Yes you're right but remember Islam is in alliance with "the beast who was mortally wounded but survived"... this beast is for now an underground high tech beast with powerful weapons. So much so that the world asks "Who can make war with the beast" ?
Yah, I don't really ask this question though. I have a book published by the UN. Maybe I will get it out later, but it has a breakdown of how much money has been given to terrorists by different countries. People might actually be surprised to find out that while the US gave the most, if I remember correctly, there are a lot of countries funding terrorism at the moment. Probably has something to do with the whole New World Order thing.
So while I recognize what you are saying about Muhammad being a false prophet, this came about because of the early struggle to create orthodoxy. This was a way of attacking orthodoxy with an opposing Christology that included a way to promote this ideology with force. Therefore, people who were recruited into this belief could cope with alternative beliefs by having permission to remove them by force. However, history shows that that this was only successful for a short time and force has been somewhat dormant and isolated to the point that Islam is really more of a religion of censorship and oppression and some people are trying to revive its potential to apply force when it faces opposition.
However, they are not independently able to apply force for many reasons. In general, when we look at the fulfillment of prophecy, we can't expect the end to demonstrate the revival of anything that the world has overcome in some way. The Catholic church is another one. When people feel like they have information available to them about something from a historical point of view, they are less likely to consider something worth reviving. There will always be a few who do, but the majority will never go back to the practices of the Catholic church and don't feel obligated to do this because there is no sense of fearing an institution that has been overcome in the way the Catholic church and Islam has.
People will fear what is new because they are less likely to be able to predict the way it will turn out. They will follow the crowd because they are more likely to be undecided about something.
Although, in the case of Islam, there are too many things that represent restrictions that the modern world would never accept as a whole and there are not enough people who would be able to apply force to change that. Technically, the Christian church outnumbers Islam by at least a billion people. The world population outnumbers this by a lot more. You are suggesting that some percentage of one billion people (which is the estimated population size for the religion of Islam) is capable of applying force to fulfill the prophecy in the way that it is described.
Islam has trouble overcoming the hurdle of converting people with or without force in the modern world. Music is debated and many people believe it is prohibited. Is it really possible to believe that in the age of iTunes that Islam is really going to keep growing once people really start understanding how accepting Islam would change their life in so many ways like this? Personally, I don't even think it exists in any significant way when the prophecy is fulfilled.
So it would be an example of a false prophet, but there have been many, and there will be a final one that will have to have a much more complex message for a modern world than Islam is able to provide.
