Is The First Or Second Beast The "numbered one"?

[ccc]

To any and all, this question has bothered me for quite some time, and I would really appreciate knowing if scripture is crystal clear as to which one is the 'numbered one'. Is it possible to put aside our presuppositions and take a fresh look at this question? I would like to determine this by staying within the Book of Revelation.

'If' it is the second one, perhaps preterism and historicism could share more than just their common thought about 70 AD etc..

We know from Rev 13:12 that the second beast exercises the 'power' of the first beast. Is this power that of 'religion', because the second beast has two horns like a lamb?

Most would say yes, the second beast is the religious False Prophet.

If we knew who the first beast was, some of the prophetic puzzle may start to fit. Let us assume, that our partial preterist brothers like Sproul, Gentry and our own Richard are correct, and that Nero is the first beast.

We should not consider this to be a new idea, as literally millions of believers, both Roman Catholic and Protestant, past and present, believe Nero was the beast who did unspeakable things in his persecution of the first century Christians. The ‘time texts’ of Revelation do indicate this to be an era of Nero and the Roman Empire.

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass ………… Rev 1:1.

Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand. Rev 1:3.


To John of Patmos, he said: Write the things that thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter. Rev 1:19.

If those believers and theologians are correct, how is Nero’s power, and his seat, and his great authority (as noted in Rev 13:12) ‘transferred’ to the second beast or False Prophet?

We know that the False Prophet has some form of power that the first beast had, and we know that the seat of the first beast was Rome, the city on seven hills. Some (but not all) scholars believe that the False Prophet and the great harlot are centered there also.

Can we determine what that particular ‘power’ was, and then, how was it transferred from Nero to the False Prophet?

I believe that this particular power is the religious power of a 'High Priest'. Nero’s title was Pontifex Maximus … 'high priest'. History confirms that he was even worshipped as a god.

Now, how is Pontifex Maximus transferred to the False Prophet? If you believe as I and the Reformation saints and martyrs, the Church of Rome is the great harlot on seven hills, and Romanism and it’s papacy is one of the beasts.

The official title of each and every Pope is … Pontifex Maximus.

Back to our question:

Is the First or Second beast identified by the image mark and number?

Revelation 13:1 marks the first mention of the first beast. We are told that the dragon gave him his power and his seat, and great authority … but so far no mention of an image mark or number.

The next nine verses describe several things. A 'head' that dies and yet comes back to life. He is given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, even blasphemy against God, His name, His tabernacle, and even them that dwell in heaven.

I remind the reader that the Church of Rome blasphemies God by its 'head' claiming to be the Vicar of Christ, vicarious … instead of Christ, in place of Christ. Now, how does it blaspheme those that dwell in heaven?

Verse 7 tells us that it made war with the saints, and had great authority.

During the height of its power …rightly called the 'Dark Ages', it is estimated that through its 'Inquisition' it slaughtered up to 50 million. Many among this number being Reformation saints and martyrs.

How did it blaspheme these saints and martyrs? By calling them heretics because they chose to believe the Bible and not the teachings and traditions of the Roman Catholic Church.

Well, within these nine verses there is still no mention of an image mark or number. Moving along to verse 13, this now marks the first mention of the second beast, the one we call the False Prophet. It had two horns (political and religious) but spoke 'like a lamb'.

Then we are told something very unusual … This False Prophet does great wonders so that it makes 'fire' come down from 'heaven on the earth' (KJV) in the sight of men.

So as not to get too far off topic at this time, I will submit a separate post titled 'The False Prophet And His 'Fire'.

And it deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast … Rev 13:13-14.

Steve Gregg has noted that 'There have been few movements, to this day, that have claimed more signs and miracles to their endorsement than has the Roman Catholic Church.'

Who has not heard the Vatican claims of 'winking' Madonna’s, 'weeping' images and miracles and cures wrought through the power of 'sacred relics' and the bones of dead 'saints' … even the raising of the dead has been claimed.

We went from the first mention of the first beast in Rev 13:1 without any reference to an image mark or number … but now that we have arrived at the passages that identify the False Prophet, we have our first mention of an image.

The False Prophet makes an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. Rev 13:15.

If you are a 100% literalist, read no further. I believe the 'False Prophet' is the Vatican hierarchy … the word vatican means … prophet.

VATICAN = PROPHET = FALSE PROPHET

Nero, the Pontifex Maximus literally died by a sword. As noted earlier, each and every Pope as head of the Church of Rome, is their Pontifex Maximus.

So how does the Vatican 'make an image' of a 'head' that dies and yet comes back to 'life'?

This is not as difficult as it may appear. Each and every Pope is officially considered to be the Image and Successor of Peter … a 'second Peter'. Perhaps coincidence, but 'Second Peter' 2, speaks about false prophets and false teachers. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you.

When Pope Paul VI addressed the United Nations, he said 'Do you know who I am? My name is Peter.'

When the previous 'head' (pope) dies, the Vatican or False Prophet simply creates another 'image of Peter' … another Papal Peter.

If we have made a connection between the False Prophet and the 'image' that has 'life', I would point out that where the KJV says: And he had power to give life unto the image …the actual literal Greek says … And ‘it’ was given to it to give spirit to the image.

I think it being the Vatican makes a little more sense rather than the sensationalism of this being an individual person as … 'he'.

If we have connected the False Prophet to the image, can it also be connected to the 'mark' and the 'number'?

I think the next two verses establish that connection: And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Is it possible that it is the image that has 'life' (ie a pope) created by the False Prophet (Vatican) that is the numbered beast 666, and not the first beast?

Question:

Is there historical evidence to connect 666 to a Pope or the papacy?
Is there visible evidence to connect the followers of Rome with a specific mark made with the right hand of the priest and placed upon the forehead of its infant and adult followers?

Yes, there definitely is, but leaving that aside, please consider my question:

Within the Book of Revelation, can clear scriptural evidence prove beyond a doubt that the numbered beast HAS to be the first beast? Please help in determining that or, perhaps you might agree with what has been presented, and that it is the False Prophet that is the numbered beast, and not the first beast.

Thank you brothers and sisters.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

To any and all, this question has bothered me for quite some time, and I would really appreciate knowing if scripture is crystal clear as to which one is the 'numbered one'. Is it possible to put aside our presuppositions and take a fresh look at this question? I would like to determine this by staying within the Book of Revelation.

'If' it is the second one, perhaps preterism and historicism could share more than just their common thought about 70 AD etc..

We know from Rev 13:12 that the second beast exercises the 'power' of the first beast. Is this power that of 'religion', because the second beast has two horns like a lamb?

Most would say yes, the second beast is the religious False Prophet.

If we knew who the first beast was, some of the prophetic puzzle may start to fit. Let us assume, that our partial preterist brothers like Sproul, Gentry and our own Richard are correct, and that Nero is the first beast.

We should not consider this to be a new idea, as literally millions of believers, both Roman Catholic and Protestant, past and present, believe Nero was the beast who did unspeakable things in his persecution of the first century Christians. The ‘time texts’ of Revelation do indicate this to be an era of Nero and the Roman Empire.

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass ………… Rev 1:1.

Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand. Rev 1:3.

To John of Patmos, he said: Write the things that thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter. Rev 1:19.

If those believers and theologians are correct, how is Nero’s power, and his seat, and his great authority (as noted in Rev 13:12) ‘transferred’ to the second beast or False Prophet?

Hi ccc!

This sounds like an excellent project. I really want to test my understanding of Rev 13 - and you have added a lot by forcing me to look at how the RCC fits in. It seems likely that Revelation has elements from all four major interpretive schools - which is why each school is able to exist in the first place!

I think the confusion is largely caused by the individual schools excluding the others. The Preterists have erred by forcing everything into the first century and so blinding themselves to the later historical fulfillment of some of the prophecies. Likewise, the Historicists, in their battle against the Preterists, have blinded themselves to any and all first century fulfillments! I think this mix of a Preterist first century fulfillment of the first beast in Nero followed by the Historicist understanding of the second beast as the medieval RCC may well be the "real deal" that is revealed in Rev 13. This interpretation causes lots of bells to ring.

One nuance - I would think first century imperial Rome is the first beast, with Nero its representative, since it was much more than one man as seen in its seven heads and ten horns.

We know that the False Prophet has some form of power that the first beast had, and we know that the seat of the first beast was Rome, the city on seven hills. Some (but not all) scholars believe that the False Prophet and the great harlot are centered there also.

That is a point I am still working on. The harlot rides the beast, but it is the beast that is identified as the seven hills. So the harlot could be located elsewhere, which I take to be Jerusalem. This would fit with the harlot being apostate Jerusalem in cahoots with (riding) the Roman political beast (identified by the 7 hills). It also would explain Rev 17:16:

Revelation 17:16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.

If the harlot is apostate Jerusalem, and the ten horns represent imperial Rome, then this fits perfectly with the judgment on Jerusalem in 70 AD. On the other hand, if the harlot is Rome, how is it that the emperors make her desolate? This view also fits with the harlot being drunk on "the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth" (Rev 18:24). And a 70 AD fulfillment of this judgment on Jerusalem literally fulfills the words of Christ and the time marker he used:

Matthew 23:35-36 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. 36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

It seems to me that this is a powerful confirmation of this interpretation. And it is confirmed again by the judgment of the harlot which is a quote from God's judgment on apostate Jerusalem in 586 BC:

Revelation 18:23 And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.

Jeremiah 7:34 Then will I cause to cease from the cities of Judah, and from the streets of Jerusalem, the voice of mirth, and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom, and the voice of the bride: for the land shall be desolate.

Thus God declared exactly the same judgment on Jerusalem both times He destroyed the City and the Temple in 586 BC and 70 AD.

Can we determine what that particular ‘power’ was, and then, how was it transferred from Nero to the False Prophet?

I believe that this particular power is the religious power of a 'High Priest'. Nero’s title was Pontifex Maximus … 'high priest'. History confirms that he was even worshipped as a god.

It sure is creepy, and mysterious, that the Pope would apply that pagan title to himself.

You have made a leap here from Rev 13 to Rev 16 where the "false prophet" first appears. But that's ok because the correlation seems clear:

Revelation 16:13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon (Satan), and out of the mouth of the beast (First beast Rome), and out of the mouth of the false prophet (Second beast).

Now, how is Pontifex Maximus transferred to the False Prophet? If you believe as I and the Reformation saints and martyrs, the Church of Rome is the great harlot on seven hills, and Romanism and it’s papacy is one of the beasts.

The official title of each and every Pope is … Pontifex Maximus.

Back to our question:

Is the First or Second beast identified by the image mark and number?

Revelation 13:1 marks the first mention of the first beast. We are told that the dragon gave him his power and his seat, and great authority … but so far no mention of an image mark or number.

The next nine verses describe several things. A 'head' that dies and yet comes back to life. He is given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, even blasphemy against God, His name, His tabernacle, and even them that dwell in heaven.

I remind the reader that the Church of Rome blasphemies God by its 'head' claiming to be the Vicar of Christ, vicarious … instead of Christ, in place of Christ. Now, how does it blaspheme those that dwell in heaven?

Verse 7 tells us that it made war with the saints, and had great authority.

During the height of its power …rightly called the 'Dark Ages', it is estimated that through its 'Inquisition' it slaughtered up to 50 million. Many among this number being Reformation saints and martyrs.

True.

How did it blaspheme these saints and martyrs? By calling them heretics because they chose to believe the Bible and not the teachings and traditions of the Roman Catholic Church.

Well, within these nine verses there is still no mention of an image mark or number. Moving along to verse 13, this now marks the first mention of the second beast, the one we call the False Prophet. It had two horns (political and religious) but spoke 'like a lamb'.

Yes. Horns represent "power" so it makes sense to see their number as representing the "church and state." And since we know the number of horns have symbolic meaning when specified elsewhere (ten horns), it makes sense that the specific number here is also supposed to carry symbolic meaning.

Then we are told something very unusual … This False Prophet does great wonders so that it makes 'fire' come down from 'heaven on the earth' (KJV) in the sight of men.

So as not to get too far off topic at this time, I will submit a separate post titled 'The False Prophet And His 'Fire'.

And it deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast … Rev 13:13-14.

Steve Gregg has noted that 'There have been few movements, to this day, that have claimed more signs and miracles to their endorsement than has the Roman Catholic Church.'

Who has not heard the Vatican claims of 'winking' Madonna’s, 'weeping' images and miracles and cures wrought through the power of 'sacred relics' and the bones of dead 'saints' … even the raising of the dead has been claimed.

This is certainly true. Ask anyone about which Christian denomination is into images and you will get RCC and Eastern Orthodox. But when combined with the other identifiers, the RCC is selected with little doubt.

We went from the first mention of the first beast in Rev 13:1 without any reference to an image mark or number … but now that we have arrived at the passages that identify the False Prophet, we have our first mention of an image.

The False Prophet makes an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. Rev 13:15.

If you are a 100% literalist, read no further. I believe the 'False Prophet' is the Vatican hierarchy … the word vatican means … prophet.

VATICAN = PROPHET = FALSE PROPHET

Nero, the Pontifex Maximus literally died by a sword. As noted earlier, each and every Pope as head of the Church of Rome, is their Pontifex Maximus.

So how does the Vatican 'make an image' of a 'head' that dies and yet comes back to 'life'?

This is not as difficult as it may appear. Each and every Pope is officially considered to be the Image and Successor of Peter … a 'second Peter'. Perhaps coincidence, but 'Second Peter' 2, speaks about false prophets and false teachers. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you.

When Pope Paul VI addressed the United Nations, he said 'Do you know who I am? My name is Peter.'

When the previous 'head' (pope) dies, the Vatican or False Prophet simply creates another 'image of Peter' … another Papal Peter.

This seems to make a lot of sense to me. It also follows the principle of "first the natural (political) and then the spiritual (religious)".

If we have made a connection between the False Prophet and the 'image' that has 'life', I would point out that where the KJV says: And he had power to give life unto the image …the actual literal Greek says … And ‘it’ was given to it to give spirit to the image.

I think it being the Vatican makes a little more sense rather than the sensationalism of this being an individual person as … 'he'.

As with the first beast, there is an individual (Nero or Pope) that represents the multi-headed beast (political or religious Leviathan).

If we have connected the False Prophet to the image, can it also be connected to the 'mark' and the 'number'?

I think the next two verses establish that connection: And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Is it possible that it is the image that has 'life' (ie a pope) created by the False Prophet (Vatican) that is the numbered beast 666, and not the first beast?

Could not the number apply to both beasts? Literally in the name of Neron Kaiser, and figuratively in the many associations you have found with the RCC? (But I still am skeptical about many of those associations, and I still reject the English gematria).

Question:

Is there historical evidence to connect 666 to a Pope or the papacy?
Is there visible evidence to connect the followers of Rome with a specific mark made with the right hand of the priest and placed upon the forehead of its infant and adult followers?

I am confused why you continue to press this point. In Revelation, the mark is made ON the right hand, not WITH the right hand.

Yes, there definitely is, but leaving that aside, please consider my question:

Within the Book of Revelation, can clear scriptural evidence prove beyond a doubt that the numbered beast HAS to be the first beast? Please help in determining that or, perhaps you might agree with what has been presented, and that it is the False Prophet that is the numbered beast, and not the first beast.

Thank you brothers and sisters.

Thank you for this very helpful post! At this time, I don't see any problems with identifying the first beast with imperial Rome represented specifically by Nero and the second beast/false prophet by the medieval RCC headed by the Pope. But I need to test these ideas to see how they fit with the harlot of Rev 17-18 which seems to be apostate Jerusalem led by a false high priest (prophet) in cahoots with, and then destroyed by, the Roman beast sitting on the seven hills. You hold to a still future fulfillment with the destruction of literal Rome. I can see some truth there, because Catholic Rome does look a bit like apostate Jerusalem, but I also see very strong correlations with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

Thanks again!

Richard

[ccc]

You are right on the money Richard when you say that much of the confusion is caused by the individual schools excluding the others.

“The Preterists have erred by forcing everything into the first century and so blinding themselves to the later historical fulfillment of some of the prophecies. Likewise, the Historicists, in their battle against the Preterists, have blinded themselves to any and all first century fulfillments! I think this mix of a Preterist first century fulfillment of the first beast in Nero followed by the Historicist understanding of the second beast as the medieval RCC may well be the “real deal” that is revealed in Rev 13. This interpretation causes lots of bells to ring.”

Ring a ding ding!

In partial defense of the historicists regarding Rev 1:1-3 “must shortly take place … “the time is near”, Steve Gregg says that Historicists would see the fulfillment as “beginning” shortly after John’s time, but extending long beyond, through the entire age of the church.

Regarding the two beasts, Gregg’s explanation of Preterism and Historicism is as follows:

First beast (sea) … Preterism = Nero plus the Roman Empire.
Historicism = Roman Empire and persecution of first century Christians.

Second beast (land) … Preterism = Jerusalem, pagan religions or pagan priesthood and Emperor worship (Chilton sees it as the Jewish religious system etc.)

Historicism = Papacy and the RC priesthood.

Is it possible that Judaism and Romanism could each be considered as “Babylon”, as both became harlots and apostate?

We agree regarding the destruction of Jerusalem (70AD) but could a future “double fulfillment” be considered also? A future destruction of both “great cities” Jerusalem and Vatican City would not surprise me. Hope that does not put me back in the futurist camp!

You asked “Could not the number (666) apply to both beasts?”
I definitely agree with you Richard … why not Nrn Qsr and the papacy or a pope?

Regarding the RCC sign or mark of the cross, you wonder why I continue to press this point, as you (Richard) said “the mark is made ON the right hand, not WITH the right hand.

The idealist uses symbolism and allegorical language in his interpretations, so perhaps you could “cut me a little slack” rather than hold me to the literal letter. I will try to explain what I mean.

And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads. Rev 13:16.

Even though the KJV says “in” the right hand or “in” their foreheads, you are correct that the literal Greek (epi) is ON the right hand or ON their foreheads.

Please note the word “or”. The mark could be on the right hand OR on their foreheads. Your critique noted the right hand, but you neglected the forehead.

Envision this scenario. You are with John on Patmos and are given a vision of the Romish ritual of “marking” its people. They claim that this is an indelible mark on its followers, and you are anathema if you do not believe this.

You will recall in an earlier post that their doctrine of marking at baptism and on Ash Wednesdays uses the word charagma or characterem … this is the same word they use when describing the “mark” of the beast.

In your vision, you are shown one in priestly garb, place his right hand into what appears to be the burnt ashes of a fire, and then with that hand, place a mark on the forehead of one of its followers.

You are then shown another vision, where a priest dips his right hand into a marking fluid, and after dipping, he then places an “+” mark on the forehead of its infant followers.

Well my friend 'Richard of Patmos' … would this understanding be logical and yet biblical?
Might this have been what John was shown?

As noted in an earlier post, what other religious organization on the face of planet earth utilizes, as a fundamental part of its religious rites and observances, a self-professed indelible mark on the soul placed on the forehead by the right hand of a Romish priest or Bishop?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

You are right on the money Richard when you say that much of the confusion is caused by the individual schools excluding the others.

'The Preterists have erred by forcing everything into the first century and so blinding themselves to the later historical fulfillment of some of the prophecies. Likewise, the Historicists, in their battle against the Preterists, have blinded themselves to any and all first century fulfillments! I think this mix of a Preterist first century fulfillment of the first beast in Nero followed by the Historicist understanding of the second beast as the medieval RCC may well be the 'real deal' that is revealed in Rev 13. This interpretation causes lots of bells to ring.'

Ring a ding ding!

Hey there ccc!

Glad we see eye to eye on this point. Perhaps it will save us from making the same mistakes as those who went before.

Regarding the two beasts, Gregg’s explanation of Preterism and Historicism is as follows:

First beast (sea) … Preterism = Nero plus the Roman Empire.
Historicism = Roman Empire and persecution of first century Christians.

Second beast (land) … Preterism = Jerusalem, pagan religions or pagan priesthood and Emperor worship (Chilton sees it as the Jewish religious system etc.)

Historicism = Papacy and the RC priesthood.

Is it possible that Judaism and Romanism could each be considered as 'Babylon', as both became harlots and apostate?

Yes, the correlations seem pretty clear in the sense that the RCC is formally like apostate Jerusalem. But I have found some difficulties with mixing the historicist 2nd beast (RCC) with the preterist first beast (Nero/Rome) because they are presented together in various Scriptures (e.g. Rev 16:13, 19:20, 20:10) so its hard to see the 2nd beast as appearing some centuries later. In other words, I don't see justification for a 3-5 century gap between Rev 13:10 and 13:11. I'm still working on this.

In partial defense of the historicists regarding Rev 1:1-3 'must shortly take place … 'the time is near', Steve Gregg says that Historicists would see the fulfillment as 'beginning' shortly after John’s time, but extending long beyond, through the entire age of the church.

Yep, and that's a good point, since partial presterists are forced into the same camp in as much as they don't believe everything in Rev has been fulfilled yet.

We agree regarding the destruction of Jerusalem (70AD) but could a future 'double fulfillment' be considered also? A future destruction of both 'great cities' Jerusalem and Vatican City would not surprise me. Hope that does not put me back in the futurist camp!

Yes, there could be a double fulfillment, but I don't see a need for a literal destruction of the Vatican if the Vatican itself is a "spiritually" identified with Babylon. It seems possible that the RCC has already been destroyed in the sense that they have lost their rule over the "kingdoms of men" - by which I mean they no longer appoint kings like the "good old days" in medieval Europe.

You asked 'Could not the number (666) apply to both beasts?'
I definitely agree with you Richard … why not Nrn Qsr and the papacy or a pope?

I see no problem with that.

Regarding the RCC sign or mark of the cross, you wonder why I continue to press this point, as you (Richard) said 'the mark is made ON the right hand, not WITH the right hand.

The idealist uses symbolism and allegorical language in his interpretations, so perhaps you could 'cut me a little slack' rather than hold me to the literal letter. I will try to explain what I mean.

Sure .... take all the slack you need ... just be careful not to hang yerself with it!

And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads. Rev 13:16.

Even though the KJV says 'in' the right hand or 'in' their foreheads, you are correct that the literal Greek (epi) is ON the right hand or ON their foreheads.

Please note the word 'or'. The mark could be on the right hand OR on their foreheads. Your critique noted the right hand, but you neglected the forehead.

I agree that the "mark on the forehead" made by the priests matches the vision, but have you forgotten that God Himself gave Ezekiel a very similar vision where the mark (tav = x = cross) was placed on the foreheads of the SAVED? I believe - and there is evidence supporting my belief - that the faithful Christians of the first and second centuries adopted the practice of marking themselves specifically on the forehead with a tav cross by following the lead of Ezekiel 9:4. What do you think of that?

Envision this scenario. You are with John on Patmos and are given a vision of the Romish ritual of 'marking' its people. They claim that this is an indelible mark on its followers, and you are anathema if you do not believe this.

You will recall in an earlier post that their doctrine of marking at baptism and on Ash Wednesdays uses the word charagma or characterem … this is the same word they use when describing the 'mark' of the beast.

Yes, but its just the word for any character, indeed, that's where we get the word character from. Your view gains some support from the fact that this word is used only to refer to the mark of the beast in Revelation, but it doesn't feel conclusive to me.

In your vision, you are shown one in priestly garb, place his right hand into what appears to be the burnt ashes of a fire, and then with that hand, place a mark on the forehead of one of its followers.

You are then shown another vision, where a priest dips his right hand into a marking fluid, and after dipping, he then places an '+' mark on the forehead of its infant followers.

Well my friend 'Richard of Patmos' … would this understanding be logical and yet biblical?
Might this have been what John was shown?

Yes, its biblical, and it could be what he saw, but I still have reservations based on the valid use of the mark of the cross by God in Ezek and by His faithful followers in the early church.

As noted in an earlier post, what other religious organization on the face of planet earth utilizes, as a fundamental part of its religious rites and observances, a self-professed indelible mark on the soul placed on the forehead by the right hand of a Romish priest or Bishop?

I grant you the formal similarity, especially since the RCC places the mark literally on the forehead. But I am still compelled to reject the attempt to force-fit the image of a priest using his right hand with the biblical statement that the mark was on the right hand. This does not strengthen your case. On the contrary, it weakens it because you seem to be attempting to force-fit your interpretation. And I presume, my friend, that you know me well enough by now to know that I consider any attempt to force-fit anything to be about worst possible hermeneutical crime because it destroys any hope of a true interpretation. The perfect mind must needs be a perfectly flat mirror that perfectly reflects reality. Any attempt to force-fit anything warps the mirror, and so warps our vision of reality.

So let's return to the text on this one. The mark on (epi) the hand is presented as equivalent to the mark on (epi) the forehead. Let us suppose John saw RCC priests marking people with the Ash Wednesday cross on the forehead. How does the mark on the hand fit into this?

Great chatting bro! You are really helping me as I work on this book.

Richard

[ccc]

Hey Richard, we started off being poles apart, but we may have whittled some of it down to 2x4’s! You said:

“I agree that the “mark on the forehead” made by the priests matches the vision, but have you forgotten that God Himself gave Ezekiel a very similar vision where the mark (tav = x = cross) was placed on the foreheads of the SAVED? I believe – and there is evidence supporting my belief – that the faithful Christians of the first and second centuries adopted the practice of marking themselves specifically on the forehead with a tav cross by following the lead of Ezekiel 9:4. What do you think of that?”

Well my friend, (if Origen was correct) I think that would be a very crafty practice of Satan to adopt a “sign” to counterfeit or duplicate something that signified the truly saved of the first century. What do you think?

Like the tav, the cross sign or mark is placed before the names of each and every pope according to the “other word” … Webster’s “signs and symbols”.

A subject for another time, but I suspect that the mark God placed upon Cain was that of a “twin”. According to some Rabbinic sources, Cain and Abel were twins … no mention of “knowing Eve again”, as she “continued to bare”. That is the intent of the verb the rabbis claim.

There is biblical evidence to suggest that God has used the “two or twin” sign as a prophetic “marker” in His Word. Babylon is fallen, is fallen. This is repeated in Rev 18. Also, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen … reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double.

Alas, alas, that great city Babylon … for in one hour is thy judgment come.
Alas, alas that great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls!

Rome was founded upon the mythical “twins” Romulus and Remus, and suckled by a “she wolf”. Over time, Romanism became a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Rome is the world center for the study of twins.

You will recall that the first “sign” in the Bible is the majuscule letter bet or … two. There are eleven occurrences of these mysterious large letters in Torah, but only once do two occur together. They are found in the Hebrew Shema (Deut 6:4). According to Rabbi Bochin, together, they form the word “witness”.

Depending on whether you are Jew (reading right to left, or Gentile from left to right) these “two witnesses” appear as “de ad” Strongs 5707 & 5703. They have lain there as dead for 3 ½ prophetic “days” … ie for 3,500 years since the day that God inspired Moses to place them there.
Might there be an association here with Rev 11’s “two witnesses”?

Together, the Hebrew gematria of these two mystery letters sum at …74.

Seems to me there was something significant about that number!
Ah yes, the number of Levites in Ezra 2:40 was … 74.

Couldn’t resist … JESUS = 74 ... A LEVITE = 74

Richard, regarding the word “Elam” in Ezra (hidden?) would there be something about that word to indicate “two or twin”? I ask this because in Ezra 2:7, it speaks of the children of Elam as being 1254. Whereas in Ezra 2:31 it speaks about the children of the “other” Elam as being 1254 also ??

I don’t have time to check this out now, but several years ago, I put a notation in my Bible that the “given total” (Ezra 2:64) was 42,360 which is considerably higher than the sum of the actual figures noted … 29818. The “difference” between these two figures is 12542.

Might this be a “designed” difference … same number as Elam (1254) but with an added “two”.

Regarding my “force fitting” the RC priest using his right hand. A little late now, but if I had only pointed out that the mark was placed on the forehead, would that not be according to scripture, as it notes “or” on forehead?

Are you implying that it is imperative that both are required to fulfill the identification, and that it cannot be one or the other?

Without spiritualizing it away, still waiting to hear (from anyone) how this identifying mark on right hand or forehead would apply to Nero and to his followers? Likewise, how would this mark apply to the “image” of Nero?

It is a common teaching that the 144 thousands of Rev 7 and Rev 14 are one and the same, but there are some differences.

Those in Rev 7 are Jews, and are “sealed” on the forehead.
Those in Rev 14 may be Jews, but have their father’s name “written” on the forehead.

Those in Rev 14 are associated with a “new song” and “harpers harping with their harps”. Also, their mysterious new song is not understood by all.

Looking at those in Rev 7:4, there is no mention of anything musical or particularly mysterious about them, but it does note that “after this”, was a great multitude that no man could number.

In that “after this”, speaks about “number”, might this ring any bells for you, as later, the other group of 144 thousands in chapter 14 is preceded by wisdom and numbering?

I read your post about the 144 thousands. You noted associations from Genesis to Revelation, but not once mentioned the (666) verse immediately preceding the 144 thousands with the unusual new song.

You are the scholar, not me, but is it not customary to consider the context preceding and following a given passage?

In that originally there were no numbered chapter or verse divisions, is it insignificant that the verses regarding 666 and the 144 thousands of Rev 14 are located side by side?

So many mysteries!

Richard, we are off to smalltown mid-America for a few weeks.
Population 1100 …plus 2. Will catch up when back.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hey Richard, we started off being poles apart, but we may have whittled some of it down to 2x4’s! You said:

'I agree that the 'mark on the forehead' made by the priests matches the vision, but have you forgotten that God Himself gave Ezekiel a very similar vision where the mark (tav = x = cross) was placed on the foreheads of the SAVED? I believe – and there is evidence supporting my belief – that the faithful Christians of the first and second centuries adopted the practice of marking themselves specifically on the forehead with a tav cross by following the lead of Ezekiel 9:4. What do you think of that?'

Well my friend, (if Origen was correct) I think that would be a very crafty practice of Satan to adopt a 'sign' to counterfeit or duplicate something that signified the truly saved of the first century. What do you think?

Hey there ccc!

What do I think? I think that such "counterfeits" are characteristic of Satan's methodology. But it seems to me that many folks who believe the RCC's use of the cross is the mark of the beast continue on with the idea that hte sign of the cross is itself the mark, which would be an obvious error since God Himself used it in Ezek 9:4.

Like the tav, the cross sign or mark is placed before the names of each and every pope according to the 'other word' … Webster’s 'signs and symbols'.

Yes, but that's a general practice throughout Christendom. We all use the Cross as a sign of someone wholly devoted to God. It is not unique in any way at all to the RCC.

A subject for another time, but I suspect that the mark God placed upon Cain was that of a 'twin'. According to some Rabbinic sources, Cain and Abel were twins … no mention of 'knowing Eve again', as she 'continued to bare'. That is the intent of the verb the rabbis claim.

I will grant that its possible that Cain and Abel were twins, but I don't know of anything in the Bible that would support that claim, so I would never want to build any doctrine from it. The Rabbinic willingness to build doctrines off of pure speculation is their great error.

There is biblical evidence to suggest that God has used the 'two or twin' sign as a prophetic 'marker' in His Word. Babylon is fallen, is fallen. This is repeated in Rev 18. Also, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen … reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double.

Alas, alas, that great city Babylon … for in one hour is thy judgment come.
Alas, alas that great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls!

I agree completely that God "doubles" things to confirm them. As it is written: "And for that the dream was doubled unto Pharaoh twice; it is because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass." (Genesis 41:32)

Rome was founded upon the mythical 'twins' Romulus and Remus, and suckled by a 'she wolf'. Over time, Romanism became a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Well, that kind of association feels pretty weak to me because it would still be the case even if the RCC were the one true church. In other words, it seems like those kinds of associations are "cherry picked" to fit a pre-existing prejudice, and other "positive" associations are ignored. So they don't strengthen your case. They wouldn't be allowed in a "court of law" if you know what I mean.

Rome is the world center for the study of twins.

You will recall that the first 'sign' in the Bible is the majuscule letter bet or … two. There are eleven occurrences of these mysterious large letters in Torah, but only once do two occur together. They are found in the Hebrew Shema (Deut 6:4). According to Rabbi Bochin, together, they form the word 'witness'.

I don't attribute any divine meaning to the majuscules because they are the product (as far as I can tell) of a human tradition. But they still could be meaningful - like the Ayin Dalet in shemA ... echaD that spells "ed" = witness. (Note that "ed" is an Ayin = "eye" KeyWord, and the "eye" certainly is a "witness"!)

Depending on whether you are Jew (reading right to left, or Gentile from left to right) these 'two witnesses' appear as 'de ad' Strongs 5707 & 5703. They have lain there as dead for 3 ½ prophetic 'days' … ie for 3,500 years since the day that God inspired Moses to place them there.

Again, that feels rather like a force-fit for a number of reasons. First, the "ed" is formed from the last letters of the first and last words of the Hebrew Shema so there is no reason to think about reading it backwards in English. Second, even if you did read it backwards, there is no reason to change the spelling, so you would have either daad or deed. Third, you could have reversed the order to get edda, adde, edde, or adda. Fourth, there is no reason to think that the combination of the Hebrew and the English form "two" witnesses, because the English "de" does not mean "witness." Fifth, there is no reason to think that the "de" and "ad" have been "dead" for 3500 years, since the English didn't exist for most of those years. Sixth ... I could continue, but I think you get the idea.

Might there be an association here with Rev 11’s 'two witnesses'?

No. Emphatically.

Together, the Hebrew gematria of these two mystery letters sum at …74.

Seems to me there was something significant about that number!
Ah yes, the number of Levites in Ezra 2:40 was … 74.

Couldn’t resist … JESUS = 74 ... A LEVITE = 74

I note that you had to add a "a" to add a "1" because "levite" = 73. Doesn't that cause you to doubt the reality of these connections? I mean, there are about 900 English words that sum to 74, and another 900 that sum to 73, so when you start playing around by adding a "1" you double your chance for random hits. And besides that, Jesus was not a Levite. He was of the tribe of Judah:

Hebrews 7:11-14 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. 13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

So what exactly are we supposed to learn by the fact that in English gematria Jesus = 74 = A Levite?

Richard, regarding the word 'Elam' in Ezra (hidden?) would there be something about that word to indicate 'two or twin'? I ask this because in Ezra 2:7, it speaks of the children of Elam as being 1254. Whereas in Ezra 2:31 it speaks about the children of the 'other' Elam as being 1254 also ??

I've never noticed that before. I'll have to look into it.

I don’t have time to check this out now, but several years ago, I put a notation in my Bible that the 'given total' (Ezra 2:64) was 42,360 which is considerably higher than the sum of the actual figures noted … 29818. The 'difference' between these two figures is 12542.

Might this be a 'designed' difference … same number as Elam (1254) but with an added 'two'.

I don't know ... but it certainly doesn't "ring any bells" to me.

Regarding my 'force fitting' the RC priest using his right hand. A little late now, but if I had only pointed out that the mark was placed on the forehead, would that not be according to scripture, as it notes 'or' on forehead?

Yes, that part (on the forehead) is entirely consistent with Scripture, but would be incomplete because it fails to account for the mention of the hand. And that is why you attempted to force-fit the hand into your explanation. But that doesn't work, as you seem to understand now.

Are you implying that it is imperative that both are required to fulfill the identification, and that it cannot be one or the other?

Yes, because otherwise your "fulfillment" does not "fulfill" the Scripture, because the Scripture mentions the hand as well as the forehead.

Without spiritualizing it away, still waiting to hear (from anyone) how this identifying mark on right hand or forehead would apply to Nero and to his followers? Likewise, how would this mark apply to the 'image' of Nero?

The pejorative "spiritualizing away" is not a proper way to describe God's Hermeneutic that He has taught us in His Word. God has taught us that His Word is spiritual and must be interpreted spiritually . The hyper-literalists have exchanged the spiritual truth of God's Word for a fleshly pot of stew.

1 Corinthians 2:7-16 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: 8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. 10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 ¶ But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

Folks who despise the "spiritual interpretation" of the spiritual Word of God run the risk of missing all the riches it contains.

Now in answer to your question, God established the spiritual meaning of the "mark" on the Hand (Our Action) and Forehead (Our Thoughts) in Deuteronomy:

Deuteronomy 6:6-8 6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: 7 And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. 8 And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes.

Note that the word "sign" is aut = Aleph Vav Tav which can be read as Aleph and Tav (because Vav signifies the word "and"). Thus, the mark of God is the Aleph Tav, and this is how He sealed His Word, as explained in the Capstone Signature article.

The upshot is this: God established the Biblical meaning of the "sign" (mark) on the hand or forehead in Deuteronomy. Anyone familiar with His Word could not miss the connection with Rev 13:16. Whether there is another "literal" meaning is up for discussion, but the primary symbolic meaning can not be missed because it was taught to us by God Himself in His Own Word.

It is a common teaching that the 144 thousands of Rev 7 and Rev 14 are one and the same, but there are some differences.

Those in Rev 7 are Jews, and are 'sealed' on the forehead.
Those in Rev 14 may be Jews, but have their father’s name 'written' on the forehead.

I see no reason to think that those are not two descriptions of the same thing.

Those in Rev 14 are associated with a 'new song' and 'harpers harping with their harps'. Also, their mysterious new song is not understood by all.

Looking at those in Rev 7:4, there is no mention of anything musical or particularly mysterious about them, but it does note that 'after this', was a great multitude that no man could number.

Correct. The great multitude in Rev 7:9 are those saved when the "angel" preaches the everlasting Gospel in Rev 14:6. Note that both groups are identified with the same language:

Revelation 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne

Revelation 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,

The 144,000 in Rev 7 and Rev 14 are the literal Jews who were saved in the first century, beginning at Pentecost. That's why they are called "firstfruits." Recall the firstfruits of the Wheat Harvest were dedicated at Pentecost, and Christ said we are the "wheat" as opposed to tares, and Mount Zion is the Church, as it is revealed in Hebrews

Hebrews 12:22-23 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

You see? This is the divine perfection of the Holy Bible. God made the spiritual meaning perfectly clear. Note also that "mount Zion" is mentioned only twice in the NT. Once in Hebrews on Spoke 14, and once on Spoke 14 of the Inner Wheel of Revelation.

In that 'after this', speaks about 'number', might this ring any bells for you, as later, the other group of 144 thousands in chapter 14 is preceded by wisdom and numbering?

No, I don't see any connection with the previous numbering. You've mentioned this a number of times now. Why don't you tell me what connection I am supposed to see? That might help.

I read your post about the 144 thousands. You noted associations from Genesis to Revelation, but not once mentioned the (666) verse immediately preceding the 144 thousands with the unusual new song.

Why should I mention the number 666 in that context? What is the connection that you see?

You are the scholar, not me, but is it not customary to consider the context preceding and following a given passage?

Yes, you MUST ALWAYS consider the context. And when you look at Rev 14, you see a "new vision" of the Victorious Lamb and His People that contrasts with the previous vision that showed the wicked oppressor of His People. The mere fact that a number is mentioned in a previous vision does not in itself make a "connection" with the new vision that follows after it.

In that originally there were no numbered chapter or verse divisions, is it insignificant that the verses regarding 666 and the 144 thousands of Rev 14 are located side by side?

The idea that the chapter and verse breaks in the Bible are entirely arbitrary is entirely wrong. Granted, there are some arbitrary breaks, but for the most part, the versification follows the structure inherent to the text. This is extremely important because the vast majority of brain-washed pseudo-scholars mindlessly parrot the anti-biblical party line that the structure of the Bible is entirely arbitrary. This error is particularly obvious in Revelation which is largely a self-parsing book, with a full 50% of the chapter breaks falling within one verse of the phrase "and I saw" (as explained in the intro to the Inner Wheel of Revelation). And this answers your question. There is an intrinsic break between chapter 13 and 14, because Revelation 14 begins with a mark of a new vision: "And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion ..."

So many mysteries!

Yes indeed!

Richard, we are off to smalltown mid-America for a few weeks.
Population 1100 …plus 2. Will catch up when back.

OK Bro! I look forward to continuing this very interesting conversation when you get back.

God bless you and keep you safe in your travels.

Richard

[TheForgiven]

.....and then I saw a Beast rising up out of the sea....

.....and I saw another Beast rising out of the earth...

Two key points here; sea and earth.

Biblically, what does the "sea" represent, and what does the "earth" represent?

Without providing a long drawn out detail, the sea usually means Gentiles, and the earth means Jerusalem. With this understanding, what Beast comes up out of the sea? We know this to be the Roman Empire, specifically the Roman Empire of the Caesars (five total). But what about the earth? If the earth is Jerusalem, what Beast came up from the earth? I'll give you a hint: A terrible Beastly Emperor was killed after being stabbed in the neck. Who became his successor a fews years later....this Beast has two horns like a lamb.

Now what do horns represent? Authority and power; generally kings or rulers. This lesson is very difficult, but I'll post more later. But think on this one thing and see what you can come up with.

1. The first Beast originated from the sea
2. Second originated from the land

Is there a Trio which existed during the destruction of the Harlot (Jerusalem)? Yes, and one of them was the New Emperor who succeeded the first Beast; and guess what? He had to sons...

How did the Trio (Father and two sons) become successors of the Roman Empire after a one year civil war? Okay, another hint....there was a special Arch which still exists in tribute to their success.

NOW DO YOU SEE IT? It took me a while, and this would explain the Beast that rises from the land / earth.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Two key points here; sea and earth.

Biblically, what does the "sea" represent, and what does the "earth" represent?

Without providing a long drawn out detail, the sea usually means Gentiles, and the earth means Jerusalem. With this understanding, what Beast comes up out of the sea? We know this to be the Roman Empire, specifically the Roman Empire of the Caesars (five total). But what about the earth? If the earth is Jerusalem, what Beast came up from the earth? I'll give you a hint: A terrible Beastly Emperor was killed after being stabbed in the neck. Who became his successor a fews years later....this Beast has two horns like a lamb.

Now what do horns represent? Authority and power; generally kings or rulers. This lesson is very difficult, but I'll post more later. But think on this one thing and see what you can come up with.

1. The first Beast originated from the sea
2. Second originated from the land

Is there a Trio which existed during the destruction of the Harlot (Jerusalem)? Yes, and one of them was the New Emperor who succeeded the first Beast; and guess what? He had to sons...

How did the Trio (Father and two sons) become successors of the Roman Empire after a one year civil war? Okay, another hint....there was a special Arch which still exists in tribute to their success.

NOW DO YOU SEE IT? It took me a while, and this would explain the Beast that rises from the land / earth.

Hey Joe,

I agree that the "sea" probably represents the Gentiles and the Land Jerusalem. This fits with the first beast (Nero/Rome) rising out of the Gentile sea, and the second beast (Jewish false prophet) arising out of the land of Jerusalem where the apostate high priest was.

But I don't understand the "trio" you are talking about. Where did you get the idea of "a father with two sons"? I understand your hint concerning the Arch of Titus, but I don't see the whole picture you are presenting.

Richard

[TheForgiven]

Hey Joe,

I agree that the "sea" probably represents the Gentiles and the Land Jerusalem. This fits with the first beast (Nero/Rome) rising out of the Gentile sea, and the second beast (Jewish false prophet) arising out of the land of Jerusalem where the apostate high priest was.

But I don't understand the "trio" you are talking about. Where did you get the idea of "a father with two sons"? I understand your hint concerning the Arch of Titus, but I don't see the whole picture you are presenting.

Richard

We know that the first Beast with seven heads and 10 horns is the primary Empire which ruled the world. But after Nero's death, Rome was plunged into a one year civil war:

Revelation 16:10
Then the fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom became full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues because of the pain.

This permitted time for Christians in Jerusalem to leave. Historically speaking, when Nero died, Vespasian returned to Rome in order to claim the throne for Himself. But prior to his succession, three attempted to become Emperor with each being killed by each other. These were Golba, Otho, and Vitelius. Ironically, I find this to match perfectly with Daniel's vision of the Beast with 10 horns, and an 11th horn which popped up after uprooting three prior. Vespasian was successful only after Vitelius decided to give the throne to Vespasian. Rome's bloody civil war lasted approximately one year, and Rome needed new hope after losing to the Jews twice before. Remember, the war began in 63AD and the Romans were beaten twice before that. That's when Nero sent Vespasian to accomplish what the prior Roman General couldn't do. But Nero's cruelty towards the Christians ruined his popularity with the Senate, as well as the Public. So in a fear for his life, especially after the great fire of Rome, he commits suicide, though by a clumsy accident; he stabbed himself in the neck. Afterwards, Rome is plunged into darkness and three generals commanding three different regions fight for the throne, each killing each other, except Vitelius, who decided to join with Vespasian. This lasted from 68 to 69AD. During this time when Vespasian left for Rome, the Christians left to a place in the mountains called Pella after hearing rumors of a much larger army coming against Jerusalem. This time, Vespasian sent his two only sons, Titus and Domitian, to put an end to the Jewish chaos and rebellion. By the time Titus reached Israel, they started killing innocent women and children, eating all the food, and chopped down nearly every ounce of wood they could find. The accounts of Jesus was coming true; the Romans along with their allies, began building a wall around the city in order to contain them. Without getting into more detail of the famine, plagues, disease, and starvation the Jews inside the walls suffered, General Titus and his brother Domitian had become victorious over Jerusalem and ended the revolt around 70 to 71 AD. This was a double success:

1. Stopped the civil war in Rome
2. Ended the Jewish revolt and a seven year war
3. Brought glory, power, and honor back to Rome [The Beast had returned!!!]

Now remember, what is Jerusalem? The "Land" which also gave birth to a new second Beast; the Beast which rises out of the earth. In other words, this Beast would rise from the land because of their victory upon the land. When the Romans finally broke through the walls, Josephus explains how the soldiers were frantic and ravaged every single Jew, whether child or old, male or female, and left nothing unturned. They nailed every single Jew to anything capable of holding nails. The estimated death count was approximately 1,100,000 thousand Jews killed, taken as slaves, or used as prostitutes. Only about 10 percent of the race lived, and those fled to a nearby mountain, eventually meeting their end in 132 AD under the final rebellion led by Shimeon Bar Kaphba (spelling).

Getting back to Rome, after the victory over the Jews, Titus and Vespasian were given an arch, called the Arch of Titus, which shows a picture of the Romans carrying off the seven lamps / light of God. This then is the trio I was talking about. Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian were basically worshiped as gods, although Josephus did not write about it. Vespasian, IMO, represents the lamb, and his two sons represented the two horns of a Ram. Vespasian is also Daniel's 11th horn, who uprooted three kings prior to him.

These three represented the Beast who came to power over their victory in Jerusalem; the land. It was Titus and his armies which persecuted, tortured, and killed thousands upon thousands of Jews. Furthermore, Domitian is counted spiritually as one of the seventh heads of the first Beast. Here's the mistake people make. Many people assume that the first beast was dead. But it wasn't; only a head was injured, but it still lived, and and 8th literal king, which was also spiritually counted among the first seven heads, was soon to come. We also have the 10 horns (kings of the nations under Roman Control) which launches attacks against the Church during Domitian and Trajan's time frame in the late 90's AD. But the lamb with two horns of a Ram which rises out of the earth is Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian, who came to power in the last 60's AD. It was they who built the Roman Arena, and not only were Jews being killed in the Arena, but Christians too were being tested. However, Domitian would later, after becoming Emperor, persecute Christians in fear of a Jew named Jesus returning to rule the world. This rumor was spread by a Christian female who explained to Domitian that Jesus is the ruler in heaven, but would return to Jerusalem in the future and set up a Kingdom. This is why Futurist's cling to teachers such as Iranaeus, Papias, and a few others who taught this.

Here's two interesting things:

1. Nero's name equals 666 using Gamatra in the Hebrew spelling
2. Domitian's name also equals 666 using Gamatra, if you use the Hebrew spelling as shown on one of his coins.

Those are your two primary persecutor's of the Beast. Domitian is also the King who "is to come" figurative for Nero Caesar. And historically speaking, some within the Church considered Domitian to be Nero back from the dead.

Joseph

[Trumpet]

Does anyone have a good bead on the true date of the writing of the Book of Revelation?

Don