Book Review: “False Christ” by Chris White

Several months ago I had the pleasure of reading Chris White’s provocative and well-researched book, False Christ: Will the Antichrist Claim to be the Jewish Messiah? At the time I recommended the book through my newsletter list, but I did not promote it elsewhere. Looking over the course that my studies have taken I now feel that it is time to highlight this book and dig in to some of the new ideas that Chris White brings to the table.

If you are like me then your interest in  end-times was probably first shaped by Dispensationalism and from the ideas that have come from of Darby, Scofield, Ryrie, Walvoord, Moody Bible Institute and Dallas Theological Seminary. The biggest dispensational success stories have been Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye, whose popular and best-selling ideas have shaped our expectation of the future. We have been taught that God’s end-times plan revolves around Israel, that as Christians we must wholeheartedly support the modern state of Israel, and that some day soon the rapture will remove the Church from the earth, after which the Lord will finally show himself to Israel, save them from the Antichrist, and redeem the final generation of Jews in a last amazing rescue. Regarding the Antichrist, we have been taught that he will be the greatest anti-Semite that has ever lived, that he will trick Israel into signing a covenant, but then he will turn against Israel and carry out mass genocide against Jews prior to Christ’s rescue.

Chris White comes on the scene in his study of the Antichrist and argues very persuasively that the Antichrist in fact rises to power as the savior of Israel, who will be wholeheartedly accepted by Israel as their champion, because of his successful wars on Israel’s behalf against her Islamic enemies!

You can order the book, or you can watch an 18-minute video of the most important points here.

The crux of the argument lies in Chris’s analysis of Daniel 11:36-45, which shows the Antichrist defeating armies to the north, and armies to the south, before triumphantly establishing his capital in Jerusalem itself. Of course the enemies to the north and south of Israel are today Islamic. After defeating these enemies Daniel gives no hint that the Antichrist must war against Israel, or that his sweeping through Israel is an invasion. No indeed, the AC may even ride through Tel Aviv on his way to Jerusalem in a ticker-tape parade, for all we know!

For Chris White, support for the idea that Israel’s leaders will embrace the Antichrist also comes from the words of Jesus Himself in John 5:43,

I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me. If another comes in his own name, you will receive him. (John 5:43)

The reality is that the early Church fathers almost unanimously agreed that the Antichrist would in fact be Jewish. Chris shows that Irenaeus, Hippolytus, John Chrysostom, Methodius, John Damascene, and many more, held this view. Now I know that in many circles the earliest Christian writings are dismissed as unorthodox and of little value, but over the years I have come to value them more and more. After all, these were the men who were discipled by the disciples. They weren’t just “book taught” in a seminary! The earliest of them lived their lives with the Apostles, who in turn lived their lives with the next generation, and so on. I think the discipleship tradition carried far greater weight at the beginning than it does now, when sola scriptura is the final word, and Irenaeus and Hippolytus traced their lineage right back to the Apostle John.

Now the Jewishness of the Antichrist is debatable, as even Chris concedes, and at least two church fathers thought the AC would be the resurrected Roman emperor Nero, yet even these early theologians believed that Nero would somehow gain the trust of the Jews as an expert in their Law, and be embraced by the Jews as a whole.

This brings the subject back to my own personal theory on the identity of the AC being the resurrected Nimrod. Somehow I see how this potential outcome could be compatible with the Antichrist being embraced by the modern state of Israel.

Consider for a moment the fact that at the birth of Christ the name Yeshua (a form of the verb “to save”) was a very popular name at the time within Israel. There were all kinds of different men running around with the name “Yeshua” in first century Israel. Now let’s take a look at the social subconscious at the time of the founding of the modern nation of Israel, as explained at a blog called “The Jewish History Channel.” This blog highlights the fact that a generation ago the name “Nimrod” was a very popular name among Israel’s secular political leadership. The fact that Nimrod was an enemy of God was actually the reason for its popularity among these anti-religious Jews! Here are some of the blog’s concluding words:

… “Nimrod” has become a fairly common male name in present-day Israel. In the 1940s, bestowing it upon a newborn child was something of political statement. In the present generation, however, it is taken simply as a name like any other…

Does this strange social trend reveal something going on under the surface of modern political Israel? I don’t know for sure but it certainly seems to support my own research into the identity of the AC, who may in fact play an end-times role in Israel that is far outside the popular evangelical Lindsey/LaHaye paradigm.

Thank you Chris White for thinking outside of the box.

8 thoughts on “Book Review: “False Christ” by Chris White

  1. Actually I feel that calling this coming SON OF PERDITION by the title Anti Christ is not very scriptural..
    The word antichrist is only used four times in the whole Bible, and each time in the letters of John. Two of these are in 1 John 2:18.
    Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come.

    John is writing to believers who have heard that the antichrist is coming. He points out the fact, that even in his time, many antichrists have already come. This tells us that the antichrist is not a single person who will come at some time in the future. There are many antichrists and they will be in the world throughout the history of the church. In verse 19, John explains that the antichrists of his time had gone out from the church. They had originally been in the church, but were not really part of it, because they did not hold to the true faith.
    Antichrist is not a title applied to someone who claims that he is the Christ. It is a title applied to a person who spreads false belief about Jesus. In John’s time there were people who claimed that Jesus had not come in the flesh, but had come in a spiritual form. They denied the fundamental truth of Christ’s humanity. John applies the title antichrist to them. They are working against Jesus, because they are denying the truth of who he is. For John, antichrist was a title given to early heretics, and especially those whose teaching about Jesus was incorrect.

    This understanding of the word is confirmed in 2 John 7, where he writes,

    Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.


  2. I understand what you are saying but when I (and Christ White) speak of a singular Antichrist I am speaking of the Beast from the Abyss from Revelation. He is the singular figure doomed to destruction, whose end is described in Revelation 19:20. Also, John speaks of a singular end-times Antichrist in 1 John 4:3, the one “you have heard is coming.” This singular Antichrist exists in addition to the many “antichrists” that were operating in John’s day and will continually operate in the world. That’s my view, thanks for your comments.


  3. Good stuff, hey check out Walid Shoebat, also a good movie about the antichrist is “10,000 B.C.”, Also “The Dark Night Rises”


  4. Peter you know that the antichrist destroys the global elite and their money making trade empire. Hitler was a product of the elite financial industrial complex, but he fell out with the Jewish elite who caused an embargo of German goods.


  5. While I really don’t care about the race of the antichrist, I strongly disagree with the widely-held concept of using John 5:43 as a proof-text for the “Jewish race” in the end times to accept the man of sin.

    This is simply a verse in the middle of a long passage in which Jesus was rebuking the Jews for their persecution of him…in the first century. All beginning at verse 17 and continuing to the end of chapter 5. There is no mention of a far future event, and there is no prophetic context in the entire passage.

    He starts out talking about John the Baptist (32-36), then talks about the Father (36-38), then talks about the listeners (39-45), then talks about Moses (45-47)…all in reference to those who testify of him. Has nothing to do with a future AC. Even if you believe the entire chapter has to do with the future because of some prior verses referring to the resurrection, there is no reason to believe Jesus was referring to the man of sin.

    Jesus was telling the Jewish leaders that if (not when) someone came in their own authority (as others had in the past) they would accept him on that basis. But since Jesus came in the authority of the Father, they want to kill him. Has nothing to do with a future antichrist.


  6. I found this text two days ago and so far I have read only a tiny part of it. However, I understand that it proposes the fallen angel Azazel as the candidate for the AC.


  7. Hi, Mr. Goodgame. I have a question: Does Daniel’s Seventieth Week start after the five months pass? Or will the covenant start before that?


  8. My understanding is that Chris White says the beast (antichrist) will either be Jewish or present an effective masquerade. On the other hand, it may not matter to the Judeans. A person with his world dictatorial authority may actually be agreeable to the personal Jewish Talmudic worldview as the prophetic kingdom people of the entire earth. They appear to be currently attempting to accomplish this task on their own accord. If they are allowed to rebuilt the temple and start the daily sacrifices they may not care if the beast is their so-called messiah or not. The abomination of desolation will be set up whether the Jews care or not.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s