Lately there has been a whole lot of teachers getting on the Antichrist will come from Islam and that Islam is the Beast world system bandwagon.<\/p>\n
Apparently painting Antichrist horns on the obvious evil system of our time sells books but is is good theology? I posted a article why I do not believe the Beast will emerge from Islam or why the Beast will be Muslim.<\/p>\n
Will the Antichrist and his Beast government come from Islam<\/a><\/p>\n Dr Reagan has written a very scholarly work why the Antichrist will not be a Muslim.<\/a><\/p>\n Bill Salus in the article that I quote below gives more good reasons why the Antichrist will not come from Islam. There are also many informed comments. I think the main reason people are now believing that the Antichrist is from Islam is the impact Islam is having on the world and the Assyrian references in the Bible. There are thirteen Assyrian references in the Bible but most of them do not refer to the end times and the ones that might, do not have to be associated with the Antichrist. Even if the Antichrist is Assyrian by birth it does not mean that he is Muslim or that he had been living in that area prior to the days when the world headquarters is moved to the area of Babylon.<\/p>\n For example, Some Americans call Obama an African but by Africans he would be called an American. He certainly is not an African through his mother. He once lived in other nations but now he resides in America. He claims to be a Christian although Muslims would say he was Muslim because once a Muslim always a Muslim.<\/p>\n In like manor the Antichrist could identify with Christianity, have lived in Iraq, but come to power through a revived Roman Empire. I am not saying that he will be Assyrian, I do not know his decent but it is also not out of the question that he will be raised in the area of Assyria. Nevertheless, even if he were Assyrian that would not make him a Muslim. When he rises to power no matter where he was born he will identify with the pseudo Christian West much like Obama does (no I am not saying that Obama is the Antichrist).<\/p>\n I think believing that the Antichrist is Muslim can be a big danger and a trap because I believe the real Antichrist comes into power through the wars against Islamic fundamentalism. So those who fall into the trap of making an Islamic Beast might actually help create the platform for the Western Beast Antichrist to stand on and rise to power and take over the world as the world’s savior that saved us from Islam.<\/p>\n I also want to point out something else. Believing that Islam is the Beast system is not at all logical. It is obvious that Islam with all its laws will never be accepted by the decadent West. It is also obvious that any system that unappealing to the West could never take over the world by force. So the logic of a Beast Antichrist out of Islam escapes me. Also, if the Beast were Muslim and his God was Allah, why would he demand to be worshiped as God? Those in Islam will never accept the worship of a man claiming to be God. The whole concept of an Islam Antichrist is fantasy.<\/p>\n PROPHECY DEPOT: Does Daniel Debunk the Assyrian Antichrist?<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Relatively recently a small circle of individuals have injected into the Christian Church a paradigm shift in Antichrist thinking. They advocate that this beastly individual has Assyrian origins. Oddly the book of Daniel, which seemingly issues the most pivotal prophecy regarding the origin of this personage, does not once mention the Hebrew word Ashur, or Ashshur, which is translated as Assyria, or Assyrian. This term is utilized within the Old Testament approximately 135 times; however, Daniel considered by many to be a prophetic authority on the subject of the Antichrist, apparently didn\u2019t feel the Assyrian shoe fit the foot of this coming crazed world leader.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n <\/p>\n Perhaps one might think that Daniel was given information about the Antichrist, but not necessarily about his ancestral roots. However, Daniel 9:26 refutes this presumption in that it gives us the most detailed literal account within the entirety of scripture as to the origin of this individual. Therein we are informed that the Antichrist will originate from the people who would eventually destroy the city of Jerusalem, and the sanctuary, referring to the second Jewish temple.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n <\/p>\n There are two primary arguments against the Eastern leg being the leg from which the Antichrist comes: the “Historical” and the “Prophetical”. The Historical argument will conclude part one of this article and the Prophetical will be discussed in part two.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n