
John Kerry
Senate Foreign Relations Hearing
A war of words occurred recently (9/18/14) at the Senate Foreign Relations Hearing (SH – 216). Senator Marco Rubio (video) challenged Secretary of State John Kerry in an exchange that brought every ear in the room to center. The exchange related to the deployment of U S ground forces against ISIL (ISIS or Islamic State) and whether or not success was achievable without combat ground troops. Senator Rubio quoted U S military experts who recently stated that they were open to ground troops if necessary to combat ISIL. The exchange took a vociferous turn when Kerry refused to address “hypotheticals” posed by Rubio. The President had recently stated no US troops would be deployed in a combat mission in the Middle East and Kerry refused to speculate what would happen if ground troops were the only means for success to be achieved. Kerry responded:
… I am not going to get into hypotheticals but you are presuming that Iran and Syria don’t have any capacity to take on ISIL. I mean, who knows? I don’t know what is going to happen here. [Rubio interjects that Kerry’s implication is that America might cooperate with Iran and Syria] … I never said anything about coordinating [with Iran and Syria]. If we are failing and failing miserably who knows what choice they [Iran and Syria] might make.
Iran is Twelver Shia. Syria is Alawite Shia (President Bashar al-Assad is Alawite Shia). ISIL is Sunni Salafi-Islamist. ISIL considers Shias as unbelievers (“kafirs“), hypocrites to whom repentance is unavailible.
Does Bible prophecy give any hint that Shia Islam will be involved in end-of-days conflicts?
Consider the following two passages, both of which are fulfilled by Shia Islam.
Islam’s beginnings include “three horns” being “pulled out by the roots.” Daniel 7:8 NASB provides the most telling characteristic to identify Shias as the sect of Islam that will distinguish itself in the end-times conflict. It states, “While I was contemplating the horns, behold, another horn, a little one, came up among them, and three of the first horns were pulled out by the roots before it…”
The history of Shia Islam fits this very specific prophecy in way that is absolutely astounding. When Muhammad died suddenly in 632 a.d., he had not named a successor. The leadership surrounding Muhammad at his death included his companions, disciples, and scribes, known historically as the “Companions” (“Shahaba” in Islam). The Companions’ first order of business was to name a successor to their deceased messenger. They chose Abu Bakr (632-634), the first convert of Muhammad and a very close friend and follower of Muhammad, rather than Ali (656-661) (the closest surviving blood relative of Muhammad). Ali was thought to be too young by the majority. Ali was passed over by the Companions two additional times, when Umar (634-644) was elected caliph in 634 and Uthman (644-656) in 644. Ali was finally elected caliph in 656, but he was never accepted as such by the Companions. Sunnis labeled these first four caliphs as the “Rightly Guided Ones” (“Rashidun”) because they followed the “right path.”
After the Battle of Karbala in 680, Shias and Sunnis divided into two sects, permanently. Sunnis became the majority sect (90% of Muslims) and Shias the minority sect, the persecuted sect (10%). From this point on (retroactively to 632 a.d.), the descendants of Ali and Fatima, Muhammad’s daughter, were considered by Shias to be the only legitimate successors to Muhammad. Shias eradicated the first three caliphs of Islam for Shias even though at the time of the retroactive action, Ali was already dead (Ali was assassinated in 661, and the irrevocable divide between Sunnis and Shias did not occur until 680, after the Battle of Karbala). Shias literally rewrote their history by electing Ali as the first legitimate successor to Muhammad, followed by Ali’s two sons, Hasan and Husayn, the second and third Imams of Shia Islam.1 The point? The first three caliphs were “pulled out by the roots” by Shias. To Shias, it was as if they never existed. This is precisely what Daniel 7:8 prophesies of the fourth beast.
Shia Islam combines in the “seed of men.” Another key passage is Daniel 2:43 NASB which states that the antichrist kingdom will “combine with one another in the seed of men.”2 Shia Muslims “combine in the seed of men” by virtue of Shia Islam’s requirement of blood descent through Ali as the primary legitimizer for spiritual guidance. Quoting from Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World:
“The Quran refers to prophetic progeny with four key terms: dhurriyah” (direct descendant), “al” (offspring; house, dynasty), “ahl” family, progeny), and “qurba” (relation, nearest of kin). When these words are used with reference to the Prophet, the commentators of the Quran have interpreted them as meaning Muhammad’s nearest of kin: his cousin and son-in-law Ali, his daughter Fatimah, and their sons Hasan and Husayn. The Shi’ah also extend the status of “ahl al-bayt” to the descendants of Hasan and Husayn.”3
This is quite different for Sunnis who define legitimacy not by blood-line but by the opinions of the Companions of Muhammad:
The focal point of Shiism is the source of religious guidance after the Prophet; although the Sunnis accept it from the “sahabah” (companions) of the Prophet, the Shi’ah restrict it to the members of the “ahl al-bayt” (the people of the house of Ali).4
- See Islam the Cloak of Antichrist and sources cited, page 74f [↩]
- ESV, alone, translates as “mix with one another in marriage” [↩]
- Syed Husain M., Jafri, Joseph A. Kéchichian, Hamid Dabashi, and Ahmad Moussalli, “Shi`I Islam,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World. Oxford Islamic Studies Online, http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0736 [↩]
- Syed Husain M., Jafri, Joseph A. Kéchichian, Hamid Dabashi, and Ahmad Moussalli, “Shi`I Islam,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World. Oxford Islamic Studies Online, http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0736 [↩]
I think I’m missing a connecting piece here. What is the relation between the “little horn” devouring the other three, and the alliance of nations against Israel? Are you saying that the Shiites will attack the Sunni alliance and prevail? Please elaborate. Thanks.
The little horn is referring to Ali, the first Imam of Shiism, and the actions of his followers to usurp the “rashidun” because not connected to Muhammad by blood line. This identifies the sect of significance in Daniel 7:7-8, and also in the end-of-days, Dan 7:17f. I am also looking far down the road to 1) identify the nations neighboring Israel by their absence not by their mention in the text (Ezek 38:5-6). 2) the absence of these nations must be explained. ISIL defeat or their vow of allegiance is an explanation. 3) they join to attack Israel based on Ezek 38 and Zech 14:2. What I have not mentioned in this post is the three nations removed from an alliance of ten nations prophesied to occur in the end time (Dan 7:24). Interesting that the coalition of Arab nations joining America against ISIL is ten in number. If you take Dan 7:24 into affect, then this could explain that 3 of the coalition are defeated by ISIL and 7 take a vow of allegiance to ISIL.
The ultimate significance to me in Shiism is after the Ezek 38 attack, you still have to explain Rev 17 & 18. It is here that I see Shias rise up against Sunnis (ISIL) in a nuclear event.
Too much to write in one post but I hope that fills it in a little better.
I think you are drawing a very long bow here and making events fit prophecy. Daniel’s prophecies are end time prophecies. Isis is already breaking down. I think that there are more surprises in store.
Thanks, it helps. Blessings.