Revelation 17:3, 8-14 Close-up: "the beast from the sea" Chapters 13 and 17 might be companion pieces, both telling of the two entities, beast and rider, that will in harmony do the will of Satan in the last hours of history.
Certainly, if this is true, there is added significance to the fact that the woman "sits on many waters" (17:1), and the beast, correspondingly, rises "out of the sea" (13:1).
So, though chapter 17 is widely thought of as being about "Babylon", equal space is given to Babylon's chief client, "the beast.
" Likewise the beast shares chapter 13 with "the false prophet", quite possibly Babylon's head.
Antichrist is first mentioned in 17:3 as being a "scarlet" beast.
The woman herself is clothed with the same color (17:4).
Only One Other wore scarlet in the New Testament, Jesus Himself, in His humiliation at the hands of Herod's men (Matthew 27:28).
Though He is and was a King, and shall reign forever and ever, how unfitting it seemed for the Christ to be clothed in kingly garb before the Time.
How unfitting to see His followers so bedecked.
How clearly these excesses of dress and things material identify the professing church as being of the beast! Next in 17:3 comes the indication of the "names of blasphemy", tying him squarely to the beast of 13:5-6.
Likewise the reference to seven heads and ten horns takes us to 13:1 and portions of Daniel.
The description of the beast then continues in 17:8.
This passage relates that a man who has already lived on this planet is even now awaiting to be released from the bottomless pit.
Paul agrees in II Thessalonians 2, and John's record of an angel in charge of that pit adds light (Revelation 9:1).
He will come back to the earth, do his work, be destroyed and be lost forever.
In 17:9 we are told that the seven heads on the beast have a double meaning.
First, they stand for seven mountains or hills (the word in the Greek can mean either) on which the woman sits.
Tie this to 17:18, and of course we have located the city of Rome: "The woman whom you saw is that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth.
" Here is established that "heads" represent rule, the present rule being on this seven-hilled city.
But the angel takes it a step forward (17:10): The seven also means seven "kings".
Commentaries connect "kings" to world Empires.
And it is true that there cannot be a King without a Kingdom.
But the word is"King", not "Kingdom".
Perhaps it would be profitable to look closer at these Empires and single out the "King" being considered by the Spirit.
It is obvious from even a short study of history that not every ruler of every Empire was dead set against God and God's plan.
It seems to me that there could easily be one man in the major Kingdoms that rose up and fit the description of the man of sin for that generation.
One man who from time to time pushed Satan's agenda until it became the world's agenda.
He would have to be a blasphemer.
Anti-God or anti-Christ.
He would have to have a serious hatred for Jews and/or Christians.
A dictator with all authority over his people.
And as we shall see, a King of Babylon.
By John's day, five such men had fallen, says the angel.
One ruled on the Roman Throne.
One is yet to come in our own future.
And then one more (17:11).
That is eight.
The man of sin, the antichrist, is one of those seven who rules a second time! He was, that is, he existed, in John's day.
He "is not" present on the earth in John's day.
And yet he lives, somewhere.
He arises from the Pit, synonym in many Scriptures for the grave, though the angel is restraining him for now, says Paul.
He arises in his "resurrection body" like Jesus did.
He fools the world.
He goes to perdition.
Now we must certainly stop and look back into history to find the other men.
If I have discovered the truth about this matter there are surely seven men from whom the Spirit can give us grace to choose the very one being exposed here as number eight.
Did I say exposed? Oh yes, we are to know this mystery.
The facts are all out there.
John marveled at it all but was mildly rebuked! He was told (17:7) that the mystery is solvable! The Book before us is not the Book of unanswered mysteries, but the Book of Revelation! Those who seek these answers must surely find them.
Seven men.
I cannot begin my study in Egypt, though I understand the thinking of those who do.
The mysteries of the Enemy began at the Tower of Babel, with one "Nimrod.
" I have seen him labeled "the first antichrist".
In Genesis 10 we read of his greatness and how he actually founded the cities of Babylon and Nineveh, the two capitals that would rule the world from his day until near the end of Old Testament history.
Even Persia, which rounds out the secular history that serves as Old Testament background, has legends of one who "hunted" with dogs and leopards.
His fame as a world leader has given rise to myth and fable in many cultures.
Should not the founder of nations be considered the first of the "men of sin"? Josephus, Jewish historian, in his Antiquities I, 4 says about those early days: "...
the sons of Noah...
descended from the mountains into the plains and fixed their habitations there; and persuaded others...
who were very loath to come down from the higher place, to venture to follow their example...
God commanded them to send colonies abroad, for the thorough peopling of the earth...
but they did not obey God [since they had] the suspicion that they were ordered to send out separate colonies, that, being divided asunder, they might the more easily be oppressed.
Now it was Nimrod who excited them to such affront and contempt of God..
..
He also gradually changed the government into tyranny...
[bringing] them into a constant dependence on his power.
He also said he would be revenged on God, if He should have a mind to drown the world again...
" Before moving to man number two, let me point out here that since the first man in the chain is the founder of Babylon, and the last one supports Babylon intimately, it is possible to search, I believe, for the successors of the King of Babylon only, to find the men we are looking for.
I discovered that there are 133 such men.
They date from Babylon's early beginnings in the 200's BC to and past the end of Babylon proper, through Assyria, Persia, and even Greece! Yes, Alexander the Great and his successors all called themselves the "King of Babylon".
Moreover, Isaiah pinpoints a man with this title in his apocalyptic message recorded in chapter 14.
Here one called "King of Babylon" is somehow related to Lucifer! He is said to have "weakened the nations".
His pride exalts him to exaggerated thoughts of his own deity.
Yet he is brought to the pit.
Sounds a lot like Revelation's accounting of the details.
Written 800 years before John.
Man number two.
Historically, the Kingdom of Assyria with Shalmanezer I at the helm, rose up and overpowered Babylonia around 1300 B.
C.
Nineveh now rules.
But Nineveh is also from Nimrod.
And Assyria's men will call themselves King of Babylon also.
It's in the blood.
Babylon is the mother of all abominations and must give her name to them.
Historical records assist us with this label through the Grecian Empire.
John the Revelator adds Rome to the list.
One of Assyria's most powerful rulers was Sennacherib.
His reign is mentioned briefly but with great significance in God's Word.
Through his men he actually challenged the God of Israel and the Israel of God in the 700's B.
C.
( II Kings 18), as he was snatching up real estate all around the Promised Land.
In fact he was successful in the overthrow of the Northern Kingdom (Israel) and felt he could lay claim to the South (Judah) also.
His pride and self-assurance turned him into a blasphemer, one of the prime requisites for Satan's men (II Kings 19:22).
His hatred for Israel and plan to destroy them, also revealing his character and its source, was intercepted by God through the intercession of Judah's king Hezekiah and the prophetic utterances of none other than Isaiah (II Chronicles 32).
Both Micah and Isaiah speak of one they call "the Assyrian", a true enemy who will be defeated by the Lord.
Like Isaiah's words about "the King of Babylon" it seems almost like an end-time statement in both cases, leading some to believe that the man of sin will indeed be an Assyrian.
I can almost believe this myself, but of course only in the light of a resurrected King as John predicts, not as a revival of the Assyrian nation today, a notion that seems a bit too far-fetched and that is not demanded by any specific text.
For the record though, Micah does say that the one born in Bethlehem, the Messiah, is going to be the one who will deliver Israel from "the Assyrian" (Micah 5:2-6).
And Isaiah, in the same chapter that he speaks of the "King of Babylon" and Lucifer (14), later refers to the "Assyrian", who will be broken, removing the yoke from Israel.
Now I have suggested earlier that it is Antiochus Epiphanes waiting in the Pit of revelation 17:8, and I think I have good reason.
But I can understand the reasoning that would lead people to think it is Sennacherib.
One other item that points to this Assyrian: To my knowledge he is the only one of the seven who was slain by the sword, (II Kings 19:37).
Now, the wording of Revelation 13 does not in my opinion demand a sword wound to a human, but I still find Sennacherib intriguing and worth more study.
Certainly, if this is true, there is added significance to the fact that the woman "sits on many waters" (17:1), and the beast, correspondingly, rises "out of the sea" (13:1).
So, though chapter 17 is widely thought of as being about "Babylon", equal space is given to Babylon's chief client, "the beast.
" Likewise the beast shares chapter 13 with "the false prophet", quite possibly Babylon's head.
Antichrist is first mentioned in 17:3 as being a "scarlet" beast.
The woman herself is clothed with the same color (17:4).
Only One Other wore scarlet in the New Testament, Jesus Himself, in His humiliation at the hands of Herod's men (Matthew 27:28).
Though He is and was a King, and shall reign forever and ever, how unfitting it seemed for the Christ to be clothed in kingly garb before the Time.
How unfitting to see His followers so bedecked.
How clearly these excesses of dress and things material identify the professing church as being of the beast! Next in 17:3 comes the indication of the "names of blasphemy", tying him squarely to the beast of 13:5-6.
Likewise the reference to seven heads and ten horns takes us to 13:1 and portions of Daniel.
The description of the beast then continues in 17:8.
This passage relates that a man who has already lived on this planet is even now awaiting to be released from the bottomless pit.
Paul agrees in II Thessalonians 2, and John's record of an angel in charge of that pit adds light (Revelation 9:1).
He will come back to the earth, do his work, be destroyed and be lost forever.
In 17:9 we are told that the seven heads on the beast have a double meaning.
First, they stand for seven mountains or hills (the word in the Greek can mean either) on which the woman sits.
Tie this to 17:18, and of course we have located the city of Rome: "The woman whom you saw is that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth.
" Here is established that "heads" represent rule, the present rule being on this seven-hilled city.
But the angel takes it a step forward (17:10): The seven also means seven "kings".
Commentaries connect "kings" to world Empires.
And it is true that there cannot be a King without a Kingdom.
But the word is"King", not "Kingdom".
Perhaps it would be profitable to look closer at these Empires and single out the "King" being considered by the Spirit.
It is obvious from even a short study of history that not every ruler of every Empire was dead set against God and God's plan.
It seems to me that there could easily be one man in the major Kingdoms that rose up and fit the description of the man of sin for that generation.
One man who from time to time pushed Satan's agenda until it became the world's agenda.
He would have to be a blasphemer.
Anti-God or anti-Christ.
He would have to have a serious hatred for Jews and/or Christians.
A dictator with all authority over his people.
And as we shall see, a King of Babylon.
By John's day, five such men had fallen, says the angel.
One ruled on the Roman Throne.
One is yet to come in our own future.
And then one more (17:11).
That is eight.
The man of sin, the antichrist, is one of those seven who rules a second time! He was, that is, he existed, in John's day.
He "is not" present on the earth in John's day.
And yet he lives, somewhere.
He arises from the Pit, synonym in many Scriptures for the grave, though the angel is restraining him for now, says Paul.
He arises in his "resurrection body" like Jesus did.
He fools the world.
He goes to perdition.
Now we must certainly stop and look back into history to find the other men.
If I have discovered the truth about this matter there are surely seven men from whom the Spirit can give us grace to choose the very one being exposed here as number eight.
Did I say exposed? Oh yes, we are to know this mystery.
The facts are all out there.
John marveled at it all but was mildly rebuked! He was told (17:7) that the mystery is solvable! The Book before us is not the Book of unanswered mysteries, but the Book of Revelation! Those who seek these answers must surely find them.
Seven men.
I cannot begin my study in Egypt, though I understand the thinking of those who do.
The mysteries of the Enemy began at the Tower of Babel, with one "Nimrod.
" I have seen him labeled "the first antichrist".
In Genesis 10 we read of his greatness and how he actually founded the cities of Babylon and Nineveh, the two capitals that would rule the world from his day until near the end of Old Testament history.
Even Persia, which rounds out the secular history that serves as Old Testament background, has legends of one who "hunted" with dogs and leopards.
His fame as a world leader has given rise to myth and fable in many cultures.
Should not the founder of nations be considered the first of the "men of sin"? Josephus, Jewish historian, in his Antiquities I, 4 says about those early days: "...
the sons of Noah...
descended from the mountains into the plains and fixed their habitations there; and persuaded others...
who were very loath to come down from the higher place, to venture to follow their example...
God commanded them to send colonies abroad, for the thorough peopling of the earth...
but they did not obey God [since they had] the suspicion that they were ordered to send out separate colonies, that, being divided asunder, they might the more easily be oppressed.
Now it was Nimrod who excited them to such affront and contempt of God..
..
He also gradually changed the government into tyranny...
[bringing] them into a constant dependence on his power.
He also said he would be revenged on God, if He should have a mind to drown the world again...
" Before moving to man number two, let me point out here that since the first man in the chain is the founder of Babylon, and the last one supports Babylon intimately, it is possible to search, I believe, for the successors of the King of Babylon only, to find the men we are looking for.
I discovered that there are 133 such men.
They date from Babylon's early beginnings in the 200's BC to and past the end of Babylon proper, through Assyria, Persia, and even Greece! Yes, Alexander the Great and his successors all called themselves the "King of Babylon".
Moreover, Isaiah pinpoints a man with this title in his apocalyptic message recorded in chapter 14.
Here one called "King of Babylon" is somehow related to Lucifer! He is said to have "weakened the nations".
His pride exalts him to exaggerated thoughts of his own deity.
Yet he is brought to the pit.
Sounds a lot like Revelation's accounting of the details.
Written 800 years before John.
Man number two.
Historically, the Kingdom of Assyria with Shalmanezer I at the helm, rose up and overpowered Babylonia around 1300 B.
C.
Nineveh now rules.
But Nineveh is also from Nimrod.
And Assyria's men will call themselves King of Babylon also.
It's in the blood.
Babylon is the mother of all abominations and must give her name to them.
Historical records assist us with this label through the Grecian Empire.
John the Revelator adds Rome to the list.
One of Assyria's most powerful rulers was Sennacherib.
His reign is mentioned briefly but with great significance in God's Word.
Through his men he actually challenged the God of Israel and the Israel of God in the 700's B.
C.
( II Kings 18), as he was snatching up real estate all around the Promised Land.
In fact he was successful in the overthrow of the Northern Kingdom (Israel) and felt he could lay claim to the South (Judah) also.
His pride and self-assurance turned him into a blasphemer, one of the prime requisites for Satan's men (II Kings 19:22).
His hatred for Israel and plan to destroy them, also revealing his character and its source, was intercepted by God through the intercession of Judah's king Hezekiah and the prophetic utterances of none other than Isaiah (II Chronicles 32).
Both Micah and Isaiah speak of one they call "the Assyrian", a true enemy who will be defeated by the Lord.
Like Isaiah's words about "the King of Babylon" it seems almost like an end-time statement in both cases, leading some to believe that the man of sin will indeed be an Assyrian.
I can almost believe this myself, but of course only in the light of a resurrected King as John predicts, not as a revival of the Assyrian nation today, a notion that seems a bit too far-fetched and that is not demanded by any specific text.
For the record though, Micah does say that the one born in Bethlehem, the Messiah, is going to be the one who will deliver Israel from "the Assyrian" (Micah 5:2-6).
And Isaiah, in the same chapter that he speaks of the "King of Babylon" and Lucifer (14), later refers to the "Assyrian", who will be broken, removing the yoke from Israel.
Now I have suggested earlier that it is Antiochus Epiphanes waiting in the Pit of revelation 17:8, and I think I have good reason.
But I can understand the reasoning that would lead people to think it is Sennacherib.
One other item that points to this Assyrian: To my knowledge he is the only one of the seven who was slain by the sword, (II Kings 19:37).
Now, the wording of Revelation 13 does not in my opinion demand a sword wound to a human, but I still find Sennacherib intriguing and worth more study.
SHARE
