God has used Babylon, and he might again.

The key passage for this study is Jeremiah 27 and 28.  Read all of that before going into this study, I shall quote one particular verse at the start, verse 8 of 27.

"And it shall come to pass, that the nation and kingdom which will not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, and that will not put their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish, saith Yahuah, with the sword, and with the famine, and with the pestilence, until I have consumed them by his hand."

God's people should never worship the gods and goddesses of Babylon or other nations.  But it's important not to forget that there was a time when God's will was for nations to serve political Babylon.

Jeremiah, and also Ezekiel, preached to the people of Israel that God wanted them to submit to and serve Babylon.  And he was accused of Treason for that, of being a spy.  Imagine the modern equivalent of that, an American Baptist or Pentecostal Pastor going on Television and Preaching to the whole Nation that God wants The United States to surrender to Russia or to China, or to Iran, or I.S.I.S. and if they don't then God will punish them.  The Pundits and your typical Evangelicals would go crazy.

But that's what happened.  And The People indeed didn't listen and instead allied themselves with Egypt.

My point Eschatologically here is that there are reasons to think that in some ways the End Times will be a repeat of some of that history.  Plenty of Prophecies from Jeremiah and Ezekiel seem to be about both their own time and the End Times.  I've already argued that Ezekiel 30:24 could be telling us a King of Babylon will be who Mortally Wounds The Beast.

And now I think, what if Jeremiah and Ezekiel were also Types of the Two Witnesses?  What if part of what they'll Preach is to side with Babylon over Egypt?  Because Egypt is being ruled by The Beast?  The modern Church would be totally unprepared for that, especially if this Egyptian Ruler is also presenting himself as a Conservative Christian, and maybe even an American.  And maybe he'll even be preaching the same kind of Anti-Babylon message as Rob Skiba.

Rob Skiba is right spiritually to preach against the wickedness of Babylon.  Yet at the same time I suspect his treating Babylon as being the same as The Antichrist may be unwittingly helping The Beast.

So I want to repeat. The Bible never says Nimrod was Evil.  And it also never necessarily says the World will Love the Antichrist.

Could The Beast of Revelation 17 possibly be a different Beast?

I've suggested one bold new theory on how Revelation 17 ties into the rest of the book already [And followed up on it in Who Is The Bride of Christ].  Now I have another one.

The parallel imagery of Seven Heads and Ten Horns leads to an assumption that the Beast of Chapter 17 is the same one we saw in Chapter 13.  And references to The Beast made in chapters 14-16 are clearly the Beast out of the Sea.

But The Dragon also had Seven Heads and Ten Horns and that is indisputably a different entity.  The Beast of Chapter 17 also has in common with the Beast out of The Sea over The Dragon being called a Beast.  And also terminology that seems to imply one of the Seven Heads is an individual who has died and been resurrected, but how that idea is communicated is different.  However it is called a Scarlet Beast, which is a variation of the Color Red, so the Revelation 17 Beast is affiliated with the same Color as The Dragon.

References to The Beast of Chapter 13 in other chapters usually mention The False Prophet, or The Mark, or the Image.  But in Chapter 17 it seems to be The Woman, Mystery Babylon, who is serving The False Prophet's function, as a simultaneously religious and economic system.

However Revelation 11's Beast is described with terminology elsewhere used only in Chapter 17, the Beast that Ascends out of the Bottomless Pit/Abyss, and goes into Perdition. 

I've also noted recently that it is strictly speaking the Ten Horns not the Eight King himself who hates and attacks The Harlot.

I've talked a lot on this Blog about the possibility of a Decoy Antichrist, possibly to be identified with The Terrible of The Nations of Ezekiel.  And while I've connected that figure to themes of Revelation like the Kings of The East, I had lacked a clearly specific place for him.  Until within the last month when I thought of this possibility.

However, it then occurred to me, what if they are the same Beast and yet different in terms of which of the Seven Heads is the main Head in mind?

I have laid out already my main view on the Seven Kings.  In identifying them with modern Geopolitical entities, The Lion is Iraq and/or ISIS, the Bear is Iran and perhaps parts of Iraq currently controlled by Iran via the Mahdi Army (the Medes being The Kurds and the Persians being the Shiites).  The four heads of the Leopard are Greece, Macedonia, Turkey and Egypt, and the Fourth Beast/Seventh Head (the one with the Ten Horns) is the European Union.

When we separate the Death and Resurrection imagery of 13 and 17.  Only 13 requires a Mortal Wound, sometimes assumed to specifically be a head wound but that forgets that the use of the word Head is itself symbolic in these chapters.  Meanwhile my argument that the Eight King must be one of the first Five applies solely to Chapter 17.

I feel the one in 13 make most sense if the Resurrection/healing of the Wound itself happens in the End Times, before the eyes of the World.  While the one in 17 I think could maybe have been Resurrected in the past, perhaps in 30 AD (Matthew 27:52-53) as part of fulfilling Daniel 12, but then was sealed in the Abyss.

If The Terrible of The Nations is someone who lived in the Past resurrected in the End Times.  Based on Ezekiel 29&30 the first obvious candidate is Nebuchadrezzar, as I alluded to in my last post.

There are people arguing Nebuchadrezzar is the Antichrist, including a Google Group.  Much of the argument for that is the Terrible of the Nations passages, because they overlook the last part of Ezekiel 30 which identifies the Terrible of The Nations with the one who gives not who receives the Mortal Wound.  And the Prophecy against the Prince (not King) of Tyre in chapter 28 could also back that up.

However, the fact that Daniel 4 depicts Nebuchadrezzar as being Saved I view as a problem with the whole "Goeth into Perdition" detail.  Though perhaps that is less definitive since I'm now pretty much a Universalist, and Nebuchadrezzar wasn't a Church Age believer.  But it still seems odd to me, and I've yet to see a Nebuchadrezzar is the Antichrist argument address Daniel 4.

Nebuchadrezzar was the first of the Seven Kings in my view.  The remaining four of the first five would be Cyrus, Alexander The Great (or maybe a Ptolemy), Antigonus or Demetrius, and a Seleucid King.

Of those I feel inclined to rule out the Ptolemies and maybe also Alexander on the grounds that if a Beast of Revelation is a Pharaoh of Egypt, that is definitely the Revelation 13 Beast.  Also both Cyrus and Alexander I view as like Nebuchadrezzar confirmed to most likely be among the saved, so if that rules him out it maybe rules them out too.

There is not much to Biblically make Antigonos or Demetrius significant.  But if you think The Antichrist is also the Little Horn of Daniel 8, then that makes the Seleucids, especially Antiochus Epiphanes, a pretty strong candidate.  And if the Beast out of the Sea is a Ptolemy, then one of his adversaries being a Seleucid would fit well.

Are the Woman of Revelation 12 and the Woman of Revelation 17 possibly the same Woman?

I know that's a controversial suggestion, if true it probably invalidates one or the other of two theories on Bible Prophecy I've advocated on this Blog (the Wilderness of Revelation 12 being Mt Sinai, or the Babylon of 17 being East of the Euphrates), maybe both given other factors.

If true it would prove Mystery Babylon is Israel in a Rebellious state before her ultimate salvation, as I'm unshakable on The Woman of 12 being Israel and The Church being The Man-Child.  But it would NOT prove Jerusalem, rather it contradicts it, this is Israel after fleeing.  (So either way this Babylon is still probably East of the Jordan.)

We often see the Wildness refuge of Revelation 12 as a repeat of the Exodus-Deuteronomy wandering, Israel fell into Idolatry then too.  And in DeMille's movie The Ten Commandments, he draws on Revelation 17 imagery in depicting the Golden Calf incident.

Now, here is the first clue that lead me to consider this possibility.

The word "Wilderness" is used in the Book of Revelation three times, in the Greek it's also the same word all three times, even the same form of the word (Eremon rather then Eremos).  In Revelation 12 verses 6 and 14 it refers to the place where The Woman is taken to be protected.  But then in Chapter 17 verse 3, John is taken to The Wilderness to see a Woman sitting on a Beast.  And all three seem to use the definite article, The Wilderness, not a wilderness.

That I noticed months ago really, it kept sticking in my head but I felt it's conflict with my other theories and how they fit together meant I shouldn't read too much into it.

Then today I was for a completely different theory I've been working on, studying various usages of Hebrew words for Spear/Lance/Javelin.  And I happened to notice something profound in Jeremiah, aspects of this have probably been used by Babylon is Jerusalem theorists before, but I doubt they noticed the Revelation 12 relevance.

Jeremiah 6:23 and 50:42 are saying almost the exact same thing.  In Hebrew it's more similar then in the KJV as there Lance and Spear are the same word.  The only difference is thar one says the Daughter of Zion and the other says the Daughter of Babylon.

And in both cases the verses right before and after are also profoundly similar.  Jeremiah 6:24 is part of the reason we know the Woman of Revelation 12 is Israel, but we overlook Jeremiah 50:43 using the same term.  And in 6:22/50:41, could the Kings of this "northern" nation be the 10 Kings of Revelation 17?  And the King of Babylon either The Antichrist or a Decoy Antichrist, claiming to be Messiah Ben-Joseph and/or the Imam Mahdi?

Now the problem with using this to prove Babylon is Jerusalem is that Jeremiah 6 read from the beginning makes clear the Children of Zion have already fled The Land.  While Jeremiah 50 and 51 is repeatedly tied to the Land of the Chaledeans and of Babylon.  And God calls his faithful people to leave.

Could the "Mountains" Jesus told the people to flee to after the Abomination of Desolation in Matthew 24 be the Seven Mountains?

Chuck Missler likes to talk about the Woman of Revelation 17 boasting that she is not "widowed and divorced" as a contrast to Israel, described by The Prophets as widowed and divorced.  But others have interpreted that "boast" as being a denial.

And then there is Zachariah 5.  We've long speculated that Woman is the Revelation 17 Woman.  But she's transported with parallel wing imagery to Revelation 12 which we overlook.  And in Daniel 7 the Lion representing Babylon has Eagle's Wings which are plucked.

Micah 4:9-10 seem to refer to the Daughter of Zion going to Babylon after travailing in Childbirth.

Returning to what I've argued before that the Woman of Revelation 12 is in a sense Rachel. In Genesis 31, after Joseph is born and Jacob leaves Laban's household which I view as a possible type of the birth of the Man-Child and The Rapture in Revelation 12.  Rachel stole Laban's Teraphim idols, and in verses 34 and 35 she sits on them, and claims to Laban she is menstruating to avoid being searched.  What color does that imagery evoke?  Red, the color of Scarlet.  And this incident took place in Gilead interestingly.

 And if you still insist on linking the Woman of Revelation 12 to the constellation Virgo (called Bethulah by Semites) in some fashion.  Isaiah 37:22 refers to a "Virgin Daughter of Zion" (along with 2 Kings 19:21 and Lamentations 2:13) while  Isaiah 47:1 refers to a "Virgin Daughter of Babylon".  The word for Virgin being Bethulah in each of those.

Now if this is true, which previous theory should I consider abandoning?  I don't know, but let's consider some things.

If in any way Israelites fleeing the Fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD is a type picture of the End Times flight (Jesus uses similar language of both in Luke 21 and Matthew 24) then that doesn't narrow it down.  Because some went to Arabia, like the ancestors of many Arabian Jewish communities and the Lemba.  But also many went to Mesopotamia where there were already Jewish communities in Seleucia, Nisibis, Osroene and a Jewish Kingdom in Adiabene, and in time wrote the Babylonian Talmud.

If you are a fan of The Book of Enoch (which I'm not, but I've studied it), that book does refer to a Seven Mountain formation, but where this range is supposed to be isn't made clear.  Some theories say Mount Hermon (relevant to other parts of the book) is one of these mountains.  Which is interesting in that... A: the form of Wilderness used in Revelation, Eremon, could also work as a Greek transliteration of Hermon, Eremon is also used of a "Desert Place" near Bethsadia which is near Hermon.  And B: 1 Chronicles 5:23-25 says Seven Families dwelt there, who transgressed the law and went a whoring after foreign gods.

But another theory proposed is that the Seven Mountains of Enoch are to the South not North, and possibly one of the Seven is Sinai.  Sinai did have other mountains near it, like Mount Hor where Aaron was buried, and there is some dispute on if Horeb is the same Mountain or near it.  And Mount Seir is often refereed to as if it's close by.  And there is a Mount Paran.  And Mt Sin also.

Independent of all this many aren't convinced by my argument that the references to the Euphrates in Revelation proves Babylon must be East of it and with the Kings of The East.  Maybe they're right and I'm jumping to conclusions.

And another detail of Revelation 17 I've overlooked in expressing my past theories is that strictly speaking it is only the 10 Horns described as hating the woman and seeking to destroy her, not the 8th King himself directly.   So again all of those could be more complicated then we're prepared for.

On the other hand.  Jeremiah 6 begins by talking about Benjamin specifically, the Prophecy began sooner, but still, it's interesting given my Argument that in a sense the Woman of Revelation 12 is Rachel.  And I have an argument for linking Modern Israel to Saul typologically.  Esther talking about Jews who didn't return to Judea but stayed in the east, is centrally a Benjamite family, descended from the Kinsman of Saul whom David spared.  Hilel The Elder was also a prominent Benjamite born in Mesopotamia.  The families who sinned in Hermon I mentioned before were of Eastern Manasseh who were deported by Assyria.  Could it be the Shiites are descended from Joseph (and many Jews of the region from Benjamin), while the Kurds are a product of a mingling of the Medes and Naphtali?

People like to use Micah 2:12 as evidence Israel's wilderness dwelling will be in Bozrah of Edom.  I criticized that in my Sinai post by pointing out the lack of any other Edom references here, and other places are called Bozrah like in Moab, and that it means "sheep fold" and the context here reflects that.

But in light of this theory it is interesting to note that a name suspiciously similar to Bozrah is Basra, which I've discussed before as possibly being the Babylon of Revelation 17&18.

Or maybe it won't all be in one place, maybe they'll start at Sinai and then wander.  I already said I think the scale of the Numbers wandering was larger then most think it was.  I remain confused on the exact geography of Basra, including which side of the Euphrates it is on.  Maybe they'll wander all of the land I view as allotted to Ishmael.

So the assumption in Mystery Babylon debates has been that she can't be both Israel in rebellion and geographically in Mesopotamia.  But that Assumption I now feel is wrong.

The Imam Mahdi of Shia Islam

All the speculation among Christians about if the Antichrist might claim to be the Mahdi of Islamic Eschatology barely acknowledges the differences between the Sunni and Shiite views of the Mahdi.  But when it does in general the focus is on the Shia version because there are more details in their traditions to over analyze.  For example, it's the Shiites who call him Imam, to the Sunnis he is a Caliph.  I've tried to be an exception in my past speculations, but have hardly gone too deep into it.

The interesting thing I've discovered recently is, it's not just Christians who think the Imam Mahdi could be the Antichrist, there is a Sunni Website saying the Dajjal is actually the Shiite Imam Mahdi.  And their reasoning is very interesting given my own speculations on a number of subjects.  But I should of course say I doubt all or even most Sunnis would agree with everything on that site, it engages in a lot of weirdness similar to what I'm used to seeing from the most off the deep end Christian websites.

It kind of starts with how the Shiite view makes Imam Mahdi kind of quasi Divine, even giving him a Pre-existence.  While the Sunnis see the Mahdi as not even a Prophet.

Another claim of this website is that Shiites don't always admit to being Shiites, and so ideas it's skeptical of in traditional Sunni sources they suspect could have been planted by Shiites.  Since for most of Islamic history the Sunnis have been in control and haven't always allowed Freedom of Religion, one can't blame Shiites for having a history of hiding.

Today most Shiites live in Iran and Iraq.  Geographically that happens to be the lands associated with the Dajjal in the oldest Muslim eschatological traditions.

The Dajjal was originally expected to be a Jewish Messianic claimant.  This website points out many things that seem oddly Jewish to them about the Shia traditions.  Like Traditions that the Imam Mahdi will use the Jewish Name of God (I've read other Muslim websites agreeing with conspiracy theories that YHWH is actually a pagan god), and rule in the manner of David and Solomon.  And that specifically say the Imam Mahdi will have Jewish followers.

And many Jews have lived in the Irag/Iran region, going back to the exile and the Exilarchs.  Also early Caliphs resettled the Jews of Khyabar in Iraq.  I meanwhile could add my arguments that the Lost Tribes settled East of the Euphrates, and that the Persians and Iranians partly descend from Naphtali and the Eranites.  In the context of all that, seeing the Shiite Imam Mahdi and the Rabbinic Messiah Ben-Joseph as possibly the same personage could fit pretty well.  And that fits how Shiite traditions often treated Ali as the Joshua to Muhammad's Moses.

They are suspicious of prophecies that say he'll discover the Original Torah Scroll and Gospel, and rule the Jews and Christians according to their own laws.  And also re-discover the original Koran as well.  I've commented on the Mahdi's expected archaeological exploits before.

They are also suspicious of the Sufyani tradition, an enemy the Mahdi is said to defeat, who will rule parts of Syria and Iraq and will descend from Sufyan.  When the split between the Sunni and Shia happened the Sunni followed a son of Sufyan, so it could be possible to see Sufyani as a code for a Sunni leader (maybe even Sunni Mahdi claimant) from a Shia POV.  Today ISL/ISIS and it's desire to set up a Sunni Caliphate in Syria and Iraq could be seen as fitting the Sufyani description from a Shiite POV.

They also object to Shiite traditions that seem anti-Arab and even Anti-Mecca.  If you're thinking "how could any version of a Faith founded by Arabs be Anti-Arab" just look at all the Anti-Semitism in Christian history.

The Koran was written before the split happened obviously.  Thing is the word Shia was originally a word for Sect, so this site takes advantage of some Koran and early Haddith usage of that word, including references to the Dajjal having a Shia(Sect).

Thing about all this is, my emphasis on the overlooked fact that the Beast is actually against Babylon, and that his Seat is West of the Euphrates.  Tells me that an Imam Mahdi claimant is far more likely to be a Decoy Antichrist then the real one, and perhaps one of the Kings of the East, or the Terrible of the Nations.

Does that make a Sunni Mahdi claimant the real one?  Maybe, maybe not, there could be multiple Decoys.

And I still have my skepticism the Antichrist will be Muslim or Pagan at all.

Could The Antichrist rule from Egypt?

This post is not a speculation on his ethnic ancestry, or his religious affiliation prior to the Abomination of Desolation, this is mainly just geographical.

The only clue Revelation gives us about where he will rule from is that it's West of the Euphrates, based on Revelation 16 when the 6th Bowl is poured out.  But since the Euphrates is also the Western border of what God promised to Abraham, perhaps it's not too difficult to extrapolate from that that it'll be West of what God promised to Abraham, that Israel is in the middle of this conflict as they were the Daniel 11 conflicts.

A lot of false assumptions about the Antichrist exist because of a desire to find him in as many Old Testament prophecies as possible.  I no longer view him as The Assyrian.  And in Daniel I feel only chapter 7 and 8 give us any hints about him and 8 is mostly typological.  Daniel 11:40-45 is the basis for thinking of Egypt as a nation he goes to war with, but that is actually about Augustus.

What about the Fourth Beast being Rome?  The Ten Horns I believe are European nations that emerged from Rome, the Little Horn emerges after them.  The Eight King I believe must be a king of one of the first three Beasts.  So it's a complicated relationship, basically I feel the Horns provide his military strength.  And it could be noted that the Roman Emperors took over the Pharonic Worship in Egypt, Egypt was treated uniquely among Roman Provinces, as the personal possession of The Emperor.

Rob Skiba's Yahuah Triangle theory is interesting, I disagree with the Pyramid stuff, but he has a valid point that throughout the The Bible the narrative seems to bounce back and forth between Israel, Mesopotamia and Egypt.  At face value Egypt seems absent from Revelation, but we often see typological parallels to the Exodus and Wandering in Revelation.

Some Jewish traditions name The Pharaoh of the Exodus Adikam, like the Sefar Olam and the Prayer of Asenath, and the alleged Jasher.  This obviously wasn't his real name since it's a blatantly Hebrew name.  It could be a shortened form of Adonikam, a name which in Ezra 2:13 is linked to the number Six Hundred and Sixty Six.

I have recently discussed reasons to suspect a connection between Satan's Seat and Egypt.

To many, all Daniel 8 tells us for certain is he'll come from or rule one of the Kingdoms Alexander The Great's empire was divided into.  One of those was Egypt, the Ptolemaic Dynasty.  Ptolemaioin is a known attested variation of the name Ptolemaios/Ptolemy that has a Greek Gematria value of 666.  3 Maccabees is an apocryphal book included in the Orthodox canon where Ptolemy IV Philopater seems to serve as a type of The Antichrist.

In Isaiah 19 the "Cruel Lord" who rules Egypt could be viewed as The Antichrist, but I also see it as fulfilled in the 20th century.  I'm still unsure entirely what to make of Isaiah 19, I'll likely return to it in the future.

The real smoking gun however to me is what I've noticed that few have before about Ezekiel 29-32.

A lot of people even who are Futurists think those Prophecies were fulfilled by the time the Old Testament ended.  There is a statement that is interpreted as saying Egypt would never have a native ruler anymore, and then saying that was fulfilled by the time the Ptolemaic dynasty took over.  But the statement was not about ethnicity but that no one would ever rule from Egypt again (perhaps more specifically Egypt being an Empire ruling other lands).  So we know that isn't fulfilled yet because of the Ptolemies, the Fatimid Caliphs and modern Egypt.

Bishop James Ussher tried to argue the prophecy of Egypt being uninhabited for 40 years was fulfilled during what we today call the Neo-Babylonian empire.  But archaeology is lacking for that and even his seeing it documented in Herodotus seems like a stretch.  I think it's possible that that 40 years is the first 40 years of the Millennium, which I don't view as being as Utopic as most people do.

Some verses here mention Nebuchadrezzar by name implying an at least typological connection to Ezekiel's own time.  But it's also important to remember that this isn't all one Prophecy, there are numerous "The word of Yahuah came onto me saying" indicating a separate prophecy.  All linked in some way but also separate.  Nebuchadrezzar is mentioned by name only in 29:17-21 and 30:1-19, the latter may have been given the same day as the former.  I could make this argument independent of those prophecies, but his role is still at least typologically linked due to the title Terrible of the Nations being applied to him.

Ezekiel 30:24 says "And I will strengthen the arms of the king of Babylon, and put my sword in his hand: but I will break Pharaoh's arms, and he shall groan before him with the groanings of a deadly wounded man.".  The word for "deadly" there can also be translated "mortally".  Being mortally wounded by a sword is a defining trait of The Beast in Revelation 13, and this is the only Old Testament prophecy that has that same terminology.  Later chapter 32 again refers to the Sword of the King of Babylon.

Then in chapter 32 and also slightly 31 it talks about Pharaoh descending into the underworld.  The most vivid description of the underworld the Hebrew Scriptures have.  Chapter 31 also says "the Pit" a likely idiom of specifically The Abyss.  The Beast ascends out of the Abyss.  32:17 dates this Prophecy to the 15th day of the month.  I've argued before the 15th of Nisan is when Jesus entered Sheol, so perhaps the Antichrist enters it on the same day.

A further striking detail is that Ezekiel 29:3 calls Pharaoh the "Great Dragon" this is the only place outside Revelation that the phrase "Great Dragon" is used.  Now at face value that seems to identify Pharaoh with Satan, and there are other Prophecies I see as about Satan even though it seems like a human ruler because it's in the context of Satan's relationship to that nation. Also later the Hebrew word translated "whale" in the KJV is the same word translated Dragon here.

But again the Dragon in Revelation gives his Seat to The Beast, so maybe the Pharaoh in 29:1-16 and 30:20-26 aren't the same. or maybe they're doing some kind of mimickery of the Ancient Egyptian view of the relationship between Osiris and Horus, both of the gods associated with the Rulership of Egypt, who were father and son and thus in comparative mythology get misleadingly compared to the Trinity.  And in that context Thoth could be the role taken by the False Prophet.

And given what I've said before about Babylon being in conflict with The Antichrist in Revelation. I think The Terrible of The Nations/King of Babylon/Assyrian of these prophecies is the man who will kill The Antichrist.  And may perhaps be a Messiah Ben-Joseph claimant given my theories about the Kings of the East and the Lost Tribes.

The talk of Egypt in Isaiah 27 could also be a clue.

I've done a post on how this could tie in with American Antichrist theories.

And now I've maybe found a smoking gun in Daniel 11?

Messiah The Prince of Daniel 9

The 70 weeks Prophecy four times refers to an awaited personage at the the end of the 69 weeks and/or the 70th week.

Messiah The Prince in verse 25
The Messiah in verse 26
The Prince that shall come in verse 26
He in verse 27

The standard view among Christians who are Premillennial Futurists (and even some Preterists) has been that the first two are Jesus Christ and the last two the person we commonly call The Antichrist.  Chris White however promotes a theory he didn't invent himself that makes each of the four something different. predicating it largely on how unclear it is which of the earlier personages the He in verse 27 appears to be.

However most people reading this Prophecy without a Christian starting point, as well as many Christians who are Preterist, see the clear grammatical logic as saying all four are the same person.

When verse 25 says to await the coming of a Messiah The Prince and then verse 26 says The Prince that shall come logic dictates that it's the same Prince.  And if there aren't two or three different people refereed to earlier, figuring out who He is, isn't that complicated.

It's also pretty much unique to Christians to see a Villain in any of the four references.  Because you see the "he" after "Abominations" in the KJV of verse 27 isn't in the Hebrew.  So the first He is not the one who sets it/them up.  That can agree with seeing him as The Antichrist however, because in Revelation while The Image is of The Beast, it's the second beast (False Prophet) that sets it up and enforces it's worship.

I'm going to suggest that the traditional Christian view, and this "only one person is mentioned" view can both be right, via the principle of Double Fulfillment.  I've already documented that there are Jews without a Christian bias who see the 70th Week as yet future and separated from the first 69.  But I've also argued that seeing the 70th Week as being entirely fulfilled from 30-37 AD is more plausible then my fellow Futurists realize.  Recently I've argued that some of our assumptions about how the End Times 70th Week will play out are wrong.

The suggestion that there is a Prophecy which is fulfilled by both Jesus and the Antichrist is certainly controversial.  But Solomon was a type of both Jesus and The Antichrist.  When doing well he was the near fulfillment of the Messianic Kingdom.  But when he backslid, the number 666 was directly linked to him.  Samson likewise has been argued to prefigure both, especially by those who see Genesis 49 as implying a Danite Antichrist.  Saul could also be viewed this way.

The word "Antichrist" means, false Christ, or counterfeit Christ, or opposing Christ, or replacement Christ, or enemy of Christ. or antithesis of Christ, or opposite of Christ.  I've seen several different meanings argued for it, but they all involve Christ, which is Greek for Messiah.  Many Old Testament types of The Antichrist were anointed by true Prophets of God (Jeroboam and Jehu, also Solomon and Saul I already mentioned).  Jesus refereed to Judas as someone He Choose, and Judas could perform divine Miracles by Jesus authority.  Yet he was a Devil and the Son of Perdition.

And at any-rate, he'll need to be able to make Messianic Prophecies apply to him if he'll be a credible Messiah Ben-Joseph.

Given what I argued on those posts I linked to.  This would mean his Mortal Wounding is at the beginning of the 70th week.  We tend to assume that his Resurrection happens soon after his death.  But I notice that there is no reference in Revelation to The Beast being active during the first half of The Week.  The first undisputed appearance of The Beast is when he kills The Two Witnesses, and hes' already ascended out of The Pit by then.

I do agree that The First Horseman is likely the man who'll become The Beast.  But I've become inclined to view all of the first 6 Seals as being right at the start of The Week, due to my Sixth Seal view and other things.

Maybe the opening of the First Seal has him doing his own Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, after winning many wars.  Doing it maybe even on the same day Jesus did his, the 10th of Nisan.  Then he is Crowned Messiah Ben-Joseph.  But the next thing to happen is the Red Horseman.  Who I argued in that same Four Horseman study could be The Antichrist's killer because of his Sword.  And many Christians and Jews will assume that that killer is The Antichrist/Armillus.

My main False Prophet theory wouldn't have it be possible for him to have The False Prophet with him already at this point.  But I could be wrong, he could also have a Prophet with him all through those Wars.  They could together claim to Christians to be The Two Witnesses, and to Jews that they're Messiah Ben-Joseph and/or Elijah and/or The Prophet like unto Moses and/or the Priest of the order of Melchizedek and/or Enoch.  And then people might selectively use the day=year theory to say that The Witnesses being dead three and a half days really means three and a half years.

This deception could fit what Perry Stone (who I respect and consider truly Saved) is predicting.  He's saying that The Temple will be under construction during the first half of the week, after Elijah/Witnesses conquers the Muslims.  Then The Mahdi will conquer Jerusalem and kill them and stop the sacrifice sin The Temple right after it was just finished being constructed.

Being Pre-Trib is frankly the least of Left Behind's problems

With the new Left Behind movie about to come out a lot of bloggers and websites are complaining.  Within the Church the negative comments about it mostly come from people who are irritated with Pre-Tribulationisim.  But as someone who's also not Pre-Trib, I don't even find that it's most annoying trait.  Same with other Pre-Trib based End Times fiction.  I haven't read all of it of course, but still I get the gist of what it's world is like.

None of these works of fiction about the Pre-Trib Rapture actually acknowledge the whole dispensational point of the uniqueness of The Church that lies behind it, and any view but Post-Trib or Preterisim/Amillennialisim.  There is no exploration of the fact that these post-Rapture believers lack certain promises that we of The Church have.  The problem is that these writers are probably all Cessationists, so to them The Church lost most of it's unique promises in the 1st Century.  I believe during the era just before The Rapture the 144,000 will be surpassing what the earliest Christians did just after Pentecost.

The simple fact that it's always obvious who The Antichrist is right from the start of The 70th Week is a problem to me.  Paul makes a point that the Abomination of Desolation incident is what identifies him.  And I believe there is good reason to expect there to be Decoy Antichrists during the first half of the 70th Week, among them The Terrible of The Nations.  So even from a writing perspective, why not have a few possible Antichrist and let readers argue over who it'll be.

They also tend to reflect how American Evangelicals have married their Faith to their Patriotism and political Conservatism way to much.  Of course The Antichrist is always the ultimate European Liberal (the End Times movie fad ended before the Mahdi thing really took off).

I'll be posting in the future on why I think End Times fiction that makes the President of the United States a hero who opposes The Antichrist and then gets killed by him is in fact potentially dangerous.

Along with that having an Antichrist who's Russian(ish), having video conferences with East Asian leaders as he destroys the U.S.  It's like they don't know the Cold War ended, and was only a fraud propped up by the Military Industrial Complex to begin with.

Also like a lot of Christian fiction it seems to come off unintentionally Calvinist.  Simply because the people who will or won't be saved are predestined by the writer.

There is a limit to how sinful they allow the characters who will latter become saved and members of the "Tribulation Force" to get.  The Airplane pilot stops short of actually committing adultery with the sexy stewardess.  I'd like to see a character analogous to Paul, who was a full blown enemy of The Gospel before being saved.

And then there is how they treat Homosexuality.  That they depict it as a Sin is sadly of course expected, but no Gay character ever becomes saved either, they're just there to be a problem for our protagonists until they suffer a horrible "deserved" death.  As if the writers agree with the insane position of some Baptists that being engaged in Homosexual activity is evidence of being no longer eligible for Salvation.

Both Christian writers and Secular Hollywood writers have trouble understanding the people who disagree with them.  But in all honesty it seems to me like the Left tends to make a better effort to at least try.

The Four Horsemen of Revelation 6

This is not gonna be your typical Four Horsemen study.  I'm not going to go equally in depth into each one.  I'm gonna elaborate on my own thoughts on what I feel others commonly get wrong, while adding unique observations of my own.  Rather then rehash what countless other teachers have gone over.

Even though I disagree with his Pre-Trib assumptions I recommend Chuck Missler's seminars and related articles on them from his Website, the last three at least.  And to elaborate on the issues connected to the Third Horseman I recommend the documentaries The Money Masters, America Freedom to Fascism, and Fall of The Republic.  On on the issues connected to the Fourth Horsemen I recommend Endgame:Blueprint for Global Enslavement, and various of Chris White's videos on YouTube dealing with The New Age Movement.

[[Update: My endorsements of Alex Jones documentaries I now greatly regret since he's become a Trump supporter.]]

First I want to discus the common notion that they're perfectly analogous with Matthew 24:5-7.  As I explain in my Olivte Discourse Study, these are the Non Signs, they're characteristic of all History and Jesus' whole point here was it is fallacy to cite those vague things as Signs.

I'm not saying the Horsemen have no connection to these trends, I wouldn't have recommend those documentaries if I felt that way.  In a sense they are these common trends of history coming to their true commencement.  But to cite that part of the Olivte Discourse as specifically End Times is to give a middle finger to what Jesus actually said.

Verse 7 says these things are the "Beginning of Sorrows", that doesn't contradict my point.  What Preterists miss is that in a sense the entirety of the Church Age is the Time of the End.

With that out of the way, I want to get into to how they relate to the issue of The Antichrist.  The most common view is The White Horseman is The Antichrist, which I consider possibly true in a sense, I'll get to that.

Some like to say all four horses have the same rider, and that's The Antichrist.  The problem with that is the Fourth Rider is identified in Revelation 6 itself as Death.  Revelation 20 reveals that Death is sent into the lake of Fire after the Millennium, after Satan even.  The Beast and The False Prophet are sent there before The Millennium.

So IF all four have the same rider, that goes against the rider being The Antichrist.

Is it possible Death rides all four not just the Fourth?  Would seem weird not to identify him earlier, but things affiliated with earlier horsemen are repeated for the Pale Horse.  However looking at Zechariah 6 which is linked to the Four Horseman issue, I'm inclined to view them as separate riders.

Not all agree The White Horseman is The Antichrist.  First objection might be, why is this the only time in Revelation that The Antichrist isn't "the beast"?  Other books of The Bible use various titles for him, but Revelation is everywhere else far more consistent.  Well, the second beast of Chapter 13 is called by a far more human title elsewhere, The False Prophet, so why not the first?

But also I feel he doesn't become The Beast until he ascends out of the Bottomless Pit, when his Mortal Wound is healed.  The first reference to The Beast is in Chapter 11, when The Witnesses are killed, 3.5 years into the 70th Week.  The Rider on the White horse I view as the Human being who later becomes The Beast.

This isn't something to build doctrine on, but the fact that so many awaited Messianic Figures of false religions also ride White Horses, (like Kalki, the future Avatar of Vishnu in Hinduism), I feel backs up this being The Antichrist.  Doesn't prove The Antichrist will actually claim to be those individuals either, I believe Satan has planted many seeds for the End Time deception, and that even he isn't 100% sure how things will play out.  Example, while I've come to reject the theory that The Antichrist will claim to be the Mahdi of Islam, I do not doubt at all Satan created that Prophetic tradition for the purpose of being a possible option for The Antichrist.

The Rider on the White Horse is often interpreted as a positive figure.  Confusing him with the White Horseman of Revelation 19 is the root of that.  But not all interpretations making him a good guy make him Jesus.

I've seen this Horseman argued to be The Church.  I feel that view is not sufficiently backed up by any other terminology used of The Church.

Some Muslim scholars have identified their Mahdi with this part of Revelation, which only lends fuel to Christians who are obsessed with an Islamic Antichrist.  I don't know if current Mormons have actually connected their White Horse prophecy to the First Horseman.  But I feel like Revelation 6 must have inspired Joseph Smith or whoever really originated it.

The Fourth Horseman we know winds up in the lake of fire, but does that prove they're all villains?  Death is an Angelic being clearly while the first I view as Human, so there can be differences between what kinds of personages they are.

Perhaps it's not either/or, perhaps he is a good guy at first, but makes a deal with the Devil latter.  There are Biblical precedents for a leader anointed by a True Prophet of God's orders winding up a villain.  Saul, Jeroboam, Jehu, and yes even Solomon.  Not to mention Jesus personally choose Judas, yet he was a Devil (John 6:70).

I and Chris White think he may claim to be, or be claimed by others to be, the Rabbinic Jewish figure of Messiah Ben-Joseph.  And with what I suggested above, maybe that wouldn't even be entirely a wrong claim.  Three out of those four Old Testament examples are people viewed in one way or another as a type of Ben-Joseph by those who believe in that concept.

I talked in that post I made on White's theory about how even some Christians accept this idea of a Messiah Ben Joseph separate from Jesus.  I'm kind of surprised I haven't yet seen any of those Christians link Messiah Ben-Joseph to the White Horseman.

The rider on the White Horse has a Bow and is given a Crown.  Genesis 49:24 Jacob says of Joseph "But his bow abode in strength, and the arms of his hands were made strong by the hands of the mighty God of Jacob".  And Zechariah 9:13 says "When I have bent Judah for me, filled the bow with Ephraim, and raised up thy sons, O Zion, against thy sons O Javan".  And Isaiah 28 "Woe to the crown of pride, to the drunkards of Ephraim".

Those who look for astronomical correlations to the imagery in Revelation, inevitably see Sagittarius as the Rider on the White Horse.  He is a Horseman, he has a Bow, and is sort of holding the Corona Borealis (a Crown).

Different Mazzaroth/Gospel in The Stars researchers have different theories on how to align the 12 Zodiac signs with the 12 tribes.  Leo as Judah and Scorpio as Dan are the most universal.  But maybe more then one such theory is equally true, because the 12 Tribes are defined differently in different Biblical passages.  Even on the near universal two I mentioned, Deuteronomy 33 has Dan as the Lion's Whelp.

The same Biblical references that could connect Joseph/Ephraim to the White Horseman, have caused some Mazzaroth sites to make him Sagittarius.  Sagittarius being next to Scorpio is interesting, Dan and Ephraim are the two names left out of Revelation 7's account of the sealing of the 144,000.  It is Genesis 49 that makes Dan a Serpent (Scorpion fits the Biblical definition of a Serpent, and Scorpio is linked to Ophiuchus and Serpens) and Judah the Lion.  That Chapter's description of Joseph can only make him Sagittarius, not Taurus or Aquarius.

Generally the first and last Horsemen are the only ones identified with specific personages.  Death and The Antichrist.  What about the two in between?  Certainly those evils can have villains in charge of them too.  But as far as other Biblical Prophetic personages to identify them with goes, I can't think of anyone for the Black Horseman.  For the Red Horseman however, someone who goes to War with The Antichrist seems logical.

The King of The South or King of The North of Daniel 11:40 perhaps.  But I've discussed elsewhere how The Terrible of The Nations in Ezekiel seems to be the one who gives the beast his Mortal Wound.  And he does so with a Sword, and The Rider on The Red Horse has a Sword.

Lastly I want to address Chris White's claim that the "wild beasts of the earth" from the Fourth Horseman's description are the beasts of Revelation 13, and so he can therefore place the Abomination of Desolation in the Fourth Seal thus helping the Pre-Wrath position.

True, it's technically the same Greek word used for beast, and only here in Revelation is "wild" added to try and make it seem like it's clearly wild animals, but it is rendered "wild beasts" elsewhere outside Revelation.  And in Revelation this is also the only time it's plural.  The Beasts of Revelation 13 are never refereed to with the plural form of the word, when it's necessary to refer to both in the same breath, the second becomes The False Prophet.

His argument about the grammar of the verse is true however.  The Greek text does imply these beasts are controlling the famines and wars and earthquakes mentioned before.  So I do think the word is being used here in a way related to Daniel 7 and 8, as imperialistic nation states.  But it's not the Chapter 13 Beasts yet.

They could possibly be the current Globalist Agenda carrying out their planned Eugenics operations.  I think, drawing on White's own theories about The Antichrist, that The Antichrist may present himself as saving the world from their evil operations.

Or maybe they're the first three beasts of Daniel 7, before the Fourth Beast conquers them.  Which also lends itself to other theories of White's, which I partly agree and partly disagree with.

The Resurrection of The Antichrist: Ezekiel 28

The other major Hebrew Bible passage on the Fall of Satan is in Ezekiel 28. Some people discuss how Ezekiel 28 starts out talking about a human ruler of Tyre and then goes on to discus Satan as if it's ambiguous where this change happens, but it's not.

 Ezekiel 28 begins with "The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying", which is a typical Sign of a new message being given, that might be in some way connected to the prior message, but might not. Verse 11 says "Moreover the word of the LORD came unto me, saying". It's after verse 11 it's talking about the "Anointed Cherub", the first 10 verses are about the human ruler.

The human ruler is the "Prince of Tyrus" the word for "Prince" here being Nagiyd, which is also translated Ruler, Captain, Leader, Governor and Noble. Satan is refereed to as the "King of Tyrus", the word for King being "Melek". The patron deity of ancient Tyre was Melqart, who's name was derived in part from Melek and means "King of the City". So part of the intent in referring to Satan this way may have been to link him to that false god. (Who the Ancient Greeks identified with Herakles/Hercules.)  Also the Hebrew word Melek for King is spelled the same as it's word for Angel, Malak,  M-L-K.  So the Holy Spirit could be doing some word play here.  Moloch is also spelled the same BTW.

Don't get over excited about an Antichrist passage seemingly calling him the "Prince of _____" or "King of _____". He will conquer and take over many Near Eastern locations, so none of these really tell us anything about his origin. Tyre may likely come under his control when he is victorious over the "King of the North" in Daniel 11:36-45. He'll also conquer Egypt (King of The South) which is important to remember later. This particular Prophecy is speaking of him in terms of his connection to Tyre because it spins off from Ezekiel's earlier prophecies of the contemporary conquest of Tyre by Babylon.

"Son of man, say unto the Ruler of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord Yahweh; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, "I Am A God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas"; yet thou art a man, and not a god, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God: Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee: With thy wisdom and with thine understanding thou hast gotten thee riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures: By thy great wisdom and by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches: Therefore thus saith the Lord Yahweh; Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God; Behold, therefore I will bring foreigners upon thee, the terrible of the nations: and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy brightness. They shall bring thee down to the pit, and thou shalt die the deaths of them that are slain in the midst of the seas.  Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, "I am God"? but thou shalt be a man, and no god, in the hand of him that slayeth thee. Thou shalt die the deaths of the uncircumcised by the hand of foreigners: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord Yahweh."

Here we have a ruler explicitly thinking of himself as God-Like, and also being sent down to the Pit. The word for "pit" here is different in the Hebrew then in Isaiah 14, but the idea is still clearly the same.

We're also told specifically he will be killed, and his killer is refereed to as "the terrible of the nations". This figure is significant, to me since many of the False Prophecies I see as setting up Messianic Figures that I think The Antichrist could seek to identify himself with have what I like to call a "Decoy Antichrist" figure who will kill him setting the stage for his Resurrection. Messiah Ben-Ephriam is killed by Armilus and the Mahdi by Dajjal. There are also similar ideas in apostate Christians traditions, though they don't as specifically expect their hero to be killed. I'll return to this subject latter.

Some see "die the deaths of the uncircumcised" as meaning he is Jewish, and that dying like a Gentile is some kind of mystical disgrace. If that's the case then it certainly goes against seeing this as applying to Ithobaal III (Ethbaal) the Ruler of Tyre at the time of Nebuchadnezzar's conquest of Tyre. But others see it the opposite, as simply saying he's Uncircumcised.

I believe The Antichrist will die only one death, because of what I mentioned before about Revelation 19 and being cast alive into The Lake of Fire. Some see Daniel 7:11 as clarifying that "The Beast" is killed first. "I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame." While the Beast imagery in Revelation draws on Daniel 7 it's also different. In Revelation The beast is both the individual and his Kingdom, in Daniel 7 The Beast is only The Kingdom, the Little Horn is the individual who is The Antichrist. This detail of Daniel 7:11 is about Edom/Rome as a nation being destroyed, not an individual person being killed.

Chris White and some others like to diminish the Eschatological-Antichrist significance of this passage by saying it merely makes this ruler of Tyre a type. But the problem is none of this really fits Ithoball/Ethoball at all. I alluded to one possible problem already, but there are others.

 He was not killed by Nebuchadnezzar (who in a contemporary context is the only person "the terrible of the nations" could be, Ezekiel elsewhere gives this title him explicitly) or his armies, simply forced to abdicate. And there is no evidence he arrogantly deified himself, I don't know whether or not like in Egypt the ruler was ceremonially always viewed as a sort of avatar of the patron god, but that would be different from this Prophecy where someone really honestly believes he's divine in his own heart.

This prophecy appears to be about him before and up to his death. but since the Abomination of Desolation is clearly after his resurrection, isn't the focus on his deification a little out of place? This prophecy does not reference that specific event, it may not be a matter of not publicly proclaiming himself yet but believing it in his heart, and/or simply not silencing his supporters who deify him. In which case I think it might work well to see Herod Agrippa in Acts 12 as a type.

Acts 12:20-23 And Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon: but they came with one accord to him, and, having made Blastus the king's chamberlain their friend, desired peace; because their country was nourished by the king's country.  And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them.  And the people gave a shout, saying, "It is the voice of a god, and not of a man".  And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.

This is verified by Josephus in Antiquities of The Jews Chapter 8.

Now when Agrippa had reigned three years over all Judea, he came to the city Cesarea, which was formerly called Strato's Tower; and there he exhibited shows in honor of Caesar, upon his being informed that there was a certain festival celebrated to make vows for his safety. At which festival a great multitude was gotten together of the principal persons, and such as were of dignity through his province. On the second day of which shows he put on a garment made wholly of silver, and of a contexture truly wonderful, and came into the theater early in the morning; at which time the silver of his garment being illuminated by the fresh reflection of the sun's rays upon it, shone out after a surprising manner, and was so resplendent as to spread a horror over those that looked intently upon him; and presently his flatterers cried out, one from one place, and another from another, [though not for his good,] that he was a god; and they added, "Be thou merciful to us; for although we have hitherto reverenced thee only as a man, yet shall we henceforth own thee as superior to mortal nature." Upon this the king did neither rebuke them, nor reject their impious flattery. But as he presently afterward looked up, he saw an owl sitting on a certain rope over his head, and immediately understood that this bird was the messenger of ill tidings, as it had once been the messenger of good tidings to him; and fell into the deepest sorrow. A severe pain also arose in his belly, and began in a most violent manner. He therefore looked upon his friends, and said, "I, whom you call a god, am commanded presently to depart this life; while Providence thus reproves the lying words you just now said to me; and I, who was by you called immortal, am immediately to be hurried away by death. But I am bound to accept of what Providence allots, as it pleases God; for we have by no means lived ill, but in a splendid and happy manner." When he said this, his pain was become violent. Accordingly he was carried into the palace, and the rumor went abroad every where, that he would certainly die in a little time. But the multitude presently sat in sackcloth, with their wives and children, after the law of their country, and besought God for the king's recovery. All places were also full of mourning and lamentation. Now the king rested in a high chamber, and as he saw them below lying prostrate on the ground, he could not himself forbear weeping. And when he had been quite worn out by the pain in his belly for five days, he departed this life, being in the fifty-fourth year of his age, and in the seventh year of his reign;

The last part of Ezekiel 28 is about a judgment on Sidon. Which did not suffer any so epic Judgment in Ancient Times. I think it's possible to keep that passage in mind anytime tensions involving modern Lebanon are flaring up.

Ezekiel reuses some of the key themes of this passage in chapters 29-32. Another human ruler killed by "the terrible of the nations" and going down into Sheol. This time it's given new details like "and he shall groan before him with the groanings of a deadly wounded man." But there the human ruler is the Pharaoh of Egypt.

This time there definitely is a sense of near fulfillment in Ezekiel's own time, since "the terrible of the nations" is spoken of as synonymous with 'The King of Babylon" and Nebuchadrezzar is mentioned by name.

Along with this is a prophecy of Egypt being uninhabited for 40 years. Ussher believed this was fulfilled from about 572-532 B.C., but the documentation for that isn't solid. Some see in the text a possible allusion to this 40 year desolation beginning with the Aswan Dam being Nuked, with the references to a fire being set, and references to "the tower of Syene". Syene being where the Dam was build and no major ancient structure was built there.

Nebuchadnezzar is clearly only a type of The Antichrist's killer here. Many see him ironically as serving as a type of The Antichrist in Daniel 3. So I don't see this as definitive that the future "Terrible of the Nations" will be from or in Iraq. But Daniel 11:36-45 does refer to The Antichrist having trouble from the North and the East, after he's already conquered the King of The North (Syria). So that makes either Turkey and/or Iraq a likely candidate for this new adversary.

But if the King of Babylon detail is relevant, it seems awkward given it's The Antichrist who's the King of Babylon in Isaiah 14. After his Resurrection and return to power this enemy will quickly be taken care of. Armilus and Dajjal seem to be killed by the False Prophet figure in those false prophecies, but the heretical Christian traditions would rather see it be the Last Roman Emperor/Great Catholic Monarch who defeats the evil tyrant. Either way, it's likely The Antichrist will then take Rulership of Babylon, or whatever lands "the Terrible of the Nations" controls, for himself.

It's interesting to note that there are rival claimants to the Hashamite "King of Iraq" title right now. In addition to the proper claimants coming form two rival lines, there are those in the international community who'd rather give the title to someone of the Jordanian Royal Family.  But I'm no longer a fan of the Islamic Anitchrist view as I used to be.

That Nebuchadnezzar can be a type of The Antichrist to one Prophet, but a type of his killer to another, just further reinforces my belief that this individual will be a sort of "Decoy Antichrist". I've written elsewhere that I think there may be many potential Antichrists during the first half of the 70th Week, or perhaps even before the 70th week begins. And that no matter how convincing it might seem to view someone currently on the rise as The Antichrist, to remember that we will not know for certain who he is until the Abomination of Desolation happens.

The Resurrection of The Antichrist: Isaiah 14

Isaiah 13 and most of 14 is one Prophecy. 13 is talking about the Fall of Babylon, a prophecy that has not been literally fulfilled, an arguable near fulfillment exists in Isaiah's day, but it doesn't fit the full details even remotely. And attempts to make this fit the fall to Cyrus don't work at all. 14 begins with saying how Yaweh will choose Israel and give them the land.

I used to view The King of Babylon as not being The Beast, but as probably a decoy Antichrist the Beast will defeat, but I've changed my mind after only recently noticing aspects of this I repeatedly overlooked. Which is gonna cause me to have to go back and adjust some details of my older dissertations.

A note, I shall adjust the KJV rendering to better reflect The Hebrew, influenced by my own in depth study.

Now let's begin, verses 4-11 are talking about the human King.

That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased ! the golden city ceased ! Yaweh hath broken the staff of the wicked, and the sceptre of the rulers.  He who smote the people in wrath with a continual stroke, he that ruled the nations in anger, is persecuted, and none hindereth.  The whole earth is at rest, and is quiet: they break forth into singing.  Yea, the fir trees rejoice at thee, and the cedars of Lebanon, saying, Since thou art laid down, no feller is come up against us. Sheol from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the demons for thee, even all the rams of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations.  All they shall speak and say unto thee, "Art thou also become weak as we? art thou become like unto us?" Thy pomp is brought down to Sheol, and the noise of thy viols: the maggot is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.

So this Human ruler has died and is now in Sheol, called Hades in the Greek and often by us Hell. But this isn't the Lake of Fire.

Now people assume what comes next is mentioned for the purpose of comparing these two personages. I feel the grammar justifies that a new character is in mind, but the person we were discussing will come up again latter. Isaiah 14:12-14

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the Dawn ! how art thou cut down to the earth, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Highest.

This is one of the core passages on the fall of Satan from heaven. The only one besides Revelation that could help us time it chronologically, but Revelation is far more precise.

Now I think we learn why these two come together in verse 15

Yet thou shalt go down to Sheol, to the sides of the pit.

They are now in the same place. In the New Testament "The Pit" is used of the Abyss. Given Hebrew poetic style however, I think this reference means a synonym of Hades. Though it could work either way if the Abyss is a specific part of Hades, or a location right next to it. This Hebrew word is also used of just literal cisterns and dungeons also.

The big translation issue I noticed is that the part of the usual translations that imply he's being brought there against his will, like his fall was, isn't in the Hebrew. It can be read that he went down there on his own, his fall was only to The Earth.

In the past I've been against viewing The Beast as possessed by Satan like Judas was, simply out of lack of direct reference. But here once both characters are in the underworld, the grammar of the text does seem to treat them as one.

Now verses 16-19 is the key really interesting part.

They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms; That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners? All the kings of the nations, even all of them, lay in glory, every one in his own house. But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcase trodden under feet.

Generally we've considered the idea of the Beast's having his own Death and Resurrection merely implied by the "mortal wound" being healed in Revelation 13, and how Daniel 45 speaks of his end. But we miss how Isaiah here explicitly speaks of a King who'll go to Hell, but then be "cast out of his grave". And having some sort of wound from a sword.

Of the three ways the KJV translated that word throughout The Bible I chose "grave" because it most literally conveyed the idea poetically. It can also mean "sepulcher", and I do think as I explained elsewhere the Dome of The Rock could be his sepulcher. It's not Sheol however, which the KJV also often renders Grave, but I personally choose never to translate it that way.

Revelation twice when describing The Beast (both references timing wise I see as after his resurrection). Refers to him as ascending out of the Abyss. 11:7 "And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them." 17:8 "The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition".

I also see here a possible description of his post resurrection state. See I don't think The Antichrist's resurrection will be one like Lazurus, just being returned to how he was before. Though he's certainly not like our promised Resurrection either. That he and The False Prophet are in Revelation 19 cast into the Lake of Fire without being killed first implies to me that they are early partakers of the Second Resurrection. I've written on my theory about The False Prophet's identity elsewhere.

Since we who will be of The First Resurrection will have bodies like The Angels. I think it's possible that the bodies of The Second Resurrection will be like the bodies of Fallen Angels. II Corinthians 5:2 "For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven". The word translated "house" here is Oiketerion. A word used only one other time in The Bible, in Jude 6 where it's translated "habitation". "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." Like Chuck Missler I view this word as being a technical term for the Incorruptible bodies of Unfallen beings.

Does this tell us anything about the timing of other events in relation to his resurrection, mainly the destruction of Babylon that was discussed before?

That his mortal wound's healing is mid week is pretty indisputable from other references. This account is in the context of the yet future Fall of Babylon. But the context here is a semi change of subject, it could be looking back to explain how this King became what he is now, when Babylon falls. Or it could be this is going on to describe how this King after is judged Babylon is judged. Or maybe Babylon's End Times Judgment really happens in phases? Now to continue. Verses 19-23

But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcase trodden under feet. Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain thy people: the seed of evildoers shall never be renowned.  Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not stand, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with enemy cities. For I will rise up against them, saith Yahweh of hosts, and cut off from Babylon the name, and remnant, and offspring, and posterity, saith Yahweh.  I will also make it a possession for the porcupines, and pools of water: and I will sweep it with the broom of destruction, saith Yahweh of hosts.

The subject of Babylon itself seems to be returned to, as if the process of destruction began earlier but hadn't ended yet. It's interesting that he's spoken of as slaying his own people.

What new does this understanding tell us?

It kind of directly links the counterfeit resurrection to Satan's fall. Daniel 11:45 and 12:1 are the same continuous message originally, (the Chapter divisions are modern), also place "Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people" at the time the Willful King meets his end. Daniel 12:1 I also believe correlates to Revelation 12:7 "And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon" which is directly linked to when The Woman (Israel) flees to the Wilderness.

Verses 24-27 are still the same Prophecy, no "Word of The LORD came unto me saying" or any other indicator of it being a change in subject. None the less some Bibles include a new Chapter heading here as if it were different that calls it Judgment on Assyria. The text in the KJV says The Assyrian however.

The Assyrian here could be one of 3 or 4 things

1. The same King of Babylon we'd been discussing. I consider this the least likely since the other passages people cite as calling The Antichrist as The Assyrian I see as flawed logically also. Micah 5 is being hypothetical, saying how Israel can't be attacked once The Messiah reigns. And I've come to see Isaiah 9-11, if End Times at all (it could be easily just be about events form Isaiah's time when he gave this Prophecy) as linking The Antichrist to Ephraim rather then Assyria. Because I see Isaiah 9:14-15 "Therefore the LORD will cut off from Israel head and tail, branch and rush, in one day. The ancient and honourable, he is the head; and the prophet that teacheth lies, he is the tail." as being a rare outside Revelation reference to The Antichrist being paired with a False Prophet.

2. Perhaps the "Terrible of The Nations" from Ezekiel I'll discus when I study those Chapters later.

3. The "King of The North" from Daniel 11:40. Could be the same person as 2 or maybe not.

4. It could be a flawed Translation, and simply mean Assyria, or the Assyrian people. Which could maybe overlap with either 1 or 2 or 3.

When it's said of The Beast "and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months." The terminology could mean continue as in he should have ended already. I think specifically it's referring to the amount of time following his being cast out of Hades.