Who are the seven heads of Revelation 17?

[JoeMo]

Thomas,

You keep on blowing my mind with the thoroughness of your research and the logical eloquence with which you present it.  God Bless you for your consistency and level-headedness.  Honestly, I'm not a good typist; and I'm too lazy to write a post that long; but I agree with and support what you have stated above, brother!

[Kevin H]

Thomas the Doubter, I'm sorry that you are having trouble seeing what I'm saying. For me it is a difficulty as well as these are topics that I spent 4 years at AUC studying 2 years at Andrews as well as a Semester Break at the Jerusalem Center for Biblical Studies. So I have a wide background that these different teachers were able to build the evidence over the years and I'm just trying to fit it into a summery.

Did you read the chapter I recommended from the SDABC? "The Role of Israel in Biblical Geography" ? This may help some.

Too often we are very effected by Fundamentalism, seeing the Bible as written in concrete.  Too often we think that Daniel was writing about the Pope and Europe. That the people coming home from hearing Revelation read the first time were either scratching their heads saying "That was odd, I did not understand this" and that the generations to come finally understood. Or that they left from the first reading saying "The Pope is coming and after that the United States."

The philosophy of the dispensationalists is that the prophets saw what looked like was a mountain range, while it was actually 2 ranges one close the other farther away with a plain in between. And the Prophets describes the two things as if they were one.  While we don't hold to the dispensationalist's view of the rapture and 7 years and secular vs. religion, we still have the same idea that Daniel and John saw our day.

But there are 3 ways to quote and use the Bible. First is exegesis or what the words meant to the original audience. For example we all know that Isaiah 7:14 is a prophecy of Jesus coming. But look at the situation: King Ahaz was worried about King Rezin of Aram and Pekah. Isaiah was trying to get King Ahaz to trust in the Lord. And it was a prophecy that a child was going to be born and before he knew right from wrong that the Lord would have delivered Ahaz from these two kings.

As a prophecy for Jesus do you see how ridiculous this is? "Don't worry King Ahaz, in about  500 years a baby will be born  and before he knows right from wrong these two kings you are worrying about will no longer be a threat. Just hold on for 500 years and you will no longer have to worry about them."

The prophecy was about a specific local situation. And it raises up issues on "How will God be with us, for good or for evil?" indicating that Ahaz had his focus in the wrong place. That he's worried about these 2 men while he needs to worry about his relationship with the Lord. That God is going to take care of those 2 men and that in a very short time they will not be a threat. But for it to really be a blessing Ahaz needs to be right with God.

Matthew make analogies between what Isaiah was talking about and who Jesus is and how Jesus really fulfills the principles of the text.

Another place for understanding is how God wanted to bring his children into the promised land. They got to the borders, sent over 12 spies (then the history gets a little confused so the Bible gives all 3 possibilities depending on where you read. In one story 10 of the spies give a bad report and 2 give a good one. While in Deuteronomy all 12 give a good report but the people reject their report and 2 men stand up to the people in defense of the spies, and as we read different accounts through the Bible either 1 or both of these men who stood in defense of the spies were spies themselves.) Anyway we find that instead of entering into the land they had to go into the wilderness and all but the 2 men had to die and a new generation was brought again to the borders of the promised land. This time they send out only 2 spies making an application of the 2 men from the first time they were there.

We are like Israel. There were times that God brought us to the borders of the true promised land, but we had to go out for another generation to have the chances. But we have lost sight of how the Lord could have come err this. As we study the Bible in this context we are able to see things about these times and how it could have been. See how the Bible reapplies the principle for later times and what happened and from these see how they can reapply to our day. This way we stand on a more sure word of prophecy instead of speculating.

[JoeMo]

I have trouble believing that we humans have anything to do with the timing of the Second Coming.  So many times in prophecy we are told of the "fullness of time" or "at the appointed time".  If God indeed knows all from the beginning to the end, He knows exactly when "the Fullness of time" or the "appointed time is; and we have no influence over it whatsoever.  If the prophecies of the second coming are fulfilled in the same way as the prophecies of the 1st coming, they will be fulfilled in real-time oner a holy day season (spring feasts or fall feasts).  What year? Only God knows; but I personally believe and hope that it is sooner rather than later.

[Kevin H]

6 hours ago, JoeMo said:

I have trouble believing that we humans have anything to do with the timing of the Second Coming.  So many times in prophecy we are told of the "fullness of time" or "at the appointed time".  If God indeed knows all from the beginning to the end, He knows exactly when "the Fullness of time" or the "appointed time is; and we have no influence over it whatsoever.  If the prophecies of the second coming are fulfilled in the same way as the prophecies of the 1st coming, they will be fulfilled in real-time oner a holy day season (spring feasts or fall feasts).  What year? Only God knows; but I personally believe and hope that it is sooner rather than later.

Here it is a oneness of opposites. Our big mistakes are when we take part of the truth and use it against the rest of the truth.

There are Bible texts where we are so use to explaining them away and coming up with excuses that we miss the message. Daniel 2 could have been not the 7 periods consisting of 4 kingdoms, but it could have been 7 periods with 4 KINGS: Nebuchadnezzar,  Belshazzar, Diarus and Cyrus. Old and New Testament passages where the messianic kingdom/second coming is imminent are giving a message offering the event to have been just as imminent as the Hebrews were on the borders of the promised land but had to go out for another generation.  Jesus could have been born during the Babylon exile to lead a second great exodus home. But on the other hand God knew what the response would be and when the perfect time for the fullness of time would be. The fullness of time for the first coming does not make the Old Testament prophecies of the immense false.

Yes, on the one hand God sees the end from the beginning and knows when the perfect time of the second coming will be. However he works with our free wills and gives each generation (some with more possibilities than others, which Dr. Jim Valentine called "Crisis Periods") where God offers the chance to either prepare their children and grandchildren to be the last generation, or offers a generation themselves to be the last generation.

But while God gives us the freedom to close the work, he sees the end from the beginning and knows when the best time to come will be

[Alchemy]

I am so sorry for being gone so long. Just a lot going on lately. My apologies everybody.

 

I would like to address the post from Rick H.

 

I believe it to be an excellent post and very insightful. My only real change would be to say Babylon, instead of Anti-Christ.

[Alchemy]

On January 14, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Kevin H said:

For further study may I recommend: The Time of the End  by George McCredy Price and if you can get a hold of recordings from the 1976 Southern New England Campmeeting "Last Day Events" series.

http://www.amazon.com/Time-End-George-McCready-Price/dp/B0006BS1S6

I haven't looked at this yet. I completely forgot. But, I will.

[Thomas the Doubter]

On 20/02/2016 at 10:23 PM, Kevin H said:

Thomas the Doubter, I'm sorry that you are having trouble seeing what I'm saying. For me it is a difficulty as well as these are topics that I spent 4 years at AUC studying 2 years at Andrews as well as a Semester Break at the Jerusalem Center for Biblical Studies. So I have a wide background that these different teachers were able to build the evidence over the years and I'm just trying to fit it into a summery.

Hi Kevin H.

Sure I understand the general points you are making right now - fundamentalism, exegesis, the prophetic applications to immediate and later times, etc. I don't have a problem with that general discussion. But the issues I raised in my last post were only really addressing many of the specific points that you made. I understand its hard to say everything into a short post (I have trouble myself doing that), but I merely want to get our historical facts correct, thoughts coherent and logical not contradictory, and speculations presented as speculations not facts - like saying one could know that Jesus would have arrived in the past. Of course we do know that he will arrive, of course we know he will likely arrive soon given the nature of events on the planet in general and the correspondence with Biblical prophecies. But to say that one could know that Jesus would have arrived at a particular point in the past in a kind of omnipotent way, and repeatedly so, is much more than saying that - it is saying one is privy to God's mind more than others.

And anyway, all of this was and is beside the point, because in my first post I was really wanting to answer the question of this discussion - who are the seven heads of Revelation - but more specifically I wanted to identify who the Seventh Head was. And that question, I believe, I had answered with as much historical references as I could, demonstrating that the Roman Empire (6th Head) lived on in the East, with its capital in Constantinople (Istanbul in Turkey), only to be conquered by the Ottoman Islamic Empire in 1453 (a revisionist movie was even made in recent years in Turkey which turned out to be its biggest blockbuster that depicted the event, called Fetih 1453 (see trailer here)), which in turn demonstrated that it was the 7th Head. 

I was a Adventist Fundamentalist. I am no longer. I didn't receive a college or seminary education like yourself. I had to self-educate through purchasing hundreds of books. I spent time reading and listening to a wide range of topics since mid to early 2000s - apologetics, Islam, Atheism, Historical Jesus studies, philosophy, science, history and salvation. I had to learn the fine art of effective communication and debate, engaging with many colleagues at the House of Commons where I worked as a receptionist for five years, encountering all sorts of Atheist, Islamist, cult challenges. Ultimately, the point is, out of all of this I wanted to know the truth, and exposed myself to difficult challenges to get there. And that's why I shared with you and others those 7 simple but key principles:

1. Verification (1 Th. 5.21) – to verify and prove things rather than just accept immediately as true;
2. Impartiality (1 Tim. 5.21) – to be open to new conclusions other than the ones we have bias towards;
3. Evidence (2 Pet. 1.16) – to base conclusions on evidence, not have pre-determined conclusions that try to misrepresent evidence.
4. Argument (1 Pet. 3.15; Act 17.2-4; Act 18.24-28) – to make a case based on strong arguments.
5. Reason (Act 17.2-4) – to have good reasoning/logic behind the arguments.
6. Sensibility – to not entertain speculations (1 Tim. 1.4), cleverly invented but baseless theories/myths (2 Pet. 1.16), or superstitions (1 Tim. 4.7) as facts, which lead to turning away from truth (2 Tim. 4.4).
7. Source Credibility (Lk. 1.1-3) – ensure that your information comes from accurate, reliable, authoritative, credibly established sources.

There are many other principles that I've learnt from a wide range of my "teachers" (as I call those I read and learn from). But these are enough to give an excellent start. And if you find yourself breaking them then something needs to be rethought. And like I alluded to in my first post, it appals me that Adventist leaders/pastors/teachers don't teach, or simply don't know, these principles after all that time studying. We have a responsibility to ourselves, to others and to the God that died for us, to get it right, to get the truth right. Not what we want the truth to be, not what we've been taught the truth to be, but what the objective, unadulterated, impartial truth actually is in reality. This is not easy to do since for many it challenges our very fundamental view of the world that has been handed down to us. But really, so what? Is Jesus not worth breaking our own dogmas for?

Islam is now upon the world, whether we will choose to ignore it at our peril or not. It doesn't have to be killing you for it to be winning (although for many Christians in the world it is killing them, torturing them, raping them). It can simply be making us more Islam-compliant, that is to say, unable to criticise Islam itself, which is absolutely rife here in Britain and Europe (although many ordinary people are beginning to wake up and stand up to it despite the political and media elite's propaganda in favour of Islam). But to be sure it is an existential threat, whether ideologically (many educated or disaffected young people here find affinity with it and are attracted to ISIS in particular - I have had many Muslim friends who although were once moderate now more fundamentalist), demographically (the Times of London did an article a few years back, along the Pew Research Center on the alarming Muslim demographic growth rate of Britain in years to come - this has been totally accelerated by the unanticipated overwhelming migrant crisis), politically, religiously (they are the most dominant religious force in Britain and Europe), financially (most of the oil reserves in the world are in the possession of Islamic countries, most notoriously Saudi Arabia and Iran), militarily (with acquirement of nuclear weapons, not to mention terror armies like ISIS, and the fourth biggest army in the world being Turkey who is a NATO member), prisons, schools, universities, sharia courts (for marriages), you name it, they are doing it. And the only force to stop it is and will ultimately be Jesus Himself. But we will not have the choice to be bystanders. This is Satan's Empire. And he is bringing it closer to everyone. In the East Christians have already found out, Israel is already fighting against it. Europe is fractured, political leaders totally deluded, inept to the task and possess no solutions or willingness to tackle it, Christian leaders drowned out, silent or simply irrelevant. France, Britain, Germany, Greece, Holland, and more are all struggling. Eastern and Central European states are now building borders to cope with the influx of migrants from the Middle East. Now we wrestle with the prospect of a referendum to take Britain out of the EU at a time when the world is at its most chaotic. It is quite bleak people. Perhaps it doesn't feel that way in our individual worlds, but geopolitically it is a total nightmare, and for many individuals in the world it is sharply felt. It is no wonder that the Doomsday Clock of atomic scientists is now 3 minutes to midnight/armaggeddon (I highlighted many of these portents of doom with references to news articles in another discussion "Do Adventists even care about events in Paris"). Islam is encroaching on every issue in world society. Does that not sound like a resurgent 7th empire / 8th and final empire? If it doesn't then I can't see how any other candidate (the Pope for example) will be able to.

[Thomas the Doubter]

On 19/02/2016 at 3:27 PM, JoeMo said:

Thomas,

You keep on blowing my mind with the thoroughness of your research and the logical eloquence with which you present it.  God Bless you for your consistency and level-headedness.  Honestly, I'm not a good typist; and I'm too lazy to write a post that long; but I agree with and support what you have stated above, brother!

Joe

Thanks brother! Its always great to receive kind words of support. I very much appreciate it. 

I also like and believe in your point about the holy days with the first coming applying to the second coming. It makes total sense! After all, he didn't just plant festivals for no apparent reason. 

I'm working on another post about the identity of the Beast (if I can get any time to do it! Even just now took ages to write a simple post and its past my bedtime!). You might want to watch out for it.

Take care my brother!

Thomas

[hch]

It appears that this topic is all over the map.

If I might attempt to make it really simple:

Revelation explains itself by its fulfillment.

And both Daniel and Revelation use the repeat and enlarge methodology.

So to understand the 7-headed beast in Revelation 17

we must first understand the 7-headed beast in Revelation 12 and 13

[hch]

The 7-headed beast in Revelation 12:

Timeframe in Rev 12:

FACT:
Before Satan was on earth

Rev 12:3 "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."

It was a wonder that Satan could appear in Heaven (where God dwells) or in the starry heaven.

Luke 10:18 "And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven."

Fact:
The symbolic PREGNANT woman standing on the moon depicts Israel & its 12 tribes before the Manchild was born.

Rev 12:1 "And there appeared a great wonder in heaven;

a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:"

Rev 12:2 "And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered."

FACTS:
There were about 1260-years from Moses birth in Egypt until Christ's birth

The 7 heads in Rev 12 align with the powers that tried to kill the Manchild

1) Egypt issued a death decree to kill the Manchild
2) Assyria annihilated Israel and tried to do the same to Judah (to kill the Manchild)
3) Babylon castrated men in David's line to prevent the Manchild's birth
4) Medo-Persia had a universal Jewish death decree (to kill the Manchild)
5) Greece under Antiochus IV persecuted the Jews (to kill the Manchild)
6) Pagan Rome - Herod tried to kill the Manchild in Bethlehem
7) Pagan Rome killed the Manchild, who arose from the dead and ascended to heaven.

Papal Rome tried to kill the Manchild's people for 1260-years after Christ ascended to Heaven
and that is enlarged and explained in Rev 13

FACT:
After the Manchild ascends to heaven, the meaning of Revelation 12 is repeated in Rev 13

FACTS:
The papal beast in Rev 13 is described in similar terms as the beast in Rev 12
Both beasts are allotted 1260-years/days to war against the Manchild
 

If you believe that the Facts relating to Rev. 12 are not correctly stated please address the FACTS

and let me know why you see them differently

I currently have plenty on my plate and cannot take time to consider this topic all over the map

Christian regards

hch 

[Kevin H]

Thomas the Doubter: Good points that you brought up. The issue is that the Bible does give us a groundwork, a basic scheme. You can find a good summery of it in "The Role of Israel in Old Testament Prophecy" and in Deuteronomy 4. Then you find chapters that refer to coming close to this outline and from these you can see more of what could have happened and less speculation.

I do see the issues in radical Islam as part of the beast, but as for the heads, we have to remember that like the 5th head the 7th head will look very Christian, enough to if it were possible to deceive the very elect. I do not see Islam fitting this condition. We also don't find Radical Islam controlling everyone's life and finances. And we are finding the great corporations and banks fulfilling these prophecies.

A few years ago already the Council of Foreign relations had an article on a post radical Islam world.  The banks and corporations run them too and will get them to start dancing to their tune.

[JoeMo]

13 hours ago, Kevin H said:

We also don't find Radical Islam controlling everyone's life and finances.

Really?  Ask the people who live under jihadi rule in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, etc.  If somehow the flow of oil out of the Persian Gulf is interrupted by radical Islamic action (Iran?),  Many large and mighty corporations and financial institutions would crater within months.  Look at all of the accumulated oil wealth in the Middle East - much of it controlled by fairly fundamentalist Muslims who are allegedly our "friends" (in spite of the fact that many terrorists who have attacked the west come from their countries).  Look at the influence that the Muslim Brotherhood has in the US under the present administration.  Radical Islam or the sovereign countries that harbor it deserve a higher place on the "List of Potential Beast Powers" than any other worldwide entity I can think of at this time.  The coming elections in the U.S. could determine just how far the jihadi movement will get before the politically correct western world understands the catastrophic scenario in front of them.  I just hope that we can wake up before we realize that the war is already lost.  At the very least, radical Islam is one of the horns (maybe the prominent one) of the beast upon which the harlot rides in Rev. 17. 

[JoeMo]

16 hours ago, Thomas the Doubter said:

I'm working on another post about the identity of the Beast (if I can get any time to do it! Even just now took ages to write a simple post and its past my bedtime!). You might want to watch out for it.

Absolutely!  Feel free to PM me if you want to talk off line.

[Kevin H]

33 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

Really?  Ask the people who live under jihadi rule in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, etc.  If somehow the flow of oil out of the Persian Gulf is interrupted by radical Islamic action (Iran?),  Many large and mighty corporations and financial institutions would crater within months.  Look at all of the accumulated oil wealth in the Middle East - much of it controlled by fairly fundamentalist Muslims who are allegedly our "friends" (in spite of the fact that many terrorists who have attacked the west come from their countries).  Look at the influence that the Muslim Brotherhood has in the US under the present administration.  Radical Islam or the sovereign countries that harbor it deserve a higher place on the "List of Potential Beast Powers" than any other worldwide entity I can think of at this time.  The coming elections in the U.S. could determine just how far the jihadi movement will get before the politically correct western world understands the catastrophic scenario in front of them.  I just hope that we can wake up before we realize that the war is already lost.  At the very least, radical Islam is one of the horns (maybe the prominent one) of the beast upon which the harlot rides in Rev. 17.

Oh it is definitely among the horns, but three other things to consider. First, an additional sign about this 7th head is that if possible it would deceive the very elect. So how tempted are you to join the Radical Muslim bandwagon? Was Jesus wrong?

Second you said "Radical Islam or the sovereign countries that harbor it deserve a higher place on the "List of Potential Beast Powers" than any other worldwide entity I can think of at this time. " have you thought of opening your wallet and looking at the back of your credit card and compare it to the back of mine, and the back of the bank cards in the wallets of the radical Muslim terrorists.....

Thirdly, what could causes the merchants of the earth to mourn: the fall of radical Islam or the fall of the worldwide economic system?

[JoeMo]

1 hour ago, Kevin H said:

Oh it is definitely among the horns, but three other things to consider. First, an additional sign about this 7th head is that if possible it would deceive the very elect. So how tempted are you to join the Radical Muslim bandwagon? Was Jesus wrong?

Assuming the Beast (or at least one or more horns) is radical Islam, and the harlot is apostate Christianity,  the harlot is deceived into thinking she can control the beast.  She is deceived; and the beast will devour her.  True believers will not by deceived.  I infer from the phrase "if it were possible", that it is not possible to deceive the elect.  So Jesus was correct (as always).  He is NEVER wrong! Kind of a leading question.  Do you actually think that I would say Jesus was wrong about anything?

 

1 hour ago, Kevin H said:

have you thought of opening your wallet and looking at the back of your credit card and compare it to the back of mine, and the back of the bank cards in the wallets of the radical Muslim terrorists

I'm guessing radicals in this country have the same types of credit cards that you and I have.  I imagine that ISIS folks in Syria and Iraq use explosives, guns and knives as credit cards.
 No need to repay debts that way.

1 hour ago, Kevin H said:

what could causes the merchants of the earth to mourn: the fall of radical Islam or the fall of the worldwide economic system?

When/if the wealth of the oil- and mineral-rich Islamic nations is withheld (or withdrawn due to the region's geopolitical instability) from the west and their merchants; or these countries suddenly default due to the cataclysmic drop in commodity prices currently occurring, the merchants will weep bitterly.  The fall of one system will precede and precipitate the fall of the other.  We live in a global economy where the domino effect is alive and well.  If a mere 7% slowdown in the Chinese economy almost brings the world to its knees, think of what a collapse of the OPEC nations would do.

[hch]

On ‎3‎/‎2‎/‎2016 at 8:32 PM, hch said:

The 7-headed beast in Revelation 12:

Timeframe in Rev 12:
FACTS:
There were about 1260-years from Moses birth in Egypt until Christ's birth

The 7 heads in Rev 12 align with the powers that tried to kill the Manchild

1) Egypt issued a death decree to kill the Manchild
2) Assyria annihilated Israel and tried to do the same to Judah (to kill the Manchild)
3) Babylon castrated men in David's line to prevent the Manchild's birth
4) Medo-Persia had a universal Jewish death decree (to kill the Manchild)
5) Greece under Antiochus IV persecuted the Jews (to kill the Manchild)
6) Pagan Rome - Herod tried to kill the Manchild in Bethlehem
7) Pagan Rome killed the Manchild, who arose from the dead and ascended to heaven.

Papal Rome tried to kill the Manchild's people for 1260-years after Christ ascended to Heaven
and that is enlarged and explained in Rev 13

Revelation uses a repeat and enlarge format

Thus when Revelation 12 introduces the dragon beast

Revelation 13 explains the 7th-head as if it is another beast that looks like the dragon-beast that had 7-heads

The beast in Rev 13 is the papacy

It had a deadly wound that was healed

Facts:

1) The papal (first) beast in Rev 13 is not in its wounded condition

2) The papal beast in Rev 13 that had been wounded is in its healed condition

3) The Pius head was wounded (Pope Pius VI) in 1798 when he lost his secular kingdom

4) The Pius head was healed (Pope Pius XI) in 1929 when the secular kingdom was restored

5) The papal beast's head has used six names since the 1929 healing:

Pius, John, Paul, John-Paul, Benedict, & Francis (the 7th is yet to be understood)

6) From the perspective of the individual popes that ruled since the 1798 wound was healed, the 7-names are:

Pius XI & XII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John-Paul I & II, and Benedict

7) The 7 popes corresponding to Revelation 13 that ruled as solo popes do not include Francis in Rev 13's portion of prophecy 

8) The beast in Rev 13 has 7-heads when the earth-beast that has 2 horns brought to view

9) The 7th head identified of the RC since the wound was healed in 1929 was Pope Benedict & his reign aligned with GW & Obama

Those are some of the FACTS and Revelation 17 will repeat and enlarge the prophecy to explain more  

Thus to understand Revelation 17 chapters 12 & 13 must be understood.
Prophecy is history before it happens

History is prophecy fulfilled only when all of the FACTS fulfill the prophecy

[hch]

Since I have not seen to much Bible posted on this topic and the interest seems to be lacking (to get into the word)

I'll wait a while before giving the FACTS about Revelation 17.

When I prayerfully studied the Bible,

I was right about Pope Benedict & surprise:

Pope Francis is a Short-Timer - Loudcryer right again?

https://youtu.be/258evSZHtZ4 

 

0001-10194.avi

[Thomas the Doubter]

hch,

I guess I’ll get straight to the point since as you say you have plenty on your plate.

Shaky Methodological Foundation: Ignoring Revelation’s Own Explanation

I agree that “Revelation explains itself.” The thing I find odd is that you’re using Rev. 12 to explain Rev. 17. But Rev. 17, (as testified by the angel himself in v.7: “I will tell you the mystery of the woman, and of the beast with seven heads and ten horns that carries her”), is itself the explanation as to who the Beast is in Rev. 13. Rev. 12 does not tell you it is the explanation to Rev. 17 or 13 at all. My question is therefore, why reject Rev. 17’s own interpretation in favour of one that you made up? That is in my view an erroneous and shaky foundation of interpretation.

Fact Disputed 1: The Roman Empire as the 7th Head

So whilst I agree with your list up to Roman Empire as #6, your 7^thone is at odds with the explanation given in Rev. 17.10, which states in reference to the 7^th, “the other has not yet come.” That would be odd, don’t you think, if the 7^th head were the “Pagan Rome [that] killed the Manchild” because the Roman Empire was extant at the time the vision was revealed to John, and the killing of the Manchild had already passed, but the text says it had “not yet come”? If it had “not yet come” it surely could not be the Roman Empire which did come and remained until 1453. Do you see my point? Therefore, calling your interpretation “fact” is rather misguided.

Interlude: The Beast’s Similarities with the Dragon

Just a side note. Why the Beast is similar to the Dragon is telling of a greater truth – that Satan has his own Anti-Trinity, where the 7-headed Dragon Satan has his own ‘son,’ so-to-speak, in the form of the 7-headed (Antichrist) Beast, who is in turn supported by a Dragon-Speaking Lamb Beast (Rev. 13.11) otherwise known as the False Prophet (Rev. 19.20). Notice how the Beast is given the Dragon’s “throne” (seat of kingship) as well as his “power” and “authority” (Rev. 13.2), and how the Dragon-Speaking Lamb has that same “authority” (“it exercises all authority of the first beast” Rev. 13.12). Also notice that at the end of the entire saga all 3 major antagonists that are condemned in the “lake of fire” as a triplet: the Devil, the Beast and the False Prophet (Rev. 20.10).

Fact Disputed 2: Alleging the Beast of Rev. 13 to be Papal

Another “fact” that you describe is that the Beast in Rev. 13 is a “Papal Beast.” I know this is the standard Adventist so-called ‘fact’ but is it a Biblical/Historical fact. One of the first most obvious features described of the Beast is that it is composed of a Leopard, Bear and Lion (Rev. 13.2). This obviously hearkens back to Daniel 7.1-6’s Lion, Bear and Leopard Empires of Neo-Babylon, Achaemenid Persia, and Macedonian Greece. What defines any empire is its territories (“a major political unit having a territory of great extent or a number of territories or peoples under a single sovereign authority, especially one having an emperor as chief of state” - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/empire) - it wouldn’t be called an empire if it had none. If you look at any map of those empires (see attached maps) they cover huge swathes of the Middle East. What is discrediting to the Papal interpretation is that the Pope has never had an empire with significant control of those vast areas of the Middle East. The Dynasties of the Islamic Empire on the other hand have, all the way up until the First World War in fact, until the carving up of the Islamic Ottoman Empire by the British, the French and the Russians (http://www.britannica.com/event/Sykes-Picot-Agreement).

Fact Disputed 3: The 1260-Year SDA Interpretation Does Not Match Historical Reality

A note about the 1260-year period. This idea that the Papacy began its persecution or its ascendancy in 538 and ended in 1798 is totally discredited, and its about time that we looked at the actual historical facts.

The Real Date of the Destruction of the Ostrogoths: 535-554

The claim is that in 538 the Ostrogoths were at last uprooted to allow the Pope to begin its reign of terror. Firstly, the Ostrogoths were not destroyed or uprooted in 538. The actual assault on the Ostrogoths began in 535 by order of the Roman Emperor Justinian to recover Roman territory. The actual final destruction of the Ostrogoths occurred in 554:

“A period of instability then ensued in the ruling dynasty, provoking the Byzantine emperor Justinian to declare war on the Ostrogoths in 535 in an effort to wrest Italy from their grasp. The war continued with varying fortunes for almost 20 years and caused untold damage to Italy, and the Ostrogoths thereafter had no national existence.” - Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Ostrogoth,” http://www.britannica.com/topic/Ostrogoth.

This fact is so well established that even Adventist scholar, Church Historian and Retired Professor at Andrews University, Samuele Bacchiocchi PhD, acknowledges this glaring fallacy:

“Historically, our Adventist church has interpreted this prophetic period as representing the 1260 years of Papal domination from 538 to 1798. Supposedly the prophetic period of the Antichrist began in 538 when Justinian’s general, Belisarius, defeated the Ostrogoths, thus enabling the Pope to regain some of his power… This interpretation poses two major problems, which thinking Adventists have long recognized. In fact during the past few months I have received several email messages and calls from pastors who have asked me to help them understand more fully what really happened in 538. The first problem is the questionable significance of 538. We noted earlier that Justinian’s triumph over the Ostrogoths in 538 was short lived, because under their new leader, Totila, the Ostrogoths quickly recaptured most of their lost territories. In other words, this event did not significant boost the power of the Papacy, which still faced constant harassments from various rulers for centuries to come.” - Samuele Bacchiocchi, End Issues Newsletter No. 86, “Islam and the Papacy in Prophecy”, (6 July 2002), http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/eti_86.html.

Did you notice when Bacchiocchi alluded to the emails and calls from pastors asking for clarity on the issue? It is rather telling that even Adventist leaders are perplexed at the traditional interpretation that doesn’t match with the historical record.

The Real Date of the Pope’s Rise to Political Power: 756

In actual fact, the clear year as to the Pope’s rise to temporal political power was the donation of lands under the Frankish ruler Pipin III to Pope Stephen II in 756, incorporating Central Italy into the “Papal States”:

“When the Lombards threatened to take over the whole peninsula in the 750s, Pope Stephen II (or III; 752–757) appealed for aid to the Frankish ruler Pippin III (the Short), who “restored” the lands of central Italy to the Roman see, ignoring the claim of the Byzantine Empire to sovereignty there. This Donation of Pippin (756) provided the basis for the papal claim to temporal power.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Papal States,” http://www.britannica.com/place/Papal-States.

The Real End of the Political Rule of the Papacy: 1870

As we all know, the official interpretation is that the “political rule of the papacy [came to] an end” in “1798” after Pope Pius VI was taken prisoner (General Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists, Seventh-Day Adventists Believe… A Biblical Exposition of 27 Fundamental Doctrines, (Review and Herald Publishing Assoc.: Maryland, 1988), p. 156.). But is that actually true? Did the “political rule of the papacy” end in 1798? Lets look at some real facts.

First of all, the breaking up of its territory began in 1790. And yes, subsequently, Pope Pius VI’s refusal to accept this state of affairs did lead to his imprisonment in 1798 and his subsequent death in 1799. But what Adventist experts completely fail to mention is that his successor, Pope Pius VII became defiant of Napoleon, ultimately helping defeat Napoleon, and eventually led a resurgence in Papal popularity, in the aggrandisement of Papal State territory, and even, unwittingly, Papal authoritarianism. In other words, Papal political power was restored:

“The Emperor’s [Napoleon] bullying of Pius aroused a far-reaching sympathy and respect for the Pope, especially among northern Catholics, who helped align Pius with the allies who eventually defeated Napoleon. In June 1812 Napoleon transferred Pius to Fontainebleau, where he forced the Pope to sign a humiliating concordat on Jan. 25, 1813, which Pius renounced two months later. Released in 1814, Pius was greatly acclaimed en route to Rome. The Congress of Vienna (1814–15) restored nearly all the Papal States, including Rome to Pius, who then sought to reestablish the church on traditional foundations… Ecclesiastically, Pius revived the Society of Jesus (1814) and encouraged the religious orders to reorganize themselves… In the tradition of the humanist popes, he sponsored educational reform and the establishment of Rome as a cultural centre. Despite his efforts to adapt the papacy to the political, intellectual, and social conditions of the modern world, the reinstatement of authoritarianism in the Papal States was inevitable, and a “government by priests” followed his death and the dismissal of Consalvi.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Pius VII,” http://www.britannica.com/biography/Pius-VII.

All this goes to prove that 1798 is hardly likely to be the end of the “political rule of the papacy.” The exact opposite is true in fact.

However, there is an actual clear year of the end of the papacy’s “political rule.” The piecemeal dismemberment of the Papal States recommenced in the 1850s due to nationalist movements sweeping the region, until finally in 1870 the complete annexation of the Papal States was achieved and the political temporal power of the Papacy came to a complete and utter end:

“In the course of the Risorgimento (the 19th-century movement for Italian unification), the existence of the Papal States proved an obstacle to national union both because they divided Italy in two and because foreign powers intervened to protect papal independence. Annexation of the Papal States to the new Italian nation, however, was eventually achieved. After Austria’s defeat in 1859, several territories detached themselves from the Papal States and joined the kingdom of Sardinia. In 1861 all the former papal territories, with the exception of Rome and its surrounding region, joined the new kingdom of Italy. Rome and its patrimony remained separate only because they were protected by French troops, who eventually withdrew in 1870 during the Franco-Prussian War. Italian troops entered Rome on September 20, 1870; after a plebiscite in October of that year, it became the capital of Italy. The Papal States had finally come to an end. Pius IX refused to accept the new political situation or to recognize the loss of papal temporal power, and he and his successors remained self-described “prisoners in the Vatican.” The question of the pope’s relation to the Italian state was unsettled until the Lateran Treaty of 1929 set up the independent ecclesiastical state of Vatican City.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Papal States,” http://www.britannica.com/place/Papal-States.

Conclusion

So as you can see, all of these so-called “facts” that you present, when checked against actual historical facts, are nothing more than fictions. I would be careful to prematurely and presumptuously state “fact” before I had verified it if I were you.

[hch]

11 hours ago, Thomas the Doubter said:

I guess I’ll get straight to the point since as you say you have plenty on your plate.

Thomas

That was a super post. Wish I had found it earlier. Will come back to and check your facts. I can't wait to get back home. 

[JoeMo]

I totally agree with hch, Thomas.  If hch comes back and agrees with you, feel honored and respected.

I sure respect you.  You are such a great researcher and writer, you should write a book.  I'll buy the first copy.

[hch]

17 hours ago, Thomas the Doubter said:

I agree that “Revelation explains itself.” The thing I find odd is that you’re using Rev. 12 to explain Rev. 17. But Rev. 17, (as testified by the angel himself in v.7: “I will tell you the mystery of the woman, and of the beast with seven heads and ten horns that carries her”), is itself the explanation as to who the Beast is in Rev. 13. Rev. 12 does not tell you it is the explanation to Rev. 17 or 13 at all. My question is therefore, why reject Rev. 17’s own interpretation in favour of one that you made up? That is in my view an erroneous and shaky foundation of interpretation.

Thomas

me thinketh thou putteth the cart B 4 the horse.

There has been no evidence put forth to assume that I fit into the pigeon whole that I have been so neatly placed. 

I accept Rev 17 self interpretation, but it is not divorced from what has gone before it in Rev 12 & 13

It was by understanding Rev 17's self interpretation that I successfully predicted that Pope Benedict would not be pope in 2013.

A private interpretation is from the Greek idios; from which we get idiotic and such words.

A workman who rightly divides the word of God is one that understands the word of God and give the correct explanation:

In case you missed my tweets or did not watch the video to which I provided the link:

Pope Benedict XVI has but a very short time left (9/3/11)

#Pope Benedict XVI marks his last year with a Latin America trip that includes a visit to #Cuba (23 March 2012)

With Benedict XVI in his last year,

Who’s going to be the new pope? … (3 April 2012)

Is Pope Benedict going to be pope in 2013? (29 April 2012)

Months ago I tweeted that pope Benedict XVI is a short timer. Now Vatican power play is news! Y u b last 2 know? (28 May 2012)

If Pope Benedict’s 8th year is really his 7th, his time ends before May 2013 (7 July 2012)

Pope Benedict’s 8th year is really his 7th, because his ascension year was John-Paul II’s last year. Will Benedict XVI’s 7th year B his last (8 August 2012)

Pope #Benedict XVI As I read Daniel’s prophecy, 7’s number of completeness. His ascension year (zero) 2005.

He might last till spring 2013? (30 September 2012)

Pope Benedict announced this morning (Monday February 11, 2013) that he is resigning as of 28 February 2013.

A truly private (idios) interpretation of Rev 17, will not understand that Benedict XVI was the king that had been allotted a short space.

Such an interpretation will try to make the chapter say something different than what it says.

 

Already wrote too much and I have not even gotten into your response

 

[hch]

17 hours ago, Thomas the Doubter said:

18 hours ago, Thomas the Doubter said:

Fact Disputed 1: The Roman Empire as the 7th Head

So whilst I agree with your list up to Roman Empire as #6, your 7^thone is at odds with the explanation given in Rev. 17.10, which states in reference to the 7^th, “the other has not yet come.” That would be odd, don’t you think, if the 7^th head were the “Pagan Rome [that] killed the Manchild” because the Roman Empire was extant at the time the vision was revealed to John, and the killing of the Manchild had already passed, but the text says it had “not yet come”? If it had “not yet come” it surely could not be the Roman Empire which did come and remained until 1453. Do you see my point? Therefore, calling your interpretation “fact” is rather misguided.

Thomas

The Roman Empire is the 6th head on the beast in Rev 12 but it is not in the vision in Rev 17.

I never placed The Roman Empire on the beast in Rev 17 .

For it to be presented in that fashion in your response is to take what I wrote and to put  my words and meaning into a setting that is totally out of context.

Fact confirmed 1: The Roman Empire is the 6th Head on the beast in Rev 12

Fact 2: The Papal-Roman Empire is the 7th Head on the beast in Rev 12

[hch]

18 hours ago, Thomas the Doubter said:

Fact Disputed 2: Alleging the Beast of Rev. 13 to be Papal

You can dispute Ellen White's explanation that the first beast in Rev 13
 but she is right so I won't waste my time on this faulty dispute.

"Of the leopardlike beast it is declared: "There was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies. . . . This prophecy, which is nearly identical with the description of the little horn of Daniel 7, unquestionably points to the papacy."  {GC 439.1} 

[hch]

18 hours ago, Thomas the Doubter said:

Fact Disputed 3: The 1260-Year SDA Interpretation Does Not Match Historical Reality

A note about the 1260-year period. This idea that the Papacy began its persecution or its ascendancy in 538 and ended in 1798 is totally discredited, and its about time that we looked at the actual historical facts.

Thomas

Disagreeing with history, Ellen White, and the entire historical department of the SDA Church won't change the facts.

I have studied this point extensively and address it at length In my book that comes out on the Ides of March (The Great Controversy: Earth's Gran Finale)

Summary: after Emperor Justinian's appointee Pope Vigilius was installed 29 March 537 the Goth's siege of Rome was broken and King Witigis was virtually powerless after 538. Thus Vigilius was finally enabled to act as the surrogate Western Roman power over state and church. The popes maintained their authority until the French imprisoned Pope Pius VI in 1798.

The SDA church frequently focuses on kingdoms when explaining prophecy, but sometimes when a king is mentioned it is a king that meets the fulfillment of the prophecy. And sometimes folks look at a partial fulfillment of prophecy as the real deal when a final more complete fulfillment is indicated that has yet to come. The 1260-years (538-1798) have a more complete final fulfillment in recent history, but the partial vies is a great waymark to show us that we are on the right path.

 

[hch]

18 hours ago, Thomas the Doubter said:

Conclusion

 

So as you can see, all of these so-called “facts” that you present, when checked against actual historical facts, are nothing more than fictions. I would be careful to prematurely and presumptuously state “fact” before I had verified it if I were you.

Thomas

I was really quite disappointed that you chose to dispute 1) me by taking me out of context, 2) denying that the leopardlike beast in Rev 13 is the papacy, & 3) debunking the 1260-years (538-1798 but that point was more thought out than the other 2 for it shows that you are thinking and comparing the facts).

If you take the time to read my book (The Great Controversy: Earth's Gran Finale) expect to be surprised. I don't rubberstamp SDA teachings. I believe them because they are true, but they are not the whole truth. Light is shining from God's throne as we are nearing home. Thus it behooves us to study to show ourselves approved of God workers that do not need to be reproved.

Your presentation was very professional.

If there is an interest: I will consider posting an explanation of Revelation 17