Anti-Christ's fatal wound

[rizen]

Just so everyone understands, when we read Revelation 13, we see both the entire empire system, and we see the individual at the head of the system. How can we tell the difference? When it says, "one of its heads", how do we interpret that?

When describing the beast of Rev. 13:1-2, John writes that the beast has ten crowns upon its ten horns. Now this certainly indicates something specific about the ten kings of Rev. 17:12. In Rev. 17:10, John tells us that the "sixth" is. In Rev. 17:12, he tells us that the ten kings have received no kingdom "as yet". This "as yet" clues us into the fact that during the reign of the "sixth" who "is" the ten kings have not yet risen to power with their kingdom. Therefore, by deduction, we can surmise that it is only during the reign of either the "seventh" or "eighth" that the ten kings can give the "scarlet-colored beast" of Rev. 17 their kingdom (Rev. 17:12).

I highlighted "scarlet-colored beast" because it is to him--the eighth king--the ten kings will receive power as kings for one hour. According to Rev. 17:8, this hour cannot begin until the scarlet-colored beast ascends from the bottomless pit. In other words, there is much more than mere co-existence of the ten kings and the antichrist required for the "one hour" to begin. In Rev. 17:17, they must give the scarlet-colored beast their kingdom. And it is God himself that will perform it.

This all relates back to Orange's question about how we are to read the "one of its heads" that is wounded. The fact that he only has seven heads, and when the sixth head who "is" was reigning at a time when the ten horns "have received no kingdom as yet" clues us into the idea that the only head the ten kings can reign together with is the seventh.

Therefore:

a) All ten horns exist on one head
b) The head that all ten horns exist on can only represent the seventh

The most popular theory is that the seventh head is wounded being the antichrist before his head wound. Then the antichrist becomes the eighth at that point in time.

The healing of the deadly wound inflicted upon the ten-horned head causes the beast of Rev. 13:1-2 to become "the great red dragon of Rev. 17.

All of this is a replay of Esau selling his birthright to Jacob in Gen. 25. After Esau sold his birthright, his name became "Edom" (red), and he despised his birthright. Same thing happened with Judas in John 12. Jesus feeds Judas the bread, Judas hurries off and it suddenly becomes night. Satan enters him and Judas sells out Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. Both despised their birthright. Joshua was sold out to merchants by his brothers for 20 pieces of silver. In selling out their friends or relatives for money, all them were despising their birthright. After the deadly wound is healed and the beast becomes the "red" dragon, the Antichrist will make war against the saints and overcome them.

At the same time the deadly wound is healed and the beast of Rev. 13:1-2 becomes the red dragon, a voice from heaven declares:

And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them. (Rev. 14:13)

Then the antichrist becomes the eighth at that point in time. The antichrist is the eighth, but he is also of the seven (or belongs to the seven). So how do we reconcile that?

The color "red" is the symbolic distinction between the beast of Rev. 13:1-2 and the great red dragon or scarlet-colored beast. While Satan certainly gives the Antichrist his power and authority when the ac is first revealed, he does not yet literally indwell him. This indwelling occurs when the deadly wound is healed. The color "red" is the distinction. Red or Scarlet-colored = Satan. The same way that Jesus revealed Judas to John (his most beloved) before Judas was indwelled by Satan, Jesus will reveal the Antichrist to the church of Philadelphia (brotherly love) before the great tribulation begins.

The asassination thing is pretty popular and there might be some truth to it, but I think there is something larger there because "one of the heads" would be interpreted as one of the mountains, which I believe refers to a kingdom or empire.

In my opinion it's all going to go down the same way it went down with Herod after he was "fatally wounded' from the sword of an angel in Acts 12:23. Herod bred worms and died. The same thing happened to Nebuchadnezzar when he was struck dumb for seven years after he failed to give God the glory for his power. It will be no different with the Antichrist. First he will put himself in the place of God (not necessarily standing in a literal temple), will refuse to give God the glory, and will then be struck down by an angel of the Lord. My opinion is that it will likely arrive in the form of a fatal disease.

[rizen]

We all know who "those who dwell on the earth" are. It's even clearly verified within this passage. It's those who names have "not been written in the book of life." So why on God's green earth would THEY be the ones singled out as being amazed at seeing the beast? And why aren't the saints amazed It doesn't seem to make sense to me if it's an empire that they are looking at. But if it's a spiritually discerned issue, it makes perfect sense. An evil man coming to life is amazing to one that does not have spiritual eyes, but to those that have the Spirit, it's very clear, and not something to make us wonder. We "get it."

Exactly!

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before. (Matt. 24:25-26)

[rizen]

AFTER the beast (with seven heads and ten horns) arises out of the sea, this means the beast empire has its authority in the ten kings. These ten kings rule as kings for one hour together with the beast (empire or man?).

The ten kings do certainly "co-exist" with the Antichrist of Rev. 13:1-2 after he rises out of the sea, but the question is, does this beast of Rev. 13:1-2 represent the same scarlet-colored beast of Rev. 17? We are told in Rev. 17:12 how the "beast" the ten kings will "receive power as kings with" for one hour and give their kingdom to (Rev. 17:17) is the scarlet-colored beast. Unlike the beast of Rev. 13:1-2, this scarlet-colored beast does not rise up out of the sea. Furthermore, the beast of Rev. 13:1-2 only has a "name" of blasphemy in its head. The scarlet-colored beast of Rev. 17, on the other hand, possesses "names" of blasphemy (unspecified where) on it.

Exactly who are the ten kings receiving their power from when they give their kingdom to the scarlet-colored beast? Does this have any connection to the reason why Daniel describes three kings being "plucked up by the roots" in Dan. 7:8? The beast of Dan. 7:7, like the beast of Rev. 13:1-2, does rise up out of the sea. Only it has one head (Dan. 7:20).

[rizen]

The statement that he "was, and is not; and is about to come up out of the abyss" would probably indicate that he will reembody the cruelty and power of a previous one of "the seven." He is in this sense one of the seven come to life again. He is the seventh in the series, and is for a time supported by "ten kings," who reign "with the beast, for one hour." Yet he "is himself also an eighth," or may be so regarded when he becomes the sole embodiment of world power.

Excellent summary by Erdman. The only nit is when it speaks of the eighth king ascending from the bottomless pit in Rev. 17:8, it appears from Rev. 9 that this is a literal event that will occur.

[rizen]

In the return of imperialism through the sovereignty of the Beast and the dechristianization of all that once constituted the governments of Christendom, the "deadly wound" (the death stroke) of ancient imperialism is healed and the nations return to their original, godless civilization and culture. It will be a gigantic final attempt of men to realize the primal lie of the serpent "ye shall be as gods," whose poison infused into the heart of man with the first sin has been transmitted from generation to generation ever since.

Shadows of Deut. 32:

How should one chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight, except their Rock had sold them, and the LORD had shut them up? For their rock is not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves being judges. For their vine is of the vine of Sodom, and of the fields of Gomorrah: their grapes are grapes of gall, their clusters are bitter: Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps. (Deut. 32:30-33)

And Job 20:

Yet his meat in his bowels is turned, it is the gall of asps within him. He hath swallowed down riches, and he shall vomit them up again: God shall cast them out of his belly. (Job 20:15-16)

This venom, poison, and wine the world will swallow appears to have a strong association with wealth.

How much gold came to Solomon ("peace") in the year after he told Sheba ("oath") all the wisdom he knew?

Now the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year was six hundred threescore and six talents of gold. (1 Kings 10:14)

[rizen]

This myth was indeed used in certain circles of Christian apocalyptic where the return of a triumphant Nero is pictured, sometimes as the Antichrist (ascension of Isaiah 4:1-14; Sibylline Oracles 4:119; 5:363; 8:70). The fatal objection to this view is that it is not only one of the heads of the beast which is slain, but the beast himself which received the mortal wound (13:12, 14). Later, it is spoken of as “the beast that …was, and is not, and is to ascend from the bottomless pit” (17:8). The murder or suicide of a Roman emperor might lead to a period of chaotic unrest, but it in no way interrupted the continuity of the empire itself. The fact that both one of the heads and the beast himself received the mortal wound suggests that the beast is in some way to be identified with his ten heads. The beast is the embodiment of all that was expressed in the four beasts of Daniel 7, and the seven heads are concrete embodiments of this imperial power. (See further notes on 17:8-12.) The beast himself, in the person of one of its heads, was slain but later revived. In this vision, John radically reworks the materials in Daniel 7.

So in Ladd's views, it must be a person which is slain, but it will affect the entire beast empire.
Perhaps if I get time I will type up his comments on Revelation 17. But that is a lengthy section.

IMO, Ladd is correct. Daniel 7 indicates that both the "king" (Dan. 7:17) and "kingdom" (Dan. 7:23) will be "diverse". The question is, what is the thing that will make both the "king" and "kingdom" this fourth beast represents "diverse"?

John does not necessarily "rework" the prophecies of Daniel 7, he actually clarifies and completes them.

Diverse = Dominion of Satan

Dominion of Satan = Red

Great Red Dragon = Satan

Great Red Dragon in Sea of Isaiah 27:1 = Fourth Beast from Sea in Dan. 7

Fourth Beast = Diverse King and Diverse Kingdom

Diverse King of Dan. 7:17 = Dominion of King via Satan (Rev. 13:2)

Diverse Kingdom of Dan. 7:23 = Dominion of Kingdom via Satan (Rev. 17:17)

Seven heads = Rome

Seven Headed Diverse King = Roman King via Satan

Seven Headed Diverse Kingdom = Roman Kingdom via Satan

[The Orange Mailman]

Orange,

Is the beast in verse 11 an empire?

Hey Overcomer, which verse 11? Are you referring to chapter 13 or chapter 17?

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

[revelation12eleven]

It was chapter 13 Orange...do let me know your understanding of the two horns it possesses...please...

[The Orange Mailman]

Well that changes things. All along I had thought you wanted an explanation about 17:11 which I'm unqualified to do. But now that it's chapter 13, I'm completely unqualified to give an explanation.

With that aside though, there are aspects to Revelation that I don't think we will understand until they unfold. Certainly this lamb is a false prophet which means he is a person. It's interesting that the second beast is given a better identity in 16:13 and 19:20. But the first beast remains the beast throughout the rest of the Revelation. We can only surmise what role he might have. Of course there are some scriptures in Revelation which refer to him as a king which means a ruler over a country or empire.

But the second beast is still pictured as a beast with two horns. But these horns are like the horns of a lamb. Would that mean they are small horns? We usually don't think of lambs as even having horns. I read something one time about the pope being the future false prophet. The pope always holds up two fingers, many believe it's a symbol for peace. This author stated that the two fingers mean temporal power and apostolic succession. I have absolutely no idea what the two horns symbolize or will symbolize. The false prophet's entire duty seems to be to point to the beast and have the entire world worship him. But there is some type of authority to the position of this beast with two horns and a mouth like a dragon. He comes up out of the earth which is open for debate. Since the sea is the nations (Gentile nations Rev. 17:15), this could make the earth be either the religious realm, as opposed to the political realm; or it could be from the Jewish nation as opposed to the Gentile nations.

He certainly does have some type of authority. Whether it's an official government position or perhaps it is religious authority only, the two horns must mean something. And since they mean something then there is a reign to his position which means some type of kingdom, albeit earthly, not heavenly.

On another thought, what do the seven horns represent on the Lamb in Revelation 5? The way the verse reads I would say that the seven eyes are the seven spirits of God, but the horns are not explained. How could the kingdom of Jesus Christ consist of seven kings?

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

[The Orange Mailman]

Here are Ladd's thoughts on Revelation 17. He leans toward kingdoms rather than kings for the heads and states his case quite well. He also adds to his thoughts concerning the death wound of Revelation 14.

The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman is seated. Most modern commentators see here a positive and inescapable identification of the great harlot with first-century Rome, because Rome was widely known as the city that was built on seven hills. As one writer says, “The local allusion is too plain to be doubted.” However, John immediately goes on to say in the next verse that “they are also seven kings.” It is difficult to see any connection between the seven hills of Rome and seven of its emperors.

It is a biblical commonplace that a hill or mountain is a symbol of power or rule. In Dan. 2:35, the stone cut out without hands smites the nations of the world and in turn grows to become a great mountain. God said to Babylon, “Behold, I am against you, O destroying mountain… which destroys the whole earth” (Jer. 51:25). “In the latter days, the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established as the highest of the mountains and shall be raised above the hills” (Isa. 2:2). God’s servant “shall thresh the mountains and crush them, and… make the hills like chaff” (Isa. 41:15; see also Ps. 68:15-16; Hab. 3:6). It is easier, therefore, to understand the seven hills to stand for seven empires and the rulers who headed them.

It may be objected that John says the hills are also seven kings, not seven kingdoms; but this is biblical language. The four beasts of Dan. 7 were said to represent four kings (Dan. 7:17) when, more precisely, Daniel means the kingdoms over which they rule. The great harlot sits upon a succession of empires. She found her embodiment in historical Babylon, in the first century in historical Rome, and at the end of the age in eschatological Babylon. This may well be what John intended in speaking about the “mystery of the woman” (vs. 7). No simple identification with any single historical city is possible. The woman has formed an adulterous connection in every epoch of her history with the then existing world power.

Verse 10. They are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he comes he must remain only a little while. This is one of the most debated verses in the book of Revelation. Preterist interpreters usually apply the verse to the succession of Roman emperors.

Here Ladd states the Preterist position and articulates the issues in holding it. I omit it here but I will post the entire section on my blog.

This problem is altogether avoided if John does not mean to designate a succession of individual kings or emperors, but a succession of kingdoms. This finds some support in the statement, “five… have fallen.” Several interpreters have pointed out that the word “fallen” is much better applied to the fall of a kingdom than to the death of an emperor (H. Alford, Th. Zahn). The great harlot who seduces the nations and persecutes the saints finds her support from the beast who appears in history in a succession of secular, godless kingdoms; five belong to past history; a sixth kingdom – Rome – ruled the world when John wrote. However, Rome is not Antichrist; a seventh kingdom is expected which will have only a short reign. This interpretation of the beast and its seven heads is supported by the verse that follows.

Verse 11. As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth but it belongs to the seven, and it goes to perdition. Three times in 17:8-11, John has said that the beast does not exist in the present, and twice that the beast will appear in the future. The beast has already once existed (he was); he does not now exist (he is not), but he will come up again out of the abyss (11:7; 17:8, 11). John has also said that the beast had seven heads, one of which was wounded unto death and then healed (13:3). He has also said that the beast itself received the mortal wound but was healed (13:12, 14). Now he adds a new fact: the beast is an eighth head, yet it belongs to the seven heads. The symbolism is made difficult by the fact that the beast is sometimes identified with his heads, but is sometimes differentiated from them. The solution to this involved symbolism lies in the interpretation that the beast is the Antichrist, and yet he is not the Antichrist; he is the Antichrist in two of his heads only. As the Antichrist, he has already appeared in history (he was); he does not exist in the present, but he is yet to arise in an embodiment of satanic power. This is why John can say that one of the heads was wounded to death, but the death wound was healed; and also that the beast itself had received a death stroke and had come to life again. In other words, the beast is identified with two of its heads more closely than with the other five. In one of the heads, the beast had himself appeared in history; this head – and the beast himself – had been slain (i.e. had disappeared from history) but is to be revived in a final appearance, which will be a more complete manifestation of the beast than the first (i.e. he shall ascend from the abyss). Still, the other five heads are also heads of the beast, yet it is not identified with them as with the two. The heads are successive manifestations of the worldly kingdoms at enmity with God through all the changes of history. The beast, then, has a twofold meaning: broadly, it is the anti-God worldly power; narrowly, it is one particular kingdom which has a twofold manifestation. Five of the heads are manifestations of the worldly kingdoms as such; two of the heads are specific embodiments of the beast himself. The clue to the understanding of this is the prophecy of Daniel, on which John draws for his symbolism of the beast (see notes on 13:2). In Daniel, the great enemy of God’s people is Antichrist, who has previously been manifested in history in the person of Antiochus Epiphanes (Dan. 8:9, 21). In typical prophetic manner, these two figures are sometimes blended together so that they seem to be practically one (see p. 13). The beast that you saw was (vs. 8), i.e., it was embodied in Antiochus Epiphanes; it is not, i.e., it does not now exist in this same malevolent form; it is to ascend from the abyss (vs. 8) in the person of Antichrist.

Here I omit another paragraph and conclude with his thoughts on the ten kings.

Verse 12. John now explains the ten horns. They are ten kings who are to receive authority as kings for a very short period of time –for one hour- and are to be the colleagues and supporters of the beast. Modern commentators who accept the Nero redivivus theory of the Antichrist usually understand these ten kings to be ten Persian satraps who will return in revived Nero’s retinue to help him regain his empire. However, John expressly says that they have not yet received the royal power. They are not yet kings; they will receive their power when the beast appears. This clearly casts John’s thought into the future. It is idle to speculate as to the identity of these kings, or to understand them, as some do, as ten European kingdoms of a revived Roman empire. The idea of ten kings is based on Dan. 7:7, 24 where the fourth beast has ten horns who are ten kings, out from whom emerges a final king who fills the role of Antichrist. It is very possible that the number ten is meant to be symbolic designation the fullness of Antichrist’s power and is not intended to be taken literally. The ten kings are purely eschatological figures representing the totality of the powers of all nations on the earth which are to be made subservient to Antichrist.

So there ya go. Certainly food for thought. Especially the idea that Antiochus Epiphanes is "of the seven".

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

[revelation12eleven]

Orange.

[The Orange Mailman]

Philip Mauro, a renown Historicist, has some views with which I would disagree with. But let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater. He has many things in his book “Of Things Which Must Soon Come To Pass” that most Futurists would agree with whole heartedly. I’ll keep this one short.

Close examination of the text leads to the conclusion that the wound was a thing of the past when the beast came into John’s view. The parallel expression is “a Lamb as it had been slain” (5:6). The beast had already received the death-stroke, and yet lived again, when John first saw it. Much is made of this matter; for in verses 12 and 14, reference is made to “the beast which had the wound with the sword and did live”; and it should be noted that what is said in verse 3 of “one of its heads” is said in verses 12 and 14 of the beast itself, showing that the beast is identified with one head at a time.

This important event in the career of the beast comes to view again Chapter 17:8, in the words, “was, and is not, and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition”. Thus the stroke is regarded as having put the beast to death; and its revival is viewed as a coming up again out of the abyss. Further the importance of this episode is emphasized by the threefold repetition of the words, “was, and is not, and yet is” (vv. 8 and 11). These verses show also that it was the sixth head that received the death stroke.

To what then does this refer? Considering the great importance given to this death wound of the beast, the fact that it was something that had already taken place when John saw the vision, and the further fact especially that the dragon and the beasts are so closely identified as to be virtually one (v. 2), it is clear that the death stroke referred to could have been nothing else than that which befell the dragon and all that is associated with him through the death of Jesus Christ. It is another pictorial representation of the truth that our Lord by death destroyed him that had the power of death (Heb. 2:14); or as another Scripture that speaks of Christ and the cross puts it, “having slain the enmity thereby” (Eph. 2:16). This latter passage is seen to be specially pertinent when it is observed that the phrase “as wounded to death” in Revelation 13:3, is literally “as slain to death” (see margin). According to the words of the Lord, recorded by this same John, the cross was the stroke of judgment upon the prince of this world. It is most fitting then that this vision should display conspicuously the effect of the cross of Christ upon the Devil in his character of world ruler.
Have fun and stay busy – Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

[Tevye]

Verse 11. As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth but it belongs to the seven, and it goes to perdition. Three times in 17:8-11, John has said that the beast does not exist in the present, and twice that the beast will appear in the future. The beast has already once existed (he was); he does not now exist (he is not), but he will come up again out of the abyss (11:7; 17:8, 11). John has also said that the beast had seven heads, one of which was wounded unto death and then healed (13:3). He has also said that the beast itself received the mortal wound but was healed (13:12, 14). Now he adds a new fact: the beast is an eighth head, yet it belongs to the seven heads. The symbolism is made difficult by the fact that the beast is sometimes identified with his heads, but is sometimes differentiated from them. The solution to this involved symbolism lies in the interpretation that the beast is the Antichrist, and yet he is not the Antichrist; he is the Antichrist in two of his heads only. As the Antichrist, he has already appeared in history (he was); he does not exist in the present, but he is yet to arise in an embodiment of satanic power. This is why John can say that one of the heads was wounded to death, but the death wound was healed; and also that the beast itself had received a death stroke and had come to life again. In other words, the beast is identified with two of its heads more closely than with the other five. In one of the heads, the beast had himself appeared in history; this head – and the beast himself – had been slain (i.e. had disappeared from history) but is to be revived in a final appearance, which will be a more complete manifestation of the beast than the first (i.e. he shall ascend from the abyss). Still, the other five heads are also heads of the beast, yet it is not identified with them as with the two. The heads are successive manifestations of the worldly kingdoms at enmity with God through all the changes of history. The beast, then, has a twofold meaning: broadly, it is the anti-God worldly power; narrowly, it is one particular kingdom which has a twofold manifestation. Five of the heads are manifestations of the worldly kingdoms as such; two of the heads are specific embodiments of the beast himself. The clue to the understanding of this is the prophecy of Daniel, on which John draws for his symbolism of the beast (see notes on 13:2). In Daniel, the great enemy of God’s people is Antichrist, who has previously been manifested in history in the person of Antiochus Epiphanes (Dan. 8:9, 21). In typical prophetic manner, these two figures are sometimes blended together so that they seem to be practically one (see p. 13). The beast that you saw was (vs. 8), i.e., it was embodied in Antiochus Epiphanes; it is not, i.e., it does not now exist in this same malevolent form; it is to ascend from the abyss (vs. 8) in the person of Antichrist.[/color]

Here I omit another paragraph and conclude with his thoughts on the ten kings.

Intriguing.

So there ya go. Certainly food for thought. Especially the idea that Antiochus Epiphanes is "of the seven".

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

Hello Orange Mailman,
Interesting, the part about A.E. IV
I briefly heard something like this by Marv. Rosenthal
but I'm not sure if he is too much into that theory or not anymore
I heard it on one of his tapes. I believe it was the Daniel tapes.
It makes sense that there could be an interesting connection
to the once was, now is not, and yet will come.
A.E. IV once was, was not in John time of the Revelation
and is possible to be once again up from the Abyss,
in "the appointed time."

Intriguing.

Thank you for sharing it!

[The Orange Mailman]

I have been saving the best two for last. It’s not that these are the two that I agree with the most, but these are the two commentaries on Revelation that stretch my views more so than others. Here I post quotes from Henry W. Frost’s book entitled Matthew 24 and The Revelation. He leans towards Nike’s view pretty consistently. Briefly on chapter 13:

Such words as these only fit and describe on personality mentioned in Scripture, namely, the one of whom Paul speaks in much the same language (2 Thess. 2:3-12), that is, the Antichrist. This monster of iniquity then, is seen rising up out of the Gentile nations –

Then more on Revelation 17:

It is evident from the eighth and tenth verses of the seventeenth chapter that the Antichrist is to be a satanically miraculous personage (17:8, 10). According to these verses, he will be one of seven kings, five of whom, in John’s day, had passed away, one of whom was living and one of whom was yet to come. The Antichrist, being one of the first five of the seven and being then dead – it is possible that Alexander the Great is in mind (see paragraph 37) – had gone into the abyss (17:8, 11). At the same time, being yet to come, he would appear after the seven and would thus become and eighth (17:11). Revealing and enlarging these statements, we may make the following declarations concerning this Man of Sin: first, he would be a king who had ruled on the earth; second, he had finished his earthly course when John was living; third, he was, when John wrote, shut up in the abyss; fourth, he would be reincarnated, that is, his spirit would be brought up from the under world, located in a human body, and given liberty to re-enter earthly existence and activity; fifth, he would in this reincarnated state, be a king, would rule over a ten-fold kingdom, would be Satan’s tool, and would fulfill his diabolical purposes in making war against the Lamb and His saints; and finally, he would be overcome by the Lamb and meet his doom by being sent, finally and forever, into perdition (17:7-15; 2 Thess. 2:1-12). It is to be noted from the above that the reincarnation of which the Buddhists and Theosophists speak is not altogether apart from the truth. But according to Scripture, there is only one personage to whom such an experience is granted, namely, the Antichrist. In this single case, God permits the Devil, in the last days, to produce this supreme miracle. His doing so will bring upon the scene of life and history the greatest monster of iniquity, next to Satan, which the world has ever seen (2 Thess. 2:3-11). Coming up from the abyss, he will do all the works of that nethermost region, becoming thus the full and exact antithesis of Him who came down from heaven and did the works of that uppermost place. He will thus be openly manifested, as Paul declared, as the lie (2 Thess. 2:11, R. V.). Happy the men, in those deceiving and beguiling days, who will be able both to discern and cleave to Him who is the Truth (John 1:14, 17; 14:6; 18:37).

So there ya go, Nike. Here’s an orthodox missionary/evangelist who believed that reincarnation would be allowed one time.

Have fun and stay busy – Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

[nike]

And this is a stretch of your views because...it's so...literal...?

When do you find the time to read all these writings, Orange?

(You never cease to amaze...even if you are overly aggressive...)

[smackbucket]

And this is a stretch of your views because...it's so...literal...?

Okay, that made me laugh out loud.

And I agree, Orange reads too much. Orange is well red. Get it? I must be tired.

[slick]

Hello Gang, (specially Nike & Orange), oh yeah and HI Kathy!

This is an interesting discussion and though I haven't gotten involved or read in detail the whole thread, I want to comment on it at the risk of possible repeat.

Over the last few years as I have engulfed myself in the study and understanding of the timing of the beginning of the 70th week, an incontrovertible fact has over and over surfaced itself to me and that is we are often guilty of looking too closely at the minute details and not the big picture.

By nature I am a "WHY" guy and small details have always been difficult for me to grasp, however often in life it has been easy for me to see the big picture,as has proven to be helpful in my current studies of Eschatology.

So ask yourself WHY is the AC resurrected/reincarnated? not who or when! what purpose does his return to authoritative power after having been dead serve? why Would Satan desire to reincarnate a former failure in his scheme of attack against GOD?

The answer is quite simple really, to emulate GODS MESSIAH JESUS CHRIST!! The term Anti Christ is not so much a term of opposition as it is a term of replacement, or reinvention. Thus a more relaxed, tolerant Deity must surface in order to placate those that are suspicious or critical of "Christians" intolerant view of salvation. What is the TRUE sign that people have associated with Deity? OVERCOMING DEATH!!!!!

food for thought I hope!
THE BATTLE RAGES TIL THE LION ROARS!

GOD BLESS,
Clarence

[nike]

Hi, Slick -

That's a good point...I do think that we have to keep in mind the whole delusion thing as well...as spectacular as a man risen from the dead would be or an empire (I said that to keep you engaged, Orange), add the delusion to it and whoa! It's hard to even predict what it's going to look like...except for the fact that Satan will wear out the saints like an old garment and be highly successful in his attempt to rid the earth of God's children...we need to soberly consider these facts...when Daniel contemplated the rule of the AC, he grew pale and kept the matter to himself (Daniel 9 - whole chapter is a great read!). I get caught up in the details at time and neglect the big picture...

So thankful we know Who sits on the throne and holds our lives in His hand..."Be anxious for nothing but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God." (Phil. 4:6) "For this reason I say to you, do not be worried about your life..."(Matthew 6:25)

nike

[revelation12eleven]

Hey Clarence! By the way, I'm going with the AC being resurrected, not reincarnated. I don't think the AC will have been a bug or a cow prior to his resurrection...and what a cheap, cheap imitation he will be of the TRUE Messiah!

I think it is good to prepare by encouraging one another with the word just like Nike did. We are going to have to hang on with all our strength during that time...(sound familiar Nike?)

Been in a study of Psalm 18 recently...I like verse 32..."...God who girds me with strength..." We are going to need strength and He will be the supply for us just like He was for David...

[slick]

Hello Nike,

The delusion thing,Note that The AC and FP use signs and wonders, and miraculous events to substantiate their claim to authority which is whole heartily bought into by mankind, IE the false Christian/Tares within the ranks of the church.This is why Jesus in the Olivet Discourse adamantly warned the Disciples (believers) not to be misled.Take note of II THESS 2, who uses the Delusion and Why is it used? It is a tool by GOD not Satan, the purpose being to lock them up for judgment, this corresponds well to Rev 13:3 where the word is translated AMAZED but in the GREEK carries the idea of being BEWITCHED!!! what is the final outcome for those who are bewitched? destruction and eternal damnation!!! So you see the false signs and wonders are accepted as truth by those who have been deluded by GOD for the purpose of his Wrath.once again we see SOVEREIGNTY in action!

THE BATTLE RAGES TIL THE LION ROARS!
GOD-BLESS,
Clarence
(slick)

[nike]

Slick,

Can you imagine how frustrating it will be to see such signs and wonders, long for them to be truly from God, all the time knowing He warned us of exactly this very thing and not to fall for it? I suppose when we see the miracles we can be confident that no matter how cool they are, God is so much bigger...imagine trying to explain to people that it's not the God we worship, though he looks and acts remarkably similar to the One we follow...they are going to think we are completely off our rocker!

This is time well spent, thinking about what is to come, preparing for what will be so confusing to most...Jesus was rather adamant in His warning, wasn't He?

nike

[The Orange Mailman]

Hey Nike (and everyone else)-

I mentioned that Frost's book stretches me because it makes me think outside my own box without going outside the scriptures. I mean that applying to the book as a whole, not just the individual passage at hand. Matthew 24 and the Revelation and this other book that I will quote from I purposefully saved till last because they seem be the ones in my arsenal that I usually wind up adopting as my own views. I was surprised that Ladd landed so close to my views. I usually don't follow his views on Revelation as a whole because he lines up a little too close with Covenant Theology. So I put him early in the line up simply because I thought I would probably dismiss his views.

It's kind of funny that Ladd hits so close to my views everywhere else, but when it comes to Revelation, I can usually count on something a little off (in my humble opinion).

The language about ascending out of the bottomless pit it pretty straight forward. So I think Frost's comments are a viable interpretation. I'm actually just debating this issue to have fun. I'm not 100% sold on it, but I think it's worth considering. Of course, I can't tell you that in the middle of a debate.

Oh, and Smackbucket, Orange is only partly red. There's an equal part of yellow in there.

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

[Tevye]

Hello Orange Mailman,
thank you for sharing this!
I would agree with what he is saying there.
The only thing I would question is the Alexander the Great part
I think he is really close on that one.

Although Alaxander the Great was, and in some places still is, very revered, and maybe even loved or worshiped.

I have been saving the best two for last. It’s not that these are the two that I agree with the most, but these are the two commentaries on Revelation that stretch my views more so than others. Here I post quotes from Henry W. Frost’s book entitled Matthew 24 and The Revelation. He leans towards Nike’s view pretty consistently. Briefly on chapter 13:

Such words as these only fit and describe on personality mentioned in Scripture, namely, the one of whom Paul speaks in much the same language (2 Thess. 2:3-12), that is, the Antichrist. This monster of iniquity then, is seen rising up out of the Gentile nations –

Then more on Revelation 17:

It is evident from the eighth and tenth verses of the seventeenth chapter that the Antichrist is to be a satanically miraculous personage (17:8, 10). According to these verses, he will be one of seven kings, five of whom, in John’s day, had passed away, one of whom was living and one of whom was yet to come. The Antichrist, being one of the first five of the seven and being then dead – it is possible that Alexander the Great is in mind (see paragraph 37) – had gone into the abyss (17:8, 11). At the same time, being yet to come, he would appear after the seven and would thus become and eighth (17:11). Revealing and enlarging these statements, we may make the following declarations concerning this Man of Sin: first, he would be a king who had ruled on the earth; second, he had finished his earthly course when John was living; third, he was, when John wrote, shut up in the abyss; fourth, he would be reincarnated, that is, his spirit would be brought up from the under world, located in a human body, and given liberty to re-enter earthly existence and activity; fifth, he would in this reincarnated state, be a king, would rule over a ten-fold kingdom, would be Satan’s tool, and would fulfill his diabolical purposes in making war against the Lamb and His saints; and finally, he would be overcome by the Lamb and meet his doom by being sent, finally and forever, into perdition (17:7-15; 2 Thess. 2:1-12). It is to be noted from the above that the reincarnation of which the Buddhists and Theosophists speak is not altogether apart from the truth. But according to Scripture, there is only one personage to whom such an experience is granted, namely, the Antichrist. In this single case, God permits the Devil, in the last days, to produce this supreme miracle. His doing so will bring upon the scene of life and history the greatest monster of iniquity, next to Satan, which the world has ever seen (2 Thess. 2:3-11). Coming up from the abyss, he will do all the works of that nethermost region, becoming thus the full and exact antithesis of Him who came down from heaven and did the works of that uppermost place. He will thus be openly manifested, as Paul declared, as the lie (2 Thess. 2:11, R. V.). Happy the men, in those deceiving and beguiling days, who will be able both to discern and cleave to Him who is the Truth (John 1:14, 17; 14:6; 18:37).

So there ya go, Nike. Here’s an orthodox missionary/evangelist who believed that reincarnation would be allowed one time.

Have fun and stay busy – Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

[The Orange Mailman]

Hey Tevye-

If we go with the continuity of Daniel 11, like you suggest, then yes, Antiochus IV would be the best fit for a resurrection or reincarnation. Daniel 8 would give us the same impression. In fact, the gap in Daniel 8 seems to match up with Daniel 11 giving the appearance that Daniel 11 expands upon Daniel 8. In both prophecies we get to the one who commits some type of abomination of desolation during the Greek empire portending an end times antichrist. It was out of that very portion of the Greek empire that this end times antichrist was to spring, or so Daniel 8 seems to indicate.

However, if we adopt Nike's approach, and say that the seven heads of Revelation 17 are primarily seven kings and perhaps after that as a secondary application they are empires, then we must view the king as the one which had the greatest influence over the empire very early on. So the head over the Babylonian empire would be Nebuchadnezzar (esp. before his heart was changed). The head over the Medo-Persian empire would be Cyrus. The head over the Greek empire would be Alexander the great. But I would be at a loss as to who to assign to Rome and Nike has been reticent to fully explain this view. That's where I personally believe we must view the heads as empires first.

So with that type of viewpoint, Alexander the great would be the better fit since Antiochus was only a king over one of the four portions of the entire kingdom after it was split up. I think Slick's question may help us here. Why? What would be the point of Antiochus or Alexander inhabiting the end times antichrist? Or anybody else for that matter? Certainly as Slick states, to give some type of view of victory over death to deceive the world into believing he is a messiah, but why a certain personage from the past like Nero, Hitler, or Nebuchadnezzar?

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

[Tevye]

Hello Orange Mailman,
I'm very sorry
I was editing my post
I was thinking maybe I was a bit overboard
and then there was your reply.
There goes my hoof in mouth problem.

Very, very sorry.
I should edit before posting and then leave it be.

More below.....

Hey Tevye-

If we go with the continuity of Daniel 11, like you suggest, then yes, Antiochus IV would be the best fit for a resurrection or reincarnation. Daniel 8 would give us the same impression. In fact, the gap in Daniel 8 seems to match up with Daniel 11 giving the appearance that Daniel 11 expands upon Daniel 8. In both prophecies we get to the one who commits some type of abomination of desolation during the Greek empire portending an end times antichrist. It was out of that very portion of the Greek empire that this end times antichrist was to spring, or so Daniel 8 seems to indicate.

However, if we adopt Nike's approach, and say that the seven heads of Revelation 17 are primarily seven kings and perhaps after that as a secondary application they are empires, then we must view the king as the one which had the greatest influence over the empire very early on. So the head over the Babylonian empire would be Nebuchadnezzar (esp. before his heart was changed). The head over the Medo-Persian empire would be Cyrus. The head over the Greek empire would be Alexander the great. But I would be at a loss as to who to assign to Rome and Nike has been reticent to fully explain this view. That's where I personally believe we must view the heads as empires first.

So with that type of viewpoint, Alexander the great would be the better fit since Antiochus was only a king over one of the four portions of the entire kingdom after it was split up. I think Slick's question may help us here. Why? What would be the point of Antiochus or Alexander inhabiting the end times antichrist? Or anybody else for that matter? Certainly as Slick states, to give some type of view of victory over death to deceive the world into believing he is a messiah, but why a certain personage from the past like Nero, Hitler, or Nebuchadnezzar?

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

Thank you for your reply!

In thinking about a horn
would A.E. IV have been a "little horn" not worthy of royalty
and Alexander the Great was a regular or large horn??
A powerfully great horn?

[The Orange Mailman]

Hey Tevye-

No apologies necessary. I actually view your idea as having more support than what Frost proposed because of the way Daniel 8 and 11 line up. But whether someone from the past will actually be reincarnated, I'm still not sure on that.

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

P.S. The language of Daniel 8 and 11 seems to indicate that AEIV is a king. His modus operandi was more like a power mad general though.

[The Orange Mailman]

And now, from BW Newton's Thoughts on the Apocalypse, here are his thoughts on the wound of the beast and also a few thoughts on the interpretation of heads. I will post a fuller quote on my blog for those who want to wade through it. He really does believe the beast is the antichrist, but when it comes to the heads of the beast he believes they are centers of power or empires of power concentrated in that one person. It's an interesting view that I don't totally buy into. But here is the pertinent portion.

One marvelous feature in the vision of the Beast as seen arising from the sea, is that he arises with one of his heads wounded,* apparently unto death. But the wound was suddenly healed, and men marveled the more. The Scripture, it is true, does not in express words reveal what the wound is, or what its healing; yet it may, I think, with much certainty be inferred: for when we remember that Antichrist had previously to this, during all the period of which the seventeenth chapter treats, been possessed of all the influence of the systems by which the ten kingdoms had been ruled – his heads representing those systems as centres of concentrated power; and when we consider further, how decidedly the element of ecclesiastical influence is blended into the arrangements of all the kingdoms of the prophetic earth, forming one of their chief instruments of rule; and consequently how great the shock will be to the whole social and political fabric when all religious influences are suddenly swept away, we can easily understand how Antichrist, when he destroys the Woman, purchases his place of solitary greatness by forfeiting one of the chief centres of his former influence; and therefore he may well be described as rising into his power with one of his governmental heads wounded as unto death.

* Newton’s note reads thus: , in the past tense, implying that he first met the eye of John in this wounded condition. This symbol does not imply that Antichrist personally will be wounded. It is a symbol that applies to him only governmentally. It indicates that he is smitten as to a certain branch of his power.

Now from chapter 17, his view of the seven heads are seven different types of government...

The native monarchy of Nimrod, the theocracy of Israel, the despotic authority of Nebuchadnezzar, the aristocratic monarchy of Persia, and the military monarchy of Alexander and his successors, had all passed away when John beheld this vision. All these methods had been tried - none had been found to answer even the purposes of man; and now another had arisen, the half military, half popular monarchy of the Caesars - the iron empire of Rome. "Five have fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh he must continue a little space."

The native monarchy of Nimrod - the theocracy of Israel - the systematic despotic monarchy of Nebuchadnezzar, which was, in a peculiar sense, established by God - the aristocratic monarchy of Persia - the military monarchy of Alexander - the empire of the Caesars, which arose out of democracy - and the clay-iron or constitutional monarchies of modern Europe, are the seven forms which have already appeared. The sixth, viz. that of the Caesars, was existent when the Revelation was given; the seventh, though it has appeared, has not yet been perfected; the eighth, which is reserved for Antichrist, closes the scene.

So there you go. Any comments?

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

[nike]

However, if we adopt Nike's approach, and say that the seven heads of Revelation 17 are primarily seven kings and perhaps after that as a secondary application they are empires, then we must view the king as the one which had the greatest influence over the empire very early on. So the head over the Babylonian empire would be Nebuchadnezzar (esp. before his heart was changed). The head over the Medo-Persian empire would be Cyrus. The head over the Greek empire would be Alexander the great. But I would be at a loss as to who to assign to Rome and Nike has been reticent to fully explain this view. That's where I personally believe we must view the heads as empires first.

Nike's approach is not as well thought out and organized as Orange would like to believe it is - that's why she asked the OP. Nike apologizes for being reticent and asks that those hurt by her reticency would forgive her, though she believes this was a sin of omission rather than a sin of comission, it is apparently a sin nonetheless...

Having that cleared up, is it possible (honest question) that the 7 heads are not the kings "which had the greatest influence over the empire early on" but were the leaders of the empires who Satan specifically used to persecute Israel in the most horrific ways? Seven specific men, who (by their position) represent their empire, whose oppression of Israel was Satanically driven and more successful than the common, average Israel-hater? I think in Neb's statue we are given empires and the beast goes one step further, showing that within the empires, specific men were used by Satan.

Am I thusly less reticent?

nike

[The Orange Mailman]

Nike, your apology is very gracious. A lack of organization doesn't really warrant an apology in my humble opinion. But let's talk here...

You make a good point about Nebuchadnezzar's statue, or Colossus as I like to term it. (Secretly I'm still an X-Men fan.) But we can't just skip to the beast of Revelation 13, first we have to visit Daniel 7 and the vision of 4 beasts. There we see each empire in its totality, but the empire is seen in its final form. For instance, the lion was seen as being given a man's heart. You could make a case that this is Nebuchadnezzar, but consider the idea of the entire empire becoming more kind to the nation of Israel toward the end of the reign of power. Evil-Merodach brought Jeconiah out of prison and set him at the king's table in Babylon. So the man's heart in the lion shows the beast in its final form. The same for the bear raised up on one side. At first the Medes and Persians seemed equal, but later in the empire all you hear about is the Persians. In the Greek Empire, the four heads did not appear until after the death of Alexander. Now for the fourth beast.

The ten horns never appeared. Yet the picture is accurate. These four beast were all separate entities in Daniel's vision. The fourth beast was to digest the previous three into its being. So when John sees a beast with lion, bear, and leopard all incorporated into its being, he has witnessed as present what Daniel saw as future, namely the beast in its final form with the previous three empires absorbed into its dominion AND with ten kings. So if these heads symbolize the past empires (five fallen, one present, one to come), we can make the direct connection with Revelation 12 (which you agree with). The Roman Empire in the days of Caesar Augustus was used by Satan to try to devour the Messiah. This dragon would give its power to the beast from the sea about to rise to form the final head of the empire, one consisting of ten horns.

Now if considering your inquiry, would we go with the approach that the emporer at the time of John's writing (Domitian) was the "king that is" referred to in Revelation 17:10? Or would we try to pick out the emperor who persecuted Israel, the Messiah, or the church above all others? I would be hard pressed to pick Caesar Augustus who was moved by Satan to take a world census or to pick Nero as Ladd in his commentary tried to address. Or would we pick Vespasian since it was under his rule and his son's military leadership that Jerusalem was destroyed?

Now you haven't stated whether you agree with Van Kampen's views (shared by many) of the past five heads being Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece. But if we do adopt that view (or some variant) who would we choose from Assyria? I would have a tough time deciding between Tiglath-Pileser who took Galilee captive (II Kings 15:29), Shalmaneser who dispersed Samaria/Israel (II Kings 17:6), and Sennacherib who stood against Jerusalem and Judah only to be divinely judged since Hezekiah turned the people's hearts toward God in revival, (II Kings 18-19). It's difficult for me to make this interpretation work systematically through to the end. It's more natural for me to see (in light of the above comments concerning Daniel 7) that these seven heads are empires even though the word king is used. You can't have a king without a kingdom.

But there is one other view that could be considered, but it may get me in trouble since no one here will probably buy it. It is possible to adopt an entirely futuristic view of the description in Revelation 17. If we see the beast as it will exist just prior to Daniel's 70th week, with the harlot sitting atop, then we might say this "five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come" to be referring entirely to individual kings in a position of power to be created in the future within this entire beast system. If the description reads thus, we can expect that a position of authority over an empire with ten kingdoms within the bounds of the old Roman empire would be created. Five men would serve in that position and have "fallen", so just as we are poised to enter Daniel's 70th week, this is what the beast would look like. The weakness of this view is that Daniel 7 gives no room for this. The fourth beast is seen in it final form with ten horns, then after that a little horn comes up speaking great words against heaven. That's the antichrist with no room for five individual kings which fell previous to that. So even with this attempt to try to make the seven heads to be individuals seems to fail us.

This would also limit us from believing that a past personage would be reincarnated as the antichrist. The only viable interpretation would be that the seventh king is resurrected after the deadly wound and becomes the eighth. But the idea of the beast ascending out of the bottomless pit should be considered. We could say this is an evil spirit and not a deceased human soul. This really gets at the original intent of your question, which I have seriously hijacked your thread. But I'm not very good at apologies. So which do you see as the best scriptural view after all this discussion?

a.) a recent wound, like a world leader gets shot, dies and then resurrects
b.) a recent wound, where he swoons but doesn't really die
c.) a wound which is hidden but when he reveals it, it will prove that he is a past, dead world leader who was brought back to life (i.e. Hitler or Nero)

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

[nike]

c

[nike]

You know, I do appreciate your study, Orange - it is far beyond where I take mine. So thanks for sharing your process of trying to put the pieces of the puzzle together. This is obviously not a simple puzzle to do.

Six comments into this post I said that perhaps I should have added a fourth choice - d.) none of the above. This seems to be your answer. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if any of the choices ended up being correct, though I still lean toward c. As VanKampen used to classify his understanding, I wouldn't die for this position (that the AC is a risen leader from history) though I feel it fits with the world's response better than the empire view. I agree there can't be a king without a kingdom, but I can't abandon my hermeneutic - be as literal as possible and then go from there.

You have once again blown all of us away with your study process and we are left with more questions than answers...the biggest one being, Why is this guy a mailman? He should be a pastor...

Thanks for the insights...

nike

[Tevye]

Hello Orange Mailman, thank you.
I so appreciate your insights
it takes me beyond my imagination into the scriptures.
Keep up the good work!
Tevye

Someday when things 'work' out here
we'll have to hang out.

Hey Tevye-

No apologies necessary. I actually view your idea as having more support than what Frost proposed because of the way Daniel 8 and 11 line up. But whether someone from the past will actually be reincarnated, I'm still not sure on that.

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

P.S. The language of Daniel 8 and 11 seems to indicate that AEIV is a king. His modus operandi was more like a power mad general though.

[revelation12eleven]

Why is this guy a mailman? He should be a pastor...

...or a seminary prof...teaching future pastors...

[The Orange Mailman]

Awww, shucks. Thank you.

Nike, I hope you don’t think I’m derogatory toward the resurrection or reincarnation view. There certainly is enough evidence in Rev. 17:8, 11 to see it that way. I have entertained the idea that the head wound is the wounding of an empire as a definite possibility for some time and I do not see any reason that it can not be so. Some time after considering this seriously, I began reading some of the old school premillennialists to find out that some believed the same thing. So I continue to give the idea serious consideration to the point of presenting it as a viable scriptural interpretation.

I guess the reason I asked was because I got jumped on the other day for believing in reincarnation, because I said that AC would be someone who was raised from the dead - that is what a FATAL wound is, right? (And wasn't Lazarus raised from the dead, and the Roman soldier's daughter, and Elisha raised a little boy, right?)

To lend a hand here, if the person who “jumped” you is a student of the Word, ask them this. “What do you believe about the scripture in Malachi 4:5-6 that states that the LORD will send Elijah before the Day of the LORD?” Then whatever their response is, ask them if the LORD could fulfill Revelation 17:8, 11 in the same way. Perhaps they believe that Elijah will physically come back, perhaps they believe someone will go forth in the spirit and power of Elijah. Whatever their response, frame a possibility with their own language threaded in.

One more question - if you think he is a current individual who would die and then rise, does that happen before or after the mid-point desecration of the Temple? (because wouldn't we be pretty suspect if he did it before?)

The healing of the head wound occurs before the abomination of desolation in my view. Whether it’s a resurrection, reincarnation, or the healing of an empire from war, the worship of the beast happens after that miraculous healing. And I believe that worship of the beast occurs in conjunction with the abomination of desolation, the bringing to life of the image of the beast, and the mark of the beast.

Tevye- Hanging out would be fun. Hopefully you live in the USA.

Have fun and stay busy – Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

[The Orange Mailman]

We should probably include Marv Rosenthal's views here since we are PreWrath, right?

From the July-August 2009 issue of Zion's Fire quoting the article Antichrist is Coming. Bold and italics are his.

As Jesus lived before His incarnation - His “goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting” (Micah 5:2), the Antichrist lived upon the earth before his final incarnation during the last days, It is said of the beast that he was, he is, an he will be (Revelation 17:8, 11).

As Jesus literally died by crucifixion, the Antichrist will literally die by a fatal wound.

As Jesus was literally resurrected from the dead to die no more, the Antichrist will be literally raised from the dead (Revelation 13:14; 17:8, 11). But unlike Christ who will live forever, the Antichrist will go into perdition – he will be imprisoned forever in the lake of fire.

In appearance, the beast of Revelation 13 represents both a kingdom and a king, and is nondescript.

John saw one of the seven heads of the beast” as it were wounded to death” (v. 3). The expression “as it were wounded to death” is precisely the same Greek wording used of Christ and translated “as it had been slain” (Revelation 5:6). If Jesus, at His crucifixion actually died (and He did), it must be concluded that one of the heads of the beast actually died. But more than that, John tells us that “his deadly wound was healed” (v. 3). This can only be referring to a restoration to life. Some don’t want to attribute this power to Satan – but I believe it is so.

Since a “head” of the beast can refer to both a kingdom and its king, the question is: “Who or what died and was raised to life again?” Is the text referring to one of the seven kingdoms over which the beast ruled which died and came back into existence, or is it referring to a king of one of the seven kingdoms who died and was brought back to life? Either, or both, could be true. If only one of the options is chosen, it would seem to this writer that a king – the Antichrist, himself – is in view and that the restoration to life will be observable by the masses of people. As a result of the restoration of the Antichrist to life, John wrote, “And all the world wondered after the beast” (v. 3c).

In response to repeated questions, Jesus told the Jewish leaders that the sign (miracle or wonder) to authenticate all that He did in life and death would be His resurrection (John 2:18-21). Satan, therefore, will perform a counterfeit resurrection to authenticate his counterfeit message concerning the Antichrist. Jesus was resurrected, never to die again. The Antichrist will be raised from the dead, but eventually, he will be thrown into the abyss for eternity (Revelation 19:20).

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman

[imightdecrease]

I've come into the thread late in the game. I started reading from the beginning, but I didn't make it all of the way to the end before I could no longer resist putting my two cents in. You all may have hit on these exact points already, so I apologize if I am rehashing the same info. I'm of the mind set that it is both a kingdom and a man that receive the fatal wounds and come back to life.

Revelation 17:7-8
And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her,(surely speaking of a kingdom here) which hath the seven heads and ten horns.

The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world,when they behold the beast that was (The Third Reich),and is not (history at the end of WWII), and yet is (The kingdom comes back to life with a new location for headquarters central, Brussels).

Revelation 17:10-11
And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh (Hitler), he must continue a short space.

And the beast that was (the Man of Sin), and is not (captured at the end of Armageddon[/color]), even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.(The Man of Sin and the False Prophet both are cast into the lake of fire)

Revelation 13:1-8
And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast (kingdom) rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.

And the beast (kingdom) which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him (the Man of Sin) his power, and his seat, and great authority.

And I saw one of his heads (a head of this last kingdom/A little horn/the Man of Sin?) as it were wounded to death; and his (the Man of Sin) deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast (the Man of Sin).

And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast (the Man of Sin), saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? (Man of Sin plus his kingdom)

And there was given unto him (the Man of Sin) a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.

And he (the Man of Sin) opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.

And it was given unto him (the Man of Sin) to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him (the Man of Sin), whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

I have really struggled with these verses for many years. I finally now believe that I have a little grasp of them. However, I could be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time and it surely will not be the last.
It appears that we don't have very long to wait before we see it all unfold with our physical eyes.