by
Damien F. Mackey
“Some have
identified the Beast as being an individual such as the Pope, Martin Luther,
John Calvin, William of Orange or Hitler. Others have seen the Beast more as a
group or movement of people, such as the apostate Roman Church, the
Protestants, the Roman Empire (or the Common Market), the Roman persecuting
power of the first century, or some other great world-power that will rise up
to persecute Christians”.
At the beginning of the New Testament’s Acts 8,
immediately following the account of the testimony of Stephen, and his
martyrdom, we read that “Saul [Paul] approved of their killing him”, and that (8:1-3).
On that day a great persecution
broke out against the church in Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were
scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. Godly men buried Stephen and mourned
deeply for him. But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to
house, he dragged off both men and women and put them in prison.
When they have finished their testimony, the beast that comes up out of the
abyss will make war with them, and overcome them and kill them. And their dead
bodies will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called
Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.
First of all, let's compare the above text to
Luke's Acts of the Apostles. In Acts, Stephen gives testimony of Jesus Christ,
for which reason the Jews stoned him. It says...
"Saul was in hearty agreement with putting
him to death. And on that day a great persecution began against the church in
Jerusalem, and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and
Samaria, except the apostles. Some devout men buried Stephen, and made loud
proclamation over him. But Saul began ravaging the church, entering house after
house, and dragging off men and women, he would put them in prison."
Now read Revelation again:
"When they have finished their testimony
[when Stephen and those who followed after him finished their testimony], the
beast that comes up out of the abyss will make war with them, and overcome them
and kill them [a great persecution will afterward arise, they will ravage the
church, enter house after house, and drag off men and women].
And their dead bodies will lie [unless some
devout men come along to bury them] in the street of the great city which
spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified [in
Jerusalem].
Revelation also says, "The beast that you
saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to
destruction."
Compare this text's promise of destruction to 1
Thessalonians:
"For you, brethren, became imitators of the
churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea, for you also endured the
same sufferings at the hands of your own countrymen, even as they did from the
Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out. They
are not pleasing to God, but hostile to all men, hindering us from speaking to
the Gentiles so that they may be saved; with the result that they always fill
up the measure of their sins. But wrath has come upon them to the utmost."
1 Thess also says, "Now as to the times and
the epochs, brethren, you have no need of anything to be written to you. For
you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a
thief in the night. While they are saying, "Peace and safety!" [the
classic statement of the false prophets of old--Jer 6:13-14] then destruction
will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child, and they
will not escape."
2 Thessalonians seems to speak of the beast and
the false prophet:
The man of lawlessness is called also the
"son of destruction."
It is said that he "opposes and exalts
himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his
seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God" [compare this
to the image of the beast that must be worshipped--Rev 13:4,14]
It then says, "Then that lawless one will
be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to
an end by the appearance of his coming" [compare to Rev 19:20, those who
"were killed with the sword which came from the mouth of Him who sat on
the horse..."]
It goes on to describe the culprit as "the
one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and
signs and false wonders." [compare to Rev 13:2 where the beast receives
its authority from the serpent. Also compare with Rev 13:14; 16:14; 19:20 where
the false prophet performs "signs"]
Who was responsible for the great persecution?
Paul, in his allegory, says "as at that
time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born
according to the spirit, so it is now also."
Yet in his allegory he contrasts two covenants
and the children of two covenants. The children of the one, born for slavery
from Mount Sinai and corresponding to the "present Jerusalem"
persecuted the free children born of the Jerusalem that is free. There is, of
course, no mention of Rome.
John's Gospel also seems to downplay Rome. Jesus
omits any reference to it (as a persecuting body) when he says, "They will
make you outcasts from the synagogue, but an hour is coming for everyone who
kills you to think that he is offering service to God. These things they will
do because they have not known the father or me. But these things I have spoken
to you, so that when their hour [of destruction] comes, you may remember that I
told you of them."
So...with all of this background and history,
why do people still identify the beast as Roman?
[End of quotes]
Also at: http://www.preterist.org/articles/the_beast.asp
the same conclusion has been drawn, that the “Beast” of Revelation 13 must have
been Jewish, and not Roman:
We are dealing with the
character known as "the Beast" in the book of Revelation. Let me
suggest, if you are not familiar with this subject, that you read the following
passages before going on: Rev. 11, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20; 2 Thess. 2; 1 John 2, 3,
4, 5; and Matthew 24 (esp. vss. 23, 24).
The identity of "The
Beast" has always intrigued theologians. Legions of theories have been
conjured up to excite the imagination. This article will examine some of them.
It is not our purpose here to identify specifically who the Beast is, but
rather to clarify his general nature (i.e. whether he is a Jewish Beast or a
Roman one). If we can determine that, maybe his specific identity will be
easier to pinpoint. We want to show why the Beast cannot be Roman and why it must
be Jewish in character.
The whole question as to the
nature of the Beast (Jewish or Roman) and his identity is related closely to
the date of the book of Revelation. This article assumes that the book of
Revelation was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (AD 70).
Past Theories
Some have identified the Beast
as being an individual such as the Pope, Martin Luther, John Calvin, William of
Orange or Hitler. Others have seen the Beast more as a group or movement of
people, such as the apostate Roman Church, the Protestants, the Roman Empire
(or the Common Market), the Roman persecuting power of the first century, or
some other great world-power that will rise up to persecute Christians. Some of
the more serious attempts have been to identify the Beast as Nero, based on the
"666" number in Revelation 13. Another person (Spitta) urged a
first-century application to the Biblical character of Simon Magus (Acts 8).
Zullig interpreted the Beast as being the Herodian dynasty of rulers. J. S.
Russell (in his book, The Parousia) suggests the Roman Procurators (from AD
44-66) and Nero. Once when walking in New York City, I was handed a sheet which
stated that Rockefeller was the Antichrist! I've heard similar rumors about
Henry Kissenger! Every famous person who was feared or hated was someone's
"Beast!" This really illustrates how fear and hate (and other
emotions) can affect one's exegesis!
An Alternative
Very few have mustered the
courage to suggest a Jewish fulfillment of these "beastly" passages.
Most modern interpreters (who are Amillennial) say the Beast is Rome. So, the
thesis of a Jewish Beast will probably not be easily accepted.
I want to preface our study
with some comments taken from Dr. Cornelius Vanderwaal's commentary on First
John, where he deals with the antichrists: (from his commentary set entitled,
Search The Scriptures, vol. 10, pp. 60,61) --
"John, who may have been
on the island of Patmos when he wrote this letter, now declares that things
have gone so far that many antichrists have already appeared. This indicates
that it is the 'last hour' (2:18). Many false prophets have gone out in 'the
world' (4:1), that is, the apostate Jewish world. (emphasis mine, ees). John's
words make it clear that we must not think of the 'antichrist' in connection
with a misty future. When John reports the vision of the Beast in the book of
Revelation, he is not telling us about a future political antichrist with the
reins of world government in his hands; he is indicating that some beastly
devil will arise out of Israel to attack the church. 2 Thessalonians 2 follows
the same line of thought. In 3:9, John distinguishes sharply between the seed
of God and the children of the devil (see John 8:44)."
Who Were The Serpents?
The "Dragon" was the
source of power and authority for the Beast. He is called "the
Serpent" and "the Devil" also. He is clearly identified as
"Satan" himself (Rev. 12:9, 20:2). Were the Romans ever called
"children of the devil"? The Jews were: (John 8:44; Acts 13:10; 1
John 3:10)! The Jews were also called "serpents" and "offspring
of vipers" (Matt. 23:33)! And that same verse (Matt. 23:33) condemns them
to a fiery end similar to the end of the Beast and his followers (Rev.
19:19-21)!
Two Beasts!
There are actually two
"Beasts" mentioned in Revelation (ch. 13). The second of these is
later identified as the "False Prophet" (cf. Rev. 13:11-14; 16:13 and
19:20). Throughout the Old and New Testaments the words "false
prophet" are continually used to denote Jewish characters. It would be
strange indeed to speak of a Roman Beast with such terminology. This is another
indication that the Beast and those he associates with are Jewish in character.
The Beast Revived
If the Beast is a Roman
Emperor (such as Nero or Domitian), we are going to have to deal with the lack
of historical evidence for his resurrection. Rev. 13:2, 12, 14 make it clear
that the Beast was killed with the sword but came back to life. Some who favor
the idea that Nero is under consideration here recall the rumor that was
circulated after his death that he really hadn't died but that he was over in
Parthia gathering an army to come back to Rome and take over. There is, of
course, historical evidence that such a rumor was circulated in the first
century, but there is not the slightest evidence that the rumor was true, and
Nero never reappeared. This theory (called the "Nero Redivivus"
theory) has pretty well been abandoned by most who consider John's account in
Revelation to be inspired. How could an inspired Apostle entertain such speculative
notions which never did materialize? Neither Nero nor Domitian nor any other
Roman emperor came back to life again. This would certainly militate against
the Beast being Roman. And it can't be the Roman persecuting power that was
revived, since the Roman persecution dragged on for several more centuries, and
whatever persecution this is, was supposed to end shortly after the book was
written (see Rev. 1:1-3; 22:6,10). This is interesting, because the Jewish
persecution did come to a screeching halt shortly after the book was written!
Before its end, the Jewish cause got a couple of extra lives: one in AD 66 when
Cestius Gallus (the Roman general) withdrew his forces and suffered a
humiliating defeat at the pass of Beth Horon. A second chance for their religion
came when Yochanan Ben Zakkai pretended dead and escaped (in a coffin) out of
Jerusalem to the Romans, where he was allowed by Titus to go to Yavneh and
continue his teaching of the Law (where it continued until the destruction of
Jerusalem in Hadrian's day (AD 135).
The Song of Moses
To anyone familiar with the
Law of Moses and Jewish tradition, Rev. 15:2,3 will have meaning. It says that
those martyrs "who had come off victorious from the Beast" were
singing "the Song of Moses." Deuteronomy 32:1-43 is the song that
John has reference to. The Jews were to sing this song to remind themselves of
what would befall them "in the latter days" (Deut. 31:29). the song
talks about "the end" of the Jews (Deut. 32:20), and details their
destruction by a consuming fire (Deut. 32:22), "famine" (32:24),
"plague" (32:24) and "bitter destruction" (32:24). God
calls them a "perverse generation" (32:5,20), and says He will
"render vengeance" upon them and "vindicate His people"
(32:41 and 32:36 respectively). Why would Christian martyrs of the first
century be singing this song about the Romans, when the song had reference to
the Jews? It wouldn't make much sense. But if it was Jews who were killing them
(like the book of Acts shows), then they had every reason to be singing the
Song of Moses! It was the Jews who were the real threat to the Christians! No
one else knew better how to attack the church than the Jews. Paul said that his
intention as a former persecutor was not just to debate the Christians and
prove they were wrong. He was out to "destroy" them (Gal. 1:13,23; 1
Tim. 1:13; Acts 8:3; 9:21)! It was a Jewish beast who was persecuting and
killing these Christians, and these martyrs were singing the Song of Moses to
remind their Jewish persecutors of what was coming upon them! Aren't these the
same martyrs who cried out earlier, "How long, Or Lord, wilt Thou refrain
from judging and avenging our blood" (Rev. 6:10)? Who was it who had all
the "blood of the righteous" martyrs imputed against them - Jews or
Romans? These Christians who had kept their faith in Jesus in spite of the
intense persecution by the Jews were the ones "who had come off victorious
from the Beast." (See Matt. 23:35 and Luke 13:33)! This passage (Rev.
15:2,3) points very clearly to a Jewish beast.
Gnawed Tongues and Wild Beasts
In Rev. 16:10,11, it says that
the people in the Beast's kingdom "gnawed their tongues because of
pain." They had great sores on their bodies along with other plagues that
had been poured out on them. The question is, if this is Rome or a Roman beast
of some kind, when were they ever in such a miserable mess? John makes it clear
that these events were to happen soon after the book was written (Rev. 1:1,3;
22:6,10). When was Nero or Domitian's kingdom thrust into such dire straights?
We know from Josephus when the Jews literally gnawed their tongues for lack of
food during the siege of AD 70! And, it is interesting that Josephus even calls
the Jewish Zealot forces a "wild beast" in several places (Wars
V.1.1; IV.7.4; IV.9.8; V.2.5)! This doesn't fit the Romans at all, but it does
fit the Jews very well! This point is emphasized even more by the fact that the
whole context of the Song of Moses is full of references to "beasts,"
"serpents," and "dragons" (Lev. 26; Deut. 28-32; esp. Deut.
32:24,33).
The Beast Was Seized
The real clincher to the whole
story is found in Revelation 19:11-21, where it says the Beast was "seized
and "thrown alive into the lake of fire" (vs. 20). Keep in mind that
these events were to happen soon after Revelation was written (Rev. 1:1,3;
22:6,10). Was Nero or Domitian seized and thrown into the Lake of Fire shortly
after Revelation was written? Did Rome make war against Jesus and His angelic
hosts and get defeated shortly after the book was written (Rev. 19:19)? Did the
Roman armies get "killed with the sword" and become a feast for all
the vultures, shortly after Revelation was written (19:21)? The Roman
persecution did not end shortly after the writing of Revelation, but the Jewish
one did. Whoever the Beast is, he is soundly defeated here, his persecution
against the church is crushed and his armies become plunder for the birds of
prey to eat. Rome didn't fall until the Fifth Century, and that's a long time
after Revelation was written! This sounds more like a Jewish Beast trying to
persecute and destroy the church, but finally getting itself destroyed! The
Romans were the vultures of this text (Rev. 19:21) who circled outside the
Jewish walls watching the Jewish factions kill each other, waiting until they
wore themselves out enough to become easy prey. This soon happened (in AD 70)
and Jews glutted the world slave market. The Roman armies weren't seized and
"killed with the sword" in AD 70, nor in AD 96 either. Therefore, the
Beast here (Rev. 19:19-21 cannot be a Roman one. It had to be Jewish!
Conclusion
We hope someone will go from
here and discover the specific identity of the Jewish Beast. Whether he is an
individual or a group within the Jewish nation is a matter that will be left to
future studies. John Bray has suggested the Jewish Zealot leader, John of
Gischala. Others have suggested Menachem, who was a relative of Judas the
Galilean who had stirred up troubles back in earlier days. He gathered a zealot
band and attacked Masada, captured the fortress, seized the armaments and
paraded through Jerusalem with them. Menachem put on the purple robes,
proclaimed himself Messiah, and went into the Temple, but he was assassinated
in the Temple and his army vaporized. There may have been rumors about his
coming back to life, but I haven't read of them so far. He never reappeared as
far as Josephus recorded.
[End of quote]
For more on Stephen, see my
article:
St. Stephen
a true Israelite
