"He Who Does Not Remember History Is Condemned To Repeat It"     -     Georges Santayana
"Power tends to Corrupt, and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely"     -     Lord Acton
"Liberty Is The Only Thing You Cannot Have Unless You Are Willing To Give It To Others"     -     William Allen White

Home Page

Revelation 17 and the Number 666

(Click here to get the free Adobe PDF Reader if you don't have it already)

To save the PDF file to your computer, place your mouse pointer over the link and right click, then click on "save as", then select a destination folder to save the file.

Revelation 17 Video

Flash Format

Youtube Video

PST! - Check out the new 666 Number History Page. It is loaded with new information.

Attention Adventists: It isn't the Heruli or the Visigoths! Find out who it is here! This is a new groundbreaking study on the three horns removed from the head of the fourth beast of Daniel 7.

Share Him Bible Studies - Learn more about the Bible through video presentation of Bible study topics. The page that comes up will allow you to pick from various topics and formats. Click on one of them to pick the topic you wish to hear.

Understanding the meaning of the Old Testament Sanctuary - Watch videos of short lectures explaining the Old Testament Sanctuary. These videos show a full size model of the Old Testament Sanctuary so that you can better understand its purpose and function. The purpose of the Old Testament Sanctuary was to provide a graphic picture of the entire plan of salvation for man, so if you want to understand God's plan, you will want to see these videos.

Videos On Demand

Streaming Videos for High Speed Internet Connections

We have streaming videos for high speed internet connections that you can listen to online or download for listening to later. To select a video to watch, Click Here. This includes videos of Revelation 17 prepared by us, and videos on the Sabbath and how it was changed to Sunday.

An amazing hidden clock has been discovered in Revelation. Silently it began ticking with the arrest of the Pope in 1798. And soon, when the count strikes 666, the end of the world will begin!

Listen! Tick. Tick. Tick....

It is vitally important to learn about God's countdown to the return of the beast. This clock was created just for you.  What you learn here will both surprise and shock you. But don't wait too long. Yes, the clock is still ticking. But within our lifetime, soon, even sooner than you think, it is going to stop suddenly. Then the end of the world events will begin!

Tick. Tick. Tick....

The purpose of this web page is to help you clearly understand the true meaning of Revelation 17, which contains information that has remained hidden by the Holy Spirit from the inquisitive minds of even the most brilliant of men for centuries, until now.  Why now?  Because this knowledge could not have been helpful to those living in generations prior to our time.  God intended it only for our time period. It is a sign of God's great love and concern for us that He has fashioned this prophetic method to alert and inform us of what is coming next, all while hiding it from those not needing to know and from those who would have destroyed it had they known of what it prophesied.

The Bible tells us that when God is about to do something major which will have a major impact on his people, he will not leave us in the dark about it. Here is proof of that care and concern for his people:

Amos 3:7 Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, unless he reveals his secret unto his servants the prophets.

Something VERY BIG is about to happen and God has revealed it so you may be prepared for it. On this site, you will learn of the amazing discovery of the hidden connection of the seven heads of the scarlet beast of Revelation 17, the seven kings and the eighth to the number 666. We will share with you the keys found in the Bible and the history which we used to unlock the mystery of this strange and fascinating chapter, and we will teach you the same keys so you may also understand it. Specifically, we will show you how the clock accurately predicts certain events to take place between 1798 and the end of the world when Jesus comes again. Most of these predicted events have already taken place, something which allows us to test the validity of the master clock. You will be able to easily see exactly how the clock has counted and measured off the allotted incubation time of the beast before the end begins. It is true no one knows the exact time when Jesus will come, but He has always provided adequate prophetic warning of coming crisis events which will spiritually endanger His followers. So there should be no surprise He has given us this prophetic device, accurately and precisely timed, as a last wake up call before the events strike.

But, before reading further, consider these verses:

Matthew 18:3 "And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven."

Matthew 11:25 "At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes."

It is absolutely vital the Bible be allowed to interpret itself, and when examining the symbolic language of Revelation, this rule becomes absolute. We arrogant humans have a fatal flaw, as we automatically, blindly and even unknowingly, make judgments, close our minds, and blithely assume we know the meaning of some of the words and phrases we are reading in Revelation, to the extent it is actually our voice, rather than God's voice, we hear as our eyes race over the familiar words. Our minds tend to fill in accepted and expected meaning. In a very real sense, instead of letting the Bible tell us what it has to say, most people, usually without awareness of what they are really doing, actually read the "commentary" out of their own minds when they are reading the Bible. When doing this, they believe they are reading the Bible and they have understood truth, when in fact they may just be parroting back in their mind things they have read or believed previously concerning the material they are reading. Under such circumstances, people think they have really read and understood the Bible, but have they really done that? Consider that sometimes, to really grasp what the Bible is actually saying to us, it is very important to turn off the verbal commentary and the preconceived ideas in the mind and let the Bible speak for itself.

But tell me, why should we trust a dictionary or our own programmed definitions or preconceived ideas when the Bible is eagerly waiting to tutor us into truth of the real meaning of its symbolisms? The simple realization that even the most innocent looking preconceived accepted assumptions lodged firmly within our minds actually serve to blind the searcher of truth into sadly passing over the true message contained in these texts.  Dropping these preconceived ideas and turning off the commentary in the mind, following the direction of the Holy Spirit, and comparing scripture with scripture and using the Bible to carefully define symbols, and dropping expectations of what these things mean so that God could be heard, all these steps have led to marvelous discoveries by the author, all within a chapter the best bible scholars of the world readily admit befuddles them. But it isn't very large brains, vast amounts of wisdom, a Ph.D. education, or a very high IQ that led to these discoveries.  No, it was hard work, digging deep in the word of God and having an unassuming open minded innocent obedience in accepting and following God's directions that led to these discoveries. The innocent complete trust and eyes like those of a child. Who would of thought?

As of May 2009, the author has been studying this single chapter of the Bible for nearly 10 enthralling years of intensive investigation and collecting hard lessons learned. And now, this exciting study is carefully laid out to logically lead you to a full and complete understanding of Revelation 17, something that has never before been possible. And you will not have to spend 10 years to learn the same thing. You will be able to do it in a matter of hours!

May God open the eyes of your heart and show you His glory! You need only look with new eyes to see! All else has been laid open for you.

John 16:13 "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."

Daniel 12:4,9,10 "(4) But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. (9) And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. (10) Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.

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

John 8:32 "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

Let's go look for truth! Are you coming? If not now, don't wait long! Tick. Tick. Tick....

Unlocking Revelation 17

General Principles

First, there are a few guiding principles that must be discussed before we progress to studying Revelation 17.

Time Perspective of Revelation

With the exception of the introductory vision (the prologue), presented in Revelation 1, we are directly told that the remaining visions of Revelation were about the future, the time after John. It directly says as much when John wrote this in Revelation 4:1:

After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up here, and I will show you things which must be hereafter.

People have a strong tendency to forget this, but it is very important because it sets the time perspective of everything from Revelation 4:1 onward. Forgetting this can easily greatly alter the understanding of Revelation, so it is extremely important that the time perspective be correctly understood.  The rule for this is very simple: it is always about the future unless there is no other way it can be understood but to be in the past or present.

There is evidence within the messages to the seven churches in Revelation 2 - 3 which shows that they also are future relative to John's time. That evidence will not be presented here, but if you wish to learn more about it, read the seven churches of Revelation.

The prophecies of Daniel and Revelation begin with the prophet's own time and move forward from there. While prophets often deal with subject matter of their own time and their statements from God about these things were considered in Bible times to be prophetic, such prophecies were not a prediction of anything beyond their immediate time in most cases. Where such statements moved beyond the present or immediate near future, then such prophecies clearly take on the nature of predictiong something that cannot be known except by divine revelation. Prophecies involving time elements normally do not go backwards because then it is a revelation of the past and is not a prediction of the future. There is no purpose to that in Revelation because God knows we usually already know the past. Naturally, the past cannot be predicted because it has already happened.

John was told that he was to see things which will be "hereafter", which clearly refers only to his future. Therefore, from Revelation 4:1 onward, it must be understood that everything is about the future of John's time unless it can be absolutely proven to be a review of the past. The only topics which can meet that standard in the book of Revelation after Revelation 4:1 are the verses in Revelation 12 that clearly refers to the birth, life, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus to heaven, and the history of the dragon (who primarily represented Satan) starting with his life in heaven and moving forward to the ascension of Jesus into heaven (which clearly includes the secondary representation of the dragon as Pagan and Papal Rome). Virtually everything else John was shown and recorded from Revelation 4:1 onward was about the future from his point in time.  Any claim to the contrary should be looked upon with great suspicion because the angel, being from God, cannot lie to us about this.

Revelation follows a repeated pattern in which John was shown things that represented events beginning roughly in his own time, and then moved into the future. It presents events to the reader as if John was traveling forward through time and stopping at various points to get a view of what was going on. Whatever was happening at each stop was presented to the reader in symbolic form. This is very similar to the visions of Daniel 2, 7, and 8, in which much the same thing is done. The "time travel" continues forward until some important point in the vision is reached, and then the reader is taken back in time again, usually to a point in time shortly after the time of John, after which the entire process repeats. Each time John was taken forward in time, it usually covered roughly the same time period again but from a different perspective. Some shorter time hops are interspersed between the longer ones. The general pattern is that Revelation tells the story repeatedly from different perspectives, starting with John's own time and moving forward towards the future. 

The tricky part is correctly discerning the movement through time, both forwards and backwards as the story unfolds, a process that requires a correct understanding of the remainder of the Bible and what it teaches.

Methods of Interpreting Revelation

There are several different methods that people have used to interpret Revelation. Due to the obvious evidence that the book of Revelation is built upon the model presented in Daniel, which is the historicist method, this web site uses the Historicist method for interpreting both Daniel and Revelation.  If you wish to learn more about the various methods that have been employed by people over the years to interpret Revelation, then see methods of interpreting Revelation.

Revelation Is Structured Around Jesus Using Symbolism

Revelation 1 begins with a vision of Jesus standing among seven golden lamp stands with seven stars in his right hand and a sharp, two-edged sword that came out of his mouth. Though Jesus did not explain the sharp, two-edged sword in Revelation 1 (the Bible tells us elsewhere that it represents the Bible or the Word of God, which is "sharper than a two edged sword" - Hebrews 4:12), he did explain the seven stars and the seven golden lamp stands.

The key points of the introductory vision in Revelation 1 are:

• Revelation is based on symbols, so it should be seen primarily as a book of symbolism.
• Jesus himself is the heart and soul of those symbols because it directly says it is a revelation of Jesus.  Consequently, studying the symbols IS studying Jesus.
• Revelation will define most of the symbols for us just as Jesus immediately explained the symbols for John.

Therefore, we should always see things in Revelation as symbolic unless they clearly are literal. This is just the opposite of Daniel, where things should be seen as literal unless they clearly are symbolic. Studying the symbolism of Revelation is a study of Jesus because he is at the center of the symbolism, contrary to the opinion of some people who think that studying the symbolism of Revelation seems to leave Jesus out of it. The book of Revelation is, after all, the Revelation of Jesus Christ (Revelation 1:1), so why should Jesus not be at the center of the entire book and the symbols that are included within it?

Experts in Greek point to a word in Revelation 1:1 as another evidence that Revelation is a book of symbols. Here is the point that they make:

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Some Greek experts say that the word "signified" means "this is a book of symbols." This is something that we would do well to remember because doing so will significantly improve our understanding of Revelation.

Some people teach that Revelation should not be studied, but instead they should study only the life of Jesus. But the book of Revelation is a revelation of Jesus himself, so how can it be that one should not study it if one wants to study and understand Jesus? That makes no sense and contradicts known facts. Jesus himself said there is a blessing to those who study it (Revelation 1:3). Satan does NOT want you to understand Jesus, so therefore, if someone tells you not to study the book of Revelation for any reason, do not do as they tell you because Satan is speaking through them.  Do you want to listen to Satan?

The Core Issue of Revelation: Whom Do You Worship?

The principal issue in the book of Revelation is: whom do you worship? It presents two clear choices for every person and the consequences of those choices. By choosing whom you will worship, God or the devil or the devil's proxy power, you choose your ultimate destiny. Eternal life or eternal death is the choice God puts forward in this book for every person on earth.

This also informs us that political powers, their history and activities are not the central message of Revelation. Unfortunately, many think that Revelation's beasts center on political powers. But such a message is largely unneeded in Revelation because the book of Daniel centers on political powers and events surrounding them, which was done because God wanted to reveal how political powers were going to affect his people. In contrast with Daniel, in Revelation God principally focused upon religious powers and how they would use political powers to affect God's people. This is especially true in the last half of Revelation.

A Tale of Two Women Who Are Two Cities

The story in Revelation from chapters 12 through 20 is primarily centered around two women, the prostitute woman of Revelation 17 and the woman of Revelation 12 (who is commonly said to be pure because she does not fornicate with the kings of the earth, unlike the prostitute woman of Revelation 17), and the cities each of them represents, which are Babylon and the New Jerusalem respectively. Revelation could easily have been titled "A Tale of Two Women" or "A Tale of Two Cities." Either title is probably appropriate.

The battle between these two is at the heart of Revelation and is a battle that will continue until God brings this world's current history to a close when Jesus comes again. By choosing which "city" you give allegiance to, you make your choice for God or the devil. This is a battle between good and evil and the consequences for each person's choice on either side are eternal.

For many of the good choices that God has for us, the devil has his false counterpart that is designed to deceive people. The choice of cities one gives allegiance to is a choice between true Christianity, which Revelation places you as symbolically living in the New Jerusalem, and false, apostate Christianity, which Revelation places you as symbolically living in Babylon. It is a choice of whom you will worship, God or Satan, and how you will worship, God's way or Satan's way. Satan's way of worship is a counterfeit of true worship and will appear to be the true form of worship. In other words, it will appear to b the true form of Christianity and will even claim it is the true Christian Church, and yet it is a false church for it is not loyal to God. For many, choosing the false Christian Church will lead to loss of eternal life. Therefore, it is imperative that a person determine exactly how God wants us to worship him. Following his directions leads to eternal life. You cannot expect God to accept worship done just any way we please, for God has made it plain that we must do it according to his specific instructions, or it is not acceptable. If we worship him as we please, we risk losing everything, including our very lives for eternity. That lesson should be clearly evident in the experience of Nadab and Abihu in the Old Testament (see Leviticus 10:1-10) or in the experience of Cain and Abel as recorded in Genesis 4:1-16.

Who Really Wrote Revelation?

This section is not intended to answer the question of whether the individual who wrote Revelation was John. the disciple of Jesus, or someone else named John. Instead, the issue here has to do with the degree of participation of the author, John, in writing Revelation relative to the degree of participation God.

There are scholars who make comments such as "John meant _________ when he wrote_________." In light of such thinking, please consider for a minute whether the scholars can truly know what John meant? Consider also that such statements put a lot of emphasis upon what John meant rather than what God intended us to learn. Ultimately, did the vision come from John or God? Is the message of Revelation a message from John (did he make it all up) or is it a message from God?

First, how do the scholars know what John was thinking as he wrote Revelation? He didn't tell us much of anything about what he was thinking as he wrote and nobody can talk to him today to discover his thinking because he died about 1900 years ago. So, can they really know what he was thinking? The real answer is that truthfully they cannot know. Thus, any statements about what John meant when he wrote certain things in Revelation are almost entirely speculative. We should not be basing our beliefs on what John may or may not have been thinking but rather upon what he actually wrote. The things he wrote are descriptions of things that God showed him and told him to write.  Those things should be our focus point.

Second, John acted as a reporter when he wrote Revelation. He was not an interpreter or commentator. He tells us as much when he wrote this:

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and revealed it by his angel unto his servant John:
Revelation 1:2 Who bore witness of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

Revelation 1:19 Write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

He did not make up an explanation to fill in the gap when an explanation was not given to him about certain things.

Third, who scripted the visions John saw? Was it God, or was it John? I think we all know the answer to this question, or, at least, should know it. Absent the visions God created and gave to John, we would never have heard of the book of Revelation. Therefore, God is the author and what his intentions were with regards to any given issue in Revelation should be paramount in our thinking. John's intent anywhere in the book of Revelation is essentially irrelevant. John never said in Revelation that "I think the explanation of _________ is _________". Much of what we have in Revelation is that which he recorded, based on what he saw, heard or experienced in the vision which God showed him, except for those portions where God himself spoke or an angel spoke to him. Therefore, for those portions of Revelation where neither the angels nor God spoke, we should not be basing our understanding of Revelation on what people imagine John meant. Having the letters "Ph.D." or "Th.D." after one's name does not qualify one to know 1900 years after the fact what John meant when such information is not revealed to us (unless that Ph.D. happens to have access to a time machine and can actually go back in time and speak to John!)

Until more recent times, if a newspaper reporter for a major newspaper sprinkled his own commentary among news events he was reporting on, it was considered bad journalism because he was no longer reporting the facts, but was instead trying to sway your thinking in a particular direction. That is usually considered acceptable for a commentary where such is expected, but not in a news story. Since God was the source of the visions given to John, don't you think God would have done something about it if the book that John wrote contained his own ideas and thoughts so as to essentially change the message to fit his own viewpoint?

Some individuals go so far as to build up theological ideas based on what they think John or Daniel meant when they wrote parts of their respective books. However, given that this changes the nature of the message that God intended and either adds to it or removes from it, then in light of the warning that is given about changing the contents of the book of Revelation (Revelation 22:19), this is very serious. Such a warning would also apply to John, for, after all, he was given a message from Jesus to deliver to us. Would it then make sense for him to be adding his own commentary or slant when that very act would in fact alter the book of Revelation, which God directly warns us against doing? Therefore, it seems inconceivable that he was writing a commentary.

In summary, it is better to contemplate what God meant, rather than what John meant when we are studying the book of Revelation. To do otherwise will obscure the meaning of the message that God gave and can very subtly mislead our understanding of Revelation. It was not Daniel's or John's message in either book, but God's message. This is something we must never forget.

The Bible Defines Most Things For Itself

The last preliminary issue to discuss is that the Bible usually defines things for us, so we should use the Bible as the prime source of information and definitions. If nothing is said in the Bible about a particular thing we are trying to understand, then we must use sources outside the Bible to properly understand them. So, keep in mind that the Bible will be our primary source of information and wherever possible, it will be used to define the meaning of the symbols that appear within it.

Along with this, when studying Revelation, do understand that IF Revelation defines a symbol for you, then that definition of the symbol should always be used in Revelation instead of using a definition from another part of the Bible, unless the definition from Revelation clearly cannot fit in the verse in question.

For an example of how drastically the meaning of a vision can change if you fail to use the proper definitions the Bible gives for the symbols, consider that one symbolic meaning of waters is the Holy Spirit (John 7:37-38). Now, if you use this interpretation for the waters in Daniel 7, then you would have the four beasts arising from the Holy Spirit. Obviously, that does not make much sense, does it? Of course not! So, you should be able to see the point, which is that the symbolic meaning given in Revelation 17 for waters should always be applied first to both Daniel and Revelation to see if it makes sense before other possible symbolic definitions from other parts of the Bible are applied and tested to see if they make sense.  The same is true for other symbols of Revelation, that is, use the definition given in Revelation first, if one exists, before turning to other parts of the Bible for a definition.

The search order for symbol definitions in Revelation is this:

1. The book of Revelation.
2. The book of Daniel.
3. The remaining parts of the Bible.
4. History and archeology or other outside sources.

Just don't forget to actually use the definitions once you have them to test them out to be sure they fit in where you need them.  Use the definitions that fit and discard the remaining ones.

Keys To Unlock Revelation 17 - Page Index

To Main Menu

There are seven keys that lead to a full understanding of Revelation 17. Below is a numbered list of those keys. Each key will be covered in detail below. Links within this page are included here so that if you have to take a break from your study, you may easily return here and then jump to the section you have been reading. Between keys 6 and 7, the author has inserted an explanation of Revelation 17 that builds on the foundation of the first 6 keys. This is then followed by key 7 to complete the story.

1. The Biblical definition of blasphemy
2. The three primary powers presented in Revelation 17 and 18
3. The Beast Formula - how the Bible defines the beast
4. The simplified basic rules of interpretation for the beasts of Daniel and Revelation
5. Basic symbol definitions from Revelation 17 and 18
6. The 3 main environments of prophetic powers and what they symbolize



Let Us Put It All Together To Understand Revelation 17




• Revelation 17 in a Picture
• The First Phase of the Papacy
• The Second Phase of the Papacy



• The Desert Scene and the Kings of the Earth
• The Kings of the Earth
• The Desert Scene
• The Separate Parts of the Beast and the Miller Principle
• The 7 Heads



• The Third Phase of the Papacy



• The Ten Horns



• Crowns on Heads and Horns - What Are They?
• The Seven Heads of the Dragon What Are They
• How Do the 10 Horns Receive a Kingdom



• The eighth and the Returned Beast



• An Overview of Revelation 17



7. The final papal count - 666 - and its connection to Revelation 17
   
   
   • What do we know about 666 from the Bible?
   • The Papal Title Theory - Vicarius Filii Dei
   • The Triple Six Theory - 6-6-6
   • The Papal Name Count Discovery
   • The Papal Mountain Count Discovery (new, August of 2010)
   • Several Objections and Answers (new, August 2010)

End of Document Comments:

• What is ahead for America and the World?
• God's Final Warnings to Man
• Final Items of Interest

The seventh key completes the understanding of Revelation 17, so you will want to be sure to go through it.

As you read each of the first six keys, they may seem like disconnected pieces of information, but they all come together when they are used to decode the message in Revelation 17. So, if it seems a bit confusing, please be patient and go through each step so that you build a solid foundation. There is no shortcut to a full understanding of Revelation 17 because it is a chapter that has puzzled people for more than 1900 years and it is complex. But with a little effort on your part, learning to understand it will be a fascinating adventure. By starting this adventure, you will learn to understand things that you probably never thought possible to comprehend and you will see Revelation 17 in an entirely different light. Revelation 17 will no longer be an unsolvable puzzle that only the experts can understand. With the tools given to you in the material below, ANYONE can understand Revelation 17! In addition, many find that once they understand Revelation 17, other parts of Revelation begin to reveal themselves right before their very astonished eyes. It is as if a whole new world of understanding has suddenly opened up to them. Thus, there are multiple benefits to the study of Revelation 17. It will be an adventure worth your time.

Are you ready to begin this fascinating adventure?

To Main Menu

Key #1 - the Biblical Definition of Blasphemy

The sea beast of Revelation 13 and the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 both have names of blasphemy written on them. In Bible prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, things placed on the beasts such as words, wings, colors, and even the species of animal used to represent a power, always refers to behaviors of the powers the beasts represent. Use of such things can be a very effective means of facilitating identification of the power represented by a given beast. Therefore, since names of blasphemy are written upon both of these beasts and this refers to their behaviors, a good understanding of blasphemy should facilitate proper identification of the power represented by these beasts.

In Revelation 13:1, it says that there were names of blasphemy written upon the sea beast. Remember that Revelation is a book of symbols, so the word "name" in Revelation 13:1 almost certainly has symbolic meaning attached to it and is not literal. It turns out there is a symbolic meaning for the word "name" in Revelation which is consistent with the message of Revelation 13 and 14. The word "name" symbolizes "character" in Revelation 14:1, 5, so when it says that the sea beast of Revelation 13 and the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 have names of blasphemy written upon them, this tells you that these beasts have the character of blasphemy, or in other words, they consistently behave in a blasphemous manner.

If you ask people to define blasphemy, very frequently the answer they give is that blasphemy is "speaking against God" or "taking the prerogatives of God". But in essence this is the modern definition from the dictionary and is not fully representative of the definition given in the Bible. For comparison, here is the dictionary definition of blasphemy taken from the Merriam-Webster's year 2000 Collegiate Dictionary, computer edition:

1 a : the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God b : the act of claiming the attributes of deity
2 : irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable

The Bible defines blasphemy in terms of very specific behaviors and does not "generalize" the definition to cover all possible cases, unlike the dictionary definition. There is nothing wrong with generalizing the definition of most words, but that does not work where the beasts of Revelation 13 and 17 are concerned, for good reasons. It appears that God intended us to use a very carefully constructed Bible definition of blasphemy to help us better understand the behavior of the powers represented by these beasts.

The author began to question the use of the dictionary definition of blasphemy when he noticed that most of the beasts of Daniel and Revelation have no names of blasphemy written on them and were not said to speak blasphemy. Yet, the beast from the sea of Revelation 13 and the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 have names of blasphemy upon them. Whether the words are actually written on the beast or the beast is said to speak blasphemy, the result is the same: it describes the behavior of the beast in question.

The obvious question the author asked himself is this: Why do some beasts have blasphemy on them and others do not? Think about this for a minute. How does the dictionary definition answer this question? Perhaps the author is a little more dense than the average reader, but when the author first asked himself this question after attempting to apply the dictionary definition of blasphemy to understand the prophetic beasts, he discovered he could not differentiate between those beasts which had and those beasts which did not have names of blasphemy on them. In other words, some beast had names of blasphemy written upon them, while others did not and the dictionary definition did not make clear why the difference. The author found this rather disturbing as it is clear that God put the names of blasphemy on some of the beasts for a good reason. But what was that reason?  And why leave it off from other beasts?

If you read the vision recorded in Daniel 7 and then compare the behavior of the empires the beasts represented to the dictionary definition of blasphemy, it seems that three of the four empires represented in Daniel 7 should have names of blasphemy written on them, or they should have been said to speak blasphemy. Oddly enough, none of those beasts had blasphemy written on them nor were they said to have spoken blasphemy. Why?

Let us take a few paragraphs and examine why it is that the beasts of Daniel 7 should have names of blasphemy written upon them based upon the dictionary definition of blasphemy.

In the case of Babylon, the elements of blasphemy have their roots in the dream recorded in Daniel 2. In that dream, God showed Nebuchadnezzar the future of that area of the world by means of an image in which the head was gold, which represented Babylon, the chest and arms were silver, which represented the Medes and Persians, the belly and thighs were bronze (an alloy of copper and usually tin, but may have little or no tin and instead has other elements), which represented the Macedonian-Greek Empire of Alexander the Great, the legs were of iron, which represented Rome, and the feet were made of a mix of iron and clay, which represented a number of kingdoms that came into existence after the breakup of Rome. In the explanation, Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar that the head of gold represented him. Apparently, being associated with gold went to Nebuchadnezzar's head and he began to have some ideas of his own concerning the future rather than listening to God's declarations....

Due in part to a rebellion in his own palace, Nebuchadnezzar had an image constructed that was made of gold from top to bottom. He then had it erected and after gathering all his officials together, he ordered that they bow down and worship the image he had made. This became a test of loyalty to him.  If you bowed down to the image, you were to be considered loyal to Nebuchadnezzar. But if you refused, you were considered disloyal to Nebuchadnezzar and you were destined to become like burnt toast. Definitely not a pleasant prospect for anyone's future who would not bow down to the image!

For Nebuchadnezzar to build an image all of gold plainly indicated that he believed that his kingdom would not be replaced by others and would last until the end of time. This was done in defiance of God's declaration to the contrary. In Nebuchadnezzar's thinking, clearly, God had not gotten with Nebuchadnezzar's program! His kingdom would last at least until the end of this world and maybe, he perhaps hoped, just maybe forever! Can you imagine Nebuchadnezzar might have said, "God, I am in charge down here and you will have to go along with my improved plan!"

It seems Nebuchadnezzar thought he could order God around, which made him at least equal to, if not greater than God. Did that make Nebuchadnezzar into a deity in his own thinking? The author believes it does. Making the image of all gold and then ordering that everyone bow down and worship it strongly suggests that symbolically, they were worshipping Nebuchadnezzar when they bowed to it and worshipped it. After all, was he not said to be the head of gold? Then make it all of gold and make everyone worship it!   A great loyalty test for those he governed and a great way to boost his own ego, all at the same time. He surely was brilliant - in his opinion of himself.

Therefore, the image of gold, while it represented the gods of Babylon (Daniel 3:18), also apparently represented Nebuchadnezzar as a god. If nothing else, he did show insulting behavior towards God by making the image all of gold and by that very act, putting himself at the center of worship rather than putting the true God at the center of worship and it put his plan ahead of God's plan for the world. According to the dictionary definition, this behavior is blasphemy. It is showing contempt for God because Nebuchadnezzar defied God's declaration that his kingdom would be replaced by another. As far as Nebuchadnezzar was concerned, that was not going to happen.

Therefore, because Nebuchadnezzar committed blasphemy, as defined by the dictionary, the lion of Daniel 7, which also represented Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon, should have had names of blasphemy placed on it. Yet, strangely, there are no names of blasphemy on the lion. We are not told of any blasphemous behaviors it engaged in. Why? Did God forget something important? Or is it that there is something about blasphemy in the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation that we have not understood in the past because we were too busy trying to apply the dictionary definition and not paying attention to the fact that it really did not fit? Perhaps we should permit blasphemy to be defined by the the books of Daniel and Revelation for their own special purposes rather than trying to fit in a definition that is misleading because it was never intended to be used here?

Now let us move on to the kingdom of Alexander the Great.  According to a program aired on the History Channel (http://www.history.com/), Alexander the Great was a self-proclaimed god. According to the dictionary definition, this is blasphemy because it is taking on the attributes of deity. Yet the four headed leopard beast of Daniel 7 did not show names of blasphemy upon it and it did not show blasphemous behaviors in the vision. Why should this power in real life openly engage in behaviors that according to the dictionary are clearly blasphemous and yet not be shown with blasphemy upon it in the vision? Clearly, Alexander's behavior fitted the dictionary definition of blasphemy, so why is the beast that represented him and his kingdom not shown with names of blasphemy upon it? What decides that a beast is to be shown with names of blasphemy upon it in a vision while another has no names of blasphemy upon it?

Pagan Rome certainly committed blasphemy according to the dictionary definition. At least some of the emperors claimed to be gods. Some emperors did not claim this publicly but still permitted or required the public to worship them, sometimes on the penalty of death if people did not comply. Some required that they be directly worshipped. According to the dictionary definition, such behavior is blasphemy. And yet, again, like the lion of Daniel 7, the dreadful fourth beast of Daniel 7 did not have names of blasphemy upon it. Why not?

The Medes and Persians did not claim to be gods so they probably should not be said to have committed blasphemy. They were monotheistic in their beliefs and did not permit worship to be directed towards themselves. It is probably for this reason, among others, that the beast which represented them, the bear of Daniel 7, was not shown with names of blasphemy upon it and we have no record that they engaged in blasphemous behaviors according to the dictionary definition.

Given that God is omniscient (He knows everything there is to know), it became clear to the author that God would not have failed to tell Daniel and John something so important as whether or not a beast should have names of blasphemy upon it. So, the author concluded that using the dictionary definition of blasphemy does not work when it is used to explain the names of blasphemy upon the sea beast of Revelation 13 and the scarlet beast of Revelation 17, and the lack thereof upon other beasts. To put it simply, the dictionary definition simply does not work because it cannot properly distinguish between why some beasts have names of blasphemy on them and others do not.

The author concluded that in order to properly understand the symbolic meaning of the names of blasphemy on the beasts, it is necessary to understand exactly how God himself defines blasphemy for the beasts of Daniel and Revelation. Forget about the dictionary definition.  Forget about other definitions in the Bible that apply elsewhere.  Just find the definition used for Daniel and Revelation. Once that is understood, then the reasons for showing some beasts with names of blasphemy while other beasts do not have blasphemy upon them should become very clear.

This led the author into a very careful study of the Bible to learn its own definitions of blasphemy. There are some 8 different ways that the Bible defines blasphemy that the author was able to discern, all in terms of specific behaviors (if you wish to read into the details of this, click on this: Blasphemy - How the Bible Defines It , http://www.666man.net/Blasphemy_Bible_Definitions_of.html).

The clue to the definition of blasphemy that distinguishes between the beasts with blasphemy on them and those without it is found in Revelation 13:4, which says this:

Revelation 13:4 And they worshiped the dragon who gave power unto the beast: and they worshiped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?

This verse says that people worshiped the beast. In the Bible, when people worshiped something, it was because they considered it to be a god of some kind. Because people worshiped the sea beast, they must perceive it to be a god of some sort. Now, we know that the true God accused it of blasphemous behaviors. To understand this accusation lodged against it by God, please ask yourself the following questions: elsewhere in the Bible, is there a record of a god being accused of blasphemy and, if so, why was this god accused of blasphemy? What specific behaviors was this god accused of that constituted blasphemy?

Do you remember reading in the Bible that Jesus was accused of blasphemy? It is true! But, because he is God, this means we can look to his experience to help explain why the sea beast in Revelation 13, which people have perceived as a god, is accused of blasphemy.

After very careful study in the Bible, the author found that two specific behaviors, when used together, were sufficient to differentiate between prophetic beasts with and without names of blasphemy upon them. These two definitions come from Matthew 9:2 - 8, Matthew 26:62 - 65, and John 10:30-36.

Matthew 9:2 - 8 says the following:

Matthew 9:2 And, behold, they brought to him a man sick, a paralytic, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the paralytic; Son, be of good cheer; your sins be forgiven you.
Matthew 9:3 And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemes.
Matthew 9:4 And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Why think you evil in your hearts?
Matthew 9:5 For which is easier, to say, Your sins be forgiven you; or to say, Arise, and walk?
Matthew 9:6 But that you may know that the Son of man has power on earth to forgive sins, (then said he to the paralytic) Arise, take up your bed, and go unto your house.
Matthew 9:7 And he arose, and departed to his house.
Matthew 9:8 But when the multitude saw it, they marveled, and glorified God, who had given such power unto men.

Note that the central issue in the verses above was the claim of Jesus to have the authority to forgive sins against God's laws. Any person claiming such powers when he is not God is speaking blasphemy.

There was a second issue for which Jesus was said to speak blasphemy.  Please read the following:

Matthew 26:62 And the high priest arose, and said unto him, Answer you nothing? what is it which these witness against you?
Matthew 26:63 But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure you by the living God, that you tell us whether you be the Christ, the Son of God.
Matthew 26:64 Jesus said unto him, You have said so: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall you see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
Matthew 26:65 Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, He has spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now you have heard his blasphemy.

John 10:30-33 says this:

John 10:30 I and my Father are one.
John 10:31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
John 10:32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I showed you from my Father; for which of those works do you stone me?
John 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone you not; but for blasphemy; and because that you, being a man, make yourself God. John 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, You are gods?
John 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
John 10:36 Say you of him, whom the Father has sanctified, and sent into the world, You blaspheme; because I said, I am the Son of God?

The central issue in these verses was the claim of Jesus to be God. Any person claiming to be God is blasphemy, unless, of course, he really is God. The only human who ever lived on earth rightfully able to make that claim was Jesus because he is God in human form.

Some say that this is nothing more than the dictionary definition that says blasphemy is "the act of claiming the attributes of deity", which, to a degree, is true. However, using this dictionary definition alone to define the blasphemy on the beasts does not work to determine why some beasts have names of blasphemy on them and others do not. More is necessary to properly make the distinction. If you do not believe the author, then try it for yourself. The author has done this and found that you cannot tell why the beasts with blasphemy on them should have it and the others do not when you use the dictionary definition of blasphemy.

Some people have claimed to be the true God himself. The author is not speaking of insane people here, but rather of influential, powerful, religious figures of past history, and even some in the world today. How do we know whether they speak the truth or not?

To help us understand whether or not they speak the truth, the Bible tells us the following in Isaiah 42:

Isaiah 42:5 Thus says God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which comes out of it; he that gives breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk in it:
Isaiah 42:6 I the LORD have called you in righteousness, and will hold your hand, and will keep you, and give you for a covenant to the people, for a light to the Gentiles;
Isaiah 42:7 To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.
Isaiah 42:8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.
Isaiah 42:9 Behold, the former things have come to pass, and new things do I declare: before they spring forth I tell you of them.

It should be noted that these verses plainly speak of the things that God has done, his creative ability, and the ability to predict the future. By doing this, God is speaking of his position as God and his natural ability to be God because of the kind of being he is. But very significant is that in verse 8 he makes it plain that he will not give his glory to another. He says that just after saying his name is the Lord, which is another way of saying that he is God. In essence, he is making it very plain that he will never make another created being into a God like himself AND he will never give or delegate his authority as God to another being. Nothing in all the universe in all of eternity can ever reverse this declaration of God.

As a direct result of this, anyone on earth, other than Jesus, who claims to be God OR who claims God has delegated his authority as God to him is, in fact, a liar. God will never contradict himself in regards to this issue. The Bible says that it is impossible for God to lie (Hebrews 6:18). Inasmuch as God says that he does not change (Malachi 3:6), you can know he will never give his authority as God to any other being, no matter who they claim to be.

Thus, if someone tells you that their church leader has been given authority as God directly from God or Jesus, or even indirectly through an apostolic line of authority, to act in place of God himself with God's full authority, don't believe it because God has already told us he will never grant such authority to anyone, anywhere, anytime. Even if they produce a text from the Bible that appears to substantiate their claim, do not believe it because the text is being used to contradict what God has already said. Such an act attempts to make a liar out of God even if the person making the claim does not realize it. They are twisting scripture to make it say that which God never intended it to say. God will not lie and will never contradict himself.

In summary, here are the working definitions of blasphemy from the Bible in Revelation which, when used together, allow you to correctly explain why some beasts have blasphemy upon them and why others do not:

It would be a very good idea to make a note of these two definitions as it will help in your study of the beasts of Daniel and Revelation. Remember that both definitions must be applied to a beast to be able to determine why it has or does not have names of blasphemy on it.

The beasts of Daniel 7 did not have names of blasphemy upon them because their leaders did not claim both to be God and to have authority to forgive sins against God's laws. For the same reasons, the dragon of Revelation 12 and the earth beast of Revelation 13 were not shown with words or names of blasphemy upon them. But, because the sea beast of Revelation 13 and the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 did have blasphemy upon them, then you can know that they claimed both of these powers. There is more discussion of the implications of this later on this page.

There is a second way to know that the blasphemy definition given above is correct.  Many claim that the definition of blasphemy given in the dictionary is the only one that applies, so the definition given above is not valid. However, that is a false claim because Revelation takes care of that claim and shows that the definition above is in fact correct.  Here is how it does that through the use of the dictionary definition to lead us back to the definitions just given.

To show that the definition derived here is correct, we must look at a second way to define Blasphemy from Revelation 13.  To do that, let us do a little comparison.  Consider the comparison of the first beast beast of Revelation 13 to Jesus.   Note the things in the following table:

In case you are questioning the 3-1/2 year ministry of Jesus shown in the table above, consider that he was baptized in the fall of 27 A.D. (see history books and Luke 3:1-2).  Then consider that this was followed by four recorded passover feasts in the book of John, all of which occurred in the spring (John 2:13, John 6:4, John 11:55, John 18:28).  This means that between his baptism and the first of the four passovers, approximately six months elapsed. The first passover was then followed by three more, each a year apart. Thus, his ministroy was approximately 3-1/2 years in length, or 1260 days.

As you should be able to see in the table above, there are things that the beast does to emulate Jesus, but in some things, the beast does exactly the opposite of what Jesus does. Now, the Antichrist is someone that people think will be against Christ because the prefix "anti-" means "against".   Thus, they think he will be a Godless ruler or charismatic leader of some type who will rise up against Christ.   Some even think he is a Muslim.  This concept that he will act against Christ is entirely true, but is not the whole story of what this prefix means. 

Let us illustrate this to help you understand the full concept of what the word Antichrist really means, so please consider this:  Suppose someone hands you a tray with two drinking glasses with liquid in them on the tray.   Both have a liquid in them for you to drink, and you are very thirsty so you want to drink one of them immediately.  You can take your pick of either one to drink.   But before you pick up either glass of liquid, you notice something very disturbing about one of them. One glass of liquid on the tray appears to be just plain water, but it has a label on it that causes your heart to skip a few beats because the label clearly says in very obvious, big letters, "POISON".  Yikes!  You don't want to drink that glass of liquid!  So you look at the other glass on the tray.  This glass has no label saying that it is poison and it is a drink that looks very delicious.  Unfortunately, unknown to you, it also has a poison in it. Naturally, you might be a bit suspicious of this one, but it looks very good and does not say it is poison and you are extremely thirsty and hot (it is a hot day), so you pick it up and drink it down.  And you drop dead later because this drink also was poisoned, but was disguised to make it look very good and innocent.  It looked so good, tasted so good, was cool and refreshing because it had a few ice cubes in it, and you were as good as dead the moment you finished it!

Of course, both glasses of drink will kill you if you drink either of them, but it should not be hard to understand that the glass with the delicious looking liquid in it WITHOUT a label that says "Poison", is far more dangerous to anyone because it fools you. It looks to be very good for you, but is actually poison and will kill you.   Because you are so thirsty and hot, it is very enticing.  For that reason, you will very likely drink it and then die.  It should not be hard to understand that you would not drink the glass containing the drink which is clearly labeled poison.

Now, this illustration is not perfect.   One look at the first glass should be enough to tell you that you don't want to drink anything at this place, so most people know that they should leave immediately and find water elsewhere where it is safe.   But the illustration teaches a lesson that is important. A similar thing is true about the Antichrist.   If he were some charasmatic leader who is clearly not a Christian and acts directly against Christ, much of the Christian world would probably see this person for who he really is because he is what you see.  They would not be fooled by him and would stay away from him, charisma or not. But the Antichrist is much smarter than that. He can best destroy you by appearing to be a good Christian while at the same time working to destroy the work of Christ in a hidden manner so that you don't see it, but are harmed by it nonetheless.   Impossible, you say, because the prefix "anti-" means "against"?  Well, yes it does mean that but, think again!  It means a whole lot more!

The prefix "anti-" also means "to stand in the place of another".   It should be clear from the comparison above that God sees this power, the beast, as standing in the place of Christ because there are many characteristics of both that are like one another, such as the 3-1/2 year ministry, the baptism, the "death", the rising from "death", and so on, and God is trying to make that point abundantly clear to us.   Where it matters most is where the beast is trying to do the things that Jesus does which make our salvation possible.   The beast claims to have the sanctuary service, meaning that it creates its own sacrifice, obtains forgiveness for our sins, and substitutes itself in place of God as God and as the forgiver of sins.   Thus, it is substituting itself in place of Christ.   It can fool the best, but there is no salvation in this.  Some of its behaviors are clearly against Christ, but that does not stop it from substituting itself in place of Christ as well, all the while fooling you in the process concerning its identity.   Many have been fooled by it, so that is not unusual. The important thing is to learn how to unmask the Antichriast so that you can plainly see who it is.  That is the reason this web page was written, to help you unmask the Antchrist so you can identify him and avoid him and the danger he presents to you. 

You see, it is like the delicious looking drink that was not labeled "poison".   Such a drink is very dangerous to you because it can fool you into drinking it and yet kill you. The beast is like that because it looks Christian, it has many of the teachings of Christ, claims to be the true church and even has evidence that it has the authority of Christ, and yet it has teachings that are poisonous to your salvation. The Antichrist will do this.   Therefore, the Antichrist will come from within the Christian community.

This is why the Bible gives such strong warnings against the beast.  You can easily recognize a drink labeled "POISON" if you see the label, but not one that looks good and is poisonous and is not labeled. Likewise with the beast. 

Do understand that the Bible says there are many Antichrists, which is true. But there is the final and most important one that will occur just before Jesus comes again. This final Antichrist will be more dangerous than the others, so he and all who follow him (including churches who follow him), must be avoided. This means you must avoid the mark of the beast and learn to identify the image of the beast as well, because if you do not, you will lose your salvation. The Bible makes that very plain.  Great deception will be used to deprive you of your salvation.   For reasons not explained here, it is of the highest interest of Satan to make sure that happens to you.

The beast is not just against Christ, but it IS the Antichrist because it puts itself in place of Christ. That is well within the dictionary definition of blasphemy, which says that blasphemy is

1 a : the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God b : the act of claiming the attributes of deity
2 : irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable

Source: Merriam-Webster's 2000 Collegiate Computer Dictionary.

Clearly, the beast claims the attributes of deity because it is said to be worshipped AND the evidence of the table above shows that it clearly stands in the place of Christ in the way that God presents it to us. We should be able to see that God is trying to tell us that it will claim to be God and to have authority to forgive sins against God's laws just as Jesus did while on earth and continues to do in heaven through his ministry in the heavenly sanctuary.  This supports the definition of blasphemy given in Revelation 13 for the words of blasphemy written on the beasts (or spoken) being that it is the claim to both be God AND to be able to forgive sins against Gods laws.  The Catholic Church in the person of the popes completely fulfills these requirements.

Finally, there is a third way to define blasphemy in Revelation 13 using the standard dictionary definition of blasphemy which leads back to the definitions given above.  Please read the following verse:

Rev 13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.

Here John was told first that the beast will speak blasphemy against God.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

Key #2 - The Three Primary Powers of Revelation 17 and 18

Revelation 17 and 18 describe events that lead right up to the second coming of Jesus. As that event approaches, Satan will do all in his power to influence the powers that be on this earth to bring pressure against anyone not in conformity with his wishes. He will do this because it is in his own best interest. Of course, Satan's own best interest is not really in the best interests of any person on earth, but Satan does not care about that because he is thinking only of himself. The nature of sin is to do whatever it takes to get what you want without consideration for others, a principle which will ultimately control you if you ever give in to it. Sin controls Satan, so he will do whatever he needs to accomplish his objective.

Because all major forms of power that occur in societies will play a part in the final events of earth's history, it is logical that they should be presented as players in the events described in Revelation 17 and 18. And it turns out that they are part of the story told there. Most people do not realize this, but it is true. If you don't understand who the players are in this vision, how can you possibly understand it? Therefore, it is a good idea to learn about them and how they are presented.

There are exceptions, but over the course of human history, these three primary powers are quite evident in nearly all human societies. This ranges from small villages to the largest nations and empires on earth.

Let us now define the three primary powers listed in Revelation 17 and 18 directly from the Bible. They are:

• Kings of the earth - Daniel 7:17 explains the kings of the earth. It says:
  

  These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.

  This verse informs the reader that the leaders of the four beasts of Daniel 7 were "kings" who "arise out of the earth". There once was a time when the author read this verse, he wondered what the phrase "arise out of the earth" actually meant. The meaning is neither obvious nor intuitive by itself. Clearly, the phrase cannot be literal because kings don't literally come up out of the ground to rule a kingdom, so it must be symbolic of something. The four beasts of Daniel 7 were said to rise from the waters, so the four kings rising from the earth certainly cannot be the same thing and the earth cannot be the same as the waters. The earth must be symbolic just as the waters are symbolic. Yet the kings are connected to the beasts by the verse in Daniel 7:17. So, what does the phrase "arise out of the earth" symbolize?
  
  One day, while studying Revelation 17, the author noted the phrase "kings of the earth" (Revelation 17:2, 18) and remembered the nearly identical phrase from Daniel 7:17. After some study of the function of these two phrases in Daniel 7:17 and Revelation 17:2, 18, it became obvious that the kings of Daniel 7 which rise out of the earth of Daniel 7 are the same type of thing as kings of the earth in Revelation 17. This can be summarized as:
  
  kings of the earth = kings which arise from the earth
  
  After additional careful study, It became abundantly clear to the author that the two nearly identical phrases are a literary device by which God intended the reader to link the two phrases together, which in turn should cause the reader to link the two verses together. God's apparent intent is that the phrases and associated verses should help explain each other.
  
  It should be obvious that the kings who ruled the four kingdoms represented by the four beasts were political rulers of political kingdoms. Therefore, the kings of the earth in Revelation 17 are political rulers of political kingdoms. Nothing in Revelation 17 contradicts that conclusion.
  
  Now let us increase our understanding of the meaning behind the phrase "kings which shall arise out of the earth". Read Daniel 7:17 and the first part of Daniel 7:24:
  

  Daniel 7:17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.
  Daniel 7:24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise . . . .

  In Daniel 7:24, the 10 horns are called "kings", just like those of Daniel 7:17. The definition of the word king is not changed anywhere between Daniel 7:17 and Daniel 7:24. Therefore, the term kings in Daniel 7:17 for the four beasts and the first half of Daniel 7:24 for the 10 horns has an identical meaning - they are "kings . . . which shall arise out of the earth", meaning that the kings in both of these verses were the political leaders of their respective empires and nations.
  
  However, we have not considered the second half of Daniel 7:24. What does it say and what does it mean?
  
  

  Daniel 7:17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.
  Daniel 7:24 . . .and another shall rise after them [the ten horns]; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

  Note that there is a big difference between the "kings . . . which shall arise out of the earth" in verse 17 and the "diverse king" that follows in the second half of Daniel 7:24. The fact that it is diverse (which means "different") from the 10 kings and the four beasts changes the definition of the word king. This means there are two types of kings in Daniel 7, which are:
  
  
  • Political Kings of the nations, the kings who arise out of the earth
  • Kings who are not political leaders of the nations. These must be a religious king, the diverse king.
  
  The kings of the earth of Revelation 17:2, 18, which are linked to the "kings . . . which shall arise out of the earth" of Daniel 7:17, must be political leaders of the nations. There is no difference between them. Remember this:
  
  Kings of the earth = Political leaders of the nations
  
  The political kings of Daniel 7 are said to arise out of the earth for several reasons, among them being that the political leaders do not normally lead the Christian churches (there are a few exceptions to this). Their main task in life is more earthly instead of heavenly. Moreover, the earth in Daniel 7 and 8 symbolizes both nations and a stable, established government in most cases. This can be contrasted to the environment of the woman of Revelation 12, a symbol of a religious power, who is placed in the heavens to indicate that her standing in the sight of God is like that of Jesus and her main task in life is of a heavenly nature rather than merely a mundane earthly nature. This symbolism also indicates that her origin is with God rather than earthly, or in other words, she came about because of an action that God did directly rather than by the will and action of man. Therefore, she is religious in nature rather than political.
  
  The kings do not rise out of the waters because they are not peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. They are individuals who, together with those who inherit their thrones, help form lines of kings that lead each of the nations or empires that they rule. Kings always represent lines of kings rather than individual kings. That kings are lines of kings is demonstrated by the simple fact that King Nebuchadnezzar was said to be the head of gold in Daniel 2, but the gold head also represented continuous time from his time until the end of the Babylonian empire. Nebuchadnezzar was not the first and last king of Babylon, but rather he founded a line of several kings who ruled Babylon until the Medes and Persians conquered and occupied Babylon. Therefore, he represented the entire line of kings who ruled Babylon from his time until its fall to the Medes and Persians years later.
  
  The earth, which the beasts of Daniel 7 and 8 walked upon after they came out of the waters, symbolized the "nations" (the word "kingdom" can also be used in place of "nations") and secondarily can represent established, stable governments that usually settled in once an empire was formed. Therefore, the kings of the earth rise out of the earth because they rise out of their nations and also because they rose out of their stable, established governments. The latter should be logical because they inherited their positions in most cases from their fathers.
  
  
• Merchants of the earth - Revelation 18 refers to the "merchants of the earth", who it says are the "great men of the earth" (Revelation 18:23) and that they buy and sell goods and convey them to and from Babylon (Revelation 18:11-19) using their ships. This clearly implies that Babylon is on the waters when this activity is being carried out. These verses refer to them as "your merchants", meaning they are merchants who sell for or also to the woman. This phrase does not restrict them to selling only for the woman and the fact that they have ships implies that they transport "goods" to other cities as well as bring goods to Babylon for sale there. Remember that Revelation 17 says that the woman has daughters. If she is a city, then they too are cities, so the merchant's goods could also be bought and sold by them.
  
  Because the word earth is symbolic in the phrase "merchants of the earth", then this is saying that these are "merchants of the nations." This is probably symbolic of large business enterprises that do business with the woman.
  
  Evidence that they sell things to the woman is found in the list of goods they have for sale and in the things she has. For example, they have scarlet and fine linen to sell and the woman is clothed with scarlet and fine linen. This implies that she obtains these things from the merchants of the earth.
  
  The Bible says in Revelation 18:23 that the merchants of the earth are the "great men of the earth." This clearly does not refer to the political leaders because those are already labeled as kings of the earth. Because these are obviously merchants, they are not religious leaders. Remember that the definition from Revelation must take precedence over any other definition elsewhere in the Bible, so the information given in Revelation 18 clearly tells us that these men who buy, sell and transport goods must be leading business men. They are the leading economic and business powers of societies and the nations.
  
  
• Kings and queens - Everybody assumes that the "kings" of Revelation 17 (verses 10-14, 16, and 17) should be placed in the same category as the "kings of the earth". They believe that the kings are the same as the kings of the earth and that both are political leaders. But that belief is in fact nothing more than an assumption and is incorrect. People often tend to believe this assumption because they have certain preconceived ideas of interpretation of Revelation 17 that requires the kings to be the same as the kings of the earth. But, that sets the outcome before they have even examined the evidence for the identity of these powers, which is a bias that is faulty from the outset. If a person is genuinely looking for truth, one must be open to examining the evidence before one's mind is made up.
  
  So, what is the evidence regarding the identity of the kings? To understand their identity, a comparison of terms must be done. Here is how to do that. Many people believe that the woman represents a religious power, which the author will show evidence for elsewhere. The woman says that she is a queen (Revelation 18:7). But nobody ever notices that she does NOT call herself a "queen of the earth" (Revelation 18:7). IF she had called herself a "queen of the earth", this would mean that she is a political queen of a nation (remember that the phrase "of the earth" in the phrase "kings of the earth" means "of the nations" or "of the stable, established governments" ). Because she titles herself a "queen" instead of "queen of the earth", this tells us her role is that of a religious queen, which is consistent with other evidence that her primary role is that of a religious power rather than a political power.
  
  This does not deny that the woman has political power, but rather it is taking the evidence that God gives us at face value. He considers her primary role to be a a religious power and we should leave it at that rather than trying to reconfigure her into a political power. Remember that the woman fornicates with the kings of the earth, which is how she obtains political power - she uses the political power of others for her own ends. If she were primarily a political power, she would not need to do that.
  
  Now, what bearing does this have on understanding the identity of the kings? Note that the phrase "kings of the earth" makes these kings political kings of the nations and the term "queen" makes the woman a religious power rather than a political queen of a nation. The fact that the woman is called a queen rather than a queen of the earth which helps identify her as a religious power, informs us that likewise the "kings" must be religious kings (leaders of religions) rather than political kings of the nations. This is true for the very same reason that the woman is not a political queen - the "kings" lack the attached phrase "of the earth" as part of their title. As a result, the kings cannot be the same as the kings of the earth. It is impossible. The kings are religious kings or religious leaders rather than political kings. That being the case, we should not look to the leaders of the nations to see these kings for they will not be found there. We must look to the leadership of the various Christian religions to find them. The author will deal with their more specific identity later, but the information here is sufficient to let us know that the kings and queens are religious in nature rather than political. This drastically changes how we perceive Revelation 17.
  
  Note that the woman has daughters and, because she is a religious queen, they too are religious queens and therefore are religious powers. More on this later.

Here is a summary table to help you picture this information.

Remember these three important points:

• Kings of the earth = political leaders of the nations or stable, established governments
• kings and queens = religious leaders or powers
• Merchants of the earth = business leaders of the nations

Many individuals think that the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 is another primary power, so they will think that the author has omitted an important category of power. But, while it is a power to be reckoned with, it is a composite power made up from several other powers, so is not a primary power. Therefore, it will be covered in the next section.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

Key #3 - the Beast Formula

There is a general misunderstanding of the exact identity of the sea beast of Revelation 13. The same is even more true of the scarlet beast of Revelation 17. This section will show you how the Bible actually defines the beasts for you so that there need be no question about the identity of either beast. That way, if you find a web site that, for example, says Prince Charles of Great Britain is the sea beast of Revelation 13 (there is, or at least has been in the past, such a web site!), you know they guessed and did not study their Bible carefully enough.

The reason the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 is not listed as one of the three primary powers is that the Bible defines the scarlet beast as a composite power, meaning that it is a combination of two primary powers, with one of them as the dominant power. Most people never notice this and think of the scarlet beast as a single, primary power. It is also true that there are those who do understand that the Revelation 13 sea beast is a composite power, but have never come to understand that this is also true of the Revelation 17 scarlet beast. Many also do not realize that the sea beast of Revelation 13 and the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 represent the same power. Evidence for all of this is presented in this section.

Something that often happens when discussion of the scarlet beast comes up is that when people are told that the sea beast of Revelation 13 and the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 represent the same composite power, they tend to get hung up on the fact that the sea beast of Revelation 13 looks very different than the scarlet beast of Revelation 17. They believe that if these beasts represent the same power, then they should look the same. Because of the difference in appearances of the two beasts, they conclude that they represent different powers.

Those who cannot seem to get past the different appearance of the two beasts usually forget that God showed Daniel different beasts in Daniel 7 and 8 to represent the same powers. For example, the goat of Daniel 8 represents the same power as the four headed leopard of Daniel 7. Obviously, there is a huge difference in appearance between a leopard and a goat! Therefore, there is precedent for God to show different beasts to represent the same power. Consequently, if the two beasts in Revelation 13 and 17 look different, that does not mean they necessarily represent different powers. One must determine their identity by other means, such as their behavior.

On the other hand, there are those who notice the apparently identical set of 7 heads and 10 horns on both beasts. From this they conclude that these beasts are the same or that at least the heads and horns are the same. This observation is correct and is helpful to such individuals.

To begin the exploration of the Beast Formula, please note that both the sea beast of Revelation 13 and the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 have names of blasphemy on them. Many people take note of this and sometimes conclude that the names of blasphemy are literal. However, Revelation is a book of symbolism, something that Jesus demonstrates at the very beginning of the book in chapter 1. The word name usually symbolizes the word character in Revelation (see Revelation 14:1, 5). Consequently, the names of blasphemy on the body and heads of both beasts indicates that a fundamental character trait of these powers is to commit blasphemy. Remember that things placed on beasts (such as wings, for example) indicates their behavior, so names of blasphemy placed on any given beast indicates its behavior traits.

The sea beast spoke blasphemy during the 1260 days it had power (Revelation. 13:5), which refers to its behavior during that time. Its heads also had names of blasphemy upon them, which refers again to the behaviors of the heads when they are in power. The horns were not said to have blasphemy upon them for either beast, so they behave in such a way that God does not mark them with names of blasphemy. In addition, the scarlet beast is said to have names of blasphemy all over it (the body and heads but not on the horns). What does this mean? Does the blasphemy somehow tie these two beasts together?

Let us review blasphemy as it is defined in the Bible to enable us to discern the identity of the beasts which have names of blasphemy upon them. Blasphemy is defined in the Bible to be:

• Claiming to be God AND
• Claiming to be able to forgive sins against God's laws (remember: neither man's laws nor the "laws" of a false god have anything to do with this)

Consider this, please: what significant power has existed on earth beginning relatively soon after the time of John (say, within a few hundred years) and remains until the present day and which has claimed both of these powers during most of its existence?

There is only one such power known in history: the Roman Catholic Church.

The beasts which have blasphemy on them point directly to the Roman Catholic Church. This absolutely must be true because there is only one significant power on earth that claims both powers which define blasphemy. Thus, whether we like it on not, they are "it".

The Catholic Church claims to be able to forgive sins against God's laws. Catholics are required to confess their sins to a priest to obtain forgiveness for them. This is based on the priests' claim to be able to forgive sins and that the Bible tells us that we are to confess our sins to Jesus in order to obtain forgiveness. The Bible says that Jesus is our high priest in heaven (Hebrews 2:17, 4:15-16), so to make sure that the Catholic believer is confessing his sins to Christ, the Catholics claim that the priests are another Christ (think of how many Christs this makes walking around on earth, all at the same time).

Some may have doubts that the Catholics claim this power, so for evidence that they do claim this power, here are some statements of authoritative Catholic sources to show that this is true:

"And God himself is obliged to abide by the judgment of his priest and either not to pardon or to pardon, according as they refuse to give absolution, provided the penitent is capable of it." -Liguori, «Duties and Dignities of the Priest», p.27

The basis for this is that the priest is "another Christ". This is a declaration that they, as Christ, are the forgiver of sins. In some more recent Catholic statements the author has seen, it appears that they try to explain this away by saying that the forgiveness of sins is ultimately still done by Christ, but interposing an earthly priest seems to take the duty away from Jesus and clearly is contrary to the Bible because the Bible does not teach that we need an intercessor to obtain forgiveness of sins after the death of Jesus.

In the New Testament, there is no authority for positioning an earthly priest between the sinner and God like there was in the Old Testament. In fact, we are told to come directly to God to obtain mercy and forgiveness of sins (Hebrews 4:15-16), so placing a priest in the pathway violates what God has already commanded. Moreover, since they teach the priest that he is another Christ, then it seems that if Christ does the forgiveness of sins, the priest is the Christ who forgives the sins of the sinner. Truthfully, there is only one Christ, so saying that the priest is another Christ is to say that he is Christ himself, unless, of course, they want to introduce more Gods beyond the trinity than they say they believe in. It appears they cannot escape this simple fact of logic.

Saying that the forgiveness of sins is still ultimately done by Christ seems to confuse the issue and contradicts their statement that the priest is another Christ. Either the priest is or he is not another Christ and the real Christ does the forgiveness of sins ultimately. If the priest is the real Christ, then the forgiveness must be done by him according to their beliefs and Jesus in heaven has nothing further to do with it. Otherwise the priest has no such authority. To say that Jesus in heaven ultimately does the forgiveness of sins seems to say that the priest is not a real Christ and therefore not needed. So, which is it?

Clearly, from their own educational text for the priests, this is not a duty passed off to God. The priest is not a mere conduit for the forgiveness of sins, but is an active participant and is taught that God is obligated to obey the decision of the priest to grant or not grant forgiveness of sins. Clearly, this sidesteps the authority and active participation of Jesus, for if the priest has these powers and actually is another Christ, then there is no need for Jesus in the process. The power to forgive sins is explained to be a direct power that the priest possesses. It can hardly be plainer as to who is actually supposed to be doing the forgiveness of sins in these situations. Clearly, they teach that It is the priest who obtains it from God instead of Jesus.

The Bible says that only God has the power to forgive sins. Here is what it says:

Mark 2:7 Why does this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?

The Bible also says that we may come directly before God (obviously through prayer) to obtain mercy from God. We need mercy when we have sinned, so this is saying that we may go directly before God to obtain forgiveness for our sins. We do not need to go through an earthly priest. We have direct access to God. Here is what the Bible has to say about this:

Hebrews 4:14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
Hebrews 4:15 For we have not a high priest who cannot be touched with the feeling of our weaknesses; but was in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin.
Hebrews 4:16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

The Bible plainly says that Jesus is our advocate before God. This disallows an earthly priest because it says that there is only one who is able to go before God, and that person is the one and only Jesus in heaven. Consider that Jesus in heaven is the only one who has access to the literal presence of God. There is no other.

1 John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that you sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

Any way you look at it, IF the Catholic priests can indeed effect forgiveness of sins, then the Bible, which is God's word, is a liar. Does God lie? Something to think about, is it not? If he does lie, then he is not trustworthy. But, if he tells us the truth, then those who claim that they can do what God says they cannot, are not telling us the truth.

The Catholic Church has also claimed that the Pope and the priests are God.

Perhaps you don't believe that this is true. You may say, "That is blasphemy, so surely they would not be guilty of such a claim!" Indeed, we have received letters from individuals stating that this cannot possibly be true because to make such a claim is blasphemy. Unfortunately, it is true. Just so you know, here are several statements by their own officials and popes about this (color coding of certain phrases done by the web site author):

"The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh." Catholic National July 1895.

"We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" ...Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894,

"For thou art the shepherd, thou art the physician, thou art the director, thou art the husbandman, finally thou art another God on earth." Labbe and Cossart's "History of the Councils." Vol. XIV, col. 109

The title "Lord God the Pope" is found within a gloss of Extravagantes of Pope John XXII, title 14, chapter 4,

"The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth." Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, "Cities Petrus Bertanous".

"Of what sublime dignity is the office of the Christian priest who is thus privileged to act as the ambassador and the vicegerent of Christ on earth! He continues the essential ministry of Christ; he teaches the faithful with the authority of Christ, he pardons the penitent sinner with the power of Christ, he offers up again the same sacrifice of adoration and atonement which Christ offered on Calvary. No wonder that the name which spiritual writers are especially found of applying to the priest is that of 'alter Christus.' For the priest is and should be another Christ" (Faith of Millions, John O'Brien, Ph.D., LL.D., 268-269, "nihil obstat" by Rev. T. E. Dillon-Censor Librorum and "imprimatur" by John Francis Noll, D.D. -Bishop of Fort Wayne).

Remember what Jesus said about such claims? Here is his statement:

Matthew 24:4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
Matthew 24:5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

Matthew 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; so that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
Matthew 24:25 Behold, I have told you before.
Matthew 24:26 Therefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
Matthew 24:27 For as the lightning came out of the east, and shines even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Remember what God says about this claim to be God? He said he will NOT give his glory to another, meaning that he won't make any created being into a God AND he will never delegate his authority as God to another created being. If God tells us the truth (remember that the Bible says it is impossible for God to lie and God says he will never change), then no pope and no priest is God and none of them is another Christ. It simply is not possible, in spite of their claims.

Please do not misunderstand our altitudes towards Catholics because we show you evidence of their claims. There are many good, wonderful people in the Catholic Church whom the author believes will be in heaven. God loves these people just as much as anyone else in this world. God is very much in the business of saving people, not destroying them. But we also know that the Catholic Church hierarchy is teaching things that the Bible directly contradicts. Either they are right and God is wrong, or else they are wrong and God is telling the truth. You get to make the choice about which you want to believe.

All Christians owe much to the Catholic Church because they did preserve the Bible and knowledge of God during the dark ages. The also set up many of the educational institutions in Europe that over the centuries have helped many through life. And even today, they carry out humanitarian work that does a lot of needed good for people all around the world. We believe that God will take note of these things in the judgment and will not forget them. Many within that church are living up to the light they have on the truth about God to the best of their ability. God knows this and will take that into consideration when deciding their future.

The Catholics teach that truth is based on both the Bible AND tradition. But the Bible gives the basic standard by which all truth (old and new) and all tradition is to be tested, regardless of the source. It says:

Isaiah 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Therefore, any tradition or new truth must conform to what has previously been said by God in his word - the Bible. If it does not conform to what God has already said, then it is false information and is not to be believed. Any tradition of ANY church that does not conform to this standard is not to be believed regardless of who it comes from or the circumstances under which it arises. God is the final authority in this universe and has already said that he will not delegate his authority to anyone else (Isaiah 42:8). Therefore, NOBODY can change the standard God has set up in Isaiah 8:20. That means that no pope or priest can change the standard and no tradition of the church can change it either. Neither can a church president, prophet, or anyone else change the standard that God has set up in Isaiah 8:20. Remember, God says "I change not" (Malachi 3:6), so this disallows changes to his laws or pronouncements of truth. Therefore, church traditions cannot change what God has already said in the Bible, a fact which can NEVER be changed by anyone in all of eternity.

It should be very clear to you by now that both the body and heads of the sea beast of Revelation 13 and the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 are primarily Papal. There should be no question about their identity. The names of blasphemy on them make it clear that the Catholic Church is the dominant power represented by the body and heads of both beasts.

What Type of Power Was Given To the Beast?

The sea beast of Revelation 13 has been seen by many researchers over the centuries as a symbol of the Papacy. Given that the names of blasphemy on the beast plainly points only to the Papacy, this is a logical deduction. The Papacy is the dominant power of the beast. But, there is more to it than that. For good reasons, the sea beast of Revelation 13 is believed by many to be identical to the horn power on the head of the fourth beast of Daniel 7, the horn that talked and had eyes and a mouth like a man. The behavioral characteristics of both powers are the same because they both make war against the people of God, both have power for the same length of time (42 months of 30 days = 1260 days), and their origins are identical - both received power after Rome fell in 476 AD. On this web site, we refer to this horn power of Daniel 7 as the talking horn because it talked, unlike any of the other horns, heads or beasts shown to Daniel.

As it happens, both the talking horn of Daniel 7 and the sea beast of Revelation 13 were given power over the people of God for 1260 prophetic days, which is the same as 1260 literal years. In Daniel 7:25, it says that the people of God were handed over to the talking horn. Here is the evidence:

Daniel 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

In the Bible, when you were given into the hands of a power, it meant this power was able to control you, imprison you, or even to kill you. They were given the power of a king, meaning they had the power of life and death over a person. They could do with you as they wished. First, let us go over evidence of what it means to be handed over to someone in power over you:

Joshua 21:43 And the LORD gave unto Israel all the land which he swore to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt there.
Joshua 21:44 And the LORD gave them rest round about, according to all that he swore unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their enemies before them; the LORD delivered all their enemies into their hand.

Joshua 24:8 And I brought you into the land of the Amorites, who dwelt on the other side of Jordan; and they fought with you: and I gave them into your hand, that you might possess their land; and I destroyed them from before you.

Ezra 5:11 And thus they returned us answer, saying, We are the servants of the God of heaven and earth, and build the house that was built these many years ago, which a great king of Israel built and finished.
Ezra 5:12 But after that our fathers had provoked the God of heaven unto wrath, he gave them into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, the Chaldean, who destroyed this house, and carried the people away into Babylon.

Nehemiah 9:27 Therefore you delivered them into the hand of their enemies, who oppressed them: and in the time of their trouble, when they cried unto you, you heard them from heaven; and according to your manifold mercies you gave them saviors, who saved them out of the hand of their enemies.

Jeremiah 44:30 Thus says the LORD; Behold, I will give Pharaoh-hophra king of Egypt into the hand of his enemies, and into the hand of them that seek his life; as I gave Zedekiah king of Judah into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, his enemy, and that sought his life.

Daniel 1:1 In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it.
Daniel 1:2 And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God: which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the vessels into the treasure house of his god.

Next, the book of Daniel provides the definition of the power of a king. Here is what Daniel said about that:

Daniel 5:18 O king, the most high God gave Nebuchadnezzar your father a kingdom, and majesty, and glory, and honor:
Daniel 5:19 And for the majesty that he gave him, all people, nations, and languages, trembled and feared before him: whom he would he slew; and whom he would he kept alive; and whom he would he set up; and whom he would he put down.

Nebuchadnezzar was given complete power over those under him, including the power of life or death. That is a rather dangerous power to have in the hands of one man, but that is the power that God gave to him. It was the power of a king in those days.

Therefore, the fact that the people of God were handed over to the talking horn of Daniel 7 indicates that this power got the authority of a king over the people of God. He was given power of life or death over them. This means he had the power to drag people into court and then punish them as he wished. Today, the equivalent power is called civil power, which is the power through the law to take people to court and then punish them according to the law. For the talking horn, this could only have happened in 538 AD when the Papacy was given the legal power, through the decree of Justinian, to prosecute the people of God for anything which the Catholic Church deemed to be heresy. Eventually this power was extended into all the nations of what was once the Western Roman Empire (Daniel 7:20-26, Revelation 13:7). Justinian put the authority of the state behind Catholic Church laws, which in essence gave the pope the power to prosecute people for heresy.

The sea beast of Revelation 13 and the talking horn of Daniel 7 made war against the saints of God during the 1260 prophetic days it had power. In war, your enemy is usually out to kill you, so this is very clear about what it means.

This power of life or death over the people of God, the power of a king in those days, is the power that defined when the talking horn gained power and later lost it. In essence, it defined when the 1260 days began and ended, something that many do not understand. Many believe that the Papacy receiving political power is the event that defined the talking horn as a king, which they may date to as early as the time when Constantine the Great gave the Roman Church considerable political power around 310 AD. But this is a misconception that is unbiblical and does not match the facts of history. Here is the evidence:

In Daniel 7:24, it says this:

Dan 7:24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

Now, if receiving political power is the rise of the talking horn and knowing that such power was given to the Catholic Church at the time of Constantine, then logically the talking horn had to rise at the time of Constantine. That is logical, is it not? But, then why does the Bible say that the talking horn rises AFTER the ten horns, which clearly rise after the fall of the Western Roman Empire? Clearly, while to say that political power being received by the Catholic Church is the rise of the talking horn and that such power was received at the time of Constantine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_I) may appear logical, the problem is that it does not match the description given in the Bible of the rise of the talking horn. In the Bible, the talking horn got its power AFTER the rise of the nations which come out of the Western Roman Empire in 476, so the talking horn rising cannot be the same as receiving political power. It must instead refer to its receipt of power over the people of God. It is not logical any other way.

It is very important not to mix up the concepts of political power, temporal power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_power) , and power over the people of God (a form of civil power). These are all separate concepts and rose at different times for the Papacy. Political power first came to the Catholic Church in about 310 AD when Constantine first mixed up church and state affairs. Power over the people of God came in 538 AD when the decrees of Justinian became legally effective in Rome, enabling the Catholic Church to use civil power to prosecute people for heresy. Temporal power came to the popes when they received the gift of the Papal States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_States) in 756.

In summary, the types of power the Papacy has had are as follows:

• Temporal Power - Power to rule the Papal States using both political and civil powers
• Political Power - Power to influence or determine political events, policies and influence important persons; of or relating to government and the making of government policies, but is separate from the actual administration of government
• Civil Power - Power to use the courts to prosecute and punish people for crimes committed and is essentially the power of the state
• Power over the people of God - A special type of civil power used specifically against heretics

We know from history that the ten horns of Daniel 7 came up at the fall of Rome in 476 AD, at which time they obtained power. What many do not realize is that the ten horns were kings long before they obtained power. This is true for several reasons. First, there were tribes among them which had invaded Western Roman territory and eventually settled in to stay. These became subject to Rome so lost their independence. Later they regained their independence as Rome began to fall apart. Second, leaders existed among them even when Rome ruled them. These leaders were the "kings" who had not yet received a kingdom prior to 476 AD, but did receive a kingdom when Rome fell. These leaders naturally asserted themselves when Rome fell and became evident at that point in time.

Daniel 7:24 says that the talking horn came up after the rise of the ten horns. This should not be understood to say that the Catholic Church came into existence after the ten horns came up because it obviously existed long before then, but rather God is defining when he recognized that this power got the authority to persecute the people of God. Only then does God say that this power arises. Only then does it receive a kingdom.

To summarize, the ten horns of Daniel 7 obtained power after Rome fell in 476 AD, while the Papacy got power in 538 AD when it was given authority over the people of God. In both instances, the following points apply:

• When they obtained power, they received the legal power of a king over his subjects, which means they obtained the power of life and death over them.
• The civil governments received the power of life and death over their subjects and primarily applied that based on civil laws.
• The Papal government received the power of life and death over its subjects and primarily applied that based on its religious laws. It used the civil governments to enforce the religious laws as it could not do this on its own without their permission. Thus, they cooperated with the beast (aka the talking horn) and thereby became part of the talking horn or beast.

From history we know that the Papacy gained considerable political power when Constantine the Great moved the capital of the Roman Empire to Constantinople. Because of the change in Capitals, a power vacuum was created in Rome which was largely filled by the Papacy. This was especially important because the barbarian invasions were a source of great distress to the Romans and the Papacy acted as a center of power through which the Romans could hopefully deal with the Barbarians. However, note that this is not the same as civil power. Civil power came only through power granted to them by decrees of the Roman government.

Note the following that is said in Revelation 13:7, which says this:

Revelation 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

This power is given power "over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations". Some insist this means that it would dominate the entire world, but that is not what is portrayed in Daniel 7 in regards to the domain of this power. This power is shown to come up among the 10 horns, showing that its domain is among them and not elsewhere. It also comes up out of the head of the dreadful beast, indicating that its power and origins would be from the Western Roman Empire. Therefore, the domain referred to in Revelation 13:7 cannot refer to all the world, but rather applies to all nations of what was once the Western Roman Empire. This limits its domain to Christendom during the 1260 prophetic days.

To summarize, the talking horn would be given:

• power to make war against the saints of God, meaning it would be given the power of a king over them
• A domain would be given to it, meaning it would have power over all the nations of what had once been the Western Roman Empire during the 1260 prophetic days

So, just how and when did the Catholic Church receive the power of a king?

How and When Was Power Given to the Beast?

The Bible says that the talking horn power would arise after the 10 horns came up out of Rome. The following information, quoted from this other web site (http://www.biblelight.net/dragon.htm#PiusIX) , indicates that the Bible was right about this and tells us very plainly that they got the power of a king (civil authority) at that time:

 Pope Pius IX gave this remarkable testimony:

"It is, therefore, by a particular decree of Divine Providence that, at the fall of the Roman Empire and its partition into separate kingdoms, the Roman Pontiff, whom Christ made the head and center of his entire Church, acquired civil power." − Pius IX, Apostolic Letter Cum Catholica Ecclesia (http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ITA0493/_P2.HTM), March 26, 1860).

Source: Papal Teachings: The Church, selected and arranged by the Benedictine Monks of Solesmes, translated by Mother E. O'Gorman, R.S.C.J., Manhattanville College of the Sacred Heart, St. Paul Editions, Boston, © 1980, 1962 by Daughters of St. Paul, Library of Congress catalog card number 62-12454, par. #225, page 160 (http://biblelight.net/Sources/Papal-Teachings-Church-pgs160-161.gif).

This shows that one of their own popes officially recognized that they gained civil power after the fall of Rome. While the statement of Pius IX does not place receiving civil power in the year 538 AD (the year when this actually occurred), It does restrict the time to just after the division of the Roman Empire into separate kingdoms. Pope Pius IX's statement that the Catholic Church received civil power matches the statement in Daniel 7:24 that this power would rise after the 10 horns and that its power would be that the people of God would be handed over to it (the civil power they received gave them power over the people of God).

Civil power is the power of a king because that is the power that legal authorities have that allows them to use the courts to prosecute and punish people for violation of the law. This can include the power of life or death over a convicted person. Thus, when Pius IX said that they received civil power, he confirmed that they did in fact receive at least the same power that the Bible predicted that they would receive in Daniel 7:25. In fact, they evidently received more than just the power over the heretics, but that is not really relevant for the prophecy. The author believes that the popes certainly would know their history better than anyone else, so this a rather remarkable statement that accurately matches the facts of history and prophecy.

It is clear that Pius IX (1846-1878) was not referring to the temporal power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_power) of the Papacy that was acquired through the Papacy being given the Papal States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_States) in 756, but refers instead to the power given to them by Justinian, which included power for enforcement of church doctrines. There are several reasons this must be so, which are as follows:

• Pius IX said that this occurred just after the fall of Rome, which happened in 476. But it could not have happened immediately after the fall of Rome. Here is why from history:
  
  
  • The Western Roman Empire in was succeeded in 476 by the government run by Odoacer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odoacer), who was king of Italy from 476 until 493. There is no evidence that any civil powers were transferred to the Catholic Church by the government of Odoacer. Odoacer's government was Arian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism) so it would not have had any interest in giving the Papacy civil powers. They were not generally antagonistic towards the Catholic Church and granted everyone religious freedom, but they would never have given them such powers because to do so might have subjected Arian believers to persecution by the Catholic Church, which was trinitarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitarianism).
  
  
  • The Ostrogoths went to war against the government of Odoacer in 488 and after a five year war, they took over Italy in 493. Like the members of the government of Odoacer, they were Arians and, while they also granted everyone religious freedom, there is no evidence that any civil powers were transferred to the Catholic Church by their government. Because the Ostrogoths were Arians, they also would not have had any interest in transferring civil powers to the Papacy because that might have subjected the Arian believers to persecution by the Catholics.
  
  Just based on the known events of history in Italy immediately following the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476, the earliest time that the popes could have acquired civil power was during the invasion of Italy begun in 535 by the Eastern Roman Empire, then ruled by Emperor Justinian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justinian).
  
  
• The Bible says that the talking horn, which is the same power as the sea beast of Revelation 13, had the people of God handed over to him. The Bible defines beasts, heads, and horns all the same way. The first and primary definition for all of them is that they are kings. Thus, according to the prophecy of the talking horn, this applies to the Pope, that it was he who was to receive this power because he is the king of the Catholic Church. That matches precisely with the statement of Pope Pius IX, because he said that "the Roman Pontiff, ..., acquired civil power." Thus, the pope, as head or king of the Catholic Church, received civil power, thereby fulfilling prophecy.
  
  
• The Bible says that pagan Rome would hand its power over to the sea beast of Revelation 13. It says this by saying that the dragon gave the beast its power, throne, and great authority (Revelation 13:2). The dragon primarily represents the devil (Revelation 12:9) but secondarily it also represents pagan Rome (if you question this, then ask yourself this question: who tried to have Christ destroyed when he was born? see Revelation 12:4 and Matthew 2). Therefore, the civil power that the popes acquired after the fall of Rome could not have been handed to them by anyone but the Roman government. Because the Western Roman Empire fell in 476, any civil power the popes might have acquired prior to that time was immediately lost because the new government was not going to allow the Papacy to exercise civil power. Therefore, for it to have acquired civil power after this time, it had to have been acquired from the Eastern Roman Empire. This means that sometime during the invasion or occupation of Italy by the troops of the Eastern Roman Empire, the popes were given civil power. According to the statement of Pius IX, this happened shortly after the fall of Rome, so it almost certainly had to be very early in the invasion of Italy by the troops of Justinian that the popes acquired civil power. To have the transfer occur years later would seem to nullify the statement of Pius IX.
  
  
• Because Pius IX was pope from 1846 to 1878, he could not possibly have been referring to the civil power popes acquired by being given the Papal States. These were not given to the papacy until 756, which clearly is long after 476. Also, the Papal States were given to the Papacy by Pepin the Short (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepin_the_Short), not by the Eastern Roman Empire. Someone wrote up a fraudulent document shortly after the Papal States were first given to the Papacy (which was called the Donation of Constantine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donation_of_Constantine) and used by the Papacy at times during the Dark and Middle Ages to justify Papal temporal power), in which it was claimed that Constantine had given the Papal States to the Papacy (remember that Constantine [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_I] died in 337, so this was a long time before the fall of Rome), but that document was later proved to be a forgery in the 1400s. Because Pius IX lived in the 1800s, he had to have known that it was a forgery so would not have been referring to this document. Plus, his own statement is evidence against that being what he was referring to because he said that the civil power was acquired shortly after the fall of Rome, which was a long time after Constantine and long before the Papal States were given to them.
  
  
• The prophecy itself in Daniel 7:25 was not about temporal power in general, but only civil power as it related to the people of God. Thus, if the pope had been given civil power ONLY over the people of God and had not been given any other civil powers, that would have been sufficient to fulfill the prophecy. There is evidence he was actually given more, but that is irrelevant for the purposes of the prophecy.

Justinian, the Eastern Roman Emperor, wrote a decree in the year 533 AD giving the pope in Rome the following powers:

The legal right to punish heresy had been decreed prior to the fall of the Western Roman Empire by Roman emperors prior to Justinian and there are recorded instances in which the Catholic Church certainly used it. However, that authority vanished when Rome fell in 476. The reason it vanished was not just because of the fall of Rome, but ultimately because of what replaced Rome. The Arian governments of Odoacer and the Ostrogoths did not recognize any such previously existing authority of the Papacy and never extended such authority to it on their own. Therefore, the Eastern Roman Empire had to be placed into a position such that it could legally reinstate this authority to the Catholic Church in order for it to have received it as Pius IX said happened. That was done and this authority continued to be recognized by future governments all over Europe, thus extending and perpetuating the civil authority of the Papacy all over Europe for over a thousand years.

The point the Bible was making with the prediction of the 1260 prophetic days is two fold:

• First, the civil power over the people of God had to be given to the Papacy again because any civil power the Papacy had prior to the fall of the Western Roman Empire ceased to exist at the fall of the Rome in 476. These civil powers were never restored by either of the governments of Odoacer or the Ostrogoths.
• Second, the fact that the civil power over the people of God was given after the ten horns rose to power and remained in force until the end of the 1260 prophetic days is a marker that can be used to identify the Papacy as the talking horn. The Papacy is the only religious authority that had civil power handed to it over the people of God that would last for exactly 1260 prophetic days, or 1260 literal years. That does not mean the Papacy would not get that power given to it at other times (such as prior to the fall of Rome or after the end of the 1260 days), but those times are irrelevant to the 1260 day prophecy. The point is that there would be a specific time period of 1260 years when it would have that power which would be given to it shortly after the fall of Rome and no other religious authority would have civil power handed to it for this exact time period and at the time specified. Therefore, this is an identifier of this power that separates it from other religious powers. This rules out the Muslims, the Protestants, or variations of the Catholic Religion (such as the Coptic Church of Egypt) as the talking horn. None of them were given this power by Rome shortly after the fall of Rome and which lasted for exactly 1260 prophetic days.

As it happens, in 529 Justinian appointed a group of lawyers to compile Roman laws into one set of books so that lawyers and judges would have better resources to know, use and understand Roman law. In that law, Justinian included some laws concerning the Catholic Church and also heretics, which became the decrees restating the Catholic Church's civil authority.

The laws that were compiled and issued, which were referred to as the Corpus Iurus Civilis, were done in three main steps, which are:

• The first was the Codex Justinianus (529), which gathered together and organized all Roman law from the time of Hadrian onward. These were referred to as the imperial constitutiones.
• In the second step, completed in 533, the Digest, or Pandects was issued. This compiled the works of great Roman judges in such a way as to organize the case law of the time into an organized law structure.
• The third step, referred to as Novels, were a set of laws issued by Justinian in years after the laws compiled in 533 were issued. The Novels were issued over a period of years and usually were written in Greek, whereas the first two steps of law compilation was written mostly in Latin.

The source for this information is: Medieval Sourcebook - Roman Law(http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook-law.html#ROMAN%20LAW).

Some people conclude that because the decrees restating the civil authority of the Catholic church were done in 533, that is the year when the talking horn rose to power. But, like all governments and their laws, the decrees of Justinian were subject to the issue of jurisdiction. Because the prophecy concerning the talking horn must apply to the pope (the pope is the king of the Catholic Church and the talking horn is symbolic of a king), this means that in order for Justinian's decrees concerning the authority of the pope to be legally effective, he (Justinian) had to have undisputed (uncontested) authority over Rome. That was where the pope had his headquarters and throne, so that is where Justinian had to have uncontested jurisdiction in order for his decrees to be legally effective over the pope.

The BIG PROBLEM that Justinian had in 533 was that he did not have any jurisdiction over Rome at all. Quite literally, he did not own Rome. Consequently, his decrees were powerless, null and void in Rome and Italy when written and would have remained that way until such time as the Eastern Roman Empire could come into possession of Rome. If that had taken a hundred years, it would not have made any difference because, until that condition was satisfied, he had no ability or authority to impose a law upon the pope - even a law that the pope wanted to obey! No nation on earth can enforce its own laws in territory that it does not have uncontested jurisdiction over and under normal conditions, no other nation on earth will recognize its laws under such conditions. Wishing it to be otherwise will not make it so. All governments are concerned with the issue of jurisdiction and uncontested jurisdiction is a fundamental requirement to implement and enforce any law over a given territory. This is a basic fact of government and there is no way around this.

Some individuals claim that Justinian did rule Italy before the invasion of 535 because the Ostrogoths nominally recognized Justinian's right to rule. The facts of history are that they gave lip service to his nominal rule, but in actuality they ruled it and ignored him. As a result, he really didn't own any of it. If he had truly ruled Italy, then it would not have been necessary to use military force to drive them out of Italy. All that would have been necessary was for him to have issued any order he wanted them to obey and it would have been done. The simple fact that it was necessary for him to drive them out proves that he didn't own it and had no control over it. The Ostrogoths totally owned and controlled Italy and Justinian owned nothing and had no authority over anything in Italy. Justinian was powerless in Italy prior to his invasion.

In order to bring the pope under his jurisdiction, Justinian had to have control of the city of Rome. Justinian's army began invading Italy in 535 and they marched into Rome in December of 536, while at the same time the Ostrogothic troops were marching out of Rome on the opposite side of the city. The Ostrogothic troops left Rome out the other gate because they did not believe that they had enough troops to defend Rome against Justinian's army. Therefore, they went for reinforcements and evidently made it plain as they were leaving that they were going to return and defend their claim to Rome. It was clear to Justinian's army that they could not claim undisputed ownership of Rome, so, they immediately set about preparing for the siege they knew was coming, which began soon after in March of 537.

Following a year long siege, the Ostrogoths gave up in March of 538. Resistance against the siege was successful largely because of the stubborn resistance of Justinian's troops, the cooperation of the people of Rome, and the great fortune Justinian's troops had when the Ostrogoths tried to drive them out of the city by breaking open the aqueducts that brought water into Rome. The Ostrogoths were hoping to deprive them of water, which failed because Rome had an internal source of water and the people were able to make do with the supplies that they had. This act only succeeded in creating large pools of water near Rome that created ideal conditions for millions of mosquitoes to breed, which in turn became infected with malaria. These millions of malaria infected mosquitoes went looking for blood when it came time for breeding and the largest nearby sources of that were the Ostrogothic soldiers outside the city of Rome. The mosquitoes infected, sickened, and may have killed many of the Ostrogothic troops. Whatever happened to them, they were in no condition to fight any war. This was quite possibly the main factor in the defeat of the Ostrogoths at Rome (cited by C. Mervyn Maxwell, God Cares, page 146, volume 1, Pacific Press Publishing Association, Nampa, Idaho, USA). The author's guess is that some of Justinian's troops also became infected, but they were apparently farther away so evidently were not nearly as much affected by them as the Ostrogoths were.

Once the city was freed from the threat of the Ostrogoths, then the decrees of 533 concerning the Pope and the Catholic Church became enforceable because, as they saw it then from their vantage point in history, there was uncontested jurisdiction over Rome in the foreseeable future. From that point forward, the decree was eventually recognized by all the nations of Europe.

By driving the Ostrogoths away from Rome, Justinian gained undisputed jurisdiction over Rome and thereby started the clock ticking on the 1260 day/year prophecy. There are no statements in either Daniel or Revelation that specifies how the clock on the 1260 literal years may be interrupted, so logically, once it started, nothing could stop it until 1260 years later in 1798 when Napoleon's army decreed the Papal government at an end. A decree started the clock, so logically a decree was necessary to stop the clock. Nothing but another decree, one which reversed the original decree, could stop it. A decree is a law and, like all laws that are put into effect with no expiration date on them, only another law by an equal authority can stop them.

Therefore, when people argue that because the Ostrogothic troops returned to recapture Rome a few years later and that this means the 1260 day/year prophecy did not start in 538 AD, the argument is wrong because the clock had already started ticking on the 1260 day/year prophecy and the Ostrogothic recapture of Rome could not by any means change that. The clock had already started because the decrees of Justinian had already gone into effect and nothing in the Bible permits it to be interrupted. All that God specified in Daniel 7:25 was that the people of God would be handed over to the talking horn. Once that condition was met, which did happen in 538, the clock started ticking. Therefore, the prophecy was fulfilled then, not later. Once the decree could go into effect, it went into effect. Rome changed hands several times starting in 540 but eventually Justinian's troops got it back and kept it.

After jurisdiction was firmly established over Rome by Justinian's troops and the decree was implemented, Justinian further prepared the way for the pope by continuing his warfare with the Ostrogoths. His army was able to permanently defeat the main Ostrogothic forces in either 554 or 556 AD and captured the last of their cities in 561. It was a 26 year long war, which one can be sure was much longer than Justinian ever anticipated. Much changed during that time and Justinian was never able to go on to recreate the Western Roman Empire as he intended to accomplish when he first started his conquests in 533 by attacking the Vandals in North Africa. His plan was continued in 535 by his attacks against the Ostrogoths. He did capture a small amount of territory elsewhere but never was able to bring his plan to fulfillment. Click here (http://historyhuntersinternational.org/index.php?page=244) for a map which shows the territory over which Justinian was eventually able to establish control (scroll down to see the map).

Later the pope was able to take advantage of the fact that the French, beginning in 508 with the conversion to Catholicism of the French king Clovis, had already built an empire and facilitated converting the people within the conquered empire to Catholicism. This did much towards the eventual conversion of all of Europe to Catholicism so that they eventually came under the religious control of the pope. According to historians, the events of 538 AD set the pattern governing the relationship between the Roman Church and the European governments for the next 1260 years. But it is equally clear that Clovis did a great deal to help that process along. Without his conquests, the pope may never have established religious control of all of Europe.

While we do have the direct testimony of Pope Pius IX that they got civil authority after the fall of Rome, it would be nice to know more about the decrees that gave them that authority, so what do we know from Roman law concerning the decrees that Justinian wrote giving the pope the two powers of being head bishop over all Christian Churches and being able to prosecute heretics? To answer that question, a little information about the Roman law that Justinian issued may be helpful.

Here is a compilation on the web of an English translation of the Corpus Iurus Civilis laws issued by Justinian: The Civil Law (http://www.constitution.org/sps/sps.htm). The law compilation page which is most relevant to our question about the powers given to the church is Codex Books I - III (http://www.constitution.org/sps/sps12.htm). Once you have opened that page, you have to scroll down the page to reach the relevant material because it is not indexed. Note that their home page (http://www.constitution.org/liberlib.htm) listed at the bottom of the page for volume 12 (Codex Books I - III) contains some very interesting historical materials. You may enjoy browsing through some of their documents when you have some free time.

Now, here are several relevant statements concerning the powers given to the pope as quoted from the Codex Books I - III (http://www.constitution.org/sps/sps12.htm).

"Among the conspicuous reasons for praising your wisdom and gentleness, Most Christian of Emperors, and one which radiates light as a star, is the fact that through love of the Faith, and actuated by zeal for charity, you, learned in ecclesiastical discipline, have preserved reverence for the See of Rome, and have subjected all things to its authority, and have given it unity."

(Corpus Iurus Civilis, Codex Books I - III (http://www.constitution.org/sps/sps12.htm). BOOK I, TITLE I. CONCERNING THE MOST EXALTED TRINITY AND THE CATHOLIC FAITH, AND PROVIDING THAT No ONE SHALL DARE TO PUBLICLY OPPOSE THEM, part 4. [letter of Pope] John [II, 533-535], Bishop of the City of Rome, to his most Illustrious and Merciful Son Justinian.)

This was a letter from Pope John II to Justinian. Because it was added to the civil code, it was intended therefore to become part of the law of Justinian.

But what is significant about the statement quoted above is that it said that Justinian had "subjected all things to its" (the pope in Rome) "authority". This indicates that there was a prior decree which gave the pope civil authority and he was very much aware of its existence. Some might argue then that this does not constitute anything but authority over religious matters, but additional thought on this and additional statements indicate otherwise. This must have referred to civil authority. Here is why.

The statement of Pius IX indicates that they received civil authority relatively shortly after the fall of Rome. Since that could not have happened during the governments of Odoacer or the Ostrogoths, the decrees of Justinian have to be the source of the civil authority he referred to. This statement of Pope John II can hardly be taken any other way than a recognition of this fact, though it does not cite the specific decree that Justinian wrote giving the pope this authority. Yet it makes it clear that such a decree existed. We may not have a historical record of that decree, but again it is possible that such a record exists. The author has not found it to date.

When the pope wrote this statement, it seems extremely unlikely that he was referring to local religious authority. Such authority would not have mattered to him because he already had that type of power over his own religious territory with or without Justinian's approval by virtue of being the bishop over his church. It came with the territory. This power was extended by a decree of Justinian, which we know because he specifically mentioned this fact a little farther into the letter. He said that the decrees of previous emperors and Justinian had given him authority as head bishop over all other bishops, something that apparently Justinian included in his compilation of the law so as to put them back into effect. Here is the statement of the pope concerning this:

"This See is indeed the head of all churches, as the rules of the Fathers and the decrees of Emperors assert, and the words of your most reverend piety testify."

Justinian included a letter which he sent to the pope as part of this law. In this letter, he said the following:

"For we do not suffer anything which has reference to the state of the Church, even though what causes the difficulty may be clear and free from doubt, to be discussed without being brought to the notice of Your Holiness, because you are the head of all the Holy Churches, for We shall exert Ourselves in every way (as has already been stated), to increase the honor and authority of your See." (Title I, part 4)

The fact that Justinian included this as part of the compilation of Roman law indicated that he meant for this to be a law.

It is interesting that Justinian restated this law in Novel 131 issued in 545 in which he said the following:

"Hence, in accordance with the provisions of these Councils, We order that the Most Holy Pope of ancient Rome shall hold the first rank of all the Pontiffs, but the Most Blessed Archbishop of Constantinople, or New Rome, shall occupy the second place after the Holy Apostolic See of ancient Rome, which shall take precedence over all other sees."

(Corpus Iurus Civilis, New Constitutions (Novels) Collections VIII-IX; Constitutions of Leo; General Index, (http://www.constitution.org/sps/sps17.htm), TITLE XIV, CONCERNING ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES AND PRIVILEGES, AND VARIOUS OTHER MATTERS, ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY-FIRST NEW CONSTITUTION, CHAPTER II, CONCERNING THE PRECEDENCE OP PATRIARCHS.)

As you should be able to see, the statements indicate that the power to be head bishop was stated separately from the statement that the pope got civil power. This makes it rather clear that they considered these powers as separate issues. Thus, the authorization to have civil power or having all things put under his (the pope's) authoritywould have very likely been called "head bishop" if that is what is intended. Instead, there are references to two different forms of power.

As you should be able to see from their laws and the statement of Pope John II, the pope was given civil power as well as power to be head bishop.

On February 10, 1798, Napoleon's army took the city of Rome and became the government in control of that city. At that point, they had uncontested jurisdiction over it. Five days later, on February 15, 1798, the 1260 prophetic days ended when the French General Berthier in Rome, under the authority of the French government, wrote a decree ending the Papal government. The French troops conquered Rome on February 10, 1798. A decree written by the Eastern Roman Emperor had created the power of the Papal authorities over the people of God, an authority that was greatly extended because of the French government of Clovis. Ironically, it was a decree by the French government in 1798 which ended it. This stopped the clock 1260 years after it started in March of 538 AD.

Five days after the decree ended the authority of the beast (aka the talking horn), the French authorities were concerned that the pope might create a rebellion against the French government because he had been deposed from his role as head of a civil government. So, on February 20, 1798, five days after the beast was already gone, they arrested the pope and hauled him off to France, where he died in prison during August of 1799.

Note that political control over the nations was NOT the important issue (it really is totally irrelevant to the prophecy) but rather the ability to carry out a war against the people of God in all nations of the former Western Roman Empire is the important issue according to Daniel 7:25 and Revelation 13:7. All actions of the beast spoken of in the Bible ultimately centered upon control of Christian behavior, beliefs, and thinking. The political activities of the popes was ignored by God in these prophecies because they were irrelevant to his message, which centered on the power of the beast over God's people. There are two principal concerns in the book of Revelation, which are:

• whom will you worship?
• the welfare and safety of God's people.

In the book of Daniel, it says the following about the talking horn:

Daniel 7:24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

To summarize, three main factors brought about the rise of the talking horn of Daniel 7, or what Revelation 13 calls the beast that rises from the sea. These were:

• The decree written by Justinian in 533 AD, which included the power to hire/fire bishops and authority to prosecute heresy. The decrees, once they could be implemented, eventually led to the pope having complete control over all of Christianity. This united the churches under the authority of the pope.
• Justinian gained jurisdiction over Rome which allowed the decrees of Justinian to be implemented.
• The conversion of the remaining nations to Catholicism (Trinitarian) through the efforts of Clovis and others

The Beast Formula Continued

Now that you have the historical background, here are the Bible verses in Revelation 13 that are the basis for the beast formula:

Revelation 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
Revelation 13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
Revelation 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all tribes, and tongues, and nations.

Notice that verse 5 distinguishes between saying "great things" and "blasphemies". Apparently God considers them different things. Have you ever before noticed this? If you want more information about this, compare Revelation 13:5 with Daniel 7:25. Line up the corresponding parts of the two verses next to each other and compare what you find. You might be surprised by what you learn.

Observe also that Revelation 13:7 says the beast was given power to make war against the saints, which is essentially the same as was done in Daniel 7:25. Notice the blasphemy mentioned in Revelation 13:5. Which power is it that we have identified that (1) claims to be God and (2) claims to be able to forgive sins against God's law? Answer: the Catholic Church. So, the Catholic Church is part of the beast, the leading part at that. But there is a second power hidden in these verses which helps make up the beast. Can you find it? Please think about it for a minute before continuing to read.

Here is the identity of the second power that helps make up the beast. Note that in verse 7 it says "power was given him over all tribes, and tongues and nations." Consider this for a minute, if you will. To understand this better, imagine for a minute that you are the pope in say, for example, the year 1200 AD, and heard about a group of Christians living in say, France, who were refusing to give allegiance to you as the pope and you wanted to stop that or punish them if they refused to surrender to you. How would you go about it? Would you march in with an army gathered from other countries to arrest these people? What if the French decided that they didn't want you doing this? They might come out and fight you with an army (maybe even a much BIGGER army) and maybe even kill you! Well! You certainly cannot risk that happening, can you?

So, what to do? You use your brain and realize that if you could just get the French to believe that you were God or that your word was as good as God's word or that anything you said was based on authority delegated to you by God, then you could simply ask the French to take care of the problem for you and you would not have to take any risk upon yourself! Very smart idea! So, you approach the French and over time you convince them that your word must be obeyed because your word is as good as God's word, or maybe you even convince them you are God. You certainly remind them that their salvation depends on obedience to your word because you claim to have God's authority passed down from Peter, who you claim got it from Jesus, and you remind them of the "unbroken" line of succession of the popes, an argument which you hope is convincing enough in their minds to back up your claim to have God's authority. Then you simply ask them to take care of the heretics for you. To back it up, perhaps you bring out a copy of Justinian's decree just to be sure they get the point, a decree which they respect. And, it works! It is usually a risk free power play. You win, while the other Christians lose. Its sort of like the old cartoon joke about the Coliseum in Rome: Lions - 10, Christians - 0! Its all about power and YOU have the power!

In fact, this is somewhat like how it actually happened. The pope (and others certainly helped the process along) used persuasive powers based on religion and the pope's position to win over the governments of the day so that the political leaders of the time gave their allegiance to the pope and prosecuted almost anyone for heresy upon the request of the church. They dared not refuse him because they knew that if they did, the pope probably would excommunicate them from the church, which the Catholic Church had taught meant no salvation for them. It was a mind game, no doubt about it, but the difference was that the pope knew what he was really doing, while the leaders of the nations usually did not because they didn't know the Bible well enough to realize that salvation comes only through Jesus, not the church (Acts 4:12). This thought terrified many rulers into obeying the pope no matter the cost to justice and truth. Of course, as the power of the popes increased, eventually there was the additional threat that the pope might be able to bring a large army against any king who dared to oppose him. That threat had the effect of preventing too much deviance from the will of the pope most of the time.

The result was that the leaders of the French government and the leaders of other Christian nations of Europe all became part of the beast because they chose to cooperate with the pope. They threw their political power and authority behind the wishes of the pope. Therefore, the second power that constitutes the beast is the leaders of the nations who cooperated with the Papacy during the 1260 days. The Roman Church was the dominant power of the beast when it came to the issue of Christian beliefs and how it was defined, with the nations playing a generally subordinate, though not unimportant role, to empower the wishes of the pope to accomplish his will against the people of God. Without this cooperation, the pope could do very little in other nations to persecute the people of God because then he would lack the legal authority to act against them.

As a result, you can define the beast in this fashion, something we call The Beast Formula:

This formula is valid ONLY when the Roman Church is the beneficiary of a decree by other nations which gives it the legal right to punish heresy. This, of course, requires the ongoing cooperation of the leaders of OTHER NATIONS of Europe. The Papacy cannot give itself this right over other nations all by itself, even if it is a king over its own territory (the Vatican) because that does not give it the right to punish heresy in other nations. Remember that one of the conditions to create the beast that arose in 538 AD was that the Papacy was given control of all of the Christians in the nations of Europe. Until that condition arose, the beast was not yet present even though there was a pope in Rome and he certainly was a ruler over some territory at that time. The legal right to persecute for heresy is a power that must be given to the Papacy by other nations. Without it, there is no jurisdiction over the people of God in other nations, a legal fact that limits their power. There is no way around this simple fact. No jurisdiction means no prosecution. And it means there is no beast until there is jurisdiction over the people of God in other nations based on their religious beliefs, beliefs that the Catholic Church says are heresy. It is that simple.

And that is The Beast Formula. Very simple, isn't it?

This also exposes an inconsistent belief common among those who believe that the sea beast of Revelation 13 is the Papacy alone. Such a belief is not consistent because there was a pope in Rome before 538 AD, and even before 476 AD, and there still is a pope in Rome long after 1798. If the beast is the Papacy alone, then there was a beast long before 538 AD and a beast should remain even today. But that contradicts the Bible because it says the talking horn power would arise AFTER the 10 horns of the fourth beast of Daniel 7, which we know could not possibly have arisen before 476 AD when Rome fell. Because the talking horn arose AFTER the 10 horns of the fourth beast of Daniel 7, then the conclusion is that the beast is a composite power rather than a single power, consisting of the Papacy combined with the nations in a war against the people of God that has been authorized by a decree. If it were not a composite power, then it would have existed long before 538 AD and would exist even today, long after 1798.

There are some who think that the sea beast is a political power alone, but this too is inconsistent with the evidence at hand in Revelation 13. Consider the blasphemy present upon the sea beast. That points directly to the Catholic Church and not to the nations because the nations and their leaders do not claim both to be God and to be able to forgive sins against God's laws. Therefore, the sea beast of Revelation 13 is not a political power alone, but instead is a composite power, albeit primarily a religious power.

If you understand that the cooperating leaders of the nations became part of the beast, then both the talking horn of Daniel 7 and the sea beast of Revelation 13 begin to make a lot more sense. The beast arose because of the decree which placed the people of God under the Pope's jurisdiction, which could only be implemented if the leaders of the nations cooperated with the pope in persecuting the people of God. Because the leaders of the nations did choose to cooperate with the pope, they were part of the beast. There is no other conclusion that can be drawn from history.

As a matter of history, the Catholic Church points out that they really didn't execute that many heretics. Instead, most of the heretics were killed by the national governments of the time, an argument which appears to be true. The strength of this argument, of course, hinges on comparison of the numbers they killed to those killed by the national governments. It is a distraction argument, to be sure, because the Catholic Church wants you to minimize the deaths of those they also killed, even one of which is extremely serious. By comparison, they hope to look better in your mind. If you were one of those "heretics" who was burned at the stake, how would you feel about it? How do you think God feels about it?

One very important thing their argument does point out, however, and for which we can be thankful because of the insight it gives us, is that there indeed was a cooperative relationship that existed between the Papacy and the national governments of the day for the express purpose of persecution of the people of God. By attempting to deflect the criticism rightfully aimed at them for their bloody past history, they have in fact validated exactly that which the Bible predicted: the two powers cooperated together for a common purpose: to war against the people of God. You might say they were political and religious "bedfellows".

The Papacy had the leading role as part of the the sea beast because it taught the national leaders that the Pope is God and is to be obeyed, so they are primarily responsible for what was done. For this reason, the Bible does call the pope the beast (this is especially done for the 8th king), but one must understand that this refers to his leadership role of the beast and still includes other powers as part of the beast. The 8th king will not be the beast without the decree in place giving him the powers that creates the beast. The fact that the national governments engaged in persecution alongside the Catholic Church authorities does not absolve the national leaders from their own responsibility for their own acts. They did take part in the war against the people of God and that is what the Bible said the beast would do (Revelation 13:7), so one can be sure that God will hold them responsible. God even says as much by saying that the beast will be thrown into the lake of fire at the end. That has to include the national leaders who cooperated with the popes in causing persecution against the people of God.

At this point, the author believes it important to clarify a few things. The Bible condemns not just the leadership of the Catholic Church for having used state power to enforce church doctrine, but also the Protestant Churches that will soon do the same thing. Any religious organization that uses state power to enforce its teachings is condemned by God for such action. So, please don't think we are just picking on the Catholics.

For those who insist that they do right by using the state to enforce church doctrine, they should seriously consider what Jesus had to say about this issue. Here is what he said:

John 16:2 They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time comes, that whosoever kills you will think that he does God service.
John 16:3 And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me.

Remember that this was a prediction of persecution based on church doctrine issues, not civil issues such as murder or theft. The initial part of this was addressed to the disciples in regards to what the Jews would do to them, but it clearly is applicable anywhere, anytime in the world because it plainly says "whosoever kills you". This means anyone, not just the Jews who might do these things to the disciples or their followers. Thus, no religious group should be killing others because their religious beliefs are different or "heretical". Anyone doing so proves they do not know God and therefore have not the truth in them. They also prove they are the ones lost to salvation.

One other thing you may be sure of: whether the Catholic Church killed only a few thousand heretics (as the Catholic Church claims) or millions of heretics (as the Protestants used to claim), just one such death is sufficient to prove that the Catholic Church leaders who did such things did not know God. Of course, some say that the Catholic Church would never do such things today because they have apologized for their past actions and have changed. Unfortunately, the truth is otherwise. The author has seen recent statements on the Internet by Catholic theologians justifying the killing of heretics even today were the power to do so returned to them. Therefore, nothing has changed with Rome even though their behavior is restrained at this time. They have been very successful in convincing people that they have changed, but they have not. When given the opportunity again, they will revert to their former behavior. And the Protestant Churches will join them in doing this next time around.

In the New Testament, you find plenty of evidence that the Christian Church had the right to remove heretics from among the members. But that never extended to punishment by the civil authorities on behalf of the church. Doing so always leads to trouble in paradise. It leads to absolute power and the abuse of it. And it leads to condemnation by God, which is by far the worst thing that can happen to the church. Of course, God's judgment of such actions will not be evident until the end of the world and after the millennium, but that does not mean he will not condemn such actions and eventually punish it.

Let us continue with learning about The Beast Formula. The Beast Formula is actually stated in two different places in Revelation, once in Revelation 13 and the other in Revelation 17. Revelation 13 states it differently than Revelation 17, but it means the same thing. The fact that the Beast Formula is stated twice in two different ways demonstrates its validity.

Here is how Revelation 17 explains the Beast Formula:

Revelation 17:1 And there came one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come here; I will show unto you the judgment of the great harlot that sits upon many waters:
Revelation 17:2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.

Notice that the prostitute is said to sit upon the waters and fornicate with the kings of the earth. Do you remember that in the Three Primary Powers Table the kings of the earth belonged to the political powers category and the prostitute woman belonged to the religious powers category? If you look at the Beast Formula, you should notice that it also consisted of powers from the same two categories, the Roman Church being a religious power and the national political leaders being political powers. As you can see, the same two categories of power occur together in Revelation 17:1-2. Therefore, one should conclude that the same two powers that occur in the beast formula are represented by the woman and the kings of the earth in Revelation 17:1-2. The following table should make it easier to remember this:

The obvious question is whether the woman symbolizes the Roman Catholic Church, particularly its leaders. If she is, then you know that the beast is the same as the woman + kings of the earth. History and the Bible answer this question because from the Bible we know that fornication is symbolic of reliance upon powers other than God for the needs and wishes of the church, including dealing with heresy. It can also be defined as an improper relationship between the leaders of political powers and religious leaders, but in the final analysis, this is based on her reliance upon them to do something that she does not have the power to do on her own, something that God never gave her the right to do but she is determined to have anyway. Here are several Bible verses that show this to be true:

Exodus 34:15 Lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go play the harlot after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call you, and you eat of his sacrifice;

Exodus 34:16 And you take of their daughters unto your sons, and their daughters go play the harlot after their gods, and make your sons go play the harlot after their gods.

Leviticus 20:6 And the soul that turns after mediums, and after wizards, to play the harlot after them, I will even set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his people.

Judges 2:17 And yet they would not hearken unto their judges, but they played the harlot with other gods, and bowed themselves unto them: they turned quickly out of the way which their fathers walked in, obeying the commandments of the LORD; but they did not so.

Judges 8:27 And Gideon made an ephod of it, and put it in his city, even in Ophrah: and all Israel went there and played the harlot with it: which thing became a snare unto Gideon, and to his house.

The last verse is quite revealing. The ehpod was a garment for the high priest to wear which had certain precious stones on the front of it, two of which were called the Urim and Thummin. Here is what the Bible tells us about these two stones and their purpose and use:

Exodus 28:30 And you shall put in the breastplate of judgment the Urim and the Thummim; and they shall be upon Aaron's heart, when he goes in before the LORD: and Aaron shall bear the judgment of the children of Israel upon his heart before the LORD continually.

Numbers 27:18 And the LORD said unto Moses, Take you Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit, and lay your hand upon him;
Numbers 27:19 And set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation; and give him a charge in their sight.
Numbers 27:20 And you shall put some of your honor upon him, that all the congregation of the children of Israel may be obedient.
Numbers 27:21 And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall ask counsel for him after the judgment of Urim before the LORD: at his word shall they go out, and at his word they shall come in, both he, and all the children of Israel with him, even all the congregation.

1 Samuel 28:6 And when Saul inquired of the LORD, the LORD answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets.

The main purpose of the Urim and Thummin stones was to act as a means of communication between God and man. In some way, God used these stones to indicate his will in regards to certain questions put to him. Men RELIED upon God to guide them through the use of the Urim and Thummin by answering their important questions. Thus, the statement in Judges 8:37 that the people played the harlot with the ephod in Gideon's home, which he had made, indicates that the people were using it to guide their lives. Therefore, they were in RELIANCE upon it and ultimately a god, which the people believed answered their questions through the Urim and Thummin on the ephod Gideon had made. The people hoped to obtain divine answers to the most deep questions of their hearts.

The "god" answering questions through this ephod could not have been the true God because this was an ephod neither authorized by nor brought into the presence of the true God and used in the approved way. The author's best guess is that people's imaginations got carried away so that they thought that their questions had been answered or else one of Satan's angels made sure these people got answers to their questions. Exactly how their questions were answered through the use of these stones perhaps is not known for sure, but the author has heard it said that a light would appear over one of the stones in answer to a question.

This explains the meaning of the word "harlot" which God applied to the people of Israel in the event they worshipped a false god. Examples of such usages were cited above. In those verses, the word harlot means reliance upon another power (a god in these instances) to obtain the desires of their hearts.

Therefore, when the Bible refers to the fornication of the woman with the kings of the earth, she is in reliance upon these kings of the earth to obtain the desires of her heart, which was the eradication of any opposition to her way of thinking and control over peoples' spiritual lives. The end justifies the means in her way of thinking so that even killing the people of God is justified to obtain that which she wanted more than anything else.

From history we know that the Roman Church has been the greatest user by far of such power by relying upon the state to meet its wishes for the purpose of prosecuting heretics. It has done so far more and far longer than any other church. Therefore, for this and other reasons, the woman is representative of the Roman Catholic Church.

To be sure of that identification so that we don't incorrectly label the woman, remember that the Bible says the woman is Babylon. In the Bible as a whole, Babylon represents false, apostate religions. Now, this means that there must be major deviation away from what God instructs us in the Bible is truth. Otherwise, a religion cannot qualify as a false, apostate religion. Is the popes' claim to be God such a major deviation? Is the claim of the priests and popes to be able to forgive sins against God's laws a major deviation away from God's statement of the truth? You will have to decide the answer to that for yourself, but at this web site, we believe it is because the Bible says that both of these acts are blasphemy. Remember that the Bible is the gold standard of truth because it is based on the word of the eternal God who will never make another being into a God like himself and will never delegate his authority as God to another created being. Therefore, we conclude that Babylon in Revelation 17 is representative of the Roman Catholic Church.

The scarlet beast of Revelation 17 has blasphemy all over it. That means this beast power claims to be God and to be able to forgive sins against God's laws. Therefore, this means the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 is identical with the sea beast of Revelation 13 because the blasphemy is the same in both verses and must point to the same power.

As a result, the beast formula can be stated like this:

This is the complete Beast Formula. It tells you that the woman combined with the kings of the earth in Revelation 17 is the scarlet beast and is the same as the Roman Church leaders combined with national government leaders, which is the sea beast of Revelation 13. Both beasts are composite powers, made up of the same two other primary powers, the leaders of the Roman Church and the leaders of the nations, in a cooperative relationship for the purpose of legal prosecution of heresy.

There are a couple of additional things to understand about this. In Revelation 17, the angel spoke about the woman sitting upon the waters fornicating with the kings of the earth. From The Beast Formula, you now know that when this activity between the two powers is going on, it is the same thing as the scarlet beast. But, it is very important to notice that the angel makes a distinction between the beast and its heads and horns. In verse 8, he says that the beast "was", which means that the body of the beast (which is the same as the woman engaged in sitting with the kings of the earth and fornicating with them) is something in the past relative to the time from which the angel is speaking. Of course, the beast itself was yet future to John's time because it didn't begin to exist until 538 AD.

Because the beast did not yet exist, the angel is speaking as if he is far into the future relative to John's time. Many think he was speaking as if he were in John's time, but that is because they do not understand the beast nor do they correctly understand the explanation of the beast and the heads and horns.

Note carefully what the angel tells us about his explanation. He does NOT say that he is going to explain the woman, the beast, its heads or its horns, but rather he says that he is going to tell us the mystery of the woman and the beast that carries her. He has given us a puzzle, not an explanation. Many fail to understand this important point: The angel gives us a puzzle to be deciphered only when the time comes that God wants it known. Until that time, nobody will be able to decipher it. What many do not know is that time is NOW.

The angel mentions that one head exists at the exact moment from which he is speaking. After he explains the 7 kings/7 heads, he tells the mystery of the horns and mentions that they are yet future, which obviously means that when the ten horns arrive, the seven heads are done. By explaining things in this manner, he is indicating that for the explanation he gives, we are to consider the beast to be the body of the beast, which is to be thought of as existing in a separate time period that comes before the 7 kings/7 heads, which in turn come before the 10 horns. Thus, the body occurs first, then the seven heads, then the ten horns occur last. As he presented it, the 7 heads/7 kings have to represent the relative present from the time from which the angel was speaking AND they represent history that will occur between the body of the beast (which was already in the past according to the angel) and the horns (which he indicates are yet future). Just remember that the angel had to be speaking as if he were in the future because this beast did not begin to exist until 538 AD, long after John was dead. More on this later.

As you now know, both beasts represent the same two combined powers. Yet there are significant differences between them as they were presented to John. One has the general appearance of a leopard, with body parts of a bear and a lion on it, while the other is scarlet in color, is an unknown species and has no body parts from other animals on it, or at least, none were noted. One has the prostitute woman sitting on the seven heads, while the other has no woman on it at all. One is first seen in the wilderness, while the other arises from the sea and is never said to go to the wilderness. These very significant differences creates an obvious question, which is this: Even though the two beasts represent the same combination of powers, why do they present such a different appearance of one compared to the other?

There are several answers to this question , which are:

• God is trying to emphasize different characteristics of the same power as seen from different time periods.
• God wanted to avoid distracting us with issues that are not important to the story being told for each time period being represented. This is especially true in the case of the woman not being shown in Revelation 13 while she does appear in Revelation 17. Her presence in Revelation 13 would have been very distracting to the overall story because he intended to explain her later, so he left her out of the picture.
• God also wanted to hide from us the real understanding of Revelation 17 UNTIL the right time arrived for it to be understood. There is no question that he succeeded extremely well because Revelation 17 has been a mystery for more than 1900 years. There are many explanations out there for this chapter, but until now, there have been none which were true.

The appearance of the sea beast of Revelation 13 primarily emphasizes the beast as it appears during the 1260 days. This beast is shown as a predator because of its nature in hunting down any people who held Christian beliefs that differed from it. It was explained that it would have power over God's people for a period of 1260 prophetic days.

The woman is not shown in Revelation 13 because God intended to explain the remaining history of the heads and horns of the beast in Revelation 17, so the woman would only have been a distraction in Revelation 13 were she presented but not explained. Just as was the case in Revelation 17, had she been shown in Revelation 13, she would have been shown sitting upon the seven heads.

The appearance of the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 primarily emphasizes the beast as it appears AFTER the 1260 days. The scarlet appearance of this beast can certainly suggest that this beast is covered with blood because of the warfare it had previously carried out against the people of God. This is certainly true as is demonstrated by history and by the fact that Pope John Paul II apologized for the atrocities that the Catholic Church carried out during the dark ages. Thus, this beast is seen from a historical perspective as being very guilty of the blood of many.

The presence of the woman on the seven heads of the scarlet beast in teh wilderness (clearly far away from the waters) emphasizes the fact that she is not combined with the kings of the earth during that time period. Because the body of the scarlet beast must represent conditions during the 1260 prophetic days, then the 7 heads represent conditions AFTER the 1260 days are over and done with. The kings of the earth are nowhere in the picture when she is in the wilderness. It also shows her condition - she is drunk which clearly means she is not much in control of the beast or herself during this time - and it helps demonstrate many of her characteristics by the things she is wearing (thereby giving more clues to her identity). And the beast she rides on is described in the original Greek as a "wild beast", meaning she has little control over it. Being drunk and riding a wild beast sounds like a prescription for disaster for her, but the Bible says that the beast will come out of the abyss - out of the wilderness - and this implies that she will return to fornicating with the kings of the earth once again. She will combine with them and return to power once again.

It is especially important to note that Revelation 17 does NOT say that the woman sits on the BACK of the scarlet beast at any time. This idea is common in the minds of many, but this idea exists because the back of an animal is where a person normally rides on a beast and also because artists commonly place her on the back of the scarlet beast. However, nowhere in Revelation 17 does it say that the woman rides (or sits) anywhere but upon the seven heads, which it says are also seven mountains. Of course, because the Bible defines heads as kings, then the woman also sits upon the seven kings.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

Key #4 - Basic Rules of Prophetic Beast Interpretation

There are basic rules by which the beasts of both Daniel and Revelation can be understood. The short list here is not complete and is meant as a summary only, but should give you an idea of the most important rules of interpretation. A complete list with more information about how the rules work and how they are derived may be seen by clicking here or go to the Main Menu at the top of this page and click on Prophetic Rules of Interpretation.

Note that these rules apply ONLY to the prophetic beasts of Daniel and Revelation and do NOT apply to non prophetic beasts or other things such as the Euphrates River, which occurs in Revelation 16. However, anything attached or directly related to a prophetic beast will follow these rules. For example, the woman of Revelation 17 sits on the seven heads of the scarlet beast. Because of her position on the beast, her clothing certainly falls under the Characteristics Principle, and her location certainly falls under the Environment Principle as well as the Miller Principle.

Characteristics Principle -

This rule is very simple. It merely says that things attached to a beast, for example, wings, or ribs in the mouth of a beast, represent behaviors of the power represented. This also applies to the species of the beast or even if a beast is made up of several types of beasts (for example, the sea beast of Revelation 13). Even the woman sitting on the scarlet beast is an "attachment" on a beast and so somehow affects the behavior of the scarlet beast's seven heads. Behaviors are always implied by such things. The body, heads, and horns of a beast in and of themselves represent different stages of the history of a kingdom and so do not represent descriptions of behaviors. Verbal descriptions of the behavior of a beast may sometimes substitute for something attached to or written on a beast. For example, the ten horns in Revelation 13 on the sea beast have ten crowns, which tells us that they are kings, while in Revelation 17, there are no crowns on the ten horns because the angel verbally explains that they are kings. It does not need to show crowns on the horns in Revelation 17.

Concurrency Principle -

If a beast has multiple heads, then all the heads represent kings that have divided from the same original kingdom and usually become separate powers. Alternatively, they may represent divisions of kings WITHIN the SAME kingdom. In either case, all of the heads on a beast represent powers that rule together, meaning that they all rule at the same time as one another, a principle from which this rule takes its name. This naturally should follow logically because heads represent divisions of a previously existing kingdom (or divisions within the same kingdom that follows a previously existing kingdom) so the heads MUST come after the original kingdom existed and therefore coexist with one another. The only way to change this is through a statement that conforms to the Exception Principle (explained below), and then it applies only from that point forward in the prophecy.

The classic example of this principle is the four headed leopard of Daniel 7. The four heads represent the four kings that divided Alexander's kingdom 23 years after his death. The four kings arose together and ruled together until, one by one, they were destroyed. Three of them were destroyed by the Romans.

The same rule applies to a beast with several horns on its head(s). The horns represent kings that arise together and rule at the same time. This rule applies until a statement is made in the prophecy which conforms to the Exception Principle. However, an Exception Principle statement in the prophecy changes this rule only from that point forwards in the prophecy. It does not work backwards in time.

Definition Principle -

This principle is also very simple. The idea behind it is that Revelation often, though not always, contains its own definitions for the symbols used in it. These definitions should be used whenever possible before a search is made into other parts of the Bible. Therefore, when the student of Revelation encounters a symbol, the first thing he should do is find other examples of that symbol in Revelation and study how it is used in an attempt to understand the definition of the symbol. If no such symbols are found in Revelation or there is no definition of the symbol that is useful in Revelation (perhaps because it does not fit into the context of the verse one is studying), then the book of Daniel should be consulted. If no symbol definition is found in the book of Daniel, then other parts of the Bible should be investigated. Once a symbol definition is found, use the one definition (there may be more than one) that best explains the symbolism in the verse in question in Revelation. If nothing is found in the Bible, then and only then go to history or archeology.

An example of this is the symbol formed by the word water. This occurs in several places in Revelation. As the angel was showing John the vision in Revelation 17-18, he gave the definition for waters, which is as follows:

Revelation 17:15 And he said unto me, The waters which you saw, where the harlot sits, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

This definition will most likely work anywhere in Revelation where water is used as a symbol in a similar context. If you search in another book of the Bible, you may indeed find a symbolic definition of water, but you will likely find that it does not work well in Revelation because it was not designed for it.

Environment Principle -

This rule says that the environment a beast is placed in during the vision or dream of the prophet tells you either the origins of the power or else something about its current condition. A beast rising up out of waters, for example, tells you that it arises from among the nations around it. Staying near the waters after it arises out of the waters tells you that it continues to have dominion so long as it is said to have been given dominion from the beginning. A beast walking about on the earth after it arises out of the waters says that it has formed an established, stable government, and is now a power to be reckoned with. The earth symbolizes "nations" or "kingdoms" in these instances but can also symbolize a stable, established government.

Exception Principle -

This rule states that exceptions to the previously stated or existing rules of interpretation may be stated for particular parts of a beast. This plainly means that the usual rules will be followed until a statement is made that constitutes the exception to the previously existing rule, after which the previously stated rule will not be followed for that part of the beast from that time forward. Instead, the rule implemented by the exception will be followed.

For an example of this, in Daniel 7 the talking horn on the fourth dreadful beast was said to be diverse from those before it, a statement that is an exception to the previously existing rule. The previously stated rule was that those kings which came before the talking horn, specifically the kings who were the four beasts (Daniel 7:17) and the 10 kings on the fourth dreadful beast of Daniel 7 (Daniel 7:24), were all kings who arose from the earth, symbolizing that these kings were political kings and they inherited their thrones from their fathers. Therefore, because the talking horn is said to be diverse from those immediately around it (who were the 10 horns), this implies that the individual kings represented by the talking horn would not be kings who arose from the earth (would not be political kings) and would not inherit their thrones from their fathers. It is a fact that the popes did not inherit their thrones from their fathers.

The word diverse means "different", so this tells you that this particular king will not have the same characteristics as those which came before it. However, this also means it does not follow the same rule as the others that immediately preceded it, specifically, the 10 horns follow a different rule. The rule changes when it comes to the talking horn and remains that way from that point forward FOR THE TALKING HORN ONLY. The other horns continue to follow the rule they started under. Therefore, the talking horn was the "exception" to the normal rule that kings arose from the earth.

Miller Principle -

For lack of a better name when the author came to understand this rule, it was named after William Miller, a man who taught the Bible prophecies of Daniel in the 1830s and 1840s in the Northeastern United States. The rule stated here has nothing whatsoever to do with the rules of interpretation that William Miller wrote out for himself. The Miller Principle was simply named after him and nothing more.

This rule is about progression through time of different stages of the history of a kingdom from one stage to the next. Some kingdoms of both Daniel and Revelation have several different stages to their history, which is represented by having a body and multiple heads or even multiple horns on them. Those kingdoms represented by a beast with only one head and no horns have only one stage to their history and this rule does not apply to them.

An example of a kingdom which had more than one stage to its history is the leopard beast with four heads that occurs in Daniel 7. It represented a power with two stages to its history. The first stage, shown as the body of the leopard, represented Alexander the Great and his immediate successors to his throne in Babylon after his death. The second stage, represented by the four heads of the leopard, represented the four kings who divided Alexander's kingdom four ways some 23 years after his death.

A beast with several heads and several horns will have 3 stages to its history. The sea beast of Revelation 13 is a good example of a power having 3 stages to its history. The first stage, represented by the body of the sea beast, took place from March of 538 to February 15, 1798, which occupied the 1260 prophetic days of time. The second stage, represented by the 7 heads, began immediately after the end of the 1260 prophetic days and will run until the 7 heads are finished and the 8th king, who will be the returned beast, is revealed to the world. Then the third stage, represented by the 10 horns, will begin immediately and run until Jesus comes again.

This rule also implies that heads and horns normally are an outgrowth of the body they are attached to. This means they come after the body has existed and then is gone.For example, the leopard beast had heads on it that represented that the kingdom was divided in some way after Alexander the Great's death. These heads did NOT represent kings that came from a time before Alexander the Great even existed. Instead, the heads were leopard heads, just like the body was that of a leopard, which tells you that the succeeding kingdoms were very much like the original kingdom they came from and they were derived from the original "leopard" kingdom (the kingdom of Alexander the Great).

This implies that the heads cannot be kingdoms that are derived from another kingdom. The leopard heads were divisions of the kingdom represented by the body of the leopard and not that of, for example, the bear or the lion.

Ownership Principle -

This principle says that God is the owner of the kingdoms of this world. Daniel 2, 4 and 5 make that abundantly clear. Therefore, Satan is not the owner of the world's kingdoms. When Satan was offering to give Jesus the world's kingdoms during his temptation in the wilderness, Satan was a liar because he did not own that which he was offering. He could not give that which he did not own.

Separate Powers Principle -

Within the same vision, separate kingdoms that arise independently of each other will be represented by separate beasts. This also means that heads on a beast do NOT represent separate kingdoms that arise independently of each other, but instead arise from a common previously existing kingdom. There are those who suggest that the heads on the scarlet beast are a series of seven ancient kingdoms, all of which arise separately from one another, but this rule, along with the Miller Principle, make it very clear that this idea is incorrect and not possible. Heads on a beast NEVER represent kingdoms that arise independently of one another. They must ALWAYS result from divisions of one kingdom only, the one they come from - the heads always grow out from the body they are attached to! The same principle applies to the horns that grow out of the same beast's heads. Ultimately, the heads on a beast trace their origins back to a common kingdom.

Similarity Principle -

This principle is really very simple. If a beast has several heads or several horns, then if the body represents a political power, the heads or horns will also represent political powers UNLESS an Exception Principle statement occurs to change that. If the body represents a religious power, then the heads or horns will also be like that of the body and will be religious powers UNLESS an Exception Principle statement occurs to change that. Thus, the leopard beast of Daniel 7 was a political power and the heads also were political powers. They were similar to each other in the nature of their power. The body of the dreadful fourth beast of Daniel 7 was a political power and the ten horns were like the body because they were political powers. However, the talking horn had an Exception Principle Statement attached to it: the Bible said that it was diverse from the others, which meant it was not like the others. It was primarily a religious power rather than a political power, though it is true that there were political powers subordinate to the Papacy that were part of it.

The dragon of Revelation 12 is an interesting case because there are those who claim that the heads on the dragon are a series of ancient political kingdoms. Unfortunately (or otherwise), that is not possible. The dragon is not the owner of any kingdoms on earth. Daniel 2 and 5 make it very clear that it is God who owns all the kingdoms of this world. Therefore, the dragon is a spiritual power only, not a political power. As a result, the heads of the dragon cannot be political kingdoms but must primarily be spiritual kingdoms in nature. They must be similar to the body of the beast they are attached to. Because it is not a political power, they cannot be primarily political powers, but instead must be religious powers.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

Key #5 - The Symbol Definitions

Note: The author has moved the symbol definitions that were once here, which gave complete details, to another web page. These will be made available at a later date when the new page is ready.

The table below gives brief definitions of most of the symbols found in Revelation 17. Some, but not all, of the definitions are complete, though brief, meaning that some of the symbolic interpretations are not necessarily applicable to Revelation, but are included so you can see how to compare the definitions to their usage in Revelation.

The author has prepared another table that has symbol definition for many of the symbols found throughout Revelation, which will be made available here soon.

Print the Table below: HTML (on the new page, click on File and then Print) PDF

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

Key #6 - The 3 Symbolic Environments

Prophetic beasts or powers usually occur in any of three symbolic earthly environments in both Daniel and Revelation. Two of these occur for the woman in Revelation 17, so it would be a good idea to better understand their symbolic meanings. The three environments are:

There are 2 exceptions to this, which are the dragon and the woman of Revelation 12 who are initially presented in the heavens. However, both of these powers end up in one or more of the three environments in the world, just like all others.

The symbolic location of a beast can indicate its origin and subsequent condition, or it may not indicate its origin at all, but rather indicates its current condition for the point in time represented for that power in the vision.

Let us begin a short discussion of the symbolic meaning of each of these three environments.

The waters - What Do They Mean Symbolically?

The sea or waters represent "peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues." (Revelation 17:15) The author has heard and read many people quote this verse, but most never follow that up with a real analysis of exactly what it means.

The beasts of Daniel 7 rose from the waters to indicate their origins AND their subsequent condition. Because they rise up from the waters, this indicates that they rise from among the nations and then rise above those around them. This implies that they cannot do this freely without a struggle, and indeed, in Daniel 7, winds were shown blowing over the waters to indicate the warfare and struggle for the empires to rise from among the nations and gain power over the others. They had to struggle against those around them. Their subsequent condition is shown by having the beasts remain either above or next to the waters from which they arose, which, at a minimum, indicates that these powers have influence over the nations from among which they arose. Daniel 7:12 says that each of those powers was given dominion (it states this by saying that they had it taken away from them, thereby implying that they had it given to them in the first place except for the leopard which was specifically stated to have been given dominion in the beginning), so as long as they remained next to the waters and were given dominion, they had controlling power over the nations , peoples, multitudes, and languages around them within their domain.

It is very important to note that when the Bible says that a power is next to or over water, it must also in some way indicate that this power has been given dominion over the nations. If a beast is over or next to waters but has not been said to be given dominion over the waters, then that beast has influence only and no control over the waters. Do understand that the kings of the earth are an exception to this because they automatically have dominion over the nations that they rule simply because they are the direct rulers of those nations.

Conversely, any power NOT placed on or near waters automatically DOES NOT HAVE dominion over the nations. It is simple based on the symbolism: no water = no peoples = no nations = no kingdom = no rulership. Think through the symbolism if you don't see this immediately.

The origins of the woman of Revelation 17 is never shown in that chapter. However, placing her over or next to the waters shows her condition when she is busy fornicating with the kings of the earth (remember that the combination of these two powers, the woman and the kings of the earth in fornication, is the beast according to the Beast Formula). This says that she is in a position of dominance over the nations because it directly says she has a kingdom over the kings of the earth in Revelation 17:18, so she can rule the nations through leveraged power over the kings of the earth. On this web page, we will represent the woman as sitting directly upon the waters, which is the same as her sitting next to the waters.

Something interesting about the Revelation 13 sea beast is that the Bible never says it goes ashore during the 1260 days once it rises out of the water. It was given dominion over the nations because it is said to have power over the nations (Revelation 13:7). It may have simply risen directly out of the water and remained above them or may have gone to shore. We simply are not told. But either way, the beast remains on or near the water. If it left the vicinity of the waters, such an action would represent that it no longer ruled the nations. Because its power ended in 1798, Revelation 13 could have said that it left the vicinity of the waters at that time, but did not do so because that detail was left to be explained in Revelation 17. However, it did say that its dominion ended in 1798 (that is when its time of power terminated, which is the same as ending its dominion), so this implies that it left the vicinity of the waters in 1798.

Where multiple kings or governments are indicated to exist, they must be over water, not earth, to be ruling over their nations. That is a situation like the kings of the earth, who are over water to symbolize that they are ruling their respective nations. Take them away from the water and the result is that they have nobody to rule. Anarchy prevails in the wake of removing them from the waters if another king is not put in place.

The Desert - What Does It Mean Symbolically?

A strange thing often happens when the subject of either the desert (wilderness) or abyss (bottomless pit) comes up in a study of Revelation. People often run to the Greek-English dictionary and look up the Greek definitions. Very strange, indeed, because they don't need to do that. The Bible defines the symbolic meaning of these words very clearly. Here is how.

Compare the following verses:

In the case of the scarlet beast of Revelation 17, John first sees it in the wilderness and then the angel explains that it will come out of the bottomless pit. In the case of the devil, he is first locked in the bottomless pit and a thousand years later is let out of his prison.

The essence of his prison is that he cannot tempt the nations for a thousand years. He is almost literally bored stiff because he has nothing at all to do but think over what he has done and what he is facing because of his actions.

But do you see what is done here by the statements of the angel? He says that the bottomless pit is the same as a prison in Revelation 20:1-3, 7, and also says that the desert is the same as the bottomless pit in Revelation 17:3, 8. Therefore, he makes this equation:

If you put this information into the wilderness in Revelation 12, it makes good sense because all it says is that the woman is put into a prison for protective custody for her protection during the 1260 years. Also, the dragon (devil) does NOT follow her into the wilderness during the 1260 years because if he did, that would say that he went into prison also. Thus, he remains on the earth.

This same information works in Leviticus 16 with the scape goat, who is a symbol of Satan being put into the abyss during the thousand years.

Some have argued that the wilderness of Leviticus 16 or Revelation 12 is not the same as the wilderness of Revelation 17. The burden of proof is upon them because there is no statement in the Bible saying that they are different. Therefore, that is their opinion and nothing more. We must not allow our opinions to define the symbols for us but allow the Bible to clarify the meaning for us. There is no redefinition of the wilderness between Revelation 12 and Revelation 20 so the symbolic meaning is identical.

So, whenever you see the symbolic words wilderness or desert, abyss or bottomless pit in Revelation, think "PRISON"!

The abyss or bottomless pit of Revelation 9 uses the literal definition of the abyss in a symbolic way as a prison. After all, the angel of the abyss (Satan) is given a key to unlock the door to the abyss. Prisons are normally locked. This key obviously had to have been given to him by God because Satan is not the ruler of the bottomless pit. God rules all domains and Satan does not rule any. The key is "permission" to start a new religion at that time, the Muslim religion, and all he does is release this into the world, which has a big impact and will continue to do so until the very end of this world's history.

The Earth - What Does It Mean Symbolically?

Where used alone without naturally occurring water nearby, the earth should be considered to be different than either the water or desert. It is not the sea, so cannot represent a condition where there are significant previously organized peoples, nations, languages, or multitudes. It is also not the desert, so is not a prison. The earth is not a prison and is not a condition where there are significant previously organized nations. Then what is it?

We find the earth beast of Revelation 13 in this condition. The earth represents that this beast power arose in a location where there were no significant previously organized nations. This is a reasonable conclusion because the earth is "dry", the opposite of having water. The fact that it arose at all indicates that it clearly is not in a prison. Combining the condition under which it arose and the approximate date, about 1798 (it is near the end of the 1260 days of the sea beast because it comes after the sea beast's time of power), and the fact that it will have great power, leads one to conclude that this beast represents the United States in prophecy.

A power rising out of the earth will not have a significant struggle against other nations because they simply are not there to create any significant opposition, or else are small enough that they are not significant.

Do remember that the earth represents a condition and usually does not represent a specific country. The devil also is said to be upon the earth, so if the earth is a specific country, that country certainly has the devil in them! Of course, that is not true because the earth represents a condition, not a specific country. But just don't be fooled if someone claims that the earth represents a specific country. Used in the way it is in Revelation and Daniel, it cannot do that. However, it can represent a stable, established, secular government of a specific country, but cannot represent the country itself.

The devil is said to be upon the earth because he is not in prison and he has no significant opposition from earthly powers. In addition, God is said to be the ruler of the nations (see Daniel 2:37, 5:18), so Satan is not said to have dominion over the nations.

There is one ancient version of the Bible in which Revelation 13:1 says that he (Satan) stands upon the sea shore as the sea beast rises out of the water. This in no way should be construed to say that Satan has dominion over the waters because it does not say that he has such power. Instead, in this instance, this is a position of influence on the part of Satan. He instigated the Eastern Roman Empire to create the Papacy by a decree. Satan is responsible, to be sure, but it was through influence, not direct control that he accomplished this. We can say he has been given credit by responsibility because he is the hidden agent responsible for instigating this event in history.

Any beast representing a visible earthly power which is over the earth has control only over the people within its own domain. It has no control over other nations. However, whenever two or more kingdoms are involved, then waters must be under them. At least, that is how God seems to have designed the visions.

In Daniel 7, we are presented the picture of the fourth dreadful beast walking about on the land, treading it down (Daniel 7:23). This beast clearly represented Rome, but if we say that the earth represents unpopulated areas (as is commonly done with the earth beast of Revelation 13), then we have a problem because Rome certainly did not generally rule over unpopulated areas. It is estimated by historians that the population in the Roman empire at its height was about 120 million people (Thomas J. Craughwell, How the Barbarian Invasions Shaped the Modern World, Fair Winds Press, Beverly, Massachusetts, USA, copyright 2008, page 14), so it certainly was not a "dry" area. So, why is the fourth dreadful looking beast said to walk about on dry land and tread it down?

If you take time to examine Daniel 7, you should note that there are four beasts that come out of the water. As each beast in turn comes out of the water, each one of them goes up onto dry land near the water from which they came. We know that the waters represent nations, languages, multitudes and peoples, and when you add winds blowing upon the waters, which represent warfare and strife among the nations, then you get the picture that the four empires rise because of warfare among the nations, out of which one of them rises to dominance over the others. The rising of the beasts out of the waters represents this ascension to dominance over the other nations. Once the dominance is achieved, a stable, established government is fixed in place. The earth represents the stable, established government that rules over the nations once the main conquest is finished.

Therefore, the four beasts achieve dominance over other nations, which is represented by their rising from the waters. Next, they establish a stable government that rules over the conquered nations, which is represented by each of the four beasts walking about on the land around the waters from which they arose. The waters continue to represent the nations that they conquered, while the dry land that they walk about represents the stable, established government that rules over the conquered nations. This is the only way to make sense of the symbolic earth that the four beasts walk on after they rise out of the waters.

Some have suggested that the earth is literal, but why would it be that everything else in the vision, such as the waters the beasts rise from and the beasts themselves are symbolic, and yet the earth is literal? That does not make much sense. It is better to see the earth as symbolic for then it fits in with the other symbols and explains the entire vision better.

In the case of the earth beast of Revelation 13, the beast rising from the earth represents that this new power rose out of a stable, established government that was already in place. The earth beast represents the United States in prophecy, so the stable, established government out of which it arose is that of Great Britain because it was the ruler of much of the Eastern North American Continent when the United States arose. Thus, in the prophecy of Revelation 13 for the earth beast, the earth itself represents the stable established colonial government of Great Britain. It represents only the government in place, not the nation of Great Britain. They are not identical things. of course, for the earth beast to rise to power, it required a revolution against the British colonial government. Thus, the rising to power of this beast represents the revolution that brought it to power and independence from the previous colonial government that remained in place until the signing of the treaty between the United States and Great Britain that granted the United States independence in 1783.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

Let Us Put It All Together To Understand Revelation 17

Revelation 17 in a Picture

Now that you have studied the first 6 keys to understanding Revelation 17, let us begin to put this all together so that you can see the big picture. First, examine the picture below. This is a pictorial summary of Revelation 17.

Note: licensors of the pictures in the graphic above include Microsoft Corporation (for the water background). Other licensors are: http://www.novadevelopment.com (the desert background) and http://www.hemera.com (the daughters). Some pictures obtained from http://www.krohneFamilyMedia.com (prostitute woman and kings of the earth), a source we found to be excellent.

Here are the important points of the graphic above:

1. The prostitute woman's history begins with her sitting on the water fornicating with the kings of the earth (this is the scarlet beast according to the Beast Formula), then she moves to the desert where she sits on the seven heads of the scarlet beast, and finally she moves back to the waters and resumes fornicating with the kings of the earth for the second time (the beast returns). These are the three phases of the Papacy during its history. Note that the woman in the artist's representation above is sitting upon the seven necks of the seven heads. It would be nearly impossible to show her sitting directly upon the seven heads and for you to see that they are seven heads, so the author placed them on the necks. That is not totally accurate, but is much better than placing her on the back of the beast, which is totally inaccurate and misrepresents things completely.
   
   
2. There are three phases to the history of the Papacy, which match up with the body of the beast, the 7 heads, and the 10 horns. The three phases are the "was" phase of the beast, the "one is" phase of the 7 heads, and the "yet is" phase of the beast (the return of the beast during the time of the 10 horns).
   
   
3. The kings of the earth stay on the water at all times. They NEVER leave the waters to go anywhere else.
   
   
4. The daughters are born during the first phase of the Papacy or shortly after, then begin to grow up during the time of the 7 heads. During the time of the 10 horns, they will join their mother in fornicating with the kings of the earth. Therefore, they will also be upon the waters when this time arrives (they have to because that is the only place the kings of the earth are ever at).
   
   
5. The 7 kings which match up with the 7 heads and 7 mountains have power only when they and the woman are together in the desert during the second phase of the beast's history. The power of the 7 kings is severely restrained because they are in the desert, which symbolizes a prison. Their power is religious only because they have no kings of the earth through which to legally leverage power against the people of God. The seven kings are not the kings of the earth and must not be confused with them. Even though during the desert scene the seven heads are the only part of the beast which actually exist, for completeness the body of the beast and its 10 horns are also shown to show the past and the future. It would look very strange to John if only the 7 heads showed up with the woman sitting upon them while in the desert with no body to attach them to.
   
   
6. When the prostitute woman returns to sitting upon the waters during the third phase, this allows her to resume fornicating with the kings of the earth, the combination of which is the beast and is identified with the 8th king of Revelation 17:11.

Do understand that the vision recorded in Revelation 17 and 18 is one vision because they are about the same subject, the judgment or punishment of the prostitute woman. Unfortunately, those who divided the Bible into chapters failed to leave the two parts together as one. The story in Revelation 18 is relatively straightforward whereas the story in Revelation 17 is the mysterious part that needs to be understood, so we will concentrate on that.

Before explaining the graphic above, it is important to first outline exactly what John actually saw and did not see. So far as we can tell, in the vision of Revelation 17 and 18 John actually saw the following:

1. the prostitute woman's clothing, her jewelry, the golden cup and the things in it
2. the desert or wilderness
3. the scarlet colored beast with 7 heads and 10 horns
4. the names of blasphemy on the body and the 7 heads of the beast
5. the prostitute woman sitting on the 7 heads of the beast (this was explained in detail, probably because John merely noted she sat on the beast)
6. the drunk state of the woman
7. the destruction of the woman (merely explained but not seen in Revelation. 17. However, it apparently was seen in Revelation. 18.)

John did NOT see the following:

1. the woman fornicating with the kings of the earth
2. the kings of the earth
3. in Revelation 17 he did not see the waters where the woman sits (he saw these previously elsewhere), but he may have seen the waters again in Revelation 18, though that is not certain
4. the daughters of the woman
5. the seven kings
6. the 10 kings (but he did see the 10 horns)
7. the war against the saints of God

Now , let us explain why the graphic above that shows the three phase overview of the Papacy was designed as you see it. Certainly the understanding we have of Revelation 17 is not like any other, and some would say we are wrong simply because we see it differently. But, there are very good Biblical reasons why the graphic was designed this way. It explains Revelation 17 in considerable detail.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

The First Phase of the Papacy

Here is what the angel said at the beginning of Revelation 17:

Revelation 17:1 And there came one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come here; I will show unto you the judgment of the great harlot that sits upon many waters:
Revelation 17:2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.

In the picture on the left side of the graphic, you should see the woman seated on the waters and the kings of the earth standing around her (we could not find any good pictures of kings sitting that were usable, so settled for these). Of course, we won't actually show her fornicating with the kings of the earth, but the angel does explain that this is the activity that the woman and the kings of the earth engage in while they are together on the waters.

Because the angel's explanation of this vision starts with the woman on the waters fornicating with the kings of the earth, we make this the first picture on the left side of the graphic because we believe that the history of the prostitute woman begins at that point in time. We believe this because of several reasons, which are as follows:

• There is a general progression of time from the beginning of the story in Revelation 17 to the end of the chapter. Because of that, it only makes sense to see the beginning of the story as the earliest part of it, even if that part was merely explained instead of shown to John. It does not have to be shown to be part of the story.
  
  
• A second important reason is that the scarlet beast has blasphemy all over it, which clearly points to the Catholic Church. We know from history that the Catholic Church persecuted people during the dark ages and instigated the nations of Europe to persecute even larger numbers of people on its behalf. It was able to do this because the decree of Justinian gave the Church power over the people of God through leaders of the nations of Europe. In effect, it was a combination of the Catholic Church with the leaders of the nations of Europe, which was the beast that persecuted millions. But this is the same thing as the prostitute woman fornicating with the kings of the earth. Therefore the story starts when the beast began, 538 AD.

The key to understanding this idea is to understand the Beast Formula. If you understand the beast formula, then you should have no difficulty seeing that the woman fornicating with the kings of the earth upon the waters is the same thing as the beast itself.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

The Second Phase of the Papacy

The Desert Scene and the Kings of the Earth

There are two pictures in the middle part of the graphic. The top picture is of the woman with the beast and the young daughters in the desert. The bottom picture is of the kings of the earth standing alone on the waters. What is the rational behind these two pictures?

Revelation 17:3 and 8 say the following:

Revelation 17:3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sitting upon a scarlet colored beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
Revelation 17:8 The beast that you saw 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, and is not, and yet is.

Now, notice verse 8 begins with the phrase " The beast that you saw was, and is not". This should be very clear. The scarlet beast itself is primarily Papal, but is a combined power which God said in Daniel 7 would not exist until 538 AD and would remain until 1798 (1260 years later). But the angel says here that it "was, and is not". This makes it very clear that the angel is speaking from a time after 1798 because he says that one of the heads "is".

Many suppose that the angel's statement that one of the seven heads of the scarlet beast "is" makes it perfectly clear that the angel is speaking from John's own time. But because the scarlet beast is Papal, that is an impossibility. God clearly indicated in Daniel 7 that the composite beast power arises after 476 AD, so there is no way that the angel's statement could possibly refer to John's own time. Those who assume that the angel is speaking from John's time have failed to properly identify the beast, which in turn leads them to incorrectly date the time from which the angel is speaking to John.

According to the Beast Formula, the Beast = Prostitute Woman + Kings of the Earth = Roman Church + Leaders of Other Nations. Think about this in relation to what the angel told John at the beginning of the vision where the woman and the kings of the earth are mentioned. It clearly is Papal because this is the same exact makeup of the sea beast in Revelation 13, which is also clearly Papal.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

The Kings of the Earth

The kings of the earth are a bit of a problem. What happens to them after February 15, 1798? Did they go into prison (the desert) also or did they remain upon the waters?

To answer this question, think carefully about the symbolism. The kings of the earth are upon the waters during the 1260 prophetic days when the woman is there fornicating with them. The kings of the earth are there because they are the legal, rightful rulers of the nations so automatically have dominion over the nations. On February 15, 1798, the Papal power had its legal right to persecute taken away from it. This forcibly separated the Roman Church from the leaders of the nations so that the Roman Church could no longer use the leaders of the nations to enforce its rules against heresy. Thus, symbolically, the Roman Church, as the woman, was removed from the waters to indicate that she no longer ruled the nations through the kings of the earth.

But the kings of the earth are a different matter. Whereas the Papacy lost its legal rights to prosecute heresy, the legal right of the kings of the earth to rule over the nations was not in any way impacted by the decree of the French government on February 15, 1798. Therefore, they continued to rule, which means that symbolically they remained upon the waters. If they had been taken away from the waters in the vision, then such an act would tell us that after the decree of the French government, we would have no governments at all but rather would have anarchy. If you don't believe this, think through the symbolism and you should see that this is the correct conclusion.

It is for this reason that the kings of the earth are shown in the middle of the graphic standing alone on the waters. The woman cannot be there with them and they must remain upon the waters to indicate that they are still ruling the nations after February 15, 1798.

So, do remember this: the kings of the earth NEVER leave the waters.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

The Desert Scene

Now, if you were God and designing this vision for John, how would you show the history of the Roman Church AFTER February 15, 1798? Would you place the woman on the waters? Careful! If you leave her on the waters this would suggest she can still fornicate with the kings of the earth because that is where they always stay. So, what would you do?

What God did was move her to the desert or wilderness to indicate that she is no longer able to rule the nations through the kings of the earth and to indicate that the beast no longer exists as a power on earth because it is in prison. The kings of the earth remain upon the waters and the woman moves to the desert. Consequently, they are symbolically separated meaning they can no longer legally interact to effect persecution.

Therefore, the woman sitting upon the 7 heads of the scarlet beast in the desert is symbolic of the history of the Catholic Church beginning on February 15, 1798, and running until the beast returns someday, as is explained in verse 11. The kings of the earth remain upon the waters while the woman remains in the desert until the woman is done sitting upon the 7 heads of the scarlet beast. Then she will move back to the waters and resume fornicating with the kings of the earth, which means that the beast returns at that moment.

Obviously, when the woman is sitting upon the seven heads, she is no longer over waters. This means she is ruling over nobody. The waters represent nations, languages, multitudes, and peoples, and without waters under her, none of these symbolic conditions are present. Therefore, when she is in the desert, she has no power over the nations. Plus, there is no statement giving her dominion over other nations in the desert scene. There can be no fornication going on there because the kings of the earth are not in the desert due to the fact that they stay on the waters when she moves to the desert. The kings/heads/mountains she sits on are not kings of the earth, so have no political power and no access to it either. Plus, they are not over water either, so rule over nobody. Their power is religious power only and have no dominion over the nations during this time.

There is one other aspect of the desert picture in the middle section of the graphic overview of Revelation 17. Did you notice the young girls in the left side foreground of the picture? These represent the daughters of the prostitute woman (we only had room for a couple of them but there really are more). They are not babies here because they were born near the end of the 1260 days when the woman was busy fornicating with the kings of the earth (illegitimate births do occur sometimes because of fornication, and these are no exception to that). We chose to represent them as young girls because at this stage of history, they are growing and have not yet reached the age when they will turn to prostitution.

Because the prostitute woman represents the Catholic Church, from history we know that the Catholic Church gave birth to the Protestant Churches. Clearly then, the daughters represent the Protestant Churches.

Some say that the term "mother of harlots" in Revelation 17:5 is more like a madam of a whore house. That may be true, but we do know that in history, the Catholic Church gave birth to the Protestant Churches. Therefore, it is the mother of the Protestant Churches in a very real sense, madam or not.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

The Separate Parts of the Beast and the Miller Principle

The scarlet beast of Revelation 17 obeys the rules of Daniel 7 in which the body comes first, then the heads, and finally the horns - the rule we call the Miller Principle. The fact is the angel spoke of the different parts as if they were separate. Here is the evidence of this:

Revelation 17:8 says the following:

Revelation 17:8 The beast that you saw 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, and is not, and yet is.

Notice that the angel says that the "beast...was". The angel is clearly referring to the beast as in the past relative to the time from where he is speaking.

Revelation 17:10 says the following:

Revelation 17:9 And here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sits.

Revelation 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he comes, he must continue a short time.

Notice that the angel says that "one is". This is the moment from which he was speaking to John. Based on the evidence demonstrated so far, it should be clear that this is sometime after February 15, 1798.

But what is important here is that after having said that the "beast...was", he then says there are seven heads. Obviously, he considers the heads to be separate from the "beast", which means that the term "beast" must refer to the body of the beast, and for his purposes of explaining the vision, it did not include the heads and horns.

Revelation 17:12 says the following:

Revelation 17:12 And the ten horns which you saw are ten kings, who have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

Notice the use of future language. The ten horns "have received no kingdom as yet". In other words, their day of power is yet future from the point in time from which the angel is speaking.

But again, here he clearly refers to the horns as if they are separate from the "beast".

The angel has already said that the beast was and then explains the heads and says the horns are yet future. This tells you several things:

• The beast is considered to be separate from the heads and horns by the angel for the purposes of the explanation of the vision recorded in Revelation 17 and 18.
  
  
• Because we know that the beast (meaning the body of the beast) is the combination of the woman with the leaders of other nations, the heads and horns CANNOT be the same thing as the body of the beast or they would not be considered separately from the body.
  
  
• Note that the angel did NOT say that "the beast and five heads were", but rather instead he said the "beast...was...five are fallen, one is, and the other is not yet come...And the ten horns...have received no kingdom as yet" (Revelation. 17: 8, 10, 12). By doing this, he makes it clear that the time frames for each of the body parts (body, heads, and horns) are separate from one another.

Does it not strike you that this is an identical pattern to that displayed in Daniel 7? The beast's body comes first and represents the Papacy combined with other nations for the legally authorized purpose of persecution during the 1260 prophetic days. Then the 7 heads occur, and finally the horns come last, just like is done in Daniel 7. Daniel 7 showed two different 2-phase beasts. Revelation has several 3-phase beasts, but the principle of interpretation is identical. The Miller Principle was demonstrated in Daniel 7 through the design and understanding of the beasts and how they showed future history. Nowhere in Daniel or Revelation is the Miller Principle revoked by an Exception Principle statement, so it still holds true in Revelation 17.

When the prostitute woman is sitting on the 7 heads of the beast in the desert, this represents that she is sitting upon all of them at once. Thus, because she is there after February 15, 1798, this means that all 7 of those heads must exist during the same time frame. This means the heads cannot exist prior to that time.

The fact that the woman does not sit upon the back of the beast and does not sit upon the horns reinforces that each part of the beast represents a separate time period.

The three phases can be summarized like this:

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

The 7 Heads

Let us now identify the 7 heads.

The seven heads are said to be seven kings (Revelation 17:10). They are not kings of the earth and are not merchants of the earth, so the only category left for them is religious kings. But who are these religious kings? John said that the beast had blasphemy all over it. This means that both the body and the heads have blasphemy on them (same as where it is found on the Revelation 13 sea beast). The blasphemy on the heads points directly to the Catholic Church. Therefore, the heads must be the religious kings of the Catholic Church, or in other words, they are the popes.

The heads somehow represent the popes. But how? Each head must be a line of kings and cannot be individual popes because in Daniel 7, kings are lines of kings. Take a look at the list of popes below that have been in office beginning in 1798. Try to figure out how you would divide them 7 ways.

• Pius VI (1775-1799)
• Pius VII (1800-1823)
• Leo XII (1823-1829)
• Pius VIII (1829-1830)
• Gregory XVI (1831-1846)
• Blessed Pius IX (1846-1878)
• Leo XIII (1878-1903)
• St. Pius X (1903-1914)
• Benedict XV (1914-1922)
• Pius XI (1922-1939)
• Pius XII (1939-1958)
• Blessed John XXIII (1958-1963)
• Paul VI (1963-78)
• John Paul I (1978)
• John Paul II (1978-2005)
• Benedict XVI (2005-)

So, how would you divide them seven ways?

Do you give up?

Try dividing them by name (ignore the Roman numerals after their names). In other words, group them by their name lines (such as Paul or Pius).

Now, do you see how this works? There are in fact seven name lines of popes (such as Paul or John Paul) that have occurred after 1798. Those name lines are:

1. Gregory (fell in 1846)
2. Leo (fell in 1903)
3. Benedict (fell in 1922 - there is an explanation for this one!)
4. Pius (fell in 1958)
5. John (fell in 1963)
6. Paul (fell in 1978) - the "one is" of Revelation 17:10
7. John Paul (fell in 2005) - the one "not yet come"

A name line is considered to exist until it falls (which means a given line exists until the last member of that line dies IN OFFICE with that name attached to him). The first six names listed above are considered to exist continuously until each of them falls, one by one. Obviously, the individual popes do not rule at the same time, but that is not the point. The point is that kings are lines of kings, not individual kings, so, they are considered by God to exist simultaneously with the others until then. The emphasis is upon the continuity of the name lines, not the individual popes.

If you look at the name Paul, the last pope of which occurred as Paul VI from 1963 to 1978, there were five Papal name lines that had died out before him (Gregory, Leo, Benedict, Pius, and John) and there was a new name who was to come after him (John Paul), who had never been before and was to remain only a short while. The John Paul line did in fact remain (or hold office) the least time of any of the seven names. Some get upset at this because John Paul II's time in office was one of the longest in Papal history, but the total time of reign of both John Paul's was about 26 years or so, far less than the total time in office for any of the name lines among the seven. For more information about this, click here and look at the table near the bottom of the page.

A very important point not to miss is that the "one is" of Revelation 17:10 is Pope Paul because that name line coexisted with the others before John Paul, and remained after the first five names had died out before him, for which reason the angel could say that five had fallen before him and he was the "one is". This is logical, is it not? The last member of that line was Pope Paul VI who was on the Papal throne from 1963 to 1978.

You may question about Benedict because we now have a Benedict in office, so how is it that he would be counted as having fallen when in fact his name has returned to the Papal office? Do understand that Benedict has indeed fallen. For a name line to fall means that the last individual pope of a name line dies in office with that name attached to him. For a name line that has fallen, there will never be another pope that will die with that name attached to him, even if he were to start out with that name. As incredible as it may seem, Benedict XVI will not die with the name Benedict attached to him. The Bible tells us that. But more about that later. So, Benedict is a name that indeed has fallen.

To see a graphical representation of the lines of popes and when they reigned, click here.

For a quick review, if you think about this scenario, you have the woman seated on the 7 heads, who are seven mountains and seven kings. She sits on all of them at once. She does this during the entire time that she is not sitting upon the waters. Since this must occur after February 15, 1798, this shows that the heads must also occur after that same date. They have to be there at the same time the woman is present or she could not sit upon them. Because she sits upon the heads and not upon the body and not upon the horns, this also indicates that she is there only during the time of the heads. Of course, being in the desert symbolizes that she is in restraint during that time and that the beast and all its heads and horns are also under restraint. At all other times, she is back on the waters fornicating with the kings of the earth. This also tells you that the heads are a separate time period from either the body or the horns.

But significantly, you now know that she sits upon the kings who rule her city, who are the lines of popes by name. And do remember that it did NOT say that she has a kingdom over the seven kings but rather has a kingdom over the kings of the earth. There is a difference.

Some have argued with the author that the woman sits only upon one head or maybe upon only one head at a time. The burden of proof is upon them, however, because there is no verse that says any such thing in Revelation 17 or even implies it. And to say such a thing directly contradicts the words of the angel who said that the woman sits upon the seven heads who are seven mountains. I don't know about you, but the author would rather not contradict the angel. Chances are, he knew what he was talking about a lot more than we do.

Some will also object by saying that the seven heads are also seven mountains, and because Daniel defines mountains to be political kingdoms, we are totally wrong.

Such an objection appears reasonable because Daniel indeed does define mountains to be political kingdoms. But they forget that Daniel also has a second definition of the symbolism by association (remember that symbols are defined by several methods, including by association - as long as it was recognized by the people of the times in which it was written). Take a look at these verses from Daniel:

Daniel 9:16 O Lord, according to all your righteousness, I beseech you, let your anger and your fury be turned away from your city Jerusalem, your holy mountain: because for our sins, and for the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and your people have become a reproach to all that are about us.

Daniel 9:20 And while I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God for the holy mountain of my God;

Daniel 11:45 And he shall plant the tents of his palace between the sea and the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.

As you read these verses, you should realize that Daniel associated a mountain with God (Daniel 9:16 also associated it with the city of Jerusalem). Don't forget that most Christians believe that God actually is a Godhead with three divine beings working together as one. Thus, this mountain of God that Daniel refers to is in fact a dwelling place for a group of Gods, just like the Babylonians defined a mountain as a symbol for the dwelling place for a group of gods. The important differences are that God is not a figment of the imagination as were the pagan gods and the Godhead members work together as one, instead of independently as the pagan gods were supposed to do (so he indeed is "one" as he says). These are not the only places in the Bible where mountains are associated with gods. For further information about this issue, click here.

The definition of mountains as political kingdoms would be perfectly acceptable in Revelation 17 if it were not for the fact that the beast and its heads are Papal AND the 7 kings are not kings of the earth, meaning that they are not political kings but instead must be religious kings. These two facts negate the idea that the mountains are political kingdoms because all the facts have to fit together as a consistent whole. Remember that it says that heads are mountains and are kings. That is an identity (each is the same as the other), meaning you cannot mismatch the symbolism together.

But maybe one could say that it all depends on how one looks at it. By defining things in a different order, maybe we can come up with a different interpretation?

Suppose then that mountains are first interpreted to be political kingdoms, just as Daniel defines it. IF that is true, then the definition of kings given in Revelation 17 would have to be that they are political kings. That only makes sense, does it not? Unfortunately, Revelation 17 make it very clear that kings CANNOT BE POLITICAL KINGS but are religious kings because kings are not kings of the earth. Kings of the earth and merchants of the earth have a fixed definition in Revelation 17 that cannot be changed. Kings clearly are different than either of them. As a result, given the premise that the mountains are political kingdoms, this creates a mismatch between the kings and mountains. You cannot change the interpretation of kings and be consistent with the Bible's own definitions, so the only thing you can do to create a true match between the kings and mountains is to find a different Bible definition of mountains that matches up with kings.

Do remember that the prostitute woman is said to have a kingdom over the kings of the earth, but is never said to have a kingdom over the seven kings. The fact is, there is no statement giving the prostitute woman dominion over any power while she is sitting upon the seven heads of the scarlet beast, which indicates that she has no kingdom over anybody, whether she is sitting on the heads or not. There must be a statement of dominion for her to have power because she is NOT defined to be a queen of the earth, which would make her a political power and the direct ruler over a nation, thereby giving her automatic dominion. Since there is no such statement, she has no kingdom while sitting upon the seven heads of the scarlet beast in the desert.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

The Third Phase of the Papacy

The 10 Horns

Let us now look at the 10 horns.

If you carefully read Revelation 13 and 17, you should notice that nothing is said about the horns having blasphemy on them. The body of the sea beast speaks blasphemy (clearly a behavior) and the heads have names of blasphemy written on them in Revelation 13 (remember the Characteristics Principle which says that things attached to beasts or other powers, such as words written on them, refers to behaviors). The horns of the sea beast of Revelation 13 are not mentioned to have names of blasphemy on them so the only conclusion we can draw is that there is none. John was quite careful to record details like this, so if he didn't say the horns had blasphemy upon them, you can be quite certain that they didn't.

In Revelation 17, the scarlet beast has blasphemy all over it. The fact that the scarlet beast and the sea beast of Revelation 13 represent the same combined powers means that the body, heads, and horns of both beasts correspond to one another. This means the horns on the scarlet beast do not have blasphemy on them while the body and heads do have blasphemy on them just like the heads of the Revelation 13 sea beast had blasphemy on it and the body spoke blasphemy (it did say that during the 1260 days, the beast would speak blasphemy so that has to mean that the body did this).

The lack of blasphemy on the horns indicates that they do not claim to be God and do not claim to be able to forgive sins. That clearly indicates that the horns cannot be Papal. So, what are they?

From the rules of interpretation derived from Daniel (the Miller Principle), we know that the heads of a beast must come from the body and the horns from the heads. In other words, the power the heads represent come from the power represented by the body of a beast. Since the body and seven heads of the scarlet beast are Papal, this means the horns on the scarlet beast MUST represent powers that come from the Catholic Church. However, the lack of blasphemy on the horns tells us that the horns are not Catholic. Historically, what religious organizations have come out of the Catholic Church and yet are not Catholic? From history, it is obvious that the Protestant Churches fit this criteria. Therefore, the 10 horns are connected with the Protestant Churches.

Revelation 17:12 says the 10 horns are 10 kings who have not yet received a kingdom. This should lead you to some interesting parallels with the prostitute woman and some reasonable deductions. The Bible says that the prostitute woman is a city. It also tells us that this city is named Babylon because that name is on her forehead. In cities of ancient times, it was not uncommon for them to have a king ruling the city and its residents.

The woman in Revelation 17 is said to be a city, so it should be apparent that the Bible is trying to get us to compare the woman to this common theme from ancient times. In this comparison, we can say that she is a city which has a king who rules the city and residents that live inside the city. Since the woman is a symbol of the Catholic Church, we can conclude that the kings who rule the city are the popes and the citizens are the members of the Catholic Church who believe in and follow the pope. You can take this one step further because cities in those days had walls around them. The walls correspond to the beliefs of the church and serves to distinguish between those on the inside from those on the outside. The walls served also to protect those inside from those outside who would do them harm, at least, in the view of those in authority in the Catholic Church.

Now, because the woman is the Catholic Church, then her daughters must be the Protestant Churches because the Protestant Churches came out of the Catholic Church towards the end of the 1260 days of prophetic time (1260 literal years). Think comparison and parallels here. The prostitute woman is a queen, a prostitute, a church, a city called Babylon, has kings that rule her city, and has citizens living inside that city. Since her daughters are churches, are prostitutes also, and also have kings (the 10 horns are the Protestant Church leaders who are 10 kings that according to the angel had not yet received a kingdom), then the following can be reasonably concluded:

• the daughters are also cities
• the daughters have kings who rule their cities, so the kings are Protestant Church leaders just like the prostitute woman has seven kings that rule her city
• those cities have residents who are members of the Protestant Churches
• The daughters are also queens like their mother
• The walls around each daughter city corresponds to the individual beliefs of each Protestant Church which serve to define who is and who is not a member of each church. In other words, the beliefs of each church, like a wall, determines who is inside a given city and who is on the outside.
• In ancient times, walls around cities helped protect those inside from those outside. Likewise, the beliefs of each of these churches will help protect their residents inside from those outside.
• We don't know for sure but it appears that there is one king for each Protestant Religion and 10 cities, so there probably are 10 daughters that represent all Protestant denominations. It is reasonable to conclude that there is one king for each Protestant Religion when the 10 horns receive power because they will have it only a short time.

The cities of the daughters are unnamed in the Bible but it is not at all unreasonable to conclude these ideas. It really helps to understand Revelation 17 by considering the woman and her daughters to be comparable to cities of ancient times. It explains where the kings come from and it helps us understand their role.

The Bible has this to say about the 10 kings:

Revelation 17:12 And the ten horns which you saw are ten kings, who have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
Revelation 17:13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.

The 10 horns receive power with the beast for one hour. Remember that the beast will return when the woman goes back to the water and begins fornicating with the kings of the earth. Receiving power with the beast strongly suggests that the 10 horns receive power at the same time as the beast, and will have it on their own for a short time but then give their power over to the beast. By doing this, they make the beast their master. He will control and rule over them eventually.

Crowns on Heads and Horns - What Are They?

It is interesting that in Revelation 13, the sea beast has 10 horns which have 10 crowns upon them. In Revelation 12, it is the 7 heads of the dragon who have 7 crowns.

To understand the relationship of the beasts to the crowns in Revelation 12 and 13, consider these facts. The dragon, the sea beast, and the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 all have 7 heads and 10 horns. There is only one explanation in all of the Bible for a single beast with 7 heads and 10 horns: that explanation is found in Revelation 17 (we really don't care where the explanation is given as there is no rule that says the explanation must occur after Revelation 12 and 13 - all that really matters is that there is one beast with 7 heads and 10 horns with an explanation for the heads and horns). Therefore, the explanation found in Revelation 17 MUST explain the 7 heads and 10 horns upon all three beasts. That means the 7 heads and 10 horns upon all three beasts must represent the same powers.

The crowns upon the 10 horns in Revelation 13 on the sea beast represent that these horns are kings (note that in Revelation 17, they are called kings and no crowns are shown because it is not necessary to show crowns since it is explained that they are kings). Kings and queens wear crowns. The fact that crowns are placed on the horns upon the sea beast indicates that the sea beast will dominate the ten horns when they are kings. Remember that in Revelation 17, the beast will return during the time of the 10 horns, so indeed they can be dominated by the beast. Further, in Revelation 17, you learn that these 10 horns will hand their power and authority over to the beast, thereby making him their master. So, they will be ruled by the beast.

The 7 crowns upon the dragon's seven heads signify that these heads are also kings, but are upon the dragon's heads to indicate that these kings will be controlled by Satan during the time of the 7 heads. Those seven heads, of course, are the name lines of the popes during the time after February 15, 1798, who remain until the beast returns someday soon.

The Seven Heads of the Dragon - What Are they?

A related issue is this: There is a common theory that the 7 heads of the dragon represent a series of ancient kingdoms, usually, but not always, beginning with Egypt, then Assyria, then the four empires of Daniel 7, and finally either the Papacy or the final Antichrist, depending on who is proposing the theory. We call this the sequential ancient kingdoms theory.

For this theory to be true, the world's kingdoms must be under the ownership and control of Satan. This is an unavoidable requirement demonstrated by the leopard beast of Daniel 7. The four heads of the leopard were created entirely from the territory and kingdom that Alexander the Great controlled and owned before his death. They were not created from territory outside of his kingdom or control. The same is true of the 10 horns on the fourth dreadful beast, which were entirely under the control and ownership of the Western Roman Empire. When Rome broke up, the 10 largest tribes created their territories from the territory formerly owned and controlled by the Western Roman Empire.

In essence, everyone who believes in this theory must ultimately believe that Satan owns and controls the world's kingdoms. Saying that Satan merely influences these kingdoms won't do by the Bible standard as demonstrated in Daniel 7 through the leopard beast and its four heads, and also by the 10 horns on the fourth dreadful beast of Daniel 7. Satan either controls and owns the world's kingdoms, which makes the theory true that the seven heads of the dragon are a series of ancient kingdoms, or else Satan does not own and control the world's kingdoms, in which case the seven ancient kingdoms theory is totally false. There is no middle ground. Which is right?

The authors have studied into this issue to determine the truth about it. Here is some of what was found: For the seven ancient kingdoms theory to be true, it hinges entirely upon Satan owning and controlling the kingdoms of this world and their physical domain so that the kingdoms the seven heads represent can be created entirely from territory which he owns and controls. This condition must be met to meet the Bible standard or else it is a false theory. In other words, if Satan fails to own and control the kingdoms of this world, then the seven ancient kingdoms theory to explain the heads of the dragon is totally false.

So, what does the Bible say about who owns and controls the kingdoms of this world? Study of the Bible shows that God directly owns and controls the kingdoms of this world, not Satan. Here is proof of that:

Daniel 2:37 You, O king, are a king of kings: for the God of heaven has given you a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.
Daniel 2:38 And wherever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven has he given into your hand, and has made you ruler over them all. You are this head of gold.

God could not give Nebuchadnezzar a political kingdom unless he (God) was the legal owner of it. God cannot just arbitrarily change the rules of the contest between him and Satan because then Satan would charge that God is arbitrary and unfair. The rest of the universe that is watching would likely agree with that. So, for God to do this, he has to be the legal, original, rightful owner before he can give out a kingdom to anybody, including to Nebuchadnezzar. This must be the state of things both before and after the cross of Jesus. If Satan was the legal owner of the kingdoms of this world and God arbitrarily gave it to Nebuchadnezzar, taking control of it away from Satan, then Satan could easily have shown up at the meetings that periodically go on in heaven (see Job 1 and 2) and declared that God was a thief! And he would have proof. Therefore, Satan never gained control or ownership of the kingdoms of this world. God is the legal, rightful owner of the world's kingdoms. Here is more evidence that this is true:

Daniel 5:21 And he (Nebuchadnezzar) was driven from the sons of men; and his heart was made like the beasts, and his dwelling was with the wild donkeys: they fed him with grass like oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven; till he knew that the most high God ruled in the kingdom of men, and that he appoints over it whomever he will.

Daniel 5:26 This is the interpretation of the matter: MENE; God has numbered your kingdom, and finished it.

These verses are very clear about this matter. The political kingdoms of this world do not belong to Satan but instead belong to God. Always have and always will. They are not Satan's to own or control. Satan claims them (see Matthew 4:8-9) but in truth, they are not his to give to anyone, so his claim is irrelevant. What matters is that God owns and controls the political kingdoms of this world.

Because God owns and controls the political kingdoms of this world, the conclusion of the whole matter is that the seven heads on Satan cannot possibly represent a series of ancient kingdoms. This is true because the seven heads cannot be created out of political kingdoms that Satan does not own.

One author has suggested that God owns the kingdoms, while Satan actually controls them (Ted Noel, The Controversy Over Worship, Part II). His justification for asserting that Satan is in control of this world is found in these verses:

John 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.

John 16:11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.

However, he forgot several other very important verses that completely change the meaning of these verses, the first of which is:

Eph 2:2 In which in time past you walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now works in the children of disobedience:

This tells you that Satan is allowed to control the forces of nature as well as those who choose disobedience to God.

There is a verse that is the "coffin nail" for the idea that Satan controls the world's kingdoms even if he does not own them:

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loves us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

This plainly tells us that it is Jesus who is the leader of the kings of the earth, the political leaders of the nations. There is no mistaking that Jesus is in control of the political leaders of the kingdoms of this world. Therefore, God not only owns the kingdoms, but through Jesus, he controls them as well. Satan neither owns nor controls the kingdoms of this world. Satan can and does influence them to do evil, for sure, but Jesus is in charge ultimately and Satan can do no more than permitted. This concept is plainly taught by the situation that Job faced because Satan challenged God (see Job 1-2).

One must conclude from this evidence that the seven heads of the dragon cannot possibly represent seven ancient kingdoms because Satan does not own them and does not even control them. Further, he cannot possibly possess the territory of the previous kingdoms to pass onto the seven ancient kingdoms that are supposedly represented by the heads of the dragon, something that is absolutely required as shown by the examples in Daniel 7 and 8 with the leopard, the dreadful beast, and the ram and goat. Satan is the prince of many individuals and many things of nature in this world, but God is the ruler over the kingdoms.

A second reason why the sequential ancient kingdoms theory is incorrect is this: Heads that represent kingdoms on a beast must be of a similar nature to the body which came before them (the Similarity Principle), which means that if the body represents a political kingdom, then the heads also must be political in nature. If the body represents a religious kingdom, then the heads likewise must be religious kingdoms. This is always true unless there is an Exception Principle statement allowing an exception to this rule. The problem is that Satan (represented by the body of the dragon) has a spiritual kingdom and there is no Exception Principle statement to allow the heads of the dragon to be political kingdoms. Therefore, any heads and horns on him have to be primarily spiritual in nature and cannot be political kingdoms.

Consider that Satan does not need or want a kingdom of this world. He wants the hearts and minds of everyone because he believes that this will give him bargaining power with God. He is trying to hold us hostage so as to force God to give him the world for his own permanent home. Therefore, the hearts and minds of everyone on this planet is far more important to him than having a throne or having earthly kingdoms in his possession. He wants to take it all, not just part of it. He is the ultimate terrorist.

In the entire Bible, there is only one visible earthly kingdom of which Satan is said to have been given control. This kingdom is a spiritual kingdom like Satan's own kingdom, so it meets the requirements of the Similarity Principle. This kingdom is the one represented by the sea beast of Revelation 13. Here is the statement of the Bible about that:

Revelation 13:2 And the beast that 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 his power, and his throne, and great authority.

The sea beast is primarily a spiritual kingdom (the blasphemy on it tells you this), just like the kingdom Satan has. Revelation 13:2 clearly gives the dragon ownership and control of the sea beast spiritual kingdom. Therefore, the heads are created out of the sea beast kingdom, which Satan already owns and controls. This meets the requirements of Daniel 7 that the heads must be created out of the territory and kingdom of the previous or current owner, which in this case is Satan. Clearly, the seven heads and ten horns of the dragon represent the same powers as the seven heads and ten horns of the sea beast.

There are no political kingdoms mentioned anywhere in the Bible over which Satan has ownership and control so that he can have them for his heads or horns. Therefore, the only logical explanation of the seven heads and the ten horns of the dragon is that they represent identical powers to those explained in Revelation 17.

There is a third reason why the heads cannot be a series of ancient kingdoms. The Concurrency Principle from Daniel 7 shows us that heads always rule at the same time and come after the kingdom represented by the body of the beast they are on. Unless there is an Exception Principle statement allowing some or all of the heads to be in sequence, they must all rule at the same time. Unfortunately, there is no such exception statement in Revelation 12. Therefore, the heads of the dragon must all occur at about the same relative time and cannot be a series of ancient political kingdoms.

In summary, what this means is that the heads of the dragon must come from the sea beast. Satan is not the ruler of this world's political kingdoms and the dragon heads cannot be political kingdoms. Heads also have to rule together, at the same time, unlike the series of ancient kingdoms. The Bible directly says that there is only one spiritual kingdom like his own of which he has been given control, the sea beast of Revelation 13, so the dragon's heads and horns must be the same as those of the sea beast. Since the Bible has clearly been fulfilled by this, why look for any other interpretation?

How Do the 10 Horns Receive a Kingdom?

Logically, you might ask what it means for the 10 horns to receive a kingdom? The answer to this is very simple. Do you remember that the prostitute woman has a kingdom over the kings of the earth (Revelation 17:18)? How did she get this kingdom? The answer is that she got it by fornicating with the kings of the earth and has it only so long as she continues this activity. That has to be true because when she moves to the desert, she cannot be fornicating with them during her stay in the desert due to the fact that the kings of the earth have to remain on the waters and cannot go to the desert. Thus, the fornication stops once she leaves the waters.

Remember that the woman is a city and has kings that rule within that city. That does constitute a type of kingdom but is NOT the kingdom that God refers to when he says that she has a kingdom over the kings of the earth. The one referred to is the power she gains over the leaders of the nations by fornication with them, or in other words, by having an improper alliance with them. By this means she obtains power over the people of God through the kings of the earth. That is the kingdom that God refers to by saying that she has a kingdom over the kings of the earth. This is demonstrated further by the talking horn in Daniel 7. It did not become a king until it gained power over the people of God (Daniel 7:25), which means this is the criteria for it to gain a kingdom.

The 10 horns each have their own cities and kings that rule over them, but for them to receive the kingdom that God is talking about in Revelation 17:12, they must gain the same type of kingdom that the prostitute woman gained by fornicating with the kings of the earth. The 10 daughters are not at this time fornicating with the kings of the earth (March of 2006) but someday soon they will become like their mother, the Catholic Church, and will do as she did in the past. That day is fast approaching as the Protestant Churches are already making compromises with the Catholic Church and working to join forces with it. By so doing, they destroy all that they gained by leaving the Catholic Church in the beginning and compromise their integrity. This is a move that they will deeply regret someday, but by the time they realize that simple fact, it will be too late.

It appears that the ten daughters are symbolic of all the Protestant Churches, but especially of those who came out of the Protestant Reformation. This may be comparable to the 10 horns upon the fourth beast of daniel 7. There were 10 main nations that came out of the Western Roman Empire, but in fact there were probably some 20 of them that actually came out of that empire, so the number 10 for them, at least, was probably representative in purpose. The same may be true of the Protestant Churches and the 10 horns.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

The 8th King and the Returned Beast

In Revelation 17:11, it says:

And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goes into perdition.

The seven kings are the seven names of the popes that occur after 1798. The 8th must also be a name, one that has not occurred before and must occur after the seven kings. If his name was used before, he would not be the 8th king but would belong to another name line. Because the seven kings are the seven name lines of the popes after 1798, then in order for the 8th king to be of the seven, this almost certainly means that he starts out his term of office using one of the seven names and then becomes the 8th by changing his name to a different name than the one he starts out with. The fact that we now have a Benedict XVI will not change the status of Benedict being a fallen name over the long run because the name fell when the last pope who would die with the name Benedict died in 1922. Benedict XVI will not die with the name Benedict attached to him, so the name Benedict has already fallen. We know this to be true because in Daniel 5, when the city of Babylon fell, king Belshazzar died. Thus, the last king of the line died when the city fell. So, when the name falls, the last king of that line has died.

It is almost certain that Benedict XVI must change his name. The only other way out for him is to be deposed, which would reset the Papal count back to 665. but that only puts off the question of whether a pope in the future will either change his name, which we know that Benedict XVI will do, or will come into office with a new name and on the very same day receive the power to be the beast (which has to happen on the very same day because the 8th is the beast, meaning that one cannot be there without the other). There are very high odds against a pope coming into office with a new name and receiving the power to be the beast on the very same day. Thus, a name change is far more likely. And the original words of the Greek text apparently support that idea.

Here are all possibilities of what could theoretically happen to Benedict XVI:

• Change his name - for very good reasons, we believe this is what will happen
• Be deposed - very unlikely because they have to prove the election was invalid - how are the Cardinals going to do that when they all showed up for the election and the whole world watched on world wide television?
• Die in office - if this were to happen, then we would be wrong, but the pattern in Revelation 17:10-11 would be violated if this happened, so from that we know it will not happen. Death in office would leave the count at 680 at the point of death.
• Officially resign - again, if this were to happen, then we would be wrong, but the pattern in Revelation 17:10-11 would be violated if this happened, so from that we know it will not happen. They can officially resign, but if he were to do so, it would leave the Papal count at 680 at the point when he leaves office.

As you should be able to see, the only two viable options are that he will either change his name or be deposed. It would be nearly impossible for a group of Cardinals to challenge the validity of his election, which is required to begin the process of deposing him, something that would be nearly impossible at this point, so the only option left is for him to change his name to a new name.

The idea of a name change actually makes sense because the word translated from the original Greek as "of" in the phrase "and is of the seven" in the King James Version of the Bible literally means to come out of, to originate from, or among. Therefore, you could say that it says something like "and is originated from the seven" (paraphrase by the author). The original meaning of the Greek is consistent with the idea of a name change. It can also be translated as "after" which would support a deposed pope, but if you look at many versions of the Bible, you should note that almost none of them translate it as "after" (the author has not yet found one that says the eighth is after the seven and all say he is either "of", "out of", or "among" the seven). Greek scholars don't always get everything right in the translation, but it is unlikely that all of them have failed to get it right. Therefore, the Greek word NOT being translated as "after" argues against the deposed pope idea.

Some have suggested that it is impossible for the pope to change his Papal name. Others say that it has never happened so cannot happen. Actually, neither of these arguments is true. There is nothing to prevent them from doing it other than the simple fact that they have not had a reason to do so before. Past inaction on this is not an accurate predictor of the future. Every pope who uses a throne name (which has been done since relatively early in Papal history) has in fact changed his name by changing his birth name to his throne name. So, if each of them has done it once, what is to prevent them from doing it twice? Moreover, they are the highest authorities in the Catholic Church. There is no law that the authors are aware of that prevents them from doing it. Because the popes are the top authority of their church, it seems they could change such a law even if it existed. And as an independent state, no other nation can legally prevent them from changing names (and why would they?)

There is another issue. The 8th king, being a symbolic king, should be a line of individual kings with the same name, but this one is a single individual. Remember that symbolic kings in the book of Daniel are defined as lines of kings. You can know that the eighth is one individual because the seven kings are also all equated to mountains while the eighth is not. The mountains here are a group of gods. The eighth, not being a group of gods unlike the seven kings, must be a single individual, so this constitutes an exception to the usual rule, which means this is an Exception Principle statement for this particular king (though certainly very well hidden!)

It says the 8th is the beast. Does that mean the beast is this one person? No. Actually, what it means is that he is called the beast because he heads the beast, but he cannot do that until the combination of the Roman Church with the leaders of the nations for the legally authorized purpose of persecution of the people of God occurs. Until then, Benedict XVI is NOT the beast and there is no beast until that legally authorized combination occurs.

But just as the 8th is the beast, the beast is the 8th. In other words, one cannot be there without the other. This means that when the 8th name comes he will get the beast power at the same time. We believe that in actuality, the pope will get the beast power and then, in commemoration of this event, on the same day, he will change his name and will reveal his true character by so doing. The events will essentially be simultaneous. This also means that the eighth cannot come first and then, months or years late, be given the power to be the beast. That is simply not possible because it violates the definition God gave us.

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

An Overview of Revelation 17

Before beginning the study of the 7th key to understanding Revelation 17, let us explain Revelation 17 in its entirety. We'll go through it a few verses at a time. Some of what is said in this section will repeat what you have read in the sections just above.

Revelation 17:1 And there came one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come here; I will show unto you the judgment of the great harlot that sits upon many waters:
Revelation 17:2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.

This is a brief review of the history of the 1260 prophetic days of the sea beast in Revelation 13. During the 1260 prophetic days in Revelation 13, the sea beast is a composite power made up of the Roman Church and the cooperative nations in order to legally persecute the people of God (which is what we call the Beast formula where the Revelation 13 sea beast = Roman Church + Leaders of the Nations). In these two verses, the exact same thing is shown because the woman is a symbol of the Roman Church and the kings of the earth are the political leaders of the nations (and this too is called the Beast Formula, where the Revelation 17 scarlet beast = Woman + Kings of the Earth = Revelation 13 sea beast). The fornication is a symbol of a prohibited relationship in which the Roman Church relies upon the authorities to punish those it does not agree with. It relies upon the nations to enforce church teachings instead of relying upon God for its needs and wishes.

The judgment referred to here is more than the punishment of the woman that is seen in Revelation 18, but also includes the investigative judgment in heaven of all who have ever claimed the name of Jesus, which certainly includes the Catholic Church and its members. This judgment takes place before Jesus comes again, is going on right now, and will be completed before Jesus comes again.

Revelation 17:3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sitting upon a scarlet colored beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
Revelation 17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet color, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
Revelation 17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
Revelation 17:6 And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great wonder.

John is told that the beast has names of blasphemy all over it. Because the Bible defines blasphemy as claiming to be God and claiming to be able to forgive sins against God's laws, this exclusively points to the Roman Catholic Church. Both the body and heads must have blasphemy on them because this beast is the same as the sea beast of Revelation 13, which had blasphemy spoken by the body and written on the heads, but none appeared on the horns. So, the scarlet beast has blasphemy on both the body and heads but not on the horns.

In verse 3, John becomes a time traveler of sorts because he is carried into the wilderness to see the woman sit upon a scarlet colored beast. What actually happens is that he seems to have been symbolically taken into the future after the 1260 days to see the condition of the beast and the woman as she is after February 15, 1798, when the Roman Church was no longer legally combined with the leaders of the nations. How do we know it is after the 1260 days? Because the beast and the woman are in the desert and the woman is not engaging in fornication with the kings of the earth. The fornication between the woman and the kings of the earth only took place between 538 and 1798, so this desert scene cannot be the same time period and must occur afterwards. Also, remember that the pattern set down in Daniel shows us the same thing. According to the pattern, the body occurs first in history, which was from 538 to 1798. Then the heads occur in history, which started in 1798 and continues to the present day (this modification to this paragraph is being written in June of 2009). The ten horns will begin soon when the beast returns.

Keep the Characteristics Principle in mind as you read the next paragraph. Remember that a symbol of a power that has things attached to it, such as wings, ribs in the mouth (of the bear of Daniel 7), clothing (on the woman), and so on, represent BEHAVIORS. These things should almost always be interpreted with this idea in mind.

John is shown that the prostitute woman is corrupt because she fornicates with the kings of the earth and has killed the people of God in the past. She even got drunk on their blood. When a person loves killing, we often say they are bloodthirsty, so it seems this may hint at that idea. But it also hints at their desire for control of those who refuse to obey the Catholic Church. He also was told that she symbolizes a city called Babylon and is a prostitute with prostitute daughters. The golden cup is a reminder of the golden vessels taken from the temple of God in Jerusalem during the time of Daniel (see Daniel 5). The cup itself is a symbol of punishment. The things about her person, such as her clothing and jewelry, are things that symbolize her connection with or claim to be God, but since she is not clothed with the sun, we can know that this connection is pretense. It is not real. The jewelry is found on the city of God (see Revelation 21:18-21), while the clothing suggests that she is royalty, which makes sense because she claims to be a queen. However, this is religious royalty, not political royalty because this symbol must match her character of pretending to be the true Christian Church. Also, the woman of Revelation 12 has a crown, which is a symbol of religious royalty, so the prostitute woman wants to project the same image. Therefore, she calls herself a queen. In addition, were she claiming political royalty, then she would have been called a queen of the earth, to correspond with the kings of the earth who are political leaders of the nations. Therefore, she is a religious queen rather than a political queen.

The author has encountered people make the mistake of making a big deal of the fact that this woman is supposedly in great control of the beast whose heads she sits upon. But they fail to really notice that it says she is drunk, though they may parrot it back to you that she is drunk and then talk about the great control she has over the beast, never realizing the huge contradiction they create this way. If you have ever followed a drunk driver on the road, you know that they frequently don't have much control of their vehicles. Likewise, this woman does not have much control because she is drunk. In addition, the word translated as "beast" in this chapter in the original Greek is a "dangerous or venomous, wild beast". If you have ever tried to ride a wild horse, how much control do you have over it? Probably not much! How about trying to ride a wild horse when you are drunk? How much control will you have then? It is very doubtful that you would have much control. Hence, the real issue is the lack of control. Plus, it does not say that the woman has dominion over the heads or the nations in this part of the chapter, so she has no dominion over anybody during this time. She has been stripped of her legal power over the people of God in other nations.

Revelation 17:7 And the angel said unto me, Why did you marvel? I will tell you the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carries her, which has the seven heads and ten horns.
Revelation 17:8 The beast that you saw 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, and is not, and yet is.

Here the angel announces that he will tell you the mystery. He does not say that he is going to explain the mystery to you. You have to figure out how to solve the mystery. Of course, he does not bother to tell John that nobody would understand this until near the second coming of Jesus. The explanation was given so that those just before the second coming of Jesus would be able to understand the hidden message contained within.

The angel then announces that the beast "was". He even reinforces this by saying that the beast "is not". It cannot get much plainer that than. The angel is plainly telling John that he is speaking to him as if he were at a point in time after February 15, 1798.

The angel plainly tells John that the beast which was and isn't, will come back someday by coming out of its prison - the bottomless pit (which is the same as the desert). And people who don't know God or the prophecies will be astonished at its return. Still, that beast will eventually be destroyed.

Verse 8 is very important because without it we would not know for sure that the beast was in the past from the standpoint of the angel and it would be almost impossible to determine where in time the angel was actually at.

Revelation 17:9 And here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sits.
Revelation 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he comes, he must continue a short time.

Here the angel tells us that the seven heads are seven mountains and are seven kings. The woman sits on the seven heads, not on the back of the animal as many artists depict in their illustrations. Nowhere in Revelation 17 does it say that the woman sits on the back of the animal. If you don't believe this, go read the chapter very carefully for yourself.

Verse 10 is probably the most misunderstood verse in the whole chapter. It says that "one is" and "the other is not yet come", which clearly is in sequence, so, everybody ASSUMES that this means the first five that have fallen are also in sequence. They will claim that context proves them to be in sequence. Actually, it is an assumption that they make here and they mistake an assumption for fact and proof, which it isn't. Believing that context here proves all are in sequence actually proves nothing. But they are free to believe anything they want. They also fail to consider all possible alternatives, which is never a good idea because failure to correctly understand something is likely to occur if all possibilities are not considered. In this case, they have failed to consider that there is a way to explain this verse with the first 6 heads running together or in parallel with one another.

Both the books of Daniel and Revelation have a tendency to be very exact books in that the authors wrote precisely what was to be understood and didn't deviate from that goal. Thus, if something is NOT said, one needs to be very sure that any assumptions one makes regarding the issue which the Bible does not address are well founded, backed up by other data, and not contradicted by other things. In the case of verse 10, to assume that the first five heads are in sequence creates problems. Here are the problems briefly:

• The angel separates the heads and horns from the body of the beast. He says it "was". He then discusses the heads, noting that "one is" at the moment he is speaking from and then says that the ten horns have not yet received a kingdom, which plainly tells you that the horns are yet future, almost certainly after the seven heads. Thus, by doing this, the angel describes the three phase history of this beast in keeping with the pattern that occurs in Daniel where the body of a beast represented the first phase of the history of a power, and then either the heads or horns represented the second phase of the history of a power.
  
  
• The angel did NOT say the following in verse 8, but could and should have IF he had wanted us to understand that the heads were all in sequence: "The beast AND THE FIVE HEADS that you saw WERE, and are not and all rule one after the other.... " Also, in verse 10, he should have said that each head ruled after the previous head. The fact that he did NOT say these things is very important because this was a golden opportunity for the angel to show that the rules of Daniel were to be ignored and that he was setting up a new set of rules. Failure to do this speaks volumes. The rules of Daniel remain in effect in Revelation. That fact is virtually unavoidable.
  
  
• If the heads are a series of ancient kingdoms as many believe, which usually begin with ancient Egypt, then consider that the beast and the heads have blasphemy on them, which points only to the Catholic Church and makes it abundantly clear that the beast cannot occur before 538 AD. In addition, that means even the heads cannot occur before 538 AD, at the earliest.

The angel said that the seven heads are seven mountains and are seven kings. Daniel 7 demonstrates that when a beast has more than one head on it, the heads are to be understood to be divisions of a power which have power at the same time as one another. These will be either of two forms of divisions: they may be divisions within the same kingdom (such as is done with the 2 horns of the earth beast of Revelation 13), or it may be complete divisions of the kingdom into multiple separate kingdoms. Kings are NOT kings of the earth, which are political leaders, and are not merchants of the earth, which are business leaders, so the kings must be religious leaders. This means that the mountains cannot possibly be political kingdoms because the heads are said to also be mountains. Political kings can only match up with political kingdoms, but since the kings cannot be political leaders, the mountains therefore cannot be political kingdoms. Therefore, mountains must have another meaning found in the Bible. There are several such possible symbols in the Bible for mountains, but the one that fits here is that a mountain is a dwelling place for a group of gods. Therefore, the heads are divisions within the same kingdom, each of which are religious leaders and claim to be a group of gods. With the blasphemy on the heads and the fact that these heads are kings, this clearly points to the popes of the Catholic Church for the heads. Divide them into groups by name and you have the seven divisions. Here are the seven divisions:

1. Gregory (fell in 1846)
2. Leo (fell in 1903)
3. Benedict (fell in 1922 - there is an explanation for this one!)
4. Pius (fell in 1958)
5. John (fell in 1963)
6. Paul (fell in 1978) - the "one is" of Revelation 17:10
7. John Paul (fell in 2005) - the one "not yet come"

Revelation 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goes into perdition.

Since there are only seven heads on the beast, the eighth cannot be an eighth head. Greek experts say that the context and grammar of the original text points towards understanding the eighth to be a king, and not a head and not a mountain. Unfortunately, this leads to confusion because the word "king" by the definition in Daniel is more than one individual king in a line, or in other words, a king is a line of individual kings.  That the eighth is not a head says that he is not a king, so cannot be a line of individual kings.  Also, he is not said to be a mountain, so cannot be a group of gods.  The fact that the eighth is neither a mountain nor a king says that he is a single individual, unlike the other kings who are mountains and therefore a group of gods. The eighth is one man. and the fact that he is the eighth means he has to follow seven of something.  The immediately preceding seven kings must be that which he follows, so he is like them but is only a single individual, unlike the seven who are groups of gods and are also lines of individual kings.

Verse 11 says that "the beast ... is the eighth...." This plainly means that they are one and the same. But it is also true that the beast formula must remain true as well. So, since the eighth is the beast, it means he must head the beast, which is the combination of the church with the leaders of the nations for the purpose of persecution of the people of God. And since he is the eighth, this means he has a new name never used before in Papal history.

But, since he has a new name and it says that he is of the seven, this tells you that he will start his time in office with the name of one of the seven kings. When the power to be the beast comes to him, he changes names to become the eighth, apparently in commemoration of the return of the beast. This must be a nearly simultaneous event because it says that the eighth is the beast. One cannot be there without the other, meaning that you cannot have a new name arrive without the power for him to be the beast arrive simultaneously, and you cannot have the power for him to be the beast and not have the new name arrive simultaneously. The beast is the eighth! One and the same.

Do remember this one simple fact: when the beast returns, this means that the woman is once again sitting upon the many waters and is fornicating with the kings of the earth. Therefore, her history begins by being upon the many waters fornicating with the kings of the earth, then she moves to sit upon the 7 heads of the beast in the desert, and finally, she moves back to sitting on the waters and is busy fornicating with the kings of the earth once more. Her history occurs in three phases.

Let us now discuss the 10 kings/horns. Please read the following verses:

Revelation 17:12 And the ten horns which you saw are ten kings, who have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
Revelation 17:13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.
Revelation 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

The ten kings get their kingdom by the combination of the cities that they rule (the daughters of the woman) with the kings of the earth for the legal purpose of persecution of the people of God. They receive it at the same time as the beast and have it for one hour, which almost certainly means they have it by themselves for only a short time. Then, apparently the ten horns decide that they can better accomplish their goal by working with the beast, so they hand their power and authority over to him. The beast becomes their master. Then their war progresses. Only too late do they realize that this is a terrible mistake.

But this time, in contrast with the first time around in Revelation 13, the beast and 10 horns lose this war. Jesus wins against them.

Revelation 17:15 And he said unto me, The waters which you saw, where the harlot sits, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

This definition should be fairly self-explanatory at this point.

Revelation 17:16 And the ten horns which you saw upon the beast, these shall hate the harlot, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.
Revelation 17:17 For God has put in their hearts to fulfill his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.

The ten horns who have received their kingdom, represent the Protestant Churches in combination with the kings of the earth. These will work with the Papacy until all has been accomplished that they are to do, and then they turn upon the prostitute woman and destroy her. This seems to correspond to the 6th and 7th plagues of Revelation 16. This clearly means that they eventually realize that they have made a terrible mistake in joining with the beast to accomplish their common goal. But it will be too late.

Some versions of the Bible state verse 16 like this:

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

Note that in this version, both the ten horns AND the beast will hate and turn on the prostitute.

Many other versions say something like the King James Version, which says this:

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

So, which translation is right?

We at 666man.net web site have no ax to grind with respect to promoting one version of the Bible over another, for almost all of them are reasonably well translated. Some clearly are better than others but much can be learned from any one of them. But, in the instance of the translation of verse 16 where both the 10 horns and the beast turn on the woman, we have good reason to believe that this is due to a copying mistake done sometime early in the history of this particular version. Apparently scholars believe that the original manuscript that is the source for this translation is apparently older than the one used for creating most other Bible translations, which includes the King James Version. But, greater age with a mistake in it usually is no better than a younger document without the same mistake.

Now, here is why we believe there is a mistake in the copying process of this verse sometime in the past. The beast formula, which is stated in both Revelation 13 AND in Revelation 17, two different places and two different ways of stating it, indicates that the beast is made up of the woman combined with the kings of the earth, which is the Roman Church combined with the leaders of other nations. Because it is stated twice in two different ways, you can be quite certain that it is not a copy mistake. Now, consider this question carefully: how likely is it that the returned beast will turn on the woman when the Bible makes it plain that the woman herself is part of the beast? For this to happen means that the woman turns on herself, which makes no sense whatsoever. Therefore, there has to have been a copy mistake made sometime early in the history of this Bible version. Perhaps other verses of this version are better than others, but this particular verse almost certainly is incorrect.

There is another reason to doubt the version in which both the beast and the 10 horns turn upon the woman. Verse 17 says that God will put it into the hearts of the 10 horns to give their kingdom to the beast until God's prophecies concerning them and the beast will be fulfilled. Now, this implies that at some point they withdraw their kingdom from the control of the beast. Note that God did not say that the 10 horns and the beast split away from the woman, but instead, the 10 horns withdraw their power and authority from the beast. At a minimum, this means they withdraw their support for the beast, which includes the woman, but more likely it means they turn on the woman. Ultimately, If verse 16 actually says that the 10 horns AND the beast turn on the woman, then there is inconsistency between verses 16 and 17.

Therefore, the correct translation is:

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

This translation would be consistent with the facts in both Revelation 13 and 17.

Revelation 17:17 For God has put in their hearts to fulfill his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.

The ten horns will allow the beast to be their master until God's prophecies concerning their power combination is fulfilled. Then they withdraw from this alliance. This seems to match up with the 6th plague in Revelation 16 in which the waters dry up for Babylon, which is symbolism saying that the people withdraw their support for Babylon. In the 7th plague of Revelation 16, it says that God remembers Babylon and gives "her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath" (Revelation 16:19) , which is saying that she will be punished. It appears that this coincides with the woman being burned with fire in Revelation 17:16 so these are very likely one and the same event.

Revelation 17:18 And the woman whom you saw is that great city, which reigns over the kings of the earth.

This is a clear allusion to Babylon as a symbol of Rome. From sources we have, it appears that the original Greek says that the woman has a kingdom over the kings of the earth, a slightly different way of saying it. This, of course, is indirectly telling us that the woman has power over the nations by leveraging it through their kings.

One last little observation. The woman is said to have a kingdom over the kings of the earth in Revelation 17:18. What is interesting is that the Bible did NOT say that the woman has a kingdom over the kings. There IS a difference!

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

Key #7 - The Final Papal Count - 666 - and Its Connection to Revelation 17

Introduction

Revelation 13 is a prophecy explaining future events (relative to John's time) that is divisible into two sections. The first section precedes the second section so that they are in consecutive order. The two sections are as follows:

• The 1260 days story of the sea beast, verses 1-10, followed by
• The time of the earth beast which is followed by the image beast, but these two beasts are intermingled together in the story in verses 11-17. The time of the earth beast and the time of the 8th king of Revelation 17 overlap and are nearly identical.

Within each section, events are not necessarily in order.

The history represented by the body of the sea beast explained in verses 1-10 does not significantly overlap the history of the earth beast as explained in verses 11-17. The prophetic history represented by the body of the sea beast ended in 1798 while the prophetic history of the earth beast begins only a few years before 1798 (1783), so there is minimal overlap between the two. The image beast has yet to be fulfilled but we have not long to wait for its arrival.

Like the history of the body of the sea beast in verses 1-10, the prophecies of the earth beast and the image beast in verses 11-17 are intermingled. The prophetic history of the earth beast has several different players which are written as if one power alone does all the acts recorded there, but there actually are several different powers doing the things recorded in verses 11-17. Unfortunately, the prophecy does not distinguish between them. It is nearly impossible to understand the different players unless one understands the Miller Principle, so if you have not yet done so, read the short summary of the rules of interpretation. To read them, click here. When finished, simply click on your browser's back button and it should return you here.

Here is a general outline of the history presented by Revelation 13 and the corresponding sections of Revelation 17:

What is important to realize is that the number 666 is presented in the second section of Revelation 13, during the time of the image beast. Because Revelation 13:18 says that 666 is the number of the beast, it is not possible, as of the writing of this paragraph (March of 2006), for the number to be applied to the beast because there is no beast right now. When the beast returns, then the number may be applied.

Revelation 13 tends to be very concise. God gave John very few words to say, but each word carried a lot of weight. John was very thorough and yet very frugal with the words he used to describe that which God was showing him. There is a lot of meaning in the symbolism so one must be very careful to properly understand the symbolism in order to correctly understand the chapter. A complete understanding can only be obtained if one has a thorough understanding of Daniel (particularly Daniel 2, 7, and 8) and the rules of interpretation based on Daniel. The last half of Revelation 13 has many things in it that have a great deal to do with events that are soon to take place, so it is important to understand it.

What Do We Know About 666 From the Bible?

To reduce the size of the home page, this section has been moved to another page.  To read it, please click here

There are several methods that have been proposed to explain the number 666.  Let us examine several of them and then finish with the best methods.

The Papal Title Theory - Vicarius Filii Dei

To reduce the size of the home page, this section has been moved to another page.  To read it, please click here.

The Triple Six Theory - 6-6-6

To reduce the size of the home page, this section has been moved to another page. To read it, please click here

The Papal Name Count Discovery

So, what is the correct way to count the number of the beast, 666? The only way to know is to look back into history and find out how the number 666 was originally calculated and how it was understood in John's day. Because the woman in Revelation 17 is part of the beast (you should remember this from the Beast Formula) and she is said to be Babylon and the number 666 is the number of the beast, we believe it is reasonable to look to ancient Babylon to find out how this was number was originally calculated. You certainly would not look to the leaders of the nations as the source of the number 666 because they are not spiritual powers even though they too will become part of the beast.

The pagan priests of ancient Babylon (apparently around the time of the prophet Daniel) devised a method of calculating the number 666, a system that was well known in Rome and some other parts of the world in John's time. To read about the history of the number 666 from ancient Babylon, including how the pagan priests counted their gods to arrive at the number 666, click here.

Because the woman is said to be Babylon, the number must come from the way the Babylonians calculated the number. One would not do it the way the Gnostics or others of John's time did it because they are not mentioned as the model upon which this is to be calculated. There is no other way that truly fits all the conditions in the Bible.

Remember that Babylon was associated with false, apostate religions in the Bible as a whole, so this number should also be associated with the false, apostate religion of Babylon. The way the pagan priests of ancient Babylon calculated the number 666 clearly applied it to their gods. This gets interesting when one realizes that the mountains of Revelation 17 clearly symbolizes the lines of kings who claim to be Gods. So, though the Bible gives no specific instruction about how the number is to be calculated, it almost certainly must come from Babylon because of the following facts and clues:

• The beast contains the woman who is said to be Babylon
• The seven heads come out from the body of the beast, which contains the woman
• In Babylon the pagan priests calculated the number 666 by counting their gods and adding up the count (to be discussed shortly)
• God called Babylon a mountain in Jeremiah 51:25
• Each mountain of Revelation 17 is a symbol of a group of gods, something which then connects the number 666 to the beast itself. Just as the gods were counted and added up to 666 in literal Babylon, the seven groups of gods in each mountain of symbolic Babylon are to be counted and the count of all seven groups of gods are then to be added to arrive at a total.

How is the method of ancient Babylon for calculation of the number 666 applied to the popes? Well, the priests of ancient Babylon had 36 chief pagan gods, with the sun god over the other 35 of them (they had many others that were not included in their method of calculating 666). They counted the 36 gods, assigned them count numbers in the process, and created the total, 666, by counting their gods and adding up the count numbers. The number 666 was assigned to the first god, the god who was given the count value of one, the sun god. The sun god was considered the father of all the other gods (probably except for the moon god), so was given the count of one. The moon god was considered the wife of the sun god, so was given a count value of 2. All the other gods were given count numbers from 3 through 36.

In the case of the 7 lines of popes and the 8th king, a very similar but not exactly identical pattern is outlined in the Bible. In Revelation 13 the number 666 comes up at the time of the image beast, which is the same time as the 8th king or the return of the beast. Therefore, the 8th king has the final number, 666. The number 666 has to arise at the time of the image beast because the number cannot apply to the beast time during the 1260 days due to the fact that this number is stated in the section of Revelation 13 which gives the history of the earth beast and the image beast. Since there is no beast now, it can only apply during the image beast time.

God called Babylon one mountain in Jeremiah 51:25. He probably called it a mountain because the Babylonians saw their ziggurat as a symbolic mountain in which their gods lived. In the one mountain of Babylon, the pagan priests counted each of their gods and added up the count to arrive at a total, which was 666. The total was for all the mountains available, which in the case of babylon was just one mountain. The method can be generalized and summarized as follows:

• Count all the gods in each mountain
• Sum the count of the gods in each mountain
• Sum the mountains to reach the total of 666

In the case of Babylon, there was only one mountain, but the total remained at 666. They wanted the total of 666 so that their "magic squares" of numbers would work out correctly. For more information about the magic squares, click here.

In the case of the seven heads of the beast of Revelation 17, one should count the gods for each mountain and then add up all the count numbers to reach 666. This is exactly as was done in Babylon, except that you count the gods in seven mountains instead of just one. This means you count the gods within each mountain and then add them together to reach the total. When this is done, the following table can be created to show the results:

Pius
 1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
+7
+8
+9
+10
+11
+12
78

Leo
 1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
+7
+8
+9
+10
+11
+12
+13
91

Gregory
 1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
+7
+8
+9
+10
+11
+12
+13
+14
+15
+16
136

Benedict
 1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
+7
+8
+9
+10
+11
+12
+13
+14
105

John
 1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
+7
+8
+9
+10
+11
+12
+13
+14
+15
+16
+17
+18
+19
+20
+21
231

Paul
 1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
21

John Paul
 1
+2
 3

Totals as of
John Paul II:

+78
+91
+136
+105
+231
+21
   +3
665

But, what about the eighth? Where does he fit into this and how is the total 666 arrived at? As of John Paul, the total is 665, so only a count of 1 is needed to reach the total of 666. But how does this happen?

A count of one can only come from a pope who is the first pope of a new line which obviously has a completely new name. Since 1798 we have already gone through seven Papal names, which fulfills all of Revelation 17:10. At the present time with Benedict XVI, we have a name that has already fallen and yet has returned. So, has Benedict really fallen and how do we complete the count? The answer is found in Revelation 17:11, which says:

Revelation 17:11 - And the beast which was, and is not, and he the eighth is, and out of the seven he is, and unto destruction he departs (this the author's direct almost word for word paraphrasing of the translation of the parsed Greek New Testament taken from 26th ed. Nestles, Allen Text, American Bible Society; New York and Gramcord Institute, 2218 NE Brookview Dr.; Vancouver WA 98686, posted on the web site at http://www.gracebiblechurch.us/).

Revelation 17:11 indicates that the final count of 1 needed to complete the count total to 666 comes from an individual who begins his reign after the seven names have already passed into history. He will start with one of the seven names, which we now know to be Benedict, and will change to a new name. A new name always has a count of 1 (the count number is not necessarily the same as the Roman Numerals assigned by the Vatican to a pope because they may or may not assign a Roman Numeral I to a new name, but if you are counting popes, you always start with 1, even if there is only 1). Therefore, the new name will complete the count total to 666.

This means that the count will be completed to 666 by an individual who the Bible says is NOT a mountain, the eighth. All of the count except for that of the eighth will be done by those who are classified as mountains. The eighth is also the beast because he will head the beast. Remember that Revelation 13:18 says that the number 666 is the number of the beast and a man, so this fulfills both aspects of this because the eighth will be one individual and will head the beast.

Do remember that the word king can stand for several things, including a name. In Daniel 7:17, the four beasts were said to be four kings. This is the primary definition given by God for the beasts. This means the word kings stands especially for the political leaders of those empires. In Daniel 2, the first kingdom was represented by the head of gold on the image Nebuchadnezzar saw in his dream. Daniel told him that he was that head of gold, which clearly means that a head can stand for a name. But, it also is true that Nebuchadnezzar stood for the line of kings who were to rule the empire of Babylon, so this associates the word king (as a line of kings) with a name.

This is also demonstrated in Daniel 8 because the great horn on the goat was said to stand for the first king of that empire, whom we know to be Alexander the Great. But there were several kings that ruled that empire before it broke up, so the great horn and Alexander the Great stood for the rest of the kings that ruled his empire until the breakup of that empire. But because this is one of the four empires referred to in Daniel 7:17 that were said to be four kings and Alexander the Great clearly was one of them, this associates a name with that line of kings.

Do not forget that in history, it is not uncommon for a line of kings to be named for the founder of that line. This was done, for example, with the Ptolemies of Egypt, or the Seleucids of what is now Iraq and Syria today. The Ptolemies and the Seleucids ruled two of the kingdoms that came out of the empire of Alexander the Great. So historians even today name lines of kings after their founders.

Why is this important? It is important because it is clear from history that the seven heads of the scarlet beast are divisible by name seven ways using the names of the popes (remember that they are Papal and must occur after 1798). However, the eighth is not a head and is not a mountain, and yet he must have a name or it would not distinguish him from the previous seven lines of kings. Therefore, the seven kings are seven names and the eighth is an eighth name. The original Greek says that the eighth comes out of the seven (Revelation 17:11). The logical meaning of this is that the one who will become the 8th king will start with one of the seven names and will change to the new eighth name.

Right now, with the name Benedict XVI in place, the count total stands at 680 (there have been only 15 Benedicts because Benedict X was skipped). After Benedict XVI changes his name to a new name, the name Benedict will not count towards the total and it will be as if he never was as far as the count is concerned. This is because a name only counts in the Bible if the pope dies with that name. Since the current pope will not die with the name Benedict, it won't count. Instead, the name he dies with is what will count. Therefore, the name Benedict has indeed fallen even though Benedict XVI seems to be a return of the name Benedict. Nobody yet knows what the new name will be and we probably will not know until he announces it to the world.

Click here to see the years the popes reigned and how totals are calculated

Here are the totals as of Pope John Paul II:

In the original Greek, it says "And the beast which was, and is not, and he the eighth is, and out of the seven he is....". The phrase, "out of the seven he is" can be understood if one knows that the word "king" symbolizes the name of a line of popes. However, in Revelation 17, a king is a line of individual kings only so long as a king/head is also a mountain. A mountain is a group of gods, so a king who is not a mountain is not a group of gods, but instead is a single individual. Thus, the eighth name, a single individual, is out of the seven names. The word "out" here apparently signifies an active coming out of something or away from a point of origin (place), cause, or time (Strong's Hebrew and Greek Dictionary). Benedict XVI was elected pope on April 19, 2005. On that date he was 78 years old. So, this tells us that we may not have much time before he changes his name. The end should come relatively soon after that before he dies a natural death. Here is a summary of how the mathematics of this works with the count:

John Paul II added 2 to the count total which then stood at 665. Benedict XVI adds 15 to the count total which now stands at 680. After Benedict XVI changes names, subtract 15 from the count total to remove the count for Benedict XVI from the total. The count total then stands at 665 just as it was after John Paul II died and before Benedict XVI was elected. To complete the process, understand that Benedict XVI's new name will be a new Papal name not used before in Papal history, so the new name will add a count of 1 to the count total. Then 665 + 1 = 666.

Another way to look at it is this table:

Benedict will not die a natural death. When Jesus comes, the Bible says that the final Antichrist will be destroyed by the brightness of his coming (2 Thessalonians 2:8). Because this refers to the pope (2 Thessalonians 2:4 - he is the one who sits in the temple of God showing himself that he is God because they do claim to be God and they do claim to be the true church), this means he will die that way instead of by way of a natural death. But this means that with Benedict's advanced age, there is not much time left before the end of the world.

Do note that this prophecy will be fulfilled and yet it does NOT predict the day or hour of the coming of Jesus, which Jesus said we would not know. The fact is, it does not even predict the year of the coming of Jesus, let alone the day and hour of his coming. We don't know how long Benedict may potentially live were he to live out his full natural life span. To top it off, there are new technologies coming that may extend life some for him, though how much extension will be available is unknown. Likely it will be only a few years with the early versions of this technology. Whatever happens, we cannot know when Jesus will come except that it will be sometime during the life span of the pope now known as benedict XVI.

The name Benedict is one of the names that "have been" or "have fallen", depending on the translation, even before Benedict XVI was elected pope. This remains true because Benedict XVI's name and number is not counted in the final end of things from the perspective of how God counts things in the Bible. What the Papacy would do with it were time to last beyond Benedict XVI is another issue altogether, but God did not consult their wishes about this. He defined how he wanted it counted and that is really all that matters.

Given the advanced age of Pope Benedict XVI and the events yet to happen before he dies, one must ask: Are you ready to meet Jesus? He is coming soon after the eighth comes! If not, then take time to get to know Jesus. He says that this is the criteria for entrance to heaven (Matthew 7:23).

---

Return to Index (Keys to Unlock Revelation 17)         To Main Menu

Final Items of Interest

 

10 Years of Sacrifice and Labor!

(Ex. 20:15)

If you like our web site, please pass along our web site address to a friend to help spread this message. To help you do this, we offer a "business card" (shown below), that can be printed out using either of two methods, which are:

1. A link to a FREE business card program that can be used to print our unique 666man.net card, as illustrated below, on your printer. You can also create and print other cards of your own design with this program from Avery Dennison Corporation.
   
   
2. A full page already prepared with the image below set up with two columns of images, 5 rows high, which will just fit an 8-1/2 inch by 11 inch page of business cards that are 2 inches high by 3 1/2 inches wide. Just download it, save it to your computer, and then print it using any program that can display and print images. (soon to be available)

Just click on the "card" below for more details and downloads.  The business card stock you want to print these on should be 8-1/2 inches wide by 11 inches high, with each card 2 inches high by 3-1/2 inches long, with 10 cards per printed page.  The cards can be separated from the page by folding on the perforations and pulling them apart.