The Prophecy
It was 1933, a young minister by the name of William Branham was praying before service. As he prayed, some visions of world events appeared before him. Following is his commentary on one of the visions that he saw, specifically about the great fortified region we know now as the Siegfried and Maginot Lines.
Prophecy:
The fourth, I said, “Our war will be with Germany, and they will build a great big concrete place and fortify themselves in there, and the Americans will take a horrible beating.” Almighty God knows that, Who I stand before now. I seen those independent Nazis kicking the Americans like that and things at that wall. And there’s many boys standing here now that was at that Siegfried Line that knows what it was. And ,remember, that was eleven years before the Siegfried Line was built. Is God true? Does He still foretell things to happen? Watch. That’s–that was the fourth. The Seventieth Week of Daniel
The next vision foretold that an Austrian by the name of Adolph Hitler would rise up as dictator over Germany and that he would draw the world into war. It showed the Siegfried Line and how our troops would have a terrible time to overcome it. Then it showed that Hitler would come to a mysterious end. The Seven Church Ages
How that the Americas would go to war with Germany, they’d take an awful beating at a place called, a great line where there would be concrete fortified in there. I believe it’s called the Siegfried Line. And there’s one called Maginot; I believe that was the French. Was that right? And the Siegfried Line was the German line. And the Lord let me see that, eleven years before it was built. And they never would admit getting a beating on it, the Americans wouldn’t, ‘til they almost sunk the complete army. Shalom
And eleven years beforehand, it said that “We’d go to war with Germany, and Germany would be fortified behind concrete,” the Maginot Line. It happened just that way. The Ephesian Church Age
The Line:
There are plenty of other great walls that have significance throughout history. Hadrian’s Wall, the Berlin Wall, The Great Wall of China. There are even other walls in France. Bro. Branham did not refer to any of them and never interchanged them. Bro. Branham is describing two fortifications that are right next to each other in the fulfillment of the same prophecy. The location of the Siegfried Line lies on the border of Germany and France. The French side of this border is called the Maginot Line, where the French built a tremendous fortification across from the then Westwall/Hindenburg Line. To put this geography into perspective, Germany is not much bigger than the state of Wisconsin. On the western border of Wisconsin is Minnesota. The Minnesota/Wisconsin border follows the Mississippi River Valley. This analogy of the Maginot/Siegfried Line would be like Minnesota fortifying the western side and bluffs of the Mississippi River Valley and Wisconsin fortifying the hills of the eastern portion of the River Valley. Each wall was two sides of the same coin and area. Rev. Branham alternately refers to this area as the Maginot Line and Siegfried Line.
The German side was called the Siegfried Line by the Allies, A popularized version of the song written during WW2, “We’re going to hang the washing out on the Siegfried Line,” was a tune that kept the spirits of the allies cheerful as they rolled on through Europe. The Germans called it the Westwall.
Understanding what Happened:
There are some that have pointed to various links suggesting that not much happened at the Siegfried and Maginot lines. This is actually a fulfillment of bro. Branham’s statement. “They don’t like to admit it”. General Patton himself said these lines were a testament to the folly of fixed fortifications. Never mind that he lost many of his men at this area. History notes that there is a great effort to disguising the difficulty the Allies had here. There’s a narrative that occurs during this time that the Allies had run out of supplies and so had to wait for some time while the supply lines caught up. One way to penetrate this fog of misinformation is to understand the different conflicts that occurred in this area. Books have been written of these individual conflicts some which took place at the more southern parts of the Maginot line, while other historic conflicts were at more northern portion and against the Siegfried line. The northern portions had no Maginot line across from them making this a bit of a riddle at times to understand. But when the riddle is cleared the details bro. Branham speaks of actually provide a much more encompassing understanding of the situation.
The Conflicts:
There appear to be 3 major sources of casualty losses in this area during the war.
1) Patton’s Loraine Campaign centering around the city of Metz in the lower French area. It was at this point where he was stalled due to the limited supplies and fuel available, which gave the German army the time to get in front of him and fortify their positions. The city of Metz was one of the key fortified cities in the Maginot line.
2) The Battle of Hurtgen Forest: Belgium had not built any addition to France’s Maginot line so there were no fortifications opposite the German Westwall. The 1st and 9th armies’ job was to attack through the Hurtgen Forest while establishing a breach in the Siegfried Line at Aachan. One hundred and twenty-thousand (120,000) men were involved in this conflict, and during the battle the United State experienced 24,000 casualties including 9,000 non-combatants. In Aachan there were an additional 5,000 casualties for a total of 38,000 casualties.
The Battle of the Hurtgen was intended to seine off reinforcements to Aachan. What the Allies didn’t know is that the Hurtgen Forest was to be the staging area for Hitler’s final punch at the Allies. That final punch is now known as the Battle of the Bulge.
Wikipedia records this in regard to the location of the Siegfried Line at the Hurtgen Forest:
“.. there were numerous bunkers in the area, mostly belonging to the deep defenses of the Westwall, which were also centers of resistance.”
3) Battle of the Bulge: Germany used the Hurtgen Forest to stage their final blow to the Allied invasion in western Europe. During this eruption, which nearly decimated the 1st and 9th armies, General Patton came into his glory spinning 3 divisions up into the underbelly of the German advance and stabilizing the 101st Airborne in their gallant hold of Bastogne.
3) Battle of the Bulge: Germany used the Hurtgen Forest to stage their final blow to the Allied invasion in western Europe. During this eruption, which nearly decimated the 1st and 9th armies, General Patton came into his glory spinning 3 divisions up into the underbelly of the German advance and stabilizing the 101st Airborne in their gallant hold of Bastogne.
All these battles have volumes written about them which could not possibly be covered here sufficiently.
Some have simply researched the fortifications themselves (which say little of these conflicts and seem to imply that little happened here), concluding that Rev. Branham’s vision was incorrect, but understanding these conflicts brings the realization of what actually occurred here.
The Casualties
|
Hurtgen
|
24,000
|
|
Metz
|
55,182
|
|
Aachan
|
5,000
|
|
Bulge
|
89,500
|
|
Combat only
|
173,682
|
|
NB Bulge
|
71,654
|
|
NB Metz
|
42,088
|
|
Total
|
287,424
|
Above are the Combat casualties totalling 173,682. In addition to the battle casualties there is another significant source of casualties or the non-battle casualties. Non battle casualties are due to accidents, disease, trench foot and frostbite. In the chart above NB stands for non-battle casualties.
Some estimates are as high as 100,000 killed. There were a total of 418,000 killed in WW2. That being said, it appears that 20-25% of these losses happened at the Maginot line. Did the Germans give the Americans a beating at the Siegfried Line? What more needs to be said?
Conclusion:
The Siegfried and Maginot Line was, in fact, a great fortified area where the American forces had a difficult time.
Bro. Branham’s references to both the Maginot and Siegfried Lines actually serve to describe the broader picture of what happened. Patton’s army faced the Maginot Line in the south, and later had to contend with the Saar region, while at the same time thrusting with 3 divisions into the Siegfried Line at the Battle of the Bulge.
Keys to understanding the prophecy’s subtle nuances
- When Bro. Branham is describing the Maginot and Siegfried Lines he’s not prophesying. It’s already years after the battle. The original prophecy simply says that “Germany would be fortified behind concrete.” They rebuilt this in the case of the Siegfried, and they used the fortifications of the Maginot Line. When he saw the vision it simply said there would be great fortifications. The Maginot and Siegfried Lines were the interpretation of that vision, and much of what he said was simply what he read about WW2.
- To understand the prophecy AND his statements about the fulfillment of the prophecy, it’s necessary to realize the broad scope of the battle line, the army groups involved, and the locations they were attacking. One division would have a very different experience than another. There are also reports of divisions crossing the line with little difficulty, often this is AFTER the conflict has already moved on further into Germany.
- Geographical significance explains a great deal. This fortified area is front and back of the same slice of bread. The Germans used both sides against the Allies. There are plenty of other great walls that have significance throughout history. Hadrian’s Wall, the Berlin Wall, The Great Wall of China. There are even other walls in France. Bro. Branham did not refer to any of them and never interchanged them. He’s placing two fortifications that are right next to each other in the fulfillment of the same prophecy.
- Germany was not fortified behind the Maginot line until 1944. Up until Germany’s invasion the French were fortified at the Maginot line. In 1944 when the German’s used the Maginot line – Hitler mobilized massive, conscripted labor groups to build and revamp the lines, much of which had been cannibalized for the Atlantic defense of the Normandy invasion. Previously the Treaty of Versaille required the destruction of ALL fortifications 50 km past the Rhine and France occupied the historically German area up until Hitler’s taking it back.
CHAPTER IV.
FORTIFICATIONS
ARTICLE 180.
All fortified works, fortresses and field works situated in German territory to the west of a line drawn fifty kilometres to the east of the Rhine shall be disarmed and dismantled.
Within a period of two months from the coming into force of the present Treaty such of the above fortified works, fortresses and field works as are situated in territory not occupied by Allied and Associated troops shall be disarmed, and within a further period of four months they shall be dismantled. Those which are situated in territory occupied by Allied and Associated troops shall be disarmed and dismantled within such periods as may be fixed by the Allied High Command.
The construction of any new fortification, whatever its nature and importance, is forbidden in the zone referred to in the first paragraph above.
The system of fortified works of the southern and eastern frontiers of Germany shall be maintained in its existing state.
References:
The total American deaths in WW2 was 418,000 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#Total_dead)
History of the Hindenburg line, Siegfried Line-British, Siegfriedstellung, Westwall, Germany
Extensive underground amenities of the Westwall
Proximity of the Maginot and Siegfried lines
Narration of the Battle of Mets/ Lorraine Campaign
Metz video #3
55000 men killed wounded missing
WIKI History of the Siegfried line.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siegfried_Line
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siegfried_Line
*Note there appears to be some conflicting ideas of when/how the line was named. WIKI appears to conflict with what some of the videos say.
Reccomended further research:
Battle of Hurtgen, Battle of the Bulge, Lorraine Campaign.
Discover more from Present Truth Ministries
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This is very impressive. But with anything prophetic one has to always ask: When were these prophecies recorded?
Is this William Branham speaking before the fact or after the fact. If beforehand, then I would like more information. If after the fact (which I assume is the case), do you have any examples of his prophecies that were made publicly and later fulfilled?
This latter type of prophecy (and the only valid prophecy in my opinion) is virtually impossible to find.
If you have any examples of the latter, you have my complete attention. But as I said, I am highly skeptical.
If you can accept Moses, and that he was the promised deliverer of Israel; the prophecy recorded that he fulfilled in bringing Israel out of Egypt after 400 yrs, was a)written by himself, b) written after the fact when he wrote the first 5 books of the Bible.
Your question, while interesting, doesn't appear to be a valid Biblical reason for rejecting a prophecy.
If you don't have a verifiable prophecy in advance of the fulfillment, how is that a prophecy?
Since you didn't answer in the affirmative, I have to assume that you don't have any.
So you're just another group following another wannabe prophet, only your guy is dead.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Frankly what you believe SHOULD be the case doesn’t really matter. I’m appreciative of your knowledge that we think William Branham is a Prophet as there are many other prophets with prophecies we could also refer to.. Obviously you have some experience in making your lambasting’s known, albeit anonymously,
What has been shown DOES satisfy the scriptural standard. Moses documented prophecies after they were actually fulfilled. All the Gospels were written after Christ was on earth. Even the earliest ‘documented’ NT manuscripts were after the famous prophecy of His where all the Christians were commanded to leave Jerusalem to avoid Titus conquest. I can think of many examples in the Biblical prophets where this is the case.
That being said Your demand is rather shallow minded, hypocritical and lacking in value, which is why your reasoning never catches the move of God, it does not conform to the actual standard God puts forward in His Word, It then places a false interpretation(your own) on what that standard should be and it then claims anything outside of that interpretation is wrong. Well good luck with that. Nothing in this world works like that, physics does not, math does not, nor does religion. (not even grammar. 😉 )
In essence you’ve become your own standard of truth. Sort of just another variation of a cult.
Comments are closed.