“The first kingdom is the Assyrian or Babylonian kingdom; the second, the Medo-Persian; the third, the great kingdom of Alexander and the Greeks; and the fourth, the Roman Empire. In this the whole world agrees, and history supports it fully in detail.PFF2 267.3

“But the prophet has the most to say about the Roman empire, ... the legs, the feet, and the toes. The Roman empire will be divided. Spain, France, England, and others emerged from it, some of them weak, others strong, and although it will be divided there will still be some strength, as symbolized by the iron in it.... This empire shall last until the end; no one will destroy it but Jesus Himself, when His kingdom comes.” ^{7Translated from Luther, Schriften, vol. 6, cols. 898-900.}PFF2 267.4

2. KINGDOM OF SAINTS FOLLOWS ROME’S DIVISIONS

In chapter 7 the same four kingdoms are repeated under beast symbols, Luther asserted, giving special emphasis to the fourth, or Roman, with the day of judgment following the coming of Christ in the time of Rome’s divisions, after which the saints receive the kingdom.PFF2 268.1

“This prophecy of Daniel is by all teachers uniformly explained to represent the kingdoms of Assyria and Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, the kingdom of Alexander the Great, and the fourth, the Roman empire, which is the largest, the most cruel, and most powerful, and the last on earth. Daniel states clearly that after the fourth beast or empire the judgment will sit, and no other kingdom shall follow but the kingdom of the saints which will last forever.” ^{8Ibid., vol. 20, col. 2160.}PFF2 268.2

But before all this happens, the Roman Empire will long have been divided into ten kingdoms, symbolized by the ten horns, which, he said, are Syria, Egypt, Asia (Minor), Greece, Africa (northern), Spain, Gallia, Italy, Germany, and England. ^{9Ibid., vol. 6, col. 903.}PFF2 268.3

3. HIS POSITION ON THE LITTLE HORN

Luther is not al ways consistent. In his treatise against Catharinus (1521) he had considered the Little Horn of Daniel 7 to refer to the Papacy, but he must have changed his opinion between 1521 and 1529, for in his special sermon against the Turk, which left the press on October 28, 1529, ^{10Ibid., vol. 20, cols. 2158 ff.} he distinctly expounded the Little Horn as the Turk, or Mohammed’s kingdom. This sermon contains a full exegesis of Daniel 7, and among others he makes this explicit statement:PFF2 268.4

“Since we have for certain in the little horn, Mohammed and his empire, we can easily learn from Daniel, what should be thought about the Turk and Mohammed’s kingdom.” ^{11Ibid., col. 2162.}PFF2 268.5

The same explanation appears in his introduction to the prophet Daniel, wherein he states:PFF2 269.1

“A little horn shall also come forth from among them and shall pluck out three of the foremost horns of the ten. This is Mohammed or the Turk, who today has Asia, Egypt, and Greece in his claws. This little horn shall fight the saints and shall blaspheme Christ. All this happens before our own eyes, for the Turk has gained a mighty victory over the Christians, and yet he denies Christ and elevates Mohammed above all. We surely have no more to expect but the day of judgment, because the Turk will not destroy more than three of the ten horns.” ^{12Ibid., vol. 6, col. 903.}PFF2 269.2

Luther seems to have adhered to this opinion for a long time, for in one of his Table Talks, on February 17, 1538, he is quoted as having asserted, “Really the Turk is no small or mean enemy, as Daniel 7:21 shows us, because to him is given the power to fight against the saints of the Lord.” ^{13Ibid., vol. 22, col. 1599.} This did not, of course, alter his conviction that the pope is Antichrist, which Luther proved from the various other symbols.PFF2 269.3

We shall not be surprised by Luther’s point of view concerning the Turk when we take into consideration the political situation of his time. Western Christianity was in deadly danger of being overwhelmed by the onrushing Ottoman Turks; Eastern Christianity had already succumbed. Soliman the Magnificent had conquered the whole of Southeastern Europe and was knocking at the gates of Vienna, with the resources of a vast empire at his disposal. On the contrary, the Christian princes, disunited as usual, apparently had little with which to oppose him. Luther consequently drew comfort and fortitude from this prophecy, in the belief that this power should pluck out only three horns and not more.PFF2 269.4

4. ANTIOCHUS REGARDED AS SYMBOL OF ANTICHRIST

On Daniel 8, after identifying the ram as Medo-Persia, and the goat as Greece under Alexander, who defeated Darius, Luther states that the kingdom of Alexander was “split into four parts: Syria, Egypt, Asia, and Greece.” ^{14Ibid., vol. 6, col. 904.} The conspicuous horn, according to Luther, coming out of Syria, seemed to typify Antiochus initially and his conflict with the Jews, whose country lay between Syria and Egypt, and the duration of the conflict was 2300 literal days, or about six years and three months. “That,” said Luther, “is why all the teachers of the past saw a symbol of the Antichrist in this Antiochus, and surely they found the truth.” ^{15Ibid., cols. 904, 905.}PFF2 269.5

5. APPLIES YEAR-DAY PRINCIPLE TO SEVENTY WEEKS

On the application of the year-day principle to the seventy weeks of Daniel 9, Luther not only is explicit but declares the harmony of all teachers thereon.PFF2 270.1

“All teachers are in harmony that these are year-weeks and not day-weeks, that means, a week encompasses seven years and not seven days. This also is taught by experience, for seventy day-weeks would not even span two years, and that would not be a remarkable period for such a wonderful revelation; therefore, these seventy weeks are 490 years.” ^{16Ibid., col. 906.}PFF2 270.2

Luther divides them into their component parts, but begins them with the commandment of the second year of Darius. And he places the death of Christ at the beginning of the seventieth week, during which last week of years the gospel was preached with power. ^{17Ibid., cols. 906-909.} In this unusual exegesis Luther was followed by Osiander and some others.PFF2 270.3

6. WILLFUL KING OF CHAPTER 11 APPLIED TO POPE

Luther firmly believed that the willful king of Daniel 11:36—that exalted and magnified himself above every God, and lorded it over emperors-referred to the pope.PFF2 270.4

“Here the pope is clearly pictured, who in all his decrees shouts impudently that all the churches and thrones will be judged by him, but he cannot be judged by anyone. And Cap. Solitae: As the sun is superior to the moon, so the pope is superior to the emperor. And wherever authority is, there is power to command, and the others are obliged to obey.” ^{18Ibid., col. 917; also the same in substance in vol. 22, cols. 918, 919.}PFF2 270.5

After discussing the distinctive features of the prophecy—disregard of the desire of women through the prohibiting of thePFF2 270.6

marriage of priests, the construction of strong church-fortresses, and the approach of the last conflict when war with the Papacy shall reach its predicted climax-Luther cites Huss’ prediction of 1416, that after roasting a goose (Huss meaning goose in Bohemian), a swan would arise after a hundred years whom they would not be able to fry. This, Luther averred, began with the controversy over indulgences in 1517. And although the pope received a mighty shock but still remained on his seat, never the less at the time of the end the pope will be pushed against. And he will finally be destroyed, coming to his end between the seas—Rome being between the seas of Tyrrhenum and Adriaticum—with none to help him. In support, he cites Daniel 11:41 2 Thessalonians 2:8, Revelation 18:4, and Daniel 8:25. ^{19Ibid., cols. 922-933.}PFF2 270.7

Luther’s application of the Antichrist to the Papacy is explicit, though at times he rather inconsistently seeks to include both pope and Turk, ^{20Ibid., vol. 22, col. 844, no. 1 (Cordatus nos. 1354, 1355).} while in others he explicitly rules out the Turk.PFF2 271.1

“Here, in Daniel 11:37, we have a description of the Antichrist. He will not regard God, that is religion, nor the love of women, that is the worldly order and the order of the household and family. Under woman is understood the propagation of the human kind. And who despises that, despises all mankind, because all the civil institutions and orders of the world are made ultimately for the sake of the woman, to protect her and her offspring. Now the Antichrist, that is the pope, will not have God not a legitimate wife and that means that the Antichrist will despise laws and regulations, customs and principles, kings and princes, principalities in heaven and on earth and accept only his own law. Daniel was a mighty prophet, who was loved by Christ and he spoke in no uncertain terms about the Christ and the Antichrist. The latter shall reign between two seas, at Constantinople, but that place is not holy, they [the Turks] also do not forbid marriage, therefore, believe me, the Pope is the Antichrist.” ^{21Ibid., cols. 844, 845, no. 2 (Cordatus, nos. 1409, 40, 1676, 1441); also Table Talk of Martin Luther (trans. by Hazlitt), no. 430, pp. 193, 194.}PFF2 271.2

On the relationship between the pope and the Turk, Luther interestingly observes:PFF2 271.3

“The body of the Antichrist is as well the pope as the Turk, because a living being consists of body and soul. The spirit of the Antichrist is the pope, his flesh is the Turk; the latter fights against the church with material weapons whereas the former with spiritual. But both are from the same master, the devil, because the Pope is a liar and the Turk is a murderer. Make a unit of the Antichrist and you will find both in the pope (lying and murdering).PFF2 271.4

“But as in the beginning the church was victorious over the saintliness of the Jews and the might of the Romans, in like manner, she will today and forever be victorious over the hypocrites, that is over the pope and the power of the Turk and the emperor. Just let us pray for it.” ^{22Luther, Schriften, vol. 22, col. 844.}PFF2 272.1

However, in declaring that Daniel “spoke of that Antichrist persecutor as clearly as if he had been an eyewitness thereof,” Luther asserts, in the same Table Talk, that the holy mountain between the seas is at Rome, not at Constantinople. Thus:PFF2 272.2

” ‘He shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas, in the glorious holy mountain’; that is, at Rome, in Italy. The Turk rules also between two seas, at Constantinople, but that is not the holy mountain. He does not honor or advance the worship of Maosim, nor does he prohibit matrimony. Therefore Daniel points directly at the pope, who does both with great fierceness.” ^{23Luther, Table Talk, no. 430, p. 194.}PFF2 272.3

7. BOOK OF DANIEL BEING OPENED BY STUDY

On Daniel 12:4, concerning the sealing of the book till the last days, when it “shall be opened and greater knowledge proceed from it,” Luther says significantly:PFF2 272.4

“This is the work which we are doing at the present time. And as formerly stated prophecies can only be perfectly understood after they have been fulfilled.” ^{24Luther, Schriften, vol. 6, cols. 935, 936.}PFF2 272.5

Dealing last of all with prophetic time, Luther again reverts to the three and a half times of Daniel 12:7. When it will end, and the desolation of the abomination come, we cannot know, he said, until we see it fulfilled. Luther is hazy here, but says that if the 1290 and 1335 are years, as with the seventy weeks, then they should have come to an end about seven years before the great papal schism (1378). They will be “understood only by their fulfillment on the day of judgment,” which day he believed near. ^{25Ibid., cols. 937-939.} Luther closes his comment on the indispensability of the book of Daniel thus:PFF2 272.6

“Therefore we bid that all earnest Christians read the book of Daniel, to whom it will be a consolation and a great profit in these last miserable times.... ‘But when these things begin to come to pass, look up, and lift up your heads, because your redemption is at hand.’ For the same reason we find in Daniel that all the dreams and visions, how fearful they might be, end always in joy and gladness with the coming of Christ and His kingdom, yea, for that chief article of faith, the coming of Christ, these visions were given, explained, and recorded.” ^{26Ibid., cols. 942, 943.}PFF2 273.1

8. PROFOUND INFLUENCE OF PROPHECIES ON REFORMATION

Disavowing originality for the positions presented, but declaring their profound influence upon the course of the Reformation, Luther states:PFF2 273.2

“Nobody can say or pride himself that these teachings have originated in his head, or have been taught deliberately and on purpose. We all stumbled upon them incidentally, or it happened to us as Isaiah expresses it: [65:1] ‘I am sought by them that ask not for me. I am found by them that sought me not.’ I myself must confess that I am one of the first of those who originally followed an altogether different purpose. I first directed my writings against the misuse of indulgences, not against indulgences themselves. Neither had I thought of opposing the pope, or to harm even a hair of his head. First I had not rightly understood either the pope or Christ Himself. [But our text states] that tidings also come from the north, that means from the pope’s own kingdom, because we ourselves had been papists and antichristians, perhaps even more than they.” ^{27Ibid., col. 932.}PFF2 273.3

I. Luther’s Deep Interest in Prophecy

III. Luther on the Book of Revelation