The Unveiling of Antichrist

Who is the Antichrist?

I came across a news article that revealed billionaire co-founder of PayPal, Peter Thiel, is concerned about the identity of the Antichrist. Thiel has previously suggested that Greta Thunberg, the 22-year-old climate change activist, could be the Antichrist. In his lecture series, Thiel explored the possibility that Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder and philanthropist, might be the Antichrist, describing him as a “very, very awful person.” He even extended his speculations to include President Trump! (https://www.thetimes.com/.../peter-thiel-antichrist-trump...).

The Bible is the most reliable source of information about the Antichrist, and not PayPal’s founder. It is the actual origin of the concept of the Antichrist. However, no one wants to read the Bible to discover its true teachings about him. Here are some considerations from a Biblical literalist’s perspective.

The Antichrist is a male. The book 2 Thessalonians 2:3 refers to him as “The man of sin, the son of perdition (ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἁμαρτίας, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας).” While “ἄνθρωπος” refers to mankind, “υἱὸς” clearly has a masculine connotation. Throughout the Old and New Testaments, prophecies about the Antichrist use male pronouns like “he” to describe his ascent to power. For instance, the Book of Daniel describes a powerful end-times “king” who “will do as he pleases” and exalts himself above all gods, and not a queen. Sorry Oprah Winfrey, Greta Thunberg, Taylor Swift, and Nancy Pelosi. You are all out.

The Antichrist’s appearance will be different (perhaps superior?) from his companions. Daniel 7:20 states, “Whose appearance was greater than his fellows.” Similar language was used by King Saul to describe himself as tall and handsome.

The Antichrist is unlikely to be married to a woman. Daniel 11:37 states, “He shall regard neither the God of his fathers nor the desire of women.” This passage does not imply that he lacks desire for men. The Antichrist could be a homosexual.

The same verse states that he will rebel against the god (elohim) of his fathers. Some interpret this to imply that the Antichrist is Jewish, but this is not necessarily the case. Elohim is the general term for god, and the context clarifies its usage. False gods in the Bible are false elohim. Verse 37 serves as a contrast to verse 36, which states that the Antichrist will blaspheme against the “God of gods.” I interpret this to refer to YHWH, the El of the elohim. If verse 37 is a contrast, then the Antichrist does not worship YHWH. Instead, he abandons the religion of his fathers to establish a new religion, one that is centered around himself.

According to Revelation 13:1-10, the First Beast, the Antichrist, emerges from the sea. Revelation 13:11–18 describes the Second Beast, the False Prophet, as arising from the land. Together with Satan, they form the Unholy Trinity. When examining the biblical concepts of people from the sea and land, it becomes evident that they can be contrasted with Gentiles and Jews. God’s chosen people, Israel, are the inhabitants of the land, also known as the Promised Land. Conversely, the people of the sea are Gentiles. While I cannot be definitive, I believe the Antichrist is a gentile, while the False Prophet is Jewish.

According to the timeline of Revelation 6 and Matthew 24, the Antichrist will seize power after the literal Rapture of the Church, which will occur before the seven-year Tribulation.

The Bible also reveals that the Antichrist will be a highly intelligent and cunning individual. Daniel describes him as someone who “understands sinister schemes” and who, through his cunning, will “cause deceit to prosper under his rule” (Daniel 8:23, 25). This description eliminates the many individuals who are falsely accused of being the Antichrist.

The Antichrist will emerge from the fourth kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue in Daniel 2, which represents the Roman Empire. However, this raises a challenge: the Western Roman Empire fell in 476 AD, while the Eastern Roman Empire, also known as the Byzantine Empire, fell in 1453 AD. How could the Antichrist rise from a fallen empire? According to Daniel 2, the Roman Empire will be revived through an unholy and unstable alliance with another empire. This revived Roman Empire, as depicted in Daniel 7:23-24 and Revelation 17, leads to the rise of the Antichrist. From a Biblical literalist’s perspective, this event is still considered a future development.

The Antichrist is a political and militant figure. As described in Revelation 6:2, he emerges on a white horse, wielding a bow as a weapon of war, and wearing a crown similar to those awarded to Olympic winners. This suggests that he achieves success in conquering the world. According to Daniel 7:24–25, the Antichrist is a king who initially forms an alliance of ten kings (the little horn). He then subjugates three of these kings, becoming a king of kings (the Eleventh Horn).

I frequently get asked if the Antichrist will be a Muslim, and I honestly say it’s a logical possibility, but the Bible never explicitly states it. Why is it logical? Let’s consider the evidence. The Antichrist is described as a male Gentile who rebels against the religion of his ancestors. Currently, the Temple Mount is occupied by Islam, and it will remain so until the end of the Times of the Gentiles at the Second Coming of Christ. Given this context, it’s hard to imagine a Gentile who doesn’t sympathize with Islam convincing Muslims to strike a peace treaty with Israel and hand over the Temple Mount to the Jews for the construction of the Tribulational Temple. Furthermore, it’s plausible that ten Islamic Republics could unite and launch the Antichrist as the Twelfth Imam. It is easy to picture the Roman Catholic Church striking an unholy and unstable alliance with Islam to bring about the Revived Roman Empire and New World Order. However, it’s important to note that these are purely speculative ideas and not supported by biblical evidence. Ultimately, it’s possible that God could create a completely new religion before the Tribulation, rendering Islam irrelevant.

While it’s enjoyable to speculate, we must adhere to the literal Biblical data. I hope this article clarifies some things for you. As always, Be Literal.

PTL