Dr. Thomas Ice

As I demonstratedin my previous installment, Matthew 24:4-14 deals with events of the first halfof the seven-year tribulation period known as "the beginning of birth pangs"(Matt. 24:8). These events areparallel to the seal and trumpet judgments of Revelation 6, 8-9. I take it that in Christ's discourse"The disciples were the representatives of godly Jews, and were warned of whatshould befall their nation."[1] Thus, this passage, which is before uswill take place in the future, after the rapture of the church, at the time ofthe beginning of the tribulation.

Do Not Be Deceived
Since thetribulation begins with the arrival of the antichrist on the scene, it is notsurprising that this section also begins with a warning to believers about hisarrival. Jesus begins answeringthe disciple's question with a warning about false messiahs. "And Jesus answered and said to them,'See to it that no one misleads you. For many will come in My name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will mislead many'" (Matt. 24:4-5).
I think WilliamKelly is correct to note that this passage is not referencing Christians duringthe current church age.

In the epistles of Paul it is never exactly such a thought aswarning persons against false Christs. For there the Holy Ghost addresses us as Christians; and a Christiancould not be deceived by a man's pretensions to be Christ. It is most appropriate here, becausethe disciples are viewed in this chapter, as representatives, not of usChristians now, but of future godly Jews.[2]

The first thingJesus tells them is to make sure that no one misleads you. Spiritual deception will be the primarypurpose of the Antichrist during the tribulation and thus a primary item to beavoided. "This warning wasprompted by their eagerness for a sign. The danger of being misled was increased if one was too enthusiastic oranticipated some symbolic indication of the event."[3] Dr. Stanley Toussaint tells us:

The key to understanding the discourse is found in this firstsentence. The disciples thoughtthat the destruction of Jerusalem with its great temple would usher in the endof the age. The Lord separates thetwo ideas and warns the disciples against being deceived by the destruction ofJerusalem and other such catastrophes. The razing of the temple and the presence of wars and rumors of wars donot necessarily signify the nearness of the end.[4]

Many False Christs
Why are they tobe on guard against deception? Vigilance will be needed since there will be during the tribulation ahost of those claiming to be the Messiah and many will believe them. But the Jewish believers during thetribulation are not to fall for that line.
The emphasis inverse 5 is upon "many." Not just asingle person will come claiming to be the Messiah, but a whole host ofindividuals will make such claims. Multiple claims to Messiahship is one of the reasons why this passage isnot referring to events leading up to the a.d.70 destruction of Jerusalem. A. H.M'Neile says, "No such definite claim to Messiahship is known till that ofBarkokba in the reign of Hadrian."[5] The Barkokba revolt was put down by theRomans in a.d. 135 when Hadrianlead the Roman legions to once again destroy Jerusalem, and the surroundingarea, which resulted in the death of half a million Jews.[6] Robert Gundry notes the following:

The lack of evidence that anyone claimed messiahship betweenJesus and Bar-Kokhba a hundred years later militates against our seeing thediscourse as a vaticinium ex eventu [aprophecy of an event] concerning the first Jewish revolt (a.d. 66-73). False prophets figured in that revolt (Josephus J.W. 6.5.2 285-87; 7.11.1 437-39; Ant. 20.5.1 97); but one did not have to claimmessiahship to be a false prophet. Cf. Acts 5:36; 8:9; 21:38.[7]

JamesR. Gray tells us, "strict claims to the Messianic office in the strictest senseare almost nonexistent in history."[8] However, in the future, this passagetells us it will be rampant.

The First Seal Judgment
As noted in myprevious article, the judgments of Matthew 24:4-11 parallel in order the firstfive seal judgments of Revelation 6:1-11. "The first seal depicts a false Messiah,"[9]as observed in Revelation 6:1-2.

And I saw when the Lamb broke one ofthe seven seals, and I heard one of the four living creatures saying as witha voice of thunder, "Come." And I looked, and behold, a white horse, and he who sat onit had a bow; and a crown was given to him; and he went out conquering, and toconquer. (Rev. 6:1-2)

ArnoGaebelein, that great Bible teacher from a former generation says the followingabout this similarity:

The rider upon the white horse under the first seal is acounterfeit. He is a false Christ,who goes forth to conquer. Hisconquest is a bloodless one, as he has only a bow. He will bring about a false peace among the nations, whichfor a time may have been alarmed by the supernatural removal of thechurch. The second rider "takespeace from the earth," from which we would conclude that the first rider uponthe white horse (white emblem of peace) has established peace.
Andas we turn to Matthew xxiv we find that the first thing our Lord saith, isabout the deceivers who will come with the beginning of the age endingsaying: "I am Christ," and succeedingto lead away many.[10]

What is the nationalityof the Antichrist?
A widely heldbelief throughout the history of the church has been the notion that Antichristwill be of Jewish origin. Thisview is still widely held in our own day. However, upon closer examination we find no real Scriptural basis forsuch a view.

Argumentsfor a Jewish Origin
Three reasons areoften given in support of the argument that Antichrist will be Jewish.[11] First, it is argued that he willbe a Jew since the Jews are responsible for the world's problems. Thus, it follows that the greatestproblem of history-Antichrist-will also be Jewish. This is the Anti-Semitic reason. It should be clear that since Anti-Semitism is unbiblical,and so is any logic that reasons upon such a premise.
Dr. ArnoldFruchtenbaum offers a refutation of the second reason, which he calls "TheLogical Reason." He writes:

Stated in a syllogism, this argument goes as follows:

Major Premise: TheJews will accept the Antichrist as the Messiah

Minor Premise: TheJews will never accept a Gentile as the Messiah.

Conclusion: The Antichrist will be a Jew.[12]

The difficultiesof this argument are many, not the least of which are the two premises. Neither premise can be supported fromthe Bible. Just because the Jewsmake a covenant with the Antichrist (Dan. 9:27; Isa. 28:15), it does not followeither textually or logically that they accept him as Messiah (orAntichrist). Second, since theyare not accepting him as Messiah, the fact that he is a Gentile peacemaker isirrelevant. Thus, the conclusiondoes not follow.
An attempt at aScriptural argument reasons that Antichrist will spring forth from the tribe ofDan. This has been a view that hasbeen widely held throughout church history, from the earliest times to ourmodern day. Support for this viewis inappropriately derived from Genesis 49:17; Deuteronomy 33:22; Jeremiah8:16; Daniel 11:37; Revelation 7:4-8. Even though many passages are cited in support of this argument, none ofthem actually support the notion since they are all taken out of context. In reality, only Daniel 11:37 refers tothe Antichrist. Even though somebelieve that the phrase in Daniel 11:37 "the God of his fathers" (KJV), impliesa Jewish apostasy, the phrase is more accurately translated "the gods of hisfathers" (NASB). Since Antichristwill be a Gentile, as will be shown, the argument is unfounded. Since the original Hebrew supports theNASB translation and not the KJV, Antichrist's apostasy will be Christian andnot Jewish.[13]

Argumentsfor a Gentile Origin
We have seen thatthe Bible does not teach that Antichrist will be Jewish; however, Scripturedoes teach that he will be of Gentile descent. This can first be seen from biblical typology. Most commentators agree that Daniel 11speaks of Antiochus Epiphanes, a Gentile, who typifies the futureAntichrist. Since Antiochus is aGentile, then so will be Antichrist.
Secondly,biblical imagery supports a Gentile origin of Antichrist. Scripture pictures Antichrist as risingup out of the sea (Rev. 13:1; 17:15). In prophetic literature the sea is an image of the Gentile nations. Thus, Antichrist is seen as a Gentileprogeny.
Thirdly, thenature of the "Times of the Gentiles" (Luke 21:24) supports a Gentile Antichrist. Fruchtenbaum notes:

Itis agreed by all premillennialists that the period known as the Times of theGentiles does not end until the second coming of Christ. It is further agreed that theAntichrist is the final ruler of the Times of the Gentiles. . . .
Ifthis is so, how then can a Jew be the last ruler at a time when only Gentilescan have the preeminence? To saythe Antichrist is to be a Jew would contradict the very nature of the Time ofthe Gentiles.[14]

Finally, theBible not only teaches that Antichrist will be Gentile, but it also impliesthat he will be of Roman descent. This is understood from Daniel 9:27, where the one cutting a covenantwith Israel is said to represent the revived Roman Empire, since it was theRomans who destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in a.d. 70. Therevived Roman empire comes from a second phase of the Roman Empire, i.e., "feetpartly of iron and partly of clay" (Dan 2:33, 40-45).

The implicationsof the non-Jewishness of the antichrist has significant implications as notedby Gray:

Because the true Anti-Christ is not a Jew (cp Daniel 7, 11,Revelation 13:1), therefore he will not claim to be a false Messiah. These false claimants will becontemporaneous with Antichrist and will likely oppose him. During this time Israel will have manyoptions and opportunities to follow false Messiahs, yet, the Antichrist willnot be one of them. He comes as abenefactor of Israel, a great world diplomat turned persecutor, but not aMessianic deliverer. He will beworshipped, not as Messiah, but as God.[15]

(To BeContinued . . .)
Endnotes

[1] William Kelly, Lectures on The Gospel ofMatthew (Sunbury, PA: Believers Bookshelf, 1971 [1868]), p.479.
[2] Kelly, Matthew, p. 479.
[3] Ed Glasscock, Matthew: Moody Gospel Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1997), p. 464.
[4] Stanley D. Toussaint, Behold The King: A Study of Matthew (Portland: Multnomah Press, 1980), p. 270.
[5] Alan Hugh M'Neile, The Gospel According to St.Matthew (London: MacMillan, 1915), p. 345.
[6] Roman historian "Dio Cassius relates that theRomans demolished 50 fortresses, destroyed 985 villages, and killed 580,000people in addition to those who died of hunger, disease, and fire." Encyclopaedia Judaica, 17 vols. (Jerusalem: Keter Publishing House, n.d.), vol. 4, p. 233.
[7] Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for aMixed Church under Persecution,second edition, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), p. 477.
[8] James R. Gray, Prophecy on The Mount: A Dispensational Study of the OlivetDiscourse (Chandler, AZ: Berean Advocate Ministries, 1991), p.29.
[9] Thomas O. Figart, The King of The Kingdom ofHeaven: A Verse by VerseCommentary on the Gospel of Matthew(Lancaster, PA: Eden Press, 1999),p. 438.
[10] Arno C. Gaebelein, The Gospel of Matthew: An Exposition (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, [1910] 1961), pp. 481-82.
[11]These three reasons were gleaned from ArnoldFruchtenbaum, "The Nationality of the Anti-Christ" (Englewood, NJ: AmericanBoard of Missions To The Jews, n.d.).
[12]Fruchtenbaum, "Nationality," p. 8.
[13]Fruchtenbaum, "Nationality," pp. 11-22.
[14]Fruchtenbaum, "Nationality," pp. 24, 26.
[15] Gray, Prophecy on The Mount, p.29.