The Rich Merchants in the True Structuring of the Revelation

[Jerryhuerta]

In “Exposing the Seven Heads of Revelation”Christian Forums it was confirmed that in Revelation 17 the scarlet beast “was” before the sixth king and revives fully as the eighth.

And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. 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. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. (Revelation 17:9-11)​

The proper reading of the passage undermines the preterist and futurist’s interpretation of Revelation. In the preterists’ rendering, it cannot be reasonably held that in John’s time, history confirms one emperor preceded a sixth one and ended up living again as the eighth. In the futurist’s reading, the antichrist or eighth king cannot have existed before the Roman Empire, which is the king that “is” in their view.



The passage from Revelation is a conundrum that is only solved by grasping that the Spirit took John to the future to witness the judgment of the harlot Babylon and the kings are kingdoms commencing with ancient Babylon. From this perspective, the king that “is” represents an entity of our time (the beast rising out of the earth, and the seventh is the image that it forms). From this perspective, the kings of the earth are already in bed with the harlot, and the earth’s inhabitants are already intoxicated by her doctrines, which is her “wine” (Jeremiah 51:7; Revelation 18:3).

And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great harlot that sitteth upon many waters: With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication. (Revelation 17:1-2)​

The reason for the woman's condemnation is a matter of debate. Some argue that it is because she was unfaithful to God, as mentioned in Jeremiah 3:1-3, while others believe it is due to her corrupt nature, as described in Nahum 3:1-5 when referring to Nineveh. The first viewpoint suggests that she broke her covenant with God and its judgment time, while the latter implies that she was wicked from the start. The solution to this dilemma is revealed in the next chapter,

And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. (Revelation 18:2)​

Egeneto, translated “is become,” signifies a change in condition, which substantiates Babylon in Revelation 17 is judged for her infidelity to God, her fallen state, as in Jeremiah 3:1-3. Jeremiah 5:27 also supports this rendering in the example where the prophet wrote, “as a cage is full of birds, so are their houses full of deceit: therefore, they are become great, and waxen rich,” concerning covenant violations. And the NT is not silent about a great falling away before Christ’s return (Matthew 5:13, 24:12; 2 Thessalonians 2:1–12; 1 Timothy 4:1–3; Romans 14:10; 2 Corinthians 5:10). Furthermore, the seventh and final church in Laodicea, is judged for just such a fallen condition,

And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked. (Revelation 3:14-17)​

The state of being rich and increased with goods and yet being wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked is a significant reason God’s people were judged in the past, as witnessed in Jeremiah. This prodigal state is also linked to a market-driven society in which the merchants achieve an elevated status that is facilitated by the harlot Babylon,

For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies. (Revelation 18:3)​

The consequences of these links to past covenantal violations and the harlot Babylon undermine the preterist and futurist’s renderings. Preterists maintain the harlot represents the great city of Rome or the ancient city of Jerusalem. Yet, pagan Rome did not “become” the habitation of devils; inherently, it was pagan; they worshiped gods and goddesses. And the partnership of the Church, God’s people, with the wealthy merchants of the earth is a contemporary story, not a past one. The Jews in Christ’s time could not be regarded as enriching the earth’s merchants; the Roman Empire had enriched them. And feudalism destroyed the status of the merchants when Rome fell. As for futurism, the enrichment of the merchants, for the most part, has been ongoing for over two hundred years; it is not some future phenomenon. The most extraordinary rise of the merchants is a contemporary phenomenon commencing with the late eighteenth century that continues to this day.



With the rise of the papacy and feudalism, the merchants of the earth suffered a societal downfall. Before feudalism, the merchants of the Mediterranean region had attained great status through the Roman Empire. A secularist, lawyer, law professor, and author Michael Tigar wrote a book concerning the rise of capitalism in which he comments,

To regard Roman legal concepts as applicable to “all peoples” was not so formidable a conceit. Between 280 B.C. and the destruction of Carthage in the Third Punic War in 146 B.C., Rome had forcibly conquered most of the lands bordering on the Mediterranean. A village-based agricultural economy was rapidly being replaced by the class structure of the Empire, in which the dominant figures were traders, bankers, merchants, landowners, and the military power which protected their interests. The labor force which fueled this system was slave or half-free, recruited mainly from the conquered and colonized peoples. The power of the ruling class could commit the Roman state to the enforcement of a commercial law which permitted trade.[ii]​

(It must be noted here that all past empires, such as the Babylonian, Persian, and Greek, were obtained through religion, raising the status of the merchants, and facilitating war.[iii]) With the fall of Rome, the Western dominion became feudal. It returned to a village-based agricultural economy in which the merchants became social outcasts, which was upheld by the papacy. “Profit-taking was considered a form of usury, and the merchant’s soul was thought to be in jeopardy.”[iv] As this stage developed the merchants, ultimately identified as the “bourgeois” for city dweller, were not content with their status but continually fomented rebellion to improve their status again,

merchants, town dwellers, or bourgeois— call them what you will— were advancing by open revolution, subversion, and economic chicanery ill-understood by their “betters.” All four groups were either outside the law or against it.[v]​

This essay will focus on the role of merchants as an antagonist in the narrative of Revelation, particularly their association with the harlot. While the history of their rise since the fall of Rome is not within the scope of this essay, a market-driven society is a crucial part of the narration of Revelation. In this story, the rich merchants and the harlot Babylon play a significant role as antagonists at the return of Christ. Tigar's work sheds light on these merchants’ modern rise to power,

Finally, there are the laws that the merchants made for themselves, the legal system they fashioned to serve their own interests. First they set up tribunals to settle disputes among themselves, then wrested or cajoled concessions from spiritual and temporal princes in order to establish zones of free commerce, and finally— over a period of centuries— swept to power over nations.[vi]​

Under feudalism, the papacy struggled with the merchants. In modern times the Protestants secularized society, which enriched the merchants. Sociologist George M. Thomas writes of this phenomenon,

The Protestant Reformation in addressing specifically religious issues raised by the nature of the feudal church articulated a rational cosmos… Ecclesiastical bureaucracy was delegitimated at several levels, resulting in a transfer of authority to the secular state and local institutions… The reformation found its first alliance with the territorial prince, partly because of a mutual interest in undermining imperial church authority, but basically because of a similar ontology based on rationalizing principles and common acceptance of a rational central authority. The spread of the Reformation throughout the town councils must be interpreted in the larger political contexts of its isomorphism with the prince as well as with the town’s increasing dependence on the incorporation into the central authority.[vii]​

---

Christian Forums Jerry Huerta, Exposing the Seven Heads of Revelation, Exposing the Seven Heads of Revelation by Jerry Huerta copyright 2023
[ii] Michael Tigar, Law and the Rise of Capitalism, Monthly Review Press (June 1, 2000) 28 0f 348
[iii] Marsue and Jerry Huerta, Thy Kingdom Come; Re-evaluating the Historicists Interpretation of the Revelation, Booktrail Publishing (January 4, 2022)
[iv] Tigar, Law and the Rise of Capitalism, 21 of 348
[v] Ibid., 13 of 348
[vi] Ibid., 22 of 348
[vii] George M. Thomas, Revivalism and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press; Revised edition (January 19, 1998), 147

 

[Jerryhuerta]

Ontology is the philosophical argument that upholds a worldview. Rationalism is a worldview that attempts to exclude religion and irrational responses in determining the organization of society, which ultimately secularizes society. Thomas reveals that the politics of the Protestants and the princes were isomorphic, similar in form and relations, in their advancement of a bureaucracy in which “the dominant figures were traders, bankers, merchants, landowners, and the military power which protected their interests.” An article in The Quarterly Journal of Economics by authors Davide Cantoni, Jeremiah Dittmar, and Noam Yuchtman substantiates the same,

While the Reformation was a religious movement, we find that its unintended consequence was to promote economic secularization: a significant shift in the balance of power toward secular authorities and a sharp and immediate reallocation of resources toward secular purposes… the pre-Reformation era can be understood as an equilibrium in which a monopolist religious producer (the Catholic Church) provided political legitimacy to secular authorities at a high price—charged in the form of control over resources, tax exemptions, and some degree of political power.2 The Reformation represented a competitive shock in the market for salvation… Protestant reformers offered a popular, lower-cost alternative to the Catholic Church. Crucially, this shock to the market for salvation also affected the market for political legitimacy. During the Reformation, the value of Catholic legitimacy fell and the bargaining power of secular rulers vis- ` a-vis religious elites rose. Protestant reformers’ need to strike a bargain with secular lords meant they would accept a lower price in exchange for conferring legitimacy. Where Protestants were willing to grant secular authorities extensive control of church resources, the need to maintain doctrinal consistency restricted the bargains Catholics could offer.[1]​

Historian Eric J. Hobsbawm also affirms the lack of pushback from the Protestants against the merchant’s rise to power and secularization,

And yet within Christianity there were signs of counter-attack again the advance of secularization. Not so much in the Protestant world… as among the Catholics.[2]​

According to historians like Thomas, secularism followed individualism. Individualism rebelled against authority for autonomy, citizenship, and the franchise, which had a significant impact, especially during the First and Second Great Awakenings in America. The Protestant creed on priesthood challenged authority when the Enlightenment did the same. Both facilitated the merchants’ restructuring of society, demoting the Church to the private sphere. Individualism placed a new emphasis on autonomy, challenging “communal obligations” that hindered the pursuit of status through wealth and economic growth. Professor Bernard Bailyn, an expert in early American history, has written about this shift away from communal obligations during commercial struggles between the orthodox Puritans and merchants,

the first generation Puritan merchants agreed that religious considerations were highly relevant to the conduct of trade, that commerce, being one of the many forms of human intercourse, required control by moral laws. But some of the newly arrived merchants, as they assumed power over the exchange of goods, felt the restrictive effect of these ideas when acted upon by a determined ministry and magistracy. In their confused reaction to ethical control as well as in the progress of their business enterprises lay seeds of social change.[3]​

Bailyn explains that Christian ministry and magistracy aimed to foster a close-knit community where everyone cared for each other’s welfare. However, the liberal Protestants supported the merchants’ liberal economic worldviews. Bernard reveals that, ultimately, it was the liberal merchants who emerged victorious,

moral injunctions against taking advantage of a neighbor’s distress and violating the laws of justice in business dealings lost their urgency.[4]​

In the early days of the nation’s establishment and the onset of the Industrial Revolution, merchants continued to gain economic hegemony while diminishing the Church’s influence in the public square. As Thomas revealed, this trend had started with the Protestants’ intercourse with princes to vanquish papal authority while advancing their own. This intercourse is the harlot’s fornication in Revelation. As Bernard reveals, this trend found its way to America, and Thomas reveals that revivalism advanced it. Both Thomas, Tigar, and Bailyn agree with a professor of sociology George M. Thomas’ view that the rise of merchants led to a decline in communal responsibilities starting with the late eighteenth century,

With the American polity already showing high levels of individualism, market penetration in the North and Midwest resulted in an intensification of individualistic nationalism… Rationalization undermined local communal obligations, and rational authority was located diffusely in the nation and national institutions such as law and elections. Individualism and rationality were directly coded into the conception of the people, primarily through the categories of citizenship, progress, and civilization. Thus, as in other such systems, the concept of the individual was abstract and collectivized as the people and nation, and individual happiness entered social accounting as the collective good or economic growth… Despite the somewhat secular nature of the changes, to a great extent they were brought about by religious movements, and revivalism was one of the most successful. Revival religion embraced the new ontology, articulating it within already individualistic nationalism. In some respects, revivalism manifested secularization. Deism in many ways was built into main stream Christianity by revivalism’s viewing God as the creator of a mechanical universe. Nature was reified as “natural resources” which individuals were to use to produce he Kingdom of God through rational action.[5]​

Thomas revealed that the previously mentioned ideologies shaped society to believe that affluence in goods and services was the basis of “happiness,” which enriched the merchants of the earth. Here we have the motive for Christ’s denunciation to the Church in Laodicea. This movement by the Protestants to secularize society would ultimately lead to disestablishment in America and the marketing of religion. Reformed evangelical theologian Mark A. Noll reveals that disestablishment, the separation of church and state, compelled the denominations to “compete for adherents, rather than being assigned responsibility for parishioners as had been the almost universal European pattern.”[6] Noll elaborates further on this market-driven competition for adherents,

The primary way the churches accomplished this task was through the techniques of revival— direct, fervent address aimed at convincing, convicting, and enlisting the individual. As Finke describes it, this process led to “a religious market that caters to the individual and makes religion an individual decision. Though religion is still a group phenomenon, which relies on the support, control and rewards of the local church, the open market stresses personal conversion and faith. Once again, the religious decision is an individual decision set in the context of a religious market with a wide array of diversity— a diversity that is assured by the diversity of the population and the lack of religious regulation.”[7]​

According to Noll, the phenomenon of religious revival marketed the popular idea of salvation as an individual choice, amongst other goods and services, making Arminianism profitable. Noll continued to delve into the topic of revivalism riding upon disestablishment and its influence,

This combination of revivalism and disestablishment had effects whose importance cannot be exaggerated. Analyzed positively, the combination gave the American churches a new dynamism, a new effectiveness in fulfilling the Great Commission, and a new vitality in bringing the gospel to the people. Analyzed negatively, the combination of revivalism and disestablishment meant that pragmatic concerns would prevail over principle. What the churches required were results— new adherents— or they would simply go out of business. Thus, the production of results had to override all other considerations.[8]​

Noll accurately observed that the Church's enthusiasm for revivalism was tied to the Great Commission's ethos. However, Noll goes on to reveal that the evangelicals were indifferent to the economic injustices of the day, which he proceeds to catalog,

“liberal” in the context of the nineteenth century, historians mean the tradition of individualism and market freedom associated with John Locke and especially Adam Smith… The point again is not whether evangelicals should have embraced liberal economic practice, for a case can be made for the compatibility between evangelical Christianity and moderate forms of market economy. The point is rather how evangelicals embraced liberal economic practice. Again this was done without a great deal of thought. But precisely in the antebellum period, before attention was drawn to the economy as a moral problem, was when such thinking was needed. The most important economic questions of the day dealt with the early growth of industrialization. What kinds of obligations did capital and labor owe to each other? How would the growth of large industries, first in textiles and then in railroads, affect community life or provisions for the disabled, aged, and infirm? Each of these questions, and many more like them, posed a potential threat to Christian witness and to public morality. Each of them was also the sort that could be answered only by those who had thought through principles of Scripture, who had struggled to see how the truths of creation, fall, and redemption applied to groups as well as to individuals. Unfortunately, there was very little of such thinking.[9]​

It must be noted that these injustices were occurring in the quickly industrializing areas, such as the North Eastern part of the country. It was not the evangelicals that ministered to these domains but the “established” or leading churches, where they had imbibed the worldly doctrine of the Enlightenment for some time. American evangelical author Nancy R. Pearcey comments on these “established” churches,

the established churches tended to be the first to drift into theological liberalism. The wealthier the church, the more likely its clergy were to enjoy social status and formal academic training— and thus also the more likely to welcome the liberalism emerging from European universities at the time. Well before the American Revolution, leading scholars at Harvard and Yale had become Unitarian. Instead of exhorting their congregations to repent and be saved, they delivered elegantly styled lectures on “reasonable religion,” with the supernatural elements increasingly stripped away. When the First and Second Great Awakenings broke out, the liberal clergy firmly opposed them, declaring themselves on the side of “Reason” against the revivalists’ “religion of the heart.”[10]​

The established American churches ministered to city dwellers, traders, bankers, merchants, and real estate brokers. As Thomas commented, these Protestants had “articulated a rational cosmos,” a deist ontology, acknowledging only mechanical principles set by God in accord with the Enlightenment. Pearcey suggests that the established Protestant churches garnered wealth and status by legitimizing the city dwellers, traders, bankers, merchants, and real estate brokers. Here is where it is written,

And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication. (Revelation 17:4)​

According to Pearcey, the evangelicals provided spiritual guidance to the pioneers in the wilderness. However, she also acknowledges that for various reasons, they tended to focus more on emotions rather than theology and doctrine, leading to a neglect of the cognitive aspect of belief.[11] Both Noll and Pearcey view this anti-intellectualism negatively. Christianity was unable or unwilling to prevent the emergence of educated merchants in modern times, as warned against in the scriptures. Pearcey revealed that,

Many evangelicals uncritically absorbed the individualism that was coming into vogue in American political life, and simply transferred it to the church.[12]​

As previously stated, the partnership of the Church, God’s people, with the wealthy merchants of the earth is a contemporary story, not a past one. The Jews in Christ’s time could not be regarded as enriching the earth’s merchants; the Roman Empire had enriched them. And feudalism destroyed the status of the merchants when Rome fell. As for futurism, the enrichment of the merchants, for the most part, has been ongoing for over two hundred years; it is not some future phenomenon. The most extraordinary rise of the merchants is a contemporary phenomenon commencing with the late eighteenth century that continues to this day. And the numerous authors cited in the paper reveal that it was the Protestants that had a great deal to do with that rise.

Religion is no longer considered the source of serious truth claims that could potentially conflict with public agendas. The private realm has been reduced to an “innocuous ‘play area’,” says Peter Berger, where religion is acceptable for people who need that kind of crutch— but where it won’t upset any important apple carts in the larger world of politics and economics.[13]​

---

[1] Davide Cantoni, Jeremiah Dittmar, and Noam Yuchtman, “Religious Competition and Reallocation: The Political Economy of Secularization in the Protestant Reformation,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 2018, 2037–2096.
[2] E. J. Hobsbawm, The Age of Capital 1848-1875 (New American Library, 303
Inc., New York, N.Y., 1979), 261.
[3] Bernard Bailyn, The New England Merchants In The Seventeenth Century, Harvard University Press; Revised ed. edition (November 15, 1979), 21
[4] Ibid. 32
[5] George M. Thomas, Revivalism and Cultural Change: Christianity, Nation Building, and the Market in the Nineteenth-Century United States (University of Chicago Press, January 19, 1998), 63
[6] Mark A. Noll, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (p. 91). Eerdmans. Kindle Edition.
[7] Ibid., 91-92
[8] Ibid., 92
[9] Ibid., 101
[10] Nancy R. Pearcey, TOTAL TRUTH Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity, Crossway; Study Guide edition (February 28, 2008), 261
[11] Ibid., 266
[12] Ibid., 266
[13] Ibid., 68

 

[Douggg]

In “Exposing the Seven Heads of Revelation”Christian Forums it was confirmed that in Revelation 17 the scarlet beast “was” before the sixth king and revives fully as the eighth.

Jerry, Revelation 17:11 says the beast is "of the seven". Not that the beast was before the sixth king.

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.

11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

 

[Douggg]

Jerry, if the intent of the thread is to prove preterists wrong regarding their views of the Antichrist and beast - you should make a simple, easy-to-understand, sentence as the opening line of your first post. as that being the purpose of the thead.

Also, right at the start, you should identify yourself as a historist.

===========================================================

It appears as though you are creating the entire content of your posts by copying and pasting from some article or book.

 

[Jerryhuerta]

Jerry, Revelation 17:11 says the beast is "of the seven". Not that the beast was before the sixth king.

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.

11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

Your comprehension is lacking.


It says the sixth king “is,” and five are fallen. And that the scarlet beast “was, and is not, even he is the eighth,” which makes him one of the five that have fallen. That agrees with he is also "of the seven."

 

[Jerryhuerta]

Jerry, if the intent of the thread is to prove preterists wrong regarding their views of the Antichrist and beast - you should make a simple, easy-to-understand, sentence as the opening line of your first post. as that being the purpose of the thead.

Also, right at the start, you should identify yourself as a historist.

===========================================================

It appears as though you are creating the entire content of your posts by copying and pasting from some article or book.

Again, your comprehension is lacking from my perspective, and rather than respond in ad hominem replies, deal with the issues. And the post exposes the folly of the futurist paradigm also.

 

[Douggg]

It says the sixth king “is,” and five are fallen. And that the scarlet beast “was, and is not, even he is the eighth,” which makes him one of the five that have fallen. That agrees with he is also "of the seven."

In Revelation 17:10-11, it does not the "scarlet" beast.

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.
11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

================================================================================

The coming little horn person will be king 7. After he is killed and comes back to life, he becomes the beast, king 8, of the Roman Empire. In the end times, dictator of the EU, for 42 months.

All of the kings in verses 10 and 11 are of the Julio-Claudian bloodline of Caesars.

 

[Douggg]

Again, your comprehension is lacking from my perspective, and rather than respond in ad hominem replies, deal with the issues. And the post exposes the folly of the futurist paradigm also.

Jerry, what is the ad hominen in my reply ?

 

[Jerryhuerta]

In Revelation 17:10-11, it does not the "scarlet" beast.

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.
11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

================================================================================

The coming little horn person will be king 7. After he is killed and comes back to life, he becomes the beast, king 8, of the Roman Empire. In the end times, dictator of the EU, for 42 months.

All of the kings in verses 10 and 11 are of the Julio-Claudian bloodline of Caesars.

It says, “the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth,” in verse 11. The beast that “was, and is not” is the scarlet beast, according to verses 7 and 8.

I will tell thee the mystery of the woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast… The beast that thou sawest was, and is not… (Revelation 17:7, 8)​

​

Who or what is the sixth king?

 

[Jerryhuerta]

Jerry, what is the ad hominen in my reply ?

Making comments that I should do things according to your opinion is personal, not objective.

 

[Douggg]

It says, “the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth,” in verse 11. The beast that “was, and is not” is the scarlet beast, according to verses 7 and 8.

The scarlet colored beast is Satan.

I will tell thee the mystery of the woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast… The beast that thou sawest was, and is not… (Revelation 17:7, 8)

Jerry, you are leaving off part of that verse 7. In it, there is the mystery of the woman. And the mystery of the beast (the scarlet colored beast) she was riding.

The scarlet color beast - is Satan.

In verse 8, is the mystery of Satan - poses the question to the reader of who is in the bottomless pit who was alive and is not. It is not Satan in the bottomless pit.

What entity, a literal beast, associated with Satan, was more craftier than all the other beasts in the Garden of Eden?

The serpent, who could talk, and was an agent of Satan - to get man to sin. That beast lost his glory, and ability to speak, when God reduced him to snake status for the remainder of his life. That is who is in the bottomless pit, the Garden of Eden serpent, as a disembodied spirit.

When the end times person is killed and comes back to life, the world will be dumbfounded to witness it happen. That disembodied spirit of the serpent beast will ascend out of the bottomless pit and possess the mortally wounded but healed head, king 7, on the beast in Revelation 13. Henceforth, the end times person, referred to in the rest of Revelation will be as the beast - king 8.

 

[Douggg]

Making comments that I should do things according to your opinion is personal, not objective.

I did not say anything degrading of you personally. I made a suggestion on how to improve your thread - so others will know the objective of the thread, and from what eschatalogical viewpoint you are coming from.

 

[Jerryhuerta]

The scarlet colored beast is Satan.


Jerry, you are leaving off part of that verse 7. In it, there is the mystery of the woman. And the mystery of the beast (the scarlet colored beast) she was riding.

The scarlet color beast - is Satan.

In verse 8, is the mystery of Satan - poses the question to the reader of who is in the bottomless pit who was alive and is not. It is not Satan in the bottomless pit.

What entity, a literal beast, associated with Satan, was more craftier than all the other beasts in the Garden of Eden?

The serpent, who could talk, and was an agent of Satan - to get man to sin. That beast lost his glory, and ability to speak, when God reduced him to snake status for the remainder of his life. That is who is in the bottomless pit, the Garden of Eden serpent, as a disembodied spirit.

When the end times person is killed and comes back to life, the world will be dumbfounded to witness it happen. That disembodied spirit of the serpent beast will ascend out of the bottomless pit and possess the mortally wounded but healed head, king 7, on the beast in Revelation 13. Henceforth, the end times person, referred to in the rest of Revelation will be as the beast - king 8.

Satan is behind all the beasts, but the beasts specifically represent kingdoms. The scarlet beast in chapter 17 is the beast that is cast into the lake of fire in 19.

And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet… were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. (Revelation 19:20)​

At the same time, Satan is cast into the bottomless pit.

And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit… And he laid hold on the dragon… And cast him into the bottomless pit. (Revelation 20:1, 2, 3)​

The scarlet beast is not Satan; it is a kingdom, the fifth and eighth kingdom.

Again, who or what is the sixth king?

 

[Jerryhuerta]

I did not say anything degrading of you personally. I made a suggestion on how to improve your thread - so others will know the objective of the thread, and from what eschatalogical viewpoint you are coming from.

Nevertheless, it is a personal criticism about my thread which by definition an ad hominen.

 

[Blade]

Again, your comprehension is lacking from my perspective, and rather than respond in ad hominem replies, deal with the issues. And the post exposes the folly of the futurist paradigm also.

"of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. "vicious ad hominem attacks""
"appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect."

Before this you said twice "Your comprehension is lacking.". I pray I don't have to say anything else

I got lost from the start " it was confirmed ". Its nice when we find others that agree with out personal view huh. We do tend to dive in go deep just to find out we could be standing all alone. Always go to the source if you want to know what He meant by what He wrote...or not

 

[Jerryhuerta]

"of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. "vicious ad hominem attacks""
"appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect."

Before this you said twice "Your comprehension is lacking.". I pray I don't have to say anything else

I got lost from the start " it was confirmed ". Its nice when we find others that agree with out personal view huh. We do tend to dive in go deep just to find out we could be standing all alone. Always go to the source if you want to know what He meant by what He wrote...or not

I see another who appeals to feelings or prejudices rather than the issue. Deal with the issues, and if you don’t grasp the subject matter and thesis, rather say nothing.

BTW, what is confirmed by Revelation 17:9-11 is that the scarlet beast “was” before the sixth king and revives fully as the eighth.

 

[Douggg]

Nevertheless, it is a personal criticism about my thread which by definition an ad hominen.

You are wrong. But report my post, if you think I was making an ad hominin.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

It states that preterists and futurists are wrong, but does not clearly establish what the new position is.

However, it is reminiscent of the time I noticed that the protestant reformation was like the dividing of the kingdom of Israel and Judah. It focused more on democracy and the focus on the amount of work being done for the reason than the economics.

It was part of a larger idea that applied the histories of Israel and Judah to church history as an allegory or "spiritual fulfillment."

The OP's idea seems to be converging all of the "sevens" in Revelation and looking at the seven churches as particular ages. Since any given age has churches meeting the descriptions of the seven churches, I tend to not use that association. In terms of sevens, I tend to use creation imagery in the prophets, gospels, and revelation to illustrate that God has been creating a new heaven and new earth since the old one was made subject to sin. With that prophetic backdrop, I would then determine which "age" we are in. I have found however, that determining things using "sevens" has the same flaw ... that it can be established that there are "weeks" when applied on an individual level .. so might actually mean nothing in the larger picture.

Anyway, that's my first attempt to understand what's going on in the piece of writing with end notes in the OP.

 

[Douggg]

Again, who or what is the sixth king?

The sixth king - the one is, at the time of John, was Nero, last of the historic Julio-Claudians.

The five fallen kings are:
1. Julius Caesar
2. Augustus
3. Tiberius
4. Caligula
5. Claudius.


king 7, the one yet to come, will be the little horn person. Who will also be of that Julio-Claudian bloodline.

The little horn person evolves as....

The little horn (leader of the EU ten) > becomes the prince who shall come > becomes the Antichrist > becomes the revealed man of sin>

becomes the beast (dictator of the EU)

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Observed Assumption 0: Reading this paper with a Futurist or Preterist logical premise, will result in an incorrect understanding of the concepts.
Observed Assumption 1: The heads of the beast are Roman Emperors. (This stands out because they're heads of blasphemy, so possibly religious or at least ideological in nature)
Observed Assumption 2: The beast seems to come out of the earth in this theology(, revelation and daniel depicts the beasts coming out of the sea. )
Observed Assumption 3: The kings of the earth are seduced by "the harlot" and drunk on her doctrines, the wine is interpreted to be the "wine."
Observed Assumption 4: The church in various ages is babylon being judged.
Observed Assumption 5: The "laodicean church age," the market driven economy, and the fornication of the harlot riding the beast are examined as the same event.
Observed Assumption 6: The gods and goddesses of the Roman empire were not devils. This ignores 1 Corinthians 10:20 and the theme of not eating food offered to idols in New Testament writings during the time of Rome.
Observed Assumption 7: The enrichment of the merchants is not a future phenomenon. The OP is speaking of the present day.
Observed Observation 8: The writing says that it cannot be Rome that is being spoken of because the class of merchants diminished under feudalism, but modern post reformation groups secularized society which enriched the merchants. This seems to be the centre of the argument that it is not a past or future thing, but "the apocalypse is now."

The rest appears to be proving the observed assumptions through the philosophers and economics around the time of reformation: Stating the end goal of protestantism was to secularize society, promote individualism, and enrich commerce and industry.