SERMON: “Who is the Antichrist? Part 1” (Dan. 11:36–45)
“Who is the Antichrist? Part 1”
(Dan. 11:36–45)
Series: “Daniel:
God’s Sovereign Plans” #32 Text: Daniel
11:36–45
By: Shaun
Marksbury Date: August 16, 2026
Venue: Living Water Baptist Church Occasion: PM Service
Introduction
There are lots of theories as to who the Antichrist is. Some names floated in the past are perhaps
unknown to anyone under a certain age, and if the Lord tarries, current
theories will suffer the same fate. The
truth is that we can’t know for certain who the Antichrist is yet because 1.)
if he is alive, he will be insignificant until the appointed time (cf. Dan.
7:20), and 2.) we have not reached that time yet. I know this fact ruins many social media
posts, but that is the biblical reality.
But, I don’t want you to think I gave a false title to this
sermon. Scripture does give us clues as
to the nature and deeds of the Antichrist so that he’s recognizable in the end
times. We saw a good bit of that in
Daniel 7, with the four beasts and then the horns which grew up from the fourth
beast. There were descriptions of him
there, and we see more of them here at the end of Daniel 11.
But, is this really the Antichrist? As I mentioned last time, some wonder if this
is just a continuation of the discussion of the activities of Antiochus
IV. However, as we saw last time, that
isn’t the case, as his life doesn’t match the details of this section. Most notably, the figure of these verses
meets his end in Israel, and Antiochus died in Persia.[1] It’s best to see that, just like with the
rest of this chapter, the people behind these titles continues to change. The text signals the shift, as verse 40
places these events “at the time of the end.”
Moreover, the early church traditionally interpreted this passage to be
referring to the Antichrist.[2] That means, as one commentary notes, the
prophecy now moves from the “near” to the “far.”[3]
Still, we might wonder why this passage seems to parallel
the Antichrist to Antiochus. The answer
is that one the type and the other is the antitype. As another commentary explains,
In Antiochus one sees a
foreshadowing, a scale model, of the final opponent of God’s people. This final scourge will be like Antiochus
Epiphanes — only more and worse. … [W]e
are not dealing, as in Robert Louis Stevenson’s tale, with a Dr Jekyll and Mr
Hyde, with a reasonable, companionable fellow versus a reclusive, vicious, evil
beast of a man. No, it’s only the latter
type, what we might call a case of Mr Hyde and Mr Hyde.[4]
This means that much of what we read about in Antiochus IV
is applicable to the Antichrist. This
explains why the abomination of desecration, an action committed first by
Antiochus (Dan. 11:31), is said to be coming again at the end of this book
(12:11), and Christ tells His disciples to watch for it (Matt 24:15; Mark 13:14). As the Apostle John will later say, “even now
many antichrists have appeared” (1 John 2:18), and there are aspects of
Antiochus and other tyrants of history in the Antichrist, just as there are
parallels in their opposition to God.
That’s why we can also see parallels in both Islam and the Roman
Catholic Church to the spirit of Antichrist.
Still, the text would have us focus here on the similarities between him
and Antiochus IV.
Now, some might object that that places a huge gap spanning
millennia between vv. 35 and 36. Yet, that’s
not completely strange, as there are many smaller gaps between the other verses
in this chapter. We also saw a gap of
decades back in 9:26, describing the time of the Messiah’s crucifixion and the
destruction of the temple, and there is a gap of perhaps 2,000 years between
vv. 26–27 of that chapter. We’re seeing
a gap including that same period here in this chapter.
So, we’re briefly looking again at the final seven years of
history for the Jewish people (and the present age), specifically considering
the Antichrist is this evening. So, who
is he? First, we’ll see the vicious temperament
of the Antichrist (vv. 36–39), and that will be all the time we have. Next week, we’ll see the second point, the
temporary victories of the Antichrist (vv. 40–45). Let’s begin with the first part.
First, the Vicious Temperament of the Antichrist (vv.
36–39)
Then the king will
do as he pleases, and he will exalt and magnify himself above every god and
will speak monstrous things against the God of gods; and he will prosper until
the indignation is finished, for that which is decreed will be done. He will show no regard for the gods of his
fathers or for the desire of women, nor will he show regard for any other god;
for he will magnify himself above them all. But instead he will honor a god of fortresses,
a god whom his fathers did not know; he will honor him with gold, silver,
costly stones and treasures. He will
take action against the strongest of fortresses with the help of a foreign god;
he will give great honor to those who acknowledge him and will cause them to
rule over the many, and will parcel out land for a price.
Verse 36 opens by describing him as a willful king. The same language is used of God in 4:35 — “He
does according to His will in the host of heaven.” Yet, Persia (8:4), Alexander (11:3), and
Antiochus III (11:16) are all also described as doing whatever they want, and
the Antichrist will be that way.
Scripture doesn’t tell us exactly how much power he has at
the beginning of the tribulation. The
prophecy of Daniel’s seventy weeks indicates that he will initiate the
seven-year covenant with the nation of Israel (Dan. 9:27). As one commentary notes, “The reason for the covenant seems to be the
guarantee of his protection for Israel while the Jews rebuild their temple in
Jerusalem.”[5] Perhaps he “ ‘solves’ the Arab/Israeli
problem and proves himself to be a master politician.”[6]
But he won’t initially be the ruler of the world.
Again, we learned earlier that he begins small, a “little
horn” (Dan. 7:8). He exercises the
political power given him by the ten kings (Rev. 17:12–13). That’s the trouble with identifying anyone
today with the Antichrist — if his name is already recognized as a major player
on the world stage, he is likely not the Antichrist. I got an email recently stating that Donald
Trump is the prophesied Antichrist, but for this reason among others, I can’t
agree. This will be someone who appears
at that moment as a lesser leader among a confederation of ten and then seizes greater
power than them all.
That means he’ll eventually be independent, a sole authority
unto himself.[7] He will “exalt
and magnify himself” as time proceeds. He
will become a one-world ruler. Yet, this
won’t just be political exaltation.
He’ll eventually place
himself above every divine being, including the true God of heaven (like the
devil, Isa. 14:13). In Daniel 7:25, we
read, “He will speak out against the Most High,” and “he will intend to make
alterations in times and in law.” He’ll
speak monstrous or “extraordinary things” (NASB footnote), which “denotes ‘astonishing,
shocking, or unbelievable things.’ ”[8] His opposition will be against
the Lord Jesus Christ, of course, and he’ll live in opposition to the ways God
designed.
He’ll have the “personal
charisma, intelligence, evil character, and political power” to “believe that
he can function sufficiently well without God.”[9] It’s almost as though he’ll behave like an
atheist, and those who have dealt with atheistic objections know how vile some
of the statements about God can be.
Indeed, some of the worst tyrannical regimes known to man have been both
atheistic and Marxist. And, like most
atheists, he is fighting against the knowledge he claims he doesn’t have.
Of course, this
successful influence comes at the edge of the sword, like every previous
antichrist way. Especially beginning in
the middle of the tribulation (the beginning of the Great Tribulation period),
he will persecute the saints who are coming to Christ at that time. In Daniel 7:25, we read, “He will … wear down
the saints of the Highest One… and they will be given into his hand for a time,
times, and half a time.” He will think
himself greater than God.
His blasphemy reaches a fever pitch in the middle of the
tribulation. He will even take “his seat
in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God” (2 Thess. 2:4). He will also persuade the world to worship him by the miracles of his false prophet
(Rev. 13:11–15). As one study notes, “He
will succeed in spreading his influence around the world, both politically and
religiously (Rev. 13:7–8).”[10] As v. 36 says here, God will allow him to
prosper until the end of the period of the Lord’s indignation (a term referring
to God’s wrath on the sinful world[11]). In spite of how successful the Antichrist
might feel, this is within the Lord’s sovereign plan or decree from the
foundation of the world.
It’s at this point that we come to what some
see as another clue to the Antichrist’s identity. Instead of seeing the plural “gods” here like
most modern translations have, the KJV translated this verse, “God of his
fathers.” Based on this, some Bible
teachers in the past suspected that the Antichrist must be an apostate Jew. They then argued that the Jews would be more
willing to sign the seven-year covenant of Daniel 9:27 if the Antichrist was
also a Jew. However, there are several
problems with this view.
First, it is built on supposition from a
single Bible translation that is likely in error here. The underlying Hebrew word is Elohim,
a plural term that often refers to the God of heaven, but in pagan contexts, it
refers to false gods.[12] Moreover, since the Antichrist is “the little horn” arising from the Roman Empire, and
Daniel 9:26 describe the people who destroyed the temple in the first century
as his people (the Romans), it’s likely he will be ethnically or religiously
European (unless there is some mixed lineage that can be confirmed). Finally, Jews have often negotiated terms and
signed agreements with Gentiles in the past,[13]
and even today, the nation of Israel often restrains its actions based on
pressure from US presidents. While some
dispensational writers in the past have thought the Antichrist might be Jewish,
virtually all dispensational theologians today see the text’s emphasis as
pointing toward a European ruler.
The text
is saying he will not be a respecter of his cultural heritage. From ancient times, people honored their
religious heritage,[14] but he
will not — even today, there is a growing movement among the “woke” to
disregard all European heritage, and it appears that he will follow that
trend. In fact, this is likely a
reference to his modus operandi in the tribulation period — he “will set
aside all organized religion” and “will set himself up … as the sole object of
worship. Instead of depending on gods,
he will depend on his own power (received from Satan, Rev. 13:2) and by that
power he will demand worship of himself.”[15] Of course, Christianity became the official
religion of the Roman Empire, which also might be the Antichrist’s family
history,[16]
but Europe has imported Muslim hordes as well as religious ideas from all
around the globe; the Antichrist rejects it all.
He also
seems to reject women based on this verse, though that is debatable. The
surface reading here implies that he is homosexual or celibate.[17] Given the rise of social justice narratives
in Western society, with woke, identitarian politics, this may even be seen as
a positive to the world. It is
interesting that every June, some people in pride marches wave banners that
praise Satan. Even Israel has these
pride marches, ironically just having their largest one recently at the Dead
Sea (the historical site of Sodom and Gomorrah). Thus, this could refer to his sexuality. If it does, it’s likely 1.) referencing
sexuality just as Antiochus’s lusts were highlighted, 2.) stating that he is
homosexual based on Paul’s usage of abandoning women in Romans 1:27, and 3.)
this kind of activity is also a kind of self-exaltation, fitting with the
context of the rest of this verse.
Yet, we
have to always consider whether we are importing our ideas on the text. Many commentators point out that the
language could be translated “the desire of/ that which is desired by
women,” and this reflects a deeper theological theme that could even reference
Christ.[18] Many Jewish women would have wanted to be the
mother to the Messiah,[19]
the promised seed of Genesis 3:15. Given
that everything in this verse is about worship, and Scripture doesn’t remark
elsewhere on the Antichrist’s sexuality, that view makes sense. If that is how this is to be taken, then this
is a very subtle way of saying that the Antichrist will discourage the Jews
from looking for the first coming of the Messiah.
It would not be surprising if the Antichrist
were part of the LGBTQ+++ community, opposing everything natural that God has
created and established, but it is also just as likely that this is reinforcing
how he will exalt himself above the Messiah.
He will magnify himself in every way above
God and all other deities. That brings
us to the next verse, which says he will honor “a god of fortresses.” This means “a strong place” and means that he
will be about power and warfare.[20] Interestingly, when he first appears in
Revelation, he is symbolized as mimic of Christ — a rider on a white horse with
a bow, and “a crown was given to him, and he went out conquering and to conquer”
(Rev. 6:2). Despite offering peace to
Israel (and the world), he brings war upon it.[21]
Later in Revelation, we read that people will
ask “who is able to wage war with him?” (13:4). He will advance his military strength as much
as possible,[22] and he “will not regard any god except the god of power.”[23] This doesn’t mean that he bows to another
god, of course — this is a poetic way of stating that Antichrist is devoted to
himself, willing to engage in war to accomplish his cause.[24] He’s worshiping himself, which is how this is
a god “whom his fathers did not know.”[25] In fact, peak at v. 39 here — We read
that he “will take action against the strongest of fortresses with the help of
a foreign god.” By means of his
overwhelming military power — his “god” — he will destroy all who dare
challenge him.
Of course, for the man who worships himself
and his power, what else does he need except money? He must fund these war efforts, so he honors
his “god of fortresses” with “gold, silver, costly stones and treasures.”[26] Perhaps this is part of the reason he will
force “all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free
men and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hand or on their forehead,”
so that “no one will be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the
mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name” (Rev.
13:16–17). He will control the worldwide
flow of money as he simultaneously demands worship.
This is why it’s silly to worry that people
could receive the mark of the beast today.
For instance, during the Covid “pandemic,” people were worried that the
Covid shot itself was the mark of the beast because someone figured out how to
make the letters COVID equal 666. I will
say that it’s interesting that, in many states and countries, you had to
display your proof of vaccination if you were to be allowed to leave your home,
buy groceries, or engage in other commerce.
However, that’s just a foreshadowing of what it will be like, and no one
will be taking the mark accidentally; the Antichrist will be demanding the mark
as a sign of loyalty to him and worship of his name. No one has the mark yet.
Now, in v. 39, we read he will go to war
against those who refuse his mark and oppose his policies. We’ve already seen a bit of that, but look —
he knows how to keep his friends close!
We also read, “he will give great honor to those who acknowledge him and
will cause them to rule over the many, and will parcel out land for a price.” Those who vow allegiance to him, those who “recognize” him (LSB),
will be rewarded with leadership positions and territories.[27]
The price for such rewards includes
unquestioning allegiance, and may also involve financial payoffs and political
favors.
What will his campaigns include? We’ll have to talk about that next time!
Conclusion
We have
all had our theories. What many
Evangelicals don’t realize is that people of the past have had theories, as
well. For instance, it is the position
of the Reformation that the Roman Catholic Church and the pope in particular fulfill
the role of the prophesied antichrist. Consider what Matthew Henry wrote about this:
“Now here
is very much that is applicable to the man
of sin; he exalts himself above all
that is called god or that is worshipped; magnifies himself above all; his
flatterers call him our lord god the pope.
By forbidding marriage, and magnifying
the single life, he pretends not to regard the desire of women; and honours the
god of forces, the god Mahuzzim, or strong holds, saints and angels, whom his followers take for their
protectors, as the heathen did of old their demons; these they make presidents
of several countries, etc. These they
honour with vast treasures dedicated to them, and therein the learned Mr. Mede
thinks that this prophecy was fulfilled, and that it is referred to 1 Tim. 4:1,
2.[28]
This is to say nothing of the warfare and persecutions lead
by the pope.
Yet the final fulfillment awaits a future individual who
will embody these traits in full.
Remember that though there are many antichrists today, the Antichrist is
coming. Thankfully, God gives us plenty
so that he is recognizable in that time.
One teaching I haven’t even touched on is the rapture of the
church. Those who may fear the future
must put their trust in Jesus Christ for salvation. The Lord gives a promise to His church, that
if He goes away, He will return and receive us unto Himself (John 14:1–3). We need not fear what the future holds, for
the Lord has decreed that we who trust in Him will forever be with Him.
[1] Stephen R. Miller, Daniel,
The New American Commentary, (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers,
1994), 18:305.
[2] Ibid., 18:306.
[3] J. Dwight Pentecost, The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures,
1985, 1, 1370–1371.
[4] Dale Ralph Davis, The Message of
Daniel: His Kingdom Cannot Fail, eds. Alec Motyer and Derek
Tidball, The Bible Speaks Today, (Nottingham, England: Inter-Varsity Press,
2013), 158.
[5] Warren W. Wiersbe, Be Resolute,
“Be” Commentary Series, (Colorado Springs, CO: Victor, 2000), 139–140.
[6] Ibid., 140.
[7] Pentecost, 1371.
[8] Miller.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Pentecost.
[11] Miller, 18:307.
[12] John MacArthur Jr., Ed., The MacArthur Study
Bible, electronic ed., (Nashville, TN: Word Pub., 1997), 1248.
[13] Wiersbe, 140.
[14] Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s
Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete and Unabridged in One Volume,
(Peabody: Hendrickson, 1994), 1459.
[15] Pentecost.
[16] Miller.
[17] MacArthur.
[18] Miller.
[19] Pentecost.
[20] MacArthur.
[21] Pentecost.
[22] Ibid.
[23] Earl D. Radmacher, Ronald Barclay Allen, and H. Wayne
House, The Nelson Study
Bible: New King James Version, (Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers,
1997), Da 11:38.
[24] Davis, 159.
[25] Radmacher, et. al.
[26] Miller, 18:308.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Henry.