Updated: Jan 28
I did an Internet search this afternoon of the name “Nostradamus.” Of course, many pages came up. I went through about 14 pages, clicking on some of the articles with the more interesting headings, such as, “Did God send the world Nostradamus?” and, “Quack Prophet.” I looked for some articles that went into some detail about why to believe in Nostradamus, or why not to believe. All that I read presented a case for not believing.
As I read these explanations why not to believe Nostradamus, I sensed people needing to influence others how foolish it would be to believe in Nostradamus. The articles were rather detailed, presenting what appeared to be well thought out examinations of the facts others had presented as reason to believe. Their bias made their reasoning against belief in Nostradamus very clear. All articles presented the standard arguments that it is humanly impossible to know the future, meaning that Nostradamus must have used some of the common tricks used by charlatans. Some articles were designed to save Christians from being misled by a false prophet.
From those differing perspectives, quite a few addressed why quatrain I-35 was wrong. In that quatrain, Nostradamus supposedly predicted the jousting accident of France’s king, Henry II. Every one of those articles I read agreed that Nostradamus did not predict that event. However, none of them explained that Nostradamus never claimed to have predicted that event; they all simply explained how the details of the verbiage did not fit the details of the historical event.
I was moved to post some comments on one of the articles, just to make it known that Nostradamus never made the claim that quatrain I-35 was about King Henry II dying at a joust. That event was nothing more than a sad freak accident. If a prophet had been warned of such a happening, it would have been accompanied by a divine command, “Go now and save your king.” Just because Queen Catherine de Medici began telling the world, “Nostradamus is a true prophet because quatrain I-35 is about my husband Henry’s death,” the world has maintained her interpretation as truth. Because Nostradamus did not go public and denounce that interpretation, there is no reason to show as fact that Nostradamus predicted that event. Catherine de Medici started a rumor, which is hearsay and not admissible in a court of logical debate.
In my comments on that one website, I pointed out that logic demands that one use as evidence some words that Nostradamus put in writing, where he officially claimed the meaning of his work, The Prophecies. He did that in two letters that accompany the “complete” versions of that book. He explained what the quatrains meant collectively, without making any statements like, “Quatrain I-01 is about ….” Thus, it is illogical to argue against the meaning of any individual quatrains, because Nostradamus never explained individual quatrains.
One can explain the meaning of one quatrain by supporting interpretative claims about the meaning of that text. Factual evidence can be as simple as stating the definition of the words written, with that meaning guiding the interpretation. Still, an interpretation is a guess and opinion until one states as evidence something akin to a statement like, “One can assume this interpretation because Nostradamus explained this generally in his letter ….” No articles that I read did anything more than expose the foolishness of some idiot interpreting individual quatrains from The Prophecies, without knowing a damn thing about Nostradamus’ explanation of the meaning of his work.
What angered me most, while reading those Internet condemnations of Nostradamus, were the “evangelicals” who shot flurries of biblical arrows into the air as proof that Nostradamus was most certainly a “false prophet.” While those articles showed some human being playing God by flexing his scripture memorization abilities, not one addressed what Nostradamus clearly stated in his letters, as to how he was able to prophesy. They condemned him for being wrong about his predictions in individual quatrains (thus false prophecy) and they condemned him for being an “occultist,” because he used astrology to calculate his predictions.
Nostradamus stated that his source was not astrology. Perhaps his words about “astronomics” and “astrology” were not as clearly organized as were others that stated his source, but he never explained that he wrote The Prophecies because he used that art form. To draw a conclusion that Nostradamus was a false prophet, because he used astrology, only proves the “false prophesying” going on is by the evangelical writers who falsely reject anyone who states he or she is a true Prophet of the LORD. Blinded by the thrill of self-importance, an evangelical writing without facts, or without testing the facts that are present for falseness, is doing nothing but attempting to distract Christians from a real, true prophecy. After all, the real “false prophets” are the ones who love to make money from people who read their false condemnations of others. That is especially “easy money” when the condemned are dead and cannot sue them for slander.
For that reason alone, I went through the letter of preface and came up with the following statements made by Nostradamus, each prefacing his work. To those who do not understand the word “preface,” it is a document usually written by the author of a book, which explains the scope, intention, and expectations of the book being prefaced. With that known, read the words of Nostradamus and let me know what you think Nostradamus said about his source. Tell me what you think is “occultist” about his statements.
To preface this presentation, everything following is my translation, maintaining the exact word order as the original Old French (as published in the 1568 Lyon edition). This literal translation is not the only translation possible; as many words have acceptable alternate translations (what one would call synonyms). Each segment presented is shown in the order of appearance within the preface, although there is other text to be found between these statements. The double return represents where that other text would be found. (I recommend reading the whole preface, but read this first.)
One can benefit by realizing the systemic use of punctuation. Rather than present these snippets from the preface as the continuous text they appear to be in the actual preface letter, I will use punctuation to separate the words into segments, creating a poetic style. It also acts as a “speed bump,” design to slow reading down. But, the line format makes the letter match the presentations made in the quatrains (4-line poems). It will also be helpful to NOT read an ampersand as a mark simply indicating the word “and.” An ampersand is a mark that makes the statement, “what follows next is important.” Like punctuation, the ampersand symbol will be used to separate text into line format.
Any comments that I add, within the flow of text from the preface, will be bracketed. Words found in parentheses are alternative translations. The italicized words represent the Latin text of Nostradamus; and they correlate to Biblical text. The Latin does not represent direct quotes from the Holy Bible, but are more like paraphrases. Again, reading Nostradamus is best when reading one word at a time, letting images flow from each word, such that there are no “paraphrases,” per se, because that would imply standard sentence structure and syntax. I will place certain keywords in bold, to show how words repeat. Repeating words denote important themes.
The Old French text will not be presented in this posting, as that would make the eyes of typical blog readers weary and unable to maintain focus. A separate post will be made public later, which will only be to show the Old French text. It is my opinion that the 1568 Lyon edition is the edited and correct publication to use, in lieu of an actual manuscript.
From the Preface to The Prophecies:
& that the whole is royal
& guided by the power of God invaluable,
Considering also the maxim of the true Savior:
Be unwilling holy to give dogs,
not to send all pearls before swine,
lest trampled under foot
& to turn around to break apart you.
to the Prophecies:
by the medium of God immortal,
& the good Angels had received the spirit of making predictions of the future,
[the capitalized “Propheties” is to be seen as a distinction between the lower case “vaticinations” – “predictions of the future – which were Nostradamus’ publications prior to The Prophecies]
As for us who amounts humans not powerful ones anything of our natural cognizance
& tendency to machine,
to know the secrets abstracts of God the Creator
Because not is ours to know times,
and not to warn,
that God the creator has required to reveal by imaginative impressions,
some secrets of then to become,
Because these works devine ones,
that totally are absolute ones,
God these came to perfect:
There competent who is in the center,
those Angels then third them malicious.
[The reference to “third malicious” is to the followers of the Fallen Angel, Lucifer.]
but what all will proceed from the power divine of the great God eternal,
to who all kindness proceeded.
And for becoming that the Prophet,
fairly the perfected wisdom of the prophecy him to appear manifesting the things divine ones,
that these not themselves powered to make,
seen them effect ones of the future prediction itself extended far,
For the secrets of God incomprehensible,
but the perfected the causes summaries not itself ability to acquire without those divine inspirations:
want that all inspirational prophetic received absorbing its main principle changing from God the creator,
I yourself implore that never you not view them to use your understanding in such to succeed
& vanities that dried the bodies
& putting in ruin the soul,
giving trouble to the weak sense:
same the vanity of the more that detestable magic reprobate in times past by the sacred scriptures,
& by the divine canons,
reluctant long the fantastic ones imaginations which will become,
limiting the particularity of the places,
by divine inspiration supernatural:
& by the spirit of prophecy: [This can also state “the spirit to prophecy,” indicating it is a prophecy of the Holy Spirit.]
not that I myself view it to award nomination not effect prophetic,
but by revealed inspiration,
which are comprised ones with the understanding of this one inspired which prophesy,
the one is that came in to infuse,
brightening the light supernaturally,
to the person who predicted by the doctrine of the Stars [i.e.: Astrology]
& prophesy by inspired revelation,
which is one certain participation with the divine eternity,
in return for the Prophet lived at to judge from that that his divine spirit he to given by the medium of God the creator,
also any ones faith ones God the creator through ministers of his messengers of fire in flame epistle sent (or “missive”) came from to declare in them sense outward ones principally with nose eyes,
them causes of future prediction significators (those who read signs) to the case future,
which they owe to the one who presage to manifest.
Because the presage which oneself made from the illumination outward came infallibly in to award party with them
& working the light outward:
how truly that the party who seemed to have by the eye understanding,
this that not is through the harm to be predicted by reason of inspiration from divinity,
For the mercy of God not will be point scattered one time,
& the term prefixed,
that humans after coming ones,
will be seeing knowing ones the adventures happened infallibly,
Praying to the God immortal,
that he you wanting to lend life,
& prosperous happiness.
Okay. I saw a theme there, one which said, “God is the author of The Prophecies, and all I did was hold the pen on paper.” Did anyone else see the same? Guess what? If you want to know what the quatrains say, and if you want to know how to read the quatrains so you will see what they say, read the preface and the explanation letter to Henry II. It is all there.
Oh, by the way. Nostradamus makes sure that if you miss the God element of the preface, he repeated it several times in his explanation letter.
R. T. Tippett