-one-arabs-destroyed/
Since he said to correct him if he was wrong, after this is posted, I plan to send him a link to this post.
Now, who did Josephus claim destroyed the city?
The Romans.
Who did Josephus claim destroyed the temple sanctuary?
The Romans.
It is not that Arabs had nothing to do with it, but they were not the initiators and of themselves did not destroy the city–the Romans did. The Roman army fulfilled Daniel 9:26.
Joseph Farah’s article also has the following within it:
Get Joel Richardson’s groundbreaking New York Times best-seller, “The Islamic Antichrist,” for the full, comprehensive case.
Just because a book may be a best seller, that does not mean that it is accurate (remember The Da Vinci Code?). Regular readers of the COGwriter Church of God News page are aware that I have dispelled many of the errors of Joel Richardson and that book in the past.
Let’s also dispel a few more.
The use by Joseph Farah of Daniel 9:26, of necessity, ties in with Daniel 11:31 and subsequent verses in Daniel (see also The ‘Peace Deal’ of Daniel 9:27 and Who is the King of the North?). Joel Richardson and Joseph Farah would seemingly agree with the tie of Daniel 9:26 and Daniel 11:31, etc. It is the King of the North that stops the sacrifices according to the Bible.
Yet, the 11th chapter of Daniel is quite problematic for the view that the final Antichrist power is Islamic.
Daniel 11:39 tells of the King of the North destroying the strongest fortresses. This King is the one referred to as a prince in Daniel 9:26. In the 21st century, that would be the King of the North destroying the USA as the USA has the strongest military forces (for more details, see USA in Prophecy: The Strongest Fortresses).
Then, the Bible shows that the King of the North will destroy the King of the South. Notice:
40 “At the time of the end, the king of the south shall attack him, but the king of the north shall rush upon him like a whirlwind, with chariots and horsemen, and with many ships. And he shall come into countries and shall overflow and pass through. 41 He shall come into the glorious land. And tens of thousands shall fall, but these shall be delivered out of his hand: Edom and Moab and the main part of the Ammonites. 42 He shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the land of Egypt shall not escape. 43 He shall become ruler of the treasures of gold and of silver, and all the precious things of Egypt, and the Libyans and the Cushites shall follow in his train. (Daniel 11:40-43, ESV)
Notice that the King of the North is prophesied to destroy what are now predominantly Islamic regions of the Middle East and North Africa.
While the King of the South would seemingly have to be Islamic (perhaps called a Mahdi), that is not the case for the King of the North.
Let’s now also see more about those peoples allied with the King of the South in Ezekiel 30:
1 The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, prophesy, and say, Thus says the Lord God:
“Wail, ‘Alas for the day!’
3 For the day is near,
the day of the Lord is near;
it will be a day of clouds,
a time of doom fora the nations.
4 A sword shall come upon Egypt,
and anguish shall be in Cush,
when the slain fall in Egypt,
and her wealth is carried away,
and her foundations are torn down.5 Cush, and Put, and Lud, and all Arabia, and Libya, and the people of the land that is in league, shall fall with them by the sword.
6 “Thus says the Lord:
Those who support Egypt shall fall,
and her proud might shall come down;
from Migdol to Syene
they shall fall within her by the sword,
declares the Lord God.
7 And they shall be desolated in the midst of desolated countries,
and their cities shall be in the midst of cities that are laid waste.
8 Then they will know that I am the Lord,
when I have set fire to Egypt,
and all her helpers are broken.9 “On that day messengers shall go out from me in ships to terrify the unsuspecting people of Cush, and anguish shall come upon them on the day of Egypt’s doom; for, behold, it comes! (Ezekiel 30:1-9, ESV)
While there was a prophesied earlier fulfillment of this by Nebuchadnezzar (Ezekiel 30:10-19), Ezekiel 30:3 has a fulfillment near “the day of the Lord”–which means it still has not been completely fulfilled. Furthermore, notice the following:
25 … Then they shall know that I am the Lord, when I put my sword into the hand of the king of Babylon and he stretches it out against the land of Egypt. 26 And I will scatter the Egyptians among the nations and disperse them throughout the countries. Then they will know that I am the Lord.” (Ezekiel 30:25-26, ESV)
Please realize that the bulk of the Egyptians did not learn that the God of the Bible was Lord back then. Ezekiel 30 is referring to a time when the end time King of Babylon, the European King of the North, will destroy Egypt and its allies.
Those allies are the predominantly Islamic peoples of North Africa and the Middle East, including the Arabs.
Thus, it is not logical to conclude that the King of the North, who Joel Richardson and Joseph Farah are identifying as the final Antichrist, is an Islamic power based in Saudi Arabia (Joel Richardson and others have claimed that Mystery Babylon is the Saudi city of Mecca; watch also the video Mystery Babylon USA, Mecca, or Rome?).
Perhaps I should add that while I do believe that the final King of the South will be anti-Jesus, biblically, there is no way that the final Antichrist will be an Arabic Islamic leader.
Although there are certain doctrinal areas that Joseph Farah and I tend to agree on (like the fact that the early Christian church had more “Jewish” characteristics than most realize today and that Christians should keep the biblical holy days), this Islamic antichrist position is one of many areas of prophetic disagreement I have with him.
The Bible does NOT support the view that the final Antichrist is an Islamic Arab.
Much more information about why that is so is in the article Can the Final Antichrist be Islamic?
Some items of possibly related interest may include:
Can the Final Antichrist be Islamic? Is Joel Richardson correct that the final Antichrist will be Islamic and not European? Find out. A related sermon is titled: Is the Final Antichrist Islamic or European? Another video is Mystery Babylon USA, Mecca, or Rome?
Jerusalem Temple Destruction and the Messiah Was there any connection between prophesies of the Messiah and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D? On the 9th day of the fifth month on the Hebrew calendar, Jews fast because of the destruction of that Temple and other events that have befell the Jews. Did you know that the Jews tie the birth of the Messiah in with the month of Av? They also tie positive events from then to ‘Rosh Hoshana’ in the month of Tishri. Is there any relationship to Jesus and the first feast in Tishri? Did Jesus’ prophesies related to the Temple come to pass? What do Jewish and non-Jewish sources report about what happened to Jerusalem and the Temple? Did Jesus come when the Messiah was prophesied to start His ministry in Daniel 9? What happened when Jesus was killed? Was there a time of transition until the Temple was to be destroyed on August 30, 70 A.D.? What should Jews and others do related to the Messiah and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem? What seems to have happened to some of the ashlar stones that were part of that Temple? Dr. Thiel addresses these issues and more.,
Is the Future King of the South Rising Up? Some no longer believe there needs to be a future King of the South. Might Egypt, Islam, Iran, Arabs, or Ethiopia be involved? Might this King be called the Mahdi or Caliph? What does the Bible say? A YouTube video of related interest may be: The Future King of the South is Rising.
The Arab and Islamic World In the Bible, History, and Prophecy The Bible discusses the origins of the Arab world and discusses the Middle East in prophecy. What is ahead for the Middle East and those who follow Islam? What about the Imam Mahdi? What lies ahead for Turkey, Iran, and the other non-Arabic Muslims? An item of possibly related interest in the Spanish language would be: Líderes iraníes condenan la hipocresía de Occidente y declaran que ahora es tiempo para prepararse para el Armagedón, la guerra, y el Imán Mahdi.
Some Doctrines of Antichrist Are there any doctrines taught outside the Churches of God which can be considered as doctrines of antichrist? This article suggests at least three. It also provides information on 666 and the identity of “the false prophet.” Plus it shows that several Catholic writers seem to warn about an ecumenical antipope that will support heresy. You can also watch a video titled What Does the Bible teach about the Antichrist?
Does God Have a 6,000 Year Plan? What Year Does the 6,000 Years End? Was a 6000 year time allowed for humans to rule followed by a literal thousand year reign of Christ on Earth taught by the early Christians? Does God have 7,000 year plan? What year may the six thousand years of human rule end? When will Jesus return? 2027 or 20xx? There is also a video titled 6000 Years: When will God’s Kingdom Come? Here is a link to the article in Spanish: ¿Tiene Dios un plan de 6,000 años?
When Will the Great Tribulation Begin? 2019, 2020, or 2021? Can the Great Tribulation begin today? What happens before the Great Tribulation in the “beginning of sorrows”? What happens in the Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord? Is this the time of the Gentiles? When is the earliest that the Great Tribulation can begin? What is the Day of the Lord? Who are the 144,000? Here is a version of the article in the Spanish language: ¿Puede comenzar la Gran Tribulación en 2018 o 2019? ¿Es el Tiempo de los Gentiles? You can also see the English language sermon videos: The Great Tribulation from the Mount of Olives and Can the Great Tribulation begin before 2020? A shorter and newer video is: Might the Great Tribulation start in 2019?
The Times of the Gentiles Has there been more than one time of the Gentiles? Are we in it now or in the time of Anglo-America? What will the final time of the Gentiles be like? A related sermon is available and is titled: The Times of the Gentiles.
Armageddon Who is involved and when will this gathering happen? Here is also a video from Dr. Thiel, from Tel Megiddo in Israel: Armageddon. Other videos include: Armageddon Will it come on Trump’s watch?, Iraq, Armageddon, & Prophecy, Freemasonry, Armageddon, and Rome, Is China paving roads to Armageddon?, and Jordan, Petra, and Armageddon.
Who is the King of the North? Is there one? Do biblical and Roman Catholic prophecies for the Great Monarch point to the same leader? Should he be followed? Who will be the King of the North discussed in Daniel 11? Is a nuclear attack prophesied to happen to the English-speaking peoples of the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand? When do the 1335 days, 1290 days, and 1260 days (the time, times, and half a time) of Daniel 12 begin? When does the Bible show that economic collapse will affect the United States? In the Spanish language check out ¿Quién es el Rey del Norte? Here is a link to a video titled: The Future King of the North.
The ‘Peace Deal’ of Daniel 9:27 This prophecy could give up to 3 1/2 years advance notice of the coming Great Tribulation. Will most ignore or misunderstand its fulfillment? Here is a link to a related sermon video Daniel 9:27 and the Start of the Great Tribulation.
Anglo – America in Prophecy & the Lost Tribes of Israel Are the Americans, Canadians, English, Scottish, Welsh, Australians, Anglo-Saxon (non-Dutch) Southern Africans, and New Zealanders descendants of Joseph? Where are the lost ten-tribes of Israel? Who are the lost tribes of Israel? What will happen to Jerusalem and the Jews in Israel? Will God punish the U.S.A., Canada, United Kingdom, and other Anglo-Saxon nations? Why might God allow them to be punished first? Here is a link to the Spanish version of this article: Anglo-América & las Tribus Perdidas de Israel. Information is also in the YouTube sermons titled Where are the Ten Lost Tribes? Why does it matter? and British are the Covenant People. A short YouTube of prophetic interest may be Barack Obama and the State of the Apocalypse.
Will the Anglo-Saxon Nations be Divided and Have People Taken as Slaves? Will the lands of the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand be divided? What about Jerusalem? What does Bible prophecy teach? Are there non-biblical prophecies that support this idea? Who will divide those lands? Who will end up with the lands and the people? Here is a link to a video titled Will the USA and other Anglo-nations be Divided and Their People Made Slaves? Here is a related item in the Spanish language ¿Serán divididas las naciones anglosajonas?
USA in Prophecy: The Strongest Fortresses Can you point to scriptures, like Daniel 11:39, that point to the USA in the 21st century? This article does. A related sermon is titled: Do these 7 prophesies point to the end of the USA?
 |
Tweet |
|