Why doesn't Revelation show three horns being defeated

[John Reece]

@John Reece

Esther 1:3
In the third year of his reign, he made a feast unto all his princes and his servants; the power of Persia and Media, the nobles and princes of the provinces, being before him

Then how come the Bear didn't have any horns, to refer to these princes of the provinces?

What does that have to do with the text of Revelation?

[seanD]

@Sean

Vespasian would be either the ninth or the tenth, depending on whether you count Julius Caesar. Not the eleventh.

I agree with JP Holdings' analysis of the Beast of Dan:

1. Julius Caesar, 49-44 BC
2. Triumverate: Marc Anthony/Octavian (Augustus)/Lepidus 44-31 BC
3. Augustus, 31 BC-14 AD
4. Tiberius, 14-37
5. Caligula, 37-41
6. Claudius, 41-54
7. Nero, 54-68
8. Galba, 68-69
9. Otho, 69
10. Vitellius, 69
11. Vespasian, 69-79

....

In the year 49 BC, Julius Caesar assumed the title of dictator of Rome. In 44 BC, he assumed the title of dictator perpetuus, or dictator for life. He was assassinated before he could enjoy it for long, but he laid the foundation for what would become a dynasty.

The Triumverate is not included in Suetonius' work. However, it consisted of two men who were relatives of Julius Caesar: Marc Anthony, who was a grandson of one of Julius' uncles, and Octavian, who later became Augustus and the first of the Julio-Claudian dynasty. Lepidus was part of the triumverate but was not part of Julius' family.

http://www.tektonics.org/esch/danman.php

This is by far the best historical interpretation and less contrived I've seen thus far (though I don't agree with all his interpretation of Daniel).

[Obsidian]

What does that have to do with the text of Revelation?

You do understand that there are provincial rulers in both empires, correct?

I agree with JP Holdings' analysis of the Beast of Dan:

I don't think he does a good job at all of explaining how Vespasian was "little," or stouter than his fellows, or really any different at all from the other ten horns.

[John Reece]

You do understand that there are provincial rulers in both empires, correct?

Of course; but I do not see texts in the prophecy of Daniel as necessarily being templates for determining meanings of texts in the prophecy of Revelation.

I do not post any interpretation as definitive or conclusive, but only of interest in considering options. The following is by Ian Boxall in The Revelation of John (Blacks New Testament Commentary; A & C Black: London, 2006):

After an identification of the monster (...), attention turns to the monster's ten horns. These are also kings (cf. Dan. 7:24), though these ten have not yet received royal power. Given that they are horns of the monster, one might assume that they too are Roman emperors (although their natural round number, ten, lacks the precision of the five-one-one of verse 10 and suggests that particular individuals are not in mind). However, these ten seem to be kings who will rule simultaneously, for they are of one mind in giving power and authority to the monster. Furthermore, they will receive authority as kings, along with the monster, whether in its present form as imperial Rome, or as its returning head. Another possibility therefore makes good sense: these are close allies of Rome, or (in the light of verse 16) of the returning Nero and his allies from beyond the Euphrates as a threat to the dominance of Rome (e.g. Sib. Or. 5:93-110). Echoes of expected Parthian allies (the 'kings from the rising sun' of 16:12) may well have been detected by first-century audiences.

Yet there is more here than first-century political allusion. Rather, these horns, like the monster itself, are part of the final onslaught of evil, the conspiring of the nations against the Lord and his Anointed (Ps. 2:1-3). The nations are amassing for the final battle in which they will wage war with the Lamb (the battle which has been announced at 16:14, 16, and which will be described at 19:11-21 and 20:7-10. However, the outcome of this battle is assured from the outset: the Lamb will conquer them, because he is Lord of lords and King of kings. This is surely an allusion to Christ's victorious death and resurrection, by which he is crowned as King (cf. 12:5, 10) and received the name of Lord (Κύριος;; e.g. Acts 2:36; Phil. 2:9). The title 'Lord of lords and King of kings', a variant of which is used of Christ at 19:16, is probably influenced by the LXX of Dan. 4:37 (Beale 1985; cf. I En. 9:4). Because of Christ's victory, the influence of these kings will be short-lived (they will receive authority for one hour, the time of the judgment of Babylon: 18:10, 17, 19). But Christ does not win his victory alone; rather he is accompanied by his great band of faithful witnesses, who form his powerful army: they are described as called, chosen, and trustworthy. They too are victorious over the monster and his allies, even if in human form their victory initially appears as defeat (see 11:7, where the two witnesses are conquered and killed by the monster).

[seanD]

I don't think he does a good job at all of explaining how Vespasian was "little," or stouter than his fellows, or really any different at all from the other ten horns.

Are you joking or are you serious?

[Obsidian]

His numeration to make Vespasian the 11th is also extremely arbitrary. He clumps 2-3 people into one. He skips Pompey, the Senate, etc.

@John Reece

I do not think that Rome had ten allies. And I don't think the Parthians and Rome were allies. The rest of that second quote just seemed to be a rather weak idealistic interpretation.

With regard to the earlier quote, I do not think that horns represent regional governors because Persia had governors but no horns. Also, you never dealt with my second and third objection (one of which Sean agreed with, and one of which he has rather unsuccessfully tried to counter by citing JP Holding).

[Darfius]

I have read The Two Babylons, and your post is interesting, but there are two problems with your post. One, you do not clearly explain what you think the two beasts are. And two, you don't really answer the question that I raised in the thread. Who are the ten horns, and why doesn't Revelation show the horns fighting each other?

I clearly explained that the two beasts are one and the same: paganism which is really organized Satanism at its core. One perspective from before the separation of Church and State and one from afterward.

Revelation answers who the ten horns are. They are ten horns who "for one hour receive power alongside the beast." Revelation does indeed portray turmoil between the forces of Satan when it says "the beast will hate the prostitute", which I also alluded to.

[Darfius]

#2 If we assume the fourth beast in Dan is the Roman Empire (which I personally believe is a good interpretation) and the ten horns are Caesars, then the eleventh horn would be Vespasian who uprooted Galba, Otho and Vitellius, that were all ruling simultaneously.

#3 Exactly. Which is why it doesn't fit the ancient Roman Empire.

Your attempt to equate the eleventh horn with Vespasian falls woefully short when we see the language applied to this "eleventh horn":

Daniel 7:11 “Then I continued to watch because of the boastful words the horn was speaking. I kept looking until the beast was slain and its body destroyed and thrown into the blazing fire. 12 (The other beasts had been stripped of their authority, but were allowed to live for a period of time.)"

This language is clearly eschatological and Paul later echoes it here:

2 Thessalonians 2: 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

Clearly the "eleventh horn" is the man of lawlessness.

[seanD]

Your attempt to equate the eleventh horn with Vespasian falls woefully short when we see the language applied to this "eleventh horn":

Daniel 7:11 “Then I continued to watch because of the boastful words the horn was speaking. I kept looking until the beast was slain and its body destroyed and thrown into the blazing fire. 12 (The other beasts had been stripped of their authority, but were allowed to live for a period of time.)"

This language is clearly eschatological and Paul later echoes it here:

2 Thessalonians 2: 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

Clearly the "eleventh horn" is the man of lawlessness.

I'll admit, I'm still unsure about the little horn. The language looks as though it's describing end times, and I just can't equate "saints" with first century Jews. But there's no reason to assume the two beasts in Dan and Rev are the same when they're described completely different. It's confusing.

[eschaton]

Let me offer an alternative way to look at these things if I may. Methodius (about 270 AD) gives this explanation of the heads and horns.

>>Therefore, taking to you a masculine and sober mind, oppose your armour to the swelling beast, and do not at all give way, nor be troubled because of his fury. For you will have immense glory if you overcome him, and take away the seven crowns which are upon him, on account of which we have to struggle and wrestle, according to our teacher Paul. For she who having first overcome the devil, and destroyed his seven heads, becomes possessed of the seven crowns of virtue, having gone through the seven great struggles of chastity. For incontinence and luxury is a head of the dragon; and whoever bruises this is wreathed with the crown of temperance. Cowardice and weakness is also a head; and he who treads upon this carries off the crown of martyrdom. Unbelief and folly, and other similar fruits of wickedness, is another head; and he who has overcome these and destroyed them carries off the honours connected with them, the power of the dragon being in many ways rooted up. Moreover, the ten horns and stings which he was said to have upon his heads are the ten opposites, O virgins, to the Decalogue, by which he was accustomed to gore and cast down the souls of many imagining and contriving things in opposition to the law, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God,” (Deut. vi. 5.) and to the other precepts which follow. Consider now the fiery and bitter horn of fornication, by which he casts down the incontinent; consider adultery, consider falsehood, covetousness, theft, and the other sister and related vices, which flourish by nature around his murderous heads, which if you root out with the aid of Christ, you will receive, as it were, divine heads, and will bloom with the crowns gained from the dragon. For it is our duty to prefer and to set forward the best things, who have received, above the earth-born, a commanding and voluntary mind, and one free from all necessity, so as to make choice like masters of the things which please us, not being in bondage to fate or fortune. And so no man would be master of himself and good, unless selecting the human example of Christ, and bringing himself to the likeness of Him, he should imitate Him in his manner of life. For of all evils the greatest which is implanted in many is that which refers the causes of sins to the motions of the stars, and says that our life is guided by the necessities of fate, as those say who study the stars, with much insolence. For they, trusting more in guessing than in prudence, that is, in something between truth and falsehood, go far astray from the sight of things as they are. Whence, if you permit me, O Arete, now that I have completed the discourse which you, my mistress, appointed to be spoken, I will endeavour, with your assistance and favour, to examine carefully the position of those who are offended, and deny that we speak the truth, when we say that man is possessed of free-will, and prove that
“They perish self-destroyed, By their own fault,” choosing the pleasant in preference to the expedient.

Chapter XIII.—The Seven Crowns of the Beast to Be Taken Away by Victorious Chastity; The Ten Crowns of the Dragon, the Vices Opposed to the Decalogue; The Opinion of Fate the Greatest Evil.<<

Seven represents Spirit and ten represents Law. In the dragon's case it is vice rather than virtue. The son of perdition puts himself above all these things (2 Thess 2:4).

Mountains and kings might not seem to fit, but according to Christian interpretation Christ is the mountain that destroys kingdoms in Daniel 2, and sets up the everlasting kingdom.

This sort of spiritual interpretation wasn't uncommon in the early church (see Didymus the Blind's (313-398 AD) interpretation of the symbols in Zechariah). Eusebius (260-340 AD) gives us this interpretation of Daniel 2 and 7.

>> 31...For as the prophet saw a great sea, so the king saw a great image. And again, as the prophet saw four beasts, which he interpreted as four kingdoms, so the king was given to understand four kingdoms under the gold, and silver, and brass, and iron. And again, as the prophet saw the division of the ten horns of the last beast, and three horns broken by one; so the king, in like manner, saw in the extremities of the image one part iron and another clay. And besides this, as the prophet, after the vision of the four kingdoms, saw the Son of man receive dominion, and power, and a kingdom; so also the king thought he saw a stone smite the whole image, and become a great mountain and fill the sea. And rightly so. For it was quite consistent in the king, whose view of the spectacle of life was so false, and who admired the beauty of the mere sensible colours, so to speak, in the picture set up to view, to liken the life of all men to a great image; but (it became) the prophet to compare the great and mighty tumult of life to a mighty sea. And it was fitting that the king, who prized the substances deemed precious among men, gold, and silver, and brass, and iron, should liken to these substances the kingdoms that held the sovereignty at different times in the life of men; but that the prophet should describe these same kingdoms under the likeness of beasts, in accordance with the manner of their rule. And again, the king—who was puffed up, as it seems, in his own conceit, and plumed himself on the power of his ancestors—is shown the vicissitude to which affairs are subject, and the end destined for all the kingdoms of earth, with the view of teaching him to lay aside his pride in himself, and understand that there is nothing stable among men, but only that which is the appointed end of all things—the kingdom of God. For after the first kingdom of the Assyrians, which was denoted by the gold, there will be the second kingdom of the Persians, expressed by the silver; and then the third kingdom of the Macedonians, signified by the brass; and after it, the fourth kingdom of the Romans will succeed, more powerful than those that went before it; for which reason also it was likened to iron. For of it is said: “And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron; as iron breaketh and subdueth all things, so shall it break and subdue all things.” And after all these kingdoms which have been mentioned, the kingdom of God is represented by the stone that breaks the whole image. And the prophet, in conformity with this, does not see the kingdom which comes at the end of all these things, until he has in order described the four dominions mentioned under the four beasts. And I think that the visions shown, both to the king and to the prophet, were visions of these four kingdoms alone, and of none others, because by these the nation of the Jews was held in bondage from the times of the prophet.”
Scholia On Daniel <<

The life of all men is represented by the image, and Israel is the example of this in scripture. Life is a struggle between vice and virtue. It takes God's wisdom to win the struggle. (13:18, 17:9). This sort of spiritual interpretation was common in second temple Judaism.

[Obsidian]

But Revelation 17 says that the horns and heads represent kings. I don't see how your interpretation could be true whatsoever.

[eschaton]

But Revelation 17 says that the horns and heads represent kings. I don't see how your interpretation could be true whatsoever.

I don't call it my interpretation (private interpretation). I call it spiritual interpretation from the early church.

Again, from above.

Mountains and kings might not seem to fit, but according to Christian interpretation Christ is the mountain that destroys kingdoms in Daniel 2, and sets up the everlasting kingdom.

Dan 2:35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.
Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

Christ is a mountain and a king.

Eusebius:
For it was quite consistent in the king, whose view of the spectacle of life was so false, and who admired the beauty of the mere sensible colours, so to speak, in the picture set up to view, to liken the life of all men to a great image; but (it became) the prophet to compare the great and mighty tumult of life to a mighty sea. And it was fitting that the king, who prized the substances deemed precious among men, gold, and silver, and brass, and iron, should liken to these substances the kingdoms that held the sovereignty at different times in the life of men; but that the prophet should describe these same kingdoms under the likeness of beasts, in accordance with the manner of their rule. And again, the king—who was puffed up, as it seems, in his own conceit, and plumed himself on the power of his ancestors—is shown the vicissitude to which affairs are subject, and the end destined for all the kingdoms of earth, with the view of teaching him to lay aside his pride in himself, and understand that there is nothing stable among men, but only that which is the appointed end of all things—the kingdom of God.

[eschaton]

We can't divorce scripture from the culture and interpretation of the early church. Augustine on 7 and 10.

8. For if we determine on the number that should indicate the law, what else can it be but ten? For we have absolute certainty that the Decalogue of the law, that is, those ten well-known precepts, were first written by the finger of God on two tables of stone. (Deut. ix. 10.) But the law, when it is not aided by grace, maketh transgressors, and is only in the letter, on account of which the apostle specially declared, “The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.” (2 Cor. iii. 6.) Let the spirit then be added to the letter, lest the letter kill him whom the spirit maketh not alive, and let us work out the precepts of the law, not in our own strength, but by the grace of the Saviour. But when grace is added to the law, that is, the spirit to the letter, there is, in a kind of way, added to ten the number of seven. For this number, namely seven, is testified by the documents of holy writ given us for perusal, to signify the Holy Spirit. For example, sanctity or sanctification properly pertains to the Holy Spirit, whence, as the Father is a spirit, and the Son a spirit, because God is a spirit, so the Father is holy and the Son holy, yet the Spirit of both is called peculiarly by the name of the Holy Spirit. Where, then, was there the first distinct mention of sanctification in the law but on the seventh day? For God sanctified not the first day, when He made the light; nor the second, when He made the firmament; nor the third, when He separated the sea from the land, and the land brought forth grass and timber; nor the fourth, wherein the stars were created; nor the fifth, wherein were created the animals that live in the waters or fly in the air; nor the sixth, when the terrestrial living soul and man himself were created; but He sanctified the seventh day, wherein He rested from all His works. (Gen. i., ii. 3.) The Holy Spirit, therefore, is aptly represented by the septenary number. The prophet Isaiah likewise says, “The Spirit of God shall rest on Him;” and thereafter calls our attention to that Spirit in His septenary work or grace, by saying, “The spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and piety; and He shall be filled with the spirit of the fear of God.” (Isa. xi. 2, 3.) And what of the Revelation? Are they not there called the seven Spirits of God, (Rev. iii. 1.) while there is only one and the same Spirit dividing to every one severally as He will? (1 Cor. xii. 11.) But the septenary operation of the one Spirit was so called by the Spirit Himself, whose own presence in the writer led to their being spoken of as the seven Spirits...

NPNF1-07. St. Augustine: Homilies on the Gospel of John; Homilies on the First Epistle of John; Soliloquies
Tractate CXXII
Chapter XX. 30-31, and XXI. 1-11.


Or from first century Jewish interpretation. Philo on the multi-headed beast.

... But as for the deeper meaning," this must be said. The girdles represent drawing together and the coming together of the sensual pleasures and other passions," which, being, as it were, released and let go, overtake all souls. Wherefore not ineptly does He add that one must have a girdle about the middle, for this place is considered as the manger of the many-headed beast of desire within us. 19. (Ex. xii. 11)

Why is the height of the altar three cubits ? The literal meaning (refers to) the service of the several priests, that they may easily be able to perform their office by standing on a firm base, hiding their bellies and the things within their bellies, because of that many-headed beast, desire," and the farther (part) around the heart, because of anger, the counsellor of evil," that it may be superior to the head. And the head is the temple of the mind, in which firmly dwell thoughts and the ministering senses.
100. (Ex. xxvii. Ic)

Philo, Questions and Answers on EXODUS, BOOK I

Jer 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

Joh 2:24 But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men,
Joh 2:25 And needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man.

[Darfius]

eschaton, Philo and subsequently Augustine were influenced by the very mystery schools which the Bible portrays as the enemy of God. I see nothing more than the ramblings of private interpretation in what you've posted. Proximity to an event does not guarantee accuracy in testimony, particularly if the person giving the testimony is poor in vision.

[eschaton]

eschaton, Philo and subsequently Augustine were influenced by the very mystery schools which the Bible portrays as the enemy of God. I see nothing more than the ramblings of private interpretation in what you've posted. Proximity to an event does not guarantee accuracy in testimony, particularly if the person giving the testimony is poor in vision.

I don't think there is a basis for that opinion. What about Methodius, Didymus the Blind, and Eusebius that i sited earlier. How about Victornius (about 270) and the oldest commentary on Revelation? Jerome's (347-420)(ending to his version of Victorinus' commentary, which replaces Victorinus' material on chapters 20 and 21 of the Apocalypse:

1 For I have not considered the kingdom of the thousand years to be earthly: for, if it is being perceived thus, at the completion of the thousand years they cease to reign. But I will offer as my capacity for understanding has perceived.
The *number ten signifies the Decalogue*, and one hundred shows the crown of virginity.
For he who has preserved entire his resolution for virginity, and faithfully fulfilled the precepts of the Decalogue, and has overcome impure actions and impure thoughts among the chambers of the heart so that they do not rule him, this is truly a priest of Christ and entirely completes the millenary number, believed to rule with Christ, and rightly with Him the devil is bound. He who has been ensnared in the errors and dogmas of the heretics, in him the devil is released. But because he says he will be released at the completion of the thousand years, at the completion of the number of the perfect saints, in the bodies and hearts of whom virginity reigns, with the arrival of the coming of the hating one, many will be overthrown by him, seduced by earthly loves, and will likewise enter the lake with him. And after a little while, the ground returns the bodies of the saints which shortly before were resting: he shows that those receiving, with the eternal King, the immortal kingdom, which is not by virginity of the body alone, but also of language and thought, will rejoice with the Lamb.