9 Reasons Why the Antichrist is not a European

To Honor Jesus Christ, Glorify God, Encourage Believers, & Warn All
Est 03-22-2005 Changed 06-08-2005 (reason for 06-08-2005 emendation at bottom of page)

This information is offered with the hope that YOU can come to KNOW the Lord personally.

1. The kingdom of the antichrist is from one of the parts of Alexander the Great's empire, none of which is in Europe.

2. The antichrist is called by name the "Assyrian".  (Assyrian, or Seleucid, is that part of the Grecian empire out of which antichrist arises.)

3. The antichrist is also called the "king of the north".  Europe is not north of Israel.  (see Daniel chapter 11). 
06-08-2005 emendation starts here>  The historical King of the North which occupies a great deal of Daniel chapter 11, beginning with verse 6, is the ancient King of Assyria.  Verses 6,7,8,11,13,15 specifically refer by title to this ancient king, who is not a European.  The future portion of the prophecy in Daniel 11 (which is yet unfilled) begins in verse 36 with a reference to the "king" who shall do according to his will."  This king himself (as opposed to his kingdom), who is clearly the antichrist, is also referred to as the "king of the north" in verse 40, thus identifying the antichrist with the historical King of Assyria, not some European place of origin.  It is correct to say the king proper comes (originally, upon assumption of his position of authority) from the north which can not geographically be Europe as a place of origin of the antichrist.

4. The historical "king of the north" (to be distinguished from the prophetic "king of the north") was the king of Assyria. (see Daniel chapter 11)  Assyria is not in Europe.

5. The historical "king of the north" (Assyria) fought against the historical "king of the south" (Egypt) exactly as the prophetic "king of the north" will when he (the antichrist) conquers Egypt. (see Daniel chapter 11)

6. The kingdom of antichrist grows in three directions toward the south, the east and toward the pleasant land. (the pleasant land is Israel). 

Daniel 8:9   And out of one of them [ one of Alexander the Great's 4 divisions ] came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east and toward the pleasant land

If this kingdom waxes EXCEEDING GREAT,
and the PLEASANT LAND (Israel/Palestine).

Follow me here:  these directions point to 3 mutually exclusive compass directions.

 The kingdom (not the king) is growing in THREE (3) directions.  If the kingdom was West of Israel, EAST and the PLEASANT LAND would be the same direction.  Therefore, the kingdom is NOT west of Israel.  If the kingdom was North of Israel, the SOUTH and PLEASANT LAND would be redundant. Therefore, the kingdom is not north of Israel.  This leaves SOUTH of Israel and EAST of Israel as our 2 choices.  We have to eliminate the SOUTH of Israel because the antichrist attacks and conquers the king of the south - Egypt .

This leaves us with EAST of Israel as the place of the antichrist's kingdom.  06-08-2005 emendation starts here> The kingdom (as distinct from the king) is predominantly EAST of Israel.  This kingdom comes into play after the king has received a crown, giving him more territory/authority than he initially had.  This kingdom has the 7 heads and 10 horns and it represents the developed and expanded kingdom of the antichrist depicted in  Revelation 13 and forward.

7. In a military campaign moving toward the south (toward Egypt) antichrist will establish his headquarters in Israel.  If he was in Europe he could not do this.  (Actually, it appears that the antichrist returns from a southern campaign against Egypt.)

8. Arguments from a negative viewpoint are never quite as good as positive arguments.  However, at this point let it be said that there are no scriptures which say that the antichrist is European or Roman.  On the otherhand, there are scriptures which do say that he is an Assyrian.  If one stopped at Daniel 2 a case might could be made that the antichrist was from Rome.  However, one can not stop at Daniel 2, but, must include Daniel 7 and 8.  (see Note A)

9. The antichrist arises AMONG ten kings.  These ten kings are clearly Muslim nations

Note A:

In Daniel 9:26 it says that the "people (Romans) of the prince that shall come" (the antichrist) "shall destroy the city and the sanctuary."  This says that the antichrist will be descended from Roman peoples.  There is a Muslim king whose mother was British.  There is also research on the internet that shows that the Etruscans were originally from Assyria.

the Etruscans, seem to have sailed from Asia Minor to found a state in the forest wildernesses of middle Italy; some built themselves cities upon the south-east coasts of the Mediterranean and became later that people known in history as the Philistines.  http://www.bartleby.com/86/18.html

Somewhere between 900 and 800 BC, the Italian peninsula was settled by a mysterious peoples called the Etruscans. We don't know where the Etruscans came from, but archaeologists suspect that they came from the eastern Mediterannean, possibly Asia Minor. http://ancienthistory.about.com

The Roman historian Dionysius of Halicarnassus stated that this new culture had deemed themselves Rasenna, or Rasna. One theory of this name is that a large number of immigrants were from Resen, a city in Assyria. Their route is believed to have taken them from Assyria to a place called Eluthya in Egypt, where there are supposedly tomb decorations that are similar to the Etruscans.  http://www.vintageadventure.com/flash/history/default.asp

In Daniel 11:37 it says "neither shall he regard the God of his fathers".  Many claim that this means that the antichrist is Jewish.  However, since Ishmael (the father of the Moslem nations) is the son of Abraham, it means the antichrist is a semite, one of the semitic nations.


Great website!  I want to point something out though on your page "9 Reasons Why the Antichrist is not a European." 
<>On point 3 you say that because Europe is not North of Israel it can't be where the antichrist arises from.<>  As part of your explanantion behind point 6 you deduce that "Therefore, the kingdom is not north of Israel".
This appears to contradict - you are saying the kingdom must be North of Israel AND must not be.

Thank you for your email.  It looks like you are correct but that is probably due to my lack of specificity on point #3.  I emended point #3 to make it more specific (and made a slight emendation for #6).   See 06-08-2005 emendations.  Questions like yours make the website better.

End 06-08-2005

How Is A Man Saved?

Home Page

Please e-mail us with questions or comments today.   I may be wrong, but the Bible is never wrong. 

"I am the way, the truth, and the life" - Jesus Christ
John 14:6