Two House Chronicles
Identifying the Two-Horned Beast in the Revelation of John
- Category: evaluation
- Published: Monday, 21 November 2016 23:24
- Written by Administrator
- Hits: 609
By Hope Helen Huerta
common law copyright 2016
Identifying the two-horned beast that rises out of the earth can only be accomplished under the right set of guidelines, which was analyzed in the previous essay: The Proper Rendering the Apocalypse of John. In the previous essay, it was demonstrated that only the Historicist’s guidelines deliver the greatest harmony between the beasts in Daniel and the beasts in the Revelation. One of those guidelines is that the beasts in Daniel cannot be construed as mere individuals but as successive dominant world powers.1
“These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.” Daniel 7:17
Both Preterists and Futurist acknowledge that the beasts in Daniel do not represent individuals but successive regimes that go forth to conquer2 but alter the guideline when it comes to the little horn of Daniel that they force into the past or the future. The perception that Daniel was uniform and the little horn also represents a regime and not an individual overthrows the Preterist’s and Futurist’s guidelines who are forced to perceive the kings in Revelation 17 as individuals because of the time constraints in pushing everything back or forward. The continuous-historical guidelines hold the complementary nature of Daniel and Revelation without such restraints and for this reason represents the true hermeneutic in rendering the apocalypse of John. The Revelation has something to “keep” in all the lives of the people of God who live during the interim between the advents when the mountains, renamed heads and then kings, are perceived as successive dominant world powers. The guidelines of Preterism and Futurism produce tremendous tension concerning the blessing for, “he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein,” when the people of God have nothing to “keep” if the things written therein do not pertain to them, as in Preterism and Futurism. Revelation 1:3.
While Historicism is often credited to the Reformation the sine qua non or the creed of Historicism is that the papacy represents the beast that rises from the sea and the little horn in Daniel 7 and 8, which has its roots some centuries before with the 10th century bishop Arnulf of Orléans who applied the man of sin prophecy in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-9 to the papacy, according to the 19th century Historicist E.B. Elliott.3 The sine qua non of Historicism is that the beast that rises out of the sea represents the Papacy. Historicists agree that the beasts in Daniel 7 represent Babylon, the lion that fell and was succeeded by the Persian empire, the bear, which fell and was succeeded by the Greek empire, the leopard, that fell and was succeeded by the pagan Roman empire, the diverse beast, that disintegrated and was succeeded by the division of its provinces depicted as ten horns4 upon the fourth beast in Daniel, out of which the little horn, the papacy, rises. Through the sine qua non of Historicism it is easily to perceive the dragon in Revelation 12 as the personification of Satan (Rev 20:2) and pagan Rome that bruises the heal of seed of the woman in Genesis 3:15, Christ,and “stood before the woman… to devour her child as soon as it was born,” who was the, “man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron.” Christ reveals his mother in the gospel of Matthew.
“Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.” Matthew 12:47:50
The church fulfills the seed of the woman in Genesis 3:15, those doing the will of God at Christ’s first advent, which Rome immediately attempted to eradicate. Rome was in league with the seed of the serpent (Jn 8:44) those who sat upon the seat of Moses to crucify Christ, which disqualifies them as the woman in Revelation 12. The dragon is cast to the earth in chapter 12, which is Christ’s testimony in the gospel of Luke.
“And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name. And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven. Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you. Notwithstanding in this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven.” Luke 10:17-20
The power that is in Christ was taken to the nations and the pagan, demonic strongholds were cast down fulfilling Luke, above.
Chapter 12 also maintains the woman/church is persecuted for a period of a thousand two hundred and threescore days the by the dragon cast to the earth, at which time God makes a place for her and feeds her in the wilderness.5 This is the same amount of time the beast that rises from the sea makes war with the saints, which is a thousand two hundred andthreescore days, the same as forty or two months. By the 5th century the church had developed into five episcopal Sees with control of the churches within their dominions (Sees comes from the word sedes, meaning “chair”): Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Constantinople. By the next century the Roman See gained hegemony over the other dominions and provoked the monarchies that were once the Roman empire to wield their civil power against any that did not submit to its ecclesiastic authority, just as the, “Nicene Christianity was made the state religion of the Roman Empire.”6 This marriage between ecclesiastic and civil power, or the establishment of national religion is the sine qua non of the beasts or seven heads in Daniel and the Revelation, which is essentially the object of this essay! In the 6th century the Paulicians were one such group that led to the pattern of dissenters departing the dominions controlled by the Roman church for remote areas outside of its control for the next 1200 years, until the Roman church’s power was broken by the Protestant movement. Under scrutiny the accusations of heresy by the established national church against such people as the Paulicians, Albigenses, Cathars, Waldenses and the Anabaptists do not prevail; in truth, it was these people that maintained primitive Christianity. It was these people who rejected the marriage of state and religion, the violation of their conscience, the practice of pagan rituals, the opulence of the church and numerous other defilements the Roman church accepted by their fornication with the kings of the earth, which fulfills the prophecy that God fed the woman in the wilderness and that the beast, the papacy, makes war with the saints in Revelation 13:7.
It must be noted that the crowns are upon the seven heads of the dragon in chapter 12, but are shifted and seated on the horns when the beast rises out of the sea.
“And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.” Revelation 12:3
“And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.” Revelation 13:1
The shift of the crowns to the horns obviously represents the breakdown of Rome into numerous monarchies symbolized by horns in Daniel and John. The monarchies are expressed as, “all kindreds, and tongues, and nations,” in verse Revelation 13:7. The sift of the crowns ensued when theRoman empire (the fourth beast in Daniel 7 and the fourth head in Revelation 17:3, 7, 9) disintegrated and was succeeded by the division of its provinces into numerous monarchies, represented as ten horns, out of which a little horn, the beast from the sea, representing the papacy, becomes the fifth head. Whereas Rome held both ecclesiastic and civil power under one state, the beast that rises from the sea blasphemes, which suggests ecclesiastic power, while the civil power was shifted to the various states during the forty and two months, noted by the crowns on the horns; even so, marriage between church and state persisted until, “one of his heads as it were wounded to death.” Revelation 13:3. One of the heads is wounded unto death, which upon examination of Daniel and Revelation is confirmed as the fifth head on the beast in Revelation 17:3, 7, 9. Following after the model of imperial Rome, the power of the Papacy over the ten horns did not recognize barriers between state and religion, which continued until the rise of the nation of America. Moreover, Daniel’s little horn/beast has the same allotted power as the beast rising from the sea and both are, “given to the burning flame,” which supports the fifth head is the papacy that is being healed now.
“I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.” Daniel 7:11
“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 worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.” Revelation 19:20
The wisdom required to grasp the issue commences with accepting Daniel’s determination of the first four heads as Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and imperial Rome. The beast that rises from the sea in the Revelation has the body of a leopard, representing Greece, the feet of a bear, representing Medo-Persia, and his mouth was like that of a lion, representing Babylon, while the dragon, as established above, represents the personification of Satan, imperial Rome in the previous chapter, that gives this beast in the next chapter its power, seat and authority. Uncontrovertibly, imperial Rome gave the Roman church its power, seat and authority after almost three centuries of attempting to eradicate it. The perspective that the heads/mountains/kings do not refer to individuals in Revelation refutes Preterism and Futurism; it follows that the perception the fallen heads commence with the first beast in Daniel 7 also refutes Preterism and Futurism.7 When Daniel is complied with, the sixth king cannot be perceived as imperial Rome but must be perceived as the fourth. The former perception allows only one short lived world power after imperial Rome falls that establishes national religion as the seventh head, an image of a previous, before the eighth head is healed and rises out of the abyss to war with Christ at his return; perceiving the sixth king as imperial Rome leads to Preterism or Futurism. When Daniel is complied with, Rome is grasped as the fourth head and allows for three more dominate world powers that continue the establishment of national religions before Christ’s return, which History actually reflects. When one grasps thesine qua non of the heads as the establishment of national religion, the fifth head is revealed as the papacy, which history vindicates endured 1260 years before the Protestant Reformation enfeebled it and then mothered the sixth: the United States of America, that came up as a lamb and is even now entering its dragon stage.8 Moreover, the fifth is gaining influence again with the help of America. Fifty years ago, George McCready Price wrote in his book, Time of the End, we are living in, “the time of the deadly wound, our present age.”9
“But, as before stated, the point of time from which the beast and its rider are seen by the apostle is our own day, the time of the end, not the time of the Roman emperors.”10
Price correctly perceived we live in the time of the sixth king and this work maintains we are entering the time of the seventh, which is brief. Price expounds on the significance that there are no crowns to speak of in Revelation 17.
“The ten horns of the scarlet beast of chapter 17 have no crowns upon them, suggesting that this vision applies at a later period, after the ten horns have ceased to do the bidding of the Papacy, a fact further suggested by the statement that these ten kings ‘have not yet received royal power,’ or the power to oppress or lord it over the minds and lives of men; ‘but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together with the beast.’ (Revelation 17:12, R.S.V.) In other words, at the time here spoken of intolerance and persecution had ceased for the time being, but would again be revived, along with the power of the beast from the abyss, the bottomless pit. And how accurately this describes our own times, when the power to persecute has been quiescent for nearly two centuries, but when the ominous signs of the revival of intolerance are visible to all!”11
Price noted that the crowns are absent while the woman rides the beast, which he rightly perceived as concurrent with the interlude in which the head is wounded and has not been healed, prophesied in Revelation 13:3. This is clearly affirmed in the evidence that the eighth head “is not” at the time John witnesses the woman riding the beast, but had lived prior to the “vision” and will rise and live again when the brief time of the seventh head is accomplished, to war with Christ at his return (Rev 17:8, 14). Moreover, Price also perceived this time as the fragile aberration of our secular society. The sine qua non of the beasts is easily revealed as the establishment of national religion when the Roman empire is perceived as the fourth head on the beast in Revelation 17. One must agree, history affirms this.
“Please do not misunderstand me. The complete separation of church and state is a wise, good policy. Civil and religious liberty are both good. But the French Revolutionists stole these heavenly ideas from the Americans of a previous generation, and used them to camouflage their propaganda of anti-God and anti-Bible which spread so universally at that time.”12
“Separation of church and state….
“Ancient history Many societies in antiquity had imperial cults where heads of state were worshiped as messiahs, demigods or deities. Ancient history is replete with examples of political leaders who derived legitimacy through religious titles…. Late antiquity An important contributor to the discussion concerning the proper relationship between Church and state was St. Augustine, who in The City of God, Book XIX, Chapter 17, began an examination of the ideal relationship between the "earthly city" and the "city of God". In this work, Augustine posited that major points of overlap were to be found between the "earthly city" and the "city of God", especially as people need to live together and get along on earth. Thus Augustine held that it was the work of the "temporal city" to make it possible for a "heavenly city" to be established on earth….
Medieval Europe For centuries, monarchs ruled by the idea of divine right. Sometimes this began to be used by a monarch to support the notion that the king ruled both his own kingdom and Church within its boundaries, a theory known as caesaropapism. On the other side was the Catholic doctrine that the Pope, as the Vicar of Christ on earth, should have the ultimate authority over the Church, and indirectly over the state. Moreover, throughout the Middle Ages the Pope claimed the right to depose the Catholic kings of Western Europe and tried to exercise it, sometimes successfully (see the investiture controversy, below), sometimes not, such as was the case with Henry VIII of England and Henry III of Navarre.
“In the West the issue of the separation of church and state during the medieval period centered on monarchs who ruled in the secular sphere but encroached on the Church's rule of the spiritual sphere. This unresolved contradiction in ultimate control of the Church led to power struggles and crises of leadership, notably in the Investiture Controversy, which was resolved in the Concordat of Worms in 1122. By this concordat, the Emperor renounced the right to invest ecclesiastics with ring and crosier, the symbols of their spiritual power, and guaranteed election by the canons of cathedral or abbey and free consecration….
“Enlightenment The concept of separating church and state is often credited to the writings of English philosopher John Locke (1632–1704). According to his principle of the social contract, Locke argued that the government lacked authority in the realm of individual conscience, as this was something rational people could not cede to the government for it or others to control. For Locke, this created a natural right in the liberty of conscience, which he argued must therefore remain protected from any government authority. These views on religious tolerance and the importance of individual conscience, along with his social contract, became particularly influential in the American colonies and the drafting of the United States Constitution.”13
Suspension of the sine qua non of the beasts is easily resolved as the time of the “lamblike horn” on the beast that rises “up out of the earth” (Revelation 13:11) and represents America, the sixth king in Revelation 17. There are those who grasp that the four heads on the leopard are subsumed or depicted as one beast by Daniel and not to be counted as four in Revelation 17; the horns on the beast from the earth abide in the same precedent. The beast from the earth comes up as a lamb, which represents the time of the first horn and ends when America enters the time of the dragon like horn.14 Price, a Seven-day Adventist, mistakenly asserts the horns represent civil and religious liberty15 and overlooks the precedent set by the bear like beast; the Medes held hegemony before the Persians but was perceived as one beast by Daniel and in like manner we are to perceive the two-horned beast as successive regimes of the sixth king. The interval of the lamblike horn and the wounded head is easily discernable as the separation of church and state when one perceives the first four beasts in Daniel to be the first four heads on the beast in Revelation 12:3; 13:1 and 17:3. Such a perception precludes Preterism because the sixth king is not the Roman empire but one much more contemporary. And it precludes futurism because the beast in Revelation 13 is not future, but follows the successive unfolding of history as the Papacy. America is easily seen as the sixth king by conceding the sine qua non of the beasts or heads is the marriage of state and religion.
America is also easily seen as the sixth king when one comprehends the significance of John being taken, “in the Spirit on the Lord's day.” Revelation 1:10. The significance has been debated as previously conveyed in: The Proper Rendering the Apocalypse of John. Key in the debate is John’s intent of the phrase in Revelation 1:10 “on the Lord’s Day” (en tē kyriakē hēmera) that only appears once in the NT. The preponderance of the evidence supports that it is an anachronism is perceive the phase as pertaining to the “first day of the week” while the hegemony of the church was still in the hands of the Jews and they were the principal acolytes John addressed. This is hardly a Patristic perception. Furthermore, the context pertains overwhelmingly to eschatological events such as Revelation 17 that is introduced as a “judgment of the Harlot riding the eighth beast” by an angel in possession of one of the vials of the last plagues. The greatest evidence, including the syntax, lies with the perception John’s perspective was the eschatological “Day of the Lord,” much nearer our time!16Dispensationalist, Bullinger, agrees:
“anthrōpinēs hēmeras, in 1 Corinthians 4: 3, is rendered “Man’s judgment (margin, Greek day)”. So we contend that, in Revelation 1: 10, tē kuriakē hēmera should in like manner be rendered “The Lord’s judgment (margin, Greek day)”. In both passages the same word “day” denotes the time or period when the judgment spoken of is being carried out. In the former it is the day now present, when “man” is judging; in the latter it is the future day, when “the Lord” will be judging. Indeed, this is the exact contrast as shown by the conclusion in 1 Corinthians 4: 5: “Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord shall have come”. This coming is the great subject of the whole book of Revelation, as is proclaimed in its opening words (Revelation 1: 7). And John is taken by the Spirit into the judgment scenes of that day.”17
Dispensationalist E W. Bullinger agrees; John was not merely speaking in the present, but also, through the Spirit, a future tense nearer our time, the “Day of the Lord;” Bullinger inadvertently agrees, John lived during the time of the fourth head, the Roman empire, and taken by the Spirit to our time, that of the sixth king! It is from this future perspective, our time, John witnesses the Harlot riding the beast. Nevertheless, the Revelation soon began to be perceived as relating things in John’ time, which is the general perception today. Only the future perspective corresponds with the Roman empire as the fallen fourth head and represents the wisdom required to comprehend the mystery of the 7, nay 8 heads. Revelation 17:9. The future perspective affirms the sine qua non of the 7 heads in Revelation 17 and the beast of Daniel as the marriage between ecclesiastic and civil power, or the establishment of national religion.
Finally, the sine qua non of the beasts affirms the powers that beconcerning Romans 13 are restricted to secular matters. It is unavoidable, Daniel disobeyed Darius’ decree concerning worship, while Shadrach, Meshack and Abendego refused to obey Nebuchadnezzar’s decree to bow before his idol. Such resistance to the powers that be univocally sustains Paul was not writing about man’s duty to God in Romans 13, but strictly presented man’s duties to man.
“They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.” Matthew 22:21
As this website proceeds to chronicle the two houses of Israel the significance of the sine qua non of the 7 heads will be seen in the mandates of the two-horned beast that causes, “all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive,” in order that they, “might buy or sell.” Revelation 13:16-17.
1 Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg, The Revelation of St John, Forgotten Books (24 July 2016), 204.3 / 1321, “In ch. xvii. 0, it is said, that the seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sits, and seven kings. It is clear as day, that there is not a double signification ascribed here to the seven heads, but that the second only serves as an explanation of the first. Even Bengel remarks, "It is certainly no satisfactory exposition, which takes a particular symbol in two quite different significations." Now, in the symbolism of Scripture generally, and especially of the Apocalypse, mountains uniformly denote, not particular kings, but kingdoms—see on ch. viii. 8. The kings, therefore, are not individuals, but ideal persons, personifications of kingdoms, the king of Babylon, of Rome, &c. Such phraseology occurs very frequently in the higher style of prophecy.”
2 Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., PMT 2015-058, https://postmillennialismtoday.com/2015/05/13/daniels-beasts-and-revelation/ “John actually reworks and reapplies OT verses, particularly from Daniel, his second leading source (behind Ezekiel). For instance, note that Daniel’s image involves four successive, distinct beasts (Dan 7:3). And these are counted seriatim: “first,” “second,” third (implied), and “fourth” (Dan 7:4-7). Whereas John’s beast is one beast: “a beast” (Rev 13:1). And his one beast is even a compound that employs only three of Daniel’s four beasts: leopard, bear, and lion (Rev. 13:2)… Clearly Revelation changes much regarding Daniel’s imagery.”
“Dr. Michael J. Vlach, The Kingdom Program in Daniel 7, http://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2012/03/kingdom-program-in-daniel-7.html, “These four kingdoms parallel the four parts of the statue that Nebuchadnezzar saw in his dream showing the strong connection between the two sections:
1. Head of gold (2) and beast like a lion (7) = Babylon
2. Arms and breast of silver (2) and second beast like a bear (7) = Medo-Persia
3. Belly and thighs of bronze (2) and third beast like a leopard (7) = Greece
4. Legs of iron (2) and terrifying fourth beast (7) = Rome”
3 Arnulf, ArchBishop of Orleans, speech at the Gallican Synod, Council of Rheims, 991, “Looking at the actual state of the papacy, what do we behold? John [XII.] called Octavian, wallowing in the sty of filthy concupiscence, conspiring against the sovereign whom he had himself recently crowned; then Leo [VIII.] the neophyte, chased from the city by this Octavian; and that monster himself, after the commission of many murders and cruelties, dying by the hand of an assassin. Next we see the deacon Benedict, though freely elected by the Romans, carried away captive into the wilds of Germany by the new Caesar [Otho I.] and his pope Leo. Then a second Caesar [Otho II.], greater in arts and arms than the first [?], succeeds; and in his absence Boniface, a very monster of iniquity, reeking with the blood of his predecessor, mounts the throne of Peter. True, he is expelled and condemned; but only to return again, and redden his hands with the blood of the holy bishop John [XIV.]. Are there, indeed, any bold enough to maintain that the priests of the Lord over all the world are to take their law from monsters of guilt like these - men branded with ignominy, illiterate men, and ignorant alike of things human and divine? If, holy fathers, we be bound to weigh in the balance the lives, the morals, and the attainments of the meanest candidate for the sacerdotal office, how much more ought we to look to the fitness of him who aspires to be the lord and master of all priests! Yet how would it fare with us, if it should happen that the man the most deficient in all these virtues, one so abject as not to be worthy of the lowest place among the priesthood, should be chosen to fill the highest place of all? What would you say of such a one, when you behold him sitting upon the throne glittering in purple and gold? Must he not be the ’Antichrist, sitting in the temple of God, and showing himself as God?’ Verily such a one lacketh both wisdom and charity; he standeth in the temple as an image, as an idol, from which as from dead marble you would seek counsel.”
4 Jack Wellman, October 4, What Does The Number Ten (10) Mean or Represent in the Bible?, 2014, Panteos webpage: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/christiancrier/2014/10/04/what-does-the-number-ten-10-mean-or-represent-in-the-bible/, “The number 10 seems to reflect God’s authority or God’s governmental rule over the affairs of mankind. This is seen elsewhere as in the 10 elders that were placed in most of the city gates of Israel (Ruth 4:2) so the number 10 also seems to represents man’s responsibility of obedience to God’s law. Such a number seems to indicate the law, responsibility and a completeness of order in both divine and human structures of society. Some scholars see 10 as the number of divine perfection.”
5 Oral E. Collins, Ph.D, THE INTERPRETATION OF BIBLICAL PROPHECY, http://www.historicism.com/Collins/interp.htm, “One of the more controversial principles of prophetic interpretation is the “year-day” principle. This is the principle whereby chronological designations such as “day,” “week,” or “month” are understood to be used symbolically. This interpretation presupposes that “day” or its derivative multiples used as symbols means “year” or corresponding multiples of years, so that one “day” means one year, one “week” means seven years, and so forth. The year-day principle is explicitly indicated in several old Testament texts (cited below), and is commonly applied to the “seventy weeks” prophecy of Daniel 9, but is often rejected in the interpretation of the Apocalypse. The following evidence strongly supports a more general respect for the “year-day” principle than is often allowed.
1. The principle has the support of the nearly unanimous voice of Protestant interpretation, especially with regard to the “70 weeks” of Daniel 9, from the Apostolic Church through the nineteenth century. The current skepticism is characteristic of the antisupernaturalistic attitude of our time. The negative attitude of some conservatives appears to result both from a somewhat simplistic and generalizing approach to prophetic study and the tendency of some nineteenth-century historicists to project dates for the return of Christ.
2. The symbolic character of the Apocalyptic vision favors a symbolic approach to the numerical chronologies which they contain. Note also that the year-day formula is an appropriate mask for the long periods of time involved. The 1000 years of Revelation twenty may be literal since it occurs after the second advent of Christ and therefore need not be veiled.
3. The principle of counting years for days is clearly established in non-apocalyptic portions of the Old Testament. This provides a reasonable source for understanding the numerical symbolism in the biblical apocalyptic. The relevant texts are Num 14:34, "According to the number of days which you spied out the land, forty days, for every day you shall bear your guilt a year, even forty years, and you shall know My opposition," and Ezek 4:4-5, in which Ezekiel was to lie on his left side 390 days for the Israel's punishment and on his right side 40 days for the punishment of Judah, "for I have assigned you a number of days corresponding to the years of their iniquity" (NASB; emphasis mine). The obvious fulfillment of the Mosaic prophecy was the forty years of Israel's wandering in the wilderness. The rationale for the Ezekiel prophecy is less than clear, but the principle of a year for each day is unambiguously spelled out. Note that in both of the above instances the year-day formula is used in predictions of judgments against the covenant nation of Israel.
4. The principle is used in the “70 weeks” prophecy of Daniel with regard to the appearance of the Messiah. This, though not explicitly interpreted in the prophecy ("seventy sevens") is accepted as standard usage (Hebrew shab‘uim = “heptad or seven[weeks] of years ”). The 490 year period thus extends from 458 B.C.-A.D. 33, B.C. 1 & A.D. 1, being the same year. In all occurrences of the year-day symbolism, a period of judgment is predicted, suggesting that Num 14:34 is the prototype for subsequent usage. In using the year-day principle it is important to distinguish between interpretation and application. Interpretation is concerned with the "year" as a symbol in the text and utilizes a 360-day year. Application applies the meaning of the text to history and involves real, 365¼-day years.
6 H.Grattan Guinness, Light for The Last Days, Edited by E.P. Chachmaille.( London & Edinburgh: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1917), pp. 72-73, “These ten kings should be looked for in the territory of the western empire of Rome only. ‘The ten horns of the fourth empire must none of them be sought for in the realms of the third, second, or first, but exclusively in the realm of the fourth, or in the territory peculiar to ROME, and which had never formed part either of the Grecian, Medo-Persian, or Babylonian empires.’ The master mind of Sir Isaac Newton perceived this long ago. He says: ‘Seeing the body of the third beast is confined to the nations on this side the Euphrates, and the body of the fourth beast is confined to the nations on this side of Greece, we are to look for all the four heads of the third beast among the nations on this side the Euphrates, and for all the eleven horns of the fourth beast among the nations on this side of Greece.’...”
7 The prophets use of PT (Prophetic Telescoping) was explained in The Proper Rendering the Apocalypse of John. The method of PT was used by the prophets to convey an impending judgment, expressed as the “Day of the Lord,” and then, without chronological notice, segued to the distant future and final judgment, immediately preceding the Messianic kingdom. Zephaniah is a salient example of PT, where the prophets forewarned the day of the Lord was at hand, an imminent judgment at the hands of a heathen nation and then without notice segued into the eschatological consummation, the ultimate restoration of Israel and the pacification of its enemies. PT as a hermeneutic destroys the Preterist’s doctrine concerning temporal indicators such as, “the things which must shortly come to pass,” in Revelation 1:1. Preterists insist that the stated temporal indicator maintains the “things” in the Revelation pertain strictly to 1st century and cannot be protracted beyond, but PT exposes the use of temporal indicators in such a manner as untenable. The Historicist’s perception that said temporal indicator rather conveys that there is a sequence of events that commence precipitously but the sequence is protracted unto the distant future, which maintains a greater fidelity with historical accounts.
8 Actually, the wall between church and state is being disestablished even now through the Faith-based Initiatives enactments by the government. Associate professor of sociology at Loyola Marymount University, Rebecca Sager, has written a book, Faith, Politics and Power:The Politics of Faith-Based Initiatives, in which she brings us up to date on the progress of breaking down the barriers between church and state in America (Oxford University Press, 2004). In her book she documents that: “The twin processes of government desecularization and devolution-most prominent in conservative political philosophy-have significantly altered culture and politics in the United States. "Desecularization" can be defined as the increasing role of religious authority in aspects of society. Most American political institutions are largely secular in nature, and this has angered conservative political and religious leaders from William F. Buckley to Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.” This will be dealt with at greater length as this work continues.
9 George McCready Price, Time of the End, Southern Pub. Association; 1st edition (1967), pg. 31
10 Ibid., pg.34
11 Ibid., pg. 33
12 Ibid., pg. 43
13 Wikipedia, Separation of church and state, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state
14 Tony Garland, A Testimony of Jesus Christ: A Commentary on the Book of Revelation, SpiritAndTruth.org (January 17, 2007), “Revelation 17:10… “Daniel’s four beasts are widely held to be Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome. Since the initial stage of the fourth beast, Rome, is already underway (“one is,” see below) at the time of John, this provides identification of the previous three: Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece. It is apparent that the Seleucid empire—an outgrowth of the disintegration of the Greek empire under Alexander, is largely subsumed into the third leopard beast.”
15 George McCready Price, Time of the End, Southern Pub. Association; 1st edition (1967), pg. 54, “Everybody admits that these two horns, civil and religious freedom, are good and harmless as abstract principles.”
16 Bullinger, E W. The Lord’s Day (Kindle Locations 496-507), “Now, in the case of Revelation 1: 10, we have the Adjective, “Lord’s”, and the emphasis falls therefore, naturally, on the Noun “day”—“ the Lord’s day”. But when it is desired to express the Old Testament thought of the Day being prophetic and future, and as having the emphasis on the word “Lord”, then the Noun is used (in the Greek) instead of the Adjective, and the emphasis falls on the Adjective “of the Lord”, i.e. “the lord’s day”. (This is done in 1 Corinthians 1: 8, 1 Thessalonians 5: 2, 2 Thessalonians 2: 2 (RV), and 2 Peter 3: 10.). In the latter case (that of the Noun) the day is viewed as being “the lord’s Day”, revealed by Him in the prophecies of the Word of God. In the former case (that of the Adjective: Revelation 1: 10) the day is viewed as “the Lord’s day”, seen by John as being then present to him “in the Visions of God”. There is an exact parallel to this use of the adjective in 1 Corinthians 4: 3, where we have the correlative word anthrōpinos, man’s, with the Noun “day”. The emphasis here, therefore, is on the noun, “man’s day”; because this present time is the day when man is judging; and forming and executing his judgments. This is why the Greek word “day” is actually, rightly, and necessarily translated “judgment”, in both the Authorized and Revised Versions. anthrōpinēs hēmeras, in 1 Corinthians 4: 3, is rendered “Man’s judgment (margin, Greek day)”. So we contend that, in Revelation 1: 10, tē kuriakē hēmera should in like manner be rendered “The Lord’s judgment (margin, Greek day)”. In both passages the same word “day” denotes the time or period when the judgment spoken of is being carried out. In the former it is the day now present, when “man” is judging; in the latter it is the future day, when “the Lord” will be judging. Indeed, this is the exact contrast as shown by the conclusion in 1 Corinthians 4: 5: “Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord shall have come”. This coming is the great subject of the whole book of Revelation, as is proclaimed in its opening words (Revelation 1: 7). And John is taken by the Spirit into the judgment scenes of that day.”