By Walid Shoebat (Shoebat Sunday Special)
This is perhaps the most crucial four thousand words you will ever read regarding Bible Prophecy and how history will repeat itself where the top clergy covered up the most serious threat to the church in all history.
It was Martin Luther’s eschatology and interpretation of prophecy that made the realities of his time. This reality trickled all the way down to our time, setting a standard on how Christians viewed Bible Prophecy. The end times, to Luther, was interpreted as having practical implications for a Christian’s life and actions where eschatology provided the basis, not just for political issues, but for pastoral advice in his time which still exist today for much of western Christianity.
For example, in our times we see politician Mike Pence made declarations about Turkey which stems from Luther's paradigm on Bible Prophecy. Today in Turkey we see trouble at Incirlik air base, a coup, and a complete Islamist takeover which happened on July 15th, 2016. Yet there is no sound of any alarm from church pulpits. Turkey is rising again as it was in Luther's day to threaten Christendom once more.
In Luther's day, this same Ottoman threat arose with him responding to the threat from a prophetic paradigm that still repeats itself today:
"From the prophecy of Daniel 7, Luther concluded three determined realities that shaped his entire perspective on the Turks: (1) the Turks would never conquer European Christianity; (2) they [the Turks] would never be conquered by European Christianity. (3) they would always oppress Christianity militarily." (Eschatology And The Turks by Nicholas Proksch from Bethany Lutheran Theological Seminary)
All three as it turned out were wrong assumptions. So why wouldn't history repeat itself?
The Turks, according to Luther's view, which we still see today, resembled no serious threat, since Luther believed that the real serious threat would arise out of the Roman Empire which according to him was the fourth beast with its ten horns signifying ten nations that were once part of the Roman Empire. Luther did not know what to do with the Ottomans who were rising at his time to threaten the church. So instead of viewing them from the whole of scripture, he was confident that the Turks must somehow occupy "some prophecies" while he ignored the bulk of verses that spoke of this threat etched by John in the Book of Revelations. According to Luther "the Turk is also so great and powerful... [and] such a powerful thing has to be stated in Scripture" and so Luther reserved Islam's prophetic role as "the Little Horn" while reserving the Catholic Church as "Harlot" and the Holy Roman Empire as "the beast".
How such "Catholic Harlot" rides this "Muslim little horn" which biblically only rises after the ten other horns was unexplained by Luther. Revelation 17:3 mandates that this whore in "the desert" "sat upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns."
Although Islam was the main threat to Christendom from before Luther and during Luther and after Luther, yet to Luther, the more insignificant the Turk was made, the better it was for Luther's arguments and actions to fit neatly in his faulty paradigm. Luther's reaction to the Ottoman beast had terrible consequences. While Luther's main paradigm in his eschatological interpretations turned out false, Luther believed that the Turks were 'a chastisement,' 'a scourge' and a 'rod in the hand of God' to 'bring Christians to repentance'. Luther, instead of encouraging preparedness, he instructed fatalism since in his view:
"the Turk ―has good fortune in waging war against Christians and usually gains the upper hand and obtains the victory... [but] here in Daniel it is announced beforehand that Christians are punished here on earth on account of their sin and the innocent are made into martyrs."
In other words, when it comes to Ottoman victory, to Luther it was "God wills it" and so not much should be done. How can an "innocent" be deserving to be "punished" was an odd observation. In other words, in Luther's view, the Catholic Church deserved the Turks who were according to Luther's interpretation only a "little horn" which cannot expand beyond to Germany since God protected that nation.
Luther's reason for pointing the Ottomans as this "little horn" was that in his view the Turks had conquered three Roman dominions: 1) Egypt, 2) Asia Minor and 3) Greece, which according to Luther’s reckoning, was a clear fulfillment of Daniel 7:24. How Luther separated "Greece" from "Asia Minor" (Greece after all is in Asia Minor) was another oddity. Luther simply jimmy-rigged his theory to fit a text.
This is also classic interpretation in our days, where people find a number in the Bible (3 horns plucked out of the root) and equate it with a current incident making a grand claim out of it. And since this little horn uproots only three, using Luther's textual isolation, he believed that the Ottomans resembled no danger to Europe (especially Germany) since they can only knock out and uproot three horns from the Roman Empire and nothing more.
Luther's error is simple to explain. In his view, the Holy Roman Empire was the beast, which also included Europe. Since Luther sits in Europe, he was already living in what was destined to be Antichrist territory in the ends of days which this separate little horn only knocked out three of its previous provinces. Therefore, this "little horn" will not knock out any other horns, so he was safe and Germany was also safe from Muslim wrath.
Luther's eschatological blunders should be a lesson which must be revealed and exposed since the bulk of Protestant Christians still follow a similar error. Fitting a handful biblical verses without applying all other verses has been incredibly the most dangerous outcome to western Protestant Christian society.
Secondly, listening to the famed theologian interpretations is another folly; correct interpretation belongs to the "maidens" and "elders" (Joel 2:28) who according to Joel will add "visions" and would be inspired through "dreams" which added a clearer understanding to prophecy. For one example out of many, the Venerable Bartholomew Holzhauser (August 24, 1613 – May 20, 1658) whose works was considered as inspired by God, was a German priest who understood prophecy and broke it down to seven epochs (seven time periods) considered that in "the sixth epoch" of the Church, he predicted from studying the Apocalypse that:
"The Turkish Empire shall be broken up, and all nations shall come to and worship their [own] God .."
Saint Francis of Paola, as Joel predicted that elders will utter prophecies; Paola was born 27 March 1416 and died 2 April 1507. Among other instances, for three years before it happened, several times he foretold the taking of Constantinople by the Turks, which prophecy was verified May 24, 1453:
"Under the personal command of Mahomet II. He also foretold that Otranto, one of the most important places in, and the key of, the Kingdom of Naples, would fall into the hands of the same infidels, which, in fact, happened in August, 1480."
He also remarkably predicted certain victories for the church:
"But he also promised the Christians, and especially the pious John Count, of Arena, one of the generals of Ferdinand I., king of Naples, certain success the following year, when, in reality, the Christian arms recovered that most important city, and drove the Turks completely out of Italy, therefore, the princes of this world be prepared for the greatest scourges to fall upon them."
These provided victories and not fatalism as Luther did. These encouraged, that besides "overcoming the saints" that "many will do great endeavors".
While Luther was not far off from recognizing the Ottomans playing a role, he caused a disaster for Europe. Luther was somewhat correct. After all, the Ottomans did "emerge from meager beginnings," as Luther explained, but he was oblivious to the Ottoman's further expansions into Europe. Luther's European paradigm simply did not fit the reality at hand. That, plus Luther's error is that he did not understand the significance of "beasts" in the Bible as the Venerable Bartholomew Holzhauser completely understood it with perfect precision.
The latter (misunderstanding beasts in the Bible) is one major misconception which still trickles down to millions of Protestants in our time. Today, the bulk of Christendom think that "beasts" are exclusively regarding "end-times".
What Luther missed and what Holzhauser got, was that scripture clearly signifies that "beasts" encompass threats to the entire history of God's people, even including Israel's time period prior to Christianity. This rule in fact is etched by John the Revelator where a sequential order is clearly addressed including post Israel (the Church). When John in Revelation 17:10 addressed "the seven headed beast" he says “five have fallen” (past) these are pre-church which encompassed Israel and then he addresses there are two remainders after the 6th (Roman, during the church period of John's day) and then the two “the other that is not yet” is regarding a threat to the church age after Rome's conversion. This 7th was what Luther faced and lived with, is also the 8th which re-arises at the end of days.
These (two consecutive beasts) is also confirmed in what every Christian must know. It is so crucial. In the book of Apocalypse by John, it was destined that the Church suffers "two beasts," both separate in time and are not to arise at the same time. John clearly addressed this. The error many fall under (which was Luther's folly) is that they believed these "two beasts" arise at the "same time". This is a significant error. John clearly pointed out two remaining beasts (yet they are of the same entity) which come after the sixth. The first beast in the church age is stemming from the same entity as the second and is the last beast which we see arising on July 15th, 2016 from Turkey.
Pay extra attention. The first stems "out of the sea" and is taken to "the pit" and the second stems out of the pit and back into the pit. John confirms this. As to the first, we find:
“And I saw a beast [first beast] coming up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten diadems, and upon his heads names of blasphemy.” (Revelation 13:1)
This is the Islamic threat which Luther completely missed since he missed that beasts encompass a span of history. Even the ten horns, they do not sprout all up at the same time. These are consecutive and sequential. This first beast with all its ten horns arising out of the sea (Mediterranean sea) then later on went to the pit in the 19th century to later on sprout out of the pit (the earth) as the second beast in our time:
“And I saw another beast [second beast] coming up out of the earth, and he had two horns, like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon.” (Revelation 13:11)
This "spoke like a dragon" is the "red dragon" of Revelation 12 with the crescent moon. It has two power pegs in Turkey (leopard) and another in Iran (bear).
Please note, that historically, the seven heads fit Islam's seven Caliphates. These have been swallowed up by the pit and now is coming as the second beast “another beast” back from the earth (the pit) but with two power pegs and not ten. The seven heads (Caliphates) are counted from the first to the seventh. We count the horns as each was taken over by the next, while we also count each appointed crown (or Caliph/horn) keeping in mind that each crown is transferred to the next Caliph. This construct also supports what we see in Daniel's chapter two four kingdoms. We had Four Main Caliphates (Rashidun, Umayyad, Abbasid and Ottoman) yet there were also seven caliphates (Rashidun, Umayyad, Abbasid, Fatimid, Ayyubid, Almohad and Ottoman) and ten crowns which represent the seven caliphates that also arise in the end as the second beast with two horns (Turkey and Iran). With prophecy, everything must fit like a glove. These are seven in four. Three were plucked out of the root by the Ottomans (Fatimid, Ayyubid and Al-Mohad).
There are four main caliphates (Rashidun, Umayyad, Abasid and Ottoman) with the other three within this same timeframe (Fatimid, Ayyubid and Al-Mohad) adding to seven caliphates (heads).
Everything fits like a glove. Even the crowns. The Rashidun which sparked the conquest of Christian Syria in 637 and later Armenia. It had two, (1st crown) Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq and (2nd crown) Hasan ibn Ali’ , Grandson of Muhammad Son of ‘Ali ibn Abi-Talib' which branched into the Shiites. This sprouted the two horns and is why it is a “divided kingdom”. Then the Umayyad Caliphate (second head, 661-750) was appointed Muʿāwiyah ibn ʾAbī Ṣufyān (3rd crown) centered in Mecca and Abd-ar-Rahman III (4th crown) centered in Christian Spain and North Africa and reached to east China borders and southern France Africa Morocco. Then the Abbasid Caliphate (third head with two horns (750-945/1258/1517). Founded by Abul `Abbas al-Saffaḥ or the butcher (5th crown) centered in Baghdad and Al-Mustansir Billah (6th crown) centered in Cairo. Then the Fatimid Caliphate (fourth head 910-1171) which was founded by al-Mahdi Billah (7th crown) established Fatimid rule (Shiite) throughout much of North Africa, Hejaz, Palestine and the Levant. Then the Ayyubid Caliphate (fifth head 1171-1260) with the famed Sultan Saladin (8th crown). Then The Almohad Caliphate (sixth head, 1147-1269). The Alomhads (9th crown) ruled major areas of the Maghreb and Muslim Spain. Then the Ottoman Caliphate (1517–1923 the seventh head), founded by Selim I (10th crown) and by that he was the tenth and final horn. This one encompassed all and is the seventh which also arises as the eighth (in our time) as the 11th little horn (spans 7 years) and this one comes as the two last horns of the lamb that speaks like a dragon with crescent moon (Revelation 12).
Whoever persecuted the church throughout history must be the beast (the threat) mentioned in scripture. Nothing in history so perfectly fit like these seven heads and ten crowns. Anyone who disagrees must answer: where else would anyone find a beast that persecuted the woman (the church) like these seven Islamic dynasties?
The cause for these errors in not understanding that prophecy spans history is selfish in nature. It is as if God only cared about the Christians in a specific time as if God cared little to guide the Church throughout history.
But because Luther saw the conquest of what he considers only three Roman fragments at the hands of the Turks in his time, he could draw no other conclusion. To him those historical details were identical to the details prophesied by Daniel. To him the "little horn" is an entity outside of this paradigm of ten-horns. And since the Ottomans opposed God as He was revealed in Christian Scripture further substantiated Luther’s interpretation and eschatology. Daniel 7:25 prophesies that the "little horn" will "speak against the Most High" since Muslims, denied Christ’s office and divinity. That the "little horn has a mouth which speaks awful things" corresponds to the "horrible blasphemies in which Muhammad not only denies Christ but also fully exalts himself and asserts he is above Christ." Luther even identified Ezekiel 38 and Revelation 20 as "the Turks". However, he failed to tie these into the rest of Daniel and Revelation. Unfortunately, this error still exist today where Ezekiel 38 is isolated as a battle with a Russian (plus Islamic invasion) separate from this revived Unholy Roman Empire headed by a harlot in the Vatican.
To Luther he cared mostly that Germany (his ass) is safe and to him prophecy ensured it.
But Luther's myth that the Turks will strictly and only pluck 'three horns' was busted when Turkey invaded Hungry in 1542 and were planning to go to Germany by passing through and invading Poland.
It was only then that Luther's anti Christian Militarism went out the window where Luther cloaked it explaining that militarism was Christian but only and strictly when it is declared by secular government. Eastern Europe was ravaged by Suleiman's army and Luther began to do some date setting that the Ottomans will "invade Italy and Germany in 1600" or "1606". Luther wrote:
"In 1600 comes the Turk to lay waste to all Germany."
When the Ottomans began to gobble up parts of Europe, Luther began to adjust his interpretation that whatever the Ottomans took besides the three horns are simply "scraps" which they will soon return back:
Daniel does not give him any more horns. On account of this, it is to be hoped that the Turk henceforth will not conquer any more lands of the Roman Empire.... If he steals away and tears off something at the boarders and neighbors, that’s his nightcap for a good night. (see here)
It was as if the house was being robed and the watchman was telling the owner to step aside and let the thief get his fill since he is only occupying the backyard. The center of the Christian world after all and according to Luther was Germany:
the German Empire ―must remain until the Last Day, no matter how weak it may be.
Luther's colleagues explained Luther as partnering the Turk with the Pope:
“The Pope is the spirit of antichrist, and the Turk (Muslim) is the flesh of antichrist. They help each other in their murderous work. The latter [Ottomans] slaughters bodily by the sword; and the former spiritually by doctrine”
Yet in Luther's writing, he strictly identified the Antichrist with "the Pope" while the Turk was simply an aberration and strictly the beast of Revelation 20:10 which was Muhammad. That according to Luther, Muhammad is "the beast of the east" and the papacy was the "beast of the Catholic west" and that only protestants are the true church. (Martin Luther and Islam, page 84)
But in Luther's view, because the Turkish "little horn" of the beast displaced three horns, Luther considered the Turks far more powerful than any one of the remaining seven remnant nations of the Holy Roman Empire and so he thought that it can never be defeated by Europe. Luther never thought that the world will continue beyond the 1600s.
Both claims were wrong as the Ottomans collapsed in the 20th century. It was defeated by western Europe, especially a pro-Catholic crusading Protestant named General Allenby. Not only was Luther counterproductive, but he had thought and taught that the territory of three nations (3 uprooted horns, Egypt, Greece and Asia Minor) were permanently plucked and uprooted by the Muslim "little horn". To him, there could be no hope of taking back anything the Ottomans stole since this was already etched in the Word of God. Thus, in Luther’s estimation, a crusade to retake lost land would not only be contrary to the Christian theology, but was also downright folly and predetermined to fail. This was proven false. Even Jerusalem was returned and an Armageddon erupted in the very Valley of Megiddo which uprooted the Ottomans from the Holy Land in 1918.
Battle of Megiddo (1918) in the Valley of Megiddo
And since the "little horn" in Luther's fatalistic view would wage war and "overcome the saints," there was no room in his eschatology for Christians militarily to prevail overall for the remaining time before Judgment Day (see Mark U. Edwards, Jr., Luther’s Last Battles). Luther completely ignored that "many will do great endeavors".
Luther who opposed ecclesiastical authorities for 'self-flagellation' was himself a self-flagulating x-monk. He considered fighting against the Turks to be opposing God himself. According to Luther, God punishes the people for their sins because they 'do not punish themselves' all the while he condemned the ecclesiastical authorities for waging wars and crusades to reconquer what the Ottomans robbed.
In a way, Luther believed that Europe deserved to be raped. He (like many today) believed that individual Christians were not called to resist, but that temporal authorities (secular authority) must protect their subjects. Luther's eschatological paradigm made him to be pessimistic regarding the outcome of particular campaigns and is why we see many today oppose the Crusaders.
This was well etched in the 'big-deal' story-Luther's 'Ninety-Five Theses'-Explanations of the 95 Theses, 1518. In it Luther argues that when it comes to the Muslim invasions by the Ottomans that the pope cannot remit God’s punishment because he cannot drive away the Turks who are the lash and rod of God.
He clearly considered that fighting against the Turks to be opposing God himself who punishes the people for their sins because they do not punish themselves. Instead of focusing on combating the Turkish invasions he focused his criticism toward ecclesiastical authorities for waging wars and crusades against the Turk. This was the bulk of church arguments in Germany, England and later in the U.S. This is why Christian militarism is frowned upon even until today. As a result of this type of eschatology and theology, the United States, John Adams, cozied up to the Ottomans, to even declare that the U.S was not a Christian nation in order to appease Islam. Such declarations were not only made by Obama who is suspected by many to be Muslim.
In essence, and as it turned out, Luther was Lucifer's best agent doing the work of the enemies of Christ.
On War Against the Turk by Martin Luther (1529) regarding Islam and resistance to the Ottoman Empire which was written during the most critical period of territorial expansion by the Ottomans in Europe which marked by the capture of Buda in 1526 and the Siege of Vienna in 1529. In it Luther argued:
"...as though our people were an army of Christians against the Turks, who were enemies of Christ. This is absolutely contrary to Christ's doctrine and name"
There is no difference between this and the daily troll who comments on blogs. These always ask for chapter and verse as to "where did Christ ever teach warfare?" And by this the troll would obliterate the entire Old Testament just because the New rendered the Levitical laws 'obsolete'. It is arguing as since we are done with eating pork, therefore we must be done with Joshua's wars and the Maccabean revolt as an example for the survival of God's people. It was the classic "throwing the baby out with the bath water".
"We must obey God rather than any human authority" argued Luther as does today's troll. Nothing changed today as we read the daily comments "I only obey Jesus Christ" (which at face value sounds good) while they rebel against church authority.
Again, the church age suffers two beasts (two massive threats); one comes as a “seven headed beast” to also come again as the second beast in the end as “a lamb with two horns”; which is the “the eighth” kingdom of the Antichrist’s empire (see here for much in depth detail).
Interesting that the last beast spans 2520 days (7 years) and all beasts from ancient Israel till now span 25 centuries. Interesting also that the wrath spans 1260 days and Islam's first beast spanned 12 centuries. The second beast is exactly the seventh (revived) as two horns. Today we see the threat in this re-arising second beast which is a “leopard [Asia Minor] bear [Persia/Iran], and a mouth of a lion [Babylon/Arabia]” and it will rule for 1260 days while committing the abomination of desolation which is banning Christians from communion.
Even the "mouth" fits, as all verses in Scripture when speaking of Babylon it addresses literal Arabian (the mouthpiece of Islam) which are the districts in scripture “Tema” “Dedan” “Kedar” “Dumah” and “Arabia” and even every occurrence where we see “Babylon is fallen is fallen” in Revelation 14 and 18 it addresses Arabia with the same rendering “Babylon is fallen is fallen” in Isaiah 21 which strictly addresses Arabia.
Even the dual usage “is fallen is fallen” alludes to two falls: first when Arabia (the harlot) betrayed the Ottomans (the beast) in World War I, the Ottomans began to lose their seat and so they shelled Mecca and the Black stone during the rule of Sharif Hussein. This was one "fallen" to be counted. Scripture insists that the "beast" destroys the "harlot". And so it will be when the Ottomans revive, Mecca will be totally destroyed, but this time by Persia (see Isaiah 21). This is the second "fallen".
This would make the beast with both its historic and future composites as having participated in her destruction; Turkey in World War I and Persia in World War III. This fulfills precisely what John declared that the revived beast destroys the harlot and burns her (Revelation 17:16).
Obviously Luther missed that his animosity towards the papacy clouded his spiritual vision. This is why anti-popes missed the other woman; this dragon was after the sons of God and specifically the sons of Mary who honor and love the woman of Revelation 12. This started in 632 A.D when all Christians honored Mary. Historically the first beast did not persecute the Protestant church and in fact in the sixteenth century the Protestants cooperated with the Ottomans during their war with the Catholic League.
The persecution against the church finally turned around between 1871-1876 A.D lasting 1260 lunar years (1242 solar years) after the first Muslim attacks and from when Christendom (Arab-Byzentine Wars) erupted in 629 A.D.
Indeed. It was in 1871 A.D., that the tables turned where God hit the Ottomans with natural catastrophes.
Even the wheat was extremely rare where “food sold for ten times the normal value” (2):
“Food was so scarce that the little available sold for ten times the normal value. Although the rains came in 1871, there was no easing of the famine, for the farmers had no seed to sow.”
“A drought in 1872 led to massive crop failures across the Empire. Locust swarms denuded Cyprus of crops. A harsh winter led to widespread starvation. Dead bodies were seen on the streets of Istanbul and packs of wolves were observed attacking people in the suburbs.”
“Two pounds [a quart] of wheat for a denarius” (Revelation 6:6) went on to 1915, even a greater famine where locusts invaded Turkey and the entire Levant region. Locusts even invaded the Ottoman sympathizer at the time, the United States when John Adams cozied up to the Ottomans (as they still do now) and declared in the Treaty of Tripoli:
“the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”
In fact, if you still do not believe, here is a photocopy:
All this mess for misinterpreting few verses. The troll therefore must ask himself as to why he machine-guns verses of scripture. Does he ever seriously contemplates that a false interpretation has eternal consequences?
Therefore, you shall know them by how fast they cry "s c r i p t u r e"!
In the meanwhile, I will go romance Maria. Its her 'Saturday night special':
Post a Comment