No, the 1st beast Kingdom that arose from the sea can not have the 8th horn/king/antichrist ruling it, because the 1st beast only had the 6th king ruling it before it was given the mortal head wound.
Provide the verse that says the beast received a deadly head wound when the 6th king was ruling it. There's none. You are drawing unmerited conclusions that are not written. All scripture says is the beast received a deadly wound that was healed. How do you come up with it being during the 6th king, I don't know.
The saying goes that the beast that existed, now is not. The revived image of the 1st beast after the head wound is healed by the second Christ like beast is the time when he receives the 7th king/horn/antichrist, who is also the 8th. The 7th and 8th are the same king/horn/antihcrist.
Again, show me the verse that says the 2nd beast heals the 1st beast's wound. This is blasphemy.
No where does it mention in John's revelation that the 1st beast is a coalition of four beast who receive the (definite article) wound across several hundreds of years apart.
This is your quote from my post 114:
"If we recall that John summarises Daniel's four beasts in Rev 13:2,"....
How's that for chasing one's tail? And again, please provide a verse that says the beast received the deadly wound over several hundred yrs apart. Please!
There is only one wound being delivered when the 6th king/horn/antichrist rules from the head.
Verses please!
John does not mention the first beast having a coalition of ten horns, rather he highlights only two players; the 1st beast and false prophet who are directly related to Judaic Jerusalem of his time in focus.
What does Rev 13:1 say?
Rev 13:1 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.
Seven hills are not literal hills rather they are symbolising a geopolitical religious power. Even if you were right and they did represent hills, according to John, this would point to Jerusalem who has seven hills and John's focus is to his imminent audience, that is, the seven churches located in the Middle East. Jerusalem herself is the harlot city who disposed of many of God's prophets and witnesses. She was charged with this by the prophets, Jesus and the disciples.
She is not the 4th beast. Rome is. And Rome is built on 7 of 10 hills. Isn't that a coincidence.
Read the four gospel accounts and the acts of the apostles and establish the persecuting religious power of their day.
What persecuting religious power of their day? It was a political persecution, the "great tribulation" by the Roman emperors, the 10 kings/horns burning Rome with fire.
John would advance this knowledge about the same harlot who rebelled against God and rejected his Son.
You are trying to conceal Rome's involvement in prophecy, but you can't. Rome is the 4th and final beast kingdom in Daniel, the two beasts in Revelation.
Again John's focus is not the Roman Empire or the city of Rome. John focuses on the religious power who uses the beast as an instrument to persecute the first century church. Please read the acts of the apostles.
The Roman empire is the two beast in Revelation and the focus is on the kings/horns' persecution of the Christians.
Where do you get five besst Kings as fallen angels, when John assays they are passes away, meaning died.
Dan 7:17 says the four beast are four kings; beast are fallen angels. The four beast in Dan 7 are four kings. Care to name these four kings, that rise out of the earth?
The harlot always represents an apostate religious institution. The harlot site in a place, meaning is located in where the craddle of civilisation is in the Middle East, called Babylon, where all the multitudes, and nations and tongues originated from.
Scripture specifically states the harlot is a city that sits on my waters and on 7 hill, not an apostate religious institution. You keep putting your spin on what scripture says, without a shred of evidence. The 7 hills are the 7 hills of the Roman city and the many waters are the nations and people she rules over, the Roman empire. Entailed is the city of Rome and her territory, her domain.
Rev 17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
Rev 17:12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
++++++++++++++++++++
Rev 17:15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the harlot sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.
++++++++++++++++++++
Rev 17:18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.
- Now, that's plain English.
You said that the ten horns are ten provinces of Rome, so tell me how these ten provinces all at once rebelled against Rome and together in a unified effort attacked her, made hers desolate and naked and ate her flesh and burned her with fire. Did the ten provinces destroy Rome? Ha, anyone, please, Hmmmmmmmmm!
You can't even get the facts straight. I said what scripture specifically says the 10 horns are. Try reading it. They being the 1st ten Roman emperors persecute the city, the people, and the nation. I have countless times before explained to you how in Dan 7 their thrones were cast down after they received power one hour with the Beast when they attacked heaven. In fact, my question before to you was, "Do you know of any kingdom that 10 kings rule together for one hour?"
Either way of this was the case, where the ten provinces ganged up on Rome and the city and burned it to the ground and they continued whilst Rome was completely desolated. Is this how history tells he story of Rome and the city. Mmmmmmmmm, No!
You haven't a clue.
The 2nd beast in context to the city Jerusalem as far as the prophets, Jesus, the disciples and John is concerned is a religious enterprise who gives life to the image of the 1st beast that received the mortal wound.
Revelation specifically states they are kings in Rome, Daniel's 4th and 5th beast kingdom and kings, Rome.
This 2nd beast is a lamb/Christ like institution that erects the image, not a physical statue, but an established image in memory to the first beast.
How do you come up with these conclusions if there not written? It's as if you're blaspheming the scriptures. Scripture does not say the 2nd beast is a religious institution; in fact, it says all the "beasts" in scripture are kingdoms and kings. It also says the 2nd beast makes an image of the Beast and that he causes the image to speak and to kill. Yet, you say it's not a statue. How does an established image speak and become alive if it's not a physical object?
The second beast builds up the institution of the first beast as a copy of the first beast that died previously. This beast is a Kingdom, not a king, remembering that the 1st beast went down when the 6th king/horn/antihcrist was in power.
I don't know what book you're reading from, but it's not the scriptures. Are you now saying there are 3 beast kingdoms in Revelation!
The revived 1st beast is when he receives his 7th king who is also the 8th, meaning resurrected king/horn.
You are blaspheming the word. Scripture says he's "
of" the 7, not the 7th, nor of the 7th, but of the 7-
kings. It's called reading comprehension, maaan!
The papacy does not fit this picture, but rather a unified worldly religious institution who receives an earthly messiah in Jerusalem today is that persecuting religious power all over again.
Can't you see you're straying away from Daniel's context of the 4 beast kingdoms, from Rome being the last.
The 2nd beast is not a man/king/antichrist, the 2nd beast is a religious enterprise.
For the umpteenth time, religious enterprises do not go to the lake of fire, only living beings do.
No he is not the original false prophet who went down with the 1st beast, but is instrumental in reviving the image and establishment of the 1st beast who had been destroyed by fire.
The 2nd beast is the False Prophet:
Rev 13:11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.
Rev 13:12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
Rev 13:13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
Rev 13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.
- You definitely have a reading comprehension problem. It specifically says here the 2nd beast works "miracles" and does "great wonder," and he's not the False Prophet? not Dan 7's blaspheming 11th horn? Please!
Oh, my bad. It's Jerusalem, I guess.
This 2nd beast brings down fire upon those that oppose what? The question of worship to the image of the first beast. So what image did the first beast hold? You need to reference this beast to the time of John and the persecution of the apostles at the hands of the false prophet who was a religious system charged by the prophets, Jesus, apostles and John as having the blood of all the faithful on their hands from Abel down to them.
The scriptural 11th Roman emperor Nerva instituted the worship of the scriptural 8th Roman emperor who just happened to be historically documented as having messianic prophecies:
http://www.livius.org/men-mh/messiah/messianic_claimants13.html
http://carrington-arts.com/cliff/FlavSyn.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_cult_(ancient_Rome)
These marks are not physical marks, rather they are spiritual marks. The head requires a person to wilfully accept through faith, the hand is means of transaction where the worship and fellowship is directed towards, that is the 1st beast that was, is not and yet is again compliments to the Christ like institution who re-established his seat.
LOL!
Daniel's 4rth beast is Rome, that is BC. This is Satan's work in progress. Look at the bigger picture, God is planning to bring in Messiah when Jerusalem is being built up, whilst the devil is planning a not so welcome wagon by developing the original metal kingdoms into John's 1st beastly Kingdom that is comprised of not war as the four horses of the apocalypse but is now focussed on the religious enterprise of the day, that being the temple worship of the adherents to the Abrahamic religion. The beast had to have been developed to join with the Abrahamic religious institution in an effort to block God's effort to successfully deliver the messiah. Read the versus below and I will explain the trap that the devil laid to circumvent God's plan:
Rome is not BC and Christ and the NT aren't either.
The versus above tell the story of the first century women, the apostolic church who tried to deliver the child (gospel) into the world and the devil had other plans when he had already prepared through the geopolitical religious enterprise a trap, that is why the language "the Dragon stood in the way of the women as an obstacle" to devour/stop the child/gospel before it had the chance to be spread out into the word. The depiction of a heavenly war highlights God's plan and Satan's counter plan to sabotage God's efforts of successfully delivering the child/gospel.
I always interpreted that to be Israel and the Flood, Noah's flood.
Yet the struggle in context to the devil's masterpiece political/religious enterprise would favour God by the following statement:
And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God,
It seems more like a masterpiece of your doing.
