Mahdi of the Shiite Muslims (The Biblical Antichrist?) will launch his Global Revolution from Isfahan, Iran with 70,000 Jews of Isfahan

In the complex world of religious eschatology, where prophecies, messianic expectations, and apocalyptic scenarios intersect, few figures spark as much fascination—and controversy—as the Mahdi of Shiite Islam. Often compared or contrasted with the Christian Antichrist, the Mahdi is central to the beliefs of Twelver Shiism, the dominant branch of Islam in Iran. A provocative claim sometimes advanced in certain Christian evangelical circles is that the Mahdi, seen by Shiites as a savior, might correspond to the Antichrist in biblical prophecy—and that he will launch his global revolution from Isfahan, Iran, accompanied by 70,000 Jews.

This article explores the origins of this claim, the theological background of the Mahdi, and the broader implications of such comparisons.

---

The Mahdi in Shiite Islam

In Twelver Shiite doctrine, the Mahdi (Arabic: المهدي, “the guided one”) is the twelfth and final Imam, known as Imam al-Mahdi or Muhammad ibn Hasan al-Askari. He is believed to have been born in 869 CE and to have gone into "occultation" (ghaybah) as a child in 874 CE to escape persecution. According to Shiite belief, the Mahdi remains alive in a hidden state and will reappear at the end of time to bring justice, defeat tyranny, and establish a global Islamic order based on divine justice.

The Mahdi is not a fringe belief but a cornerstone of Shiite eschatology. His return is anticipated with great fervor, and he is expected to be accompanied by Jesus (Isa), who will assist him in defeating the Dajjal—the Islamic equivalent of the Antichrist.

---

Isfahan and the 70,000 Jews: The Source of the Claim

One of the more controversial and less widely understood aspects of Mahdist prophecy is the claim that he will rise from Isfahan, a historic city in central Iran, and be supported by 70,000 Jews wearing black turbans. This belief is not standard in mainstream Islamic sources, Shiite or Sunni. Rather, it emerges from interpretations of Hadiths (Islamic prophetic traditions) that are often cited out of context or are of dubious authenticity.

Some Sunni Hadiths, for instance, reference the Dajjal (Antichrist figure in Islam) being followed by 70,000 Jews from Isfahan. This tradition is not universally accepted and is rarely emphasized in Shiite discourse. Critics argue that this reference is misappropriated in polemical Christian and conspiratorial literature, which conflates the Mahdi with the Islamic Dajjal or the Christian Antichrist.

In Shiite thought, the Mahdi is the polar opposite of the Dajjal. While the Dajjal represents falsehood and tyranny, the Mahdi represents truth and justice. To claim they are the same figure is theologically incoherent within Islamic doctrine. Nonetheless, some evangelical authors and theorists have attempted to draw parallels between the two figures, leading to widespread speculation, particularly in geopolitical circles.

---

Christian Eschatology and the Antichrist

In Christian theology, especially among evangelical Protestants, the Antichrist is a future global leader who will deceive humanity, oppose Christ, and rule a one-world government before being defeated at the Second Coming of Jesus. The Book of Revelation, the epistles of John, and 2 Thessalonians are key sources for the Antichrist narrative.

Some Christian commentators have pointed to similarities between descriptions of the Islamic Mahdi and the Christian Antichrist, arguing that both are expected to:

• Appear during times of global crisis

• Claim divine authority or perform miracles

• Establish a global order

• Be opposed by Jesus at his second coming

However, such comparisons often ignore or oversimplify the profound theological differences between Islamic and Christian eschatology. In Islam, Jesus returns not to fight the Mahdi but to support him. In Christianity, Jesus returns to destroy the Antichrist. Equating the Mahdi with the Antichrist is therefore a theological stretch that requires significant reinterpretation of both traditions.

---

Why Isfahan?

Isfahan is a significant city in Iranian history and home to a long-standing Jewish community, dating back over 2,500 years. At its height, Isfahan had one of the largest Jewish populations in the Middle East. Today, the Jewish population is small but officially recognized and protected by the Iranian government.

The claim about the Mahdi emerging from Isfahan with 70,000 Jews is speculative and likely rooted in a misreading of Sunni Hadiths about the Dajjal, not the Mahdi. It may also reflect political and sectarian anxieties, as Isfahan is home to significant military-industrial infrastructure, including Iranian missile bases and nuclear facilities. This has made it a focal point in Western media and intelligence circles.

From a symbolic perspective, Isfahan represents a cultural and strategic center of Iran, which may explain its appearance in eschatological narratives. However, mainstream Shiite sources do not emphasize Isfahan as the location of the Mahdi’s emergence. According to most Shiite traditions, the Mahdi will reappear from Mecca, near the Kaaba, during the Hajj season.

---

Geopolitical Interpretations and Modern Tensions

The Mahdi narrative has taken on increased political relevance in recent decades, especially within Iran's revolutionary ideology. Leaders such as Ayatollah Khomeini and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have made references to the Mahdi as a source of legitimacy and future hope, fueling speculation in the West that Iran sees itself as preparing the ground for his arrival.

Western analysts, particularly in the U.S. and Israel, sometimes interpret Iran’s foreign policy—especially its support for Shiite militias and anti-Israel rhetoric—through a Mahdist lens. Evangelical Christian writers have further stoked this perception by suggesting that the Mahdi could be the Antichrist, leading a final war from Iran with Jewish allies from Isfahan—an interpretation rejected by mainstream scholars of Islam and dismissed by Jewish and Muslim communities alike.

---

Conclusion: Apocalyptic Narratives and Responsible Scholarship

While eschatological figures like the Mahdi and the Antichrist carry powerful symbolic weight, it is essential to treat such topics with academic rigor and cultural sensitivity. The claim that the Mahdi will rise from Isfahan with 70,000 Jews is not grounded in mainstream Shiite theology but is instead a fusion of obscure Hadith, apocalyptic speculation, and modern political fears.

Rather than fueling fear or conspiracy, understanding these narratives in their proper theological context allows for better interfaith dialogue and geopolitical insight. In an age of rising tensions and misinformation, clarity and careful scholarship are more crucial than ever.

According to the Prophet Muhammad, the Antichrist Will First Appear in Isfahan, Iran

In Islamic eschatology, the figure of the Antichrist, known as Al-Masih ad-Dajjal (literally “the false messiah” or “the deceiving messiah”), holds a central place in the narrative of the end times. According to numerous hadiths (sayings and teachings attributed to the Prophet Muhammad), Dajjal will be a powerful, deceptive figure who appears near the end of the world to lead people astray, claiming to be divine. Among the specific and startling details offered in these traditions is the claim that the Dajjal will first emerge from Isfahan, a city in modern-day Iran.

Who Is the Dajjal?

In Islamic tradition, the Dajjal is not mentioned explicitly in the Qur’an, but he is vividly described in the Hadith corpus, particularly in Sahih Muslim, Sahih Bukhari, and other authenticated compilations. The Dajjal is portrayed as a false messiah who will perform apparent miracles to deceive people into following him. He will claim divinity, and his rule will be marked by turmoil, widespread deception, and tests of faith for believers.

Some key characteristics of Dajjal mentioned in hadiths include:

• He will be blind in one eye.

• The word “kafir” (disbeliever) will be written between his eyes, visible only to true believers.

• He will travel rapidly across the earth, spreading his false message.

• He will have control over worldly resources, such as food and water, using them as tools to manipulate people.

The Prophetic Warning: Dajjal’s Emergence from Isfahan

One of the more geographically specific hadiths concerning the Dajjal's emergence places his initial appearance in Isfahan, a city historically and culturally significant in Persia (modern Iran). According to a narration found in Sahih Muslim, the Prophet Muhammad is reported to have said:

“The Dajjal will emerge from a land in the East called Khurasan. He will be followed by people with faces like hammered shields.”
— (Sahih al-Tirmidhi)

In a more specific narration, the Prophet is reported to have said:

“The Dajjal will emerge from the Jewish district of Isfahan, followed by seventy thousand Jews wearing robes.”
— (Sahih Muslim)

This hadith, while open to interpretation, clearly links the appearance of the Dajjal with Isfahan, and more specifically, to its Jewish quarter, known in some narrations as Yahudiya.

Significance of Isfahan in Islamic Eschatology

Isfahan, historically an important center of Persian culture, learning, and governance, is a city located in central Iran. In the medieval period, it had a notable Jewish population, which lends historical context to the hadith. The mention of Isfahan’s Jewish quarter has led to various interpretations, both literal and symbolic.

The city’s prominence may not be incidental. In classical Islamic literature, the Dajjal's association with Isfahan is sometimes interpreted as a symbolic link to a region known for its complex religious and political history. Some scholars suggest that the hadith indicates a concentration of support for the Dajjal in that area, rather than a literal birthplace.

Others argue that the Prophet’s mention of Isfahan points to a future reality that will unfold during the end times, where the city becomes a geopolitical or ideological hub that supports falsehood and opposes the true message of monotheism.

Scholarly Interpretations

Muslim scholars have differed in their interpretation of the hadith regarding Dajjal's origin. The literalist approach takes the hadith at face value — that the Dajjal will literally emerge from Isfahan, particularly its Jewish population. This view is often emphasized in more traditional and conservative readings.

On the other hand, some contemporary scholars urge a symbolic understanding. According to this view, the mention of Isfahan may not necessarily refer to the modern Iranian city in a geopolitical sense, but rather to an ideological or religious stronghold that will align itself with deception and opposition to God’s truth.

Notably, there is no indication in Islamic tradition that Jewish people as a whole are to be blamed or vilified. The hadith specifies a group — “seventy thousand” followers — which is interpreted by many scholars as a subset who will follow the Dajjal, not an indictment of the entire Jewish community. Context is crucial here, as Islam also contains many teachings promoting respectful coexistence with the People of the Book (Jews and Christians).

The Dajjal’s Reign and the Role of Jesus (Isa)

Islamic eschatology teaches that the Dajjal will reign for a short but intense period — typically said to be forty days, though the first day will last like a year, the second like a month, the third like a week, and the rest like normal days.

During this period, the Dajjal will wreak havoc on the earth, leading many astray. However, his reign will ultimately be brought to an end by Jesus (Isa), who is believed in Islam to be the true Messiah. Jesus will descend from the heavens, land near a white minaret in Damascus, and join forces with the Mahdi (a guided leader also expected to appear in the end times). Together, they will confront the Dajjal.

According to Islamic belief, Jesus will kill the Dajjal near Lod (Lydda), in present-day Israel, signaling the beginning of a new era of peace and monotheism.

Theological Implications for Muslims

The story of the Dajjal, including the detail of his emergence from Isfahan, serves several purposes in Islamic theology:

1. A test of faith – Believers are warned to be vigilant and informed so as not to be deceived.

2. A call to preparedness – Muslims are encouraged to seek knowledge, recite certain chapters of the Qur’an (such as Surah Al-Kahf), and stay strong in their belief.

3. A reaffirmation of divine truth – The eventual defeat of the Dajjal reaffirms the ultimate triumph of God’s guidance over falsehood.

Conclusion

The prophecy concerning the Dajjal’s appearance from Isfahan remains one of the more striking and specific geographical references in Islamic end-times literature. Whether taken literally or symbolically, the narration underscores the Islamic emphasis on vigilance against deception, the importance of faith, and the eventual victory of truth. For Muslims, the warnings of the Prophet Muhammad regarding the Dajjal are not simply matters of curiosity — they are reminders to remain spiritually prepared, intellectually alert, and firmly grounded in their belief.

Being an Anti-Zionist Does Not Mean Being an Anti-Semite

In today's political climate, the line between anti-Zionism and antisemitism is often blurred, both in public discourse and policy. While antisemitism — prejudice or discrimination against Jewish people — is a centuries-old form of bigotry that must be unequivocally condemned, anti-Zionism — opposition to Zionism as a political ideology — is a distinct political stance that should not be automatically conflated with hatred of Jews.

Understanding the difference between the two is not just a matter of semantics; it has profound implications for free speech, global politics, and the safety of both Jews and Palestinians. To critically analyze Zionism or the state of Israel does not, by definition, mean one harbors ill will toward Jews. Failing to draw this distinction does a disservice to both Jewish communities and those advocating for Palestinian rights.

What Is Zionism?

Zionism emerged in the late 19th century as a nationalist movement advocating for the establishment of a Jewish homeland, primarily in response to widespread antisemitism in Europe and Russia. Its goals were ultimately realized with the founding of the state of Israel in 1948. Zionism, like any political movement, is not monolithic. It encompasses a range of ideologies — from secular nationalism to religious messianism.

However, it’s essential to note that not all Jews are Zionists, and not all Zionists are Jews. There have always been Jewish voices who opposed Zionism on theological, political, or ethical grounds. For example, ultra-Orthodox groups such as Neturei Karta reject Zionism because they believe the Jewish people must wait for the Messiah to establish a Jewish homeland. Meanwhile, some secular Jewish thinkers have criticized Zionism for its colonial implications and for what they perceive as its role in the displacement of Palestinians.

The Problem With Conflating Anti-Zionism and Antisemitism

Conflating anti-Zionism with antisemitism can be deeply problematic. It silences legitimate criticism of Israeli government policies and actions, particularly concerning the treatment of Palestinians in the occupied territories. Human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and B’Tselem (an Israeli group) have documented systemic inequalities and abuses that they argue constitute apartheid. Critiquing these realities, or advocating for Palestinian rights, does not make one an antisemite.

Moreover, equating anti-Zionism with antisemitism puts Jews who are critical of Israel in an impossible position. Many Jewish individuals and organizations, such as Jewish Voice for Peace and IfNotNow, oppose Zionism or at least aspects of Israeli policy. To brand these critics as antisemitic is to deny the diversity of thought within the Jewish community itself.

The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism has been widely adopted but remains controversial, especially its examples conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism. Critics argue that this framing stifles free speech and criminalizes political activism, particularly in academic and cultural spaces where discussion and dissent are vital.

Anti-Zionism as Political Dissent

At its core, anti-Zionism is a political position. It can be motivated by a commitment to anti-colonialism, human rights, or secularism. Many anti-Zionists argue that Israel, as a state built on the displacement of Palestinians, functions as a settler-colonial project. Others contend that any state based on ethnoreligious identity — whether Jewish, Islamic, or Christian — is inherently exclusionary and unjust.

Criticism of Zionism can also be tied to global solidarity movements. Activists who support Indigenous rights, anti-apartheid struggles, or anti-racist causes may view the Palestinian struggle as interconnected with these issues. Labeling such criticism as antisemitic not only shuts down important conversations but also undermines the very real fight against actual antisemitism.

Historical and Contemporary Jewish Anti-Zionism

Historically, many Jewish communities, particularly in Europe and the Middle East, did not support Zionism. Some feared that advocating for a Jewish state would question their loyalty to their countries of residence. Others rejected the idea on theological grounds. In the early 20th century, organizations such as the Jewish Labour Bund in Eastern Europe envisioned a future where Jews lived freely and equally in diasporic communities, not in a separate state.

Today, Jewish anti-Zionists continue this legacy. Jewish intellectuals, rabbis, and activists argue that their opposition to Zionism stems not from self-hatred, but from a deep commitment to justice, ethical responsibility, and even to Jewish values themselves. To call these voices antisemitic is not only inaccurate but also silences valuable perspectives within Jewish thought.

Antisemitism Is Real — And It Should Not Be Politicized

None of this is to deny that antisemitism exists. It is on the rise in many parts of the world, often fueled by conspiracy theories, white nationalism, and extremist ideologies. Real antisemitism includes synagogue shootings, Holocaust denial, hate speech, and discriminatory laws. It is a grave and ongoing threat.

But diluting the term by applying it to all criticism of Israel weakens efforts to fight genuine antisemitism. It becomes harder to identify and address real threats when the term is overused or misapplied. Moreover, it risks creating a “boy who cried wolf” situation, where legitimate concerns about Jewish safety are dismissed because the term has been politicized.

The Importance of Nuance and Open Dialogue

In a polarized world, nuance is often the first casualty. But if we are serious about justice, equality, and free expression, we must distinguish between legitimate political criticism and hate. Anti-Zionism is not a monolithic ideology; it can be principled, well-reasoned, and grounded in universal human rights. At the same time, antisemitism is a specific form of hatred that must be identified and confronted wherever it appears.

The task for activists, scholars, and policymakers is to make these distinctions clear — to protect the right to criticize governments and ideologies without impugning entire ethnic or religious groups. This includes holding Israel accountable for its actions, just as we would any other state, without resorting to racist or antisemitic tropes.

Conclusion

Being anti-Zionist is not inherently antisemitic. It can reflect a legitimate, even deeply moral, stance against nationalism, colonialism, or ethnocracy. A healthy democracy must be able to accommodate this range of thought. At the same time, society must remain vigilant against genuine antisemitism in all its forms — and not allow political interests to obscure the difference between hate and dissent.

If we are to move toward a more just and peaceful future — for Jews, Palestinians, and everyone else — we must be able to talk honestly about power, ideology, and history. That requires clarity, courage, and above all, a refusal to let bad-faith accusations derail necessary conversations.

A Lobby for Israel: American-Israeli Relations by Edward Tivnan

Edward Tivnan’s The Lobby: Jewish Political Power and American Foreign Policy (1987) offers a critical examination of the pro-Israel lobby in the United States, particularly focusing on the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Tivnan, a former journalist for Time, delves into the historical development, strategies, and political influence of this lobby, presenting a perspective that has sparked significant debate. commentary.org+6publishersweekly.com+6wrmea.org+6

---

Origins and Evolution of the Israel Lobby

Tivnan traces the roots of the American-Israeli lobby back to the early 20th century, highlighting the efforts of Zionist leaders to garner support for the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. He notes that organizations like the American Zionist Council of Public Affairs, established in the 1950s, laid the groundwork for what would become AIPAC. By the 1960s, these efforts culminated in the formation of AIPAC, which Tivnan describes as a powerful entity capable of influencing U.S. foreign policy to align with Israeli interests. thefreelibrary.com

---

AIPAC’s Political Influence

Central to Tivnan’s thesis is the assertion that AIPAC has become a formidable force in American politics, leveraging financial contributions, grassroots mobilization, and strategic lobbying to shape policy decisions. He provides examples such as the 1981 battle over the sale of AWACS surveillance planes to Saudi Arabia, where AIPAC successfully rallied opposition, influencing congressional votes . Tivnan argues that such actions demonstrate AIPAC’s capacity to sway legislative outcomes, often prioritizing Israeli interests over broader American strategic considerations. washingtonpost.comnybooks.com+4wrmea.org+4publishersweekly.com+4

---

Ethical and Strategic Concerns

Tivnan raises concerns about the ethical implications of AIPAC’s influence, suggesting that the lobby's unwavering support for Israeli policies may sometimes conflict with American values and interests. He criticizes instances where AIPAC has defended controversial Israeli actions, such as military operations in Lebanon and settlement expansions in the West Bank, without sufficient scrutiny or acknowledgment of the broader geopolitical consequences. nybooks.com+1wrmea.org+1

---

Internal Dissent and Criticism

The book also highlights internal dissent within the Jewish-American community regarding AIPAC's approach. Tivnan quotes individuals like Arthur Hertzberg, who criticized AIPAC for its narrow focus and lack of engagement with diverse Jewish perspectives. This internal critique underscores the complexity of the relationship between American Jews and Israeli policies, challenging the monolithic portrayal often associated with the pro-Israel lobby. newyorker.comwrmea.org

---

Reception and Critique

Upon its release, The Lobby garnered attention for its bold assertions and in-depth analysis. However, it also faced criticism for perceived bias and selective presentation of facts. Some reviewers contended that Tivnan's portrayal lacked nuance and failed to adequately consider the broader context of Middle Eastern geopolitics. Additionally, the book's focus on AIPAC's influence raised questions about the role of lobbying in American democracy and the ethical boundaries of political advocacy. publishersweekly.com+4washingtonpost.com+4wrmea.org+4

---

Conclusion

Edward Tivnan’s The Lobby remains a provocative contribution to discussions on American foreign policy and the influence of interest groups. While it offers a critical perspective on the pro-Israel lobby, it also invites readers to reflect on the complexities of political influence, ethical considerations, and the interplay between domestic politics and international relations. The book serves as a starting point for further exploration into the dynamics of lobbying and its impact on shaping national policy.

Against Our Better Judgment: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel by Alison Weir

Against Our Better Judgment: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel by Alison Weir is a meticulously researched examination of the political maneuvering and lobbying efforts that led to the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948. The book challenges the conventional narrative by highlighting how American political Zionists influenced U.S. foreign policy, often against the advice of seasoned diplomats and military experts.

---

The Genesis of Zionist Influence in the U.S.

The roots of Zionist influence in the United States trace back to the late 19th century. By 1897, Theodor Herzl had convened the First Zionist World Congress, marking the formalization of political Zionism. In the U.S., figures like Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis and his associate Felix Frankfurter played pivotal roles. Brandeis, in particular, was instrumental in recruiting young lawyers to champion Zionist causes, often through clandestine organizations such as the Parushim, a secret society dedicated to Zionist objectives.

---

The Balfour Declaration and Its Aftermath

During World War I, Zionist leaders negotiated with the British government, leading to the 1917 Balfour Declaration. This document expressed British support for the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. In exchange, Zionist leaders promised to mobilize American Jewish support for the Allied cause, thereby securing U.S. involvement in the war.

---

The U.S. Decision to Support the Creation of Israel

Despite warnings from U.S. officials like Secretary of State Dean Acheson, who cautioned that creating Israel on land already inhabited by Palestinians would "imperil" American and Western interests, President Truman supported the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine . Weir argues that this decision was heavily influenced by a powerful Zionist lobby that utilized its influence to shape American foreign policy, often sidelining the best interests of the United States.

---

The Displacement of Palestinians

The establishment of Israel led to the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, who were forced to flee their homes and become refugees. This has created a long-standing humanitarian crisis and a source of ongoing regional conflict.

---

The Rise of the Israel Lobby

Weir delves into the evolution of the Israel lobby in the United States, highlighting how Zionist groups organized campaigns, established committees, and launched political and public relations offensives to garner support for their cause. These efforts were aimed at key sectors of American society, including Congress, the media, and academic institutions, to shape public opinion and influence policy decisions.

---

Suppression of Dissenting Voices

The book also examines how dissenting voices within the U.S. government and media were marginalized or silenced. Officials who opposed the creation of Israel on strategic grounds faced career repercussions, and journalists who reported on the Palestinian perspective were often discredited or ostracized. Weir provides examples of how the Zionist lobby effectively suppressed criticism and maintained a narrative favorable to their objectives.

---

The Legacy of U.S. Support for Israel

Weir argues that the U.S. decision to support the creation of Israel has had far-reaching consequences, including undermining America's credibility as an honest broker in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This has contributed to anti-American sentiment in the region and has made it difficult for the United States to play a neutral role in peace negotiations.

---

Reception and Impact

Since its publication in 2014, Against Our Better Judgment has sold over 50,000 copies and has been praised by various experts and former U.S. officials. Ambassador Andrew Killgore described the book as "prodigiously documented" and commended Weir for shedding light on the relationship between the United States and Israel . Senator James Abourezk called it "a must for all Americans," emphasizing its importance in understanding U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

---

Conclusion

Alison Weir's Against Our Better Judgment offers a critical perspective on the historical events that led to the creation of Israel and the role of U.S. foreign policy in that process. By highlighting the influence of the Zionist lobby and the suppression of dissenting voices, Weir provides a nuanced understanding of the complexities surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The book serves as a valuable resource for those seeking to comprehend the historical context of one of the most contentious issues in international relations.