RandyPNW
Well-Known Member
- Jun 8, 2021
- 2,257
- 464
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Wouldn't it make better sense to interpret that to mean the beast is in the pit at the time? After all, in order to ascend from the pit eventually, this requires that the beast has to be in the pit first. Which should also mean that when the beast 'was', this indicates that the beast wasn't in the pit yet. By making Nero the beast logically means Nero will ascend out of the pit eventually. I find that totally unreasonable myself, as if Nero could somehow be relevant in the end of this age, and that when Christ returns it is a resurrected Nero that is cast into the LOF in Revelation 19:20.
We have to keep in mind that the beast that ascends out of the pit, this has to be the same beast that got put into the pit. Otherwise, how does one explain how the beast acends out of the pit it was never in? That doesn't make sense, right?
Yea, I was just throwing that out there--it's not what I really believe myself. I don't think Nero is the Beast head that "is not." My own thought was that this was a projection into the future that the ancient form of the Roman Empire would come to a time when it "is not."
But that doesn't satisfy me either. I thought maybe the Antichrist himself would be mortally wounded. But this indicates he was, but "is not." I really can't say I understand this one verse at all:
Rev 17.11 The beast who once was, and now is not, is an eighth king. He belongs to the seven and is going to his destruction.
I feel like I'm missing something that should be more obvious. I've probably just listened to too many popular ideas for too long. I'm open to suggestions...
Maybe it's just saying that the Beast theocracy existed in the form of these 4 pagan kingdoms, but that the Antichrist himself "is not," because he hasn't come as an individual yet? I don't know!
There's also the possibility that the reference is indirectly to Satan whose "head" was wounded at the Cross. His Kingdom existed in the 4 Kingdoms of Dan 7, but Jesus condemned paganism to death. So even though the Roman Empire still existed, the individual "Beast" did not yet exist, ie the individual Antichrist.
And yet he will rise as an "8th," because the previous 7 Kingdoms had been defeated, preventing his rise. His so-called "resurrection" is a mystery in light of the fatal wound he received at the Cross.
This also has been unsatisfactory for me, though it fits the passage and sounds reasonable. It would've been much easier, though, for the Holy Spirit to spell this out. When He doesn't, it indicates there is a danger of Roman retaliation against John, in my view.
Last edited:
Upvote
0