There is one thing that I think everyone agrees on: The Book of Revelation is a strange book to read. As someone once said about the Troubles in Northern Ireland: ‘If you’re not confused, you don’t really know what is going on!’
There are many reasons for Revelation’s ‘strangeness’ to us, in a technical sense. First, we are not familiar with the genre of ‘apocalypse’ (assuming there is such a thing); we learn to recognize difference genres of writing primarily by experience and familiarity, and unlike Jesus and his disciples we are not very familiar with it.
Revelation is saturated in allusions to the Old Testament (by my counting, 676 in its 404 verses), and unless we know our OT well, this will also be strange to us.
Revelation’s use of numbers is also puzzling to us, though in a world without a separate number system, using the numeric value of letters was a commonplace. Its strangeness to us is analogous to how strange the clues to a cryptic crossword puzzle are to those who are not familiar with them.
But we are also mostly unfamiliar with the social and cultural context in which Revelation is set, and there is no book in the New Testament which is so engaged with its material culture and social context as the Book of Revelation. I find it fascinating that the book of the New Testament which appears to talk more about cosmic and heavenly realities is also the book which is most seriously engaged with the specific realities of its context. We might talk of this as the ‘scandal of particularity’; the fact that Revelation is so deeply articulated in terms of the realities of a specific time and place makes it hard to read, and means that the discipline of reading this text in its context is more vital that ever.
Of course, this ‘scandal of particularity’ is at the heart of the Christian faith; the God of the universe, the creator of all that is, who transcends space and time, has made himself known in the specifics of a particular person, who lived in a particular time and place, and whose teaching of cosmic relevance can only be properly understood by learning about that time and place. That is why Christian theology, as it has spread into different cultural contexts, has always been concerned to engage with a particular language (koine Greek), and has an interest in history, archaeology, and (to use a contemporary term) the material culture of the first century where the New Testament is set. (This is another reason why I would argue Revelation can make a claim to be the most Christian book of the New Testament…!)
(Quick plug: for a short overview of the reasons why Revelation is strange, see my Grove booklet here. For a deeper dive, see the 52-page introduction to my commentary here. For an exploration of why ‘reading in context’ is one of the four key elements of good interpretation of Scripture, see my Grove booklet on the subject here. For a six-session group study resource exploring these questions, see my Gateway book here.)
One of the strangest passages in Revelation relates to the beasts of chapter 13, and in particular the spectacles associated with the image of the beast:
Then I saw another beast, coming out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb, but it spoke like a dragon. It exercised all the authority of the first beast on its behalf, and made the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed. And it performed great signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to the earth in full view of everyone. Because of the signs it was given power to perform on behalf of the first beast, it deceived the inhabitants of the earth. It ordered them to set up an image in honor of the beast who was wounded by the sword and yet lived. It was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that it could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed (Rev 13.11–15).
There are some fairly clear biblical allusions to the story of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego refusing to bow down to the golden statue of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 3. But what are we to make of the actual details?
Commentary on this text has often gone in one of two directions. More academically, this is seen as absurd hyperbole, since clearly the idea of animated and talking statues is implausible; here John is exaggerating and raising the stakes in relation to his opposition to the imperial cult. More popularly, this is seen in ‘futurist’ readings as a prediction of an ‘end times’ scenario in which the antichrist deceives the nations (despite the term ‘antichrist’ never appearing in the text; for a discussion of that, see my article here). The image at the top of this article is of a statue that was temporarily placed outside the UN building in New York, and was interpreted in exactly this way by such futurist readers.
But what if both are wrong? What if John is describing something actually quite well-known in his culture in realistic terms?
This was explored some years ago by Steven J Scherrer in his article ‘Signs And Wonders In The Imperial Cult: A New Look At A Roman Religious Institution In The Light Of Rev’ 13:13-15 JBL 103/4 (1984) 599-610. He comments not only on the plausibility of John’s claims, but also on their relation to known practices in the Roman imperial cult:
It does seem unlikely that he would invent powerful and impressive miracles and attribute them to his archrival and opponent were there no evidence whatsoever for their existence…What then is the possibility that we are dealing here with actual phenomena in the imperial cult?
Thunder and lightning are associated with Jupiter as symbolic of his authority and divinity, and hence have been imitated by rulers…
Dio Cassius tells us that the princeps Gaius had a device (μηχανή) whereby “he gave answering peals when it thundered” (Roman History 59.28.6)…This is a quite striking text, which brings us closer to the atmosphere of Rev 13:13…
In the light of all this it seems quite plausible that technology and simulation of nature might also have been employed in the imperial cult. We suggest that Rev 13:13-15 should be accepted as describing a part of the actual practice in the cult of the princeps in the East.
Scherrer is relying here on literary evidence, but the discussion of the issues has completely changed since then, in large part because of some archaeological discoveries, but also because of a renewed appreciation of the actual technological achievements in ancient Greece, some of which fed through into technology in the Roman Empire.
The most significant of these was the discovery and later understanding of the Antikythera mechanism, found in a shipwreck off Antikythera in Greece (from which it takes its name). It was discovered in the wreck in 1901, but it was only in 2005 that scanning techniques revealed what it really was:
an Ancient Greek hand-powered orrery (model of the Solar System). It is the oldest known example of an analogue computer. It could be used to predict astronomical positions and eclipses decades in advance. It could also be used to track the four-year cycle of athletic games similar to an Olympiad, the cycle of the ancient Olympic Games.
The knowledge of celestial movements was not that surprising to those researching the mechanism. But what was surprising is the ability so early on to make such refined gears with precise teeth which engaged with one another. It was generally thought that the technology did not exist at that time (second century BC) to make such precise mechanisms.
The schematic to the right here gives you some idea of the complexity involved.
But this is not the only sophisticated mechanism that has been explored and recreated from literary accounts. (Note that we are almost completely dependent on literature here; anything making use of ropes and wooden gears will have long perished and left no archaeological record.) Several people have looked at literary accounts, and actually worked out how this mechanisms could function. Many of these examples relate to divine figures and their cults.
After these women, a four-wheeled cart eight cubits wide was led by sixty men. On it there was a seated statue of Nysa eight cubits high wearing a yellow tunic embroidered with gold,and with a Lakonian himation wrapped around her. This statue stood up mechanically with no-one putting a hand on it, and after pouring a libation of milk from a golden phialē, it sat back down again. It was holding in its left hand a thyrsos bound with fillets, and was crowned with golden ivy leaves and with expensive bunches of grapes made of precious stones. It also was fitted with a canopy and at the corners of the four-wheeled cart were harnessed four torches interwoven with gold. (Athenaeus, Deipnosophistae)
This might be thought to be just fantasy, were it not for the fact that researchers into early technology managed to replicate what the mechanism might look like and how it would work, using technology well within the known possibilities of the time.
I presented a paper on this last year at the Evangelical Theology Society meeting in San Diego, and will be presenting further research in the Revelation section of the British New Testament Society this September. But my interest here was supercharged by visiting Heraklion in Crete last weekend, and discovering the Kotsanas museum of Ancient Technology. It appears to be the work of one man, Kostas Kotsanas, who has devoted his life not only to researching these technologies, but actually building working reproductions of them, and putting them on display in a series of museums around Greece. Staff are available to demonstrate them!
One of the most remarkable is the automaton of Philon from the third century BC which actually walked around the room and poured a mix of water and wine into the cups of guests. The video here is of the simulation which is shown in the museum, but Kotsanas did in fact create a working model which he has demonstrated at conferences. (He has published a book which documents every single one of the mechanisms that he has built, with diagrams explaining how they work. You can buy a copy at any of the museums.)
The museum included several replicas of the Antikythera mechanism, and I was allowed to hold one of them (‘but carefully!’). You can see demonstrations of many of the devices on Kotsanas’ YouTube channel here.
How does all this help us in reading Revelation 13? Firstly, it locates the text in a long tradition of the functioning of statuary within religious cults in the ancient world, something that was particularly enhanced when the statues were animated and appeared to perform impressive feats.
In ancient Greece, automata were used in religious contexts because they had the particular appeal of toying with the perceived division between nature and culture. This division should not be seen as a sharply distinguishable frontier between two opposite realms, but rather as a sliding scale where ambiguity of status becomes an important feature. The defining quality of automata – artificial animation – suspended the machines at the perfect point of ambiguity between the prerogatives of the divine and the capabilities of mortals. This fragile place of suspension was where their status as a manifestation of the uncanny became most evident, allowing them to be seen as tangible proof of supernatural involvement in human affairs (Tatiana Bur Mechanical Miracles: Automata in Ancient Greek Religion MPhil thesis, Sydney 2016, p 188)
This has a particular function within the text of Revelation, and its depiction of the power of the imperial cult over its subjects.
Roman imperial court ceremonial, and, more especially, the imperial cult with its representations of the emperor and its rites of adoration, sought to achieve no less an impact upon the provincials in Asia Minor. The colossal statue of Domitian (Titus?) in Ephesus, the presence of cult statues and temples throughout Asia, the execution of impressive processions and other rites involving these cult sites and simulacra, replete with choral associations singing hymns to the emperors as to gods, all sought to excite awe among the residents of the seven cities (and beyond), contributing thus to the popular legitimation of imperial rule (David A. deSilva ‘The Strategic Arousal Of Emotion In John’s Visions Of Roman Imperialism: A Rhetorical-Critical Investigation Of Revelation 4–22’ Neotestamentica, 2008, Vol. 42, No. 1 (2008), pp. 1–34, p 6).
Reading this text in its context, we can see that John is highlighting for his readers the connections between autocratic power and domination, the demand for submission and allegiance, and the use of technology to demonstrate in tangible ways the superiority of the system which is demanding such allegiance.
And this forces us to consider, in our own context: where do we see systems of domination at work, which claim to offer us peace and prosperity, ‘victory’ even, and use technology to impress us with their power, in such a way as to compromise our allegiance to the one true king, the one true Prince of Peace, and the only one who can grant us true victory, sharing the victory he has won in the cross and resurrection?
This demonstrates the power of this text, and of reading it well. The more carefully we locate it in its first-century context, and the more attention we give to its material culture, the more powerfully relevant it becomes to our day, and what it means for us to live as faithful disciples of Jesus with patient endurance.
Additional note: I am thinking of organizing another study trip around the seven cities of Revelation, to explore the material culture of the ancient world so we can read Revelation well, in May 2027. If you are interested in receiving information about this in due course, please email me at editor (at) grovebooks (dot) co (dot) uk with ‘Study trip 2027’ in the subject line.
Buy me a Coffee
If technology could do that then, just imagine what it can do later this century with AI!
I dispute that ‘apocalyptic’ is a literary genre. It is simply the attempt to describe, using the vocabulary of two or three millennia ago, modern phenomena that were unknown then – meteorites, nuclear detonations, etc.
Nor would I rule out that the supernatural makes a comeback. I have often suspected that Satan has turned the volume down on his side of the supernatural in the West, so that when he turns it up again people will be utterly awed and worship him.
Yours ever
A. Futurist
‘It is simply the attempt to describe, using the vocabulary of two or three millennia ago, modern phenomena that were unknown then – meteorites, nuclear detonations, etc.’
That would appear to be simply an assertion based on your futurist view. If the futurist view is wrong then that definition falls away.
The idea that ‘apocalyptic’ is a literary genre is due to philosophers from several centuries later and from a quite different culture from that in which those scriptures were written.
But that doesnt mean assigning it a particular genre is wrong. It may in fact help to understand them properly, in their cultural context.
Your definition doesnt do that.
There is no such genre. The idea that you have to know about ‘apocalyptic literature’ and first decide whether a particular piece of prophetic writing is of that genre before trying to understand it is wanton over-intellectualising. Typical philosophers!
I agree that apocalyptic is not a genre, certainly not so far as Daniel and Revelation are concerned. That’s because God invented ‘it’ and others later merely imitated what he initiated. Daniel the book becomes progressively more apocalyptic as it goes along, starting off with two dreams, then a vision at night, then a vision – apparently in the day – when he is transported to Susa (animals representing kings/kingdoms), then a vision of Gabriel and more prophecy, then a vision of Jesus himself. These revelations of the future – the root meaning of ‘apocalyptic’ – all came from God, communicated cryptically by means of symbols. Any such purported revelation that does not come from God is false apocalyptic.
I think we need to explore the meaning of ‘genre’ in this context as well as the meaning of apocalyptic. The fact that , Anton, when speaking of apocalyptic cites the term in quotation marks would seem to indicate that he has issues with the term itself .Further elaboration needed here!
I’m sure the ancients knew about meteorites.
The Scriptures contain a large motif of the fact of deception[s]
It is the first “ seed” of Satan planted in Eden.
John’s experience of deceivers, persecution, false teachers and plausible but vain philosophies were but a parochial storm at this time.
God informs him that, you ain’t seen nothing yet! This will go global.
Think, Jer 12:5.
Perhaps these local difficulties had impacted the Church in Ephesus to the end that Jesus declared them to “have lost their first love,” repent.
This church of which John was the Elder; he who was the most intimate with Jesus. His church censured.
The beasts seem awesome and destructive, not of the church alone, but of mankind in general.
However, in the next Vision/ chapter Christ is Sovereign,
and an encouragement not to lose our intimacy with Christ.
I see some ‘straw man-ism’ here. I was under the impression that the generally accepted understanding of Revelation – at least among those whom I mix with – is that (a) John was drawing on his experience from what he saw at the time of writing and that (b) he skilfully picked out things well known in his own culture in realistic terms – that were eternally true of all ages between the first and second coming of Christ.
For example – let us consider Revelation 13:11-18 where, sure, he has experience of what is going on in the Roman empire at that time – which turns out to be remarkably similar to other empires throughout the ages. Has anyone ever heard of the ‘Three-Self Movement’ in China?
Revelation 13:11-18 introduce us to the second beast, rising up out of the earth. This beast is the false prophet mentioned in Revelation 16:13 and Revelation 19:20. His introduction completes the description of the trinity of evil. The first beast represents Satan’s ‘incarnation’ on earth, the second the propaganda and efficiency which are associated with this. Thus, the second beast ( ‘the false prophet’) appears ‘like a lamb’ (Revelation 13:11). We have the blasphemous imitation of the Lamb of God and the deceptiveness of Satan. He comes with soft words and fair speeches, and it is only later that his real character is discerned for what it is. He symbolises false religion and false philosophy in whatever form these appear throughout the *entire* age from the first to the second coming and works in perfect co-operation with the first beast, who represents anti-Christian government.
A very remarkable expression of this unholy alliance, is found in the Communist stranglehold over the Church in China. What is known as the ‘Three-Self Movement’ in Chinese religious life has co-operated with Communist political power, and capitulated to it, in effectively suppressing the true Church of God and bringing it to the place spoken of here. The measure of the subtlety of this deception is seen in the inclination in the Christian West to accept the ‘Three-Self Movement’ Church as a true and authentic expression of the faith once delivered to the saints.
Brother Yun described them as “birds with clipped wings”. Probably there are genuine believers among them. Not sure about the leaders in the Three-Self Church though.
Much like the Church of England today…
Anton – well, yes …. I didn’t mention the C. of E. out of a sense of diplomacy and charity, but now you come to mention it …..
Another very good example of John using something reasonably well-known in his culture in realistic terms, knowing full well that it had much wider implications and applications extending from the ascension to the time of the second coming, is the mark of the beast, 666. I think that pretty much everybody is aware that this is based on the numerical value of the name “Nero Caesar” using gematria. At the same time, John would have been well aware that 666 (three six’s) imitates Holy numbers (three – the Trinity, seven – the whole creative period, including the day of rest is 7 days). In this context, the subtle deception employed by Satan, whereby the ‘Three-Self Movement’ has capitulated to the Communists, true Church of God is suppressed while the ‘Three-Self Movement’ masquerades as Christianity is a perfect illustration of the Mark of the Beast (666).
Some seem to reject this understanding of 666 (indicating the subtlety of Satan pretending to be the true church) out of hand – and these are invariably people with something to hide who are presenting a ‘synthetic gospel’.
We can take it that throughout Revelation, John uses things that are well known to him in his own culture in realistic terms – understanding full well the application in different contexts throughout the age.
I agree that 666 refers to Nero, that John was referring to him as that beast. Im not convinced of the other possible meanings such as less than 7. It was a clever way for John to write bad things about a specific Roman emperor. Im not sure we are free to extend that to generalisations.
Hello PC1 … yeah – perhaps reading in too much, but it does fit very well, since John is going out of his way to present the second beast as the grand-master of subtle deception – and a number that represents subtle deception would fit like a glove.
The position of the Lord’s people in China is vividly and accurately depicted in Revelation 13. The first ten verses suggest the force which faces them; the remaining eight verses give an idea of the propaganda and efficiency which are associated with it. This is the oppression that the Church in China has faced in our time, and indeed that whole situation serves us with an eloquent commentary on what John Reunfolds here. aders of the book, ‘Come Wind, Come Weather’, by Leslie T. Lyall, a C.I.M. missionary, will know just how grimly these prophesies have been fulfilled. Speaking of the advance of the Communists, he tells of how a Colonel of the Nationalist Army gave him this
warning: ‘The Communists will soon be here; we are about to withdraw and go to Formosa. But don’t trust the Communists; they will not interfere with you at first, and will be very polite. On no account fall into the trap and be deceived by fair words. When they have gathered all the information they need, then after a year, or perhaps two, they will act. You have been warned’. So startlingly similar in spirit and atmosphere to this chapter are these words that
one might be pardoned for suspecting that the Chinese Colonel had been reading it. ‘Fair words…. very polite….’. The second beast came ‘like a lamb’ and ‘deceiveth them that dwell on the earth’.
….. further analysis of the situation in China which I found to indicate that if John did not intend the 666 number to signify something of the devil that is a very convincing imitation of Christ, then in the context (of where it is placed in Chapter 13) then it should, since this is what the chapter is about. The final installment of what happened in China indicating the subtlety of the devil:
What followed in China bears out the message of Revelation 13 fully, and the warning of the Nationalist colonel. For after the Revolution was an accomplished fact, the Church began to say to itself, ‘It is not so bad after all; we are being left alone; we are free to meet, we are free to preach, to read the Word’. And this went on for quite a time. It was only at a later stage that the pressure began, and that only in the most ‘gentle’ subtle ways. In the atmosphere of ‘approval’ and ‘co-operation’ shown by the Communists, it began to be suggested that it was up to the Church to purge itself of all imperialist taints, so that the Church might take its place honourably in the new Chinese society. The Government disclaimed any basic antagonism against the Church itself, but only against the way it had been used as a tool for imperialistic designs in China. Significantly, Mr Chou-en-lai is reported to have said, ‘While China is putting its house in order, it is undesirable for guests to be present’. This was the thin edge of the wedge which finally led to the expulsion of the missionaries. Next, the Communists went to the Church and said, ‘You agree with everything we are saying, of course? Then why do you still welcome the presence of these foreign, imperialist missionaries?’
Crucially, there was no Government edict expelling missionaries; there was no direct Government action to interfere with their work, only subtle pressure on the Christians to act themselves. Sadly and fearfully they sent delegations to see the missionaries. That was the beginning of the exodus of the great missionary band, of all denominations. And so it went on, until at last the organised Church as such had a stranglehold upon it, and a puppet Church under Communist domination and control largely taking its place.
PC1 – you’re right that we’re not free to read into Scripture that which may well not be there. Perhaps some interpretation of the 666 is going too far.
On the other hand, the context is clear: John has just informed us that the beast is a master of subtlety – and that huge numbers will be deceived by the subtlety and will follow after the beast.
In this context – yes, the ‘number’ may just have been John’s way of having a dig at Nero (with nothing more to it than that) – but Nero really was as subtle as a brick with woodworm to coin a phrase (i.e. not very subtle at all). Don’t you think that there may be the possibility that John may have intended something deeper? Something that reflected the foregoing? John was a highly intelligent author, inspired, and if Nero was the *only* meaning there, I suggest that this might be a little out of character.
By the way, nothing of what I pointed out (showing the great subtlety of the anti-Christian forces – and taking China as an example) depends at all on this (or indeed any other) understanding of the number – the message that we can draw from this passage where John explicitly tells us how the beast operates does not depend on this at all. When we look at the example of China, we see that John was right – we can see this as an explicit outworking of what the text says. If we look further (as Anton alludes to by mentioning the C. of E.), this is how the beast has consistently operated throughout the entire period from the ascension of Jesus until now.
It also means that we should be encouraged by, but at the same time approach with extreme caution, any figures that suggest that Christianity is on the increase. Is it really the true faith? Or is it another manifestation of the beast, employing extreme subtlety to look like Christ, but lacking the crucial elements of the faith?
PC1 – (with apologies for over-posting here) – but clearly 666 as Nero cannot be the *predominant* meaning of John here, since that would mitigate against the text. It was pretty much well understood at the time that Nero was morally degenerate. If John is describing something actually quite well-known in his culture in realistic terms, then the gemantria was quite well known and didn’t need ‘understanding’ (Revelation 13:18). In Scripture, ‘understanding’ and ‘wisdom’ usually refer to moral concepts, ‘the fool has said in his heart that there is no god’. So – if John were simply taking the opportunity to have a dig at Nero (with no other meaning), this would not require ‘understanding’ in the sense meant by Scripture.
In fact, finishing the chapter with a local reference to Nero would surely be a crass anti-climax after he has just given us very good information as to how we should expect the second beast to operate between the first and second coming of Christ (which we see played out precisely – for example – in China – as outlined above).
So I’m wondering what you take as the *predominant* meaning here – something that stands the test of time, requires ‘understanding’ and which has references way beyond 1st century Rome.
In fact – it’s a general point – while an understanding of numerology may help to enhance our understanding, the *main message* concerning God’s redemptive plan, what it says about us and why we need redemption, is never given in this way.
Instead of John simply naming Nero, he uses gematria which presumably a number of his readers would understand (they would have had to know Hebrew) and they would have explained it to others. It seems to me the reason why John just doesnt say ‘Nero’ is because if his writing fell into the wrong hands, to refer to a Roman emperor as a ‘beast’ would presumably have had serious consequences, not only to the author but to anyone found reading the letter which may be many people. I think that is the straightforward reason why John chose not to refer to him directly by name. And by naming him indirectly, John is firmly rooting Revelation in the 1st century.
It’s similar to Bauckam’s argument of ‘protective anonymity’. In not directly naming individuals in the Gospels, particularly Mark, the author is trying to protect certain individuals in the story who were still around at the time of writing. But it also works in a different way – not naming specific people who may bring great harm to the church if they found the Christians were writing about them negatively. This, I think, explains why Mark chose not to name the particular Jewish High, Caiaphas, under whom Jesus was crucified. Caiaphas was the son-in-law of the previous HP Annas. The Annas family had considerable influence in how the Jewish authorities behaved. Mark was writing at a time when they still had such influence, and didnt want to specifically refer to him which would no doubt bring further prosecution. This is also another reason for thinking Mark was written quite early, probably in the 40s or 50s, when such influence continued. John, however, had no qualms referring directly to Caiaphas in his Gospel as he was writing long after that High Priest family had any influence, either just before or after the destruction of the Temple.
Im not saying we cant identify ‘beasts’ in the here and now if they display similar features. We can see how various leaders down through the centuries have been just as evil. But they are not the beasts of Revelation.
PC1 – yes – all very well, but the main point of difficulty (at least for me) is that I don’t think Nero would have been so uninformed. Think of today. If some group had a coded way of communicating to each other that they considered Donald Trump to be reprehensible in some way, then you’d expect the CIA to have infiltrated them and found out. I don’t believe that Nero would have been unaware of the coded language. I mean – the devil was infiltrating Christian circles (Judas Iscariot) even when Jesus Christ was here. Christianity was seen as a threat – therefore difficult to believe that it wasn’t infiltrated – so I really don’t believe for one minute in the ‘protective anonymity’ here.
So yes – he may well have been blatantly telling Nero what he thought of him – but it extends much further than Nero, since Nero wasn’t very subtle (and John has spent the whole chapter emphasising that the beast is subtle) – so I don’t think that this can possibly even be the main meaning.
Yes – John draws very much on what he sees in the 1st Century – so in this sense it is rooted there – but I do think that the book of Revelation is trivialised if this is considered to be the main meaning – John clearly transcends the time and place of the writing. You can see this even at the beginning of the book with the messages to the seven churches – he is writing to specific churches, but he has an eye to characteristics of churches that we have seen throughout the whole of the last 2000 years.
Hi Jock, and Peter, you’ve probably moved on from this topic but I want to make a comment about the word ‘beast’. I think it denotes a system, be it political or economic or religious. As I see it no person can be “the beast” . The beast is what arises from ‘the sea’ of people opposed to God. The “heads” are the world’s systems of governance. The horns on the other hand can be identified with the leaders of the heads. In today’s world we have the world’s greatest religions aligned with their geopolitical economies. There are 7 of them. Each is antichrist but the beast is the underlying world system that supports them.
I agree with previous comments that when the earth beast sets up a speaking image of the abyss beast (whose worship was compulsory, 13:14-15) this is characteristic of ‘living’ automaton in some temples and wealthy homes in John’s era.
I would like to add that, since the Greco-Romano period is characterised by elaborately decorated temples with statues and carved friezes representing the gods and mythical events, then it is possible that the visual appearances of satan/ the dragon and both beasts are like statues and friezes that tell the story of evil on earth.
‘Behind’ the beasts are the manipulations by satan, who has ‘seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads’ (12:3). The heads and horns of the scarlet/ abyss beast tell a story about seven (and then ten) kings and seven hills and John would have been familiar with this form of illustration of past and future history.
The first era illustrated on the abyss beast is that of the seven kings/ Caesars, i.e. John’s own time (the first century A.D.); the second is the era of the ten kings in the eschaton. It is in the second era that the beasts rise from the abyss or earth and they either become the eighth king (who hates Christ the Lamb and the harlot Babylon, 17:14-16), or the false prophet. The earth beast’s two horns may also be reminders of temple friezes that may illustrate two eras.
This ‘two era’ interpretation is compatible with ‘the present age’ and ‘the age to come’, which is embedded in the eschatology in the Gospels and was a common historical structure in John’s era.
Thank you Lynn. What in the text leads you to separate the ten kings from the later episode? Most commentators I know see them as belonging together…