"Myths of a Muslim Antichrist"

The traditional view among Christians of the Antichrist described in Revelations is that he would be a European leader, perhaps attempting to resurrect the Roman Empire. However, over the past decade, an alternative theory--that the Antichrist would be Muslim, or at least be from Turkey or Syria--has started to challenge the traditional interpretation. I think there is a lot going for the more modern interpretation, although I have doubts as to whether Islam (at least in its current form) is the religious system overseen by the Antichrist and False Prophet. However, here is an article from Jeremy Stevens that presents an argument against the "Muslim Antichrist." He presents six basic arguments against the "Muslim Antichrist" interpretation:

1.  The "Assyrian" references in the Bible do not necessarily refer to the Antichrist.

2.  Assyrians are predominantly Christian anyway.

3.  Daniel predicts a Roman antichrist.

4.  The fourth beast of Daniel's (actually, Nebuchadnezzar's) dream is Roman/Western, not Islamic/Middle-Eastern.

5.  Beheadings are not limited to Muslims.

6.  A Muslim antichrist would not blasphemy Muhammad. 

Read it and see what you think.