The idea that the antichrist may come from the tribe of Dan is not a universally accepted doctrine but originate from a combination of some biblical views, typology, and early church commentary. A dear friend who is a great supporter of my ministry, emailed me this question: “Is it possible that the antichrist could come from the tribe of Dan?”

This theory is built on several scriptural implications, symbolic patterns, and omissions, rather than an explicit biblical statement. The following is a detailed explanation of this theory and the reasons it has been proposed:

Dan Omitted from the 144,000 in Revelation 7

One of the most significant clues used to support this theory is the absence of the tribe of Dan in the listing of the 144,000 sealed from the tribes of Israel in Revelation 7:4–8.

Revelation 7:4-8 lists 12 tribes, but Dan is missing—and Manasseh is included instead. This omission is interpreted by some early scholars as a sign of spiritual judgment or apostasy, implying that Dan plays a negative role in the last days.

Prophecies About Dan: Genesis 49:17

Jacob’s prophecy about Dan in Genesis 49:16–17 is cited:

“Dan shall judge his people as one of the tribes of Israel. Dan shall be a serpent by the way, a viper by the path, that bites the horse’s heels so that its rider shall fall backward.” ~Genesis 49:16–17

The reference to Dan as a “serpent” and “viper” is seen as type of satan, who is called “that ancient serpent” in Revelation 12:9. This often leads to the conclusion by some that Dan’s genealogy could produce the ultimate deceiver, the Antichrist.

Typology and Serpent Imagery

The antichrist is closely linked with satanic influence (cf. Revelation 13:2–4; 2 Thessalonians 2:9). Since Dan is associated with the serpent, this typology is sometimes extended to suggest Dan as the tribal origin of the antichrist.

“A Serpent by the way” and “viper by the path” language in Genesis 49 matches the deceptive nature of the antichrist. The “biting the horse’s heels” may symbolize undermining or sabotaging power or authority, again fitting the Antichrist’s role.

Dan’s History of Idolatry

Judges 18:30–31 describes how the tribe of Dan set up an idol and a priesthood that persisted through the time of captivity:

“The tribe of Dan set up for themselves the carved image, and Jonathan the son of Gershom, the son of Moses… was priest to the tribe… until the day of the captivity of the land.” ~Judges 18:30–31

Dan is the first tribe mentioned in Israel’s history to institutionalize idolatry. This has led some to argue that Dan’s historical spiritual apostasy parallels the apostate character of the antichrist.

Early Christian Church Leaders

Several early church fathers referenced this theory, though not all agreed. Here’s a look at their views:

Irenaeus (c. 180 A.D.) – Supports the theory

In Against Heresies (Book 5, Chapter 30), Irenaeus writes: “Moreover, Dan, also, and Ephraim, for the same reason, are not reckoned in the Apocalypse among the saved… It is said that the Antichrist is to spring from the tribe of Dan.”

Irenaeus connects the omission of Dan from Revelation 7 with the birth of the Antichrist.

Hippolytus of Rome (c. 200 A.D.) – Also confirms this idea

In his treatise On Christ and Antichrist (section 14), Hippolytus writes: “As the Christ was born of the tribe of Judah, so will the antichrist be born of the tribe of Dan.”

Hippolytus builds this typology as a mirror image—Christ from Judah, the Antichrist from Dan.

Jerome and others – Do not believe Dan is the source of the antichrist.

Later biblical expositors found this theory to be speculative and lacking direct biblical confirmation.

The Problem: A Lack of Direct Scriptural Evidence

While the theory has early support and typological connections, it lacks direct biblical statements like:

1. “The Antichrist will come from Dan.”
2. Nowhere in the New Testament is Dan associated with the antichrist.
3. Revelation 13 (where the antichrist is introduced) does not mention tribal affiliation.

Many biblical scholars today, like myself, do not believe that Dan will be the source of the antichrist. This certainty is due to the fact that we know a great deal more now about who the antichrist will be than biblical scholars knew much earlier.

Categories: Robert Clifton Robinson