"Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path." Psalm 119:105
The seven heads of the beast
posted Monday, August 3, 2009 :: 10:58 AM
There is so much interest in the church lately about the apocalyptic books and the return of Jesus Christ, possibly being right around the corner. I was recently sent a question about the beast with the seven heads, spoken of in Rev 13, whether it represents Rome on seven hills, as some say it is, or Jerusalem on seven hills, as others say it is:
"Then I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name. Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion. The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority." Rev 13:1-2
My opinion is that it is neither.
Daniel saw four beasts in his vision (Dan 7:1-7), and they had seven heads between them. The four beasts were:
1) a winged lion with one head, representing Babylon.
2) a bear with one head, representing Media - Persia.
3) a leopard with four heads, representing Greece.
4) a terrible beast with one head, representing Rome.
Daniel was seeing a vision of the kingdoms of this world, which are always opposed to the kingdom of heaven, the kingdom of our Lord and of His Messiah. Babylon is the head of gold, i.e. Babel (rebellion, man's will and way exalted over YHVH's will and way) is the first kingdom of this world, and the pattern all the kingdoms of this world follow. Daniel was looking forward into history.
We are still living under the beast of Rome. One of the books I read with my kids when we were still homeschooling, was Ancient Rome: How it Affects You Today by Richard Maybury. It was not written by a believer nor had he Bible prophecy in mind. He just took all the threads of the society, culture, worldview, and political system of Rome, and showed how they have endured through the centuries, and are so well entrenched in modern society, in American society, in what we consider 1st world societies all across the globe, that we have no idea that we are even living by the dictates of Ancient Rome. Very enlightening little book. There is a reason, I believe, YHVH commanded fathers to teach history to their children.
So fast forward to John. He saw a vision of a single beast with seven heads. The beast has the attributes of a lion, a bear, and a leopard, as well as of the terrible beast. John is seeing the same thing that Daniel did, only since John was looking back, more or less, on history, while Daniel was looking forward, John saw the beast as a single entity while Daniel saw it as four entities. By that I understand that the four beasts of Daniel are the kingdoms of this world, and the one beast of Revelation is also the kingdoms of this world -- they are one and the same.
I see Revelation as a picture of unfolding history from the Messiah's first coming to His second (therefore most of it including the mark, 144,000, etc. has already been fulfilled). Just as Daniel's vision vwas a picture of unfolding history from his time to Messiah's first coming. The two visions are of a piece.
This is all my opinion and I could be wrong. But let's allow that the Lord still has things to reveal to us, that perhaps not all of prophetic Scripture has been opened yet. So let us not get "set" in our interpretation or understanding, we might miss something important if we do. :)
Last time we looked at the traditional historicist understanding of the seven bowls of wrath. If they are correct, we are in the middle of the sixth bowl, waiting for the seventh which will culminate in the downfall of the kingdoms of this world, and the beginning of the kingdom of our Lord and of His Messiah. They might be correct.
However, here are my questions with the traditional historicist understanding: First, the identity of the two witnesses. I believe the rest of Scripture makes it clear that they are the two houses of Ephraim and Judah, who correspond to Gentiles who believe in Jesus the Messiah (otherwise known as Christians), and Jews. If that is correct, then the historicists were mistaken in saying that the death and resurrection of the two witnesses took place during the French Revolution. The prophecy doesn't fit.
Second, the testimony of the two witnesses seems to take place right up until the very end. Their resurrection might very well correspond with the resurrection of all the saints at the last trumpet. The last trumpet may even correspond with the seventh trumpet, for the seventh trumpet was blown following their resurrection. As soon as the seventh trumpet was blown, the voice from heaven says, "The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign for ever and ever!" It just doesn't seem like that happened at the end of the French Revolution.
Third, it seems to me that Revelation 14 sets events in this order: the increasing triumph of the true Lamb over the false lamb who speaks the words of the Devil; then the great harvest of the souls of men, then the harvest of the grapes of wrath. It is the vintage from that harvest that is present in the seven bowls of wrath. It may very well be the returned Lamb who Himself executes the wrath of God on His enemies as described in Revelation 16, for He is said to be the One who treads out the wrath of God. In other words, the events of Revelation 16 might take place following the return of the Lamb. 1 Corinthians 15 says of Messiah Yeshua that He must reign UNTIL He has placed His enemies under His feet. Might He subdue opposition "with a rod of iron" throughout His millenniel reign? We don't know for sure.
We are speculating - the thing with prophecy, is that it is not a crystal ball in the sense that any one of us can know the exact details of what will happen. The purpose of prophecy is to glorify God - after the thing has come to pass, mankind can look back and see that God had said it would happen just that way thousands of years before it happened. Prophecy most exactly reveals itself through hindsight, not foresight.
So those are my little quibbles and nagging uncertainties about the strict historicist interpretation.
n this chapter, the final seven bowls of the wrath of God are poured out on the beast and the kingdoms of this world, to bring about its fall. The wrath in the bowls, remember, comes from the harvest of the grapes of wrath which were harvested in chapter 14:
Then another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle. And another angel came out from the altar, who had power over fire, and he cried with a loud cry to him who had the sharp sickle, saying, “Thrust in your sharp sickle and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth, for her grapes are fully ripe.” So the angel thrust his sickle into the earth and gathered the vine of the earth, and threw it into the great winepress of the wrath of God. And the winepress was trampled outside the city, and blood came out of the winepress, up to the horses’ bridles, for one thousand six hundred furlongs. Revelation 14:17-20
Now the historicists see the completion of the trumpet judgments at the French Revolution, and the seven bowls of wrath, then, correspond to events from the French Revolution to the present. In their scheme, the plagues are as follows:
1. Dreadful sores - atheism and rejection of Roman Catholicism, which rose from the French Revolution and grew until it affected all the earth.
2. Death of naval supremacy of the beast -- France, Spain, and other Roman countries at the hands of the Protestant British.
3. Battles fought in Europe during the Napoleonic wars which bloodied the same rivers struck by the 3rd trumpet judgment in Rev
4. Napoleon as the sun scorches the men of the earth with his great heat.
5. Plague on the throne of the beast, or the Vatican, which causes darkness and pain: during the wars for nationalism which followed the destruction of the Napoleonic empire, the temporal power of the papacy was removed when the Papal States were absorbed into the new nation of Italy (1848).
6. Euphrates drying up symbolizes the gradual drying up of the Turkish empire, which was released as a plague upon the earth in the 6th trumpet judgment.
The purpose of this loss of power was to prepare the way of the kings of the east: that is, kings east of the Euphrates (Iran? India? Afghanistan? China?) so that they can come to the battle of Armegeddon against God. Notice the sixth plague is not the actual battle, but it prepares the way for the battle, by removing the power of the Turks. The Turkish empire was fully defeated at the end of World War I in 1917.
The sixth judgment in any series of judgments is an interval period, in which spiritual events more than historical events unfold. The spiritual event of the sixth judgment is the letting loose of the three frog demons which go out to decieve the nations, so that they can be drawn to the battle of Armegeddon. The three frogs come from the dragon, which I believe is the spirit of atheism / naturalism / evolution; from the beast which looks like a lamb but which speaks the words of the dragon, which I believe is the spirit of false religion / paganism / new age pseudo spirituality and the like; and from him whom the Scriptures call the false prophet, but whom history calls the prophet, which I believe is the spirit of a resurgent virulent Islam. In fact, the battle of Armegeddon may very well be a spiritual battle which has been taking place since the mid 1800s, a battle which on one side is God and His truth, and on the other side are the enemies of God characterized by atheism, false religion, and Islam.
If the historicist interpretation is the correct one, we are in the midst of the 6th plague at the moment, and the releasing of the 7th bowl is coming quickly.
7. The plague in the air which culminates in the final fall of the enemies of God and the kingdoms of this world. There is a great earthquake, which one would expect if power was finally transferred to the triumphant Messiah after man has held sway for 6000 years. The great city was divided into three parts - Jerusalem? The cities of the nations fell, Babylon or the Babylonian worldview received wrath from the Lord, and every island and mountain fled away, or every nation and political boundary fled away, either because a one world central government arises, or the Lord Jesus begins reigning as King of kings and Lord of lords. We will not know what the plague of hail is until it happens.
However, I have some quibbles with the traditional historicist understanding of the final seven plagues ...
By Revelation 15, we begin to pick up the history where it was left off at the end of Revelation 11. The intervening chapters - 12 through 14 - had a purpose - to identify upon whom the seven bowls of wrath would be poured out. So the history of the dragon was told, and his war against Israel and the saints, and his beasts (which we saw were kingdoms of this world) and their horns (which were their rulers) and the antichrist. And the history of those who worship the beast was told. All these had to be identified, because the next portion of the prophecy concerns them - it is upon them that the wrath of God, contained in the seven bowls of wrath, is to be poured out.
Now we saw previously in Revelation, that the seventh seal was not actually a judgment in and of itself, because when the seventh seal was opened, it produced the seven trumpet judgments. So also, the seventh trumpet judgment is sounded at the end of Revelation 11:
Then the seventh angel sounded: And there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever!” Revelation 11:15
The result of the seventh trumpet, is that the kingdoms of this world are no more, and they become the kingdoms of YHVH and His Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ. How does that happen? The seven bowls of wrath, which was contained within the seventh trumpet, if the pattern already established in Revelation holds, judges the kingdoms of this world and brings about their fall.
The saints who did not bow the knee to the beast or worship him, who did not receive his mark, are pictured in heaven on what sounds like a sea or pavement of transparent diamond, singing the praise of God who is getting ready to pour out His judgment on the world.
I believe this scene actually takes place BEFORE the return of Jesus Christ. These are the souls of those saints who have died, for they are in heaven, and the harvest or resurrection of their bodies has not yet taken place. I say that because, in chapter 14, the sequence of events was: 1) the Lamb appearing on Mt. Zion, 2) the three proclamations, which proclaim the everlasting Gospel and which proclaim the fall of the kingdoms of this world and the punishment of those who reject the everlasting Gospel, 3) the reaping of the earth's harvest, and 4) the harvest of the grapes of wrath, and the treading out of the winepress the wrath of God.
But then the Great Lamb actually does not make His appearance until Revelation 19:11-16. At that time He returns from heaven on a white horse, and defeats the beast (the kingdoms of this world) and his armies. But in His description, it says of Him, "He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God." He is the one, with His return, who treads out the winepress that we read about in Revelation 14.
So I am thinking that chapter 14 is another summary chapter, as the passage at the end of chapter 11 was. Chapter 14 gives us the general outline of how the kingdoms of this world become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, but then chapters 15 through 19 or so give us the details.
Next, the wrath of God begins to be poured out ...
Then I looked, and behold, a white cloud, and on the cloud sat One like the Son of Man, having on His head a golden crown, and in His hand a sharp sickle. And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to Him who sat on the cloud, “Thrust in Your sickle and reap, for the time has come for You to reap, for the harvest of the earth is ripe.” So He who sat on the cloud thrust in His sickle on the earth, and the earth was reaped.
Then another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle. And another angel came out from the altar, who had power over fire, and he cried with a loud cry to him who had the sharp sickle, saying, “Thrust in your sharp sickle and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth, for her grapes are fully ripe.” So the angel thrust his sickle into the earth and gathered the vine of the earth, and threw it into the great winepress of the wrath of God. And the winepress was trampled outside the city, and blood came out of the winepress, up to the horses’ bridles, for one thousand six hundred furlongs. Rev 14:14-20
Quick recap: Revelation chapters 12-13 describe the rise of the kingdoms of this world, under the leadership of the Beast and the antichrist. The kingdoms of this world are typified by the Roman empire which lived on after its head received a mortal wound (the Holy Roman Empire and the Roman church). The kingdoms of this world waged a successful war upon the saints, the citizens of the kingdom of heaven.
But then the Lamb that was slain appeared on Mount Zion (Revelation 14), and the tide began to turn. First the everlasting Gospel was once again preached, to every tribe, nation, and tongue. That has been going on since the Reformation. Then as a result of the spread of the Gospel, the angel announced the fall of the kingdoms of this world (which is the city of man) and the fate of those who reject the Gospel to remain citizens of the world - eternal torment in the lake of fire. The saints are encouraged to have patience, for the fall of the kingdoms of this world will not take place in one day, or one month, or one year.
That brings us up to verse 14. The next event is the harvest of the earth, which the Son of Man harvests. This harvest is of the souls of the saints. The feast days of the Lord are prophetic in nature, and three of them are harvest festivals. The first, Firstfruits or the barley harvest, prophesies of the Lord Jesus' resurrection from the dead as the firstfruit of those who will be reborn with new life for God.
The second, Weeks or Pentecost, the wheat harvest, is I believe the harvest which is going on right now, which has been going on since the day of Pentecost described in Acts chapter 2. This is the harvest of those who are "born again" - another reference to new life and resurrection from the dead. The third and final harvest festival is Tabernacles, the fruit harvest. This harvest takes place at the Lord's return. My current understanding is that Tabernacles represents the actual resurrection from the dead and rapture of the saints which will occur at the blowing of the Last Trumpet at the Lord's return. This may well be the harvest referred to here.
If that is the case, let me just say that the rapture will not leave a void on the earth of godliness because of the absence of the saints for seven years. Paul clearly describes the saints going up (raptured) to meet Jesus in the air at the same time as He is coming down. Although Paul stops his explanation there, it is likely that once we have met Him, we will also continue down with Him and His host that has come with Him from heaven (those who have died in Christ and whatever angelic host accompanies Him). We will be added to His host, to serve Him in His defeat of His enemies as He establishes His millennial reign on the earth, beginning in Jerusalem. That is my opinion.
Okay, the next event, after the harvest of souls, is the harvest of the grapes of the wrath of God. The souls who are His are harvested first from the earth, because the wrath of God is not going to be poured out on them. Those with the Lord's mark on their foreheads, the name of the Father of the Lamb, will not receive the wrath of God, nor will we be under its punishment. The wrath of God is reserved for His enemies, for the kingdoms of this world, for the Beast and the antichrist. For Babylon and those with the mark of the beast.
I believe that what might happen, at the Lord's return, is Jesus establishing His kingdom beginning in Jerusalem. I believe His reign will be local over Israel at first. His local reign may be very brief indeed. His saints - us - will be dwelling in Israel, and beginning from Israel, He will establish His reign over all the kingdoms of this world. Thus the kingdoms of this world will become the kingdoms of our God and of His Christ. I believe the story of Moses, Pharaoh, Egypt, and Goshen is historic, and prophetic. As the wrath of God was being poured out on Egypt in terrible plagues, the people of God were dwelling in safety with no plague to be found anywhere within their borders. The point is, it is those with the mark of the beast who will experience the wrath of God, not the saints.
The history of the final plagues and of the final war, which will establish the Lord Jesus as King of all the earth for a millennium, is found in Revelation 15 through 19. Stay tuned ...
"Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, “Write: ‘Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.’” “Yes,” says the Spirit, “that they may rest from their labors, and their works follow them.” Revelation 14:12-13
This follows the three proclamations which the angels make: 1) the everlasting Gospel preached to every nation, 2) the fall of Babylon, or the kingdoms of this world, 3) the warning that the end of those who refuse the mark of the name of YHVH, and instead receive the mark of the name of the beast of Babylon, will be plagues, fire, brimstone, and torment for ever and ever. During the time that these three events are happening, which have been occurring since the Reformation, the saints will need patience. In other words, it will not all be accomplished in one month or one year or ten years. We will need patience until we come to the end of the kingdoms of this world, and until we come to the end of those who receive the mark of the beast.
There is an interesting translation issue in verse 12. The phrase, "here are those" is not in the Greek. The sentence would read, "Here is the patience of the saints who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus." There are the two witnesses again - those who keep the commandments of God, who is Judah, and those who keep the faith of Jesus, who is Ephraim.
It is in fact NOT God's plan that the two remain separate forever. At some point in time, according to Ezekiel, the two witnesses will be made one:
Again the word of the LORD came to me, saying, “As for you, son of man, take a stick for yourself and write on it: ‘For Judah and for the children of Israel, his companions.’ Then take another stick and write on it, ‘For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel, his companions.’ Then join them one to another for yourself into one stick, and they will become one in your hand. And when the children of your people speak to you, saying, ‘Will you not show us what you mean by these?’— say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: “Surely I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel, his companions; and I will join them with it, with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they will be one in My hand.”’ And the sticks on which you write will be in your hand before their eyes. Then say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: “Surely I will take the children of Israel from among the nations, wherever they have gone, and will gather them from every side and bring them into their own land; and I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king over them all; they shall no longer be two nations, nor shall they ever be divided into two kingdoms again. They shall not defile themselves anymore with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions; but I will deliver them from all their dwelling places in which they have sinned, and will cleanse them. Then they shall be My people, and I will be their God." Ezekiel 37:15-23
This is one of the unfulfilled prophecies remaining in Scripture. It immediately preceeds the chapters in Ezekiel which describe the battle of Armageddon. God intends to make Judah, the Jews, those who keep the commandments of God, and Ephraim, the Christians, those who keep the faith of Jesus, into one people in His hand. In that day, Ephraim will be careful to not defile themselves with transgressions and destestable things - in other words, they will also keep the commandments of God. And in that day, Judah will acknowledge their king, who is David their king forever and forever - in other words, they will also keep the faith of Jesus. There will be ONE people of God as there is ONE God.
Because the two people becoming one, as spoken of in Ezekiel, is echoed in Revelation, in that the saints of God are those who BOTH keep the commandments of God AND the faith of Jesus, I believe the events of Ezekiel parallel the events of Revelation here.
Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.” Revelation 14:9-11
We have seen that the first two proclamations announce the preaching of the everlasting gospel, and the fall of the kingdoms of this world, as the Lamb appears on Mount Zion with those who have been marked by His Father's name coming with Him. Those two proclamations are occurring right now, and have been since the time of the Reformation. The third proclamation concerns the people who stayed true to the beast and his mark, instead of converting to the Lamb and receiving His mark as a result of the preaching of the everlasting gospel. (Here is a quick review of what Scripture is talking about when it discusses being marked on the hand and forehead.)
The third proclamation announces the fate of those who worship the beast, and retain his mark. The wine of the wrath of God, which has not yet been poured out (that is coming up in Revelation) is reserved for them. The wrath that God is going to pour out on the world for its sin is NOT directed at us, people! That encouraged me so much when I realized it! I can take the wrath of man, as long as the wrath of God is not directed at me! The punishment of the beast, the fire and brimstone, is reserved for them.
Revelation is a book of comfort and hope for those of us who bear the mark of the name of the Father of the Lamb on their foreheads! But for those who bear the mark of the name of the beast on their foreheads, Revelation is a book of dread.
Then I saw another angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to those who dwell on the earth—to every nation, tribe, tongue, and people— saying with a loud voice, “Fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment has come; and worship Him who made heaven and earth, the sea and springs of water.” And another angel followed, saying, “Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she has made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.” Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.” Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, “Write: ‘Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.’” “Yes,” says the Spirit, “that they may rest from their labors, and their works follow them.” Revelation 14:6-13
The first angel's proclamation is the everlasting gospel to preach to every nation, tribe, tongue, and people, with the admonition to fear God and give glory to Him, to worship Him who created all. Well, someone in an obscure tribe or tongue would have to first know about the God who created all, before he could know how that God provided salvation for him. In fact, it has been since the Reformation that the preaching of the everlasting gospel (that salvation or right- standing before God is by faith in Jesus Christ, not works) has gone forth. To this day, ministries like Wycliffe Bible Translators are taking the everlasting gospel to the last of the nations, tribes, tongues, and peoples. So this proclamation has been going forward since the time of the Reformation.
The second angel's proclamation is the announcement that Babylon the Great is fallen. The language the angel uses is similar to language Isaiah recorded:
“Babylon is fallen, is fallen! And all the carved images of her gods He has broken to the ground.” Isaiah 21:9
In Isaiah's day Babylon was still a great city - the queen city of the world, according to Strabo, covering 200 square miles, with 25 gates in each of her four walls. But under the Romans, it gradually declined, until by our era a village of 10,000 Iraqis sat atop its ruins. Saddam Hussein worked to rebuild Babylon's former glory, restoring some of her ancient palaces and gates. However, he was overthrown long before he could complete even a portion of the work.
Isaiah 13 and 14, and Jeremiah 50 and 51, both prophecy a spectacular destruction for the great city of Babylon, which has not ever been fulfilled of Babylon the literal city.
So there are two possibilities concerning the angel's proclamation in Revelation 14. The first is literal. That Babylon will be restored as a great city, again the queen city of the world, and all commerce and power and influence will be seated in her, and the destruction of that city as Isaiah and Jeremiah foretold, an event still future to us as Babylon is not even a city yet, much less a great one, will prompt the second angel's proclamation.
Or that Babylon, which has not been a city of influence really since its conquest by the ancient Romans, is not the name of a literal city, but a descriptive name of a source of citizenship of the earth, or the world, just as Zion is not a literal city but a descriptive name of a source of citizenship of heaven. In other words, the city of Babylon is the place where the citizens of the kingdoms of this world have their citizenship. Its root is the Tower of Babel, or the Tower of Babylon, for Babel is Hebrew for Babylon.
The Tower of Babel, we saw, was the source of rebellion against God, exalting the creature rather than the Creator as god, and the source of every perversion of immorality and wickedness. It was the source of human government such that a ruling elite held totalitarian sway over the oppressed people.
It is the philosophy and worldview of Babylon - rebellion against God, independence of man, worship of nature, of self, of materialism, occultism and wickedness - that will fall as the everlasting gospel is preached to all the world.
The most important thing to remember in trying to understand Revelation 14, is that it is preceded by Revelation 12 and 13. Revelation 12 and 13 are pictures of the rise of the kingdoms of this world to dominance, under the leadership of Satan, during the course of all the ages of the earth. The war in heaven (Revelation 12) takes place very early in the history of the earth, while the marking with the name of the beast (Revelation 13) takes place during the Middle Ages, if the historicist interpretation is correct.
Revelation 13 ends at the height of the power of the world's kingdom, under the leadership of Satan and his antichrist, the Roman system and the Roman papacy. In Revelation 14 the scene begins to drastically change: the Lamb appears on Mount Zion! The tide is now going to turn!
The 144,000 which were sealed in chapter 7 appear with the Lamb. In chapter 7, we were just told that they were sealed with the seal of God on their foreheads. In this chapter we have a little more information. In contrast to those who were marked by the NAME of the beast on their foreheads in Revelation 13, the 144,000 were marked by the NAME of YHVH on their foreheads. Compare these passages for even more insight into what it means to be marked by the name of YHVH on one's hand and forehead.
The phrase, "these are the ones who were not defiled with women, for they are virgins," has been a source of controversy in the church, and has contributed to the Roman church's stand on celibacy for the priesthood. First of all, a marital relationship does not defile a man, for from the beginning He made them male and female, and said that it was not good for man to be alone, and admonished that what God had joined together, let no man put asunder. But then there is the word "virgin" in Greek, and means just what you would expect it to mean. We saw in chapter 7 that the sealing of the 144,000 took place during the time of the great Roman persecutions of the church, and it is possible that these particular 144,000 were indeed virgins in the literal sense - choosing not to marry because of the times of persecution that they lived in. We can speculate till the cows come home. We will know for sure when the Lord Jesus is here to explain every last detail. :)
So far this summer there have been two national holidays which fell on the same day as Biblical holidays. The first was Father's Day, June 15, which happened to fall on Shavuot, or Pentecost, this year. The second was Independence Day, July 4, which fell on the beginning of the Sabbath. So how does that change the way we celebrate the national holiday? Can they be combined? This was the first year we had to address this question.
For us, it did not really matter that there was a national celebration; we did whatever we would normally do on a national holiday as long as it did not interfere with what we would normally do for the biblical celebration. So for Father's Day and Shavuot, Shavuot is a Sabbath of rest except that food for that day may be prepared. So we made a nice breakfast brunch for Dad, and a nice feast for later in the day for the Shavuot feast. On sabbaths of rest, we do not work, and we spend the day pursuing the Lord's interests, not our own personal interests. It is one way that we set the day apart (the meaning of keeping it holy). We had communion and did the other things we do on feast days. Resting, reading, Playing games, playing outside with the kids and grandkids, all these things are allowed on a biblical feast day.
On the 4th of July, since the feast day of Sabbath did not begin until sundown that evening, the only overlap was the evening activities. So we still went to our small town parade, grilled for lunch, and all the other things we would do during the day of the 4th. Only I did not go to the fireworks after dark, that would have interfered with my normal Sabbath activities of feast dinner, communion, worship of the Lord, and setting the time apart for the Lord's interests and not my own interests.
So that is how we handled a convergence of a national holiday with a biblical holiday so far this year. How did you do?
To see why Mary might have gone to the tomb while it was still dark, instead of waiting even for the first rays of dawn, we have to look at first century Hebrew culture again. The Hebrew Sabbath began at sundown on Friday, and continued until sundown on Saturday. After sundown on Saturday, for the Jew, it was now the first day of the week, the 7th day being over. So the dark of Saturday evening, to a Jew, is the first day of the week. We, thinking like Romans, don't consider it the first day of the week until we get up in the morning on Sunday, but 1st century Jews did not think like Romans. They thought like Hebrews.
During the Sabbath, from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday, work was prohibited. In order to set the day apart from the rest of the week (which is what keeping the day holy means) they greeted the Sabbath on Friday evening with a special ceremony, and they bid the Sabbath farewell on Saturday evening with a special ceremony. In between the ceremonies, no work was done.
The Friday evening ceremony usually consisted of a special family meal in their homes; special prayers and blessings were said, and special food was served. Sunday dinner at Grandma's is the American equivalent in concept. Then the Jews gathered together twice on Saturdays: in the morning, in the synagogue, to hear the Torah reading, and the readings from the Psalms and the Prophets, and the teaching on the readings. The Gospels record one instance where Jesus gave the teaching on the reading from the Prophets in one synagogue meeting.
Then in the evening, as it was drawing toward sundown, the Jews gathered again, usually in homes, for a havdallah service: a special ceremony in which the Sabbath was bid goodbye. This Saturday evening meeting often lasted well into the night, as it was an opportunity for fellowship which did not occur during the rest of the week.
The meeting in Acts 20:7 was most likely a havdallah service. Paul did not preach from Sunday morning until midnight (not really humanly possible, for the preacher or the listeners); but from Saturday at sundown, at the close of the Sabbath, until midnight. Either meaning for "one of the sabbaths" could apply in Acts 20:7: the meeting began on "the first of the sabbaths" as we can see from reading the verse in its context with Acts 20:6; and it ended on "the first day of the week," as Jews considered the dark of the night Saturday night to be the first day of the week.
So back to John 20:1: it was Mary's desire to anoint the body of Yeshua with spices for His burial, but because He was taken down from the cross so close to sundown before a Sabbath, it could not be done right away. The best she could do was prepare the spices, then wait for the Sabbath to be over before she anointed the body. If I put myself in Mary's shoes, and my heart was heavy with love and grief for my Lord, and I knew that His body had been put into the tomb unanointed, I would want to anoint His body as soon as possible. It could not, however, be done on the Sabbath: at any time in between the opening and closing ceremonies. But the very next opportunity would be as soon as the closing ceremony was over, on Saturday night or Sunday morning. (We know from Jewish tradition, and Acts 20:7, that these meetings went well into the night, Saturday night and Sunday morning.) If it were me, I would have taken the spices with me to the havdallah service, so that I could go straight to the tomb when the service was over. And this is what I believe she did: she most likely took the spices with her to the havdallah service, so that, on her way home, the Sabbath being over, she could go to the tomb and anoint the body. Thus she could do the work the love in her heart for her Master was urging her to do as soon as possible, while not violating the Sabbath.
So it being yet dark, on the first day of the week to a Jew (sometime Saturday night or Sunday morning to a Roman); the Sabbath being over, she went to the tomb, and found the stone already rolled away.
Could I be wrong about this? Of course. But this understanding does not violate the meaning of the Greek; it does not violate first century Hebrew traditions and practice, and it does not contradict other places in the Scripture which portray Yeshua and His followers as obedient to God, and keepers of the Law of Moses, including the Sabbath.
There are several possibilities for the meaning of this phrase. One of them, we talked about last time: that it is referring to the special numbered sabbaths which fall between the feast of Unleavened Bread and Weeks, or Pentecost.
Another is this:
That it is a Hebraism, a Hebraic idiom. The Hebrews did not have names for the days of the week, other than the seventh day, the Sabbath. All the other days were named for their relation to the Sabbath.
So the first day of the week was referred to as one day from (or of) the Sabbath; idiomatically "mia (one) ton (of the) sabbaton (sabbath-s)." "Day" was implied; and sabbaton is not plural in this case. The day which is one day from the Sabbath, is Sunday, the first day of the week.
This is the way the phrase mia ton sabbaton is used in the Gospels when describing the discovery of Jesus risen from the dead. For example, in John 20:
"Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came early to the tomb, while it was still dark, and saw the stone already taken away from the tomb." John 20:1
It is mia ton sabbaton, literally, "one of the sabbaths," or idiomatically, "one (day) from the sabbath(s);" i.e. Sunday, or the first day of the week.
But why did Mary go to the tomb while it was still dark; why not wait for the light of day? To understand a plausible explanation, which will also shed light on our Acts 20:7 passage, we have to understand 1st century Hebrew culture again.
I procured a Greek New Testament, and have been looking up the instances of Sabbath, and sabbaton, in it. Sabbaton, I said last time, means "Sabbath," (singular); but my new Greek lexicon says it is plural (i.e, it should read "Sabbaths"). So I looked up our text we were discussing, in Acts 20.7, and it is in the Greek New Testament, mia ton sabbaton. A little different from my Bible study dictionary. Mia is the feminine form of heis, and my BIble study dictionary in this place says it means "first." So, "the first of the Sabbaths." Well, this is a bit longer than saying, "the First Sabbath," but it still means the same thing; the first of the special numerated Sabbaths which occur between Unleavened Bread and Weeks.
So I did a search for the English word "first" in the New Testament Scriptures, cross checking them with the Greek New Testament. I expected to find forms of heis or mia, and found instead that in 99% of the cases, the Greek word for "first" is protos. Ah! So this is where we get words like "prototype" from.
But I did not expect this monkey wrench! So I did some digging, and discovered that protos is the ordinal for one, while heis, mia is the cardinal for one. In other words, in English we have words like one, two, three, four ... these are cardinal terms. We also have first, second, third, fourth ... these are ordinal terms. So my Greek lexicon is telling me that the cardinal of one, which means "one," is heis, mia; while the ordinal for one, which means "first," is protos.
I thought, Why did my Bible study dictionary tell me that heis, mia meant "first?" And as I began going through the Gospels, looking up each occurrence of "first," which turned out to be protos, I discovered that the context was talking about priority, without reference to a numerated series. So I began to think that perhaps heis, mia was used in place of protos when a numeration, a numerated series, is meant. I was happy with that theory until I came to Matthew 22:23-28:
"On that day some Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) came to Jesus and questioned Him, asking, "Teacher, Moses said, 'IF A MAN DIES HAVING NO CHILDREN, HIS BROTHER AS NEXT OF KIN SHALL MARRY HIS WIFE, AND RAISE UP CHILDREN FOR HIS BROTHER.' Now there were seven brothers with us; and the first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother; so also the second, and the third, down to the seventh. Last of all, the woman died. In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had married her.""
Ah! A numerated series, first, second, third, down to the seventh! Time to test my theory! If heis, mia is to be used to mean "first" when speaking of numeration rather than priority, the word for "first" in the above passage should be a form of heis, mia. I eagerly looked it up in my Greek New Testament and ... it was protos. So I thought, Well, this is Matthew, and Luke wrote Acts. He also wrote Luke, so while we may account for the different use of protos vs. heis, mia between Matthew and Acts due to two different authors, we cannot say the same of Luke and Acts. We would expect an educated fellow like Luke to be consistent in his usage. This same incident with the Sadducees is also recorded in Luke 20:27-33, also using a numerated series. The Greek word for "first" is also protos here. Back to the drawing board.
There is no escaping the Scriptural evidence, that so far heis, mia is used for the cardinal of one, just as the Greek lexicon says it is, while protos is used for the ordinal of one, also in accordance with the Greek lexicon. In every instance! So why oh why in Acts 20.7 is heis, mia translated "first," i.e., "the first of the Sabbaths"? What I found surprised me!
In the last post, I referenced many apologetic sources from the Roman Catholic theologians, who say that nowhere in the Scriptures can a command be found to change the day of rest from Sabbath, Saturday, to Sunday. Since this command came wholly from the Catholic church itself, and the Protestants accept it and practice the day of rest on Sunday, then they are disingenuous when they claim "Sola Scriptura!" as authority for their other doctrines and practices.
But in their documentation, the Roman Catholic theologians do cite three Scriptures, as justification for considering the Lord's Day to be Sunday. So I thought it best to look at these three. First:
"Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight." Acts 20:7
Wow, a church service that began in the morning and lasted until midnight! Is that really what is going on here? Let's look at the previous verse:
"We sailed from Philippi after the days of Unleavened Bread, and came to them at Troas within five days; and there we stayed seven days. On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight." Acts 20:6-7
Paul, Luke, and their companions were in Philippi for the days of Unleavened Bread, or, the 14th of Nissan (Passover) through the 21st of Nissan, a High Holy Sabbath of rest (the 21st of Nissan, as the 7th and final day of Unleavened Bread, is always a High Holy Sabbath, no matter what day of the week it falls on). After the holiday, they proceeded to Troas where some believers had gone on ahead and were waiting for them. While they were there, they had an assembly of the ekklesia where Paul preached till midnight, and, reading on in this chapter in Acts, a young man, drowsing on the windowsill, fell down three stories and was killed, and Paul raised him back to life again.
In my Bible, the word "day" is in italics, which means it is not in the original Greek, but was added for clarity. That means the phrase in Acts 20:7 would have originally read, "On the first of the week." Actually, the whole phrase is in Greek, hice sabbaton. Hice is "first," and sabbaton is not "day" or "week." The Greek for "day" is hemera and for "week" it is ebdomada. What is sabbaton then?
It is the Greek transliteration of the Hebrew, shabbat, or Sabbath. It does not mean "week;" the Hebrew word for "week" is shavua. There was no need to transliterate shavua into Greek if "week" is meant here; Greek already had a perfectly good word for "week." Sabbath, however, is a completely Hebraic concept, and there is no word for it in other languages, other than as a transliteration from Hebrew, as sabbaton is.
So what does hice sabbaton mean? I believe it means, "the first Sabbath," as in "On the first Sabbath, when we were gathered together to break bread ..." Okay, plausible, but why "first Sabbath?" Why not just say, "On the Sabbath, when we were gathered together ..."? This is where the information from the previous verse comes in. This meeting took place following the Unleavened Bread holiday. Jews number the Sabbaths between Unleavened Bread and Weeks, or Pentecost, because the Torah says to number for yourselves seven Sabbaths from the Feast of First Fruits (that was Resurrection Sunday) to the Feast of Weeks (that was Pentecost). This instruction is how the Feast of Weeks got its name; because it takes place seven weeks after Unleavened Bread. So every spring, following Unleavened Bread, there are a series of regular Saturday Sabbaths with special names: the First Sabbath, the Second Sabbath, the Third Sabbath, and so on until the Feast of Weeks is reached.
Luke is merely stating that on the First Sabbath, i.e., the Sabbath which was the first to occur following the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and the first of the special numbered Sabbaths in the countdown to the Feast of Weeks, they gathered together and thus and so happened. This is not an argument for the apostles' changing the day of meeting, fellowship, and preaching to Sunday.
However, someone who did not know Torah well or the practice of 1st century Jews which was founded in Torah, could easily misunderstand this passage, and this is what I believe happened. The misunderstanding took place centuries ago (perhaps at the first English translations of the Greek New Testament?) and has become entrenched. When we read it for what it says, without bringing our culture to it, but in the light of the culture in which it was written, then it is clear that this passage does not contradict other passages in Scripture which indicate the followers of Yeshua met for preaching and fellowship on the Saturday Sabbath.
Another issue with coming out of Babylon has to do with the day of rest. Any way you slice it, Sunday as a day of rest had its same origin with the Roman church wanting to distance itself from "Judaizing" believers who still kept Saturday as the day of rest, as did Jesus and the apostles. The fact that the Protestant church kept the Sunday day of worship -- which the Roman church instituted, not God, not Scripture, not Jesus, and not the apostles -- has been used by the Roman church to prove to the world that the Protestants aren't really serious about Sola Scriptura, but they inherently accept the authority of the Roman church, and are just being rebellious.
"Prove to me from the Bible alone that I am bound to keep Sunday holy. There is no such law in the Bible. It is a law of the holy Catholic Church alone. The Bible says 'Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.' The Catholic Church says, No. By my divine power I abolish the Sabbath day and command you to keep holy the first day of the week. And ho! The entire civilized world bows down in reverent obedience to the command of the Holy Catholic Church." --Priest Thomas Enright, CSSR, President of Redemptorist College, Kansas City, Mo., in a lecture at Hartford, Kansas, February 18, 1884, and printed in the Hartford Kansas Weekly Call, February 22, 1884, and the American Sentinel, a New York Roman Catholic journal in June 1893, page 173.
Well? How does one answer that argument? If we were serious about Sola Scriptura, wouldn't we be observing the feast days of the Lord instead of the feast days of the Pope? Wouldn't we be obeying all of the Ten Commandments? These are the questions I have been asking myself.
The Sabbath is the first feast day listed in Leviticus 23. It is so holy to YHVH, that in the original Hebrew which Moses wrote under the direction of the Holy Spirit, the instructions for celebrating it are also set apart (the Hebrew meaning of "holy") from the instructions concerning the rest of the feast days in Leviticus 23. If someone were to begin keeping the Lord's feast days, keeping the Sabbath is the best starting place.
We learned that the purpose of these chapters which come between the trumpet judgments and the bowl of wrath judgments is to identify the dragon, the beast, the antichrist, and Mystery Babylon, on whom the bowl of wrath judgments are poured out.
Historically, the Church has identified this enemy of God with the Romans. Even the Catholics agree. In the footnotes of the Catholic Bible, the 4th beast of Daniel 7 and Mystery Babylon of Revelation are both identified with the Roman Empire, and the Protestants agree.
But Revelation 13 includes additional description, which show the body of Christ that the Roman system, and ultimately, the Babylonian system which is at its root, continued on after the Fall of Rome, in the form of the Roman church and the Holy Roman Empire. So let's recap chapter 13 and make sure all the details confirm the Church's traditional understanding.
Verses 1-2 describe a beast which looks like the four beasts of Daniel 7, so we know that the beast from the sea is a picture of the kingdoms of this world, rooted in Babylon (which is the head kingdom in Daniel's visions), which receives its authority from the dragon, or Satan. Verses 3-4 tells us that one of the heads of the kingdoms of this world received a fatal wound - in other words, it was dead as a head of authority, which happened at the Fall of Rome - and then its wound was healed - its authority was restored, which happened when the Holy Roman Empire was established - which made all the citizens of this earth (as opposed to those whose citizenship was in heaven) follow the beast and worship it as god.
Well, all the world (which in Revelation, we established meant all the Roman world) did follow the beast after its authority was restored in the form of the Holy Roman Empire, and worship it as god, if the beast is indeed Roman. The Roman church changed the gospel, changed the Lord's holidays and law, and established multiple idols in the pattern of Babylonianism -- the mother of Jesus and the saints -- which were venerated in place of YHVH.
Verses 5-8 describe the blasphemy of the beast and its war against those whose citizenship is in heaven instead of in the earth. We documented the blasphemy of the head of the Roman church, and the war the Roman church waged against those who opposed it is well known. About the forty-two months of authority, or 42 x 30 = 1260 years, most historicists believe the period began with the decree of Justinian in 533, which established the authority of the bishop of Rome as the head of the Christian church, and ended 1260 years later, in 1793, with the French Revolution and the dawn of the Age of Enlightenment, which repudiated the authority of the Roman church.
"He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name." Revelation 13.16-17
If, as we saw last time, the name of the beast is "Roman," and the beast itself is an empire, then those who are marked as belonging to a form, or continuation of, the Roman empire, may buy and sell, or participate in the economy. But those who are not so marked, may not.
During the days of the this beast's power; i.e. the Roman church exercising temporal power in conjunction with the Holy Roman Empire, that is exactly what happened. In Europe during the days of the Dark and Middle Ages, the days of the power of Holy Roman Empire, every person who was born was born into the Roman church. No one could be a member of a town, province, or country, without also being a member of the church.
Membership was not voluntary as it is today; it usually never entered into a person's head not to be a member of the Roman church. There was no other church to be a member of, nor any other religion. They were baptized into the church as infants, raised in all the church rites and holidays, married in the church, and died in the church. Those who were outside needed to be converted, and many were so, forceably. Those who started inside but left were heretics, and were punished as such.
Those who defied rule of church or pope were excommunicated, or forced to live outside the church. The problem with excommunication was that there was no life outside the church; this is why it was so feared, and such a powerful weapon of coercion. The excommunicate was like a leper of ancient days; shunned by all. Even the plates the excommunicate ate from were broken or burned. He could not employ or be employed; no shopkeeper would sell to him, and if he was a shopkeeper, no one would buy from him.
The church was the legal body which enacted and validated all contracts: personal and business. The excommunicate did not have access to law, and contracts which were previously enacted on his behalf became invalid. The excommunicate, like the heretic, had no civil rights.
So we see that small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, were alike marked with the name of the beast, Roman, on their hand, the agent of action, and on their forehead, the agent of thought. They did what the church instructed them to do, and thought as the church taught them to think. No other authority existed; Bibles were very scarce and were hardly ever read. Those who, because of tradition or knowledge, did or thought contrarily were severely punished, as the Irish and Welsh discovered, and as the Waldenses discovered, and as the Reformers discovered.
"He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666." Revelation 13:16-18
What is the name of the beast, and the number of his name? Why does his name also have a number? Ancient languages often did not use separate symbols to denote numerical value, but the same symbols used for phonetic values doubled for numerical values also. Most of us are familiar with Roman numerals. They are an example of this:
I = 1; II = 2; III = 3; IV = 4; V = 5, and so on.
Hebrew and Greek also used their regular alphabet to denote numerical value (although not in the same way the Romans used the Latin alphabet). Now this is not original with me - it has been known for centuries what the name of the beast is. It was known in the time of the apostles. Many times in the New Testament, the writers appear to be referring to something which is known, which they strive to keep cryptic in the letters. This place in Revelation 13 is one, where a name, instead of being told outright, is referred to in code, by the number of the name rather than the name itself.
"Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God. Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things? And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed."
He does not say the name of the man of lawlessness outright in the letter, but reminds them to think of what he explained to them while he was with them in person.
Another instance is here:
"“Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand)," Matthew 24:15
Why add the cryptic note to the reader, inserted among Jesus' words? It simply means, let the reader understand what has been spoken to him in person, which we dare not repeat in writing! Now all of these cryptic references have one thing in common: they all appear in passages discussing the end times and the antichrist!
I mentioned that this name has been known for centuries. It is:
ROMAN
The believers who have recorded this name, and shown that its number was 666, include Ireneus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Isaac Newton, and a host of 18th and 19th century theologians and biblical scholars.
The word 'roman' in Greek is 'lateinos;' when this word is written in the Greek alphabet, and the numerical values of its Greek letters are determined and calculated, it equals 666.
The word 'roman' in Hebrew, interestingly enough, is 'romiith' (feminine form when modifying an empire or a beast); when this word is written in the Hebrew alphabet, and the numerical values of its Hebrew letters are determined and calculated, it also equals 666.
I suppose there are a great many names which could equal 666 when added up. But how many share the same number when the name is applied in both biblical languages, Greek and Hebrew? It narrows the field considerably. In fact, I know of no other name in which its value remains true to the Scriptural account in Hebrew as well as in Greek, the language of the New Testament.
It becomes clear why the New Testament writers used cryptic language and coded words, rather than clearly naming the beast and the antichrist as "Roman." If their letters fell into the hands of the Roman authorities, it would have caused a great deal of trouble for the Church.
Visit with Christine Miller awhile and let's share our thoughts on homeschooling, education, and life.
:: home :: rss site feed
:: archives :: email me
"The Story of the Romans provides an introductory context for the culture and ideas so foundational to the development of Western thought.�
Anne Weiland :: The Old Schoolhouse Magazine
:: read a chapter from this book
:: more books
"For new and veteran homeschool families alike, this extensive new release from the editors of The Old Schoolhouse Magazine serves as a homeschool convention in a book. It details today's most viable education models, helping parents formulate an educational game plan and choose teaching methodologies. There are more than twenty contributors." Including Christine Miller, who wrote a chapter on Classical Education.
christine's reading
I am researching the holy days which were instituted by God as a celebration of the Messiah, instead of celebrating the holy days which were instituted by man to honor nature in place of nature's God.
:: Israel's Feast - Wooten
:: Annals - Ussher
