The Two Beasts

If anyone is content to know what the two beasts of Revelation 13 represent in simple terms, and if they desire nothing more by way of implication, then I would offer this excellent commentary by William Hendriksen,

“The beast that comes up out of the sea is Satan’s persecution of Christians, embodied in world-governments and directed against the bodies of believers. In John’s day this was the Roman government. The beast that arises out of the earth is Satan’s antichristian religion which is aimed to deceive the minds and enslave the will of believers. At the time when these visions appeared to John, that beast out of the earth was incorporated in the pagan religion and emperor-worship of Rome.”1

Now the one who is studying Revelation through, or the doctrine of eschatology—he will want to connect more dots.

The First Beast: Revelation 13:1-10

This is the dragon’s false government. Notice first that its location is “rising out of the sea” (v. 1). So to the imagery from Daniel, the Apostle now combines imagery from Isaiah.

“In that day the LORD with his hard and great and strong sword will punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent, Leviathan the twisting serpent, and he will slay the dragon that is in the sea” (Isa. 27:1).

Hendriksen further points to Isaiah 17:12, “where the roaring of the peoples is compared to the roaring of the sea; and the surging of nations to the surging of mighty waters.” Thus, “The sea represents nations and their governments.”2

And about that imagery from Daniel, it has the combined image of those familiar beasts: “like a leopard; its feet were like a bear’s, and its mouth was like a lion’s mouth” (v. 2).

A key point is often overlooked and not often held in the balance with Romans 13:1 about all civil authorities coming from God. Here we read, “And to [this beast] the dragon gave his power and his throne and great authority” (v. 2).

This of course creates a dilemma for the statist interpretation of Romans 13. Either the demand to submit is absolutely universal and without exception, or else it is not. If it is, then we are equally commanded to submit to the authority of Satan. That seems indefensible to all parties. If it is not, then we are back to establishing criteria for when an authority is legitimate from God or has delegitimized as an ectype of Babylon’s beast.

At the thought of this, observe the otherwise non-futurist or non-dispensationalist become an ultra-futurist to uphold his pietism! He will be forced to say (though he would never dream to say it of any other aspect of eschatology), “Oh, that is only talking about the last of the last days antichrist, and by then it will be irrelevant to any actual Christians!” Indeed.

Other details include the seeming “mortal wound” that was healed (v. 3); and we are later told the manner in which “he-it” was slain—“wounded by the sword” (v. 14)—which seems to imply a righteous government on earth putting away the tyranny, at least for a time. Think of Constantine’s takeover of Rome, Carolignian Western Europe’s subjection of the barbarians and then of the Muslims, and then the modern West’s momentary check against the likes of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. That is really the key. It is repeatable, and it is momentary. 

Finally, the worship of the beast is rooted in fear—whether (1) admiration for the beast’s fearsomeness, or (2) horror that it’s power makes life hopeless, or simply (3) resignation to utter dependence upon the global system, that life wouldn’t make sense except to keep moving along with its stream. Too difficult to detach from it: “And they worshiped the dragon, for he had given his authority to the beast, and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast, and who can fight against it?” (v. 4). It is crucial to note that the worship of the beast is ultimately the worship of the dragon, John is saying, since the dragon’s authority and power is behind it. Hence statism simply is Satanism.

The main takeaway from the continuity between Daniel’s vision and John’s appeal to it is precisely that—continuity. In other words, this is a type or form of secularist, antichristian governments: a usurping of God’s rightful ordinance of the sword, to do what? John tells us, “to make war on the saints and to conquer them” (Rev. 13:7).

Note the parallel in the location and number of horns. Compare the beast of Daniel’s vision to the one John sees emerging: 

“Daniel declared, ‘I saw in my vision by night, and behold, the four winds of heaven were stirring up the great sea. And four great beasts came up out of the sea, different from one another … and it had ten horns. I considered the horns, and behold, there came up among them another horn, a little one, before which three of the first horns were plucked up by the roots. And behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things” (Dan. 7:2-3, 7-8).

“And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, with ten horns” (Rev. 13:1).

But what about the seven heads in Revelation versus the four beasts in the Daniel vision? Hendriksen is on the right track in saying, “The beast assumes different forms; it has seven heads.”4 In other words, here we have another instance of the ordinary use of seven, for a general totality.

Historical Views About this First Beast

Preterist. The first beast is either apostate Israel, or else Rome, persecuting first-century Christians. If Nero could be the prototype antichrist, the Roman government at his whim would be the corresponding beast. Yes, Nero had that nickname, “the beast”; but leaving it at that doesn’t deal with Daniel’s terminology that John must also have in mind. As to Nero, we might consider the words of various Roman writers of the time, as summarized by Gentry:

“Tacitus … spoke of Nero’s ‘cruel nature’ that ‘put to death so many innocent men.’ Roman naturalist Pliny the Elder … described Nero as ‘the destroyer of the human race’ and ‘the poison of the world.’ Roman satirist Juvenal … speaks of ‘Nero’s cruel and bloody tyranny.’ … Apollonius of Tyana … specifically mentions that Nero was called a ‘beast’: ‘In my travels, which have been wider than ever man yet accomplished, I have seen many, many wild beasts of Arabia and India; but this beast, that is commonly called a Tyrant, I know not how many heads it has, nor if it be crooked of claw, and armed with horrible fangs … And of wild beasts you cannot say that they were ever known to eat their own mother, but Nero has gorged himself on this diet.’”3

But how does Nero and Rome fit in with the language in the rest of Revelation? The preterist points forward to that description in Chapter 17.

“This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; they are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he does come he must remain only a little while. As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth but it belongs to the seven, and it goes to destruction” (17:9-11).

We will come back to Nero shortly concerning the mark, but just notice that this point the equation of Babylon on the seven hills to the city of Rome, and that there are also seven kings; and that either a seventh or the eighth is significant to the identity. It leads many to the absolute equation of beast to antichrist. 

Futurist. This is the one-world government prefigured first by Babel, but increasingly made more realistic by means of technological advance. 

Idealist. The beast is drawn from Daniel, but a type of human government that sets itself up against the church to persecute them. Daniel himself had four such beasts, so there is precedence already. But the time element suggests that this is of a type or kind spanning the whole age: “it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months” (v. 5).

The Second Beast: Revelation 13:11-18

To be concise, this is the dragon’s false religion. Note its origin and appearance.

“Then I saw another beast rising out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon” (v. 11).

It is the cultivator of worship, but not its object. Note it “makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast” (v. 12).

What could this be in the Preterist view? Mathison points to “the Jewish leadership who enforced submission to Rome and persecuted Christians and specifically, perhaps, Gessius Florus, the Roman procurator over Israel.”

By “signs” that cause fear, it persuades humanity to “make an image for the beast” (v. 13). Don’t forget, when the theme of the mortal wound that was healed persists (vv. 3, 12, 14), that this need not be an individual. So consider a system of tyranny that seemed to have died but then was resurrected. 

What is the link, if any, to the false prophet? Three texts in Revelation treat the “false prophet” in the same place as the second beast. 

“And I saw, coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs” (16:13). 

“And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence had done the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur” (19:20).

“and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever” (20:10)

But there are other New Testament texts that are relevant. Like the antichrist, “false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you” (2 Pet. 2:1); and “many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 Jn. 4:1); “And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray” (Mat. 24:11). And what do false prophets produce? Mat. 7:15-20 is an important text there. It reminds us that this is just one more type or kind or form before it is “about” this or that individual. The phrase “doctrines of demons” (1 Tim. 4:1) come from this context.

Perhaps the most critical text is in 2 Thessalonians 2, right after Paul had spoken of the apostasy and the revealing of the man of lawlessness.

“The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness” (2 Thess. 2:9-12).

One other text must fit into this context, as it comes later in Revelation. What is the pharmakeia that deceives the nations? It is the word from which we derive the English “pharmacology” or “pharmacist" and so forth. Do not think this has been lost on people over the past three years. As with so many issues, it is important that we do not jump on board the pendulum ride at such a thought. One view may be guilty of sensationalism, but many equally wrong views are birthed out of not wanting to play the sensationalist dupe. Being “respectable” becomes more important to us than being alert to the devil’s schemes.

The Synergy of the Two Beasts

There are really two pillars of the dragon’s world order. One of external and the other internal, so that those participants will worship the globalist idol willingly. It is instructive that calling these two beasts up to his aid is the devil’s response to Christ’s victory over him, and his being cast down and his knowing “that his time is short” (12:12). Hence the reduction of them to Rome, whose structures were already in place, whether before 70 AD or otherwise, is a shallow view. They can have application to Rome; but they cannot be reduced to it.

Hendriksen wrote, 

“The first is a monster of indescribable horror. The second has a harmless appearance and for that very reason is even more dangerous than the first. The first beast comes out of the sea. The second arises from the land. The first is Satan’s hand. The second is the devil’s mind.”5

While he sees the two beasts and Babylon to be Satan’s three agents on earth, Bauckham sees the dragon and two beasts as three, with Babylon as a fourth entity: 

“They are the satanic trinity: the dragon or serpent (the primeval, supernatural source of all opposition to God), the beast or sea-monster (the imperial power of Rome), and the second beast or earth-monster (the propaganda machine of the imperial cult). (Babylon, the great harlot, who represents the corrupt and exploitative civilization of the city of Rome, supported by the political and military power of the empire, is not properly introduced until chapter 17, but she has a rather different status. Christians are not called to conquer her, but to ‘come out of her’ (18:4), i.e., to disassociate themselves from her evil.)”6

The mark of the beast is another detail on which there is synergy, or in which one beast drives mankind toward the other. Note that “it causes all … to be marked” (v. 16). So the second beast drives mankind religiously into the first beast’s governing clutches, and the second beast drives mankind economically into those same clutches. But can an economic system be harnesses by what is essentially the greatest cult the world has ever known? Can a worldwide economy actually be captivated by a zeitgeist, a religious spirit? We thought that the big-wigs were only in it for the bottom line; but in the end, that would be mistaken.

Historical Views on the Mark

Unsurprisingly there have been different views on this as well.

Preterist. I mentioned the seven kings and then the eighth in the context of Nero. Gentry writes, “It has been documented by archeological finds that a first century Hebrew spelling of Nero’s name provides us with preceisely the value of 666.”7 What he is referring to is something more grounded in fact than modern notions of numerology, which are fanciful and subjective. In many ancient languages, numbers and letters corresponded. So there was the practice of gimatriya. “Any name could be reduced to its numerical equivalent by adding up the mathematical value of all of the letters of the name.” So there you have it—Nero matches up.

But there is a problem. Different MSS have different numbers, namely 666, but also 616. Bruce Metzger’s view of the MSS that have 616 rather than 666 is it is precisely because the Latin form of Nero’s name is 616 and the Hebrew is 666 that the former is no “mistake.” The variant was intentional so that Greek readers of the Mediterranean coastal cities, who would be very familiar with Latin, wouldn’t have to know Hebrew to discern John’s point about Ceasar Nero. That is an interesting discussion which I leave to others to resolve if they need to.  

Futurist. For Dispensationalists (and others), the mark is exclusively speaking of some physical identification by which Christians will be excluded from the world system. A strong argument can be made from John’s expression, 

“Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark” (13:16-17).

Idealist. Elsewhere in Scripture, we see such a mark symbolizing possession by the Lord: “And it shall serve as a sign to you on your hand, and as a reminder on your forehead” (Ex. 13:9; cf. 16; Deut. 6:8; 11:18-19; Ezk. 9:4). In this book, we see the same—

“Do not harm the earth or the sea or the trees, until we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads” (7:3; cf. 9:4).

“Then I looked, and behold, on Mount Zion stood the Lamb, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads” (14:1).

“they will see His face, and His name will be on their foreheads” (22:4).

Like so many other items here, not an either-or. What we are seeing yet again is a type of spiritual reality or literal, particular on earth. Of course even this dominant meaning does not logically rule out a literal mark of some kind, which may factor into account the language of “buying and selling” (13:17). But even this does not necessarily imply anything like a microchip, as there are other ways for a world economic-political system to exclude Christians.

Unity and Diversity of Final Babylon

How is Babylon distinct from these three agents? If the beast from the sea is “the State,” how is Babylon-the-harlot the same, if the harlot rides the beast? The first answer is that it is not the same. As Babel was more than its Tower, and Rome more than the Papacy, so this “world order” is a larger circle than its governing or beauracratic or enforcement powers.

What is most primary about this evil order?

The chief characteristic of what is the greater circle than the “state-circle” within is seduction. That is the imagery. To be a part of a spirit of the age, and its empire, is seductive. It captivates the whole soul because it promises a whole system of meaning. It has its own kingdom, its own salvation, its own eschatology. It has its own priesthood with its own sacraments. It has its prophets and even its sermon and liturgy, and it catechizes its young and offers penance to its elderly.

The final form of the beast linked to the end of the period.

There are two more crucial texts to examine. Compare Revelation 11:7 and 17:15 to the totality of 12-13 and then 20. The first regards the two witnesses, who, remember, represented the two pillars of the church (whether Old and New, or Jew and Gentile).

“And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that rises from the bottomless pit will make war on them and conquer them and kill them” (11:7).

“And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and threw him into the [bottomless; cf. 20:1] pit … And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison” (20:2-3, 7).

So, on the one hand, the beast [or, at least a final form of it] rises from the pit in a way that is linked to the unbinding of Satan at the end of the millennim; and, on the other hand, the dragon makes war—through these beasts—on the church for this period that seems to cover all the imagery. Riddlebarger collects these references:

“‘The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise his authority for forty-two months (Rev. 13:5)—the forty-two months are most likely a reference to the inter-advental age. Taken from Daniel 7:25 (“a time, times, and half a time,’ see also Dan. 12:7), this same period of time appears in the preceding chapters of the Book of Revelation. In Revelation 11:2-3, the Gentiles are said to ‘trample the holy city’ (the church—i.e., the dwelling place of God in the new covenant) for forty-two months or 1,260 days. This is the same time period in which the two witnesses proclaim the gospel (Rev. 11:3). In Revelation 12:6, John refers to the time of the protection of the woman in the wilderness (the church) as spanning 1,260 days and then again later as ‘a time, times, and half a time’ (Rev. 12:14) … This means that the beast’s efforts to oppose the gospel extend from the time of the Neronian persecution into the present and will continue until the end of the age, when the beast is destroyed by Christ at his second advent (Rev. 20:10).”8

The most reasonable conclusion, again, is the Realist view, where both Beast and his war against the church is first an archetype, second, a series of types intensifying throughout the period, and then, finally, the most intensified form at the end. 

___________________________

1. Hendriksen, More Than Conquerors, 20, italics mine.

2. Hendriksen, More Than Conquerors, 145.

3. Gentry, quoted in Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus, 187.

4. Hendriksen, More Than Conquerors, 145.

5. Hendriksen, More Than Conquerors, 144.

6. Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation, 89.

7. Gentry, quoted in Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus, 187.

8. Riddlebarger, The Man of Sin, 97.