No, Obama isn’t the Antichrist, BUT…

Penned nearly two thousand years ago, the Book of Revelation details how in the days directly preceding the return of Jesus Christ a massive assault will be launched against Israel. The setting of this event, according to chapter 16, will be a mountainous range located sixty miles North and East of Jerusalem and about twenty miles east of the port city of Haifa -- a place known as “Armageddon.” The attackers involved will be a coalition of nations who share a common ideology -- and a common goal.

In chapter 38 of Ezekiel, the Prophet describes these attackers as being led by “Gog,” and lists them in order as Magog, Meschech, Tubal, Persia, Cush, Put, Gomer, and Beth Togarmah. While these names are likely not familiar to most of us, Bible scholars and historians, by correlating them to their modern-day descendants, have determined that this “Armageddon coalition” is made up of people who hail primarily from the areas now known as Turkey, Iran, Sudan, and Lybia.1 These nations -- all of which are currently Islamic -- happen to form a perfect circle around Israel.

In Revelation 13 we are given further clues about the nature of this satanically inspired coalition. Referred to collectively as the “beast,” it is described as having the “feet of a bear.” The symbolism behind the bear is revealed in Daniel 7, wherein God uses various types of animals to represent particular kingdoms. Here, the bear is found to represent the ancient Medo-Persian Empire, or the region currently known as Iran.

In Revelation 17 we are given still more clues about the beast.

And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.

—Revelation 17:12, 13

Here, we are told that the beast has “ten horns.” These horns represent “kings,” or rulers, who apparently have “one mind,” or share a common goal. Thus they will join together, albeit briefly (for “one hour”), to accomplish this goal.

Based on the geographic clues provided in Daniel, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah, it is speculated that the ten horns may represent kings of the following modern Middle Eastern nations:2

Sudan, Libya, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan

And so, from just the few scriptural clues we have looked at thus far, we have already begun to gain a sense of what the final beast kingdom will look like: First and foremostly, it will be exclusively Middle Eastern and therefore presumably Islamic in nature. Secondly, it will be a short-lived coalition of ten kings who share a common goal: the destruction of Israel. And, thirdly, it will be led by the chief prince of Meschech and Tubal (Turkey) and supported by the feet of a bear (Iran).

Most would agree that these clues supply more than enough information to identify the beast. But in verse 8 God goes one better, revealing yet another unique characteristic of this kingdom, a characteristic that sets it apart from all others throughout history:

“and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder…when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is…”

—Revelation 17:8

The line describing the beast that “was, and is not, and yet is” speaks to the fact that, from the viewpoint of the end-times generation, the beast kingdom will have existed previously -- will have ceased to exist at some point and, then, in the very last days leading up to Christ’s return -- will exist again.

An even clearer depiction of this seemingly miraculous regeneration is given in chapter 13. Here, in the context of the great kingdoms of world history, the beast is described as a “head” that is wounded to death and then, to the amazement of all, is somehow “healed” to assume its role as the final Antichrist, or beast, kingdom:

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.

—Revelation 13:3

Today, a growing number of scholars and authors are highlighting the fact that this description of a fallen -- to be later healed or rejuvenated -- kingdom parallels the history, as well as the current geopolitical goings on, in the Middle East.

Let us take a brief look at what has led to these comparisons.

The Fall (and Rise?) of the Islamic Empire

Once presided over by a series of all-powerful spiritual and military leaders known as “Caliphs,” the former Islamic-Ottoman Empire, or Caliphate, ruled the Middle East, Turkey, and North Africa for the better part of six centuries before being defeated, or “wounded to death,” by the British at the close of World War One -- thus reducing this once mighty empire to a scattering of feuding Muslim states. In the decades following this collapse, however, something miraculous, some would say fateful, happened: Massive reserves of crude oil were discovered in these same lands, thereby providing the lifeblood or “fuel” needed to revive the seemingly lifeless beast: “and his deadly wound was healed.”

Needless to say, over the course of the latter half of the twentieth century, this once utterly demoralized and poverty stricken part of the world has become increasingly flush with oil money. And even though the lion’s share of this wealth has been kept by the ruling elite of these nations, much of it has been funneled throughout the world to finance special Islamic schools, or madrassas, and mosques, for the sole purpose of spreading Islam.

The fruits of these efforts are now being realized in the form of a worldwide Islamic revival that centers on, for many Muslims, a renewed call to Jihad against the West. This Jihad -- and this point is critical -- is by no means an aimless exercise for Muslims. It comes with a clearly defined end-goal, which is to carry out the foundational edict issued by Allah and his prophet, Muhammad, many centuries ago. This edict states, in no uncertain terms, that the entire world must be ruled under Islam.

Of course, before this can happen, the Muslim world -- in spite of its longstanding internal differences -- is going to have to unite. And this is where things begin to get interesting.

Caliph Wanted:

Although the idea of a Caliphate system has lain largely dormant since the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1922, there is, today, a steadily increasing call for all Muslims to once again unite under a singular leader. This is, in fact, the stated goal of virtually every Muslim terrorist group and has, since day one, been the ultimate goal of Al Qaeda.

Significantly, the growing call to unite under a Caliph is not limited to terrorist groups. It is equally promulgated by many so-called “mainstream” Muslim leaders and activists. Even more telling, though, is the fact that more than two-thirds of those recently polled in four Muslim nations say they support unifying all Muslims under a single leader, or Caliph.3

For those who need more convincing of the growing momentum behind this movement, a simple web search will yield a multitude of articles and commentaries that examine the benefits, or (depending on which side of Islam one stands on), the consequences, of a united Muslim world.

In a recent example, a radical Iranian cleric has been quoted as calling for the creation of a “Greater Iran” that would rule over the entire Middle East and Central Asia:

“Ayatollah Mohammad Bagher Kharrazi said the creation of what he calls an Islamic United States is a central aim of the political party he leads called Hezbollah, or Party of God, and that he hoped to make it a reality if they win the next presidential election.

Kharrazi's comments reveal the thinking of a growing number of hard-liners in Iran, many of whom have become more radical during the postelection political crisis and the international standoff over the country’s nuclear program…He said he envisioned a Greater Iran that would stretch from Afghanistan to Israel, bringing about the destruction of the Jewish state.

He also said its formation would be a prelude to the reappearance of the Mahdi, a revered ninth-century saint known as the Hidden Imam, whom Muslims believe will reappear before judgment day to end tyranny and promote justice in the world.4

As a casual glance at a map of the Middle East reveals, the Greater Iran called for by Kharrazi essentially amounts to a modern-day version of the fallen Islamic Empire.

In view of this growing call to unity in the Islamic world, and the uncanny way in which it seems to echo the prophetic Bible verses noted earlier, many students of prophecy are asking the question: Might we be witnessing what will prove to be the final healing of the once seemingly mortally wounded head of the beast?

The other noteworthy aspect of this excerpt, and just as interesting in a biblical context, is the mention of the “Mahdi,” who Kharrazi -- along with millions of other Muslims -- believes will assume control of the Greater Iran after it comes into being. Muslims see the coming Mahdi as a type of messiah or savior of Islam. It is believed that when he arrives he will assume the role of Caliph and “promote justice” throughout the world by spreading the “one true religion.”

Significantly, the descriptions from the Islamic traditions regarding the Mahdi portray a figure that eerily mirrors -- both in character and deed -- the infamous archetype of evil, or “Antichrist,” found in the pages of the Bible.

In light of these very parallels, it is interesting to note this cleric’s belief that the Mahdi will gain control of an already formed empire. Whether coincidental or not, Daniel (7:24) describes the Antichrist as also gaining power over a kingdom that has taken shape just prior to his arrival on the scene.

New Alliances, Unlikely Alliances

The expectations surrounding a revived Caliphate to be ruled by the Mahdi are not the only interesting developments in the Middle East though. The Republic of Turkey, an end-times player that, according to Ezekiel, will figure most prominently among the beast coalition, has seen radical transformation in recent years:

To emphasize the extent of this transformation, we should first note something important about Turkey’s past: Turkey, which lies at the heart of what was once the Islamic-Ottoman Empire, has, since its inception in 1923, been a friend and ally to both the U.S. and Israel. In fact, it was the first Muslim nation to recognize Israel as a state in 1949, followed, ironically, by Iran in 1950. Unlike other Muslim states, Turkey has always maintained strict separation between religion (Islam) and government -- a definite plus in the eyes of Westerners.

Over the past decade, however, commentators note that the lines between government and Islam in Turkey have become increasingly blurred, and relations with the West and Israel increasingly hostile. At the same time, relations with its Arab and Persian (Iranian) neighbors -- neighbors it had heretofore held at arms length -- have become increasingly cozy.

More specifically, in 2002, just as Turkey’s Islamic-rooted Justice and Development party (AKP) was voted into power, Iran started courting Turkey as a powerful new regional partner. Thus began an unprecedented chain of contact and cooperation between Turkey and its Islamic neighbors, including, for the first time ever, a meeting between the presidents of Turkey and Syria. This was a notable development indeed, as Syria is, of course, an acknowledged sponsor of terror in the region.

Just prior to this 2007 meeting, Turkey had elected its first ever Islamic president, sparking further fears within its own secular government of a turn toward the nation’s Islamic-Ottoman roots.

A little later, in 2009, Turkey’s Prime Minister visited Tehran, making the ominous statement that the two countries’ interests in regional developments (i.e., Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine) “complete each other.”5

The latest illustration of Turkish-Iranian cooperation comes in the form of a supposed concession on the part of Iran in which Turkey has agreed to temporarily take some of its enriched uranium, a move many commentators are convinced is intended to undermine any momentum behind sanctions against Iran and its nuclear program.

In a May 2010 commentary, Charles Krauthammer noted that this supposed concession on the part of Iran is simply a ruse that Turkey, along with Brazil, is helping to perpetuate. Shipping some of its enriched uranium to Turkey will do nothing to halt Iran’s nuclear program observes Krauthammer, “it will, however, make meaningful sanctions [against Iran] more difficult.”6

Indeed, it appears that Turkey, long considered a vital Middle Eastern ally to the U.S. and even a military partner to Israel, is now providing cover for Iran -- a notion that would have been unthinkable only a few years ago.

The president of Brazil (far left), our largest ally in Latin America, and the prime minister of Turkey (far right), raising hands together with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the most virulently anti-American leader in the world.

Beyond the burgeoning relationship between Turkey and Iran, as well as that between Turkey and Syria, it is interesting to note, in light of the proposed ten horns of the beast listed earlier, some other intriguing developments in the Middle East. For instance, Iran is also forging new relations with Syria and Sudan. And Sudan has been working to improve relations with Lybia, even signing a mutual cooperation agreement.7

Underlying all of this is the ever-growing sense of instability at play in the region: The governments of Pakistan, Afghanistan and, of course, Iraq, remain in an extremely precarious state, and the fall of any one of these may result in a dangerous power vacuum that, believe it or not, could be filled with something far worse than the status quo.

There is also a general and notable rise in the tenor of anti-Jewish and anti-Christian sentiment throughout all of these Middle Eastern nations.

The bottom line is that, particularly since after 9/11, the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East has been rapidly transforming itself into something seemingly new, something that eerily resembles what is described in the millennia-old prophecies of the Bible.

Many in the secular media, ignoring any biblical angle, nonetheless note that all of this may portend the inevitable reestablishment of the Caliphate -- an event that will dramatically shift the balance of power in the world, especially if one considers the possibility of a nuclear armed Islamic “super state.” Many Bible believers, however, view the inevitable reestablishment of the Caliphate as nothing less than the fulfillment of the ten horns of the Beast of Revelation.

Obama, the Antichrist?

Considering the overall atmosphere of unrest and change that is sweeping not only the East but the Western hemisphere these days, many are left wondering about America’s role in all of this. In view of the curiously meteoric rise of our current president, threats of unrest and war in a growing number of nations, startling increases in natural disasters, as well as failing economies and governments around the globe, there is a growing consensus within some Christian circles that the leader of the free world -- President Barack Obama -- may be the Antichrist. After all, his persuasive nature -- not to mention his eastern roots -- and, according to some, his anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian leanings seem to echo the “Man of Sin” described in the Bible.

The fact is, however, Barack Obama no more fits the profile of the biblical Antichrist than has any other U.S. President -- unless, that is, one is to believe he will soon abandon his role as leader of the U.S. to pursue a leadership position in the Middle East, where he will lead a coalition of nations into a great battle on the mountains of Israel.

While anything is possible, this scenario seems somehow unlikely.

I will assert here, however, that our current president’s policies are indeed contributing to the ever-burgeoning “antichrist spirit” in the world by helping to foment and accelerate the conditions that will soon lead to the formation of a new Islamic Empire -- a twenty first century version of the Caliphate -- that will presumably come under the control of the Mahdi, or, depending on ones religious affiliation, the Antichrist.

How so you ask? While ostensibly designed to make our enemies think better of us, Obama’s soft approach to diplomacy has had the effect of emboldening them. As Krauthammer points out, referencing the above photo:

“That picture… is a crushing verdict on the Obama foreign policy. It demonstrates how rising powers, traditional American allies [read Turkey], having watched this administration in action, have decided that there’s no cost in lining up with America’s enemies and no profit in lining up with a U.S. president given to apologies and appeasement.8

Indeed, America’s new approach to dealing with its enemies has not only endangered the lives of Americans but, to a much greater degree, the lives of Israelis.

In a New York Post article, Michael Goodwin, speaking to the Turkish reaction to Israel’s May 31 boarding of an “aid ship,” which was planning to run an Israeli arms blockade -- and which also happened to be carrying at least forty known Al Qaeda mercenaries -- notes the following:

“Weakness always begets aggression, and, like clockwork, Obama’s repeated signals that he is weakening America’s commitment to Israel are emboldening the Jewish state’s enemies. From Syria to Iran to Lebanon, from Hezbollah to Hamas and the PLO, the wolves smell blood and are trying to gauge whether they can get close enough for the kill.” 9

At this point, one cannot help but note the irony in all of this: Our newly-elected president, arguably one of the most liberal and secular-minded presidents ever, who has derided the middle-American and largely Bible-believing Tea Party, even lowering himself to use the juvenile and vulgar term “tea bagger,” and who has also infamously spoken condescendingly about those who “cling to guns and religion” as a means to cope with their “frustrations” is, himself, playing a key role in the accelerated fulfillment of Bible prophecy. This, he has done by emboldening Israel’s -- and indeed America’s -- enemies, perhaps even to the effect, albeit presumably not intentionally, of encouraging them to make their moves now, before the U.S. votes in a more hawkish or “Israel-friendly” administration.

No doubt if this fact were pointed out to Obama or anyone in his like-minded circle of influence, it would be laughingly dismissed as the backwoods rantings of the uneducated, the superstitious -- or the “religious right.”

Nonetheless, for those that do have eyes to see, it goes without saying that we are living in truly momentous times. The current generation, though largely unaware, has been witness to the final stage-setting for the closing act of history as we know it. Not only are all of the biblical signs of the end-times converging for the first time, but all of the geopolitical conditions that the Bible has predicted for these times have fallen into place: Israel is back in the Land; Jerusalem has been restored to the Jews; the nations surrounding Israel, who happen to share the most quintessential “antichrist” religion ever practiced on earth, are preparing to unite and complete the recovery from the deadly wound dealt to the Islamic head of the beast nearly a century ago.

In light of all of this, it is remarkable to consider that as recently as one hundred, fifty, or even twenty years ago, even the most astute political prognosticator could not have predicted the alliances now being formed in the Middle East; yet the authors of the Bible seem to have done just that -- not decades but thousands of years before the fact.

Not long ago, Turkey and, yes, even Iran (until the 1979 fall of the Shah) were friends to Israel. Now the opposite is true. Moreover, Turkey seems to be jockeying for a leadership role in the Middle East and Iran is racing to go nuclear.

But here is the punch line: Two millennia ago, at a time when the Temple at Jerusalem had just been burned and leveled and the Jews scattered to the four winds, the Bible predicted that they would be back in the Land in the latter days, facing down an unholy alliance made up of the surrounding nations, an alliance that, you guessed it, would be led by Turkey and supported by Iran.

More to the larger picture is one last incredible thing to consider: Many centuries before there was a fiercely anti-Jewish religion called “Islam” -- arguably the only unifying factor powerful enough to spark the formation of a massive Middle Eastern coalition intent on killing every last Jew -- Ezekiel, who, of course, had no inkling of the coming of Islam, predicted that a coalition made up of nations who share just such a goal would attack Israel.

Mere coincidence? If so, perhaps someone should call Vegas to see what kind of odds the experts would have laid down on all of this coming together as predicted.

In closing, then, for those still wondering how the War on Terror ends, to believe the Bible, it is not so much a mystery: It will conclude on the mountains of Israel with the destruction of God’s enemies at a battle called “Armageddon.”