FROM "The Second Advent - How: When: Where?" Daniel Chapter 11

A RECAP Of A 1940 Booklet, By A.J. Ferris, His Expounding on the Past 2000 Years of The Middle East’s Rise and Fall of the Arabs and Turks:-

FROM The Second Advent - How: When: Where? Daniel Chapter 11 

By A. J. Ferris

Published 202300703 -:- Revised 20251215P

Scripture references are from Modern King James (MKJV) unless noted otherwise.

Aim -

Is to produce a short useful piece of reference material based on the work by Mr. A. J. Ferris concerning his commentary on Daniel chapters 11.

Reason –

This booklet is out of print. In my opinion it is one of the few commentaries with considerable detail covering this particular prophecy. Hence it is worthy of revival.

 

Reference:

The Second Advent: How, When, Where? / A. J. Ferris. - Fourth Edition.;

And my HARD copy of the booklet

Background

The attached material has been copied from the above-mentioned booklet. Ferris initially produced his first edition in 1935, then later, the third edition in July 1940. The works of Ferris can be obtained from the National Library; you can search via “Trove”, “https://trove.nla.gov.au/”.

NB: PLEASE DON'T throw out the baby with the bath water! Take note that Ferris wrote this in the late 1930's, World War II era. People thought the, "END is NIE!" So, his prediction "the l9l7 generation will see the Second Advent", was obviously wrong! The rest of this booklet is from good hindsight analysis of history and scripture, and I believe it is excellent. It is a whole lot better than some people these days who predict this chapter is still ALL future. 

This chapter is one continuous event or vision. Cyrus and Darius the Mede are the same person, Refer to the works by James Ussher’s, ‘The Annals of the World’- “560 BC par 902”. So it is Gabriel who says in Dan 11:1 “I, in the first year of Darius the Mede, I was standing for a supporter and for a fortress for him.”

The symbols like [P57] indicate the exact location of the bottom of the booklet page. In some cases it happened to be mid sentence. Or [Map] indicate the exact location of the map or chart.

Ferris uses the Historic interpretation point of view, as did many of the orthodox Protestant commentators. Refer to ‘e-Sword’, History of The Christian Church, volume 1 chapter 12 par. 101. Or do a word search using the phrase “The Apocalypse is a prophetic”.

From “The Second Advent: How, When, Where? By A. J. Ferris. - Fourth Edition.”

Starting page 57

****************************************************************************************************************

(5) The Fall of Turkey, the last “King of the North” of Dan 11, also shows that the l9l7 generation will see the Second Advent.

DANIEL, Chapter 11. 3. And a mighty king shall stand up. 4. ..and his kingdom shall be broken. 5. And the King of the South shall be strong ..and he (the King of the North) shall be strong above him. (verses 6 to 30) 31 ..And arms shall stand and they shall pollute the sanctuary, and shall take away the daily sacrifice (70 A.D,) and they shall place the abomination that makes desolate. 32 ..the people that do know their God shall do exploits and shall .. 33. Instruct many, yet they shall fall by the sword., and by flame, by captivity ..many days. 34 ..but many shall cleave to them with flatteries. (35) ..36. And the king shall ..exalt himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished. 37. Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers nor the desire of women.... 38. But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not ..with gold, and silver, and  with precious stones.

DAN. 11 Is the consecutive history of the nations ruling the Near East from Alexander the Great to fall of Turkey in 1917- 18. The “mighty king” of DAN. 11-3 was Alexander the Great after whose death in 323 B.C. the Greek Empire was divided into two smaller Empires, one centred in SYRIA, north of Palestine, and the other in EGYPT, south of Palestine. Verses 6 to 30 then foretold the history of those two powers from 323 B.C. to 62 B.C., calling them by the names of the " King of the North " and the “King of the South. “Bishop Newton, the well-known writer on prophecy, stated that Daniel's forecast of the careers of those kings of Syria and Egypt” was really more perfect than any history." About 60 B.C. the Romans conquered the whole of the Near East, so that the " King of the North " and the " king of the South " ceased to exist until the fall of Imperial Rome when, as Daniel foretold, they rose again. [P57]

Verse 31 describes the rise of the Imperial Roman Empire; (“arms shall stand on his part"); and how that the Romans would destroy the Temple-as in70 A.D. (“they shall take away the daily sacrifice”) the same " abomination of desolation" referred to in Christ’s prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem.

Verses 32, 33, then describe the preaching by the early Christians ("the people that do know their god shall do exploits ") and then their persecution under Pagan Rome (" yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame and by captivity.")

Verse 34 then describes the cessation of that tribulation by the nominal conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity under the leadership of the Emperor Constantine in 312 A.D. (" many shall cleave to them with flatteries.”) - Christianity became popular.

Verses 36 to 39 then describe apostate Christendom during the "'time of the end "under the head of the Papacy from 533 B.C." [My Comment Here - A Typo 'BC' should be AD?] ...till the indignation be accomplished' that is, until the end of the "seven times” chastisement of Israel. The Papacy certainly “(exalted himself above every god”, i.e., above all idols and rulers, nor did he " regard the desire of women," by laws of celibacy forbidding the marriage of its priesthood of both sexes, and confining multitudes to seclusive monastery life. Also “in his estate he honoured the God of forces”, or as literally rendered, “a God of protectors”, or divine guardians. Parallel with the rise of the Papacy into power, the Church of Rome encouraged the worship of the shrines, relics and images of dead saints who came to be regarded as intercessors and mediators to God. The Roman Catholic nations name their streets after their saints. Thousands of village churches and chapels in France, Belgium, Austria, etc., have their patron saints. The Roman Catholic peoples also hang medals of their saints around the necks of their cattle as lucky charms, and wear brooches of their saints to protect them from accidents, etc. Moreover the Papacy “honoured a god whom his fathers knew not, with gold, silver, and precious stones”. Some regard this as a reference to the [P58]  “Virgin Mary” images of whom were, and still are covered with priceless jewels. However the “Queen of Heaven” was well known to the Babylonians and idolatrous Israelites of old, (see Jer, 44:17 to 19,) so that this more likely refers to the worship of the “bread-god” the “host” or “mass” encased in the be-jewelled monstrance.

The fall of the Imperial Roman Empire also allowed the nations of the Near East to rise into power once again. As foretold in DAN. 7:2, “their lives were prolonged for a season and a time.” Thus Dan. 11:40 to 45, describe during the period of Papal dominion, the rise again of the two Gentile Empires corresponding to the Kings of the North and South of pre-Roman days. Verse 40 shows these two powers attacking in turn the dominions of apostate Christendom, and shows the “King of the North” being victorious over many countries of the former Imperial Roman Empire. Verse 40: -

“and at that time  of  the end shall the King of the South push at HIM, and the King of the North shall come against HIM like a whirlwind. . . .”

First of all notice in this verse that the “King of the North” does NOT fight against the “King of the South” as so many people wrongly read this verse. The “King of the South” attacks “HIM” -the Papal dynasty and the countries of idolatrous Christendom described in the previous verses 36 to 39. Then the “King of the North” follows on and also attacks “HIM” -the same countries, and apparently with far more permanent results.

It needs very little knowledge of European history to identify these two anti-Papal Eastern powers of the latter days. Sir Isaac Newton, one of history's greatest intellects, clearly showed in his “Observations Upon the Prophecies of Daniel”, 1733, that these two powers were the ARABS and the TURKS who successively attacked and conquered large portions of apostate Papal Christendom. Here is similar evidence from a later famous Bible student. Dr. Alexander Keith, who wrote on pages 141, 142 of his “Signs of the Times”, 1847: - [P59]

“The King of the South, and the King of the North, as denoting the successive sovereigns of Egypt and Syria, necessarily passed away, when these kingdoms were engrossed in the Roman Empire. But as their designation was derived from the local relation of their kingdoms to Judea, so also in the more recent things (i.e. in the latter days) the some names must be held to retain the same general significancy. And not only is it so in respect to the Saracenic and Turkish powers-that the one arose on the south, and the other on the north of Judea-but the Saracens actually became masters of Egypt, the original kingdom of the of the King of the South, and were the first to dispossess the Romans of that country, and long retained possession of it; while 'Syria, or the Kingdom of the North, was also a province of the Turkish Empire. And both, thought in a larger sense, have occupied the stations of the former and original kings. With the exception of them, there is none in all past history to whom the appellation of the Kings of the South and of the North, in reference to Judea, can, with any propriety, be adapted; while the Caliphs of the Saracens, and the Emperors of the Turks, have a clear as well as exclusive right to the name, and have sustained the characters, as they occupy the place, of the Kings of the North and of the South, during the period of the " time of the end," even as during that appointed time the Pope bore all the marks of the king, who did according to his will, and magnified himself above all,”

In regard to the "King of the South," in 622 A.D. Mohammed was proclaimed in Medina, Arabia, as the prince and prophet of Allah by the Arabs. In 629, he sallied forth from the SOUTH of Palestine at the head of a vast and victorious army. From 634 to 644 A.D., the Caliph Omar, a successor to Mohammed, conquered 36,000 cities or strongholds, destroyed 4,000 Christian churches and built 1.400 Mosques. By the year 638, A.D. the Mohammedans had conquered Palestine including Jerusalem, while Egypt fell in 640. Then the Saracen Empire gradually [P60] spread across Northern Africa and thence to Spain.

[P61 is Map]

The Arabs even sacked Rome the city of the Popes. In 876, Pope John resisted the Arabs at sea. By military conquest of all the countries which formed the extremities of the Papal dominions, the Mohammedan power thus “pushed at him”. Also the fact that this desolating power had its origin and capital in Arabia and Egypt directly SOUTH of Palestine, further proved that it was the latter-day “King of the South” of verse 40.

Towards the end of the 11th century A.D., a number of tribes of TURKS migrated up the valley of the Euphrates, and took up their abode in Baghdad. Damascus and Aleppo, i.e., in SYRIA. The Turks quickly adopted the Mohammedan faith and became a far worse scourge to idolatrous Christianity than the Arabs had been. As the Turkish Empire sprang from Syria -the very, centre of the “King of the North” of pre-Roman days-the Turks thus became the later day “King of the North” of. DAN. 11-40: -

“. . . and the King of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries and shall overflow and pass over”.

This verse exactly describes the career of the Turks from the 11th to the 16th century, A.D., when they became the greatest military power of Europe and Asia-the “terrible Turk”. Their one object was to destroy idolatrous Christianity according to the Koran of Mohammed, and this they did when they “entered into the countries” of Asia Minor and “overflowed and passed over” the Mediterranean Sea into Europe. In 1453 A.D. Constantinople which was the centre of Eastern Christendom, fell to the Turks.

The next, event Daniel described in time order was the conquest of the “glorious land” or Palestine. Verse 41: “He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon”. [P62]

The Crusaders' Tower at Ramleh, Palestine, still standing as a memorial of the Turkish-Papal wars.

In the original Greek, the word “countries” is missing having only been put in by our translators. Thus the verse should read as follows: - “He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many shall be overthrown,” That is, as a result of the invasion of Palestine by the King of the North, many would be overthrown. The historian Gibbon not only unconsciously confirms the accuracy of this. prophecy in regard to Turkey's conquest of Palestine, but also shows how as a result “many were overthrown” i.e. Gibbon's History, Vol. 10. Page 375 – “But the most interesting conquest of the Seljukian Turks was that of Jerusalem which soon became the theatre of nations.” We surely only have to mention the “CRUSADES” to show clearly the fulfilment of verse 41. The Turkish conquest of Palestine gave the Papacy a rallying battle-cry which aroused all his dominions [P63] to endeavour to wrest the Holy Land from the “infidel" Turk and to drive him back from Roman Catholic Europe. Truly " many were overthrown " and all in vain for Palestine finally passed into permanent possession of the Turks, and half Europe fell to the sway of the Crescent.

The only exceptions to the conquests of the Turks form Baghdad to Vienna were foretold in verse 40, i.e. "Edom, Moab and the chief of Ammon," on the east of Palestine. Owing to the scarcity of water and to the rugged nature of these countries by which they could be easily defended by the Bedouin Arabs, they were never conquered by the Turks. This fact can be confirmed in Turkish Histories. Thus the identity of Turkey as the latter-day "King of the North " of Daniel is confirmed by even the least detail.

Daniel then went on to describe in time order the Turks' conquest of the countries in North Africa, and actually named Egypt, Libya and Ethiopia as coming under Turkey's dominion, i.e. verses 42, 43:- “He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape. But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.”

It is a fact of history that after Palestine the Turks conquered Egypt in '1517, and exactly as Daniel foretold they drained Egypt of all her wealth and left her the poverty-stricken nation she has since been. Not only did the Turks take over the taxes which the Egyptians had been accustomed to pay their rulers, but as Sir Paul Rycaut tells us in his authoritative “Turkish History” Vol. 1, Page 375: -

“Above 500 families of the noblest and richest of the Egyptians were commanded to remove from Cairo to Constantinople in ships hired for the purpose. Into this fleet, besides the King's treasures and riches, he conveyed all the public and private ornaments of that most rich and famous city.” [P64]

In 1550, the Turks next conquered Libya - in strict agreement with Daniel's prophecy' As regards Ethiopia. Sit Paul Rycaut tells on the same page as quoted above. that after the Turkish conquest of Egypt and Libya, "all the princes who were before tributary or Confederate to the late Sultan of Egypt even to the Most mighty King of Ethiopia without delay entered into like subjection with the Turks." Thus the Ethiopians - were truly " at his steps" on the southern boundary of the Turkish Empire.

Thus Dan 11: 40 to 43 describes a vast Empire obtained by military conquest, stretching over Asia Minor, South-Eastern Europe, Palestine, Egypt, and North-African lands. This exactly was the composition -of the Ottoman Empire in the 16th, 17^th and 18^th centuries There could never have been written a more accurate description of the rise of the Turkish Empire in so few words as Daniel used in DAN 11:40 to 43. Nor has history recorded any other Empire which has fulfilled Daniel’s prophecy except Turkey.

DAN. 17:44-45, then foretold the cause of the collapse of the "King of the North" and that he would come to his end. " But tidings out of the EAST and out of the NORTH should trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many".

Trouble from the east and from the north of Turkey. would be from Russia as the latter is directly north-east of Turkey. (As there was no single word for " north-east " in Hebrew, the above method was the only way to indicate the direction of Russia). The “tiding" from Russia was the news of the repeated encroachment of Russia across Turkey's north-eastern boundaries (Russia’s ulterior motive being to capture Constantinople, the gate to the Black Sea). As a result of such an encroachment, Turkey sent army after army, and navy after navy against Russia “with great fury” and in every case met with disaster. For Example, in the Russian-Turkish War of 1768, the Turkish armies were beaten and disgraced.

In 1770, [P65] the Turkish fleet was annihilated by Russia in the Aegean Sea. In 1774, another Turkish army was completely beaten. In 1777, Russia again defeated Turkey on both sea and land. In 1806, Russia occupied Moldavia and Walachia, and the Turkish fleet was again destroyed by the Russian fleet. In 1826, Turkey surrendered to Russia all the fortresses it possessed in Asia. The war continued and resulted in the independence of Greece in 1829. Then in 1853 Turkey took the offensive against Russia and the Crimean War broke out. In 1867 Servia was made independent. Then in 1877-8, there took place the most disastrous war of all between Russia and Turkey as a result of which the countries forming modern Jugo-Slavia, Rumania and Bulgaria were severed from the Turkish Empire which thus lost the major portion of its European territory.

Verse 45 then foretold the complete end of the Turkish Empire: - “And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.”

The glorious holy mountain between the seas is Mount Zion, between the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean. The translation " tabernacles of his palace,” as in the A.V., obscures the true meaning. On page 356 of his "Dissertations on the Prophecies” l754. Bishop Newton pointed out the correct interpretation (as also borne out by Elliot and other scholarly commentators), as follows: -

“...he shall plant the TENTS OF His Army, etc." What then are the facts of history? In the Great War, the Turks made their military headquarters in Jerusalem on Mount Zion, with the result that the once great Turkish Empire came to its final end by the loss of Palestine, Mesopotamia and Syria. In 1917-18, the Turks were driven out of Baghdad Damascus and Aleppo – the three capitals of the pre-Roman “Kings of the North”. Thence Turkey ceased to be the “King of the North,” which [P66] thus “came to his end”, and none helped him.

[P67 Map]

The Turks afterwards shifted their capital from Imperial Constantinople to Ankara in Asia Minor, which became a small cosmopolitan Republic.

Verses l to 3 of DAN. 12, tell us what will happen next. Dan 12: 1 "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people (and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time:) And at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. :2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt."

Therefore the next great events before us are (A) the activity of Michael the archangel, (B) a great national deliverance of the peoples of Israel and Judah, and (C) the first resurrection. We recognize these three events as all being associated with the second coming of Christ. As regards Michael, we saw in 1 THESS., 4-16, that when the Lord Jesus descends from heaven, the voice of the archangel will ring out at the head of the angelic hosts. As regards the national deliverance of Israel, God has promised to destroy the German attack on Britain, and also the Russian attack on Palestine, and many scriptures show that all in Israel who at this time call upon the name of the Lord will be saved from destruction. Thirdly, we know that at Christ's advent, there will take place the first resurrection. Therefore, as the last “King of the north,” Turkey, came to his end in 1917-18, these next events as shown to Daniel cannot be far off in our, experience.

*For the fulfilment of this prophecy, see “The Great Tribulation, Past, Present or Future?” by A. J. Ferris. [P68]

(6) Daniel's Time-periods of the Mohammedan Desolation also point to the l9l7 generation as the end of the age.

In the remaining verses of Dan 12 the prophet inquires of God what would be the absolute end of the wonders he had been told about in the previous visions, DAN. 2 etc. He is then told the exact length of time the Mohammedan desolation would last and that at its end, the resurrection would take place which means of course the second advent of Christ. Let us now study the dates provided in DAN. 12, which will thus give us a very approximate idea as to when to expect the advent of Christ. 

As recorded in the last part of Dan 12, Daniel had a vision in which he saw a river on each bank of which stood an angel; the angel who had been telling Daniel about the “King of the North”, etc., apparently stood in the centre of the river. Verse 5: - "Then I Daniel looked, and behold, there stood other two (angels), the one on this side of the. Bank of the river, and the other on that side of the bank." 

Daniel then heard one of the angels call from the bank to the angel in the centre of the river, "How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?" The “wonders" were the prophetic visions give to Daniel as recorded in Dan. 2, etc. These can be divided into two groups (A) those including the career of the pre-Roman Kings of the South and North, i.e., Egypt and Syria, and (B), those including the latter-day, Kings of the South and North, i.e. the Arab and Turkish Empires. And so Daniel heard the answer: -

 “And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his RIGHT HAND and his LEFT HAND unto heaven, and sware by Him that liveth for ever that IT (each group of wonders) SHALL BE FOR A TIME, TIMES, AND AN HALF; and when He (God) shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.” [P69]

We notice that the angel raised TWO hands instead of the usual one hand in making an oath, this indicating that his oath referred to the TWO groups of "wonders" in DANIEL. Each group would last for: “3½ times” which meant that the whole of DANIEL would take "seven times” or 2520 years to be fulfilled. We recognize this period as the very length of time God foretold He would chastise and scatter His people Israel and Judah Lev. 26: 32: - “if ye will not hearken unto me, I will chastise you seven times for your sins. …I will SCATTER you among the nations.”

MY comment here: - "Lev. 26: 32"?? Maybe a misquote of scripture reference? But what he is quoting IS refereeing to the following: -

Lev 26:14 “But if ye will not hearken unto me, and will not do all these commandments;..:18 And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins. …:21 And if ye walk contrary unto me, and will not hearken unto me; I will bring seven times more plagues upon you according to your sins. …:24 Then will I also walk contrary unto you, and will punish you yet seven times for your sins. …:28 Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins. …:33 “And I will scatter you among the heathen, and will draw out a sword after you: and your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste.” 

Hence it seems as if the wonders of DANIEL were to be fulfilled during the captivity of God's people. This is confirmed by the remainder of the angel's answer that “when He shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people" (or as the Septuagint puts it, “when the dispersion is ended,”) then “ALL THESE THINGS SHALL BE FINISHED.,, Thus the prophecies of DANIEL were to be fulfilled during the “seven times” dispersion of Israel and Judah, and to terminate at the same time as the dispersion ended. The historical interpretation of DAN. 11 as fulfilled in the Papacy, the Arab and Turkish Empires, etc. fits in perfectly with this answer of the angel. Daniel of course could not understand these Prophecies, (as we can now), and so he exclaimed in verse 8: - "I heard, but I understood not …O my Lord, what shall be the END of these wonders?" The prophet was then told to go on his way for the wonders were "sealed till the TIME OF THE END," when many saints would be persecuted at the hands of the wicked. Then and only then would the prophecies of Daniel be understood.

Verse 9-10: - “And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.” Truly during the “time of the end” the Papacy [P70] persecuted unto death millions of true Christians. At the same time the martyrs came to understand Daniel’s prophecies which were unsealed by their fulfilment. by its blasphemous pretentions the Papacy revealed itself as the self-deifying power of Dan. 11: 36-39, while the war of the Arab and Turkish Empires against the Papacy revealed then as the later-day ‘Kings of the South and North”

The Book of Revelation is the continuation of Daniel 's visions. Now we read in REV. 22: l0, "SEAL NOT the sayings of the prophecy of  this book: FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND." This means that in 90 A.D., the "time of the end" had commenced, when the books or DANIEI and REVELATION would be unsealed. Truly many of the Lord's people were purified in the fires of Pagan and Papal precaution, and came to understand the meaning of DANIEL and REVELATION as the prophecies were progressively. fulfilled throughout the "time of the end” or the "last time" or "last days".

As regards Daniel himself, his fervent request was not altogether in vain, for the angel of the Lord went on to tell him how long it would be to the end of the second group of wonders. Verse 11:- "And from the time that the daily shall be taken away, and an Abomination THAT MAKETH DESOLATE BE SET UP, there shall be 1290 days, (to its end)." Thus the desolating power of Mohammedanism which the angel sware would last ‘3½ times’, or 1260 “days" would pass away during the next 3O “days” Daniel was then told a most amazing promise that those of his people Israel and Judah alive to see the 1335 “days" of the Mohammedan faith would be blessed, and what was more, at the end of those 1335 “days” the resurrection would take place (as already explained in the first few verses of.'' DAN. 12) and Daniel himself would be resurrected Verse 13: -

"Blessed is he that cometh to the 1335 days. But go thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, (i.e.. sleep in death) and stand (be resurrected) in thy lot at the end of those days." [P71]

 According to these figures, 1335 prophetical days from the time the Mohammedan power arose ought to bring us to the time of the first resurrection which is of course the second advent of Christ as Paul taught the Thessalonian church.

(Note: - All the prophetical "days" in DAN. and Rev. are equal to YEARS in the calendars of the nations concerned. In regard to the Papacy, we saw that "3 ½   times" or 1260 prophetical "days" were equal to 1260 Solar years because the Latin earth uses the Christian calendar of solar years. But the prophecies of DAN. 11, as above, refer to the Near East, and to Mohammedanism. Now the Mohammedan year consists of. 12 revolutions of the moon around the earth which equal 354 days. This is called a LUNAR year. Then the "3½ times" or 1260 prophetical days of Mohammedanism will be equal to 1260 LUNAR years, on the scale of a year for a prophetical "day". The 1290 "days" will be equal 1290 L. years, and likewise the 1335 "days.")

Let us now test out these time-periods given to Daniel and see whether the power of Mohammedanism did desolate Christendom for 126O L. years, and whether it came to its end after 1290 L. years, and whether Daniel's people have been blessed after 1335 L. years. Then we ought to be able to tell how near or otherwise we are to the first resurrection. A chart is here enclosed for reference showing the dates of the rise of anti-Papal Mohammedanism and the dates which were 1260, 1290 and 1335 L. years later. In the year 622 A.D., Mohammed was publicly proclaimed at Medina as the prophet of God and commenced gathering his followers. In 629, he led his army from Mecca to conquer Arabia In 637, his successor the Caliph Omar attacked Palestine, and early in 638 entered Jerusalem. Gibbon tells us in his history Vol. 9, p. 413, how at that time the Christian patriarch of Jerusalem testified that the abomination of desolation (of DAN. 12-11) is in the holy place." In 643, on the very site of Solomon's Temple, Omar commenced building a [P72]

[P73 Chart]

mosque which became a physical symbol of the Mohammedan desolation of Eastern Christendom. By 644, the Saracen Empire had become firmly established over the Near East, and in that year the great Othman became Caliph and the mightiest in history. Thus the years 622 to 644 A.D. were the commencing dates of the rise of Mohammedanism and we should expect to see corresponding periods of decline at the end of the 1260 and 1290 L. years. On the chart it will be seen that these two periods ran out in the years 1844 to 1895 A.D., and in absolute confirmation of the accuracy of our interpretation, in those very years the great Mohammedan Turkish Empire came to its end. Now let us test the detailed dates.

As we come down 1260 L. years from 622-644 A.D., we reach the years 1844-1866 which should have seen the cessation of Mohammedanism as an active desolating power. In the very year 1260 of Mohammed which was the Christian year 1844., Britain demanded of Turkey that she cease the practice of putting to death Mohammedans who became Christians. Although this meant an alteration in the very laws of the Koran, the Mohammedan Bible, pressure from Britain forced the Sultan to issue a "Decree of Religious Toleration," by which Christians were allowed to live within the Turkish Empire. In the succeeding years the Turkish Empire experienced rebellion and revolution throughout all its states as well as war with Russia. In 1853, the Czar of Russia, the Emperor Nicholas, gave testimony as to the end of Turkey as a great power in his memorable words to Sir Hamilton Seymour the British ambassador in St. Petersburg, "We have on our hands a sick man – a very sick man, and he may suddenly die on our hands.”

Then as we come down a further 30 years, that Is 1290 L. years all told from the era of the rise of Mohammedanism, we reach the years 1873 to 1895, which should have seen the end of the Turkish Empire. In 1874 the Turkish states of Herzegovina, Bosnia, Montenegro and Bulgaria all rebelled in open war [P74] against the Sultan.

[Map Top of P75]

Then in 1877-8, there took place the great war between Russia and Turkey as a result of which the peoples of modern  Jugo-Slavia, Rumania and Bulgaria broke away from the Turkish Empire. In 1882, Britain defeated the Mohammedan Egyptians by which Egypt passed into British hands. Then through the efforts of General Gordon in 1884, and Lord Kitchener in 1896, the Mohammedan followers of the Madhi were defeated, and the Sudan became British. Thus the Turkish Empire came to its end as a great power. Then as we come down a further 45 L. years, that is 1335 L. .years all told from the era of the rise of Mohammedanism, we come to the years 1917 to 1939, which should have seen (1) the final end of the Turkish Empire, (2) God's blessing on His peoples Israel and Judah, and ( 3) the way made open for the first [P75] resurrection. The Mohammedan year 1335 commenced on October 28th, 1916 and terminated October.16th, 1917. On page 77 there will be seen a drawing of an Egyptian coin which was minted in 1917. As Egypt was then a Protectorate of Britain, the Christian Year 1917 is shown in English figures. Also as Egypt was largely Mohammedan in faith, the coin shows the corresponding year of Mohammed -1335, in Arabic figures.

[Map from P77]

On January 9th, 1917, British troops invaded Palestine by capturing the border town of Rafa, and from then onward  the Turks were driven back. Two months later, in March, British troops also entered Baghdad  in Mesopotamia. Then on November 2^nd 1917, Lord Balfour made the historic "Balfour Declaration," announcing that Britain would give her support to 'making a national home for the Jews in Palestine! Thus right to the year what a blessed hope swept through Jewry, and the hope has since materialized. Then on November 9th, the Turks lost Gaza followed a week later by the loss of Jaffa. Then came the crowning victory of all, the DELIVERANCE' OF Jerusalem. On December 9th, 1917, through fear of being surrounded and cut off, the Turks evacuated Jerusalem without the necessity of a single shot being fired into the Holy City, and on December 11th, General Allenby made his official entry in the name of Christian Britain. Then in September, 1918, came the great drive in which the Turks were driven completely out of Palestine and thousands taken prisoner. By October 1st, 1918, Damascus was captured, and on October 26th, British troops entered Aleppo. Five days later, on October 31st, Turkey unconditionally surrendered. Thus in the exact year commencing the period of prophesied blessing for God’s people, the armies of the British Empire as Modern Ephraim-Israel the birthright tribe, came into possession of Palestine, and the way was made open for the return of the Jews.

Moreover, wonderful to relate, on January 31st, 1977, right in the year 1335 of Mohammed, [P76] then [Map of P77] the Turkish Government abandoned using Mohammedan calendar and adopted instead the Christian calendar! Here is "THE TIMES” report of this most significant event.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE TIMES, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 31, 1917. Imperial and Foreign News Items.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Turkish Chamber of Deputies has sanctioned the adoption of the Gregorian calendar.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What else but the Hand of God caused Turkey to finish with the Mohammedan calendar as soon as their year 1335 was reached? To those who had  “eyes to see" it was an obvious demonstration by God that Daniel's 1335th year of blessing had been reached. Also what further need was there for the Mohammedan calendar. God's over-ruling of the Turkish mode of reckoning in favour of the Christian was a symbolic dramatization that the “times of the Gentiles" were at their end and the end of the age was nigh.

Then in 1923 the League of Nations granted Britain the Mandate to govern Palestine, while in 1924, the Turkish Republic expelled her religious head the Caliph and abandoned Mohammedanism as her official Religion, exactly 1335 L. years from the time Mohammed her first Caliph went forth to victory. Then in 1925 came the record return of some 38,000 Jews to Palestine. As we come down 1335 L. years from the time the Mohammedans under Omar conquered Palestine and Egypt, 638 to 640 A.D., we reach the years 1933 to 1935, which saw the remarkable return of some 136,000 Jewish immigrants to Palestine. As we come down 1335 L. years from the years 642 to 644 A.D., when the Mosque of Omar was built and the Saracen Empire established over the Near East, we reach the years 1937 to 1939. In 1937, owing to the Jewish influx into Palestine, the Palestine Mohammedans broke the peace of the land. As a result Britain expelled their leaders including their [P78] head the Grand Mufti, in spite of his sheltering in the Mosque of Omar!

[Photo Top P79]

Then in October 1937, an earthquake shook the Mosque of Omar as a result of which the experts appointed by Britain reported on April 11th, 1938, that the Mosque was "in a dangerous condition and needs immediate repair” surely symbolizing the death-knell of this last relic of the Mohammedan desolation. Also 1937 and 1938 witnessed the activities of the Royal Commission, whose suggestions caused the League of Nations to agree to Britain having permanent government of the three holy cities, of Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Nazareth. Then in 1939-40 came the disastrous earthquakes in Turkey with the loss of 60,000 lives and widespread damage.

Thus true to Daniel’s promise, the 1335th year of Mohammedanism has brought the final end of the Turkish Empire, the blessing to Britain-Israel of having the dominion of Palestine and Jerusalem, while the family of Judah are, escaping from their persecution in Europe to Anglo-Saxon lands, and in part [P79] to Palestine. Finally, Daniel was told that he would be resurrected at the end of the 1335 years. The events of 1917 and since have confirmed that we have reached the end of the 1335 years of Mohammedanism. Therefore we must be very close indeed to the time of the first resurrection and the second advent of Christ. Readers can judge this for themselves.

Here are the facts which none can gainsay. In conclusion listen to what that great Bible scholar, Dr. Grattan Guinness, wrote over 60 years ago in his “Approaching End of the Age”, pages 473 474. as follows: -

“THE DESTRUCTION OF THE OTTOMAN Empire ..SHOULD BE A Trumpet BLAST TO Christendom, Proclaiming THAT THE DAY OF CHRIST IS AT HAND. When the Moslems, now driven out of Bulgaria, shall be driven also out of Syria, When the nations of Europe shall conspire to reinstate the Jews in the land of their forefathers, THEN the last warning bell will have rung, then the second advent will be CLOSE at hand.”

Dr. Guinness was able to make such a prophecy because the Bible showed the destruction of the Turkish Empire, and the return of the Jews, as signs of the immediate return of Christ. We who now live in 1940 have seen the destruction of Turkey. We have seen the Moslems driven out of Syria in 1918. We have seen the League of Nations "conspire to reinstate the Jews" by entrusting the Mandate of Palestine to Britain for the purpose of repatriating the Jews. We have witnessed the Jewish population increase by 500,000 since 1918. Therefore if the above great Bible student was alive to-day he would say that "the hast warning bell HAS rung - the second advent IS at hand," and we must agree. [P80]

********************************************

(Notes: -The late Italian-Abyssinian War tempted many Bible students to try and fit the event of Dan. 11: 40-45 into the present and near future. For example, some think that Italy is the "King of the South" of verse 40. But Italy can never be either a "King of the South" or a "King of the North" because she is the heart of the former Roman Empire, NOT the Greek, and also is WEST of Palestine rather than north or south. Others consider that Italy is the latter-day "King of the North", but if so she has gone about her conquests in exactly the opposite order described by DAN. 77. Daniel's "King of the North" was to build up its Empire by conquering (1) "many countries," (2) then "the glorious land" or Palestine, (3) then Egypt, (4) then Libya and Ethiopia: whereas Italy has conquered Libya and Ethiopia first! This shows the futility of trying to apply DAN. 11 to the present day, for DAN. 11 is historically fulfilled in every minute detail. Then some think that Britain is that “King of the South", But the “King of the South" of pre-Roman days was always the southern half of the GREEK Empire, and was an heathen Gentile power. The heart of Britain is NORTHWEST of Palestine, not south, nor can she be classified as a Gentile power since she contains more spiritual children of Abraham than any other race, quite apart from her Bible identity, as latter-day Ephraim-Israel.

Also there are some who think that Russia is the "King of the North" of verses 40 to 45 in view of the fact that Ezekiel describes at the end of the age an invasion of Palestine by Russia, etc.. from the NORTH. Russia is certainly north of Palestine, but TOO FAR north to qualify since the centre of the dominions of Daniel's pre-Roman "King of the North" was always SYRIA. Russia has never even occupied Syria so that once and for all rules her out.

Also the "King of the North" was to have "many ships" (verse 40); there is no evidence that Russia has any considerable fleet whatever to-day, nor does she need ships to invade the Near East. On the other hand, the Turks had great fleets by which they were able to “overflow and pass over" the seas from Asia Minor into Europe. The Turks also conquered all the islands in the Aegean Sea. (Gibbon relates in his [P8l] History, Vol. 5, p. 553, how that at one time the Turks Caused a fleet of 200 ships to be constructed by their captive Greeks)

Again some think that Russia is Daniel's "King of the North" because the Authorized Version of EZEK. 38: 5 states that “ETHIOPIA and LIBYA" Will be with Russia. But Ezekiel plainly shows that all these countries who will be in league with Russia, will come down “OUT OF THE NORTH PARTS" And “from THE NORTH QUARIERS" (V. 6). Therefore these cannot be the modern African Ethiopia and Libya since the latter are SOUTH and West of Palestine. The descendants of "Kush and Phut" Translated "Ethiopia and Libya" in the A.V.), divided into two, one section migrating into Asia and the other into Africa. Obviously, it is the Asiatic section which will be with Russia, probably the modern Afghanistan with its Hindu-KUSH.

This Russian league will certainly invade Palestine but will not conquer and build up the vast Near Eastern Empire which Daniel described for the "King of the North" of verses 40 to 45. As there can be only a year or two left of the period known as the “times of the Gentiles", it is now absolutely impossible for any Gentile power to carry out the long and mighty exploits pictured in Dan. 11: 40 to 45. It must be remembered that Daniel prophesied concerning events which cover 2520 years in their fulfilment, and which were to be fulfilled during the "scattering of the holy people" (Israel and Judah). Anglo-Saxon Israel is now gathered out of the Continent, and since 1918 hundreds of thousands of Judah have migrated into Israel and back to Palestine, thus proving that the dispersion is ended. Hence all attempts to apply the prophecies of Dan. 11: 40 to 45, to the present and near future will prove to be contradictory speculation which will lead nowhere, and only confuse people, and lead to unbelief by their non-fulfilment'  [P82]

I hope you found that as informative as did I

 

GBY, (God Bless Ya!) 

Yours Adrian Deacon

Here are some of my other talks that you might find interesting: -

Rebuilding The Temple Of Jerusalem

The Charge At Beersheba 1917

The Day For A Year Conundrum

Make America Great Again

The One World Government

 

He Shall Speak Words Against the Most High

I have NO wish to upset anyone and their beliefs This is a collection of hundreds of years of blasphemous papal claims from multiple sources

He Shall Speak Words Against The Most High

Published 20210616 -:- Revised 20250825

I am dyslexic so please bear with me. Scripture references are from Modern King James (MKJV) unless noted other wise. 

THIS IS A WORK IN PROGRESS!

Introduction:

This started as a short section of a few paragraphs in a talk I am working on at present entitled, “The One World Government”. It soon became more than 7 pages plus, so I decided to publish it as a separate paper.

Aim:

From the Historical Viewpoint I wish discuss the blasphemies of ‘The Little Horn’ of Daniel chapter 7, in particular the one characteristic in verse 25, “And he shall speak words against the Most High”. Likewise in Dan 7:8 “and a mouth speaking great things”. If ‘The Little Horn’, the antichrist is historically the pope, then there must be some historical evidence of blasphemes claims which points to the pope. So I want to use multiple sources, find them, then put them together in this one reference!

 

Abbreviations, References & Equipment

NAdvent          -New Advent Catholic Encyclopaedia , with reference link, e.g. [Ref NAdvent link Explanation of papal infallibility]
No.666             -A web site entitled ‘666, The Number of the Beast’ by By Michael Scheifler from Bible Light, with historical records.
PClaims           -A web link entitled ‘Papal Claims to Authority’ by By Michael Scheifler from Bible Light, with historical records.
Pope-L             -A web link entitled ‘List of Popes’, a hand chronology that is also available within ‘NAdvent’.
AT-Pope           -A web link entitled ‘About the Pope’ from ‘The True Church of GOD Website’, with historical records.
HCC                -History of The Christian Church (by Philip Schaff) 1882 Edition. via e-Sword. [Phrases underlined for easy reference.]
CN                  -Commentary Notes via e-Sword. By “NAME” on Bible Ref “BOOK CH: Vrs” e.g. [Ref CN by Clark on Dan 7:7].
e-Sword         -The FREE Bible on line. e-Sword downloads
Slide#            -Television/Projector for presentations, e.g. ‘Slide No, etc”
Wiki              -Wikipedia ref, egample: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint

He Shall Speak Words Against The Most High

This is a very delicate issue! And I’ve no wish to upset anyone’s faith or beliefs, so I’ve used quotations to verify these papal claims. The claims STILL exist! Consider: As of 1870 the pope is officially Infallible? He’s Snookered himself now! So now he can’t rescind the dozens of blasphemous claims on public record from previous “infallible” popes. For example we have the issue of the infallible excommunicated pope Honorius I. But what is Blaspheme? Jesus was accused of blaspheme. Refer Mat 26:63 “..the high priest ..said ..are you the Christ, the Son of God ..:64 Jesus said to him, You said it ..you shall see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of the heavens. ..:65 ..the high priest ..saying, He has spoken blasphemy! ..now you have heard his blasphemy.” Also in John 10:36. Jesus said He was the Son of God! But He is the Son of God! So He is not guilty of blasphemy! But what if someone else says they are God, or they are equal to God, or they claim the prerogatives of God? They would be guilty of blasphemy correct?

So Blaspheme is one of the main characteristic by which we MUST defiantly be able to recognise the antichrist! Here I have given you a list of the key characteristic blasphemies we should look for in scripture. We have Rev 13:5- “a mouth speaking great things ..and blasphemies ..blasphemy toward God ..blaspheme His name ..His tabernacle ..those dwelling in Heaven”. Also we have in 2Th 2:4- who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God ..that is worshiped ..he sits as God in the temple of God ..setting himself forth, that he is God”. Daniel sums up all this blasphemy, as ‘He Shall Speak Words Against The Most High’. This gives us a list of 10 distinct forms of blasphemy we can look for in history. History books and such give us dozens of blasphemes declared by the pope. I have made a list below. I have tried to show when the claims were historically mentioned. If I couldn’t find the date, then I have tried to find the pope who made the claim and then find date he was in office.

May I suggest you read the references I have quoted completely? There are other links within them. They are mind-boggling to say the least! They cover each claim in more detail than I can spare in this talk. Some claims have been embellished or referred to by later popes. So rather than restating each claim, I have given multiple references with additional appropriate dates. I have underlined key phrases, which you can copy, then past into the link or reference to easily find the claims.

Below is just a sample. Go to the Library or Google “PClaims” or “Concerning the extent of Papal dignity, authority, or dominion and infallibility”. As for the Beast’s number 666, you can do your own web search for that; it has little to do with the papal claims of authority. We can group some of these claims together using ‘key’ words or phrases. Others are a general mix of various claims so I must present them in full.

The main headings are as follows: -

1. Universal Bishop
2. The Pope Is God On Earth
3. The Donation of Constantine Question
4. Concerning The Extent Of Papal Dignity, Authority, Or Dominion And Infallibility
5. No Salvation Except Through The Pope
6. The Pope and the State
7. The Pope Is Infallible
8. The Bull of Excommunication of Luther
9. The Infallible Excommunicated Pope Honorius I.
10. Angels Must Submit To The Pope

1/ Universal Bishop

1073 [Ref HCC vol.5 ch.2 p.011] “Hildebrand was convinced that, however unworthy personally, he was, in his official character, the successor of Peter, and as such the vicar of Christ in the militant Church. He entirely identified himself with Peter as the head of the apostolic college, and the keeper of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven; …He constantly appealed to the famous words of Christ, Mat_16:18, Mat_16:19, as if they were said to himself. The pope inherits the lofty position of Peter. He is the Rock of the Church. He is the universal bishop, a title against which the first Gregory protested as an anti-Christian presumption. He is intrusted with the care of all Christendom (including the Greek Church, which never acknowledged him). He has absolute and final jurisdiction, and is responsible only to God, and to no earthly tribunal. He alone can depose and reinstate bishops, and his legates take precedence of all bishops. He is the supreme arbiter in questions of right and wrong in the whole Christian world. He is above all earthly sovereigns. He can wear the imperial insignia. He can depose kings and emperors, and absolve subjects from their oath of allegiance to unworthy sovereigns.”

607 [Ref PClaims] “Pope Boniface III (607 A.D.), a mere three years after the death of Gregory, petitioned Emperor Phocus to declare the Roman See the head of all Christian churches and that the title Universal Bishop would apply exclusively to the Bishop of Rome. This was done in an attempt to end the ambitions of the Patriarch of Constantinople.” [Ref also HCC vol.4 ch.4 p.051&53]

2/ The Pope Is God On Earth

858 [Ref link AT-Pope] “Nicholas I “..superior papal authority and dominion is derived from the law of the Caesars." “...the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who being God, cannot be judged by man."

1512 [Ref HCC vil.6 ch.6 p.055] “Julius must be pastor, shepherd, physician, ruler, administrator and, in a word, another God on earth.” Also[Ref HCC vol.6 p.001] [Ref HCC vol.7 ch.1 p.011] also [Ref “another God” in AT-Pope]

1520 [Ref HCC vol.7 ch.3 p.048] “Luther, …He cites from the papal law-books thirty articles and errors in glorification of the papacy, which deserve to be burned; and calls the whole Canon-law “the abomination of desolation” (Mat_24:15) and antichristian (2Th_2:4), since the sum of its teaching was, that “the Pope is God on earth, above all things, heavenly and earthly, spiritual and temporal; all things belong to the Pope, and no one dare ask, What doest thou?”

1871 [Ref link AT-Pope] “The pope is the supreme judge of the law of the land....He is the vicegerent of Christ, and is not only a priest forever, but also King of kings and Lord of lords." La Civilta Cattolica, March 18, 1871 (quoted in "An Inside View of the Vatican Council" by Leonard Woosely Bacaon, p 229, American Tract Society edition).

PERPETUAL [Ref link AT-Pope] “Receive the tiara adorned with three crowns and know that thou art Father of princes and kings, Ruler of the world, Vicar of our Savior Jesus Christ." Papal Coronation Ceremony.

1567+ [Ref link AT-Pope] “All the names which are attributed to Christ in Scripture, implying His supremacy over the church, are also attributed to the Pope.” Robert Bellarmine, in Disputationes de Controversiis, "On the Authority of Councils", book 2, Chapter 17.

1895 [Ref link AT-Pope] “The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh.” Catholic National, July, 1895.

3/ The Donation of Constantine Question

324 [Ref HCC vol.4 ch.4 p.060], This is lengthy but very interesting. “The Donation of Constantine, which is incorporated in this collection, is an older forgery, and exists also in several Greek texts. It affirms that Constantine, when he was baptized by pope Sylvester, a.d. 324 (he was not baptized till 337, by the Arian bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia), presented him with the Lateran palace and all imperial insignia, together with the Roman and Italian territory. The object of this forgery was to antedate by five centuries the temporal power of the papacy, which rests on the donations of Pepin and Charlemagne. The only foundation in fact is the donation of the Lateran palace, which was originally the palace of the Lateran family, then of the emperors, and last of the popes. The wife of Constantine, Fausta, resided in it, and on the transfer of the seat of empire to Constantinople, he left it to Sylvester, as the chief of the Roman clergy and nobility. Hence it contains to this day the pontifical throne with the inscription: “Haec est papalis sedes et pontificalis.” There the pope takes possession of the see of Rome. But the whole history of Constantine and his successors shows conclusively that they had no idea of transferring any part of their temporal sovereignty to the Roman pontiff. 

1054 [Ref PClaims] “Pope Leo IX sent a letter to Michael Cærularius, Patriarch of Constantinople, in 1054, that cited a large portion of the Donation of Constantine, to include the phrase Vicarius Filii Dei, the Roman numerals of which add up to 666. The reason that Leo provided the Greek Patriarch with the bulk of the text of the donation, was to officially notify him that Emperor Constantine had conferred a unique dignity, authority and primacy on the See of Peter, making Constantinople subject to Rome.”

1519 [Ref HCC vol.7 ch.3 p.036] Luther continued the careful study of history, and could find no trace of popery and its extraordinary claims in the first centuries before the Council of Nicaea. He discovered that the Papal Decretals, and the Donation of Constantine, were a forgery. He wrote to Spalatin, March 13, 1519, “I know not whether the Pope is anti-christ himself, or his apostle; so wretchedly is Christ, that is the truth, corrupted and crucified by him in the Decretals.”

1073 [Ref PClaims] “Now note that Pope Gregory VII also declared himself to be "Universal Pope", a title which Gregory the Great refused and condemned. This papal claim has been maintained or embellished on by every subsequent pope, eventually leading to the declaration of papal infallibility”.

THE DICTATES OF HILDERBRAND (POPE GREGORY VII) (1073-1085)
1. That the Roman Church was founded by the Lord alone.2. That the Roman Pontiff alone is justly called universal.
3. That he alone can depose bishops or restore them …
9. That all princes should kiss the feet of the pope alone…
12. That it is lawful for him to depose emperors …
18. That his sentence ought not to be reviewed by any one; and he alone can review [the decisions] of all.
19. That he ought to be judged by no one …
22. That the Roman Church never erred; nor will it, according to Scripture, ever err …
27. That he can absolve subjects from their allegiance to unrighteous [rulers].

1746 [Ref PClaims]
4/ “Concerning The Extent Of Papal Dignity, Authority, Or Dominion And Infallibility”.
#1. "The Pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not mere man, but as it were God, and the vicar of God."
#13. "Hence the Pope is crowned with a triple crown, as king of heaven and of earth and of the lower regions."
#18. "As to papal authority, the Pope is as it were God on earth, Sole sovereign of all the faithful of Christ, chief king of kings, having a plentitude of unbroken power, entrusted by the omnipotent God to govern the earthly and heavenly kingdoms."
#30. "The Pope is of so great authority and power, that he is able to modify, declare, or interpret even divine laws."
Source: Lucius Ferraris, “Papa,” art. 2, in his Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica, Ascetica, Polemica, Rubristica, Historica. (“Handy Library”), Vol. 5, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition, column 1823, Latin.
Here are the relevant Scanned pages from Ferraris' Prompta Bibliotheca for those who would like to see the original Latin text of the above quotes.

1512 [Ref link AT-Pope] “Take care that we lose not that salvation, that life and breath which thou hast given us, for thou art our shepherd, thou art our physician, thou art our governor, thou art our husbandman, thou art finally another God on earth." Christopher Marcellus in Oration addressing Pope Julius II, in Fifth Lateran Council, Session IV (1512), Council Edition. Colm. Agrip. 1618, (Sacrorum Conciliorum, J.D. Mansi (ed.), Vol. 32, col. 761), (also quoted in History of the Councils, vol. XIV, col 109, by Labbe and Cossart).

1316+ [Ref link AT-Pope] “To believe that our Lord God the Pope has not the power to decree as he is decreed, is to be deemed heretical." The Gloss of Extravagantes of Pope John XXII, Cum. Inter, title 14, chapter 4, "Ad Callem Sexti Decretalium", Column 140, Paris, 1685. (In an Antwerp edition of the Extravagantes, the words, "Dominum Deum Nostrum Papam" (“Our Lord God the Pope”) can be found in column 153).

1572+ [Ref link AT-Pope] “It is quite certain that Popes have never disapproved or rejected this title 'Lord God the Pope' for the passage in the gloss referred to appears in the edition of the Canon Law published in Rome by Gregory XIII." Statement from Fr. A. Pereira.

1198+ [Ref link AT-Pope] “Those whom the Pope of Rome doth separate, it is not a man that separates them but God. For the Pope holdeth place on earth, not simply of a man but of the true God....dissolves, not by human but rather by divine authority....I am in all and above all, so that God Himself and I, the vicar of God, hath both one consistory, and I am able to do almost all that God can do...wherefore, if those things that I do be said not to be done of man, but of God, what do you make of me but God?  Again, if prelates of the Church be called of Constantine for gods, I then being above all prelates, seem by this reason to be above all gods." Decretales Domini Gregori ix Translatione Episcoporum, (on the Transference of Bishops), title 7, chapter 3; Corpus Juris Canonice (2nd Leipzig ed., 1881), col. 99; (Paris, 1612), tom. 2, Decretales, col. 205 (while Innocent III was Pope).

[Ref link AT-Pope] “The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth...by divine right the Pope has supreme and full power in faith, in morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true vicar, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth." Quoted in the New York Catechism.

[Ref link AT-Pope] “
"The pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not a mere man, but as it were God, and the vicar of God...
"The Pope alone is called most holy...
"Hence the Pope is crowned with a triple crown, as king of heaven and of earth and of hell.
"Moreover the superiority and the power of the Roman Pontiff by no means pertains only to heavenly things, but also earthly things, and to things under the earth, and even over the angels, whom he his greater than.
"So that if it were possible that the angels might err in the faith, or might think contrary to the faith, they could be judged and excommunicated by the Pope....

1858 [Ref link AT-Pope] “...the Pope is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief of kings, having plenitude of power." Lucius Ferraris, in "Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica, Ascetica, Polemica, Rubristica, Historica", Volume V, article on "Papa, Article II", titled "Concerning the extent of Papal dignity, authority, or dominion and infallibility", #1, 5, 13-15, 18, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition.

1928 [Ref link AT-Pope] “[Pope] PIUS XI, Pontifex Maximus." Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (The Promotion of True Religious Unity), Encyclical promulgated on January 6, 1928. http://www.catholicism.org/pages/mortal.htm or try https://catholicism.org/  

1566+ [Ref link AT-Pope] “The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth." Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, "Cities Petrus Bertanous".

1894 [Ref link AT-Pope] “...We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty..." Pope Leo XIII, in Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae (The Reunion of Christendom), Encyclical promulgated on June 20, 1894.

1198 [Ref PClaims] “Pope Innocent III (1198-1216) Claims Divine Authority “..only the Roman Pontiff had the power to transfer and separate bishops, because when he separates, it is not a man that separates, but God that separates, because he acts "not only as a man, but as the true God's vice governor on earth" [non puri hominis, sed veri Dei vicem gerit in terris], ... he "dissolves not with human, but with divine authority" [non humana, sed divina potius auctoritate dissolvit.]:”

858 [Ref PClaims] “The papal theory made the Pope alone God’s representative on earth and maintained that the Emperor received his right to rule from St. Peter’s successor. For historical proof of the genuineness of this position attention was called to the power of the keys, the Donation of Constantine, the coronation of Pepin, the restoration of the Empire in the West. … It was upheld by Nicholas I. (858), Hildebrand, Alexander III., Innocent III., and culminated with Boniface VIII. at the jubilee of 1300 when, seated on the throne of Constantine, girded with the imperial sword, wearing a crown, and waving a sceptre, he shouted to the throng of loyal pilgrims: “I am Caesar—I am Emperor.”

1037 [Ref HCC vol.5 ch.5 p.037] “Gregory VII.’s illustration, likening the priestly estate ..to the sun, and the civil estate .. to the moon, Innocent amplified and emphasized. Two great lights, ..were placed by God in the firmament of heaven, ..these correspond the “pontifical authority and the regal authority,” the one to rule over souls as the sun rules over the day, the other to rule over the bodies of men as the moon rules over the night. And as the moon gets its light from the sun, and as it is also less than the sun both in quality and in size, and in the effect produced, so the regal power gets its dignity and splendor from the pontifical authority which has in it more inherent virtue. The priest anoints the king, not the king the priest, and superior is he that anoints to the anointed. Princes have authority in separate lands; the pontiff over all lands. ... “As in the ark of God,” so he wrote to John of England, “the rod and the manna lay beside the tables of the law, so at the side of the knowledge of the law, in the breast of the pope, are lodged the terrible power of destruction and the genial mildness of grace.” Innocent reminded John that if he did not lift his foot from off the Church, nothing would check his punishment and fall. Monarchs throughout Europe listened to Innocent’s exposition and obeyed. His correspondence abounds with letters to the emperor, the kings of Hungary, Bohemia, Sicily, France, England, the Danes, Aragon, and to other princes, teaching them their duty and demanding their submission.” [Ref also PClaims]

1198 [Ref also PClaims], “Pope Innocent III (1198) Claims Authority Over Kings: Just as the founder of the universe established two great lights in the firmament of heaven, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night, so too He set two great dignities in the firmament of the universal church..., the greater one to rule the day, that is, souls, and the lesser to rule the night, that is, bodies. These dignities are the papal authority and the royal power. Now just as the moon derives its light from the sun and is indeed lower than it in quantity and quality, in position and in power, so too the royal power derives the splendor of its dignity from the pontifical authority....  Letter to the prefect Acerbius and the nobles of Tuscany, 1198.

1243 [Ref link PClaims] “Pope Innocent IV (1243-1254) Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is wrong, for no one can judge him. The only exception was if the command involved heresy or tended to the destruction of the church. — Pope Innocent IV, Comment. in Decretal. Francof. 1570, 555. [Apparatus in quinque libros decretalium, commentary on the Decretals of Gregory IX] ...Source: The Pope and the Council, by Janus [with the collaboration of J.N. Huber and J. Friedrich], translated from the German by Johann Joseph Ignaz von Döllinger, Johannes Nepomuk Huber, Third Edition Revised, Rivingtons, London, Oxford, and Cambridge, 1870, page 161.”

1245 Council of Lyons, Innocent IV vs Frederick. [Ref HCC vol.5 ch.6 p.044] “Seeing that we, unworthy as we are, hold on earth the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, who said to us in the person of St. Peter, ‘whatsoever ye shall bind on earth,’ etc., do hereby declare Frederick, who has rendered himself unworthy of the honors of sovereignty and for his crimes has been deposed from his throne by God, to be bound by his sins and cast off by the Lord and we do hereby sentence and depose him; and all who are in any way bound to him by an oath of allegiance we forever release and absolve from that oath; and by our apostolic authority, we strictly forbid any one obeying him. We decree that any who gives aid to him as emperor or king shall be excommunicated; and those in the empire on whom the selection of an emperor devolves, have full liberty to elect a successor in his place.”

1303? [Ref HCC vol.6 ch.10] The most extravagant claims of the papacy still had defenders. Augustus Triumphus and Alvarus Pelayo declared there could be no appeal from the pope to God, because the pope and God were in agreement. He who looks upon the pope with intent and trusting eye, looks upon Christ, and wherever the pope is, there is the Church. Yea, the pope is above canon law. [Ref link Alvarus Pelayo 1530+] [Ref also “ there is the Church in AT-Pope]

5/ No Salvation Except Through The Pope

107. [Ref HCC vol.2 ch.4 p.045] “Development of the Episcopate. By Ignatius in Syria (d. 107 or 115). “He that honors the bishop, shall be honored by God; he that does anything without the knowledge of the bishop serves the devil.” “This is making salvation pretty much depend upon obedience to the bishop; just as Leo I. (440-461), three centuries later, in the controversy with Hilary of Arles, made salvation depend upon obedience to the pope by declaring every rebel against the pope to be a servant of the devil!

440-461 [Ref HCC vol.3 ch.5 p.063] Leo pronounces resistance to his authority to be impious pride and the sure way to hell. Obedience to the pope is thus necessary to salvation. Whosoever, says he, is not with the apostolic see, that is, with the head of the body, whence all gifts of grace descend throughout the body, is not in the body of the church, and has no part in her grace.

249+ [Ref HCC vol.2 ch.4 p.053] “The Scriptural principle “Out of Christ there is no salvation,” was contracted and restricted to the Cyprianic principle: “Out of the (visible) church there is no salvation;” and from this there was only one step to the fundamental error of Romanism: “Out of the Roman Church there is no salvation.” [Ref Wiki Cyprian]

249+ [Ref HCC vol.2 ch.5 p.074] “Cyprian …As the one Catholic church is the sole repository of all grace, there can be no forgiveness of sins, no regeneration or communication of the Spirit, no salvation, and therefore no valid sacraments, out of her bosom”.

1305-14 [Ref HCC vol. 6 ch.1 p.008] If that were so, how is it that Clement V. could make the bull Unam sanctam inoperative for France and its king? Did not that bull declare that submission to the pope is for every creature a condition of salvation! Can a pope set aside a condition of salvation?

[Ref HCC vol. 6 ch.10] “If that were so, how is it that Clement V (1305-14). could make the bull Unam sanctam inoperative for France and its king? Did not that bull declare that there could be no appeal from the pope to God! Can a pope set aside a condition of salvation?”

1320 [Ref PClaims,] “The Decision of the Pope and the Decision of God Constitute One Decision.

Only the Pope is said to be the Vicar of God: because he alone is able to bind and loose, .. given to him by God. The decision of the Pope and the decision of God constitute one decision, ….. Therefore no one can appeal from the Pope to God, as no one can enter into the consistory of God without the mediation of the Pope, who is the key-bearer and the doorkeeper of the consistory of eternal life; and as no one can appeal to himself, so no one can appeal from the Pope to God, because there is one decision and one court of God, and the Pope.”

[Augustinus Triumphus (1243-1328) Summa…ecclesiastica (Summary On The Power Of The Church) Internet] [ref HCC vol.6 ch.10]

1417 [Ref PClaims,] also [Ref HCC vol.3 ch.5 p.061], and [Ref HCC vol.5 ch.2 p.011]

“Pope Martin V Claims Worldwide Authority. The Roman Pontiff, successor of the blessed Peter, and the vicar of Jesus Christ, keeper of the keys of the heavenly Kingdom, of all regions of the world, and of all of the nations and those who dwell in them, ... (4 April 1417)”.

1301 [Ref HCC vol.6 ch.1 p.005] “The pope judges all things and is judged by no man, 1Co_2:15. To him belongs plenary power, plenitudo potestatis. This power is without measure, without number, and without weight. It extends over all Christians. The pope is above all laws and in matters of faith infallible. He is like the sea which fills all vessels, like the sun which, as the universally active principle, sends his rays into all things. The priesthood existed before royalty. …As the government of the world is one and centres in one ruler, God, so in the affairs of the militant Church there can be only one source of power, one supreme government, one head to whom belongs the plenitude of power. This is the supreme pontiff. The priesthood and the papacy are of immediate divine appointment.

1894 [Ref PClaims] “Pope Leo XIII Claims to hold the place of God on Earth. ... We [the pope] hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty, ...Source: Pope Leo XIII, Apostolic Exhortation  Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae (The Reunion of Christendom), dated June 20, 1894, trans. in The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII (New York: Benziger, 1903), paragraph 5, page 304.”

[Ref link Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae], “But since We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty” 

140 later 440+ [Ref HCC vol.2 ch.4 p.045] This is making salvation pretty much depend upon obedience to the bishop; just as Leo I, (440-61), three centuries later, in the controversy with Hilary of Arles, made salvation depend upon obedience to the pope by declaring every rebel against the pope to be a servant of the devil! [Ref also to AT-Pope, ‘no salvation’] also [Ref to FoxBM ch.16]

251 [Ref HCC vol.2 ch.4 p.053] “Cyprian, in his Epistles, and most of all in his classical tract: De Unitate Eccelesiae, written in the year 251 …The Scriptural principle “Out of Christ there is no salvation,” was contracted and restricted to the Cyprianic principle: “Out of the (visible) church there is no salvation;” and from this there was only one step to the fundamental error of Romanism: “Out of the Roman Church there is no salvation.” Also [Ref PClaims] also [Ref vol.2 ch.13 p.168. “Hermas”]; [Ref HCC vol.5 ch.15 p.123]

1302 [Ref HCC vol.6 ch.1 p.004] “The council called by the pope convened in Rome the last day of October, 1302, and included 4 archbishops, 35 bishops, and 6 abbots from France. It issued two bulls. The first pronounced the ban on all who detained prelates going to Rome or returning from the city. The second is one of the most notable of all papal documents, the bull Unam sanctam, the name given to it from its first words, “We are forced to believe in one holy Catholic Church.” It marks an epoch in the history of the declarations of the papacy, not because it contained anything novel, but because it set forth with unchanged clearness the stiffest claims of the papacy to temporal and spiritual power. It begins with the assertion that there is only one true Church, outside of which there is no salvation. The pope is the vicar of Christ, and whoever refuses to be ruled by Peter belongs not to the fold of Christ. Both swords are subject to the Church, the spiritual and the temporal. The temporal sword is to be wielded for the Church, the spiritual by it. The secular estate may be judged by the spiritual estate, but the spiritual estate by no human tribunal. The document closes with the startling declaration that for every human being the condition of salvation is obedience to the Roman pontiff.

1328+ [Ref vol.6 ch.1 p.008] The Spanish Franciscan, Alvarus Pelagius, was not always as extravagant as his Augustinian contemporary. He was professor of law at Perugia. He fled from Rome at the approach of Lewis the Bavarian, 1328, was then appointed papal penitentiary at Avignon, and later bishop of the Portuguese diocese of Silves. His Lament over the Church, — de planctu ecclesiae, — while exalting the pope to the skies, bewails the low spiritual estate into which the clergy and the Church had fallen. Christendom, he argues, which is but one kingdom, can have but one head, the pope. Whoever does not accept him as the head does not accept Christ. And whosoever, with pure and believing eye, sees the pope, sees Christ himself. Without communion with the pope there is no salvation. He wields both swords as Christ did, and in him the passage of Jer_1:10 is fulfilled, “I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant.” Unbelievers, also, Alvarus asserts to be legally under the pope’s jurisdiction, though they may not be so in fact, and the pope may proceed against them as God did against the Sodomites. Idolaters, Jews, and Saracens are alike amenable to the pope’s authority and subject to his punishments. He rules, orders, disposes and judges all things as he pleases. His will is highest wisdom, and what he pleases to do has the force of law. Wherever the supreme pontiff is, there is the Roman Church, and he cannot be compelled to remain in Rome. He is the source of all law and may decide what is the right. To doubt this means exclusion from life eternal.

1451 [Ref vol.6 ch.6 p.049]  In answer to the appeals of the Greeks, Nicolas despatched Isidore as legate to Constantinople with a guard of 200 troops, but, as a condition of helping the Eastern emperor, he insisted that the Ferrara articles of union be ratified in Constantinople. In a long communication, dated Oct. 11, 1451, the Roman pontiff declared that schisms had always been punished more severely than other evils. Korah, Dathan and Abiram, who attempted to divide the people of God, received a more bitter punishment than those who introduced idolatry. There could not be two heads to an empire or the Church. There is no salvation outside of the one Church. He was lost in the flood who was not housed in Noah’s ark. Whatever opinion it may have entertained of these claims, the Byzantine court was in too imminent danger to reject the papal condition, and in December, 1452, Isidore, surrounded by 300 priests, announced, in the church of St. Sophia, the union of the Greek and Latin communions. But even now the Greek people violently resented the union, and the most powerful man of the empire, Lucas Notaras, announced his preference for the turban to the tiara. The aid offered by Nicolas was at best small. The last week of April, 1453, ten papal galleys set sail with some ships from Naples, Venice and Genoa, but they were too late to render any assistance.

417 [Ref vol.7 ch.1 p.011] “The mediaeval theory of the Catholic Church assumes a close alliance of Caesar and Pope, or the civil and ecclesiastical power, in Christian countries, and the exclusiveness of the Catholic communion out of which there can be no salvation. …St. Augustin, ..But during the Donatist controversy, he came to the conclusion that the correction and coërcion of heretics and schismatics was in some cases necessary and wholesome. His tract on the Correction of the Donatists was written about 417, …The Roman church has never repented of her complicity with these unchristian acts. On the contrary, she still holds the principle of persecution in connection with her doctrine that there is no salvation outside of her bosom.”

415 [Ref vol.3 ch.6 p.070] “More stringent civil laws were now enacted against them, banishing the Donatist clergy from their country, imposing fines on the laity, and confiscating the churches. In 415 they were even forbidden to hold religious assemblies, upon pain of death. …Augustine himself, who had previously consented only to spiritual measures against heretics, now advocated force, to bring them into the fellowship of the church, out of which there was no salvation.

1198 [Ref HCC vol.5 ch.15 p.123] “Beginning with Innocent III., it became the fixed custom for the pope to speak of himself as the vicar of Christ and the vicar of God. He was henceforth exclusively addressed as “holiness” or “most holy” — sanctitas or

[Ref HCC vol.5 ch.15 p.123] “For Cyprian’s motto, “there is no salvation outside of the Church,” was substituted, there is no salvation outside of the Roman Church. It was distinctly stated that all who refuse subjection to the pope are heretics. From the pope’s authority to loose and bind no human being is exempted. Nothing is exempted from his jurisdiction.

6/ The Pope and the State

1198 [Ref HCC vol.5 ch.15 p.123] “England, Poland, Norway, and Sweden, Portugal, Aragon, Naples, Sardinia, Corsica, and Sicily, not to speak of portions of Central Italy, were in this period, for a longer or shorter time, fiefs of the Apostolic see. In 1299, the same claim was made over Scotland. The nations ..were reminded that Rome was the throbbing centre of divinely bequeathed authority. The islands of the West were its to bestow. To Peter was given, so Innocent wrote, not only the universal Church, but the whole earth that he might rule it. His practice, as we have seen, followed his pen. There was a time when the pope recognized the superior authority of the emperor, as did Gregory the Great in 593. Peter Damiani, writing in the age of Gregory VII., recognized the distinction and coordination of the two swords and the two realms. But another conception took its place, the subordination of all civil authority under the pope. To depose princes, to absolve subjects from allegiance, to actively foment rebellion as against Frederick II., to divert lands as in Southern France, to give away crowns, to extort by threat of the severest ecclesiastical penalties the payment of tribute, to punish religious dissenters with perpetual imprisonment or turn them over to the secular authorities, knowing death would be the punishment, to send and consecrate crusading armies, and to invade the realm of the civil court, usurp its authority, and annul a nation’s code, as in the case of Magna Charta, — these were the high prerogatives actually exercised by the papacy.

1302 [Ref HCC vol.6 ch.1 p.004] “The council called by the pope convened in Rome the last day of October, 1302, …It issued two bulls. …The second is one of the most notable of all papal documents, the bull Unam sanctam, the name given to it from its first words, “We are forced to believe in one holy Catholic Church.” It marks an epoch in the history of the declarations of the papacy, not because it contained anything novel, but because it set forth with unchanged clearness the stiffest claims of the papacy to temporal and spiritual power. It begins with the assertion that there is only one true Church, outside of which there is no salvation. The pope is the vicar of Christ, and whoever refuses to be ruled by Peter belongs not to the fold of Christ. Both swords are subject to the Church, the spiritual and the temporal. The temporal sword is to be wielded for the Church, the spiritual by it. The secular estate may be judged by the spiritual estate, but the spiritual estate by no human tribunal. The document closes with the startling declaration that for every human being the condition of salvation is obedience to the Roman pontiff.”

1451 [Ref HCC vol.6 ch.6 p.049] “In a long communication, dated Oct. 11, 1451, the Roman pontiff declared …There could not be two heads to an empire or the Church. There is no salvation outside of the one Church. He was lost in the flood who was not housed in Noah’s ark. Whatever opinion it may have entertained of these claims, the Byzantine court was in too imminent danger to reject the papal condition, and in December, 1452, Isidore, surrounded by 300 priests, announced, in the church of St. Sophia, the union of the Greek and Latin communions”.

415 [Ref HCC vol.7 ch.1 p.011] The mediaeval theory of the Catholic Church assumes a close alliance of Caesar and Pope, or the civil and ecclesiastical power, in Christian countries, and the exclusiveness of the Catholic communion out of which there can be no salvation. The Athanasian Creed has no less than three damning clauses against all who dissent from the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity and the Incarnation. From this point of view every heresy, i.e., every departure from catholic orthodoxy, is a sin and a crime against society, and punishable both by the church and the state, though in different ways. “The church does not thirst for blood” but excommunicates the obstinate heretic and hands him over to the civil magistrate to be dealt with according to law. And the laws of pagan Rome and Christian Rome were alike severe against every open dissent from the state religion. The Mosaic legislation against idolatry and blasphemy, which were punished by death, as a crime against the theocracy and as treason against Jehovah, seemed to afford divine authority for similar enactments under the Christian dispensation, in spite of the teaching and example of Christ and his Apostles. The Christian emperors after Constantine persecuted the heathen religion and heretical sects, as their heathen predecessors had persecuted the Christians as enemies of the national gods. The Justinian code, which extended its influence over the whole Continent of Europe, declares Christian heretics and schismatics, as well as Pagans and Jews, incapable of holding civil or military offices, forbids their public assemblies and ecclesiastical acts, and orders their books to be burned.

7/ The Pope Is Infallible (search  HCC for ‘infallible Infallibility’)

1839 [Ref NAdvent; re Infallibility; under the sub-heading; ‘Explanation of papal infallibility’].
Below is an extract of that article; the ‘links’ shown are functional when you are in the ‘New Advent’ page.
“The Vatican Council has defined as "a divinely revealed dogma" that "the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra — that is, when in the exercise of his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the whole Church — is, by reason of the Divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to be endowed in defining doctrines of faith and morals; and consequently that such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of their own nature (ex sese) and not by reason of the Church's consent" (Densinger no. 1839 — old no. 1680). For the correct understanding of this definition it is to be noted that:”

1545? [Ref wiki Papal Infallibility] “This doctrine was defined dogmatically at the First Vatican Council of 1869–1870 in the document Pastor aeternus, but had been defended before that, existing already in medieval theology and being the majority opinion at the time of the Counter-Reformation.^[2]” (About 1545-1648)

1870 [Ref HCC vol.1 ch.4 p.026] since 1870 — with the additional claim of papal infallibility in all official utterances, doctrinal or moral

1846 [Ref HCC vol.1 ch.4 p.026] The famous saying that “no pope shall see the (twenty-five) years of Peter,” which had hitherto almost the force of law, has been falsified by the thirty-two years’ reign of the first infallible pope, Pius IX., who ruled from 1846 to 1878.

102+ [Ref HCC vol.2 ch.4 p.050] “The first example of the exercise of a sort of papal authority is found towards the close of the first century in the letter of the Roman bishop Clement (d. 102) …. The hierarchical spirit arose from the domineering spirit of the Roman church, rather than the Roman bishop or the presbyters who were simply the organs of the people. But a century later the bishop of Rome was substituted for the church of Rome, when Victor [189AD] in his own name excommunicated the churches of Asia Minor for a trifling difference of ritual. From this hierarchical assumption there was only one step towards the papal absolutism of a Leo [440AD] and Hildebrand, and this found its ultimate doctrinal climax in the Vatican dogma of papal infallibility.”

1483 [Ref to PClaims also AT-Pope]
The Decision of the Pope and the Decision of God Constitute One Decision.
Second reason considering the role of the Pope. Only the Pope is said to be the Vicar of God: because he alone is able to bind and loose, possessing alone loosing and binding given to him by God. The decision of the Pope and the decision of God constitute one decision, just as the decision of the Pope and his disciple are the same. Since, therefore, an appeal is always taken from an inferior judge to a superior, as no one is greater than himself, so no appeal holds when made from the Pope to God, because there is one consistory of the Pope himself and of God Himself, of which consistory the Pope himself is the key-bearer and the doorkeeper. Therefore no one can appeal from the Pope to God, as no one can enter into the consistory of God without the mediation of the Pope, who is the key-bearer and the doorkeeper of the consistory of eternal life; and as no one can appeal to himself, so no one can appeal from the Pope to God, because there is one decision and one court of God, and the Pope.

1073 [Ref HCC vol5 ch2 p011] “10. Hildebrand Elected Pope. His Views on the Situation…11. The Gregorian Theocracy: ...The pope inherits the lofty position of Peter. He is the Rock of the Church. He is the universal bishop, a title against which the first Gregory protested as an anti-Christian presumption. He is intrusted with the care of all Christendom (including the Greek Church, which never acknowledged him). He has absolute and final jurisdiction, and is responsible only to God, and to no earthly tribunal. He alone can depose and reinstate bishops, and his legates take precedence of all bishops. He is the supreme arbiter in questions of right and wrong in the whole Christian world. He is above all earthly sovereigns. He can wear the imperial insignia. He can depose kings and emperors, and absolve subjects from their oath of allegiance to unworthy sovereigns.” Also [Ref to PClaims], also [Ref to AT-Pope on ‘universal’]

[Ref NAdvent, re Pope, The] “The title pope, once used with far greater latitude (see below, section V), is at present employed solely to denote the Bishop of Rome, who, in virtue of his position as successor of St. Peter, is the chief pastor of the whole Church, the Vicar of Christ upon earth.”

[Ref NAdvent, re Popes, Election] Popes, Election of the - The pope becomes chief pastor because he is the Bishop of Rome; he does not become Bishop of Rome because he has been chosen to be head of the universal Church”. 

590+ [Ref HCC vol.2 ch.13 p.160] “Pope Gregory [590] the Great repudiated the title “ecumenical bishop” as an antichristian assumption, and yet it is comparatively harmless as compared with the official titles of his successors, who claim to be the Vicars of Christ, the viceregents of God Almighty on earth, and the infallible organs of the Holy Ghost in all matters of faith and discipline. None of the ancient fathers and doctors knew anything of the modern Roman dogmas of the immaculate conception (1854) and papal infallibility (1870).”

[Ref HCC vol.3 ch.5 p.060] By its advocates the papacy is based not merely upon church usage, like the metropolitan and patriarchal power, but upon divine right; upon the peculiar position which Christ assigned to Peter in the well-known words: “Thou art Peter, and on this rock will I build my church.” This passage was at all times taken as an immovable exegetical rock for the papacy. The popes themselves appealed to it, times without number, as the great proof of the divine institution of a visible and infallible central authority in the church. According to this view, the primacy is before the apostolate, the head before the body, instead of the reverse.

1870 [Ref HCC vol.4 ch.4 p.055] The policy of Pepin was followed by Charlemagne, the German, and Austrian emperors, and modern French rulers who interfered in Italian affairs, now as allies, now as enemies, until the temporal power of the papacy was lost under its last protector, Napoleon III., who withdrew his troops from Rome to fight against Germany, and by his defeat prepared the way for Victor Emanuel to take possession of Rome, as the capital of free and united Italy (1870). Since that time the pope who a few weeks before had proclaimed to the world his own infallibility in all matters of faith and morals, is confined to the Vatican, but with no diminution of his spiritual power as the bishop of bishops over two hundred millions of souls.

[Ref HCC vol.4 ch.4 p.057] The Vatican Palace is the richest museum of classical and medieval curiosities, and the pope himself, the infallible oracle of two hundred millions of souls, is by far the greatest curiosity in it.

1873 [Ref HCC vol.4 ch.4 p.058] When Pius IX., in a letter to William I. (1873), claimed a sort of jurisdiction over all baptized Christians, the emperor courteously informed the infallible pope that he, with all Protestants, recognized no other mediator between God and man but our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

1854-1870 [Ref HCC vol.4 ch.5 p.072] “two new dogmas, — the immaculate conception of Mary (1854) and the infallibility of the pope (1870). When Pius IX. invited the Eastern patriarchs to attend the Vatican Council, they indignantly refused, and renewed their old protest against the antichristian usurpation of the papacy and the heretical Filioque.

681 [Ref HCC vol.4 ch.11 p.112] “in concert with Agatho, a General Council. It convened in the imperial palace at Constantinople, and held eighteen sessions from Nov. 7, 680, to Sept. 16, 681. It is called the Sixth Ecumenical, …The epistle of Agatho is a worthy sequel of Leo’s Epistle to the Chalcedonian Council, and equally clear and precise in stating the orthodox view. It is also remarkable for the confidence with which it claims infallibility for the Roman church, in spite of the monotheletic heresy of Pope Honorius (who is prudently ignored). Agatho quotes the words of Christ to Peter, Luk_22:31, Luk_22:32, in favor of papal infallibility, anticipating, as it were, the Vatican decision of 1870.”

625-869 [Ref HCC vol.4 ch.11 p.113] Various attempts have been made by papal historians and controversialists to save the orthodoxy of Honorius in order to save the dogma of papal infallibility.  …Honorius was condemned by the sixth ecumenical Council as “the former pope of Old Rome,” who with the help of the old serpent had scattered deadly error. This anathema was repeated by the seventh ecumenical Council, 787, and by the eighth, 869. …Here again ultramontane historians have resorted to the impossible denial either of the genuineness of the act of condemnation in the sixth ecumenical Council, or of the true meaning of that act. The only consistent way for papal infallibilists is to deny the infallibility of the ecumenical Council as regards the dogmatic fact. In this case it would involve at the same time a charge of gross injustice to Honorius. [Ref background on Honorius I “Honorius I, (born, Roman Campania [Italy]—died October 12, 638), pope from 625 to 638 whose posthumous condemnation as a heretic subsequently caused extensive controversy on the question of papal infallibility.]

1198+ [Ref HCC vol.5 ch.5 p.036] “The brilliant pontificate of Innocent III., 1198-1216, …It marks the golden age of the medieval papacy and one of the most important eras in the history of the Catholic Church. No other mortal has before or since wielded such extensive power. As the spiritual sovereign of Latin Christendom, he had no rival. At the same time he was the acknowledged arbiter of the political destinies of Europe from Constantinople to Scotland. He successfully carried into execution the highest theory of the papal theocracy and anticipated the Vatican dogmas of papal absolutism and infallibility. To the papal title “vicar of Christ,” Innocent added for the first time the title “vicar of God.” He set aside the decisions of bishops and provincial councils, and lifted up and cast down kings. He summoned and guided one of the most important of the councils of the Western Church, the Fourth Lateran, 1215, whose acts established the Inquisition and fixed transubstantiation as a dogma. He set on foot the Fourth Crusade, and died making preparation for another. On the other hand he set Christian against Christian, and by undertaking to extirpate religious dissent by force drenched parts of Europe in Christian blood.”

1198+ [Ref HCC vol.5 ch.5 p.037] “Indeed, the papal theocracy was Innocent’s all-absorbing idea. He was fully convinced that it was established of God for the good of the Church and the salvation of the world. As God gave to Christ all power in heaven and on earth, so Christ delegated to Peter and his successors the same authority. Not man but God founded the Apostolic see. In his famous letter to the patriarch of Constantinople, Nov. 12, 1199, he gave an elaborate exposition of the commission to Peter. To him alone the command had been given, “Feed my sheep.” On him alone it had been declared, “I will build my church.” The pope is the vicar of Christ, yea of God himself. Not only is he intrusted with the dominion of the Church, but also with the rule of the whole world. Like Melchizedek, he is at once king and priest. All things in heaven and earth and in hell are subject to Christ. So are they also to his vicar. He can depose princes and absolve subjects from the oath of allegiance. He may enforce submission by placing whole nations under the interdict. Peter alone went to Jesus on the water and by so doing he gave illustration of the unique privilege of the papacy to govern the whole earth. For the other disciples stayed in the ship and so to them was given rule only over single provinces. And as the waters were many on which Peter walked, so over the many congregations and nations, which the waters represent, was Peter given authority — yea over all nations whatsoever (universos populos). In this letter he also clearly teaches papal infallibility and declares that Peter’s successor can never in any way depart from the Catholic faith.”

1232 [Ref HCC vol.5 ch.8 p.068] “As early as 1232 Gregory IX. confided the execution of the Inquisition to the Dominicans, but the order of Francis demanded and secured a share in the gruesome work. Under the lead of Duns Scotus the Franciscans became the unflagging champions of the doctrine of the immaculate conception of Mary which was pronounced a dogma in 1854, as later the Jesuits became the unflagging champions of the dogma of papal infallibility.”

1130+ [Ref HCC vol.5 ch.15 p.123] “Bernard was the friend of popes and the ruling spirit of Europe during the pontificates of Innocent II. [1130-43] and Eugenius III. [1145-53]. …Bernard distinctly grants the two swords to the pope, who himself draws the spiritual sword and by his wink commands the worldly sword to be unsheathed. …It is also true that Bernard follows his generation in making the pope the viceregent of God on earth. The views of Thomas Aquinas …statements are so positive ... In the pope resides the plenitude of power. To the Roman Church obedience is due as to Christ. …The pope is both king and priest, and the temporal realm gets its authority from Peter and his successors. Thomas went further still. He declared for the infallibility of the pope. In confirmation of this view he quoted spurious writings of Cyril, but also genuine passages from the Fathers. …The popular opinion current among priests and monks was no doubt accurately expressed by Caesar of Heisterbach at the beginning of the thirteenth century when he compared the Church to the firmament, the pope to the sun, the emperor to the moon, the bishops to the stars, the clergy to the day, and the laity to the night.”

1290+ [Ref HCC vol.6 p.001] The power of the papacy, which had asserted infallibility of judgment and dominion over all departments of human life, was undermined by the mistakes, pretensions, and worldliness of the papacy itself, as exhibited in the policy of Boniface VIII., the removal of the papal residence to Avignon, and the disastrous schism which, for nearly half a century, gave to Europe the spectacle of two, and at times three, popes reigning at the same time and all professing to be the vicegerents of God on earth. …Thus European society was shaking itself clear of long-established customs and dogmas based upon the infallibility of the Church visible, and at the same time it held fast to some of the most noxious beliefs and practices the Church had allowed herself to accept and propagate.

1301 [Ref HCC vol.6 ch.1 p.005] “The tract by Aegidius .. his Power of the Supreme Pontiff — De ecclesiastica sive de summit pontificis potestate. It was the chief work of its time in defence of the papacy, ..written in 1301. ..dedicated to Boniface VIII. : - ‘The pope judges all things and is judged by no man, 1Co_2:15. To him belongs plenary power, plenitudo potestatis. This power is without measure, without number, and without weight. It extends over all Christians. The pope is above all laws and in matters of faith infallible. He is like the sea which fills all vessels, like the sun which, as the universally active principle, sends his rays into all things. …As the government of the world is one and centres in one ruler, God, so in the affairs of the militant Church there can be only one source of power, one supreme government, one head to whom belongs the plenitude of power. This is the supreme pontiff. The priesthood and the papacy are of immediate divine appointment. Earthly kingdoms, except as they have been established by the priesthood, ..the Church has the right to possess worldly goods. ..all temporal goods are under the control of the Church. As the soul rules the body, so the pope rules over all temporal matters. The tithe is a perpetual obligation. No one has a right to the possession of a single acre of ground or a vineyard without the Church’s permission and unless he be baptized. ..The fulness of power, residing in the pope, gives him the right to appoint to all benefices in Christendom, but, as God chooses to rule through the laws of nature, so the pope rules through the laws of the Church, but he is not bound by them. He may himself be called the Church. For the pope’s power is spiritual, heavenly and divine.

1308 [Ref HCC vol.6 ch.1 p.005] James of Viterbo, d. 1308. …His Christian Government — De regimine christiano — is, after the treatise of Aegidius, the most comprehensive of the papal tracts. ..was dedicated to Boniface VIII., who is addressed as “the holy lord of the kings of the earth.” …To Christ’s vicar, James says, royalty and priesthood, regnum et sacerdotium, belong. …Priests are kings, and the pope is the king of kings, both in mundane and spiritual matters. He is the bishop of the earth, the supreme lawgiver. Every soul must be subject to him in order to salvation. By reason of his fulness of power, the supreme pontiff can act according to law or against it, as he chooses.

1870 [Ref HCC vol.6 ch.6 p.050] In issuing the decree of papal infallibility four centuries later, Pius IX. did not excel his predecessor in the art of composition; but he had this advantage over him that his announcement was stamped with the previous ratification of a general council.

1512 [Ref HCC vol.6 ch.10] Burckhardt ..twice in the same work. …it solemnly reaffirmed the claim of supreme jurisdiction over the souls and bodies of men, the Church and the state. And after the Reformation had begun, Prierias, Master of the palace, declared the pope’s superiority to the Scriptures in these words: “Whoever does not rest upon the doctrine of the Roman Church and the Roman pope as an infallible rule of faith, from which even the Holy Scriptures derive their authority, is a heretic.” And to be a heretic meant to be an outlaw. Prierias was the man who spoke of Luther as “the brute with the deep eyes and strange fantasies.”

1870 [Ref HCC vol.7 ch.1 p.002] “Romanism is the Latin church turned against the Reformation, consolidated by the Council of Trent and completed by the Vatican Council of 1870 with its dogma of papal absolutism and papal infallibility.”

Can’t rescind infallibility
1885 [Ref HCC vol.7 ch.1 p.002] “Leo XIII., a great admirer of the theology of St. Thomas Aquinas, in his Encyclical of Nov. 1, , “concerning the Christian constitution of states,” wisely moderates, but reaffirms, in substance, the political principles of his predecessor. A revocation would be fatal to the Vatican dogma of papal infallibility.”

Luther’s says why the pope couldn’t be infallible
1518 [Ref HCC vol.7 ch.3 p.035] “35. Luther and Cajetan. October, 1518 The transactions at Augsburg” …“They had three interviews (Oct. 12, 13, 14). Cajetan treated Luther with condescending courtesy, and assured him of his friendship. But he demanded retraction of his errors, and absolute submission to the Pope. Luther resolutely refused, and declared that he could do nothing against his conscience ; that one must obey God rather than man ; that he had the Scripture on his side; that even Peter was once reproved by Paul for misconduct (Gal_2:11), and that surely his successor was not infallible.”

8/ The Bull of Excommunication of Luther June 15, 1520

1520 [Ref HCC vol.7 ch.3 p.047] “The bull of excommunication is the papal counter-manifesto to Luther’s Theses, …It was the last bull addressed to Latin Christendom as an undivided whole, and the first which was disobeyed by a large part of it. Instead of causing Luther and his friends to be burnt, it was burnt by Luther. It is an elaborate document, prepared with great care in the usual heavy, turgid, and tedious style of the curia. It breathes the genuine spirit of the papal hierarchy, and mingles the tones of priestly arrogance, concern for truth, abomination of heresy and schism, fatherly sorrow, and penal severity. The Pope speaks as if he were the personal embodiment of the truth, the infallible judge of all matters of faith, and the dispenser of eternal rewards and punishments.”

9/ The Infalable Excomunicated Pope Honorius I.

1520+ [Ref HCC vol.7 ch.3 p.056] Luther ..protested against the Council of Constance .. “The Roman Church itself must admit the fallibility of Councils if the Vatican decree of papal infallibility is to stand; for more than one ecumenical council has denounced Pope Honorius as a heretic, and even Popes have confirmed the condemnation of their predecessor. Two conflicting infallibilities neutralize each other.”

[Ref HCC vol.8 ch.3 p.029] “Roman Catholics believe in the Bible because they believe in the Church, as the custodian and infallible interpreter of the Bible.”

1554+ [Ref HCC vol.8 ch.4 p.038] “tracts of Vergerio are chiefly polemical against the Roman hierarchy of which he had so long been a conspicuous member. …He agreed with Luther that the papacy was an invention of the Devil; that the pope was the very Antichrist seated in the temple of God as predicted by Daniel (Dan_11:36) and Paul (2Th_2:3 sq.), and the beast of the Apocalypse; and that he would soon be destroyed by a divine judgment. He attacked all the contemporary popes, except Adrian VI. [1522-23], to whom he gives credit for honesty and earnestness. He is especially severe on “Saul IV.” (Paul IV.), who as Cardinal Caraffa had made some wise and bold utterances on the corruption of the clergy, but since his elevation to the “apostate chair, which corrupts every one who ascends it,” had become the leader of the Counter-Reformation with its measures of violence and blood. Such monsters, he says, are the popes. One contradicts the other, and yet they are all infallible, and demand absolute submission. Rather die a thousand times than have any communion with popery …Popery and the gospel are as incompatible as darkness and light, as Belial and Christ. No compromise is possible between them. …The Protestants who follow the Word of God are orthodox, the Romanists who follow the traditions of men are the heretics.

1552+ [Ref HCC vol.8 ch.14 p.113] “Calvin sets the absolute sovereignty of God and the infallibility of the Bible over against the pretended sovereignty and infallibility of the pope.

Honorius I.

1864-1870 [Ref HCC vol.8 ch.16 p.138] “Pope Pius IX., in the Syllabus of 1864, expressly condemned, among the errors of this age, the doctrine of religious toleration and liberty. And this pope has been declared to be officially infallible by the Vatican decree of 1870, which embraces all his predecessors (notwithstanding the stubborn case of Honorius I.) and all his successors in the chair of St. Peter. Leo XIII. has moderately and cautiously indorsed the doctrine of the Syllabus.

10/ Angels Must Submit To The Pope

1080 [Ref HCC vol.5 ch.2 p.011] Gregory VII. “Gregory compares the Church to the sun, the State to the moon, which borrows her light from the sun. The episcopal dignity is above the kingly and imperial dignity, as heaven is above the earth. …His theory of the papal power could not have been more explicitly stated …He concluded his second excommunication of Henry IV., at the synod in Lent, March 7, 1080, with this startling peroration: — 

“And now, O ye princes and fathers, most holy Apostles Peter and Paul, deal ye with us in such wise that all the world may know and understand that, having the power to bind and to loose in heaven, you have the like power to take away empires, kingdoms, principalities, duchies, marquisates, earldoms, and all manner of human rights and properties .... Having such mighty power in spiritual things, what is there on earth that may transcend your authority in temporal things? And if ye judge the angels, who are high above the proudest of princes, what may ye not do unto those beneath them? Let the kings and princes of the earth know and feel how great ye are — how exalted your power! Let them tremble to despise the commands of your Church!”

 

Conclusion:

You can see I have extensively used ‘History of The Christian Church (by Philip Schaff)’, who wrote in 1882. So to find anything after that date you would need to go to other sources. And as you can see there are numerous other references on the Internet. So lets go back to the original question, has the pope fulfilled the passage in, Daniel chapter 7:25, “And he shall speak words against the Most High”? ……. 

I think the pope has adequately done so!

Thankyou very much for joining me and I hope that has been of interest to you. Some other talks I have produced are: -

British Israel - 1.01 [For Beginners]

When Did Jesus Become The Messiah

CHURCH HISTORY Part 1 -:- [From Christ to The Pope]

The-Book-Of-Revelation-Started-2000-Years-Ago

Faults with The Future Coming Antichrist Theory

The ‘Futurist Interpretation’ Automobile

Thankyou and GBY (God Bless Ya)

Yours Adrian