| "Come Out Of Her My People" - Jesus Christ
UNDERSTANDING DANIEL CHAPTER 7
| Daniel Chapter Seven – The Little Horn of Antichrist
In the first year of Belshazzar, the final king of Babylon; God gave Daniel a vision of four great beasts. What is this vision about? This vision, like the dream of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2:31-45), deals with the four world empires of human history. In fact, Daniel is told clearly what the four beasts represent.
Daniel 7:17 "These great beasts, which are four, are four kings (kingdoms), which shall arise out of the earth."
With this vision, God takes the basis of Daniel chapter two, and he adds many more details. God is like an artist, he gave us an sketchy outline of world history in Chapter two, and now he is going to take his brush and fill the outline with color and detail. With that in mind we will now quickly identify each beast and we will see that the beasts correspond to the four metals of the vision in Daniel chapter two.
The Winged Lion of Babylon.
Daniel 7:4 The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it.
This first beast is Babylon. The winged lion is an ancient symbol of Babylon and even King Nebuchadnezzar was called an lion by God in Jeremiah 4:7. It was King Nebuchadnezzar who was lifted up in pride, until God removed his understanding, and "Let his heart be changed from man's and let a beast's heart be given unto him: and let seven times pass over him." Daniel 4:16. After the seven years of living like a beast of the field (Daniel 4:33) his understanding returned, along with a humbled heart of man. Nebuchadnezzar was then willing to give honor to GOD.
The Bear of Medo-Persia
Daniel 7:5 And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.
The second beast is the united kingdom of Medo-Persia. This Kingdom is named in Daniel 8:20. One side of the bear being higher than the other represents the Medes being more prominent of the two. There was actually found in the city of Babylon a figure of a bear with one foot raised which represented this empire. The three ribs represent the three conquests of the of Medo-Persia, which were: Lydia, Babylon, and Egypt.
The Leopard of Greece
Daniel 7:6 After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it.
The leopard symbolizes Greece, whose army was deadly swift, and quickly conquered the known world. Amazingly, this Kingdom is named in Daniel 8:21. The four heads of the beast represents the division of the kingdom after the death of Alexander the Great. When Alexander died the kingdom of Greece was given to his four generals; Ptolemy took Egypt, Seleucus took Syria, Lysimachus chose Asia Minor and Cassander took Greece [As explained in Daniel 8:8, 22].
The Great Dragon of Rome.
Daniel 7:7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.
The fourth beast is the Roman Empire who ruled with an iron fist. It has been called by historians the ‘Iron Kingdom’. It is described as a seven headed dragon in Revelation 13. It was the Roman Empire that conquered Greece and absorbed the territories of these other Kingdoms. Rome conquered Palestine in 63 B.C. and continued as a united kingdom for five-hundred years. The Roman Empire was not conquered, but rather it fell apart from within during its incorporation with the Germanic and Slavonic tribes. The ten horns represents the ten nations that would rise out of the divided Roman Empire. According to prophecy a horn represents a king [Daniel 7:24, 8:21].
The Little Horn of Antichrist.
Daniel 7:8, 21-22 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things... I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; Until the Ancient of days came...
According to these Scriptures an evil king [a horn represents a king-Daniel 7:24] over a very small nation would rise in the midst of the divided Roman empire. During his rise to power he would cause three of the first ‘horns’ [divisions of Rome] to be plucked up by the roots. This king would also be a religious figure because the symbols of ‘eyes’ and a ‘mouth’ represent a Seer or a prophet [1st Samuel 9:9, Isaiah 30:10, Jeremiah 1:9, 15:9, Exodus 4:16, Zechariah 8:9]. He would also be a persecuting, blasphemous power, and he would prevail against the saints until the coming of Christ. This little horn is the ‘Man of Sin’ that Paul spoke about, he is the one the Church calls “antichrist”. And as you see according to Scriptures he will not only be revealed before Christ comes, but he will be devastating the Church also. This is why Paul taught that the ‘Man of Sin’ had to be revealed before Christ could come. He had studied this Chapter of prophecy and he knew the Scriptures could not be broken. This is the historic interpretation of the prophecy as seen in the following quotes:
Irenaeus [120-202AD]: “Daniel having respect to the end of the last kingdom; that is the last ten kings among whom their kingdom should be divided, upon whom the son of perdition shall come; he says that ten horns shall be upon the beast, and another little horn should rise up in the midst of them; and three horns of the first be rooted out before him; and, "behold", saith he, "in this horn were eyes as the eyes of man", of whom again the Apostle Paul, in 2Th 2:8 declaring together the cause of his coming, thus says, "and then shall that wicked one be revealed."... and he shall sit in the temple of God, leading astray those who worship him, as if he were Christ.” Irenaeus: Advers. Haeress, l. 5. c. 25.
Hippolytus [170-236AD] “As these things, then, are in the future, and as the ten toes of the image are equivalent to (so many) democracies, and the ten horns of the fourth beast are distributed over ten kingdoms, let us look at the subject a little more closely, and consider these matters as in the clear light of a personal survey. The golden head of the image and the lioness denoted the Babylonians; the shoulders and arms of silver, and the bear, represented the Persians and Medes; the belly and thighs of brass, and the leopard, meant the Greeks, who held the sovereignty from Alexander’s time; the legs of iron, and the beast dreadful and terrible, expressed the Romans, who hold the sovereignty at present; the toes of the feet which were part clay and part iron, and the ten horns, were emblems of the kingdoms that are yet to rise; the other little horn that grows up among them meant the Antichrist in their midst; the stone that smites the earth and brings judgment upon the world was Christ.” – Hippolytus Treatise on Christ and AntiChrist.
“And it [the fourth beast ]had ten horns.” For as the prophet said already of the leopard, that the beast had four heads, and that was fulfilled, and Alexander’s kingdom was divided into four principalities, so also now we ought to look for the ten horns which are to spring from [the Roman Empire], when the time of the beast shall be fulfilled, and the little horn, which is Antichrist, shall appear suddenly in their midst” – Hippolytus Exegetical On Daniel 7
St. Cyril of Jerusalem [315-386 AD] “There shall rise up together ten kings of the Romans, reigning in different parts perhaps, but all about the same time; and after these an eleventh, the Antichrist, who by his magical craft shall seize upon the Roman power; and of the kings who reigned before him, three he shall humble, and the remaining seven he shall keep in subjection to himself.” Lecture XV
Jerome [340-420 AD] "We should therefore concur with the traditional interpretation of all the commentators of the Christian Church, that at the end of the world, when the Roman Empire is to be destroyed, there shall be ten kings who will partition the Roman world amongst themselves. Then an insignificant eleventh king will arise, who will overcome three of the ten kings" Commentary on Daniel, Chapter 7, Verse 8
J. Zanchius the historian writes: “All ecclesiastical writers [agree], that when the Roman empire is destroyed, there shall be ten kings who shall divide it among them; and an eleventh shall arise, a little king, who shall conquer three of the ten kings; and having slain them, the other seven shall submit their necks to the conqueror:” Jerome Zanchius [1516-1590]
As you can see the early Church had a wonderful historical understanding of prophecy. All of these men wrote before Rome fell, yet they all knew that it would be divided because of the prophecies of Daniel. Bishop Hippolytus [who wrote around 200 AD] had an especially astounding understanding of the Book of Daniel. From his prophetic studies he predicted the restoration of the nation of Israel and even accurately predicted the timing of the Roman Empire’s fall as seen in the following quote:
“ of necessity the fourth beast [the Roman Empire], as being strong and mightier than all that were before it, will reign 500 years. When the times are fulfilled, and the ten horns spring from the beast in the last (times), then Antichrist will appear among them.” – Hippolytus Exegetical On Daniel 2
If you begin counting from the time Rome captured Palestine in 63 BC and add 500 years you come to the latter half of the fifth century [464AD]. Which is quite remarkable seeing that the Roman Empire was divided into ten nations in 476 AD.
Identifying The Little Horn
Has the ‘Man of Sin’ been revealed? Is it possible for us to identify the ‘little horn’ of Daniel Seven? It certainly is. Notice that pagan Rome fell and was divided into these ten kingdoms in 476 AD: the Alamannis (Germany), Visigoths (Spain), The Franks (France), The Sueves which is now called Portugal, Burgundians (Switzerland), Anglo Saxons (England), Lombards (Italy), The Ostrogoths, Vandals and the Herulis. According to Scriptures the entity that is called the ‘little horn’ would come after the division and would pluck up three of these ten horns. We know that seven of these ten nations still exist today. So if we find what destroyed the missing three, we will know who the ‘little horn’ is.
According to history the three kingdoms that are missing are the three that adhered to Arianism in opposition to the orthodox Roman Catholic faith (the "Catholic faith" was the official religion of the empire) and they were therefore annihilated for it. History testifies that the Herulis (493AD), the Vandals (534AD) and the Ostrogoths (538AD) were all ‘plucked up’ for their rejection of the Pope. Notice the following historical quote:
"AD 538, the year when the Ostrogoths collapsed. It was out of the smoking ruins of the western Roman Empire and after the overthrow of the three Arian kingdoms that the pope of Rome emerged as the most important single individual in the West, the head of a closely organized church with a carefully defined creed and with vast potential for political influence. Dozens of writers have pointed out that the real survivor of the ancient Roman Empire was the Church of Rome”. -E.G. McKenzie, "Catholic Church" p. 14.
History testifies that shortly after the fall of the Roman Empire a new and diverse civil power arose and soon it forced most of Europe to bow down in reverent obedience to it. That entity is the Papacy of Rome. Consider the following historical quotes:
“Long ages ago, when Rome through the neglect of the Western emperors was left to the mercy of the barbarous hordes, the Romans turned to one figure for aid and protection, and asked him to rule them; and thus, in this simple manner, the best title of all to kingly right, commenced the temporal sovereignty of the popes… And meekly stepping to the throne of Caesar, the vicar of Christ took up the scepter to which the emperors and kings of Europe were to bow in reverence through out so many ages.” – American Catholic Quarterly Review, April 1911.
“Another consequence of the fall of the Roman power in the West was the development of the Papacy. In the absence of an emperor in the West, the popes rapidly gained influence and power, and soon built up an ecclesiastical empire that in some respects took the place of the old empire and carried on its civilizing work.” Philip Van Ness Myers, Rome: Its Rise and Fall, General History for Colleges, Pg. 316.
“In a few centuries the pope had become in theory, and to a certain extent in practice, the high priest, censor, judge and divine monarch of Christiandom” Well’s Outline of History pg 526.
In its great pride and arrogance the Papacy soon exalted its self above the Kings of the earth. The Pope claimed to hold the seat of Caesar and the place of Christ on earth. He also claimed the power to enthrone kings and to dethrone kings. And the Monarchs of the nations of Europe trembled under the heavy hand of the Pope. Consider the following claims of the Papacy:
Pope Boniface VIII decreed in 1303, that “Temporal authority [Kings] must be subject to spiritual power [The Pope]”. This decree is still part of Canon Law in the Roman Church.
Pope Pius IV (1566-1572) in his famous Bull published against Queen Elizabeth stated: “He that reigneth on high made him alone (the pope) prince over all people and all kingdoms, to pluck up, destroy, scatter, consume, plant and build.”
The Englishman, Cardinal Manning, said: ”The right of deposing kings is inherent in the supreme sovereignty which the popes, as viceregents of Christ, exercise over all Christian nations.”
The Encyclical of Pope Pius IX, issued in 1864, asserted that the Papacy has the following rights:
1. The right to require the State not to leave any man free to profess his own religion;
2. The right to employ force;
3. The right to claim dominion in temporal things;
4. The right to hold princes and kings in subjection;
At the turn of the nineteenth century Dr.Mananus de Luca, SJ, Professor of Canon Law at the Gregorian University at Rome, said: “The Catholic Church has the right and the duty to kill heretics, because it is by fire and sword that heresy can be extirpated.....The only recourse is to put them to death. Repentance cannot be allowed to save civil criminals.”
Examining the Characteristics of the Little Horn.
Now let’s look at the characteristics of this entity and see if the Roman Catholic Church fits every aspect of the description provided by Daniel.
Did the Papacy come to civil power after the fall of Rome? Yes.
Pope Pius IX gave this remarkable testimony concerning the Papacy receiving its civil power at the fall of the Roman Empire:
"It is, therefore, by a particular decree of Divine Providence that, at the fall of the Roman Empire and its partition into separate kingdoms, the Roman Pontiff, whom Christ made the head and center of his entire Church, acquired civil power." ? Pius IX, Apostolic Letter Cum Catholica Ecclesia, March 26, 1860.
Source: Papal Teachings: The Church, selected and arranged by the Benedictine Monks of Solesmes, translated by Mother E. O'Gorman, R.S.C.J., Manhattanville College of the Sacred Heart, St. Paul Editions, Boston, 1980, 1962 by Daughters of St. Paul, Library of Congress catalog card number 62-12454, par. #225,
Is the Pope both the head of a state and a prophet [religious leader]? Yes. He is the head of the Vatican which is the smallest nation on earth [the littlest horn] and of course he claims to be a prophet, priest and king.
Is the Vatican located in the midst of the Divided Roman Empire? Yes. In the very heart of Rome. These things are proven by the following quote from the Encarta Encylopedia:
“Vatican City, independent state, under the absolute authority of the pope of the Roman Catholic church. It is an enclave within Rome, Italy, with an area of 44 hectares (110 acres). The smallest independent country in the world”
Did the Pope Hold the Seat of Rome for 1260 Years? Yes.
Did the Church of Rome rule for ‘A time and times and dividing (a half) of time’? Yes it did! First let’s establish what is meant by this phrase. Here a time means a ‘year’. So a year plus two years (times) plus a divided year (a half) is 3 ˝ years. This is the same period given by John in Revelation 12:6, 14, 13:5. So 3 ˝ years or 42 months, which is1260 prophetic days is the time period. So if we remember that in prophecy God has “appointed thee each day for a year” (Ezekiel 4:6); we clearly see that Papal Rome was given it’s civil power for 1260 years. If we begin to count from the time that the Church of Rome gained it’s civil power with the fall of the Ostrogoths in 538 AD and add 1260 years, we come to the year 1798. Was Civil Authority removed from the Papal seat at this time? YES! The French General Berthier took Pope Pius VI captive thus for a time ending the civil reign of the Papacy. As history testifies:
“Vigilius...ascended the papal chair (538 A.D.) under the military protection of Belisarius." History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3, p. 327
“In 1798 General Berthier made his entrance into Rome, abolished the papal government, and established a secular one." -Encyclopedia Britannica 1941 edition
Was Rome a Persecuting Power? YES.
During this 1260 year period were the true followers of God persecuted by Papal Rome?
“The Church of Rome has shed more innocent blood than any other institution that has ever existed among mankind, will be questioned by no Protestant who has a complete knowledge of history” (William E. H. Lecky,, History of the Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism in Europe, Vol. II, pp. 35, 37).
The conservative estimates of those killed by the Roman Catholic Church is 50 million, but some reckon that it is closer to 150 million. Who with any knowledge of the persecutions of the Waldensese, the ravages of the Duke of Alva, the fires of Smithfield; the tortures of Goa, the crusades, the massacres, and the inquisitions could doubt that Papal Rome made war with the saints and prevailed against them? I would urge everyone to read “Foxe’s Book of Martyrs” which contains much information concerning the persecutions of Rome..
Does the Roman Church speak ‘against’ or ‘blaspheme’ the Most High? YES!
Let’s first look at two biblical ways that man can ‘blaspheme’. When Christ forgave the sins of the man ‘sick with palsy’ the scribes said he blasphemed because “Who can forgive sins but God only?” (Mark 2:5-7). The scribes were correct that it is blasphemy for a mere man to say he can ‘forgive sin’ but Christ was God in the flesh. Does the Pope claim to have the power to forgive sins? Yes.
“An indulgence is a remission of the temporal punishment due to sin, the guilt of which has been forgiven” -- New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia , indulgence
“Absolution is the remission of sin, or of the punishment due to sin, granted by the Church...
the power of forgiving and retaining sins was communicated to the Apostles and to their lawful successors for the reconciling of the faithful who have sinned after baptism... Leo the Great does not hesitate to assert that pardon is impossible without the prayer of the priest.” – New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia , Absolution
Pope Benedict XVI: “Christ has chosen us... to be the only ones able to forgive sins in his name. Therefore, it is a specific ecclesial service that we must make a priority" Catholic News Service Feb 17, 2007
The Pope claims to have the judicial power to forgive sins. Roman Catholics are taught that if it is at all possible, they must go to a Priest to have their sins forgiven. Did the Apostles pretend to have the power to forgive sins? Never! When someone sinned after they were baptized the Apostles told them to “repent and pray to God that you might be forgiven” [Acts 8:22].
Does the Pope Claim to Hold the Place of God on earth?
Next we find that when Jesus said, “I and my Father are One” the Jews accused him of blasphemy because “Thou being a man makest thyself God” (John 10:30-33). Of course Jesus is God, the Second Person of the Godhead. But does the Pope claim to hold the place of God on earth?
Pope Leo XIII said of himself, "The supreme teacher in the Church is the Roman Pontiff. Union of minds, therefore, requires... complete submission and obedience of will to the Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God himself." – Encyclical promulgated on January 10, 1890, #22-24.
Pope Nicholas- "I am all in all and above all, so that God himself, and I, the Vicar of God, hath both one consistory, and I am able to do almost all that God can do... Wherefore, if those things that I do be said not to be done of man, but of God, WHAT CAN YOU MAKE ME BUT GOD?.... I then, being above all prelates, seem by this reason to be ABOVE ALL GODS. Wherefore, no marvel if it be in my power to dispense with all things, yea, with the precepts of Christ." Decretales Domini Gregori ix Translatione Episcoporum, (on the Transference of Bishops), title 7, chapter 3; Corpus Juris Canonice (2nd Leipzig ed., 1881), col. 99; (Paris, 1612), tom. 2, Decretales, col. 205 (while Innocent III was Pope).
When Pope Pius X was Archbishop of Venice, he stated: “The pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ Himself, hidden under the veil of the flesh. Does the pope speak? It is Jesus Christ who speaks. Does the pope accord a favour or pronounce an anathema? It is Jesus Christ who accords the favour or pronounces that anathema. So that when the pope speaks we have no business to examine.”-- The Catholic National, July, 1895
Pope Pius IX- "I alone despite my unworthiness, am the successor of the Apostles, the Vicar of Jesus Christ: I alone have the mission to guide and direct the bargue of Peter; I AM THE WAY, THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE." – History of the Christian Church by Henry Charles Sheldon pg 59.
The Pope claims to be the “Vicar of Christ”. The term Vicar means a substitute for or one who stands in the place of another. It is interesting to note that the Greek term “ante” has two meanings: 1. In opposition to or 2. in the place of. Thus the term “vicar of Christ” could be translated “anti-christ”.
Does the Church of Rome Think to Change ‘Times and Law’? YES!
Which law would this be referring to? Of course the Law of the Most High, it is no strange thing to change the laws of man. So does the Church of Rome claim the power to change the Law of God?
"The Pope has the power to change times, to abrogate laws, and to dispense with all things, even the precepts of Christ... The Pope has the authority and often exercised it, to dispense with the command of Christ." Decretal, de Tranlatic Episcop. Cap. (The Pope can modify divine law.) Ferraris' Ecclesiastical Dictionary.
Pope Innocent III - "We may according to the fullness of our power, dispose of the law and dispense above the law. Those whom the Pope of Rome doth separates, it is not a man that separates them but God. For the Pope holdeth place on earth, not simply of a man but of the true God." (1 book of Gregory 9Decret.C3)
For an example of the Papacy attempting to appeal and to alter the Law of God we can look at the Second and the Fourth Commandments of the Decalogue. In many of the Catechisms of Rome the Second Commandment, which prohibits bowing to images [Exodus 20:5], is totally removed and the Tenth Commandment which forbids covetousness is split into that they may still have Ten Commandments. Not only does Rome remove the Second Commandment, but it declares a curse upon all who would teach that it is wrong to bow to an image. The following is a Decree from the Council of Trent:
"great profit is derived from all holy images... which we kiss and before which we uncover the head and prostate ourselves... But if anyone should teach or maintain anything contrary to these decrees, let him be anathema." (H. J. Schroeder, O. P., The Canons And Decrees Of The Council Of Trent, Tan Books and Publishers, Inc., 1978, p. 216)
Concerning the Fourth Commandment which commands men to remember the Sabbath Day [Exodus 20:8-10] the Roman Catholic Church admits the following:
Q. "Which is the Sabbath day?" A. Saturday is the Sabbath day. Q. "Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?"
A. "We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic church, in the counsel of Laodicea (336 A.D.) transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday" The Convert's Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, by Rev. Peter Geirman, Second Edition, pg.50
"I have repeatedly offered $1,000 to anyone who can prove to me from the bible alone that I am bound to keep Sunday holy. There is no law in the Bible. It is a law of the holy Catholic Church alone. The bible says; “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy." The Catholic Church says: "NO. By my divine power I abolish the Sabbath day and command you to keep holy the first day of the week." And LO! The entire civilized world bows down in a reverence obedience to the command of the holy Catholic Church." T. Enright, C.S.S.R, in a lecture at Hartford, Kansas, Feb. 18, 1844.
Has the Papacy been recognized as the Anti-Christ historically? Yes.
The early Church taught that anyone who would assume the title of “Universal Bishop or Priest” would be the forerunner of antichrist, in the sixth century even the Bishop of Rome acknowledged this:
'I confidently say that whoever calls himself, or desires to be called, the Universal Priest [or Bishop], is the forerunner of Antichrist in his pride, because by exalting himself he places himself above others. Nor is his pride different from that which leads Antichrist to his error, because as that wicked one wishes to be thought a god above all men, so he who desires to be called the sole priest exalts himself above all other priests.' – Pope Gregory, Lib. 7 Ep. 154
Augustine, the Bishop of Hippo [like many others of his day] agreed with Gregory in saying: "I say confidently therefore, that whosoever calls himself Universal Bishop, or even desires in his pride to be called such, is the forerunner of antichrist." – Augustine, bishop of Hippo (540–604)
Yet as we know from History that it was not long before Pope Boniface III [607AD] accepted the very title from Emperor Phocas. John Huss, a great reformer, appeared before the faculty of Paris in 1413 AD and declared that the Pope was not the Universal Bishop. The declaration of John Huss was rejected, and shortly afterward he was declared an heretic by the Church of Rome. He was then chained to a pole and burned to death.
Every characteristic of the little horn has been fulfilled by the Papacy. The Papacy has been recognized as the ‘little horn’ from the earliest times. All of the Reformation leaders considered the Pope the Antichrist, including Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Huss and their successors in the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th Centuries. Bible translator William Tyndale identified the Pope as the Antichrist in his treatise “The Practice of Prelates” and in the Preface to the 1534 edition of his New Testament. The translators of the Authorized King James Version also identified the Papacy as such. Many of the early Protestant Bibles contained dramatic wood cuttings portraying the Scarlet Woman of Revelation 17, plainly identifying the Roman Catholic Church with this apostate religious system. In his 1893 work titled “Union with Rome”, Bishop Christopher Wordsworth of the Church of England stated the view which prevailed among Protestants at that time: "... we tremble at the sight, while we read the inscription, emblazoned in large letters, 'Mystery, Babylon the Great,' written by the hand of St. John, guided by the Holy Spirit of God, on the forehead of the Church of Rome." These examples could be multiplied almost endlessly. Old-line Protestants, Baptists, and other Fundamentalist Christians continue today to identify Rome as the ‘anti-christ’ the little horn of Daniel Chapter Seven.