ORIGINAL BLOG POST PUBLISHED IN FINNISH ON APRIL 23, 2023

READING TIME: 10 MINUTES

Momentous things are happening right now, but most people are in a spiritual sleep and are blind to the signs of the times around them. When it comes to the British Monarchy, this even applies to many prophetically awake Christians who are following the signs of the times. Even the conservative media focus all their attention almost obsessively on the royal drama raised by woke royals Harry and Meghan, and fail to see that it it as a mere smokescreen obscuring a far more important prophetic reality. I have written on my blog on the Royal House of England and the prophetic role of Charles III for over eight years and have published three books on the subject. I started work on my first book, which was never published, just over 10 years ago.

I have predicted over the years that if my conclusions about biblical eschatology are correct, events should culminate in Charles’ seven-year covenant with the state of Israel, and that this covenant should possibly include the Arab countries surrounding Israel, its historic enemies. This idea arises in part from the prophecy of Daniel 9, which tells us that the Antichrist will bring about a seven-year treaty, which in the context of the prophecy would involve Jerusalem and the state of Israel. This was the understanding of the renowned biblical scholar Arthur W. Pink in his study of the Antichrist 100 years ago, before the state of Israel had even come into being. Likewise, the earliest church fathers, such as Irenaeus, advocated this view as early as the 100th century AD.

There have been alternative views of this vision, where the covenant maker in the last verse of the vision is associated with Jesus Christ instead of the Antichrist. In my blog in February, I presented seven arguments from the Bible and history as to why this alternative view is wrong. After that post, I received a personal email from teacher Petri Paavola, who invited me to read his arguments for this alternative view. Paavola sent me a very polite and friendly letter, but his arguments for his case did not change my position on the matter and I showed him in my thorough reply why they do not stand up to closer scrutiny in a light of history and Scripture. I received no further reply or rebuttal to my letter from Pavola. I am certainly willing to change my views on any issue if someone offers only convincing and well-reasoned evidence for their viewpoint.

Daniel 9:27 is just one of the many Bible prophecies concerning the Antichrist that I have identified with Prince Charles and now King Charles. By this I mean that I have been able to demonstrate how Charles can fulfill most literally most of the Scriptures’ prophecies regarding this man, or is the most potential candidate to fulfill even those prophecies about him that are still waiting to be fulfilled. I wrote several blog articles back in 2015-19 where I predicted that Charles would make an official state visit to Israel in the near future and that one of the main purposes of the trip would be to speed up the Middle East peace process. I came to this conclusion not only from Bible prophecies but from several news articles in the Israeli and British press where such a trip had been predicted years in advance. Such a visit finally took place in January 2020 – coinciding with President Trump’s “deal of the century” – during which Charles spoke publicly about how peace in the Middle East would be one of his main objectives.

Charles was still a prince at that time, as Daniel 9:26-27 characterizes the Antichrist (and even more accurately as a prince of the Romans, which is what the title “Prince of Wales” etymologically means). Now he is King Charles III and as King he just made a seven year covenant with Israel. Medialine, an online publication covering Middle East affairs, reported in its headline on March 21: “Israel, UK sign 7-year deal to deepen trade, technology and security ties.” The Guardian and other prominent newspapers have also reported on the matter. According to reports, this 7-year agreement would also cover issues related to the Israel-Palestine conflict and Israel’s security from the threat posed by Iran.

The reports say nothing about King Charles III’s personal role in this agreement, but it should be noted that as the new ruler of England, all decisions of Rishi Sunak’s government are made in the name and with the signed approval of His Majesty Charles III (even those decisions on which he would personally disagree). When Britain invaded Iraq in 2003 with America under Tony Blair’s government, Queen Elizabeth II herself had to approve and sign off on the military operation, whether she was personally for or against the war. We know Charles privately opposed the war, but only the Prime Minister knew what the monarch’s personal views on it were and the Prime Minister did not leak to the public his weekly bilateral discussions with the monarch.

Because of this confidentiality in the relationship between the ruler and the prime minister, we don’t even know how much Charles really influences government decisions and agendas behind the scenes. We already know from Charles’s leaked ‘black spider’ memos that when he was Prince of Wales, Charles used to bombard cabinet members with letters lobbying elected politicians to change their policies on any issue, and using his influence to promote his own political interests on climate change, architecture, alternative medicine or other issues that are close to his heart.

A female Christian friend of mine from Australia, who subscribes to my view on the identity of the Antichrist, shared this news report with me privately and on her FB page. I am careful not to jump to conclusions about how this or that covenant would be the covenant mentioned in the book of Daniel. I mentioned to her that in the 90’s many people also thought that the Oslo peace treaty (in which Charles also played a key role behind the scenes) was the treaty predicted in the Book of Daniel. Although the hands of the end-time clock are now much closer to midnight than they were in the 90s, I do not agree that this agreement already marked the start of the last week of Daniel’s 70 weeks. The agreement was signed on 21 March, so from that we could also calculate that Charles should enter the rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem on 1 September 2026 and Jesus’ public return to the Mount of Olives would fall in late winter or early spring 2030.

Such a timetable would, of course, be a perfectly possible scenario. But it would mean also that my pre-tribulationist notion of rapture were wrong, because I myself have yet to hear of the sudden and unexplained disappearance of millions of people. Of course, I could be wrong about the rapture, but I haven’t found enough evidence for it in the Bible. I recommend that you check out my views on the rapture, for example, in my recent debate in the comments here with a reader of my blog and a Christian friend of mine . In it, both of us argued for a pre-tribulationist rapture, but we had slightly different views on a few details regarding the chronology of Revelation and the second chapter of 2 Thessalonians.

In my blog article on the previous link, I considered it possibility that the first seal of the Book of Revelation would be opened as early as next month with Charles’ coronation. But a reader who is already familiar with my views will know that I do not date the beginning of the 7-year tribulation to the opening of the first seal, but only to the time after the sixth seal, at the beginning of Revelation chapter 7. So even if the rider of the white horse would be crowned as early as May, that person’s agreement with Israel should not follow until the Lamb has unleashed the other three horsemen (Revelation 7:1). We are also not told in what time frame those horsemen will follow one another. If the first seal was opened in May, the second seal (the blood-red war horse) could be opened either in June of the same year or a few years later. So the pact made by the Antichrist could follow just weeks later when he is crowned king or it could happen a few years after that.

I also maintain the view I have been advocating for about ten years now that the agreement mentioned in Daniel 9:27 should apply not only to Israel but to the Arab countries as well and would therefore be a peace treaty between Israel and the Arab countries, brought about by the Antichrist with his diplomatic skills and peaceable rhetoric. The agreement signed in March only concerns Israel and the United Kingdom, but the final agreement should be broader and more significant for the history of the Middle East as a whole. It would be hailed by heads of state and the media as the first real step towards an end to the Middle East conflict and lasting world peace.

Charles III is the most likely candidate for such a treaty at the moment, as he has a long history not only of promoting interfaith dialogue, but also the Middle East peace process (even though many are not aware of this at all). Moreover, his unique personal and family ties to the Holy Land, Jerusalem and its Temple Mount have already been stressed by the world’s religious leaders. The same cannot be said of many party political leaders, although President Trump was also a highly skilled diplomat, who (like his young Jewish son-in-law Jared Kushner) was largely responsible for the Abrahamic peace agreement between Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain in September 2020 (for which he received no praise from the mainstream media ).

Conclusion

I personally think that the seven-year agreement signed in March did not yet mean the implementation of the agreement predicted in Daniel’s book, but it is undoubtedly a preparation for it and Charles himself will play a key role in bringing about that final agreement. Even when he was Prince of Wales, the British Foreign Office often said that it saw Charles as a tremendous asset in promoting Britain’s foreign policy interests in the Arab world, where Charles enjoyed greater prestige than any other Western leader. Already highlighted by the Israeli media for his many positive links with Jews and the Holy Land, Charles would be a diplomatic asset in building state relations between Israel and the UK. Indeed, it is highly likely that the British Foreign Office will use him in the coming months and years for just such a purpose – to promote peace between Israel and the Arabs.

He is also the most natural candidate for the job in light of the fact that the British Empire created the modern Middle East. When Brits occupied the Ottoman territories after World War I, it also planted the seeds for both the state of Israel and the Arab states of today. The British monarchy created the conflict in the Middle East, so it is also responsible for fixing it, as one might argue.