The Identity of the Antichrist

“And He put forth the form of a hand, and took me by a lock of mine head; and the Spirit lift me up between the earth and the heaven, and brought me in the visions of God to Jerusalem…

“[W]here was the seat of the image of jealousy, which provoketh to jealousy…and behold, northward at the gate of the altar this image of jealousy in the entry” (Ezekiel 8:3,5).

Grace and peace unto the brethren.

This morning I happened upon a certain “Christian” news site, where I came across the following headline:

“The Early Church Father’s Belief About the Antichrist.”

I was hesitant to investigate the article further, because when I hear the term, “church fathers,” I immediately know that it is not referring to the writers of the Four Gospels, but to the men to whom the Roman Catholic church looks for wisdom and light.  I can therefore always count on this interpretation being unscriptural.  But, I clicked on the article anyway, thinking that perhaps—just perhaps—I could be wrong.  I wasn’t.

The author goes on to make six statements about the Antichrist, which he attributes to the “church fathers.”  Though each of these statements is scripturally false, and therefore, doesn’t merit our attention, the second statement is important, as it reflects the opinion of many in the Christian Church:

“The Antichrist will be a Jew, and will achieve his stated objectives by being accepted as the Christ, the messianic King of the Jews, taking his seat in the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, pretending to be God Himself, and thereby becoming the ‘abomination of desolation’ spoken of by the prophet Daniel and mentioned also by Jesus (Daniel 12:11, Matthew 24:15).”

The author claims that the Antichrist will become the Abomination of Desolation after taking the throne of David in a rebuilt Jewish temple.  But this is a false interpretation of Scripture.  Because many Protestant theologians also hold to this false belief, it behooves us to examine what the Bible has to say on the matter. 

As we shall discover, the Abomination of Desolation and the Antichrist are two separate entities, but they are irrevocably linked.  Therefore, when one discovers who the Abomination of Desolation is, one shall also discover who the Antichrist is.

Before we continue, let us go to the Lord for spiritual guidance.  Remember, the Bible is a spiritual book, so we need the Holy Spirit to guide us as we read.  We should always pray before we study the Bible:

“Heavenly Father, may your blessed Holy Spirit teach and guide us in your Truth, as we read from your Word.  In Jesus’ name, Amen.”

Now let us go to Scripture.  The author cites Daniel 12:11 and Matthew 24:15 as proof of his contention that the Antichrist is the Abomination of Desolation.  Let us examine these passages:

“And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days” (Dan 12:11).

“When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand). (Matthew 24:15).

From these two passages it may be possible to believe that the Abomination of Desolation is a person.  However, it must also be noted that the Lord Jesus adds, “whoso readeth, let him understand.”  Whenever He says this, He means that we need to be reading with our spiritual eyes wide open.  It means that there is something more here than meets the eye.

First, it would serve our purposes to go to a secular source for a definition of the word abomination.  Webster’s defines abomination as:

“1. Something abominable 2. Extreme disgust and hatred : LOATHING.”

According to this definition, an abomination is a thing rather than a person.  Abomination in Strong’s Concordance is #8441 and is said to mean,

“Something disgusting [morally], i.e. (as noun) an abhorrence: especially idolatry or [concrete] an idol:– abominable (custom, thing), abomination.

Strong’s also defines an abomination as a thing: either a detestable act such as idolatry, or an idol.  This is extremely important.  There are a couple of instances in the Bible where God refers to a person as an abomination, but it is important to understand that it is in connection with the sin of idolatry.  Generally, the word abomination in the Bible refers to an idol or the act of idolatry.  Armed with this understanding, let us examine what the Bible says about the Abomination of Desolation.

As stated, the author cites Daniel 12:11 as the basis for his understanding that the Abomination of Desolation is the Antichrist, but there are passages in Daniel that show that the Abomination is a thing and not a person.  Ironically, Daniel 12:11, which the author quotes, is one of them.  Let us examine it again:

“And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days” (Daniel 12:11).

People aren’t generally “set up,” but things are.  Now, some contend that “set up” in this sense means to establish in power.  But, as we shall see, Daniel 9:26 refutes this:

“And he (the Antichrist) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.

“[A]nd for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate” (Daniel 9:26-27). 

As one can plainly see from this passage, it is the Antichrist who shall take away the Jewish sacrifice.  This presents a problem for those who contend that “set up” in Daniel 12:11 means “to establish in power,” because, in order for the Antichrist to cause the Jewish sacrifices to cease, he would have to already be in power.  The Antichrist, then, cannot be what is being “set up.”  It must be something else.  This makes perfect sense if the Abomination of Desolation is a thing, as we contend, rather than a person.

Now, recall that the definition of abominations includes the act of idolatry.  Daniel 9:27 says that because of the “overspreading of abominations [the Antichrist] shall make it desolate.”  Strong’s says that desolate means, “to be destitute” or “to lie in waste.” In that it is the act of idolatry that is being discussed, it is logical to conclude that desolate in this sense means “desecrated” or “defiled.”  In that the “overspreading of abominations” immediately follows the cessation of the Jewish sacrifices, it is also logical to conclude that the place being made desolate is the Jewish temple, which is where the Jews historically performed animal sacrifices to God.

It would seem, therefore, that the Antichrist will order Jewish sacrifices to cease and commit idolatry in the temple and desecrate it.  In order to commit idolatry, one requires an idol.  The thing being “set up” in Daniel 12:11, therefore, could be an idol.  Daniel 11:31 would seem to support this contention:

“And arms shall stand on [the Antichrist’s] part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall PLACE the abomination that maketh desolate.” [Boldface and CAPS mine.]

Again, we contend that abominations in Daniel 9:27 means idolatry and that desolations in the same passage means desecration or defilement.  Note that this passage says that the sanctuary of strength shall be “polluted.”  A sanctuary is the central place of worship in a church or temple.  It is also where the altar is located.  Remember this, for it is important.  The pollution of the sanctuary of strength coincides with the taking away of the Jewish sacrifices, which historically took place at the Jewish temple.  Since the sanctuary is where the altar is located, it is logical to conclude that the “sanctuary of strength” is the Holy of Holies, in the Jewish temple.

This would agree with the words of Jesus in Matthew 24:15:

“When ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand).”

The Holy Place was the inner sanctum of the Jewish temple, where the Ark of the Covenant was kept.  Now, note that, in addition to being “set up” and “placed,” as we have seen in Daniel 12:11 and 9:27, we now see that the abomination will also “stand” in the holy place.  This is important for several reasons.  

First, it further proves that the abomination of desolation is a thing and not a person.   We have already seen that the Abomination will be “set up,” and we have proven that this term could not apply to the Antichrist.  We have also seen that the Abomination will be “placed,” further suggesting that it is a thing and not a person.  Now we see that the Abomination will “stand” in the “holy place,” which is where the ark of the covenant stood.  This further suggests that the Abomination is a thing and not a person, because the only thing that is supposed to stand in the holy place is an object of worship.

This brings me to my second point.  Recall that the author of the article states that the Antichrist would become the Abomination of Desolation after “taking his seat in the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem.”  But we have also seen that the Abomination would be “set up,” “placed,” and shall “stand” in “the sanctuary of strength,” or “the holy place.”  This is extremely important, because, again, the holy place is where the ark of the covenant stood, and the throne of David is not located there.  In other words, the Antichrist will not rule from the Holy Place, as it were, because the only thing that stands in the holy place is an object of worship.  The abomination of desolation, therefore, is not a person, but an object of worship; and anything that is worshipped other than God is an idol.  Mark 13:14 would seem to confirm this:

“But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet standing where IT ought not, (let him that readeth understand,)…” (Mark 13:14).

One can plainly see that Jesus uses the third-person neuter pronoun it, which demonstrates conclusively that the abomination is a thing and not a person.  For if the abomination were a person, Jesus would likely have said:

“But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation…standing were HE ought not…” 

Moreover, Jesus yet again immediately follows up His reference to the Abomination of Desolation with “Let him that readeth understand.”  He is telling us to carefully consider the Abomination.  There is more here than meets the eye.  

Therefore, to summarize what we have discussed thus far, if the word abomination refers to an idol, and Daniel 11:38, Daniel 12:11, Matthew 24:15, and Mark 13:14 refer to a thing, as the passages suggest, then the Abomination of Desolation is an idol.  If the desolations spoken of in Daniel 9:27 is idolatry, and the Antichrist will commit these desolations, then the Antichrist will be an idol worshipper.  

We believe that the Antichrist is, in fact, an idol worshipper, and we will prove this by looking at some of his characteristics.  To begin, let us start with Daniel 9:26:

“And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”

This verse deals with the prophecy of the 70 weeks given by the angel Gabriel to Daniel.  Now, these are not 70 weeks of days, but 70 prophetic weeks of years, the last week, or seven years, of which is the Great Tribulation.  Now, the “people of the prince that shall come” is important, because the “prince” is the Antichrist and the “people” refers to the nation that the Antichrist will come from.  The passage says that the people of the Antichrist shall destroy Jerusalem and the temple, and we know that this was, in fact, accomplished in 70 AD, when the Roman general, Titus, destroyed Jerusalem and razed the temple to the ground.  Titus was a Roman, so the “people” referred to here are the Romans. 

The Antichrist, then, who is “the prince that shall come,” will be a Roman: that is, a citizen of Rome.

Consider also that Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 both state that the Abomination of Desolation will “stand” in a particular place.  But the author of the aforementioned article contends that the Abomination will “take his seat” in the throne of David.  If this were true, why doesn’t the Bible state that the Abomination of Desolation will sit?  Why, instead, does the Bible say that the Abomination of Desolation will stand?  This, together with the use of the pronoun it in Mark 13:14, may be the greatest evidence that the Abomination of Desolation is not a person, but a thing: specifically an idol.

We continue:

“Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.

“But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.

“Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory” (Daniel 11:37-39).

Let us examine this passage closer.  The Antichrist shall not regard:

“The God of his fathers”

The word meaning God here is Elohim, which is the Holy Trinity, or God Almighty.  “God of his fathers” is a frequently used reference to Yahweh, or Jehovah, the God of the Jews (2 Kings 21:22, Acts 22:14).  If Jehovah is the God of the Jews and also the God of the Antichrist’s fathers, then the Antichrist has to be Jewish.  There can be no other explanation for this wording.

“Nor the desire of women”

The Antichrist will be celibate or homosexual.

“Nor…any god”

The Antichrist will not worship Jesus.

“But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces…a god whom his fathers knew not.”

This is very significant.  The his in “in his estate” is God Almighty.  Estate means “place.”  “In his estate” therefore, means “in God’s place” or “instead of God.” 

The use of this term is interesting, because it implies that one is doing something other than what one is supposed to be doing.  For example, if I am supposed to go to the store, yet I go to the beach, one can say that I went to the beach instead of to the store.  If it were not my responsibility to go to the store, however, and I went to the beach, one would simply say that I went to the beach.

The fact that this man worships the God of forces instead of God Almighty may imply that it is his duty to worship God.  In other words, he may be a priest.  This will be important later.

Next, the passage says that the Antichrist will worship the “God of forces.”  In this context, the Hebrew word for god is eloahh (as opposed to Elohim), and is found under Strong’s #433, which gives the following definition:

“eloahh, (el-o-ah), from 410; a deity or the Deity—God, god.  See 430.”

When we go to #410 we see that the word is el, which gives the following definition:

“strength; as adj.  mighty; espec.  the Almighty (but used also of any deity)—God (god), idol, mighty one, power, strong.”

So the word “god” in “God of forces” can mean God Almighty or a deity or idol.  Since verse 37 says that the Antichrist will not regard “the God of his fathers” or Jehovah, this means that the “God of forces” is an idol; for the Bible states that there are no other gods.  Note that the definition of el includes “mighty one” for it is important.

It yet remains for us to discover what the word “forces” means in “God of forces.”  Strong’s says that “forces” in this instance is the word mauz which is based on a word which means “a fortified place” and is defined as “a fort, a fortress, strength, and a strong hold.”  So, the “God of forces” is an idol of the “God of fortresses, or strength.” 

This is very interesting, because Christian pastor and historian, Alexander Hislop, says that the God of forces is Ala Mahozim (If you have your thinking cap on, you can make another important connection), which literally means “god of fortifications.”

In the book, The Two Babylons, Hislop writes:

“Who this god of fortifications could be, commentators have found themselves at a loss to determine.  In the records of antiquity the existence of any god of fortifications has been commonly overlooked; and it must be confessed that no such god stands forth there with any prominence to the ordinary reader. 

“But of the existence of a goddess of fortifications, every one knows that there is the amplest evidence.  That goddess is Cybele, who is universally represented with a mural or turreted crown, or with a fortification (fortress), on her head.” [parentheses mine.]

“The reason why the statue of Cybele wore a crown of towers was, ‘because she first erected them in cities.’  The first city in the world after the flood (from whence the commencement of the world itself was often dated) that had towers and encompassing walls, was Babylon…

“[I]t was Semiramis, the first queen of that city, who was believed to have ‘surrounded Babylon with a wall of brick.’ 

“Semiramis, then, the first deified queen of that city and tower whose top was intended to reach to heaven, must have been the prototype of the goddess who ‘first made towers in cities.’  When we look at the Ephesian Diana, we find evidence to the very same effect.”

Below is a picture of Diana of Ephesus.

Now listen to what Hislop says about the goddess Diana, because it is very important:

“In general, Diana was depicted as a virgin, and the patroness of virginity; but the Ephesian Diana was quite different.  She was represented with all the attributes of the Mother of the gods, and as the Mother of the gods, she wore a turreted crown, such as no one can contemplate without being forcibly reminded of the tower of Babel. 

Now this tower-bearing Diana is by an ancient scholiast [sic] expressly identified with Semiramis.  When, therefore, we remember that Rhea or Cybele, the tower-bearing goddess, was, in point of fact, a Babylonian goddess, and that Semiramis, when deified, was worshipped under the name of Rhea, there will remain, I think no doubt as to the personal identity of the “goddess of fortifications.”

“Rhea or Cybele, the ‘tower-crown’ goddess, was just the female counterpart of the “deity presiding over bulwarks or fortresses;’ and that this deity was Ninus, or Nimrod…If, therefore, Rhea (Cybele), the wife of Kronos (Nimrod) was the goddess of fortifications, Kronos or Saturn, the husband of Rhea, that is, Ninus or Nimrod, the first king of Babylon, must have been Ala mahozin, ‘the god of fortifications’” (Hislop, 31-32).

So, according to Hislop, the goddess of forces is Cybele, who was also called Diana and Rhea (as well as many other names), which identifies her as Semiramis, the first queen of Babylon.  And Hislop says that her husband, Nimrod, the first king of Babylon, was the “god of fortifications” or forces.  Now, pay close attention to what the Bible says about Nimrod:

“And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth.  He was a mighty hunter before the Lord” (Genesis 10:8-9).

Nimrod was a mighty one before the Lord.  “Mighty one,” as you recall, is one definition of el, which means a god or idol.  This is biblical confirmation of historical sources which say that Nimrod was worshiped in the ancient world as a God.

As we have seen, the Bible clearly records that the Antichrist will worship the God of forces.  In that the goddess of fortifications was worshipped under many names, including Diana, Diana of Ephesus, Cybele, and Rhea, it is possible that the Antichrist will also worship her under another name.   Therefore, the best way to identify this goddess in the present day would be to look at her attributes.  Hislop says that Diana was “depicted as a virgin, and the Ephesian Diana was “represented with all the attributes of the Mother of the gods.”  Remember this.

This is what we know about the Antichrist thus far:

– He will be a Roman (Daniel 9:26)

– He will be a Jew (Daniel 11:37)

– He will be celibate (Daniel 11:37)

– He will worship an idol (Daniel 11:38)

– The idol is a goddess (Daniel 11:38/Hislop)

– The goddess is depicted as a virgin and called “the Mother of the gods” (Hislop, 31-32)

The Antichrist and the goddess are inseparable.  So, in order to discover what name the goddess will be called (and is called), it will be necessary to further identify the Antichrist.   To do this, let us look at Daniel 8:23:

“And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.”

The angel Gabriel is talking to Daniel about the future.  The “latter time” is the time in which we now live, and the “king” spoken of is the Antichrist.  Let us examine his characteristics.

The Antichrist:

1.  Is a king, which means a ruler.  This is a very significant detail, because when the Antichrist comes to power, there will already be four kings and their kingdoms in place, yet he is not numbered among them (Daniel 8:22).  Because he is already a ruler, yet not numbered among the rulers, it must mean that he is not ostensibly a ruler, but rules from behind the scenes.  In other words, perhaps his kingdom is spiritual, and not (ostensibly) temporal.

2.  Has a fierce countenance.  Webster’s defines fierce as “wild or menacing” and countenance as “face or visage.”  The Antichrist then, will have a fierce or menacing face.

3. Understands “dark sentences.”  This term is used in several places in the
Bible, always in a religious sense (SEE Numbers 12:8, Ps. 49:4, Ps. 78:2, and Prov. 1:6), and means “proverbs”, “riddles,” or “hard saying.”  Webster’s defines a riddle as “something or someone difficult to understand.”  Numbers 12:8 gives an excellent example.  God speaks:

“With him (Moses) will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in “dark speeches.” [Parentheses mine.]

The Antichrist, therefore, will be a religious ruler who will speak in words difficult to understand.  Now, Revelation, Chapter 13 tells us something more about the Antichrist and his goddess idol that will be important to our understanding.

“And [the false prophet] deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast (Antichrist); saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast…

“And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed” (v.v. 14-15).

It should be noted that an image is an idol.  Now, Bible scholars say the image spoken of in verse 14 is a replica of the Antichrist and I believe this to be true.  But they also believe this image to be the same as the image spoken of in verse 15, which I believe is false.  I will explain why.

At this point in the narrative, the Antichrist is already in power.  Earlier, Revelation 13:5 tells us that “power was given unto [the Antichrist] to continue forty and two months,” which is to say, three and a half years.  This is the midpoint of the seven year Tribulation, and, as we have seen, it is at this time that the Antichrist commands the Jewish sacrifices to end, and places an idol in the Holy Place of the Jewish temple.  So by Revelation 13-14, the Antichrist’s idol, the goddess, already stands in the Holy Place.

Moreover, notice in Revelation 13:14 that the image is “TO the beast” and not “OF the beast.”  The term “to the beast” here appears to mean “in honor of the beast” or “in the beast’s honor.”  We use this term the same way when we speak of making “a toast to someone.” It means paying tribute or honor to a person.

Also notice in verse 14 that the False Prophet says the world “should” make an image to the beast.  It is not a commandment.  Strong’s Concordance says that the word “should,” in this instance, implies “intent or expectation.”  In other words, he is suggesting that they make an image of the Antichrist in his honor.  The reason he suggests this is given in the second half of verse 14:

“And…[the False Prophet said] that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.” 

This wound is mentioned also in Revelation 13:12 which says,

“[A]nd [the False Prophet] causeth all the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast (Antichrist), whose deadly wound was healed.”

That his wound was “deadly” tells us why they wanted to make a statue in the Antichrist’s honor.  Deadly means fatal as opposed to life-threatening.  If the wound were fatal, then the Antichrist should have died from it (or, in this case, stayed dead).  But since he didn’t, they are hailing him as a god.  This will become clear in a moment.

Bear in mind that verse 14 says that the wound is by a sword, and verse 12 says that it was deadly, but healed.  Now let us go to Revelation Chapter 13:3, which tells us where the wound was.  Now, in this part of the vision, John sees the beast as an actual creature coming out of the sea, “having seven heads and seven horns” (v. 1).  Notice what he says about one of the heads:

“And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed; and all the world wondered after the beast.”

Both Revelation 13:3 and 13:12 describe a beast with a wound to the head.  Now we know that the Antichrist will be called The Beast and, like the beast from the sea, he has a wound to his head.  It is, therefore, safe to assume that both beasts are one and the same. So this is what we know about the Antichrist’s wound:

1. It is by a sword,

2. It is to the head,

3. It is fatal,

4. YET, it healed

Now, the preceding passages tell us that, in spite of his “deadly wound,” the Antichrist lived.  A wound cannot be “to death,” or fatal, if the person lives.  This is a huge clue.  I believe that the Antichrist will be either shot in the head or publicly beheaded in the sight of the world and later resurrected by the power of Satan, who will possess him.  He will then proclaim himself the Christ.  At that time the whole world will worship him (Revelation 13:4,8).  He will then use this miraculous healing to lay claim to the throne of David.  This is not a stretch, for Judas Iscariot was also possessed by Satan, and he went on to betray Jesus Christ (John 13:27). The Antichrist will be possessed by Satan and make claim to be the Christ.

Think about it.  The prophets foretold that the Jewish Messiah would be killed and resurrected on the third day, and this was fulfilled in Jesus Christ, but the Jews rejected Him.  Anyone proclaiming to be the Messiah, therefore, would have to be killed and resurrected.  The Antichrist will do this, by the power of Satan. 

This is important because if I am right about the identity of the Antichrist, then even though Jesus said that we should flee when we see the Antichrist’s idol, the Abomination of Desolation, standing in the Holy Place, we can know even sooner when to run.  If we see the man whom I believe is the Antichrist beheaded on live television, we can know for certain that he is the man.

This is the ultimate reason I believe the media have been showing us graphic images of death from the war zones of the world.  They are priming us for the time when they will show us on live television the beheading and miraculous resurrection of the Antichrist.  

The Bible supports this theory.  Recall that in Chapter 11 of the Book of the Revelation, we are told that the Two Witnesses shall testify for three and a half years and then be killed by the Antichrist.  Listen to what the Bible says about the world’s reaction:

“And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days…”

“People, kindreds, and tongues and nations” means the entire world.  I believe this means that the killing of the witnesses will be seen globally, and the only way for this to happen would be for it to be televised live.  The Bible goes on to say that the witnesses will be resurrected and go up to Heaven in the sight of their enemies (Rev. 11:12).  

Because the witnesses’ deaths and resurrection follow the killing and resurrection of the Antichrist, and the Bible tells us that the whole world will see the witnesses bodies, I believe that we shall also see the Antichrist killed and resurrected. Again, given that CNN broadcasts graphic footage from the world’s war zones and trouble spots twenty-four hours a day, this is not at all a stretch.  We are being prepared for something  big.

Now recall that the Bible says that after the Antichrist’s deadly wound is healed, “all the world will worship the beast.”  I believe that what this passage is trying to tell us is that when the Antichrist is resurrected, all the world’s religions will follow him.  This will be the official beginning of the One World Church.  This man will claim to be the Christ and demand that all religions unite under him.  If a man who cannot be killed tells everyone that they must worship him, I don’t think there is one religious leader who will refuse. 

Also understand that the world’s great religions are all waiting for a great leader to appear.  The Jews are waiting for their “Messiah,” the Christians are waiting for Jesus to return, the Muslims are waiting for the Fifth Imam, and the New Agers, Hindis, and Buddhists are waiting for Maitreya (some say the Buddhists are waiting for Buddha). Antichrist will claim to be all of these.

Now let us get get back to the Antichrist’s image.  Revelation 13:15 says something very important about this image that merits our attention:

“And [the False Prophet] had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed” (Revelation 13:15).

Notice in referring to the image of the beast, Jesus does not use the personal pronouns, he, she, or it, but instead repeats the phrase “the image of the beast” three times.  Now, it is very unusual to repeat a noun phrase in this way without once using a pronoun.  Something very important to our understanding is going on here.  The False Prophet has given life unto this idol, so that it is now a living thing.  It would, therefore, be correct to refer to it as he or she as well as it.  But Jesus continues to repeat “the image of the beast.”  Why?  Because He is calling our attention to it.  He wants us to think about it: to meditate upon it.  Let us do this, therefore.

Now, it has been proposed by many, including Jack Chick, that “the image of the beast” will be a statue of the Antichrist.  But, as we have established,  it is merely suggested that an image to the Antichrist be made.  There is no verse that tells us that it was, in fact, completed or even begun.  Recall also that by this time, the Abomination of Desolation, which is an idol, already stands in the Holy Place.  If the image of the beast is an idol of the Antichrist, then there would be three idols, because the Antichrist will be worshipped, making him an idol, and the Abomination of Desolation will also be worshipped.  Idols always come in pairs: a male and a female, not trios. 

I believe, therefore, that “the image of the beast” means “the image that belongs to the beast.”

If, for example, I say “Sally’s book,” I am actually saying “the book of Sally” or “the book that belongs to Sally.”  So “the image of the beast” could be the same as “the beast’s image” or “the image that belongs to the beast.”  If we substitute idol for “image” and Antichrist for “beast,” then the phrase becomes “the idol that belongs to the Antichrist” or “the Antichrist’s idol.”  This is clearer and agrees with my contention that, by this time, the Antichrist’s idol already stands in the Jewish temple.

There is something else to consider.  We are told that the Antichrist will desire the world to worship Him (Daniel 11:38), and the world will (Revelation 13:4).  Now, why would the Antichrist want the world to worship an idol of him when he will himself receive worship?  Now, you may say that this is not far-fetched, because Nebuchadnezzar also built an idol that he commanded all to worship.  But the Bible never tells us that Nebuchadnezzar’s idol was of himself, though this is believed by some contemporary Protestant theologians and avoided entirely by the rest.  Though the Bible doesn’t give any specifics about the image other than it was made of gold and was of a certain width and height, Daniel Chapter 4 does give us a very important clue as to the image’s identity that is crucial to this discussion.

But first, recall that Hislop writes that the Goddess of forces was worshipped since antiquity as Diana and Diana of Ephesus.  Recall also that Diana was called Rhea and Cybele, as well as other names, and that all of these were merely aliases for Semiramis, the wife of Nimrod, the first king of Babylon.  Now listen closely.  If all idolatry originated from Babylon, and Nebuchadnezzar was Babylon’s greatest king, then it is not only likely, but highly probable, that Nebuchadnezzar also worshipped the goddess of forces and that the idol that he built and commanded all to worship could have been Diana.

For proof of this, let us go to Daniel Chapter 4.  Now, recall that when Daniel was brought to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar, he was renamed Belteshazzar.  This is what Nebuchadnezzar says about the name Belteshazzar:  

“Daniel came in before me, whose name was Belteshazzar, according to the name of my god” (Daniel 4:8).

Easton’s Bible Dictionary says this about the name Belteshazzar:

“Belteshazzar – Beltis protect the king!, the Chaldee name given to Daniel by Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 1:7).”

So, Nebuchadnezzar says that the name Belteshazzar was derived from the name of his god, and we see that this god was named Beltis.  Alexander Hislop has this to say about Beltis:

“The very name by which the Italians commonly designate the Virgin, is just the translation of one of the titles of the Babylonian goddess.  As Baal or Belus was the name of the great male divinity of Babylon, so the female divinity was called Beltis (Hislop, 20).

Bel or Baal, which means “Lord,” was just another name for Nimrod.  Beltis, therefore, being the female counterpart of Bel, was none other than Semiramis, who, as we know, also went by the name of Diana—The Virgin.  

You must understand the importance of this.  The Bible tells us that when Nebuchadnezzar built his idol and stood it in the plain of Dura in Babylon, he ordered that all should worship this idol or perish (Daniel 3:6).  According to what we have just learned, it is highly likely that the idol that Nebuchadnezzar set up was Beltis also called Diana, The Virgin.

Now the Book of the Revelation tells us that the False Prophet will do the exact same thing that Nebuchadnezzar did:

“And he (the False Prophet) had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed” (Revelation 13:15).

You may ask why it is so important to draw the parallel between Nebuchadnezzar, Antichrist, and goddess worship.  It is important because I could not understand why Daniel 11:38 says that the Antichrist will “magnify himself above all,” yet he will himself worship an idol and demand that the world worship this idol also.  If he will sit “in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God,” then why would he not demand all the world to worship him exclusively?  

It is because the Antichrist, in point of fact, will be the new Nimrod, who was worshipped as a god (Genesis 10:8).  In keeping with the principle of duality, sacred to the Mystery Schools, if there is a god, there must also be a goddess.  The Antichrist’s idol, then, which, as we have seen, goes by the names of Cybele, Rhea, Diana, and Beltis, which are only aliases for Semiramis, the first deified queen, will be that goddess, the counterpart of the Antichrist—the god-man.

This is why the Antichrist is referred to as “the beast that was, and is not, and yet is” (Revelation 17:8).  Nimrod was the world’s first king.  He was not a godly man, which is evident by his name.  The name Nimrod is based on the Chaldee root mrd, which means “to rebel.”  The Jewish Encyclopedia says that Nimrod was “he who made all the people rebellious against God.”   Nimrod and the Babylonians practiced child sacrifice, cannibalism, and witchcraft, and tradition holds that for these crimes and others, he was killed by his great-uncle, Shem, the son of Noah and the father of the Semetic peoples, which includes the Jewish nation.  

The Antichrist will be the reincarnation of Nimrod, and for this reason, the Bible says that the Antichrist shall not “regard…the desire of women.”   His consort will be the goddess, Diana or Beltis, if you will, whom Hislop says was called, “the Queen of Heaven” (p. 103). The world will again worship Nimrod and Semiramis—the god and the goddess—only this time it will be done out in the open, whereas up to now, it has been done (almost) in secret.  This claim is supported by the fact that the Antichrist and “the image of the beast” are the only two individuals, if you will, whom the world will be mandated to worship.  

Now for those who believe that the image of the beast will be a statue of the Antichrist, consider this:  The Antichrist and his image will be located in the same place; to wit: the Jewish temple.  The Antichrist will be seated on the throne of David, and his image will be in the Jewish holy of holies.  Why, would the Antichrist desire worship of himself and also mandate that the people worship a statue of him located in the same building?  If the Antichrist’s image were to be located in another physical location like Nebuchadnezzar’s image, then there would be a logical basis for argument.  But since they will be in the same physical location, it would be pointless for the Antichrist to mandate that the people worship both him and a statue of him.  The only logical conclusion, then, is that the image will not be of the Antichrist, but of someone else.  

This will all make sense to you, when we recall what we know about the Antichrist and his idol:

– He will be a Roman citizen (Daniel 9:26)

– He will be a Jew (Daniel 11:37)

– He will be celibate (Daniel 11:37)

– He will be a ruler (Daniel 8:23)

– He will have a fierce, menacing face (Daniel 8:23)

– He will be a religious leader who speaks words difficult to understand (Daniel 8:23)

– He will worship an idol (Daniel 11:38)

– The idol is a goddess (Daniel 11:38/Hislop 31-32)

– The goddess is depicted as a virgin and called “The Mother of the gods” (Hislop, 31-32).

– She is also known as Beltis, “The Queen of Heaven” (Hislop, 103).

Once we determine the identity of the Antichrist, the identity of his idol, the abomination of desolation, becomes crystal clear: for you see, the Antichrist is none other than the Roman Catholic pope, Benedict XVI.

The pope perfectly fulfills all of the characteristic of Antichrist.  The Vatican sits in Rome, which would technically make the pope a Roman.  He is also celibate.  He is also a king, for Vatican City is recognized as a sovereign state, and one of the pope’s titles is that of “Sovereign of the State of Vatican City.”  This makes him a king in his own right.  He is also the head of the Holy Roman Empire, a theocracy, making him both a secular and religious ruler.  And as one can plainly see in the above photo, he indeed has a fierce countenance, and it shows in virtually every photo I have ever seen of him. 

The Roman Catholic mass is said in Latin, a dead language, which is intelligible to the mass of society.  This would qualify as “dark speech.”  And all Roman Catholics, including the pope, worship an idol named Mary, who is called The Virgin, The Mother of God, and The Queen of Heaven.  

The popes have always worshipped Mary.

As for the pope’s Jewish ancestry, although he is German, I believe that at some point, his Jewish ancestry will surface.  Scripture says “all that dwell upon the earth” shall worship the beast (Revelation 13:8).  This includes the Jews, who worship Jehovah God exclusively.  Having denied Jesus, the Jews are still waiting for their Messiah, whom the Bible says will be a descendant of King David.  If the Jews will also worship the Antichrist, then this could only mean that they will believe he is Jewish and a descendant of King David. 

The Bible also says that the Antichrist will sit on the throne of David.  This would never be allowed if the Benedict XVI were not Jewish and his ancestry could not be proved.  If what this Catholic-Jewish lady says about Pope-Benedict’s Jewish-ancestry is true, then he is indeed Jewish, and therefore, fulfills all the characteristics of the Antichrist.

UPDATE May 29, 2015:  The above page discussing Pope Benedict XVI’s Jewish ancestry, was removed from the site.  Click here for my copy of it.

Many believe that it is merely the office of the pope that is the Antichrist, and not one particular person.  Though the office of pope is antichrist, one cannot deny the fierce, overwhelmingly evil countenance of Joseph Ratzinger.  I believe Jesus included this characteristic to make it crystal clear that He is talking about one specific person, and since He went to the trouble of calling this detail to our attention, we should not overlook it.  

 

With regard to the idol known as the Abomination of Desolation, as anyone of even the minutest discernment can plainly see, the Virgin Mary is, in fact, an idol, and she has the same attributes as Diana of Ephesus, who was depicted as a virgin and called “the Mother of the gods.”  Could it be merely a coincidence that the Roman Catholic Mary is also called “The Virgin” and “The Mother of God?”  The Virgin Mary is also called “The Queen of Heaven” as was the goddess Diana.

The Virgin Mary is the Abomination of Desolation, and thanks to the Ecumenical Movement, she is gaining ever increasing acceptance in the Christian church.  Proof of this is the fact that “prophetess” Juanita Bynum is known to have prayed to “The Many Breasted One.”  This is one of the titles of Diana of Ephesus.

We strongly suggest that the reader view our post comparing the Roman Catholic Virgin Mary with the goddess Diana entitled, A Goddess By Any Other Name.  You will also want to read The Star of Your God, The Star of the Sea, and Two Marys.  Collectively, these articles provide convincing evidence that the Virgin Mary is actually the goddess Semiramis, who was worshipped by the Phoenicians and apostate Jews, including King Solomon, as Ashtoreth.  We are confident you will be blessed by this information.

Saints, Benedict XVI is the Antichrist, and the Roman Catholic church is the true enemy of the Christian Church.  This will become all too clear in the very near future.

“He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.”

The podcast of this teaching is available for free at the iTunes Store.  You can download it to your iPod or other mp3 player and listen to it at your leisure.  For your convenience, you can also listen to it below.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Now that you know who the Antichrist is, we strongly suggest you read our posts identifying The False Prophet and the Mark of the Beast.  A global financial crisis is on the horizon, and I believe that the mark will be offered as part of the solution.  But beware: all who take the mark will be damned for eternity.

Be encouraged, and look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.

The Still Man

Sources:

1.  Hislop, Alexander, The Two Babylons.  Chick Publications.  ISBN: 0-937958-57-3.

2.  Easton, M.G. “Belteshazzar,” Easton’s Bible Dictionary.  Blue Letter Bible.  1897. 24 June, 1996 – 5 June 2012. <http://www.blueletterbible.org/Search/Dictionary/viewTopic.cfm?type=GetTopic&Topic=Belteshazzar&DictList=2#Easton’s>