Papacy - Tumblr Posts
Who Are the Two Beasts of Revelation 13?
By Author Eli Kittim
A “Beast” Represents An Empire
In the Bible, a “beast” represents a kingdom or an empire (see Dan. 7.3 ff.). Dan. 7.3 reports that “four great beasts came up out of the sea, different from one another.” In Dan. 7.4 we read: “The first was like a lion and had eagles' wings. Then, as I watched, its wings were plucked off, and it was lifted up from the ground and made to stand on two feet like a human being; and a human mind was given to it.” So, although it initially appears as an empire, it ends up looking like a human being, probably signifying its leader.
•••••
The Danielic narrative continues. Then a second beast appears, but this one is not depicted as a human being. Dan. 7.5 reads: “Another beast appeared, a second one, that looked like a bear. It was raised up on one side, had three tusks in its mouth among its teeth and was told, ‘Arise, devour many bodies!’ “ This is certainly not a human being. Dan. 7.6 goes on to describe a third “beast” that is also nonhuman, given that it has four heads: “After this, as I watched, another appeared, like a leopard. The beast had four wings of a bird on its back and four heads; and dominion was given to it.” The “dominion” that “was given to it” signifies that it’s some type of a political, economic, or military power and certainly not an individual!
A “Horn” Signifies A King
Dan. 7.7 clearly demonstrates that these beasts represent “kingdoms” or “empires” because it also mentions that the fourth beast had *ten horns,* signifying “ten kings” (see Rev. 17.12: “the ten horns that you saw are ten kings”). Daniel 7.7 declares:
“After this I saw in the visions by night a fourth beast, terrifying and dreadful and exceedingly strong. It had great iron teeth and was devouring, breaking in pieces, and stamping what was left with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that preceded it, and it had ten horns.”
It’s in Dan. 7.8 that a little horn (a king) appears, in addition to the 10 earlier horns, and this king is said to be a human being. But he arises out of the fourth beast (or empire). Dan. 7.17 gives us the exact interpretation:
“As for these four great beasts, four kings shall arise out of the earth.” However, Dan. 7.23-24 is even more precise by referring to the fourth beast as “a fourth kingdom on earth”:
“As for the fourth beast, there shall be a fourth kingdom on earth that shall be different from all the other kingdoms; it shall devour the whole earth, and trample it down, and break it to pieces. As for the ten horns, out of this kingdom ten kings shall arise, and another shall arise after them. This one shall be different from the former ones, and shall put down three kings.”
Thus, in Daniel 7, a “beast” represents a kingdom, while a “horn” signifies a king. Of course, the last king of the final empire will be the one we call the “Antichrist,” who will rule on earth for 3 and a half years (i.e. during the time of the Great Tribulation):
“He shall speak words against the Most High, shall wear out the holy ones of the Most High, and shall attempt to change the sacred seasons and the law; and they shall be given into his power for a time, two times, and half a time” (Dan. 7.25).
The First Beast of Revelation 13
Revelation 13.1 reads:
“And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads” (cf. Rev. 12).
This is obviously not a description of a human being but of the final empire on earth (cf. Dan. 2; Rev. 12; 17.9-15; for further details on why this is the final empire on earth, see https://www.instagram.com/p/BYr5b5HgBq1/?igshid=1ml02os1or44x Click “more” to view the successive empires).
Revelation 13.3 goes on to say:
“One of its heads seemed to have received a death-blow, but its mortal wound had been healed. In amazement the whole earth followed the beast.”
Question: is the whole earth following a king or a kingdom? It’s quite possible that the Bible has conflated the leader with his actual kingdom, as in Dan. 7.4 where the first beast is transformed into a human being. The evidence for this is that Rev. 13.3 uses the personal pronoun “his” (Gk. αὐτοῦ) in the phrase, “his mortal wound was healed,” which is also found elsewhere in the chapter.
And even though a “beast” is typically an empire, and a “horn” a king, nevertheless this chapter suggests that the so-called first “beast” is both a person and an empire.
•••••
The beast will be granted authority for 42 months (Rev.13.5). Rev 13.7 suggests that the beast will persecute the “saints,” war against them and come out victorious, creating a religious apartheid in the process, and that authority will be given to him over every nation and every language on the planet for three and a half years. Rev. 13.3 suggests that the beast’s resurrection from the dead is what stirs great amazement and causes “the whole earth” to follow him, and ultimately to worship him (v. 8).
The Second Beast of Revelation 13
First off, it’s important to note that, unlike the first beast, the second beast is never explicitly referred to as a person (e.g. “he”) in the Greek text. No wonder that the NRSV descriptions of the second beast are always translated as “it.” And given that we are told that “It exercises all the authority of the first beast on its behalf” (Rev. 13.12), it’s reasonable to assume that it represents some kind of political/religious entity. This explains why it performs the socioeconomic and military functions as well as the public relations of the first beast. And since we know that Biblically a beast represents an empire, it seems quite plausible that the second beast is a reference to a nation. Rev. 13.11 refers to the second beast as ἄλλο θηρίον (Gk. “another beast”), which is suggestive of another nation. A further distinction is that the second beast came “out of the earth,” in contrast to the first beast that arose “out of the sea.”
•••••
So, let’s review the descriptions of the second beast. Rev. 13.11 talks of the appearance of another beast. This one came out of the Earth (not the Sea); “it had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon.”
This could be a reference to an ecclesiastical monarchy, suggested by the phrase “two horns like a lamb,” that might be governed by 2 heads of state (i.e. 2 horns/kings, such as the 2 heads of the Vatican, Pope Francis and President Bertello [the Holy See and the Vatican City State], for example). In Rev 13.12, this enigmatic second “beast,” which is probably a political/religious institution, makes the inhabitants of the earth to worship the first beast due to the latter’s miraculous resurrection. And the second beast also makes great signs, so that even fire descends from the sky. Although this could be in the category of the miraculous, it’s probably a reference to a nuclear holocaust. At any rate, Rev 13.14 suggests that this second “beast” deceives the entire world through great signs and insists that an *image* be made to the first beast who was killed by some type of weapon yet miraculously came back from the dead. And, in Rev. 13.15, the *image* was animated and took on lifelike qualities. Those who didn’t worship it were to be killed. What is more, the second beast causes all to have a mark on their right hand or forehead (v. 16), “so that no one can buy or sell who does not have the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name” (v. 17). Rev 13.18 goes on to say:
“Here is wisdom. He who has understanding, vote the number of the beast; it’s a number of a human being, and his number is 600, 60, 6” (my translation).
Who Is the First Beast?
Obviously, the reference in Rev. 13.18 is to the first beast, not the second. And the solution to the riddle of his identity may be associated with the time-period in which he’s *voted into office,* that is, the time-frame during which his political party gains ascendancy. Thus, the triple-digit 666 could be a cryptic code of this particular time-period which might be deciphered and decrypted only through a sort of retrograde inversion or reversal: (i.e. “999”):
The year 1999 seven month,
From the sky will come a great King of terror:
To bring back to life the great King of Angolmois, (the Mongols),
Before after Mars to reign by good luck
(Century X, Quatrain 72)
“Nostradamus' most famous doomsday prediction warns future generations of a King of Terror descending from the skies in July 1999. This holy terror could be linked to the Third Antichrist,” writes John Hogue, an authority on Nostradamus! It is beyond the scope of this paper to describe who the Antichrist might be, but I will briefly mention what most eschatological studies indicate.
•••••
We are accustomed to think of the European Union as the Revived Roman Empire of Bible Prophecy, with a focus primarily on the Western rather than the Eastern leg of this Empire, which was supplanted by Russia after the fall of Byzantium in 1453. The Septuagint, an early Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, uses the phrase "Ρως Μοσοχ"----which seemingly stands for Ρωσία (the Greek word for Russia) and Μόσχα (the Greek term for Moscow)----in Ezek. 38.2 to identify the country from the far north that will head up a large coalition against Israel in the latter days (see Ezek. 38.15-16). Moreover, according to Josephus, a first-century scholar and historian, "the land of Magog," which is also mentioned in Ezek. 38.2, refers to the Scythians (Ant., bk. I, 6), and thus represents contemporary Russia. And although the "chief prince" of this nation is not explicitly mentioned as the Antichrist (cf. "the troops of the prince who is to come," Dan. 9.26), Ezek. 38 is quite suggestive in this regard, while clearly pointing to the Eastern leg of the Roman Empire! Most Bible prophecy experts agree that this is a reference to Russia. Therefore, the point I made earlier about 666 being a cryptic inversion of 999 has a great deal to do with the current leader of Russia, Vladimir Putin, who actually came to power in 1999!
What Is the Second Beast?
According to the undermentioned symbols of Bible prophecy, the second beast with “two horns like a lamb,” which is traditionally associated with the false prophet of Revelation, appears to represent the Vatican City-State, a Country in Europe and the headquarters of the Roman Catholic Church! Rev 17.1-6 reads:
“Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, ‘Come, I will show you the judgment of the great whore who is seated on many waters, with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and with the wine of whose fornication the inhabitants of the earth have become drunk [the sacramental wine of the Eucharist?].’ So he carried me away in the spirit into a wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was full of blasphemous names, and it had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was clothed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her fornication; and on her forehead was written a name, a mystery: ‘Babylon the great, mother of whores and of earth's abominations.’ And I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the witnesses to Jesus [martyrs who were killed as heretics by the Catholic Church?].”
The symbolism of drunkenness “with the blood of the saints” coupled with the golden cup in her hand suggest not only the perpetual sacramental wine of the Eucharist but also the innumerable saints that were burned or killed as heretics by the Catholic Church. The specific colored attire of verse 4 also matches the Vatican dress code: for example, the purple cassocks worn by Bishops and honorary prelates, as well as the scarlet cassocks worn by members of the College of Cardinals. Moreover, the commingling with the kings of the earth (v. 2) is suggestive of the union of church and state in former times when the Catholic Church flaunted its power in Europe and controlled both countries and kings! She is also said to be “adorned with gold and jewels and pearls” (v. 4), an obvious description of the papal tiara (crown) that is adorned with gold and is heavily bejewelled with sapphires, rubies, emeralds, and other precious stones. As you can see, the specific symbols generated in Revelation 17 match perfectly with those of the Holy Mother Church, a term that is often used to refer to the Roman Catholics Church!
Conclusion
Studies in Biblical eschatology suggest that the second beast is the so-called “false prophet” of Rev. 16.13:
“And I saw three foul spirits like frogs coming from the mouth of the dragon, from the mouth of the beast, and from the mouth of the false prophet.”
This verse would strongly indicate that the false prophet represents a religious figure/institution. And the previous symbolism strongly suggests that it might be the Roman Catholic Church. After all, the term Antichrist doesn’t only mean “against Christ”; it also means “in place of Christ.” Similarly, the term Vicar of Christ (Lat. Vicarius Christi) means that the Pope is the”earthly representative of Christ” or acts “in place of Christ” (i.e. Antichrist)! Also, the second beast appears to be in collaboration with the first beast in controlling the world for 42 months (during the time of the Great Tribulation), as well as the one that causes all to take the latter’s “mark,” while killing all those who refuse. The Bible warns that those who take the mark of the beast will be eternally condemned (Rev. 14:9-10). So, the coded trilogy of 666 appears to be a reference to a person, to wit, the so-called first beast of Revelation 13. Astoundingly, most comprehensive Bible-prophecy studies suggest that this figure is most likely the leader of Russia!
•••••
So the so-called “whore” (πόρνη) of Revelation 17.1 (the second beast) appears to be the Papacy, which is sitting on the first beast, while the “scarlet beast that was full of blasphemous names, and . . . had seven heads and ten horns” (Rev. 17.3) represents the final superpower on earth, namely, Russia!
(For further details on this point, see https://www.instagram.com/p/BqRDTWHgOIQ/?igshid=fzgzeal7j94t
Click “more” to view the 10 kings).
•••••
However, later in the narrative, Revelation 17 reveals that Russia, despite its alliance, will nevertheless turn on the Vatican and destroy the Papacy, probably after it has accomplished its mission of promoting its leader:
“The beast and the ten horns you saw will hate the prostitute. They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will eat her flesh and burn her with fire” (Rev. 17.16).
•••••
So, let’s answer this paper’s original question.
. . . . .
Question: Who Are the Two Beasts of Revelation 13?
Answer: The first Beast probably represents Vladimir Putin and Russia, while the second Beast seemingly represents the Pope (Vatican) and the Roman Catholic Church!
The Roman Primacy
The foundation of the papacy is the supremacy of St. Peter in the College of Apostles. This supremacy was established by Jesus Christ outside of Caesarea Philippi, and is recorded by St. Matthew.
And Jesus came into the quarters of Caesarea Philippi: and he asked his disciples, saying: Whom do men say that the Son of man is? But they said: Some John the Baptist, and other some Elias, and others Jeremias, or one of the prophets. Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. Mt. 16:13-19
The key to this passage is Christ's response, THOU art Peter. In ancient languages, such as Greek, pronouns are rarely used, because the verb conjugations make it obvious whom you are speaking to. So they are only used for emphasis.
Transliterated, it says, "kago de SOI lego hoti SU ei Petros..." I say to THEE, that THOU art Peter. So, in this conversation, Christ is making it obvious that He is specifically referring to Simon, whom He renames Peter.
In Scripture, God's changing of a person's name is a big deal. It is a sign of a special vocation or mission. The name change reflects what God specifically wants that person to do.
The classic examples were God's changing Abram's name to Abraham, because he would be the father of many nations, and His changing of Jacob's name to Israel, because Jacob had "overcome" God (by God's permission) which would symbolize that the People of Israel would "overcome" God by prayer.
There are no other Apostles whose names were changed by Christ.In this passage, Christ renames Simon "Peter" (which means rock) because He intends St. Peter to be the rock of the Church. Specifically, Peter is to be the rock because he made the profession of faith in Christ's divinity. Thus, Peter is the Apostle whose faith will not fail, and who will confirm the brethren in the faith throughout the ages.
And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren. Lk. 22:31-32
The third instance in Scripture is after Christ's resurrection, where He meets the disciples along the coast of the Sea of Galilee. There, He confirms St. Peter's mission as chief pastor of Christianity.
When therefore they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter: Simon son of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep. Jn. 21:15-17
Once again, this commission to feed the sheep and the lambs is to St. Peter alone. It is not given to any other Apostle. Therefore Christ had commissioned St. Peter to be the supreme pastor of the faithful, of the followers of Christ.
The notion of being a shepherd or pastor signifies power and control. A shepherd guides his sheep, telling them where to go. He protects them from wolves and thieves. He feeds them and makes sure they are healthy. All of the Apostles have this role generically, but to St. Peter alone was it given to do this universally and with the highest authority, as this commission came from Christ explicitly.
Further, Christ tells St. Peter to feed "my lambs and my sheep." This means that St. Peter is the universal pastor. He governs everyone. Some have interpreted that "sheep" mean laity, and "lambs" clergy, meaning that St. Peter is the supreme pastor over both clergy and laity.
Next, we take a step back and look at Sacred Scripture itself. It is clear from the very writing of Scripture that St. Peter is the leader of the Apostles. In every single instance where all the Apostles are listed, St. Peter is at the top of the list. There are no exceptions. Other Apostles move around the list to some degree, but St. Peter is always first.
--
The early Church testifies to the supremacy of St. Peter, who established his pontificate in the city of Rome in virtue of his martyrdom. By the end of the first century, a dispute had arisen in the city of Corinth over some disciplinary matter. (St. Paul had written two epistles to the Corinthians, who are natives of Corinth.) This church, in order to resolve its dispute, did not consult Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, or even Smyrna, wher St. Polycarp was a bishop. (St. Polycarp was the disciple of St. John the Evangelist.) Rather, the Corinthians consulted the Bishop of Rome, the Pope, to resolve this issue. At the time, this was St. Clement of Rome. The fact that they bypassed so many local eastern clergy to go straight to Rome argues in favor of the Roman supremacy in the Church, even by the year 100 AD.
In his response, St. Clement commands the Corinthians to stop quarreling and to obey their priests. He puts an end to the dispute. This also does not argue in favor of a primacy of honor only, but rather a primacy of authority. St. Clement's word was final because the Pope's word is final.
You therefore, who laid the foundation of this sedition, submit yourselves to the presbyters, and receive correction so as to repent, bending the knees of your hearts. Epistle of St. Clement
--
Next, here are quotations from Eastern Fathers on the Papacy:
Since to Peter was handed over the complete responsibility of feeding the sheep, and since upon him the Church was founded, as if upon the ground, no other confession of virtue is required of him except that of charity. Origin, commenting on St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans
Jesus said to him: Feed my sheep... and committed to him the command of his brothers. St. John Chrysostom, Hom. 88
Nor does the kingdom of heaven belong to sleepers and sluggards, but the violent take it by force (Mt. 11:12). Therefore on hearing those words, the blessed Peter, the chosen, the pre-eminent, the first of the disciples, for whom alone and Himself the Savior paid tribute, quickly seized and comprehended the saying. And what does he say? Lo, we have left all and followed Thee (Mt. 19:27, Mk. 10:28). St. Clement of Alexandria, "Who is the rich man that shall be saved?" Ch. 21
--
Finally, for those who are Catholics, here are the pronouncements of the First Vatican Council, 1870. (Denzinger 1822)
So we teach and declare that according to the testimonies of the Gospel the primacy of jurisdiction over the entire Church of God was promised and was conferred immediately and directly upon the blessed Apostle Peter by Christ the Lord. For the one Simon, to whom He had before said: "Thou shalt be called Cephas" [John 1:42], after he had given forth his confession with those words: "Thou art Christ, Son of the living God" [Matt. 16:16], the Lord spoke with these solemn words: "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar Jona; because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it: and I shall give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven" [Matt. 16:17 ff.]. [against Richerius etc. (see n. 1503)]. And upon Simon Peter alone Jesus after His resurrection conferred the jurisdiction of the highest pastor and rector over his entire fold, saying: "Feed my lambs," "Feed my sheep" [John 21:15 ff.]. To this teaching of Sacred Scriptures, so manifest as it has been always understood by the Catholic Church, are opposed openly the vicious opinions of those who perversely deny that the form of government in His Church was established by Christ the Lord; that to Peter alone, before the other apostles, whether individually or all together, was confided the true and proper primacy of jurisdiction by Christ; or, of those who affirm that the same primacy was not immediately and directly bestowed upon the blessed Peter himself, but upon the Church, and through this Church upon him as the minister of the Church herself.
And, finally, an anathema from the Catholic Church. (Denzinger 1823)
If anyone then says that the blessed Apostle Peter was not established by the Lord Christ as the chief of all the apostles, and the visible head of the whole militant Church, or, that the same received great honor but did not receive from the same our Lord Jesus Christ directly and immediately the primacy in true and proper jurisdiction: let him be anathema. Si quis igitur dixerit, beatum Petrum apostolum non esse a Christo Domino constitutum apostolorum omnium principem et totius ecclesiae militantis visibile caput; vel eundem honoris tantum, non autem verae propriaeque iurisdictionis primatum ab eodem Domino nostro Iesu Christo directe et immediate accepisse; anathema sit.
Quid ergo incongruum si Petrus post hoc peccatum factus est Pastor Ecclesiae, sicut Moyses post percussum aegyptium factus est rector Synagogae? Therefore how incongruous is it that Peter, after this sin, was made the Pastor of the Church, like Moses was made the leader of the Synagogue after having struck the Egyptian?
St. Augustine, Contra Faustum