The Difference Between Show Business and Ministry

As the dust settles after the Lakeland fiasco, I take up the subject of flesh-inspired antics in charismatic ministry...

The realm of finance is presently teaching us what the realm of ministry has taught us over and over again: people are unwilling to call their superstars on their excesses. Success inexorably excuses excess. Despite red flags, warning sirens, and the inevitable recognition, after the fact, that we knew something was fishy, we look the other way if the party in question at least gives the appearance that he or she's getting it done. The Charismatic movement is in disarray because of that unfortunate trait.

Are there some simple principles that charismatics could use to assess the actual spirituality vs. fleshly embellishments of ministry, before the result is another boondoggle that embarrasses everyone who cherishes the gift of the Holy Spirit? Yes, I think there are...

• If Jesus didn't minister that way, neither should we
• If it was not envisioned by the scriptures, it's not of God
• Goofiness is not spiritual, it's just goofy
• Prestidigitators and illusionists need fanfares and distractions to perform their art, legitimate ministers of Christ do not
• No one is all that special
• In the Bible, only the megalomaniacal needed music to set the tone for ministry
• When they were slain in the Spirit in the Bible, they were carried outside and buried forthwith
• When Jesus took off his coat while ministering, he washed feet, not stoked up the crowd

More could be said, but the bottom line is: if a man or woman ministers outside these guidelines, he or she is fleshly at best and an out and out charlatan at worst. That may sound judgmental, but how many dog and pony shows are we going to be subjected to before we start exercising the discernment any Bible-believing, Spirit-filled person should be able to easily? Or, God forbid, are we so far out at sea that we cannot tell the difference between show business and ministry?

Are You Ready for Religion in Politics?

Biblically, I see the only purpose of government, under God, as protecting the innocent from the evil-doer. Secularly, this is an absolute necessity if life amongst sinners is to continue until Jesus comes back. In the best of worlds, we wouldn't need government, in ours (even in the Millennium) we do, desperately. The Bible instructs us to cooperate with the governing authorities in their purpose of ensuring justice, they don't bear the sword for nothing!

But that government bears the sword and not the key leads us to some further conclusions... 

Government is not in place, under God, to tell anyone what to think, how to run their life, what to do for retirement or education or with private property or what to do medically. Certainly, government in this world in this age should never enforce a belief system, though it did in ancient Israel. Government, at its most fundamental, is there simply to keep the powerful and the violent from doing harm or oppressing the rest of the population.

With that Biblical, worldwide mandate in mind, let me suggest a few policy positions a politician who actually brought biblical religion into the realm of politics might take:

Concerning the Use of Deadly Force

• The Death Penalty should be enforced, without pity or mercy, upon anyone who willfully or callously takes the life of another.
• No other government or body should be allowed to kill or oppress the citizens of this country while they are in their own lands, without incurring the response of the sword, which necessitates a strong, ready and able military.
• Abortion should be illegal, unless the unborn child is causing immediate, physical distress that realistically threatens the mother's life. A practitioner, or anyone else, who performs an illegal abortion should be sentenced to death.

Concerning Crime and Punishment

Prisons, by and large, should be abolished. Criminals owe their victims, not the state. Those that commit crimes should be indentured to the victims of those crimes until restitution is made. Those too violent to put on the streets should be sentenced to death. Crimes that are of a personal nature should not be crimes at all.

Concerning Economic Justice

Labor should not be commoditized. The ox is not to be muzzled as it treads the grain. It is a travesty that the most powerful sliver of the workforce uses its power to enrich itself, tapping into the harvest, while the mass of the workforce is forced into ever tighter, constricted competition for less and less. In hubris, the powerful actually believe they deserve that much more than the poor schlubs at the bottom of the ladder. God is no respecter of persons and has no respect for greed. Neither should the law! Whatever profit a corporation disburses in dividends to stockholders and bonuses to the top tier of management should be at least matched and distributed among all of its employees, including the janitor and the receptionist. Sole proprietorships and partnerships should follow similar rules.

Concerning Welfare

Those who will not work, should not eat. Those who cannot work, should be shown mercy. Those who cannot find work ought to be put to work serving the public good.

Concerning Reparations

The bulk of idle federal landholdings, not held in trust for Native Americans, ought to be divided among and deeded to all those who can trace their lineage to former slaves. Those slaves were not only often abused and mistreated, but were given nothing upon achieving freedom, and that needs to be rectified. Whether it's 40 acres or not doesn't matter, but regardless, no mules will be distributed..

Concerning Law and Order

Every neighborhood in this country, rich or poor, should be safe enough for even a stranger to pass through without fear. Wealthier neighborhoods already are, but poorer neighborhoods often do not experience the same level of law and order. There is no excuse for governing authorities to abandon entire areas of cities to the de facto control of gangs, thugs and crime. The poor deserve safe neighborhoods every bit as much as the wealthy.

More police need to be placed on our streets, particularly, the mean ones. There's not one square inch of this country that the government, under God, can justifiably cede to the rule of thuggery rather than the rule of law and order. One idea for utilizing our police forces that would help immediately: stop parking them along the streets in patrol cars manning speed traps and start placing them more often on the streets preventing crime!

Concerning Political Parties

The Constitution should to be amended to specifically ban elected officials at any level of government from being associated with any political party, and furthermore, should ban any association which seeks to organize candidates or office holders into ideological blocks in order to gain political power. Taxpayers should not foot the bill for party politics as it does now through gridlock; double staffing; witch hunting, grand standing inquisitions; primary elections and matching funds for campaigns.

I could go on, but I won't. Hopefully, you're reading in between the lines and can see the problem that lies ahead for any who would resolutely attempt to bring biblical religion into politics. Jesus rules, unapologetically, with a rod of iron, and we will rule with him, like him. 

The world is not ready for that just yet, but ready or not, it's coming!

Just How Depraved Are We?

The natural spiritual state of mankind is both the subject of theological debate, and homespun philosophy without any reference to religious doctrine. Folksy conclusions drawn from the observation of life can be stated succinctly, running along a spectrum, from "nobody's perfect," to "everyone has some good in him," to "children learn what they live." The parallel theological spectrum runs from Calvinistic total depravity to Pelagianian ability. One would think that Paul put the issue to rest with Romans 7, but the debate lingers on.

In trying to assure that God gets all the glory in salvation, many feel they have to diminish man in order to elevate God. But, I wonder, does God need us as a step ladder? While the desire to glorify God is commendable, diminishing his stated plans, purpose and design for man in order to do it is, at least, misplaced assistance. How, exactly, does Worm Theology glorify the Creator in whose image the "worm" was made and the Son of God was incarnated?

Of course, in the opposite vein, overstating the quality or abilities of natural man only induces self-dependence, which results in pride, frustration and loss.

The problem outlined in Romans 7 for natural mankind is not that a sinful person is unable to perceive the goodness of the law, nor even to understand what is good conceptually, but that he has something within him which frustrates his ability to actually do anything about it. We do, in fact, have a clue in the scriptures that natural man is actually able to derive what is good on his own apart the written law, even though he's not able to carry it out. Even that ability owes its existence to the action of God who wrote such into mankind's very nature.

The truth is, natural man has no desire to know God or to do good.

So, the natural man is able to discern the nature of God by what God has given him naturally, and even able to discern and discover what is good by the same. His problem is that he does not have the inclination to do so nor the power to follow through. That certainly doesn't mean he isn't capable of seeing it when God graciously presents it to him-- he absolutely can, and without being regenerated! The godly sorrow that results from that perception is what leads the natural man to abandon his self-reliance and to put trust and hope in Christ. 

To the depraved Christ proclaims his life saving message, "Repent, and believe the good news!" More than mere communication, it confronts the sinner with divine presence, with Holy Spirit conviction. For sinners awakened by such communication and who do repent and believe, the frustration of personal depravity yields to the peace of his salvivic ability. That ability regenerates the sinner who has turned to him in faith, infuses that former sinner with the indwelling Holy Spirit and makes a life of obedience in faith possible.

So humans are never so depraved that they cannot sense the tap of the Holy Spirit on their shoulder and turn to Christ and be saved by him.

The World's Background Noise

It's been said that the mass of humanity is sheep-like, following whomever seems to know where to go. There doesn't have to be a logic to it, boldness is sufficient to turn the masses. Adolf Hitler's strategy was to tell the biggest lie he could as boldly as he could, and the sheep would follow in tow. Hitler as Bo-peep, now there's an image you won't find on the average blog, boy, I wish I had graphical skills!

It doesn't take anything as dark as Hitler to reveal this quality in the human race, we see it in the rather silly and less threatening realm of fashion and celebrity. A star wears the outrageous or impractical and the stores can't stock enough to staunch the crescendo of bleating. Though we're all adapting to the concept of the viral in the internet age, I wonder if its roots trace wa-a-a-a-ay back before Al Gore's famous creation to the fawning of a new age introduced by bobby-soxers' hysteria over Frank Sinatra.

Does one little match really set the forest aflame?

It makes one wonder, at least it does me, where my ovine tendencies are leading me. Whether it be election year musings, or some more profound stirring of soul, I'm asking myself whose lead am I truly following. We all know the PC (preferred Christian) answer: Jesus!-- but does an investigation of our trail  to this point reading this silly blog, confirm or belie that contention?

There are many whose wool rises above the heights of any other's in the vicinity. They write books for dummies, testify to the greener grass in the pasture they know the way to. They host TV shows, wool carded and sounding not b-a-a-a-a-d at all. They get on soapboxes in the public square and blather until we choose, between them or that other blatherer standing on a different colored soapbox, which to follow.

Where are we going following them? 

It's time for us to begin checking credentials at the door. You know, that door to your life (thanks Bill Bright). We're not made of iron and these stars we follow are not made of neodymium. We can't follow two masters, two gurus, or two directions at once. Jesus rose from the dead so his credential trumps everyone else's. So, regardless of what anyone is selling, or supposedly knows, or thinks they can guarantee, put all your eggs in Jesus' basket.

We don't need to be like the world, we don't need to have what the world thinks we do, we don't need to fit into their mold, and we don't have to see things their way.

The ruckus of all that bleating, even the howls of wolves, are just background noise.

Works vs. Faith

Jesus was asked one day, "What must we do to do the works God requires?" His answer, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

I am Arminian in theology, not because I feel any particular bond or loyalty to Jacob Harmenszoon, but because I believe the Bible clearly teaches that salvation is not accomplished without, and is predicated upon, the the conscious choice of the saved. It's not that God isn't involved in nor even providing the impetus toward that choice, but that belief in Christ is a response made by, not for, the saved. It's a question of personal faith, and, given the wooing of the Holy Spirit, it is possible for everyone.

Believing in Jesus is, in fact, the work that God requires of us. As Mark Knopfler might say, "that ain't workin'!" But that is the way we do it! Faith is not the product of sweat and toil, nor the fruit of planning and vision. It's a response to a circumstance, a reaction to a stimulus. The word of the Lord (stimulus) came to Abraham, faith was his response, righteousness credited was his reward.

Jesus died for our sins and rose from the dead on the third day because of our justification (circumstance), the reaction of the saved to that circumstance is faith, eternal life is the repercussion. Where's the work in all this? The answer is that it is excluded. The believer did nothing work-like in order to be made righteous, he merely responded to something done by another.

It is by grace that we are saved, through faith, not of works so that no one can boast. The work was done by God, we only respond to it. Jesus was being tongue in cheek when he answered that question the way that he did on that day so long ago. It must have struck a perplexing note in his hearers. "What kind of work is that?" they might have asked themselves. That's the point-- it isn't one, and I think that's just what the Lord wanted to point out.

Abortion's Reluctant Champion?

Here's a remarkably well done analysis of Sen. Obama's response to the abortion question Rick Warren posed last week during the Civil Forum. Generally, I wouldn't put something this partisan on my blog, but it is wonderfully expansive and can be applied more generally to the arguments anyone uses to excuse abortion out of one side of the mouth while they despair over it out the other. Enjoy reading, and saying, "that's what I'm talkin' 'bout," (that's more fun than amen when dealing with political subjects!). Then come back and tell me if it's possible to be a reluctant champion of abortion.

How to Handle a Fallen Leader

The Todd Bentley affair has brought into sharp relief one reality church folk never seem to be able to remember: every minister who has ever lived, or ever will, is just an ordinary human being. Like anyone else they have strengths, they have weaknesses, they sin. Whatever gift they pass along is no more their fault than the waters of the Mississippi are attributable to the towns she meanders through. As gravity, not will, dictates her muddy course, so to the Spirit of God, not the merit of a man, decides who is gifted and how.

The thud of the mighty falling awakens us from reverie. Startled, we're aghast and thirsty for blood. They may not have actually been giants, but looking up to them, our perspective made them seem so. Their failure calls into question all we so readily received at their hands and shakes our very foundations. We've been had, we reason, and we want our dignity returned along with a pound of flesh from the guilty. In no time flat, we mob together at the Place de la Concorde, shouting, "off with his head!"

It would be nice if we never had occasion to get this right in the future (we will), but I fear we're already over the threshold of getting it wrong in the present. We seem unable to learn from the Bible or the past, and so we repeat the same missteps over and over and over and over again. Every time we do, the church looks more like a petty social club than the body of Christ--the only army in the world that kills its wounded rather than dressing their injuries, and especially so if they're officers.

What should we do?

Look to the word: 1 Timothy 5:19-21; Galatians 6:1; James 5:19-20; and 1 Corinthians 5:9-12 give us plenty of instructions about how to deal with this kind of thing. Matthew 18:15-17 is also helpful, but is trumped by the Timothean passage when dealing with an accusation against an elder. I think the process can be summed up this way: confrontation, admonition, contrition/excommunication, restoration. In the case of an elder (church leader), transparency is commanded and necessary.

What should be jarring about this process is that disqualification is not one of the steps. 

Disqualification is not a biblical concept in either the Old or the New Testament. Samson didn't cease being a judge of Israel, even as he milled grain before the derisive glares of his pagan enemies. David didn't boot Saul out of office before his time, despite God rejecting Saul's kingship. Saul was qualified by God when he became king and he remained the Lord's anointed until he died. David's only recess in service occurred as a result of rebellion, not justice. Peter never stopped being an apostle in Jesus' mind, though he denied the Lord in the time of trial.

In fact, one of the things I love best about the biographies in the scriptures is that we are shown the godly, warts and all--the good, the bad and the ugly! Their stories tell us that God's servants are his servants, even when they prove themselves all too human. Arbitrarily removing God's servant from service is a fleshly concept from the world, not even hinted at in the NT. The gifts and callings of God are without repentance. 

Though one must meet certain qualifications to embark in ministry, once the mooring line has been released, that ship has sailed. There is no indication whatsoever that a failing minister has to requalify (read: go through a lengthy process leading to restoration) in order to serve. As I see it, these automatic ministerial decapitations are completely unscriptural-- more akin to the ravenous French mob drooling in front of the guillotine than the body of Christ. God forbid!

So what would a biblical process of correcting elders look like?

When an accusation against an elder is substantiated by witnesses, that elder is to be confronted by the witnesses and a fellow elder. If the charges are admitted and the accused wants to repent, confess and go on with ministry, he should be publicly, and I would add specifically, rebuked before his church. The accused elder should then publicly acknowledge his guilt fully and honestly before his congregation, and humbly announce what actions are being taken to turn from the sin.

His ministry should then continue, but with transparency concerning the issues of the fall.

Hiding things under the carpet until the dust settles, or having experts beat that carpet clean in their secluded workshops is not what the Bible commands. Neither are arbitrary suspension periods, or restoration processes-- these are human inventions, not scriptural mandates. They have not served the body well, it seems to me, and only cover a wound rather than healing it. Healing and deliverance occur in the light: it's the truth that sets us free.

If a minister will not repent or accept correction, or is not willing to be transparent about the process, he or she should be publicly excommunicated, even if in absentia. There are, as well, certain legal transgressions that will make it impossible for a minister to ever lead corporately thereafter. Regardless, our aim and hope should always be restorative, for there are way too many wasted gifts and way too much avoidable damage done in the body of Christ all in the name of correction.

The cure should never be worse than the disease.

The Antichrist: From Head Wound to Armageddon

The Rise and Fall of the Antichrist Part III

Will the Antichrist usher in and reap the benefits of an era of peace, security and unity unknown previously upon the face of planet earth? Although such a case could be made using some passages of the scripture, that's not quite the whole picture the Bible paints. Though the Antichrist may be a mesmerizing messianic figure to the world, ultimately, it's his use of the big stick that gets things done. The question the world asks that elicits its acquiescence is not about his program for peace, nor his prowess in the supernatural, it's his ruthlessness in war.

Because of the head wound passage (and this one), it is often supposed that the Antichrist suffers an assassination attempt and recovers in a seemingly miraculous way--a pseudo-resurrection of sorts. That interpretation is wrong because it mixes metaphors and thereby misses the point. The heads of the beast, its horns and its crowns do not refer to the physical person of the Antichrist but to the nations or kingdoms that make up his empire. A wound to one of the heads of the beast, therefore, is not a physical wound to the Antichrist's person, but the loss of political control over one of the kingdoms in his empire. 

My reading of Daniel and Ezekiel tells me that the wound will be a rebellion of the King of the South (Egypt). It is put down with such a ruthless, callous, cunning, and an overwhelming display of willfulness and power that whatever independent spirit might have remained in the Gentile world at that time evaporates. "Who is able to wage war with him?" they'll ask themselves acquiescently. The Antichrist will then be poised to expand his hegemony from the Middle East to the world, though he'll need a friend to do so.

Jay Leno learned a valuable lesson shortly after taking the reigns of the Tonight Show. When one is in the limelight, it can be very helpful to have a sidekick (a foil that makes the big dog look good). He hadn't planned for that when he took over for Johnny Carson, and Branford Marsalis wasn't willing to play that gig. Enter Kevin Eubanks who was willing, and voila, his rise into the spotlight.

For the Antichrist, that person is the False Prophet. He will provide a sense of spiritual legitimacy, backed up by signs and wonders, for the Antichrist's claims of divinity. He's the foil that makes the Antichrist look good and the lieutenant that advances and executes the spiritual component of the Antichrist's agenda. The need for such a figure is puzzling given the description of the Antichrist. 

Nonetheless, there he is, prophesied in intriguing detail, the third beast of the Apocalypse's unholy trinity. Is this figure identifiable before he actually appears? Yes, he is! We're told that he's like a lamb with two horns, but he speaks like a dragon (devil). Furthermore, we have the cryptic description of the Whore of Babylon in Revelation 17-18. She rides upon the seven-headed, ten-horned beast and she dwells in the city on seven hills.

What do these things this tell us? Believe it or not, that there is a connection between the False Prophet and the Whore. 

The False Prophet has the appearance of being of Christ (like a lamb); he has two horns, that is, power centers associated with him; and though he looked like a lamb, he did the bidding of and spoke for the Devil, not for Christ. The Whore is a mother figure but not wholesome; she dwells in Rome, the city on seven hills; she commerced with the kings and merchants of the world; she was fabulously rich, global in reach, multi-cultural; and she spread her idolatry (adultery) through a goblet of wine. It's hard not to see the writing on the wall!

The Whore ultimately represents the Catholic Church. The Mother Church which worships the "Mother of God" is actually the Mother-of-All-Harlotries. Although she was useful to the Beast and the Ten Horns in deceiving the world prior to their advent, and they did partner with her for a time (her riding), they actually hate her and want to destroy her. Understandable, I would say, for a Muslim tyrant ruling over a Muslim dominated empire. God's call to all true believers that happen to be in her at the end of days-- "Come out of her," lest you share her sins and the plagues of judgment upon those sins.

On an interesting side-note: both Rome and Constantinople are known as "the City on Seven Hills."

The False Prophet is the Pope at the time of the Antichrist's ascension to power. The lamb-like appearance with those horns representing his ancient Roman and Orthodox loci of power are a dead giveaway. His attachment to the Whore is not so much as mentioned-- so much for his faith-- as would become the chief promoter and spokesman for the Antichrist. This Pope will actually possess some dark, spiritual powers, unlike his ancient predecessors, who were merely performers. Evil signs and wonders, even the release of demonic hordes at his hand are the result.

Three and a half years into the treaty period, probably just prior to the Temple's dedication, the Beast will reverse course in two ways: 1) he will break his treaty with Israel, make war against them, and confiscate and defile the new temple; and 2) his nominal support of Allah will fall by the wayside altogether as he will declare himself god above all that is called God instead. With the assistance of the False Prophet, he will require everyone in the world to acknowledge his divinity by taking a mark on the right hand or upon the forehead.

Wonder where he got that idea?

This mark will not be coercive, despite the fact that no one can buy, sell or trade without it. The combination of the Antichrist's forceful will, the deceptive signs and wonders done at his bidding, and the strong delusional influence sent by God upon the Gentiles of that day will result in a ready capitulation by the masses. They will gladly take the mark, and it will seem the right and good thing to do. They would actually feel indignation toward any who would not! The mark, however, spells their doom.

Not so with the Jews. Under the ministry of Enoch and Elijah, and the 144,000 in the first 3 1/2 years of the pact, the Jews will embrace Christ en masse and resist taking the mark. Many of them will be imprisoned and some of them will be beheaded for doing so. Though tragic in human terms, it leads to glory in divine ones--  for Christ will raise them up when he returns, the last remnants of the First Resurrection, all participants of which will never die again.

Near the end of the 7 year treaty period, the armies of the nations will be mustered together in northern Israel to do battle against the anticipated invasion of Christ and his army of saints. When the sixth angel empties his vial of wrath upon the Euphrates River at that time, it will set in motion the events we call Armageddon. The river will dry up allowing the armies of the east to cross over it unhindered. Where will those armies be heading? Ultimately to the mount of Megiddo (Har Megiddo) in north-central Israel.

I don't think it is absolutely necessary to envision this as the armies of China and/or India, but it sure is possible, even if not specifically indicated by scripture.

According to Daniel, the Antichrist will find the initial news of these armies stirring alarming. He immediately puts the spin machine into gear and gets out in front of it. Whatever rogue quality these movements may have had at first will be transformed by spiritual deception into a patriotic effort which supports the mission of the Antichrist. Israel, as in the time of Hitler, will be made the fall guy, but I think the key to turning the situation around for the Antichrist may be convincing the world that an alien invasion targeted at Jerusalem is afoot.

Of course, it won't be aliens invading, it'll be Jesus Christ and his church  returning! On a rise, somewhere in the Jezreel Valley near Megiddo, the armies flying the banner of the Antichrist will be utterly destroyed. The Antichrist and False Prophet will be caught alive and thrown immediately into the Lake of Fire which burns forever. The Devil will be shackled and thrown into the Abyss, and Jesus and those who have believed in him will begin to rule here on planet Earth for a thousand years. 

Though the Devil has tried to accomplish the Antichrist scheme for so long, when he finally succeeds, he'll falter rather quickly and end up going out with a whimper rather than a bang. 

To all of which I say, Maranatha!

Index to the Entire Series
I, II, III

The Antichrist: A Muslim in a Muslim World

The Rise and Fall of the Antichrist: Part II

Since the Antichrist's kingdom is typified by the King of the North (the Seleucid Kingdom) and his empire is bounded by the area controlled by both Alexander and the Romans, we can make some fairly certain statements about what will and what will not be part of the Ten Horns. Western Europe is out, entirely-- not England, France, Spain, Italy, Germany... you get the picture. The ten horns will be in the Levant, the Balkans and Africa and nowhere else.

The specificity of a revived Kingdom of the North ensures that Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Lebanon will absolutely be included. Jordan and Saudi Arabia (Ammon, Moab and Edom) are specifically excluded in the biblical text, whereas Egypt, Libya and the Sudan (Cush) are specifically included. That leaves three others which would have to come from the Balkans (i.e. Bulgaria, Greece, Macedonia, or Albania) or Azerbaijan. Israel is not one of the ten, it merely signs a covenant with their leader, the Antichrist.

Daniel's prophecy has to be taken as locating this covenant in time with the ultimate abominator as opposed to the type of the abominator (Antiochus) or with the Romans. Additionally, the destruction of the city and the temple can only refer to the events of 70 AD and not with anything done by Antiochus. Furthermore, Jesus mentioned the abomination in question as yet to come, not as fulfilled by Antiochus Epiphanes, despite having been fully aware of that history. Because the events of 70 AD do not even remotely resemble what Daniel prophesied concerning this covenant, the actual fulfillment of it has to be reserved to a time after 70 AD by the actual Antichrist.

We have not considered the potential of Palestine being one of the ten nor the producer of the Antichrist, because Palestine is not a biblically legitimate entity. Even though the area had a large Gentile population in the days of Antiochus, and though there are efforts afoot to incorporate an Arab state in the Beautiful Land today, Canaan is Israel's, given once and for all time to her by God. The land of Israel is being restored to the people of Israel in these last days along with Jerusalem their eternal capital.

The notion of Palestine is a wisp of fancy from unredeemed minds that God will never allow to stand now that he's brought the Jews back to their promised land.

The Antichrist will worship a god unknown in Daniel's day. That is the implication of the descriptive phrases used by Daniel-- not the god of his fathers, not the one desired of women, a militaristic god unknown to his fathers, a foreign god. Whenever something is described prophetically that will only exist in the far future, it tends be a bit weird, hence the cryptic language. It is an important, identifying characteristic, nonetheless, or it would not have been mentioned from so many angles.

Let me ask you, "What new god has arisen since the days of Daniel, that is totally outside the bounds of previously existing pagan pantheons and is militaristic? A god of fortresses (literally, strongholds), who assists his followers in overcoming the mightiest of citadels? In my mind, this is a perfect description of the jihadist god of Islam, Allah, and really, nothing else. So, the Antichrist will be a Muslim, at least when he reaches power. Considering his locale and his international ambitions (one third of the current world population is Muslim).

Of course, he could only at best be a nominal one, because as his true heart is revealed, he ends up repudiating all gods and claiming himself alone as one.

Index to the Entire Series
I, II, III