When Elizabeth II was called to face her Maker on September 8, 73 -year heir to the throne ascended the throne and became the King Charles III of the United Kingdom, and 14 other Commonwealth realms, a relic of the Empire’s glorious past that one hundred years ago ruled over a quarter of the Earth’s total land area. It seems like there is something pre-ordained about the timing of this historic turning point when the reign of Elizabeth II lasted 70 years and 7 months and Charles delivered his first speech, as King Charles III, 77 years and 7 days after the end of World War II on September 2, 1945. I predicted in my 423-page book that was published in May 2022 (my first book that I wrote in English as a Finnish author) that there would be likely some momentous event in this year concerning the British monarchy, based on my understanding of the Scriptures’ prophetic calendar and how it is related to the number seven and its multiples like 49, 70 and 490. To put it simply, many historically and prophetically significant events seem to follow at intervals of 49 years or 70 years. We saw the same phenomenon, for example, in 2018 when President Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel and moved the US embassy there as a gift to the 70th anniversary of the State of Israel.
I am one of those Christian authors and prophecy students who have promoted this idea about Prince Charles of Wales and now King Charles III as the likely Man of Lawlessness, whose rise to power and to the center place on the world stage was prophecied in many passages of the Holy Bible. To be clear, this idea has been known on some websites for at least since 1995 (when there were only a few thousand websites compared to today’s almost 2 billion websites). And in 1998 a Messianic Jew Tim Cohen published a 444-page book called The Antichrist and a Cup of Tea (publisher: Prophecy House), the first eschatological book that was justifying this theory in detail and with solid biblical arguments. One of Cohen’s mentors was Monte Judah, another Messianic Jew, who promoted this idea even earlier than Tim Cohen. Then there are some other prophecy students and authors like John D. Christian from New Zealand who has written on this topic in his books that have been published mostly as in ebook format on online. I want to encourage other Christians to follow in their footsteps, to start studying this topic independently, to pray for wisdom and guidance from above with humility and the fear of the Lord, and to write a book or to make YouTube/Rumble videos of your own on this very multidimensional eschatological subject.
And then there is me, from tiny and cold Finland, a 34 -years old blogger, author, and YouTuber (mostly just video editor) who has written on this and some other topics since 2012 when I started to write my first book on this subject in my native language. I don’t know how I ended up here – when I had difficulties to write even one page essays in my school – but after 10 years I have written over 5000 pages of text in my books and blog posts (that is more than a million words). My english blog article that I published regarding my reasearch on Prince Charles in May 2018 has attracted over 15 000 views thus far (3834 alone in the last September). Not very much but enough to make some impact to those who have seen it. I have to say, it is quite challenging to write on the topic of biblical eschatology. Firstly, because there are a million different interpretations and many of your fellow Christians may assume (incorrectly) that you don’t have profound biblic understanding of the prophetic study or its established schools of thought. Or then those who don’t have very deep knowledge of biblical prophecies may judge you based on their superficial misconceptions of the end-time prophecy. And secondly, if your aim is to reach those secular people, who are not even aware of how the Scriptures predicted the future in the past (as such rational minded giants of intellect like Isaac Newton already well understood), they just laugh in your face when you even mention such biblical phrases as an ”antichrist”.
To them it is like, I would write a serious article on the Santa Claus as if he is a real person. So it’s like I have to wage a war on two different fronts at the same time. Nonetheless, even one highly educated agnostic in Finland has been sharing my some writings and videos about Charles as the possible Antichrist and the First Beast of Revelation 13. Not that he would agree necessary on my Scripture-based thesis on him, but because he too could understand from his secular perspective how dangerous person Charles III really is. But for all of those agnostics and atheists or evens Christians in readers, who may think that the only unbalanced and dangerous fellow here is me, let’s cite this fragment from a new royal biography of King Charles III by Christopher Andersen that was published just a few days ago.
Charles’s attitude toward employees verged on “outright contempt,” said one Highgrove staffer. “For someone who said he was bullied as a child, Prince Charles clearly enjoyed bullying us. He could be pleasant and courteous, but just as much of the time, he was moody and mean. He didn’t think twice about shouting insults at you if you put a foot wrong.” Charles’s former valet Ken Stronach, who for years was in charge of hand washing the Prince’s underpants and tucking him into bed with Teddy [bear], agreed. Not only was Charles prone to exploding at subordinates, but he also was capable of “flying into violent tantrums” if something displeased him.
Stronach was in the room when Charles, in the middle of an argument with Diana, grabbed a heavy wooden bootjack and threw it at her, missing the Princess’s head by inches. Another time, while vacationing at the villa of an aristocratic friend in the South of France, Charles was standing at his bathroom sink when he fumbled with one of his cuff links, and it fell down the drain.
Flying into a blind rage, he pulled the sink off the wall, then smashed it, looking for the cuff link. Unable to find the missing jewelry, a wild-eyed Prince of Wales spun around and grabbed his valet by the throat. Stronach broke free, darted out a side door—and into a linen closet. Terrified, he huddled there for thirty minutes before he could hear Charles leave the bathroom. “Finally, the coast was clear,” the valet recalled, “but I was still shaking.”
It was not the only time the Prince of Wales ripped a sink from the wall in a fit of pique; the porcelain went flying yet again after a particularly furious row with Diana at Highgrove. Stronach, once again laying bare his boss’s petulant streak, recalled that Charles became so frustrated at not being able to part his hair properly that he kept “hopping up and down and shaking his fists.” Once, when Charles was spending time with Camilla at Ray Mill House, Diana called Highgrove to check up on him.
Her butler, Paul Burrell, happened to be at Highgrove at the time and answered the phone. The next day, Charles learned that Burrell had refused to cover for him and summoned the butler to his room. When Burrell asked if the Prince was ordering him to lie to Diana, Charles exploded. “Yes! Yes, I am!” he replied, picking up a book and hurling it at Burrell’s head. The butler ducked, although he would hear the pages flutter as the book flew by. Charles was “still ranting and stamping his foot,” Burrell recalled. “I am the Prince of Wales,” Charles shouted, “and will be King!”
Imperious to a fault, the Prince also counted on those within his tight social circle to indulge his every impulse. Once, while a guest at a friend’s country home, Charles wanted some fresh air. Unable to open the window, he picked up a chair and smashed it open. Not satisfied with the results, he smashed another. “You have to understand,” Stronach said. “The Prince is accustomed to getting what he wants. And he wanted some fresh air.”Andersen, Christopher. The King: The Life of Charles III
Andersen’s book is not the only one that documents the King’s, previous Prince of Wales’s, outrageously self-important, arrogant, petty, futile, pampered, childish, bullying, cold, aggressive and machiavellian behavior behind closed doors. Another one that I recommend you to read is Tom Bower’s Rebel Prince from 2018. One Christian woman, who had read that same book, told me on Facebook that it was like this secular royal biographer was describing – without knowing it – all biblical traits concerning the personality of the coming Man of Lawlessness. The point is: whatever you thought you knew of this man during his 74 years-long existence on this Earth, it has been only a smoke screen to hide his more sinister and wicked side from the spiritually blinded world. Many dark secrets of his real character have yet to be unveiled. For example, it is not a so far-fetched conclusion to suggest that Charles was behind his first wife Princess Diana’s horrible death at Pont de l’Alma tunnel of Paris on August 31, 1997. There are far-fetched and illogical conspiracy theories and then there are just conspiracy facts and common sense where 2 +2 = 4. This case falls into the latter.
The conspiracy facts of this case – that you can find even in the mainstream media reports – are the following: Diana suspected that her apartment was bugged and that her phone was tapped by the British intelligence services MI5 and MI6, and she was also right in her fears, as it later came out. All of those who, during the so-called War of Waleses, were aiding Diana to get her word out – including the best-seller author Andrew Morton – were threatened by the ”dark forces” to terminate their work or their lives would be in danger. Diana was seen as a ”non-starter” and and a ”threat” to the monarchy, as she said in her BBC Panorama interview in 1995, at least by those within the ”the firm” and the establishment who were behind her husband’s camp in the War of Waleses. At the same time, Diana approached her lawyer lord Mischon saying that there was a conspiracy masterminded by her husband where Prince Charles was planning to get rid of her in a staged car-accident. She was saying the same thing to her valet Paul Burrell two years earlier in October 1993. Diana once told her friends that the brakes of her car were tampered with when the brakes didn’t work and she almost crashed her car on the streets of London in early 1995 (event that was portrayed also in the fifth season of Netflix’s popular The Crown series).
During their marriage Diana had witnessed and suffered for her husband’s emotional coldness – even amidst of Princess’s several attempts to take her own life after her feuds with Charles – and she also believed that he had arranged the murder of Diana’s extramarital lover, protection officer Barry Mannakee on May 15, 1987. So Diana didn’t only believe that her husband was capable of murdering people but that he had already done so to her own closest friends like Barry Mannakee. And that he was guileful and machiavellian enough – by exploiting his high status as Prince of Wales – to hide his traces and to disguise his crimes as ”tragic accidents”. An official inquiry into Diana’s death in 2007 didn’t conclude that Diana’s driver Henry Paul or paparazzi were guilty of the car-crash of Diana’s and Dodi’s car, but unidentified vehicles that were chasing Mercedes-Bentz into Pont de l’Alma tunnel. Some of them, like white Fiat Uno, allegedly belonged to British intelligence agents. Princess Diana was trying to destroy her husband’s reputation – or what was still left of it – by publishing seven video tapes that she recorded with former BBC cameraman in Kensington Palace just a months before her death. In those tapes she unveiled some very embarassing and even incriminating accusations of her ex-husband. With those tapes she was either trying to get some negotiation trump card against those who were planning to silence her, or to destroy completely Charles’s chance of inheriting the crown after his mother’s death.
You don’t need to be Sherlock Holmes to solve this puzzle and to conclude who had the motive, means, and opportunity to commit the crime – not by his own hands but through his aides and subordinates in the intelligence service’s hit squad. If Diana herself predicted that her husband was going to kill her and stage the homicide as ”a car accident”, then we have better to believe her own words. As American author Joseph Heller has said, ”Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t after you.” I am quite sketchy here because this is just a small part of this extremely multidimensional topic. But it is important to understand this lost or a hidden history, not only because that should make us very cautious for the reign of Charles the Third, but also because its fits perfectly with Holy Scriptures on this last tyrant of the world. Daniel 8:23-25 foretold on this gruesome man:
When the wrongdoers have run their course, a king will arise, insolent and skilled in intrigue. And his power will be mighty, but not by his own power, And he will destroy to an extraordinary degree And be successful and do as he pleases; He will destroy mighty men and the holy people. And through his shrewdness he will make deceit a success by his influence; And he will make himself great in his own mind, and he will destroy many while they are at ease. He will even oppose the Prince of princes, but he will be broken without human agency.
Although a large part of the passage is still unfulfilled, this passage charactirizes the Antichrist as ”a king” who is ”insolent” and ”skilled in intrigue”, meaning that he has those arrogant traits and this masterful Machiavellian ability to conspire behind the scenes, and hide the traces of his crimes from the public eye. When Charles hired his spin doctor Mark Bolland to burnish the public image of him and his lover Camilla Parker-Bowles after Diana’s death, Bolland found it startling how Clarence House was ”a very medieval environment full of jealousies and intrigues and backstabbing and plots.” Author Tom Bower adds, ”Readers may have wondered why he needed to point that out – it was how the public at large now viewed Charles’s world.” (Rebel Prince, page 234) Trevor Kavanagh wrote in The Sun, that ”There is a cesspit of intrigue at the heart of the realm.” (ibid. p. 207) Robert Higdon, the chief executive of Charles’s charity foundation in America, complained:
I put up with the corrupt, mean, vicious people Charles is surrounded by. The most horrible people I’ve ever worked with. They used my resources. I didn’t like their Machiavellian behaviour, the dishonesty. They weren’t straight.”ibid. p. 310
Daniel 11:36 predicted that the Antichrist will be ”The king [who] will do as he pleases, and he will exalt himself and boast against every god and will speak dreadful things against the God of gods.” Renowned Bible teacher John MacArhur taught in his sermon in 1980:
Here he is called the king who does according to his will, or the willful king. Now the angel gives us several facts that indicate his character. First of all, his character is marked by prerogative, prerogative. In other words, he exercises the ultimate prerogative. He makes all decisions. He does according to his will. He is an absolute sovereign; he is an absolute dictator. He will rule alone. He will rule with utter selfishness, utter self-will. He will rule in a self-centered and self-energized approach, and behind the scenes moving it all along is Satan himself. One writer said he will come to the world with the baptism of hell. He will have full demon cooperation. He will establish an absolute world monarchy.
Now, we all know that the British Monarchy is constitutional monarchy and not absolute monarchy. But royal author Clive Irving has warned: ”The prospect of Charles III is pretty frightening… there are some of the hints of a tyrant king about him.” Charles’s biographer Tom Bower agrees: ”Like some feudal lord, he presides at the centre of a court with no place for democracy or dissenting views. Unlike the queen, with her genius in being able to unite the nation, especially in difficult times, Charles divides his countrymen. Clearly, he enjoys provoking argument, but only on his terms. He has refused to engage in debate. Advisers know that to say ’No’ will simply prompt his search for a replacement who will say ’Yes.’ Every decision is his and his alone.” In the same prophetic vision, it has been told that he will be a ”despicable person… on whom the majesty of kingship has not been conferred; but he will come in a time of tranquility and seize the kingdom by intrigue.
Here we are seeing again the king who will intrigue and conspire. But it also says that he will be a ”despicable person… on whom the majesty of kingship has not been conferred.” (New American Standard Bible). King James Version translates it this way: ”a vile [bazah] person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.” This would suggest that this person may be a lawfull heir on the throne of his kingdom, but his own people or the popular public opinion would not give him the ”honour of the kingdom” or ”the majesty of kingship” (many polls have shown over the years that the British people would prefer William to become king instead of his father after the reign of Elizabeth II). So this verse does not say that he will never become king because he will also ”seize the kingdom by intrigue” and in verse 36 he is said to be ”the king [who] will do as he pleases”. But the first part of this verse seems to suggest that he is this unpopular heir to the crown or unpopular king ”to whom they [his people] shall not give the honour of the kingdom”. Does this also indicate that they will demand his abdication? Maybe or maybe not. But another indication that he will be this unpopular crown prince/king is a hebrew word bazah, which means ”to despise” or ”despised”. It is a same word that is used in Isaiah 53:3-6 that prophesied on our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ:
He was despised [bazah] and abandoned by men, A man of great pain and familiar with sickness; And like one from whom people hide their faces, He was despised [bazah], and we had no regard for Him. However, it was our sicknesses that He Himself bore, And our pains that He carried; Yet we ourselves assumed that He had been afflicted, struck down by God, and humiliated. But He was pierced for our offenses, He was crushed for our wrongdoings; the punishment for our well-being was laid upon Him, And by His wounds we are healed. All of us, like sheep, have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way, But the Lord has caused the wrongdoing of us all to fall on Him.
So like Jesus, AntiChrist – His adversary, opposite, and surrogate – will be also this despised king, not because he would be rejected by this corrupt and sinful world but because he is too despicable and vile even in the eyes of this depraved generation. And this rejection of his character by his people is only temporary because in Revelation 13:8 we also read: ”All who live on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slaughtered.”
But it goes much deeper than that. Because in the same vision we also read how this despised king will ”enter the richest parts of the realm, and he will accomplish what his fathers did not, nor his ancestors; he will distribute plunder, spoils, and possessions among them, and he will devise his schemes against strongholds, but only for a time.” This indicates, again, that he will rise from the hereditary monarchy because ”he will accomplish what his fathers did not, nor his ancestors” and because in verse 21 it is said that he will come ”in place” of the previous kings of his kingdom (who were his fathers and ancestors). And then we also read in verses 16 – 20 how those previous kings, whose reign preceded this last one, ruled over the Holy Land of Israel, like British Empire did during the reign of George V and George VI between 1917 – 1948 before the State of Israel was born.
If you want a more profound and detailed exposition into this topic, you can order my book To whom the majesty of kingship has not been conferred – The Antichrist revealed? (Books on Demand, May, 2022) where I have demonstrated, in detail, for example, how Daniel 11 (together with Daniel 7 and 8) foretold the whole Middle Eastern history from the days of Daniel to the accession of Charles III, covering the times of Antique, Middle Ages and Modern Age, and not just our current ”end times”. While in my book I have tried to expose all major Antichrist prophecies in Old and New Testament and how they all match up with the known characters of previous Prince of Wales and current King Charles III, its main emphasis is on the prophecies of the Book of Daniel. In this regard it deviates from Tim Cohen’s book which focused more on the prophecies of the Book of Revelation and how Charles’s (previous) name and heraldic symbolism fits together with the beast symbolism of Revelation 12 and 13.
I have included all these Cohen’s claims in my book as well but its main focus is on the visions of Daniel. Cohen is publishing soon an updated version for his 1998 book, so I recommend that you read both, his book and my book, to see where we may agree or disagree on our eschatological thoughts or on other matters. It is impossible to agree on eschatology in every point even if you had the same candidate for he man of lawlessness. But that is only a positive thing as it proves that Tim and I are independent minds who have come to their conclusions through their independent research, and not just by parroting blindly what others may say on this topic without questioning anything.
Tim and I may also disagree on some chronological aspects of the end-time events, but if we (and some others) are correct in our assessment of the identity of the Antichrist, then I would expect that there will be soon the third temple on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, and soon after its completion and reinstalling of the Jewish animal sacrifices according to Mosaic law, King Charles III will visits in that temple and send forces to ”desecrate the sanctuary fortress, and do away with the regular sacrifice. And they will set up the abomination of desolation.” (Daniel 11:31) This is what Daniel foretold on this man in Chapters 8, 9 and 11, and what also Jesus prophecied on him in Matthew 24, Luke 21 and Mark 13, and Paul in 2 Thessalonians Chapter 2.
He will also get a global authority over our political and financial system since Revelation 13 says that ”authority was given to him over every tribe, people, language, and nation” and ”all, the small and the great, the rich and the poor, and the free and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, and he decrees that no one will be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name.” And then there will also a somekind of global cult of personality around this last world ruler as ”all who live on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slaughtered.” In my book, I have reasoned and documented why Charles is the most likely candidate to fulfill also these aspects of the Bible prophecy on the First Beast, not least because of his central role behind World Economic Forum’s dystopian The Great Reset agenda, which has attracted significant attention from many conservative and even leftist writers and commentators. I conclude this article with my motto ”Soli Deo Gloria”, which is Latin and means ”Glory to God Alone”. Below are the names of all Chapters of my book which you can order here:
5 vastausta artikkeliin “The new King Charles III of the United Kingdom is a worryingly unbalanced and dangerous person who could be the possible Antichrist, according to Holy Scriptures and their Christian expounders.”
Löytyykö tätä suomeksi?
TykkääLiked by 1 henkilö
Ei nyt valitettavasti, mutta voit koittaa google-kääntää. Jos luet esim. puhelimesta, niin vierittämällä vähän sivua alaspäin, löydät tuon käännöstoiminnon. Tai jos luet PC:llä, ja käytät Google Chromea selaimena, niin hiiren oikea ja käännä…
Huomasinkin, ettei tuosta sivuni omasta käännöstoiminnosta löydy suomea.
Syynä voi olla se, että ohjelma lukee sivustoni kielen jostain syystä suomeksi vaikka artikkeli itsessään on englanniksi… kummallista.
No, suomeksi materiaalia löytyy sivuiltani jo niin paljon, että täytyi ajatella hieman ulkomaalaisiakin lukijoita.
TykkääLiked by 1 henkilö
I believe you are doing important work! I’ve been looking at Charles for a long time.
TykkääLiked by 1 henkilö
Thank you, Robert. Yes, I encourage everyone to do their own independent research into the man and this eschatological idea.