By Walid Shoebat (A Shoebat Christmas Special)
So is Donald Trump the Great Monarch, the Cyrus of our times (Isaiah 45:1,2) who was ordained in this hour to be a blessing to the nations?
There has been much fascination over the rise the "great monarch," a Christian King who is foretold to set up a new social order upon the ruins of socialism. He is to usher the arrival of the “eagles” spoken of in the Bible which speaks of "seven shepherds" in Micah 5 who will arise to defeat "the Assyrian" (Antichrist). He is to squash the Islamic threat, the New World Order and all enemies of Christianity. To many, Trump seems to fit the bill, since some of these prophecies speak of a monarch of German descent and the Donald fit this criteria:
Protestants in Germany as well as Catholics throughout Europe speak of the West to be ruled in the spirit of Charlemagne, the Franks after all were the first barbaric tribe to embrace Christianity who (like Trump) were mostly of Germanic origin. Catholics speak of the "Great Monarch" accompanied by an "Angelic Pope" who helps to restore Christendom to its rightful state after a period of apostasy.
Some of these prophecies say that this great monarch will possess Jerusalem establishing what they term "an era of peace" which comes before the arrival of the Antichrist. Trump recently has increased his church attendance which is noted by many Christians.
So is Trump the man?
Let us examine. But first heed this advise: always keep in mind the most crucial point in the Christian walk is doctrine. Lest you have the wrong prophetic interpretation, you should solely rely on doctrine, which ranks higher than prophecy. For it is by doctrine you will spot the Christ, the true Christian from the false Christian, as well as the Antichrists. This is crucial, since if you later get disappointed, you can easily correct your faulty prophetic interpretations, while your doctrine remains firm, then repent of your error, tie your shoelaces and "continue running the marathon".
So lets delve and seriously and thoroughly examine some of these prophecies in light of certain prophetic scale accepted by both Catholics and Protestants and in light of the Bible itself. One prediction states:
"He [the great monarch] shall reign over the House of Agar, and shall possess Jerusalem." (Isidore of Seville, 7th Century)
So far so good, until we read one prophecy collector, Yves Dupont interprets:
"The Jews will be converted and, after a short period, probably a few years, Christ will come down again and judge the nations".
This, they predict, will usher in what is termed as "an era of peace" and only then, after that era of peace is over, that the Antichrist will finally appear to be destroyed by Christ's coming.
While there is no doubt that God will raise "seven shepherds" (Micah 5) who will combat the "Assyrian" (Antichrist) and these will redeem many in Israel, but to think there is an "era of peace prior to the advent of Antichrist" should be questioned in light of crucial factors well etched and established in both scripture and by many other saints.
First of all, we do not find anywhere in the whole of Scripture anything remotely close to "an era of peace" preceding the coming of Antichrist, where Israel is restored.
This idea which states that Israel is restored by a monarch needs to be examines in light of scripture which clearly states:
And so all Israel should be saved, as it is written: There shall come out of Sion, he that shall deliver [Israel], and [he Christ] shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob. (Romans 11:26)
We find no monarch here, "All Israel should be saved" by Christ and this is preceded by the Church's ultimate trial after "a religious deception" and "the falling away come first" which seems within sight more than "an era of peace".
Perhaps one might write-off this critique we just made here, but lest someone objects, it is not only the Bible which states this, but the Catechism of the Catholic Church itself does. Both agree, that only "Christ as king" is to be manifested in "the last days" and his recognition is by "all Israel".
Even St. Augustine confirms: "the Jews shall believe in the true Christ, that is, our Christ, thanks to this great and admirable prophet Elias ..." St. Augustine confirms scripture which does not say what Dupont says.
Also, we cannot, and should not, completely and strictly rely on everything we read on the internet and in ill-sourced books. It is this crucial problem that I see amongst many Christians, especially today. With many of these predictions, it is nearly impossible to even verify the authenticity of some quotes that are supposed to be about the 'Great Monarch'. Many of the quotes mentioned in books and on websites about him do not give original sources.
Even “Prophecy for Today” which many use as a source for these prophecies by Catholic Edward Connor, he agrees with my warning:
"Public prophecy ceased with the death of St. John the Apostle. Private prophecy, even if received from God, is not reliable because the prophet is fallible. He can forget, misunderstand or misinterpret. Even when he does not err, those who hear him and who transmit the message can err"
Not only can interpreters err, but Conner himself erred. One could find a multitude of unverifiable quotes in his book. For example:
"The Great French Monarch, who shall subject all the East, shall come around the end of the world.... " - St. Hyppolitus (235 AD)
Not only that France as a nation did not exist in the 3rd Century AD, but Conner simply gives no source.
Go ahead, try to hunt down this quote and you will never find it written in any historic reference. Many of the Great Monarch prophecies originate from a book titled "From Hell with Love" By Zak Portelli and even he failed to provide sources for some of these supposed 'original quotes'.
For another example "He shall inherit the Crown of the Fleur-de-Lis (Bishop Ageda, 12th Century)" is a quote which one cannot find a source from any credible reference.
One needs to wisely sift. Indeed, the Jews will return in unbelief and while some Catholics object about establishing Israel, while Protestants claim that the popes have always been anti-Israel, this is not true. Popes unanimously agree Israel's return is of God. For example, Pope Benedict XV (died 1922) and before Israel was established he correctly interpreted and predicted:
"The return of the Jews to Palestine is the will of God, hence they will have to leave many countries."
"The Jews shall return to Palestine and become Christians toward the end of the world." (Anne Catherine Emmerich, died 1824)
The papacy always had a certain care for the Jewish people and Catholic history debunks the notion that the Catholic Church was anti-Semitic. We also do not find popes saying that we will have an "era of true peace" just before Antichrist comes. The Vatican's position is clear on this issue.
The impossible to answer Jesus-style question to many who solely focus on such prophecies is this:
Which of the prophecies is true, the ones who say that the "Great Monarch" is French, German, Roman, Spanish, Bourbon, of the House of Habsburg, a descendant of Constantine, Charlemagne or King Louis IX, especially that these bloodlines are not the same?
These rulers all belonged to different ethnicities, different races, different families, different countries, and possess different lineages.
Whenever one find die speculation, one sees multitudes filled with a false hope.
Always keep in mind that the bulk of these prophecies stem from when the claim was made by Saint Remigius, bishop of Reims and apostle of the Franks in 496 "vision" of the last monarch to descend from France. This prophecy was related through Hincmar (806-882), archbishop of Reims, and Rabanus Maurus Magnentius (780-856) O.S.B., archbishop of Mainz.
However that may be, Marie-Julie Jahenny (1850-1941), also known as the "Breton" stigmatist, prophesied that Henry V, the Count of Chambord, was the chosen King. Yet despite his death, one of her predictions dated 1890 declares he is yet "reserved for the great epochs" (the end of time). So here we have a factor of human error.
We must always keep a balance. For example, I have poured much effort in evaluating the works of Valtorta and wrote two articles one in favor and another in critique where I show how some of her 'amazing finds' can easily be obtained from other sources. While there are claims that Pope Pius XII approved Valtorta's writings, this is questionable. Therefore, we should not take a dogmatic approach to certain seer or prophecies or interpreters or nuns lest we err in interpreting them or someone else erred in transmitting their predictions. Collectors err tremendously. For example, Dupont (who collects these prophecies) includes other serious contradictions to scripture. For example, he gives a supposed quote by Venerable Bartholomew Holzhauser:
God will bind Satan for a number of years until the days of the Son of Perdition…there will be an ecumenical council which will be the greatest of all councils. By the grace of God, by the power of the Great Monarch, and by the authority of the Holy Pontiff [Angelic Pope], and by the union of the most devout princes, atheism and every heresy will be banished from the earth. The Council will define the true sense of Holy Scripture, and this will be believed and accepted by everyone (Dupont, p. 40).
Contrary to this private prophecy, that satan is bound before all heresy is eliminated, in scripture Satan is never bound before the Son of Perdition come but strictly after. We find absolutely nothing (not a single verse) in scripture to support this conclusion.
On the contrary, St. Bellarmine who did an entire essay on Antichrist, he correctly instructs never to proclaim such things. He refers to Second Thessalonians where God instructs:
And then [after the falling away happens] that wicked one [Antichrist] shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, him, Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders … (2 Thess 2:8-9)
“And then that wicked one shall be revealed”? This “then” comes right immediately after the great apostasy and there is no epoch of peace. It is strictly a falling away first and then immediately the Antichrist appears.
Lets again examine:
"God will bind Satan for a number of years until the days of the Son of Perdition"
This goes contrary to Scripture which clearly states the devil is bound way after the Antichrist appears and is captured (see Apocalypse, 19:20-21; 20:1-2).
We do not have two separate bindings of Lucifer. This alone puts a dent in all of these claims of an "era of peace" that supposedly comes before Antichrist shows up.
And here is another danger. Such reliance on "an era of peace" would lax the saints to roam and be worry free like the virgin without oil to only be caught when the Bridegroom comes and be left out. This is a very serious issue to consider.
Other problems can be found. It was the Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius, which shaped and influenced the bulk of these prophecies. St. Methodius was from the fourth century. So the prophecies would sound amazing especially that they mention a monarch (king) combating the Muslim world. Islam only appeared in the seventh century after Pseudo-Methodius was written. St. Methodius of Olympus of the fourth century never wrote the Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius which became heavily accessed by some seers.
This takes the thunder of the miraculous factor of predicting Islam in many of these prophecies. Dupont for example whom I have poured much time into his works, I found grave errors. He naively credits prophecies to the fourth-century theologian St. Methodius of Olympus when in fact it was from the Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius (7th century). He wrote:
St. Methodius. "A day will come when the enemies of Christ will boast of having conquered the whole world. They will say: 'Christians cannot escape now!' But a Great King will arise to fight the enemies of God. He will defeat them, and peace will be given to the world, and the Church will be freed from her anxieties."
So this would be another source where this "era of peace" was deduced: "peace will be given to the world".
But this was never uttered by St. Methodius. Pseudepigrapha are falsely-attributed works, texts whose claimed author is not the true author, or a work whose real author attributed it to a figure of the past.
Such mistakes are not only done by Catholics. Many pre-tribulation evangelical Protestants who use Pseudo-Ephraem which also relies upon the Pseudo-Methodius to prove a 'pre-tribulation rapture' when in reality neither Methodius or Pseudo-Ephraem ever mention anything about a pre-tribulation rapture. Yet so many books are written on the subject and people consume them to no end believing they will vanish before WWIII erupts.
Scripture clearly speaks of a false peace (not an era of peace) which is established after some turmoil by Antichrist, not a monarch. Therefore, be careful lest you fall for the Antichrist believing he is the monarch.
We ought to ask: isn't the world today calling for peace between Shiite and Sunni? Isn't Erdogan of Turkey approaching the Jews and just made a deal with them on cooperation becoming the defender of Gaza and for benefits from the Mediterranean he already made a pact with Israel? Isn't the world tired of ISIS and here comes Erdogan promising to restore peace? Isn't the world crying for peace and the end of bloodshed? Doesn't scripture tell us that when the world says "peace and safety" is when "sudden destruction comes"? Therefore, this "era of peace" is dangerous for it is built on false hope.
Another danger is this: imagine if a nationalist arises in Europe (altra-nationalists are already arising in Europe) and alongside stands a bad pope. A multitude of Catholics would gladly follow them believing them to be the 'great monarch' and the 'angelic pope'. After all, Antichrist comes after (not before) the great monarch. So we still have time to be merry. But as it turns out, these (as Paul warned in 2 Thess 2) are agents of Antichrist or are even "the beast" and "the false prophet," who will lead these souls to hell, while the true Christ who later comes to combat them is viewed as the Antichrist.
This is why doctrine is the scale and not prophecy. The Catholic Church today is not the same as it was during Pope Pius XII during Hitler. God forbid in the future the Vatican embraces more Protestantism to accept a Protestant tyrant from Germany and then we have a German Antichrist whom we think is the "great monarch". Catholics and Protestants should remain miles apart when it comes to the mixing of what each considers essential theology.
Remember Christ said to be like the five wise virgins, to be prepared and be ready for His coming and not the coming of another (unless they are the two witnesses). So then here comes Christ to find the five slumbering virgins instead are standing on the wrong side of the fence and then He shuts the door.
Left: Bad Virgins. Right: Good Virgins. Choose your virgins wisely
Christ warned of this. Keep in mind, the two witnesses will come and be martyred teaching true doctrine. These two do not come in an "era of peace" but turmoil. Scripture also speaks of seven shepherds and eight principled men. There is no doubt that we will have a "monarch" or even perhaps "seven" or "eight" leaders who will devastate the Antichrist, but this will occur after, not before, the falling away, and during when the man of sin is revealed immediately. Few of these prophecy books focus on Micah 5:5 which is clear as to when this peace happens:
And this man [Messiah] shall be our peace, when the Assyrian [Antichrist] shall come into our land, and when he shall set his foot in our houses: and we shall raise against him seven shepherds, and eight principal men.
The "peace" will only and strictly occur after the seven shepherds are led by Christ Himself. It is only then will they defeat the Antichrist in Israel. It is only then "this man [Messiah] shall be our peace".
This is not established by a monarch who brings a pre-peace.
It is crucial to also keep in mind, that while these saints are approved saints by the Vatican, this is not the issue here. The issue is that Catholics should not put stock in all the claims and quotes made in the name of such saints, many of which collections are not verified or are approved by Rome or might have been wrongly interpreted.
Always keep in mind the most crucial point in the Christian walk is doctrine. Lest you have the wrong prophetic interpretation, you should solely rely on doctrine which ranks higher than prophecy for it is by doctrine you will spot the true Christ from the false Christ. This is crucial since if you later get disappointed with Trump not fulfilling your hopes, you can easily correct your faulty prophetic interpretations, tie your shoelaces and continue "running the marathon".
Note: In my next critique (of the same thread since some complained of my long articles) I will include further misunderstandings when examining these prophecies in light of scripture. There are some human errors. However, the errors are matters of misunderstanding the timing of the epochs. Nevertheless, the conclusions of some of these prophecies are quite remarkable and we should not ignore them. As I have poured into the works of Yves Dupont but thought to share this time a few articles presented from my critical lens. Perhaps someday I will write articles critiquing myself, from my own "critical lens" since I too erred. I perhaps will end up plucking out my own eyeballs for penance lest I sin again.
Post a Comment