Revelation 17:9-11 Discussion Islamic Antichrist

[Raymond]

Dear All,

I have been revisiting the subject of the Islamic Antichrist as I believe this to be the correct understanding. I have watched all of Tims Revelation study videos and his Daniel series as well. I know Tim does not agree with this understanding which is fine as we can all have our own opinions and beliefs.
I have read a very good book by Waluid Shoebat called “Why I Left Jihad” and he makes a very good and historical and biblical case for an Islamic Empire being the 7th and 8th Empires.

I would just like to ask a question about Revelation 17:9-11 which states the following:-

Revelation 17:9-11 This calls for a mind with wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. They are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for a little while. The beast who once was, and now is not, is an eighth king. He belongs to the seven and is going to his destruction.

Now the seven heads are called seven mountains. The Bible often uses mountains as a symbol representing a kingdom or an empire. But most importantly this passage gives us insight into the fact that, before Jesus returns, there will actually have been a total of eight “beast” empires. The eighth empire will be ruled by the Antichrist. How can this passage help us gain insight into the identification of the final empire of the Antichrist? First, we see that at the time that John wrote this passage, five of the empires had already fallen. This is seen in the phrase “five have been.”

These empires are generally accepted by Bible teachers as the following:

1. The Egyptian empire
2. The Assyrian empire
3. The Babylonian empire
4. The Persian empire
5. The Greek empire

After these five, the angel tells John that one empire “is.” At the time that John wrote the Book of Revelation, Rome “was.” It ruled the Middle East, Northern Africa, and much of Europe. Thus the 6th empire was the Roman empire. The next empire, of course, is the seventh, and then the eighth will be the empire of the Antichrist.

So, it is the 7th empire that we need to identify, because, according to the verse, the 8th empire will be a resurrected or a revived version of the seventh empire: “The beast who once was, and is not, is an 8th king.” Let me just paraphrase this portion for clarity: “The seventh beast [empire] that existed, but then did not exist, will come back as an eighth empire.”

So, if we are now waiting for the final 8th empire, then what was the 7th?

Which empire followed Rome?

Because of the harsh anti-Semitic nature of the German Third Reich, some Bible teachers have speculated that Germany was the 7th empire and thus Germany will come back as the 8th.

The most common belief, however, held almost universally by Bible teachers, is that the Antichrist’s empire will be a revived Roman empire. There are, however, some problems with this theory. First, Rome was the 6th empire. Does everyone agree with this?

If Rome was the sixth and will also be the last, then what happened to the seventh? This theory has a hole in it. How can Rome be the 6th, 7th, and the 8th empires?

Every one of the previous 6 empires ruled the Middle East, including Jerusalem. As we all know, we must always remember that the Bible is thoroughly Jerusalem-centric. In the biblical view of things, Jerusalem is the center of the earth. Any theory that revolves around a revived Roman empire based in Europe—for instance on the European Common Market—is a concept foreign to the Bible. Unless the empire rules over or directly affects Jerusalem, it is actually a bit irrelevant to the biblical mind-set.

If we look at the first 6 empires, each succeeding empire either destroyed or absorbed the empire that preceded it. There is a very natural succession. If we look at each empire, we see that they
all fulfill these two characteristics: they ruled over Jerusalem and they defeated or absorbed their predecessor. The Egyptian empire ruled all of Egypt and Israel as well. But the Assyrian empire defeated the Egyptian empire and likewise ruled over a vast portion of the Middle East, including Israel. After this, the Babylonian empire defeated the Assyrian empire and became even larger than its predecessor, again, ruling over Israel. Such is the pattern with each successive empire:

The Medo-Persian empire succeeded the Babylonian empire, only to be succeeded by the Greek empire. The Greek empire was in turn succeeded by the Roman empire. Which leads us to the 7th
empire. Who overcame the Roman empire? In order to answer this question, we need to briefly review the fall of the Roman empire.

What exactly happened?

In AD 395, the Roman empire was divided into two portions; the eastern and the western portions. The eastern portion became known as the Byzantine empire, which I have read about in a book called The Great Arab Conquests written by Hugh Kennedy. In AD 410 the western capital city of Rome fell to invading Germanic tribes known as the Visigoths or Barbarians. The western/European half of the empire, including its capital, had fallen, but the Roman empire nevertheless continued.

It simply shifted its capital and its throne from Rome to Constantinople— a thousand miles east. The western European portion of the Roman empire fell but the Eastern Byzantine portion of the Roman empire lived on for nearly another thousand years with Constantinople as its capital. The Roman empire didn’t actually completely fall until the eastern portion of the empire finally fell in AD 1453 to the Turks. The Turkish/Ottoman empire succeeded the Roman empire and ruled over the entire Middle East, including Jerusalem, for nearly five hundred years. The Turkish empire existed right up until 1909.

Thus, we see that the only empire that fulfils the patterns necessary to be considered the 7th empire is the Turkish/Ottoman empire. This of course corresponds perfectly with Ezekiel’s list of
nations with such a heavy emphasis on Turkey (Togarmah, Gomer, Meshech, Tubal with Magog being now understood to cover the current Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and possibly parts of modern Afghanistan).

The Coming Restoration Of The Caliphate

The Turkish empire was the seat of the Islamic caliphate. It was not until 1923 that the Islamic caliphate was officially abolished. Today the Islamic world awaits the restoration of that caliphate. The Bible teaches that someday soon the Turkish empire will be revived:

The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the Book of Life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast, because he once was, then he was
not, and yet came again. (Revelation 17:8)

I would recommend to everyone to at least read the book the Islamic Antichrist and see how Satan has crafted Islam to be the ultimate Anti-Christ religion as it completely rejects that God can have a Son. Not only that, but Islam teaches that Jesus will come back and convert people to Islam and help eradicate any Jews and Christians that stand in their way. https://joelstrumpet.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Islamic-Antichrist.pdf It is in Swedish as well for Anders Gardeborn. https://joelstrumpet.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Swedish_EnIslamiskAntikrist_inlay_190306-till-print.pdf

Can anyone demonstrate why the 7th and thus the 8th cannot be the Islamic Caliphate?

Thanks to everyone for reading and bearing with me.

[Marty]

Yes Joel Richardson does make a compelling case for an Islamic Antichrist. We’ll know soon.

[Timothy]

Raymond,

Your argument that there is a “hole” in the interpretation regarding Rome, since it was the 6th kingdom and not 7th kingdom, presupposes that the clause “one of the seven” means that the 8th kingdom must have also been the 7th. That is a false assumption imposed on the text, not derived from it. The critical clause is ἐκ τῶν ἑπτά ἐστιν (lit. “out from the seven is”). The word “seven” is the cardinal number “7”, not the ordinal number “7th”). This means that the 8th kingdom could potentially be any one of the previous seven kingdoms reborn. It is “out from” the GROUP of seven.

Also, the woman who rides the beast is said to sit upon seven mountains, and she is then identified as Rome (the great city which is reigning over the kings of the earth). If the “mountains” refer to the seven heads (kingdoms), then how does the city of Rome relate to the other proposed kingdoms (heads of the beast)? It just does not work.

One of the primary faults with Joel’s interpretation is that the “fourth beast” of Daniel 7 is the Roman Empire, and the 10 kings arise out from this 4th Beast, and then the “little horn” (Antichrist) arises from among them (also the 4th beast – the Roman Empire). According to Rev. 17, the 10 kings give their power and authority to the Antichrist, which then becomes his kingdom.

I agree that Islam is an “anti-christ” religion. But there are many “anti-christ” religions. There are many other problems with Joel’s interpretations, which are in fact related to his dispensationalism (which is a false doctrine).

The reason Joel’s interpretation is persuasive to many Christians is because of the many parallels he draws between Revelation and Islamic prophecy. However, these parallels are NOT because Islam contains genuine prophecy. That would mean that Satan has the power to prophesy the future. Yet Isaiah records God mocking and challenging the false gods to predict the future, which He alone claims as His domain. The reason for these parallels that Joel tries to point out is because Islam was a 7th century knockoff of a heretical sect of Unitarian Christianity. It is a heretical “Christian” cult in the extreme. As such, it tries to reinterpret the New Testament, especially the book of Revelation. That is the reason for the many parallels between Revelation and Islamic prophetic figures. Joel mistakes these false interpretations of Revelation as the fulfillment of Revelation, or at least Satan trying to set up a system to deceive in the end times. While that may be true, such would deceive only Muslims.

IMO, Joel is plagued by his “confirmation bias.” He is quite good at forcing the text to make it seem to agree with his theory.

[Author]

Posts