To put it in context... there are 2 major camps when it comes to the identity of the man of sin.
There's the "revived Roman Empire" western Antichrist camp, which is the traditional more popular interpretation.. and then there is the Islamic Caliphate Islamic Antichrist camp, popularized by Joel Richardson.
There are arguments for both.
In Daniel 9, it states
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
There are 3 main ways of interpreting this.
#1. That since the Roman army destroyed the temple and Jerusalem, that this means it will be the western Roman Empire.
#2. That since the Romans hired Syrians and Arabs into the army, that it could be eastern Roman Empire/Islamic
#3. That the Prince referred to is not the Antichrist, but rather Jesus (making the Roman Army to be the implements of God's judgement, like the Babylonians were instruments of God's judgement on Judah prior), which goes into a further interpretation that THE covenant is in fact the new covenant that gets strengthened so aligning with a latter rain fulfillment of Joel 2:28
I cannot say which one I really firmly side on, because I can see arguments for both, and because Revelation 17 says the following
10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
The five that are fallen, are Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, and Greece. The one that was current in John's time was Rome, and the 7th could be the Ottoman Empire/Islamic Caliphate.
Now.. the 8th is
of the seven... there are 2 ways to possibly interpret this:
1. That it is
one of the seven previous empires
2. That it is an amalgamation of multiple previous empires
I side with #2 on this, meaning that this end of the world empire could consist of both Europe, representing the Roman and Greek empires, and the middle east, representing the Islamic Caliphate but also Babylon and Persia.
Daniel 2 tells us that the final empire will be like Iron mixed with clay, and will not be cohesive. So like Secular (and on the surface, Christian) Europe, and the Islamic middle east, it wouldn't be a great unity.
SO
Identity of the Antichrist or at least where he comes from?
can't be totally certain but there's a few things to consider
Revelation 17 tells us this
3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
So at first, Mystery Babylon (the end times globalist civilization)
rules over the beast
this is supported here also
15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the harlot sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.
So Mystery Babylon rules the world for a time prior to the beast ruling the world.
Now we go further]
16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the harlot, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.
17 For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.
So first you have Mystery Babylon ruling the world, then the Beast turns on Mystery Babylon, destroys it, and then takes over ruling the world in her place.
So what I see as being quite possible, is a western Mystery Babylon, that is later taken over by an Islamic Antichrist.
