Frequently Asked Questions
There are some questions that we are frequently asked, so this page will attempt
to address some of those for you here and now.
-- Why do you use larger print on many of the pages of this website?
-- Because there are a lot of older folks that read this web site
who have trouble reading the smaller print commonly used on many web sites. They
will simply move on if they cannot read it - and they often don't bother to resize the
print, so that will not help either. So hopefully you, the reader, can put up with
it. We want the older folks to have a chance to understand this message too.
-- Are you setting a date for the Lord's second coming? Jesus
does say "Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of
man cometh." (Mat 25:13), so based on what you are saying, it would appear that you
are setting a date for the Lord's coming.
-- Jesus did tell us to watch because we could not know the day or
the hour. However, He also told us that we can know of his approaching coming even
while we will not know the day or the hour of his coming. Jesus says this in Matthew
24 where he says;
Matt. 24:32-33 - Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet
tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: So likewise ye, when ye
shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
In other words, there will be certain signs that will occur prior to His second coming,
and when these things happen, know that His coming is near. So, there will be warning
signs. We won't be ignorant and surprised if we are watchful of the things He says to
watch out for. However, if we ignore the warning signs He tells us of, then He will
indeed surprise us like a thief in the night.
In the study on this web site, there is NO prediction of the day, hour, or even
a year for the Lord's coming. There is no date predicted for his coming on
this web site and there will not be one because the Bible does not reveal that information
to us. However, like Jesus said, when there are certain warning signs present,
you may know that His coming is approaching. This web site is revealing certain
of those warning signs that have not been understood before. It is up to you
to decide to respond by getting ready for the Lord's coming, or ignore this warning
sign. Whichever choice you make, the consequences are sure to follow.
I would urge each reader to prayerfully consider the warning signs presented in
the pages of this web site and get ready to meet Jesus. He is coming very
-- Why has the Lord not revealed the message long ago that is just
now found on this web site
-- God has his own timetable for doing things and like any good
general, he does not reveal his moves against the enemy (Satan) until it is time, except
for those moves he must reveal ahead of time. Evidently this is now the time and it
has not been necessary to reveal it before this time. In addition, had he revealed
it before this, there would have been certain consequences. Allow me to quote the
words of an individual by the name of Bill, who said the following (in a personal e-mail)
and says it much better than the author:
"...it makes sense that God did not reveal this to us until recently, because had
we known all of this a long time ago we would not have expected His coming for some
It is not hard to decipher what people would do if they thought the Lord's coming was 150
years away. They would LIVE as though He was NOT coming for 150 years. Why
worry today? I can always repent just before I die and have fun in the
meantime! Do you see why? It does make good sense.
-- What about the "rapture" you do not mention it at all, why?
-- We do not find any Biblical support for the "rapture"
before the tribulation. Many people misinterpret scriptures to get the idea of a
silent and invisible taking of people to heaven. Unfortunately, the Bible does not
support this idea at all. The second coming of Jesus is a worldwide event that is
very visible and very loud. For example, the most frequently quoted text regarding
the "rapture" is in 1 Thessalonians 4,
1Th 4:16-17 - For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout,
with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall
rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them
in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
The popular image of the "rapture" is that of a silent event, as we see the
second coming is not silent, nor as we see in Revelation invisible,
Rev 1:7 - Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and
they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of
him. Even so, Amen.
Regarding the timing of the "rapture," here again people misinterpret
scripture, specifically Daniel 9 by trying to say that of the seventy weeks only 483
apply to the coming of the Messiah, while the last week in the prophecy is placed
some 2,000 years in the future. However, there is nothing in Daniel 9 that says
this; instead, the prophecy is given as seventy weeks or 490 years. The evidence
just does not support splitting out the last week of this prophecy.
Many Christians believe that they will not go through a tribulation, that some how before any tribulation occurs God snatches them up, leaving the non-Christians to go through the tribulation. Once again, the Bible does not support this idea, instead what we find is Jesus telling His disciples in Matthew 24,
Mat 24:15 - When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation,
spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him
Mat 24:16 - Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
Mat 24:17 - Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
Mat 24:18 - Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
Mat 24:19 - And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
Mat 24:20 - But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
Mat 24:21 - For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
Here we see Jesus plainly telling His disciples that they will go through great
tribulation, not that God will take them to heaven before any tribulation.
We need to clearly understand what the Bible says, not what we want it to say. This is a problem for many who read the Bible, instead of reading carefully what is there; they read into the text what their pastors have said, regardless of what the specific text says. Regarding prophecy we urge you to study the Rules of Intrepretation that we have outlined, a clear understanding of these rules will not only help with Bible prophecy but with your overall understanding of the Bible.
Revelation 13 Related Questions
-- The beast in Revelation 13:18 seems to refer to the Image to
the Beast rather than the leopard beast earlier in the chapter. That being the case,
can the number 666 really apply to the leopard beast (or the scarlet beast, which is the
same identical power)?
-- The answer is that this reasoning is based on the placement of
the verses near to one another. The words used for the beast and the image of the
beast clarify things. From Revelation 13 to the end of Revelation, there are
references to both beasts first revealed in Revelation 13, and the words used reveals the
identity of the power referred to. Everywhere the beast is referred to, it is called
the "beast", but where the image to the beast is referred to, it is called the
"image to (of) the beast" or simply "his image". The two are never
intermingled. There are several references later in Revelation where reference to
both is made and the language used clarifies this point. Therefore, there need be no
confusion about this even though the placement of these verses would suggest a mixing of
Here are places where both are referred to. Notice the separate terms:
Rev 14:9 - And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any
man worship the
beast and his image,
and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
Rev 14:11 - And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
Rev 15:2 - And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God.
Rev 19:20 - And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshiped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
Rev 20:4 - And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshiped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
As you can plainly see by these quotes that where the image is referred to, it always
makes it clear which beast is referred to by the terminology used. However, the
reference at the end of Revelation 13 about the 666 number is in fact referring
to the leopard beast, not the image to the beast. Consequently, there need
be no confusion on this point.
-- Revelation 13:18 indicates that the number 666 applies to one man
only because it uses a singular pronoun in the original Greek for the "number of a
man" in that verse. Also, a singular verb is used for the word translated
"count" in that verse. Hence the addition system used on this website may
be invalid. It cannot apply to a whole group of popes because of the singular
pronoun used in the original Greek for "man". Therefore, why should I
believe the method this web site teaches?
-- The author has heard this one before, that the pronoun for the
666 man is singular. The author agrees that it is singular for he looked it up in a
Greek-English dictionary in the back of a Greek-English Interlinear. But that does
not mean that there is not a count involved in the manner in which the authors are teaching
on this web site. The reason has to do with the instructions on how to arrive at the
number 666. The instructions are to COUNT the number of the beast.
The author checked with a Greek-English dictionary about the Greek word that is
translated as "count", and it stated that the primary meaning of that
word is to count. Some dictionaries give a definition in which enumerating
with pebbles is to be done, but that is still counting by any definition.
One secondary meaning is to calculate, which our website certainly does recommend
because one must add up the count, which is a form of calculation. Another
secondary meaning they listed is to "enumerate", which if you look it
up in the Merriam-Webster's Collegiate dictionary, the first meaning of that word
is to "COUNT". The second meaning of enumerate is to merely list
one item after another, which really is not counting at all, but rather simply creating
a list of items. One could not even infer calculation from this secondary
meaning of the word enumerate, so obviously listing items one after another has
little to do with the number 666.
One method some authorities use to arrive at the number 666 is to take the pope's
supposed title (which history indicates it has been his title, which is "Vicarius
Filii Dei", but Papal officials are disputing that now, so maybe they have
dropped it), convert the letters that correspond to Roman numerals to Arabic numerals,
and then add up the numbers. This method of letter to numeric conversion is
a system called gematria. Popes have claimed that title ever since it was
invented somewhere around 700 AD. Since then, there have been a lot of popes
who have either claimed it directly or simply never disavowed it and thereby accepted
it. One problem with the gematria system is that this is NOT counting..
That is simply adding and nothing more.
Further, that title applied to every pope that ever held it, which means every one of them
would have had the number 666, which means it is plural by any stretch of the
Factually, because the words used in the phrase in
Revelation 13:18 - ("for it is the number of a man")
are clearly singular, the number must apply to only one person who is also of the
beast. Under the gematria system, that title translates to 666, so that means every
pope that ever claimed that title was claiming the number 666 for himself. How could
that usage then be singular? Is it impossible for the usage to be singular and insist
on using the title as the source of identifying the beast and the ONE MAN who this number
applies to when the title applied to every pope who claimed it? Therefore, the title
of the pope is a faulty solution for determining who the number applies to. In
addition, many other individuals, if they check their name by using the rules of gematria,
will discover that their names also add to 666. Does that make them the man of the
beast? Not at all likely!
One individual wrote the author and objected that the verb meaning to count in Revelation
13:18 is singular, and concluded that therefore it points to the title. I
find this strange because that title has historically been applied to more popes
by far under his system than the system used on this web site since he was a believer
in the gematria system. Hence, even his own use of the verb was not singular.
And it was not singular for another reason, which is that he adds the numeric value
of a number of letters of the title - something that clearly is not a singular
application. He did, after all, object that we were adding up the numbers of many
popes, so if he wants to object that our use is plural (even though only one pope gets the
number 666 unlike his system where ALL popes who ever claimed the title receive the number
666), then by the same logic, his usage of adding up the letters should also be seen as
plural. Under the counting and adding system outlined on this web site, the authors
believe that the count is singular because ultimately only one man receives the final
total, 666, and it is for this reason that the verb itself is singular.
But there is another issue here that is commonly overlooked. While it is true
that the number 666 has a singular pronoun and verb for counting is singular, the
instructions don't because counting itself generally implies more than one item
exists to count. In other words, you normally don't simply count one item.
Technicaly, it can be done, but in Revelation, it seems extremely unlikely that
God would give such an instruction to count only one item as that would be ridiculous.
Revelation has a great deal of detail in it, but every detail is meaningful.
Nothing is added that is unnecessary. This means that if there was only one
thing to count, that instruction would not be necessary so would not likely have
been included. Instead, we would very likely have simply been told to look
for the number 666, rather than being told to count or calculate something to arrive
at 666. Even today, no known method the authors of this web site are aware
of uses only one item to arrive at the number 666 (in spite of the claim by those
who favor use of the title). Moreover, the phrase "here is wisdom"
strongly suggests a link to the heads of the scarlet beast of Revelation 17, which
certainly is not singular by any stretch of the imagination.
Moreover, counting the letters of his name does not work either because that does
not match the instructions. Somehow counting itself must be involved in the
sum or there would not be such an instruction. It is, after all, the primary
meaning of the word used in the Greek for the instructions. So, counting the
Roman numerals while adding them up from the pope's title is circumventing the instructions
God gave. And what does counting do towards the total if you are adding up
the numbers from the letters of the title? They do nothing. Does that
make sense? But, believe it or not, individuals have argued that they are
following the instructions by counting the letters of the title of the pope.
To continue with the main point. the instructions do say to count, so there absolutely
has to be more than one item to count. Hence, whatever objects are counted
are obviously plural as a group. The singular pronoun cannot and does not
restrict this instruction. The final sum applies to only one man, of that
we may know because it uses a singular pronoun for the guy who gets this number
("for it is the number of a man" - Rev 13:18).
But that does NOT rule out the authors' counting and adding system at all. As a
matter of fact, we follow the instructions much more closely than any other known method
because the authors' system uses counting, the counting is involved in a calculation to
arrive at the final total, 666, and finally, the total is applied to only one man who is
of the beast.
Under the system used on this web site, the reason that the number 666 is said to
be singular, or to apply to one man, is because it is a running total that accumulates
as each new pope goes by in history. At any given time, the running total
stands at a unique value that applies only to that pope within the seven papal names
that have existed since 1798. For example, Pope John Paul II has the value
665 because the total for his name combined with that of all previous popes among
the 7 papal names that have existed since 1798, comes to 665. He will never
have the value 666, 661, 550, or any other number. Only 665 applies to him
and him alone. His predecessor, Pope John Paul I, had the value of 663 (665
- 2 = 663). Again, only he had that number.
No other pope within the 7 names existing since 1798 have had that number and none
ever will again.
Consequently, his number is unique. Likewise, when the pope comes along who
has the total 666, he will be the only pope in the history of the 7 papal names
who will have that total. Thus, he is in fact a singular person, unique in
papal history, and therefore a singular pronoun is appropriate for him.
However, I would conclude that our system remains sound because of the Greek singular
pronoun that applies to the 666 man. We actually do use a system that agrees
with the original Greek, unlike those who use the pope's title.
Revelation 17 Related Questions
-- I have reviewed the list of the Pope Johns and the list indicates
there were 23. Could you explain why you only count 21? Also, why does the Pope Benedicts
list indicate 15 but you record only 14?
-- Many of our readers have reviewed the list extensively and also
discovered this interesting detail or mystery that has yet to be explained by any
Vatican or Catholic official. And while the records show the last Pope John is listed
as number John 23; logically, 16 and 20 must have existed also for this count to be
accurate. However, since the Vatican records do not acknowledge Popes 16 and 20 or
that they ever existed, our count therefore must stand at 21. The same 'lack of
acknowledgement' for Benedict 10 is evident also. Because they skipped number 10 and
the last Benedict is 15, the Vatican only acknowledges 14. Therefore, our count stands at
14 Benedicts. While there are no shortages of speculation and theories
to explain this abnormality, nothing that is official or historical to explain this
discrepancy exists in our research and library records. Please visit the
Years Reigned & Count Totals page
and look at the information about the Pope Johns and Benedicts. You can also go to
the listing of all the popes and check the facts against that list.
Here for the complete listing of all official popes.
At times, there have been Popes that were an embarrassment or concern to the (so
called infallible) Papacy. Many readers have submitted suggestions such as: bishops
were Vying for power, several popes reigning at one time; once they discovered a
female pope who had actually been officially elected, fired another, etc. We thank
you for your input, however, there is nothing official or historically factual provided
in those e-mails to go on.
-- How can the pope become very powerful in the near future when it
is the United States that is the leading power in the world?
-- The pope has always been, and still is today, recognized as a
highly important and influential spiritual leader of the free world. While there are
reports of dissention and disagreements among the ranks as to how the church should proceed
into the 21st Century, there still exists an effort to bring the Protestant churches back
into the fold (even if only to agree that the Pope is their superior). And, in spite of the
most recently disclosed sexual abuse scandals that has troubled many Catholic Churches for
some time -- most of the 2 billion Catholics believe that the Pope is God's intermediate
between God and man and that he is infallible. Of course almost all Protestant
Christians know that Jesus is the only mediator between God and man (this comes directly
from the Bible, through verses such as
1Timothy 2:5,which says, "For there is one God, and one mediator between
God and men, the man Christ Jesus;").
Recently recognized as a governing nation unto itself (by the Lateran Treaty of
1929, which was negotiated between the Italian dictator Benito Mussolini and Pope
Pius XI), the Vatican also represents itself as a nation within the United Nation.
Diplomats and ambassadors from all over the world have offices located on the Vatican
grounds and they seek the counsel of the reining pontificate for spiritual guidance
and direction. The Vatican also has one of the oldest and best intelligent gathering
networks and capabilities in the world. Empowered by the pope to serve as priests
of God, the priests lend an eager ear to the mandatory confessions of all Catholics.
As Bishops and Cardinals, they are a personal confidant to many heads of states
and governing bodies. And as a Jesuit, they serve as the popes’ Secret Service
–willing to lie, torture and even kill at his command. Collectively, they
are all unfailing and extremely loyal to the pope.
These said agents are numbered into the tens of thousands. Armed with the establishment
of the mandatory confessional in the early days of the Jesuits Order of priests,
this made for a unique way of gathering intelligence from the least likely commoner
to the greatest of nobleman which included Kings, Queens, Presidents, and even Dictators.
Information was gathered from every corner of the world and made known to the pope
for his purposes. Sought out by the many leaders of the world for the council of
their trusted priests or local clergy, these titled also secured blessings and curses
before engaging their enemy. Because this method proved extremely useful to the
services of the Papacy, many local communities were ultimately at the governing
hands of the churches direction. With the fear of excommunication hanging over each
soul for not cooperating, the Pontificate could gather information and personal
details that are still used to their advantage today. Many Governments are aware
that a great deal of information indeed courses through the Vatican and its agencies
and many have ingratiated themselves to the Vatican, extending a hand in friendship
and unity. With an ever growing body of followers, the Vatican today, can alter
or change the course of moral understanding and command a loyalty to whatever dictates
she chooses that can and ultimately will, influence the world to come, through any
Vatican decree she issues.
This is a unique and ingenious structuring of informational networks. It has the
capabilities of micro management on the grandest of scale and is the envy of many
intelligent agencies. Their best tool for effectiveness is emotional blackmail on
a spiritual level but have not limited their methods to that tool alone. This foundation
for information gathering was laid out long ago. Mirroring the United Nations itself
for peaceful intentions and unity, it is equal to any super power’s intelligence
network today –and yet, it is not subject to anyone for accountability.
Revelation 13 tells us that the earth beast (which is the United States in prophecy)
will force the world to worship the leopard beast (which is the Papacy), so it stands
to reason that power will come to the Papacy in the future at least in part because
of the United States. Logically, if the earth beast will someday be forcing
the world to worship the leopard beast, then it will have given it's allegiance
to the Papacy when these events occur.
The Bible tells us that this growth of power of the Papacy is a progressive process.
The ten horns have been identified elsewhere on this web site as being the Protestant
Religions that in the future will apostatize. Now, the Bible says in
Revelation 17:8 - The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall
ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition...
First there is the ascension out of the bottomless pit, a process that is continuing even
Rev 17:12 - And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have
received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
This tells us that the beast will receive power together with the ten horns, therefore,
the power of the beast is growing at this point.
Rev 17:13 - These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength
unto the beast."
Therefore, in the final step, the Beast acquires power directly from the Protestant
Religions, which will complete it's journey back to being the full beast it once
was before 1798. After this last step is complete, the forces that will exist
then will carry out a war against God's people.
Consider that America is largely a Protestant Nation and that political leaders
will do as the people ask when it is clear that they must. Thus, when the
Protestants and Catholics combine political forces, they will create a power structure
that no politician will want to resist, even if they know it is the wrong course
of action. When the Protestants later give their power to the Papacy, there
is little question then as to how the Pope could end up being the chief power in
the world because he will then control the most powerful nations on earth.
With that control, he will be able to carry out a war against those who will serve
God as He requires, or any other purpose the pope may select.
Therefore, it is the act of the Protestant Churches that will make the Papacy the leader
of the Christian World and will make the Papacy a world leader. We may not
understand all the ways this will be brought about, but of this we may be sure:
the Bible tells us that this will indeed happen, and since it is God who tells us
this, we may be sure it will indeed happen as He says.
-- What is the Lateran Treaty of 1929? Who were the parties
to the treaty and what provisions did it have that were of importance? Is it still
in effect today?
-- The Lateran Treaty of 1929 was an agreement between the Vatican
and the Italian government then run by the Italian Dictator Benito Mussolini. A
representative of the Vatican and the Italian dictator himself signed the treaty when it
was finished in 1929.
This treaty had the following provisions that were of importance:
In addition, a concordat (which is a diplomatic agreement between the Vatican and
any other country), had the following provisions:
But changes did happen. In 1985, there was another treaty between the Vatican
and the Italian government that changed most of the above provision, except that
the Vatican did still retain its Sovereignty. The most significant changes
in the 1985 treaty were:
Perhaps most significant results of the 1929 Lateran Treaty was the fact that prior
to the signing of the treaty, the pope voluntarily made himself a virtual prisoner
in the Vatican, but afterwards he began to come out in public much more. He
also began to interject himself into the international arena, though this came about
rather gradually. The result of this diplomatic activity has been the growth
of the power of the Papacy. But then, the Bible said that this power would
begin to grow again, and we can now look back and see that this indeed has happened.
This growth in power can be traced back to the Lateran Treaty of 1929.
-- The Papacy was wounded in 1798 by Napoleon's army. Was the
wound healed in 1929 by the Lateran Treaty between Italy and the Papacy?
-- To answer that one must define how the wound occurred in the
first place and exactly when it occurred. Historically the Papal power over the
saints of God was given to the Papacy in 538 A.D. when a decree written in 533 A.D. by the
Eastern Roman Emperor (Justinian) was implemented (it could not be before then because
Justinian did not rule a free Rome until March of 538 A.D. This decree made the Pope
head bishop over all other bishops and also gave him power to punish anything that he
considered heresy, which gave him complete power over anyone because he could define heresy
however he wanted to.
Thus it was a decree that created the leopard beast of Revelation 13 (also the same
as the talking horn of Daniel 7 on the 4th dreadful beast), so logically it requires
a decree to remove those powers. And in fact that is exactly what happened.
In February of 1798, the army of Napoleon marched into and took over Rome.
Five days later on the 15th of February of 1798, General Berthier, acting under
authority granted to him by the French Government, declared the Papal government
at an end, that it had no more authority over any civil function at all - anywhere.
Since Berthier then ruled Rome and nobody could challenge him, his word was law
and there was nothing the Papacy or anyone else could do about it. So it was
that a decree given 1260 year after the decree which created the beast, removed
the beast from power. This severed the power of the church and state.
This put the beast into the "was" state of Revelation 17, for after that
decree, the beast was past history.
Now, on the 20th of February of 1798, Napoleon's army took the pope captive, fearing
that he might try to create a revolt against Napoleon's army. So, off to prison
he went until August of 1799, when he died in prison in France.
Notice the symbolism present in Revelation 13 and 17. The
beast was created in 538 AD by a decree and taken away by a decree in 1798.
That time constitutes the "was" time of the beast (remember that John
was being shown the history of the beast from a time future to 1798) and corresponds
to the body of that beast in Revelation 17. The Revelation 13 leopard beast
and the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 are one and the same, so by February 15,
1798, the body time of both beasts was history. That means the time of the
heads began on February 15, 1798.
The wound was to the head of the leopard beast of Revelation 13, not to the
body. So, the wound must occur
the beast went away. That means it must occur anytime after February 15, 1798.
Now notice Revelation 13:10, which seems to indicate that one who causes captivity
and death must also suffer captivity and death. Has that occurred to any of
the popes since 1798? The answer is yes, to Pope Pius VI - the same pope taken
captive on February 20, 1798. So, this likely constitutes the head wound as
no other pope since February 15, 17982 has matched that criteria. That means
a capture and death constitutes the wound.
The removal of the powers of the Papacy by Napoleon's army constitutes the same
thing as the going away of the beast into the abyss because the abyss in Revelation
20:1-3 is defined as a restraint, a type of jail, and the Papacy certainly went
into restraint when it's powers were taken away. This also means the going
of the beast into the abyss and return of the beast from the abyss that is spoken
of in Revelation 17 is NOT the same thing as the head wound and healing.
The beast went into the abyss on February 15, 1798, and will not return until its
powers are restored, an event yet future to our time. The power of the beast
will not be fully restored until the Protestant Churches (the 10 horns) hand their
accumulated political power over to the beast, who then becomes head over them once
again. The head wound, on the other hand, occurred during the time represented
by the heads after the beast went into the abyss, and the healing of the wound must
occur before the beast returns from the abyss because it is the head that is healed.
It cannot be healed after the heads have gone into history, so must occur before
the 10 horns come along. Since the beast will not return from the abyss until
after the 10 horns have come on the scene, the logical conclusion is that the wound
healing and the return of the beast from the abyss are in fact two different, separate
events. Do remember that the full power of the beast must be restored for
it to constitute the beast, which means it must consist of the church and state,
with the church in control of the state for punishment of heresy, and must be in
control of all bishops. These were the original conditions that defined the
beast, so logically these must again be restored to reconstitute the beast.
Until those conditions are fully vested in the beast, the beast is still ascending
out of the abyss and cannot be said to have fully come out of it.
What constitutes the healing. Notice the original event carefully. The head
that was wounded had a name attached to it - the name of Pius. Pius VI was the
articular pope of that particular head that was taken captive and died in prison.
Therefore, to restore the wound so that the head lives, one must in some way restore a Pope
Pius. How was the wound inflicted? Not by taking away the Papal powers, for
that had already occurred before the Pope was taken captive and imprisoned, something that
constituted the going away of the beast. So, the wound was inflicted by removal of a
Pius from the throne of the Papacy by force. So how do you heal such a wound?
Reverse the original event. Of course that cannot be done exactly because Pius VI was
dead. But the very next pope that was elected was Pope Pius VII. This would
restore a Pius to the throne of the Papacy, which would be a reversal of the original
wound. Thus, when the Cardinals of the Catholic Church voted in another Pope Pius,
that healed the wound to the head named Pius.
There is good reason to believe this scenario. The Bible says;
Rev 13:10 - He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that
killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the
faith of the saints.
Since the subject changes in the very next verse (verse 11) to the earth
beast and there seems to be no indication that the subject has actually changed
in Revelation 13:10, this must refer to the leopard beast of Revelation 13.
History defines the event that changes things from the time of the body to the time
of the heads on the beast, so that is already outlined. And clearly no capture
and imprisonment and death that occurred before the decree of February 15, 1798,
is of any significance whatsoever because these events would have occurred during
the time represented by the body of the beast and so could NOT constitute the wound
to the head. Therefore, this remains as the definition of what the head wound
However, there are those who hold to the view that the Lateran Treaty of 1929 healed
the wound. The author agrees that this certainly could be seen to be true
because it did restore the Vatican to the Papacy (they got a small amount of their
Papal Lands back in the deal) and it in fact was a Pope Pius (Pius XI) that
was in power at the time, so one could say that it was a Pius that was restored
to power - nevermind that he already was in power. He just got a little more
with this treaty. But it was a beginning of the activity of the popes that
has brought them a great deal more power today. For from then on, the Papacy
began to act in foreign affairs with greater and greater frequency and power, though
the increase in its activity has been very gradually done.
More accurately, one could say with some degree of confidence that this event of
1929 began the ascent of the beast out of the abyss that is not yet complete, but
will be completed during the time of the 10 horns.
-- The Ostrogoths were driven out of Rome in 538 A.D. but were not
extinguished as a people until about 20 years later. Is this true and if so, how does
it affect the 538 A.D. dating for the implementation of the decree of Justinian making the
Pope head bishop and giving him the right to punish heresy?
-- It is true that the Ostrogoths were driven out of Rome in 538
A.D. and were not completely destroyed as a people for about another 20 years. The
fact is, even after they were driven out of Rome, they returned once again and took
it. Belisarius was sent back to drive them out again, but Justinian was suspicious of
Belisarius so did not send him adequate men and equipment to get the job done.
Consequently, he was not particularly successful in controlling the Ostrogoths.
Generals who followed in his footsteps later on were able to drive the Ostrogoths to the
point of extinction in about 556 A.D.
In the first set of battles between the Eastern Roman Empire and the Ostrogoths,
the Ostrogoths were nearly totally defeated. They held Rome but were forced
to abandon it as the Eastern Roman Empire general Belisarius approached. They
returned for a siege that lasted from March of 537 AD to March of 538 AD, and were
largely defeated right there. They cut the aqueduct that supplied a large
share of Rome's water, and water spread everywhere near their camp so that malaria
caused huge numbers of casualties among them (you can find this information in the
Encyclopedia Britannica in the 2003 computer edition in an article about Witigis,
who was king of the Ostrogoths during this time). Shortly thereafter, they
were defeated and Belisarius hauled Witigis and others captive to Constantinople.
So Belisarius left Rome, but this allowed the Ostrogoths to regroup and again regain
much of the territory they had lost.
Therefore, how does this affect the 538 A.D. dating for the beginning of the 1260 days/years
of Daniel 7:25? Not significantly because these events were not the only things
that determined the beginning of the 1260 years. The Ostrogoths and other
barbarian tribes had become Christianized by this time, but the Ostrogoths were
Arian Christians, which opposed the supremacy of the pope. On the other hand,
the Franks, along with others not aligned with the Arians, were for the pope.
Those supporting the pope were in the majority among the barbarian tribes.
So, one can see that the decree, once implemented in 538 A.D, could not be undone.
The word was out that the pope was supreme. Over time, he was able to make
good on being the supreme ruler of the churches and guardian of the Catholic doctrines
by punishing whatever he considered heresy and controlling the bishops of all the
Consequently, the activity going on around the pope had little impact upon the force
of that decree once that decree was implemented. The wars and political activity
around the region certainly had a big impact on everything and everybody else, but
the decree for the pope had come and was now in force. Once implemented, nothing
that happened in history could reverse the beginning date of the 1260 days/years.
This was the beginning point of growth of the Pope's power that continued for
centuries. The European political situation set up in 538 AD also persisted until
1798, so 538 A.D. was a very important year historically.
-- Please explain the meaning of 'anti pope' (having no count).
Exactly what does that mean and how did it come into being.
One that is elected by the Catholic Church to rule as a legitimate pope. The names
and numbers of legitimately elected popes are counted in the Catholic Church's official
ist of popes. (Future Popes using the name of a previous Pope will normally take on the
next number in the sequence).
One who claims the title of pope but for various reasons is not considered to have
been rightfully authorized by the Catholic Church to rule as pope. The number
associated with the Papal name they choose is not counted by Catholic Church
officials. In a couple of cases, antipopes were popes that were officially elected,
but were deposed and so were counted after the fact as antipopes.
The Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (2000 edition) defines ANTIPOPE to be
"one elected or claiming to be pope in opposition to the pope canonically chosen."