Does Bible prophecy require the literal death and resurrection of Charles III in order to meet the prophecy’s ultimate criterion of the Beast “whose mortal wound was healed”?

Listen to the article

I wrote about King Charles’ cancer on my blog in January and also wrote my partly sarcastic and self-ironic apology to His Majesty. I have said from the beginning of my vocation that I am not infallible and therefore I could be wrong about Charles. But because the biblical evidence for him has been so strong, I have felt it my moral duty to warn the world and the Church about him. At the same time, I have sought to refute the doctrinal errors that lead many Christians to believe that it would not even be possible to identify a man of lawlessness by me or any other Christian before the rapture has taken place. Indeed, such a premise prevents Christians from looking at the whole subject objectively and without prejudice.

But despite all the biblical and historical evidence that I presented in my English-language book, in 424 pages and 760 footnotes, and on which I have written over a million words, I myself have also been at times the biggest skeptic of my own research. And as someone who has spent so much time researching and publicly promoting such a subject, it makes perfect sense to try to look at it from all angles, to consider all possible objections and circumstances where the logic used to support my ideas would have been flawed and misleading. Indeed, the truth-loving mind seeks truth even when it means questioning our own beliefs.

Content

Grandpa

For this reason, I have always appreciated well thought-out rebuttals where the reader is also aware of the content of my arguments and can respond to them accordingly. Although the Bible nowhere states the age of the Antichrist at the time of his accession, Charles’ advanced age is one factor that makes skepticism perfectly justified. Charles’ unpopularity is again more a confirmation of his prophecied role, since this is the explicit criterion of the prophecies about this person according to Daniel 11:21, on which the title of my book is based.

This is not to say that the Antichrist has to be young and handsome to attract the masses, because a person’s magnetism has nothing to do with his age or appearance. Most of the most prominent world leaders of our time are also in the same age group as King Charles. But at Charles’ age (75), many people’s physical and cognitive condition may begin to deteriorate, as is already evident with 81-year-old President Joe Biden, who stumbles around on his own and babbles nonsense about men living on the moon. On the other hand, some of us may still have a perfectly clear mind at age of 100. But not all of us will live to 100 either, because the average lifespan of a person living in the West is about 80 years, as the Psalmist says:

“As for the days of our life, they contain seventy years, Or if due to strength, eighty years, Yet their pride is but labor and sorrow; For soon it is gone and we fly away.¹

Zombie Apocalypse

If Charles were to die soon of cancer, he would have died at about the same age as most other UK citizens. His heavy-smoking grandfather George VI died of lung cancer at the age of 56, while his mother Elizabeth II lived to be 95 and his father Prince Philip 99. But Charles’ grandmother Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon was the longest-lived of them all, dying in March 2002 at the age of 101. But can a person die and rise again into the living? I believe this has happened at least once in history in the case of one crucified man. But generally speaking, people don’t rise from the grave once they’ve been buried in the ground. At least I haven’t had the chance to witness it myself… except maybe in a low-budged horror movies.

More common, of course, are cases where a person’s heart has stopped for a while and they have been declared dead, but they have been revived at the last minute. These cases also often constitute so-called “near-death experiences” where those who have returned from the dead claim to have already had a foretaste of either the joys of heaven or the horrors of hell. But other than in the case of Lazarus and Jesus, the dead who have been in the grave for a few days do not usually come back to life. At least I don’t happen to know any living dead, but feel free to comment on the article if you’ve ever come across a zombie.

Re-examining of my own writings

Since the dead do not, in most cases, return from the underworld back to the world of the living, I have been somewhat sceptical about claims that the Antichrist will receive a mortal wound from which he will be resurrected back into the realm of the living. However, I went to research what I had written earlier about the mortal wound of the beast using a word search (I have written about a million and a half words of text, so I can’t memorise all of my own teaching on eschatology). In my first book, Muhammad, Charles the Great and the Antichrist, written between 2012 and 2014, I stated the following on page 610:

Some believe that this passage [Revelation 13:3] refers to the Antichrist literally receiving a mortal wound to the head, but coming back to life as a result of power given to Satan or a great deception. According to Paul, the appearance of the Child of Perdition would be “in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all the deception of wickedness.”² To imitate Christ in all things, the Antichrist would also die and come back to life again.

On page 318 you will also find the following interesting historical background:

C. A. Patrides, in a book The Apocalypse in English Reneissance thought and literature, says that during the [English] Civil War and the subsequent interregnum years, it was commonly taught that Charles I was the Antichrist – one of the seven heads of the beast, which John saw “as it were wounded to death (i.e. the beheading of Charles I), but its mortal wound was healed.” (Revelation 13:3). The rise of his son Charles II in 1660 was interpreted as a healing of this mortal wound. Royalists, on the other hand, saw him as “a messianic king whose miraculous return heralded the coming of the golden age.” Particularly great fear and hope were attached to the year 1666 because it reflected the number of the beast, 666.

In my first print book, published in 2019, Who Was Not Regarded Worthy of a King – The Antichrist Revealed? (Books on Demand), I wrote along the same lines on pages 208-209:

In Chapter 8 we saw how in medieval Europe the Antichrist was often associated with the post-apocalyptic prophecy of the Last Roman Emperor, who was believed to rise from Western Europe, descend from Charlemagne and to be a prince named Charles. Of course, as Bible-centred Christians, we cannot hang our image of the beast on such extra-biblical prophecies, unless he also fits the Bible’s own predictions about this man’s characteristics.

I will now leave it to everyone’s speculation as to whether the “mortal wound of the beast that was healed” refers to the revival of the Roman Empire and its imperial office in this person, or whether the Antichrist returns to life through literal death and resurrection to imitate our Lord Jesus Christ. If this latter theory is correct, it would explain why verse 3 says, “And the whole earth was amazed and followed after the beast” After all, according to Paul, the appearance of the Antichrist would be followed by satanic miracles and signs (2 Thessalonians 2:9).

In my English book I also referred to this when I quoted Arthur W. Pink’s 1923 treatise on the Antichrist prophecies of the Bible:

[In Ezekiel 28:10] it says of him, “You shall die as the uncircumcised”, which is a strong hint that he should not die the death of the “uncircumcised” because he was one of the circumcised [note: Charles was circumcised as a child by a Jewish mohel]! If it is said that this verse could not apply to the Antichrist because Christ himself will destroy him at his coming, the objection can easily be dismissed by reference to Revelation 13:14, which tells us that the Antichrist will be wounded to death and will rise from the dead – which is before his final destruction at the hands of our Saviour.³

The ecclesiastical and historical origins of the doctrine

So this is what Arthur W. Pink taught over a hundred years ago, that the Antichrist will die and come back to life before his final judgment. How far back does this teaching go? The one who popularized this doctrine in modern times is Hal Lindsey in his bestselling books such as The Late Great Planet Earth published in 1970. On pages 107-108 he wrote:

We are told in Revelation 13:3 that this great world leader will have a fatal head wound which will be miraculously healed. Many people have not known just what to make of this statement. Some have thought that what this means is that one of the empires of the ancient Roman Empire would be miraculously revived and brought back to existence. That is one possible interpretation. However, I do not believe that is the right interpretation. Here is why, . , .

Look for a moment at Revelation 13:14, This is speaking of the False Prophet, who will be an associate of the Great Roman Dictator. The verse says: “And he deceives those who dwell on the earth because of the signs which it was given him to perform in the presence of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who had the wound of the sword and has come to life’ Whoever this person is with this fatal wound will have a statue made of himself, and men are going to worship this idol. You do not make an idol of an empire. You make an idol of a person.

The way in which this dictator is going to step onto the stage of history will be dramatic. Overnight he will become the byword of the world, He is going to be distinguished as supernatural; this will be done by an act which will be a Satanic counterfeit of the resurrection. This writer does not believe it will be an actual resurrection, but it will be a situation in which this person has a mortal wound. Before he has actually lost life, however, he will be brought back from this critical wounded state. This is something which will cause tremendous amazement throughout the world.

We could draw a comparison to the tragic death of John F, Kennedy. Imagine what would have happened if the President of the United States, after being shot and declared dead, had come to life again! The impact of an event like that would shake the world. It is not difficult to imagine what will happen when this coming world leader makes his miraculous recovery. This man, the Antichrist, will probably not be known as a great leader until the time of his revival from the fatal wound. After that the whole world will follow him.

The doctrine is still popular in many dispensationalist and futurist interpretations of prophecy and can also be found in Tim LaHaye’s and Jerry B. Jenkins’ fictional book series Left Behind, where the Antichrist is a Romanian politician named Nicolae Carpathia, who is murdered by the Israeli head of state Chaim Rosenzweig, but miraculously resurrected three days later when Satan takes full control of his body. In LaHaye and Jenkins’ series of books, this death and resurrection of the Antichrist takes place midway through the seven-year Tribulation. However, this plot twist was not invented for Hollywood films, but can be dated back to the eschatological reflections of the early Church Fathers.

I riffled every biblical scholar’s treasure trove, the website Bible Hub (nowdays I also use the “all-knowing” ChatGPT in my research), for English Bible commentaries from the 1800’s about a mortal wound of the beast that was healed. Many commentaries advocated the Historicist prophecy interpretation of the time, according to which the papacy fulfilled the Daniel prophecies of the Little Horn of the beast (an interpretation with which I agree) and the Revelation prophecies of the First Beast, its seven heads and ten horns (an interpretation with which I do not agree).

Thus, the mortal wound of the the one head of the beast was also interpreted not as the death and resurrection of an individual, but rather as the death of the pagan Roman Empire and the rise of the Roman Catholic papacy as its successor in the Holy Roman Empire of the 800s-1800s. That is, the beast was struck dead by the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 AD, but was revived and resurrected by the coronation of Charles the Great as Roman Emperor by Pope Leo III in 800 AD. Other commentaries of the 19th century, on the other hand, advocated a Preterist interpretation of the vision, according to which the beast of Revelation referred to the Emperor Nero and his supposed resurrection at the end of time.

Emperor Nero as an archetype for the Antichrist

Emperor Nero, who ruled from 54 to 68, was the first Roman emperor to persecute Christians and one of the most brutal. There is no evidence that early church teachers linked him more generally to the Beast of the Revelation, although some did, mainly Victorinus and Augustine. The idea of Nero as the beast of Revelation only became more widespread in the writings of the Preterist prophecy teachers of the 1800s. This idea is supported, among other things, by the fact that the transliterated Hebrew form of his Greek title counts the number of the beast 666 . Secondly, Nero is also associated with the prophecy of Revelation 17:8-11 about the seven heads and ten horns of the beast.

Both Preterist and Historicist prophecy teachers have agreed that the Beast and the Harlot are linked in the vision to ancient Rome; that the harlot riding on the seven heads of the beast referred to the city founded on the seven hills of Rome, because “the seven heads are the seven mountains on which the woman sits” and that “The woman whom you saw is the great city, which reigns over the kings of the earth.” This harlot was “drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses of Jesus”, as Rome was the greatest persecutor of Christians in John’s lifetime.

But John was told that “The seven heads are… [also] seven kings; five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain a little while. The beast which was, and is not, is himself also an eighth and is one of the seven, and he goes to destruction.⁴ In the Preterist interpretation of the vision, these seven kings are thought to have referred to the early Roman emperors, of whom Nero would have been among the first five. And so “the beast which was, and is not, is himself also an eighth and is one of the seven” would be the emperor Nero, who rises from the dead before the second coming of Jesus.

This was also linked to the ‘Nero Redivivus myth’ that spread in ancient Rome after the suicide of Emperor Nero, that he was not dead but would return from Parthia, from nowadays Iran, to become Emperor of Rome. The myth was so well known for hundreds of years after Nero’s death that Christian writers such as Victorinus and Augustine referred to it in their interpretations of the Book of Revelation. Victorinus, who lived during the persecutions of Emperor Diocletian (284-305), wrote in his commentary on the Book of Revelation:

Now that one of the heads was, as it were, slain to death, and that the stroke of his death was directed, he speaks of Nero. For it is plain that when the cavalry sent by the senate was pursuing him, he himself cut his throat. Him therefore, when raised up, God will send as a worthy king, but worthy in such a way as the Jews merited. And since he is to have another name, He shall also appoint another name, that so the Jews may receive him as if he were the Christ. [i.e. the prophesied Messiah of the Jews].”

This is perhaps the first time Nero was associated with the beast of Revelation. Augustine, considered as the most important church father in the Western Church, also referred to this view in a slightly more sceptical way in his work on the City of God, written in the first half of the 400s :

Some think that the Apostle Paul referred to the Roman empire [in 2 Thessalonians 2:7], and that he was unwilling to use language more explicit, lest he should incur the calumnious charge of wishing ill to the empire which it was hoped would be eternal; so that in saying, For the mystery of iniquity does already work, he alluded to Nero, whose deeds already seemed to be as the deeds of Antichrist. And hence some suppose that he shall rise again and be Antichrist. Others, again, suppose that he is not even dead, but that he was concealed that he might be supposed to have been killed, and that he now lives in concealment in the vigor of that same age which he had reached when he was believed to have perished, and will live until he is revealed in his own time and restored to his kingdom. But I wonder that men can be so audacious in their conjectures. However, it is not absurd to believe that these words of the apostle, Only he who now holds, let him hold until he be taken out of the way, refer to the Roman empire, as if it were said, Only he who now reigns, let him reign until he be taken out of the way. And then shall the wicked be revealed: no one doubts that this means Antichrist.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, published in 1882, echoes the views of these early church writers on the Emperor Nero: “It is possible that he [the Apostle John in Revelation 17] means to tell us, that the Antichrist who is to come will actually be Nero risen from the dead (we notice, that in the words of the text his death, the reality of which is historically certain, is not denied, but affirmed): more probably, Antichrist will be a new Nero in the same way as he will be a new Antiochus, an enemy of God as they were, typified by them inasmuch as they were actuated by his spirit.”

Preterism, Historicism and Futurism

I have often said that I am in favour of a kind of integrated interpretation of prophecy where I have integrated together a preterist, historicist and futurist interpretation of prophecy. That is, while I do not agree with all aspects of preterist, historicist or futurist prophecy interpretation, I do agree with each in their main lines and do not see them as contradictory or mutually exclusive views of end-time biblical prophecy. I can also agree with the view of the Bible commentary quoted above that the Emperor Nero was one of many Antichrists (1 John 2:18) and the final example of that one, like Antiochus Epiphanes. Some of these historical examples of the Antichrist were also very accurately predicted in Bible prophecy, such as Antiochus Epiphanes, the Papal States and the Ottoman Caliphate (as I have already argued in my writings).

The seven-headed beast of Revelation may well have some prefigurative reference to Emperor Nero or the papacy, as partial preterism and partial historicism already teach, but in general I interpret the prophecies of Revelation mainly in the light of their futuristic understanding. My point in quoting the interpretations of the early teachers of the Church now is mainly that the idea of the death (or perhaps a faked death) of the Antichrist and a satanic resurrection goes back at least 1700 years. And in the days of the early church this was understood to refer – as in the teaching of the futurists of the 1900s – to the literal death and resurrection of some world ruler through whom this person would seek to imitate Jesus Christ. In fact, even the church father Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp, a disciple of the apostle John the Apostle, referred to this idea a few decades after the Revelation was written :

We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign. But he indicates the number of the name now, that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is: the name, however, is suppressed, because it is not worthy of being proclaimed by the Holy Spirit.

For if it had been declared by Him, he (Antichrist) might perhaps continue for a long period. But now as he was, and is not, and shall ascend out of the abyss, and goes into perdition, Revelation 17:8 as one who has no existence; so neither has his name been declared, for the name of that which does not exist is not proclaimed. But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father, sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire

A beast that was, and is not, and will come.

It is important to note now that one of the earliest teachers of the church here connects the beast of Revelation to the coming world ruler, whose name could be counted as 666 in Greek Hebrew gematria (as Charles’ name counts in English and Hebrew) and who will visit the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, as foretold in Matthew 24:15 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4. Furthermore, though he does not say so directly, he alludes to this person’s death and resurrection by quoting Revelation 17:8:

The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to destruction. And those who live on the earth, whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will wonder when they see the beast, that he was, and is not, and will come.

We can equate this verse with Revelation 1:8, 17-18 where Jesus speaks of Himself:

“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty”… I am the first and the last, and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.

Just as Jesus is said to have given his life and “went and made proclamation to the spirits in prison [in Hades],”⁵, so too the beast is said to rise from the “abyss” or underworld. But unlike Jesus, he is also returning to the abyss. And just as John saw Jesus as a Lamb who was “as it were slain “⁶, so also with the beast he sees “one of his heads as if it had been fatally wounded, and his fatal wound was healed. “⁷ Revelation 13:12-14 tells of a False Prophet:

He exercises all the authority of the first beast in his presence. And he makes the earth and those who live on it worship the first beast, whose fatal wound was healed. He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down out of the sky to the earth in the presence of people. And he deceives those who live on the earth because of the signs which it was given him to perform in the presence of the beast, telling those who live on the earth to make an image to the beast who had the wound of the sword and has come to life.

In these passages, the resurrection of the beast from his fatal wound is thus linked to satanic miracles performed by another beast, the false prophet. This is also the context of Paul’s teaching to the church at Thessalonica:

….the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not accept the love of the truth so as to be saved. For this reason God will send upon them [n]a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness.⁸

Why is the whole world wondering the beast?

While I have often been more inclined to think that the healing of the deadly wound of the beast would indicate the revival of his kingdom or the Roman emperorship in the office of The Last Roman Emperor that this person will hold, the idea of his literal death and resurrection would be more consistent with the idea that “the whole earth was amazed and followed after the beast” as his deadly wound was healed. If the Pope would crown a ruler named Charles as Emperor of Rome [or Emperor of Europe]- the last time being under Charles V in the 1500s, and the first time in the 800s marking the birth of Western civilisation – it would indeed be an event of great interest and wonder, but would it be such a spectacle as to draw the whole world to marvel at him with their mouth agape?

Secondly, does the Antichrist have to die and rise again to really fulfill the anti prefix of his name, which comes from the Greek and means the opponent, the opposite and the substitute of Christ? He is therefore not only the enemy of Christ, but also His imitator and antithesis. Is he then also to be one ‘who is and who was and who is to come’? At least this is what the 1871 Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible⁹ suggests, noting Revelation 1:8 and 17:8. The idea of the literal death and resurrection of the Antichrist is therefore not new and is also supported by the precise textual exegesis of the biblical texts (as opposed to eisegesis, which means reading our own assumptions and preconceptions into the text).

But if I have expressed scepticism about this interpretation, I am not the first person. Even Augustine wondered about the “conspiracy theories of the Fifth Century” and the gullibility of the people of his time, when the Emperor Nero, who had been in the tomb for over 200 years, was believed to be alive and would return as Emperor of Rome. In the 1970s, Hal Lindsey said that he did not believe in a literal return of the Antichrist from death to life, but in “a situation in which this person has a mortal wound. Before he has actually lost life, however, he will be brought back from this critical wounded state.”

King Charles’ cancer could be just such a situation where he now has a “mortal wound”, but “before he has actually lost life, however, he will be brought back from this critical wounded state.” But what if he not only has a “fatal wound” but is actually going to die of cancer? Even in this situation, I should logically have no problem believing in his resurrection. After all, I also believe in the resurrection of my own relatives who died in Christ in the rapture of the church.¹⁰ Paul taught:

Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain, your faith also is in vain. Moreover, we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If we have hoped in Christ only in this life, we are of all people most to be pitied.¹¹

It is not consistent to say that as a Christian I believe in the bodily resurrection of all people – saints and wicked alike – but at the same time I find it impossible that an individual person will rise from the dead before Christ’s second coming. In the same way, it is somewhat inconsistent to say that I cannot believe that Charles could rise from the dead, but I do believe that he would fight with his tanks and ballistic missiles against a heavenly army from outer space that would defeat him with flying horses.¹² Or that I could not possibly believe in the bodily resurrection of Charles, but I do believe in the bodily resurrection of two witnesses at the end of the beast’s reign.¹³

“Death has been swallowed up in victory”.

I have sometimes said that I am an “eschatological realist”, by which I mean that I try to understand and interpret prophecy in the most realistic light possible, rooted in the real world. As scientists and technologists today are already on the threshold of being able to give the blind their sight, the deaf their hearing and the crippled their mobility, I see this as part of the historical trajectory predicted in the Bible prophecy ¹⁴ rather than seeking to scare and demonise such a trajectory, which many Christians may now fall into in the age of Elon Musk’s brain chips and artificial intelligence.

My eschatological realism does not mean that I deny the existence of the supernatural or the power of God. But often the two are mistakenly contrasted, because we can explain, for example, the return of the Jews to their land and the rebirth of the State of Israel in the light of a completely secular history (Zionism was, after all, a secular nationalistic ideology founded by atheistic Jews) without the need to see the supernatural hand of God behind the events. But such a view is a mistake, because the Bible says that God is guiding our history according to His good will to liberate all creation from the “corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.”¹⁵

We can also see erroneously God and medicine as enemies of each other, or we can see them as allies. I speculated on my blog already in September 2018 that Charles might die before he rises to his status as the Biblical Antichrist and that he would be resurrected by some scientific miracle of modern medicine.

So I don’t think it’s impossible that the Antichrist could be over 80 years old when he came to power. If you think of the patriarchs of the Old Testament, for example, many of them did not begin their vocation until they were 70 or 80 years old. The Antichrist, moreover, can begin to play a significant public role years before the beginning of the Tribulation period [Nowhere does the Bible say that the rise of the Antichrist and the beginning of the tribulation period are simultaneous events]. In addition, some prophecies about him seem to suggest that he will undergo some kind of satanic counterpart to Christ’s death and resurrection…

Since many of these “miracles” performed by the false prophet – the image of the beast and the mark of the beast – can also be explained in the light of today’s advanced technology, is the healing of the first beast’s mortal wound also a scientific breakthrough brought about by modern technology? Consider the news headlines quoted earlier about how scientists are now planning to defeat even death and they believe it could be possible in the coming decades. Already with today’s medicine, a person can be revived from the dead even if their heart has been stopped for more than an hour. The Daily Mail reports on a patient who was revived after being dead for 70 minutes: “Previously, doctors believed that after 20 minutes of resuscitation the chances of survival were very low, but last year they received new information suggesting that the survival rate increased beyond the 20-minute mark.” But scientists are now investigating whether it is possible to revive people even after a much longer period of death. In the article Can the dead be brought back to life? Scientists believe so!

New Delhi: Soon the brain dead can be brought back to life – if the Multi-Modality Approach or ReAnima Project is successful. A team of doctors from India to the US, led by Indian scientist Dr Himanshu Bansal, are working on an ambitious project to bring life to those considered brain dead. As part of the project, the team has been granted ethical clearance to recruit 20 patients who have been declared clinically dead from brain injury.

The team will conduct the first phase of the trial, called ‘First In Human Neuro-Regeneration and Neuro-Reanimation’ at Anupam Hospital in Rudrapur, Uttarakhand, India. In the trial, the scientists will incorporate a series of procedures and therapies that include injecting the brain with stem cells and experimenting with peptides in an attempt to regenerate the brain and bring it back to life.

Bansal, who works with biotech companies Revita Life Sciences and Bioquark Inc, claimed he already had some success with two patients in the Gulf and Europe. “We are now trying to do a definitive study with 20 subjects and prove that brain death is reversible.

This opens the door for future research and especially for people who lose a loved one suddenly,” Dr Bansal told the Telegraph. Peptides are administered into the spinal cord – of those kept alive by life support alone – daily by pump, and stem cells are given every two weeks for six weeks. This ground-breaking project is the first of its kind and also a step towards the possible reversal of death in our lifetime.

Conclusion

So while the idea of the literal death and resurrection of the Antichrist is biblically justified and goes back to the eschatological texts of the earliest teachers of the Church, I admit that it would also give me a convenient escape from facing reality and admitting error in the event of Charles dying of cancer. For I could believe, as the early Church eschatologists did about Emperor Nero, that King Charles would rise from the grave weeks, months, years, or decades after his death.

In reality, it might be more honest to admit it after three days and three nights that if the king has not risen from the grave, then I was wrong about him as the beast of Revelation and a man of lawlessness. After all, the most important thing in our faith is not to believe in the resurrection of Charles but in resurrection and ascension of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To conclude with the words of our Saviour, “I am the resurrection and the life; the one who believes in Me will live, even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die. Do you believe this?”¹⁶

Footnotes

Psalm 90:10 ↩︎
2 Thessalonians 2:9 ↩︎
To Whom the Majesty of Kingship Has Not Been Conferred – The Antichrist Revealed? (Books on Demand, 2022, page 119) ︎ ↩︎
Revelation 17:9-11 ↩︎
1 Peter 3:19 ↩︎
Revelation 5:6 ︎ ↩︎
Revelation 13:3 ↩︎
2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 ↩︎
Although the comment promote a historicist interpretation of the papacy – not a person – as that beast risen from the dead ︎ ↩︎
1 Thessalonians 4:16 ︎ ↩︎
1 Cor. 15:12-19 ︎ ↩︎
2. Tess. 2:8, llm. 19:11-21 ︎ ↩︎
Ilm. 11:11 ︎ ↩︎
Isa. 35:5-6, Matt. 11:5 ︎ ↩︎
Romans 8:21 ↩︎
John 11:25-26 ↩︎