Will the Antichrist be gay?

"The king shall do according to his will, and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself" — not only above every man, but "above every god." And it is not only that he takes his place above these so-called gods, but "he shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods." And strange to say (if one did not know the perfect wisdom of God, and could not wait for His counsels to be matured), in spite of his fearful profanity, "he shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished; for that that is determined shall be done." This clause contains a word that gives us the key to the passage. For some have found immense difficulties in this portion of the word of God. Many have transported into this verse the Pope of Rome, others Mahomet, or Buonaparte. But here we find that "the king" is to prosper till the indignation be accomplished. What, or about whom? Has God indignation against His Church? Never. This is the time, too, of God's patience with man — not of His indignation. With whom, then, is it connected? The word of God is perfectly plain. It is when dealing with Israel that God speaks of indignation: I have already shown this fully from Isaiah 5, 10, 14, and other passages, as it is entirely confirmed by the whole nature of the revelation here. For we read of one that would be the king of Israel — not in Constantinople or Rome, but in Palestine. And the time is a future outburst of indignation against Israel in the promised land. He (the false king) shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished. "Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women." The expression, "the desire of women," clearly, to my mind, refers to Christ — the One to whom all Jews were looking forward, and whose birth must have been above all things desired by Jewish women. It is plain from the connection that such is the true meaning. For it occurs between "the God of his fathers" (Jehovah) and "any god." Nothing is less likely than, if it had merely referred to natural relationships, that it would have been thus placed. It was, probably, from the wish to apply this to the pope that such an interpretation has found currency. But let us only understand that the prophecy concerns Israel and their land, and all is plain. He shall not "regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women." Christ is distinguished from "the God of his fathers," perhaps, because the Son was to become incarnate. But Christ is regarded no more than the God of his fathers — an expression, by the way, which implies that he himself is a Jew. It is "the God of his fathers." "For he shall magnify himself above all. But in his estate shall he honour the god of forces." It is not that he goes forward as Antiochus did, trying to force Jupiter Olympus upon the Jews; but he adopts a new superstition. This also disproves the reference to the Syrian king, who was a Gentile. Here it is a Jew, who will take the place of the Christ, and who, of course, regards neither the true Christ nor Jehovah. It is a self-exalting personage who opposes the true God, i.e. who equally sets aside the superstitions of men and the faith of God's people. Self-exaltation is his marked feature.

But this is not all. The Antichrist will be infidel, but not merely infidel. He will have rejected the God of Israel, and the Messiah. Nor will he honour any of the gods of the Gentiles. But even this man, although he sets himself up as the true God upon the earth, will, for all that, have some one to whom he bows and causes others to bow along with himself. The human heart, even in Antichrist, cannot do without an object of idolatry. So, in ver. 38, there is this apparent inconsistency that comes out in the Antichrist. "But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces." He makes a god, as well as setting himself up to be God. "A god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things." It is entirely an invention of his own. More than that. He will divide the land among his adherents. "He shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain." Such, then, is God's account of the king that will be found in Palestine in the last days. And it is plain that this last verse is a most conclusive proof that he is in Palestine reigning. It is "the land." The Spirit of God never so speaks of any other country. It was that land which was nearest to God — a sort of centre for all others.

There can be no doubt from Scripture that the eastern potentate is identical with a character who is abruptly brought in in Daniel 11:36 as "the king." Indeed the second beast of Rev. 13, the man of sin of 2 Thess. 2, the king of Daniel 11:36-39, and the antichrist of 1 John 2:18, 22, are clearly identical. Some in reading Dan. 11 have thought that the expression "the king" in a chapter dealing with the king of the north and the king of the south, must refer to one of these two. But for an Israelite to mention his own king in this indefinite way is perfectly natural both here and in Isa. 30:31. When an English newspaper announces that "the King" is going to Scotland, it would be quite superfluous to say "the King of England"; while, if speaking of another king it would be necessary to specify — the King of Spain, or whatever other king might be meant. So Daniel and Isaiah, when referring to kings, specify king of the north or king of the south, etc., but "the king" without further definition, means of course king of Israel. The chronological place of this king is determined by Daniel 11:40, which says that "at the time of the end" the king of the south shall push at him. This occurrence we do not now discuss, merely adducing the proof which it affords that "the king" previously referred to is found "at the time of the end." Two interesting features may be remarked in Daniel's sketch of the antichrist. One, that he will not regard the desire of women. This, in a Jewish prophecy, refers to the proper aspiration of Jewish women to be the mother of the promised Messiah. That this is its significance is confirmed by the collocation in which the expression occurs, both that which precedes and that which follows it, viz., "Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god; for he shall magnify himself above all" (Dan. 11:37). Secondly, the God of his fathers is twice referred to, which is a probable indication that this person will be of the Jewish race — a high qualification in one presenting himself to Israel as Messiah and Messianic king.

In Daniel this false Messiah is also mentioned by the name of "the king." It is said, "The king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done. Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all. But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces … and shall divide the land for gain. And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind." (Dan. 11:36-40.)

Here is a king reigning in "the land," which when thus spoken of can only mean Palestine, the land about which Daniel was interested, and this prophecy spoken. He is "at the time of the end" and continues "till the indignation be accomplished," showing that he reigns in the last days of Gentile supremacy — until, God's indignation against Israel being ended, He once more restores her to favour. He is an Israelite; for he does not regard "the God of his fathers," an expression which in Daniel can only mean the patriarchs. Neither does he regard "the desire of women." The great desire of all Hebrew women was to give birth to the Messiah. Thus Mary was saluted by Gabriel as "highly favoured among women," when her miraculous conception of the Saviour was announced. In naming "the desire of women" between "the God of his fathers" and "any God," the connection shows that something analogous in nature, not something entirely different, is meant. Though an Israelite, he heeds neither Jehovah, the God of the nation; nor the Messiah, the hope of the nation; nor even the false gods to which the nation had so often turned. But he honours the God of forces, referring probably to the religious homage rendered by his direction to the beast, the head of the Roman Empire, and the embodiment of worldly power. In time and place, in blasphemy and self-exaltation, in rejection of God and the introduction of a new and dreadful idolatry, this king exactly corresponds with the false Christ of the Revelation and the man of sin of the Thessalonians. "The king of the north," too, who comes against him, shows the existence of that enemy against whom the fatal alliance with the beast is formed.

The second beast (vv. 11-18) will be more subtle than the first; the first will infatuate men by his power and audacity; the second will work by deception (v. 14). He will appear as a lamb, in imitation of Christ, for he will be the anti-Christ, but when he shall speak he will reveal his true character for he will speak as a dragon; he will he Satan's mouth-piece. What a contrast he will be to all that Christ was who spoke His Father's word and was Himself all that He said. As anti-Christ he will appeal first to the Jews, and they will receive him. Because they would not receive Christ when He came in His Father's name, they will receive this deceiver when he comes in his own name (John 5:43). He is also spoken of as THE FALSE PROPHET; this is his special designation in the Revelation (chap. 16:13; 19:20; 20:10) and as such he will deceive apostate Christendom and the whole world, by doing great wonders. He will represent himself as equal to any of the Old Testament prophets by calling fire down from heaven, and greater than any New Testament Apostle by giving life and speech to the image of the beast, and will compel all men to worship it or be slain. The seat of his power will be at Jerusalem, as the throne of the beast will be at Rome, and the rulers of the nation of the Jews will make a covenant with him (Isa. 28:14-15). But a man who has cast off all fear of God will not regard any treaty with men and, in alliance with the beast, he will break the covenant and terribly oppress the nation (Dan. 9:26-27). It is evident that he will be a Jew, for the Jews would not be likely to receive him if he were not, but that it is said that he will disregard “the God of his fathers” confirms this. He will magnify himself above all gods, i.e., he will not permit any religion in the land that does not centre in himself, and he will abolish all God-ordained institutions too, for he will not regard the desire of women, which is surely marriage and the home life. These two things which make life bearable and are the greatest spiritual and natural blessings—the recognition of God and family life—will be the objects of his special hatred. These two devil-empowered men are brought together in 2 Thessalonians 2, and they are always together in the Revelation, except in chapter 17, where the beast appears as the head of the Roman earth. The beast is “that man of sin,” “the son of perdition,” and the false prophet is “that wicked [or the lawless] one”. With Satan as their energising force they will form the trinity of evil.

The Bible tells us of a wilful king who will exercise great authority in the earth (Dan. 11:36). Amongst other sinister features of his rule will be these, “He shall regard not the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women.” I take that to mean that he will banish religion and marriage from his realm, the two things that make decent life possible in the world. His reign shall be brief, for swift destruction shall fall upon him and his corrupt kingdom from God, to make way for the righteous reign of Christ. The drift today is in the direction of that impious kingdom, and civilized society is being prepared to willingly accept and obey the will of this coming antichrist.

We may now turn to other passages. Let us consider Daniel 11: "The king shall do according to his will." We find a king in the land (uninformed whence he came; for, though it is a continuation of the history of the king of the north as being found in that territory, yet the previous verses had carried us on to the time of the end), lawless, self-exalting, magnifying himself above every god; yet this (which might seem to have put a contrast between the characters of 2 Thessalonians and the second beast) does not hinder after all his setting up idolatry - that unclean spirit now gone out of the Jews, but to enter in with seven others worse. "The God of his fathers" - as strong a claim on nature as we know, and owned in Judaism, "nor the desire of women" - that posterity naturally wished for, but of which Christ was the centre of hope among the Jews (for in this verse it evidently refers to religioso-traditional objects and influence), none of these things have any influence over him: he uses idolatry only for his convenience and divides the land as recompense, causing them (his followers, I suppose) to rule over the mass of the Jewish people. Here we have, then, a royal power in Palestine doing as he pleases there, having, as to self-exaltation and blasphemy, fully the character of 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4, and disposing of the Jewish people, while rejecting his traditional God, and blaspheming the God of gods (the dragon-voice and character, I judge).

*In Daniel 11:37, <span style="font-family: 'H ebraica'">µyvin: tD'm]j&lt;</span> "desire of women" clearly means the Messiah. Gesenius admits some deity, "flagitante contextu intelligendum idolum à mulieribus Syris studiose cultum." Rationalism ever curtails and degrades.

The next verse intimates that he is a Jew himself, an apostate one, for he regards not the God of his fathers. It is not natural to apply this to any other than the true God, and then his ancestry is plain. Then too the "desire of women," put as here among the objects of worship, is the Messiah, promised as the "woman's seed." Thus his character comes still more clearly out.

Then from verse 36 we find ourselves confronted with the last time. We are told, not of a king of the north or of the south as before, but of "the king," that final wicked one whom a prophet so distinguished and early as Isaiah presents in Isaiah 11:4, Isaiah 30:33, Isaiah 57:9 under the same ominous phrase. He is the Anointed's personal rival reigning in the land according to his own pleasure, and thus fully contrasted with Him who only did His Father's will. It is an energetic sketch of one exalting himself against every god; whereas Antiochus Epiphanes was devoted to the gods of Greece and Rome. Though speaking impious things against the God of gods, he is to prosper "till the indignation be accomplished" — God's indignation against His guilty people (as Isaiah also spoke), another proof of days still to come. The Palestinian prince (which Antiochus Epiphanes was not, but king of the north) will have no regard for the God of his fathers, namely, Jehovah (for he is an apostate Jew), nor the desire of women (Messiah, the hope of Israel), nor any god (i.e. of the Gentiles); which last it is absurd and false to say of Antiochus Epiphanes. In truth it is the long predicted and then present Antichrist, supplanting Christ, denying the Father and the Son, coming in his own name, and received by those that refused Him who came in the Father's. His and their destruction is shown elsewhere. But here the prophet turns to the old struggle of the kings of the north and of the south, both being as opposed to "the king" as to each other: an incontestable proof of the folly, first of fancying Antiochus Epiphanes here, and next of denying that these events, believed or disbelieved, are set forth as the prophet's prediction of the last future collision

Verse 37. "Neither shall he regard the god of his fathers … for he shall magnify himself above all." This is a strong feature of the pride of man; "he magnifies himself above all." He would efface every idea of the true God; he is indifferent whether about the real religion of the heart, or the religion of his fathers; he dislikes even the name of Christ (called here "the desire of women"); he is even against religious customs, and religious nationality; he has no respect for any god. But, arrived at this point, it is necessary to keep the people in restraint, and he needs instruments for this, as well as his gods, mahuzzim (fortresses) - some species of idolatry, which he introduces when he has denied every god. This idolatry will be connected with the interests of those who govern. He will cause them to rule over many (the many, the mass), viz., the people of Israel, and the country will be divided among his chiefs. So far the royal and Judaic history of this king.