Rebekah Yi Liu - The Background and Meaning of The Image of The Beast in Revelation 13.1

Andrews University
Digital Commons @ Andrews University
Dissertations Graduate Research
2016
The Background and Meaning of the Image of the Beast in Rev.

13:14, 15
Rebekah Yi Liu
[email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/dissertations
Part of the Biblical Studies Commons
Recommended Citation
Liu, Rebekah Yi, "The Background and Meaning of the Image of the Beast in Rev. 13:14, 15" (2016).
Dissertations. 1602.
https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/dissertations/1602
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Research at Digital Commons @
Andrews University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital
Commons @ Andrews University. For more information, please contact [email protected].
ABSTRACT
THE BACKGROUNDS AND MEANING OF

THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST IN
REV 13:14, 15
by
Rebekah Yi Liu
Adviser: Dr. Jon Paulien

ABSTRACT OF GRADUATE STDUENT RESEARCH
Dissertation
Andrews University
Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary
Title: THE BACKGROUNDS AND MEANING OF THE IMAGE OF THE

BEAST IN REV 13:14, 15
Name of researcher: Rebekah Yi Liu
Name and degree of faculty adviser: Jon Paulien, Ph.D.
Date Completed: May 2016
Problem
This dissertation investigates the first century Greco-Roman cultural
backgrounds and the literary context of the motif of the image of the beast in Rev
13:14, 15, in order to answer the problem of the author’s intended meaning of the
image of the beast to his first century Greco-Roman readers.
Method
There are six steps necessary to accomplish the task of this dissertation.
These steps are taken in the form of the exegetical studies which are done in six
chapters, respectively.
Following the introductory chapter, the second chapter is a brief history of
the historical interpretations of the image of the beast in Rev 13:14, 15, starting with
the interpretations from scholars of the first three centuries and continuing on to the
present. This historical survey in Chapter 2 demonstrates that an in depth exegetical
study of the image of the beast is much needed. Chapters 3-6 were an attempt to
make up for this deficiency by providing an exegetical study of the image of the
beast motif in its original cultural and literary context of the book of Revelation.
Chapter 3 is a study of the image-of-the-beast motif within its immediate
context of Revelation 13. Chapters 4-6 provide a study of the image-of-the-beast
motif in the latter half of Revelation, i.e., Revelation 14-20, with Chapters 4-5
studying the image-of-the-beast motif in the chapters (Revelation 14-16, 19, and 20)
in which this term occurs, and Chapter 6 studying this motif in the chapters
(Revelation 17, 18) in which this term is absent.
Conclusion
As I have come to see it, the narrative of Rev 13:14, 15 depicts the attempt of
an unholy trinity to counteract God’s goal for the plan of salvation, i.e., the
restoration of Imago Dei in human beings in the last days by creating the image of
the beast on Earth. The image of the beast is an end time entity, comprised of a
community of people who reflect the character of the dragon, and has the three-fold
religious-economic-political power to impose false worship on Earth. The image of
the beast is best identified with the end time Babylon the Great of chapters 17-18.
Andrews University
Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary

REV 13:14, 15
A Dissertation
Presented In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
by
Rebekah Yi Liu
May 2016
REV 13:14, 15
A dissertation
presented in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
by
Rebekah Yi Liu
APPROVAL BY THE COMMITTEE:
_____________________________ ________________________________
Faculty Adviser, Director of PhD/ThD Religion Program
Jon Paulien Tom Shepherd
Dean, School of Religion
Loma Linda University
_____________________________ _______________________________
P. Richard Choi Jirí Moskala
Professor of New Testament Dean, SDA Theological Seminary
_____________________________
Roy Gane
Professor of Old Testament
_____________________________
Teresa Reeve
Professor of New Testament
_____________________________ _______________________________
David L. Barr Date approved
Professor of
DEDICATION
To My Husband Dezhang:
who has willingly taken upon himself the burden of solely

nurturing our son most of the time for more than 10 years, and who
always supports me in my academic pursuits without complaint.
To My 11-year-old son Haojü:
who was put on the altar of sacrifice when he was only 16 months
old without his consent, and who is the one person on Earth whom
I always felt deeply sorry for not being able to fulfill my duties
when he needed me. This was done for the sake of a greater cause,
i.e., the advancement of God’s Kingdom in the land of the Middle
Kingdom.
And to my Lord Jesus Christ:
who has known me and searched my soul, and has nevertheless

chosen to reveal to me a tiny portion of the great mystery of his
Word in the last days, despite my sinfulness and unworthiness.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Justification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Scope and Delimitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2. HISTORY OF INTERPRETATION OF
“THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
The First Three Centuries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Irenaeus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Hippolytus of Rome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Victorinus of Pettau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
The Fourth Century Through the Eleventh Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Tyconius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Augustine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
The Twelfth Through the Eighteenth Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Joachim of Fiore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Protestant Scholars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Roman Catholic Scholars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
The Nineteenth Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
The Twentieth Century to the Present . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
3. EXEGESIS OF “THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST”

IN REV 13:14, 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
The Meaning of the Words Eikōn and Thēriou . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Eikōn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
In the LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
In Connection to Its Hebrew/Aramaic Equivalents:
Tselem, Semel, Pesel and Demûth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
In Second Temple Judaism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
In Greco-Roman Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Thērion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
In the LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
In Connection to Its Hebrew/Aramaic Equivalents:
Chāyāh and Behemah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
In Second Temple Judaism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
In Greco-Roman Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
The Literary Context of “The Image of the Beast”
In Rev 13:14, 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Key Themes of Revelation 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Allusions to Old and New Testament Passages
In Rev 13:14, 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Cultural Background of “The Image of the Beast” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Cultic Practices in the ANE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Cultic Practices in Greco-Roman World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
The Power of the Cult Image . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
Echoes in Rev 13:14, 15 of the Cultic Practices in the ANE
And the Greco-Roman World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
4. THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST IN REVELATION 14-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
The Image of the Beast in Revelation 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
The Literary Context of Revelation 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
Major Themes of Revelation 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
The Image of the Beast in Revelation 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
5. THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST IN REVELATION 19 and 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
The Image of the Beast in Revelation 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
6. THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST IN REVELATION 17 and 18 . . . . . . . . . . . 234
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
The Image of the Beast in Revelation 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
The Literary Context of Revelation 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
The Image of the Beast in Revelation 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277
The Literary Context of Revelation 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298
Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AB Anchor Bible
ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. 6 vols. New
York: Doubleday, 1992.
ABRL Anchor Bible Reference Library
AC Affirmation & Critique

AfO Archiv für Orientforschung
AGI Archivio Glottologico Italiano
AJT Asia Journal of Theology
ANET Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Edited by
James B. Pritchard. 3rd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.
ANF Ante-Nicene Fathers
APB Acta Patristica et Byzantina
ASOR American Schools of Oriental Research
AUSDDS Andrews University Seminary Doctoral Dissertation Series
AUSS Andrews University Seminary Studies
BA Biblical Archeologist
BAR Biblical Archaeology Review
BBR Bulletin for Biblical Research
BDAG Danker, Frederick W., Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur
Gingrich.Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early
Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
BDB Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. A Hebrew and

English Lexicon of the Old Testament
BFCT Beiträge zur Förderung christlicher Theologie

Bib Biblica
vii
BibInt Biblical Interpretation Series
BLT Brethren Life and Thought
BR Biblical Research
BSac Bibliotheca Sacra
BT Bible Today
BTB Biblical Theology Bulletin
BZAW Beiheft zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
CBC Cambridge Bible Commentary
CBET Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology

CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly
CBR Currents in Biblical Research
CCSL Corpus Christianorum: Series Latina. Turnhout: Brepols, 1953-
CH Church History
Chm Churchman
ChrT Christianity Today
CJ Concordia Journal
CM Cuneiform Monographs
COS The Context of Scripture. Edited by William W. Hallo. 3 vols. Leiden:

Brill, 1997-2002.
CSCO Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium. Edited by Jean Baptiste

Chabot et al. Paris, 1903.
CSEL Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum
CTJ Calvin Theological Journal
CTM Concordia Theological Monthly
CTQ Concordia Theological Quarterly
CTR Criswell Theological Review
CurTM Currents in Theology and Mission

DARCOM Daniel and Revelation Committee Series
viii
ED Euntes Docete
EQ Evangelical Quarterly
ETCSL Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature
ExAud Ex Auditu
ExpTim Expository Times
FAOS Freiburger altorientalische Studien
FCNTECW Feminist Companion to the New Testament and Early Christian Writings
FH Fides et historia
FRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments
GELS Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Johan Lust, Erik Eynikel and
Katrin Hauspie. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2003.
HALOT The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Ludwig Koehler,
Walter Baumgartner, and Johann J. Stamm. Translated and edited under
the supervision of Mervyn E. J. Richardson. 4 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1994-
1999.
HDR Harvard Dissertations in Religion
HTR Harvard Theological Review
Int Interpretation
JANER Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions
JANES Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society

JATS Journal of the Adventist Theological Society
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JBT Jahrbüch für biblische Theologie
JDT Journal of Dispensational Theology
JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
JHS Journal of Hellenic Studies

JR Journal of Religion
ix
JRAS Journal of Royal Asiatic Society
JRS Journal of Ritual Studies
JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament
JSNTSup Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series
JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series
JTC Journal for Theology and the Church
JTS Journal of Theological Studies
LCL Loeb Classical Library

List Listening: Journal of Religion and Culture
MSJ The Master’s Seminary Journal
NCBC New Century Bible Commentary
NCE New Catholic Encyclopedia
Neot Neotestamentica
NHL Nag Hammadi Library in English. Edited by James M.

Robinson.Translated by James Brashler, Peter A. Dirkse, and Douglas M.
Parrott. San Francisco: Harper& Row, 1988.
NICNT New International Commentary on the New Testament
NIDNTT New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Edited by

Colin Brown. 4 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975-1978.
NovT Novum Testamentum

NPNF Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers
NTS New Testament Studies
Nu Numen
OLA Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta
OTP Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. 2 vols.

NewYork: Doubleday, 1983, 1985.
PG Patrologia Graeca [= Patrologiae Cursus Completus: Series Graeca].

Edited by Jacques-Paul Migne. 162 vols. Paris, 1857-1886.
x
PGM Papyri Graecae Magicae: Die griechischen Zauberpapyri. Edited by Karl
Preisendanz. 2nd ed. Stuttgart: Teubner, 1973-1974.
PL Patrologia Latina [= Patrologiae Cursus Completus: Series Latina]. Edited

by Jacques-Paul Migne. 217 vols. Paris, 1844-1864.
PRSt Perspectives in Religious Studies
RA Revue d'assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale
RBB Rivista biblica brasileira
ResQ Restoration Quarterly
RevExp Review & Expositor
RR Reformed Review
SAOC Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilizations
SBB Stuttgarter Biblische Beiträge
SBLSP Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers
Semeia Semeia
SEÅ Svensk exegetisk årsbok
ScrB Scripture Bulletin
SNTSMS Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series
Sobornost Sobornost
StudBib Studia Biblica
TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by Gerhard Kittel

and Gerhard Friedrich. Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. 10 vols.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964-1976.
TDOT Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G. Johannes

Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren. Translated by John T. Willis et al. 8
vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974-2006.
TJ Trinity Journal
TLNT Theological Lexicon of the New Testament. Ceslas Spicq. Translated and
edited by James D. Ernest. 3 vols. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994.
TLOT Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament. Edited by Ernst Jenni, with
assistance from Claus Westermann. Translated by Mark E. Biddle. 3 vols.
Peabody, MA:Hendrickson, 1997.
TNTC Tyndale New Testament Commentaries

xi
TSK Theologische Studien und Kritiken
TynBul Tyndale Bulletin
VC Vigiliae Christianae
WBC Word Biblical Commentary
WTJ Westminster Theological Journal
WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen um Neuen Testament
YNER Yale Near Eastern Researches
ZA Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie
xii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Prima facea, glory to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit—these are the same
words I quoted from Divine Comedy by Dante when I received an award from my school
back in 1985. At that time, I was an atheistic middle school student and could not
comprehend the meaning of the quote at all, but somehow these words of Dante made a
deep impression on me upon receiving my award. Thirty years later, I still cannot find
any better words to express my gratitude to my God.
It would be impossible to complete this dissertation without the love and care of
many people who served as God-appointed angels to me along the way. First of all, I
would like to thank the three members of my dissertation committee who have made
invaluable contributions to my dissertation. My deepest gratitude goes to my adviser and
mentor, Dr. Jon Paulien, for his fatherly support, encouragement, guidance, and insights,
and above all his readiness to help and patient endurance despite my ignorance and
tardiness. The same gratitude goes to the other members of my committee, Dr. Richard
Choi and Dr. Roy Gane, for their support and insights, especially their careful reading
and patient editing of my drafts in order to improve this dissertation. It was a privilege for
me to sit at their feet, and to learn from the three of them, not only in terms of biblical
knowledge but also in my Christian walk. The writing process they have guided me
through turned out to be not just an academic exercise but also a journey to know God
better. I wish to thank Dr. Teresa Reeve, the fourth reader for her willingness to help in
the defense of this dissertation.
xiii
My deep gratitude also goes to Prof. Terry Robertson and Dr. John Matthews who
taught me how to write a dissertation, and who walked me through the very first stage of
dissertation writing, the proposal.
Special gratitude goes to all who have helped me financially during my studies,
including my American parents, John and Blanette Hanson, Dr. Richard Liu and his wife
Hannah Liu, Professor Zhan-Yue Zhao, and his wife Ye-Hong Pan, the Ph.D/Th.D
financial committee led first by Dr. Randall Younker, later by Dr. Roy Gane, and recently
by Dr. Tom Shepherd, the Chan Shun Scholarship Foundation, the North American San
Yu Alumni Association (NASYAA) scholarship, Time for Equality in Adventist Ministry
(TEAM) scholarship, the Swallen Missionary Scholarship, the Woman’s Ministry
scholarship offered by the Northern Asia Pacific Division, the Women’s Advisory
Scholarship offered by the Andrews University Woman’s Scholarship Committee, and
the named scholarships offered by the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary of
Andrews University.
Special thanks to the late Dr. Leona Running and brother Jonathan Stefanović for
their professional help in editing this dissertation and making it readable. My deepest
gratitude goes to Dr. Nancy Vyhmeister, the God-sent angel to me, whose self-sacrificial
help gave this dissertation a final golden touch, and whose motherly love carried me
through the last days of my writing project.
I am also grateful to the staff of the James White Library at Andrews University,
in particular the interlibrary loan office, for their help in my bibliographical research.
I must also thank my teachers and mentors Dr. Peter Swanson, Dr. Zdravko
Stefanović and his wife Bozana Stefanović for providing me with constant pastoral care
and counseling, and who walked me through my lonely years of studying overseas.
Special thanks also goes to the church board members of the Seventh-day
Adventist Chaoyang Church in Beijing, China, who generously granted me time to leave
my work as the senior pastor, and to come back to school to finalize my dissertation.
xiv
Last but not least, my gratitude goes to my dear husband, who has always
supported me with endless patience and unconditional love without any complaint, and
has taken upon himself solely the dual responsibility of both parents to take care of our
son for many years. I must profoundly apologize to my 11-year old son for my absence
during the early years of his life when he needed me most. May God make up what I
neglected in providing for my family.
There are still many who are not named but have extended their helping hands to
me and made this dissertation possible. May God remember their good deeds and
continue to bless them.
To God be the glory!
xv
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Background
In his book, New Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors,
Gordon Fee defines exegesis:
In a consciously limited sense to refer to the historical investigation into the meaning
of the biblical text. Exegesis, therefore, answers the question, What did the biblical
author mean? It has to do both with what he said (the content itself) and why he said
it at any given point (the literary context). Furthermore, exegesis is primarily
concerned with intentionality: What did the author intend his original readers to
understand?1
With this definition in mind, a survey of pertinent literature revealed that much exegetical
study has been done on the two beasts, namely, “the beast rising out of the sea” (the sea
beast, Rev 13:1), and the “beast that rose out of the earth” (the land beast, Rev 13:11),2
1
Gordon D. Fee, New Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors
(Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993), 27, italics his.
2
For a study on the sea beast, see J. Massyngberde Ford, Revelation, AB (Garden
City, NY: Doubleday, 1975), 220-222; David E. Aune: Revelation 6-16, WBC 52b
(Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1998), 733; G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation:
A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 616. See also Adela
Yarbro Collins, “Vilification and Self-definition in the Book of Revelation,” HTR 79
(1986): 308-320. For a study on the land beast, see Steven J. Friesen, “The Beast from the
Land: Revelation 13:11-18 and Social Setting,” in Reading the Book of Revelation: A
Resource for Students, ed. David L. Barr (Atlanta: SBL, 2003), 49-64; Jean-Pierre Ruiz,
“Taking a Stand on the Sand of the Seashore,” in Reading the Book of Revelation: A
Resource for Students, ed. David L. Barr (Atlanta: SBL, 2003), 131,132. Ruiz also
pointed out that the “specific historical referent” of the land beast is still a matter of
debate. Aune has a list of interpretations by various commentators on the identity of the
land beast: It may be “the eschatological false prophet . . . a specific contemporary
individual or institution that promotes the imperial cult, e.g., the Roman emperor himself
. . . , Roman provincial governors . . . , the Greco-Roman priesthood, the provincial
imperial priesthood . . . , the province of Asia in its double aspect of civil and religious
1
but little attention has been paid to an exegesis of hē eikōn tou thēriou (the image of the
beast, Rev 13:14, 15). Scholars have not done “the historical investigation into the
meaning”3 of the image of the beast.
The settled opinion of mainstream New Testament scholarly studies of Revelation
13 is that the chapter is “a sarcastic, visionary description of worship of the Roman
emperors in western Asia Minor,”4 which concludes that the imperial cult, “with its
colossal statue, is what lies behind.”5 Thus mainstream scholarship identifies the image of
the beast as “a cult image in honor of the emperor.”6 The act of giving “breath to the
image of the beast” (Rev 13:15) by the land beast, which enables the image to speak, is
administration, the proconsul and the commune . . . , a more general conception of

propaganda for the imperial cult . . . , the koinon of Asia as represented by priests of the
imperial cult . . . , or all those individuals and institutions that actively promote the
imperial cult.” Aune himself favors the imperial priesthood as the land beast. See Aune,
Revelation 6-16, 756.
3
Fee, New Testament Exegesis, 27.
4
Steven J. Friesen, “Ephesus: Key to Vision in Revelation,” BAR 19/3 (1993): 26.
5
S. R. F. Price, Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor (New
York: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 198; see also Alan S. Bandy, “Persecution and
the Purpose of Revelation with Reference to Roman Jurisprudence,” BBR 23 (2013): 377-
398; Steven J. Friesen, “Myth and Symbolic Resistance in Revelation 13,” JBL 123
(2004): 281-313; Craig R. Koester, “Revelation’s Visionary Challenge to Ordinary
Empire,” Interpretation 63 (2009): 5; Richard Warren Johnson, “Confronting the Beast:
The Imperial Cult and the Book of Revelation,” in Essays on Revelation: Appropriating
Yesterday’s Apocalypse in Today’s World, ed. Gerald L. Stevens (Eugene, OR: Wipf &
Stock, 2010), 130-144; Jeff Wheeldon, “Angels and Supervillains: Apocalyptic
Literature Reborn as Graphic Novel,” Didaskalia 23 (2012): 39. One recent book holding
this view is written by Ryan Leif Hansen, see Ryan Leif Hansen, Silence and Praise:
Rhetorical Cosmology and Political Theology in the Book of Revelation (Minneapolis,
MN: Fortress Press, 2014), especially his chapter 2, “The War of Worldcraft: John’s
Cosmic Rhetoric Against Roman Imperial Cult Discourse,” 49-67.
6
Aune, Revelation 6-16, 761, 762. See also Grant R. Osborne, Baker Exegetical
Commentary on the New Testament: Revelation (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002),
514; Ford, Revelation, 214; Beale, The Book of Revelation, 680; Simon J. Kistemaker,
New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids: Baker
Books, 2001), 388; Gerhard Kittel, “eikōn,” TDNT 2:388.
2
merely part of the “actual phenomena in the imperial cult.”7 Apparently, to mainstream
scholars, this first century literal application of the image of the beast is the accepted
interpretation.
Needless to say, the first century Roman empire serves as a socio-religious
background for Revelation 13, but scholars, in recent years, have begun to ponder if it is
safe “to read specific historical references from the text of Rev 13.” By that, they mean
that “Most features in Rev 13 cannot be identified with what is known of Rome or
imperial policy of the late first century C.E.”8 Leonard Thompson noticed that there was
no sound historical evidence to show that there ever was a universal imperial decree on
pain of death, to worship the Roman emperor at the end of the first century.9 Thompson
7
Steven J. Scherrer, “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 (1984): 600; see also
Gordon D. Fee, Revelation, New Covenant Commentary Series 18 (Eugene, OR: Cascade
Books, 2011), 186; Rebecca Skaggs and Priscilla C. Benham, Revelation, Pentecostal
Commentary Series, ed. John Christopher Thomas (Dorchester: Dorset Press, 2009), 141.
Mitchell Reddish mentions that “Hippolytus (AD 170-236), in The Refutation of All
Heresies (8.28-42), explained in detail how several of the deceptions practiced by
sorcerers and religious figures were carried out. He explained, for instance, how thunder
was produced, or the sensation of an earthquake was created, or a skull was made to
speak. The specific example of trickery that John mentions, a speaking statue, is
mentioned in several ancient sources. Through ventriloquism, through a person hiding in
a hollow statue, or through some mechanical device, statues could appear animated and
be made to talk.” See Mitchell G. Reddish, Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary:
Revelation (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys Publishing, 2001), 259; William Barclay also
comments: “In all ancient religions the priests knew how to produce signs and wonders;
they knew well how to produce the effect of a speaking image. Pharaoh had had his
magicians in the time of Moses, and the [Roman] imperial priesthood had its experts in
conjuring tricks and ventriloquism and the like.” William Barclay, The Revelation of
John. Translated with an Introduction and Interpretation by William Barclay. 2 vols.
(Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976), 2:98.
8
Antoninus King Wai Siew, The War Between the Two Beasts and the Two
Witnesses: A Chiastic Reading of Revelation 11.1-14.5 (New York: T & T Clark, 2005),
253.
See Leonard L. Thompson, “A Sociological Analysis of Tribulation in the 中

9
Apocalypse of John,” Semeia 36 (1986): 8-159.
3
was the first one to challenge the conventional view that there was empire wide
persecution against the Christians and that it was especially severe in Asia Minor in John
the Revelator’s time; what the Christians in Asia Minor faced was mainly benign
assimilation instead of persecution.10 His view has been adopted by most scholars.11
A few scholars and a number of popular writers are also not satisfied with a mere
first century literal understanding of the image. They have done some innovative work by
arguing for a symbolic application of the word “image.” Among these, G. K. Beale,
having identified the image of the beast as the image of the Caesar, states that due to the
“transtemporal” nature of Revelation 13, the “image” of the Beast “transcends narrow
reference only to an idol of Caesar and includes any substitute for the truth of God in any
age.”12 In agreement with Beale, S. S. Smalley also comments: “The image in the present
context refers not simply to the likeness of an individual Roman emperor, who claimed
divine status (see on 13:1), or even to the first century demand for submission to the
imperial powers.”13 Among popular writers, J. T. Hinds states, “As the two beasts must
be taken symbolically, it is probable that ‘image’ should be so applied.”14 He considers
10
Leonard L. Thompson, The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 95-115.
11
Cf. Siew, The War Between the Two Beasts, 254-255, footnote 121; J. A. T.
Robinson, Redating The New Testament (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976), 233, note 64.
12
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 711.
13
Stephen S. Smalley, The Revelation to John: A Commentary on the Greek Text
of the Apocalypse (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2005), 348.
14
John T. Hinds, A Commentary on the Book of Revelation (Nashville: Gospel
Advocate Company, 1976), 195. Alexander McLeod makes a similar comment: “In the
vision of John the Divine, we are not to consider one part of the representation as literal,
while the other part of the hieroglyphic is understood metaphorically: and as the beast is
not to be understood literally, the image is neither a picture nor a statue.” See Alexander
McLeod, Lectures upon the Principal Prophecies of the Revelation (New York: Whiting
and Watson, 1814), 432, italics his.
4
the image to be “the close and cordial union between church and state.”15 From this
symbolic view of the image two major historical applications emerge. One applies it to
the papacy.16 Another, based upon the eschatological overtone of Revelation 13,17
especially the parallels between Revelation 13 and Daniel 7 and 8,18 argues: “No matter
what applications Christians of the first century . . . may have seen in Revelation 13,”19
the fulfillment of the prophecy in Revelation 13 goes further than the first century CE.20
15
Hinds, A Commentary, 195. See also Desmond Ford, A Commentary on the
Book of Revelation (Newcastle, CA: Desmond Ford Publications, 1982), 575; B. W.
Johnson, A Vision of the Ages or Lectures on the Apocalypse: A Complete View of the
Book of Revelation (St. Louis, MO: Christian Board of Publication, 1881), 268; Ranko
Stefanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book of Revelation, 2nd ed.
(Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2009), 431.
16
Hinds, A Commentary, 195. See also Henry E. Jacobs, ed., The Lutheran
Commentary: A Plain Exposition of the Holy Scripture of the New Testament (New York:
The Christian Literature, 1898), 184.
17
Several scholars have noticed that Revelation 13 echoes Synoptic eschatological
discourses, although they do not argue for a future end time application of the text. For
example, Louis A. Vos demonstrates that Revevelation 13 parallels Matt 24:24 on three
accounts: 1) the appearance of two similarly antagonists: the pseudo-messianic and
pseudo-prophetic figures who deceive people on earth; 2) the deception of those that
dwell on the earth—even the elect, if possible; 3) the utilization of “great signs” to
achieve this goal of deception. See Louis A. Vos, The Synoptic Traditions in the
Apocalypse (Kampen: J. H. Kok, 1965), 134. See also G. K. Beale, “The Use of Daniel in
the Synoptic Eschatological Discourse and in the Book of Revelation,” in Gospel
Perspectives: The Jesus Tradition Outside the Gospel V, ed. David Wenham (Sheffield:
JSOT, 1980), 142; David Wenham, The Rediscovery of Jesus’ Eschatological Discourse
(Sheffield: JSOT, 1984), 205-206, 212-213.
18
Beale points out that “the book of Revelation develops the Danielic ‘midrash’ of
the synoptic eschatological discourse.” He also comments: “Revelation 13 is modeled
broadly on Daniel.” See Beale, “The Use of Daniel,” 129, 142.
19
William G. Johnsson, “The Saints’ End-Time Victory over the Forces of Evil,”
in Symposium on Revelation, Book 2: Exegetical and General Studies, DARCOM 7, ed.
Frank B. Holbrook (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, 1992), 22.
20
Ibid., 22-27; see also Stefanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 418, 419.
5
This view identifies the image of the beast as “an institution and procedures which will
duplicate the form and behavior of the beast power in other ages” at the end time.21
Adela Yarbro Collins points out: “The first stage or moment of the interpretation of
religious texts should focus on the author and the text. . . . The goal of this stage . . . is . . .
to understand and explain the text within its original context. It is in this process that the
meaning of the text is discerned.”22 Jon Paulien emphasizes that:
God meets people where they are. God dealt with John where he was. In the process
he used some of the live symbols of his day. The book is set in the Asia Minor of the
first century and makes the most sense in that context. . . . The book of Revelation
reflected things going on in the real world of Asia Minor. Revelation was not
isolated from its environment, but was written in the language of that time and
place.23
Exegetical studies of the image of the beast with a focus on analyzing the language
expression within the relevant culture and its literary context, rather than jumping quickly
to conclusions without investigating the precise force of the language are the very
processes that current mainstream and popular studies on Revelation 13 lack in their
treatment of the image of the beast.
Problem
The fundamental unsolved problem this study addresses is: What did the author of
Revelation mean by the expression “the image of the beast”? In other words, what did the
21
D. Ford, Crisis, 575; Stefanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 431. Johnsson
acknowledges that the “full understanding of the fulfillment of this prophecy of the land
monster still awaits us. . . . Significant features of the second monster’s deceptions are
not yet clear, . . . especially the miracles that cause many to be led astray, and the ‘image’
to the sea monster.” See Johnsson, “The Saints’ End-Time Victory,” 29.
22
A. Y. Collins, Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian
Apocalypticism (New York: E. J. Brill, 1996), 2.
23
Jon Paulien, The Deep Things of God (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald,
2004), 100, italics his.
6
author intend his original first century Greco-Roman readers to understand about the
image of the beast? What did the phrase “the image of the beast” possibly symbolize
within its first century Greco-Roman cultic context? What does this phrase imply within
the literary context of the book of Revelation? What is the relationship between the image
of the beast and other entities found in the book of Revelation?
Purpose
The purpose of this research was threefold. The first was to discover the first
century Greco-Roman cultural backgrounds of the phrase “the image of the beast” in Rev
13:14, 15. The second was to investigate the intended meaning of the image of the beast
within its literary context. The third, and final, purpose was to identify the relationship
between the image of the beast and a major entity prominent in the latter half of the book
of Revelation, i.e., Babylon the Great.
Justification
In my study, based upon Fee’s definition of exegesis, I reopened the question
which mainstream scholarship has unfairly closed. A survey of the history of
interpretation of “the image of the beast” showed the scarcity of available materials on
this topic. Throughout the centuries, commentators have neglected discussing this subject
let alone applying it to in depth exegetical studies. Almost all the commentators who did
discuss the image of the beast focused their discussions on the stage of the identification
of the symbol, without going through what Fee defines as the process of exegesis, or
what Collins calls the first stage of dealing with the original meaning of the text. Much
needs to be explored in terms of exegetical study of the image of the beast, regardless of
whether it is to be understood literally or symbolically. First, although scholars talk about
Roman emperor worship as the cultic background of Revelation 13, the rich meaning
implied by the term “image” against this cultic background is not explored. In other
words, scholars have neglected to inspect how the language of Revelation 13, particularly
7
Rev 13:14, 15, reflects the cultic culture of its time, and what kind of common place
associations of the word “image” were aroused when a first century Greco-Roman
audience heard it spoken in a cultic setting.
Second, in Revelation 13, there are five main images: the dragon, the sea beast,
the land beast, the image of the beast, and the mark of the beast. Among these, only the
dragon has a fairly clear identity, while the other four remain ambiguous, most of them
are first time players in the book of Revelation. There must be some reason why John
introduces these new protagonists at this point in his writing. In short, the literary context
of the image of the beast needs to be explored.
Perhaps the reason why scholars in general have paid little attention to the
exegesis of the image of the beast is because of their assessment that it is of minor
importance. But to say that the image of the beast is of minor importance does not seem
justified. First, scholars generally acknowledge the Old Testament allusions in Rev 13:14,
15.24 The very existence of these allusions indicates that John has taken care to craft the
text in a way that begs for a deeper understanding25 of the image of the beast. Second,
24
Aune points out that “the author [John] has clearly modeled vv 14-15 [of
Revelation 13] on Dan 3:4, where Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon set up a golden
image and ordered that all peoples, nations, and languages worship the image on pain of
death.” See Aune, Revelation 6-16, 761. Beale also mentions Daniel 7 as a background
for Revelation 13. See Beale, The Book of Revelation, 680.
25
The author of Revelation 13 gives his reader a hint of a deeper understanding of
this image. For example, the language of breathing into the image in Rev 13:15 clearly
alludes to the creation of Adam in Genesis 2, making it one of the contexts for
understanding this image. Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Gen 2:7 offers an even a closer
parallel to Rev. 13:15, which reads: "And he breathed into his nostrils the breath of life,
and the breath became in the body of Adam a spirit capable of speech." See Michael
Maher, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: Genesis: Translated, with Introduction and Notes. The
Aramaic Bible: The Targums 18 (Collegeville, MN: Michael Glazier, 1992), 22. Just as
God breathed into Adam’s nostrils, and Adam as a living being began to speak, function,
carry out God’s orders, and exercise his dominion on earth on behalf of God, so the land
beast mimics the Creator God, also breathes into its image, and gets the same result as the
image begins to speak and to function. Thus, the allusion to Genesis 2 provides another
possibility of understanding the image as a living entity besides the initial possibility of
8
Gerhard Kittel notices the importance of the image of the beast. For him, it “is one of the
great themes in the second half of Rev. (13:14f.; 14:9, 11; 15:2; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4).”26
His comment also raises two questions. One, what exactly is the theme of the image of
the beast? Two, since the image of the beast appears in most chapters of the second half
of the book of Revelation, what is the relationship between this theme and other major
themes found in the second half of the book? These questions have not been asked or
answered by the mainstream scholars before they closed the issue of the image of the
beast. Part of my study dealt with these questions, as I was exploring the problem of the
intended meanings of the image of the beast in terms of and exegetical study as defined
by Fee.
Scope and Delimitations
This study dealt with exegetical issues as defined by Fee, namely, the first century
Greco-Roman understanding of what the expression “the image of the beast” meant as
intended by the author of Revelation.27 The study does not focus on the historical
applications of the original meaning of the text.
being a static cultic image, and makes the image of the beast a third earthly agent of the
dragon in Revelation 13.
26
Kittel, TDNT 2:388, italics mine.
27
This does not necessarily imply that the interpretation of pertinent texts will be
basically preterist, just as a first century understanding of the meaning implied by the
term “trumpet” in Revelation does not presuppose a preterist interpretation of the
pertinent texts as demonstrated in Jon Paulien’s dissertation on Revelation’s trumpets,
which has been well recognized by mainstream scholarship and cited by some
mainstream scholars like Beale and Beate Kowalski in their scholarly works. His study
on the trumpets starts with a first century historical understanding of the imagery, yet
reaches a conclusion which goes beyond a preterist interpretation. For details read
through Jon Paulien, Decoding Revelation’s Trumpets: Literary Allusions and the
Interpretation of Revelation 8:7-12, AUSDS 11 (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews
University Press, 1987), esp. 352-362 under the subtitle “The Time Span of the
Trumpets.” For Beale’s citations on Paulien, see Beale, The Book of Revelation, 64, 76,
77, 78, 85, 468, 472, 475, 477, 581, 482, 483, 486, 488, 841; For Kowalski’s citations on
9
Revelation 13:14, 15, Revelation 14, 15, 16, 19, and 20 were the main texts of the
study. In these the image of the beast occurs explicitly. Because of Kittel’s observation
that the image of the beast is “one of the great themes in the second half of
Rev[elation],”28 chapters 17 and 18, in which the term does not occur at all were also
included in the study with the hope that something hidden about the image of the beast
could be revealed through careful exegetical study. Other related texts in the book of
Revelation and the rest of the Bible were referred to and studied as needed.
Methodology
This study is exegetical. Chapter 2 provides a survey of the history of
interpretation of the image of the beast in Rev 13:14, 15. A review of the current
scholarly treatment of this subject is included at the end.
Chapter 3 focuses on an exegetical analysis of hē eikōn tou thēriou (the image of
the beast) in Rev 13:14, 15 by following three steps: First, there is a survey of the
meanings of the Greek terms eikōn (image) and thērion (beast) in the LXX and Second
Temple Jewish literature, particularly Philo and Josephus. Greco-Roman literature
including the Greek New Testament, are also consulted. The meanings of the
Hebrew/Aramaic equivalents of eikōn which are tselem, semel, pesel and demûth, and the
Hebrew equivalents of thērion which are chāyāh and behemah, are also included in the
Old Testament section. Second, there is a study of the literary context of “the image of
the beast” in Rev 13:14, 15. Allusions in Rev 13:14, 15 referring to both the Old and New
Paulien, see Beate Kowalski, Die Rezeption des Propheten Ezechiel in der Offenbarung
des Johannes, SBB 52 (Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2004), 12, 53, 57, 58,
72.
28
Kittel, TDNT 2:388.
10
Testaments are studied, i.e., Genesis 2; Daniel 3; Acts 2.29 Third, there is a study on the
cultural backgrounds of “the image of the beast,” focusing on the cultic backgrounds and
echoes of the cultic backgrounds of the Ancient Near East (ANE)30 and the Greco-Roman
World. This sheds light on the language employed by John in narrating the events
surrounding the image of the beast in Revelation 13. Summaries and interpretive
conclusions are provided at the end of the chapter regarding the proposed meaning of
“the image of the beast.”
Chapters 4-6 study the image of the beast in the literary context of the latter half
of the book of Revelation. This includes three steps: first, Chapter 4 studies the image of
the beast in Revelation 14, 15, and 16; second, Chapter 5 studies the image of the beast in
Revelation 19 and 20; and third, Chapter 6 studies the image of the beast in Revelation 17
29
In referring to Acts 2, I mean either the story or the text of the outpouring of the
Holy Spirit on the disciples as recorded in that chapter. While the event was known when
John wrote Revelation, he may not have had access to the book of Acts. But since John
was writing in the 90s AD, Acts may have been available already.
30
The relevance of the ANE backgrounds to this study may be questioned. Yet,
taking into consideration the numerous allusions to the Old Testament texts in the book
of Revelation, it is plausible to bring the ANE backgrounds into the text of Revelation via
the Old Testament language. Also the successful “intrusion” of Eastern religions into the
West Roman Empire in the time of Jesus and the Apostles and the religious assimilation
and syncretism characteristic of first century Roman religion serves as another reason to
include the study on the ANE backgrounds in the study. Robert Turcan observes that the
spread of Egyptian, Syrian and Anatolian cults “in Rome and the Roman West is borne
out by archaeology, epigraphy and literary tradition.” See Robert Turcan, The Cult of the
Roman Empire, trans. Antonia Nevill (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997), 3. Cf. Ruggiero
Stefanini, “The Anatolian Origin and Pre-History of Latin Missa ‘Mass’,” AGI 68 (1983):
23-49. Robert Grant also mentions that Caracalla, the Roman Emperor, “took part in the
Egyptian rites and went so far as to wear the jackal’s head of Anubis. . . . the emperor
himself acknowledged the power of the gods of Egypt. The rites once Egyptian had
become Roman, and Rome, as Ammianus Marcellinus later says, had become ‘the temple
of the whole world.’ The Egyptian religion, along with other foreign cults, had become
the state religion of the empire.” See Robert M. Grant, The Sword and the Cross (New
York: MacMillan, 1955), 108. For the intrusion of the eastern religion, the religious
assimilation and syncretism, see A. D. Nock, Conversion: The Old and the New in
Religion from Alexander the Great to Augustine of Hippo (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1961), 66-137.
11
and 18 in which the term does not occur. Summaries and conclusions are given at the end
of each chapter; these identify the image of the beast as Babylon the Great.
Chapter 7 summarizes and concludes the whole study. There is also a brief
evaluation of the two current understandings of the image of the beast by mainstream
scholars and more popular writers.
12
CHAPTER 2
HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION OF
“THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST”
Introduction
The history of the interpretation of the book of Revelation began in the second
century.1 Since then, some scholars have observed that more than any other chapters in
the book, Revelation 13 has captured the attention of entire Christian generations.2
However, the majority of the discussions are centered around the first beast, which, for
more than ten centuries, was unanimously interpreted as one of the representations of the
antichrist.3 In these discussions, the image of the beast is rarely touched upon and is most
1
Arthur William Wainwright, Mysterious Apocalypse: Interpreting the Book of
Revelation (Nashville: Abingdon, 1993), 21.
2
Hanns Lilje, The Last Book of the Bible: The Meaning of the Revelation of St.
John (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg, 1957), 184.
3
The concept of the antichrist could be viewed as the Christian manifestation of
the universal religious conceptualization of evil in history, which has a long sequence of
traditions that goes back to early antiquity. The systematic study on the subject of the
antichrist legend arises from the religionsgeschichtliche (History-of-Religion) enterprise.
Wilhelm Bousset (1865-1920) was among the first to study this subject from the view
point of religionsgeschichtliche Schule. In his book on the antichrist legend, he provides
studies on the ANE mythological antecedents of these biblical ideas, and also analyzes
Jewish sources on this subject. For discussions on extrabiblical sources of the antichrist
legend see Wilhelm Bousset, Die Offenbarung Johannis (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1966); for the English translation see Wilhelm Bousset, The Antichrist Legend:
A Chapter in Christian and Jewish Folklore, trans. A. H. Keane (Atlanta: Scholars Press,
1999). Hermann Gunkel’s book is another classic on the origin of antichrist legend, see
Hermann Gunkel, Schöpfung und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit. Eine
religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung über Gen 1 und Ap Joh 12 (Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1895); for the English version, see Hermann Gunkel, Creation
and Chaos in the Primeval Era and the Eschaton: A Religio-Historical Study of Genesis
13
often only mentioned in passing, probably due to the popular understanding given to it
from the very beginning, which was that it was the image of the antichrist himself to be
set up in the temple of Jerusalem and to be worshipped as “the only idol.”4 The purpose
of this chapter is to investigate the history of the interpretation of the image of the beast,
and not the beasts, or the antichrist. Therefore, only views which are related to the subject
of the image of the beast and are representative of a certain historical period will be
referred to in this section.
1 and Revelation 12, trans. K. William Whitney (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006). See
also James H. Charlesworth, The Good and Evil Serpent: How a Universal Symbol
Became Christianized, ABRL (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010); Richard
Kenneth Emmerson, Antichrist in the Middle Ages: A Study of Medieval Apocalypticism,
Art, and Literature (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1981); Kevin L. Hughes,
Constructing Antichrist: Paul, Biblical Commentary, and the Development of Doctrine in
the Early Middle Ages (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2005);
Bernard McGinn, Antichrist: Two Thousand Years of the Human Fascination with Evil
(San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1994); Bert Jan Lietaert Peerbolte, “To Worship the
Beast: The Revelation of John and the Imperial Cult in Asia Minor,” in Zwischen den
Reichen: Neues Testament und Römische Herrschaft, eds. Michael Labahn and Jürgen
Zangenberg (Tübingen: A. Francke Verlag, 2002), 239-259; L. J. Lietaert Peerbolte, The
Antecedents of Antichrist: A Traditio-Historical Study of the Earliest Christian Views on
Eschatological Opponents, Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 49, ed.
John J. Collins (New York: Brill, 1996); James L. Ratton, Antichrist: An Historical
Reviews (London: Burns and Oates, 1917); Stephen J. Vicchio, The Legend of the Anti-
Christ: A History (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009).
Emmerson is often quoted by other writers, e.g., Robert C. Fuller, Naming the
Antichrist: The History of an American Obsession (New York: Oxford University Press,
1995), 4, 34; Vicchio, The Legend of the Anti-Christ, 111, 154, 188, 189, 190, 191, 227,
228, 229.
McGinn is also a recognized scholar, especially in the history of post-Hippolytus
antichrist legend. He is quoted by several writers, e.g., David Frankfurter in his
introduction to Bousset’s The Antichrist Legend, see Bousset, The Antichrist Legend, xv-
xvi; Fuller, Naming the Antichrist, 4, 25, 204n; Newsom, Daniel, 275-279, 316;
Zacharias P. Thundy, Millennium: Apocalypse and Antichrist and Old English Monsters
c. 1000 A.D. (Notre Dame: Cross Cultural Publications, 1998), 28, 31, 60, 62-65, 69, 72,
73, 74, 86-88, 90, 156, 191, 192, 200, 205, 215, 218; Vicchio, The Legend of the Anti-
Christ, 108, 111, 112, 151, 155, 187, 188, 189, 230, 264, 266.
4
Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 5.25.1 (ANF 1:553).
14
Needless to say, the subject of this chapter deserves a full dissertation. My main
purpose for investigating the history of interpretation is to provide a general idea of how
this motif has been treated in the past in order to situate this study in relation to others.
My research is done to (1) show how this study is original or builds on works of others,
(2) make this study more understandable to readers who are acquainted with existing
scholarship by showing relationships and counterpoints to that scholarship, and (3)
expose some key problems/issues and offer options/approaches to dealing with them.
Therefore, the description of the history will be brief and general.
The task is fourfold. I will start with the first three centuries, which is the
formational period of the interpretation of the image of the beast. This period is
represented by the views of Ireneaus, Hippolytus, and Victorinus. During this period the
entire antichrist tradition was formed with its more or less complete vitae. In turn, an
understanding of the image of the beast was also fixed, almost in uniformity, for the later
centuries of interpretation. Therefore, emphasis will be given to this period due to its
formative influence on later interpretations. This is followed by a brief survey of the
period from the fourth century to the eleventh century. Most of the discussions on the
image of the beast during this period are repetitions of what was said during the first three
centuries. The only exception is in the West, at the end of the fourth century. Tyconius’s
spiritualized reading of the Apocalypse added some new elements to the antichrist motif.
That, in turn, affected the understanding of the image of the beast.
The reason for putting the eleventh century as a boundary mark is mainly due to
the importance of Joachim of Fiore (c. 1135-1202), whose work served as “a turning
point”5 in the history of apocalyptic interpretations. His understanding of prophecy,
Called “a new departure” by Robert H. Mounce in his work, The Book of

5
Revelation, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 40; Elliott also sees Joachim as a
15
particularly the antichrist, modified the interpretations of the preceding centuries, and
influenced future generations, including the sixteenth century Protestant Reformers. In
turn, the understanding of the image of the beast also changed drastically.
The third period is from the twelfth century6 to the eighteenth century, during
which time the antichrist took on a new interpretation as a result of the impact of Joachim,
and because of that the image of the beast took on new meanings. The fourth period is the
nineteenth century. Finally, in the twentieth century, the antichrist figure retreated into
the background and was barely touched on by mainstream scholars and popular writers.
The first beast in Revelation 13, as well as the image of the beast, underwent further
transformation through the pens of modern exegetes.
The First Three Centuries
According to patristic scholar David Dunbar, there was already “a kind of
‘mainline’ eschatology which may have been quite widespread during the closing
decades of the second century.”7 Thus, from the very beginning, it seems that the church
fathers, somewhat in unison, had already come to a clear cut understanding of the image
of the beast, and had put it into a package with the legendary figure of the antichrist. It
was through the pens of prolific writers such as Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and Victorinus that
a complete profile of the antichrist was developed and made popular.8 The setting up of
divider of the history of interpretation of the Apocalypse. E. B. Elliott, Horae

Apocalypticae, 4 vols. (London: Seeley, Jackson, and Halliday, 1862), 4:382.
6
For the importance of the twelfth century as the initiating period for new
apocalyptic traditions, see McGinn, Antichrist, 114-135.
7
David G. Dunbar, “Hippolytus of Rome and the Eschatological Exegesis of the
Early Church,” WTJ 45 (1983): 339.
8
Ibid.; see also Carol A. Newsom, Daniel: A Commentary, The Old Testament
Library (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2014), 274, 275.
16
the image of the beast was considered simply as one final act of abomination in the
climax of antichrist’s evil career.
Although the word antichristos appears in the New Testament only four times in
its singular form (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 1:7), and once in plural form (1 John 2:18),
the tradition of the antichrist mainly originated from the interpretation of several passages
in the Old and New Testaments. The main passages are Daniel 7 and 11; Matthew 24; 2
Thessalonians 2; and Revelation 11, 13, and 17. These passages created a composite
picture of the antichrist.9 It is understood to be the “little horn” in Daniel 7; also the “son
of perdition” written of by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2, and was represented presently by
the Roman Empire.10 It is also the beast from the bottomless pit in Revelation 11, the two
beasts in Revelation 13, as well as the beast in Revelation 17. My later discussion of
historical sources will show that the early church identified the antichrist as coming from
two different origins which represent the two oppositional entities of the early Christian
church, i.e. the Roman Empire and Judaism.11 So we find that the antichrist is either
Rome, a Roman emperor, or a Jew from the tribe of Dan. He will live a life in parody to
Christ’s temporal experience, and through his miraculous workings he will draw the Jews
to follow him as their false Messiah, and will rule with tyranny for three years and six
months, during which time he will set up an “abomination of desolation” in the temple of
9
It would be anachronistic to speak of an antichrist tradition during the Second
Temple Period, but the prehistory of the antichrist can be found in the apocalyptic
traditions of Second Temple Judaism. For details see Bousset, The Antichrist Legend, 95-
117.
10
Tertullian seems to be the first recorded writer with that understanding. He even
called for prayers to prolong the reign of the Roman Empire to allow more conversions to
Christianity to happen before the antichrist came. See Tertullian, Apologeticum 32 (CSEL
69:81).
11
Thundy, Millennium, 73.
17
Jerusalem and force everyone to worship it as God. But the antichrist will be destroyed
by the fire proceeding from the mouth of Christ at his second coming. Just as Jesus Christ
was prefigured throughout the Old Testament, numerous biblical characters served as
archetypes for the antichrist, such as Cain, Judas Iscariot, and Simon Magus.
Besides the biblical sources, the apocryphal Ascension of Isaiah (ca. 80 – 90), the
Sibylline Oracles,12 the Ethiopic Apocalypse of Peter (ca. 100), Epistle of Barnabas (ca.
130 – 140) were also important, albeit noncanonical, sources contributing to the antichrist
tradition.13 Christian writers also identified typological antecedents of the end time
antichrist from history. Most typical were Antiochus Epiphanes IV, the Seleucid king
from 175 to 164 B.C.E, and the Roman Emperor Nero. As for the coming of the antichrist,
writers of the first four centuries saw it as imminent. From the prophecy of Daniel 7, they
concluded that the antichrist would appear at the end of the Roman Empire, when it
would be divided into ten clashing kingdoms.
After this general introduction of the antichrist tradition, it is necessary to focus
on individual writers who laid the foundation for the above interpretation. These are
Irenaeus of Lyon, Hippolytus, and Victorinus.
Irenaeus
Irenaeus of Lyon (d. 202) was the first writer whose works are still available to
scholars to develop such a more or less complete description of the antichrist. His work
was mainly a polemic against the Gnostics, who denied both biblical salvation history
12
Christian revisions are found in Books I, II, and V while Books VI, VII, and
most of Book VIII are purely Christian.
13
For discussions on the Ascension of Isaiah, see L. J. L. Peerbolte, The
Antecedents of Antichrist, 194-205; for the Sibylline Oracles, see ibid., 326-339; for Acts
of Peter, see ibid., 56-61; for Epistle of Barnabas, see ibid., 184-193.
18
and biblical prophecies. His Magnum Opus is Adversus Haereses. In the fifth book,
Irenaeus pronounces the doom of the Gnostic heretics by presenting an outline of the last-
day events as prophesied by Daniel and the Apostle John. In this book he gave a detailed
account of the antichrist, where the earliest extant interpretation of the image of the beast
is found.
In his discussion, Irenaeus identifies the first beast as one manifestation of the
antichrist,14 who only appears in the future after the division of the kingdom of Rome into
ten. When the ten kings are reigning, the antichrist will come to claim his own kingdom
for himself.15 As for the number 666, Irenaeus points out that Lateinos has this number,
and it is “very probably” a solution.16 He then comments that Lateinos is the name of the
last kingdom seen by Daniel, the current ruler, namely, the Latins.17 Therefore, in a subtle
way, Irenaeus identifies the first beast, the antichrist, as Rome.
Based upon his exegesis of Jeremiah 8:16, Irenaeus also identifies the antichrist as
a Jew, born from the tribe of Dan.18 For that reason, the tribe of Dan is absent from the
list of the saved in Revelation 7. According to Irenaeus, this antichrist is, first of all, a
14
Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 5.29.2 (ANF 1:558).
15
Ibid., 5.30.2 (ANF 1:559).
16
Ibid., 5.30.3 (ANF 1:559)
17
Ibid.
18
Ibid., 5.30.2 (ANF 1:559). McGinn considers that Irenaeus depended on early
Jewish and Christian apocalyptic traditions for his claim that the antichrist was to be born
a Jew, specifically from the tribe of Dan. See McGinn, Antichrist, 59. For details on
antichrist born from the tribe of Dan, see Bousset, The Antichrist Legend, 171-174. This
notion of the Jewish Danite origin of the antichrist is followed and developed by most of
the later commentators. See Hippolytus, De Antichristo 24 (CSCO 264:60); Rufinus of
Aquileia, De Benedictionibus Patriarcharum 2.15 (CCSL 20:213); Augustine,
Quaestionum in Heptateuchum 6.22 (CCSL33:329).
19
man.19 He is the “little horn” of Daniel 7,20 “the Man of Sin” mentioned by Paul in 2
Thessalonians 2,21 and the future eighth king in Revelation 17, who “‘was, and is not, and
shall ascend out of the Abyss, and goes into perdition.’”22 Based on Daniel 7 and
Revelation 13, Irenaeus states that just before the Lord’s coming from heaven in the
clouds, the antichrist will “reign over the earth . . . for three years and six months,”23 and
shall set himself in the temple of Jerusalem.24 He also “is lifted up above all that is called
God. . . . and . . . will endeavor in a tyrannical manner to set himself forth as God.”25
With regard to the second beast in Revelation 13, Irenaeus has only one comment.
He identifies it as the first beast’s “armor-bearer, whom he [John] also terms a False
Prophet.”26
Irenaeus does not engage in any explicit discussions on the image of the beast. He
seems to hint that it is the idol image of the antichrist, because he points out that the
image set up by Nebuchadnezzar in Dan 3 prefigures the coming of the antichrist as a
19
Ibid., 5.28.2 (ANF 1:557). According to McGinn, Irenaeus’s “sense of the
reality of God taking on flesh in Jesus led him to emphasize that antichrist must be a
single human still to come, not a present or future collectivity.” See McGinn, Antichrist,
60.
20
Ibid., 5.25.3 (ANF 1:553, 554).
21
Ibid.
22
Ibid., 5.30.4 (ANF 1:560).
23
Ibid.
24
Irenaeus holds that “the temple of God” mentioned by Paul in 2 Thessalonians is
the temple in Jerusalem. See ibid., 5.25.2 (ANF 1:553). According to Irenaeus, this is
“the abomination of desolation, which has been spoken of by Daniel the prophet.”
25
Ibid., 5.25.1 (ANF 1:553).
26
Ibid., 5.28.2 (ANF 1:557).
20
man, decreeing himself to be worshipped by all men.27 It seems that by the time of
Irenaeus, an understanding of the image of the beast had already been fixed and was
commonly understood. Most probably that was why Irenaeus did not bother to give an
explicit explanation for the image as he did for the antichrist. He may have simply
assumed that his readers knew what the image represented. He notes that the antichrist
will promote himself as the only idol to be worshipped as God.28 He also thinks that this
is what Jesus talked about in Matt 24:15, in relation to the fulfillment of the prophecy of
Daniel, which deals with the “abomination that causes desolation.”29 Thus, it seems that
Irenaeus considers that the image of the beast is actually the antichrist himself, who, in
his three-and-a-half year reign on earth, sits in the temple of Jerusalem to be worshipped
as “the only idol.”30
Hippolytus of Rome
Next comes Hippolytus of Rome (d. 236),31 who has been termed “the most
important theologian and the most prolific religious writer of the Roman church in the
27
“For that image [of Daniel 3], taken as a whole, was a prefiguring of this man’s
coming, decreeing that he should undoubtedly himself alone be worshipped by all men.”
Ibid., 5.29.2 (ANF 1:558).
28
“For he (antichrist) being endued with all the power of the devil, shall come, not
as a righteous king, nor as a legitimate king, [i.e., one] in subjection to God, but an
impious, unjust, and lawless one; as an apostasy, and setting aside idols to persuade [men]
that he himself is God, raising up himself as the only idol, having in himself the
multifarious errors of the other idols. This he does, in order that they who do [now]
worship the devil by means of many abominations, may serve himself by this one idol.”
Ibid., 5.25.1 (ANF 1:553); cf. Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:279.
29
Ibid., 5.25.2 (ANF 1:553).
30
Ibid., 5.25.1 (ANF 1:553).
31
For a reconstructed view of Hippolytus based upon his fragment, see Robert
Charles Helms, “The Apocalypse in the Early Church; Christ, Eschaton and Millennium,”
(PhD diss., University of Oxford, 1991); Pierre Prigent, Apocalypse 12; Histoire de
l’exégèse (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1959).
21
pre-Constantinian era.”32 Hippolytus wrote “at a time of renewed belief in the imminent
coming of the end, perhaps due to the persecutions.”33 Most of his commentaries on
several books of the Bible have been lost, including a Commentary on the Apocalypse.
Fortunately, his work Dogmatical and Historical Treatise on Christ and Antichrist has
come down to us in its entirety in the original Greek. His Commentary on Daniel also is
one of “the fullest extant”34 commentaries. These are the two works that provide a
glimpse of Hippolytus’s understanding of the image of the beast.
Hippolytus interprets both the first beast and one of the two horns of the second as
manifestations of the antichrist.35 Unlike Irenaeus, Hippolytus explicitly identifies the
first beast with the fourth beast of Daniel 7, that is, the Roman Empire, when he
comments on Rev 13:12.36
N. Roy, “Hippolytus of Rome, St.,” in NCE, ed. Berard L. Marthaler (New

32
York: Gale, 2003), 6:858.

33
McGinn, Antichrist, 60.
34
Roy, “Hippolytus of Rome, St.”
35
Hippolytus, De Antichristo 47, 48 (ANF 5:213, 214). There is no direct
statement by Hippolytus that the first beast is the antichrist, but from his comments in De
antichristo, 47, 48, this could be concluded. In paragraph 47, Hippolytus refers to the
beast ascending out of the bottomless pit in Revelation 11 as the antichrist; then he
explains that “this is meant by the little horn that grows up.” This beast in Revelation 11
is further identified in paragraph 48 as having “a number”, which can only be the first
beast in Revelation 13. For one of the horns of the second beast being antichrist, see ibid.,
49 (ANF 5:214, 215). Elliott understands Hippolytus’s interpretation of the first beast to
be “the heathen Roman empire,” while the second beast is antichrist, and the image of the
beast is the revived antichrist which is “the image or ghost of the old [Roman] empire.”
See Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:285.
36
“By the beast, then, coming up out of the earth, he means the kingdom of
antichrist; and by the two horns he means him and the false prophet after him. And in
speaking of ‘the horns being like a lamb,’ he means that he will make himself like the
Son of God, and set himself forward as king. And the terms, ‘he spake like a dragon,’
mean that he is a deceiver, and not truthful. And the words, ‘he exercised all the power of
the first beast before him, and caused the earth and them which dwell therein to worship
the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed,’ signify that, after the manner of the law
of Augustus, by whom the empire of Rome was established, he too will rule and govern,
22
Just like Irenaeus, Hippolytus also identifies the antichrist as the one who “will
come in the form of a man. . . . and . . . will raise a temple of stone in Jerusalem.”37 As
for the ethnic origin of the antichrist, he supports Irenaeus’s view that the antichrist is to
be from the tribe of Dan. He does this by adding two more biblical passages, prophecies
spoken about the tribe of Dan by Jacob in Gen 49 and by Moses in Deut 33.38 Hippolytus
further indicates that the antichrist will also set up a Jewish kingdom.39
Following Irenaeus’s interpretation, Hippolytus identifies the antichrist as the
“little horn” in Daniel 7,40 which will rise after the ten kingdoms have supplanted the
Roman Empire.41 The antichrist’s rule will be immediately before the coming of the Lord,
and will last for three and a half years.42 He will make war against the saints, and
persecute them so that all mankind will glorify him and worship him as God.43 The
antichrist is also the “Man of Sin” spoken of by Paul in 2 Thessalonians.44
sanctioning everything by it, and taking greater glory to himself. For this is the fourth
beast, whose head was wounded and healed again, in its being broken up or even
dishonored, and partitioned into four crowns; and he then (antichrist) shall with knavish
skill heal it, as it were, and restore it. For this is what is meant by the prophet when he
says, ‘He will give life unto the image, and the image of the beast will speak.’” Ibid., 49
(ANF 5:214), italic mine.
37
Ibid., 63 (ANF 5:218). Ibid., 6 (ANF 5:206).
38
Ibid., 14 (ANF 5:207).
39
Ibid., 25 (ANF 5:209).
40
Ibid.
41
Ibid., 28 (ANF 5:210).
42
Hippolytus, Commentarium in Danielem 12. 7 (ANF 5:190).
43
Ibid., 7.19, 22 (ANF 5:190).
44
Hippolytus, De Antichristo 63 (ANF 5:218).
23
Hippolytus makes some comments on the image of the beast. It seems that he
understood it as a revived Roman Empire like kingdom established “after the manner of
the law of Augustus.” The giving of life to the image of the beast, symbolized by the
healing of the wound of the first beast, is the revival of a latter-day empire. In another
place, Hippolytus seems to have understood the image of the beast as a literal idol of the
antichrist, which is how Irenaeus understood it. Hippolytus also understood the image of
the beast as the abomination of desolation prophesied by Daniel.45
In summary, Hippolytus understood the first beast of Revelation 13 as both the
antichrist, who was a Jew from the tribe of Dan, and the Roman Empire. He interpreted
the image of the beast both as the literal image of the antichrist, which would be
worshipped in the temple in Jerusalem, and a revived, last day, Roman empire like
kingdom.
Victorinus of Pettau
Victorinus of Pettau (d. 303) is the first Latin exegete of the Bible, according to
Jerome. Victorinus wrote commentaries on various books of the Bible, but only his
commentary on the Book of Revelation, In Apocalypsin, is extant.
For Victorinus, the antichrist is the “Man of Sin” spoken of by the apostle Paul in
2 Thessalonians, and “he was in the kingdom of the Romans, and that he was among the
Caesars.”46 The “Man of Sin” is also one of the seven heads of the red dragon in
45
Hippolytus, Commentarium in Danielem 12.11 (ANF 5:190). “The abomination
of desolation shall be ‘given (set up).’ Daniel speaks, therefore, of two abominations: the
one of destruction, which Antiochus set up in its appointed time, and which bears a
relation to that of desolation, and the other universal, when antichrist shall come. For, as
Daniel says, he too shall be set up for the destruction of many.”
46
Victorinus, In Apocalypsin 11.7 (ANF 7:354).
24
Revelation 12, and one of the seven heads of the beast in Revelation 17,47 which were the
seven kings of the Romans.48 He is to reign for three years and six months, immediately
before the coming of the Lord,49 when the ten kings are to receive power at the end of the
Roman Empire.50 In Revelation 17, Victorinus first interprets the seven kings of v. 10 as
Roman emperors, with Domitian as the first, because John wrote during his reign.51 Then
Victorinus says that Nero, “when raised up”52 is the eighth king which “the Jews
merited.”53 Nero’s death and his later being “raised up” are equated with what happens to
one of the heads, which suffered a deadly wound and was healed again.54 Thus it is the
first beast in Revelation 13.
Commenting on Rev 13:1, Victorinus does not give any explicit identity to the
first beast as Ireneaus and Hippolytus do. Later, when he comments on Rev 13:13, his
47
Ibid., 17.9, 10 (ANF 7:358).
48
Ibid., 12.3 (ANF 7:355).
49
Ibid., 11.3 (ANF 7:354).
50
Ibid., 17.11 (ANF 7:358).
51
Ibid., 17.10 (ANF 7:358).
52
Ibid., 17.16 (ANF 7:358). This is commonly known as the Nero redivivus
legend. Victorinus is said to be the first writer to apply this pagan legend to the first beast
in Revelation 13. The Nero redivivus legend is the belief that Nero would return with a
Parthian army to destroy his enemies and tyrannically rule the world again. Both Tacitus
and Suetonius reported that there were rumors of Nero’s return after his death in the first
century and that belief was common in Achaia and Asia. Very early on, there was a
fusion of this legend with the coming of the antichrist. According to Ascension of Isaiah
(ca. 80-90) 4:1-14, Beliar will come “in the form of a man” to rule as “a lawless king,”
who is like Nero, “a slayer of his mother.” The Christian Sibylline Oracle VIII (ca. 180)
also predicts that “the fugitive fierce mother-slayer shall come again” to rule the world
with tyranny. See New Testament Apocrypha, 2 vols, ed. Wilhelm Schneemelcher
(Philadelphia: Westminster, 1964), 2:727.
53
Ibid., 17.11, 16 (ANF 7:358).
54
Ibid., 17.16 (ANF 7:358).
25
understanding of the first beast is clarified. He says that, “He [the Second Beast] shall
cause also that a golden image of antichrist shall be placed in the temple at Jerusalem.”55
Apparently, the antichrist Victorinus mentions in Rev 13:13 is the first beast.56 Like
Irenaeus and Hippolytus, he considered the setting up of the image in the temple of
Jerusalem to be the literal fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy.57
Victorinus provides more information on the image of the beast.58 Apparently, the
image of the beast is “a golden image of antichrist” which will “be placed in the temple at
Jerusalem” and will be worshipped by the Jews, since the resurrected Nero is said to be
the “merited” king of the Jews.59 This image is also what Jesus talked about in Matt
24:15 in regard to Daniel’s prophecy.60 Commenting on the reason why the image of the
beast is called the abomination of desolation, Victorinus says it is so, “because idols are
worshipped instead of God.”61 How will the image speak? According to Victorinus, “The
apostate angel should enter, and thence utter voices and oracles.”62 So for Victorinus, the
image of the beast is a golden image of the antichrist to be placed in the temple of
55
Ibid., 13.13 (ANF 7:357).
56
Elliott understands Victorinus’s interpretation of the first beast as the antichrist.
See Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:295.
57
Ibid.
58
“He [the False Prophet] shall cause also that a golden image of antichrist shall
be placed in the temple at Jerusalem, and that the apostate angel should enter, and thence
utter voices and oracles.” Ibid.
59
Ibid., 17.11, 16 (ANF 7:358).
60
Ibid., 13.13 (ANF 7:356).
61
Ibid.
62
Ibid.
26
Jerusalem. Since he identifies the first beast as a resurrected Nero, the image of the beast
must be the idolatrous image of Nero.
Summary
In summary, from the writings of these three authors, it could be concluded that
during the first three centuries, the beasts in Revelation 13 were identified either with
Rome, Nero, or a Danite Jew.63 This may be due to the anti-imperial and anti-Jewish
sentiment that permeated the early church.64 Scholars observe that after the conversion of
Constantine and the establishment of Christianity as the official religion of the Roman
Empire, Christian exegetes after the fourth century tried to abandon this anti-Roman
interpretation.65
The interpretation of the image of the beast is that it is the idolatrous image of the
antichrist himself. It was tied up with a whole package of antichrist fascination.
Revelation 11,13, and 17 were understood as eschatological and to be fulfilled in the
future, and yet, due to their understanding of Danielic prophecy and Pauline eschatology,
the scope of the eschatology seemed to be contained within the writers’ world of
reference. Only after the downfall of the Roman Empire and the revival of the anti-
Christian Jewish temple cult would the antichrist, either a Jew or a Roman,66 come and
63
Cf. Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:303.
64
65
Ibid. Stephen Finamore, God, Order and Chaos: René Girard and the
Apocalypse, Paternoster Biblical Monographs (Colorado Springs, CO: Paternoster, 2009),
5.
66
On the subject of the identification of the antichrist in the first few centuries,
Elliott notes that while there was “a universal concurrence in the general idea of the
prophecy,” there were also differences in the details of the applications in terms of the
ethnicity of the coming antichrist. Some thought it would be Jewish, while others thought
it was to be Roman, cf. Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:303.
27
set himself or his image up to be worshipped by all as the fulfillment of the abomination
of desolation as prophesied by Daniel and forewarned by Jesus Christ.
The Fourth Century Through the Eleventh Century
Due to the events of history, the time period from the fourth century to the
eleventh century saw an intensified interest in the figure of the antichrist. Writers such as
Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Hippolytus had speculated that the antichrist would only rise
after the Roman Empire lost its power to unify the world, when ten kings would ascend
to power. After the coronation of Constantine, the Roman Empire had been perceived as
a positive force and was identified as the power that restrained the antichrist (2 Thess 2:6).
This prevented the coming of the antichrist,67 and therefore events such as the barbarian
invasions which culminated in the sack of Rome at the end of fourth century and later
resulted in the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 C.E., were generally looked at as
signs of the coming of the antichrist, as well as a fulfillment, at least in the West, of the
Irenaean-Hippolytan predictions of the dissolution of the Roman Empire. Also, the
tradition of identifying the antichrist with entities that threatened the well being of the
church continued after the conversion of Constantine. Thus the rise and threat of Islam in
the eighth century was also linked to the coming of the antichrist.68 Natural calamities
such as the Athenian plague (430 C.E.) and the bubonic plague (540 C.E.) were perceived
as apocalyptic precursors. The popular feeling among the Christians was that they lived at
the threshold of the coming of the antichrist.69
67
68
Thundy, “Islam as Antichrist,” in Millennium, 80-83; Stanley E. Porter, Michael
A. Hayes, and David Tombs, Faith in the Millennium (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 2001), 275.
69
Emmerson, Antichrist in the Middle Ages, 89.
28
In the fourth century, writers were trying so hard to identify the ten kings in their
respective times that Augustine warned that naming the kings would be dangerous, since
the number ten could symbolically imply the totality of kings who precede the
antichrist.70 And yet the efforts to identify the ten kings were unceasing. There was also
the turn from the first to the second millennium C.E., which was “greeted by terrors
throughout western Europe as the populace awaited the onslaught of the antichrist and the
coming of the Last Judgment.”71
During this period, most Christian exegetes ceased to identify antichrist as pagan
Rome or a pagan Roman emperor because Rome had been Christianized, so the exegetes
put more emphasis on the Danite Jewish antichrist figure.72 They often merely repeated
their sources, only occasionally expanding the antichrist tradition by adding fine details.73
70
Augustine, De civitate Dei 20.23 (CSEL19:664).
71
McGinn, Antichrist, xi. See also Richard Allen Landes, The Apocalyptic Year
1000: Religious Expectation and Social Change, 950-1050 (New York: Oxford
University Press, 2003).
72
Thundy, Millennium, 76. Thundy writes that, “All the Byzantine apocalypses
agree that antichrist will be of Jewish origin and will be born of the tribe of Dan.” Ibid.
73
Emmerson, Antichrist in the Middle Ages, 34. This can be seen from the twenty-
four Catechetical Lectures delivered in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher (c. 350) by
Cyril of Jerusalem (ca. 313 to 386). See his Lecture 15, 11-12 (NPNF 7:107-108).
Catecheses 15.11:“Since the true Christ is to come a second time, the adversary,
taking occasion by the expectation of the simple, and especially of them of the
circumcision, brings in a certain man who is a magician, and most expert in sorceries and
enchantments of beguiling craftiness; who shall seize for himself the power of the Roman
empire, and shall falsely style himself Christ; by this name of Christ deceiving the Jews,
who are looking for the Anointed, and seducing those of the gentiles by his magical
illusions.”
Catecheses 15.12: “But this aforesaid antichrist is to come when the times of the
Roman empire shall have been fulfilled, and the end of the world is now drawing near.
There shall rise up together ten kings of the Romans, reigning in different parts perhaps,
but all about the same time; and alter these an eleventh, the antichrist, I who by his
magical craft shall seize upon the Roman power; and of the kings who reigned before
him, three he shall humble, and the remaining seven he shall keep in subjection to
himself. . . . And after perpetrating work such things for three years and six months only,
he shall be destroyed by the glorious second advent of God, our Lord and Saviour Jesus,
29
The understanding of the image of the beast remained mostly unchanged. This
can be seen from the writings of Adso of Montier-en-Der of France (d. 992),74 who was
the leading teacher of the antichrist tradition during the Middle Ages.75 Adso was a
prolific writer, whose Libellus de Antichristo (Little Work on Antichrist) was a summary
of the standard teachings on the antichrist for this period. Adso served as a court chaplain
to Queen Gerberga of France. Upon her inquiry regarding the doctrine of the antichrist,
and the popular apocalyptic expectations concerning the year 1000, Adso gathered all the
pertinent materials available in his time, and presented them to the Queen under the title
Libellus de Antichristo. Adso’s Libellus is commonly assumed to be written around the
year 954 C.E.
According to Adso, the antichrist is still a Jew born from the tribe of Dan.76 The
antichrist will appear in Jerusalem, set himself up above all gods, and persecute the
Christians for three and a half years.77 But the antichrist will only appear after the fall of
the Roman Empire, with the last Frankish ruler still to come. Jews will be converted, the
the true Christ, who shall slay antichrist with the breath of His mouth, and shall deliver
him over to the fire of hell.” Cyril of Jerusalem is excluded from the discussion on the
image of the beast because although he gives a systematic discussion on antichrist, he
does not touch on the subject of the image of the beast.
74
There are over three hundred and sixty extant manuscripts of Adso’s antichrist
accounts, together with Pseudo-Methodius’s, another writer on a historical antichrist; see
Curtis V. Bostick, The Antichrist and the Lollards: Apocalypticism in Late Medieval and
Reformation England. Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought 70, ed. Heiko A.
Oberman (Leiden: Brill, 1998), 29.
75
Hughes, Constructing Antichrist, 167-172; Vicchio, The Legend of the Anti-
Christ, 158-160.
76
See also Rufinus of Aquileia, 2.15 (CCSL20:213); Augustine, Quaestionum in
Heptateuchum 6.22 (CCSL33:329); Rupert of Deutz, Commentariorum in Genesim 9.32
(PL 167:556-557).
77
According to Gregory’s Moralium, the Jews denied Christ, therefore they will
persecute Christians and will wait for the antichrist, Gregory, Moralium 36.24.43 (PL
76:597).
30
antichrist will lift himself up above all gods, setting himself up either in the Jewish
temple or in the Christian church, and will finally be killed by Christ upon His return.78
During this period, the antichrist is still associated with the beast from the
bottomless pit in Revelation 11,79 and with the first and second beast in Revelation 13.80
Symbolically, the dragon, the beast from the sea, and the beast from the land, can all be
seen as the antichrist.81 Like Antiochus Epiphanes,82 the antichrist will organize his own
false religion in the temple by setting up an idol or establishing himself in the temple.83
Thus, the image of the beast is still the idolatrous image of the antichrist or the antichrist
himself as the “abomination[nem]et desolation[nem] . . . in typo antichristi.”84
However, among some commentators there appeared a little revision of the
definition of the temple. Jerome (c. 331– 420), the most learned of the major Latin
Fathers, argued that the temple in which the antichrist was said to be enthroned in 2
Thessalonians was to be understood as the church and not as a rebuilt temple in
Jerusalem.85 Ambrosiaster has the same understanding that the antichrist will take the
78
See Adso, Libellus de Antichristo (PL101:1289-1299). For an English version
see McGinn, Antichrist, 81-96.
79
Oecumenius, Commentary on the Apocalypse, trans. John N. Suggit
(Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2006), 103.
80
For the first beast, see Berengaudus (PL 17:966); Andreas, In . . . Apocalypsin
Commentarius (PG106: 336); Arethas, In . . . Apocalypsin (PG 106: 649, 672). For the
second beast, see Oecumenius, Commentary, 123.
81
Bruno of Segni, Expositio in Apocalypsim (PL 165:695).
82
Hieronymus, De Antichristo in Danielem 4.11.21 (CCSL 75A:915).
83
See Ambrose, Expositionis in Lucam 10.15 (PL 15:1900); Beatus, Ad
Elipandum epistola 2.102 (PL 96:1028).
84
Hieronymus, 4.11.31 (CCSL 75A:921), italic mine.
85
Jerome, Epistulae 121.11 (CSEL 66:2).
31
seat of Christ in the house of the Lord and claim to be God himself.86 In his Moralium,
Gregory the Great also prefers the view that the antichrist will establish a false religion of
his own by infiltrating the Christian church.87
Tyconius
In the West at least, an alternative eschatology took shape and came into
dominance during this period: “the antiapocalyptic theology of history” advanced by
Tyconius (370 – 390 C.E.) and Augustine (354 – 430 C.E.), with emphasis on “a moral
and internal reading of antichrist symbolism.”88 As a result, the book of Revelation
underwent a transformation from being a book of “apocalyptic fervor” to becoming an
“extended allegory of the Church,”89 devoid of historical significance.
Tyconius’s commentary on Revelation “marked a turning point in Western
interpretation” of this text.90 He offered a spiritual interpretation of the book focusing on
86
Ambrosiaster, In epistolam 2 ad Thess 2.4 (CSEL 81:235-244). The name
Ambrosiaster was given to the author of a commentary on all the Epistles of St. Paul,
with the exception of Hebrews. It is usually published among the works of St. Ambrose
(PL, 17, 45-508). See J. H. Crehan, “Ambrosiaster,” in NCE, ed. Berard L. Marthaler
(New York: Gale, 2003), 346.
87
Gregory, Moralium 29.8.18 (PL 76:486).
88
McGinn, Antichrist, 79. Probably due to his adherence to Donatism, the textual
transmission of his commentary on Revelation grew scarce through history. Only three
segments of the original commentary have been recovered, and are now in the Central
Catholic Seminary in Budapest. For fragments of Tyconius’s commentary see Francesco
Lo Bue, ed., The Turin Fragments of Tyconius’ Commentary on Revelation (New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1963).
89
E. Ann Matter, “The Apocalypse in Early Medieval Exegesis,” in The
Apocalypse in the Middle Ages, eds. Richard Kenneth Emmerson and Bernard McGinn
(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992), 38.
90
Manlio Simonetti, Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church: An Historical
Introduction to Patristic Exegesis, trans. John A. Hughes (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1994),
96.
32
the question of the relevance of the apocalyptic text for his fellow Donatists.91 What
Tyconius meant by a spiritual interpretation was that the Holy Spirit reveals “present
spiritual realities rather than the shape of future eschatological events.”92
Therefore, to Tyconius, the antichrist or “the man of sin,” was not so much a
single historical figure or personal incarnation of the totality of evil existing outside the
body of the Christian church, but was instead the “adversum corpus,”93 the aggregate
body of evil people inside the church—the church of Satan.94 Without denying the reality
of a coming antichrist, Tyconius urged that it was more crucial to identify contemporary
antichrists, which are “the invisible growth and spread of evil throughout the church,”95
than a future antichrist.96
Tyconius’s doctrine of the antichrist is closely associated with his doctrine of the
Christian church, an understanding which might have been closely tied to his personal
experience as a Donatist. According to him, the church is “bipertitum.”97 This means that
it is presently composed of two parts: the corpus antichristi and the corpus Christi, both
91
Pamela Bright, The Book of Rules of Tyconius: Its Purpose and Inner Logic,
Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity 2, ed. Charles Kannengiesser (Notre Dame:
University of Notre Dame Press, 1988), 11.
92
Ibid., 9.
93
Tyconius, The Book of Rules, trans. William S. Babcock (Atlanta: Scholars
Press 1989), 11.
94
Ibid., 9, 11.
95
Bright, The Book of Rules of Tyconius, 10.
96
For details of Tyconius’s understanding of the antichrist, see Horst Dieter Rauh,
Das Bild des Antichrist im Mittelalter: Von Tyconius zum deutschen Symbolismus
(Münster: Aschendorff, 1973), 102-121.
97
Tyconius, The Book, 14.
33
of which come from the same seed.98 Both parts coexist throughout history. Tyconius
looked forward to the day when the body of Christ would depart from the midst of the
body of Satan.99
Tyconius’s understanding of the image of the beast was not so easily identified as
his understanding of the antichrist. In his Liber Regularum, he only mentions that the
antichrist “will install ‘the abomination of desolation’ in God, i.e., in the church.”100 This
is the closest reference to the image of the beast which can be found in the extant writings
of Tyconius, since his Commentary on the Apocalypse was lost. But Elliott understands
that Tyconius interprets the image of the beast as “a system of Satan masked or disguised
under a Christian profession.”101
Scholars have unanimously agreed that later exegetes such as Augustine consulted
and incorporated Tyconius’s commentary on Revelation in their writings.102 I shall use
Augustine’s works to shed light on Tyconius’s interpretation of the image of the beast.
98
Ibid., 20.
99
Ibid., 15.
100
Ibid., 10.
101
Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:334.
102
Finamore, God, Order and Chaos, 11; Paula Fredriksen, “Apocalypse and
Redemption in Early Christianity; from John of Patmos to Augustine of Hippo,” VC 45
(1991): 151-183; Paula Fredriksen, “Tyconius and Augustine on the Apocalypse,” in The
(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992), 20-37; Hughes, Constructing Antichrist, 84;
T. W. Mackay, “Early Christian Exegesis of the Apocalypse,” StudBib 3 (1978): 257-263;
Delno C. West and Sandra Zimdars-Swartz, Joachim of Fiore: A Study in Spiritual
Perception and History (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1983), 11. However,
scholars disagree in regard to the nature and extent of Augustine’s use of Tyconius.
Roger Gryson holds that the whole final section of The City of God was heavily
influenced by Tyconius’s commentary, see Roger Gryson, “Les commentaries
patristiques latins de l’Apocalypse [part 1],” Revue théologique de Louvain 28 (1997):
311; others think the dependence is overrated, e.g., Gerald Bonner, “Augustine and
Millenarianism,” in The Making of Orthodoxy: Essays in Honour of Henry Chadwick, ed.
Rowan Williams (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 235-254; Martine
34
Augustine
In the time of Augustine, the popular understanding of the coming of the
antichrist was associated with the fall of the Roman Empire.103 To earlier writers, such as
Irenaeus and Hippolytus, that was still a distant prophetic future, but the fall occurred
during the very time of Augustine. Instead of reinterpreting the meaning of the fall of the
Roman Empire, as many commentators did in their efforts to try to follow the antichrist
tradition, Augustine perceived that his task was to dismiss “any speculation that
antichrist’s arrival would be associated in any way with the fall of Rome.”104 In doing so,
he found Tyconius’s Commentary on the Apocalypse most helpful.
Augustine addresses the issue of the antichrist in The City of God, Book 20. This
work was produced in 427 A.D., near the end of the author’s life, and “it thus represents
the mature end of his evolving thought on eschatology.”105
Augustine was aware of Tyconius’s view that the antichrist would be an apostate
body appearing in the church. He first comments that although it is not certain in which
temple the antichrist will sit, whether in the desolated temple of Solomon, or in the
church, “antichrist means not the prince himself alone, but his whole body, that is, the
mass of men who adhere to him.” Then he adds that the temple of God which the
antichrist sits is the church.106 In his homilies on 1 John, Augustine makes it clear that,
Dulaey, “L’Apocalypse. Augustin et Tyconius,” in Saint Augustin et la Bible, Bible de

tous les temps 3, ed. A. M. La Bonnardière (Paris: Beauchesne, 1986), 369-386.
103
104
Hughes, Constructing Antichrist, 96.
105
Ibid.
106
Augustine, De civitate Dei 20.19 (NPNF 2:437).
35
“Whosoever in his deeds denies Christ, is an antichrist. I listen not to what he says, but I
look what life he leads.”107
In regard to the image of the beast, he comments that, “‘His image’ seems to me
to mean his simulation, to wit, in those men who profess to believe, but live as
unbelievers. For they pretend to be ‘what they are not, and are called Christians, not from
a true likeness, but from a deceitful image.’”108 Thus, to Augustine, the image of the
beast is no longer the literal idolatrous image of the antichrist, but a group of unfaithful
Christians who reflect the likeness of the antichrist. This interpretation must have
originated from Tyconius and is later repeated by Bede the Venerable, another exegete
who “quoted the lost commentary [of Tyconius on Revelation] extensively and often
verbatim.”109
In conclusion, on one hand most exegetes during the period from the fourth
century to the eleventh century inherited the traditional interpretation of the image of the
beast as the image of the antichrist or the antichrist himself, to be worshipped by all in the
Jewish temple in Jerusalem as the fulfillment of the abomination of the desolation of
Daniel 11 and Matt 24:15. On the other hand, there is also a trend to see the antichrist not
as an individual but as a collective body within the church. This is especially true in
107
Augustine, In epistulam Johannis ad Parthos tractatus 3:8 (NPNF 7:479).
108
Augustine, De civitate Dei 20. 9 (NPNF 2:430).
109
Kenneth B. Steinhauser, The Apocalypse Commentary of Tyconius: A History
of Its Reception and Influence (New York: Peter Lang, 1987), 131. See the Venerable
Bede, Explanatio Apocalypsis 13.14, 15 (PL 93:170, 171). For an English version, see
Bede, The Explanation of the Apocalypse, trans. Edward Marshall (Oxford: J. Parker,
1878). According to Steinhauser, Tyconius’s interpretation of Rev 13:14, 15 was
preserved in Bede’s Explanatio Apocalypsis. See Steinhauser, 300. Steinhauser is the
most quoted authority on Tyconius’ lost commentary. For a recent translation of Bede’s
commentary on Revelation, see Faith Wallis, Bede: Commentary on Revelation,
Translated Texts for Historians 58, ed. Sebastian Brock (Liverpool: Liverpool University
Press, 2013).
36
terms of the Tyconian-Augustinian tradition in the Christian West, in which the image of
the beast was understood in a spiritual sense as the antichrist’s “simulation,” i.e.,
unbelievers who professed to be Christians and yet reflected the likeness of antichrist.
The Twelfth Through the Eighteenth Century
In the hands of Tyconius and Augustine, the apocalypse was far removed from
historical events and deprived of its historical significance. However, the internal
corruption and growing secularization of the official church “called forth anew the
apocalyptic temper.”110 During this period, a “burning curiosity”111 about the antichrist
and expectations of his imminent appearance and the end of the world continued to
intensify.112
110
R. H. Charles, Studies in the Apocalypse: Being Lectures Delivered before the
University of London (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1913), 15; David Burr, The Persecution
of Peter Olivi (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1976), 18.
111
112
The apocalyptic excitement in the thirteenth century was especially centered
around the year 1260, and such was the excitement that even the passing of that year did
not discourage the predictions of the advent of the antichrist for later dates. For example,
the appearance of the so called “Toledo Letter” in 1184 predicted the destruction of the
world in 1186, and its later revisions predicted 1229, 1345, and 1359 as the last days. In
one fifteenth century recension of this letter, the antichrist’s kingdom was predicted to be
established in 1516. Czech reformer Jan Milic predicted that the coming of the antichrist
would be in 1367, based upon his interpretation of the 1,290 day and 1,335 day
prophecies of Dan 12:11-12. Manfred of Vercelli preached the imminence of the
antichrist’s kingdom in 1417-1418; in 1429 a friar named Richard preached in France
that the antichrist was already born. Natural disasters, such as the plague of the Black
Death in the fourteenth century, were seen as the signs of the end. The fifteenth and
sixteenth centuries continued to witness a growing sense of doom, despite the
Renaissance’s optimistic view of human capabilities. See Emmerson, Antichrist in the
Middle Ages, 54-56.
37
Joachim of Fiore
In the thirteenth century the traditional interpretation of the antichrist underwent a
radical transformation.113 The key writer of this transformation was Joachim of Fiore,
“the prophet of the antichrist.”114 He saw Revelation as a description of history,
presenting a segmentation of history in a series of parallels.115 It is “the key of things
past, the knowledge of things to come; the opening of what is sealed, the uncovering of
what is hidden.”116 Thus Joachim laid the foundation for the eschatological-historical
interpretation of Revelation based on his Trinitarian understanding of world history.117 In
113
Ibid., 61, 62.
114
Delno C. West, ed., Joachim of Fiore in Christian Thought: Essays on the
Influence of the Calabrian Prophet (New York: B. Franklin, 1974), 457.
For major studies on Joachim and his impact, see Morton Bloomfield, “Joachim
of Flora: A Critical Survey of His Canon, Teachings, Sources, Biography and Influence,”
Traditio 13 (1957): 249-311; Herbert Grundmann, Studien über Joachim von Fiore
(Darmstadt: Wissenschafdiche Buchgesellschaft, 1966); Bernard McGinn, “The Abbot
and the Doctors: Scholastic Reactions to the Radical Eschatology of Joachim of Fiore,”
CH 40 (1971): 30-47; Bernard McGinn, trans., Apocalyptic Spirituality: Treatises and
Letters of Lactantius, Adso of Montier-En-Der, Joachim of Fiore, the Franciscan
Spirituals, Savonarola (New York: Paulist Press, 1979), 97-148; McGinn, Antichrist, 97-
148; West, Joachim of Fiore; Marjorie Reeves, The Influence of Prophecy in the Later
Middle Ages: A Study in Joachimism (Oxford: Clarendon, 1969); Marjorie Reeves,
Joachim of Fiore and the Prophetic Future (London: Society for the Propagation of
Christian Knowledge, 1976); Marjorie Reeves and Beatrice Hirsch-Reich, The Figurae of
Joachim of Fiore (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972).
115
Finamore, God, Order and Chaos, 16.
116
Francesca A. Murphy, “Revelation, Book of,” in Dictionary for Theological
Interpretation of the Bible, ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic,
2005), 686.
117
Ranko Stefanović, The Background and Meaning of the Sealed Book of
Revelation 5, AUSDS 22 (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1996), 38.
Joachim is said to have restored the historical view of prophecy which had originated
from the Apostolic Fathers.
Based upon his trinitarian views, Joachim divided world history into three stages,
each assigned to a member of the Trinity, with each stage ending with an antichrist
figure. The first stage begins with Creation and covers most of Old Testament history. It
is the age of God the Father, andends with Antiochus Epiphanes, a type of antichrist. This
age was a carnal period of the world’s history. The second stage begins with Zechariah,
38
Joachim’s Trinitarian view of history, the church was seen only as existing in an
imperfect transitional state, waiting for transformation by monastic reformers.
Directly or indirectly, due to Joachim’s Trinitarian view of history, three
developments occurred during this period, as far as the antichrist traditions are concerned.
With these three developments, “the antichrist legend took on an increasingly ecclesial,
even a clerical and papal, tone,”118 and the antichrist as the evil power within the church
itself became prominent.119 One development in the twelfth century was that “the pope
received a place within apocalyptic speculation”120 although “there is no hint of any
special place for the papacy in the drama of the end for almost the first millennium of
Christian history.”121 Being fully aware that he was living on the threshold of the third
age, Joachim awaited the appearance of the antichrist at the end of the second age. Of
Joachim it was reported by the twelfth century English chronicler Roger Hoveden (fl.
1174-1201) that when he was interviewed by Richard the Lionhearted in the winter of
the father of John the Baptist. It is the age of the Son and the Church, to the closing of
which Joachim saw himself belonging. This age was to be ended in the year 1260, with
an antichrist who was believed to be living in Rome and was, most probably, the Pope.
This age was partly carnal and partly spiritual. The third stage is the age of “spiritual
men,” the age of the Holy Spirit, in which two spiritual orders would rise to reform the
Church, and which is to be ended by the hordes of Gog and Magog, the last antichrists.
They will be released at the end of the world as the climax of the power of evil before the
second coming of Christ. This third age was similar to the Millennium. For details of
Joachim’s trinitarian view of history, see Reeves, The Influence of Prophecy, 16-25.
118
119
McGinn comments that, because of Joachim, “the identification of the Final
Enemy with a persecuting emperor faded into the background and antichrist as the power
of deception and hypocrisy within the Church itself came to the fore.” Ibid. Actually, as
my previous research indicates, Tyconius already understood that the antichrist was
within the Church. Joachim simply built upon Tyconius’s idea and brought his view to
prominence.
120
Porter, Hayes, and Tombs, Faith in the Millennium, 272.
121
Bernard McGinn, “Angel Pope and Papal Antichrist,” CH 47 (1978): 156.
39
1190-1191, he stated that the antichrist would obtain the Chair of Peter, and that the
antichrist might have been living in Rome at that time already.122 In his Expositio in
Apocalypsim, Joachim also hints that the antichrist will usurp the place of the pope.123 In
stating that, Joachim had no intention to speak against the institutional church or
papacy,124 but only spoke against the impious manifestations of the established church.
However, his followers carried the implication of his Trinitarian view and his antichrist
statement to their logical conclusions, speaking bitterly against the papacy and the
church, which led to another development—“the polemic use of the antichrist
tradition.”125
After Joachim’s death, pseudoepigraphic commentaries bearing Joachim’s name,
from the pens of Franciscan Spirituals,126 fiercely denounced Rome as the scarlet woman
of Revelation 17 and the individual pope as the antichrist. Such were Peter John Olivi (c.
122
See Roger de Hoveden, The Annals of Roger De Hoveden. Comprising the
History of England and of Other Countries of Europe from A. D. 732 to A. D. 1201, 2
vols, trans. Henry T. Riley (London: H. G. Bohn, 1853), 2:1181-1192. On the
authenticity of this account, see Reeves, The Influence of Prophecy, 6-10. As for the
reference to Rome, Reeves holds that it probably refers to the Roman Empire rather than
to the Roman Church. See Reeves, The Influence of Prophecy, 6-11. However, Jaroslav
Pelikan supports the view that “Rome” refers to the Church; he writes: “By ‘Rome’
Joachim may not have been referring to the ancient pagan city with a minority church in
its midst, but to the capital of Catholic Christendom, in which the true church was still (or
again) a minority.” See Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, The Growth of Medieval Theology (600-
1300), Christian Tradition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978), 301.
123
Reeves, The Influence of Prophecy, 6-10.
124
See Charles, Studies in the Apocalypse, 18.
125
Emmerson, Antichrist in the Middle Ages, 62.
126
Flourishing in the thirteenth century, they were a party within the Franciscan
order. They claimed to be the “spiritual men” who were the prophetic figures ushering
Joachim’s third status of the Holy Spirit. They were the most rigorous and often Joachite
wing of the Franciscans who advocate strict poverty. Ibid., 69; also McGinn, Antichrist,
159.
40
1248-1298), who called the Roman church in his time Babylon, the great Harlot, and the
pope, the antichrist,127 and Ubertino of Casale (c. 1259-c. 1330), who identified the first
beast in Revelation 13 with Pope Boniface VIII, the second with Pope Benedict XI, and
also confirmed the identification of the latter by showing that the total value of the Greek
letters of his name equals the number 666.128
A third and most significant development happened as the result of the first two—
the progressive identification of the antichrist from an individual to an institution, i.e. the
Papacy.129 It was a gradual shift that happened from the thirteenth century on into the
Reformation era and still later into the nineteenth century.
Protestant Scholars
For those Franciscan Spirituals, the whole idea of the Roman Catholic Church and
the Papacy as an institution was never seen as an antichrist system. Their problem was
only with individual popes and evil manifestations of the established church. But it was
not so with Protestant Reformers and scholars, such as John Bale (1497-1563), who states
that “in naming the pope we mean not his person, but the proud degree or abomination of
the papacy.”130
127
Peter Olivi, Apocalypse f. 70ra, f. 93ra, quoted in David Burr, The Persecution
of Peter Olivi, 21; cf. David Burr, “Mendicant Readings of the Apocalypse,” in The
(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992); David Burr, Olivi and Franciscan Poverty:
The Origins of the Usus Pauper Controversy (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press, 1989).
128
Charles, Studies in the Apocalypse, 21.
129
See Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:427-436; Emmerson, Antichrist in the
Middle Ages, 206, 207.
130
John Bale, Select Works of John Bale, ed. Henry Christmas (Cambridge: The
University Press, 1849), 32; cf. Gretchen E. Minton, ed., John Bale’s The Image of Both
Churches, Studies in Early Modern Religious Tradition: Culture and Society 6, ed. Irena
Backus (New York: Springer, 2013).
41
In the writings of Protestant scholars, the Apocalypse was regarded as a prophetic
Compendium of Church History.131 During this period, all kinds of interpretations were
given to Revelation 13 with one commonality, i.e., the interpretation centered on the
Papacy as the antichrist. The designations for the antichrist known thus far throughout
history were all transferred to the Papacy; thus it was the Little Horn, the Man of Sin, the
Mystery of Iniquity, Babylon, and the Whore of Babylon. A time, times and half a time in
Daniel 7, Revelation 12, and the 1260 days in Revelation 11, 12 were identified as one
and the same time period. Later applied with the year-day principle,132 these time periods
became the 1260 years of the papal persecution of the believers of God.
However, there are numerous and differing applications regarding the two beasts
in Revelation. Sometimes, the first beast is the Papacy,133 while the second beast is “all
false prophets and ungodly preachers.”134 Sometimes, the first beast is pagan Rome,
131
Charles, Studies in the Apocalypse, 28; Mal Couch, ed., A Bible Handbook to
Revelation (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2001), 39.
132
The year-day principle is the hermeneutic principle of interpreting prophetic
days of the Bible prophecies. It interprets each day as a year as God appointed in Num
14:34, and Ezek 4:4-6. This principle was first applied by the Jews to the 70 weeks of
Dan 9:24. They interpreted the 70 weeks (which are 490 days) to be 490 years; later
Jewish expositors applied the year-day principle to the 2300 days of Dan 8:13 as well.
The year-day principle was applied to Daniel 12 by Christian interpreters as early as
Hippolytus; see Hippolytus, Commentarium in Danielem 12.7 (ANF 5:190, 191).
Joachim of Fiore is known as the first Christian interpreter to apply the year-day principle
to the 1260 days of Revelation 12; the Reformation scholars followed Joachim’s method
and continued to apply the year-day principle to other time related Bible prophecies
found in the book of Daniel and Revelation. For the details of this year-day principle see
LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers: The Historical Development
of Prophetic Interpretation, 4 vols. (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1950), 4:204-
207; Steve Gregg, Revelation: Four Views, Revised and Updated: A Parallel
Commentary (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2013), 271.
133
See Bale, Select Works, 423; John Albert Bengel, Bengelius’s Introduction to
His Exposition of the Apocalypse with His Preface to that Work, trans. John Robertson
(London: J. Ryall and R. Withy, 1757), 28; John Wesley, Explanatory Notes upon the
New Testament (Philadelphia: Joseph Crukshank, 1791), 1000.
134
Bale, Select Works, 436.
42
while the second beast is the Papacy.135 Sometimes the first beast is pagan Rome with its
seventh head being the Papacy, while the second beast is also the Papacy.136 Sometimes,
the first beast is the Papacy while the second beast is yet to come, appearing at the end of
the forty-two months of the first beast.137
There were numerous applications in terms of the image of the beast. John Bale
thought it was a worldly emperor who followed exactly what the Papacy commanded him,
and the image that spoke was “those emperors that were the pope’s eldest sons” making
“cruel constitutions.”138 Giovanni Diodati (1576-1649) thought it would be a political
Empire, “which should have in some manner a resemblance of the ancient [Roman]
Empire which was ruined,” and the speaking of the image represents its power to “make
laws and statutes with penalties to the disobedient.”139 According to Thomas Goodwin
(1600-1680), the image of the beast is the Papacy with its forms of government and
tyranny similar to the pagan Roman Empire.140 According to Henry More (1614-1687),
135
See Franciscus Junius and Thomas Barbar, The Apocalyps, or Revelation of S.
Iohn the Apostle and Evangelist of Our Lord Iesus Christ (Cambridge: Iohn Legat, 1596),
160, 168; Joseph Mede, The Key of the Revelation (London: 1643), 49; Giovanni Diodati,
Pious and Learned Annotations upon the Holy Bible: Plainly Expounding the Most
Difficult Places Thereof (London: Nicolas Fussell, 1651), Rev 13:1, 11; Thomas De
Laune, Eikon Tou Theriou, or, The Image of the Beast Shewing by a Parallel Scheme
What a Conformist the Church of Rome Is to the Pagan, and What a Nonconformist to
the Christian Church in I'ts [sic] Rites, Service and Ceremonies, the Better to Exemplify
the True and False Church (London: S.N., 1684), 1.
136
Thomas Goodwin, The Works of Thomas Goodwin, D.D., Sometime President
of Magdalene College in Oxford, eds. Thankfull Owen and James Barron (London:
Thomas Goodwin Jr., 1683), 63.
137
Wesley, Explanatory Notes, 1010.
138
Bale, Select Works, 442, 444.
139
Diodati, Pious and Learned Annotations upon the Holy Bible, Rev 13:14, 15.
140
Goodwin, The Works of Thomas Goodwin, 64.
43
the image of the beast was a symbol for how “the new-fangled Idolatrous Ceremonies of
the Church became the living Image of old Heathenism.”141 Thomas De Laune (d. 1685)
held that the Roman church is the image of the beast of pagan Rome.142 John Wesley
(1703-1791) and some others thought the image is symbolic of the idolatrous images of
the pope which would have an “abundance of copies.”143
Roman Catholic Scholars
The polemical interpretations of the Protestants directed against the Papacy drew
forth rejoinders from some leading scholars, and “the most effective and scientific”144
ones issued from Catholic scholars. Well versed in patristic writings, they returned to a
literal interpretation of the text, and tried to interpret the text from the standpoint of its
first century readers.145 They examined the patristic writings, and adopted the anti-Roman
and anti-Jewish understanding of the early fathers. According to these interpreters, the
Apocalypse was directed against Judaism and the pagan Roman Empire.146 They insisted
that the antichrist would be a single individual at the end of time, and that the prophecy
still waited for a future fulfillment; thus it is not the Papacy.147 Among them, Francisco
141
Henry More, Divine dialogues (London: James Flesher, 1668), 120.
142
De Laune, Eikon Tou Theriou, 1.
143
Wesley, Explanatory Notes, 1011; also Junius and Barbar, The Apocalypse, 168.
144
Charles, Studies in the Apocalypse, 33.
145
Ibid.
146
Finamore, God, Order and Chaos, 24, 25.
147
Thomas Harding, A Confutation of a Book Entitled an Apology of the Church of
England (Antwerp: Ihon Laet, 1565), 331; John Heigham, The Gagge of the Reformed
Gospel (St. Omer: Charles Boscard, 1623), 52; Thomas More, The Confutation of
Tyndale’s Answer (London: John Cawod, John Waly, and Richarde Totell, 1557), 467;
John Price, Anti-Mortonus or an Apology in Defence of the Church of Rome (St. Omer:
English College Press, 1640), 740; Nicholas Sander, The Rocke of the Churche, wherein
44
Ribera (1537-1591) and Luis de Alcazar (1554-1613) stand out as leading scholars in
initiating two different and conflicting views.148
Ribera is the first one to interpret Revelation in a futuristic way.149 He ascribed
the first three chapters of Revelation to the time of pagan Rome, during which John the
Revelator lived and wrote, while assigning the rest of the chapters to an indefinite future
when a literal figure, an individual antichrist, would appear to rebuild the Jewish temple
in Jerusalem and set up his own image inside the temple for a literal three and a half years
just preceding the second coming of Jesus.150
Ribera’s interpretation of Revelation insisted upon understanding the antichrist to
be an individual Jew rather than a system or institution, and upon predicting the time of
his coming as just before the end of the world. Thus the image of the beast must be the
literal image of the future antichrist.
On the other hand, Alcazar was the scholar who started what we call today the
preterist interpretation of Revelation. He argued that Revelation was exclusively about
the Primacy of St. Peter and of His Successors the Bishops of Rome Is Proved out of
God’s Worde (Louvain: Apud Ioannem Foulerum, 1567), 445.
Their interpretation cannot be classified as the same as ancient interpretations,
such as held during the first four centuries, because of their differing definitions of the
time of the appearance of the antichrist. To the writers of the first four centuries C.E., the
appearance of the antichrist was to occur right after the fall of the Roman Empire. See
Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:611, 620, 654.
148
Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:480; see also Finamore, God, Order and Chaos,
24-25.
Ron J. Bigalke Jr., “The Revival of Futurist Interpretation Following the

149
Reformation,” JDT 13 (2009): 48. Ribera published a 500-page commentary on

Revelation around the year 1590. Ibid.
Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:483; Bigalke, “The Revival of Futurist

150
Interpretation,” 49.
45
the triumph of the early church over Judaism and pagan Rome.151 For him, Revelation 1-
11 describes the fall of the Jewish nation; Revelation 12-20 describes the victory of the
Roman church over paganism, with the destruction of Babylon symbolizing the
destruction of paganism by Constantine and his successors;152 Revelation 21-22 describes
the glorious state of the Roman church.153 By his interpretation, the prophecies of
Revelation concern only the first six centuries after Christ, and had been fulfilled in the
past. Alcazar interprets the first beast as pagan Rome.154
Alcazar’s approach was adopted by another Catholic scholar, Jacques B. Bossuet
(1627-1704).155 Bossuet interpreted the first beast in Revelation 13 as symbolizing
Roman emperors, and the second beast as Emperor Julian’s pagan priests and
philosophers performing miracles like those done by Christians. The image of the beast
was representative of the cult images of the pagan gods that were made to speak oracles
by the pagan priesthood.156 The first Protestant scholar to adopt Alcazar’s approach was
the Dutch Protestant theologian Hugo Grotius (1583-1645),157 who imposed slight
151
Ishon T. Beckwith, The Apocalypse of John (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979), 332;
Elliott, 4:484; Finamore, God, Order and Chaos, 25.
152
Elliot, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:484.
153
Ibid.
154
Ibid.
155
Ibid., 4:501, 502.
156
Ibid., 4:504, 505.
157
Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:562; Finamore, God, Order and Chaos, 25.
46
modifications. He interpreted the first beast in Revelation 13 as Roman Paganism,158 and
the second beast as a magic cult.159
Later, Alcazar’s approach gained popularity among many German prophetic
expositors,160 such as Johann G. Eichhorn (1752-1825) and Johann G. von Herder (1744-
1803), and in the United States through Moses Stuart (1780-1852).161 By the latter half of
the nineteenth century, many Protestant scholars had adopted Alcazar’s approach to
Revelation.162
The Nineteenth Century
The nineteenth century saw a decline of eschatology in general due to the
Enlightenment.163 Because of the Enlightenment, many theologians accepted Hume’s
denial of miracles and the Kantian rejection of historical revelation, thus reducing
religion to mere morality. As a result, eschatology, together with its expectation of the
second coming of the Son of Man became irrelevant to modern reason.164 The
expectation of the antichrist became even less important. The Enlightenment also
provided an optimistic outlook on humanity’s ability in establishing a perfect kingdom or
158
Hugo Grotius, Annotationes in Novum Testamentum (Leipzig: Erlangae, 1756),
1205.
159
Ibid., 1234.
160
Elliott, Horae Apocalypticae, 4:562.
161
Ibid., 4:565.
162
Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 2:510.
163
Jerry L. Walls, ed., The Oxford Handbook of Eschatology (New York: Oxford
University Press, 2008), 7; see also Bigalke, “The Revival of Futurist Interpretation,” 45.
164
Walls, The Oxford Handbook, 8.
47
society on earth, thus “traditional religious eschatology with its reliance on God” was
denied of its necessity.165
During this period, unsatisfied by apocalyptic interpretations offered by chief
Protestant expositors, Ribera’s futuristic approach gained more and more acceptance
among Protestant scholars,166 such as James H. Todd (1805-1868), and Edward Irving
(1792-1834).
However, quite a few Protestant scholars still maintained their interest in
historical eschatology. They still followed the Protestant tradition of interpreting the
antichrist as the Papacy. Such was E. B. Elliott, who interpreted the first beast as the
Roman Papacy, and the second beast as the Papal clergy, while the image of the beast
was the papal councils.167 Robert Roberts interpreted both of the beasts as the Papacy in
its different stages,168 and the image of the beast as the Pope’s being in the exact likeness
of the old Roman emperors in his rule over political and religious affairs.169 According to
William March, the first beast was pagan Rome, while the second beast was the
Papacy.170 The image of the beast was “that imitative assumption of temporal power by
165
Ibid.
166
Ibid.
167
Ibid., 3:110. See also Benjamin Slight, The Apocalypse Explained, in Two
Series of Discourses on the Entire Book of the Revelation of St. John (Montreal: R. & A.
Miller, 1855), 365-380.
168
Robert Roberts, Thirteen Lectures on the Things Revealed in the Last Book of
the New Testament: Commonly Known as Revelation, but More Appropriately
Distinguished as the Apocalypse; Shewing Their Bearing on the Events of History and on
Those Mightier Events of the Near Future, to Which They Have All Been Leading
(Birmingham: F. Juckes, 1908), 123, 125.
169
Ibid., 127.
170
William March, Apocalyptic Sketches: Being a Condensed Exposition of the
Views of the Most Eminent Writers upon the Prophecies of Revelation, Daniel, Isaiah, &
48
the Pope of Rome, which the imperial headship of the Roman Empire had so long
enjoyed.”171
During this period, a new development in the interpretation of the second beast
was that Samuel M. M’Corkle saw it as Protestantism.172 Later among a certain circle of
popular writers, there were some who held that the two-horned, lamblike beast of
Revelation 13:11 symbolized the Protestant United States.”173 According to these writers,
the image of the beast had civil power and the authority to persecute, and was a non-
Catholic church-state combination, distinct from the papal Beast.174
During the nineteenth century, mainly due to the impact of the French Revolution,
and in particular the loss of Papal power in 1798, there was a renewed interest in
prophecy, which was centered on the 2300 days of Dan 8:14. This came among certain
circles of Protestantism who considered the 1798 event to be the fatal wound suffered by
the first beast in Rev 13:3.175 This apocalyptic interest reached its climax in the Millerite
C., Respecting the Second Coming of Our Lord with All His Saints at the First
Resurrection (Toronto: Galt, 1860), 91, 97.
171
Ibid., 99.
172
Samuel M. M'Corkle, Thoughts on the Millennium: With a Comment on the
Revelations; Also a Few Remarks on Church Government (Nashville: Republican Gazette,
1830), 36.
173
For detailed discussions of identifying the land beast as the United States of
America, see J. N. Loughborough, The Two-Horned Beast of Rev. XIII, A Symbol of the
United States (Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald Office, 1857); Uriah Smith, Our
Country’s Future: The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev.
13:11-17 (Battle Creek, MI: Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1883).
174
Cf. Ibid.
175
William Miller, Remarks on Revelations Thirteenth, Seventeenth and
Eighteenth, Second Advent Library 47 (Boston: Dow & Jackson’s Power Press, 1844), 5-
8.
49
movement in the United States, which expected the second coming of Jesus Christ in the
year 1844.
William Miller (1782-1849), the founder of the Millerite movement, continued
the Protestant prophetic tradition in his understanding of the prophecies of Revelation.176
He interpreted the first beast in Rev 13:1-8 to be pagan Rome, particularly Emperor
Justinian, who gave power to the Pope of Rome to exercise authority for 1260 literal
years or forty-two prophetic months, starting from A. D. 538, and ending in A. D. 1798
(Dan 7:10, 20, 21, 25; 2 Thess 2:4).177 Miller interpreted the second beast of Rev 13:11 to
be papal Rome,178 and the image of the beast as the Papacy, or “the Papal kingdom.”179
Another prominent Millerite expositor, Charles Fitch, applied the first beast to papal
Rome, and considered the dragon in Revelation 12 to be pagan Rome.180 Fitch also
argued that “Babylon the great” symbolized not only the Roman Catholic Church but also
Protestant Christendom, because of their rejection of the Millerite message of the Second
Coming of Jesus in 1843.181
176
Miller is considered as “the most significant premillennial voice of the
nineteenth century.” Fuller, Naming the Antichrist, 102, 103
177
Miller, Remarks on Revelations, 5-8.
178
Ibid., 11.
179
Ibid., 15.
180
Charles Fitch, “Come out of Her, My People: A Sermon,” Midnight Cry 5
(1843): 34.
181
Ibid, 34, 35.
50
The Twentieth Century to the Present
The twentieth century gained its name as “the century of eschatology”182 with
numerous eschatological writings and movements. Albert Schweitzer’s The Quest of the
Historical Jesus (1906) served as the key factor in “the revival of eschatology.”183
Critical of the liberal theologians’ pure ethical Jesus, Schweitzer argued for the centrality
of eschatology in Jesus’ teaching. Soon, the twentieth century took on its eschatological
character.184
However, the appearance of Religionsgeschichtliche Schule185 in the late
nineteenth century, with its emphasis on understanding biblical ideas as the products of
an original cultural milieu, led to the rise of the historical-critical method of interpreting a
biblical text within its original historical setting.186 The impact of applying this method to
biblical studies on the interpretation of Revelation has been that scholars read the book as
other historical New Testament documents, such as the epistle to the Romans and the
Gospel of John.187 There was also a decline of applying biblical prophecies directly to
history after the failure of the Millerite movement in 1844.188 This happened in addition
182
Walls, The Oxford Handbook, 9.
183
Ibid.
184
Ibid.
Cf. “Religionsgeschichtliche Schule,” in Encyclopaedia Britannica,

185
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/267723/Religionsgeschichtliche-Schule.
David L. Barr, “Introduction: Reading Revelation Today. Consensus and

186
Innovations,” in Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for Students, ed. David L.
Barr (Atlanta: SBL, 2003), 4.
187
Ibid.
188
For details see Kai Arasola, The End of Historicism: Millerite Hermeneutic of
Time Prophecies in the Old Testament (Sigtuna, Sweden: Datem Publishing, 1990).
Finamore points out that one reason for the decline of historicism is that numerous
commentators who use this method do not agree with one another on the key events,
51
to the growing influence of Catholic scholars in biblical studies pertaining to Daniel and
Revelation (Fitzmyer, Collins, etc.). There is an increasing tendency among mainstream
commentators to adopt Alcazar’s approach, and to see Revelation 13 as an enigmatic
narrative of first century Roman Emperor worship in Asia Minor.189 Currently,
Revelation, much like other NT books, is viewed as directed to its initial recipients’
situations rather than a book of prophecy to be fulfilled well beyond the time of the first
readers.190 Probably because of this shift of emphasis, the antichrist motif, which had
been prominent since the early Christian centuries, and had been so often identified with
the Papacy for the past three centuries, faded away from the writings of most
commentators on Revelation 13. Thus, the first beast is most commonly understood as
imperial Rome,191 and the second beast serves as a symbol for the promotion of the
individuals, or historical movements represented in the texts; see Finamore, God, Order
and Chaos, 27-28.
189
See Ernest Bernard Allo, Saint Jean, l'Apocalypse (Paris: Librairie Lecoffre J.
Gabalda, 1933), 211: “Le culte imperial en vint peu à peu à résumer tout le système
religieux du paganisme romain.” See also S. R. F. Price, Rituals and Power, 198.
190
David A. DeSilva, “The ‘Image of the Beast’ and the Christians in Asia Minor:
Escalation of Sectarian Tension in Revelation 13,” TJ 12 (1991): 186.
191
See Aune, Revelation 6-16, 729, 779; G. R. Beasley-Murray, The Book of
Revelation, NCBC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), 207; Charles Brütsch, L'Apocalypse
de Jésus-Christ: Commentaire et notes (Genève: Éditions Labor, 1942), 160; Adam W.
Burnet, The Lord Reigneth: The Russell Lectures for 1944 on the Book of Revelation
(New York: C. Scribner's Sons, 1946), 89; Philip Carrington, The Meaning of the
Revelation (New York: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1931), 229; Shirley
Jackson Case, The Revelation of John: A Historical Interpretation (Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1919), 311; A. Y. Collins, “Vilification and Self-definition in the Book
of Revelation,” 314; Oral Edmond Collins, The Final Prophecy of Jesus: An
Introduction, Analysis, and Commentary on the Book of Revelation (Eugene, OR: Wipf
and Stock, 2007), 293; Charles R. Erdman, The Revelation of John: An Exposition
(Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1936), 104; Fee, Revelation, 180; J. M. Ford,
Revelation, 54; Steven J. Friesen, Imperial Cults and the Apocalypse of John (New York:
Oxford University Press, 2001), 137, 175; D. W. Hadorn, Die Offenbarung Des
Johannes, Theologischer Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament 18 (Leipzig: Deichert,
1928), 139; Raymond Joseph Loenertz, The Apocalypse of Saint John, trans. Hilary J.
Carpenter (London: Sheed & Ward, 1947), 92.
52
imperial cult.192 Following this line of interpretation, the image of the beast easily
became the literal cultic image in honor of the Roman Emperors,193 and the acts of giving
breath to the image of the beast and enabling it to speak were only parts of the “actual
phenomena in the imperial cult.”194 Such are the interpretations offered by David Aune,
Steven Friesen, Leonard Thompson, and David DeSilva.
David Aune interprets the scene found in Revelation 13 as depicting the conflict
between God and Satan which was “historically manifested in the conflict between
Christians and the [Roman] state.”195 For him, the first beast in Revelation 13 “appears to
represent the Roman Empire (not an individual).”196 The head which suffered the fatal
wound was either Julius Caesar or Nero,197 and the healing of the mortal wound
represented “probably an allusion to the legend of the return of Nero.”198 The worship of
192
Friesen, Imperial Cults and the Apocalypse of John, 146. For details, see Aune,
Revelation 6-16, 756; cf. Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 207; Burnet, The Lord
Reigneth, 91; Carrington, The Meaning of the Revelation, 232; Case, The Revelation of
John, 318; A. Y. Collins, “Vilification and Self-definition in the Book of Revelation,”
314; O. E. Collins, The Final Prophecy of Jesus, 316; Fee, Revelation, 185; Elisabeth
Schüssler Fiorenza, Revelation: Vision of a Just World (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press,
1991), 85; J. M. Ford, Revelation, 54.
193
See Allo, Saint Jean, 211; Aune, Revelation 6-16, 761, 762; Colin Brown, ed.,
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1986), 2:288; Brütsch, L'Apocalypse de Jésus-Christ, 171; Burnet, The Lord Reigneth, 92;
O. E. Collins, The Final Prophecy of Jesus, 317; Erdman, The Revelation of John, 107;
Fee, Revelation, 186; J. M. Ford, Revelation, 214; Kistemaker, Exposition of the Book of
Revelation, 388; Kittel, TDNT 2:388; Loenertz, The Apocalypse, 97; Osborne, Revelation,
514;
194
Barclay, The Revelation of John, 98; Reddish, Revelation, 259; Scherrer,
“Signs and Wonders in the Imperial Cult,” 600.
195
Aune, Revelation 6-16, 743.
196
Ibid., 729, 779.
197
Ibid., 736.
198
Ibid., 737.
53
the first beast represents “the Roman imperial cult,”199 and the second beast symbolizes
“the imperial priesthood” which promoted the imperial cult.200 Thus, to Aune, the setting
up of the image in Rev 13:14 refers to “the fashioning of a cult image in honor of the
emperor.”201
However, Aune also notices that there is a “sudden switch” of tenses from aorist
to future indicative in Rev 13:8, and he comments that it suggests that “this part of the
vision, the adoration of the beast by all the inhabitants of the earth, lies in the future. . . .
This cannot then refer to any situation in the past or present but must refer to the
eschatological future when the rule of the beast will include the entire known world.”202
So Aune himself posits a problem of interpreting Revelation 13 only in the context of
Roman imperial cult worship.
In his monograph on the subject of the imperial cult and the book of Revelation,
Friesen recognizes that throughout the past century almost all the commentators on
Revelation noted “the crucial role” of the imperial cult in the writing of the
Apocalypse.203 He finds in Revelation 13, “the first clear reference to imperial cults.”204
And the subject of imperial cults only disappears from the apocalyptic text after the
destruction of the beast and the false prophet in Revelation 19.205 For him, Revelation 13
199
Ibid., 741.
200
Ibid., 756, 780.
201
Ibid., 762.
202
Ibid., 746.
203
Friesen, Imperial Cults and the Apocalypse of John, 3.
204
Ibid., 146.
205
Ibid., 147.
54
is “a sarcastic, visionary description of worship of the Roman emperors in western Asia
Minor,”206 and emperor worship is “the defining activity” that distinguished the two
groups of worshippers, holy and unholy, throughout Revelation 13-19.207 Thus, Friesen
interprets the first beast as representing Roman power; the riddle of 666 is the number
found in the name Nero; the healing of the mortal wound alludes to an eschatological
return of Nero.208 He interprets the second beast as representing the elite families of Asia
Minor who promoted the imperial cult.209 Friesen does not provide any discussion of the
image of the beast; however, based upon his understanding of the worship of the first
beast as imperial cult worship, it is plausible to think that he would have interpreted it as
the cult image of the imperial cult.
Thompson challenged the conventional view that under Domitian’s reign
Christians suffered severe persecution due to imperial cult worship.210 In Friesen’s words,
Thompson describes “imperial cults as a normal feature of everyday life in Roman
Asia.”211 He considers that the crisis of Revelation is perceived from John’s perspective
and is due to the conflict between Christian commitment as advocated by John and the
Roman social order.212 For Thompson, the perceived crisis the churches faced was not so
206
Friesen, “Ephesus: Key to Vision in Revelation,” 26.
207
208
Ibid., 137, 175.
209
Ibid., 203.
Leonard L. Thompson, “Ordinary Lives: John and His First Readers,” in

210
Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for Students, ed. David L. Barr (Atlanta:
SBL, 2003), 25-47.
211
Ibid., 151.
212
Thompson, The Book of Revelation, 175.
55
much from outside persecution arising from the Roman imperial cult worship but from
internal assimilation with the comfortable lifestyle which had been too compatible with
the urban life of the Empire.213 Thompson’s view is now the prevailing view among
mainstream biblical scholars.214
In particular, Thompson holds that Revelation 13 describes “hidden, mythic
dimensions of conflict in social life”215 in Roman Asia. The two beasts “disclose religious
dimensions of the Roman Empire”216 and the setting up of the image by the second beast
“may be alluding to hidden, demonic dimensions of imperial and provincial bureaucrats
who erect temples, statues, and altars to the honor of emperors and Rome.” Thompson
particularly acknowledges the lack of evidence of images in honor of emperors and Rome
being able to speak,217 and apparently holds that the image of the beast should be
interpreted more as the actual cult images of the traditional Roman gods and not so much
as literal cult images of the imperial cult.
In response to Thompson, David DeSilva wrote an article with the title of “The
‘Image of the Beast’ and the Christians in Asia Minor.” He is probably the only scholar
who wrote an article especially addressing the topic of “the image of the beast.” DeSilva
responds to Thompson’s theory by saying that it is “misleading” because it tries “to lead
the student of Revelation away from the imperial cult as less important than the cults of
213
Ibid., 132; Thompson, “Ordinary Lives,” 43-45.
214
See David E. Aune, Revelation 1-5, WBC 52a (Nashville: Thomas Nelson
Publishers, 1998), lx-lxx; J. Massyngberde Ford, “Persecution and Martyrdom in the
Book of Revelation,” BT 26 (1990): 141-146.
215
Leonard L. Thompson, Revelation, Abingdon New Testament Commentaries
(Nashville: Abingdon, 1998), 143.
216
Ibid.
217
Ibid.
56
the traditional gods.”218 In this article, he recognized the importance of the figure of the
image of the beast, and he also noted the frequent occurrences of this figure in Revelation.
But DeSilva still approaches this topic from the perspective of imperial cult worship. His
main purpose is to refute Thompson, to prove how prevalent the imperial cult was in the
Roman Asia Minor of John’s time. DeSilva insists that the image of the beast be
interpreted as the cult image of the emperor and not as the idolatrous images of the
traditional Roman cults.219
On the other hand, a few scholars and popular writers are not satisfied with
identifying the background of Revelation 13 with first century Roman imperial worship.
Among them, Tony Siew states that, “While the beastly figure is often taken to mean the
Roman empire or the Roman emperor,” yet, “John is not particularly interested in any
historical identification with Rome but rather shows that this beast takes on all the
features of the four beasts of Daniel 7 put together.”220 Siew then lists a number of points
to show that most of the features in Revelation 13 do not correspond with Rome or the
imperial policy of the late first century C.E.221
There are basically two main interpretations regarding the image of the beast
among those who do not read Revelation 13 against the background of Roman imperial
worship, but argue instead for an eschatological and transcendental understanding of the
text. Holding a futurist reading of Revelation, some writers tie the image of the beast with
218
DeSilva, “The ‘Image of the Beast’,” 201.
219
Ibid.
220
Siew, The War Between the Two Beasts, 252.
221
Ibid., 253. For detailed arguments see ibid., 253-271.
57
a future end time antichrist figure, whether it be the first beast or the second beast.222
They insist on seeing the image of the beast as the idolatrous image of the antichrist or
the abomination to be set up at the end time by the antichrist.223 The New Schofield
Reference Bible, Hal Lindsey’s There’s a New World Coming, and John Walvoord’s The
Revelation of Jesus Christ are three representatives of this school of thought.224
Another circle of writers, following the Protestant tradition, continue to view the
Papacy as the first beast, and the antichrist as appearing after the fall of Rome. They
interpret the second beast as Protestant America. For them, the image of the beast is “an
institution and procedures which will duplicate the form and behavior of the beast power
222
Donald Grey Barnhouse, Revelation: An Expository Commentary, “God's Last
Word.” (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1971), 235; Mathias Rissi, Time and History: A Study
on the Revelation (Richmond, VA: John Knox Press, 1966), 64; Louis T. Talbot, The
Revelation of Jesus Christ: An Exposition on the Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1937), 169.
223
E. W. Bullinger, The Apocalypse: Or, “The Day of the Lord” (London: Eyre &
Spottiswoode, 1935), 438; Arno Clemens Gaebelein, The Revelation: An Analysis and
Exposition of the Last Book of the Bible (New York: Our Hope Publication Office, 1915),
83; Jack MacArthur, Expositional Commentary on Revelation (Eugene, OR: Certain
Sound, 1973), 280; John MacArthur, Revelation 12-22, MacArthur New Testament
Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 2000), 61; Talbot, The Revelation of Jesus Christ,
174; Frederick A. Tatford, The Final Encounter: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation
(Newtown, Australia: Christian Outreach Book Service, 1983), 404; Theodor Zahn, Die
Offenbarung des Johannes (Wuppertal, Germany: Brockhaus, 1986), 456.
224
Hal Lindsey, There’s a New World Coming: A Prophetic Odyssey (Santa Ana,
CA: Vision House Publishers, 1973); John F. Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ
(London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1966).
58
in other ages.”225 It is a union of church-state which is characterized by compromise and
persecution.226 Seventh-day Adventists are the major representatives of this view.
Summary and Conclusions
This survey started with the first three centuries, the formational period of the
interpretation of the image of the beast as represented by views of Ireneaus, Hippolytus,
and Victorinus. From the very beginning, the interpretation of the image of the beast was
closely connected to the interpretation of the figure of the antichrist, and was associated
with factors threatening the welfare of the Christian church. The antichrist was identified
with the two beasts in Revelation 13:1, and especially with the first beast. The early
interpretations of the antichrist were anti-Roman and anti-Jewish. The antichrist was
interpreted as pagan Rome, as a Roman emperor, such as Nero, or as a Danite Jewish
male appearing at the end time when the Roman Empire was to be divided into ten
kingdoms. The antichrist figure was certainly interpreted as a person or an entity outside
the Christian church.
The interpretation of pagan Rome as the antichrist faded away after the
Christianization of the Empire. But the understanding of the antichrist as an entity
threatening the wellbeing of the Christian church still went on. At the end of the fourth
century the Roman Empire fell but the antichrist did not come. Thus there was a demand
225
D. Ford, Crisis, 575; Stefanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 431. Johnsson
acknowledges that the “full understanding of the fulfillment of this prophecy of the land
monster still awaits us. . . . Significant features of the second monster’s deceptions are
not yet clear, . . . especially the miracles that cause many to be led astray, and the ‘image’
to the sea monster.” See Johnsson, “The Saints’ End-Time Victory,” 29.
226
D. Ford, Crisis, 575; Stefanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 431. See also Roy
Allan Anderson, Unfolding the Revelation: Evangelistic Studies for Public Presentation
(Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1974), 144; D. Ford, Crisis, 572; J. R. Zurcher,
Christ of the Revelation: His Message to the Church and the World (Nashville: Southern
Publishing Association, 1980), 102.
59
for a fresh interpretation of the book of Revelation in order to make its message relevant
to the times. This task was carried out in the Christian West, where the Tyconio-
Augustinian tradition spiritualized the reading of the Apocalypse. As a result, the
antichrist became more of a symbol denoting the aggregate body of evil people inside the
church, the church of Satan, and the image of the beast symbolized the unfaithful
Christians inside the church who reflected the spirit of the antichrist. Thus, the image of
the beast took on a collective and symbolic meaning within the Tyconio-Augustinian
school.
At the end of the twelfth century, Joachim inaugurated an era of historical
application of the antichrist prophecy to the Papacy, followed first by Franciscan
spirituals and then by the Protestant Reformers and their adherents. The antichrist no
longer symbolized just a general and unspecified body of unfaithful Christians, but
became specific, identified especially with the papacy. Thus the image of the beast went
through various applications from the image of the pope to the papal council.
The sixteenth and seventeenth centuries saw a reaction on the part of the Catholic
faithful to the polemic interpretation of the Protestants against the Papacy. Drawing
support from the earliest church traditions of interpreting the book of Revelation, Jesuit
scholars such as Ribera and Alcazar returned to the literal interpretation of the early
church fathers. They defined the antichrist either as pagan Rome of the past, or the
resurrected Nero, or a Jew in the far future eschaton. Thus, the image of the beast was
interpreted either as cult image of the pagan Roman emperors in the distant past or a
literal idolatrous image of the antichrist in the far future. By the end of the nineteenth
century, these two approaches gained popularity among Protestant scholars.
However, there were a few Protestant scholars, such as E. B. Elliott, Robert
Roberts, William March, and William Miller, who continued to followed the Protestant
tradition. They interpreted the antichrist as the papacy and the image of the beast as the
papal councils or the Papacy itself.
60
Current mainstream scholars approach the book of Revelation with the
presumption with which one would approach other New Testament documents, such as
the Pauline epistles. This presumption is that the book has a message and a challenge
which addresses the initial readers in their political, social, economic, cultic, and literary
context. But in these scholars’ treatment of the image of the beast, almost all their efforts
have been concentrated on the study of the imperial cult worship as the sole political,
social and cultic background. An in depth exegetical study of the image of the beast in its
original cultural backgrounds and the literary context of the book of Revelation is the
very process that past and current studies on Revelation 13 are lacking in their treatment
of the image of the beast by commentators throughout the centuries and by contemporary
authors both mainstream scholars and popular writers.
On the other hand, there are still some scholars and popular writers who argue for
an eschatological understanding of the image of the beast. These scholars interpret the
image in connection with the end time antichrist as the idolatrous image to be set up in
the future, i.e., the final three and half years. The New Schofield Reference Bible and Hal
Lindsey represent this view. Other writers especially the Seventh-day Adventists see it as
a yet to be formed church-state union, a replica of the Middle Ages Papacy, existing for
the purpose of enforcing false worship.

Two observations regarding the history of interpretation of “the image of the beast”
must be made. First, is the scarcity of available materials on this topic. It was a rather
frustrating process to trace a history of interpretation of “the image of the beast,” because
this term could hardly be found in most of the commentaries except when they cite
biblical texts. Almost all the attention was given to the beasts, instead of the image of the
beast. Therefore, this history of interpretation of the image was constructed indirectly
through tracing the history of the interpretation of the antichrist, as I have shown
previously. It was surprising to discover how little has been written during the past 1900
years regarding this specific topic.
61
Second, is the lack of exegetical treatment of this topic. As may be seen from the
above historical survey, the history of the interpretation of the image of the beast is not
truly Auslegungsgeschichte (the history of [biblical] interpretation). The interpretation of
the image of the beast is conditioned by the interpreters’ historical circumstances. The
interpretation varies because of the changing political or religious environment of the
interpreters. It is a reflection of the historical circumstances in which the interpreters
lived. Thus, the history of the interpretation of the image of the beast is rather a history of
the application of the image of the beast by past biblical scholars. The exegetical study of
the image of the beast in its original cultural and literary context of first century Asia
Minor is the very process that past and current studies on Revelation 13 are lacking in
their treatment of the image of the beast by commentators throughout the centuries and
by both contemporary mainstream scholars and popular writers.
62
CHAPTER 3
EXEGESIS OF “THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST”
IN REVELATION 13:14, 15
Introduction
As was shown from the historical survey in Chapter 2, an exegetical study of the
image of the beast in its original literary and cultural context of first century Asia Minor
is the very process that past and current study on Revelation 13 is lacking. This
deficiency can be found in the writings of both mainstream scholars and popular writers.
Thus the object of this chapter and the following chapters is to do what Yarbro Collins
calls the first stage of exegesis, i.e., to understand and explain “the image of the beast”
within its original context and to discern its meaning.1
The specific task of this chapter is to discuss the meaning of “the image of the
beast” within its original apocalyptic context in Revelation 13. It will take three steps to
achieve this goal. First, there will be word studies on eikōn (image) and thērion (beast),
the nominative singular of the genitive thēriou. Second, there will be a study on the
literary context of “the image of the beast” in Rev 13:14, 15. Third, there will be a study
on the cultural backgrounds of “the image of the beast.” Summaries and conclusions will
be provided at the end of the chapter regarding the proposed meaning of “the image of
the beast.”
1
A. Y. Collins, Cosmology and Eschatology, 2.
63
The Meaning of the Words Eikōn and Thēriou
In order to understand the phrase hē eikōn tou thēriou (the image of the beast)
within its immediate apocalyptic context, it is necessary to find out the meaning of the
individual words that compose the phrase. The task of this section is to conduct a survey
of the meanings of eikōn and thēriou in the Bible as well as in the Greco-Roman
literature.
Eikōn
The survey of eikōn is fourfold. It starts with the meaning of eikōn in the LXX,
followed by a survey of the meanings of its Hebrew/Aramaic equivalents tselem, semel,
pesel and demûth. The third section is a survey of the meaning of eikōn in the Jewish
writings of the Second Temple period. Since most of the Jewish books written in the
Second Temple period are surveyed in the LXX section, only Philo’s and Josephus’s use
of eikōn will be briefly mentioned in this section. The fourth section surveys the meaning
of eikōn in the Greco-Roman world including its meanings in the New Testament and in
the wider realm of Greco-Roman literature. The purpose of this survey is to provide a
linguistic foundation for the second part of this chapter, i.e., the literary context of “the
image of the beast” in Revelation 13.
In the LXX
The word eikōn occurs in the LXX 56 times,2 with its first occurrence in Gen 1:26,
as part of the creation story. It has two main meanings, which are translated as “image,”
“imitation.” First, it means “image”3 as in Gen 1:26. In the creation account, the first
See “eikōn,” GELS, 173. Morrish lists only 34 times. See George Morrish, A
2
Concordance of the Septuagint (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976), 70.

3
Ibid.
64
persons were created in the eikōn of God. It is translated as “image of god, idol”4 as in 2
Kgs 11:18. It is a graven image, a similitude of any figure, a molten statue (Deut 4:16; 2
Chron 33:7; Wis 13:13, 16; Wis 14:15, 17). In this sense, it frequently appears in the
book of Daniel referring to the statue in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (Dan 2:31, 32, 34, 35),
as well as the idol image erected by Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 3:1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 12, 14, 15,
18).
Second, it means “imitation” or “reproduction of an archetype”5 as in Wis 7:26. In
this sense, Ceslas Spicq observes that an eikōn implies not just the likeness of a copy of a
model, but also a relation of origination and dependency.6
In Connection with Its Hebrew/Aramaic Equivalents:

Tselem, Semel, Pesel and Demûth
In the LXX, eikōn almost always is a translation of the Hebrew tselem.7 Among
47 occurrences of eikōn as the Greek equivalent of Hebrew terms in the LXX, 41 times it
translates the Hebrew tselem, three times Hebrew semel (Deut 4:16; 2 Chron 33:7; Ezek
8:5), twice Hebrew pesel (Isa 40:19, 20), once Hebrew demûth (Gen 5:1).8
4
Ibid.
5
Ibid.
6
Ceslas Spicq, “eikōn,” TLNT 1:416.
7
Cf. Edwin Hatch and Henry A. Redpath, A Concordance to the Septuagint and
the Other Greek Versions of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987), 377.
8
Ibid.
65
Hebrew/Aramaic equivalents tselem
In the LXX, the Hebrew/Aramaic masculine singular noun tselem is generally
translated as the Greek word eikōn with only three exceptions to this rule.9
The Hebrew tselem occurs in the Hebrew Bible seventeen times. It is first found
in the “image of God” passages in Gen 1:26, 27 (twice); 5:3; 9:6. It occurs twelve times
elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible. Its primary meaning is “image”10 especially in the sense
of “something cut out.”11 Its basic meaning is “representation, a meaning sufficiently
broad to include both the concrete and the abstract aspects of the word.”12
It is the “image, likeness or resemblance”13 of God in Gen 1:26. In this sense,
Adam is “God’s viceroy, representative or witness among the creatures.”14 Thus human
beings are viewed as God’s representatives on planet earth, commissioned by God to rule
over his creation.15
Tselem refers to “images”16 of tumors and mice in 1 Sam 6:5 (twice), 11,
apparently as the pictorial representation of something.17 It also means “idol,”18 and
9
Num 33:52, 1 Sam 6:5, and Amos 5:26. See Mainz Stenebach, “tselem” TDOT
12:388.
10
Ernest Klein, A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew
Language for Readers of English (New York: MacMillan Publishing Company, 1987),
548.
11
BDB, 853; cf. Stenebach, TDOT 12:387.
12
Edward M. Curtis, “Image of God (OT),” ABD 3:389.
13
“Tselem,” BDB 853.
14
“Tselem,” HALOT 3:1029.
Stenebach, TDOT 12:392; Gerhard von Rad, “The Divine Likeness in the OT,”
15
TDNT 2:390.
16
BDB, 853.
17
Stenebach, TDOT 12:390.
66
“molten images”19 of pagan gods or phallic symbols20 in Num 33:52; 2 Kgs 11:18; 2
Chron 23:17; Ezek 7:20, 16:17; and Amos 5:26.
The Aramaic cognate tselēm is used in the Aramaic portions of Daniel sixteen
times.21 In Daniel 2, it is the “statue” Nebuchadnezzar saw in his dream. In Daniel 3, it
refers to the large golden idol image Nebuchadnezzar erects. In Dan 3:19, it refers to the
expression of Nebuchadnezzar’s face.
Hebrew equivalent semel
The Hebrew semel occurs five times in three books of the Hebrew Bible.22 Twice
it is rendered by the Greek eikōn in the LXX (Deut 4:16; 2 Chron 33:7),23 and has a
general meaning of “image, statue.”24 It most frequently refers to idol images as in 2
Chron 33:7, 15.
This word first occurs in Deuteronomy (Deut 4:16, where the Greek eikōn is
rendered in the LXX), in the warning of Moses against making any semel in the likeness
of anything and worshipping it instead of the Lord. There Moses explains that the reason
why God did not show himself to Israel in any visible figure was to avoid the Israelites’
making any visible figure of him. And yet when the same word appears again in 2
18
Klein, A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary, 548.
19
BDB, 853.
20
See the discussions on tselem in H. Wildberger, “tselem” TLOT 3:1081.
21
Dan 2:31, 32, 34, 35; 3:1, 2, 3 (twice), 5, 7, 10, 12, 14, 15, 18, 19.
22
Deut 4:16; Ezek 8:3, 5; 2 Chron 33:7, 15.
23
According to Hatch and Redpath, only Codex Alexandrinus rendered eikōn for
semel,. For the sake of this study, I deal only with instances where the evidence is clear,
so Ezek 8:5 is excluded from this study.
24
“Semel,” BDB 702.
67
Chronicles for the second time, the king of the Israelites is already putting a semel in the
house of the Lord (2 Chron 33:7, 15). The same is true in the book of Ezekiel, where the
word appears for the fourth and fifth times. There it is said that Ezekiel is led by God to
the house of the Lord and sees a semel of jealousy there (Ezek 8:3, 5).
Hebrew equivalent pesel
The Hebrew word pesel is generally rendered as the Greek gluptos (40 times) in
the LXX. Only twice it is rendered as eikōn (Isa 40:19, 20). The basic meaning of this
Hebrew word is an “idol”25 made of metal or wood in the sense of “cultic image.”26 A
survey of the texts where the word occurs in the Hebrew Bible shows that this word never
occurs “in any neutral context”27 but always occurs in polemic contexts in opposition to
pagan idol worship or the prohibition of images. The two occurrences in Isaiah 40 where
it is rendered as eikōn in the LXX also occur in a polemic context against pagan idol
worship (vv. 19, 20).
Hebrew equivalent demûth

The Hebrew word demûth is usually rendered as the Greek homoiōma (likeness,
form, appearance) fourteen times in the LXX,28 and only once, it is translated as Greek
eikōn, in Gen 5:1. It occurs twenty-five times in the Hebrew Bible.29 The Hebrew word
25
“Pesel,” BDB 820.
26
C. Dohmen, “pesel” TDOT 12:33.
27
Ibid., 12:35.
28
Cf. H. D. Preuss, “demûth” TDOT 3:257.
29
Gen 1:26; 5:1, 3; 2 Kgs 16:10; Isa 40:18; Ezek 1:5 (twice), 10, 16, 22, 26 (3
times), 28; 8:2; 10:1, 10, 21, 22; 23:15; Ps 58:5 (4); Dan 10:16; 2 Chron 4:3. Cf. The New
Englishman’s Hebrew Concordance, 345, 346.
68
demûth is used three times to refer to human beings created in the likeness of God (Gen
1:26; 5:1, 3). Outside Genesis, the Hebrew demûth occurs most frequently in Ezekiel.
Larry Overstreet observes that “outside the book of Genesis,” Ezekiel 23:14, 15 “is the
only place in the OT where the two words for image and likeness occur in the same
context.”30
In Second Temple Judaism
Philo
The word eikōn appears in Philo’s writings some 115 times.31 Its primary
meaning in Philo is “image” and “likeness.”32 In this sense, it most often occurs in the
context of the creation of human beings in the image of God. In Philo’s words, the first
human being “was molded after the image of God,” so he is “an image of an image.”33
Philo further explains that no one should think that the image is a bodily form, but it is
the mind molded after the pattern of a single Mind of God34 which always longs to see
God.35
R. Larry Overstreet, “Man in the Image of God: A Reappraisal,” CTR 3/1

30
(2005): 64.
31
Cf. Günter Mayer, Index Philoneus (New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1974), 91,
92.
32
Philo, Rewards 114 (Colson, LCL); Philo, Good Person 62 (Colson, LCL);
Philo, Embassy (Colson, LCL).
33
Philo, Creation 25 (Colson, LCL).
34
Ibid., 69; cf. Philo, Planting 19, 44; Philo, Confusion 62; Philo, Heir 187.
35
Ibid., 71.
69
The second meaning of eikōn in Philo is closely related with the previous one. It
refers to the Divine Word as the “image” of God, and the firstborn image of God.36 The
Word is the image of the God “through whom the whole universe was framed.”37
The concept of the image of God being a seal is emphasized by Philo in his
understanding of its significance. He compares the making of a human being in God’s
image to the leaving of an imprint on wax so that “it should appear to be the handiwork
of others or of Him Who is the framer of the noble and the good alone.”38 Thus by
creating human beings, God “stamped the entire universe with His image and an ideal
form, even His own Word.”39 In other words, in Philo’s understanding, by creating
human beings in the image of himself, God has left a seal of ownership on all of creation.
In this sense, Moses was called “a faithful impress of the divine image,”40 and human
beings, as the image of God, receive “the impression of His presence, a semblance in a
different form.”41
Josephus
The word eikōn appears in the writings of Josephus about twenty-seven times.42
The most frequent use of this word is found in his Jewish Antiquities, and the most often
applied meaning of the word is “image.”43
36
Philo, Confusion 97, 147; Philo, Flight 101.
37
Philo, Spec. Laws 1.81 (Colson, LCL).
38
Philo, Names 31 (Colson, LCL).
39
Philo, Dreams 2.45 (Colson, LCL).
40
Ibid., 2.23.
41
Philo, Dreams 1.232 (Colson, LCL).
42
Cf. Karl H. Rengstorf, ed., A Complete Concordance to Flavius Josephus, 4
vols. (Leiden: Brill, 1975), 2:25-26.
70
In Josephus, eikōn also means cult “image” or “statue” of any living creature for
adoration.44 Thus the bronze statue in honor of Hyrcanus is called an eikōn,45 and the
image of Emperor Gaius was also an eikōn.46 The word is also used to denote the statues
of Roman gods that Pontius Pilate attempted to put inside Jerusalem.47
In Greco-Roman Literature
Extra-biblical literature
The word eikōn occurred as early as Aeschylus (fifth century B.C.E.), and
appeared regularly from Herodotus (fifth century B.C.E.) on.48
First of all, it means a “likeness, portrait,” referring to “an object shaped to
resemble the form or appearance of someth[ing].”49 A portrait of a soldier drawn by his
43
Cf. Josephus, Ag. Ap. 2.191 (Thackeray, LCL); Josephus, Ant.17.151; 18.56
(Feldman, LCL); ibid., 15.277, 279 (Feldman, LCL); Ibid., 17.151 (Feldman, LCL);
Josephus, J.W. 1.650 (Thackeray, LCL); Josephus, Ant.18.55-59 (Feldman, LCL); ibid.,
18.121 (Feldman, LCL); Josephus, J.W. 2.169 (Thackeray, LCL).
44
Josephus, Ant. 3.91 (Feldman, LCL); ibid., 15.276 (Feldman, LCL).
45
Ibid., 14.153; 16.158.
46
Ibid., 19.185; cf. 20.212; Josephus, J.W. 2.173.
47
Josephus, J.W. 2.194, 197.
48
“Eikōn,” BDAG 281.
49
Ibid.
71
friends is an eikōn.50 The same happens with reflections in a mirror51 or of the sun on the
water.52
Second, the word means “a copy” of a model.53 Thus, Plato used it to describe the
earthly copies and representations of their heavenly archetypes.54
Third, eikōn means “statue”55 referring to the cult statue of a god,56 such as that of
Zeus,57 or an idol,58 or a person.59 A statue erected in honor of Ptolemy that was an
eikōn.60
Fourth, it means “living image,” in the sense of “that which has the same form as
someth[ing] else.”61 In the Rosetta Stone inscription (196 B.C.E.), Ptolemy V was called
50
J. H. Moulton and G. Milligan, Vocabulary of the Greek Testament (Peabody,
MA: Hendrickson, 1997), 183.
51
Euripides, Med. 1162.
52
Plato, Phaedr. 99d, 99.e.1.
53
Plato, Tim. 29b (Bury, LCL).
54
Plato, Phaedr. 250b.
55
Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, 183.
56
Lucian, Sacr. 11.
57
Diodorus of Sicily, 2.8.7; see also The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, eds. and trans.
Bernard P. Grenfell and Arthur S. Hunt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1915),
11.1380.139.
58
Herodotus, 2.130.
59
Diodorus of Sicily, 2.8.7.
60
61
BDAG 282.
72
the eikōn of God.62 Artaxerxes, the king of Persia, was said to be honored as “the image
of that god who is the preserver of all things.”63
The New Testament
The word eikōn occurs in the NT twenty times, eight times in the book of
Revelation. In the NT, besides three occurrences in the Gospels, eikōn is only found in
the Pauline corpus, the book of Hebrews, and the book of Revelation. Kittel observes that
“In the NT the original is always present in the image. What is depicted is here given
visible manifestation.”64
First of all, eikōn means “likeness, portrait,” as an object shaped to resemble the
form or appearance of someth[ing].”65 It refers to a monarch’s head, such as the image of
Caesar on the coin in the Gospels (Mark 12:16, Matt 22:20, Luke 20:24). Also under this
meaning, it refers to the idol images in Romans 1:23, which are put in direct opposition to
the glory of God. Human beings are said to have “exchanged the glory of the immortal
God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.”
Second, it means a “living image”66 as used in extrabiblical literature referring to
human beings as the image of God, as in 1 Cor 11:7. Thus, Paul extended the use of eikōn
in two directions. First, in 2 Cor 4:4, Col 1:15, Jesus is said to be the visible eikōn of the
invisible God, which means that “God in all his divine essence and power had taken up
62
63
Plutarch, Them. 27.3 (Perrin, LCL).
64
Kittel, TDNT 2:395.
65
BDAG 281.
66
Ibid., 282.
73
residence in Christ” (Cor 1:19).67 Robert Mulholland summarizes this aspect of the
meaning of eikōn aptly:
In the Hellenistic world of the Roman Empire, with its tremendous diversity of
divinities and its even greater proliferation of their images, the term “image” had a
significant meaning. An image was not merely an artistic representation of the god,
but an incarnation of the god. The image partakes of the reality of which it
symbolizes. A similar usage can be seen in Paul when he writes that Christ “is the
image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:15).68
When Jesus is called the eikōn of God, all the emphasis is on the equality of the eikōn
with the original.69 Thus eikōn “does not imply a feeble copy of something. It implies the
illumination of its inner core and essence.”70 It means that “Christ is not only the full
representation of God, but the coming-to-expression of the nature of God, the making
visible . . . of whom God is in himself.”71
In Pauline writings, eikōn also refers to the eschatological blessing of the
restoration of the image of God in believers, the recreation of a new humanity in the
image of God.72 In Col 3:10, the eikōn of the Creator is the newborn self. In Rom 8:29,
Paul states that God has predestined believers to be conformed to the eikōn of his Son.
Further, in 1 Cor 15:49, Paul says that believers will all bear the eikōn of Jesus Christ in
the eschaton. In 2 Cor 3:18, to be transformed into the image of the Lord is again an
67
Peter T. O’Brien, Colossians, Philemon, WBC 44 (Waco, TX: Word Books,
1982), 53.
68
M. Robert Mulholland, Holy Living in an Unholy World: Revelation (Grand
Rapids: Francis Asbury Press of Zondervan, 1990), 235.
69
Kittel, TDNT 2:395.
70
Mulholland, Holy Living in an Unholy World, 235.
71
Ralph P. Martin, 2 Corinthians, WBC 40 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1982), 79.
72
For details see G. C. Berkouwer, Man: The Image of God (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1962), 98-118.
74
eschatological promise. Paul has a strong “concern for the supremely concrete ethical
consequences of this restoration of the eikōn, namely, that we should put off fornication,
blasphemy and lying (vv. 5, 8, 9).”73 This transformation into the image of God takes
place by the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit (2 Cor 3:18; cf. Col 3:10; Eph 4:24).
Paul associates eikōn with the glory of God. He states that the transformation of
the believers into God’s image reflects the glory of the Lord (2 Cor 3:18),74 while fallen
human beings “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like
mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles” (Rom 1:23). Thus by worshipping and
serving created things they exchange God’s truth for a lie, and God has to give them over
to their shameful lust (Rom 1:23-25).75 In the first chapter of the letter to the Romans,
three words appeared together: glory (of God), image, and worship. One other place that
has all these three words together is Revelation 14.
Bauer indicates the meaning of eikōn in the book of Revelation under the primary
meaning of “likeness, portrait” as “an object shaped to resemble the form or appearance
of someth[ing].”76 The word appears only in the latter half of the book; starting from Rev
13:14, 15, and it occurs in most of the chapters (14:9, 11; 15:2; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4)
73
Kittel, TDNT 2:397.
74
The passage in 2 Cor 3:18 reads: “We who with unveiled faces all reflect the
Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which
comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.” (NIV)
75
The passage in Rom 1:22-26 reads, “Although they claimed to be wise, they
became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like
mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. Therefore God gave them over in the
sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one
another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created
things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave
them over to shameful lusts. ” (NIV)
76
BDAG, 281.
75
excluding chapters 17, 18, and Revelation 21-22. Whenever it occurs, it is coupled with
the beast of Revelation 13. Similar to the transformation of human beings by the
indwelling Holy Spirit into the image of God, the image of the beast in Revelation 13 is
also formed by the power of the indwelling spirit of the land beast (v. 15). In Revelation,
the word eikōn is closely associated with the glory of God, but in the sense of opposition.
Except for Revelation 13 and 20, in the rest of the chapters in which eikōn occurs, the
word “glory” or “glorify” also occurs in the context of giving glory to God (Rev 14:7;
Rev 15:4, 8; Rev 16:9; Rev 19:1, 7), thus making the eikōn of the beast antithetical to the
glory of God. This idea is in harmony with Paul’s teaching in Rom 1:22-26.
Summary
The above study shows that the word eikōn has three primary meanings. First, it
means “image” or “likeness” of a prototype, hence it also means the idol image of a
pagan god; second, it refers to outward forms and appearances; third, it has the figurative
meaning of a living image or a representation of something else.
The word occurs in two main contexts. First, it is used in the context of creation
and eschaton, where human beings are said to be created in the image of God, and to be
recreated into his image in the eschaton. It is to be understood in the sense of being in the
likeness of God, as well as in the sense that human beings are living representations of
God on earth.
The creation of human beings in the image of God is closely related to the
prohibition of images in the second commandant of the Decalogue.77 God’s image lies in
human beings and nowhere else. Any attempts to construct an “image of God” by human
77
Cf. Berkouwer, Man: The Image of God, 81-84.
76
hands are “illegitimate” and “senseless,”78 since the human person “in communion with
God, should be that image in all of his [or her] being.”79 By worshipping another human-
made “image of God,” human beings no longer knew God or themselves.80
Mayer Gruber states that the Hebrew Bible asserts that whereas other ancient New
Eastern deities had statues, the image of Israel’s God is to be found in human beings.81 In
other words, humanity can be considered as an “extension or manifestation of divine
presence.”82 Thus in every pagan temple, there were divine images of pagan gods in the
holiest place, but the Israelite temple never had a cultic image of God. The reason for this
fundamental difference is that the true God dwells with his believers, and they were
created in his image.
The image of God was damaged because of the fall of mankind. In the NT, Jesus,
as the second Adam, came to earth as the perfect image of God. Through the
transforming power of the Holy Spirit, the eschatological blessing of the restoration of
the image of God in human beings would become a reality, beginning with Jesus Christ,
who is the beginning of a new humanity in conformity to the image of God. Even now
believers are in the process of being transformed into the likeness of God (cf. 1 John 3:2).
78
Ibid., 82.
79
Ibid.
80
Ibid.
81
Mayer Gruber, “‘In the Image of God’: What Is It?” in Homage to Shmuel:
Studies in the World of Bible, eds. Zipora Talshir, Shamir Yona, and Daniel Sivan
(Jerusalem: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press/Bialik Institute, 2001), 82.
Stephen L. Herring, “A ‘Transubstantiated’ Humanity: The Relationship

82
Between the Divine Image and the Presence of God in Genesis I 26f.,” VT 58 (2008): 494.
77
Second, the word eikōn occurs in the Bible in the context of idol worship,
frequently in a polemic context. It is the pagan idol image, the cult statue of a false god,
the worship of which replaced the worship of the true Creator God.
In the book of Revelation, the term “image of God” never occurs; in contrast, the
image of the beast occurs frequently in the latter half of the book. The worship of the
image of the beast is put in direct contrast with the worship of God, and the call in
Revelation 14 is to give him glory as the Creator. Beale argues that idol worshippers
finally become like the idols they worshipped, in the sense that they finally become deaf
and blind to the truth.83 Thus the worship of the image of the beast not only challenges
God’s creatorship, but also can be seen as a counteraction against the divine plan of
restoring God’s image in human beings in the last days.
Thērion
In this section, there will be a survey of the meanings of the word thērion. This
survey is threefold. It starts with the meaning of thērion in the LXX, followed by a
survey of the meanings of its Hebrew equivalents: chāyāh and behemah. The third section
is a brief survey of the use of thērion in the Jewish writings of the Second Temple period.
The third section also surveys the meaning of thērion in Greco-Roman world including
its meanings in the New Testament and in the Greco-Roman literature. The purpose of
this survey is to provide a linguistic foundation for the second part of this chapter, i.e., the
literary context of “the image of the beast” in Revelation 13.
83
For details see G. K. Beale, We Become What We Worship: A Biblical Theology
of Idolatry (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2008).
78
In the LXX
Thērion occurs 164 times in the LXX.84 The word first occurs in Gen 1:24, the
creation story. It has two meanings in the LXX. First, it means “wild animal, beast.”85 As
such it first appears in Gen 1:24 in the creation story as part of God’s creation. There,
human beings who were created in the image of God are appointed to have dominion
over the beasts. It occurs also throughout the flood story (Gen 6:19; 7:14, 21; 8:1, 17, 19;
9: 2, 5, 10), where once again, humanity’s dominion over the beasts is emphasized,
because humans are created in the image of God, and whoever shed their blood would be
held accountable, including the wild beasts. The books of Maccabees uses thērion in this
sense; here it is a warlike animal, translated as “elephant” (1 Mac 6:35, 36, 37, 43; 2 Mac
15:20, 21; 3 Mac 6:16).
Several observations need special attention in regard to the use of the word
thērion as meaning “wild animals, beast.” First, although there are numerous passages in
the LXX where sacrificial animals are mentioned, and though thērion also appears
twenty-nine times86 throughout the Pentateuch, this term is never used by the LXX to
denote sacrificial animals. Primarily this word “has a brutal or bestial connotation.”87
Second, it seems to be a common notion in the ANE that to throw dead bodies to
be torn by the beasts was a severe punishment: it was “the height of shame.”88 Thus, in 2
84
Johan Lust, Erik Eynikel, and Katrin Haupie, Greek-English Lexicon of the
Septuagint (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2003), 276; cf. Hatch and Redpath, A
Concordance, 650, 651; Morrish lists only 116 times. See Morrish, A Concordance of the
Septuagint, 115.
85
Lust, Eynikel and Hauspie, Greek-English Lexicon, 276.
86
Ibid.
87
Richard Chenevix Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament (Grand Rapids:
Baker, 1989), 324.
88
Wolfgang Bauder, “thērion,” NIDNTT 1:113.
79
Maccabees, for the bodies of the Jews to be torn by the thērion and for the birds to eat
them was the punishment from king Antiochus (2 Mac 9:15; Cf. Sir 39:30; Pss 13:3). In
this sense, thērion occurs in the covenantal context, and usually is qualified by such
words as tēs gēs (of the earth), or tou agrou (of the land). In the book of Deuteronomy
(Deut 32:24), as well as in other books of the Hebrew Bible, especially in the books of
the Prophets, thērion frequently appears in the context of a covenantal curse. Thus the
absence of thērion in the land elicits the covenantal blessings (Isa 35:9; Ezek 34:25);
while the presence of the thērion makes the land desolate, and elicits the covenantal curse
(Ezek 14:15; 33:27). In this context, whenever Israelites are not faithful, the creation
order and the divine order pronounced after the flood about the relationship of human
beings and beasts is reversed. Instead of human beings having dominion over thērion,
and having thērion as their food, the thērion devours human beings as their food when
the believers of God are not faithful to the Creator God. Thus, together with the sword,
famine, and pestilence, “the wild beast” serves as one of the “four sore judgments” God
places upon his unfaithful people (Ezek 14:21; cf. Ezek 5:17; 34:28; Hos 13:8; cf. Wis
16:5). In the book of Jeremiah, “the sword to slay, and the dogs to tear, and the fowls of
the heaven, and the beasts of the earth to devour and destroy” (15:3) are the four kinds of
destruction God brings upon his unfaithful people. Quite frequently, being devoured by
beasts of the field is also linked to the fate of being meat for the fowls of heaven (Isa
56:9; Jer 7:33; 12:9; 15:3; 16:4; 19:7; Ezek 5:17; 29:5; 39:4, 17). This fate is a sign of
God’s divine curse.
Thērion also appears in the context of God’s judgment against the ungodly (Sir
39:30) and the nations hostile to Israel (Ps 13:3). It is also usually signified by such
words as tēs gēs (of the earth), or tou agrou (of the land). Here again, together with the
birds of heaven, thērion serves as the divine agent which God uses to punish the nations,
such as the Philistines in 1 Sam 17:46, and the dwellers of the earth in Isa 18:6. For the
enemy nations, such as Babylon, Assyria, and Egypt, the presence of thērion means the
80
desolation of their cities (Isa 13:21, Ezek 31:13; 32:4; Zeph 2:15). Human beings’
dominion over the beast is a sign of divine favor and blessing, such as the favor bestowed
upon Nebuchadnezzar and Assyria (Jer 27:6; Dan 2:38; 4:12; Ezek 31:6; Jud 11:7).
Thērion appears in the story of Nebuchadnezzar when the king of Babylon
becomes beast like and lives the life of a wild beast (Dan 4:15).
The second meaning of the word thērion in LXX is “monster.”89 The beasts from
the sea which Daniel saw in the vision are said to be thēria, the plural form of thērion.
These composite beasts represent the “world powers” 90 (Dan 7:3) arising from chaos,
who are hostile to the believers of God, and will to be put to an end when the Son of Man
comes.91
In Connection with Its Hebrew/Aramaic Equivalents:

Chāyāh and Behemah
Hebrew/Aramaic equivalent chāyāh
In the LXX, thērion is almost always a translation of the Hebrew feminine noun
chāyāh. Among the 118 occurrences of thērion as the Greek equivalent of Hebrew
terms,92 105 times it translates the Hebrew chāyāh, and twelve times the Hebrew
89
Lust, Eynikel and Hauspie, Greek-English Lexicon, 276.
90
Bauder, NIDNTT 1:113.
91
Ibid.
92
Cf. Hatch and Redpath, A Concordance, 650, 651. This study only examines the
occurrences which have clear textual support.
81
behemah. In the LXX, the Hebrew chāyāh is rendered almost always as either one of the
two Greek terms, 105 times by thērion and 160 times by zōē.93
The meaning of chāyāh is “living thing, animal.”94 First, it can mean “all kinds of
animals, in most cases animals that are not domesticated, living in their own habitat,”95 or
“living creature.”96 Thus it denotes “every living thing” as in Gen 6:19; 9:12, “animal” of
any kind (Gen 1:18; 7:14; 8:1, 17; 9:5; Ps 104:25), and the four living creatures in Ezek
1:5, 13-22.
Second, it also means “wild animals, beasts of prey.”97 It refers to wild animals
hostile to human beings when qualified by words like “earth” or “field.” Thus the Lord
will drive out the other nations from the promised land little by little, lest the wild chāyāh
will increase to the disadvantage of the Israelites (Deut 7:22). In the place God prepares
for the redeemed in the future, there will be no wild chāyāh, and only the redeemed will
walk there (Isa 35:9). Ezekiel lamented that because of the lack of shepherds, the people
of Israel became food for wild chāyāh (Ezek 34:5, 8), and God promised that there would
be no more wild chāyāh in the future Davidic kingdom (34:25, 28). The presence of the
wild chāyāh in the city implies desolation (Zeph 2:14, 15; Isa 13:21); when qualified by
such words as “the field,” and “the land.” A wild chāyāh often serves as an agent of
divine punishment against the gentile nations (1 Sam 17:46; Ezek 29:5), and Gog will be
devoured by wild chāyāh of the field on the Day of the Lord (Ezek 39:4, 17). The
Cf. Ibid., 599-601. In the LXX, zōē occurs 289 times with its first occurrence in
93
Gen 1:30. See Lust, Eynikel and Hauspie, Greek-English Lexicon, 262.
94
“Chāyāh,” BDB 312.
95
Ibid.; H. Ringgren, “chāyāh” TDOT 4:342.
96
Ringgren, TDOT 4:332.
97
“Chāyāh,” HALOT 1:310.
82
unfaithful people of God will also become food for the wild chāyāh of the land fulfilling
the covenantal curse (Isa 56:9; Jer 12:9; Hos 2:12; cf., Deut 28:26).98 The Lord will make
wild chāyāh to be subdued by Nebuchadnezzar as a sign of divine favor (Jer 27:6); on the
contrary, the sending of wild chāyāh to people and making people food for wild chāyāh
are signs of a divine curse (Ezek 5:17; 14:15, 21; 33:27). King Nebuchadnezzar lived the
life of a wild beast as a sign of God’s judgment (Dan 4:15). The beasts in Dan 7 are also
symbolized by wild beast, representing the political powers of this world.
Hebrew equivalent behemah
Behemah occurs in the Hebrew Bible 188 times.99 In the LXX it is mostly
rendered by Greek ktēnos (beast of burden), and less frequently by thērion.
First, behemah means “animals in general,”100 as in Exod 9:9, 25; Jer 36:29.
Second, it means “beasts”101 as in Deut 28:26. Here the word occurs in the covenantal
contexts, and those who violate the covenant will be devoured by beasts. The word
chāyāh is not used in this context in the same book, although the beasts are clearly wild.
Like chāyāh, when behemah is qualified by such words as “the field,” and “the land,” it
can serve as an agent of divine judgment. Third, it means “domestic animals, cattle.”102
Botterweck notices a distinction in Gen 2:20, where behemah refers to “domestic animals,”
and chāyāh refers to “wild animals.”103
98
Ringgren, TDOT 4:342.
99
G. Johannes Botterweck, “chāyāh” TDOT 2:7.
100
“Behemah,” HALOT 1:112.
101
Ibid.
102
Ibid.
103
Botterweck, TDOT 2:8.
83
In the book of Job, Hebrew behemoth, the plural of extension form of behemah104
takes on a special meaning as “powerful animal.”105 Its Greek equivalent in the LXX is
thēria, the plural of thērion. Job 40:15ff. is the only OT text where behemoth means
“giant beast,” “sea monster,” or “hippopotamus.”106 Here behemoth is described as “as a
beginning or firstborn” of God’s creation (40:19), and it could be one of the sea monsters
God created in Gen 1:21.107 In Job, behemah “becomes in legendary lore a fabulous
gigantic animal generally.”108 Botterweck lists three explanations of the term behemah,
i.e., “a real, naturalistic beast, a mythical enemy of the creator-god, and a mythico-
historical great power.”109 Job 40:25ff. mentions another monster, Leviathan, which is
rendered in the LXX as drakōn (dragon).
In Second Temple Judaism
Sibyline Oracles
When thērion occurs in the Sibyline Oracles it is used in a figurative sense. Here
it refers to Nero as “the great beast” (Sib 8. 157).
Jewish apocalyptic writings
104
HALOT 1:112.
105
Ibid.
106
107
Ibid., 2:19.
108
Julius Fuerst, A Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament with an
Introduction Giving a Short History of Hebrew Lexicography (London: Williams &
Norgate, 1867), 182.
109
84
In the Jewish apocalyptic writings, behemah, the Hebrew equivalent of thērion, is
associated with the Leviathan-Behemoth legend.110 It is the word used to name the
monster that lives in the desert. According to 4 Ezra and 1 Enoch, the two monsters,
Leviathan and Behemoth, were created by God on the fifth day of creation and were
separated from each other afterwards. Behemoth was cast into the abyss of the sea, and
Leviathan into the dry desert.111 In the Apocalypse of Baruch, these two monsters were
kept for the day when the Anointed One is revealed, and serve as nourishment for the
righteous.112
110
Cf. 4 Ezra 6:47-52; 2 Baruch 29:3-4; 1 Enoch 60:7-10.
111
“On the fifth day you commanded the seventh part, where the water had been
gathered together, to bring forth living creatures, birds, and fishes; and so it was done.
The dumb and lifeless water produced living creatures, as it was commanded, that
thereafter the nations might declare thy wondrous works. Then you kept in existence two
living creatures; the name of one you called Behemoth and the name of the other
Leviathan. And you separated one from the other, for the seventh part where the water
had been gathered together could not hold them both. And you gave Behemoth one of the
parts which had been dried up on the third day, to live in it, where there are a thousand
mountains; but to Leviathan you have the seventh part, the watery part; and you have
kept them to be eaten by whom you wish, and when you wish.” (4 Ezra 6:47-52) See
OTP1:536.
“On that day, two monsters will be parted—one monster, a female named
Leviathan, in order to dwell in the abyss of the ocean over the fountains of water; and
(the other), a male called Behemoth, which holds his chest in an invisible desert whose
name is Dundayin, east of the garden of Eden, wherein the elect and the righteous ones
dwell, wherein my grandfather was taken, the seventh from Adam, the first man whom
the Lord of the Spirit created. Then I asked the second angel in order that he may show
me (how) strong these monsters are, how they were separated on this day and were cast,
the one into the abysses of the ocean, and the other into the dry desert. And he said to me,
“You, son of man, according (to the degree) to which it will be permitted, you will know
the hidden things.” (1 Enoch 60:7-10) See OTP 1:40-41.
112
“And it will happen that when all that which should come to pass in these parts
has been accomplished, the Anointed One will begin to be revealed. And Behemoth will
reveal itself from its place, and Leviathan will come from the sea, the two great monsters
which I created on the fifth day of creation and which I shall have kept until that time.
And they will be nourishment for all who are left.” (2 Bar 29:3-4) See OTP 1:630.
85
Philo
The word thērion appeared sixty-one times in the writings of Philo.113 The
primary meaning Philo used is “beast,” or “wild animal.” It is the name for the “land
animals”114 or “wild beasts”115 created on the sixth day.116 In Philo, this word also
includes “all wild beasts both on land and water”117 and the air.118 These are neither tame
nor gentle to human beings.119 The word thērion also has a figurative meaning in Philo’s
writings. He named the unjust man as “a thērion in human form.”120 He considers that
those who disregard their parents are “transformed into the nature of wild beasts
[thēriōn].”121
Josephus
The word thērion appears fourty-nine times in Josephus’s writings.122 Josephus
uses this word mainly in the meaning of “wild animals,”123 or “beast of prey,”124 and
often those hunted ones.125
113
Cf. Mayer, Index Philoneus, 143.
114
Philo, Creation 64 (Colson, LCL).
115
Ibid., 153 (Colson, LCL); Philo, Alleg. Interp. 2.9, 11, 12; 3.113 (Whitaker,
LCL); Philo, Posterity 160 (Whitaker, LCL); Philo, Dreams 2.54 (Colson, LCL); Philo,
Spec. Laws 4.103 (Colson, LCL); Philo, Rewards 85 (Colson, LCL); cf. Philo, Dreams
1.49; Philo, Spec. Laws 1.301.
116
Philo, Alleg. Interp. 3.65, 107.
117
Philo, Rewards 87 (Colson, LCL).
118
Philo, Embassy 139.
119
Ibid., 88; Philo, Dreams 2.66; Philo, Moses 1.109.
120
Philo, Abraham 33 (Colson, LCL); cf. Philo, Moses 1.43.
121
Philo, Decalogue 110 (Colson, LCL); cf. Philo, Virtues 87.
122
Cf. Rengstorf, A Complete Concordance, 2:346.
86
Josephus further used thērion in a figurative sense denoting brutal people as
monsters.126 Herod the Great was called “the ferocious beast,”127 and a “blood-thirsty . . .
beast.”128 Herod also accused his son Antipater of being a “foul monster” who could not
endure the idea of having to wait for so long to succeed Herod as the king.129 The
Scythians, who took delight in killing people, were little better than thēriōn, wild
animals.130
In Greco-Roman Literature
Extrabiblical literature
The Greek thērion appeared regularly from the time of Homer (eighth century
B.C.E.) on. First of all, it means “animal, beast” distinct from birds and human beings.131
123
Josephus, J.W. 1.465, 632; 2.377; 3.385; 4.174, 425, 540; 5.4, 85, 383; 6.418;
7.24, 38, 373 (Thackeray, LCL); Josephus, Ant. 1.59; 2.35, 36, 38, 303; 3.96, 97; 9.197;
10.216 (Feldman, LCL).
124
Josephus, Ant. 4.324 (Feldman, LCL).
125
Rengstorf, A Complete Concordance, 2:346; cf. Josephus, J.W. 1.43, 429;
Josephus, Ant. 5.287; 6.183; 10.258, 259, 262; 15.273, 275; 16.137; Josephus, Ag. Ap.
2.128, 139.
126
Josephus, Ant. 4.262.
127
Josephus, J.W. 1.586 (Thackeray, LCL).
128
Ibid., 1.589.
129
Ibid., 1.624; cf. Josephus, Ant. 17.117, 120.
130
Josephus, Ag. Ap. 2.260 (Loeb, 2:400).
131
See the list of beasts, birds and men in Herodotus, 3.108; cf. BDAG, 455.
87
Especially, the word refers to those “wild animals” hunted by humans.132 In this sense “a
great, high-horned stag” was identified as a “monstrous thērion”133 and “a very mighty
thērion.”134
The word also refers to the kind of animal which is hostile and odious to
humans.135 This kind of beast is different from a zōon, “living being,” “animal.” The two
words “are used in spheres as far removed as heaven is from hell.”136 Zōon is used for a
living creature, and thus can include humans; but even the more general sense of thērion
extending only to the animal kingdom in distinction from humans.137 In Socrates’s court
speech, the contrast between these two words is obvious, as he said that he himself had
investigated whether he was a thērion “more furious than Typhon” or “a gentler” zōon.138
This difference in meaning continued to the Hellenistic period; thus to this word, “No
addition is needed to convey the sense of a wild animal to readers.”139
132
Henry G. Liddell and Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford:
Clarendon, 1968), 800.
133
Homer, Od. 10.171 (Murray, LCL)
134
Ibid., 10.180.
135
Liddell and Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, 800.
136
Ibid.
137
Werner Foerster, “Thērion,” TDNT 3:135.
138
Plato, Phaedr. 230a (Fowler, LCL); cf. Plato, Menex. 237d.
139
Foerster, TDNT 3:134.
88
For this reason, it is also applied in a figurative sense to indicate “fierce and brutal
men,”140 and is often used as “a term of reproach,”141 or “a stern rebuke”142 denoting a
“wicked person, someone w[ith] a ‘bestial’ nature.”143 Thus a flatterer was in the eyes of
Socrates a horrid thērion,144 and even a coward could also be called a thērion.145 Foerster
mentions that Apollonius of Tyana calls Nero a thērion, comparing him with “a beast of
prey with claws and teeth, a carnivorous animal.”146
The New Testament
The word thērion occurs thirty-eight times in the NT, and only seven of those are
found outside the book of Revelation. It refers to wild beasts in Mark 1:13 and Acts
11:16. In Acts 28:4, 5, the word is translated as “snake” in the NIV. Tit 1:12 uses thērion
in a figurative sense, connecting it with the word “evil” and referring to wicked people.
In the book of Revelation, thērion is “part of the hellish symbolism”147 and serves
to show them as allies of the dragon, sharply contrasted with the zōon that stand before
the throne of God, “who contains the fullness of creaturely life as it gives praise and
140
Trench, Synonyms, 324.
141
Liddell and Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, 800.
142
143
“Thērion,” BDAG 456.
144
Plato, Phaedr. 240b.
145
Aristophanes, Plut. 439 (Henderson, LCL).
146
Foerster, TDNT 3:134.
147
Trench, Synonyms, 324.
89
glory to God, [and] constitutes a part of the heavenly symbolism.”148 It first appears in
Rev 11:7 where it comes out of the abyss and kills the two prophets. In Revelation 13,
there are two beasts, the beast from the sea and the beast from the land, both of which,
together with the dragon, form an end time “unholy trinity”149 in parallel to the holy
Trinity. In Revelation 17, thērion is a scarlet beast ridden by the woman of Babylon (Rev
17:3), and it is also identified as the “many waters” on which the woman sits (Rev 17:1);
they are “peoples, multitudes, nations and languages” (Rev 17: 15). The word thērion
does not appear in Revelation 18, which depicts the judgment of Babylon, but the chapter
does mention people groups on earth who have gained profit from having a relationship
with Babylon, such as “the kings of the earth” (Rev 18: 9), “the merchants of the earth”
(Rev 18:11), “every sea captain, and all who travel by ship, the sailors, and all who earn
their living from the sea” (Rev 18:17), and these could be seen as indirect references to
thērion. This word appears again in Revelation 19, where it receives its judgment
together with the false prophet. In Revelation 20, those who did not worship the thērion
enjoyed the first resurrection.
148
Ibid.
149
Larry Helyer and Ed Cyzewski, The Good News of Revelation (Eugene, OR:
Cascade Books, 2014), 76; Susan Fournier Mathews, The Book of Revelation: Question
by Question (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2009), 80. T. J. Bauer prefers the term
“widergöttliche Trias” because he thinks the term “satanic Trinity” implies that there is
already a fully developed concept of the Trinity in Revelation which does not seem to be
true. See T. J. Bauer, Das tausendjährige Messiasreich der Johannesoffenbarung: Eine
literarkritische Studie zu Offb 19, 11-21, 8 (New York: de Gruyter, 2007), 37. Stephan
Witetschek uses the term “satanic Triad,” See Stephan Witetschek, “The Dragon Spitting
Frogs: On the Imagery of Revelation 16.13-14,” NTS 54 (2008): 557. This dissertation
uses the more commonly used term “unholy trinity” for the sake of convenience.
90
Summary
From the above survey, it could be said that the primary meaning of thērion is
“wild animals,” especially those animals hostile to human beings, thus it also means
monster. In a symbolic way, thērion also denotes people who are cruel and have a bestial
nature.
Like the word eikōn, thērion occurs for the first time in the creation story. As part
of God’s creation, thērion is put under the dominion of the human beings who were
created in the image of God. After the fall, thērion became a wild animal, hostile to
human beings, and distinct from the human world. It seems that the dominion of human
beings over thērion is conditional; if the people obey God, they will have dominion over
thērion, and if they disobey God, a reversal will happen; they will be under the dominion
of the thērion, which entails being devoured by the thērion. To be devoured by the
thērion is seen as a divine judgment upon the wicked, while having dominion over the
thērion implies having divine favor.
In Daniel 4, the proud King Nebuchadnezzar experienced the reversal of his pride
and became downgraded into a beast like person. In Daniel 7, thērion gains a new
meaning symbolizing kingdoms on earth.
In the book of Revelation, the beasts are hostile powers against God and his
believers. They appear in the latter half of Revelation as allies of Satan. The land beast
will force the worship of the image of the sea beast upon all the people of the earth. The
faithful followers of the Lamb will gain victory over the beast and its image (Rev 15:2).
In other words, the faithful are given dominion over the beast; they are the ones who
glorify God as their Creator by worshipping him, and thus are being restored into his
image. But those who worshipped the beast and its image are put under the dominion of
the beast. Symbolically they suffer the divine curse, are devoured by the beast, and lose
their share in the kingdom to come.
91
The Literary Context of “The Image of the Beast”
in Revelation 13:14, 15
We turn now to a study of the immediate literary context of “the image of the
beast,” i.e., Rev 13:14, 15. This text is the first containing the phrase “the image of the
beast” in the book of Revelation.
The task of this section is to provide a study of the literary context of the image of
the beast by a survey of the key themes of Revelation 13, followed by a study of the
allusions in Rev 13:14, 15 to Old and New Testament passages. A summary of the study
will be provided at the end of this section.
Key Themes of Revelation 13
Before studying Rev 13:14, 15, it is necessary to arrive at a more or less accurate
translation of the text. The Greek text of Rev 13:14, 15 is clear and does not have any
significant issues to discuss. It could be translated as follows:
And he deceives those who are living on the earth by means of the signs which were
given to him to perform before the beast, saying to those inhabitants on earth to set
up an image to the beast who had the wound by the sword and came back to life.
And it was given to him to give spirit/breath to the image of the beast, in order that
the image of the beast may start to speak and to exercise [authority] so that whoever
shall not worship the image of the beast may be put to death.
In the following section, I will study this text against its immediate literary
context, i.e., the key themes of Revelation 13.
92
The Theme of Beasts
One key theme of Revelation 13 is the motif of the beasts. The word thērion
occurs ten times in this chapter. Revelation 13 starts with thērion in verse 1, and ends
with thērion in verse 18, forming an inclusio.
The imagery of beasts in Revelation 13 draws upon a range of mythical Jewish
and Gentile traditions.150 One of them is the Leviathan-Behemoth legend151 originating in
Gen 1:21, which records the creation of sea monsters on the fifth day of the creation
week. Other biblical texts found in Job and Isaiah also serve as part of the framework for
this legend.152 These sea monsters are also known by other names in the Hebrew Bible,
such as Rahab, Sea Dragon, and Serpent.153 The idea that Leviathan is a sea creature and
Behemoth resides on the land is first alluded to in Job,154 and fully developed in later
Jewish traditions.155 According to 4 Ezra 6:47-52, after the fifth day of creation, God
150
Cf. A. Y. Collins, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (Eugene, OR:
Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2001); John Court, Myth and History in the Book of
Revelation (London: SPCK, 1979); Friesen, “Myth and Symbolic Resistance in
Revelation 13”; Cyrus H. Gordon, “Leviathan: Symbol of Evil,” in Biblical Motifs:
Origins and Transformations, ed. Alexander Altmann, Studies and Texts 3 (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1966), 1-10.
The beasts in Revelation 13 are composite beings. For a recent study on this
subject see Constance E. Gane, “Composite Beings in Neo-Babylonian Art” (PhD diss.,
University of California, Berkeley, 2012).
151
For a comprehensive treatment of this legend cf. Gunkel, Schöpfung und Chaos;
K. William Whitney Jr., Two Strange Beasts: Leviathan and Behemoth in Second Temple
and Early Rabbinic Judaism, Harvard Semitic Monographs 63, ed. Peter Machinist
(Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006); see also Gordon, “Leviathan.”
152
Job 40:15-41:34; Isa 27:1.
153
Gunkel, Schöpfung und Chaos, 30-61, 69-81, 612-669.
154
Job 40:15-41:34.
155
For the passage in 4 Ezra 6:47-52, see OTP1:536; for the passage in 2 Bar
29:3-4, see OTP1:630; for the passage in 1 En 60:7-10, see OTP1:40-41.
93
separated the two monsters, and appointed Leviathan to live in the sea,156 while
Behemoth stayed on the land,157 “symbolizing the order of chaos by the separation of the
sea from the land.”158 Isa 27:1 puts the monsters in an eschatological context, predicting
their destruction on the Day of the LORD. Inspired by Isa 27:1, 2 Bar 29:3-4 and 1
Enoch 60:7-10 explicitly announce that the emergence of the beasts from their appointed
realms, the sea and the land, signifies the coming of the eschaton, that is, the Messianic
Age, during which the two monsters will serve as food for the righteous.159
The first beast is a “creative re-working” of the four beasts of Daniel 7,160 which
are associated with four earthly kingdoms. The second beast “recalls a similar description”
that Jesus gave of the false prophets in Matt 7:15, 24:24.161 Indeed, the second beast will
soon be called “the false prophet” in Rev 16:13, 19:20 and 20:10. Vos notes that the
parallel between the false prophet in Rev 13:11 and Matt 7:15 lies in the inconsistency
between their external appearance and their internal character: the ones in Matthew
appear in sheep’s skin and yet are ravening wolves; while the one in Revelation 13
appears to have a horn like a lamb, but his speaking as a dragon betrays his internal
character.162 There are mainly two parallels between the false prophets in Matt 24:24 and
the beast in Rev 13:13: first, both perform signs; second, both lead people astray through
their performed signs.
156
4 Ezra 6:52.
157
4 Ezra 6:51.
158
159
Ibid., 728-729; cf. 1 Enoch 60:24; 4 Ezra 6:52; 2 Baruch 29:4.
160
Beale, The Use of Daniel, 230, 231.
161
Vos, The Synoptic Traditions, 131, 135.
162
Ibid., 132.
94
Presenting the two allies of the dragon as beasts coming from the sea and the land
betrays the sarcastic intention of the author. He describes the dragon as standing on the
seashore. Apparently, the dragon is anxiously expecting his allies to come to his aid: the
beasts from the sea and the land. But the appearance of these two allies instead serves as
a signal of the dragon’s ultimate defeat. As previously mentioned, in Jewish legends the
eschatological appearance of the two monsters signifies the coming of the Messiah,163
and they are reserved until the end time to be nourishment for the righteous.164
From the previous study on thērion, the appearance of the eschatological beasts
also serves as a signal of the beginning of the divine judgment on those who are
unfaithful to the covenant (Deut 28:26; 32:24); those who bow down to the image of the
beast are actually suffering from the covenant curse. They are handed over to be
symbolically devoured by the wild beasts of the land.
The Theme of Worship
Another theme of Revelation 13 is worship.165 In fact, the book of Revelation is
lavish in its depiction of worship.166 Mazie Nakhro comments that “There is no book of
the New Testament in which worship figures so prominently, provides so much of the
language and imagery, and is so fundamental to its purpose and message as the book of
163
Cf. Aune, Revelation 6-16, 728, 729; J. M. Ford, Revelation, 218; 1 Enoch
60:7-9; 4 Ezra 6:49-52; 2 Baruch 29:4.
164
Cf. 1 En 60:7-9; 4 Ezra 6:49-52.
165
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 680; Stefanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ,
431.
Martyn Cowan, “New World, New Temple, New Worship: The Book of
166
Revelation in the Theology and Practice of Christian Worship,” Chm 119 (2005): 297.
95
Revelation.”167 The book of Revelation is “an act of worship that calls others into the act
of worship.”168 The Greek word proskuneō (worship), occurs twenty-four times in
Revelation; accounting for almost half of its total occurrences in the New Testament. It
occurs five times in chapter 13 (vv. 4 (2X), 8, 12, 15), making it a key concept for the
correct understanding of the chapter. It literarily means “kiss toward,” and often implies a
physical posture, which is bowing down or prostrating oneself before another, a posture
suggesting submission and homage.169
The first scene of the worship of God is found in Revelation 4-5. Eugene Peterson
suggests that the worship scene in Revelation 4 may have a “paranetic function” to instill
hope and exhort the church to worship the true God in the midst of a great conflict.170
Leonard Thompson points out that there are two kinds of material in Revelation, i.e.,
eschatological and liturgical.171 The Kingdom of God is realized in the liturgy,
manifested in its fullness in the worship scene of Revelation 4, and through worship “past
and future merge into present experience.”172 Thus, David Barr identifies worshipping
God as experiencing his kingdom,173 and acknowledging God’s rule. It is giving
Mazie Nakhro, “The Meaning of Worship According to the Book of

167
Revelation,” BSac 158 (2001): 75.
Eugene H. Peterson, “Learning to Worship from Saint John’s Revelation,”

168
ChrT 28 (1991): 25.

169
Ibid., 48.
170
Ibid., 49.
Leonard L. Thompson, “Cult and Eschatology in the Apocalypse of John,” JR

171
49 (1969): 330-350.
172
David E. Aune, The Cultic Setting of Realized Eschatology in Early
Christianity (Leiden: Brill, 1972), 14.
173
David L. Barr, “The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation of the World: A
Literary Analysis,” Int 38 (1984): 47.
96
allegiance to him and the Lamb in the situation of everyday.174 Therefore, the core issue
in the book of Revelation is whether to worship God or worship the beast.175
Studies have shown that Rev 13:13 is a certain allusion to 1 Kgs 18:37, 38.176 The
issue dealt with in this passage is false worship versus true worship. The land beast
parodies what Elijah did on Mount Carmel. The beast also makes fire come down from
heaven. But it does so to deceive people so that they will follow him in worshipping the
sea beast. Since Elijah is the true prophet of God, the land beast is conversely the false
prophet of Rev 16:13.
The Theme of Image-Making
Another theme of Revelation 13 is image-making. The Bible starts and ends with
the making of an image. The first mention of making an image is found in Gen 1: the
making of human beings in God’s image. The language of Revelation 13 alludes to the
Genesis story of the creation of human beings. Verbally, the language of Revelation 13
parallels the language of creation in Genesis 1-2. The same nouns occur in both passages,
i.e., sea (Gen 1:10, Rev 13:1), land (Gen 1:10, Rev 13:11), beasts (Gen 1: 24, Rev 13:1,
11), image (Gen 1: 26, 27, Rev 13:14). The making of both images started with a verbal
initiation; in both passages the verb used is legō (Gen 1:26, Rev 13:14). In Genesis 1,
God is the one saying “Let us . . .” while in Rev 13:14, the land beast is the one speaking
to the inhabitants of the earth. The verbs used for the making of the image are the same,
poieō (Gen 1:26, Rev 13:14).
174
D. Peterson, Engaging with God (Leicester: Apollos, 1992), 262.
175
Ibid.
176
Cf. Aune, Revelation 6-16, 759; Vos, The Synoptic Traditions, 136.
97
Besides verbal parallels, there also are thematic parallels between Revelation 13
and Genesis 1. In the LXX, the word eikōn first occurs in the creation account, at the very
beginning of the Bible. The first human being is said to be created in the image of God. It
is not a coincidence but it is curious that the last chapters of the Bible also focus attention
on the same term “image.” The difference is that Revelation talks about the creation of an
image of the beast, contrary to the original intention of God when he first created human
beings. Here we find a reversal of the creation account. This language of creation hints
that the whole chapter needs to be read in the context of creation or in comparison to the
Genesis creation account, which means that the creation of the image of the beast in
Revelation 13:14, 15 is a blasphemous parody of God’s creation of human beings in his
image.
The Theme of Authority
Authority is another of the themes of Revelation 13. The word exousia,
“authority,” occurs five times in this chapter (vv. 2, 4, 5, 7, 12). Beale observes that
“Revelation 13 has been shaped primarily according to Daniel 7,”177 and there is,
according to H. P. Müller, a “threefold authorization scheme from Daniel 7 throughout
Revelation 13.”178 The pattern goes like this: (1) an agent steps forward. (2) power is
given to the agent. (3) the effect of this transfer of power is described. The threefold
authorization pattern is seen in the vision of each of the four beasts as well as in Dan
7:13-14.179 The four beasts’ authorization is a parody of the authorization of the Son of
177
178
Ibid.
179
Ibid., 728.
98
Man.180 In Revelation, the pattern is (1) the sea beast steps forward (vv. 1-2a); (2) the sea
beast is given authority by the dragon (vv. 2b, 4a); (3) the effect of the authorization is
given in vv. 3b, 4, 6, and 8. The same pattern is repeated in 13:11-17 for the land beast.181
Beale notes that “the last two parts of the pattern are repeated again in v. 15a and 15b,”182
and that it concerns the image of the beast. Beale’s observation is significant because it
indicates that the image of the beast is a separate entity, which receives its authority just
as the other two beasts do.
Allusions to Old and New Testament Passages

in Rev 13:14, 15
Intertextual Interpretation and the Book of Revelation
The book of Revelation is a typical “example of intertextual text production,”183
therefore intertextual interpretation or “inner-biblical allusion”184 is key to an
understanding of the book of Revelation,185 which means that this book is best
understood within its canonical context in the Christian Bible.186 It is commonly
understood among Revelation scholars that even though John never quotes directly from
180
Ibid.
181
Ibid.
182
Beale, The Use of Daniel, 247.
183
Richard B. Hays and Stefan Alkier, “Introduction,” in Revelation and the
Politics of Apocalyptic Interpretation, eds. Richard B. Hays and Stefan Alkier (Waco, TX:
Baylor University Press, 2012), 4.
184
Intertextuality and inner biblical allusion could be understood as the same
method of biblical interpretation, see Beale, We Become What We Worship, 16, 23, no.
23.
185
Ibid.
186
Ibid.
99
an OT passage, he does draw heavily from the past activity of God as recorded in the OT
to illustrate the present and prophesy the future,187 and the language of Revelation is
filled with OT language in the form of allusions and echoes.188 Further, the symbolism of
Revelation must also be read in its relationship to the other books of the New
Testament.189 The intertextuality of Revelation also demands “intratextual” studies within
187
Laurie Guy, “Back to the Future: The Millennium and the Exodus in
Revelation 20,” EQ 86 (2014): 229. John’s rhetoric serves to remind his readers of the
past acts of God that “provide a reliable basis for divining the future.” David A. DeSilva,
“Final Topics: The Rhetorical Functions of Intertexture in Revelation 14:14-16:21,” in
The Intertexture of Apocalypse Discourse in the New Testament, ed. Duane E. Watson
(Atlanta: SBL, 2002), 240.
188
David Mathewson, “Isaiah in Revelation,” in Isaiah in the New Testament, eds.
Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menken (New York: T & T Clark, 2005), 189. For books
on Revelation’s use of the OT, see Beale, The Use of Daniel; G. K. Beale, John’s Use of
the Old Testament in Revelation, JSNTSup 166, ed. Stanley E. Porter (Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1998); Jan Fekkes, Isaiah and Prophetic Traditions in the
Book of Revelation: Visionary Antecedents and Their Development, JSNTSup 93
(Sheffield: JSOT, 1994); Ferrell Jenkins, The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation
(Marion, IN: Cogdill Foundation Publications, 1972); Kowalski, Die Rezeption des
Propheten Ezechiel; Steve Moyise, The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation
(Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995); Paulien, Decoding Revelation’s Trumpets;
Jean-Pierre Ruiz, Ezekiel in the Apocalypse: The Transformation of Prophetic Language
in Revelation 16,17-19,10, Europäische Hochschulschriften 23 (New York: Peter Lang,
1989); A. Schlatter, Das Alte Testament in der johanneischen Apokalypse, BFCT
(Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1912).
For articles see A. Gangemi, “L’utilizzazione del Deutero-Isaia dell’Apocalisse di
Giovanni,” ED 27 (1974): 109-144, 311-339; M. D. Goulder, “The Apocalypse as an
Annual cycle of Prophecies,” NTS 27 (1981): 342-367; A. Lancellotti, “L’Antico
Testamento nell’Apocalisse,” RBB 14 (1966): 369-384; B. Marconcini, “L’utilizzazione
del T.M. nelle citazioni Isaeiane dell’Apocalisse,” RBB 24 (1976): 113-136; L. P.
Trudinger, “Some Observations Concerning the Text of the Old Testament in the Book of
Revelation,” JTS 17 (1966): 82-88; A. Vanhoye, “L’utilisation du livre d’Ezéchiel dans
l’Apocalypse,” Bib 43 (1962): 436-476.
Cf. Richard Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1989); Richard Hays, The Conversion of the Imagination: Paul as
Interpreter of Israel’s Scripture (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005). Hays provides
valuable insights for Revelation scholars on the subject of biblical intertextuality, even
though his main focus was on the Pauline corpus.
189
Hays and Alkier, “Introduction,” 5.
100
the texts of the book of Revelation.190 A crucial step of intertextual study is to detect
allusions in a web or matrix of texts of which Revelation is part.191 There are three kinds
of allusions to the Old and New Testaments in the book of Revelation: verbal, thematic,
and structural.192
According to Paulien, a verbal parallel occurs when there are at least two words
of major significance in parallel between a passage in the LXX and in Revelation. He
writes that, “These two major words may be coupled together in a phrase or may even be
separated, provided they are in clear relationship to each other in both passages of the
suggested parallel.”193 The way to discover verbal parallels is to place the passage in
Revelation side by side with the passage in the LXX. Attention should be paid to words
that are exactly the same or similar.194
Thematic allusions are allusions to the Old Testament that are “characterized by
similarity of thought and theme as well as wording.”195 Regarding thematic allusions in
Guy, “Back to the Future,” 230; cf. Alan S. Bandy, “The Layers of the
190
Apocalypse: An Integrative Approach to Revelation’s Macrostructure,” JSNT 31 (2009):

469-499.
Steve Moyise, “Intertextuality, Historical Criticism and Deconstruction,” in

191
The Intertextuality of the Epistles: Explanations of Theory and Practice, eds. Thomas L.
Brodie, Dennis R. MacDonald, and Stanley E. Porter (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press,
2006), 24.
Cf. Jon Paulien, “Criteria and the Assessment of Allusions to the Old
192
Testament in the Book of Revelation,” in Studies in the Book of Revelation, ed. Steve
Moyise (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2011), 113-130.
Jon Paulien, “Allusions, Exegetical Method, and the Interpretation of

193
Revelation 8:7-12” (PhD diss., Andrews University, 1987), 180. See also Jon Paulien,
“Elusive Allusions: The Problematic Use of the Old Testament in Revelation,” BR 33
(1988): 37-53.
194
Jon Paulien, “Allusions, Exegetical Method,” 180.
195
Ibid., 182.
101
the Revelation, Paulien points out that very often, the text of Revelation clearly alludes to
an OT passage, but uses different Greek words than those used in the LXX or uses a
single word to remind the reader of the connection. This practice is to be considered
natural, because, “By their very nature, allusions are not bound to reproduce the precise
wording of the original.”196 He also notices that there are not only thematic parallels
between Revelation and the LXX, but also between Revelation and the Hebrew and
Aramaic Old Testament.197
Structural allusion “is characterized either by a similarity in the ordering of
material or by an overall similarity in content.” Paulien observes that this kind of
“structural dependence,” which Revelation has with the pertinent LXX texts, could be
called an “apocalyptic midrash.”198 Although a structural parallel may not follow the
exact wording of the previous text, its multiparallel features make it the most certain
allusion.199
Allusions to Genesis 2
The appearance of the beast from the sea in the beginning verses of Revelation 13
reminds one of the creation story in Gen 1 and elsewhere throughout the OT. In Rev
13:14, 15, the allusion to the creation story is specifically focused on Gen 2:7, the
creation of the first human being.200 Exact verbal parallels are not found between these
196
Ibid.
197
Ibid., 183.
198
Ibid., 185.
199
Ibid.
Stefanović observes that “The earth beast is delegated to give breath to the
200
image of the beast. This brings to mind the giving of the breath of life to the first man
(Gen 2:7).” Stefanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 431, italics his.
102
two passages. But the same verbal root could be traced in the narratives. In Gen 2:7, God
breathed into the man the pnoēn (breath) of life, while in Rev 13:15, the land beast is said
to give pneuma (breath) to the image. Both of these nouns are derived from the same verb
root, pneō (blow).
The thematic and structural parallels are strong between these two passages. First,
although Gen 2:7 does not have the word “image,” it is assumed that here the man
created was formed in the image of God; second, both passages have the action of
breathing the breath of life into the images; third, the result of both of the breathings is
that the images become alive.
The text of Gen 2:7 in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan offers an even closer parallel
to Rev. 13:15. It reads: “And he breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the
breath became in the body of Adam a spirit capable of speech.”201 Just as God breathed
into Adam’s nostrils, and Adam became a living being able to speak, function, carry out
God’s orders, and exercise human dominion on earth on behalf of God, the land beast
mimics the Creator God, also breathes into the image, and gets the same result in that the
image begins to speak and to function, and in a way, to have dominion over the
inhabitants of the earth, to kill those who do not worship the image of the beast.
In the New Testament, the full restoration of God’s image in believers is

presented as one of the eschatological promises (Rom 8:29; Eph 4:24; Col 3:10).
Believers are transformed into the image of God “by the power of the indwelling Spirit (2
Cor 3:18). In Revelation 13:15, it is also through the pneuma (spirit) given by the land
beast that the image of the beast begins to speak and exercise its power.
201
Maher, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, 22.
103
Thus the image of the beast could be interpreted as the counterfeit image of God
in the last days. In the creation account, human beings are made in the image of God, so
the allusion to Gen 2:7 may provide an alternative interpretation of the image as people
who have totally lost the image of God and are recreated in the image of the beast, i.e., as
members of the sunagōgē tou satana (assembly of Satan, Rev 2:9; 3:9).
One hint of this understanding is found in Rev 3:9, where Jesus gives a promise to
the church in Sardis. He says, “I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who
claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down
at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.”202 This is an allusion to Isa 60:14,
which reads, “The sons of your oppressors will come bowing before you; all who despise
you will bow down at your feet and will call you the City of the Lord, Zion of the Holy
One of Israel.”203 The Greek word for “fall down” is proskunēsousin, which is the verb
for “worship” used in Rev 13:15. Would it be possible that Rev 3:9 is to be understood as
an ultimate reversal of Rev 13:15? Thus, long before the enforcement of the worship of
the image of the beast, Jesus has foretold the ultimate end of the scene in Revelation 13,
that one actual outcome of this cosmic struggle will be that the image of the beast, the
assembly of Satan, instead of being worshipped by everyone, will finally come and fall
down before the feet of the faithful believers of God at the city of the Lord, the Zion of
the Holy One of Israel, the New Jerusalem (Rev 21:2). By understanding it thus, Rev
13:14, 15 serves as one link between the messages to the seven churches and the second
half of Revelation.
202
The meaning of “Jews” in this text is addressed on pages 133-136.
Eduard Lohse, “Synagogue of Satan and Church of God: Jews and Christians in
203
the Book of Revelation,” SEÅ 58 (1993): 122.
104
Some commentators have reached the conclusion that in Revelation 13, the
dragon, the sea beast, and the land beast form an unholy trinity in parody to the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Spirit.204 Based upon this understanding, I would like to suggest
that a holy host of Revelation could be listed as God the Father, God the Son, God the
Holy Spirit, and the assembly of the faithful, which is the image of the Son. Thus,
according to Revelation 13, the unholy parody of the holy host could be listed as follows:
the dragon, the sea beast, the land beast, and the assembly of Satan, which is the image of
the beast.
Allusions to Isaiah 40
Isaiah 40 is a message of comfort to the Judeans who were facing political crisis.
In the midst of the message, there is an exhortation addressed to the Judeans “with the
purpose of persuading them that, appearances to the contrary not withstanding, their God
had the power and the will to bring about in the political arena what he promised in the
initial prophetic proclamation (vv 1-11). . . . The idea is to lead those addressed to put
aside their doubts and give their assent to faith in” the LORD “as the all-powerful
creator.”205 The structure of Isaiah 40 could be arranged in chiastic form:
A Proclaim the Coming of the LORD (vv. 1-11)
B Rhetorical Questions—the Incomparability of the Creator God (vv.
12-14)
204
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 729; See also W. G. Campbell, Reading
Revelation: A Thematic Approach (Cambridge: James Clarke and Co, 2012), 87; Robert
P. Vande Kappelle, Hope Revealed: The Message of the Book of Revelation Then and
Now (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2013), 133; Joe E. Lunceford, “The Holy Trinity and
the Unholy Trinity,” in Parody and Counterimaging in the Apocalypse (Eugene, OR:
Wipf & Stock, 2009), 239-251.
205
Joseph Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40-55: A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary, AB (New York: Doubleday, 2002), 190.
105
C The Insignificance of the Nations (vv. 15-17)
D The Uniqueness of God versus the Nothingness of
the Idol (vv. 18-20)
C’ The Insignificance of the Nations (vv. 21-24)
B’ Rhetorical Questions—the Incomparability of the Creator God (vv.
25-26)
A’ Call for Waiting for the Coming of the LORD (vv. 27-31)
In the center of this disputation is the question “To whom, then, will you compare
God? What likeness will you compare him to?” (v.18). The question is answered by
another rhetorical question raised by God—A man made idol image of wood? No! In
Isaiah 40, God’s uniqueness lies in his creatorship. No false gods can be compared to him.
The language of Revelation 13 alludes to Isaiah 40 thematically. Both passages have
nations or inhabitants of the earth who worship false gods and are hostile to the faithful
believers of God. Both include rhetorical questions. In Rev 13:4, the question is asked by
the inhabitants of the earth regarding the sea beast, “Who is like the beast?” This question
is a parody of “the formula expressing the uniqueness”206 of the LORD in Isa 40:18. The
sarcastic intention of the author of Revelation bursts out from this question, because the
answer is already given in Isaiah 40.

The verbal parallel comes in Rev 13:14, 15 where the word “image” occurs. As
noted above, the Hebrew word pesel is generally rendered by the Greek gluptos (40 times)
in the LXX, but only twice is it rendered as eikōn, which is found in Isa 40:19, 20. In the
entire LXX, these are the only two verses where eikōn translates from the Hebrew pesel.
This fact makes the allusion of Rev 13:14, 15 to Isa 40:19, 20 more certain.
206
Ibid., 192.
106
The thematic and verbal parallels between Revelation 13 and Isa 40:19, 20 help
the author to view Revelation 13 not only as a symbolic presentation of the final battle
between the bestial powers and the Creator God, but also as a message of comfort and
hope. The question raised by the inhabitants of the earth has already been answered long
ago by God himself in the book of Isaiah. God is able to bring the rulers of this world to
nothingness (Isa 40: 23), just like the idol image they worshipped. Isaiah 40 ends with a
call for an “attitude of waiting with hope (31a). . . . Biblical Hebrew differentiates
between waiting as a neutral activity, something to be endured . . . , and waiting with
hope and the anticipation of a positive outcome . . . , which is what is meant here by
waiting for” the LORD.207 This call for waiting with hope and in the anticipation of
God’s mighty acts resonates with Rev 13:10 where the saints are called to have
hupomonē kai ē pistis, patient endurance and faith in anticipation. Thus, by alluding to
Isaiah 40, Revelation 13 became not only a message of comfort but a chapter filled with
the anticipation that the Creator God would do something mighty on behalf of his
believers in crisis, thus paving the way for the coming of the scenes in the next chapter,
Revelation 14.
Allusions to Daniel 3
It is a common understanding among students of the Bible that Revelation 13

needs to be studied in the light of Daniel 3,208 where King Nebuchadnezzar attempted to
207
Ibid., 194.
208
Hans K. LaRondelle, Chariots of Salvation: The Biblical Drama of
Armageddon (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1987), 156.
Cf. Hans K. LaRondelle, “Babylon: Anti-Christian Empire,” in Symposium on
Revelation—Book II, DARCOM 7, ed. Frank B. Holbrook (Silver Springs, MD: Biblical
Research Institute, General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventists), 173; Aune,
Revelation 6-16, 761; Beale, The Book of Revelation, 699; Beale, The Use of Daniel, 242-
244; J. M. Ford, Revelation, 223.
107
improve the image shown to him in the dream or prevent the inevitable coming of the
kingdom of God.209 William Shea considers that the image could be the image of King
Nebuchadnezzar, but it was most likely an image of Marduk, Babylon’s patron god.
Whoever bowed down and worshipped it would also show allegiance and loyalty to
Marduk. Therefore, “this scene could be viewed as a loyalty oath on the part of all of the
civil servants of Babylon.”210
Marduk (Bel) was the patron god of the city of Babylon, and was believed by the
people there to be “nothing less than the saviour of the universe and the creator of
mankind.”211 The Babylonian creation story depicted him as such. Every year, the Akītu,
the Babylonian New Year festival,212 was an occasion for “a cyclical renewal of his [the
kings] status as the divinely mandated ruler.”213 The king of Babylon would submit the
Zdravko Stefanović, Daniel: Wisdom to the Wise (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press,
209
2007), 126.
210
William H. Shea, “Daniel 3: Extra-Biblical Texts and the Convocation on the
Plain of Dura,” AUSS 20 (1982): 30. For possible interpretations of the golden image of
Nebuchadnezzar as the image of Marduk see Z. Stefanović, 122, 126, 130, 142.
Some think that the golden image could also be a statue of a man, most probably
of the King himself. Hippolytus of Rome interprets the statue fashioned by
Nebuchadnezzar as made in reminiscence of his dream. See Paul-Alain Beaulieu, “The
Babylonian Background of the Motif of the Fiery Furnace in Daniel 3,” JBL 128 (2009):
276.
Jeremy A. Black, “The New Year Ceremonies in Ancient Babylon: ‘Taking Bel
211
by the Hand’ and a Cultic Picnic,” Religion 11 (1981): 40.

212
K. van der Toorn considers that, “the designation of the Akitu-Festival as the
Babylonian New Year Festival is, at least in one respect, misleading,” since the
Babylonians celebrate two Akitu-Festivals a year. Since he himself continually uses this
designation, I will still use it for the sake of convenience. See K. van der Toorn, “The
Babylonian New Year Festival: New Insights from the Cuneiform Texts and Their
Bearing on Old Testament Study,” in Congress Volume, Leuven, 1989, ed. J. A. Emerton
(Leiden: Brill, 1991), 332.
213
Roy E. Gane, Ritual Dynamic Structure, Gorgias Dissertations 14 (New Jersey:
Gorgias Press, 2004), 241. For ritual text and analysis of the rite see ibid., 238-243.
108
symbol of his authority, i.e., “his staff of office, ring, mace and crown”214 to the šešgallu,
the high priest of the Esagil temple of Marduk. This šešgallu then “strikes the king across
the face . . . and, pulling him by the ears, forces him to kneel before the god”215 so that
the king could confess his faithful service to his god before Marduk.216 After the
confession, the šešgallu replied to assured the king of Bel’s favor by saying that “He will
destroy your enemies, defeat your adversaries,”217 and the king’s insignia was put on him
again by the šešgallu. Once more he strikes the king on his face for the sake of an omen:
if there were tears coming out from the king’s eyes, Bel was happy; otherwise, Bel was
angry.218
Thus, according to Babylonian ideology, King Nebuchadnezzar was authorized
by his god Marduk to exercise his kingship over nations and loyalty to the god Marduk
meant loyalty to the king. Thus, in Daniel 3, we have King Nebuchadnezzar, the future
beast like king, receiving authority from his god, Marduk. He then set up the image of
Marduk for people from all nations to worship and pledge their loyalty to it, on pain of
death. By bowing down to the image of the god that King Nebuchadnezzar set up, the
people pledged their loyalty to Nebuchadnezzar as well as his god (Dan 3:18). Thus, in
Daniel 3 “god, king and nation are closely interwoven and support each other.”219
214
Black, “The New Year Ceremonies in Ancient Babylon,” 44.
215
Ibid.
216
The confession formula of the king goes like this: “I have not sinned, Lord of
the lands, I have not been negligent of your godhead. I have not destroyed Babylon, I
have not ordered her to be dispersed. I have not made Esagil quake, I have not forgotten
its rites. I have not struck the privileged citizens in the face, I have not humiliated them. I
have paid attention to Babylon, I have not destroyed her walls.” Ibid.
217
Ibid.
218
Ibid.
219
John E. Goldingay, Daniel, WBC (Dallas: Word Books, 1989), 70.
109
Revelation 13 alludes verbally, thematically, and structurally to Daniel 3.
Verbally, both passages contain two key words, i.e., “image” (Dan 3: 3, 5; Rev 13: 15)
and “worship” (Dan 3: 5; Rev 13:15). Thematically, both have the concept of setting up
an image; both have reference to the number “6” in relation to the image (Dan 3:1; Rev
13:18). Both passages refer to commands for people from various nations and speaking
different languages to worship the image (Dan 3:4; Rev 13:15). Both pronounce a death
decree on those who refuse to worship (Dan 3:6; Rev 13:15). Structural parallels between
these two chapters start with the setting up of the image, then follow with a command to
worship the image, and end with a death decree on those who do not do so. Aune
summarizes the structural parallels well when he comments that “The author [of
Revelation] has clearly modeled vv 14-15 on Dan 3:4, where Nebuchadnezzar king of
Babylon set up a golden image and ordered that all peoples, nations, and languages
worship the image on pain of death.”220
Allusions to Acts 2
Scholars have noticed that Revelation 13 depicts a counterfeit to Pentecost, which
is described in Acts 2.221 The outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles on the day
220
221
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 709; R. Stefanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ,
430. It may be questioned whether John had access to the text of the book of Acts, thus
casting doubt on the possibility of John’s alluding to Acts 2. The outpouring of the Holy
Spirit as recorded in Acts 2 must have been a well known story among the early
Christians. It is reasonable to assume that such an important event in the history of the
early church must have been preserved orally with more or less accurate accounts
regarding crucial points of the history. The text of Acts reflects the oral tradition since
Luke assures us that he collected his materials for his book from eye witnesses. So when
I propose that Revelation 13 alludes to Acts 2, I’m actually saying that Revelation 13
alludes to the original story that happened in Acts 2, and not necessarily the recording in
text itself. I suggest that Revelation 13 alludes to the two main points of the story as
recorded in the Acts text, i. e., the pouring of the Spirit and the speaking of the apostles
afterwards, which are the two essential points of the whole story.
110
of the Pentecost, interpreted in the context of Revelation 5, is seen as the result of the
enthronement of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:30-36, Rev 5) by God the Father.222 In Rev 13:2,
the sea beast is said to have received ton thronon (the throne) from the dragon. Thus
Revelation 13 also occurs in the context of the enthronement of the sea beast.
In particular, the language of Rev 13:14, 15 parallels the language of Acts 2:2-6
verbally, thematically and structurally. Exact verbal parallels in terms of the word
“breath” are not found between these two passages, but the same verbal root can be
traced in the narratives. In Rev 13:15, the land beast is said to give pneuma to the image
while in Acts 2:2 a strong pnoēs filled the house where the disciples were sitting and
rested upon each one of them. Both of these nouns are derived from the same verb root,
pneō (blow). The effect of the breath/wind/spirit in Rev 13:15 is that the image started to
speak while in Acts 2:4, the apostles started to speak. The same verb laleō is used in both
passages. In both sections, people from various nations are the targeted group that is
listening to the speech and being affected by the speech.
Actually, the parallels between Acts 2:2-6 and Rev 13:14, 15 can be traced back
to their common origin in the Genesis creation story, especially Gen 2:7, the creation of
the first human being in the image of God, who breathed into him the breath of life.223
For the preservation of the controlled oral tradition in the early church, see
Kenneth Bailey, “Informal Controlled Oral Tradition and the Synoptic,” AJT 5 (1991):
34-54; Kenneth Bailey, “Middle Eastern Oral Tradition and the Synoptic Gospels,”
ExpTim 106 (1995): 363-367. See also discussions on stability of oral tradition
transmission by Paul T. Penley, The Common Tradition Behind Synoptic Sayings of
Judgment and John’s Apocalypse: An Oral Interpretive Tradition of Old Testament
Prophetic Material (New York: T & T Clark, 2010), 2-34.
222
R. Stefanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 214, 215. For detailed discussion on
Revelation 5 being the enthronement of Jesus Christ, see Ranko Stefanović, The
Background and Meaning of the Sealed Book of Revelation 5, AUSDDS 22 (Berrien
Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1996).
223
Between Gen 2:7 and Acts 2:2-4, exact verbal parallels are not found, but the
same verbal root can be found in the narratives. In Gen 2:7, God breathed into the man
111
The verbal, thematic, and structural parallels between these two passages point back to
the creation stories of Genesis 1 and 2. The event described in Acts 2 “is often
considered the birthday of the Christian church.”224 In fact, to be precise, it is the creation
story of a new humanity, i.e., the New Testament church, which is made in the image of
God. It is a foretaste of the eschatological blessings of the restoration of God’s image in
human beings.
Again, since in Acts 2 the apostles were the ones receiving the breath of God, and
they started to speak and convert people to the gospel of Jesus Christ, it is possible that
the allusion to Acts 2 by Rev 13:14, 15 suggests that the image of the beast is also a
group of people who, through the transforming power of the false spirit of the land beast,
totally lost the image of God and are re-created in the image of the beast, and become the
spokes persons of the beast for the final battle of the cosmic struggle.
Cultural Background of “The Image of the Beast”
The apocalyptic text is imprinted by the cultures of its age. Paulien points out that
“If the entire book of Revelation was intended as a communication for the benefit of
seven churches in the Roman province of Asia (Rev 1:4), it should not surprise us that its
the pnoēn of life, while in Acts 2:2, a strong pnoēn filled the house where the disciples
were sitting and rested upon each one of them. Both of these nouns are derived from the
same verb root, pneō. There are thematic and structural parallels between these two
passages. First, although Gen 2:7 did not have the word “image,” it is assumed that here
the man who is made was formed in the image of God, and there is no “image” in Acts
2:2-4. It could also be assumed that the apostles were remolded in the image of God
through the transforming power of the Spirit as a foretaste of the eschatological blessing
and the first fruits of the new humanity. Second, both passages have the action of
breathing the breath of life or spirit. Third, the result of both of the breathings is the
ability to speak, as is made clear in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Gen 2:7.
224
Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Acts of the Apostles: A New Translation with
Introduction and Commentary, AB (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 237.
112
author made use of symbols and concepts from everyday life in the region.”225 Thus, it is
no surprise that the language of Rev 13:14, 15 reflects the religious life of the Ancient
Near East (ANE) and contains cultic language commonly used in the ANE.
The Greek term eikōn and its Hebrew/Aramaic equivalents tselem are used to
denote a cult statue.226 The study in the previous section shows that Revelation 13
disclosed a cult of the first beast in conflict with the worship of the true God. Thus, the
image of the beast in Rev 13:14, 15 could be rightly understood, in a cultic sense, as the
cult image of its god which is the beast from the sea.
Revelation 13 provides some details about this cult image of the sea beast that are
crucial to the understanding of the motif of the image of the beast. First, this cult image
started to speak after it was given breath by the land beast (v. 15); second, it had the
power to force people to worship the first beast and itself on pain of death (v. 15), for it
was apparently a political power that had judicial functions; third, it had the power to
effect an economical boycott (vv. 16, 17), so it also had economic power. Thus, the task
of this section is to provide a cultural background of “the image of the beast” in
preparation for the identification of echoes of cult practices in Revelation 13 for a better
understanding of the motif of the image of the beast. In this part, I will first look at the
cultic practices of the ANE in relation to the cult statue and its god; second, I will explore
the relationship between the cult statue and its god; third, I will study the power of the
cult statue and its god in the life of the community. Finally, echoes of cultic backgrounds
in Revelation 13 will be identified.
225
Paulien, “Allusions, Exegetical Method,” 32.
226
See Edward M. Curtis, “Idol, Idolatry,” ABD 3:377. For the Aramaic
equivalent, see Zainab Bahrani, The Graven Image: Representation in Babylonia and
Assyria, Archaeology, Culture and Society (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press, 2003), 123-205.
113
Cultic Practices in the ANE
This survey of cultic practices in the ANE will start with two prominent ANE
civilizations, i.e., the Mesopotamian and the Egyptian. Then I will survey cultic practices
in the Greco-Roman world with special emphasis on the Babylonian and Egyptian cults.
Cultic Practices in Mesopotamia
According to David Freedberg and B. J. Collins, what was common to all cultic
statues was “the presence of the deity. To attract the deity to the statue, each image had to
undergo a ritual of consecration and without such a rite, the inanimate, manmade object
could not be imbued with life.”227
The Mesopotamians had an anthropomorphic way of looking at their cults:
although they thought the gods resided in heaven and the underworld, in every
Mesopotamian city many gods also lived in their own temples. Furthermore, each city
also had its own patron god residing in the main temple, represented by an
anthropomorphic statue. The statues were taken as manifestations of the gods on earth;
they were not mere images, but extensions of the personality of the gods. The images
227
David Freedberg, The Power of Images: Studies in the History and Theory of
Response (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989), 82. See also B. J. Collins, “A
Statue for the Deity: Cult Images in Hittite Anatolia,” in Cult Image and Divine
Presentation in the Ancient Near East, ASOR Book Series10, ed. Brian B. Schmidt
(Boston: ASOR, 2005), 29.
At this point, I would like to thank Professor Aune for his insightful comment on
Rev 13:15a, which reads, “This [breathing of life into the image] reflects the world of
ancient magic in which the animation of images of the gods was an important means for
securing oracles.” See Aune, Revelation 6-16, 762. It was after reading this comment of
his in 2006 that I started my research on Rev 13:15a in the direction of finding
connections between the ancient rites of consecration and the breathing of life into the
image in Rev 13:15a.
The most recent, and probably only book which spends some pages to connect
Rev 13:15a with the ANE rites of consecration of cult images is written by Rodney
Lawrence Thomas, Magical Motifs in the Book of Revelation, Library of New Testament
Studies 416, ed. Mark Goodacre (New York: T & T Clark, 2010), 72-74.
114
were identified with their gods and were treated like living beings. They ate, slept, woke
up and were dressed with clothes. They were the focus of religious activities and
ceremonies, and offerings were presented to them regularly and on special occasions.228
Taking into consideration the centrality of these statues to the cult, “it may be
assumed that a ritual for assimilating the finite, physical image to the transcendent,
intangible god and transforming the human manufactured icon into a living deity was one
of the most significant practices in Mesopotamian religion.”229 Every cult statue, after its
creation, underwent a ritual of transition,230 through which life was breathed into the
statue, a name was given to it as a specific deity, thus bringing it to life.231 By then, the
statue had become a god. No longer was it referred to as ṣalmu, the Akkadian word for
image or statue. It washes and eats food everyday just like a living being.232 The statue
has entire wardrobes to store its clothes and objects of adornment, and these were
228
Marc J. H. Linssen, The Cults of Uruk and Babylon: The TempleRitual Texts as
Evidence for Hellenistic Cult Practice, CM 25 (Boston: Brill, 2004), 12.
Victor Avigdor Hurowitz, “The Mesopotamian God Image, from Womb to

229
Tomb,” JAOS 123 (2003), 147.

230
Peggy Boden gives a detailed analysis of this rite as a ritual of transition in her
doctoral dissertation. See Peggy J. Boden, “The Mesopotamian Washing of the Mouth
(mīs pî) Ritual: An Examination of Some of the Social and Communication Strategies
Which Guided the Development and Performance of the Ritual Which Transferred the
Essence of the Deity into Its Temple Statue” (PhD diss., Johns Hopkins University,
1998). Michael B. Dick supports her view, and calls her analysis “insightful.” See
Michael B. Dick, “The Mesopotamian Cult Statue: A Sacramental Encounter with
Divinity,” in Cult Image and Divine Representation in the Ancient Near East, ASOR
Book Series 10, ed. Brian B. Schmidt (Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research,
2005), 60.
231
T. Jacobsen, “Graven Image,” in Ancient Israelite Religion, Essays in Honor of
F. M. Cross, eds. P. D. Miller, P. D. Hanson, and S. D. McBride (Philadelphia: Fortress,
1987), 15-32. See also A. Leo Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia: Portrait of a Dead
Civilization (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977), 186.
232
Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia, 183-198.
115
changed, repaired, and washed on a regular basis.233 This ritual of transition is commonly
known as the mīs pî ritual, the mouth-opening and/or mouth-washing rite,234 which was a
widespread practice in the ancient Near East, found in Mesopotamia as well as Egypt,235
without which the statue was a mere inanimate product manufactured by human hands.236
233
Bahrani, The Graven Image, 171.
234
The rites of mouth-washing and mouth-opening are most often found side by
side in ritual texts. See the Ninevite ritual text lines 58, 104, 108, 150, 161 in Christopher
Walker and Michael B. Dick, “The Induction of the Cult Image in Ancient Mesopotamia:
The Mesopotamian mīs pî Ritual,” in Born in Heaven, Made on Earth: The Making of the
Cult Image in the Ancient Near East, ed. Michael B. Dick (Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1999) , 87. Berlejung points out that “In Babylonia, the term mouth-washing
has not needed further supplementation (mouth-opening) since the 9th century. . . . mīs pî
is the terminus technicus of the Babylonian ritual language pertaining to both actions.”
See Angelika Berlejung, “Washing the Mouth: The Consecration of Divine Images in
Mesopotamia,” in The Image and the Book, ed. K. van der Toorn. CBET 21 (Leuven:
Peeters, 1997), 49.
235
For Mesopotamian practice, see Angelika Berlejung, “Geheimnis und Ereignis.
Zur Funktion und Aufgabe der Kultbilder in Mesopotamien,” JBT 13 (1998): 31-51;
Berlejung, “Washing the Mouth,” 47-49; Walker and Dick, “The Induction of the Cult
Image,” 55-121. For Egyptian practices, see A. M. Blackman, “The Rite of the Opening
of the Mouth in Ancient Egypt and Babylonia,” JEA 10 (1924): 47-59; TDOT, 12:389;
David Lorton, “The Theology of Cult Statues in Ancient Egypt,” in Born in Heaven,
Made on Earth: The Making of the Cult Image in Ancient Near East, ed. Michael B. Dick
(Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999), 123-201; Eberhard Otto, Das ägyptische
Mundöffnungsritual (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 1960); Emily Teeter and John A.
Larson, Gold of Praise: Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honor of Edward F. Wente, SAOC
58, eds. Thomas A. Holland and Thomas G. Urban (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1999).
The source materials for an almost complete reconstruction of the mouth
opening/mouth washing ritual of a divine image in Mesopotamia come from tablets of
“Neo-Assyrian or Neo/Late-Babylonian date (eighth-fifth centuries B.C.E., but second
century for some fragments from Uruk). They come from Nineveh, Ashur, Sultantepe
(Turkey), Hama (Syria), Babylon, Sippar, Nippur, and Uruk.” Walker and Dick, “The
Induction of the Cult Image,” 67.
Egyptian sources are from New Kingdom period. A standard version is found in
the tomb of Rekhmire, Teeter and Larson, Gold of Praise, 70. For detailed ceremonies
and texts of the ritual see E. A. Wallis Budge, The Book of Opening the Mouth: The
Egyptian Texts with English Translations (New York: Benjamin Blom, Inc., 1972), 9-
209.
B. J. Collins has published a study on a Hurro-Hittite cult statue induction
ceremony. He compared the Hittite cult statue induction ceremony to the Mesopotamia
mīs pî rite. See B. J. Collins, “A Statue for the Deity,” 29-35. One of the unique rituals in
Hittite cult statue induction ceremony is the Ritual Pits, during which the statue of the
116
It is recorded on the ritual tablets that “This statue without its mouth opened
cannot smell incense, cannot eat food, cannot drink water.”237 These phrases are
reminiscent of Psalm 135 and Jeremiah 10:5.238 By such rituals, the physical form of the
statue was animated, and the statue did not just idly stand but actually became a
manifestation of the god it represented. “The image was then indeed empowered to
speak, or to see, or to act, through various culturally-subscribed channels.”239 Bernhardt
concludes that what made the divine image divine and living was neither the physical
material, nor the form it was shaped into, “but the divine spirit which animates the image
as it takes its dwelling in the image.”240
goddess is dipped into a pit several times. B. J. Collins suggests that “the pulling of the
deity out of the pit was symbolic of her rebirth in a new form.” Ibid., 31. Hittite sources
come from ritual tablets from Kizzuwatna in southeastern Anatolia. For details of the
Hittite ritual see R. Beal, “Dividing a God,” in Magic and Ritual in the Ancient World,
eds. P. Mirecki and M. Meyer (Leiden: Brill, 2002), 197-208.
236
Michael B. Dick, “The Relationship Between the Cult Image and the Deity,” in
Intellectual Life of the Ancient Near East: Papers Presented at the 43rd Rencontre
Assyriologique Internationale, Prague, July 1-5, 1996, ed. Jiří Prosecký (Prague: Oriental
Institute, 1998), 112.
237
See the Sultantepe tablet STT 200 incantation text lines 43, 46 in Walker and
Dick, “The Induction of the Cult Image,” 99; see also Erich Ebeling, Tod und Leben nach
den Vorstellungen der Babylonier (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1931), 120.
238
Dick, “The Relationship Between the Cult Image and the Deity,” 112.
239
Irene J. Winter, “Idols of the King: Royal Images as Recipients of Ritual
Action in Ancient Mesopotamia,” JRS 6 (1992): 13.
240
Karl Heinz Bernhardt, Gott und Bild; ein Beitrag zur Begründung und Deutung
des Bilderverbotes im Alten Testament (Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1956), 28.
For a detailed description of the ritual as well as the texts of the ritual tablets, see Walker
and Dick, “The Induction of the Cult Image,” 68-117. See also Boden, “The
Mesopotamian Washing of the Mouth (mīs pî) Ritual,” 171-220; S. Smith, “The
Babylonian Ritual for the Consecration and Induction of a Divine Statue,” JRAS 1
(1925): 37-60; G. Meier, “Die Ritualtafel der Serie ‘Mundwaschung’,” AfO 12 (1937/39):
40-45.
117
In Mesopotamia, the Mouth-Opening rite was a process of “vivification,
purification and rebirth.”241 After the rite, the image, having possessed all senses and
divine powers, started to reign over its realm and to enjoy its rights, such as offerings,
and to fulfill its obligations as a god, such as preserving life and divine order, and giving
oracles.242 Berlejung summarizes the effect of the mouth-washing ritual as a
consolidation between god and image. It guaranteed the deity’s active participation in the
temple rituals in the form of its statue. Through the statue, the deity established its living
contact with the world. The statue thus became the epiphany of its god and was able to
reign over its subjects and interact and communicate with its earthly subjects and partners,
i.e., the king, the priests and the believers.243
Cultic Practices in Egypt
As in Mesopotamia, in Egypt the cult statue was not regarded as just a lifeless
copy; it was believed to have life in itself. “The image bore the reality that it
described.”244 Egypt, like Mesopotamia, had a ritual performed on newly created statues
called Ouphôr, literally meaning “opening the mouth.” It was an important Egyptian rite
used to vivify mummies, cult statues, and other images in the funerary cult and temple
liturgy.245 Through the rite of Opening the Mouth the image was “identified with the god,
and mysteriously imbued with his life and power,”246 and after that, the statue would
241
Berlejung, “Washing the Mouth,” 56.
242
Ibid., 68.
243
Ibid., 71, 72.
244
Hans Bonnet, Reallexikon der ägyptischen Religionsgeschichte (Berlin: Walter
de Gruyter, 2000), 118.
Ian S. Moyer and Jacco Dieleman, “Miniaturization and the Opening of the
245
Mouth in a Greek Magical Text (PGM XII.270-350),” JANER 3 (2003), 49.
118
begin to enjoy offerings such as food and beer since it was endowed with life and thus
needed care and nourishment.247
The major purpose of the Ouphôr was to open the mouth in order to allow the
image to begin breathing, and thus come to life. In fact, the first century C.E. Demotic
funerary texts, some of the latest written versions of an opening-of-the-mouth spell, are
entitled “Liturgy of Opening the Mouth for Breathing.”248 Like the Mesopotamian mīs pî,
the most common interpretation of the Egyptian Ouphôr ritual has been expressed by the
concept of “animation.”249 Like the Mesopotamians, the Egyptians ignored the
manufacturing of these statues by human hands, and attributed their creation exclusively
to a god.250
246
Blackman, “The Rite of the Opening of the Mouth,” 57.
247
Morenz describes the care of the image in Egypt in the following passage:
“Each morning the priest opens the shrine containing the image, prostrates himself before
it, cleanses it and perfumes it with incense, adorns and embellishes it, places crowns upon
it. Anoints it and beautifies it with cosmetic. Finally he wipes away his footprints. Each
motion is carried out with due ceremony. . . . The purpose of this cultivation . . . was to
furnish the image with vital force and to ensure that the deity—with whom it is not
identical—lodges within it.” Siegfried Morenz, Egyptian Religion, trans. Ann E. Keep
(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1973), 88.
248
Moyer and Dieleman, “Miniaturization,” 62.
249
“Wir kennen es unter dem Namen ‘Mundöffnung’; tatsächlich hat es aber den
Zweck, alle Organe gebrauchsfähig und damit lebendig zu machen.” Siegfried Morenz,
Äegyptische Religion (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1960), 163. “These acts were supposed to
open not only the mouth of the statue, but the eyes and ears as well, indeed endow it with
the faculties of a living person.” Blackman, “The Rite of the Opening of the Mouth,” 55;
cf. R. Bjerre Finnestad, “The Meaning and Purpose of Opening the Mouth in Mortuary
Contexts,” Numen 25 (1978): 118. Lorton also argued convincingly that the Egyptian
mouth-opening rituals were supposed to be performed on cult statues as well. See Lorton,
“The Theology of Cult Statues,” 149-151.
Lorton, “The Theology of Cult Statues,” 185. In one of the papyri from the
250
reign of Ramesses II, Amun is said to have fashioned himself. Ibid.
119
Cultic Practices in Greco-Roman World
Inscriptions from the Greco-Roman period suggest that the Near Eastern popular
religion must have remained practically unchanged through the centuries, because the
religious inscriptions do not reflect the impact of new fashions.251 In fact, one of the main
objections to Christianity was that it was not a traditional religion. People like Celsus
defended tradition, believing that “it is impious to abandon the customs which have
existed in each locality from the beginning.”252 The religion which was referred to by
Celsus had a long tradition and was well preserved.253 This includes the cultic practices in
the ANE.
Writing as early as 1940, Edwyn Bevan mentions the rite of dedication of the cult
statues in the Greco-Roman world, saying that when an image was set up, it went through
certain consecration ceremonies.254 He also points out that some pagan writers indicated
that the consecration ceremony would change the nature of the image.255 Bevan does not
mention the names of these consecration ceremonies, but it is plausible to assume that the
consecration ceremonies Bevan referred to was either the mouth-opening ritual or its
equivalent.
251
Javier Teixidor, The Pagan God: Popular Religion in the Greco-Roman Near
East (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977), 6.
252
Ibid., 11.
253
Ibid., 12.
254
Dewyn Bevan, Holy Images: An Inquiry into Idolatry and Image-Worship in
Ancient Paganism and in Christianity (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1940), 33.
255
Ibid. For example, in his dialogue, Minucius Felix put these following sarcastic
words into the mouth of a Christian disputant: “When does this god come into being? The
image is molten, hammered or carved. It is not yet a god. Next it is soldered, pieced
together, set up on its base. No, it is not a god yet. Then it is decorated, consecrated,
prayed to. Ah, now at last it is a god, when man has so willed and performed the
consecration.” Ibid.
120
Babylonian Cults in Greco-Roman World
The continuation of Babylonian culture in the Hellenistic world is a well
established fact. Scholars like L. T. Doty, G. J. P. McEwan, A. Kuhrt, S. Sherwin-White,
J. Oelsner, and R. J. van der Spek have shown that Babylonian cities, especially Uruk and
Babylon, flourished even after their occupation by the Greeks. Evidences from
archaeology and written documents indicate that the Babylonians still kept their ancient
traditions including the use of cuneiform.256
In the Hellenistic period, the ancient Esagila temple in Babylon continued to be
the most important temple in the city. It remained in use at least until the first century
C.E.. Other temples, such as the temple of Ištar of Babylon, are attested in the archive of
a temple official.257 Not only the ritual texts and other noncultic sources but also a large
number of cult songs clearly show that the Babylonian pantheon remained unchanged in
the Hellenistic period. Although most of these texts were probably not produced in the
Hellenistic period but were of older origins, they were still used for the cult of the old
gods.258
In particular, the ancient mouth-opening ritual is one of several kinds of washing
activities in the Hellenistic temple ritual texts.259 Concerning the cult statues of Uruk and
Babylon in the Hellenistic period, Linssen comments that the image of a god was
manufactured, i.e. given birth to, with much care. Rituals and incantations were
256
Linssen, The Cults of Uruk and Babylon, 1. “Whether Akkadian was still used
as a living language in the Hellenistic period is uncertain, but on the basis of the so-called
Graeco-Babyloniaca tablets and Classical sources it has been argued that cuneiform could
well have been read up to the third century A.D.” Ibid.
257
Ibid., 13, 14.
258
Ibid.
259
Ibid., 151.
121
conducted for the sake of endowing life upon the statue. Among these rituals were the
‘washing of the mouth’ (mīs pî) and the ‘opening of the mouth’ (pīt pî), after which the
statue became a living being and was able to eat and drink.260
Egyptian Cults in Greco-Roman World
In Egypt, inscriptions were found at the temple of Hathor at Dendera, built in the
first centuries B.C.E. and C.E., and at the Ptolemaic temple of Horus at Edfu referring to
the performance of the “opening of the mouth” ritual in order to enliven statues of the
gods, and even the entire temple.261 The opening of the mouth was also performed during
the daily service of the temple and at certain festival occasions, in order to revive or
awaken an image of the god.262
260
Ibid., 153, 154. Linssen noticed that “While pīt pî is not attested in the
Hellenistic temple ritual texts, we have some evidence for mīs pî.” Ibid. From my
previous study, I have noted that Berlejung points out that “In Babylonia, the term mouth-
washing has not needed further supplementation (mouth-opening) since the 9th century. . .
. mīs pî is the terminus technicus of the Babylonian ritual language pertaining to both
actions.” Berlejung, “Washing the Mouth,” 49. There were four texts from Uruk,
probably from the Hellenistic period, describing the end of the mīs pî ritual. The texts
show that there were some new elements added to the ritual, but it appears to be in many
ways unchanged in comparison with the earlier version of the ritual, cf. Gilbert J. P.
McEwan, Priest and Temple in Hellenistic Babylonia, FAOS 4 (Wiesbaden: Steiner,
1981), 164, 165.
261
Moyer and Dieleman, “Miniaturization,” 62. For the creation of a statue, see
Dieter Kurth, Treffpunkt der Götter: Inschriften aus dem Tempel des Horus von Edfu
(Zürich: Artemis, 1994), 116; For the consecration and animation of the temple of Edfu,
see A. M. Blackman and H. W. Fairman, “The consecration of an Egyptian Temple
According to the Use of Edfu,” JEA 32 (1946): 75-91; Kurth, Treffpunkt der Götter, 153-
156. According to Kurth’s note on p. 355, a similar text is found on the temple island of
Philae.
262
See Alexandre Moret, Le rituel du culte divin journalier en Égypte,
d'après les papyrus de Berlin et les textes du temple de Séti 1er, à Abydos. Biblothèque
d’études 14 (Paris: Leroux, 1902), 203, 204, 208. See also Kurth, Treffpunkt der Götter,
102, 158, 178.
122
As in Hellenistic Babylonia, the opening-of-the-mouth ritual in Egypt remained
unchanged after so many centuries. The earliest references to the “Opening of the Mouth”
are from the Fourth Dynasty (c. 2649-2513 B.C.E.), but there are papyri and hieroglyphic
inscriptions preserving different versions of the ritual down into the Greco-Roman period
in Egypt.263 There was also a book entitled “The Book of Opening the Mouth,” and
according to Budge, ritual services described in the book remained “substantially” in
their original form until the early years of the Roman Period. A copy of it was made even
after Christianity had been in Egypt for almost one hundred years.264 Some of the latest
written versions of an opening-of-the-mouth spell are the first century C.E. Demotic
funerary texts named “Liturgy of Opening the Mouth for Breathing.”265 One Nag
Hammadi codex entitled Asclepius, dating from between C.E. 260 and 310, contains
Egyptian traditional religious ideas. It talks about idols as having soul and breath, giving
prophecies.266 It can be assumed that there must have been rites similar to the opening-of-
the-mouth to enable the idols to have souls, and thus to be able to speak oracles.
The Power of the Cult Image
One needs to bear in mind that since the temple is considered the actual house of
gods or goddesses, the power of the cult image is expressed through the temple.267 Major
temples in the ANE were not just the religious centers of the community, but also
263
Moyer and Dieleman, “Miniaturization,” 61, 62.
264
Budge, The Book of Opening the Mouth, viii.
265
Moyer and Dieleman, “Miniaturization,” 62.
266
Bevan, Holy Images, 24, 25. Cf. “Asclepius, 21-29,” in NHL, 334.
267
Linssen, The Cults of Uruk and Babylon, 13.
123
political and economic centers in partnership with the palace.268 The following section
will address the threefold power of the cult image, i.e.religious power, political power
and economic power.
Religious Power
The cult image inside the temple was “a living embodiment of the god.”269 It was
not just a symbolic object, but “a fully realized existence.”270 The idol was called alarm-
dingir-ra (ṣalam ilī), i.e., the image of the god.271 It was the earthly manifestation of the
deity.272 It was fully identified with the god in question and was considered by the
268
Richard Zettler has done extensive research on the temple of Inanna at Nippur
based upon archaeological evidence and thousands of published and unpublished
Sumerian texts from the Inanna temple of Nippur. He illustrates that it played a central
role in the life and economy of a Sumerian city. See Richard L. Zettler, The Ur III
Temple of Inanna at Nippur: The Operation and Organization of Urban Religious
Institutions in Mesopotamia in the Late Third Millennium B.C., Berliner Beiträge zum
Vorderen Orient, Band 11 (Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag, 1992).
269
Boden, “The Mesopotamian Washing of the Mouth (mīs pî) Ritual,” 1.
270
Eiko Matsushima, “Divine Statues in Ancient Mesopotamia: Their Fashioning
and Clothing and Their Interaction,” in Official Cult and Popular Religion in the Ancient
Near East, ed. Eiko Matsushima (Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter, 1993), 219.
Dick also states that “There is no question that cuneiform texts from Mesopotamia, both
historical and religious, can refer to the statue as if it simply were the god him/herself.”
Dick, “Prophetic Parodies,” 32. Boden agrees with the above authors, saying that “It has
long been recognized that the temple statue was treated like a living entity in ancient
Mesopotamia.” Boden, “The Mesopotamian Washing of the Mouth (mīs pî) Ritual,” ii.
Her dissertation examines “some of the religious and ritual behavior that maintained the
belief that the statue could function as a god living among the human population.” Ibid.
The Kassite king of Babylon Agumkakrime (1602-1585 B.C.E.) talks of
Marduk’s return—not the statue’s—from captivity. Also the Babylonian Chronicles often
mention the taking of a god to Babylon, which was actually the cult statue of the deity.
There is a “customary omission” of the word “statue” when referring to divine
images in Hittite texts. For example, in his Annals, Hattusili I writes, “I carried off seven
deities to the temple of the Sun Goddess of Arinna.” See B. J. Collins, “A Statue for the
Deity,” 34.
271
Boden, “The Mesopotamian Washing of the Mouth (mīs pî) Ritual,” 7.
272
Ibid.
124
worshippers to actually be a living being, able to do whatever human beings do. In the
morning, it was provided with water for toilet, then it was dressed with luxury garments,
jewelry, and crowns. During the day, the members of its family or court paid visits to it,
and during festival occasions, it would become the focus of procession and outdoor
rituals. In its guise as a hunter, it even enjoyed the royal hunt.273
Apparently, it was through the image that the deity made his will known. He was
incarnated in it and gave oracles which affected the lives of humankind. The divine will
was expressed by the image’s nodding of its head and other physical acts. This way, the
god or goddess decreed building projects, appointed its favorite officials, judged among
its people, and initiated and blessed war plans. Thus, the sustenance for the vitality of the
temple statue was of vital importance to the community.274
Therefore, being the main medium of “divine self-disclosure (deus extra effigiem
non est),”275 and “a special theophany or epiphany by which the deity’s power and
efficacy are made available to the iconodule,”276 as long as the cult image of a city god
existed in the god’s main sanctuary, the god was present in his city, personally protecting
the king, the country and its people.277
However, the ancients maintained a clear distinction between the cult image and
the deity behind it. The destruction of a cult image did not imply the destruction of the
273
A. Leo Oppenheim, “The Significance of the Temple in the Ancient Near East,
Part II. The Mesopotamian Temple,” BA 7 (1944): 59.
274
Harold H. Nelson, “The Significance of the Temple in the Ancient Near East,
Part I. The Egyptian Temple,” BA 7 (1944), 50.
275
Dick, “The Mesopotamian Cult Statue,” 43.
276
Ibid.
277
Matsushima, “Divine Statues in Ancient Mesopotamia,” 209.
125
deity.278 Also it was not a problem to have the same deity having cult images in two
different temples.279
B. J. Collins noticed from Hittite iconography that there was also “a conceptual
distinction” between the image and the deity behind it. A relief on the Schimmel stag
rhyton presents two separate manifestations of the same divine being in one setting with
one seated and the other standing on a male deer. Collins suggests that the two images
may be the representations of the two manifestations of the deity in different realms, one
on earth and one in heaven. Collins writes: “In other words, the deity and his statue (or,
more likely, cult relief) are shown together.”280
Political Power
In ancient Babylon, the political head of the kingdom, the king, served as the high
priest of Babylon’s patron God, Marduk (Bel). During the akītu festival, the king of
Babylon “took Bel by the hand”281 to lead Bel onto his throne, thus fulfilling the king’s
ancient function as Bel’s chief priest.282 Black points out that the Babylonian New Year
festival affirmed the king as the high priest of Marduk, and acknowledged that the king
owed his kingship to the god.283 Many of the high ranking temple officials of main
temples such as Esagila in Babylon, Eanna in Uruk, Ebabbar at Sippar, were in close
relationship with kings and extended their influence over matters of internal and foreign
278
Dick, “Prophetic Parodies,” 33.
279
Ibid., 34.
280
B. J. Collins, “A Statue for the Deity,” 34.
281
Black, “The New Year Ceremonies in Ancient Babylon,” 45.
282
Ibid., 54.
283
Ibid.
126
politics of the country.284 Studies of some cuneiform tablets lead scholars to conclude that
the highest local political and legal authorities in ancient Babylonian cities were actually
temple authorities,285 who were the ones administering the lives of the local populaces.286
In ancient Egypt, the temple was a “specialized state organization, . . . a branch of
the government with its own function: to guarantee the goodwill of the gods.”287 The king
might have been originally seen as the “servant” of the god. But later, the ruler himself
became a god, the firstborn son of the god. The relationship between the god and the king
is a father-son relationship.288 Since the Egyptian temple was the place for the well-to-do
to become educated, it was natural that the priestly officers were also of the nobility.289
Economic Power
The earliest Mesopotamian temple mainly functioned as a place “of economic
redistribution,”290 facilitating various interactions between different social groups in the
284
M. A. Dandamayev, “State and Temple in Babylonia in the First Millennium B.
C,” in State and Temple Economy in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the
International Conference, 2 vols., ed. Edward Lipinski, OLA (Leuven: Departement
Oriëntalistiek, 1979), 2:589.
285
Amélie Kuhrt and Susan Sherwin-White, Hellenism in the East: The
Interaction of Greek and Non-Greek Civilizations from Syria to Central Asia after
Alexander (London: Duckworth, 1987), 61, 62, 64.
286
Ibid., 62.
287
Jac J. Janssen, “The Role of the Temple in the Egyptian Economy During the
New Kingdom,” in State and Temple Economy in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of
the International Conference, 2 vols., ed. Edward Lipinski, OLA (Leuven: Departement
Oriëntalistiek, 1979), 2:508, 509.
288
Nelson, “The Significance of the Temple,” 51.
289
W. Clarysse, “Egyptian Estate-Holders in the Ptolemaic Period,” in State and
Temple Economy in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the International Conference,
2 vols., ed. Edward Lipinski, OLA (Leuven: Departement Oriëntalistiek, 1979), 2:732.
290
Marc van de Mieroop, The Ancient Mesopotamian City (Oxford: Clarendon,
1997), 27.
127
society. A whole economic network was built around the temple.291 The daily ritual, the
festivals, the maintenance of the cult images of the gods or goddesses, the need of writing
and bookkeeping by the priests, the temple utensils and furniture, and building activities
and so on all required large numbers of personnel and a variety of works and products.
Thus, together with the palace, temples were also influential economic sectors. They
owned a large part of the arable land, and almost monopolized everything that could be
categorized as “industrial production.” They were in charge of foreign trade, which was
international as well as interstate.292
In the Old Babylonian period, temples are often mentioned in conjunction with
the royal palace as great economic organizations.293 It was not unusual to view the temple
in Babylonian cities as “the most influential economic factor.”294 Known by its wealth, “a
steady stream of royal gifts (partly spoils of war) and endowments, together with the
offerings brought in by the pious poor, extended more and more the landed property of
the temple, filled its warehouses and added glamour to its sanctuaries.”295 Numerous serfs
and slaves of the temple worked on the land and pastures owned by the temples. The
temple workshops manufactured a variety of goods, not only for the needs of the god or
goddess and their priests, but also for export so that the temple could purchase foreign
goods, such as precious metals, stones and timber which were not available in Babylonia.
291
For details see ibid., 27, 28.
292
M. I. Finley, The Ancient Economy (Berkeley: University of California Press,
1973), 28.
293
Gwendolyn Leick, ed., The Babylonian World, The Routledge Worlds (New
York: Routledge, 2007), 190, 200, 204.
294
Ibid., 200.
295
Oppenheim, “The Significance of the Temple,” 61.
128
Oppenheim writes that, “It is easy to imagine how such a thriving and ambitious
institution influenced the economic life of its city by creating the pattern and showing the
effects of international trade and commercial efficiency, not to speak of the work and
money it procured for the merchants, craftsmen, and artists of the city.”296
The Neo-Babylonian period was in many aspects a continuation of the earlier
periods of Mesopotamian history. Temples together with the palaces, were the two main
economic agents.297 The Neo-Babylonian kings even used temples as “organs of political
and economic control.”298 Major temples, such as Esagila in Babylon, owned a large part
of the land, hundreds of slaves, a great number of cattle, sheep and fowl, and took part in
business transactions and trade.299
In the Hellenistic Babylonia, temples continued to act as economic centers
collecting taxes (tithes), occupying land, owning cattle and slaves, and functioning as
banks in money-lending and participating in trade. Thus, a great number of citizens
earned their income by performing certain jobs in relationship with the temple. Together
with the palace, the temple controlled the land and economic activities.300
In the Hellenistic Asia Minor, temples continued their old tradition and functioned
as sacred banks for the depositing of treasure and money-lending. The temple of Artemis
of Ephesus was a bank that lasted from ancient times until the Roman regime. “Because
296
Ibid., 61, 62.
297
Leick, The Babylonian World, 233.
298
Samuel Greengus, “Legal and Social Institutions of Ancient Mesopotamia,” in
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, ed. Jack M. Sasson (New York: Charles Scribner’s
Sons, 1995), 474.
299
Dandamayev, “State and Temple in Babylonia,” 2:589.
300
129
of this Aristides calls Ephesus ‘the common treasury of Asia and her recourse in
need.’”301 According to Van der Spek, the Hellenistic king was the benefactor of the
temples. The king’s political and military plans might be supported by the temples,
morally and financially, and in times of want, kings would also rob temple funds.302
In the Greco-Roman world, temples in Asia Minor maintained their roles as
significant economic entities.303 Artemis of Ephesus owned “quarries, pastures, salt-pans,
and fisheries, . . . the goddess was mistress of extensive estates in the Cayster valley.”304
Echoes in Rev 13:14, 15 of the Cultic Practices of

the ANE and the Greco-Roman World
In order to easily identify the echoes, it is necessary to summarize the studies
done in the previous section. The above study shows that it was a common view in the
Hellenistic and Roman world that “the gods inhabited their statues.”305 Cult images in the
ANE as well as in the Greco-Roman world went through the mouth-opening ritual after
their manufacture in the workshop. By going through this rite, the cult image became a
manifestation of the deity and began to function as a living entity. As a result, the major
temples “were a source of tremendous power in community life.”306 They were the point
of contact between the divine and the profane, between the profound and the mundane.
T. R. S. Broughton, “Roman Asia,” in An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome,

301
Volume IV: Africa, Syria, Greece, Asia Minor, ed. Tenney Frank (Baltimore: The Johns
Hopkins Press, 1938), 889.
302
303
Broughton, “Roman Asia,” 645.
304
Ibid.
305
306
G. Ernest Wright, “The Significance of the Temple in the Ancient Near East,
Part III. The Temple in Palestine-Syria,” BA 7 (1944): 67.
130
The cult image reigned from the temple, giving oracles to alleviate human needs, giving
directions to human affairs. With its significant religious, political and economic power,
“The whole stability of the social order was dependent on the temple.”307
The language of Rev 13:14, 15 brings the reader into the ancient cultic world.
Aune especially notices that Rev 13:15a “reflects the world of ancient magic in which the
animation of images of the gods was an important means for securing oracles.”308 In
verse 14, the beast from the land orders the inhabitants of the earth to make an image in
honor of the sea beast, then it gives breath to the image. This echoes the ANE mouth-
opening ritual. Through this ritual, the image of the beast is given the breath of life and
begins to speak, i.e., to give oracles to, and make decisions for, the inhabitants of the
world, and starts to function as a living entity by itself.
Like the oracle-given activity of ANE cult images, the image of the beast being
identified with the deity (in this case, the sea beast), after the mouth-opening ritual it
became one earthly manifestation of the sea beast, who began to speak, i.e., to give
oracles to its human subjects. As long as the image of the beast exists on earth, the sea
beast is likewise present on earth, giving oracles and protecting its territory and the
interest of its people.309 The image of the beast is the image of the god, the sea beast. It is
like a banner symbolizing the occupation of the sea beast on earth. It is a special
epiphany of the sea beast.310 Through the making of the image, and the mouth-opening
ritual to enliven it, the image of the beast became a medium through which the sea beast
307
Ibid.
308
309
310
Dick, “The Mesopotamian Cult Statue,” 43.
131
established its contact with the inhabitants of the world, a fully interacting and
communicating partner for the king, the priest and the faithful.311
Yet between the image of the beast and the beast there is a clear distinction. The
destruction of the image of the beast does not entail the destruction of the sea beast,312 for
it is one manifestation of the sea beast. And based upon the Hittite iconography, it is
possible that the image of the beast and the sea beast could appear together
iconographically, since there was a conceptual distinction between them.313 Thus, we see
both the sea beast and the image of the beast appearing together in Revelation 13.
Being a center of religious, political and economic power, the image of the beast
has power over the world in terms of religion, politics and economy. It holds the political
power to give decrees to enforce the religion of the beast, and to force people to worship
the beast and its image (v. 15), and it has the legal power to kill (v. 15). The idol also has
economic power to boycott those who do not worship the beast and its image from doing
business (v. 17).
The word study of eikōn and thērion shows that these two words both made their
first biblical appearance in the creation account described in the first book of the Bible,
Genesis. They both made their last appearance in Revelation, the last book of the Bible.
Both words have symbolic meanings, and both could represent human beings: eikōn
could mean a living image in the likeness of something else; thērion could mean a bestial
person.
311
Berlejung, “Washing the Mouth,” 71, 72.
312
Dick, “Prophetic Parodies,” 33.
313
132
The exegetical study of the literary context of “image of the beast” in Rev 13:14,
15, especially the allusions to Genesis 2, Daniel 3, and Acts 2 points in the direction of
interpreting the image of the beast as a people on earth who are yet to be created by the
false spirit in the image of the beast.
The study of the cultic background of Rev 13: 14, 15 shows that the setting up of
the image is the forming of a religious entity/institution bestowed with religious, political,
and economic power. It was a medium through which the sea beast established its contact
with the inhabitants of the earth in order to give decrees, and exercise its power in
religious, political and economic realms.
Robert Mulholland’s comments on the image of the beast in Revelation 13
deserve mention. He says that the image of the beast “could simply refer to the wide
spread idolatry of the Roman Empire in John’s day. In this case, however, one would
expect the plural, ‘images,’ and not the singular, ‘image,’ unless the idolatry of the
empire is being taken as a collective manifestation of the Beast.”314 He further notices
that “Throughout the vision John seems to make this distinction between ‘idol’ and
‘image.’ (cf. 2:14, 20; 9:20; 21:8; 22:15).”315 This observation is significant, because it
may hint that the key issue for John here in Revelation 13 is not so much idolatry as a
phenomenon but a deeper existential question, the root problem of humanity, i.e., the
image of beings in the sense of reflecting the character of their creator. Mulholland
proposes that “The image could refer to the citizens of the rebellious order ‘incarnating’
the Beast in their values, structures, and dynamics of life and society.”316 David Chilton
314
Mulholland, Holy Living in an Unholy World, 235.
315
Ibid.
316
Ibid., 236.
133
seems to agree with this understanding of image being people, though differing in his
identification of the group.317
Based upon my study, I would like to propose that the Tyconio-Augustinian
understanding of the image of the beast as a group of people in opposition to John’s
understanding of Chrristian faith seems to be the most plausible. This group of people is
tēs sunagōgēs tou satana (the assembly of Satan) in Rev 2:9; 3:9, who are recreated into
the image of the beast through the transforming power of the evil spirit, and become the
living manifestation of the beast. Thus, Rev 13:14, 15 serves as a link between the themes
of the second half of Revelation and the messages to the seven churches.
Who are tēs sunagōgēs tou satana in Rev 2:9: 3:9? The text says that they called
themselves Ioudaious (Jews), but that they were actually not. Most commentators take
the word Ioudaious literally, considering that they were ethnic Jews from the synagogues
in Smyrna and Philadelphia.318 The only problem with this understanding is that the
317
David Chilton, The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of
Revelation (Ft. Worth, T: Dominion, 1987), 344.
318
See Allo, Saint Jean, 35; Aune, Revelation 1-5, 162; Beale, The Book of
Revelation, 241; Beckwith, The Apocalypse of John, 452-454; Wilhelm Bousset, Die
Offenbarung Johannis (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966), 208, 209; G. Β.
Caird, A Commentary on the Revelation of St. John the Divine (New York: Harper &
Row, 1966), 35; R. H. Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation
of St. John, the International Critical Commentary, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: T & T Clark,
1920), 1:56-57; A. Y. Collins, “The Revelation of John: An Apocalyptic Response to a
Social Crisis,” CurTM 8 (1981): 4, 5; A. Y. Collins, “Vilification and Self-Definition in
the Book of Revelation,” HTR 79 (1986): 313; Paul B. Duff, “‘The Synagogue of Satan’:
Crisis Mongering and the Apocalypse of John,” in The Reality of Apocalypse: Rhetoric
and Politics in the Book of Revelation, ed. David L. Barr (Atlanta: SBL, 2006), 147-168;
Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, “Apocalyptic and Gnosis in the Book of Revelation and
Paul,” JBL 92 (1973): 572; Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, Invitation to the Book of
Revelation (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1981), 63; J. M. Ford, Revelation, 393; Ernst
Lohmeyer, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1953), 24; Ranko
Stafanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 118, 140; J. P. M. Sweet, Revelation
(Philadelphia: Westminster, 1979), 85; Henry Β. Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John: The
Greek Text with Introduction, Notes and Indices (London: MacMillan, 1917), 31.
134
symbolic language319 and the language of “universalization”320 of the book of Revelation
may not allow a literal and ethnic interpretation of this term.321
Based upon the principle of interpretation offered by G. K. Beale,322 I propose
that tēs sunagōgēs tou satana could be understood as professed Christians inside the
church who claim to be Christians but actually are not. In fact, most scholars323 have
319
See Beale, The Book of Revelation, 50-69.
320
Ibid., 91.
321
The question of whether the Jewish synagogues in general persecuted the
Christians during the first century is still debatable. For details see Jacques Doukhan,
Israel and the Church: Two Voices for the Same God (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2002),
22-53; Jack T. Sanders, Schismatics, Sectarians, Dissidents, Deviants: The First One
Hundred Years of Jewish-Christian Relations (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity, 1993). There is
scant evidence for Jewish persecution of Christians, cf. Douglas R. A. Hare, The Theme
of the Jewish Persecution of Chrisitans in the Gospel of St. Matthew, SNTSMS 6, ed.
Matthew Black (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967); Philip L. Mayo, Those
Who Call Themselves Jews: The Church and Judaism in the Apocalypse of John,
Princeton Theological Monograph Series, ed. K. C. Hanson (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock,
2006).
322
See Beale, The Book of Revelation, 50-69. In one of his articles on symbolism
in Revelation, Beale states that “The dictum of the popular approach to Revelation—
interpret literally unless you are forced to interpret symbolically—should be turned on its
head. Instead, the programmatic statement about the book's precise mode of
communication in 1:1 is that the warp and woof of it is symbolic, so that the preceding
dictum should be reversed to say ‘interpret symbolically unless you are forced to interpret
literally.’ Better put, the reader is to expect that the main means of divine revelation in
this book is symbolic.” G. K. Beale, “The Purpose of Symbolism in the Book of
Revelation,” CTJ 41 (2006): 55.
323
E.g., Aune, Revelation 1-5, 149; David L. Barr, Tales of the End: A Narrative
Commentary on the Book of Revelation (Santa Rosa, CA: Polebridge, 1988), 50; C. K.
Barrett, “Gnosis and the Apocalypse of John,” in The New Testament and Gnosis: Essays
in Honor of Robert McL. Wilson, eds. A. H. B. Logan and A. J. M. Wedderburn
(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1983), 127-128; A. Y. Collins, Crisis and Catharsis: The
Power of the Apocalypse (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1984), 44-45; Fiorenza, The Book
of Revelation, 116; Lloyd Gaston, “Judaism of the Uncircumcised in Ignatius and Related
Writers,” in Anti-Judaism in Early Christianity, Studies in Early Christianity and Judaism
2, ed. Stephen G. Wilson (Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1986), 42;
Frederick J. Murphy, Fallen Is Babylon: The Revelation to John, New Testament in
Context (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998), 114; Thompson, The Book of
Revelation, 80.
135
recently proposed that “the synagogue of Satan” refers to insiders who are John’s
adversaries. They are mentioned in Revelation 2-3, as Jezebel, the Nicolaitans, and
Balaam.324 In the following chapters, as I begin to address the themes of the second half
of Revelation, this interpretation will be referred to repeatedly throughout the study.
324
Duff, “‘The Synagogue of Satan,’” 147, and n. 1.
136
CHAPTER 4
THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST IN REVELATION 14-16
Introduction
The previous chapter provided a study of the motif of the image of the beast
within its immediate context in Revelation 13, where the phrase “image of the beast” first
occurs. The image of the beast appears only in the latter half of Revelation; starting from
Revelation 13:14, 15, appearing in 14:9, 11; 15:2; 16:2; 19:20 and 20:4. It does not
appear in chapters 17, 18, 21 and 22. Beginning with this chapter, I will conduct a survey
of the image of the beast in a wider context, i.e., the latter half of the book of Revelation.
In this manner I will explore the relationship between the image of the beast and other
major themes in the latter half of Revelation. This survey will contribute to a fuller
understanding of the image of the beast.
In this chapter and the following chapters 5 and 6, there will be a survey of the
major themes where the term actually occurs (Revelation 14-16, and Revelation 19-20),
and a survey of the image of the beast in chapters where the term does not occur at all
(Revelation 17, 18) with the hope that something hidden about the image of the beast
might be revealed through a careful exegetical study.
This chapter will focus on the image of the beast in Revelation 14-16. The
following chapters will focus on the image of the beast in Revelation 19-20 and the
image of the beast in Revelation 17-18.
The study in this chapter will be divided into two parts: first, there will be a brief
survey of the literary context of Revelation 14-16; second, there will be a survey of major
themes of Revelation 14-16.
136
Regarding the interpretation of symbols in Revelation, based upon Elisabeth
Schüssler Fiorenza’s study1 of John’s carefully created unity in the book of Revelation,
David Barr points out two major interpretive principles. First, the interpreter must be
aware that there is “symbolic material intercalated into other sections, thus binding them
together.” Second, the interpreter should try “to see recapitulations of similar ideas under
very different symbolic images, thus producing a sense of repetition and explanation.”2
This chapter and the following chapters (chapters 5-6) will follow these principles
provided by Barr; there will be a survey of the major themes in each chapter and an
intertextual investigation of the theme of the image of the beast.
Although there is no unanimous opinion on the overall literary structure of the
book of Revelation,3 many scholars agree that the latter half of the book starts with
1
Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, “Composition and Structure of the Book of
Revelation,” CBQ 39 (1977): 344-366.
2
Barr, “The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation,” 44.
3
Both David Barr and Richard Kempson observe that there are almost as many
proposed structures and outlines of Revelation as commentators. Barr, “The Apocalypse
as a Symbolic Transformation,” 43; Wayne Richard Kempson, “Theology in the
Revelation of John” (PhD diss., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1982). Cf.
Bandy, “The Layers of the Apocalypse,” 469-499; W. Bowman, “The Revelation to John:
Its Dramatic Structure and Message,” Int 9 (1955): 436-453; José Adriano Filho, “The
Apocalypse of John as an Account of a Visionary Experience: Notes on the Book’s
Structure,” JSNT 25 (2002): 213-234; Fiorenza, “Composition and Structure of the Book
of Revelation,” 344-366; Charles Homer Giblin, “Recapitulation and the Literary
Coherence of John’s Apocalypse,” CBQ 56 (1994): 81-95; Mark Seaborn Hall, “The
Hook Interlocking Structure of Revelation: The Most Important Verses in the Book and
How They May Unify Its Structure,” NovT 44 (2002): 278-296; J. Lambrecht, “A
Structuration of Revelation 4.1-22.5,” in L’Apocalypse Johannique et l’Apocalyptique
dans le Nouveau Testament, ed. J. Lambrecht (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1980),
77-104; Ekkehardt Müller, “Microstructural Analysis of Revelation 4-11,” AUSDDS 21
(Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1994), 42; Christopher R. Smith, “The
Structure of the Book of Revelation in Light of Apocalyptic Literary Conventions,” NovT
36 (1994): 373-393; Kenneth A. Strand, Interpreting the Book of Revelation:
Hermeneutical Guidelines, with Brief Introduction to Literary Analysis (Worthington,
OH: Ann Arbor Publishers, 1976), 33-41; Felise Tavo, “The Structure of the Apocalypse.
Re-Examining a Perennial Problem,” NovT 47 (2005): 48-68; Robert L. Thomas, “The
Structure of the Apocalypse: Recapitulation or Profession?” TMSJ 4 (1993): 45-66.
137
Revelation 12,4 with a new series of visions. The new visions are a continuation from the
previous section, providing a larger picture and a deeper understanding of the same story
and revealing “the forces behind the events and the agencies employed”5 “in a gradually
fuller and more coherent manner.”6
Paulien observes that the “duodirectionality”7 of Rev 11:18 provides a “cryptic
summary”8 of the structure of Revelation 12-22. According to Paulien, the outline of the
4
Peter Antonysamy Abir, “The Place of Ch 12 in Revelation,” in The Cosmic
Conflict of the Church: An Exegetico-TheologicalStudy of Revelation 12, 7-12, European
University Studies (New York: Peter Lang, 1995), 57-59; A. Y. Collins divides the book
into two cycles of visions, 1:9-11:19 and 12:1-22:5, with each making up three series of
seven. See A. Y. Collins, Crisis and Catharsis, 111, 112; Fiorenza, “Composition and
Structure of the Book of Revelation,” 363-364 suggests that Revelation 1-11 mainly
describes the action of Jesus, while Revelation 12-22 records the action of the dragon
attacking the saints but conquered by Christ; William Hendriksen sees seven parallel
themes in Revelation divided into two major sections, and second section starts in
Revelation 12, see William Hendriksen, More Than Conquerors (Grand Rapids: Baker,
1965), 30; Mounce considers Revelation 12 “marks a major division in the book of
Revelation,” and serves to set the stage for the final conflict, see Mounce, The Book of
Revelation, 234; Thompson also comments that Rev 12:1 “begins a new sequence of
visions,” see Thompson, Revelation, 131; see also David Chilton, The Days of Vengeance,
295; Jacques Doukhan, Secrets of Revelation: The Apocalypse Through Hebrew Eyes
(Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2005), 141; Craig R. Koester, Revelation and the
End of All Things (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 117; F. J. Murphy, Fallen Is Babylon,
275; R. Stefanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 373; Mark B. Stephens, Annihilation or
Renewal?: The Meaning and Function of New Creation in the Book of Revelation,
WUNT 2 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), 191.
5
Paul S. Minear, I Saw a New Earth (Washington, DC: Corpus Books, 1968), 115.
6
A. Y. Collins, “Persecution and Vengeance in the Book of Revelation,” in
Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East: Proceedings of the
International Colloquium on Apocalypticism, Uppsala, August 12-17, 1979, ed. David
Hellholm (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983), 732.
7
A term coined by Paulien. This kind of duo directional structural seam has a two
way function. On the one hand, it provides the climax of the previous section, and on the
other, it gives an outline of the rest of the book. See Paulien, The Deep Things of God,
115; Paulien, “Looking Both Ways: A Study of the Duodirectionality of the Structural
Seams in the Apocalypse” (paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Hebrews,
General and Pastoral Epistles, Apocalypse Section of the SBL, Chicago, IL, 19
November 1988), 3; Mark Stephens calls Rev 11:19 “a ‘Janus-like’ narrative joint, or a
‘hinge’ passage,” facing both backwards and forwards, see Stephens, Annihilation or
Renewal?, 191. See also Edith M. Humphrey, And I Turned to See the Voice: The
138
latter half of Revelation is programmed by five basic statements contained in this passage,
with each statement corresponding to each of the five sections of Revelation 12-22: (1) v.
18a, “the nations were angry” corresponds to Revelation 12 and 13; (2) v. 18b, “your
[God's] wrath has come” corresponds to Revelation 14-18; (3) v. 18c, “the time has come
for judging the dead” corresponds to Revelation 20, (4) v. 18d, “rewarding your servants”
corresponds to Revelation 21 and 22,the New Jerusalem section; and (5) v. 18e,
“destroying those who destroys the earth” corresponds to Revelation 18 and 19, the
destruction of Babylon and the unholy trinity.9
Revelation 12 presents the big picture of the whole story of Revelation in a
nutshell. It discloses the cosmic conflict between God and the dragon, providing the key
to decoding the ultimate reality of what happens on earth. It is a prophetic overview of
the three stages of Christian history: (1) the dragon’s attack on the male child, and the
Christ event (vv. 1-6), (2) the war in heaven resulting in the defeat of the dragon (vv. 7-
12), and (3) the war on earth, the dragon’s attack on the Woman and her seed (vv. 13-
17).10
Revelation 12:18-13:18 is “temporally parallel”11 with Rev 12:13-17, which
explains in detail the dragon’s strategy against the church and his attack on it in the last
Rhetoric of Vision in the New Testament, Studies in Theological Interpretation, eds. Craig
G. Bartholomew, Joel B. Green, and Christopher R. Seitz (Grand Rapids: Baker
Academic, 2007), 158.
Ibid., 1; see also David R. Carnegie, “Worthy is the Lamb: The Hymns in
8
Revelation,” in Christ the Lord: Studies in Christology Presented to Donald Guthrie, ed.
Harold H. Rowdon (Leicester: IVP, 1982), 252; Stephens, Annihilation or Renewal?, 195.
For details, see Paulien, Decoding Revelation’s Trumpets, 337-339.
9
Ibid., 2, 3.
10
11
Ibid., 680.
139
days preceding the parousia of Christ.12 Revelation 12:17 serves as the summary
statement of the setting of Revelation 13.13
The very first scene after this summary is the dragon standing on the seashore,
probably frustrated, yet full of expectation. He has turned his anger on the offspring of
the Woman, and at least two allies will soon join him at the end of history,14 to wage war
against them.15
With the appearance of the two beasts, Revelation 13 introduces a Jewish belief in
connection with the coming of the messianic age, i.e., the activity of the Leviathan and
the Behemoth.16 This signifies the beginning of the end of the old age.
In Rev 16:16, the final battle between the dragon and God is named: the battle of
Armageddon. What happens in Revelation 13 could be seen partly as the dragon’s pre-
Armageddon battle preparation. This preparation includes the recruitment of bestial allies
and propaganda agents, so that “the kings of the whole world” (Rev 16:14) can be
gathered to fight for the dragon. It is within this wider context that the image of the beast
appears on the scene of history.
This section will explore the image of the beast in the first three chapters of the
second half of the book which contain the theme. The chapters are Revelation 14, 15, and
16. The purpose of this analysis is to understand how the image of the beast fits into the
12
Siew, The War Between the Two Beasts, 3.
13
Jon Paulien, What the Bible Says about the End-Time (Hagerstown, MD:
Review and Herald, 1994), 107.
14
15
16
J. M. Ford, Revelation, 217.
140
chapters and how it connects to the themes of each of the chapters. This will help us gain
a deeper understanding of this theme.
The Image of the Beast in Revelation 14
The aim of this section is to study the image of the beast within the literary
context of Revelation 14.
The Literary Context of Revelation 14
In the midst of Revelation 13, there is a call for patient endurance and faith in
anticipation of what is to come. The beastly scene of Revelation 13 raises the expectation
of a different reality beyond the earthly scene, and creates a longing for something better,
thus paving the way for Revelation 14, the scene of Mount Zion, “the end time city where
God dwells with and provides security for the remnant.”17
The vision of Revelation 14 presents “a divine perspective” on the conflicts
described in Revelation 13.18 It provides “an alternative world in order to motivate the
audience and to strengthen their resistance in the face of”19 the danger of the “total
annihilation of the Church,”20 which can be found in chapter 13. The assurance of the
vindication of the followers of the Lamb and the judgment against the worshippers of the
beast and its image are addressed in the visions of Revelation 14.21
17
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 732; Koester, Revelation, 136; Pierre Prigent,
Commentary on the Apocalypse of St. John, trans. Wendy Pradels (Tübingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 2001), 430. For Mount Zion as the mount of eschatological salvation see Isa
24:23; Joel 3:21; Ps 146:10.
18
Thompson, Revelation, 131.
19
Fiorenza, Revelation: Vision of a Just World, 129.
20
Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 221.
21
Ibid. Scholars engaged in social-scientific interpretation of Revelation have
shown that the function of the visions is to provide a “transcendent or heavenly
141
At the end of Revelation 13 an obvious question was raised in the minds of the
audience: what will be the fate of those who resist the worship of the beast and its image?
The first vision of Revelation 14 serves to answer this question.22 Revelation 14 opens
with “a proleptic eschatological scene”23 of the Lamb standing on Mount Zion; with him
are the 144,000. David Barr considers the scene of Rev 14:1-5 as pre-war gathering of the
144,000 for battle against the beasts,24 with the 144,000 in “active service . . . about to
undertake the eschatological battle.”25 On the other hand, Beasley-Murray holds that the
scene depicts the redeemed, symbolized by the 144,000 sharing with the Lamb in his
triumph.26 It may be more in accordance with the tradition of the Old Testament to see
the scene described in Rev 14:1-5 as occurring after and not before the final battle of God
subduing the forces of chaos. The Old Testament tradition is that the enthronement of
God on Mount Zion (v. 3) happens “after the subjugation of all enemies—whether human
perspective” so as to “affect the perceptions, values and behaviour of the church

members, thus “to persuade compromising believers to disengage from participation in
pagan idolatry and also to sustain those who are successfully resisting.” Ian Smith, “A
Rational Choice Model of the Book of Revelation,” JSNT 85 (2002): 99; see also Richard
Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation, New Testament Theology, ed. James
D. G. Dunn (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 10; Loren L. Johns, “The
Lamb in the Rhetorical Program of the Apocalypse of John,” SBLSP 37 (1998): 762;
Michelle V. Lee, “A Call to Martyrdom: Function as Method and Message in
Revelation,” NovT 40 (1998): 172-173.
22
Prigent, Commentary on the Apocalypse, 429.
23
24
Barr, Tales of the End, 114.
25
Jonathan M. Knight, Revelation (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999),
103.
26
Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 222. See also M. Eugene Boring,
Revelation, Interpretation: A Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville, KY:
Knox, 1989), 131, 168; G. B. Caird, The Revelation of Saint John, Black’s New
Testament Commentaries (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1993), 95, 178, 179; Kistemaker,
Exposition of the Book of Revelation, 253.
142
or, in a cosmological sense, the forces of chaos (Pss 29:10; 93:4; Joel 2:32).”27 In v. 3, the
144,000 are singing a new song alluding to the Red Sea experience—the Israelites sang a
new song after God defeated Pharaoh’s army, burying them alive in the sea. So the scene
of Rev 14:1-5 serves as a fast-forward of history, a prophetic vision of the future
Messianic Age to be seen only by eyes of faithful in the midst of the beastly scene
described in Revelation 13.
After Rev 14:1-5 comes pre-Armageddon battle preparation, symbolized by three
angels and followed by the end time judgment. Thus, Revelation 14 can be roughly
divided into three parts: (1) the redeemed with the Lamb (vv. 1-5), (2) the three angels’
proclamations (vv. 6-12), and (3) the end time judgment (vv. 13-20).28
The image of the beast appears in the second section of Revelation 14 (v. 9), in
the third angel’s declaration, which warns those who worship the beast and its image of
impending judgment. The three angels’ declarations (vv. 6-11) serve as a counter
message to the one proclaimed by the beasts and the image of the beast, which forces the
inhabitants of the world to worship the image of the beast.
27
Matthew J. Lynch, “Zion’s Warrior and the Nations: Isaiah 59:15b-63:6 in
Isaiah’s Zion Tradition,” CBQ 70 (2008): 248.
28
Aune described the composition and structure of Revelation 14 as
“extraordinarily complex.” He divided the chapter into four units: the first unit is vv. 1-5;
second is vv. 6-12; v. 13 is the third unit; and the fourth is vv. 14-20. Aune, Revelation 6-
16, 795. For a detailed analysis of the composition of Revelation 14 see Pieter G. R. de
Villiers, “The Composition of Revelation 14:1-15:8: Pastiche or Perfect Pattern?” Neot
38 (2004): 209-249.
143
Major Themes of Revelation 14
The Theme of Worship
The book of Revelation abounds with worship materials and the theme of worship
is prominent in the whole book.29 The word “worship” occurs three times in chapter 14
(vv. 7, 9, 11), permeating the first two parts of the chapter. The redeemed are said to be
the ones who did not defile themselves with women, which recalls the story of Num 25:1-
8, in which the Israelite men indulged in sexual immorality with Moabite women and
participated in their idol worship. The redeemed are “single-minded in their adoration”30
following the Lamb wherever he goes. The three angels’ declarations are also “linked by
the common thread of worship.”31 The first angel calls for true worship, the second angel
denounces false worship and the third angel gives a warning against false worship. The
image of “seeing” in Rev 14:6 makes a persuasive impression on its reader that the call is
not from the author, but comes directly from God.32 The angel’s flying in midheaven is
perceived as “the forces of heaven ‘break in’” into the visible world.33 As the readers
“look up” together with John to see the angels, they see “their sociopolitical and
David L. Barr, “The Apocalypse of John as Oral Enactment,” Int 40 (1986):

29
243-256; J. Daniélou, The Bible and the Liturgy (Notre Dame: University Press, 1956),
52-58; V. H. Kooy, “The Apocalypse and Worship—Some Preliminary Observations,”
RR 30 (1976): 198-209.
30
Johnsson, “The Saints’ End-Time Victory,” 35.
31
Ibid.
David A. DeSilva, “Seeing Things John’s Way: Rhetography and Conceptual

32
Blending in Revelation 14:6-13,” BBR 18 (2008): 278.

33
Ibid., 279.
144
economic realities from heaven’s point of view,” and are able to respond to the call to the
church34 to resist the demand to worship the beast in Revelation 13.35
Worship in Revelation 14 is explicitly expressed as fearing God and giving him
glory. Here we have “the last word on worship.”36 Revelation 14:6-13 makes it clear that
there are two forms of worship incompatible with each other, as Ford rightly says, “the
herald angel in 14:6-7 announces the reaffirmation of the Decalogue and the worship of
one God, in opposition to the worship of the image (13:15) which violated the
commandments.”37 These two forms of worship dominate “major portions of
Revelation,” i.e., the heavenly worship of God and the Lamb in Revelation 4-538 and the
34
Ibid., 280.
35
Eugene H. Peterson, Reversed Thunder: The Revelation of John and the Praying
Imagination (San Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 1991), 57.
36
Ibid.
37
38
A widely held view is to regard the heavenly liturgy of the Apocalypse
especially the throne room ceremonial in Revelation 4 and 5 as projecting the liturgy of
the early Christian church, e.g., Oscar Cullmann, Early Christian Worship (London:
SCM Press, 1953), 7; T. Harnack, Der christliche Gemeindegottesdienst im apostolischen
und altkatholischen Zeitalter (Erlangen: Theodor Biasing, 1854), 161; Ralph P. Martin,
Worship in the Early Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 45; Eric Peterson, The
Angels and the Liturgy (New York: Herder and Herder, 1964), 1-13; Massey Hamilton
Shepherd, The Paschal Liturgy and the Apocalypse, Ecumenical Studies in Worship 6
(Richmond, VA: John Knox Press, 1960). However, Aune argues that “John’s description
of the heavenly ceremonial practiced in the throne room of God bears such a striking
resemblance to the ceremonial of the imperial court and cult that the latter can only be a
parody of the former.” David E. Aune, “The Influence of Roman Imperial Court
Ceremonial on the Apocalypse of John,” BR 28 (1983): 5.
Aune thinks his view competes with the conventional view, and they are
exclusionary. In fact, his view complements the conventional view, together they enrich
the symbolic meaning of the heavenly liturgy scene, as demonstrated by Russell Morton.
See Russell Morton, “Glory to God and to the Lamb: John’s Use of Jewish and
Hellenistic/Roman Themes in Formatting His Theology in Revelation 4-5,” JSNT 83
(2001): 89-109.
145
vision of the dragon’s final attack on the faithful believers of God by promoting the
worship of the beast and its image in chapters 12 and 13.39
In Rev 14:7, the imperative “fear God” is followed by two other imperatives:
“give him glory” and “worship him who made . . .”40 Mounce explains that “to fear God
is to reverence him; to give him glory is to pay him the respect and honor that is his
due.”41
In the book of Revelation true worshippers are represented by the angels who
surround the throne of God and give him glory (4:9). They also include those who
witnessed the death and resurrection of the two witnesses who feared greatly and gave
glory to the God of heaven (11:13). Those who overcome the beast and its image sing a
hymn which echoes the message of the first angel, asking the question “Who will not fear
you, O Lord, and bring glory to your name?” (15:4). Finally, true worshippers are the
saints who are invited to attend the marriage feast of the Lamb. They are described as
“those who fear God” (19:7)42 and do not worship the beasts (cf. 15:4; 19:5).
False worshippers are those who “did not repent so as to give him glory” (16:9),43
and who worship the beast and its image (13:14-16; 14:9, 11). In the letters to the seven
churches (Revelation 2-3), there were already concerns about false worship: there was the
David A. DeSilva, “A Sociorhetorical Interpretation of Revelation 14:6-13: A

39
Call to Act Justly Toward the Just and Judging God,” BBR 9 (1999): 74.
40
Ibid.
41
Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 271.
42
DeSilva, “A Sociorhetorical Interpretation,” 76.
43
Ibid.
146
“synagogue of Satan” (2:9; 3:9); there was even “Satan’s throne” (2:13) inside the
church; there were people were eating food offered to idols inside the church (2:14); and
there was a false prophetess, Jezebel (2:20) who led the people of God into the worship
of idols.44
The setting up of the image of the beast and the demand for its worship brings this
conflict over worship to its climax. The worshippers of the beast and its image are
warned by the threat of severe punishment: “There is no rest day or night for those who
worship the beast and his image" (14:11). A “striking precursor” to 14:11 occurs in a
totally different context of the angelic liturgy surrounding God’s throne: the celestial
beings “do not rest day and night, saying, ‘Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty’”
(4:8).45 By juxtaposing these two contrasting scenes, John creates “two stark alternatives:
worship God without lapse or be punished without lapse.”46
DeSilva suggests that Rev 14:6-13 “interact extensively” with Daniel 3 on the
following points: first, the list of groups addressed by the angel, and particularly their
“comprehensiveness and universality” echoes Dan 3:3, in which a messenger also makes
a declaration to his audience; second, the message of the third angel prohibits the worship
of the beast and its image, and whoever does not heed this command will be tormented
44
Eugene Peterson, Reversed Thunder, 47.
DeSilva, “A Sociorhetorical Interpretation,” 80. Norman Walker provides a

45
study on the three-holy phrase in his “The Origin of the ‘Thrice Holy,’” NTS 5 (1959):
132-133; see also Sebastian P. Brock, “The Thrice-Holy Hymn in the Liturgy,”
Sobornost 7 (1985): 24-34.
DeSilva, “A Sociorhetorical Interpretation,” 80. See also De Villiers, “The

46
Composition of Revelation 14:1-15:8,” 226.
147
with fire and sulfur. This message echoes the decree of Nebuchadnezzar which ordered
people to worship an idol on pain of death by burning in a furnace (3:4-6).47 Thus, the
readers of Revelation 14:6-13 are “taken into an extended conversation with Daniel 3”
and are urged to follow the example of the three young Hebrews.48
True worshippers in Revelation 14 are to phobein (to fear) God the Creator.
According to Mazie Nakhro, when the verb phobeomai in Revelation is used in worship
contexts it never conveys the sense of dreadful fear; and is always used in the sense of
“reverential fear of God.”49 The word occurs about three hundred times in the LXX: to
fear God is to turn from the evil way (e.g. Job 1:1, 8; 2:3; Prov 3:7), to obey his voice (1
Sam 12:14; Hag 1:12), to keep his commandments (Deut 6:2, 24; Eccles 12:13), to walk
in his ways (Deut 8:6; 10:12; 2 Chron 6:31), and to serve him (Deut 6:13; 10:20; Josh
24:14).50
DeSilva also suggests that “the meaning of ‘fearing God’ is ‘keeping God’s
commandments,’ the covenant stipulations of the Torah.”51 Ford especially notes that the
reference to God as the Creator of the heaven, earth, and the waters in the first angel’s
declaration connects this message with the second commandment (Exod 20:4).52 Paulien
47
Ibid.
48
Ibid.
49
Nakhro, “The Meaning of Worship,” 84.
50
Ibid., 82.
51
Ibid., 88.
52
148
also draws attention to the verbal, thematic, and structural parallels between Rev 14:7 and
Exodus 20, and suggests that the Ten Commandments are the major focus of Rev 14:7,
particularly the first four commandments which regulate the relationship between God
and humans. Especially significant is the fourth commandment, which is about
worshipping on the seventh-day Sabbath.53
All three studies show that the central theme of Revelation 14 is worship, and that
it is specifically focused on the worship of God as the Creator. Worship occurs in the
context of impending judgment with a focus on the Ten Commandments.
The Theme of Babylon
In the second angel’s declaration, a new player suddenly comes on stage, i.e.
Babylon the Great, a feminine figure. Stephen Moore pondered why Babylon the great
“comes already sexed and gendered,” and concluded that it is because Babylon is a
feminine noun in both Hebrew (Babel) and Greek (babylōn).54 There is not much
53
Jon Paulien, “Revisiting the Sabbath in the Book of Revelation,” JATS 9 (1998):
179-186; Paulien, What the Bible Says about the End-Time, 125-129. Paulien observes
that the first table of the Decalogue is all attacked by the unholy trinity. The first
commandment says, “You shall have no other gods before me,” but the sea beast claims
himself to be God and receives worship (Rev 13:4, 8). The second commandment
prohibits worship of images, but the land beast sets up an image of the beast and demands
its worship (Rev 13:14, 15). The third commandment prohibits the misuse of God’s name,
but the sea beast has blasphemous names (Rev 13:1, 5, 6). Finally, the fourth
commandment, which is the Sabbath command, serves as the seal of the covenant
between God and his believers, since the Ten Commandments modeled after ancient
Hittite suzerain-vassal covenant tables, and indicate God’s creatorship, but the unholy
trinity also invents a mark of the beast to counterfeit the seal of God, ibid., 184-185.
54
Moore, “Metonymies of Empire,” 72.
149
information given to provide more reasons, because Babylon seems to appear for the first
time without any introduction, which is quite unusual and even “incongruous.”55
In Rev 14:8, there are two sins listed against Babylon: (1) she herself has
committed adultery, and (2) she made the nations participate in her adultery through
drinking her wine.
In the Bible, the term porneia (adultery), was often used symbolically referring to
Israel’s unfaithfulness to God and was likened to idolatry.56 The accused idol
worshippers could be Israel, such as the Israelites in Hos 1:2, or Gentile nations, such as
Nineveh in Nah 3:4. Thus Babylon’s adultery is connected to worshipping other gods.
In the Bible, oinos (wine), is sometimes used in the context of adultery (Prov 9:2,
5) as a means of seduction. It is also connected with idol worship and the fall of Babylon,
as in Jeremiah (Jer 50:38; 51:7, 8) and Daniel 5. The wine motif itself is prominent in the
Babylonian stories of the book of Daniel.57 Those stories start with wine in chapter 1, and
end with wine in chapter 5, forming an inclusio. In chapter 1, Daniel and his three friends
encountered the problem of drinking the wine of Babylon, and Daniel “resolved not to
defile himself with the royal food and wine, and he asked the chief official for permission
55
Koester, Revelation, 138; see also De Villiers, “The Composition of Revelation
14:1-15:8,” 229.
56
Cf. Isa 1:21; Jer 2:20. Paul B. Duff, Who Rides the Beast: Prophetic Rivalry and
the Rhetoric of Crisis in the Churches of the Apocalypse (New York: Oxford Press,
2001), 111; Paul B. Duff, “Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing: Literary Opposition and Social
Tension in the Revelation of John,” in Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for
Students, ed. David L. Barr (Atlanta: SBL, 2003), 66, 67; Kramer, “Contrast,” 110.
57
Peter F. Gregory, “Its End Is Destruction: Babylon the Great in the Book of
Revelation,” CTQ 73 (2009): 149.
150
not to defile himself this way” (Dan 1:8). In chapter 5, the king of Babylon drank wine
from the temple vessel while praising his gods, and that very night, Babylon fell.58 Thus
Babylon’s other sin is that she has seduced nations to worship the idols of false gods
rather than the true God.59
The crime of Babylon the Great is described as ek tou oinou tou thumou tēs
porneias autēs pepotiken panta ta ethnē, literally translated as “because of the wine of the
wrath of her unfaithfulness she has given drink to all the nations.” Many scholars think
this description comes from Jer 51:7, where Babylon is as “a gold cup in the LORD’s
hand; she made the whole earth drunk. The nations drank her wine, therefore they have
now gone mad.”60 DeSilva suggests that the reason why John changes “the nations drank”
to “she has given drink to all the nations” is to emphasize Babylon’s key role in this
58
Z. Stefanović, 205. Regarding the event celebrated on the very night of
Babylon’s fall, William Shea proposed that it was a celebration of Belshazzar’s
coronation as sole ruler; see William H. Shea, “Nabonidus, Belshazzar, and the Book of
Daniel: An Update,” AUSS 29 (1982): 133-149.
More recent studies have suggested that Belshazzar’s feast could better be
understood as an akītu festival in honor of the Babylonian mood god Sîn. The celebration
was an all-night feast on a Tašritu night, because the moon god only would show himself
to his worshippers during the night. See Paul-Alain Beaulieu, The Reign of Nabonidus,
King of Babylon 556-539 B.C., YNER 10 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), and
Lawrence M. Wills, The Jew in the Court of the Foreign King: Ancient Jewish Court
Legends, HDR 26 (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1990). Albert Wolters adds two pieces of
evidence to support the latter proposal, based on the astronomical facts of the movement
of the moon and a recently deciphered Aramaic manuscript, papyrus Amherst 63, which
preserves the liturgy of an akītu festival, see Albert M. Wolters, “Belshazzar’s Feast and
the Cult of the Moon God Sîn,” BR 5 (1995): 199-206.
In any case, it was clearly a religious-political event that was supposed to bolster
Babylonian confidence in spite of the approach of Cyrus.
59
Chilton, The Days of Vengeance, 364.
60
DeSilva, “A Sociorhetorical Interpretation,” 91; Ruiz, Ezekiel in the Apocalypse,
328.
151
activity.61 The verb pepotiken, lit. “has given drink” is an indicative perfect active verb;
the indicative perfect tense normally has three uses: (1) it stresses the present state
resulting from a past action, (2) stresses an action completed in past time, and (3) makes
vivid a past event. Regardless of which of the three uses John here employs, the common
stress is on a past action. This means that Babylon the Great in Revelation 14 has a
pedigree. Schüssler Fiorenza has noticed that the first mention of Babylon in 14:8 is
written as if the readers already knew about the identity of this name. She thinks this is
because the readers would immediately identify it with Rome.62 This view is held by the
majority of biblical scholars.63
In agreement with Schüssler Fiorenza, A. Y. Collins summarizes three general
reasons why most commentators take “Babylon” as a symbol for the city of Rome: first,
in the first century Jewish and Christian writings, Babylon was a cryptic name for
61
DeSilva, “A Sociorhetorical Interpretation,” 91.
62
Fiorenza, Revelation: Vision of a Just World, 89. See also Prigent, Commentary
on the Apocalypse, 441; Gordon Zerbe, “Revelation’s Exposé of Two Cities: Babylon
and New Jerusalem,” Direction 32 (2003): 57, footnote 1.
63
See Paul N. Anderson, “Revelation 17:1-14,” Int (Jan 2009): 60; David E. Aune,
Revelation 17-22, WBC 52c (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1998), 929; Charles,
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, 2:62; A. Y. Collins, Crisis and Catharsis, 121; A.
Y. Collins, “Persecution and Vengeance in the Book of Revelation,” 729; Court, Myth
and History, 139; Paul B. Decock, “Hostility against the Wealth of Babylon: Revelation
17:1-19:10,” in Animosity, the Bible, and Us: Some European, North American, and
South African Perspectives, eds. John T. Fitzgerald, Fika J. van Rensburg, and Herrie F.
van Rooy (Atlanta: SBL, 2009), 263; DeSilva, “A Sociorhetorical Interpretation,” 73;
Charles H. Dyer, “The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18, Part 2,” BSac 144
(1987): 437; J. M. Ford, Revelation, 248; Stephen D. Moore, “Metonymies of Empire:
Sexual Humiliation and Gender Masquerade in the Book of Revelation,” in Postcolonial
Interventions: Essays in Honor of R. S. Sugirtharajah, ed. Tat-siong Benny Liew. Bible
in the Modern World 23 (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2009), 71; Smalley, The
Revelation to John, 424.
152
Rome;64 second, both Babylon and Rome were known to be morally corrupted and strong
in terms of power and seduction; third, both Babylon and Rome were capital cities of
world empires that oppressed the faithful believers of God and destroyed the temple in
Jerusalem.65 According to A. Y. Collins, because of these common associations between
Rome and Babylon, it is obvious that when Babylon appears, there is no need for any
introduction.
However, there is some evidence in favor of a different reason why there is no
explicit introduction of Babylon. Paulien observes that most new players in Revelation
have an “introductory description that gives some sense of their previous history.”66
Therefore the sentence “because of the wine of the wrath of her unfaithfulness she has
given drink to all the nations” could be viewed as Babylon’s introductory description that
summarizes her previous history.
A narrative pattern in the book of Revelation presents the major players of the
apocalyptic scene. Almost every major player appears under the rubric of
characterizations, or different names. For example, Jesus is first presented as “someone
like a son of man” in Revelation 1. He appears as a lamb in Revelation 5; then in
Revelation 19, he appears as a rider on a white horse. Another example is the land beast,
who first appears in Revelation 13 as a beast coming from the land, and then is presented
64
Cf. 1 Pet 5:13; 2 Bar 11:1 ff.; 67:7; Sib. Or. 5.143, 159; see also Kramer,
“Contrast,” 110; Moore, “Metonymies of Empire,” 71.
65
A. Y. Collins, “Persecution and Vengeance,” 735.
66
Jon Paulien, Armageddon at the Door (Hagerstown, MD: Autumn House,
2008), 145.
153
as the false prophet in Rev 16:13; 19:20; 20:10. It may be possible that Babylon the Great
also has more than one characterizations. It may also be possible that Babylon appeared
before Revelation 14. That may be the reason why John did not need to introduce her in
more detail. Thus, it is necessary to go back to Revelation 13 and compare the text of
Revelation 13 with Revelation 14, and see if there is a possibility that Babylon is
somewhere present in Revelation 13.
The language of Revelation 13 and 14 has many parallels.67 The parallels between
Revelation 13 and 14 show that these two chapters are correlated and should interpret
each other.68 Revelation 13 describes false worship, while Revelation 14 condemns false
worship and calls for true worship.
There are four pairs of parallel passages in Revelation 13 and 14. The first pair is
Rev 13:1-6 and 14:1-5. Revelation 13:1-6 focuses on the first beast, while Rev 14:1-5
focuses on the Lamb and the 144,000. Both passages start with kai eidon (and I saw),
followed by the rising of the eschatological antagonists, each from its own designated
abode. In Revelation 13 the beast comes out of the sea while in Revelation 14 the Lamb
stands on Mount Zion. John further describes both the beast and the lamb: the beast has
ten horns and seven heads to support him, while the Lamb has 144,000 as his supporters.
The beast has a blasphemous name while the 144,000 have the names of the Lamb and
his Father. The beast was enthroned by the dragon while God is enthroned on Mount
67
Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 221; J. M. Ford, Revelation, 239-244;
Osborne, Revelation, 524.
68
154
Zion after defeating his enemies. The beast was given a mouth to utter blasphemy while
the 144,000 had no lies found in their mouths. These parallels make it clear that the sea
beast has characteristics in direct contrast to both the characteristics of Christ and the
144,000.
The second pair of parallelisms is between Rev 13:11-14 and Rev 14:6-7. The
first focuses on the land beast while the second focuses on the first angel’s message. The
words of Rev 13:11 are almost identical to Rev 14:6, as both start with the phrase kai
eidon allo/allon (and I saw another). Then, in Rev 13:11 another beast rises from the land
while in Revelation 14 another angel flies in midair, following the same pattern as the
description of the sea beast and the Lamb. Both passages contain the word eixen/exonta
(having). In Rev 13:11, the land beast has two horns like a lamb, a gospel-like feature,
but apparently a false gospel, because he elalei (proclaims) like a dragon, while in Rev
14:6, the first angel has the everlasting gospel to euaggelisai (proclaim). In Rev 13:12,
the land beast makes the inhabitants of the earth worship the one whose fatal wound was
healed. He later sets up an image in his honor, while the first angel in Revelation 14 tells
the people worship the one who created the heavens and the earth.
The third pair of parallels is between Rev 13:15 and Rev 14:8. This pair gives
some hint about the pedigree of the mysterious Babylon the Great. In fact, the
correspondence between the previous two sections makes the parallel between the two
items in the parallel more certain. The parallels between Rev 13:15 and Rev 14:8 are
vague compared with the other three pairs because only thematic parallels are found
between these two passages. Revelation 13:15 states that the mission of the image of the
beast is to speak and cause to be killed whoever does not worship the beast and its image,
155
while in Rev 14:8 the fall of Babylon is announced and the activity of Babylon the great
is reported to have caused all the nations to drink the wine of her fornication. As noted
before, the word “fallen” is also used for the fall of Jericho in Josh 6:20. The same root
word, piptō, could also mean “die,” as in Isa 21:15 and Jer 20:4 and many other biblical
passages. If Babylon the Great could be identified as the image of the beast, then here lies
the Ancient Near Eastern concept of lex talionis (or “measure for measure”):69 Just as
Babylon/the image of the beast kills those who do not worship the beast and its image,
the punishment Babylon /the image of the beast receives is also death.
As already noted, the word pepotiken (have caused … to drink), is in the
indicative perfect tense, stressing a completed action in the past. Since the first clear
appearance of Babylon the Great occurs in Revelation 14, the past action done by
Babylon may be found in chapter 13. In Rev 13:15, the figure parallel to Babylon is the
image of the beast. Thus it is reasonable to suggest that the past action of Babylon’s
causing all the nations to drink the wine of her fornication is the action done by the image
of the beast in Revelation 13, which is forcing everyone to worship the beast and its
image. Following this line of thinking, it is understandable that John does not feel the
need to make any introduction of Babylon the Great when she appears in Revelation 14
because this is not her first appearance.
The lex talionis (or “measure for measure”) principle of justice is found
69
throughout early Jewish and Christian literature. The general principle is well stated in
Obad 15: “As you have done it shall be done to you; your deeds shall return on your own
head.” The basic idea is that the punishment should fit the crime. Cf. Richard Bauckham,
“Judgment in the Book of Revelation,” ExAud 20 (2004): 1-24.
156
The fourth pair of parallels is Rev 13:16 and Rev 14:9. The focus here is obvious:
the mark of the beast, and the consequences of receiving it. In Revelation 13, those who
do not have the mark of the beast cannot buy or sell (v. 17), while in Revelation 14 those
who receive the mark of the beast will suffer the wrath of God (v. 11-12). Verbal,
thematic, and structural parallels appear again as in the first two pairs. The word xaragma
(mark), appears in both passages in the exact same form, and the location of the mark is
also the same. The thematic parallels are the receiving of the mark of the beast and its
consequences.
The reason for studying this comparison of two chapters is to look for the
pedigree of Babylon the Great, and thus find more information on the image of the beast
from Revelation 14. Three of the four parallels are clear, which confirms that Rev 13:15
should be in some way parallel to Rev 14:8.
In fact, Revelation 14 itself reveals that there is an intimate relationship between
Babylon’s causing all nations to drink the wine of her fornication and the worshipping of
the beast and its image. The divine punishment those false worshippers receive is that
they “too, will drink of the wine of God's fury” (v. 10). In Revelation, the punishment
received always matches the crime committed, so v. 10 could be interpreted as “since you
are so willing to worship the beast and its image, which, in a symbolic way, is to be
caused to drink the wine of the wrath of fornication, you will also be caused to drink the
wine of God’s fury.” The worshipping of the beast and its image in v. 10 is to be equated
with drinking the wine of wrath of the fornication of Babylon the Great in v. 8. Thus, it is
plausible to suggest that the one who causes people to worship the beast and its image is
the same one who causes the nations to drink the wine. Therefore, the image of the beast
in Revelation 13 could be identified with Babylon the Great.
157
The Theme of the 144, 000
The imagery of the 144,000 with the Lamb on Mount Zion is an “anti-image” of
the beast and its worshippers as described in the preceding chapter.70 Through the
depiction of this “symbolic universe,”71 the suffering “empirical community is
transported to a cosmic plane and made majestically independent of the vicissitudes of
individual existence.”72
This is the second appearance of the group of 144,000. Its first appearance is in
Revelation 7. Revelation 14 gives a more complete description of the 144,000. This is
what Thompson calls an “accumulation of images.”73 This phrase describes a
phenomenon in Revelation, which is that some imagery occurring in early chapters of
Revelation reappears later chapters where all the elements used to describe the imagery
previously are gathered together to reach a climax.74
The 144,000 is “the restored, eschatological” new Israel.75 The characteristics of
the 144,000 listed in Revelation 14 are: (1) having the name of the Lamb and his Father
written on their foreheads (v. 1), (2) singing a new song (which no one could learn except
them) before the throne (v. 3), (3) having been redeemed from the earth (v. 3), (4) not
Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, “The Followers of the Lamb: Visionary Rhetoric

70
and Social-Political Situation,” Semeia 36 (1986): 124.

71
Ibid.
72
Ibid., 140.
73
74
Ibid., 43-45.
75
Hanna Stenström, “‘They Have Not Defiled Themselves with Women . . .’
Christian Identity According to the Book of Revelation,” in A Feminist Companion to the
Apocalypse of John, FCNTECW 13, eds. Amy-Jill Levine and Maria Mayo Robbins
(New York: T & T Clark, 2009), 38. Cf. Aune, Revelation 6-16, 436, 460.
158
defiling themselves with women (v. 4), (5) following the Lamb wherever he goes (v. 4),
(6) purchased among human beings (v. 4), (7) offered as firstfruits (v. 4), and (8)
blameless because no lie is found in their mouths.76
Although there is a general consensus among biblical scholars to see the 144,000
“as the anti-image to the followers of the beast” in Revelation 13,77 the identity of the
144,000 causes much debate. Dwight Pentecost considers them as literal Jewish
Christians who have come out of the great tribulation at the end time.78 A. Y. Collins
believes that these constitute a special group of those who have died as martyrs, the same
as those sealed in Rev 7:1-8, but a different group from the great multitude described in
Rev 7:9-17.79 Aune holds a similar view to that of A. Y. Collins, regarding the difference
between the 144,000 and the great multitude in Rev 7:9-17.80 He also identifies the
76
Fiorenza identifies the 144,000 with fourfold characteristics: virgins, followers
of the Lamb, firstfruits, and blameless. Fiorenza, “The Followers of the Lamb,” 124.
(123-146). Aune summarizes the 144,000 with a three-fold characterization, each
characterization signified by the stereotypical phrase “these [are],” see David E. Aune,
Apocalypticism, Prophecy and Magic in Early Christianity, WUNT 199, ed. Jörg Frey
(Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 68.
77
Ibid.
78
J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1972), 143-146.
79
A. Y. Collins, Crisis and Catharsis, 127, 128. Her arguments are four. First, this
group is numbered, although the number may be symbolic; this fact distinguishes them
from the innumerable multitude; second, they sing a new song and they know how to sing
it; this suggests that they are an exclusive group; third, they are said to be the firstfruits
from the redeemed humankind, thus again distinguishing them from the rest of the
redeemed; fourth, their being offered to God as sacrifice indicates that they have suffered
violent deaths; also A. Y. Collins, “The Political Perspective on the Revelation to John,”
JBL 96 (1977): 255.
80
Aune contends that “there is a strong grammatical argument” against the
equation of the 144,000 in Rev 7:4 and Rev 14:1, 3, because in 7:4 there is no definite
article, which signifies that John is introducing an unknown entity to his reader. The
144,000 in Rev 14:1 also do not have the definite article, which implies that John the
author does not regard this group is the same as the group mentioned in Rev 7:4. But in
Rev 14:3, when 144,000 is mentioned again, it is “with the ‘anaphoric’ definite article”
159
144,000 as only representing a particular group of future Christians in the last days who
survive the tribulation and the great eschatological war.81
However, there are many scholars who consider the 144,000 of Rev 7:4-8 and the
great multitude of Rev 7:9-17 as the same group, described from two different
perspectives.82 This understanding agrees with the description John used to portray the
144,000 of Revelation 14, because the characteristics of the 144,000 in Revelation 14
combine the characteristics of the 144,000 in Rev 7:4-8 and the great multitude of Rev
7:9-17. In Rev 7:4, the 144,000 are sealed on their foreheads, which corresponds to the
144,000’s having the name of the Lamb and his Father on their foreheads (Rev 14:1).
Standing on Mount Zion together with the Lamb before the throne corresponds to the
great multitude standing before the throne in front of the Lamb in Rev 7:9. The great
multitude in Rev 7:9 wear white robes, signifying their purity, and the 144,000 of Rev
14:4 are said to have kept themselves pure. The victory of the great multitude symbolized
by the holding of palm branches in their hands (Rev 7:9), is repeated in Revelation 14,
where the 144,000 are on Mount Zion with the Lamb, following him wherever he goes.
The great multitude comes from every nation (Rev 7:9) and corresponds to the 144,000 in
Rev 14:4, who are purchased from among human beings.
It could be said that Revelation 14 explains in detail the characteristics of the

144,000 and the great multitude described in Revelation 7, such as the description that
they “did not defile themselves with women” (v. 4). Robert Mounce speaks of this text as
because it refers back to the 144,000 mentioned in Rev 14:1. Aune, Apocalypticism, 67,
68.
81
Aune, Revelation 6-16, 440-444.
82
See the discussion offered by Aune, ibid., 447-448.
160
“in some respects the most enigmatic in the book.”83 Numerous interpretations have been
proposed by scholars concerning the meaning of the defilement by women.84 A. Y.
Collins takes it literarily as “actual sexual practice,” meaning, the 144,000 practice sexual
continence as the “ideal Christian life.”85 Enlightened by Collins’ arguments, Daniel
Olson further explores the meaning of this text in connection with 1 Enoch, and
concludes that “Rev 14:4a is a conscious allusion to the book of Enoch (1 Enoch).”86 He
lists five passages87 found in the book of Watchers and considers them “striking” when
compared with Rev 14:4a. In all five passages, the Watchers were accused of being
defiled by the daughters of men. Assuming that John the author of Revelation, must have
been well acquainted with the book of Watchers since even Jude quoted from it,88 Olson
concludes that by alluding to the book of Watchers, John “seems to be saying that the
83
84
See the discussion offered by Aune, Revelation 6-16, 810-812.
85
A. Y. Collins, Crisis and Catharsis, 129.
86
Daniel C. Olson, “Those Who Have Not Defiled Themselves with Women”:
Revelation 14:4 and the Book of Enoch, CBQ 59 (1977): 493. The book of Enoch was
originally written in Semitic language is “now accepted on all hand,” R. H. Charles, The
Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch Edited from Twenty-Three Mss. together with the
Fragmentary Greek and Latin Version (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1906), x. A
complete version of this work survived only in Ethiopic which was brought to Europe by
James Bruce from Ethiopia in 1773, Michael A. Knibb, ed., The Ethiopic Book of Enoch:
A New Edition in the Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments, 2 vols. (Oxford: The
Clarendon Press, 1978), 1:1. There are also Aramaic fragments of Enoch found at
Qumrân; cf. J. T. Milik, ed., The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of QumrânCave 4
(Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1976). The Greek version of Enoch derives mainly from
four sources: fragments in Syncellus, the Akhmim manuscript (Codex Panopolitanus),
Codex Vaticanus Gr. 1806, and the Chester Beatty—Michigan papyrus, Knibb, The
Ethiopic Book of Enoch, 2:15.
87
1 Enoch 7:1; 9:8; 10:11; 12:4; 15:2-7.
88
Olson, “Those Who Have Not Defiled Themselves,” 497, 498.
161
redeemed 144,000 stand in radical opposition to the fallen angels of the BW.”89 Likewise,
“the 144,000 virgins of Revelation 14 are an anti-image not only to the devotees of the
beast, but also, it seems, to the fallen angels.”90
Olson’s presentation is insightful. It broadens the scope of the implications of
144,000 to include a contrast with the fallen angels. The book of Revelation indeed
concerns not only the human side but also the angelic side of the cosmic war. Thus in
Revelation 12, John was shown the vision of the third of the heavenly host, angels who
had fallen together with the dragon. However, there are two objections to this
interpretation. First, it weakens the imagery of the 144,000 as “an anti-image . . . to the
devotees of the beast.” In the context of universal apostasy described in Revelation 13, it
is unlikely that John suddenly shifts the focus from immediate human affairs to ancient
deeds of evil angels (if the book of Watchers is a true description of antediluvian history).
Second, Olson lacks the exact verbal parallels to make Rev 14:4a a possible
allusion to 1 Enoch. There is only a thematic parallel between the two passages, the motif
of having sexual relationships with women or daughters. But there is only one exact
verbal parallel found between the five passages Olson quoted from 1 Enoch to Rev 14:4a,
and that is gunaikōn translated as “women” or “daughters.” The Greek verb which is
translated as “defiled” in 1 Enoch is actually emianthēsan which means “mixed.”

However, Rev 14:4a has the Greek verb emolunthēsan, which means “defiled.”
Both A. Y. Collins and Olson insist on interpreting the word parthenoi (virgins)
literally. Renate Hood argues that this Greek word can also refer to ritual purity.91 Hood
89
Ibid., 500.
90
Ibid., 501.
Renate Viveen Hood, “Women and Warriors: Character Development in John’s

91
Apocalypse,” in Essays on Revelation: Appropriating Yesterday’s Apocalypse in Today’s

World, ed. Gerald L. Stevens (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2010), 81.
162
states that, “The imagery is one of warfare, not of misogyny.”92 Bauckham also interprets
this “much misunderstood reference to the virginity of the 144,000”93 symbolically. For
him, it is part of the military image of Revelation 14. The 144,000 are holy warriors
symbolizing the faithful followers of Christ. The ancient requirement for soldiers who
were going to participate in the holy war was to be ritually pure and they had to avoid
cultic defilement by not having sexual relationships with women (Deut. 23:9-14; 1 Sam
21:5; 2 Sam 11:9-13; 1 QM 7:3-6).94 The virginity of the 144,000 is “John’s ideal of the
church,” and it “is not sexual asceticism, but moral purity.”95 J. Massyngberde Ford also
holds that the phrase “the 144,000 are not defiled with women” means that “they have not
given themselves to the worship of the beast.”96
I would like to build upon Bauckham and Ford’s interpretation and further argue
for a more specific understanding of the virginity of the 144,000 as a symbolic way of
describing the purity of faith of those who refuse to worship the beast and its image.97 My
reasons are three: first, the literary context. Rev 14:1-5 is “a proleptic eschatological
scene”98 given immediately after the darkest scene of Revelation 13 in which all the
people on earth are forced to worship the beast and its image. It is followed by the three
92
Ibid.
93
Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation, 78.
94
Ibid.
95
Ibid.; cf. Fiorenza, Revelation: Vision of a Just World, 88-89; Mitchell G.
Reddish, “Followers of the Lamb: Role Models in the Book of Revelation,” PRSt 40
(2013), 74.
96
97
It is listed among one of the traditional interpretations by Aune, Revelation 6-16,
812.
98
Ibid., 448.
163
angels’ warnings against the worship of the beast and its image. In Revelation 13, there is
a call for patient endurance and faithfulness on the part of the saints (v. 10). The scene of
the Lamb standing on Mount Zion with the 144,000 redeemed from among human beings
could be understood as a follow-up message to encourage the saints who are in the midst
of tribulation by providing them a glimpse of what will happen to them if they remain
faithful. So if the defilement by women is a symbolic way of describing worshipping the
beast and its image, then not to defile themselves with women means to refuse to worship
the beast and its image. This symbolic interpretation is also in line with the Old
Testament prophetic tradition which uses promiscuity as a metaphor for idol worship.99
Thus, Aune comments that, “perhaps here, too, virginity is a metaphor for faithfulness to
God.”100
Second, the description of the spiritual purity of the 144,000 as not being defiled
by “women” is also worth pondering. Babylon the Great, who made her first appearance
in Rev 14:8, immediately after the description of the 144,000, later appears as an evil
woman par excellence (Revelation 17), and is also called “the mother of prostitutes.” The
prostitutes are women, probably the only “women” (plural) in Revelation who could
possibly defile people. So the act of the 144,000 refusing to be defiled by women is
closely associated with the defiling activity of Babylon. As I have shown in the survey of
the theme of Babylon in Revelation 14, Babylon’s act of causing the nations to drink the
wine of her fornication may be another way of presenting the image of the beast’s act of
causing the inhabitants of the earth to worship the beast and its image. Thus, defilement
by women could be understood as a symbol of worshipping the beast and its image.
99
Cf. Jer 3:2; 13:27; Ezek 16:15-58; 23:1-49; 43:7; Hos 5:4; 6:10.
100
Aune, Apocalypticism, 70.
164
My third reason for interpreting the defilement by women as worshipping the
beast and its image lies in the allusion of this verse to the account of Moabite women in
Numbers 25. I would like to reserve the details of this allusion for the next section
because the literary device finds its completion only when reading Revelation 14 together
with Revelation 15. The allusion to Numbers 25 shows that the defilement by women has
everything to do with idol worship; thus, again, the defilement by women may be
understood as worshipping the beast and its image.
It is interesting to note that the faithful in the church of Sardis are also described
as those that did not defile their clothes, and their promised reward was to “walk in white”
with Jesus (Rev 3:4), which is a symbol of purity and victory. The faithful of Sardis
appear to be part of the 144,000 of Revelation 14.
Summary
In this section, I surveyed the image of the beast in Revelation 14, and explored
how it fits into the overall picture of Revelation 14. Revelation 14 is the divine response
to the dark scene of Revelation 13. The image of the beast takes on the crucial role of
forcing the inhabitants of the earth to worship the beast and its image, and in Revelation
14, it meets its impending doom.
The study of the major themes in Revelation 14 shows that the image of the beast
is at the front line of the conflict between the dragon and God. The study of both Babylon
the Great and the 144,000 sheds light on the motif of the image of the beast. My tentative
conclusion is that the image of the beast of Revelation 13 may be Babylon the great of
Revelation 14, and that worshipping the beast and the image of the beast may mean
drinking the wine of the wrath of her fornication.
165
Revelation 15 serves as an introduction to the seven last bowl-plagues101 which
will be described in detail in Revelation 16.102 Verse 1 is the beginning of the
introduction103 or a summary104 of the vision starting from Rev 15:5 to Rev 16:21. Verses
2-4 are the continuation of the judgment theme in Revelation 14, acting as “a
parenthetical transition,”105 concluding the previous section and introducing the following
scene. The reward of the faithful in Rev 15:2-4 parallels Rev 14:1-5 and expands upon
it.106 It interprets the faithful not defiling themselves with women as gaining victory over
the beast and its image, and the content of the new song sung by the redeemed is
specified as the song of Moses and the Lamb. Thus, Rev 14:1-5 and Rev 15:2-4 form an
inclusio.107
The picture of the singing of “a proleptic victory song,”108 the new song of Moses,
alludes to the Israelites’ Exodus experience.109 The new song serves as “the ‘key-note
Using Paulien’s terminology of referring to the bowls/plagues in Rev 15, 16.

101
See Paulien, Armageddon, 102.

102
Prigent, Commentary on the Apocalypse, 454; see also Beale, The Book of
Revelation, 785.
103
104
105
106
Ibid., 785.
107
Ibid.
J. Massyngberde Ford, “The Structure and Meaning of Revelation 16,” ExpTim

108
98 (1987): 327.
109
Ibid., 328.
166
address’ to the final outpouring of the furious wrath of the Divine Warrior,”110 signifying
the beginning of the eschatological Exodus God is going to bring about, starting at the
pouring out of the seven last bowl-plagues.
Revelation 15 could be roughly divided into three parts: (1) the introduction to the
seven bowl-plagues (v. 1); (2) the redeemed and their song of Moses (vv. 2-4); and (3)
the temple in heaven (vv. 5-8).111
Two major themes are found in Revelation 15: the theme of the temple, and the
theme of bowl-plagues.
The Theme of the Temple
Rev 15:5 indicates that the temple is the source of the seven bowl-plagues.112 The
temple in Rev 15:5 is described as ho naostēs skēnēs tou marturiou (the temple of the
tabernacle of testimony), a phrase frequently used in the Greek Old Testament (about 140
times, with 130 found in the Pentateuch).113 The testimony refers to the stone tablets of
the Ten Commandments which were placed inside the Ark of the Covenant in the Holy of
Holies,114 and that is the reason the tabernacle built by Moses is also called the Tent of
110
Ibid.
111
Richard M. Davidson, “Sanctuary Typology,” in Symposium on Revelation—
Book I, DARCOM 6, ed. Frank B. Holbrook (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research
Institute, 1992), 118.
112
113
Ibid., 801.
114
John Ben-Daniel and Gloria Ben-Daniel, The Apocalypse in the Light of the
Temple: A New Approach to the Book of Revelation (Jerusalem: Beit Yochanan, 2003),
22, footnote 27; see also F. J. Murphy, Fallen Is Babylon, 334; R. Larry Overstreet, “The
Temple of God in the Book of Revelation,” BSac 166 (2009), 458.
167
the Testimony.115 The naming of the temple as the temple of the tabernacle of testimony
indicates a special attention to the Decalogue it contains.116
The temple is reported to be open. This is the second time that Revelation
mentions the opening of the temple. The first time is in Rev 11:19, and Aune observes
that “a parallel phrase occurs in 11:19”117 which is “then the temple of God in heaven
opened.” In Rev 11:19 as the temple opens the Ark of the Covenant is seen. Aune
mentions that in the Jewish tradition, “the temple doors that opened by themselves were
considered a prodigy.”118 It is either a sign of divine blessing or impending judgment.119
The opening of the temple in Rev 11:19 with the exhibition of the Ark of the Covenant
draws attention to the Law of God by which God will judge the nations.120 The Ben-
Daniels write, “Just as the Law, the Ark and the Tent served as a testimony against those
who rebelled against God, so also the revelation of the Ark at the opening of the
Sanctuary of the Tent of the Testimony in heaven . . . will serve as a testimony against
those inhabitants of the earth who continue to rebel against God.”121 And the judgment
will be final.
115
Ben-Daniel, The Apocalypse in the Light of the Temple, 179.
116
Caird, The Revelation of Saint John, 200.
117
118
Ibid.
119
Ibid. See Josephus, Jewish War 6.293-296.
120
Davidson, “Sanctuary Typology,” 118.
121
168
The opening of the door of the temple also reminds readers who are well
acquainted with the OT scene of the Day of Atonement,122 especially when reading about
the seven angels “emerging from the temple clad in the priestly garb traditionally worn
during the Day of Atonement: the robe of fine linen (cf. Lev 16:4).”123 It was the one day
in the year when the Ark of the Covenant was made accessible to the priest. In Rev 15:5,
even though it does not specifically mention that as the temple opens, the Ark of the
Covenant is seen, since the temple in Rev 15:5 is called “the tabernacle of testimony” it
could imply that the Ark of the Covenant may have been exposed as it was in Rev 11:19.
The opening of the temple has a twofold meaning. First, as it implies God’s
judgment upon the nations due to their violation of the covenant, it “functions as an
introduction to the judgments of the seven bowls.”124 The motif of seven angels with
seven plagues echoes the announcement of the seven plagues and of the sevenfold curse
on those who rebel against the covenant, which can be found in Leviticus 26:21 and is
almost word for word identical to Revelation.125
Second, it is also a sign of God’s presence with his faithful believers.126 Closely
related to the second point, the opening of the temple resulting in the exposure of the Ark
has a third meaning, that is, it is a symbol of God’s presence with his believers during a
122
Carrington, The Meaning of the Revelation, 261; Jan Paulsen, “Sanctuary and
Judgment,” in Symposium on Revelation—Book II, DARCOM 7, ed. Frank B. Holbrook
(Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, 1992), 292.
123
Doukhan, Secrets of Revelation, 143; cf. J. M. Ford, Revelation, 258, 265.
124
125
Prigent, Commentary on the Apocalypse, 459. The concept of a sevenfold curse
can also be found in Ps 79:12. Beale provides a few more references from other Second
Temple Jewish literature, such as Ben Sira, Beale, The Book of Revelation, 803.
126
Ibid., 619.
169
holy war, when God battles against his enemies on behalf of his believers.127 In the Old
Testament, especially in Exodus, the Ark of the Covenant played a prominent role in
leading the Israelites marching out to the wars.128 This symbolism is especially relevant
to the book of Revelation since it is a book of warfare portraying God as a divine warrior.
Both of the openings of the temple doors are followed by a battle scene: Rev 11:19 is
followed by Revelation 12 and 13, the cosmic battle scene against the dragon; and Rev
15:5 is followed by Revelation 16, God’s battle against the bestial forces, which is the
pouring out of the seven bowl-plagues.
In this temple scene, as the angels come out of the temple, it is filled with smoke
from the glory and power of God. None can enter it until the plagues are completed. Most
commentators think this scene alludes to Exod 40:35 and 1 Kgs 8:11,129 which describe
the inaugurations of the tabernacle and the temple, respectively. In both cases, human
beings were prevented from entering the consecrated building due to the filling of
tabernacle and temple with the cloud of God’s glory.130
Ben-Daniels also notice the allusion to the inauguration passages, and suggest that
Rev 15:5-8 “signals the completion [or consecration] of the new Temple.”131 But they
observe that the situation in Revelation is somewhat different from that of Moses and
127
Tremper Longman III and Daniel G. Reid, God Is a Warrior (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1995), 40.
128
Ibid., 39.
129
E.g., Aune thinks it a clear allusion, see Aune, Revelation 6-16, 881; J. M. Ford
also thinks this to be “an obvious allusion”; see J. M. Ford, Revelation, 258; Paulien also
considers it a strong allusion, see Jon Paulien, “The Role of the Hebrew Cultus,
Sanctuary, and Temple in the Plot and Structure of the Book of Revelation,” AUSS 33
(1995): 253, n. 42.
130
Overstreet, “The Temple of God,” 458.
131
Ben-Daniel, The Apocalypse in the Light of the Temple, 180, 183-190.
170
Solomon because the heavenly temple “is already consecrated by the glorious Presence of
God.”132 So they think that only some elements of the new Temple need to be
consecrated, which are the priests, i.e., “the 144,000 men gathered together on Mt.
Zion”133 referring to the victors of Rev 15:2 whose holding of harps indicates their
priestly identity.134
The Ben-Daniels’ conclusion is not without any basis in light of the
Wissenschaftlche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament monograph written by Pilchan
Lee on the faithful believers of God as the New Jerusalem/the New Temple of
Revelation.135 In his book, Pilchan Lee demonstrates that the book of Revelation follows
the tradition of the New Testament in describing the faithful believers of God as God’s
New Temple from which God presides; it is the church placed in heaven. If the allusion
to the Old Testament temple inauguration passages is taken seriously, and also the
heavenly Temple in Revelation 15 is interpreted as the people of God,136 the scene of Rev
132
Ibid., 185.
133
Ibid., 186.
134
The Ben-Daniels did not mention the holding of harps indicating a priestly
identity. This is noted by Pilchan Lee when he comments on the twenty-four elders in
Revelation 4-5, that they function like the Levites of 1 Chron 25. See Pilchan Lee, The
New Jerusalem in the Book of Revelation, WUNT 129 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001),
249.
The identity of the twenty-four elders in Revelation 4-5 is problematic. Wilhelm
Bousset, who after studying all the possible interpretations concludes that John’s
description of them originated from some ancient traditional image; see Bousset, Die
Offenbarung Johannis, 247. A. Y. Collins thinks they are “probably angelic beings
modeled on ancient astrological figures.” See A. Y. Collins, “Eschatology in the Book of
Revelation,” ExAud 6 (1990): 64. For reasons to identify the twenty-four elders as the
redeemed company and not angels, see David J. MacLeod, “The Adoration of God the
Creator: An Exposition of Revelation 4,” BSac 164 (2007): 208-210. For different views
on the twenty-four elders see G. Bornkamm, “presbus,” TDNT, 6:668-670.
135
Ibid.
136
See Ben-Daniel, The Apocalypse in the Light of the Temple, 99-110; Pilchan
Lee, The New Jerusalem, 259-263.
171
15:8 could mean the final completion of the formation of God’s eschatological temple, in
other words the perfection of his church.
The majority of biblical scholars take the scene in Rev 15:8 as signifying the
closing up of the sanctuary.137 Both Aune and Grant Osborne summarize three major
scholarly views on the reasons for the closing of the temple.138 First, the temple is closed
because the ministry of intercession is over; second, the temple is closed because God’s
wrath prevents anyone from approaching him; third, the temple is closed because of
God’s awesome holiness, majesty and power. Aune and Osborne themselves think the
second or the third view is more convincing. Both the second and the third views could
be part of the reasons for the closing of the temple, but they are too general to be used
here in Rev 15. God is awesome in his holiness, majesty and power at all times, and
God’s wrath certainly would prevent anyone from approaching him, but since the scene
in Rev 15:8 serves as an introduction to the seven last bowl-plagues, which are the final
judgment on the nations, the closing of the temple at this time should have a more clear-
cut reason.
Without excluding the other two views, I would like to propose the first view to
be the major reason, especially when considering the thematic and structural parallels
between Rev 15:8 and Ezekiel 10. Richard Davidson points out that many commentators
have noticed parallel Old Testament passages where the glory of God fills the temple at
its inauguration, and yet overlook its parallels to Ezekiel 10,139 which for Davidson
137
Paulien, “The Role of the Hebrew Cultus,” 253.
138
Aune, Revelation 6-16, 882; Osborne, Revelation, 572.
139
Kowalski did a thorough study on Revelation’s use of the book of Ezekiel, but
Ezekiel 10 is not found in her list of allusions. See Kowalski, Die Rezeption des
Propheten Ezechiel, 504-507.
172
“seems to provide a closer thematic and structural parallel in its ‘close-of-probation’ and
executive judgment context.”140 Beale, Ford, and S. S. Smalley are among the few
scholars who have noticed the connections between Revelation 15 and Ezekiel 10.141 In
Ezekiel 10 “the cloud filled the temple, and the court was full of the radiance of the glory
of the LORD” (v. 4). This is thematically in parallel with Rev 15:8. Another thematic
parallel to Revelation 15 is that the temple scene in Ezekiel 10 also serves as an
introduction to the announcement of judgment.142 The judgment announcement in
Ezekiel 11 is particularly focused on the Israelites’ violation of God’s laws and their
conformity to the standards of the nations around them (v. 12). In Revelation 15 the
temple is called the tabernacle of testimony. This is a clear reference to the law of God.
Thus the emphasis on the law is another thematic parallel between these two passages.
The reasons for punishment are also similar. In Ezekiel 11, inhabitants of Jerusalem are
accused of having “killed many people in this city and filled its streets with the dead” (v.
6). This is also the reason why God judges the nations with the bowl-plagues in
Revelation, “for they have shed the blood of your saints and prophets, and you have
given them blood to drink as they deserve” (16:6).
Structurally, both passages start with the filling of the temple with the glory of
God followed by the announcement of the judgment. Thus Davidson writes that, “Just as
the glory of the Lord filled the sanctuary/temple on earth at the close of Judah’s probation
and the commencement of the executive judgment upon her (Ezek 10:3-4), so here in
Revelation the smoke from God’s glory filling the temple so that none can enter appears
140
Davidson, “Sanctuary Typology,” 118, footnote 47.
141
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 806, 807; J. M. Ford, Revelation, 258; Smalley,
The Revelation to John, 392.
142
173
to signal the close of probationary time and the commencement of executive judgment
upon the enemies of God.”143
The Theme of the Bowl-Plagues
Bowl-plagues are “the consequences of disobedience to the covenant,”144 and
their purpose as “covenant curses” is clear.145 That is why they originate from the temple
(v. 5).146 The seven bowl-plagues are clearly patterned after the plagues in Exodus.147 The
salvation of the end time faithful believers of God is patterned after the Israelite Exodus
from Egypt.148 Just as the plagues of Egypt are “the crucible” that leads the ancient
people of God to liberty, the seven last bowl-plagues will also lead the faithful believers
of God to freedom in the eschaton.149
The victorious believers of God are described as standing by the sea150 and
singing the song of Moses. The words “sea” and “sing” are used in Exodus also to
143
Davidson, “Sanctuary Typology,” 118.
144
Paulien, Armageddon, 85.
W. G. Campbell, “Findings, Seals, Trumpets, and Bowls: Variations upon the

145
Theme of Covenant Rupture and Restoration in the Book of Revelation,” WTJ 66 (2004):
93.
146
147
Ibid.
148
149
Ibid., 456.
150
Some scholars assume that the sea of glass described as “a sea of glass, clear as
crystal” in Rev 4:6 is the floor of heaven, and think that this understanding is most clear
in Rev 15:2. Support for this assumption is found in the expression “the floor of crystal”
in 1 Enoch 14:10. See Pilchan Lee, The New Jerusalem, 250; on the other hand, scholars
like Aune think this understanding is “not appropriate” since it is said in Rev 4:6 to be
before the throne of God. See Aune, Revelation 6-16, 872.
174
describe the Red Sea experience (Exodus 15). These verbal allusions imply that the
victorious ones have just gone through an eschatological Red Sea experience.151 This
thought is complementary to the image of the river drying up in Rev 16:12, which reads,
“The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried
up to prepare the way for the kings from the East.”
According to Rev 14:4, the redeemed are said to have not defiled themselves with
women, thereby keeping themselves pure, while in Rev 15:2 the redeemed are those who
did not worship the beast and its image. Thus, the worshipping of the beast and its image
is a symbol for defiling with women.
The language of defilement by women and the plagues recalls Numbers 25, the
Israelites’ affair at Baal-Peor. At this point, I would like to suggest that Rev 14:4-15:4
alludes to the Septuagint of Num 25:1-18 verbally, thematically, and structurally.
Verbally, the word gunē (woman) occurs in both passages (Num 25:8, 15; Rev
14:4) although in Num 25:8, 15 it appears as singular, but in Num 25:1 tas thugateras
Mōab (the daughters of Moab) are mentioned, which the NIV translates simply as
“Moabite women.” Words such as proskuneō (worship, Num 25:2; Rev 14:7), God’s
thumos (wrath, Num 25:3; Rev 14:10), orgē (anger, Num 25:4; Rev 14:10), and plēgē
(plague, Num 25:8, 18; Rev 15:1) occur in both passages.

Thematically, both passages focus on the issue of worship. Numbers 25 is about
worshipping Baal or God; in Revelation 14, 15 the issue is worshipping the beast and its
image or God. Both passages involve cultic meals. In Numbers 25 the people of Israel ate
the food sacrificed for the idol (v. 2); in Revelation 14 all the nations drank the wine of
Babylon (v. 8). The timing of the issue is also similar. The events of Numbers 25, which
151
175
are followed in Numbers 26 by the story of the second census taken in preparation for the
entrance into Canaan, records the last trial in relation to worship that the Israelites
experienced before entering the Promised Land; Rev 14:1-15:1 records the final issue of
worship before the final gathering of the faithful on Mount Zion, the Promised Land of
heaven. In Numbers 25, the Moabite women caused the Israelites to worship idols, while
in Rev 14:4, not being defiled by women is interpreted by Rev 15:2 as gaining victory
over the beast and its image, which suggests that the worship of the beast and its image
are equal to being defiled by women.
The idea of using the Moabite women as a means to lead astray the Israelites
came from Balaam, the false prophet (Num 31:16), while the idea of worshipping the
beast and the image of the beast also came from the false prophet, the land beast (Rev
19:20). Although Numbers 25 does not mention the name of Balaam, and Revelation 14,
15 do not mention the false prophet, both figures are implied by the context. And the
strategy which both false prophets used is deception (Num 25:18; Rev 13:14). Just as
Balaam used the Moabite women to deceive the Israelites to join the worship of Baal, the
false prophet in Revelation uses the image of the beast to deceive the inhabitants of the
earth to worship the beast. In Numbers 31 there are additional factors that strengthen the
thematic connection between Numbers 25 and Revelation 14-15: a symmetrical army of

12,000 (1 from each of 12 tribes) to wage holy war against the Midianites who instigated
the Baal Peor episode (v. 4-6), and in the battle Balaam is killed (v. 8). Here we see a
cluster of “types” of the symmetrical army of 144,000 and “Balaam” in Revelation.
Structural parallelism can be seen from the flow of both passages. In Numbers 25,
the defilement by Moabite women happened first, followed by the plagues, and then by
the Israelites’ entering into the Promised Land. In Revelation 14, 15, the worship of the
beast and its image happens first, followed by God’s wrath, and then the redeemed enter
the heavenly court.
176
Numbers 25 serves as an illustration for the prohibition of idol worship
pronounced by God in Exodus 34. Exodus 34 records the giving of the Ten
Commandments. In the process, God specifically instructs Moses that the Israelites
should not make a treaty with those who live in the land, nor marry their sons to the
daughters of the land, because as “those daughters prostitute themselves to their gods,
they will lead your sons to do the same” (v. 16). The Israelites prostituted themselves by
following the Moabite women to worship their idols and indulge in sexual immorality.
God uses the idea of ekporneuō (indulge in illicit sexual relations)152 to describe the
whole package of idol-worshipping activities. A similar term is also used to describe
Babylon the Great in Revelation 17 (v. 1, 15, 16) and 19 (v. 2), which is pornē
(prostitute). Thus those in Revelation 14 who “did not defile themselves with women”
appear to be those who did not prostitute themselves with idol worship, and who did not
prostitute themselves with Babylon.
The allusions of Rev 14:1-15:4 to Num 25:1-18 connect Revelation 14 and 15
with the Balaam motif in Rev 2:14, where it says, “You [the church of Pergamum] have
people there who hold to the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to entice the Israelites
to sin by eating food sacrificed to idols and by committing sexual immorality.” Here is
mentioned a group of people within the Pergamum church who hold to the false prophet
Balaam’s teaching. The allusion also suggests that the expression “defiled with women”
implies idol worship, which confirms the parallel between Rev 14:1-5 and Rev 15:2-4.
The parallel suggests that the image of the beast, which directly causes the inhabitants of
the earth to worship the beast, is closely associated with the symbolism of prostitutes in
152
“Ekporneuō,” BDAG, 309.
177
Revelation, and this once again connects the image of the beast with Babylon the Great,
who is called the prostitute and the mother of prostitutes in Revelation 17.
Summary
In this section, I surveyed the image of the beast in Revelation 15 and explored
how it connects to the main themes of this chapter. The pouring out of the plagues is the
beginning of God’s end time war against the bestial forces. The plagues are poured on the
beast, the image of the beast and those who worship them. In Revelation 15, God’s wrath
is no longer a threat but a reality.
The survey of the major themes of Revelation 15 shows that the image of the
beast bears the brunt of God’s wrath. The allusion to Numbers 25 suggests that the
language of defilement by women may be a symbolic way of speaking about idol
worship. The three main elements which brought the wrath of God upon the Israelites in
Numbers 25, namely, women, seductive sex, and idol worship, make Numbers 25 serve
as a link between Babylon the Great and the image of the beast, and confirm the tentative
conclusion derived from the study of Revelation 14, that is, that the image of the beast
appears to be identical to Babylon the Great, who in Revelation 17 is called the prostitute
and the mother of prostitutes.
By describing the opening of the temple and the possible exposing of the Ark of
the Covenant, Revelation 15 has made an introduction to the beginning of the end time
war, which is God’s pouring out of the seven bowl-plagues. Revelation 16 continues to
178
describe how God, the divine warrior, fights against the bestial forces; it explains the
content of each of the seven bowl-plagues in detail.153
As mentioned before, Rev 11:18 is the summary statement for Revelation 12-22;
it reads: “The nations were angry; and your wrath has come. The time has come for
judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophets and your saints and those
who reverence your name, both small and great—and for destroying those who destroy
the earth.” Verse 18 depicts the readiness for war on both sides. Both the nations and God
are now standing on the battleground ready to fight. Revelation 12 and 13 describe how
the unholy trinity wage their end time war against God and his believers by forcing all the
inhabitants of the earth to worship the beast and its image. Revelation 14-18 is God’s
response to the bestial attack, beginning with the declaration of war, which is the
announcement of the pouring out of God’s wrath in Revelation 14, followed by a prelude
of the pouring out in Revelation 15. Now in Revelation 16 comes the actual attack from
God; God puts into action what he declared in Rev 14:9-11, which is the pouring out of
the seven plagues because the bestial forces have “poured out the blood of God’s people
and the prophets” (Rev 16:6a).154
The seven bowl-plagues have “much in common”155 with the seven trumpets, and
their exact relationship has caused much debate. Murphy suggests that the bowls
recapitulate the trumpets and the seals, and that they are to be taken as describing the
same event using different images.156 Mounce also noticed the recapitulation and yet
153
154
Paulien, Armageddon, 88. The English translation of Rev 16:6a is quoted from
Aune’s translation of the verse; see Aune, Revelation 6-16, 886.
155
F. J. Murphy, Fallen Is Babylon, 336.
156
Ibid.
179
found that the bowls do have “distinct differences” from the trumpets. He lists the three
most significant ones: (1) the trumpet-plagues symbolize partial judgment while the
bowl-plagues stand for universal and thorough judgment; (2) repentance is still available
during the trumpet series while there is no chance for repentance during the bowl-plagues;
(3) the trumpets did not attack human beings directly while the bowl-plagues attack
human beings directly, and the bowls come in rapid succession without any interlude
between the sixth and seventh bowl-plagues, while an interlude is customary during the
trumpets and the seals.157 Thus the bowl-plagues are the final judgment from God upon
those who are unfaithful to the covenant. This final judgment is the wrath of God poured
in full strength (cf. Rev 14:10).
The image of the beast is mentioned at the pouring out of the first bowl. Everyone
who has worshiped the image of the beast and had the mark of the beast will receive
punishment, and their punishment matches their crime, i.e., sores as “a penal mark”158
since their crime is having received the mark of the beast.159
Aune divides Revelation 16 into two parts: (1) the sending-out of the bowl angels
(v. 1); (2) the pouring out of the seven bowl-plagues (vv. 2-21).160
There are a number of major themes in Revelation 16, some of which are
recurring, such as plagues, judgment and warfare; I have dealt with these in the previous
157
Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 291-292; see also George E. Ladd, A
Commentary on the Revelation of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972), 209.
158
159
Lilje, The Last Book of the Bible, 214.
160
180
chapters. I will only survey new themes, which are the drying up of the River Euphrates,
and the gathering of good and evil forces for the battle of Armageddon.
The Drying up of the Waters of the River Euphrates
Rev 16:12 is “a summary statement of the sixth bowl.”161 The drying up of the
waters of the River Euphrates is the actual content of the sixth bowl-plague. It reminds
readers of God’s great redemptive acts recorded in the Old Testament, particularly the
Exodus (Exodus 14) and the entrance into the Land of Canaan (Joshua 3).162
Before touching on the theme of the drying up of the waters of the River
Euphrates, it is necessary to define the term “River Euphrates” as it is used in Revelation
16. The phrase “the great River Euphrates” first appears at the sixth trumpet (Rev 9:14).
The meaning was not explained there; the emphasis was on the four angels who were
bound in the river and were to be released during the sixth trumpet. In Rev 16:12, the
River Euphrates appears again at the sixth bowl-plague. As one of the objects which
receives the pouring out of the sixth bowl, the river’s water was dried up, preparing the
way for the kings from the East.
The literal River Euphrates is the river beside which the ancient city of Babylon
was built.163 In Jer 51:12, 13, the inhabitants of Babylon are said to “live by many
waters”164 which are the waters of the River Euphrates.165 The prosperity and defense of
161
162
Aune, Revelation 6-16, 891; Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 298.
163
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 828; Paulien, Armageddon, 101.
“Many waters” means a large amount of water (mayim is grammatically plural

164
in Hebrew).
165
181
the ancient city of Babylon depended largely upon the waters of the River Euphrates.
Once the waters dried up, the city became desolated166 and unstable.167
Aune claims that “as the largest river in southwest Asia, the Euphrates was never
known to dry up, unlike most of the rivers in the Near East.”168 However, several scholars,
such as Beale, Ford and Mounce draw attention to the historical fact provided by
Herodotus (History I, 191) that “Cyrus is said to have walked across the drained bed of
the Euphrates as he went to conquer Babylon”169 by having “temporarily diverted the
Euphrates, which ran through the center of Babylon, leaving open the river bed, through
which his armies entered and captured the city.”170 As a result, the ancient city of
Babylon and the Babylonian Empire fell.171 After the overthrow, the Israelites were
allowed to return from their exile in Babylon and to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem and
their homes in Judea (Ezra 1).172 So in salvation history, the drying up of the waters of
the River Euphrates is the direct cause of Babylon’s fall, and the fall of Babylon is the
prerequisite for the return of Israel from exile.173
166
Jeremiah pronounced a curse upon Babylon that its waters would dry up, and
the result is Babylon became a desolate place where desert creatures and hyenas lived
(50:38-39; 51:36, 37).
167
The fall of ancient Babylon was due to the drying up of the waters of River
Euphrates. See details in Beale, The Book of Revelation, 828-829; Paulien, Armageddon,
106-111.
168
169
170
Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 298. See Beale, The Book of Revelation, 827.
William H. Shea, “The Location and Significance of Armageddon in Rev

171
16:16,” AUSS 18 (1980): 157.

172
Shea, “The Location and Significance of Armageddon,” 158; Ladd, A

173
Commentary on the Revelation of John, 212.
182
Jeremiah prophesied the fall of ancient Babylon, and stated that its fall was due to
her sins (51:6). Two sins are specifically listed against her: first, she oppressed the people
of Israel (50:33); second, Babylon worshipped idols and became a land of idols (50:38).
Scholarly opinions differ as to whether to interpret the waters of the Euphrates
River literally or symbolically. A majority of the scholars interpret the Euphrates River
literally and connect its drying up with the Parthian army174 in relation to the Nero
redivivus myth found in the Sibylline Oracles (4.137-139).175 It prophesies that Nero
would return as an “eschatological adversary”176 from the east with a great Parthian army
and destroy Rome. The Euphrates is the river route by which Nero fled and would return
to destroy Rome with the Parthian army.177
However, Prigent comments that while the author of Revelation probably knew
about this legend, there is no indication that he was alluding to that legend. Prigent also
notes that “at that time the Parthian threat was no longer felt to be a real danger,
especially among the Jews.”178
174
Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 243; Charles, A Critical and
Exegetical Commentary, 2:46, 74; J. M. Ford, Revelation, 273; Mounce, The Book of
Revelation, 298; Ben Witherington, Revelation, New Cambridge Bible Commentary
(Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 209.
175
For a detailed discussion of this myth see Alan S. Bandy, “Nero redivivus,” in
The Prophetic Lawsuit in the Book of Revelation, New Testament Monographs 29, ed.
Stanley E. Porter (Sheffield: Sheffield, 2010), 71-74; John M. Lawrence, “Nero
Redivivus,” FH 11 (1978): 54-66; David A. Thomas, “Nero Redivivus,” in Revelation 19
in Historical and Mythological Context, Studies in Biblical Literature 118, ed. Hemchand
Gossai (New York: Peter Lang, 2008): 91-109.
Hans-Josef Klauck, “Do They Never Come Back? Nero Redivivus and the
176
Apocalypse of John,” CBQ 63 (2001): 688.

177
178
183
Scholars such as Beale and Osborne suggest a symbolic understanding of the
waters of the River Euphrates.179 For one thing, water is used a number of times to
symbolize groups of people in the Old Testament prophetic tradition (Isa 8:6-7; 17:12-14;
28:17),180 and it is always figuratively used throughout the book of Revelation.181 Thus
Charles takes the waters of Rev 17:1 as a translation of Jer 51:13,182 and Bauckham
interprets them as nations “subject to the universal rule of the beast and Babylon.”183
The meaning of the waters of the River Euphrates is not clear in Revelation 16. It
is necessary to find its meaning from somewhere else. It is a common understanding that
Revelation 17 expands the theme of the judgment of Babylon which is introduced in
Revelation 16.184 Thus, Schüssler Fiorenza thinks of the “Babylon visions” in Revelation
17 and 18 “as an appended interlude to the bowl septet.”185 LaRondelle and Paulien
particularly argue that Revelation 17 is the amplified version of both the sixth and
seventh bowls because of the “intimate connection” between Rev 17:1ff. and the sixth
179
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 828; Osborne, Revelation, 590.
180
Pieter G. R. De Villiers, “The Composition of Revelation 17 and Its Place in
the Book as a Whole,” APB 13 (2002): 112.
181
182
Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, 2:62.
183
Richard Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy: Studies on the Book of Revelation
(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1993), 329-330.
184
Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 248; Hans K. LaRondelle, How to
Understand the End-time Prophecies of the Bible: The Biblical-contextual Approach
(Sarasota, FL: First Impressions, 1997), 396; Osborne, Revelation, 607; Smalley, The
Revelation to John, 424. Aune considers that Revelation 17 was not connected with
Revelation 16 originally, but admits the angels with the seven bowls (Rev 17:1a) tie
Revelation 17 with Revelation 15-16; see his Revelation 17-22, 928. Osborne also
considers the fact that the angel who explains to John the judgment of the great harlot is
“one of the angels having the seven bowls” tying Revelation 16 and 17 closely, Osborne,
Revelation, 607.
185
Fiorenza, “Composition and Structure of the Book of Revelation,” 361.
184
bowl in Rev 16:12-16:186 First, it is one of the seven bowl-plague angels who introduces
Revelation 17 “with an explicit statement that he comes to explain in more detail the fall
or destruction of Babylon—that is, Armageddon”187 as Rev 17:1 reads: “One of the seven
angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, ‘Come, I will show you the
punishment of the great prostitute, who sits on many waters.’” Second, both passages
refer to the same symbol of “waters.” Jeremiah 51 makes it clear that the “many waters”
of Rev 17:1 refers to the Euphrates River of Rev 16:12. Thus, Revelation 17 “offers an
elaboration of the eschatological themes of Rev 16:12-21, not just 16:17-21.”188 At this
point, therefore, I need to refer to Revelation 17 in order to understand the meaning of the
waters of the River Euphrates in Rev 16:12.
In Rev 17:1, the great prostitute, the end time Babylon, is seen as sitting on many
waters. This featured description is also a characteristic of the ancient Babylon, which
was surrounded by a moat filled with water, while the River Euphrates flowed through
the middle of the city.189 The fact that John uses the verb kathēmai (to sit) four times in
Revelation 17 (vv. 1, 3, 9, 15) to describe the posture of the woman Babylon is “an
important feature.”190 Sitting in these contexts is “primarily an indication of
186
Hans K. LaRondelle, “The Biblical Concept of Armageddon,” JETS 28 (1985):
23, 24; Paulien, Armageddon, 101, 102.
187
LaRondelle, “The Biblical Concept of Armageddon,” 23.
188
Jon Paulien, review of Ezekiel in the Apocalypse: The Transformation of
Prophetic Language in Revelation 16.17-19.10, by Jean-Perrie Ruiz, JBL 110 (1991):
550.
189
Aune, Revelation 17-22, 929; see also Charles, A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary, 2:63. Cf. the ancient Babylonian map of the world which shows the map of
Babylon surrounded by ocean as if Babylon is sitting on the ocean. “The Map of the
World,” accessed 31 August 2015, http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/
collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=362000&partId=1&searchText
=babylon+clay+tablet+map+of+the+world&page=1.
190
185
enthronement.”191 The angel in Revelation 17 interprets the waters as “people, multitudes,
nations and languages” (v. 15); thus the waters of the River Euphrates in Rev 16:12 need
to be taken symbolically since the angel has symbolically explained it.192 In fact, it is part
of the Old Testament prophetic literary tradition that waters are often used to symbolize
groups of people.193 So the waters of the River Euphrates represent “people, multitudes,
nations and languages” which support the end time Babylon and make her enthronement
possible.194 The enthronement of Babylon the Great over the “waters” means that she
“rules over the peoples of the world.”195
In the Old Testament, “the drying up of the Euphrates allowing the eastern kings
to cross is standard prophetic expectation concerning Babylon’s judgment (Isa 11:15;
44:27; Jer 50:38; 51:36).”196 Charles refers to Rev 16:12 as the “forecast” of Rev 17:16,
17,197 which reads, “The beast and the ten horns you saw will hate the prostitute. They
will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will eat her flesh and burn her with fire,
for God has put it into their hearts to accomplish his purpose by agreeing to give the beast
their power to rule, until God's words are fulfilled.” Charles also thinks that Rev 17:16 is
191
Ibid. Jean-Pierre Ruiz notes that among the thiry-three occurrences of kathēmai
in Revelation, fifteen times have to do with sitting on a throne or thrones; eleven times
God is the one seated on the throne and nine times refer to sitting on horseback. Ruiz,
Ezekiel in the Apocalypse, 306.
192
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 828; Cf. Osborne, Revelation, 590; Smalley,
The Revelation to John, 407.
193
De Villiers, “The Composition of Revelation 17,” 112.
194
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 828; Paulien, Armageddon, 104, 105.
195
196
Campbell, “Findings,” 95.
197
Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, 2:46, 74; J. M. Ford,
Revelation, 273.
186
a prediction of the judgment announced in Rev 17:1; the actual judgment is described in
Revelation 18.198
This imagery clearly alludes to Ezekiel 16, 23, in which God announced that
Jerusalem will be handed over to her former lovers and they will strip her naked (Ezek
16:39) and burn her (Ezek 23:25).199 Thus the standard judgment of the drying up of the
waters of the River Euphrates may be a symbolic picture of the loss of support of the end
time Babylon from its supporting system, which is people, multitudes, nations and
languages of the world.200
The Gathering for the Battle of Armageddon
The gathering for the battle of Armageddon is described in Rev 16:13-16. It is
done by frog like spirits, which come out from the mouths of the dragon, the beast and
the false prophet, and then go to the kings of the world to gather them for the great
eschatological battle to be fought at a place called Armageddon. Thus the battle is called
the battle of Armageddon, an attack launched by the frog-like spirits against God and his
believers on Earth.
Before studying this theme of the gathering for the battle of Armageddon, there is
a question that needs to be answered concerning the order of events in Rev16:12-16.
Which event is earlier, the event of the gathering of the kings in vv. 13-16 or the pouring
out of the sixth bowl-plague in v. 12? Paulien thinks that chronologically the events
described in vv. 13-16 happen before v.12, which is the sixth bowl-plague, and both
198
199
Ruiz, Ezekiel in the Apocalypse, 323.
200
187
events belong to the battle of Armageddon with v. 12 describing the end of the battle.201
The following study will try to see if v. 12 should be seen as the end of the battle of
Armageddon as Paulien proposed.
In vv. 13-16, the frog like spirits are seen as coming out of the mouths of the
dragon, the beast and the false prophet, and then going out to gather the kings of the
whole world for a battle. The Greek word for “gather” is sunagagein; when followed by
persons it means “to call together.”202 Since the frog like spirits are from the unholy
trinity, which is the counterfeit godhead, the calling together of the kings for battle needs
to be viewed as giving false oracles to the kings before the battle. In the ancient Near East,
the kings conducted wars according to divine oracles; in fact, the first task before battle
was to consult the divine and receive oracles, and then according to the divine oracles,
the kings conducted their battle.203 Even though from a western secular point of view the
kings are the ones who initiated the war, the ancient Near Eastern kings believed that
wars were initiated by the gods and they were simply instrumental in carrying out the
divine warfare and strategy, and “the leadership of the kings as war commanders was
endowed by the divine warrior.”204 So Rev 16:13-16 pictures the prewar gathering of the
kings of the whole world by the frog like spirits of the unholy trinity.
201
Paulien, Armageddon, 168-183.
202
BDAG, 962.
203
Cf. the Moabite inscription of King Mesha (the so-called “Moabite Stone”). For
details of war conduct in the ANE, see Sa-Moon Kang, Divine War in the Old Testament
and in the Ancient Near East, BZAW 177 (New York: de Gruyter, 1989), 42-45. Biblical
examples of prewar conduct, seeking divine oracles can be found in 1 Samuel 13; 1
Kings 22; 2 Chronicles 18, 20.
204
Kang, Divine War, 63.
188
The place where the frog like spirits gather the kings for battle is called
Armagedon in Greek. Aune pointed out that “the name ‘Harmagedon’ has never been
satisfactorily explained.”205 For one thing, there is no place called Armageddon,206 and
there is only an ancient town called Megiddo207 located on the plain of Megiddo.208 It was
a famous historical battleground in Israel where the Israelites defeated their enemies. 209
There is one ancient proposal from the sixth century Oecumenius and Andreas of
Caesarea210 which argues that in Hebrew, Harmagedōn means “mountain of slaughter,”
and that it is a place where the kings of the earth are to be gathered for destruction. Hans
LaRondelle has a similar suggestion. He interprets Harmagedōn as the “mountain of the
cut down,” a symbolic name for the place where the kings of the earth, the beast and
Babylon the Great meet their destruction.211
The most commonly held opinion is that in Hebrew, the Greek Armagedōn
appears to mean har Měgiddôn, “mountain of Megiddo.”212 Based upon this theory, John
205
206
Ibid., 898, 899; Beale, The Book of Revelation, 838-841.
207
See Josh 17:11; Judg1:27; 1 Kgs 9:15.
208
2 Chron 35:24; Zach 12:11.
209
Cf. Judg 5; 2 Kgs 23; 2 Chron 35.
210
H. C. Hoskier, ed., The Complete Commentary of Oecumenius on the
Apocalypse, University of Michigan Studies, Humanistic Series 23 (Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan, 1928), 179-180; J. Schmid, Studien zur Geschichte des
griechischen Apokalypse-Textes, 1. Teil: Der Apokalypse-Kommentary des Andreas von
Kaisareia, Text (Munich: Karl Zink Verlag, 1955), 175.
Hans K. LaRondelle, “The Etymology of Har-Magedon (Rev 16:16),” AUSS

211
27 (1989): 69-73.
212
Aune, Revelation 6-16, 898; Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary,
2:50. For various discussions on this term see Jon Paulien, “Armageddon,” in ABD,
1:394, 395; also LaRondelle, “The Etymology of Har-Magedon,” 69-73.
189
Day proposes that the “mountain of Megiddo” is John’s combination of two Old
Testament motifs: Har alludes to the eschatological battle on the mountains of Israel as
described in Ezek 38-39; and Magedōn alludes to Megiddo in Zech 12:11, the
eschatological battlefield against Jerusalem.213 The commonly acknowledged fact that
there is no mountain which is called the Mountain of Megiddo214 may indicate that it is
not a literal place in the Middle East, and the battle may not be “a devastating strategic
world war among the nations themselves, between west and east, resulting in worldwide
nuclear annihilation”215 as understood by a certain circle of interpreters, such as Hal
Lindsey.216 It is a spiritual battle which will “emanate not from human, but divine
sources,”217 since the seven plagues originate from heaven as divine curses or judgments
against those who violate the covenant.218
213
John Day, “The Origin of Armageddon: Revelation 16:16 as an Interpretation
of Zechariah 12:11,” in Crossing the Boundaries: Essays in Biblical Interpretation in
Honour of Michael D. Goulder, eds. S. Porter and P. Joyce (Leiden: Brill, 1994), 315-
326. See also Beale, The Book of Revelation, 841; Osborne, Revelation, 560; R. Rogers,
“An Exegetical Analysis of John’s Use of Zechariah in the Book of Revelation: The
Impact and Transformation of Zechariah’s Text and Themes in the Apocalypse” (PhD
diss., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2002), 111-114.
Marko Jauhiainen offered a nine-point critique of Day’s proposal to doubt its
validity, see Marko Jauhiainen, “The OT Background to Armageddon (Rev. 16:16)
Revisited,” NovT 47 (2005): 384-387.
214
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 838, 839; Paulien, “Armageddon,” 1:395.
215
LaRondelle, “The Biblical Concept of Armageddon,” 22.
216
Hal Lindsey, There’s A New World Coming; Hal Lindsey, The 1980’s:
Countdown to Armageddon (New York: Bantam Books, 1980); Hal Lindsey, Planet
Earth: 2000 A.D., Will Mankind Survive? (Palos Verdes, CA: Western Front, 1994); Hal
Lindsey, The Final Battle (Palos Verdes, CA: Western Front, 1995). Lindsey holds that
the war will be centered in Palestine. Based upon his understanding of the prophecy in
Daniel 11, he thinks that a southern confederation of Arab-African nations led by Egypt
will fight against the king of the North, which he thinks is Russia.
217
218
Ibid.
190
The spiritual nature of this place is also supported by the exhortation to
watchfulness of Rev 16:15. Many scholars see the seeming awkwardness of Rev 16:15.
Charles draws attention to “the utter inappropriateness of 15 in its present context;”219
Prigent thinks this verse “interrupts the course of the plot;”220 Ford supposes it may be
“an interpolation;”221 Aune sees it as “an intrusive comment unrelated to what precedes
or follows.”222 However, Mounce suggests that “the interjection of a warning in the midst
of a prophecy of final conflict is entirely appropriate.”223 The language of Rev 16:15
clearly alludes to Jesus’ message to the Laodiceans (Rev 3:18).224 Paulien also compared
Rev 16:15 with Rev 3:18 and found that both passages contain four words, i.e., “garment,”
“shame,” “nakedness,” and “see.” Rev 3:18 and Rev 16:15 are the only two texts in the
entire Bible that contain all four of these words.”225 Mounce also draws attention to Jesus'
warning to his disciples regarding the unexpectedness of his second coming found in
Matt 24:42-44.226 All these connections imply that the battle of Armageddon may be a
219
220
221
222
223
Paulien, Armageddon, 120. Aune also notes that this “motif of watchfulness” is
224
only found elsewhere in Revelation 3, Aune, Revelation 6-16, 896; see also Campbell,
“Findings,” 95; Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, 216; Prigent,
Commentary on the Apocalypse, 472-473.
225
226
Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 300. Vos holds that the theme of
watchfulness, the thief in connection to the parousia, were familiar themes to the early
Christians. Both in 1 Thess 4 and 2 Peter 3, the image of the thief is applied to the
coming of the day of the Lord. Vos, The Synoptic Traditions, 76.
191
spiritual battle in the context of Jesus’ second coming,227 and that the place name
Armageddon may be taken symbolically, for the battle may be part of a spiritual war with
the church at the center.228 The “clearest description” of this war is offered by Paul in his
second epistle to the Corinthians. He writes: “For though we live in the world, we do not
wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the
world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds” (2 Cor 10:3,
4).229
Once again, Rev 16:15 makes it clear that the main concern of the entire book of
Revelation is the church of God.230 Isbon Beckwith therefore concludes that, “It [the
name Har-Magedon] is then an imaginary name for designating the scene of the great
battle between antichrist and the Messiah.”231 Mounce also sees Armageddon as the
climax of salvation history. He writes: “Wherever it takes place, Har-Magedon is
symbolic of the final overthrow of all the forces of evil by the might and power of
God.”232
Concerning the place called Armageddon, there is one thing that is sure, namely,
it is the place where the frog like spirits gather the kings of the world for the
eschatological battle. So Armageddon is actually the place where the kings are located for
227
For details of the allusion, see ibid., 119, 120.
228
LaRondelle, How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies, 389.
229
Paulien, What the Bible Says about the End-Time, 136, 137.
230
Cf. Pilchan Lee, The New Jerusalem, 248.
231
Beckwith, The Apocalypse of John, 685.
232
192
the final battle. Therefore if the kings’ gathering place is detected, then the location of
Armageddon is found.
As noted before, Revelation 17 is a further explanation of the sixth bowl-plague,
and since that chapter gives additional information on the battle of Armageddon, there
may be some more information provided about the kings’ gathering place.
In fact, Revelation 17 does provide further information concerning the kings of
the world. In v. 2, the great prostitute, the end time Babylon, is condemned for
committing adultery with the kings of the earth; in v. 3, she is described as sitting on a
scarlet beast that has seven heads and ten horns, and the ten horns are explained by the
angel in v. 12 as ten kings who will give their power and authority to the beast (v. 13) and
make war against the Lamb (v. 14). Since Revelation 17 is a further explanation of Rev
16:12-16, and the kings have the same characteristics of making war against the Lamb, it
is reasonable to assume that these kings of the world are the same group of kings as those
in Rev 16:14, who are gathered by the frog like spirits to the place called Armageddon
for the great eschatological battle.233
In Revelation 17, these kings are reported to be sat upon by the great prostitute
Babylon. Rev 18:7 describes Babylon enthroned as a queen, which implies
sovereignty.234 In v. 1, Babylon is said to be sitting on many waters, so the kings are part
of the many waters, the waters which support the end time Babylon. In other words, the
kings are part of the supporting system of the end time Babylon. Babylon is in charge of
them, rules over them. So what is the place of Armageddon? It is under the end time
Babylon, to be ruled over by her. Whoever is at the place called Armageddon recognizes
233
Aune, Revelation 17-22, 930; Beale, The Book of Revelation, 878.
234
193
the end time Babylon’s rulership and sovereignty, is controlled by her,235 and is ruled by
her.236
The angel said that these kings together with the beast, will hate the prostitute at
one point of time in the future. They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will
eat her flesh and burn her with fire” (Rev 17:16). At one time in the future, the supporting
system will withdraw its support from the end time Babylon and will turn against her.
The end time Babylon will one day lose her support from the beast and the kings, who are
the waters on which the end time Babylon sits. In other words, the waters of the end time
Babylon will one day be gone, be dried up. This is the sixth bowl-plague pronounced in
Rev 16:12, i.e., the drying up of the waters of the River Euphrates at the end time.237
Now, going back to the question raised in the beginning of this section, i.e., in
order of time, which happens first, Rev 16:13-16 or Rev 16:12? The previous study
shows that Rev 16:13-16 is the gathering of the kings to be ruled by the end time Babylon
as part of the many waters which support her. Then in the future, as the sixth bowl-plague
is poured out, the many waters will be dried up and the kings of the world together with
the beast will turn against the end time Babylon. The answer now is obvious: the
gathering of the kings in Rev 16:13-16 to support the end time Babylon happens earlier
than the withdrawal of their support to Babylon in Rev 16:12. Textual evidence supports
Paulien’s view.
The next question is, at what point in the end time does this gathering of the kings
happen? In other words, at what point do the kings begin to be ruled by the end time
235
Ibid.
236
Paulien, Armageddon, 135; Siew, The War Between the Two Beasts, 262.
237
194
Babylon? In Rev 17:2, angels told John that together with the great prostitute, “the kings
of the earth committed adultery and the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the
wine of her adulteries.” The pattern of this verse follows Hebrew synonymous
parallelism, the second half of the verse repeating the first half by using different words.
The kings of the earth are the same as the inhabitants of the earth, and committing
adultery is the same as being intoxicated with the wine of Babylon’s adulteries. As
mentioned in previous sections, in the book of Revelation drinking the wine of the
adultery of Babylon or committing adultery with Babylon symbolizes idol worship,238
which, in Revelation, means specifically the worship of the image of the beast. Therefore,
the gathering of the kings of the earth to be ruled under the end time Babylon could be
understood as symbolizing the kings’ worshiping of the image of the beast, making the
image of the beast their lord, which implies that the image of the beast may be the end
time Babylon.
So when are the kings gathered to be ruled by the end time Babylon? It is
plausible to suggest that this gathering occurs when the image of the beast is formed and
it commands the world to worship it on pain of death. This is the time when the kings are
gathered to be ruled by the end time Babylon, the time when the frog like spirits gather
the kings of the world for the battle fought at Armageddon.

At this point, I would like to go back to Revelation 13 and compare it with
Revelation 16, and see if this conclusion could be further supported by evidence.
Rev 12:18-13:18 is “temporally parallel with”239 12:13-17, which outlines the
dragon’s persecution of the church from the birth of Christ down to the last moment of
238
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 856; Osborne, Revelation, 608.
239
195
the earth’s history. Rev 13:14, 15 describes the dragon’s last war strategy against God
and his believers, which is the forming of the image of the beast and the enforcement of
its worship on pain of death. In other words, the last war the dragon wages against God
and his believers is the enforcement of the worship of the image of the beast. By
worshiping the image of the beast, bestial forces wage war against God and his believers.
This is in tune with the biblical concept of war: some scholars say that, “As odd as it may
seem to modern sensibilities, battle is portrayed as an act of worship in the Hebrew
Bible.”240
What is the relationship between this war of worship in Revelation 13 and the
battle of Armageddon on the Great Day of the Lord in Revelation 16? A comparison of
the texts between Revelation 13 and Rev 16:13-14 may reveal their relationships, or if
there is any at there at all.
There are thematic parallels between Revelation 13 and Rev 16:13-16. First is the
motif of unholy trinity. Besides Revelation 13, Rev 16:13-16 is the only place where the
unholy trinity, i.e., the dragon, the beast, and the land beast/false prophet, appear together
and work together for a common cause. In Rev 16:13-16, all three of them send spirits
out to gather the kings of the world to the place called Armageddon for the eschatological
battle. In Revelation 13, the common goal of the unholy trinity is to cause the inhabitants
of the world to worship the beast and its image (vv. 8, 14, 15). In order to achieve that
goal, the dragon gave his throne and authority to the sea beast (v. 2). When the land beast
who is later called the false prophet arises, he exercises power on behalf of the sea beast
(v. 12) which implies that the land beast’s authority came from the sea beast whose
authority in turn originated from the dragon. Then the land beast breathed into the image
240
Longman and Reid, God Is a Warrior, 34.
196
of the beast so that it could in turn speak to command the people of the earth to worship
of the beast and its image (v. 15). It could be said that in Revelation 13 there is a chain of
authority from the dragon to the sea beast to the land beast, and then to the image of the
beast.
The second thematic parallel between the two passages is the mouth motif. In
Revelation 13, the dragon is the only member of the unholy trinity who is excluded; the
actions of the sea beast and the land beast as well as the image of the beast all have
something to do with their mouth. The sea beast received a mouth to utter proud words
and blasphemy (v. 5). Beale comments that “the [sea] beast’s authority is expressed in his
speech.”241 Ford also suggests that the stress on the word mouth probably needs to be
understood as command.242 The same is true for the land beast and the image of the beast.
The land beast used his mouth commanding243 the inhabitants of the world to make an
image of the beast, and he used his mouth to breathe spirit into the image of the beast to
make it alive (v. 15). The image of the beast in turn opened its mouth to command all to
worship the beast and its image (v. 15).
In fact, Revelation 12 reveals that the dragon’s major activity is also connected
with his mouth: he is the accuser who accused the faithful believers of God before God
day and night when he was in heaven (v. 10). It is obvious that the purpose of the
dragon’s accusation against the faithful believers of God in heaven is part of his strategy
of waging war against God himself. The dragon’s accusations are meant to gain support
for himself in heaven. When he was hurled down to earth, apparently God allowed him to
241
242
The Greek verb legō can be understood as “order” and “command.” See “legō”
243
in BDAG, 589. See also Beale, The Book of Revelation, 710.
197
give a blasphemous mouth to the sea beast. In a way, the sea beast inherited a mouth like
the dragon’s from the dragon. When the land beast appeared, he had a mouth like the
dragon’s as well, because he spoke like a dragon, and he spoke on behalf of the sea beast
to command the inhabitants of the world to make an image for the beast.
Thus, through the commanding mouths of the sea beast, the land beast and the
image of the beast, the dragon is able to gather the inhabitants of the earth to assemble
before the image of the beast and worship it. The dragon is also enabled to kill all who do
not worship the image of the beast; in other words, to wage the end time war against the
faithful believers of God and ultimately against God. In Revelation 16, out of the mouths
of the dragon, the [sea] beast, and the false prophet/the land beast, came three unclean
spirits (v. 13); they go out sunagagein (to call) together the kings of the world (vv. 14-16)
to join in the eschatological battle at Armageddon.
The third thematic parallel is the motif of a worldwide deception through
miraculous signs. Wm. F. Arndt notes that the sixth plague is “an announcement of the
coming of unclean spirits which work signs and lead the rulers of the earth to oppose our
great God.”244 This is exactly what happens in Revelation 13, where the land beast/the
false prophet performed miraculous signs and deceived the inhabitants of the earth (vv.
13, 14), and the image of the beast forced all the people on earth to worship it (v. 14). In
Revelation 16, the frog like spirits from the mouths of the unholy trinity also performed
miraculous signs and became the deceptive agents through whom the kings of the whole
world are gathered to Armageddon (v. 14).
244
Wm. F. Arndt, “Armageddon,” CTM 22 (1951): 468.
198
It is a unanimous opinion among the scholars that the seven last bowl-plagues are
modeled after the plagues of Exodus.245 Paulien observes that the plague of frogs was the
last plague that the magicians of Pharaoh were able to imitate in order to deceive the
people. Therefore, the frogs were “the last deception of the Exodus,” and their
appearance in Revelation 16 signifies that their message is the last message of worldwide
deception issued by the unholy trinity.246
There are also verbal parallels between these two passages, i.e., poiei sēmeia
(performs miraculous signs) (Rev 13:13) and poiounta sēmeia (performing miraculous
signs) in Rev 16:14; another is pneuma, which is translated as “breath” in Rev 13:15, and
“spirit” in Rev 16:13, 14.
There is another commonality between Rev 13:13-15 and Rev 16:13-16, i.e., they
both have Daniel 3 as their backgrounds. Daniel 3 as a background for Rev 13:13-15 has
been dealt with in Chapter 3. Here I will only repeat its parallels to Daniel 3. The verbal
parallels are image and the number six; the thematic parallels are the worldwide worship
of the image, and the death decree. Rev 16:13-16 also has verbal parallels with Daniel 3.
In Daniel 3, King Nebuchadnezzar sends forth episunagagein (to gather), basileōn tēs
oikoumenēs holēs (the kings of the whole world), to the plain of Dura to worship the
245
Aune, Revelation 6-16, 865; Beale, The Book of Revelation, 809; J. M. Ford,
Revelation, 266; Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 291; F. J. Murphy, Fallen Is Babylon,
336; Paulien, Armageddon, 75.
246
Paulien, Armageddon, 75. Regarding the symbolism of frogs in Rev 16:13-14,
Heinz Giesen suggests that the reason why frogs are chosen as messengers of the unholy
trinity is that frogs are unclean according to Lev 11:10-12. See Heinz Giesen, Die
Offenbarung des Johannes (Regensburg: Pustet, 1997), 358. After reviewing the
symbolic meaning of frogs in John’s contemporary Greek literature, OT and early Jewish
literature, Witetschek concludes that due to their croaking, frogs were often used as a
symbol of “senseless, silly talk and for foolishness in general.” So the frog imagery is
part of the humor of John in his fun making depiction of the unholy trinity: the things
coming out of the mouths of the unholy trinity are as silly and senseless as frogs. See
Witetschek, “The Dragon Spitting Frogs,” 557-572.
199
golden image. In Rev 16:14, the spirits go out sunagagein (to gather) tous basileis tēs
oikoumenēs holēs (the kings of the whole world) to “a place that in Hebrew is called
Armageddon.”
As mentioned before concerning the place name Armageddon, there is no such
place name in Hebrew called Har Megiddo. Many scholars translate it into the “Mountain
of Megiddo” according to its Hebrew construction.247 But there is no such mountain
which is called the Mountain of Megiddo; there is only a city named Megiddo located on
the plain of Megiddo (2 Chron 35:22; Zech 12:11).
Osborne provides a summary of many scholarly opinions regarding the meanings
of Armageddon.248 Taking into consideration the allusions of Revelation 16 to 1 Kings 18,
the most convincing interpretation is by Lohmeyer and recently by Shea. Lohmeyer was
the first to associate Armageddon with Mount Carmel.249 Following Lohmeyer’s
direction, Shea also suggests Armageddon to be understood as representing Mount
Carmel, alluding to the battle between Elijah and the prophets of Baal found in 1 Kgs
18.250 He points out that “it is from this battle [on Mount Carmel] that we should draw the
imagery upon which the ‘battle of Armageddon’ in Revelation depends. All of the main
elements of the latter are paralleled in 1 Kings 18 in historically concrete form.”251
With this understanding, Armageddon fits well, both thematically and verbally,
into the overall Danielic background of Rev 16:13-16, since it was on the plain of Dura
247
Paulien, “Armageddon,” 1:395; see also Ladd, A Commentaryon the Revelation
of John, 216; Osborne, Revelation, 594.
248
Osborne, Revelation, 594-595.
249
Lohmeyer, Die Offenbarung, 137.
250
Shea, “The Location and Significance of Armageddon,” 161.
251
Ibid.
200
that King Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, gathered the kings of the whole world to
worship the golden image in order to challenge God’s plan for history.252 From
Revelation 17, which is an amplified version of Rev 16:13-16, it is clear that the kings of
the whole world are gathered under the great prostitute Babylon. So Rev 16:13-16 has a
hidden Babylon motif which fits the background of Daniel 3.
The above comparison between Rev 13:13-15 and Rev 16:13-16 and their
common Daniel 3 background shows that they are two parallel passages with common
motifs. There is no reason not to conclude that they are actually describing the same
eschatological event, which is the last worldwide deception and the eschatological battle
against God and his believers on earth. In Revelation 13 this event is described as the
worldwide gathering to worship the image of the beast, while in Rev 16:13-16 and
Revelation 17, it is described as the battle of Armageddon which is the worldwide
gathering under the ruler of Babylon to wage war against God.
Thus, I conclude that the worldwide worshiping of the image of the beast may be
the same event as the worldwide gathering under the dominance of Babylon, and that the
image of the beast may be the end time Babylon, because to worship is to be ruled by the
one worshipped. Once again, as in the Old Testament, in Revelation, the battle of
Armageddon is still a war about worship. The final battle stirred up by the unholy trinity
is the gathering of the kings of the world to the symbolic battleground of Armageddon to
worship the image of the beast. This is a challenge to God’s sovereignty of history just as
Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon gathered all the kings of the world to worship his
golden statue.
252
201
This end time worldwide gathering is accomplished through a chain of false
inspiration, a parody of the chain of holy revelation (Revelation 1): the dragon inspired
the sea beast through the sea beast’s inheritance of the authority and mouth of the dragon
(Rev 13:4-6); the sea beast in turn inspired the land beast/the false prophet through the
land beast’s inheritance of the authority and mouth of the sea beast (Rev 13:11, 12); the
land beast in turn will inspire the image of the beast/the end time Babylon through
breathing his spirit into the image (Rev 13:15; cf. Rev 16:13); the image of the beast/the
end time Babylon, which possesses the sum total of the inspiration of the unholy trinity
symbolized by the three frog like unclean spirits (Rev 16:13), will in turn inspire the
kings of the earth to gather the inhabitants of the earth to worship the image of the beast,
and acquiescing to be ruled over by the end time Babylon (Rev 16:14-16; cf. Rev 13:15,
17).
Armageddon, therefore, is better understood not as a special geographical
location, but more as a battlefield of decision.253 Many scholarly works have shown that
the crucial issue addressed by Revelation is “essentially a decision problem.”254 Arndt
notes that Armageddon “does not denote a geographical location, but refers to the great
battlefield against all the forces of evil in which will occur their final and utter defeat;”255
Ian Smith, “A Rational Choice Model,” 99. Cf. Beale, The Book of Revelation;
253
Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation; P. Coutsoumpos, “The Social

Implication of Idolatry in Revelation 2.13: Christ or Caesar?” BTB 27 (1997): 23-27;
David A. DeSilva, “Honor Discourse and the Rhetorical Strategy of the Apocalypse of
John,” JSNT 71 (1998): 79-110; P. A. Harland, “Honouring the Emperor or Assailing the
Beast: Participation in the Civic Life among Association (Jewish, Christian and Other) in
Asia Minor and the Apocalypse of John,” JSNT 77 (2000): 99-121; J. N. Kraybill,
Imperial Cult and Commerce in John’s Apocalypse, JSNTSup, 132 (Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, 1996). Cf. Joel 3:2, 12: Valley of Jehoshaphat—eschatological valley of
decision.
254
Ian Smith, “A Rational Choice Model,” 99.
255
C. H. Little, Explanation of the Book of Revelation (St. Louis, MO: Concordia
Publishing House, 1950), 167.
202
and “points to the time and occasion of the last great conflict between the forces of evil
and our Lord, the exalted Christ.”256
Summary
In this section, I surveyed major themes of Revelation 16, which are the drying up
of the waters of the River Euphrates and the gathering of the kings of the world for the
battle of Armageddon.
The River Euphrates is to be interpreted symbolically, and its waters are a
metaphor for the secular support system of the end time Babylon. The drying up of the
waters of the River Euphrates is a symbolic way of describing the sudden withdrawal of
support from the end time Babylon on the part of the peoples and the nations led by their
kings.
The intertextual study of Rev 13:13-15 and Rev 16:13-16, plus the additional
information found in Revelation 17, suggests that the image of the beast may be the end
time Babylon and the object of the sixth bowl-plague. The events described in Rev 13:13-
15 appear to be the same events described in Rev 16:13-16 and Revelation 17. The
gathering of the kings of the world to the place called Armageddon by the three frog like
spirits which come from the mouths of the unholy trinity may be the final gathering of the
inhabitants of the earth to be under the rule of the end time Babylon, and it appears to be
the same event as the worship of the image of the beast.
The battle of Armageddon involves the worship of the image of the beast.
Through the worship of the image of the beast/the end time Babylon, the unholy trinity
wage war against God; conversely through worshiping God and giving him glory, and not
participating in the worship of the image of the beast/the end time Babylon, the saints
256
Arndt, “Armageddon,” 468.
203
wage war against the bestial forces and conquer them; through the sixth bowl-plague,
which is the changing of the minds of the secular support system of the end time
Babylon/the image of the beast, God wages war against the end time Babylon and
conquers her, thus striking a heavy blow against the unholy trinity and ensuring the
success of the eschatological Exodus and the ultimate victory over the unholy trinity.
Chapter 4 is a study of the image of the beast in Revelation 14-16. In Revelation
14, through the study of the characteristics of the 144,000, I conclude that the meaning of
“defiled by women” is equal to the worship of the beast and its image and receiving its
mark, and also equals to the drinking of the wine of the wrath of Babylon’s adulteries.
From the parallels between the texts of Revelation 13 and 14, I found that the activity of
Babylon the Great is in parallel to that of the image of the beast; as the image of the beast
causes the inhabitants of the earth to worship the beast and its image on pain of death,
Babylon the great also causes the nations to drink the wine of her adulteries.
In Revelation 15, through the study of allusions of Rev 14:4-15:4 to Num 25:1-
18, I concluded that to be defiled by women is another way of saying to worship the beast
and its image. The parallel suggests that the image of the beast which directly causes the
inhabitants of the earth to worship the beast is closely associated with the symbolism of
women in Revelation, and this once again connects the image of the beast with Babylon
the Great, who is called the mother of prostitutes in Revelation 17.
In Revelation 16, through the study of the parallels between Rev 16:13-16 and
Rev 13:13-15, and taking into consideration the additional information provided by
Revelation 17, I concluded that the events described in Rev 13:13-15 are the same events
described in Rev 16:13-16 and Revelation 17. The battle of Armageddon is the worship
of the image of the beast. The end time battle is about worship. The image of the beast
appears to be the end time Babylon and the object of the sixth bowl-plague. The
204
gathering of the kings of the world to the place called in Hebrew Armageddon is the final
gathering of the inhabitants of the earth to be under the sovereignty of the end time
Babylon, and to worship her who appears to be the image of the beast.
205
CHAPTER 5
THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST IN REVELATION 19 AND 20
Introduction
Chapter 4 provided a study of the image of the beast in Revelation 14-16. This
chapter continues to explore the relationship between the image and other major themes
in the latter part of Revelation, with a focus on the image of the beast in Revelation 19
and 20.
Because Chapters 4-6 of this dissertation deal with chapters in Revelation which
explicitly mention the image of the beast, and because neither Revelation 17 or 18
contains the phrase “image of the beast,” I have skipped these two chapters and come to
Revelation 19. I will address the absence of the image of the beast in Revelation 17 and
18 in the next chapter.

Although Revelation 17 and 18 are not dealt with here in detail in their
relationship to the image of the beast, it is necessary for the sake of clarity to mention
Revelation 17 and 18 in their relationship to Revelation 19. This will situate Revelation
19 in its proper literary context.
Borrowing Paulien’s terminology, Revelation 17 could be viewed as a chapter of
duodirectionality. On one hand, it points back to Revelation 16, and provides some
details about the sixth and seventh bowl-plagues; on the other hand, Revelation 17 points
forward to Revelation 18 and 19, outlining the events which will happen in the following
204
two chapters, i.e., the punishment of the prostitute (Revelation 18), and the Lamb’s
victory over the beast, the false prophet, and the kings of the world (Revelation 19).
Hoffmann divides Revelation 19 into three visions: (1) the vision of the heavenly
service (vv. 1-10); (2) the vision of the divine warrior (vv. 11-16); and (3) the vision of
the defeat of the enemies of God (vv. 17-21).1 The image of the beast is mentioned in the
third part of the chapter (v. 20) in relation to the false prophet. The false prophet was
captured and thrown into the lake of fire because he had deceived the people into
worshiping the beast and its image.
Major Themes in Revelation 19
Several major themes appear in Revelation 19: the burning of the great prostitute,
the wedding of the Lamb, and the theme of divine war. The burning of the great prostitute
continues the theme started in Revelation 18; this theme will be discussed in detail when
dealing with the image of the beast in Revelation 18. Thus, only the latter two themes
will be discussed below.
The Wedding of the Lamb
Rev 19:7 is “the first major use of the explicit nuptial imagery” in the book of
Revelation.2 The Bible describes the relationship between Christ and his church3 as the
1
Matthias R. Hoffmann, The Destroyer and the Lamb, WUNT 2 (Tübingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 2005), 169.
2
Lynn R. Huber, Like A Bride Adorned: Reading Metaphor in John’s Apocalypse,
Emory Studies in Early Christianity, ed. Vernon K. Robbins (New York: T & T Clark,
2007), 137.
3
The Greek root ekklēsia (church) occurs nineteen times at the beginning of
Revelation (Rev 1:4, 11, 20 [twice]; 2:1, 7, 8, 11, 12, 17, 18, 23, 29; 3:1, 6, 7, 13, 14, 22)
and occurs only once again at the end of the book (22:16). The root is totally absent from
Rev 4-22:5; see Felise Tavo, “The Ecclesial Notions of the Apocalypse in Recent
Studies,” CBR 1 (2002): 116. J. M. Ford argues that the fact that the root is only found at
the beginning and end of Revelation “forms an inclusio which frames the entire work.” J.
205
“holy romance of a universal couple,”4 with Christ as the bridegroom and the church as
his bride, in Greek gunē.5
In the Old Testament prophetic tradition, God refers to himself as the divine
Husband and to his believers as his wife. Through Isaiah, God declares, “Your Maker is
your Husband” (54:5), and “as a bridegroom rejoices over his bride, so will your God
rejoice over you” (62:5). Through Jeremiah, God cried out to his wayward people, “I
remember the devotion of your youth, how as a bride you loved me and followed me
through the desert, through a land not sown” (2:2). Through Hosea God expressed his
desire to be in a sacred union with his believers, “I will betroth you in faithfulness”
(2:20).6
In the New Testament, Jesus portrays himself as a bridegroom (Matt 9:15), and
the waiting of the faithful for his second coming is likened to the waiting of the wedding
guests for the bridegroom (Matt 25:13). In his epistle to the church in Ephesus, Paul
likened Adam and Eve, the husband and wife, as a type of Christ and his church (5:31-
32).
Massyngberde Ford, “The Priestly People of God in the Apocalypse,” List 28 (1993):
245-260.
4
Ed Marks, “The New Jerusalem—A Corporate Person,” AC 5 (2000): 46. Jon
Newton proposed a “romantic reading” of Revelation; see Jon K. Newton, “Reading
Revelation Romantically,” Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18 (2009): 194-215.
5
A. Y. Collins suggests that the history-of-religion approach sees the formation of
the symbol of the wedding of the Lamb as influenced by the sacred marriage, such as that
between Zeus and Leto; see A. Y. Collins, “Feminine Symbolism in the Book of
Revelation,” in A Feminist Companion to the Apocalypse of John, FENTECW 13, eds.
Amy-Jill Levine and Maria Mayo Robbins (New York: T & T Clark, 2009), 124.
6
Marks, “The New Jerusalem,” 47, 48.
206
The bride in Revelation 19 is a “resumption”7 of the woman in Revelation 12. She
also appears in Rev 21:10 as the Holy City, the community of the saints represented by
the twelve tribes of Israel, and the twelve apostles of the Lamb (Rev 21:12, 14).8
By now, Revelation’s “dualistic worldview”9 has presented two groups of women
in sharp contrast:10 (1) The evil woman group which is composed of Jezebel (Rev 2:20),
Babylon the Great and her prostitute daughters (Revelation 17-18), and (2) the good
woman group which is composed of the woman of Revelation 12 and the bride of the
Lamb (Revelation 19 and 21).
The bride of the Lamb was given a dress of “fine linen, bright and clean” (v. 8)11
which is “in sharp contrast”12 to the prostitute of Babylon the Great, who is also dressed
7
8
Ibid., see also Robert Gundry, “The New Jerusalem: People as Place, Not Place
for People,” NovT 29 (1987): 254-264; T. Holtz, Die Christologie der Apokalypse des
Johannes, TU 85 (Berlin: Akademie, 1962), 191-195; Huber, Like A Bride Adorned, 138;
R. J. McKelvey, The New Temple: The Church in the New Testament (New York:
Oxford, 1969), 167-176; W. W. Reader, “Die Stadt Gottes in der Johannesapokalypse”
(PhD diss., University of Gottingen, 1971).
9
Caroline Vander Stichele, “Apocalypse, Art and Abjection: Images of the Great
Whore,” in Culture, Entertainment and the Bible, ed. George Aichele, JSOTSup 309, eds.
David J. A. Clines and Philip R. Davies (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000),
134. Barr also comments that the world of Revelation “is a near-total dualism, with no
consideration of dualism.” In it, there are angels and monsters, prostitutes and virgins,
Christ and antichrist. See Barr, “The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation,” 40.
10
This pair of contrast belongs to a larger list of Revelation’s prominent contrasts
as summarized by Howard Kramer which has a total of five pairs: (1) God the Father and
the dragon; (2) God the Son and the first beast in Revelation 13; (3) God the Holy Spirit
and the second beast of Revelation 13; (4) the woman in Revelation 12 and the prostitute
in Revelation 17-18; (5) Jerusalem and Babylon. See Howard W. Kramer, “Contrast as a
Key to Understanding the Revelation of St. John,” CJ 23 (1997), 109; Duff, “Wolves in
Sheep’s Clothing,” 70-74; Edith M. Humphrey, “A Tale of Two Cities and (At Least)
Three Women: Transformation, Continuity, and Contrast in the Apocalypse,” in Reading
the Book of Revelation: A Resource for Students, ed. David L. Barr (Atlanta: SBL, 2003),
89, 92-95; Lunceford, Parody and Counterimaging, 167-175, Chapter 22, “The Woman.”
11
There are many theological discussions on how to understand Rev 19:8,
particularly the fact that the bride is given fine linen to wear which is explained as the
207
in fine linen, but in the colors of “purple and scarlet” (Rev 18:16). The final destinies of
the two women are also put into sharp contrast. The bride of the Lamb is given fine linen
to wear while Babylon the Great is stripped naked (Rev 17:16). This contrast between the
bride of the Lamb and Babylon suggests that the latter is also a community composed of
different kinds of people. This is the beast-worshipping community.
A question is raised regarding the relationship between the bride of the Lamb,
which is the community of saints of Revelation 19, and the heavenly army of Rev 19:14.
In order to determine the relationship between the two groups, it is necessary to identity
the nature of the heavenly army. Aune interprets the Lord’s army in Revelation 19 as “the
force of angels”13 while other scholars, such as Osborne, consider them to be a combined
force of the saints and the angels.14 G. E. Ladd thinks it is “possible” that they are the
saints, but he goes on to argue that it is “more likely” that they are angelic hosts.15 Ladd
provides two reasons for this interpretation: first, the presence of angelic hosts on the
apocalyptic day is a common motif (Zech 14:5); second, Jesus himself foretold that he
righteous acts of the saints. It is beyond the scope of this study to discuss the theology
involved in this verse; for discussions of this issue see Beale, The Book of Revelation,
934-944.
12
Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John 249; Beale, The Book of
Revelation, 939.
13
Aune, Revelation 17-22, 1059; see also LaRondelle, Chariots of Salvation, 120.
14
15
Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, 255.
208
would come with hosts of angels (Mark 8:8; Luke 9:26).16 However, Smalley suggests
that this heavenly army is to be interpreted as the saints.17
I would like to argue that the Lord’s army in Rev 19:14 is the army of saints.
They are the same group of people as “the great multitude of victorious Christians”18 in
Rev 19:1, 6 who offered two hymns of praises19 to God for his salvation and sovereignty.
Aune dismisses the idea that the great multitude of Rev 19:1 is identical to the great
multitude in Rev 19:6 because of “the fact that phōnē is anarthrous,” which “suggests that
the author does not think that this group [in Rev 19:6] is identical with the group
16
Ibid.
17
Smalley, The Revelation to John, 493. See also Witherington, 243; J. Webb
Mealy, After the Thousand Years: Resurrection and Judgment in Revelation 20,
JSNTSup 70 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992), 80.
18
Aune, “The Influence of Roman Imperial Court Ceremonial,” 15.
19
According to Aune, there are about fifteen hymns or hymn like compositions in
Revelation at “various junctures” in John’s vision report (4:8c; 4:11; 5:9b-10; 5:12b;
5:13b; 7:10b; 7:12; 11:15b; 11:17-18; 12:10b-12; 15:3b-4; 16:5b-7b; 19:lb-2; 19:5b;
19:6b-8). In harmony with an early view that the heavenly liturgy in the Apocalypse is a
reflection of the earthly liturgy of the church, the hymns of Revelation were widely
regarded as “fragments of Christian liturgical hymns” inserted by John into his vision
report. See J. Kroll, Die christliche Hymnodik bis zu Klemens von Alexandria
(Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1968), 16; Lucetta Mowry, “Revelation
4-5 and Early Christian Liturgical Usage,” JBL 71 (1952): 75-84. However, studies show
that the hymns of Revelation are composed by John himself as demonstrated by Reinhard
Deichgraeber, Gotteshymnus und Christushymnus in der frühen Christenheit:
Untersuchungen zu Form, Sprache und Stil der frühchristlichen Hymnen (Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1967), 58; G. Delling, “Zum gottesdienstlichen Stil der
Johannes-Apokalypse,” NovT 3 (1959): 134; Klaus-Peter Jörns, Das hymnische
Evangelium (Gütersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1971), 178, quoted in Aune, “The Influence of
Roman Imperial Court Ceremonial,” 24, n. 30; see also Aune, Revelation 1-5, 315. This
conclusion, Aune notes, does not exclude John’s incorporation of traditional elements
and phrases and motifs in his own hymns, not only from Christian sources but also from
pagan sources, particularly those hymns addressed to Roman emperors, as shown by H.
D. Betz, “On the Problem of the Religion-Historical Understanding of Apocalypticism,”
JTC 6 (1969): 134-156; J. O’Rourke, “The Hymns of Apocalypse,” CBQ 30 (1968): 399-
409.
209
mentioned in 19:1.”20 However, anarthrous nouns could also be qualitative, emphasizing
the unique status of the noun;21 thus simply being anarthrous does not rule out the
possibility of identifying the two groups as one. In fact, Jean-Pierre Ruiz considers that it
is John’s style to present already familiar imagery as though it is used for the first time.
Such is the case with the beast in Revelation 17,22 and it could be the same here.
Hans LaRondelle observes that there is a “pattern of hearing and then turning to
see” the same object in John’s description of visionary scenes but from a different
angle.23 In other words, quite often when John describes a specific object, he first tells the
reader that he heard something, then he “further clarifies” it by describing what he
actually saw afterwards.24 Although often what he saw appears quite different from what
he heard, they are in fact the same object presented from different aspects. Thus what
John saw clarifies what he heard. This pattern is found throughout the book of Revelation.
It is first used by John in Rev 1:10-13 when he first hears a voice talking about seven
churches in v. 11 When he “turned around to see the voice” (v. 12), he saw seven golden
lampstands.25 In Revelation 5, he heard an elder telling him to see the Lion of the tribe of
20
21
According to Daniel Wallace, for a noun to be definite, it does not necessarily
require that it has the article. Anarthrous nouns may have one of the three forces:
indefinite, qualitative, or definite. The absence of the article may indicate the noun to be
qualitative, which stresses its quality, nature or essence. See Daniel B. Wallace, The
Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek Grammar (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 2000), 108-109.
22
23
LaRondelle, How to Understand the End-time Prophecies, 149.
24
Ibid.
25
Ibid.
210
Judah (v. 5); when he looked, he found a Lamb (v. 6).26 In Revelation 7, after John heard
that the number of those who were sealed was 144,000, he looked and saw a great
multitude (v. 9).27 The same is true in Revelation 19: John first heard the sound of a great
multitude (vv. 1, 6) and the announcement of the wedding of the Lamb, then he saw the
King of kings riding on a white horse, followed by a heavenly army (vv. 11-14). What
John saw is what he heard. So the heavenly army in v. 14 may be interpreted as the great
multitude in v. 1.
Another reason for identifying the heavenly army in v. 14 as the great multitude is
the fine linen both groups wear (Rev 19:8, 14), which suggests that both groups are the
same people, that is, they are both followers of Christ.28 Aune takes this fine linen
symbolism in a general sense, noting that it symbolizes “the purity and holiness”29 of this
heavenly army which, for him, is angelic. But in Revelation 19, the reader is obliged to
understand the fine linen as symbolizing “the righteous acts of the saints,” since it is
explained in this way in v. 8 by the text itself. The insertion of the explanation of the fine
linen at this point seems abrupt, but if understood as paving the way for understanding
the heavenly army as the previous multitude, it would not seem to be so abrupt; instead,
the explanation is necessary. One may object to calling this army the “heavenly army,” so
it cannot be the saints who are still on earth. To this objection, Pilchan Lee has argued
26
Ibid.
27
Ibid.
28
Newton, “Reading Revelation Romantically,” 200; Kevin E. Miller, “The
Nuptial Eschatology of Revelation 19-22,” CBQ 60 (1998): 315-316. Cf. Donal A.
Mcllraith, The Reciprocal Love Between Christ and the Church in the Apocalypse
(Rome: Columban Fathers, 1989), 84; Donal A. Mcllraith, “‘For the Fine Linen Is the
Righteous Deeds of the Saints’: Works and Wife in Revelation 19:8,” CBQ 61 (1999):
525, 526.
29
211
convincingly that based upon the evidences of the New Testament (1 Cor 3:10-17; 1 Pet
2:4; Gal 4:21-27; Heb 12:22-24), the saints on earth have already been in heaven with
Christ (Eph 2:6) in a spiritual sense, participating in the New Jerusalem, God’s heavenly
community.30
Another reason for identifying these two groups as one is the connection between
Revelation 19 and Revelation 2. In short, the language in Revelation 19 fulfills the
promises made by Jesus to the faithful in the church in Thyatira. One promise is that they
will be given authority to rule over the nations with a scepter of iron (2:27). This is
exactly what the heavenly army at the side of Jesus is going to experience in Rev 19:15.
Thus what is promised to the faithful in Rev 2:26, 27 finds its eschatological fulfillment
in Rev 19:14.31
Osborne also observes that Rev 17:14 has already stated that at the second coming
those who accompany Christ “will be his called, chosen and faithful followers.”32 He also
suggests that the Greek verb akoloutheō (follow) implies discipleship, and is used that
way in Rev 14:4: “They follow the Lamb wherever he goes.”33 Osborne’s observation is
supported by Vos’ study of the word akolouthei (to follow) in Rev 14:4b. Vos points out
that in the Gospels, Jesus repeatedly calls his disciples to akolouthei moi (follow me). To
follow Jesus means not just to be in company with him, but also to share in the suffering
of the Savior (Matt 10:38; 8:19f., Mark 8:34; John 12:25f.), as well as to share in the
30
For details see Pilchan Lee, The New Jerusalem, 230-304.
31
Mealy, After the Thousand Years, 80.
32
Osborne, Revelation, 684; also Miller, “The Nuptial Eschatology of Revelation
19-22,” 316. A. Y. Collins comments on the followers of the Lamb in Rev 7:14 that: “It
is unlikely then that ‘those with him’ in this passage refers to angels. Rather the reference
is to the human followers of Jesus.” See A. Y. Collins, “The Political Perspective,” 248.
33
Ibid.
212
salvation which Jesus brought (John 8:12; Luke 9:61f., Mark 10:17, 21).34 Based upon
these observations, it is more likely that the heavenly army are the saints.
The wedding of the Lamb borrows its imagery from the traditional Middle
Eastern marriage as described in the Bible. It took two major steps to be married in
biblical times: the betrothal and the wedding. Normally, there was a time of separation
between these two steps, although from the first the two persons were considered to be
husband and wife, and were obliged to be faithful to each other. The marriage feast was
hosted at the home of the bridegroom after the groom had fetched the bride from her
father’s house. Mounce writes that, “By analogy, the church, espoused to Christ by faith,
now awaits the parousia when the heavenly groom will come for his bride and return to
heaven for the marriage feast.”35
The feast announced in Rev 19:9 recalls Jesus’s promise to the Laodiceans that
those who repent would eat with him (Rev 3:20). The motif in Rev 19:8 of being given
fine linen to wear recalls the counsel of Jesus to the Laodiceans to buy from him white
clothes to wear to cover their nakedness (Rev 3:18).36
The image of marriage represents “the intimate and indissoluble union of the
community with the Messiah.”37 The wedding feast symbolizes a “consummate covenant
blessing.”38 The church, which was found wanting and unfaithful to the covenant under
34
Vos, The Synoptic Traditions, 140.
35
Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 340. Cf. Phillip J. Long, “The Origin of the
Eschatological Feast as a Wedding Banquet in the Synoptic Gospels: An Intertextual
Study” (PhD diss., Andrews University, 2012).
36
37
38
Campbell, “Findings,” 91.
213
the searching eyes of Jesus (Revelation 2-3),39 is now made ready for her wedding
through repentance and faith.40 In Rev 19:7, 9, “a double symbolism”41 is used to paint a
vivid picture of the marriage feast of the Lamb. In v. 7, the bride of the Lamb stands for
the faithful followers of the Lamb, and simultaneously they are the guests attending the
feast in v. 9. “A similar mode of thought” is also found in the parables of Jesus, such as
the marriage feast of the son of the king (Matt 22:1ff.).42
The reign of God and the wedding of the Lamb are closely related to the judgment
of Babylon the Great, as indicated in the Hallelujah chorus found in Rev 19:1-7.43 It is
manifested negatively through the judgment of Babylon, and positively through the
Lamb’s marriage to the church.44 The question is why the judgment of Babylon should
lead to the reign of God and the wedding of the Lamb. Ford seems to have explored the
question and states that, “The second redemption of the Israelites was to be modeled on
the first, namely, the escape from Egypt and the destruction of their enemies in the water
of the sea, like a stone sinking down; cf. Rev 18:21. After this the theocracy was
39
Campell calls Revelation 1-3 “mini covenant lawsuits” from the Lord against
his church. The seven messages to the churches could be seen as a “thorough
investigation of the current state of the covenant,” ibid., 75. In his dissertation, David
Graves demonstrates that Revelation 2-3 is rich in covenant allusions and themes, and
that John may have used the ANE vassal treaties structure in the messages to the seven
churches to convey a covenant message written in the OT prophetic tradition. See David
Graves, The Seventh Messages of Revelation and Vassal Treaties: Literary Genre,
Structure, and Function, Gorgias Dissertations, Biblical Studies 41 (Piscataway, NJ:
Gorgias Press, 2009).
40
41
Ibid., 275.
42
Ibid.
Miller, “The Nuptial Eschatology of Revelation 19-22,” 301; Hoffmann, The

43
Destroyer and the Lamb, 189-190.

44
Sweet, Revelation, 277.
214
established on Mount Sinai.”45 There is one problem with this statement. Babylon is only
one enemy of God and his believers. There are still other enemies who need to be
destroyed, such as the dragon and the two beasts. Why does the heavenly chorus state so
particularly that the judgment of Babylon leads to God’s reign and the wedding of the
Lamb? There may be one more reason: if Babylon is the community of the hypocritical
unfaithful inside the church, then it is necessary for God to judge Babylon before he can
enjoy an unhindered marriage relationship with his church, and exercise his sovereignty
in full over his believers. G. E. Ladd defines the reign of God as “the sovereign rule of
God, manifested in the person and work of Christ, creating a people over whom he
reigns, and issuing in a realm or realms in which the power of his reign is realized.”46
Thus the ultimate realization of the reign of God can only be achieved in full when the
evil element—Babylon the Great—is destroyed and the church is made “bright and
clean” (v. 8).
Divine War
The image of war dominates the book of Revelation from the very beginning.
Bauckham even calls the book of Revelation “a Christian War Scroll.”47 In Revelation,
the verb polemeō, meaning to “wage war,” appears five times. It first occurs in Rev 2:16,
45
46
George E. Ladd, Crucial Questions about the Kingdom of God (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1952), 80.
47
Richard Bauckham, “The Book of Revelation as a Christian War Scroll,” Neot
22 (1988): 17-40. A. Y. Collins also observed that the book of Revelation “makes use of
holy war traditions to interpret the situation of its first readers.” A. Y. Collins, “The
Political Perspective,” 256. In his monograph on Revelation 19, David Thomas states that
“generally speaking the Divine Warrior imagery in Revelation 19 is beyond debate and
will be assumed rather than argued.” His major thesis is that the Nero redivivus myth has
a significant connection with the imagery of Rev 19:11-21, see D. A. Thomas, Revelation
19 in Historical and Mythological Context, 1.
215
in the message to the church in Pergamum. Jesus warns the believers in Pergamum who
hold to the teaching of Balaam that if they do not repent, he will wage war against them
with the sword of his mouth (2:16). In Rev 12:7, Michael and his angels wage a
successful war against the dragon. A. Y. Collins argues that the narrative plot of
Revelation 12 follows “a mythic pattern of combat widespread in the ancient Near East
and Greco-Roman world.”48 This cosmic war started in heaven (v. 7). The dragon and a
third of the heavenly angelic host lost the first battle, came down to earth, and started to
pursue the woman who obviously sided with God (v. 13). After failing to destroy her, the
dragon went off to make war against the rest of the woman’s offspring (v. 17).
48
A. Y. Collins, “Feminine Symbolism,” 123. A. Y. Collins suggests that the
defeat of Python by Apollo and the defeat of Seth-Typon by Horus serve as the
background for the war between Michael and the Dragon. For details see A. Y. Collins,
The Combat Myth.
András Pataki thinks it is tenable that John refers consciously to the myth familiar
to his readers because it cannot be incidental for the three personages—the dragon, the
woman and the son—to appear together in the narrative of Revelation. But he disagrees
with A. Y. Collins by saying that one basic difference between combat myth and the
combat narrative in Revelation is the dragon and the hero are in equal partners in popular
combat myth while the dragon was denied of any possibility of fighting against Christ. So
he thinks it should be called a “defeat myth” instead. He further points out that the
intention of John to utilize the myth is polemic. The fact that there is no record of the
death of the Messiah in Revelation 12 and there is an absence of direct contact between
the Messiah and the dragon in Rev 12:5 indicates that the book of Revelation intends to
communicate to the readers the superiority of Jesus Christ—although Jesus is born in the
presence of the dragon, the dragon is totally unable to hurt him. Jesus is far beyond the
reach of the dragon, and is above all the deities in the popular combat myth. András
Dávid Pataki, “A Non-combat Myth in Revelation 12,” NTS 57 (2011): 258-272.
216
Revelation 13 is the continuation of this last war scene. The rhetorical question of,
“Who can make war against him [the sea beast]?” (Rev 13:4) could be seen as a
challenge on the part of the beast and its worshippers, to Jesus’ warning in Rev 2:16
against idolatry. Revelation 13:4 vividly depicts the sea beast as the general of the bestial
forces on earth who acts like a great Roman gladiator or a champion of war ready to fight
against Michael (whose name means “Who is like God?”) and the faithful believers of
God.
The next occurrence of the word polemeō is found in Rev 17:14, where the ten
kings represented by the ten horns turn their power and authority over to the beast and
make war against the Lamb. The depiction in Rev 17:14 of the kings of the earth turning
their leadership roles over to the beast for the sake of warring against the Lamb recalls
the picture of Rev 13:4, 8, where the beast is perceived as the leader of the bestial forces
and is worshipped by a great crowd. This war of Rev 17:14 is finally fully carried out in
Rev 19:11-19, when the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gather together
to make war against the Lamb and his army. The army of the Lamb will conquer the
beast and its army “in sacrificial manner of the Lamb . . . ‘following’ the Lamb ‘wherever
he goes’ . . . even [unto] death.”49 This war is a spiritual battle between good and evil,
and “evil can never be overcome by apocalyptic militarism nor by any other form of
violence but only by faithful witness to Jesus even to the point of death.”50 Obviously, the
war in Revelation 19 is the war forewarned by Jesus in Rev 2:16.
The portrayal of the divine Warrior51 in Revelation 19 recalls the language used in
49
Felise Tavo, Woman, Mother and Bride: An Exegetical Investigation into the
“Ecclesial” Notions of the Apocalypse (Dudley, MA: Peeters, 2007), 157.
50
Ibid., 158.
51
David Mathewson holds that the divine warrior image of Rev 19:11, 15 alludes
to the root of Jesse in Isa 11:4. He thinks that the Messiah in John’s Revelation who will
217
the message to the churches of Pergamum and Thyatira.52 In Revelation 19 Christ is
described as having a name written on him, a name not known to anyone except himself
(v. 12); he also has eyes like blazing fire (v. 12) and a sharp sword coming out of his
mouth to strike down the nations which he will rule with an iron scepter (v. 15). The
same statement of having the sharp sword is first found in the message to the church of
Pergamum (2:12). The faithful in the church of Pergamum are promised to be given “a
white stone with a new name written on it, known only to him who receives it” (2:17).
The same language of having eyes like blazing fire is first found in the message to the
‘make war’ may be “a summary of Isaiah’s ‘he shall strike the earth with the rod of his
mouth, and with his lips he shall kill the wicked’ (11:4c, d).” Mathewson, “Isaiah in
Revelation,” 192. Martin McNamara notes that the warrior image in Rev 19:11-16 is
dependent on the MT of Isa 63:1-6 and the Palestinian Targums of Gen 49:11-12; see
Martin McNamara, The New Testament and the Palestinian Targum to the Pentateuch
(Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1966), 231.
The MT of Isa 63:2-3 reads: “Why is your apparel red, and your garments like the
one who treads in the wine press? “I have trodden the wine press alone, and from the
peoples there was no man with me. I also trod them in my anger, and trampled them in
my wrath; and their lifeblood is sprinkled on my garments, and I stained all my clothing.”
Quoted in John L. Ronning, “The Targum of Isaiah and the Johannine Literature,” WTJ
69 (2007): 263, italic his.
The Tg.Neof. Gen 49:11-12 reads: “How beautiful the King Messiah who is arise
from the house of Judah. He girds his loins and goes forth to battle against those who hate
him; and he kills kings with rulers, and makes the mountains red from the blood of their
slain and makes the valleys white from the fat of the warrior. His garments are rolled in
blood; he is like a presser of grapes.” Rev 19:13, 15 reads: “He is dressed in a robe
dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. . . . He treads the wine press of the
fury of the wrath of God Almighty.”
For some modern writers, the portrait of God/Christ as a divine warrior may seem
problematic. Fiorenza writes that: “Its envisioning of God and Christ in analogy to the
Oriental Great King and the Roman emperor seems to me to be the theological ‘Achilles’
heel’ of the visionary rhetoric of Rev. that calls for theological evaluation. In likening
God's glory and power to Roman imperial power and splendor, in portraying Christ as the
divine ‘warrior’ and ‘King of kings,’ Rev. is in danger of conceiving divine power as
‘power over’ in terms of Roman domination The traditional imagery for God . . . tends to
foster militarism and escapism but not human responsibility for the fate of the earth. In a
similar fashion feminist theologians have pointed out how much the images of a
patriarchal God and all-powerful Lord in heaven legitimate and perpetuate patriarchal
domination on earth.” See Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, The Book of Revelation: Justice
and Judgment (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), 9.
52
See Mealy, After the Thousand Years, 66.
218
church of Thyatira (2:18); the faithful in the church of Thyatira are promised the
authority of ruling over the nations with an iron scepter (2:26, 27). These verbal parallels
between the portrayal of the divine warrior and the messages to the two churches indicate
that the war in Revelation 19 was waged against the unrepentant church members of
these two churches. These are the followers of Balaam and Jezebel and the Nicolaitans,
whose existence was forewarned by Jesus in Rev 2:16.
This connection between Revelation 19 and Revelation 2, which is part of the
message to the seven churches, confirms Pilchan Lee’s conclusion that “the seven
messages in chs. 2-3 provide the prophetic setting for the rest of the Book.”53 This link
reminds the reader that the seven churches represent “the whole gathering” of the faithful
believers of God, and that throughout the book of Revelation, “the author’s concern is
God’s church.”54
Rev 19:11-21 contains “the most transparent use of the divine-warrior motif in the
book of Revelation.”55 A. Y. Collins names the scene as the “theophany of the divine
warrior.”56 With its “traditional images of the eschatological battle,”57 Revelation 19
brings the divine war to its climax.58 Riding on the white horse, the divine warrior, who is
53
Pilchan Lee, The New Jerusalem, 248.
54
Ibid.
55
Longman and Reid, God Is a Warrior, 186.
56
A. Y. Collins, Combat Myth, 224.
57
58
219
identified later as the Word of God (v. 13),59 comes to judge the unfaithful nations and
wage war against the bestial forces (v. 11).60
Judgment and war go together in the divine war motif. In his work Divine War in
the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East, Sa-Moon Kang observes that the
concept of war as a divine lawsuit is present in historical Hittite and Mesopotamian
historical sources. These presuppose an international treaty relationship between the two
warring nations; thus, divine war is seen as an “ultimate remedy for wrong used as a
divine judgment for violation of a treaty. God is a judge as well as a warrior.”61
The war is no ordinary combat for at least one reason: the weapon of the divine
Warrior is a sword that is coming out from his mouth62 (v. 21, cf. 1:16; 2:12, 16; the
image comes from Isa 11:463). This sword represents “the word of his testimony,”64
59
Craig A. Evans demonstrated that “the Word of the Lord” is commonly used
hundreds of times in the extant Targums to refer to God; see Craig A. Evans, Word and
Glory: On the Exegetical and Theological Background of John’s Prologue (Sheffield:
JSOT, 1993), 118, 129. Ronning also notes that “‘the Word of the Lord’ stands in place
of the divine name, in the same way that ‘the Lord’ does in translations since the LXX.
This usage is found primarily in passages dealing with God’s interactions with his people
or his creation in general.” Ronning, “The Targum of Isaiah and the Johannine
Literature,” 262.
60
Dominant scholarly opinion holds that Rev 19:17-21 is “the culmination of the
battle for which the sixth bowl prepares,” the battle of Armageddon. There the kings of
the earth and their armies (16:19) fight against the warrior-king and his army and are
defeated. Robert L. Thomas, “An Analysis of the Seventh Bowl of the Apocalypse,”
TMSJ 5 (1994): 84; see also Beckwith, The Apocalypse of John, 734; Mounce, The Book
of Revelation, 349.
61
Barr, “The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation,” 42; Bauckham,

62
“Judgment in the Book of Revelation,” 8.

63
Ibid.
64
Cf. the Babylonian epic Enūma Elish, in which Marduk, the city-god of
Babylon, can destroy with his word.
220
which includes two components: first, a “testimony about Jesus” (Rev 1:9) which is “the
martus (witness) of his followers,” and second, Jesus’ own personal testimony, which
was his death on Calvary.65 This word of testimony now becomes a judgment against
those who reject his witness. Bauckham explains what happens in Rev 19:11-21: “In the
form of Jesus’ suffering witness and that of his followers, truth has been demonstrated in
the face of the lies of the dragon and the beasts, such that people can recognize the truth
and turn away from lies (i.e., repent). But when the truth is finally established and all
illusion dispelled, then those who persist to the end in refusing the truth must perish with
the lies they will not relinquish. This is what happens in 19:11-21.”66
The warfare of Revelation 19 ends with the ultimate defeat of the beast and the
false prophet who are thrown into the lake of burning sulfur into which Satan will be
thrown later in Rev 20:10. Thus the unholy trinity meet their destruction in the lake of
burning sulfur at the end of the war. But there is another figure which has been prominent
throughout the latter half of the book, i.e., the image of the beast. It seems that the image
65
Barr, “The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation,” 42
66
Bauckham, “Judgment in the Book of Revelation,” 8. Barr understands that Rev
19:11-21 describes the victory of the cross, where Jesus himself trod the winepress of the
wrath of God outside of the city, and Christ's robe dipped in blood a reference to Jesus'
death on the cross, and the blood is Jesus’ own, thus, he concludes that it is the death of
Jesus and his faithful followers that slays the enemies; see Barr, “The Apocalypse as a
Symbolic Transformation,” 42; also Boring, Revelation, 198; M. Bredin, Jesus,
Revolutionary of Peace: A Nonviolent Christology in the Book of Revelation (Carlisle,
England: Paternoster, 2003); Mitchell G. Reddish, “Martyr Christology in the
Apocalypse,” JSNT 33 (1988): 90.
Bauckham does not agree with this view. Rather he thinks this passage describes
the consequences of the witness of Jesus and his followers for those who do not accept it,
Bauckham, “Judgment in the Book of Revelation,” 8. See also Beasley-Murray, The Book
of Revelation, 280; Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, 2:133; A. Y. Collins,
“Eschatology,” 70; T. F. Glasson, The Revelation of John, CBC (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1965), 109; Martin Kiddle, The Revelation of St. John, The Moffat New
Testament Commentary (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1952), 384, 385; Mounce, The
Book of Revelation, 345.
221
has not met its total destruction. The image of the beast has always appeared together
with the beast throughout the latter part of the book in Rev 14:9, 11; 15:2; 16:2; 19:20
and 20:4 (except Revelation 17 and 18), but when it comes to the final destruction, only
the beast, the false prophet and Satan are mentioned. The image of the beast seems to
have disappeared from the apocalyptic scene without receiving any punishment. Thus, a
question must be asked at this point: Is it possible that the image of the beast could have
been left unpunished?
The possibility of the image of the beast being unpunished at the end of the war is
highly improbable. Since Revelation in general, and chapter 19 in particular, are written
in a military language filled with divine warfare imagery, the major elements of ANE
divine-war conduct are expected to be found in Revelation. First, there is the concept of
divine war as wars of the gods.67 Wars were fought in gods’ names.68 The wars and their
combatants acted out the will of the gods.69
Second, there is always a formality in conducting divine wars in ANE. Kang
outlines the three-stage divine war conduct practiced in ANE warfare.70 The three stages
are: (1) pre-battle divine consultation of the gods through oracles, (2) during the battle
divine presence and guidance through prophets, and (3) post-battle spoils dedication to
the gods, i.e., the divine warriors.

In Revelation, we have seen the first two stages of ANE war conduct present. As
mentioned before, the three frog like spirits going out to gather the kings for the battle of
67
68
Goldingay, Daniel, 15.
69
70
For details see ibid., 42-48.
222
Armageddon could be seen as a pre-battle consultation of the gods through oracles by the
bestial forces, while the three angels’ messages in Revelation 14 could be seen as pre-
battle divine consultation through oracles on the side of God. Then, in Revelation 13, the
false prophet leads the battle against God and his believers, and in Revelation 19, the
false prophet is destroyed together with his army, showing that he was with the army
during the war.71
Now we come to the third stage of the post-battle spoils dedication to the gods.
Since the gods are considered as the actual initiators of wars, the victories belong to
them, and as a result all the spoils of war belonged to the gods and were dedicated to the
divine warriors.72 The spoils included all belongings of the defeated armies, including
their gods, goddesses, property and people.73 Kang especially mentions that, “In the
course of the divine battle the capture of the statues of the victims’ gods was the last
stage of battle to confirm the defeat.”74 Kang’s observation is confirmed by Zainib
Bahrani, who states that, “The Near Eastern practice of the destruction and seizure of cult
images in battles is well attested in ancient texts beginning from the third millennium
B.C. onward and is also known from the archaeological record.”75 Theodore Lewis also
notes that, “Capturing divine images in battle and exiling them is well attested in text and
71
Numbers 31: death of Balaam with the army of the Midianites.
72
Kang, Divine War, 46. Cf. Dan 1:2, which states that Nebuchadnezzar took part
of the vessels of the house of God and put them into the house of his god.
73
Ibid., 47. Cf. 1 Sam 5:2. Apparently, the Philistines thought the ark of the Lord
was the God of Israel. They took it into the house of their god Dagon and set it by Dagon,
which was intended to be a symbol of subordination of the God of Israel to Dagon.
74
Ibid., 46.
75
Bahrani, The Graven Image, 174.
223
archaeology,” and, “At other times, the divine statue was destroyed rather than exiled.”76
The exile or the destruction of the images of the gods of the defeated nations was viewed
as the defeat of the gods of the defeated nations by the gods of the victorious nations.77
Being aware of this last stage war conduct, God gave the following instructions to
the ancient Israelites regarding how to treat the spoils of the enemy nations, in particular
the images of their gods. Deuteronomy 7:24-26 reads, “He [God] will give their kings
into your hand, and you will wipe out their names from under heaven. No one will be
able to stand up against you; you will destroy them. The images of their gods you are to
burn in the fire. Do not covet the silver and gold on them, and do not take it for
yourselves, or you will be ensnared by it, for it is detestable to the LORD your God. Do
not bring a detestable thing into your house or you, like it, will be set apart for
destruction. Utterly abhor and detest it, for it is set apart for destruction.”78
The Old Testament records several cases of the destruction of cultic images by
fire, although not always in the context of divine warfare. King David burned the images
of the Philistines (2 Sam 5:21; 1 Chron 14:12). King Asa burned the Asherah pole in the
KidronValley (1 Kgs 15:12-13). Jehu burned the cult image of Baal (2 Kgs 10:26).
Considering the significance of the destruction of the idols of the defeated nations as
signs of total victory over the defeated nations and their gods,79 it is hard to imagine that
Theodore J. Lewis, “Syro-Palestinian Iconography and Divine Images,” in Cult

76
Image and Divine Representation in the Ancient Near East, ed. Neal H. Walls, ASOR
Book Series 10, ed. Brian B. Schmidt (Boston: ASOR, 2005), 100; see also William H.
Shea, “Wrestling with the ‘Prince of Persia’ in Daniel 10,” AUSS 21 (1983): 237.
77
78
Italics supplied. For the divine instruction of burning the cult images of the
heathen nations see also Deut 7:5, 12:3. The burning of the images of the gods of the
nations is also attested in Sibylline Oracles: “The works and images of the gods made by
hand will be burned” (3.618).
79
Cf. 2 Kgs 19:18.
224
in a book so saturated with war language as Revelation, the final destruction of the image
of the beast would be left unmentioned. Therefore, I propose that Revelation does
mention the destruction of the image of the beast somewhere outside of Revelation 19.
Taking into consideration the commands from God for burning the cult images of the
heathen nations, and the actual practice of the burning of the idols of the Israelites kings,
I propose that the image of the beast must have been burned just like the beast and the
false prophet. The reason why there is no mention of the burning of the image of the
beast is that it has already been burnt before the burning of the beast and the false prophet
in Revelation 19. The only two places where there is a record of a burning before
Revelation 19 are found in Rev 17:16 and Revelation 18, which speak of the burning of
Babylon the Great. Thus, it is plausible to assume that the burning of the great prostitute
Babylon is actually the burning of the image of the beast. Details that identify Babylon as
the cult image of the beast will be given when dealing with Revelation 18.
Summary
In this section, I surveyed the image of the beast in Revelation 19 by studying the
two major themes of the chapter. The theme of the wedding of the Lamb shows that the
bride of the Lamb is presented in contrast to the great prostitute Babylon. The bride of the
Lamb is the Holy City, which is the community of saints; therefore Babylon the Great
must correspondingly be the beast-worshipping community. The reign of God and the
wedding of the Lamb are closely related to the judgment of Babylon, which suggests that
Babylon is a symbol for the community of the unfaithful inside the invisible universal
church. This hypocritical inner community hinders an intimate covenantal relationship
between God and his true church.
The study of the theme of the divine war in relation to the ANE war conduct
shows that the account of the divine warfare in Revelation 19 is not complete in terms of
225
the final punishment of the leaders of the bestial forces. Revelation 19 mentions the
burning of the beast and the false prophet, and Revelation 20 mentions the burning of
Satan, but the image of the beast, which has been so prominent throughout the second
half of Revelation and has been named as one of the chief sinners against God and his
believers, seems to have been left unpunished; at least there is no explicit record of the
idol’s punishment. According to the ANE divine war custom, the battle was actually
between the gods of the two fighting nations; thus ultimate victory could not be won
unless the cult images of the gods of the defeated nations were captured or destroyed, and
in the case of Israel, burned. Since God commanded the Israelites to burn the cult images
of their defeated foes, the image of the beast must be burned at the end of the divine
warfare in Revelation. The absence of the burning of the image of the beast in Revelation
19 leaves the victory of the God of Israel over the bestial forces imperfect. A further
study of the other chapters is required to find out the final fate of the image of the beast.
Revelation 20 is a section of a larger literary unit which extends from 17:1 to
21:8.80 Revelation 17 is the prediction of the fall of end time Babylon. Revelation 18 is
the actual account of end time Babylon’s fall. Revelation 19 deals with the capture and
destruction of the beast, the false prophet, the kings and their armies. Revelation 20:1-3
continues the account of warfare begun in Revelation 19 and tells of the capture of Satan
at the end of the war.81
80
81
Ibid.
226
Aune divides Revelation 20 into two major sections: (1) Satan’s defeat (1-10);
and (2) the final judgment (11-15).82
The image of the beast is mentioned in the second section; the saints who reign
during the thousand years are specified as being those who did not worship the beast or
its image (v. 4).
Revelation 20 is the last chapter which contains the phrase “the image of the
beast.” It has two major themes: first, the theme of the millennium; and second, the theme
of judgment.
The Millennium
The idea of the millennium occurs “nowhere in the 66 books, 1189 chapters,
31,173 verses of the Bible”83 apart from Rev 20:1-7. One crucial aspect of the idea of the
millennium84 is the coming of an intermediate Messianic kingdom before the appearance
of the eternal kingdom of God in the new heaven and new earth.85 The millennium theme
82
Aune, Revelation 17-22, 1076, 1077.
83
Harold Hazelip, “Revelation 20 and the Millennium,” ResQ 18 (1975): 234.
84
Scholarly opinions are divided regarding the nature of millennium. There are
mainly two ways to interpret the thousand years: literally and symbolically. It is beyond
the scope of this dissertation to discuss the two ways of interpretation. For details see
Aune, Revelation 17-22, 1089-1090; see also Vern S. Plythress, “Genre and
Hermeneutics in Rev 20:1-6,” JETS 36 (1993): 41-51. Carol Scheppard traces a brief
history of interpretation of millennium in Rev 20:1-6 from Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian,
Tyconius, Joachim to the twentieth century author Bernard McGinn. For details see Carol
Scheppard, “End Time Hermeneutics: An Overview,” BLT 46 (2001): 5-10. For the OT,
Jewish and early Christian backgrounds of the idea of millennium see Beale, The Use of
the Old Testament, 386-393.
85
Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 287. Cf. Glasson, The Revelation of
John; Mathias Rissi, The Future of the World: An Exegetical Study of Revelation 19:11-
22:5 (Naperville, IL: Alec R. Allenson, 1971).
227
is part of the prophecy of Revelation 20-22, which seems to have followed the sequence
of Ezekiel 36-3786 which describes Israel’s resurrection and its return to the Holy Land
under the reign of the Messiah. After an indefinite period comes the attack of Gog and
Magog (Ezekiel 38-39),87 followed by the establishment of the New Jerusalem in the
everlasting kingdom (Ezekiel 40-48).
Revelation 20 could be divided according to the four events that happened around
the millennium:88 the capture of Satan (vv. 1-3), the resurrection89 and the reign of the
Jewish apocalyptic writings talk about a kingdom lasting for a thousand years
after six thousand years of earthly history. This idea corresponds to the Sabbath day of
rest after a six-day creation period. James Kellerman cautions that all these Jewish
apocalypses were written at about the same time as John's Revelation, and one should not
assume that Revelation borrowed the idea of the millennium from his Jewish
contemporaries. See James A. Kellerman, "Why One Thousand Years?" CJ 31 (2005):
140-149.
Derwood Smith provides a brief discussion of the understanding of early
Christian and Jewish apocalyptic literature concerning the intermediate Messianic
kingdom on earth. See Derwood C. Smith, “The Millennial Reign of Jesus Christ: Some
Observations on Rev 20:1-10,” ResQ 6 (1962): 219-223. For Jewish background see 4
Ezra 7:26-44; 12:31-34; 2 Baruch 29-30; 40:3; 1 Enoch 91:8-17; see also Paul A.
Rainbow, “Millennium as Metaphor in John’s Apocalypse,” WTJ 58 (1996): 209-221;
Michael J. Vlach,“The Kingdom of God and the Millennium,” MSJ 23 (2012): 225-254.
For a comprehensive treatment of the Jewish and Christian texts see Hermann L. Strack
and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch, 6 vols.
(Munich: C. H. Beck, 1966), 3:823-827.
86
87
Aune, Revelation 17-22, 1096. Some scholars understand the attack by Gog and
Magog as the battle of Armageddon referred to in Revelation 16. See Hendriksen, More
Than Conquerors, 234; James A. Hughes, “Revelation 20:4-6 and the Question of the
Millennium,” WTJ 35 (1973): 282; Richard A. Ostella, “The Significance of Deception in
Revelation 20:3,” WTJ 37 (1975): 236-238.
88
There are three major views of the millennium: premillennialism,
postmillennialism, and amillennialism; see Craig A. Blaising et al., eds., Three Views on
the Millennium and Beyond (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999); Stanley J. Grenz, The
Millennial Maze: Sorting out Evangelical Options (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1992); R. F.
White, “Reexamining the Evidence for Recapitulation in Rev 20:1-10,” WTJ 51 (1989):
319-344.
For a premillennial view, see Craig A. Blaising, “Premillennialism: A Progressive
Dispensational View,” CTR 11 (2013): 63-70; D. K. Campbell and J. T. Townsend, eds.,
A Case for Premillennialism (Chicago: Moody Press, 1992); George E. Ladd,
228
saints (vv. 4-6), the battle involving Gog and Magog (7-10),90 and the final judgment of
the white-throne (11-15).91
“Revelation 20 and the Millennium,” Review & Expositor 57 (1960): 167-175; Norman
Shepherd, “The Resurrections of Revelation 20,” WTJ 37 (1974): 34-43.
For an amillennial view see Beale, The Use of the Old Testament, 361-370. Beale
prefers to call this view “inaugurated millennialism,” 356; G. K. Beale, “The Millennium
in Revelation 20:1-10: An Amillennial Perspective,” CTR 11 (2013): 29-622.
89
There is a problem of understanding the nature of this resurrection in Rev 20:4,
that is, whether it is bodily resurrection. Some understand it to be the bodily resurrection
of believers, such as Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, 265-268, and
Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 356. The classic argument for a bodily resurrection in
v. 4 comes from A. Alford’s comment that since the resurrection in v. 5 is a bodily
resurrection there is no reason to suggest that the one in v. 4 should be understood
otherwise. See A. Alford, Alford’s Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical
commentary (Grand Rapids: Guardian, 1976), 732, 733.
A more popular understanding is that the coming back to life of the soul here is a
symbolic way of describing the souls of the faithful going to be with God upon their
death, as interpreted by Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, 263. M. G. Kline, based upon
his study of the two words “first” and “second,” argues that the “first” and “second” in
Rev 20:5f. indicate not just sequence, but also a difference in kind. Since the second
resurrection is literal and bodily, the first resurrection must be different in kind, thus it
should not be literal, but metaphorical, hence spiritual. See M. G. Kline, “The First
Resurrection,” WTJ 37 (1975): 366-375. For a critique of Kline’s presentation see J.
Ramsey Michaels, “The First Resurrection: A Response,” WTJ 39 (1976): 100-109. Beale
provides a detailed discussion of the pros and cons of the bodily resurrection view and
the spiritual resurrection view; he holds the latter view. See Beale, The Use of the Old
Testament, 375-386.
90
There is no doubt among the scholars that this battle is an allusion to Ezek 38-39,
but much debate has occurred concerning its relationship with Rev 19:17-21, i.e., whether
Rev 20:1-10 follows Rev 19:17-21 chronologically or recapitulates it. For a detailed
discussion of this issue see Beale, The Use of the Old Testament, 361-370. Beale himself
understands that Rev 20:1-10 recapitulates Rev 19:17-21, and argues for the
identification of the two battles in Rev 19:17-21 and Rev 20:7-10 as one and the same.
See also David Mathewson, “A Re-Examination of the Millennium in Rev 20:1-6:
Consummation and Recapitulation,” JETS 44 (2001): 237-251. Some hold a progressive
view and understand that the events in Rev 19:17-21 precede those in Rev 20:1-6; for
details of this view see Jack S. Deere, “Premillennialism in Revelation 20:4-6,” BSac 135
(1978): 58-73; Charles E. Powell, “Progression Versus Recapitulation in Revelation 20:1-
6,” BSac 163 (2006): 95.
91
Sydney H. T. Page, “Revelation 20 and Pauline Eschatology,” JETS 23 (1980):
32.
229
The reign of the saints is the fulfillment of the promise of Rev 3:21, which reads:
“To him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I
overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne.”92
Two sentences describe the characteristics of the saints in Revelation 20. First,
positively speaking, they have kept the commandments of God and given their testimony
for Jesus (v. 4b). Second, they have not worshipped the beast or his image, neither have
they received its mark (v. 4c). This language of not worshipping the beast and its image
and not receiving the mark on their hands or foreheads points back to Revelation 13, in
which the image of the beast was first formed and the inhabitants of the earth were forced
to worship it.93 These two sentences are actually two sides of the same coin. The former
describes the characteristics of the saints in a positive manner by telling who they are,
while the latter tells in a negative way who they are not.94 Thus, bearing the testimony for
Jesus and keeping the words of God is another way to describe having not worshiped the
beast or its image.
In Revelation 17, the great prostitute was “drunk with the blood of the saints, the
blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus” (v. 6). Here the saints are described
positively to indicate who they are. Comparing the language used to describe the saints in
Rev 17:6 with that used in Rev 20:4, it is obvious that the two groups of saints are
identical. Thus, once again, the end time Babylon drunk with the blood of the saints who
bore the testimony for Jesus is identified with the image of the beast in Rev 13:15, who
causes those who do not worship the beast and its image to be killed.
92
Aune, Revelation 17-22, 1084, 1085.
93
Ibid., 1088; Beale, The Book of Revelation, 1000.
94
230
Judgment
The judgment in Revelation 20 is also the judgment “at the end of the cosmic
history.”95 It is the climax of all previous judgments.96 At its conclusion Satan (v. 10) is
thrown into the lake of fire together with death and Hades (v. 14), and all those “whose
name was not found in the book life” are also thrown into the lake of fire (v. 15). This
group of people is mentioned also in Revelation 13 as the inhabitants of the earth who
worshipped the beast. At one point in history, these people—along with Satan, the beast
and the false prophet—the judges condemning the saints. Now the reversal comes: the
forces of evil are condemned forever, while the saints are vindicated for eternity.
Biblical scholars have noticed the connection between Revelation 20 and Daniel
7.97 In fact, Revelation 20 clearly alludes to Daniel 7. Verbal parallels between the two
passages are “throne” (Rev 20:4; Dan 7:9), the open “book” (Rev 20:11; Dan 7:10),
“beast” (Rev 20:10; Dan 7:11), and “fire” (Rev 20:10; Dan 7:11). Thematically, both
chapters deal with the ultimate destruction of the beast and the final establishment of the
kingdom of God and the saints.98
Summary
Revelation 20 is a perfect conclusion to the theme of the image of the beast.
Although there is no explicit mention of the final destruction of the image of the beast,
readers are shown the eternal destruction of the associates of the image of the beast, i.e.,
95
Ibid., 1031.
96
Ibid.
97
Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation, 106; Beale, The Use of the
Old Testament, 374.
98
Ibid.
231
Satan and those who worshipped the image of the beast. Those who do not worship the
beast and his image are vindicated and receive their eternal reward of reigning with
Christ, as Christ had promised them in the beginning. They are the ones who suffered
martyrdom due to their testimony for Jesus and their refusal to worship the beast or his
image. Once again, in Revelation 20, the evidence points to the identity of the image of
the beast as Babylon the Great.
In this chapter, I studied the image of the beast in Revelation 19 and 20. These are
the last two chapters that explicitly mention the motif of the image of the beast.
In Revelation 19, as I studied the wedding of the Lamb, I concluded that Babylon
the Great is a parody of Jerusalem. Babylon is a community of unrepentant people. The
fact that the wedding of the Lamb is announced only after the destruction of Babylon and
the fact that Babylon’s punishment of being stripped naked fulfills the warning of Christ
given to the unfaithful members of the seven churches, also suggests that Babylon is the
sum total of the unfaithful members of the church. This includes those in the seven
churches: Babylon is the synagogue of Satan, who molded herself after the image of
Satan, and thus became the image of the beast. As I also studied ANE war conduct, a
problem was found in regard to the punishment of the image of the beast. The warfare of
Revelation is clearly divine. According to war customs of the Israelites, the cult images
of the enemy nations were to be utterly destroyed by fire. But Revelation only mentions
the destruction of the beast and the false prophet by fire without any record of the
destruction of the image of the beast. This omission leaves a hint to the reader to find the
destruction of the image of the beast outside of Revelation 19.
In Revelation 20, the saints are described in two aspects, one positive, which is
those who bore the testimony of Jesus; and the other one negative, which is those who
did not worship the beast and its image. The identification of the saints with these two
232
characteristics points in the direction that Babylon the Great may be the image of the
beast.
By studying the major themes of Revelation in these chapters, the meaning of the
image of the beast itself became clearer. The study of each chapter shows that all the
evidence in relation to the identity of the image of the beast points to the conclusion that
the image may be the end time Babylon. But this conclusion is yet to be confirmed and
further proved by an in depth study of the end time Babylon, which is featured in
Revelation 17 and 18.
There is also one more puzzle that needs to be solved, which is the fate of the
image of the beast at the end of the cosmic war. The end of the image of the beast is not
mentioned in Revelation 19 and 20. The end of a cult image is normally brought about by
burning, and Rev17:16 and Revelation18 are the only two places outside of Revelation 19
and 20 that record destruction by fire. Therefore it is necessary to look at Revelation 17
and 18 for answers to the final fate of the image of the beast.
233
CHAPTER 6
THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST IN REVELATION 17 AND 18
Introduction
The studies of the previous two chapters focused on the motif of the image of the
beast in the chapters of Revelation that contain direct references to it. This chapter will
study the image of the beast in chapters 17 and 18, which do not contain direct references
to the motif of the image of the beast.
In Revelation 17 there are direct references to a beast, and Babylon the Great is
presented as sitting on a beast, but there is no direct reference to the image of the beast. In
Revelation 18 there seems to be no beast at all; only Babylon the Great is featured.
However, according to the interpretation given by the angel in Revelation 17, the beast is
also a symbol for the waters on which the woman sits, which are further explained to be
peoples, multitudes, nations, languages (v. 15), and the kings of the earth. Therefore,
although there is no direct reference to the beast, the components of the beast are present
in Revelation 18. They are the kings of the earth (v. 9), the merchants (v. 11), the sea
captains and the sailors (v. 17), who are the beneficiaries of Babylon the Great. The
major difference between Revelation 17 and 18 is the relationship between Babylon and
the beast. In Revelation 17, the beast supports Babylon while in Revelation 18, the
various groups of people who supported Babylon have withdrawn their support and stand
far from her. According to Rev 17:16, these people were actually the ones who burned
Babylon the Great. Thus the beast is always present, whether or not it is the same as in
Revelation 13. Thus, it can be concluded that the figure of a beast is ubiquitous in these
two chapters and throughout Revelation 13 through 20.
234
Interestingly, chapters 17 and 18, which do not contain explicit reference to the
image of the beast, are the very chapters that feature the end time Babylon the Great.
Before and after these two chapters, there are direct references to the image of the beast,
always coupled with reference to the actual beast. But Revelation 17 and 18 seem to keep
silent about the image of the beast. The sudden disappearance of the motif of the image
of the beast in these two chapters is worth investigating. Could it be that the very reason
for the absence of direct references to the image of the beast in these two chapters is
simply because the image of the beast is overwhelmingly, but indirectly, present
throughout them? Further studies on Revelation 17 and 18 may provide an answer to this
question.
Scholars have noticed that Rev 17:1-19:10 constitute a unit.1 This passage “offers
an elaboration of the eschatological themes of Rev 16:12-21, not just 16:17-21.”2
Revelation 17, on one hand, points back to Revelation 16 by providing “a large

interpretive review”3 of the sixth and seventh bowl-plagues. On the other hand, it points
forward to Revelation 18 and 19, outlining the events that happen in these two chapters,
i.e., the punishment of the prostitute (Revelation 18), and the Lamb’s victory over the
beast, the false prophet, and the kings of the world (Revelation 19).
1
Aune, Revelation 17-22, 915; F. J. Murphy, Fallen Is Babylon, 348.
2
Paulien, review of Ezekiel in the Apocalypse, 550.
3
235
The details of Babylon’s drinking of the wrath of God are the focus of chapter
17.4 In Rev 17:1, John beholds one of the seven-bowl angels saying that he will show the
judgment of the great prostitute who sits upon many waters. So Revelation 17 is closely
associated with Revelation 16.5 Charles refers to Rev 17:16, 17 as having been forecast
by Rev 16:12.6 Smalley observes that Revelation 17 and 18 elaborate on the theme of the
judgment of Babylon, which has been announced by the pouring out of the sixth and
seventh bowl-plagues in Rev 16:12-21.7 Paulien points out that Revelation 17 is
“particularly an exegesis of Rev 16:12-16,”8 which focuses on the judgment of Babylon
the Great, or the drying up of the Euphrates River which is also called “many waters.”
This judgment is described as being related to Armageddon (Rev 16:16). Thus Revelation
17 “concerns the final battle of earth’s history (Rev 17:12-17).”9
Regarding the structure of Revelation 17, the fundamental division within this
chapter is between the vision (Rev 17:3-6) and the angelic explanation (7-18).10 Aune
divides Revelation 17 into three main sections: (1) introducing the vision (vv. 1-2); (2)
4
5
J. M. Ford, Revelation, 286; Osborne, Revelation, 607; Prigent, Commentary on
the Apocalypse, 485.
6
Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, 2:46, 74; J. M. Ford, Revelation,
273.
7
Smalley, The Revelation to John, 424.
8
Paulien, “Revelation 17 and the Papacy,” End Time Issues, unpublished email
newsletter, 8, 9. Cf. Paulien, “Ezekiel in the Apocalypse,” 550; also F. J. Murphy, Fallen
Is Babylon, 348.
9
Paulien, “Revelation 17 and the Papacy,” 8, 9.
10
Ibid., 9.
236
the actual vision of the woman seated on a scarlet beast (3-6); and (3) the interpretation of
the vision (7-18).11
The major themes of Revelation 17 are easily detected as the theme of the beast,
and the theme of Babylon the Great.
The Beast
The motif of a beast is dominant in Revelation 17. Scholars have noticed that,
“While the woman dominates the vision, the focus in the explanation of the vision is on
the beast.”12 The fact that Revelation 17 is the only passage in the book where an angel
provides an extensive explanation of the preceding vision13 indicates the importance of
that particular explanation to the book as a whole,14 and the importance of understanding
the beast.
Pieter G. R. De Villiers observed that Revelation 17 employs a certain construct
as a structural marker, i.e., “the phrases, ho or ha eides [which you saw], following a
noun that refers back to several objects in the preceding vision.”15 He counted five such
structural markers throughout the chapter. In Rev 17:8, the first marker introduces the
beast and the seven horns; in Rev 17:12, it introduces the ten horns; in Rev 17:15, the
11
12
De Villiers, “The Composition of Revelation 17,” 99; Aune, Revelation 17-22,
919.
13
Some may count Rev 1:20 as another passage in which an explanation of a
vision is given. But in Rev 1:20, the explanation is given by Jesus, not by an angel.
De Villiers, “The Composition of Revelation 17,” 100, G. Kretschmar, Die

14
Offenbarung des Johannes (Stuttgart: Calwer, 1985), 53; Aune, Revelation 17-22, 919.
15
237
waters; in Rev 17:16 again the ten horns; and the fifth time it introduces the woman. De
Villers writes: “In this way five distinctive subunits are formed of which three refer to the
beast.”16 This shows the importance of the beast in this chapter.
The beast in Revelation 17 is described as the one “who once was, now is not, and
will come” (v. 8, cf. v. 11). The beast is identified three times by this phrase or a similar
one in Revelation 17 (vv. 8a, c and 11). This title recalls the way Christ identifies himself
(1:8) and how the heavenly creatures identify God Almighty (4:8). Thus, it is widely
recognized that the beast holding such a title is a parody of God the Father and Christ.17
Prigent also notes that the life story of the beast in Revelation 17, an initial phase of
power, a time of obscurity, then a recovery,18 before the ultimate defeat, resembles the
careers of the dragon of Revelation 12 and the sea beast of Revelation 13.19
Since the time of Irenaeus, scholars have identified the beast of Revelation 17
with the beast of Rev 13:1-8.20 Indeed, the beast in Revelation 17 has several similarities
16
Ibid.
17
Ibid., 98; Aune, Revelation 17-22, 939, 940; G. K. Beale, The Use of Daniel in
Jewish Apocalyptic and in the Revelation of St. John (Lanham, MD: University Press of
America, 1984), 254.
18
Cf. the trajectory of the messianic Suffering Servant (Christ) in Isa 52:13-53:12
(the “Suffering Servant” poem) and of Christ in Philippians 2:5-11.
19
20
Irenaeus Adversus haereses, 5.30.4 (ANF 1:560); see also Bauckham, The
Climax, 395; Beale, The Book of Revelation, 864, 865; Caird, The Revelation of Saint
John, 215; Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, 2:68; Homer Hailey,
Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979), 349; Kramer,
“Contrast,” 111; Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, 226; Mounce, The Book
of Revelation, 309, J. Ramsey Michaels, Revelation, The IVP New Testament
Commentary, ed. Grant R. Osborne (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1997), 192; Osborne,
Revelation, 615; Prigent, Commentary on the Apocalypse, 491; Witherington, Revelation,
219; John Sweet, Revelation, TPI New Testament Commentaries, eds. Howard Clark Kee
and Dennis Nineham (Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1990), 258.
238
to the one in Rev 13:1-8. First, both have a similar origin. Revelation 13 describes a beast
coming out of the sea (v. 1), while Revelation 17 describes a beast in association with
many waters (vv. 1, 3, 15)21 who will ascend from the Abyss (v. 8), which is the origin of
the beast in Rev 13:1.22 Aune points out that in the LXX, the term abussos (abyss) is a
translation of the Hebrew těhǒm, which refers to deep, primeval ocean, or sea, and, in
Greco-Jewish literature, it is the sea.23
Second, both have similar appearances. The first beast in Revelation 13 has ten
horns and seven heads, and on each head a blasphemous name is written (v. 1). The beast
in Revelation 17 has seven heads and ten horns, and is covered with blasphemous names
(v. 3).
Third, both have similar activities. The first beast in Revelation 13 astonished the
whole world and drew a large group of followers (v. 3). Later it would be worshipped by
the inhabitants of the earth, whose names have not been written in the book of life (v. 8).
Similarly, after coming out of the Abyss the beast in Revelation 17 will astonish the
inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life (v. 8).24
The first beast in Revelation 13 astonishes the people on earth, because it had suffered a
fatal wound but came back to life (v. 3), while the reason for the beast in Revelation 17
astonishing the people on earth is similar. The beast once was, is not, and will come back
(v. 8).25 The language used to describe the inhabitants of the earth who follow the two
Cf. Iain Provan, “Foul Spirits, Fornication and Finance: Revelation 18 from an
21
Old Testament Perspective,” JSNT 64 (1996): 91.

22
23
Ibid., 526.
24
25
239
beasts in Revelation 13 (v. 8) is similar to that used in Revelation 17 (v. 8), suggesting
that they are the same group of people.26 The first beast in Revelation 13 challenges the
mighty power of God by the boast of his followers: “Who is like the beast? Who can
make war against him?” (v. 4; cf. v. 8), thus acting like the leader of the bestial army. The
beast in Revelation 17 will be given power and authority over the ten kings (v. 13) and
will become their leader in making war against the Lamb (v. 14).
Fourth, it requires wisdom to understand both. There is a call for wisdom (Rev
13:18) to be given those who try to understand the beast of Rev 13:1. The same call is
repeated only in all of Revelation: it is found in Rev 17:9.27 Beale discovered that the
combined use of nous (mind) and sophia (understanding) in the call of Rev 13:18 and
17:9 have a common Danielic background in “the idea of eschatological insight” for
those who live in the last days.28
26
Ibid.
27
Ibid., 941.
28
G. K. Beale, “Danielic Background for Revelation 13:18 and 17:9,” TynBul 31
(1980): 165. These texts are Dan 1:4, 17; 9:22-23 (25); 11:33 and 12:10. In Dan 1:4, 17,
the combination refers to Daniel and his friends. The two Revelation texts have the
following ideas in common with the texts in Daniel 9, 11 and 12: (1) the call for “insight
and understanding” for the sake of comprehension; (2) tribulation events at the eschaton;
(3) brought about by an evil king(s), who attacks the faithful believers and exercises
deception to lure others under his rulership; (4) finally, this call for understanding is
mediated through a vision of a prophet. In light of these common ideas, Beale concludes
that Dan 9, 11, and 12 are “the best background against which to understand Revelation
13:18 and 17:9.” The combination of nous and sophia in John’s call indicates that John
understands Christians as the fulfillment of “the prophesied maśkilîm,” the wise in Daniel
11 and 12. Beale argues that Revelation 2-3 make it more understandable to think that
John sees Christians as the Danielic maśkilîm in Rev 13:18 and 17:9. The message to the
seven churches shows that there are some supposed believers who live in compromise
with pagan society (cf. Rev 2:14; 3:2-4, 16-17). Thus, Beale suggests that John associate
these people with “those who forsake the holy covenant” in Dan 11:30b, and with the
“hypocrites” in Dan 11:34b. This association is particularly clear in Rev 2:9 and 3:9
where these people are said to be those “who say they are Jews and are not.”
240
All these evidences suggest that it is plausible to identify the beast of Revelation
17 with the beast of Rev 13:1-8. And if Babylon the Great is symbolized by the image of
the beast, as I have pointed out in this study, then the fact that the call for wisdom occurs
only in these two chapters, in which the beast actually appears together with its idolatrous
image, signals the reader that the beasts of Revelation 13 and 17 are the same.29
The majority of biblical scholars interpret the beast of Revelation 13 and 17 as a
symbol for Rome and identify the seven kings in Revelation 17 with seven Roman
emperors.30 At the same time, scholars also identify Babylon the Great in Revelation 17
and 18 with Rome.31 This raises the inevitable question as to whether Babylon the Great
and the beast are Rome. In Revelation 17, it is obvious that the beast is distinguishable
from Babylon. The angel said to John that the beast and the ten horns would hate the
prostitute (v. 16). If the beast is at the same time Babylon the Great, the problem is how
could Rome hate itself? Of course, when scholars apply the beast in Revelation 17 in
particular to Emperor Nero, and connect the destruction of Babylon by the beast and the
29
However, Prigent notes one major difference between the beast in Revelation 17
and the first beast in Rev 13:1-8, i. e., the first beast in Rev 13:1 has crowns on its horns
while there are no crowns on the horns of the beast in Revelation 17 (v. 3). Prigent,
Commentary on the Apocalypse, 478. I will leave this question to future researchers to
answer.
30
E.g., Aune, Revelation 6-16, 733; Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 209,
255; Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary, 1:345; 2:67, 68; Osborne,
Revelation, 491, 615; Prigent, Commentary on the Apocalypse, 491. The counting of the
emperors itself is a problem. Aune lists nine different ways of counting the Roman
Emperors; see Aune, Revelation 17-22, 947-948.
31
See Aune, Revelation 17-22, 934, 944; also Paul N. Anderson, “Revelation
17:1-14,” Interpretation, (Jan 2009): 60; DeSilva, “A Sociorhetorical Interpretation,” 73;
Keith A. Russell, “A Call to Sanctified Resistance: Revelation 21:1-6,” RevExp 109
(2012): 460.
241
kings to the fulfillment of the Nero redivivus legend,32 this problem automatically
disappears.33
I would like to propose an alternative interpretation: If Babylon is interpreted to
be the image of the beast, and the beast in Revelation 17 is the same as the beast of
Revelation 13, then we avoid the difficulty of identifying Rome with two incongruous
figures in one setting and fit the ANE iconography as mentioned by B. J. Collins. In my
previous chapter I noted that, based upon his study of a relief on the Schimmel stag
rhyton, B. J. Collins suggests that the deity and his/her statue could be shown together in
one relief.34 So the picture presented in Revelation 17 could be seen as showing the deity
and the image together in one setting, i.e., the beast and its image simultaneously. With
this interpretation in mind, it is easier to understand why “the beast dominates the
contents of the explanation,” because “the beast provides the hermeneutical key to the
vision of the prostitute.”35 Furthermore the prostitute is his image, which originates from
him, as De Villiers rightly says, “To some extent one could even say that the beast is
revealed as the real ‘explanation’ of who she is. It discloses her true identity.”36
In fact, many scholars suggest that the beast in Revelation 17 is identical to both
of the beasts in Revelation 11 and 13.37 Aune dismisses the idea that the first beast in
32
A. Y. Collins has the most detailed explanation of this interpretation; see A. Y.
Collins, The Combat Myth, 174-190.
33
Some scholars argued that the problem of applying the Nero redivivus legend to
the prophecies in Revelation is always the same: the legend never happened. See Minear,
I Saw a New Earth, 246; cf. Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 261.
34
35
36
Ibid.
37
Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 248; also Beale, The Book of
Revelation, 864, 865; Caird, The Revelation of Saint John, 216; Ladd, A Commentary on
242
Revelation 13 is the same as the beast in Revelation 11 on the ground that the word
thērion in Rev 13:1 is anarthrous which implies that “the author assumed it was unknown
to his readers.”38 Once again, anarthrous does not necessarily mean indefinite; it could
imply the unique status of the noun as well. Again, Ruiz thinks that it is “a characteristic
feature of the author’s style” to describe something which has already been familiar to the
readers as if it were appearing for the first time, so as to “refocus the image and to
redirect it in the new context in which the reader finds it.”39
Beasley-Murray suggests that the beasts in Rev 11:7 and Rev 13:1-8 are simply
different guises of the beast of Revelation 17.40 He may be correct. The beast in
Revelation 17 is described by the angel who says that it “will come up out of the Abyss,”
(v. 8). The exact phrase, with a slight difference in tense, occurs only once elsewhere in
the book of Revelation, in Rev 11:7. There the beast which killed the two witnesses in
Revelation 11 is described as the beast that comes up out of the Abyss. Aune also points
out that the language describing the ascent of the beast in Rev 17:8 is in “close parallel”
to Rev 11:7 and Rev 13:1.41
The Ben-Daniels also link the beast to Revelation 11, 13, and 17 through their
understanding of the word “abyss.” They think that the Abyss represents peoples, crowds,
nations and tongues, and that this can be deduced by connecting several passages in
the Revelation of John, 226; Michaels, Revelation, 197; Osborne, Revelation, 615;
Prigent, Commentary on the Apocalypse, 492; Ruiz, Ezekiel in the Apocalypse, 235.
38
39
40
41
243
Revelation. In Rev 17:1, the prostitute sits on many waters.42 She is also said to be sitting
on the beast in Rev 17:3. In these passages, the terms “waters,”“Abyss,” and “sea” are
synonymous. Therefore, the Ben-Daniels conclude that all three terms “refer to human
society throughout the world, above which the prostitute presently sits, over which the
beast will come to rule (Ap 13, 7) and from which people have been redeemed by the
blood of Christ (Ap 5, 9; 7,9).”43 J. M. Ford also states that the sea “is a symbol of
unregenerate humanity.”44 Their conclusion concurs with that of Augustine who
comments that the Abyss symbolizes “the countless number of godless men whose bitter
hatred of God’s church comes from the abysmal depths of their hearts.”45 Thus, the three
beasts of Revelation 11, 13 and 17 could be identified as the same.
The difference in tenses in describing the two beasts in Revelation 11 and 17 may
be problematic to some in identifying these two beasts as one. In order to understand the
difference of tenses between Rev 11:7 and Rev 17:8, it is necessary to deal with the issue
of time in relation to Rev 11:7 and 17:8.
According to Paulien, there are two kinds of time frames in Revelation. One is the
time frame of the vision, and another is the time frame of the explanation of the vision.46
42
This description of Babylon sitting on waters is perfectly apt because according
to Babylonian mythology, Marduk founded Babylon on the apsu, the primordial sea:
“Above Apsu, the azure dwelling, opposite Esharra, which I built above you. Below the
sacred places, whose grounding I made firm, a house I shall build, my favorite abode.”
Benjamin R. Foster, Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature (Bethesda,
MD: CDL, 1993), 381.
43
44
J. M. Ford, Revelation, 291. See also Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, 161.
45
Augustine, The City of God 20.7 (NPNF 2:437).
46
Paulien has addressed this issue of time frame in one of his articles. For details
see Jon Paulien, “The Hermeneutics of Biblical Apocalyptic,” in Understanding
Scripture: An Adventist Approach, Biblical Research Institute Studies, volume 1, ed.
244
The time of the vision is the visionary time during which the events described in the
vision actually happen, such as the time of the events of Revelation 11. But the time of
the angelic explanation of a vision must be “based on the time, place and circumstances
in which the seer lives,” which means that, “Present, past and future are not grounded in
visionary time, but in terms of the prophet’s physical location and time frame.”47
Based upon this observation, the past, present and future in Rev 17:7, 8 have a
different time frame than those in Revelation 11, since Rev 17:7, 8 is an angelic
explanation of the vision of Rev 17:1-6. The time of the angelic explanation of the vision
(Rev 17:7, 8) is located in John’s time,48 so when the angel says that the beast “will come
up out of the Abyss” in the future tense, it is in the future from John’s perspective.
Therefore the relationship between Rev 11:7 and Rev 17:8 could be understood as a
relationship between the prophecy and its fulfillment. Rev 11:7 records the actual
visionary events happening in history as predicted by the angel in Rev 17:8. In other
words, the description of the beast coming up from the Abyss in Rev 11:7 could be
interpreted as the actual historical fulfillment of the angel’s prophecy in Rev 17:8. Thus
the two beasts in Revelation 11 and 17 could be identical.
The beasts in Revelation 11 and Revelation 13 may also be the same due to the
same time element and the same activities in which they are involved. The beast in
Revelation 11 kills the two witnesses at the end of 1260 days (v. 3). The same time
period appears in Rev 13:1-8, during which the beast actively opposes God and the saints
George W. Reid (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institue, General Conference of
Seventh-day Adventists, 2006), 251-252.
47
Ibid., 21.
48
Ibid., 15-21.
245
(v. 5-7).49 As the Ben-Daniels pointed out, “The emergence of the beast from the sea
links this vision [in Revelation 13] with the ascension of the beast from the Abyss at the
end of the period of 1,260 days [in Revelation 11].”50
The fact that Revelation 11 does not associate the forty-two months directly with
the beast of Rev 11:7 may cause a problem in identifying the time element in association
with the beast. However, scholars such as Aune and Dalrymple consider that the
reference to forty-two months in Revelation 11 and 13 comes from Dan 7:25,51 and is the
“Danielic designation of three-and-one-half-years.”52 This time period of forty-two
months “is a symbolic apocalyptic number for a divinely restricted period of time (often a
limited period of eschatological tribulation).”53 It is expressed elsewhere differently as
1,260 days (Rev 11:3; 12:6), and a time, times, and half a time (Rev 12:14).54 Thus
Schüssler Fiorenza suggests that, “The time of persecution and suffering caused by the
49
It has been demonstrated by Rob Dalrymple in his doctoral dissertation that the
two witnesses “represent the entirety of the people of God, in accord with four themes:
they are divinely protected, they are called as witnesses, they will suffer persecution, and
they will ultimately be vindicated.” See Rob Dalrymple, “John’s Account of the Two
Witnesses and the Implications for Understanding John’s Depiction of the People of God
and His Hortatory Intent, Abstracts of Recent WTS Doctoral Dissertations,” WTJ 71
(2009): 489.
50
51
52
Rob Dalrymple, Revelation and the Two Witnesses: The Implications for
Understanding John’s Depiction of the People of God and His Hortatory Intent (Eugene,
OR: Wipf & Stock, 2011), 15; see also R. Stefanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 345-
346.
53
54
Ibid. Bauckham explains in detail the significance of the different types of
numbers John employed in Revelation. He demonstrates that John used square numbers
to represent the people of God (144), triangular numbers to represent the evil forces
(666), and rectangular numbers to represent the period of conflict between good and evil
forces (42, and 1,260). See Baukham, The Climaxof Prophecy, 384-407.
246
monster coincides with the time of the two witnesses, . . . as well as with the duration of
the woman’s (12:6, 10) and the true worshipper’s protection (11:2). These narrative
symbolizations prophetically illuminate in different ways the same ‘last time’ of
tribulation.”55 Therefore, it can be concluded that the time period of the persecution
waged by the beast in Rev 11:7 is also forty-two months long, the same as that of the
beast in Rev 13:1-8.
Besides sharing the same time period, the activities of the two beasts in
Revelation 11 and 13 are also the same. In Rev 13:6, the beast is spoken of as being in
opposition to the dwelling place of God, which is the temple of God in heaven.56 Aune
points out that blasphemy against the temple equals blasphemy against God (cf. Acts
21:28; 25:8).57 Dalrymple observes that the beast’s attack on those who dwell in heaven
(13:5-7) is “strongly reminiscent of” the attack of the beast on the Two Witnesses
(11:7).58 He lists several verbal and thematic parallels which describe the attacks of the
beasts in both chapters. First, in both descriptions the beasts (11:7; 13:1) wage war
against the faithful believers of God. Second, in both chapters the manner in which the
beasts make their appearance is by “coming up” (11:7; 13:1). Third, the purpose of both
beasts’ coming up is for the sake of making war (11:7; 13:7) against the faithful believers
of God. Fourth, the result of the wars in both chapters is that the beasts conquer the
faithful believers of God (11:7; 13:7). These verbal and thematic parallels between Rev
11:7 and 13:5-7 indicate that these two narratives are to be seen in light of each other, and
55
Fiorenza, Revelation, 84. See also Caird, The Revelation of Saint John, 166-167;
R. Stefanović, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 415.
56
57
Ibid., 744.
58
Dalrymple, Revelation, 106.
247
that they describe the same event and the same beast.59 Thus, the beasts in Revelation 11
and 13 are likely to be the same.
Babylon the Great
The title “Babylon the Great” occurs six times in Revelation (Rev 14:8; 16:19;
17:5; 19:2, 10, 21). It first appears in Rev 14:8, in the three angels’ declarations. The
study of the theme of Babylon the Great takes four steps: First, there will be a discussion
of the identity of Babylon the Great in Revelation 17. Second, the wickedness of Babylon
the Great will be explored. Third, the relationship of Babylon the Great with the Beast
will be addressed. Fourth, there will be a study of Babylon the Great from a cultural
perspective.
The identity
The title of Babylon the Great recalls “the ideas of worldwide rule, the destruction
of the temple, the exile, and vast economic control.”60 Stephanie Dalley points out that
“There was an indigenous tradition in which great cities of southern Mesopotamia
became known by metonymy as Babylon, at least from the Late Bronze Age, and perhaps
earlier.”61 This insight helps to explain why John the Revelator, when describing
Babylon, echoes many Old Testament descriptions of places such as Egypt, Nineveh and
59
Ibid., and footnote 35.
60
Gregory, “Its End Is Destruction,” 137.
61
Stephanie Dalley, “Babylon as a Name for Other Cities Including Nineveh,” in
Proceedings of the 51st Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, held at the Oriental
Institute of the University of Chicago, July 18-22, 2005, SAOC 62, eds. Robert D. Biggs,
Jennie Myers, and Martha T. Roth (Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of
Chicago, 2007), 33. Cf. Richard Bauckham, “The Eschatological Earthquake in the
Apocalypse of John,” NovT 19 (1977): 229.
248
Tyre, since all of them have oppressed the faithful believers of God.62 Thus Babylon
“encompasses more than a single historical nation; it is a complex reality which gathers
into one name a vast array of images and themes.”63
Mounce observes that one reason for using “Babylon” to describe this end time
entity is to remind the reader of the history of what God did to the first Babylonian
Empire. Then the reader will quickly realize that history will repeat itself and that soon
God will carry out his judgment on this end time “city,” just like he did to the first.64
Thus Aune understands the “fallen, fallen” of Rev 14:8 and 18:2 to be “the use of the
perfectum confidentiae, ‘perfect of assurance,’ or the perfectum propheticum, ‘prophetic
perfect,’ . . . in which an event of the future is described with a past tense as if it had
already occurred.”65 In John Strelan’s words, “God always triumphs over all opposition.
The fall of all who rebel against God is inevitable; it is only a matter of time.”66
The majority of biblical scholars hold that Babylon the Great is a symbol for
Rome, or simply is a “metonymy” (a word picture) for Rome;67 thus Rev 17:3-14
presents “the grandeur of Rome as a gaudy prostitute riding on a scarlet beast.”68
62
63
Ibid., 139.
64
65
66
John G. Strelan, Where Earth Meets Heaven: A Commentary on Revelation
(Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2007), 288.
Michael J. H. Godfrey, Babylon’s Cap: Reflections on the Book of Revelation

67
(Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2013), 84.

68
249
A. Y Collins, for example, after discussing some of the images found in
Revelation 17-18, concludes that, “All the images examined thus far not only describe
Rome but give reasons for her predicted downfall.”69 In these chapters John utilizes
biblical symbols pertaining to Babylon in order to describe the Roman Empire. Thus John
creates an “emotional catharsis” of the early Christians’ negative feelings and emotions,
such as anger, resistance and vengeance toward Rome.70 At the same time, John
constructs a vision of a higher court, “a symbolic universe,”71 in which God reigns from
above and carries out judgment on seemingly invincible Rome. Thus, instead of the
feeling of being victimized and overpowered by Rome, John creates “a sense of dignity
and hope for justice.”72 Just as Schüssler Fiorenza says, “Revelation constructs a world of
vision that challenges the symbolic discourse of Rome’s hegemonic colonizing power.”73
As a result, the early Christian believers “no longer suffer helplessly at the hands of
Rome; they are now in charge of their own destiny and by their voluntary suffering they
participate in the overthrow of evil and the establishment of God’s kingdom.”74
A. Y. Collins, “Revelation 18: Taunt-Song or Dirge?” in L’Apocalypse

69
johannique et l’Apocalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament, ed. J. Lambrecht (Leuven:

Leuven University Press, 1980), 200-202.
70
Ibid. Barr, “The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation,” 49. One of A. Y.
Collins’ books on Revelation is titled Crisis and Catharsis: The Power of the Apocalypse.
Barr does not deny the element of emotional therapy in the visions of Revelation. But he
considers that it is not the “central function of the literature.” He believes that “the
believing community which encountered the Apocalypse as a living performance would
be transformed, and so would the world they live in, for they would understand the world
differently.” Barr, “The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation,” 49.
71
Decock, “Hostility against the Wealth of Babylon,” 264.
72
Ibid.
73
Fiorenza, Revelation: Vision of a Just World, 124.
74
250
The fact that Babylon sits on seven mountains (vv. 9-10) is seen as a particular
reference to Rome, since Rome was known as the city on seven hills.75 Gentry
passionately writes that “the obvious allusion to Rome via the ‘seven hills’ cannot be
mistaken. To allow it to refer to something other than Rome would be a cruel taunting of
the original audience.”76 Therefore de Villiers comments that for those who identify
Babylon as Rome the description of Babylon in Revelation 17 is the “decisive evidence
for the inextricable link between the book and its Roman context.”77
There are at least three objections to this interpretation. First, Charles Dyer refutes
it by saying that in Rev 17:1, the woman is sitting on “many waters.” The many waters
are interpreted as “peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues” in v. 15; therefore,
the intention of this vision is not to locate Babylon in a geographical sense; rather, her
sitting on the waters refers to her ruling over all the inhabitants of the world.78 Therefore,
sitting on the hills is symbolic, denoting her control over political powers, and does not
refer to her literal geographical location.
Second, Beale and Hitchcock demonstrate that kingdoms or empires are often
symbolized by “mountains” or “hills” in the Old Testament and other ancient Jewish
writings (Pss 30:7; 68:15-16; Isa 2:2; 41:15; Jer 51:25; Ezek 35:3; Dan 2:35; Hab 3:11;
Zech 4:7; 1 Enoch 52; Targum of Isaiah 41:15).79 In the light of Dan 7:23, from which
75
Kramer, “Contrast,” 110. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 868.
76
Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., Before Jerusalem Fell (Atlanta: American Vision, 1990),
164.
Pieter G. R. De Villiers, “Rome in the Historical Interpretation of Revelation,”

77
APB 13 (2002): 124.

78
Dyer, “The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18, Part 2,” 437.
79
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 868; Mark L. Hitchcock, “A Critique of the
Preterist View of Revelation 17:9-11 and Nero,” BSac 164 (2007): 482.
251
Rev 17:9-11 draws its imagery, the beasts clearly represent kingdoms.80 Moreover, Rev
17:10 openly states that the seven mountains represent seven kings.
Third, F. J. Murphy notices that the fall of Babylon in chapters 17 and 18 results
in the marriage feast of the Lamb with the church as the bride (19:6-9).81 The fact that
Rome’s fall did not lead to the marriage feast of the Lamb indicates that Babylon the
Great cannot be identified historically with Rome, although a first century believer of
Christ certainly would see oppressive Rome as one manifestation of oppressive
Babylon.82 That is why Beasley-Murray rightly questions: “What are we to say of this
prophecy [of Rev 17:18] in face of the fact that no Nero-redivivus appeared on the scene
after the decease of the seventh emperor, and that in the irony of history, Rome instead of
becoming the seat of the antichrist eventually capitulated to the Lamb of God and
commanded all her citizens to acknowledge his supremacy?”83
Paul Minear argues against the interpretation of Revelation 17-18 as anti-Roman
polemics. For him to “equate Babylon with Rome would be literalism and historicism of
the worst sort. The figure of Babylon can convey the prophetic message and mentality
without such an explicit association.”84 The issue of Revelation is not political but
“religious absolutism.”85
80
Ibid., 483.
81
82
83
84
Minear, I Saw a New Earth, 246.
85
De Villiers, “Rome in the Historical Interpretation of Revelation,” 130.
Lohmeyer was so struck by the lack of political engagement in Revelation that he
claimed that John was not concerned about the politics but more worried about the
heavenly and earthly powers that hinders the coming of the end. Lohmeyer, Die
Offenbarung, 194.
252
Mounce suggests that the figure of the harlot could be a symbol for a pagan city in
the OT prophetic tradition (Nah 3:4, Isa 23:16, 17), because Nineveh was called a harlot
city by Nahum, and Tyre was depicted as a harlot by Isaiah. Thus, “In the context of
Revelation 17 and 18 the image is not that of religious profligacy but of the prostitution
of all that is right and noble for the questionable ends of power and luxury.”86
However, LaRondelle argued that the burning of Babylon by her own former
lovers (Rev 17:16) is patterned after the destruction of the harlot city Jerusalem in Ezek
16:35-41.87 Ruiz made it clear that, Ezekiel 16 & 23 describe the history of the believers
of God “as a history of their infidelity to YHWH.”88 Thus, C. Vanderwaal suggests that
Revelation 17 and 18 are not concerned with a heathen city or a political empire, but with
Israel, “the covenant people . . . the unfaithful church rather than the ‘wicked world’”89
Babylon should not be understood as wicked, worldly Rome but as “Jerusalem” who kills
her own people.90
J. M. Ford also points out that the language calling Babylon the Great a
“prostitute” in Revelation 17 is covenantal, which is in keeping with the prophetic
tradition of the Old Testament. Thus Ford reasons that “the faithfulness to the covenant
makes one the bride, while the unfaithfulness makes one the adulteress.”91 Therefore
86
Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 307. Cf. Merrill C. Tenney, Interpreting
Revelation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 83-84.
87
LaRondelle, “Babylon,” 162.
88
89
Cornelis Vanderwaal, Hal Lindsey and Biblical Prophecy (St. Catharines, ON:
Paideia Press, 1978), 135, 137.
90
91
J. M. Ford, Revelation, 285, 286. Cf. A. J. Beagley, The “Sitz im Leben” of the
Apocalypse with Particular Reference to the Role of the Church’s Enemies (Berlin: de
Gruyter, 1987).
253
Babylon cannot be Rome, but must be Jerusalem.92 Ford’s notion of the covenantal
relationship is insightful, but to think that historical Jerusalem could sit upon, or exercise
sovereignty over, imperial Rome (the beast as understood by Ford) is unthinkable.93
Kenneth Strand, following up a study done by Shea on the covenantal form of the
messages to the seven churches,94 actually concludes that the literary structure of the
whole book of Revelation is structured according to ancient suzerainty-covenant
formulary.95 So Revelation could be treated as the covenant book of Christ and his
church, with the purpose of “alerting her to religious deception and theological heresies
within the church, and inciting her to be faithful to His covenant.”96
92
J. M. Ford, Revelation, 283-286; see also Carrington, The Meaning of the
Revelation, 287; Chilton, The Days of Vengeance, 429-430; Gary DeMar, End Times
Fiction: A Biblical Consideration of the Left Behind Theology (Nashville: Nelson, 2001),
127-128; Kenneth L. Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology
(Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1997), 394; Kenneth L. Gentry, “A
Preterist View of Revelation,” in Four Views on the Book of Revelation, ed. C. Marvin
Pate (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), 76-77; James L. Resseguie, The Revelation of
John: A Narrative Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2009), 218; Arthur M. Ogden,
The Avenging of the Apostles and Prophets: Commentary on Revelation (Pinson, AL:
Ogden, 2006), 328-329; Vanderwaal, Hal Lindsey and Biblical Prophecy, 132-133.
93
94
William H. Shea, “The Covenantal Form of the Letters to the Seven Churches,”
AUSS 21 (1983):71-84. For a recent and comprehensive treatment of this subject, see
Graves’ dissertation. Graves himself claims that his study “defends Shea’s claim” for the
influence of the ANE vassal treaty structure on the message to the seven churches, 317.
95
Kenneth A. Strand, “A Further Note on the Covenantal Form in the Book of
Revelation,” AUSS 21 (1983): 251-264. W. G. Campbell concludes his recent book on
Revelation with a whole chapter on the theme of covenant, and he proposes that the
theme of covenant lies at the center of the narrative logic for Revelation’s plot, which
serves as the “one overarching theme” in the book of Revelation, see W. G. Campbell,
“Broken Covenant and New Covenant,” in Reading Revelation: A Thematic Approach
(Cambridge: James Clarke and Co, 2012), 264-343.
96
254
Gordon Campbell also demonstrated that the one dominant theme throughout the
book of Revelation is “the theme of covenant rupture and restoration.”97 He notes that at
the start of the book the message to the seven churches functions as “mini covenant
lawsuits”98 serving as an inventory of the current state of the covenantal relationship, as
shown by the risen Messiah. The concluding message to Laodicea invites the church to a
covenantal renewal by participating in the “new Passover shared by Messiah and people
(3:20).”99 In Revelation 17, 18 Babylon the whore “personifies covenant rebellion.”100
Thus, the imagery of Babylon as a prostitute should be understood within this bigger and
newer covenantal context.101
Scholars observe that the description of Babylon the Great in Rev 17:1-6 is
antithetically parallel102 to the description of the woman in Revelation 12:103 (1) both
97
W. G. Campbell, “Findings,” 71-96. W. G. Campbell notes that Revelation ends
with “the Lamb’s wedding banquet (19:7a) of consummate covenant blessing (19:9). The
all-embracing suzerain-mediator brings his reward (22:12-13) in the accomplishment of
the covenant promises made to the victors in the opening septet.”
98
Ibid., 75.
99
Ibid., 76.
100
Ibid., 96.
101
Ibid., 162.
102
Pilchan Lee, The New Jerusalem, 264. Barbara Rossing suggests that
Revelation presents the two cities as two contrasting women in order to “invoke
recognition of a ‘two-women’ ethical topos that was well-known in Jewish, pagan and
early Christian context.” This topos urges the audience to avoid the evil alternative and
choose the good. See Barbara R. Rossing, “City Visions, Feminine Figures and Economic
Critique: A Sapiential Topos in the Apocalypse,” in Conflicted Boundaries in Wisdom
and Apocalypticism, Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 35, eds. Benjamin
G. Wright III, and Lawrence M. Wills (Atlanta: SBL, 2005), 181.
103
Michelle Lee, “A Call to Martyrdom,” 188; J. Edgar Bruns, “The Contrasted
Women of Apocalypse 12 and 17,” CBQ 26 (1964): 459-463; Werner Foerster, “Die
Bilder in Offenbarung 12f. und 17f.,” TSK 104 (1932): 279-310.
255
contain elaborate descriptions of the women; (2) both women are mothers; (3) both are
defined in terms of their relationship to God and his believers; (4) both are defined in
terms of their relationship to God’s enemies; (5) both are located in the desert;104 (6)
salvation comes from the child of the woman of Revelation 12 while death and
punishment come from the whore and her offspring.105
The “introductory formulas”106 for Babylon in Rev 17:1-18:24 and the bride of
the Lamb in Rev 21:9-22:5 also appear in striking antithetical parallel to each other in
terms of words and structures.107 Structurally, both scenes start with the same angel from
the same group of bowl-plague angels108 coming to John and inviting him to see a woman.
This is followed by the angel carrying John away in the Spirit to the location where the
woman is. Verbally, in the Greek text, Rev 21:9 repeats twenty exact same words from
Rev 17:1 in the same order,109 and Rev 21:10 has five words repeating the words of Rev
104
Michelle Lee, “A Call to Martyrdom,” 188, 189.
105
Ibid.
106
Robert L. Thomas, “An Analysis of the Seventh Bowl,” 76.
107
W. G. Campbell, “Antithetical Feminine-Urban Imagery and a Tale of Two
Women-Cities in the Book of Revelation,” TynBul 55 (2004): 95; Robert L. Thomas, “An
Analysis of the Seventh Bowl,” 76-80; Barbara Wootten Snyder, ‘Triple-Form and
Space/Time Transitions: Literary Structuring Devices in the Apocalypse,” in Society of
Biblical Literature 1991 Seminar Papers, ed. Eugene H. Lovering (Atlanta: Scholars
Press, 1991), 440-460.
108
Pilchan Lee, The New Jerusalem, 264; Smalley also notices the contrast
between the bride in Revelation 21 and the harlot in Revelation 17. He thinks that the
parallels between the invitations of the angel in Revelation 17 and Revelation 21 are
significant. See Smalley, The Revelation to John, 426.
109
Robert L. Thomas, “An Analysis of the Seventh Bowl,” 76; W. G. Campbell,
“Antithetical Feminine-Urban Imagery,” 95. One could attribute the similarity between
the two introductory materials to a later editor or interpolation, but “endorsing the whole
book to be the work of John as historically received has much greater plausibility than
differing theories that partition the book into segments assigned to different scribes or
editors.” Robert L. Thomas, “An Analysis of the Seventh Bowl,” 80.
256
17:3 in the same order.110 These parallels “draw out threads connecting the heavenly
woman to the whore,”111 showing deliberately that the two should be understood in light
of each other. The “extreme similarity of the introduction”112 and the “quite deliberate”
“contrasting parallel”113 can be seen in the passages below:
Rev 17:1 Kai ēlthen heis ek tōn hepta angelōn tōn echontōn tas hepta phialas,
kai elalēsen met’ emou legōn, Deuro, deixō soi to krima tēs pornēs tēs megalēs
tēs kathēmenēs epi hudatōn pollōn.
One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, 'Come, I
will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits on many waters.
Rev 21:9 Kai ēlthen heis ek tōn hepta angelōn tōn echontōn tas hepta phialas
tōn gemontōn tōn hepta plēgōn tōn eschatōn kai elalēsen met’ emou legōn,
deuro, delxō soi tēn numphēn tēn gunaika tou arniou.
One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues
came and said to me, 'Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.'
Rev 17:3 kai apēnegken me eis erēmon en pneumati.

Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a desert.
Rev 21:10 kai apēnegken me en pneumati epi horos mega kai hupsēlon.
And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high.
Pilchan Lee provides additional antithetical parallels between the two women:114
both are adorned with jewels (17:4; 21:11, 18, 19-21); each has a name written on her
forehead (17:5; 22:4); both are cities, one is called “the Great” (17:18) and one is called
“the Holy” (21:2, 10, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 23). Babylon is filled with unclean things and
abominations (17:3-4), while such unhallowed things are not allowed to enter into the
New Jerusalem (21:6). One is the great harlot (17:1, 5) while the other is the pure bride
110
Ibid., 76.
111
W. G. Campbell, “Antithetical Feminine-Urban Imagery,” 95. Beasley-Murray
has provided a summary of the threads connecting Babylon and Jerusalem, see Beasley-
Murray, The Book of Revelation, 250-151.
112
Robert L. Thomas, “An Analysis of the Seventh Bowl,” 76.
113
A. Y. Collins, “Feminine Symbolism,” 125.
114
257
(21:2, 9). The names of those who belong to Babylon are not written in the book of life
(17:8) while the names of those who belong to the New Jerusalem are written in the book
of life (21:27). All these “contrasting feminine paradigms”115 indicate that Babylon the
great recapitulates Jerusalem,116 and in fact it is “the parody of Zion.”117
The difference between the two texts is the location of the women: one is in the
desert and the other one is on the mountain. Another difference is found in their
associates—one has the Lamb as her spouse (21:9b) and the other one has a monster as
her mount.118 Thus, “the two male figures (beast and Lamb) with the two female figures
(whore and bride)” are put into sharp contrast.119
In connection with my conclusion in chapter 3, the above observation appears to
be significant for decoding the identity of Babylon the Great. The whole section of Rev
17:1-19:10 starts with the union of Babylon, a parody of Jerusalem, which is the
community of the saints, with her consort, the beast, a parody of Christ. The section ends
with the wedding announcement of the bride and the Lamb, which is the final union of
the church and Christ,120 the completion of the restoration of the image of God in the
church. Since the relationship between the bride and the Lamb is an image-deity
relationship, the relationship between Babylon the Great and the beast should also be
understood the same: the image of the beast and the beast.
115
Duff, Who Rides the Beast, 87.
116
Pilchan Lee, The New Jerusalem, 264; also Paul Barnett, “Polemical
Parallelism: Some Further Reflections on the Apocalypse,” JSNT 35 (1989): 112.
117
A. M. Farrer, A Rebirth of Images (London: Dacre, 1949): 213.
118
Ibid., 96.
119
Snyder, ‘Triple-Form and Space/Time Transitions,” 447.
120
Miller, “The Nuptial Eschatology of Revelation 19-22,” 302.
258
The close link between the churches of Revelation 2 and 3 and the New Jerusalem
of Revelation 21 and 22 indicates that the New Jerusalem represents the community of
the saints.121 Each of the messages to the seven churches ends with a promise to the
conqueror and each message finds fulfillment in the description of the New Jerusalem
(Rev 20-22). Thus, between Revelation 2, 3 and Revelation 21, 22 there is a “Promise
and Fulfillment formula.”122 Therefore it is right to suggest that part of the members of
the New Jerusalem are the ones in the seven churches who heed the call of the Spirit for
repentance, while Babylon the Great includes those in the seven churches who heed not
the call, and represent “humanity in chaos and in rebellion against God.”123
Jon K. Newton considers that the fact that the promises given at the beginning of
the book are fulfilled at the end illustrates that the whole work of Revelation is a “love
narrative.” Newton points out that Revelation has “a romantic ending, climaxed by a
wedding.”124 After a study of love terminology and imagery in Revelation, Donal
121
122
This formula is demonstrated by Fiorenza’s concentric structure; see Fiorenza
“Composition and Structure,” 359-360. See also table 1 in Newton, “Reading Revelation
Romantically,”198.
Minear summarizes the promise and fulfillment correspondences between
Revelation 2, 3 and Revelation 21, 22: the right to eat the fruit of the tree of life (2:7) is
fulfilled in 22:2, 14, 19; not to suffer the second death (2:11), in 20:6, 21:4; having a new
name (2:17), in 19:12, 22:4; ruling over the nations and having the morning star (2:26-
27), in 22:16; white clothes (3:5), in 22:14, 21:17; a pillar in the Temple of God and the
New Jerusalem (3:12), in 21:2, 10 and 22, 22:4; sitting on the throne (3:21), in 22:3; 21:7
is the summary of the fulfillment of all the promises. Minear, I Saw a New Earth, 44.
123
Thomas E. Schmidt, “‘And the Sea Was No More’: Water as People, Not
Place,” in To Tell the Mystery: Essays on New Testament Eschatology in Honor of Robert
H. Gundry, JSNTSup 100, eds. Thomas E. Schmidt and Moisés Silva (Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1994), 236.
124
Newton, “Reading Revelation Romantically,” 195. In this article, Newton gives
much attention to the romantic element in the text, and proposes that the book ought to be
read as a romance plot.
259
Mcllraith found out that this love terminology, such as agapan and philein, describe the
relationship between Christ and his church from beginning to end.125 Mcllraith further
pointed out that “the nuptial imagery . . . is the point of arrival of the entire work,”126 and
that, “In the Apocalypse its final shape is seen to be nuptial. This prophetic symbol of the
covenant is the one chosen to express the final, eschatological fulfillment of all the
covenant promises and hopes.” Therefore Newton concluded that the love story between
Christ and his church is interwoven into the main story of the conflict between Christ and
the dragon.127 Thus the church is the overall focus of the book of Revelation is the
church.
More evidence for interpreting Babylon the Great as the community which
includes those people in the seven churches who did not repent of their sins comes from
Osborne’s observation. He notes that the expression to be “stripped naked” actually is
built on the warning that the Holy Spirit gave to the church of Laodicea. The Holy Spirit
urges the Laodiceans to buy white garments128 to cover their “shameful nakedness.” A
few chapters later, in 16:15, Jesus also gives this admonition in order to urge the
believers to “keep their clothes on, so that they might not walk around naked and people
see their shame.”129 This motif of being stripped naked again connects Babylon the Great
125
Mcllraith, The Reciprocal Love, 200.
126
Ibid., 3.
127
Newton, “Reading Revelation Romantically,” 195.
A. Y. Collins considers that in the book of Revelation, garments have “a double

128
significance.” First, they represent the character of the Christians on earth. The ones who
have kept their garments are those who are faithful to the testimony of Jesus and the word
of God (3:4). Second, white garments also represent “the state of eschatological salvation”
for the saved will walk with Jesus in white (3:4). A. Y. Collins, “Eschatology,” 63, 64.
129
260
to the community of those in the seven churches who failed to heed the call of the Holy
Spirit. In chapter 3 of my research, as a conclusion to my study of the image of the beast
in Revelation 13, I suggested that the image of the beast is a symbol for the unfaithful
community within the Christian Church, and that this interpretation of Babylon as the
community of the unrepentant links Babylon to the image of the beast.
Peter Gregory observes that Revelation 17 appears to make reference to Daniel 5,
which records the fall of historical Babylon. Daniel 5 records the defilement of the
consecrated vessels of the Lord’s temple during Belshazzar’s feast, the last arrogant act
of ancient Babylon.130 Gregory notices that the description of the fall of end time
Babylon is patterned after the historical fall of ancient Babylon. There are thematic and
verbal parallels between these two chapters. Thematically both chapters share the theme
of imminent judgment, and a subsequent swift fall.131 In Daniel 5, it was a mysterious,
disembodied hand writing on the wall that announced the overnight fall of historical
Babylon; in Revelation 17 and 18, it was the angel who announced the fall of apocalyptic
Babylon the Great, and it fall “in one hour” (Rev 18:10, 17, 19). Verbally, both chapters
have three motifs or words in common: a “king” drinking “wine” (Dan 5:2; Rev 17:2)
from “golden” vessels (Dan. 5:2; Rev 17:4). But Daniel 5 has one more motif not
explicitly mentioned in Revelation 17, that is, the praising of the “gods” or idols of
Babylon. This is the only thing seemingly missing from Revelation 17. If one
understands Babylon the Great in Revelation 17 as the idolatrous image of the beast, then
the parallels between Daniel 5 and Revelation 17 and 18 are complete in regard to the fall
of Babylon.
130
131
Ibid., 151.
261
Studies done by some biblical scholars point to that possibility. Gordon Zerbe
observes that in the book of Revelation, the posture of sitting on the waters is actually a
posture of worldly enthronement which “poses a sharp contrast to the rule of God, who is
‘seated’ on a throne in the midst of a pacified, crystal clear sea (4:1-5:1).”132 This
deliberate contrast between Babylon the Great, enthroned in the midst of the chaotic sea
as the center of the false worship, and the true God, enthroned in the midst of the sea of
glass as the center of true worship, once again shows the intention of the author to
disclose the identity of Babylon as the image of the beast which is in direct opposition to
God. Furthermore, the interpretation of Babylon sitting on the waters as a posture of
enthronement reminds the reader of the scene of the worship of the image of the beast in
Rev 13:15-18, where the false worship in opposition to the worship of the true God is
mentioned explicitly. Thus, Revelation 17 has the same combination of king, wine, gold,
and god as Daniel 5.133
Scholars have been unable to explain why the description of the beast in
Revelation 17 occupies so much space when the subject of the chapter is actually the
judgment of Babylon the whore. It may be because the beast will later become the agent
to destroy Babylon (Rev 17:16), but if one understands the relationship between Babylon
132
Gordon Zerbe, “Revelation’s Exposé of Two Cities: Babylon and New
Jerusalem,” Direction 32 (2003), 51. J. M. Ford also notes that the picture of Rev 17:1 “is
well known from ancient iconography: a city represented as a goddess, enthroned on the
shore of the river which suggests its richness and power,” Revelation, 277. Some may
argue that in the OT, the LORD is also depicted as sitting enthroned over the flood, cf. Ps
29:10 “the LORD sits enthroned over the flood; the LORD sits enthroned as king forever”
(NRSV), but studies have shown that the book of Revelation has a “distinctive mental
map of the cosmos,” which reflects a “triple-decker cosmos: single heaven, earth,
subterranean abyss.” In the book of Revelation, water, sea or abyss always associate with
chaos, death, and punishment. See Sean Michael Ryan, Hearing at the Boundaries of
Vision: Education Informing Cosmology in Revelation 9 (New York: T & T Clark, 2012),
60-74.
133
262
and the beast as that of the image of the beast and the beast, then it is reasonable to have
the beast occupy such an important role.
The evilness
Vander Stichele grouped the reasons for Babylon to appear evil into “three
semantic fields:”134 The first semantic field relates to her fornication as the word pornē
(whore), occurs in 17:1-5, 15-16; 19:2; porneia (fornication), in 14:8; 17:2-4; 18:3 and
19:2; the verb porneuō (commit fornication), in 17:2 and 18:3-9.135 The second semantic
field relates to food and especially to drinking. She is portrayed as holding a cup and
drinking the blood of the saints (17:6). Besides that, she also made the nations (14:8) and
the inhabitants of the earth (17:2) drink the wine of her fornication.136 The third semantic
field relates to hamartia (sin) which is explicitly mentioned in Rev 18:4-5 as having piled
up to heaven.137
Robert Royalty notes that the evilness of Babylon the Great is thematically linked
to Christ’s critique of John’s opponents in the seven churches of Revelation 2-3.138
Babylon’s porneia is also in parallel to the character of Jezebel who misled the church
members in Thyatira into sexual immorality (2:20);139 some members in Pergamum have
followed the teaching of Balaam, ate food sacrificed to idols, and committed sexual
134
Stichele, “Apocalypse, Art and Abjection,” 135.
135
Ibid.
136
Ibid.
137
Ibid.
138
Robert M. Royalty Jr., The Streets of Heaven: The Ideology of Wealth in the
Apocalypse of John (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1998), 210.
139
Cf. Duff, “Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing,” 75, 76.
263
immorality (2:14). Later in Revelation 18, trade also links Babylon to the wealthy
Laodiceans. All these observations connect the evil community within the church to
Babylon, making it part of Babylon.
The relationship between Babylon and the beast
Ruiz’s study of the relationship between Babylon and the beast is enlightening.
He finds that in Rev 17:3, the beast was presented with three characteristics: “its color,
the blasphemous names with which it is covered, and its heads and horns.”140 All these
three characteristics “have to do with describing the relationship between the Prostitute”
and the beast, her mount.141 The beast has the same scarlet color as Babylon; his name is
as blasphemous as that of Babylon, which is “Babylon the Great.” The seven heads of the
beast and the ten horns also are connected to the relationship between the beast and
Babylon: the heads symbolize the seven mountains upon which Babylon is seated, while
the horns represent the powers which ally themselves with the beast in order to destroy
Babylon. Thus, Ruiz concludes that no aspect of the Beast’s description “is without its
link to the figure of the Prostitute.”
Ruiz’s interpretations show that it is the relationship between Babylon and the
beast that John is trying to communicate to the audience. That is why the beast occupies
so much space in Revelation 17. The similarities between these two figures are best
explained if Babylon is interpreted as the image of the beast.
140
141
Ibid., 323.
264
A cultural perspective
Now I will explore from a cultural perspective the possibility of Babylon the
Great being the image of the beast. Before doing this, it is necessary to look at the profile
of Babylon and to list her literal characteristics as provided by John. In Revelation 17,
end time Babylon has seven characteristics: (1) she is presented as the great prostitute (v.
1); (2) she sits on many waters (v. 1) and later was seen as sitting on a scarlet beast (v. 3);
(3) the kings of earth committed adultery with her, and the inhabitants of the earth were
intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries; (4) she “was dressed in purple and scarlet, and
was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls” (v. 4); (5) she held a golden cup in
her hand which was filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries (v. 4); (6)
she has a title written on her forehead: MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT THE
MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH (v.
5); (7) she was drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of those who bore testimony
of Jesus (v. 6).
The above profile could be divided into three major areas: first, the external
appearance of Babylon, including her sitting on a beast, her dress and ornaments, and the
holding of a golden cup in her hand. Second, the activities of Babylon: She is a great
prostitute, the mother of prostitutes; she commits adultery with the kings of earth; she is
drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of those who bore the testimony of Jesus.
Third, Babylon is the mother of the abominations of the earth. In the following section, I
will explore these three aspects and see if the characteristics of Babylon the Great match
the characteristics of the cult image of the beast.
The external appearance of Babylon the Great. Babylon is first seen sitting on
many waters and later the waters became a scarlet composite beast. What would be the
265
common mental association made when seeing a woman sitting on a composite beast (the
mushshushu in Akkadian) in the ANE context? A cult image of a goddess.142
The feminine figures in Revelation “bear a striking resemblance to ancient
goddesses,”143 implying the author’s intention of “reacting to the variety of goddess
traditions prevalent within the milieu of first century Asia Minor.”144 Hermann Gunkel
was the first to suggest that the background for the imagery of Babylon seated on a beast
stems from ANE cultic iconography—the common representation of a Babylonian
goddess seated upon her characteristic animal.145 Later, several scholars further suggested
that Babylon the Great is the goddess of Roma.146 Moore especially noted that the,
“Parody of Roman imperial order in Revelation reaches its scurrilous climax in the
depiction of the goddess Roma, austere and noble personification of the urbs aeterna, as
a tawdry whore who has had too much to drink.”147
Based upon the evidence I collected in examining the description of the external
appearance of Babylon the Great, I propose that Babylon is portrayed as a cult image of
142
Prigent thinks that this scene “was suggested to our author by one
representation or another of divinity riding an animal.” Prigent, Commentary on the
Apocalypse, 487; see also David A. DeSilva, Seeing Things John’s Way: The Rhetoric of
the Book of Revelation (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2009), 204.
143
Huber, Like A Bride Adorned, 21.
144
Ibid.
145
Gunkel, Schöpfung und Chaos, 365.
Richard Bauckham, “The Economic Critique of Rome in Revelation,” in

146
Images of Empire, ed. L. Alexander, JSOT Sup, 122 (Sheffield: JSOT, 1991), 52;
Christopher A. Davis, Revelation, The College Press NIV Commentary, eds. Jack Cottrell
and Tony Ash (Joplin, MO: College Press, 2000), 317; DeSilva, Seeing Things John’s
Way, 206; Craig S. Keener, Revelation, The NIV Application Commentary, ed. Terry
Muck (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), 405; F. J. Murphy, Fallen Is Babylon, 360;
147
266
the goddess Inanna (in Sumerian) or Ištar (in Akkadian).148 The goddess Ištar is “the
multifaceted and most enduring of all the powerful Sumerian goddesses,”149 as well as
“the most revered and popular goddess of ancient Mesopotamia.”150
After interpreting the picture of Babylon sitting on the composite beast as Ištar,
the first problem encountered is: being an ANE goddess, was Ištar still popular in John’s
time? The answer is affirmative. In fact, the cult of Ištar was not only active and popular
in John’s time but was also considered important due to the following evidence: First,
scholars have found the existence of the cult of Ištar of Babylon and her temple
Eturkalamma well attested in archaeological remains and fragments from Hellenistic
Babylon.151
Second, extensive building activities and reconstructions were recorded in
building inscriptions on the Ešgal-temple of Ištar during the Hellenistic period.152 Third, a
few fragments of a famous myth, “The Exaltation of Ištar,” were actually copied during
the Hellenistic period, implying its popularity and active use.153 Fourth, one of the ritual
texts records that during a special festival for Ištar, even the Hellenistic king took part in
148
There are two ways of writing the name of this goddess, i.e., Ištar and Ishtar.
These spellings sound the same, but one transliteration uses a diacritic for the “sh” sound
and the other does not. I will use Ištar throughout this dissertation except when quoting
other authors who may use the other spelling, Ishtar.
149
Judith Ochshorn, “Ishtar and Her Cult,” in The Book of the Goddess Past and
Present: An Introduction to Her Religion, ed. Carl Olson (New York: Crossroad, 1983),
16.
Joan Goodnick Westenholz, “Inanna and Ishtar in the Babylonian World,” in

150
The Babylonian World, ed. Gwendolyn Leick (New York: Routledge, 2007), 332.
151
See Linssen, The Cults of Uruk and Babylon, 14, 120.
152
Ibid., 14.
153
Ibid., 121.
267
the ritual.154 So it was possible for John to use the picture of the goddess Ištar to describe
Babylon the Great.
One thing worth noting is that while “Ištar is the one and only deity whose
worship is known from the dawn of Babylonian civilization,”155 over the thousands of
years of history, the identity of Ištar “underwent a continual process of reinterpretation
and syncretism, mutation and fossilization, fusion and fission which generated a goddess
who was a complex multi-layered conglomerate.”156 While the features of Ištar that I will
present in relationship to Babylon the Great might seem to be anachronistic at times, just
as end time Babylon is an anachronistic sum total of all the features of historical Babylon,
i.e., the city and the empire, so the features of Ištar from her historical pool may serve my
purpose of connecting her to end time Babylon.
The second problem with this identification of Ištar with Babylon the Great is the
beast that Babylon rides. It is well known that Ištar rode on a lion,157 not a composite
beast like the one in Revelation 17. But John’s use of goddess figures could be
innovative. A. Y. Collins notes that, “Any apocalyptic work reflects elements of the
religious tradition with which its author primarily identified. At the same time, however,
those traditional elements have often been modified through the author’s experience of
world thoughts of other ethnic or cultural groups in his environment. Future work on the
154
Ibid.
155
Westenholz, “Inanna and Ishtar in the Babylonian World,” 334.
156
Ibid.
157
W. F. Leemans, Ishtar of Lagaba and Her Dress (Leiden: Brill, 1952), 24. Ištar
is depicted as either standing or seated on a lion. See Izak Cornelius, “Aspects of the
Iconography of the Warrior Goddess Ištar and Ancient Near Eastern Prophecies,” in
Images and Prophecy in the Ancient Eastern Mediterranean, FRLANT, eds. Martti
Nissinen and Charles E. Carter (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2009), 15-40.
268
origins and history-of-religions context of apocalyptic writings should pay careful
attention to both facets of the cultural process at issue—continuity and innovation.”158
Thus the image of the woman riding on a composite beast may belong to John’s
innovation of the picture of Ištar. It may also be John’s deliberate disfiguration of or
reaction against the goddess tradition159 to change the lion, a symbol of war and victory,
into a composite beast.160
The following study on the other external appearance of Babylon the Great will
present more continuity of John’s use of the conventional picture of the goddess Ištar in
describing Babylon.
First, Babylon was seen as dressed “in purple, and scarlet, and was glittering with
gold, precious stones and pearls” (v. 4). Rev 18:16 adds one more element, which is that
she was also dressed in fine linen.
Purple is a royal color. In the Old Testament, purple mostly occurs within cultic
contexts in relation to priestly garments and sanctuary furnishings.161 J. M. Ford,
LaRondelle and Paulien especially notice that the attire of Babylon the Great, which
including her purple, scarlet and gold garments, the precious stones, her cup and the
158
A. Y. Collins, “The History-of-Religion Approach to Apocalypticism and ‘The
Angel of the Waters’ (Rev 16:4-7),” CBQ 39 (1977): 380-381.
159
Huber holds that the inclusion of feminine figures which resemble the ancient
goddesses is John’s “consciously or unconsciously reaction to the variety of goddess
traditions prevalent within the milieu of the first century Asia Minor.” Huber, Like A
Bride Adorned, 21.
160
John may have put Ištar on the mushshushu (snake-dragon) of Marduk, the
city-god of Babylon, thereby conflating Ištar and Marduk to combine their Babylonian
characteristics. Quoted from Roy Gane’s comments on my dissertation draft, August 28,
2012.
Diane M. Sharon, “Echoes of Gideon’s Ephod: An Intertextual Reading,”

161
JANES 30 (2006): 95.
269
name inscribed on her forehead, resembles that of the High Priest of Israel.162
Furthermore there is a passage in the Old Testament that shows that cultic images also
were dressed in purple; this passage is found in Jer 10:9.
Extra-biblical sources, such as economic texts and letters, mention jewelry and
clothing dedicated to Babylonian gods and goddesses and placed upon the idols to be
worn by them. References are made to the garments of the cult images as being clothes of
linen with the coloring of scarlet, purple, bluish-purple, and multicolored wool.163
The Babylonian cult images are also known for their value and gaudy appearance
due to the gold ornaments attached to their garments. The gold ornaments are described
as rosettes, stars, disks, and rings made by goldsmiths and sewed onto the garment.
162
J. M. Ford, Revelation, 288; LaRondelle, Chariots of Salvation, 153; Paulien,
Armageddon, 126. For the color purple and the ornaments of precious stones see also
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 857, 912. Johnson notes that scarlet associates Babylon
with the beast’s blasphemy, and is in contrast to the white horse rider and those dressed
in white, who are faithful and true (Rev 19:8, 11, 14), Johnson, “Revelation18:1-24,”
747.
Some other scholars think Babylon’s purple, scarlet, gold, jewels, and pearls are
modeled on Ezek 16 and 23, e.g., Ruiz, Ezekiel in the Apocalypse, 324-331; Vanhoye,
“L’utilisation du livre d’Ézéchiel dans l’Apocalypse,” 436-476. John Court proposes Jer
4:30 as the source, see Court, Myth and History in the Book of Revelation, 141. Jan
Fekkes proposes Isa 61:10 as the source, see Jan Fekkes, “His Bride Has Prepared
Herself: Revelation 12-21 and Isaian Nuptial Imagery,” JBL 109 (1990): 273. See also
Jan Fekkes, Isaiah and Prophetic Traditions in the Book of Revelation, 236. Rossing
herself proposes that Proverbs 1-9 and the sapiential/moralist “two women” tradition
provides the model for John, also the story of the choice of Heracles, a stock moral topos
in the ancient world, may be a source for John, Rossing,“City Visions, Feminine Figures
and Economic Critique,” 183.
163
See Matsushima, “Divine Statues in Ancient Mesopotamia, 216.
The text on a stela set up by Nabopolassar, the king of Babylon, notes that the
statue of the god Šamaš wears a linen garment. “Šamaš the great lord, the resident of the
Ebabbar, the Lord of Sippar, a wardrobe for the great lord Šamaš; on the seventh day of
the month of Nisannu, two linen garments-šalḫu, four garments-ṣibtu of linen, their
weight being forty manas” (Ibid., 213).
Oppenheim especially notes that “The garment pišannu was reserved—in the
Neo-Babylonian period—exclusively for the clothing of images. It is often made of
linen.” A. Leo Oppenheim, “The Golden Garments of the Gods,” JNES 8 (1949): 179.
270
Sometimes golden bracteates were attached to the surface of the garment.164 Oppenheim
writes that, “The use of such golden garments definitely seems to have been restricted to
the cultic . . . wardrobe, . . . attested exclusively for Babylonia.”165
Sack states that, “Jewelry with gold, silver and precious stones was also
manufactured, maintained and repaired to decorate divine images.”166 Ištar was especially
famous for her physical splendor.167 Her cult images were decorated with precious
stones.168 In her temple treasury there were large amounts of jewelry stored for the
fashioning of the idol of the goddess and her sacred ornaments.169
In the cult inventories of Hittite archival documents, among the “cult image
descriptions,” there are descriptions of the posture of the cult images and the objects they
hold in their hands; these descriptions are illustrated by many cult figures depicted on
reliefs. One description of Ištar reads: “Ištar (Šauška) [a cult-image ……] seated; from
(her) shoulders [wings protrude;] in (her) right hand [she holds] a gold cup; [in her left
hand] she holds a gold (hieroglyphic sign for ‘Good(ness).’ […] Below her is a silver-
plated base. [Under] the base lies a silver-plated awiti-animal. To the right [and left] of
the awiti-animal’s wings stand Ninatta and Kulitta, their silver eyes plated with gold. And
164
Ibid., 180.
165
Ibid.
For details see R. H. Sack, “Some Remarks on Jewelry Inventories from Sixth
166
Century B. C. Erech,” ZA 69 (1979): 41-46.

167
Leemans, Ishtar of Lagaba, 19.
See J. Bottéro, “Les inventaires de Qatna,” RA 43 (1949): 1- 40; 137-125. An

168
extensive variety of jewelry is listed in this article.

169
271
under the awiti-animal is a wooden base. Her daily offering is ‘thick bread’ made from a
handful of flour, and a clay cupful of wine.”170
From the above historical evidences, it is plausible to conclude that the picture of
Babylon the Great sitting on the composite beast in an attire of purple and scarlet linen
and glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls, while holding a cup in her hand, fits
perfectly with the general picture of a Babylonian cult image of a goddess, and, in
particular, the goddess Ištar.
The following study will focus on the other characteristics which Babylon the
Great shares with the ancient Babylonian goddess Ištar.
Activities of Babylon the Great. Babylon (1) is called the great prostitute
because she is the mother of prostitutes, and (2) she commits adultery with the kings on
earth. So I will divide this study into two parts. First, I will explore how the goddess Ištar
fits the title of prostitute and the mother of prostitutes; second, I will explore whether the
goddess Ištar fits the description of committing adultery with kings and whether she
causes those who do not worship the beast and its image to be killed.
Babylon is called the great prostitute and the mother of prostitutes. Although “the
epithet ‘whore’ (Heb. zana; Gr. Pornē) is never leveled at Babylon in the Jewish
scriptures,”171 the image of a city being a prostitute is rooted in Old Testament prophetic
literature. Nineveh (Nah 3:4), Tyre (Isa 23:15-18) and even Jerusalem (Isa 1:21) were
170
“Cult Image Descriptions,” trans. Harry A. Hoffner, Jr. (COS 3.35:64, 65).
Most likely, the awiti-animal is a lion-griffin or lion-sphynx, italics mine.
171
272
once called prostitutes.172 Friesen states that “the ability . . . to seduce and enslave whole
nations” is what the metaphor of the prostitute emphasizes.173
Aune considers that this description of Babylon as a prostitute “is drawn at least
in part from the ancient courtesan topos.”174 However, in a recent article Jennifer Glancy
and Stephen Moore present the differences between a Roman courtesan, the hetaira, and
a common prostitute, the pornē.175 They call for a serious consideration of John’s
description of Babylon the Great as pornē.176 They argue that the description of Babylon
in Revelation better fits the image of pornē as portrayed by Greco-Roman writers, and
that the portrayal of the enthroned Babylon (Rev 18:7) is molded after the “whore-
empress” Messalina.177
Glancy and Moore are to be applauded for trying to make cultural connections
between the prostitute Babylon and Greco-Roman figures. I would like to propose
another cultural reading of the prostitute Babylon in connection to the goddess Ištar.
In Babylonian mythology, Ištar was once “the manifestation of sex and
eroticism.”178 She “played the role of the seductive woman flaunting her sexual
172
Ibid., footnote 4.
173
174
175
See Jennifer A Glancy and Stephen D. Moore, “How Typical a Roman
Prostitute Is Revelation’s ‘Great Whore’?” JBL 130 (2011): 551-569. The major
difference between a courtesan and a prostitute is that the courtesan serves only one
person at her own wish while a prostitute is degraded, serves as many men as possible,
and can be bought for a low price.
176
Ibid., 569.
177
Ibid., 562-569.
178
273
attraction.”179 The goddess was known as a prostitute and a patron of prostitutes.180 There
is a hymn in which Ištar says these words: “When I sit in the ale house, I am a woman,
and I am an exuberant young man. When I am present at the place of quarreling, I am a
woman, a figurine brought to life. When I sit by the gate of the tavern, I am a prostitute
familiar with the penis; the friend of a man, the girl friend of a woman.”181 The prostitute
is called the daughter of Ištar in the Sumerian love incantation.182 Besides being herself a
prostitute and a mother of prostitutes, her cult also had temple prostitutes who celebrated
the sexual aspects of the goddess.183
From the above historical evidences, Ištar being the great prostitute herself and
the mother of prostitutes fits well with the picture of Babylon the Great as depicted in
Revelation 17.
Babylon is also accused of committing adultery with the kings. The relationship
of the gods and goddesses with the Babylonian kings in general was that “of
collaboration and mutual ideological assistance.”184 The goddess Ištar in particular had
close relationships with the kings in two aspects. She “may accompany kings into war
but, on other occasions, she may function as their symbolic sexual partner, in both ways
sustaining royalty.”185
179
Ibid., 342.
180
Ibid., 341.
“A šir-namšub to Inana,” Segment A, 16-22, ETCSL, No. 4.07.9. Accessed 29

181
August 2011, http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/etcsl.cgi?text=t.4.07.9#.

182
Ibid.
183
Ochshorn, “Ishtar and Her Cult,” 23, 24.
184
Brigitte Groneberg, “The Role and Function of Goddesses in Mesopotamia,” in

185
The Babylonian World, ed. Gwendolyn Leick (New York: Routledge, 2007), 319.
274
First, Ištar accompanies kings into war. As a goddess of war, Ištar is often
depicted in reliefs as standing on the back of a lion, “violent and powerful, . . . who
struck terror to the hearts of gods and men alike.”186 As “mistress of battle and warfare”
she protects her kings during war. Her cult images were carried into battle, going before
the army, symbolizing her protecting presence over the king and her promise to stand by
her army’s side and to destroy their enemies.187
Second, Ištar bestows sovereignty on the kings through the “sacred marriage” rite.
The Sumerian myth of “king by love of Inanna” reveals the essential role of Ištar in the
legitimization of kingship which was obtained through the “sacred marriage” rite that
gave the authority of the kings divine sanction as the “spouse of Inanna.”188 Having been
chosen as the divine “bridegroom,” the kings designated themselves as “the overseer of
Ishtar.”189 The royal inscriptions of the Sumerians and the Old Babylonian Empire give
testimony to the kings’ relationship with the goddess, praising her as “the carrier, the
fountainhead, of [the king’s] power and prestige.”190
From the above study, Ištar as the divine bride, having sexual relationships with
the kings through sacred marriage, fits well with the picture of Babylon the Great
committing adultery with the kings of the world, and ruling over them. Ištar as a war
goddess fits particularly well with the overall context of Revelation 16 and 17 because
186
Nanette B. Rodney, “Ishtar, the Lady of Battle,” MMAB New Series 10 (1952):
211.
187
188
Ibid., 332.
189
Ochshorn, “Ishtar and Her Cult,” 22.
190
Ibid. Cf. Jørgen Læssoe, People of Ancient Assyria: Their Inscriptions and
Correspondence, trans. F. S. Leigh-Browne (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1963),
24; Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia, 205.
275
“the language of Revelation 16 and 17 is military in nature.”191 As a mistress of war, she
is drunk with human blood; to apply this image to Babylon the Great, she makes war
against the saints and is likewise drunk with their blood.
Babylon is called mother of abominations. In Rev 17:5, Babylon the Great is also
called the mother of the abominations of the earth, which means that she is the
abomination above all the abominations of the earth, the source of all abominations, the
abomination par excellence. The word bdelugma (abomination), which is not used often
in the New Testament, is frequently found in the LXX.192 Three out of five NT
occurrences are found in Revelation, the rest are in Luke 16:15; Mark 13:14 and Matt
24:15. Ruiz thinks that Luke 16:15 provides “the basic sense” of the meaning: “What is
exalted among men is an abomination before God.”193 In the LXX, bdelugma is often
used to denote idolatry.194 Beale states that: “This additional reference to ‘abominations’
in Rev 17:4 establishes beyond doubt the connection of Babylon the great with idolatry,
since this is one of the common words for idol or idolatrous sacrifice in the LXX (so at
least forty-seven of about one hundred twenty-two total uses).”195 This connection of
Babylon the great with idolatry is one more reason to interpret Babylon in Revelation 17
as synonymous with the image of the beast in Rev 13:14, 15.
191
192
193
Ibid., Bible translation Ruiz’s.
194
Ibid., 331; see also Z. Stefanović, Daniel, 358. Cf. Deut 7:25; 12:31; 2 Chron
28:3; Isa 2:20.
195
276
Summary
The study of the theme of the beast suggests that the beasts in chapters 11, 13, and
17 of Revelation may be the one and the same beast appearing in different phases. The
reason the beast is so prominent in Revelation 17 may be that the prostitute is its image,
and that she originates from him. The striking similarities between the beast and Babylon
the Great are best explained if Babylon is understood to be the image of the beast.
The study of the theme of Babylon shows that the connections between Babylon
the Great and the unfaithful members of the seven churches indicate that Babylon
represents the sum total of the evil community within the church. Babylon the whore in
Revelation 17 and 18 is the personification of covenantal rebellion. The imagery of
Babylon as a prostitute should be understood within a covenantal context.
The huge contrast between Babylon the Great and the bride of the Lamb shows
that Babylon is a parody of Jerusalem, just as the beast in Revelation 17 is a parody of
Christ. Since the relationship between the bride and the Lamb is an image-deity
relationship, the relationship between Babylon the great and the beast should also be
understood as the same: an image-beast relationship.
John’s description of Babylon the Great as sitting enthroned in the midst of the
chaotic sea contrasts with the description of God enthroned in the midst of a peaceful,
crystal clear sea. This description also confirms Babylon as the center of false worship,
for she is the image of the beast that is mentioned in Revelation 13.
The study of Babylon the Great from a cultural perspective suggests that John
described Babylon by using popular ANE idolatrous iconography, in particular that of the
goddess Ištar. Her external appearance, such as sitting on a beast, her dress and
ornaments, and the holding of a golden cup in her hand, all resemble a portrait of the
goddess Ištar. Her activities as the mother of prostitutes, and her adultery with the kings
of earth also connects her to Ištar. Therefore, the cultural study also supports my
conclusion that Babylon the Great appears to be the image of the beast.
277
Revelation 18 describes the “ultimate destruction”196 of Babylon the Great. This
graphic description of Babylon’s punishment led A. Y. Collins to comment that,
“Revelation 18 is perhaps the passage that has most deeply offended the moral
sensibilities of readers, Christian and non-Christian alike.”197

Paulien observes that “Revelation 18 is, in some ways, a mirror image of
Revelation 17, they are two sides of the same coin.”198 Babylon is portrayed as a
prostitute in Revelation 17, while she becomes the Great City in Revelation 18.199 The
link between these two images is found in Rev 17:18: “And the woman, which you saw,
196
Smalley, The Revelation to John, 425.
197
198
Paulien, “Revelation 17 and the Papacy,” 10.
199
Osborne observes that while there have been attempts to see two different
“Babylons” in Revelation 17 and 18, the unity of these two chapters has been well
demonstrated. Thus there is ample evidence to take the prostitute Babylon as one and the
same city Babylon, Osborne, Revelation, 631, n 1; see also Alan F Johnson, “Revelation
18:1-24,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, eds. Tremper Longman III and David E.
Garland (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), 12:564-568. For the two Babylons view, see
Clarence Larkin, The Book of Revelation (Glenside, PA: Larkin, 1919), 150-155; Henry
Morris, The Revelation Record: A Scientific and Devotional Commentary on the Book of
Revelation (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1983), 360. For one Babylon view, see Charles
H. Dyer, “The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-19, Part 1,” BSac 144 (1987): 305-
316; Charles H. Dyer, “The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18, Part 2,” 433-449;
Charles H. Dyer, “The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17 and 18” (ThM thesis, Dallas
Theological Seminary, 1979), 17-38; Andrew M. Woods, “Have the Prophecies in
Revelation 17-18 about Babylon Been Fulfilled? (Part 6),” BSac 170 (2013): 194-214.
278
is the Great City which has dominion over the kings of the earth.”200 The judgment of
Babylon is briefly mentioned in Rev 17:16, and Revelation 18 provides the details of the
results of that judgment,201 written in the form of a dirge that echoes the taunting
prophetic songs of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel.202
A. Y. Collins divides Revelation 18 into three units: (1) a report of a vision (vv. 1-
3); (2) a report of an audition (vv. 4-20); and (3) a narrative account of a symbolic action
performed by an angel (vv. 21-24).203
Strand has noticed the chiastic structure of Rev 18, which I reproduce in the
following lines:
A. Introduction: the situation of Babylon (vv. 1-3)
B. Interlude: an appeal (vv. 4-8)
C. The litany proper: mourning at the Judgment Scene (vv. 9-19)
B’. Interlude: an appeal (v. 20)
A’. Conclusion: the situation of Babylon (vv. 21-24).204
The themes of Revelation 18 are a continuation of the themes of Revelation 17,
except that the beast is no longer visible (although it still can be seen in its components:
200
Paulien, “Revelation 17 and the Papacy,” 10; Ruiz, Ezekiel in the Apocalypse,
377.
201
Smalley, The Revelation to John, 245; Beale, The Book of Revelation, 890, 891.
202
203
Kenneth A. Strand, “Two Aspects of Babylon’s Judgment Portrayed in

204
Revelation 18,” AUSS 20 (1982): 54.
279
the kings, the sailors and the merchants). In addition to this thematic continuance,
Revelation 18 reveals some additional aspects of Babylon the Great.
In this section, I will study two themes: the first is the theme of Babylon the Great,
particularly as a queen and as a city; the second is the theme of the judgment on Babylon.
The economic aspect of Babylon and her punishment by burning will be discussed in
connection with the theme of judgment.
Babylon the Great
Queen
Rev 18:7 describes Babylon as an enthroned queen. Babylon as a queen
“parallels” the Jezebel of Rev 2:20.205 The historical Jezebel, the queen of Ahab, king of
Israel, seduced the king and led Israel to worship Baal and Asherah. She also persecuted
and killed God’s prophets (1 Kgs 16:31; 18:13; 21:25). In the book of Revelation, Jezebel
represents the apostate leadership of the church at Thyatira. Humphrey comments on the
significance of the figure of Jezebel in Revelation: “At this early point in the Apocalypse,
the figure of Jezebel emerges like a threatening cancer in the center of the letter section,
Thyatira taking middle place among the seven churches. Within the heart of God’s
community, there is a pretender who is to be searched by the One with ‘eyes like a flame
of fire’ and found wanting.”206
205
Duff lists seven characteristics shared in common between Jezebel of
Revelation 2 and Babylon the Great of Revelation 17-18; see Duff, “Wolves in Sheep’s
Clothing,” 75, 76; Paulien, Armageddon, 125.
206
Humphrey, “A Tale of Two Cities,” 85.
280
Scholars have noticed that John uses phraseology similar to Ezekiel's in his oracle
against the city of Tyre, a great commercial center.207 Many experts have also noted that
there are thematic and verbal parallels to be found between Ezekiel 26-28 and Revelation
17-18, making it certain that Revelation 17-18 is an allusion to Ezekiel 26-28.
Thematically, both passages have the progressive theme of judgment first and
lamentation afterwards, because of the fall and ruin of two cities. Both judgments are
executed through the agency of waters. Tyre was shattered by the sea in the depth of the
waters (Ezek 27:34), and Babylon the great is burned by the “waters” she once sat upon
(cf. Rev 17:16). Each passage provides two reasons for both cities to be judged. The first
reason is the cities’ oppression of the believers of God. In Ezekiel 26, Tyre participated in
making Jerusalem a ruin (v. 2); in Revelation 18, Babylon killed the faithful believers of
God (v. 24). The second reason is their pride in their wealth (Ezek 28:5; Rev 18:7).
There are several verbal parallels between the two chapters. Both passages
contain references to seas or waters (Ezek 27:34; 28:2; Rev 17:1); both lamentations were
uttered by kings, merchants and seamen standing far off (Ezek 27:29, 35, 36; Rev
18:9,11); both mention wealth (Ezek 28:5; Rev 18:7). Both passages have exclamations
in the form of the rhetorical question of “who [is] like.” In Ezekiel, the mourners were
asking “Who [is] like Tyre” (Ezek 27:32); in Revelation 18, the mourners were asking
“Who [is] like the great city?” (Rev 18:18).
Two significant verbal parallels deserve to be discussed in some detail. The first
can be found in the words uttered by the two cities about themselves. In Ezekiel 28, Tyre
is described by the following words: “In the pride of your heart you say, ‘I am a god; I sit
207
William H. Shea, “Chiasm in Theme and by Form in Revelation 18,” AUSS 20
(1982): 251; Gregory, “Its End Is Destruction,” 145; Ruiz, Ezekiel in the Apocalypse,
412, 413.
281
on the throne of a god in the heart of the sea.’” (v. 2). In Revelation 18, Babylon is
described as speaking: “In her heart she says, ‘I sit as queen; I am not a widow, and I will
never mourn.’” In Ezekiel, Tyre claims to be a god sitting on the throne of the seas; in
Revelation, Babylon claims to be a queen, sitting on the throne of the waters (cf. Rev
17:1). The change of wording from “god” to “queen” may be due to the covenantal
framework. This has been noticed by J. M. Ford, Strand, and Shea. In fact, the language
of Revelation 18 also alludes to Jeremiah’s lamentations over Jerusalem: “How deserted
lies the city, once so full of people! How like a widow is she, who once was great among
the nations! She who was queen among the provinces has now become a slave. Bitterly
she weeps at night, tears are upon her cheeks. Among all her lovers there is none to
comfort her. All her friends have betrayed her; they have become her enemies” (1:1, 2).
Both cities are spoken of as queens-turned-widows, and both cities are betrayed by their
former “lovers” or supporters. This allusion to Jerusalem again confirms Ford’s
covenantal framework. Because Babylon is a symbol for the apostatized people of God,
and is the very opposite of the new-covenantal “Jerusalem,” John describes it in feminine
terms. In particular the allusion to Ezek 28:2 hints at Babylon’s identity as a goddess
sitting in the center of the “waters.” This imagery discloses Babylon’s identity as the
idolatrous image of the beast which demanded divine worship.

Western Semitic and Hellenistic cities “were often understood and depicted
literarily and visually as goddesses and women.”208 Goddesses were the embodiments of
the cities which were under their protection and service.209
208
Huber, Like A Bride Adorned, 92. Phoenician cities were regarded as
“goddesses, royal figures, mothers of their inhabitants and daughter cities.” Aloysius
Fitzgerald, “The Mythological Background for the Presentation of Jerusalem as a Queen
and False Worship as Adultery in the OT,” CBQ 34 (1972): 406, 407. Phoenician coins
bore legends and images explicitly portraying cities as goddesses. One of the coins
describes the city of Sidon as a goddess. Huber, Like A Bride Adorned, 92.
282
In Babylon, Ištar of the Eturkalamma (her temple in Babylon) presided over the
city and was known as Ištar of Babylon or the Lady of Babylon and even as the Queen of
Babylon.210 An Akkadian invocation to Ištar reads: “Highly exalted is Ištar, Ištar is the
(true) queen, highly exalted is the lady, the lady is the (true) queen!”211
One extant hymn dedicated by the Neo-Babylonian king Nabonidus to the
goddess Ištar has the following sentence: “To Ištar, the supreme, beloved of the gods, the
valiant, . . . which is in the midst of Babylon, my Lady.”212
City
Cities in the ANE were often personified as women. This analogy probably
originated from the idea of “goddesses as protectors of particular peoples or cities.”213
The patron goddess was typically “portrayed with a crown that looked like a city wall.”214
In the ANE context, the symbol of a great city had at least three aspects: first, a
city is a community; second, a city is a religious center; and third, a city is a political
center. I will explore each of the three aspects to see if they correspond with the picture
of the image of the beast.
209
Ibid.
Westenholz, “Inanna and Ishtar in the Babylonian World,” 342. Also George
210
Aaron Barton, The Semitic Ishtar Cult (Piscateway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2007), 22; see
also Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating to the Old Testament, ed. Walter Beyerlin
(Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978), 111; “The Sacred Marriage of Iddin-Dagan and
Inanna,” trans. Thorkild Jacobsen (COS 1.173:554-559).
211
Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 111; a hymn
calling Ištar the queen is also found in “Hymn to Ishtar,” trans. Ferris J. Stephens (ANET,
383).
212
213
214
Ibid.
283
First, a city is a community. In ancient thought, cities could be seen in two
lights. First, they could be seen in a local sense, regarded as composed by houses,
markets, and walls. Second, they could be seen in a personal sense, regarded as a
collective body of inhabitants.215 John’s use of the symbol of the great city of Babylon is
simply a continuation of “a long tradition of biblical and extrabiblical writings” which
uses the city and the woman as symbol for “human communities or groups, either in
faithful relationship to God, or in rebellion and infidelity.”216
The concept of a city as a community in relationship with God develops as
Revelation unfolds its apocalyptic scenes. From the very beginning, the letters are
addressed to the churches of the cities in Asia Minor. Then, in the letter to the church in
Pergamum, Antipas was put to death in “your city where Satan lives” (2:13). In the letter
to the church of Philadelphia, the symbol of a city “is not merely suggested, but makes a
brief cameo appearance.”217 The Holy Spirit says to the church: “I will make him a pillar
in the temple of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem which comes down from my God
out of heaven, and my own new name” (3:12). In Revelation 11, the two witnesses were
killed by the beast coming out of the Abyss, and their bodies lay openly in the street of
the great city where their Lord was also crucified (v. 8). The city collapsed after the two
witnesses ascended to heaven (v. 13). In Revelation 14, the winepress is trampled outside
the city (v. 20). In Revelation 16, the great city splits into three parts (v. 19); then in
Revelation 17 and 18 Babylon the Great is identified as the great city (Rev 17:18; 18:10,
215
Percy Gardner, “Countries and Cities in Ancient Art,” JHS 9 (1888): 47.
Humphrey, “A Tale of the Two Cities,” 83. See also Eva Maria Räpple, The
216
Metaphor of the City in the Apocalypse of John (New York: Peter Lang, 2004), 127, 128;
Leon Morris, The Book of Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary, TNTC, ed.
Leon Morris (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 195.
217
Räpple, The Metaphor of the City, 87.
284
16, 18, 19, 21). In Revelation 20, the Holy City comes down from heaven like a bride (v.
9). In Revelation 21, the New Jerusalem has twelve gates which bear the names of the
twelve tribes of Israel (v. 12), and twelve foundations which have the names of the
twelve apostles (v. 14), and in this city God and the Lamb are the temple, the center of
worship (v. 22). So throughout Revelation, two cities stand side by side, one having
Satan’s throne, and the other containing God’s throne.
Second, a city is a religious center. In ANE and biblical literature, cities were
not just communities with dense populations, they were also the homes of gods and
goddesses. Every major god or goddess served as the patron deity of a city.218 In fact,
cities were thought to have been built by their patron gods.219 A city was so closely
associated with the god that the decline of a city was thought to be the result of its being
abandoned by its patron god. Sumerian literature describes the fall of their cities as
resulting from the gods’ departure, and not from military defeat.220 Thus, the prosperity
and happiness of the inhabitants of a city depended on a harmonious relationship between
the populace of a city and its gods.221
In a biblical psalm, the city of Jerusalem is called “the holy place where the Most
High dwells” (Ps 46:4). This kind of description made the city appear “as a theological or
mythological, rather than a political or economical entity.”222 The city thus becomes “a
218
Van de Mieroop, The Ancient Mesopotamian City, 46.
219
Ibid., 48.
220
Ibid., 47.
221
Ibid., 42.
222
Martti Nissinen, “City as Lofty as Heaven: Arbela and Other Cities in Neo-
Assyrian Prophecy,” in “Every City Shall Be Forsaken”: Urbanism and Prophecy in
Ancient Israel and the Near East, JSOTSup 330, eds. Lester L. Grabbe and Robert D.
Haak (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 172.
285
space of the divine presence where heaven touches earth.”223 This mythological function
was not unique to Jerusalem, but is commonly recognized in ANE sources.224 Thus, on
the figurative level, an ANE city manifested the presence of its gods. The concept of a
divinely founded city as the meeting point of the divine and the human is clearly seen in
the Hymn to the City of Arbela.225 In this hymn, the city of Arbela is presented as a
sanctuary.226 According to the myth Enūma Elish, the city of Babylon exemplifies this to
an extreme degree.227
Third, a city is a political center. In the ANE, political power was not located in
a nation nor in a region but in a city.228 This concept originated from the time of the
earliest city states, when every city was a separate political power.229 The palace, the
residence of the king, was located in the city.230 The statement found in the Sumerian
223
Ibid., 173.
224
Ibid.
225
The hymn reads thus: Arbela, O Arbela! Heaven without equal, Arbela! City of
merry-making, Arbela! City of festivals, Arbela! City of the temple of jubilation, Arbela!
Shrine of Arbela, lofty hostel, broad temple, sanctuary of delights! Gate of Arbela, the
pinnacle of holy to[wns]! City of exultation, Arbela! Abode of jubilation, Arbela! Arbela,
temple of reason and counsel! Bond of the lands, Arbela! Establisher of profound rites,
Arbela! Arbela is as lofty as heaven. Its foundations are as firm as the heavens. The
pinnacles of Arbela are lofty, it view with […]. Its likeness is Babylon, it compares with
Assur. O lofty sanctuary, shrine of fates, gate of heaven! Tribute from the lands enters
into it. Ištar dwells there, Nanaya, the […] daughter of Sin, Irnina, the foremost of the
gods, the first-born goddess […].” Ibid., 177.
226
Ibid.
227
See translation of Enūma Elish in “Epic of Creation (1.111) (Enūma Elish),”
trans. Benjamin R. Foster (COS, 1.111:390-402).
228
Van de Mieroop, The Ancient Mesopotamian City, 48, 49.
229
Ibid., 49.
230
Nissinen,“City as Lofty as Heaven,” 173.
286
King List expresses the idea that kingship could only exist in a city. This concept of
locating political power in a city persisted even after Babylon developed and expanded
into a territorial state, for the rulers continued to use the title of “king of the city of
Babylon” and not of the entire country.231
Thus in ANE conception, a city is both a religious and a political center. In Van
de Mieroop’s words, “Temple and palace were basic urban institutions, and they were the
institutions that defined a city.”232 The relationship of the temple and the palace is that of
“collaboration and mutual ideological assistance.”233
From the study of the motif of the image of the beast in Rev 13:14, 15, it appears
that the image of the beast is a symbol for a hypocritical community of people within the
church, i.e., the synagogue of Satan (Rev 2:9). It is a religious entity but is also influential
in politics and economy. The symbol of Babylon the Great as a powerful seductress
supports my proposal, which is that Babylon may be the image of the beast who leads the
inhabitants of the earth away from the worship of God through the means of seduction
and coercion.
Judgment
Many modern readers of Revelation “recoil with horror from its lurid depictions
of judgment, which seem to them the actions not of the just God but of a wantonly cruel
deity.”234 A. Y. Collins, for example, has been “shocked by so much material that cannot,
231
Van de Mieroop, The Ancient Mesopotamia City, 49.
232
Ibid., 52.
233
234
Bauckham, “The Judgment in the Book of Revelation,” 4.
287
in her view, be reconciled with Christian love,”235 and has argued that the function of
Revelation is cathartic, providing a kind of emotional therapy for Christian readers.236
Tina Pippin holds that the description of the prostitute in Revelation 17 is sadistic, erotic,
and pornographic.237 A. Y. Collins further commented that the designation of sadism is
applicable even to Rev 17:1-19:10.238
In response to the above reactions, Bauckham states that we, as modern readers,
should not read from our own perspective, and conclude that God is a cruel God, but that
we should instead read the visions in the light of “Revelation’s fundamental confession of
the God of absolute justice.”239 A faithful interpretation of Revelation is to be faithful to
Revelation’s own priority of God’s absolute justice.240
According to Schüssler Fiorenza, Rev 18:24 is “the theological key to the whole
Babylon series of judgments.”241 The verse reads, “In her was found the blood of
prophets and saints, and of all who have been slaughtered on earth.” By the use of the
Greek word esphagmenōn (slaughtered), John indicates “a solidarity of the slaughtered
Lamb himself with”242 the martyrs.
235
Ibid., 13.
236
Cf. A. Y. Collins, Crisis and Catharsis.
237
Tina Pippin, Death and Desire: The Rhetoric of Gender in the Apocalypse of
John, Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation (Louisville, KY: Westminster, 1992), 47,
66, 73-75, 85.
238
239
Bauckham, “The Judgment in the Book of Revelation,” 4.
240
Ibid.
241
Fiorenza, Revelation, 95.
242
Bauckham, “The Judgment in the Book of Revelation,” 11
288
The verdict against Babylon the Great is in harmony with two Old Testament
laws, i.e., the law of bloodshed (Gen 9:5-6) and the law of malicious witnessing (Deut
19:16-19).243 Babylon has shed the innocent blood of the saints (v. 24) and she has also
falsely accused them (v. 20).
Scholars have found it difficult to understand Rev 18:20b. Verse 20b could be
translated literally as, “God has judged your sentence against her.” There are two ways to
understand “your sentence.” It could either be understood as the sentence the saints have
passed on “you,” or the sentence which Babylon the Great has passed on “you.”244 Caird,
by appealing to the law of bloodshed and the law of malicious witnessing, argues that v.
20b should be read as “God has imposed on her the sentence she passed on you.”245
The questions which follow ask when Babylon passed the sentence on the saints,
and what was the sentence which later proved that Babylon was, in fact, a malicious
witness. Ruiz dismissed Caird’s proposal of applying the “law of malicious witness” on
the ground that “we are never told that the Prostitute Babylon has borne witness against
the saints.”246 Searching throughout the book of Revelation, the answer is found in Rev
13:15, in which the image of the beast passes and enforces the death penalty (cf. John
5:27; Jude 1:15) on those who do not worship the beast and its image. Once again,
Babylon is identified with the image of the beast in her sentencing of the saints. Thus,
Paul Decock concludes that the judgment of Babylon the Great in Revelation 18
“connects the passing on of death sentence in Rev 13:15.”247
243
244
Strand, “Two Aspects of Babylon’s Judgment,” 59.
245
246
Ruiz, Ezekiel in the Apocalypse, 460, 461.
247
Decock, “Hostility against the Wealth of Babylon,” 266.
289
Decock associates the church of Laodicea with Babylon by saying that “The
church in Laodicea seems to be a copy of Babylon in their blind reliance on wealth (3:17).
John points out that they have a false appreciation of themselves as being rich, while in
fact they are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked.”248 This observation recalls the
warning issued in the midst of the battle of Armageddon in Rev 16:15. Docock’s
observation confirms Paulien’s, which notices a strong spiritual dimension to the battle of
Armageddon by pointing out that Rev 16:15 reads “Behold, I come like a thief! Blessed
is he who stays awake and keeps his clothes with him, so that he may not go naked and
be shamefully exposed.” He clearly connects this with the message to the Laodiceans.249
Babylon the Great could represent those unrepentant people of God within the
church of Laodicea, who were found naked and shamefully exposed. If this is so, then it
confirms my conclusion that Babylon symbolizes the apostate people of God, who have
been transformed into the image of the beast instead of turning into the image of God.
Many biblical scholars think that one of the crimes of Babylon the Great is
excessive wealth. This is illustrated by the trading items. The list in Revelation 18
signifies an economic critique of Rome’s vast wealth.250
248
Ibid., 267.
Paulien, Armageddon, 120. Aune also notes that this “motif of watchfulness” is
249
only found elsewhere in the Bible in Revelation 3, Revelation 6-16, 896; see also Ladd, A
Commentary on the Revelation of John, 216; Prigent, Commentary on the Apocalypse,
472-473.
250
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 896; Bauckham, “Economic Critique”; Eileen
Poh Chu Luan, “The Acquisition and Use of Wealth: Some Reflections from Revelation
18,” Jian Dao 41 (2014): 255-298. Robert M. Royalty produced a monograph on the
ideology of wealth in Revelation; particular attention is paid to the economic critique of
the wealth of Babylon; see Royalty, The Streets of Heaven, especially the section of “The
Destruction of Babylon,” 187-209.
290
Scholars have noticed some verbal parallels between Ezekiel 28 and Revelation
18 in terms of the trading lists.251 Ezekiel 28:5-24 lists the following items: pine trees,
cedar (v. 5), oaks, cypress wood (v. 6), linen, blue and purple awnings (v. 7), silver, iron,
tin, lead (v. 12), slaves, articles of bronze (v. 13), work horses, war horses, mules (v. 14),
ivory tusks, ebony (v. 15), turquoise, purple fabric, embroidered work, fine linen, coral,
rubies (v. 16), wheat, confections, honey, oil, balm (v. 17), wine, wool (v. 18), wrought
iron, cassia and calamus (v. 19), saddle blankets (v. 20), lambs, rams, goats (v. 21), all
kinds of spices and precious stones, and gold (v. 22), beautiful garments, blue fabric,
embroidered work and multicolored rugs with cords (v. 23).
The items Revelation 18 lists are: cargoes of gold, silver, precious stones and
pearls; fine linen, purple, silk and scarlet cloth; every sort of citron wood, and articles of
every kind made of ivory, costly wood, bronze, iron and marble (v. 12); cargoes of
cinnamon and spice, of incense, myrrh and frankincense, of wine and olive oil, of fine
flour and wheat; cattle and sheep; horses and carriages; and the bodies and souls of
human beings (v. 13).
Comparing these two lists, following the sequence of lists in Revelation 18, both
lists have cargoes of gold, silver, precious stones (v. 12; cf. Ezek 28:12, 22); both have
linen, and expensive cloth and fabric (v. 12; cf. Ezek 28:16, 23); both have wood (v. 12;
cf. Ezek 28:12); both have ivory (v. 12; cf. Ezek 28:15); both have spices (v. 13; cf. Ezek
28:22) ; both have horses (v. 13; cf. Ezek 28:14); both have wine, oil and wheat (v. 13;
cf. Ezek 28:17, 18); both have cattle (v. 13; cf. Ezek 28:21); both have slaves (v. 13; cf.
Ezek 28:13).
251
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 909; Bauckham, “Economic Critique,” 59.
291
Several items in Ezekiel 28 are not found in Revelation 18; these are mules,
honey, balm, wool, saddle blankets, and war horses. Several items in Revelation 18
which are not found in Ezekiel 28: cargoes of incense, myrrh and frankincense.
Bauckham points out that the twenty-eight items in John’s list of merchandise
have not received due attention.252 After making a careful analysis of the trading list, he
draws some “general conclusions” about it.253 First, the majority of the items listed were
some of the most expensive merchandise available at the time. Bauckham notes that
thirteen items in John’s list are found in the list of Pliny’s twenty-eight most costly
products.254 Second, he states that although some items, such as oil and wheat, are not
expensive, the vast quantities in which they appear make them costly. Therefore the list is
definitely “very representative” of the luxurious lifestyle of Rome’s affluent citizenry.255
But Bauckham also comments on the fact that sheep and cattle are on the list of
items, and tries to figure out the reasons for importing these domestic animals since they
were unlikely to be used for entertainment in the amphitheatres like other wild animals,
nor would they be used for food, since beef and mutton were not chief dishes in the
banquets of the rich. Bauckham’s final conclusion is that sheep and cattle were to be used
for labor and milk.256
252
Bauckham, “Economic Critique,” 58.
253
Ibid., 75.
254
Pliny, Nat. 37.204 (Eichholz, LCL). The thirteen items are gold, silver,
precious stones, pearls, purple, silk, scarlet, citrus wood, ivory, cinnamon, amomum,
aromatic ointment, and frankincense.
255
Bauckham, “Economic Critique,” 75.
256
Ibid., 73.
292
Bauckham also comments on the last items of “slaves and human lives.” He
thinks that the first refers to regular slaves, and that the second refers to fighters or
gladiators in the amphitheaters.257 Bauckham also mentions another possible
understanding of the phrase “slaves and human lives” can mean “slaves, that is, human
lives,” by making the kai epexegetical. He thinks that this understanding reveals that John
values all human life, including that of slaves.258
Iain Provan raises objections to Bauckham’s view of the trading list as an
economic critique of Rome. Provan doubts that John’s intention in presenting that list
was simply to criticize Rome’s citizens’ luxurious lifestyle. After all, Provan argues, out
of the twenty-nine costly items listed by Pliny, there are only thirteen found in John’s list,
composing not even half of the list.259 And some of the items listed by John are “far from
being attacked by Roman writers as extravagances,” as Bauckham himself has
admitted.260 If it is for the sake of criticizing the Romans’ luxurious lifestyle, there could
be more costly items listed such as “exotic food stuff.”261 The “surprising omissions” of
some of the most costly products show that John does not intend to make a list of
luxuries.262 So Provan finally raises the question: is this list of trading items really
intended as an economic critique of Rome?263
257
Ibid., 79.
258
Ibid.
259
Provan, “Foul Spirits, Fornication and Finance,” 86.
260
Ibid.
261
Ibid.
262
Ibid.
263
Ibid., 87.
293
Provan calls for a religious interpretation of the elements of Revelation 18. He
draws attention to the special emphasis on sea trade, and points out that the concept of the
sea is symbolically significant in the Old Testament, as well as in the book of Revelation.
In the OT, the “watery chaos” itself is “the archetypal enemy of Israel’s God.”264 Provan
argues that in Revelation 18 the emphasis on the sea is not due to the significance of
Rome’s sea trade, but is due to the significance of the sea within Revelation.265 For
Provan, the intention of the inclusion of the trading list in Revelation 18 is not an
economic critique, but a religious and theological one.266
Provan’s attention to the concept of sea trade is enlightening when connecting the
sea to the “many waters” in Rev 17:1, where Babylon the Great sits. This is later
interpreted by the angel as “peoples, multitudes, nations and languages” (v. 15), and is “a
symbol of unregenerate humanity.”267 Babylon reigns as a queen; the sea is her domain of
influence. Trading is basically an activity of communicating and exchanging things for
the purpose of mutual benefit. This is exactly the relationship described in Revelation 18
between Babylon and the kings and merchants on earth: she commits adultery with the
kings, and the merchants of the earth get rich thanks to her extravagant needs (Rev 18:3).
The intention of this sea trade list is indeed a religious one.
Leonard Thompson also understands that the primary object of the attack on the
wealth of Babylon is not an overt attack on the Roman Empire, but is instead directed
Ibid., 90; see also Schmidt, “‘And the Sea Was No More’,” 237-240; cf. A. Y.
264
Collins, “Eschatology,” 64.

265
Provan, “Foul Spirits, Fornication and Finance,” 91.
266
Ibid.
267
J. M. Ford, Revelation, 291; also Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, 161.
294
against those Christians, especially the Laodiceans, who seek to assimilate themselves
socially and economically into the secular world.268
One recent monograph written by Mark Mathews put the language of wealth of
Revelation 18 against the background of Second Temple Jewish literature. Mathews finds
that John’s theological and symbolic world view was patterned after the apocalyptic
traditions from the Second Temple period which reject wealth based on the established
paradigm, that in the present age the faithful will be poor and the wicked will be rich.
Mathews further argues that the primary concern of Revelation is not political, and that
Rome is not the enemy of the church per se, but that the visionary world which John
presents to his readers connects directly to the conflict and theological debates inside the
Christian church.269
J. M. Ford argues that Rome is not the focus of the Babylon material in
Revelation 18. Instead, she contends, Jerusalem is the one under judgment. Ford connects
the list of Revelation 18 to a temple, and comments that many of the items on the list
would have been used in the Jerusalem temple and for its services.270
As shown above, most scholars tend to take the trade items as a part of Roman
international trade in general, with which view I fully agree. However, to specify these
trade items in a religious context may be more significant, as Ford has proposed. Based
upon my previous study in chapter 3, the items found in Revelation 18 are all associated
with temples. For the decoration of the cult statues of the gods or goddesses, the temple
268
269
Mark D. Mathews, Riches, Poverty, and the Faithful: Perspectives on Wealth
in the Second Temple Period and the Apocalypse of John, SNTSMS 154, ed. Paul
Trebilco (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 207, notes 61, 217.
270
J. M. Ford, Revelation, 296-307.
295
needed gold, silver, precious stones and pearls. For the clothing of the cult image, the
temple needed fine linen, purple, silk, and scarlet cloth. For temple furniture and utensils,
the temple needed citron wood, articles made of ivory, costly wood, bronze, iron and
marble. For the daily rituals, the temple needed cinnamon and spice, incense, myrrh and
frankincense, wine and olive oil, fine flour and wheat, cattle and sheep. For the
cultivation of the land and for taking care of the daily chores in the temple, the temple
needed slaves.
Among the items listed in Rev 18:12, 13, frankincense and myrrh, which were
imported from Arabia, were not only expensive,271 but were also important to religious
observance. A wide range of Roman and other literary documents has clearly shown that
“frankincense and myrrh were predominantly considered to be items of religious
significance rather than luxury goods. These incenses had been burned in honor of the
gods at temples and at funerals for centuries, both in Roman religious practice as well as
in Hellenistic and Near Eastern cults.”272 A third century B.C.E. Greek inscription
recorded that Seleucus II of Syria offered “frankincense, myrrh, cassia, cinnamon and
costume, all incense ingredients”273 at the temple of Apollo at Didyma, near Miletus.
The above study confirms Ford’s conclusion that the items listed in Revelation 18
would have been associated with temple services. As mentioned before, the economic
aspect of temples actually expresses the economic aspect of cult images. Chapter 3 of my
research has addressed this concept, and has concluded that ANE temples were active in
271
See Gary K. Young, Rome’s Eastern Trade: International Commerce and
Imperial Policy, 31 BC-AD 305 (New York: Routledge, 2001), 16.
272
Ibid.
273
Nigel Groom, Frankincense and Myrrh: A Study of the Arabian Incense Trade
(New York: Librairie du Liban, 1981), 5, 6.
296
international trade and were wealthy. I would like to propose that the evidence points to
the identification of Babylon the Great as a cult image of a goddess who was wealthy,
dominant in the economy, active in international trade, and a great consumer of a variety
of valuable goods. Lauress Wilkins observes that the portrait of Jerusalem in Jeremiah’s
lamentations is “not unlike those of the Weeping Goddess in Mesopotamian city-
laments,”274 and the same could be true for the portrait of Babylon in the lament of
Revelation 18.
If Babylon is identified with the image of the beast, it becomes easy to solve the
puzzle in Revelation 19, which is the absence of the punishment of the image of the
beast. It is possible that the reason for the absence of the punishment of the image of the
beast could be that it has already suffered punishment by burning in Revelation 18, under
a different title, Babylon the Great.
Could it be that the reason for Babylon to suffer death by burning is that,
according to the commandment of Moses, as the cult image of the army of bestial forces,
it was to be burned (Deut 7:5)? Paulien notes that the attire worn by Babylon is similar to
that worn by the High Priest of Israel, and that furthermore death by burning is the
punishment for the prostitution of a priest’s daughter (cf. Lev 21:9).275 Paulien’s
observation is consistent with my proposal that Babylon can be viewed as a cult image
because symbols could have multiple meanings. Looking at a symbol from various
aspects can only enrich and deepen the understanding of it, as in the case with Babylon
the Great. In fact, Paulien’s view supports my conclusion that the image of the beast
274
Lauress L. Wilkins, The Book of Lamentations and Social World of Judah in
the Neo-Babylonian Era (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2010), 10.
275
Paulien, Armageddon, 104; Osborne, Revelation, 626.
297
represents the end time synagogue of Satan (Rev 2:9) within the Christian church, since a
daughter of a priest lives within the greater community of believers of God.
As noted earlier, the reason for the absence of direct references to the image of the
beast in Revelation 17 and 18 could also be that, the image of the beast is
overwhelmingly present throughout Revelation 17 and 18 in the guise of Babylon the
Great.
Summary
The study of Babylon the Great in Revelation 18, particularly of Babylon as a
queen, and her wealth and her role as an influential economic entity, suggests that all
these characteristics correspond well to the characteristics of a major ANE cult image,
such as that of the goddess Ištar. Only one cult image is found in Revelation, which is
none other than the image of the beast. Therefore, a study of the literal description of
Babylon suggests that John used the cult image of the Mesopotamian goddess Ištar to
represent Babylon in order to ultimately identify her with the image of the beast.
The study of Babylon the Great as a city reveals the presence of the three major
characteristics of the image of the beast, as indicated in Revelation 13: it is a political,
religious, and economic center. Therefore there are two cities/communities in contrast to
each other in the book of Revelation: one community has Satan’s throne, the other has
God’s throne. This study again confirms the conclusion I reached in chapter 3 of my
research on the interpretation of the image of the beast as a synagogue of Satan within the
Christian church, which will use political and economic power to advance false worship.
An examination of the judgment of Babylon, and particularly the verdict passed
against Babylon, also suggests that Babylon appears to be the image of the beast in her
two crimes: the shedding of the blood of the saints, and the false judgment on them.
An analysis of the trading items of Babylon also suggests the religious nature of
Babylon. Once again, the evidence points to the fact that Babylon is described by John as
298
a cult image that was wealthy, dominant in economy, active in international trade, and a
great consumer of a variety of valued goods.
The church of Laodicea is a miniature copy of Babylon the Great. The
punishment of Babylon affirms Christ’s warning to the seven churches. Babylon is the
sum total of the unrepentant community.
The puzzle I found in Revelation 19, the absence of the punishment of the image
of the beast, can be solved when we identify the image of the beast with Babylon. This
happens because the image of the beast has already received its due punishment by
burning as a cult image of the defeated army, as commanded by Moses (Revelation 18).
The study also provides the answer to the question: why is there no overt
reference to the image of beast in Revelation 17 and 18? The answer is that the image of
the beast is overwhelmingly present throughout these chapters under the name of
Babylon.
Chapter 6 is a study of the image of the beast in Revelation 17 and 18. This is a
study of the major themes of these two chapters, which do not contain overt references to
the image of the beast.
The study of the theme of Revelation 17-18 further corroborates my observation

that Babylon is the image of the beast. Babylon is to be understood in the context of
covenant. Through comparing the characteristics of Babylon with those of a cult image in
general, and the image of the goddess Ištar in particular, it appears that John used the cult
image of the Babylonian goddess Ištar as a symbol for Babylon the Great, thus indicated
to the reader to identify her with the only cult image found in the book of Revelation, the
image of the beast.
Babylon the Great is also called a great city, which implies that she is a
community of people, and a political as well as an economic center. These symbolic
299
meanings all fit well with the conclusions reached on the image of the beast in chapter 3,
that is, that the image of the beast is a symbol for a religious community of people
reflecting the image of the dragon, and that it has the political and economic influence
necessary to enforce false worship at the end time.
In the book of Revelation, “two major cities symbolize good and evil, life and
death, . . . Babylon (18:1-24), the city of this world, . . . represents an ignominious city of
oppression and self-deification. Jerusalem (21:1-22:5), the heavenly city, represents
everything pure.”276 One city has the throne of Satan, and the other has the throne of God.
These two cities are two women, representing two communities. Babylon, the image of
the beast, represents humanity in total depravity, and “its attempt at self-deification277—
to live life apart from the one true God, . . . the preeminent antichristian city where the
beast is enthroned and Christ is dethroned.”278 Jerusalem, the image of Christ, the bride
of the Lamb, represents, in John’s view, the faithful believers of God who are “glorious
and fortified . . . , protected and illuminated by God.”279
276
James L. Resseguie, Revelation Unsealed: A Narrative Critical Approach to
John's Apocalypse, BibInt 32 (Boston: Brill, 1998), 73.
277
Cf. the Akkadian name of Babylon: Bab-ili, which means “gate of god(s)” in
contrast to Gen 28:17 of Bethel, which means “House of God.”
278
Ibid., 78.
279
Humphrey, “A Tale of the Two Cities,” 93.
300
CHAPTER 7
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Summary
This dissertation was an attempt to “reconstruct”1 the historical setting of the
image-of-the-beast motif “in a real time and place”2 by investigating the first century
Greco-Roman cultural backgrounds and the literary context of this motif. The purpose
was to explore the intended meaning of the image of the beast of the author for his first
century Greco-Roman readers. It took six steps to accomplish this goal through studies
done in six chapters.
Chapter 2
Following the Introduction in Chapter 1, Chapter 2 is a brief survey of the history
of the interpretation of the image of the beast in Rev 13:14, 15. The survey shows that the
interpretation of the image of the beast is closely associated with the understanding of the
antichrist, which has been identified as an entity threatening the wellbeing of the
Christian church throughout history. Different persecutors or threats came and went, and
the interpretations of the antichrist and the image of the beast varied accordingly.
The survey started with the interpretations from scholars of the first three
centuries. These ancient interpretations are represented by the views of Ireneaus,
1
Barr, “Introduction,” 4.
2
Ibid., 5.
301
Hippolytus, and Victorinus with their anti-Rome and anti-Jewish understanding of the
Apocalyptic text. During this period, Revelation 13, as a whole, was viewed as
eschatological and futuristic, and was understood in the light of Danielic prophecy and
Pauline eschatology. The sea beast, and sometimes also the land beast, were mainly seen
as different manifestations of the antichrist, a literal and historical entity or a person,
either Rome, the resurrected Nero, or a Danite Jew outside the body of the Christian
church, appearing at the end time when the Roman Empire would be divided into ten
kingdoms to revive the anti-Christian Jewish temple cult. As part of the package of the
antichrist legendry, and the final act of blasphemy against God, the image of the beast
was understood as the literal idolatrous image, the “abomination” of Dan 9:27, to be set
up by the antichrist in the temple of Jerusalem or a revived Roman empire like kingdom.
The early Christian writers’ anti-Roman sentiment dissipated after Emperor
Constantine came into power, and Christianized the Empire. From the fourth century to
the eleventh century, many exegetes, especially in the Christian East, continued to follow
the Irenaean-Hippolytan tradition of the antichrist being a Danite Jew. The understanding
of the image of the beast remained mostly unchanged, interpreted as the idolatrous image
of the antichrist.
The failure of the antichrist to appear when the Roman Empire fell at the end of
the fifth century did create a problem for the Irenaean-Hippolytan interpretation of the
antichrist and demanded a fresh analysis of this subject. This challenge was met in the
Christian West by the Tyconio-Augustinian tradition. In reaction to the unceasing efforts
on the part of many interpreters to identify the ten kings in their times, in order to identify
the time of the appearance of the antichrist, and in turn the time of the end, this school
spiritualized the reading of the Apocalypse to make it relevant to Christians of all ages.
But the antichrist was still associated with persecuting powers. Possibly because of
Tyconius’s Donatist background, he argued that the antichrist was not as much outside
the Christian church as within. The image of the beast is no longer the literal idolatrous
302
image of the antichrist or a pagan entity. It is instead a group of unfaithful Christians
inside the church who reflect the likeness of the antichrist in any age. For Tyconius, the
book of Revelation was relevant to the experience of persecuted true believers of Christ,
most probably the Donatists, and brings them comfort. This interpretation of antichrist
and the image of the beast helped Tyconius to explain the phenomenon of the then
current persecution of the Donatists by the official church body. This shift in the
interpretation of the image of the beast, with a new emphasis on a collective body inside
the Christian church made a great impact on later exegetes of Revelation, especially
Joachim of Fiore, who laid the foundation for the Protestant historicist interpretation of
the Apocalypse.
Due to the influence of Joachim of Fiore, the interpretation of the antichrist
underwent another transformation from the twelfth to the nineteenth century. Joachim’s
interpretation of prophecy, particularly of the antichrist and the book of Revelation, was
bolder and more specific. For him, the antichrist was not only within the church, but
might be one of the popes (although he limited his interpretation to a person and not, to
the papacy as an institution). Nevertheless, his interpretation inaugurated an era of
historical application of the antichrist prophecy, understanding the Papacy as an antichrist
institution. This was first done by the Franciscan spirituals, and later by the Protestant
Reformers and their followers. In turn, the image of the beast was also variously applied
historically to figures from the pope to the papal council.
The Protestant polemical application, directed against the Papacy and the Roman
Catholic Church, was counteracted by scholars from the Roman Catholic Church, such as
Ribera and Alcazar, who initiated two contradictory methods of interpreting Revelation:
one preteristic and one futuristic. The commonality between the two different theories is
that both dismissed the anti-Papacy interpretation by returning to the literal and anti-
Pagan Rome, anti-Jewish patristic understanding of the apocalyptic texts. Thus the book
of Revelation was again read as directed against anti-Christian Judaism and the pagan
303
Roman Empire. Thus the antichrist was either pagan Rome, which persecuted the early
Christian church, or a single individual (a resurrected Nero or a Danite Jew) at the end
time in the far future. This excluded the possibility of interpreting the Papacy or the
Catholic Church as the antichrist. Both interpretations later gained strength within the
scholarly Protestant circles.
From the twentieth century onward there has been a drastic decline in historicism.
At the same time there has been a rise and growing prominence of the historical-critical
method of interpreting the biblical text within its original historical setting, as is done
with any other religious documents. This method harmonizes with the preteristic methods
of Alcazar; it also provides a scientific methodological basis for them. As a result, the
book of Revelation is perceived as a historical documentation of the lives of the first
century Christians who lived in Asia Minor and faced the daily harassment of the Roman
imperial cult as well as the cults of the traditional Roman gods. Currently most
mainstream commentators such as Aune and Friesen interpret Revelation 13 as an
enigmatic description of first century Roman Emperor worship in Asia Minor. The sea
beast is most commonly understood as imperial Rome, and the land beast as the imperial
priesthood. At the same time, the image of the beast automatically becomes the literal
cultic image of the Roman Emperors and is devoid of any eschatological meanings.
On the other hand, a few scholars and popular writers insist on an eschatological
understanding of the image of the beast. The New Scofield Reference Bible and Hal
Lindsey represent a group holding a futuristic interpretation of Revelation 13, insisting
that an end time antichrist, a Jewish male, will appear during the three and a half years, at
the end time, before the coming of Christ Jesus. They understand the image of the beast
as the literal idol of the antichrist. Another group of writers, such as the Seventh-day
Adventists, continue to follow the Protestant tradition of interpreting the first beast of
Revelation 13 as the Papacy. They understand the antichrist as emerging in history right
after the fall of the Roman Empire, and the image of the beast as a yet to form entity, a
304
worldwide church state union, a replica of the papacy of the Middle Ages, having the
threefold religio-politico-economic power to enforce a worldwide false worship, and to
persecute the saints immediately before the second coming of Christ.
This historical survey in Chapter 2 demonstrated the scarcity of available
materials on the topic of the image of the beast throughout the centuries; and a lack of
exegetical treatment on this topic during the past nineteen centuries. An in depth
exegetical study of the image of the beast indicated that this was a much neglected topic.
Chapters 3 to 6 of this dissertation were an attempt to make up for this deficiency by
providing an exegetical study of the image of the beast motif in the original cultural and
literary context of the book of Revelation.
Chapter 3
Chapter 3 was a study of the image-of-the-beast motif within the immediate
context of Revelation 13. The study was twofold: first, a study of the literary context;
second, a study of the cultic backgrounds. The word study of eikōn showed a word rich in
theological meanings: it points back to when human beings were created in the image of
God and points forward to the eschaton, when God will restore in full Imago Dei in his
believers. Paul portrays Jesus as the perfect eikōn of God, the ideal Adam, a perfect
manifestation of God’s character, through whose blood a new humanity was brought
forth and recreated in the image of God by the transforming power of the Holy Spirit.
The restoration of Imago Dei in humanity is the ultimate goal of redemption, and is
perceived as the eschatological blessing from the Creator God. The book of Revelation
revealed the other side of the redemptive story: instead of the restoration of God’s image
in humanity, at the end of the great conflict between Satan and Christ, there will be a
creation of the eikōn of the beast which will reflect the character of Satan. Its worship is
put in direct contrast with the worship of God and the call to give him glory as Creator.
305
The worship of the eikōn of the beast is seen as counteracting the divine program of
restoring the image of God in human beings in the eschaton.
The word study on thērion showed that this word is connected with covenantal
blessings and curses. Created on the fifth and sixth days of the creation, the sea and land
thērion were put under the dominion of human beings created in the image of God. After
the fall, thērion became wild animals, hostile to human beings and were distinctly
separated from the human world. The dominion of human beings over thērion is
conditional, depending upon human attitudes toward the covenant: if they obey they will
have dominion over thērion, otherwise, a reversal will happen. Thus, to be devoured by
thērion is seen as the fulfillment of a covenantal curse and a divine judgment upon the
wicked, while having dominion over thērion implies divine favor.
In the book of Revelation, the beasts are symbols of hellish powers hostile to God
and his believers. Like the eikōn of the beast, they appear in the latter half of Revelation
as part of the bestial forces. The faithful followers of the Lamb will gain victory over the
beast and its image (Rev 15:2), which implies their dominion over the beast. Those who
worship the beast and its image have exchanged God’s glory for the image of the beast,
and they are given over by God to believe a lie told by the beasts, and to follow the
bestial trinity. Thus, in a symbolic way, they suffer the covenantal curse and are devoured
by the beast, as stated by Paul in Romans 1.
The literary context was also investigated through the study of allusions in Rev
13:14, 15 to Old and New Testament passages. The allusion to Genesis 2 showed that
Rev 13:14, 15 is an eschatological counterfeit of the creation of the first human beings in
the image of God. It narrates how the beast carries out the will of Satan by creating a
living entity in its own image to counteract the divine program of recreating the image of
God in human beings. Thus, Rev 13:14, 15 notes that, in the eschaton the sea beast, a
counterfeit of Jesus Christ, will bring forth on earth a new group of humanity in the
image of the beast through the transforming power of the evil spirit breathed by the land
306
beast, the counterfeit of the Holy Spirit. These beastly human beings serve as agents of
Satan, an assembly of Satan, to fight against the church of God on earth, and to convert
the inhabitants of earth to Satan’s side.
The allusion of Rev 13:14, 15 to Acts 2 confirms this interpretation of the image
as being the assembly of Satan. It asserts that a false Pentecost will happen, resulting in
the forming of the image of the beast in human beings. These will in turn be false
apostles of Satan serving as propaganda agents to convert the inhabitants of the earth to
the side of Satan.
The allusion of Rev 13:14, 15 to Daniel 3 indicates that the eschatological
program of setting up the image of the beast to be worshipped by the inhabitants of the
earth refers to is a false gathering intended to challenge the divine plan for history and
hinder the fulfillment of the divine covenant of the gathering of the faithful believers of
God to establish God’s kingdom on earth. Daniel 3 also provides a promise to the faithful
believers of God that a reversal will happen once again in history: instead of the faithful
believers of God bowing down to the image of the beast, the assembly of Satan will
finally fall down at the feet of the faithful.
The allusions of Rev 13:14, 15 to passages from the Old and New Testaments
show that the key issue in Revelation 13 is not so much idolatry as a phenomenon, but is
about a deeper existential question: the root problem of humanity, i.e., the image of
beings who reflect their Creator.
The second part of Chapter 3 was a study of the cultic background of Rev 13:14,
15, which surveyed the ANE and Greco-Roman induction of cult images through the
mouth-opening ritual after which the cult image became a living being in its own right. In
Rev 13:15, the image of the beast following the prevailing cultic customs also undergoes
a mouth-opening ritual as the spirit of the land beast is breathed into it. After this, it
begins to give oracles, serving as the medium through which the sea beast establishes its
contact with the inhabitants of the earth.
307
The study of the cultic background also pointed to a clear distinction between the
cult image and its deity, in this case, the image and the beast. The destruction of the
image of the beast does not entail the destruction of the sea beast. This point proved to be
crucial to this study, since the book of Revelation explicitly mentions the destruction of
Satan, the beast, and the false prophet, but remains silent about the destruction of the
image of the beast.
At the end of Chapter 3, I reached the tentative conclusion that the Tyconio-
Augustinian understanding of the image of the beast as a community of unfaithful
believers inside the Christian church seems to be the most plausible. This community is
called tēs sunagōgēs tou satana (the assembly of Satan) in Rev 2:9; 3:9. They are
recreated into the image of the beast through the transforming power of the evil spirit.
Therefore in Revelation, two human races coexist. One is brought forth by the
spirit/breath of the land beast and reflects its image; the other is brought forth by the Holy
Spirit and reflects the image of God.
Chapter 4 and 5
Chapters 4-6 studied the image-of-the-beast motif in the latter part of Revelation,
i.e., Revelation 14-20. The aim of Chapters 4-5 was to investigate the theme of the image
of the beast in relation to the other major themes found in each of the chapters of the
second half of Revelation which contain direct references to this motif, i.e., Revelation 14,
15, 16, 19 and 20.
In Revelation 14, through the study of the theme of the 144,000, a conclusion
was reached that being defiled by women is equivalent to the worship of the beast and its
image, and also equals drinking the wine of Babylon. The parallels between the texts of
Revelation 13 and 14 show that the activities of Babylon the Great correspond to those of
the image of the beast. Just as the image of the beast causes the inhabitants of the earth to
308
worship the beast and its image on pain of death, Babylon the Great causes the nations to
drink the wine of her adultery.
The study of the allusions of Rev 14:4-15:4 to Num 25:1-18 confirmed my
previous conclusion that the metaphor of being defiled by women is another way of
describing the worship of the beast and its image. The parallel between these two
passages suggested that the activity of the image of the beast that causes the inhabitants
of the earth to worship the beast and its image is closely associated with the symbolism of
women in Revelation. Thus, once again, the image of the beast is connected with
Babylon the Great, who is called the mother of prostitutes in Revelation 17.
The study of the parallels between Rev 16:13-16 and Rev 13:13-15, in addition to
the information provided by Revelation 17, showed that the events described in those
passages are the same. The worship of the image of the beast in Revelation 13 is the
battle of Armageddon in Revelation 16. This parallelism is in line with the Old Testament
idea that worship is battle.
Once again, the image of the beast appeared to be end time Babylon. The
gathering of the kings of the world by the three frog like spirits coming out from the
mouths of the unholy trinity to the place called Armageddon is the final gathering of the
inhabitants of the earth, under the rule of the end time Babylon. The same event is
portrayed in Revelation 13 as the formation of the image of the beast through the breath
of the land beast, and the demand by the image of the beast to worship the beast and its
image on pain of death.
The study of Revelation 19 in connection with ANE war conduct raised a
question about the fate of the image of the beast, which is the cult image of the bestial
army. According to the war conduct of the ANE, the ultimate defeat of an enemy army
was symbolized by the destruction or capture of the idols of the enemy nations. In the
case of the nation of Israel, the burning of the idols of the Gentile nations was prescribed
by the Mosaic law. The book of Revelation is a war scroll, and in particular, Revelation
309
19 is filled with war imagery. It portrays the ultimate victory of God and his believers
over the bestial forces. Revelation 19 reports the destruction of the key entities of the
bestial forces, i.e., the beast and the false prophet, but keeps silent concerning the
destruction of their cult image, i.e., the image of the beast. Revelation 20 mentions the
destruction of Satan but also keeps silent about the destruction of the image of the beast.
The destruction of the cult image was a crucial step in the war custom of the ANE to
signify ultimate victory over the defeated army. Without the destruction of the image of
the beast, the war between God and Satan cannot reach its completion. The image of the
beast must in some way be destroyed. There is a lawful expectation of seeing the final
destruction of the cult image of the bestial forces as recorded in the book of Revelation.
Thus the silence of Revelation 19 and 20 on the fate of the image of the beast prompted a
further study of Revelation 17 and 18, since these two chapters are the only chapters
which mention destruction by fire.
Chapter 6
Chapter 6 was an attempt to study the image of the beast in Revelation 17 and 18,
with an emphasis on the study of the symbol of Babylon the Great. The purpose was to
find out if the destruction of Babylon had any relationship with the destruction of the
image of the beast. The study pointed in the direction of the conclusion reached in the
previous section, i.e., that the image of the beast appeared to be the end time Babylon the
Great. Through comparing the characteristics of Babylon the Great with those of a cult
image in general and the image of the goddess Ištar in particular, John appears to have
used the cult image of the Babylonian goddess Ištar to symbolize Babylon the Great. This
leaves a hint to the reader to identify Babylon with the only cult image in the book of
Revelation, i.e., the image of the beast.
In Revelation 18, Babylon the Great is also called a great city, implying that she
stands for a community of people as well as a religio-politico-economic center. These
310
symbolic meanings all fit well with the conclusions reached on the image of the beast in
Chapter 3, which is that it is a religious community of people reflecting the image of
Satan, at the same time having politico-economic power to enforce false worship at the
end time.
The identification of end time Babylon the Great with the image of the beast
could solve the puzzle of the fate of the image of the beast which was left unsolved in
Revelation 19 and 20. Since the burning mentioned in Revelation 17, 18 is the only
punishment by fire that happens outside of Revelation 19 and 20, with the silence of both
chapters on the punishment of the image of the beast, and with all the other evidence in
Chapters 3 and 4 of this research pointing to the possibility of identifying Babylon the
Great as the image of the beast, it is very possible to conclude that the image of the beast
indeed suffered its ultimate destruction in Revelation 17, 18, under the name of Babylon
the Great. This destruction was a sign of God’s total victory over the bestial forces. That
explains why there is no mention of the destruction of the image of the beast in
Revelation 19 and 20 when all other bestial entities are being destroyed.
Conclusions
Mainstream Revelation scholars today all agree on the necessity of approaching
the book “historically,”3 as they would any other historical documents of the Bible, such
as Romans or 1 Corinthians, with the presupposition that Revelation presents to its first
century recipients a message relevant to their cultural backgrounds and literal context.
This exegetical study suggested an alternative way of understanding the image-of-the-
beast motif by approaching it “historically” through “the eyes of the people of the time in
3
Barr notes that: “Nearly all academic work on the Apocalypse today recognizes
the need to read it historically, to discover what it may have meant and how it may have
functioned in first century Roman Asia Minor.” Barr, “Introduction,” 5.
311
which the text was written.”4 This study was by no means exhaustive and conclusive. The
exegetical observations made in this study serve as an impetus for further investigation of
this subject. Several conclusions can be drawn from this study.
First, the creation of the image of the beast is a counter reaction on the part of the
unholy trinity against God’s final outcome for the plan of salvation, i.e., the restoration of
Imago Dei in human beings in the eschaton.
Second, the image of the beast seems to portray a group of unfaithful Christians
inside the church who are inspired by the counterfeit Holy Spirit and who reflect the
image or character of the dragon, an entity which has the threefold religio-politico-
economic power to enforce false worship in direct opposition to the authentic worship of
the true God, as understood by the author of Revelation. The conclusion of this
dissertation is in line with the ancient Tyconio-Augstinian understanding of this motif.
Third, the image of the beast may be identified with “the assembly of Satan” in
Rev 2:9; 3:9, a group John understood as inside the Christian church and which becomes
the end time Babylon the Great.
Fourth, this study also showed that the current prevailing understanding that the
image of the beast was situated within the narrow or even questionable5 historical context
4
Ibid., 4
5
Such questions were raised by Thompson: whether Domitian was really as cruel
as the Roman and Christian historians portrayed him; whether Domitian persecuted
Christians at all; whether the island of Patmos was an island for exile and John was
banished there by Domitian, or whether he was simply visiting the congregation there.
For details see Thompson, “Ordinary Lives,” 30-34. Archaeological evidence has shown
that taking Patmos as a desolated place of exile is “a common misconception in
commentaries and popular prophetic writings.” Gordon Franz, “The King and I: Exiled to
Patmos,” Bible and Spade 12 (1999): 115-123. Franz points out that in fact, Patmos, in
the time of John was a populated major administrative center, having outlying villages, a
hippodrome for horse racing, and at least three pagan temples. Ibid., 115. See also Ian
Boxall, “Reading the Apocalypse on the Island of Patmos,” ScrB 40 (2010): 22-33.
312
of the first century Roman Emperor worship, as the cult image of the Roman Emperor6
may not reflect adequately the authorial intention which is developed with much care
through all kinds of symbolisms and well structured texts.
There is no question that first century Christian readers in Asia Minor might have
seen pagan Rome as incarnated in the sea beast. Evidence for this can be found in the
writings of the early church fathers, such as Ireneaus, Hippolytus and Victorinus. But to
conclude that the image of the beast is solely the cult image of the Roman emperor fails
to do justice to the cosmic contexts of this motif as well as to the prophetic intention of
the book as clearly stated by John once in the very beginning (Rev 1:3), once in the
center (Rev 11:6), and five times at the end of the book (Rev 19:10; 22:7, 10, 18, 19).
The identification of the image of the beast with a group of unfaithful believers
and with Babylon the Great has two implications: First, it indicates that although the
background of Roman Imperial cult worship is important to the understanding of the
message of Revelation, the interpretation of the symbols present in Revelation should not
focus primarily on Rome,7 and that the ultimate concern of Revelation is more spiritual
than political. Thus it would harmonize with other New Testament books, such as
Galatians or the Gospel of John. The message of the New Testament was concerned with
those believing in Jesus. We need to be consistent by treating Revelation the same as any
6
A. Y. Collins’ statement summarizes well this prevailing understanding by
saying that “Perhaps the hardest won and most dearly held result of historical-critical
scholarship on the Revelation to John is the theory that the work must be interpreted in
terms of the historical context in which it was composed. Such an approach refers the
images of Revelation to contemporary historical events and to eschatological images
current at the time. Probably the most widely accepted conclusions of this approach are
that the beast from the sea of chap. 13 and the woman of chap. 17 represent the Roman
empire in some way.”A. Y. Collins, “The Political Perspectives,” 241.
7
Cf., Sigve Tonstad, “Appraising the Myth of Nero Redivivus in the Interpretation
of Revelation,” AUSS 46 (2008): 176.
313
other New Testament book. Revelation’s concern is with the church; a concern which is
expressed at the very beginning of the book with the messages to the seven churches.
Ford made this point clear by arguing that the root of the word ekklēsia (church) appears
only at the beginning and the end of the book.8 This “forms an inclusio”9 and indicates
that John’s concept of the church is present throughout the whole book. Ford further
pointed out that, “John’s concept of the church is found in the materials between the
frames.”10 The book of Revelation indeed is “church-minded,” as Eduard Schweizer
said.11
Second, the identification of the image of the beast with a group within the
Christian church and with Babylon the Great implies that the message of Revelation was
intended by John to be relevant to all believers during all ages. The spirit of Babylon,
which will finally lead to the formation of the image of the beast, is indeed not something
outside of us: pagan Rome or the anti-Christian Jews, but is within each one of us, who
are all described by the Bible as sinful human beings. The city of Babylon made its first
biblical appearance in Gen 11. There, a group of human beings strove to glorify
themselves, and tried to build a city apart from God and in rebellion against him. In the
story, God saw them, he saw their true nature, that they were one people, with one
language, who were building their one city in rebellion against God. If they had been
The root of ekklēsia occurs twenty times in the book. There are nineteen
8
occurrences at the beginning of the book (Rev 1:4, 11, 20 (twice); 2:1, 7, 8, 11, 12, 17, 18,
23, 29; 3:1, 6, 7, 13, 14, 22). It occurs only once at the end (22:16). See Tavo, “The
Ecclesial Notions,” 116.
9
Ford, Revelation, 245.
10
Ibid.
11
Eduard Schweizer, Church Order in the New Testament, trans. Frank Clarke
(London: SCM Press, 1963), 134.
314
successful, the first totalitarian state would have appeared in the biblical record. The
spirit of Babylon is a spirit of totalitarianism. It does not allow the existence of diversity
and individual differences, so crucial in understanding the most basic concept of the
Bible: that human beings are created in the image of God, full of creativity and diversity.
The arrogant spirit of Babylon which forces people to submit to her will is best
illustrated by the story of the mass worship of the golden image erected by King
Nebuchadnezzar in direct challenge to God’s will (Daniel 3). In this narrative, “the
satraps, prefects, governors, advisers, treasurers, judges, magistrates and all the other
provincial officials” (3:2, 3), representing all the people on earth, bowed down
mechanically like robots to the golden image. By following whatever King
Nebuchadnezzar commanded, these people had all been dehumanized, and had been
recreated in the image of Nebuchadnezzar, who later, because of his pride, became a
beast. The spirit of Babylon is the spirit of Satan, and whoever is inspired by the spirit of
Babylon will attempt to impose his/her will on others. By creating others in his/her own
image, instead of in the image of God, all these human-made images reflect the image of
the dragon/serpent (Rev 12:9), and become part of the image of the beast as revealed in
Revelation 13.
If I have understood Revelation correctly, this study of the image of the beast has
a powerful implication for the understanding of history. There have always been people
who imposed their will on others in order to establish a totalitarian state, such as the old
Babylonian Empire, the Roman Empire, the papacy in the Middle Ages, the Nazi Regime,
Stalin of the former USSR, and Maozetong of China. Today, although there may be
fewer totalitarian political powers in the world, there are still people at more local levels
who try to control others’ lives, whether in state, church, or even family, the smallest unit
315
of society.12 Thus, the passage of Revelation 13:14, 15 probes the root problem of
humanity, that anyone who continues to challenge God’s creative power in fellow human
beings, and forces his/her own will on others, partakes of the image of the beast.
In the last few years, “new approaches, new issues, and new methodologies” have
been applied to studies of the Apocalypse of John,13 resulting in multiple and often
conflicting interpretations.14 In this study, I have attempted to reopen the closed issue of
the interpretation of the image-of-the-beast motif by mainstream scholars, and have
suggested an alternative way of understanding it. This study does not claim to be the final
correct reading of the image-of-the-beast motif in Rev 13:14, 15, but the writer does hope
that it can be viewed as a helpful reading15 complementary to the current prevailing one.
12
Being a Chinese living in a totalitarian country with a 3000 year totalitarian
tradition, I know how the leaders in the Christian churches are still trying to force their
ungodly wills on the church members. Being a mother, in my early years, I was trying to
recreate my son into my own image by forcing my own will on him without respecting
his unique God given personality.
13
Barr, “Introduction,” 6.
14
David L. Barr, “Conclusion: Choosing Between Readings: Questions and
Criteria,” in Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for Students, ed. David L. Barr
(Atlanta: SBL, 2003), 166.
15
Cf. Barr, “Conclusion,” 165, 166.
316
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abir, Peter Antonysamy. The Cosmic Conflict of the Church: An Exegetico-Theological

Study of Revelation 12, 7-12. European University Studies. New York: Peter
Lang, 1995.
Alford, A. Alford’s Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary. Grand

Rapids: Guardian, 1976.
Allo, Ernest Bernard. Saint Jean, l’Apocalypse. Paris: Lecoffre J. Gabalda, 1933.
Anderson, Paul N. “Revelation 17:1-14.” Interpretation 63 (2009): 60-61.
Anderson, Roy Allan. Unfolding the Revelation: Evangelistic Studies for Public
Presentation. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1974.
The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. 1885-1887.
10 vols. Repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994.
Arasola, Kai. The End of Historicism: Millerite Hermeneutic of Time Prophecies in the
Old Testament. University of Uppsala Faculty of Theology. Sigtuna, Sweden:
Datem Publishing, 1990.
Aristophanes. Translated by J. Henderson. 5 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University

Press, 1998-2007.
Arndt, Wm. F. “Armageddon.” Concordia Theological Monthly 22 (1951): 465-471.
Aune, David E. Apocalypticism, Prophecy and Magic in Early Christianity.

Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen um Neuen Testament 199. Edited by Jörg
Frey. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006.
_______. The Cultic Setting of Realized Eschatology in Early Christianity. Leiden: Brill,
1972.
_______. “The Influence of Roman Imperial Court Ceremonial on the Apocalypse of

John.” Biblical Research 28 (1983): 5-26.
_______. Revelation 1-5. Word Biblical Commentary 52a. Nashville: Thomas Nelson,
1998.
_______. Revelation 6-16. Word Biblical Commentary 52b. Nashville: Thomas Nelson,
1998.
_______. Revelation 7-22. Word Biblical Commentary 52c. Nashville: Thomas Nelson,
1998.
317
Bahrani, Zainab. The Graven Image: Representation in Babylonia and Assyria.
Archaeology, Culture and Society. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press, 2003.
Bailey, Kenneth. “Informal Controlled Oral Tradition and the Synoptic.” Asia Journal of
Theology 5 (1991): 34-54.
_______. “Middle Eastern Oral Tradition and the Synoptic Gospels.” Expository Times
106 (1995): 363-367.
Bale, John. Select Works of John Bale. Edited by Henry Christmas. Cambridge: The
University Press, 1849.
Bandy, Alan S. “The Layers of the Apocalypse: An Integrative Approach to Revelation’s

Macrostructure.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 31 (2009): 469-499.
_______. “Nero redivivus.” Pages 71-74 in The Prophetic Lawsuit in the Book of
Revelation. New Testament Monographs 29. Edited by Stanley E. Porter.
Sheffield: Sheffield, 2010.
_______. “Persecution and the Purpose of Revelation with Reference to Roman

Jurisprudence.” Bulletin for Biblical Research 23 (2013): 377-398.
Barclay, William. The Revelation of John. Translated with an Introduction and

Interpretation by William Barclay. 2 vols. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976.
Barnett, Paul. “Polemical Parallelism: Some Further Reflections on the Apocalypse.”

Journal for the Study of the New Testament 35 (1989):111-120.
Barnhouse, Donald Grey. Revelation: An Expository Commentary, “God's Last Word.”

Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1971.
Barr, David L. “The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation of the World: A Literary

Analysis.” Interpretation 38 (1984): 39-50.
_______. “The Apocalypse of John as Oral Enactment.” Interpretation 40 (1986): 243-

256.
_______. “Conclusion: Choosing Between Readings: Questions and Criteria.” Pages 163-
172 in Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for Students. Edited by David
L. Barr. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.
_______. “Introduction: Reading Revelation Today. Consensus and Innovations.” Pages

1-9 in Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for Students. Edited by David
L. Barr. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.
_______. Tales of the End: A Narrative Commentary on the Book of Revelation. Santa
Rosa, CA: Polebridge, 1988.
Barrett, C. K. “Gnosis and the Apocalypse of John.” Pages 127-128 in The New
Testament and Gnosis: Essays in Honor of Robert McL. Wilson. Edited by A. H.
B. Logan and A. J. M. Wedderburn. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1983.
Barton, George Aaron. The Semitic Ishtar Cult. Piscateway, NJ: Gorgias, 2007.
318
Bauckham, Richard. “The Book of Revelation as a Christian War Scroll.”
Neotestamentica 22 (1988): 17-40.
_______. The Climax of Prophecy: Studies on the Book of Revelation. Edinburgh: T & T
Clark, 1993.
_______. “The Economic Critique of Rome in Revelation.” Pages 127-129 in Images of

Empire. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 122.
Edited by L. Alexander. Sheffield: JSOT, 1991.
_______. “The Eschatological Earthquake in the Apocalypse of John.” Novum

Testamentum19 (1977): 224-233.
_______. “Judgment in the Book of Revelation.” Ex Auditu 20 (2004): 1-24.
_______. The Theology of the Book of Revelation. New Testament Theology. Edited by
James D. G. Dunn. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Bauder, Wolfgang. “Thērion.” New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology.
Edited by Colin Brown. 4 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975-1978. 1:113-114.
Bauer, T. J. Das tausendjährige Messiasreich der Johannesoffenbarung: Eine

literarkritische Studie zu Offb 19, 11-12. New York: de Gruyter, 2007.
Beagley, A. J. The “Sitz im Leben” of the Apocalypse with Particular Reference to the
Role of the Church’s Enemies. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1987.
Beal, R. “Dividing a God.” Pages 197-208 in Magic and Ritual in the Ancient World.
Edited by P. Mirecki and M. Meyer. Leiden: Brill, 2002.
Beale, G. K. The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1999.
_______. “Danielic Background for Revelation 13:18 and 17:9.” Tyndale Bulletin 31
(1980): 163-170.
_______. John’s Use of the Old Testament in Revelation. Journal for the Study of the
New Testament Supplement Series 166. Edited by Stanley E. Porter. Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1998.
________. “The Millennium in Revelation 20:1-10: An Amillennial Perspective.”

Criswell Theological Review 11 (2013): 29-62.
_______. The Use of Daniel in Jewish Apocalyptic and in the Revelation of St. John.
Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1984.
_______. “The Use of Daniel in the Synoptic Eschatological Discourse and in the Book
of Revelation.” Pages 129-153 in Gospel Perspectives: The Jesus Tradition
Outside the Gospel. Edited by David Wenham. Sheffield: JSOT, 1980.
_______. “The Purpose of Symbolism in the Book of Revelation." Calvin Theological

Journal 41 (2006): 53-66.
319
_______. We Become What We Worship: A Biblical Theology of Idolatry. Downers
Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2008.
Beasley-Murray, G. R. The Book of Revelation. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983.
Beaulieu, Paul-Alain. “The Babylonian Background of the Motif of the Fiery Furnace in
Daniel 3.” Journal of Biblical Literature 128 (2009): 273-290.
_______. The Reign of Nabonidus, King of Babylon 556-539 B.C. Yale Near Eastern
Researches 10. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989.
Beckwith, Ishon T. The Apocalypse of John. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979.
Bede. The Explanation of the Apocalypse. Translated by Edward Marshall. Oxford: J.

Parker & Co., 1878.
Ben-Daniel, John, and Gloria Ben-Daniel. The Apocalypse in the Light of the Temple: A
New Approach to the Book of Revelation. Jerusalem: Beit Yochanan, 2003.
Bengel, Johann Albrecht. Bengelius’s Introduction to His Exposition of the Apocalypse

with His Preface to that Work. Translated by John Robertson. London: J. Ryall
and R. Withy, 1757.
Berkouwer, G. C. Man: The Image of God. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962.
Berlejung, Angelika. “Geheimnis und Ereignis. Zur Funktion und Aufgabe der Kultbilder
in Mesopotamien.” Jahrbüch für biblische Theologie 13 (1998): 31-51.
_______. “Washing the Mouth: The Consecration of Divine Images in Mesopotamia.”

Pages 45-72 in The Image and the Book. Edited by K. van der Toorn.
Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology 21. Leuven: Peeters, 1997.
Bernhardt, Karl Heinz. Gott und Bild; ein Beitrag zur Begründung und Deutung des
Bilderverbotes im Alten Testament. Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1956.
Betz, H. D. “On the Problem of the Religion-Historical Understanding of

Apocalypticism.” Journal for Theology and the Church 6 (1969): 134-156.
Bevan, Dewyn. Holy Images: An Inquiry into Idolatry and Image-Worship in Ancient
Paganism and in Christianity. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1940.
Beyerlin, Walter, ed. Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating to the Old Testament.
Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978.
Bigalke, Ron J., Jr. “The Revival of Futurist Interpretation Following the Reformation.”
Journal of Dispensational Theology 13 (2009): 43-56.
Black, Jeremy A. “The New Year Ceremonies in Ancient Babylon: ‘Taking Bel by the
Hand’ and a Cultic Picnic.” Religion 11 (1981): 39-59.
Blackman, A. M. “The Rite of the Opening of the Mouth in Ancient Egypt and
Babylonia.” Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 10 (1924): 47-59.
320
Blackman, A. M., and H. W. Fairman. “The Consecration of an Egyptian Temple
According to the Use of Edfu.” Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 32 (1946): 75-
91.
Blaising, Craig A. “Premillennialism: A Progressive Dispensational View.” Criswell

Theological Review 11 (2013): 63-70.
Blaising, Craig A., K. L. Gentry, R. B. Strimple, and D. L. Bock, eds. Three Views on the
Millennium and Beyond. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999.
Blenkinsopp, Joseph. Isaiah 40-55: A New Translation with Introduction and

Commentary. Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 2002.
Bloomfield, Morton. “Joachim of Flora: A Critical Survey of His Canon, Teachings,

Sources, Biography and Influence.” Traditio 13 (1957): 249-311.
Boden, Peggy J. “The Mesopotamian Washing of the Mouth (mīs pî) Ritual: An
Examination of Some of the Social and Communication Strategies Which Guided
the Development and Performance of the Ritual Which Transferred the Essence
of the Deity into Its Temple Statue.” PhD diss., Johns Hopkins University, 1998.
Bonner, Gerald. “Augustine and Millenarianism.” Pages 235-254 in The Making of

Orthodoxy: Essays in Honour of Henry Chadwick. Edited by Rowan Williams.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Bonnet, Hans. Reallexikonder ägyptischen Religionsgeschichte. Berlin: Walter de

Gruyter, 2000.
Boring, M. Eugene. Revelation. Interpretation: A Commentary for Teaching and

Preaching. Louisville, KY: Knox, 1989.
Bostick, Curtis V. The Antichrist and the Lollards: Apocalypticism in Late Medieval and
Reformation England. Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought 70. Edited
by Heiko A. Oberman. Leiden: Brill, 1998.
Bottéro J. “Les inventaires de Qatna.” Revue d’assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale 43

(1949): 1-40.
Botterweck, G. Johannes, and Helmer Ringgren, eds. Theological Dictionary of the Old
Testament. Translated by John T. Willis et al. 8 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1974-2006.
Bousset, Wilhelm. The Antichrist Legend: A Chapter in Christian and Jewish Folklore.
Translated by A. H. Keane. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999.
_______. Die Offenbarung Johannis. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966.
Bowman, W. “The Revelation to John: Its Dramatic Structure and Message.”

Interpretation 9 (1955): 436-453.
Boxall, Ian. “Reading the Apocalypse on the Island of Patmos.” Scripture Bulletin 40
(2010): 22-33.
321
Bredin, M. Jesus, Revolutionary of Peace: A Nonviolent Christology in the Book of
Revelation. Carlisle, England: Paternoster, 2003.
Bright, Pamela. The Book of Rules of Tyconius: Its Purpose and Inner Logic. Christianity
and Judaism in Antiquity 2. Edited by Charles Kannengiesser. Notre Dame:
University of Notre Dame Press, 1988.
Brock, Sebastian P. “The Thrice-Holy Hymn in the Liturgy.” Sobornost 7 (1985): 24-34.
Broughton, T. R. S. “Roman Asia.” Pages 499-916 in An Economic Survey of Ancient

Rome, Volume IV: Africa, Syria, Greece, Asia Minor. Edited by Tenney Frank.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1938.
Brown, Colin, ed. New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. 4 vols.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975-1978.
Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. Hebrew and English Lexicon of the
Old Testament. Peabody, MA: Hendricksen, 1979.
Bruns, J. Edgar. “The Contrasted Women of Apocalypse 12 and 17.” Catholic Bible
Quarterly 26 (1964): 459-463.
Brütsch, Charles. L'apocalypse de Jésus-Christ: Commentaire et notes. Genève: Éditions

Labor, 1942.
Budge, E. A. Wallis. The Book of Opening the Mouth: The Egyptian Texts with English
Translations. New York: Benjamin Blom, 1972.
Bue, Francesco Lo, ed. The Turin Fragments of Tyconius’ Commentary on Revelation.
New York: Cambridge University Press, 1963.
Bullinger, E. W. The Apocalypse: Or, “The Day of the Lord.” London: Eyre &
Spottiswoode, 1935.
Burnet, Adam W. The Lord Reigneth: The Russell Lectures for 1944 on the Book of
Revelation. New York: C. Scribner's Sons, 1946.
Burr, David. “Mendicant Readings of the Apocalypse.” Pages 38-50 in The Apocalypse
in the Middle Ages. Edited by Richard Kenneth Emmersion and Bernard McGinn.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992.
_______. Olivi and Franciscan Poverty: The Origins of the Usus Pauper Controversy.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1989.
_______. The Persecution of Peter Olivi. Philadelphia: The American Philosophical

Society, 1976.
Caird, G. B. A Commentary on the Revelation of St. John the Divine. New York: Harper
& Row, 1966.
_______. The Revelation of Saint John. Black’s New Testament Commentaries. Peabody,
MA: Hendrickson, 1993.
322
Campbell, D. K., and J. T. Townsend, eds. A Case for Premillennialism. Chicago: Moody
Press, 1992.
Campbell, W. G. “Antithetical Feminine-Urban Imagery and a Tale of Two Women-

Cities in the Book of Revelation.” Tyndale Bulletin 55 (2004): 81-108.
________. “Broken Covenant and New Covenant.” Pages 264-343 in Reading

Revelation: A Thematic Approach. Cambridge: James Clarke and Co., 2012.
________. “Findings, Seals, Trumpets, and Bowls: Variations upon the Theme of
Covenant Rupture and Restoration in the Book of Revelation.” Westminster
Theological Journal 66 (2004): 71-96.
_______. Reading Revelation: A Thematic Approach. Cambridge: James Clarke and Co,
2012.
Carnegie, David R. “Worthy Is the Lamb: The Hymns in Revelation.” Pages 243-256 in
Christ the Lord: Studies in Christology Presented to Donald Guthrie. Edited by
Harold H. Rowdon. Leicester: IVP, 1982.
Carrington, Philip. The Meaning of the Revelation. New York: Society for Promoting
Christian Knowledge, 1931.
Case, Shirley Jackson. The Revelation of John: A Historical Interpretation. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press, 1919.
Charles, R. H. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John. The
International Critical Commentary. 2 vols. Edinburgh: T & T. Clark, 1920.
_______. Studies in the Apocalypse: Being Lectures Delivered before the University of
London. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1913.
_______. The Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch Edited from Twenty-Three Mss.
Together with the Fragmentary Greek and Latin Version. Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1906.
Charlesworth, James H. The Good and Evil Serpent: How a Universal Symbol Became
Christianized. Anchor Bible Reference Library. New Haven: Yale University
Press, 2010.
_______., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Volume 2: Apocalyptic Literature and
Testaments. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2013.
Chilton, David. The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation. Ft.
Worth, TX: Dominion, 1987.
Clarysse, W. “Egyptian Estate-Holders in the Ptolemaic Period.” Pages 2:731-743 in

State and Temple Economy in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the
International Conference. 2 Volumes. Edited by Edward Lipinski. Orientalia
Lovaniensia analecta. Leuven: Departement Oriëntalistiek, 1979.
Collins, Adela Yarbro. The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation. Eugene, OR: Wipf
and Stock, 2001.
323
_______. Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism. New
York: E. J. Brill, 1996.
_______. Crisis and Catharsis: The Power of the Apocalypse. Philadelphia: Westminster,
1984.
_______. “Eschatology in the Book of Revelation.” Ex Auditu 6 (1990): 63-72.
_______. “Feminine Symbolism in the Book of Revelation.” Pages 121-130 in A

Feminist Companion to the Apocalypse of John. Feminist Companion to the New
Testament and Early Christian Writings 13. Edited by Amy-Jill Levine and Maria
Mayo Robbins. New York: T & T Clark, 2009.
_______. “The History-of-Religion Approach to Apocalypticism and ‘The Angel of the

Waters’ (Rev 16:4-7).” Catholic Bible Quarterly 39 (1977): 380-381.
_______. “Persecution and Vengeance in the Book of Revelation.” Pages 729-749 in

Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East: Proceedings of
the International Colloquium on Apocalypticism, Uppsala, August 12-17, 1979,
ed. David Hellholm. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983.
_______.“The Political Perspective on the Revelation to John,” Journal of Biblical

Literature 96 (1977): 241-256.
_______. “Revelation 18: Taunt-Song or Dirge?” Pages 185-204 in L’Apocalypse

johannique et l’Apocalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament, ed. J. Lambrecht.
Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1980.
_______. “The Revelation of John: An Apocalyptic Response to a Social Crisis.”

Currents in Theology and Mission 8 (1981): 4-12.
_______. “Vilification and Self-definition in the Book of Revelation.” Harvard

Theological Review 79 (1986): 308-320.
Collins, B. J. “A Statue for the Deity: Cult Images in Hittite Anatolia.” Pages 13-42 in
Cult Image and Divine Presentation in the Ancient Near East. American Schools
of Oriental Research Books Series 10. Edited by Brian B. Schmidt. Boston:
American Schools of Oriental Research, 2005.
Collins, Oral Edmond. The Final Prophecy of Jesus: An Introduction, Analysis, and
Commentary on the Book of Revelation. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2007.
Cornelius, Izak. “Aspects of the Iconography of the Warrior Goddess Ištar and Ancient
Near Eastern Prophecies.” Pages 15-40 in Images and Prophecy in the Ancient
Eastern Mediterranean. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und
Neuen Testaments. Edited by Martti Nissinen and Charles E. Carter. Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2009.
Corpus Christianorum: Series Latina. Turnhout: Brepols, 1953.
Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium. Edited by Jean Baptiste Chabot et al.

Louvain: Peeters, 1903.
324
Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum. 87 vols. Vienna: [different publishers],
1864-1977.
Couch, Mal. Ed. A Bible Handbook to Revelation. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications,
2001.
Court, J. M. Myth and History in the Book of Revelation. London: SPCK, 1979.
Coutsoumpos, P. “The Social Implication of Idolatry in Revelation 2:14: Christ or

Caesar?” Biblical Theology Bulletin 27 (1997): 23-27.
Cowan, Martyn. “New World, New Temple, New Worship: The Book of Revelation in
the Theology and Practice of Christian Worship.” Churchman 119 (2005): 297-
312.
Crehan, J. H. “Ambrosiaster.” Pages 1:346-347 in New Catholic Encyclopedia. Edited

by Berard L. Marthaler. New York: Gale, 2003.
Cullmann, Oscar Cullmann. Early Christian Worship. London: SCM Press, 1953.
Curtis, Edward M. “Idol, Idolatry.” Pages 3:376-381 in Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited
by David Noel Freedman. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
_______. “Image of God (OT).” Pages 3:389-391 in Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by
David Noel Freedman. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Dalley, Stephanie. “Babylon as a Name for Other Cities Including Nineveh.” Pages 25-33
in Proceedings of the 51st Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Held at the
Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, July 18-22, 2005. Studies in
Ancient Oriental Civilizations 62. Edited by Robert D. Biggs, Jennie Myers, and
Martha T. Roth. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago,
2007.
Dalrymple, Rob. “John’s Account of the Two Witnesses and the Implications for
Understanding John’s Depiction of the People of God and His Hortatory Intent,
Abstracts of Recent WTS Doctoral Dissertations.” Westminster Theological
Journal 71 (2009): 489-494.
_______. Revelation and the Two Witnesses: The Implications for Understanding John’s
Depiction of the People of God and His Hortatory Intent. Eugene, OR: Wipf &
Stock, 2011.
Dandamayev, M. A. “State and Temple in Babylonia in the First Millennium B. C.”

Pages 2:589-596 in State and Temple Economy in the Ancient Near East:
Proceedings of the International Conference. 2 Volumes. Edited by Edward
Lipinski, Orientalia Lovaniensia analecta. Leuven: Departement Oriëntalistiek,
1979.
Daniélou, J. The Bible and the Liturgy. Notre Dame: University Press, 1956.
Danker, Frederick W., Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. Greek-
English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd
ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
325
Davidson, Richard M. “Sanctuary Typology.” Pages 99-130 in Symposium on
Revelation—Book I. Daniel and Revelation Committee Series 6. Edited by Frank
B. Holbrook. Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference
of the Seventh-day Adventists, 1992.
Davis, Christopher A. Revelation. The College Press NIV Commentary. Edited by Jack
Cottrell and Tony Ash. Joplin, MO: College Press, 2000.
Day, John. “The Origin of Armageddon: Revelation 16:16 as an Interpretation of

Zechariah 12:11.” Pages 315-326 in Crossing the Boundaries: Essays in Biblical
Interpretation in Honour of Michael D. Goulder. Edited by S. Porter and P. Joyce.
Leiden: Brill, 1994.
De Hoveden, Roger. The Annals of Roger De Hoveden. Comprising the History of

England and of Other Countries of Europe from A. D. 732 to A. D. 1201. 2 vols.
Translated by Henry T. Riley. London: H. G. Bohn, 1853.
De Villiers, Pieter G. R. “The Composition of Revelation 14:1-15:8: Pastiche or Perfect
Pattern?” Neotestamentica 38 (2004): 209-249.
_______. “The Composition of Revelation 17 and Its Place in the Book as a Whole.”
Acta Patristica et Byzantina 13 (2002): 97-119.
_______. “Rome in the Historical Interpretation of Revelation.” Acta Patristica et

Byzantina 13 (2002): 120-142.
Decock, Paul B. “Hostility against the Wealth of Babylon: Revelation 17:1-19:10.” Pages
263-286 in Animosity, the Bible, and Us: Some European, North American, and
South African Perspectives. Edited by John T. Fitzgerald, Fika J. van Rensburg,
and Herrie F. van Rooy. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2009.
Deere, Jack S. “Premillennialism in Revelation 20:4-6.” Bibliotheca Sacra 135 (1978):

58-73.
Deichgraber, Reinhard. Gotteshymnus und Christushymnus in der frühen Christenheit:

Untersuchungen zu Form, Sprache und Stil der frühchristlichen Hymnen.
Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1967.
De Laune, Thomas. Eikon Tou Theriou, or, The Image of the Beast Shewing by a Parallel
Scheme What a Conformist the Church of Rome Is to the Pagan, and What a
Nonconformist to the Christian Church in I'ts [sic] Rites, Service and Ceremonys,
the Better to Exemplify the True and False Church. London: S.N., 1684.
Delling, G. “Zum gottesdienstlichen Stil der Johannes-Apokalypse.” Novum

Testamentum 3 (1959): 107-137.
DeMar, Gary. End Times Fiction: A Biblical Consideration of the Left-Behind Theology.
Nashville: Nelson, 2001.
DeSilva, David A. “Final Topics: The Rhetorical Functions of Intertexture in Revelation

14:14-16:21.” Pages in 215-241 in The Intertexture of Apocalypse Discourse in
the New Testament. Edited by Duane E. Watson. Atlanta: Society of Biblical
Literature, 2002.
326
_______. “Honor Discourse and the Rhetorical Strategy of the Apocalypse of John.”
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 71 (1998): 79-110.
_______. “The ‘Image of the Beast’ and the Christians in Asia Minor: Escalation of
Sectarian Tension in Revelation 13.” Trinity Journal 12 (1991): 185-208.
_______. “Seeing Things John’s Way: Rhetography and Conceptual Blending in

Revelation 14:6-13.” Bulletin for Biblical Research 18 (2008): 271-298.
_______. Seeing Things John’s Way: The Rhetoric of the Book of Revelation. Louisville,
KY: Westminster John Knox, 2009.
_______. “A Sociorhetorical Interpretation of Revelation 14:6-13: A Call to Act Justly

Toward the Just and Judging God.” Bulletin for Biblical Research 9 (1999): 65-
117.
Dick, Michael B. “The Mesopotamian Cult Statue: A Sacramental Encounter with

Divinity.” Pages 43-67 in Cult Image and Divine Representation in the Ancient
Near East. American Schools of Oriental Research Book Series 10. Edited by
Brian B. Schmidt. Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research, 2005.
_______. “The Relationship Between the Cult Image and the Deity.” Pages 111-116 in
Intellectual Life of the Ancient Near East: Papers Presented at the 43rd Rencontre
assyriologique internationale, Prague, July 1-5, 1996. Edited by Jiří Prosecký.
Prague: Oriental Institute, 1998.
Diodati, Giovanni. Pious and Learned Annotations upon the Holy Bible: Plainly
Expounding the Most Difficult Places Thereof. London: Nicolas Fussell, 1651.
Diodorus of Sicily. Translated by C. H. Oldfather et al. 10 vols. Loeb Classical Library.

Cambridge: Harvard Univeristy Press, 1933.
Doukhan, Jacques. Israel and the Church: Two Voices for the Same God. Peabody, MA:
Hendrickson, 2002.
_______. Secrets of Revelation: The Apocalypse Through Hebrew Eyes. Hagerstown,

MD: Review and Herald, 2005.
Duff, Paul B. “‘The Synagogue of Satan’: Crisis Mongering and the Apocalypse of
John.” Pages 147-168 in The Reality of Apocalypse: Rhetoric and Politics in the
Book of Revelation. Edited by David L. Barr. Atlanta: Society of Biblical
Literature, 2006.
_______. Who Rides the Beast: Prophetic Rivalry and the Rhetoric of Crisis in the
Churches of the Apocalypse. New York: Oxford Press, 2001.
_______. “Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing: Literary Opposition and Social Tension in the
Revelation of John.” Pages 65-79 in Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource
for Students. Edited by David L. Barr. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature,
2003.
Dulaey, Martine. “L’Apocalypse. Augustin et Tyconius.’ Pages 369-386 in Saint
Augustin et la Bible. Bible de tous les temps 3. Edited by A. M. La Bonnardière.
Paris: Beauchesne, 1986.
327
Dunbar, David G. “Hippolytus of Rome and the Eschatological Exegesis of the Early
Church.” Westminster Theological Journal 45 (1983): 322-339.
Dyer, Charles H. “The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17 and 18.” ThM thesis, Dallas
Theological Seminary, 1979.
_______. “The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-19, Part 1.” Bibliotheca Sacra 144
(1987): 305-316.
_______. “The Identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18, Part 2.” Bibliotheca Sacra 144
(1987): 433-449.
Ebeling, Erich. Tod und Leben nach den Vorstellungen der Babylonier. Berlin: Walter de
Gruyter, 1931.
Elliott, E. B. Horae Apocalypticae. 4 vols. London: Seeley, Jackson, and Halliday, 1862.
Emmerson, Richard Kenneth. Antichrist in the Middle Ages: A Study of Medieval
Apocalypticism, Art, and Literature. Seattle: University of Washington Press,
1981.
Erdman, Charles R. The Revelation of John: An Exposition. Philadelphia: Westminster

Press, 1936.
Euripides. Translated by David Kovacs et al. 8 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1994.
Evans, Craig A. Word and Glory: On the Exegetical and Theological Background of
John’s Prologue. Sheffield: JSOT, 1993.
Farrer, A. M. A Rebirth of Images. London: Dacre, 1949.
Fee, Gordon D. New Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors.
Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 1993.
_______. Revelation. New Covenant Commentary Series 18. Eugene, OR: Cascade
Books, 2011.
Fekkes, Jan. “His Bride Has Prepared Herself: Revelation 12-21 and Isaian Nuptial
Imagery.” Journal of Biblical Literature 109 (1990): 269-287.
_______. Isaiah and Prophetic Traditions in the Book of Revelation: Visionary

Antecedents and their Development. Journal for the Study of the New Testament
Supplement Series 93. Sheffield: JSOT, 1994.
Filho, José Adriano. “The Apocalypse of John as an Account of a Visionary Experience:

Notes on the Book’s Structure.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 25
(2002): 213-234.
Finamore, Stephen. God, Order and Chaos: René Girard and the Apocalypse. Paternoster
Biblical Monographs. Colorado Springs, CO: Paternoster, 2009.
Finley, M. I. The Ancient Economy. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1973.
328
Finnestad, R. Bjerre. “The Meaning and Purpose of Opening the Mouth in Mortuary
Contexts.” Numen 25 (1978): 118-134.
Fiorenza, Elisabeth Schüssler. “Apocalyptic and Gnosis in the Book of Revelation and
Paul.” Journal of Biblical Literature 92 (1973): 565-581.
_______. “Composition and Structure of the Book of Revelation.” Catholic Bible

Quarterly 39 (1977): 344-366.
_______. “The Followers of the Lamb: Visionary Rhetoric and Social-Political

Situation.” Semeia 36 (1986): 123-146.
_______. Invitation to the Book of Revelation. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1981.
_______. Revelation: Vision of a Just World. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1991.
Fitch, Charles. “Come out of Her, My People: A Sermon.” Midnight Cry 5 (1843): 33-36.
Fitzgerald, Aloysius. “The Mythological Background for the Presentation of Jerusalem as
a Queen and False Worship as Adultery in the OT.” Catholic Bible Quarterly 34
(1972): 403-416.
Fitzmyer, Joseph A. The Acts of the Apostles: A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary. Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 1997.
Foerster, Werner. “Die Bilder in Offenbarung 12f. und 17f.” Theologische Studien und
Kritiken 104 (1932): 279-310.
Ford, Desmond. Crisis: A Commentary on the Book of Revelation. Newcastle, CA:

Desmond Ford Publications, 1982.
Ford, J. Massyngberde. “Persecution and Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation.” The

Bible Today 26 (1990): 141-146.
_______. “The Priestly People of God in the Apocalypse.” Listening 28 (1993): 245-260.
_______. Revelation. Anchor Bible. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1975.

_______. “The Structure and Meaning of Revelation 16.” Expository Times 98 (1987):
327-331.
Foster, Benjamin R. Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature. Bethesda,

MD: CDL, 1993.
Franz, Gordon. “The King and I: Exiled to Patmos, Part 2.” Bible and Spade 12 (1999):
115-123.
Fredriksen, Paula. “Apocalypse and Redemption in Early Christianity; from John of

Patmos to Augustine of Hippo.” Vigiliae Christianae 45 (1991): 151-183.
_______. “Tyconius and Augustine on the Apocalypse.” Pages 20-37 in The Apocalypse
in the Middle Ages. Edited by Richard Kenneth Emmerson and Bernard McGinn.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992.
329
Freedberg, David. The Power of Images: Studies in the History and Theory of Response.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989.
Freedman, David Noel, ed. Anchor Bible Dictionary. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday,
1992.
Friesen, Steven J. “The Beast from the Land: Revelation 13:11-18 and Social Setting.”
Pages 49-64 in Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for Students. Edited
by David L. Barr. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.
_______. “Ephesus: Key to Vision in Revelation.” Biblical Archaeology Review 19

(1993): 24-37.
_______. Imperial Cults and the Apocalypse of John. New York: Oxford University
Press, 2001.
_______. “Myth and Symbolic Resistance in Revelation 13.” Journal of Biblical

Literature 123 (2004): 281-313.
Froom, LeRoy Edwin. The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers: The Historical Development
of Prophetic Interpretation. 4 vols. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1950.
Fuerst, Julius. A Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament with an Introduction
Giving a Short History of Hebrew Lexicography. London: Williams & Norgate,
1867.
Fuller, Robert C. Naming the Antichrist: The History of an American Obsession. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
Gaebelein, Arno Clemens. The Revelation: An Analysis and Exposition of the Last Book
of the Bible. New York: Our Hope Publication Office, 1915.
Gane, Constance E. “Composite Beings in Neo-Babylonian Art.” PhD diss., University of

California, Berkeley, 2012.
Gane, Roy E. Ritual Dynamic Structure. Gorgias Dissertations 14. New Jersey: Gorgias
Press, 2004.
Gangemi, A. “L’utilizazione del Deutero-Isaia dell’Apocalisse di Giovanni.” Euntes
Docete 27 (1974): 109-144.
Gardner, Percy. “Countries and Cities in Ancient Art.” Journal of Hellenic Studies 9
(1888): 47-81.
Gaston, Lloyd. “Judaism of the Uncircumcised in Ignatius and Related Writers.” Pages
33-44 in Anti-Judaism in Early Christianity. Studies in Early Christianity and
Judaism 2. Edited by Stephen G. Wilson. Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier
Gentry, Kenneth L. Before Jerusalem Fell. Atlanta: American Vision, 1990.

_______. He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology. Tyler, TX: Institute
for Christian Economics, 1997.
330
_______. “A Preterist View of Revelation.” Pages 76-77 in Four Views on the Book of
Revelation. Edited by C. Marvin Pate. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998.
Giblin, Charles Homer. “Recapitulation and the Literary Coherence of John’s

Apocalypse.” Catholic Bible Quarterly 56 (1994): 81-95.
Giesen, Heinz. Die Offenbarung des Johannes. Regensburg: Pustet, 1997.
Glancy, Jennifer A., and Stephen D. Moore. “How Typical a Roman Prostitute Is
Revelation’s ‘Great Whore’?” Journal of Biblical Literature 130 (2011): 551-569.
Glasson, T. R. F. The Revelation of John. Cambridge Bible Commentary. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1965.
Godfrey, Michael J. H. Babylon’s Cap: Reflections on the Book of Revelation. Eugene,

OR: Wipf & Stock, 2013.
Goldingay, John E. Daniel. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word Books, 1989.
Goodwin, Thomas. The Works of Thomas Goodwin, D.D., Sometime President of

Magdalene College in Oxford. Edited by Thankfull Owen and James Barron.
London: Thomas Goodwin Jr., 1683.
Gordon, Cyrus H. “Leviathan: Symbol of Evil.” Pages 1-9 in Biblical Motifs: Origins and
Transformations. Studies and Texts, 3. Edited by Alexander Altmann. London:
Oxford University Press, 1966.
Goulder, M. D. “The Apocalypse as an Annual cycle of Prophecies.” New Testament

Studies 27 (1981): 342-367.
Grant, Robert M. The Sword and the Cross. New York: MacMillan, 1955.
Graves, David. The Seven Messages of Revelation and Vassal Treaties: Literary Genre,
Structure, and Function. Gorgias Dissertations 41. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press,
2009.
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature.
Edited by W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. W. Danker. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 2000.
Greengus, Samuel. “Legal and Social Institutions of Ancient Mesopotamia.” Pages 469-
484 in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, ed. Jack M. Sasson. New York:
Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1995.
Gregg, Steve. Revelation: Four Views, Revised and Updated, A Parallel Commentary.
Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2013.
Gregory, Peter F. “Its End Is Destruction: Babylon the Great in the Book of Revelation.”
Concordia Theological Quarterly 73 (2009): 137-153.
Grenfell, Bernard P., and Arthur S. Hunt, ed. and trans. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1915.
331
Grenz, Stanley J. The Millennial Maze: Sorting out Evangelical Options. Downers Grove,
IL: IVP, 1992.
Groneberg, Brigitte. “The Role and Function of Goddesses in Mesopotamia.” Pages 319-
331 in The Babylonian World, ed. Gwendolyn Leick. New York: Routledge, 2007.
Groom, Nigel. Frankincense and Myrrh: A Study of the Arabian Incense Trade. New
York: Librairie du Liban, 1981.
Grotius, Hugo. Annotationes in Novum Testamentum. Leipzig: Erlangae, 1756.
Gruber, Mayer. “‘In the Image of God’: What Is It?” Pages 81-87 in Homage to Shmuel:
Studies in the World of Bible. Edited by Zipora Talshir, Shamir Yona, and Daniel
Sivan. Jerusalem: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press/Bialik Institute,
2001.
Grundmann, Herbert. Studien über Joachim von Fiore: mit einem Vorwort zum Neudruck.
Stuttgart: Teubner, 1975.
Gryson, Roger. “Les commentaries patristiques latins de l’Apocalypse [part 1].” Revue
théologique de Louvain 28 (1997): 305-377.
Gundry, Robert. “The New Jerusalem: People as Place, Not Place for People.” Novum
Testamentum 29 (1987): 254-264.
Gunkel, Hermann. Creation and Chaos in the Primeval Era and the Eschaton: A Religio-
Historical Study of Genesis 1 and Revelation 12. Translated by K. William
Whitney. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006.
Gunkel, Hermann. Schöpfung und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit: Eine

religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung über Gen 1 und Ap Joh 12. Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1895.
Guy, Laurie. “Back to the Future: The Millennium and the Exodus in Revelation 20.”
Evangelical Quarterly 86 (2014): 227-238.
Hadorn, D. W. Die Offenbarung Des Johannes. Theologischer Handkommentar zum

Neuen Testament 18. Leipzig: Deichert, 1928.
Hailey, Homer. Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker,
1979.
Hall, Mark Seaborn. “The Hook Interlocking Structure of Revelation: The Most
Important Verses in the Book and How They May Unify Its Structure.” Novum
Testamentum 44 (2002): 278-296.
Hallo, William W., ed. The Context of Scripture. 3 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1997.
Hansen, Ryan Leif. Silence and Praise: Rhetorical Cosmology and Political Theology in
the Book of Revelation. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2014.
Harding, Thomas. A Confutation of a Book Entitled an Apology of the Church of England.
Antwerp: Ihon Laet, 1565.
332
Hare, Douglas R. A. The Theme of the Jewish Persecution of Chrisitans in the Gospel of
St. Matthew, Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 6. Edited by
Matthew Black. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967.
Harland, P. A. “Honouring the Emperor or Assailing the Beast: Participation in the Civic
Life among Association (Jewish, Christian and Other) in Asia Minor and the
Apocalypse of John.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 77 (2000): 99-
121.
Harnack, T. Der christliche Gemeindegottesdienst im apostolischen und altkatholischen

Zeitalter. Erlangen: Theodor Biasing, 1854.
Hatch, Edwin, and Henry A. Redpath. A Concordance to the Septuagint and the Other
Greek Versions of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987.
Hays, Richard. The Conversion of the Imagination: Paul as Interpreter of Israel’s
Scripture. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005.
______. Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul. New Haven: Yale University Press,
1989.
Hays, Richard B., and Stefan Alkier. “Introduction.” Pages 1-9 in Revelation and the
Politics of Apocalyptic Interpretation. Edited by Richard B. Hays and Stefan
Alkier. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2012.
Hazelip, Harold. “Revelation 20 and the Millennium.” Restoration Quarterly 18 (1975):

229-235.
Heigham, John. The Gagge of the Reformed Gospell. St. Omer: Charles Boscard, 1623.
Helms, Robert Charles. “The Apocalypse in the Early Church; Christ, Eschaton and
Millenium.” PhD diss., University of Oxford, 1991.
Helyer, Larry, and Ed Cyzewski. The Good News of Revelation. Eugene, OR: Cascade,
2014.
Hendriksen, William. More Than Conquerors. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1965.
Herring, Stephen L. “A ‘Transubstantiated’ Humanity: The Relationship Between the

Divine Image and the Presence of God in Genesis I 26f.” Vetus Testamentum 58
(2008): 480-494
Herodotus. Translated by A. D. Godley et al. 4 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge:

Harvard University Press, 1926.
Hinds, John T. A Commentary on the Book of Revelation. Nashville: Gospel Advocate,

1976.
Hitchcock, Mark L. “A Critique of the Preterist View of Revelation 17:9-11 and Nero.”
Bibliotheca Sacra 164 (2007): 472-485.
333
Hoffmann, Matthias R. The Destroyer and the Lamb. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen
zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005.
Holtz, T. Die Christologie der Apokalypse des Johannes. Texte und Untersuchungen zur
Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 85. Berlin: Akademie, 1962.
Homer. Translated by A. T. Murray. 2 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press, 1924-1945.
Hood, Renate Viveen. “Women and Warriors: Character Development in John’s

Apocalypse.” Pages 72-86 in Essays on Revelation: Appropriating Yesterday’s
Apocalypse in Today’s World. Edited by Gerald L. Stevens. Eugene, OR:
Pickwick, 2010.
Hoskier, H. C., ed. The Complete Commentary of Oecumenius on the Apocalypse.

University of Michigan Studies, Humanistic Series 23. Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan, 1928.
Huber, Lynn R. Like A Bride Adorned: Reading Metaphor in John’s Apocalypse. Emory
Studies in Early Christianity. Edited by Vernon K. Robbins. New York: T & T
Clark, 2007.
Hughes, James A. “Revelation 20:4-6 and the Question of the Millennium.” Westminster
Hughes, Kevin L. Constructing Antichrist: Paul, Biblical Commentary, and the

Development of Doctrine in the Early Middle Ages. Washington, DC: Catholic
University of America Press, 2005.
Humphrey, Edith M. And I Turned to See the Voice: The Rhetoric of Vision in the New
Testament. Studies in Theological Interpretation. Edited by Craig G.
Bartholomew, Joel B. Green, and Christopher R. Seitz. Grand Rapids: Baker
Academic, 2007.
_______. “The Tale of Two Cities and (At Least) Three Woman: Transformation,
Continuity, and Contrast in the Apocalypse.” Pages 81-96 in Reading the Book of
Revelation: A Resource for Students. Edited by David L. Barr. Atlanta: Society of
Biblical Literature, 2003.
Hurowitz, Victor Avigdor. “The Mesopotamian God Image, From Womb to Tomb.”
Journal of the American Oriental Society 123 (2003): 147-157.
Jacobs, Henry E., ed. The Lutheran Commentary: A Plain Exposition of the Holy
Scripture of the New Testament. New York: Christian Literature, 1898.
Jacobsen, T. “Graven Image.” Pages in 15-32 in Ancient Israelite Religion, Essays In

Honor of F. M. Cross. Edited by P. D. Miller, P. D. Hanson, and S. D. McBride.
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987.
Janssen, Jac J. “The Role of the Temple in the Egyptian Economy During the New
Kingdom.” Pages 505-515 in State and Temple Economy in the Ancient Near
East: Proceedings of the International Conference. 2 vols. Edited by Edward
Lipinski. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta. Leuven: Departement Oriëntalistiek,
1979.
334
Jauhiainen, Marko. “The OT Background to Armageddon (Rev. 16:16) Revisited.”
Novum Testamentum 47 (2005): 381-393.
Jenkins, Ferrell. The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation. Marion, IN: Cogdill
Foundation, 1972.
Jenni, Ernst, and Claus Westermann. Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament.
Translated by Mark E. Biddle. 3 vols. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1997.
Johns, Loren L. “The Lamb in the Rhetorical Program of the Apocalypse of John.”
Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers 37 (1998): 762-784.
Johnson, Alan F. “Revelation 18:1-24.” Pages 12: 564-568 in The Expositor’s Bible
Commentary. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981.
Johnson, B. W. A Vision of the Ages or Lectures on the Apocalypse: A Complete View of

the Book of Revelation. St. Louis, MO: Christian Board of Publication, 1881.
Johnson, Richard Warren. “Confronting the Beast: The Imperial Cult and the Book of
Revelation.” Pages 130-144 in Essays on Revelation: Appropriating Yesterday’s
Apocalypse in Today’s World. Edited by Gerald L. Stevens. Eugene, OR: Wipf &
Stock, 2010.
Johnsson, William G. “The Saints’ End-Time Victory over the Forces of Evil.” Pages 3-
40 in Symposium on Revelation, Book 2: Exegetical and General Studies. Daniel
and Revelation Committee Series 7. Edited by Frank B. Holbrook. Silver Spring,
MD: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference of the Seventh-day
Adventists, 1992.
Jörns, Klaus-Peter. Das hymnische Evangelium. Gütersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1971.
Josephus. Translated by Henry St. J. Thackeray et al. 10 vols. Loeb Classical Library.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926-1965.
Junius, Franciscus, and Thomas Barbar. The Apocalyps, or Revelation of S. Iohn the
Apostle and Evangelist of Our Lord Iesus Christ. Cambridge: Iohn Legat, 1596.
Kang, Sa-Moon. Divine War in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East. Beiheft
zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 177. New York: de Gruyter,
1989.
Kappelle, Robert P. Vande. Hope Revealed: The Message of the Book of Revelation Then
and Now. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2013.
Keener, Craig S. Revelation. The NIV Application Commentary. Edited by Terry Muck.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000.
Kellerman, James A. “Why One Thousand Years?” Concordia Journal 31 (2005): 140-
149.
Kempson, Wayne Richard. “Theology in the Revelation of John.” PhD diss., Southern
Baptist Theological Seminary, 1982.
335
Kiddle, Martin. The Revelation of St. John. The Moffat New Testament Commentary.
London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1952.
Kistemaker, Simon J. New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Book of Revelation.

Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001.
Kittel, Gerhard, Jeffrey Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich. Theological Dictionary of the
New Testament. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965-1976.
Klauck, Hans-Josef. “Do They Never Come Back? Nero Redivivus and the Apocalypse of
John.” Catholic Bible Quarterly 63 (2001): 683-698.
Klein, Ernest. A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language for

Readers of English. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company, 1987.
Kline, M. G. “The First Resurrection.” Westminster Theological Journal 37 (1975): 366-

375.
Knibb, Michael A., ed. The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of the
Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1978.
Knight, Jonathan M. Revelation. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999.
Koehler, Ludwig, Walter Baumgartner, and Johann J. Stamm. The Hebrew and Aramaic
Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated and edited under the supervision of
Mervyn E. J. Richardson. 4 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1994-1999.
Koester, Craig R. Revelation and the End of All Things. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.
_______. “Revelation’s Visionary Challenge to Ordinary Empire.” Interpretation 63

(2009): 5-18.
Kooy, V. H. “The Apocalypse and Worship—Some Preliminary Observations.”

Reformed Review 30 (1977): 198-209.
Kowalski, Beate. Die Rezeption des Propheten Ezechiel in der Offenbarung des
Johannes, Stuttgarter Biblische Beiträge 52. Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches
Bibelwerk, 2004.
Kramer, Howard W. “Contrast as a Key to Understanding the Revelation of St. John.”
Concordia Journal 23 (1997): 108-117.
Kraybill, J. N. Imperial Cult and Commerce in John’s Apocalypse. Journal for the Study
of the New Testament Supplement Series 132. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic,
1996.
Kretschmar, G. Die Offenbarung des Johannes. Stuttgart: Calwer, 1985.
Kroll, J. Die christliche Hymnodik bis zu Klemens von Alexandria. Darmstadt:

Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1968.
Kuhrt, Amélie and Susan Sherwin-White. Hellenism in the East: The Interaction of
Greek and Non-Greek Civilizations from Syria to Central Asia after Alexander.
London: Duckworth, 1987.
336
Kurth, Dieter. Treffpunkt der Götter: Inschriften aus dem Tempel des Horus von Edfu.
Zürich: Artemis, 1994.
Ladd, George E. A Commentary on the Revelation of John. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,

1972.
_______. Crucial Questions about the Kingdom of God. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952.
_______. “Revelation 20 and the Millennium.” Review & Expositor 57 (1960): 167-175.
Læssoe, Jørgen. People of Ancient Assyria: Their Inscriptions and Correspondence.

Translated by F. S. Leigh-Browne. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1963.
Lambrecht, J. “A Structuration of Revelation 4.1-22.5.” Pages 77-104 in L’Apocalypse

Johannique et l’Apocalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament. Edited by J.
Lambrecht. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1980.
Lancellotti, A. “L’Antico Testamento nell’Apocalisse.” Rivista biblica 14 (1966): 369-
384.
Landes, Richard Allen. The Apocalyptic Year 1000: Religious Expectation and Social
Change, 950-1050. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Larkin, Clarence. The Book of Revelation. Glenside, PA: Larkin, 1919.
LaRondelle, Hans K. “Babylon: Anti-Christian Empire.” Pages 151-176 in Symposium on

Revelation—Book II. Daniel and Revelation Committee Series 7. Edited by Frank
B. Holbrook. Silver Spirngs, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference
of the Seventh-day Adventists, 1992.
_______. “The Biblical Concept of Armageddon.” Journal of the Evangelical

Theological Society 28 (1985): 21-31.
_______. Chariots of Salvation: The Biblical Drama of Armageddon. Hagerstown, MD:

Review and Herald, 1987.
_______. “The Etymology of Har-Magedon (Rev 16:16).” Andrews University Seminary

Studies 27 (1989): 69-73.
_______. How to Understand the End-time Prophecies of the Bible: The Biblical-
contextual Approach. Sarasota, FL: First Impressions, 1997.
Lawrence, John M. “Nero Redivivus.” Fides et historia 11 (1978): 54-66.
Lee, Michelle V. “A Call to Martyrdom: Function as Method and Message in

Revelation.” Novum Testamentum 40 (1998): 172-173.
Lee, Pilchan. The New Jerusalem in the Book of Revelation. Wissenschaftliche

Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 129. Reihe 2. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck,
2001.
Leemans, W. F. Ishtar of Lagaba and Her Dress. Leiden: Brill, 1952.
337
Leick, Gwendolyn, ed. The Babylonian World. Routledge Worlds. New York: Routledge,
2007.
Lewis, Theodore J. “Syro-Palestinian Iconography and Divine Images.” Pages 69-107 in

Cult Image and Divine Representation in the Ancient Near East. Edited by Neal
H. Walls. American Schools of Oriental Research Book Series 10. Edited by
Brian B. Schmidt. Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research, 2005.
Liddell, Henry G. and Robert Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon, 1968.
Lilje, Hanns. The Last Book of the Bible: The Meaning of the Revelation of St. John.
Philadelphia: Muhlenberg, 1957.
Lindsey, Hal. The Final Battle. Palos Verdes, CA: Western Front, 1995.
_______. The 1980’s: Countdown to Armageddon. New York: Bantam Books, 1980.
_______. Planet Earth: 2000 A.D., Will Mankind Survive? Palos Verdes, CA: Western
Front, 1994.
_______. There’s a New World Coming: A Prophetic Odyssey. Santa Ana, CA: Vision
House Publishers, 1973.
Linssen, Marc J. H. The Cults of Uruk and Babylon: The Temple Ritual Texts as Evidence
for Hellenistic Cult Practice. Cuneiform Monographs 25. Boston: Brill, 2004.
Little, C. H. Explanation of the Book of Revelation. St. Louis, MO: Concordia, 1950.
Loenertz, Raymond Joseph. The Apocalypse of Saint John. Translated by Hilary J.

Carpenter. London: Sheed & Ward, 1947.
Lohmeyer, Ernst. Die Offenbarung des Johannes. Tübingen: MohrSiebeck, 1953.
Lohse, Eduard. “Synagogue of Satan and Church of God: Jews and Christians in the
Book of Revelation.” Svensk exegetisk årsbok 58 (1993): 105-123.
Long, Phillip J. “The Origin of the Eschatological Feast as a Wedding Banquet in the
Synoptic Gospels: An Intertextual Study.” PhD diss., Andrews University, 2012.
Longman, Tremper III, and Daniel G. Reid. God Is a Warrior. Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1995.
Lorton, David. “The Theology of Cult Statues in Ancient Egypt.” Pages 123-201 in Born
in Heaven, Made on Earth: The Making of the Cult Image in Ancient Near East.
Edited by Michael B. Dick. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999.
Loughborough, J. N. The Two-Horned Beast of Rev. XIII: A Symbol of the United States.
Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald, 1857.
Luan, Eileen Poh Chu. “The Acquisition and Use of Wealth: Some Reflections from
Revelation 18.” Jian Dao 41 (2014): 255-298.
Lucian. Translated by A. M. Harmon et al. 8 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1921-1960.
338
Lunceford, Joe E. Parody and Counterimaging in the Apocalypse. Eugene, OR: Wipf &
Stock, 2009.
Lust, Johan, Erik Eynikel, and Katrin Haupie. Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint.
Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2003.
Lynch, Matthew J. “Zion’s Warrior and the Nations: Isaiah 59:15b-63:6 in Isaiah’s Zion
Tradition.” Catholic Bible Quarterly 70 (2008): 244-263.
MacArthur, Jack. Expositional Commentary on Revelation. Eugene, OR: Certain Sound,

1973.
MacArthur, John. Revelation 12-22. MacArthur New Testament Commentary. Chicago:

Moody Press, 2000.
Mackay, T. W. “Early Christian Exegesis of the Apocalypse.” Studia Biblica 3 (1978):

257-263.
MacLeod, David J. “The Adoration of God the Creator: An Exposition of Revelation 4.”
Maher, Michael. Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: Genesis: Translated, with Introduction and

Notes. The Aramaic Bible: The Targums 18. Collegeville, MN: Michael Glazier,
1992.
“The Map of the World,” accessed 31 August 2015, http: //www.

britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?obje
ctId=362000&partId=1&searchText=babylon+clay+tablet+map+of+the+world&p
age=1.
March, William. Apocalyptic Sketches: Being a Condensed Exposition of the Views of the
Most Eminent Writers upon the Prophecies of Revelation, Daniel, Isaiah, & C.,
Respecting the Second Coming of Our Lord with All His Saints at the First
Resurrection. Toronto: Galt, 1860.
Marconcini, B. “L’utilizzazione del T.M. nelle citazioni Isaeiane dell’Apocalisse.”

Rivista biblica 24 (1976): 113-136.
Marks, Ed. “The New Jerusalem—A Corporate Person.” Affirmation & Critique 5
(2000): 45-65.
Martin, Ralph P. 2 Corinthians.Word Biblical Commentary 40. Waco, TX: Word Books,
1982.
_______. Worship in the Early Church. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.
Mathews, Mark D. Riches, Poverty, and the Faithful: Perspectives on Wealth in the
Second Temple Period and the Apocalypse of John. Society for New Testament
Studies Monograph Series 154. Edited by Paul Trebilco. New York: Cambridge
Mathews, Susan Fournier. The Book of Revelation: Question by Question. Mahwah, NJ:
Paulist Press, 2009.
339
Mathewson, David. “Isaiah in Revelation.” Pages 189-210 in Isaiah in the New
Testament. Edited by Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menken. New York: T & T
Clark, 2005.
_______. “A Re-Examination of the Millennium in Rev 20:1-6: Consummation and

Recapitulation.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 44 (2001): 237-
251.
Matsushima, Eiko. “Divine Statues in Ancient Mesopotamia: Their Fashioning and

Clothing and Their Interaction with the Society.” Pages 209-219 in Official Cult
and Popular Religion in the Ancient Near East. Edited by Eiko Matsushima.
Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter, 1993.
Matter, E. Ann. “The Apocalypse in Early Medieval Exegesis.” Pages 38-50 in The
Apocalypse in the Middle Ages. Edited by Richard Kenneth Emmerson and
Bernard McGinn. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992.
Mayer, Günter. Index Philoneus. New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1974.
Mayo, Philip L. Those Who Call Themselves Jews: The Church and Judaism in the
Apocalypse of John. Princeton Theological Monograph Series. Edited by K. C.
Hanson. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006.
McEwan, Gilbert J. P. Priest and Temple in Hellenistic Babylonia. Freiburger

altorientalische Studien 4. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1981.
McGinn, Bernard. “The Abbot and the Doctors: Scholastic Reactions to the Radical
Eschatology of Joachim of Fiore.” Church History 40 (1971): 30-47.
_______. “Angel Pope and Papal Antichrist,” Church History 47 (1978): 155-173.
_______. Antichrist: Two Thousand Years of the Human Fascination with Evil. San
Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 1994.
_______., trans. Apocalyptic Spirituality: Treatises and Letters of Lactantius, Adso of

Montier-En-Der, Joachim of Fiore, the Franciscan Spirituals, Savonarola. New
York: Paulist Press, 1979.
McKelvey, R. J. The New Temple: The Church in the New Testament. New York:
Oxford, 1969.
McLeod, Alexander. Lectures upon the Principal Prophecies of the Revelation. New
York: Whiting and Watson, 1814.
Mcllraith, Donal A. “‘For the Fine Linen Is the Righteous Deeds of the Saints’: Works
and Wife in Revelation 19:8.” Catholic Bible Quarterly 61 (1999): 512-529.
_______. The Reciprocal Love Between Christ and the Church in the Apocalypse. Rome:
Columban Fathers, 1989.
McNamara, Martin. The New Testament and the Palestinian Targum to the Pentateuch.
Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1966.
340
M’Corkle, Samuel M. Thoughts on the Millennium: With a Comment on the Revelations;
Also a Few Remarks on Church Government. Nashville: Republican Gazette,
1830.
Mealy, J. Webb. After the Thousand Years: Resurrection and Judgment in Revelation 20.
Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 70. Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1992.
Mede, Joseph. The Key of the Revelation. London: 1643.
Meier, G. “Die Ritualtafel der Serie “Mundwaschung.” Archiv für Orientforschung 12

(1937/39): 40-45.
Michaels, J. Ramsey. “The First Resurrection: A Response.” Westminster Theological

Journal 39 (1976): 100-109.
_______. Revelation. The IVP New Testament Commentary. Edited by Grant R. Osborne.
Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1997.
Milik, J. T., ed. The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of QumrânCave 4. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1976.
Miller, Kevin E. “The Nuptial Eschatology of Revelation 19-22.” Catholic Bible

Quarterly 60 (1998): 301-318.
Miller, William. Remarks on Revelations Thirteenth, Seventeenth and Eighteenth. Second

Advent Library 47. Boston: Dow & Jackson’s Power Press, 1844.
Minear, Paul S. I Saw a New Earth. Washington, DC: Corpus Books, 1968.
Minton, Gretchen E., ed. John Bale’s The Image of Both Churches. Studies in Early
Modern Religious Tradition: Culture and Society 6. Edited by Irena Backus. New
York: Springer, 2013.
Moore, Stephen D. “Metonymies of Empire: Sexual Humiliation and Gender Masquerade

in the Book of Revelation.” Pages 71-79 in Postcolonial Interventions: Essays in
Honor of R. S. Sugirtharajah. Bible in the Modern World 23. Edited by Tat-siong
Benny Liew. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2009.
More, Henry. Divine Dialogues. London: James Flesher, 1668.
More, Thomas. The Confutation of Tyndale’s Answer. London: John Cawod, John Waly,
and Richarde Totell, 1557.
Morenz, Siegfried. Äegyptische Religion. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1960.
_______. Egyptian Religion. Translated by Ann E. Keep. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University
Press, 1973.
Moret, Alexandre. Le rituel du culte divine journalier en Égypte,d'après les papyrus de

Berlin et les textes du temple de Séti 1er, à Abydos. Biblothèque d’études 14.
Paris: Leroux, 1902.
341
Morris, Henry. The Revelation Record: A Scientific and Devotional Commentary on the
Book of Revelation. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1983.
Morris, Leon. The Book of Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale New
Testament Commentaries. Edited by Leon Morris. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.
Morrish, George. A Concordance of the Septuagint. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976.
Morton, Russell. “Glory to God and to the Lamb: John’s Use of Jewish and
Hellenistic/Roman Themes in Formatting His Theology in Revelation 4-5.”
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 83 (2001): 89-109.
Moulton, J. H. and G. Milligan. Vocabulary of the Greek Testament. Peabody, MA:

Hendrickson, 1997.
Mounce, Robert H. The Book of Revelation. New International Commentary on the New
Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977.
Mowry, Lucetta. “Revelation 4-5 and Early Christian Liturgical Usage.” Journal of
Biblical Literature 71 (1952): 75-84.
Moyer, Ian S., and Jacco Dieleman. “Miniaturization and the Opening of the Mouth in a
Greek Magical Text (PGM XII.270-350).” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern
Religions 3 (2003): 47-72.
Moyise, Steve. “Intertextuality, Historical Criticism and Deconstruction.” Pages 24-34 in

The Intertextuality of the Epistles: Explanations of Theory and Practice. Edited
by Thomas L. Brodie, Dennis R. MacDonald, and Stanley E. Porter. Sheffield:
Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2006.
_______. The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1995.
Moyise, Steve, and Maarten J. J. Menken, eds. Isaiah in the New Testament. New York:
T & T Clark, 2005.
Mulholland, M. Robert. Holy Living in an Unholy World: Revelation. Grand Rapids:

Francis Asbury Press of Zondervan, 1990.
Müller, Ekkehardt. “Microstructural Analysis of Revelation 4-11.” Andrews University
Seminary Doctoral Dissertation Series 21. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews
Muraoka, Takamitsu. A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Leuven: Peeters, 2009.
Murphy, Francesca A. “Revelation, Book of.” Pages 680-687 in Dictionary for

Theological Interpretation of the Bible. Edited by Kevin J. Vanhoozer. Grand
Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005.
Murphy, Frederick J. Fallen Is Babylon: The Revelation to John. New Testament in

Context. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998.
Nakhro, Mazie. “The Meaning of Worship According to the Book of Revelation.”
342
Nelson, Harold H. “The Significance of the Temple in the Ancient Near East, Part I. The
Egyptian Temple.” Biblical Archeologist 7 (1944): 44-53.
Newsom, Carol A. Daniel: A Commentary. The Old Testament Library. Louisville, KY:
Westminster John Knox, 2014.
Newton, Jon K. “Reading Revelation Romantically.” Journal of Pentecostal Theology 18

(2009): 194-215.
The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Philip Schaff. 1886-1889. 14 vols. Repr.,
Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994.
Nissinen, Martti. “City as Lofty as Heaven: Arbela and Other Cities in Neo-Assyrian
Prophecy.” Pages 172-209 in “Every City Shall Be Forsaken”: Urbanism and
Prophecy in Ancient Israel and the Near East. Journal for the Study of the Old
Testament Supplement Series 330. Edited by Lester L. Grabbe and Robert D.
Haak. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001.
Nock, A. D. Conversion: The Old and the New in Religion from Alexander the Great to
Augustine of Hippo. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961.
O’Brien, Peter T. Colossians, Philemon. Word Biblical Commentary 44. Waco, TX:
Word Books, 1982.
O’Rourke, J. “The Hymns of Apocalypse.” Catholic Bible Quarterly 30 (1968): 399-409.
Ochshorn, Judith. “Ishtar and Her Cult.” Pages 16-28 in The Book of the Goddess Past
and Present: An Introduction to Her Religion. Edited by Carl Olson. New York:
Crossroad, 1983.
Oecumenius, Commentary on the Apocalypse. Translated by John N. Suggit. Washington

DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2006.
Ogden, Arthur M. The Avenging of the Apostles and Prophets: Commentary on

Revelaiton. Pinson, AL: Ogden, 2006.
Olson, Daniel C. “‘Those Who Have Not Defiled Themselves with Women’: Revelation
14:4 and the Book of Enoch.” Catholic Bible Quarterly 59 (1977): 482-510.
Oppenheim, A. Leo. Ancient Mesopotamia: Portrait of a Dead Civilization. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1977
_______. “The Golden Garments of the Gods.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 8
(1949): 172-193.
_______. “The Significance of the Temple in the Ancient Near East, Part II. The
Mesopotamian Temple.” Biblical Archeologist 7 (1944): 65-77.
Osborne, Grant R. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: Revelation.

Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002.
Ostella, Richard A. “The Significance of Deception in Revelation 20:3.” Westminster
343
Otto, Eberhard. Das ägyptische Mundöffnungsritual. Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 1960.
Overstreet, R. Larry. “Man in the Image of God: A Reappraisal.” Criswell Theological

Review 3 (2005): 43-70.
_______. “The Temple of God in the Book of Revelation.” Bibliotheca Sacra 166 (2009):
446-462.
Page, Sydney H. T. “Revelation 20 and Pauline Eschatology.” Journal of the Evangelical

Pataki, András Dávid. “A Non-combat Myth in Revelation 12.” New Testament Studies
57 (2011): 258-272.
Patrologia Graeca. Edited by J.-P. Migne. 162 vols. Paris, 1857-1886.
Patrologia Latina. Edited by J.-P. Migne. 217 vols. Paris, 1844-1864.

Paulien, Jon. “Allusions, Exegetical Method, and the Interpretation of Revelation 8:7-
12.” PhD diss., Andrews University, 1987.
_______. “Armageddon.” Pages 1:394, 395 in Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David
Noel Freedman. 6 vols. New York: Double Day, 1992.
_______. Armageddon at the Door. Hagerstown, MD: Autumn House, 2008.
_______. “Criteria and the Assessment of Allusions to the Old Testament in the Book of
Revelation.” Pages 113-130 in Studies in the Book of Revelation. Edited by Steve
Moyise. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2011.
_______. Decoding Revelation’s Trumpets: Literary Allusions and the Interpretation of

Revelation 8:7-12. Andrews University Seminary Doctoral Dissertation Series 11.
Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1987.
_______. The Deep Things of God. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing
Association, 2004.
_______. “Elusive Allusions: The Problematic Use of the Old Testament in Revelation.”
Biblical Research 33 (1988): 37-53.
_______. “The Hermeneutics of Biblical Apocalyptic.” Pages 245-270 in Understanding

Scripture: An Adventist Approach. Biblical Research Institute Studies. Volume 1.
Edited by George W. Reid. Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institue,
General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2006.
_______. “Looking Both Ways: A Study of the Duodirectionality of the Structural Seams
in the Apocalypse.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Hebrews,
General and Pastoral Epistles, Apocalypse Section of the SBL. Chicago, IL, 19
November 1988.
_______. “Revelation 17 and the Papacy.” End Time Issues. Unpublished email
newsletter.
344
_______. Review of Ezekiel in the Apocalypse: The Transformation of Prophetic
Language in Revelation 16.17-19.10, by Jean-Perrie Ruiz. Journal of Biblical
Literature 110 (1991): 549-551.
_______. “Revisiting the Sabbath in the Book of Revelation.” Journal of the Adventist
_______. “The Role of the Hebrew Cultus, Sanctuary, and Temple in the Plot and
Structure of the Book of Revelation.” Andrews University Seminary Studies 33
(1995): 245-264.
_______. What the Bible Says about the End-Time. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald
Publishing Association, 1994.
Paulsen, Jan. “Sanctuary and Judgment.” Pages 275-294 in Symposium on Revelation—

Book II. Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, 7. Edited by Frank B. Holbrook.
Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference of the
Seventh-day Adventists, 1992.
Peerbolte, Bert Jan Lietaert. “To Worship the Beast: The Revelation of John and the
Imperial Cult in Asia Minor.” Pages 239-259 in Zwischen Den Reichen: Neues
Testament und Römische Herrschaft. Edited by Michael Labahn and Jürgen
Zangenberg, Tübingen: A. Francke Verlag, 2002.
Peerbolte, L. J. Lietaert. The Antecedents of Antichrist: A Traditio-Historical Study of the

Earliest Christian Views on Eschatological Opponents. Supplements to the
Journal for the Study of Judaism 49. Edited by John J. Collins. New York: Brill,
1996.
Pelikan, Jaroslav Jan. The Growth of Medieval Theology (600-1300). Christian Tradition.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.
Penley, Paul T. The Common Tradition Behind Synoptic Sayings of Judgment and John’s
Apocalypse: An Oral Interpretive Tradition of Old Testament Prophetic Material.
New York: T & T Clark, 2010.
Pentecost, J. Dwight. Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology. Grand Rapids:

Zondervan, 1972.
Peterson, D.D. Engaging with God. Leicester: Apollos, 1992.
Peterson, Eric. The Angels and the Liturgy. New York: Herder and Herder, 1964.
Peterson, Eugene H. “Learning to Worship from Saint John’s Revelation.” Christianity

Today 28 (1991): 23-25.
_______. Reversed Thunder: The Revelation of John and the Praying Imagination. San
Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 1991.
Philo. Translated by F. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker. 10 vols. Loeb Classical Library.

Cambridge: Harvard Univeristy Press, 1934-1962.
345
Pippin, Tina. Death and Desire: The Rhetoric of Gender in the Apocalypse of
John.Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation. Louisville, KY: Westminster,
1992.
Plato. Translated by R. G. Bury et al. 10 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge:

Pliny. Translated by D. E. Eichholz. 10 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge:

Plutarch. Translated by B. Perrin et al. 11 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge:

Plythress, Vern S. “Genre and Hermeneutics in Rev 20:1-6.” Journal of the Evangelical
Porter, Stanley E., Michael A. Hayes, and David Tombs. Faith in the Millennium.
Sheffield: Sheffield Academics, 2001.
Powell, Charles E. “Progression Versus Recapitulation in Revelation 20:1-6.” Bibliotheca

Sacra 163 (2006): 94-109.
Price, John. Anti-Mortonus or an Apology in Defense of the Church of Rome. St. Omer:
English College Press, 1640.
Price, S. R. F. Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor. New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1984.
Prigent, Pierre. Apocalypse 12; Histoire de l’exégèse. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1959.
_______. Commentary on the Apocalypse of St. John. Translated by Wendy Pradels.

Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001.
Pritchard, James B., ed. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. 3rd.
ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.
Provan, Iain. “Foul Spirits, Fornication and Finance: Revelation 18 from an Old
Testament Perspective.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 64 (1996):
81-100.
Rainbow, Paul A. “Millennium as Metaphor in John’s Apocalypse.” Westminster

Räpple, Eva Maria. The Metaphor of the City in the Apocalypse of John. New York: Peter
Lang, 2004.
Ratton, James L. Antichrist: An Historical Review. London: Burns and Oates, 1917.
Rauh, Horst Dieter. Das Bild des Antichrist im Mittelalter: Von Tyconius zum Deutschen
Symbolismus. Münster: Aschendorff, 1973.
Reader, W. W. “Die Stadt Gottes in der Johannesapokalypse.” PhD diss., University of
Göttingen, 1971.
346
Reddish, Mitchell G. “Followers of the Lamb: Role Models in the Book of Revelation.”
Perspectives in Religious Studies 40 (2013): 65-79.
_______. “Martyr Christology in the Apocalypse.” Journal for the Study of the New
Testament 33 (1988): 85-95.
_______. Revelation. Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary. Macon, GA: Smyth &
Helwys Publishing, 2001.
Reeves, Marjorie. Joachim of Fiore and the Prophetic Future. London: Society for the
Propagation of Christian Knowledge, 1976.
_______. The Influence of Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages: A Study in Joachimism.
Oxford: Clarendon, 1969.
Reeves, Marjorie, and Beatrice Hirsch-Reich. The Figurae of Joachim of Fiore. Oxford:
Clarendon, 1972.
“Religionsgeschichtliche Schule.” In Encyclopaedia Britannica.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/267723/Religionsgeschichtliche-
Schule.
Rengstorf, Karl H., ed. A Complete Concordance to Flavius Josephus. 4 volumes.

Leiden: Brill, 1975.
Resseguie, James L. The Revelation of John: A Narrative Commentary. Grand Rapids:

Baker, 2009.
_______. Revelation Unsealed: A Narrative Critical Approach to John's Apocalypse.

Biblical Interpretation Series 32. Boston: Brill, 1998.
Rissi, Mathias. The Future of the World: An Exegetical Study of Revelation 19:11-22:5.
Naperville, IL: Alec R. Allenson, 1971.
_______. Time and History: A Study on the Revelation. Richmond, VA: John Knox Press,
1966.
Roberts, Robert. Thirteen Lectures on the Things Revealed in the Last Book of the New
Testament: Commonly Known as Revelation, but More Appropriately
Distinguished as the Apocalypse; Shewing Their Bearing on the Events of History
and on Those Mightier Events of the Near Future, to Which They Have All Been
Leading. Birmingham: F. Juckes, 1908.
Robinson, J. A. T. Redating the New Testament. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976.
Robinson, James M., ed. Nag Hammadi Libraryin English. Translated by James Brashler,
Peter A. Dirkse, and Douglas M. Parrott. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988.
Rodney, Nanette B. “Ishtar, the Lady of Battle.” The Metropolitan Museum of Art
Bulletin New Series 10 (1952): 211-216.
Rogers, R. “An Exegetical Analysis of John’s Use of Zechariah in the Book of
Revelation: The Impact and Transformation of Zechariah’s Text and Themes in
the Apocalypse.” PhD diss., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2002.
347
Ronning, John L. “The Targum of Isaiah and the Johannine Literature.” Westminster
Rossing, Barbara R. “City Visions, Feminine Figures and Economic Critique: A

Sapiential Topos in the Apocalypse.” Pages 181-196 in Conflicted Boundaries in
Wisdom and Apocalypticism. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 35.
Edited by Benjamin G. Wright III, and Lawrence M. Wills. Atlanta: Society of
Biblical Literature, 2005.
Roy, N. “Hippolytus of Rome, St.” Pages 6: 858-860 in New Catholic Encyclopedia.

Edited by Berard L. Marthaler. New York: Gale, 2003.
Royalty, Robert M., Jr. The Streets of Heaven: The Ideology of Wealth in the Apocalypse
of John. Macon, GA: MercerUniversity Press, 1998.
Ruiz, Jean-Pierre. Ezekiel in the Apocalypse: The Transformation of Prophetic Language

in Revelation 16,17-19,10. Europäische Hochschulschriften 23. New York: Peter
Lang, 1989.
_______. “Taking a Stand on the Sand of the Seashore: A Postcolonial Exploration of

Revelation 13.” Pages 119-135 in Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for
Students. Edited by David L. Barr. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.
Russell, Keith A. “A Call to Sanctified Resistance: Revelation 21:1-6.” Review &

Expositor 109 (2012): 459-463.
Ryan, Sean Michael. Hearing at the Boundaries of Vision: Education Informing

Cosmology in Revelation 9. New York: T & T Clark, 2012.
Sack, Ronald H. “Some Remarks on Jewelry Inventories from Sixth Century B.C.
Erech.” Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie 69 (1979):
41-46.
Sander, Nicholas. The Rocke of the Churche, wherein the Primacy of St. Peter and of His
Successors, the Bishops of Rome Is Proved out of God’s Worde. Louvain: Apud
Ioannem Foulerum, 1567.
Sanders, Jack T. Schismatics, Sectarians, Dissidents, Deviants: The First One Hundred
Years of Jewish-Christian Relations. Valley Forge, PA: Trinity, 1993.
Scheppard, Carol. “End Time Hermeneutics: An Overview.” Brethren Life and Thought
46 (2001): 5-10.
Scherrer, Steven J. “Signs and Wonders in the Imperial Cult: A New Look at a Roman
Religious Institution in the Light of Rev 13:13-15.” Journal of Biblical Literature
103 (1984): 599-610.
Schlatter, A. Das Alte Testament in der johanneischen Apokalypse. Beiträge zur

Förderung christlicher Theologie. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1912.
Schmid, J. Studien zur Geschichte des griechischen Apokalypse-Textes, 1. Teil: Der

Apokalypse-Kommentary des Andreas von Kaisareia, Text. Munich: Karl Zink
Verlag, 1955.
348
349
Schmidt, Thomas E. “‘And the Sea Was No More’: Water as People, Not Place.” Pages
233-249 in To Tell the Mystery: Essays on New Testament Eschatology in Honor
of Robert H. Gundry. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement
Series 100. Edited by Thomas E. Schmidt and Moisés Silva. Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, 1994.
Schneemelcher, Wilhelm, ed. New Testament Apocrypha. 2 vols. Philadelphia:

Westminster, 1964.
Schweizer, Eduard. Church Order in the New Testament. Translated by Frank Clarke.
London: SCM Press, 1963.
Sharon, Diane M. “Echoes of Gideon’s Ephod: An Intertextual Reading.” Journal of the

Ancient Near Eastern Society 30 (2006): 89-102.
Shea, William H. “Chiasm in Theme and by Form in Revelation 18.” Andrews University
Seminary Studies 20 (1982): 249-256.
_______. “The Covenantal Form of the Letters to the Seven Churches.” Andrews
University Seminary Studies 21 (1983):71-84.
________. “Daniel 3: Extra-Biblical Texts and the Convocation on the Plain of Dura.”
Andrews University Seminary Studies 20 (1982): 29-52.
________. “The Location and Significance of Armageddon in Rev 16:16.” Andrews

University Seminary Studies 18 (1980): 157-162.
_______. “Nabonidus, Belshazzar, and the Book of Daniel: An Update.” Andrews

________. “Wrestling with the ‘Prince of Persia’ in Daniel 10.” Andrews University
Seminary Studies 21 (1983): 225-250.
Shepherd, Massey Hamilton. The Paschal Liturgy and the Apocalypse. Ecumenical
Studies in Worship 6. Richmond, VA: John Knox, 1960.
Shepherd, Norman. “The Resurrections of Revelation 20.” Westminster Theological

Journal 37 (1974): 34-43.
Siew, Antoninus King Wai. The War Between the Two Beasts and the Two Witnesses: A
Chiastic Reading of Revelation 11.1-14.5. New York: T & T Clark, 2005.
Simonetti, Manlio. Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church: An Historical

Introduction to Patristic Exegesis. Translated by John A. Hughes. Edinburgh: T &
T Clark, 1994.
“A šir-namšub to Inana.” Segment A, 16-22. Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian

Literature, No. 4.07.9. Accessed 29 August 2011, http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/cgi-
bin/etcsl.cgi?text=t.4.07.9#.
Skaggs, Rebecca, and Priscilla C. Benham. Revelation. Pentecostal Commentary Series.

Edited by John Christopher Thomas. Dorchester: Dorset Press, 2009.
350
Slight, Benjamin. The Apocalypse Explained, in Two Series of Discourses on the Entire
Book of the Revelation of St. John. Montreal: R. & A. Miller, 1855.
Smalley, Stephen S. The Revelation to John: A Commentary on the Greek Text of the
Apocalypse. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2005.
Smith, Christopher R. “The Structure of the Book of Revelation in Light of Apocalyptic

Literary Conventions.” Novum Testamentum 36 (1994): 373-393.
Smith, Derwood C. “The Millennial Reign of Jesus Christ: Some Observations on Rev
20:1-10.” Restoration Quarterly 6 (1962): 219-223.
Smith, Ian. “A Rational Choice Model of the Book of Revelation.” Journal for the Study
of the New Testament 85 (2002): 97-116.
Smith, S. “The Babylonian Ritual for the Consecration and Induction of a Divine Statue.”
Journal of Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1 (1925): 37-60.
Smith, Uriah. Our Country’s Future: The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An
Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17. Battle Creek, MI: Seventh-day Adventist Publishing
Association, 1883.
Snyder, Barbara Wootten. ‘Triple-Form and Space/Time Transitions: Literary Structuring

Devices in the Apocalypse.” Pages 440-460 in Society of Biblical Literature 1991
Seminar Papers. Edited by Eugene H. Lovering. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991.
Spicq, Ceslas. Theological Lexicon of the New Testament. Translated and edited by
James D. Ernest. 3 vols. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994.
Stefanini, Ruggiero. “The Anatolian Origin and Pre-History of Latin Missa ‘Mass’.”
Archivio Glottologico Italiano 68 (1983): 23-49.
Stefanović, Ranko. The Background and Meaning of the Sealed Book of Revelation 5.
Andrews Univeristy Seminary Doctoral Dissertation Series 22. Berrien Springs,
MI: Andrews University Press, 1996.
_______. Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book of Revelation. 2nd ed.
Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2009.
Stefanović, Zdravko. Daniel: Wisdom to the Wise. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2007.
Steinhauser, Kenneth B. The Apocalypse Commentary of Tyconius: A History of Its

Reception and Influence. New York: Peter Lang, 1987.
Stenström, Hanna. “‘They Have Not Defiled Themselves with Women . . .’ Christian
Identity According to the Book of Revelation.” Pages 33-54 in A Feminist
Companion to the Apocalypse of John. Feminist Companion to the New
Testament and Early Christian Writings 13. Edited by Amy-Jill Levine and Maria
Mayo Robbins. New York: T & T Clark, 2009.
Stephens, Mark B. Annihilation or Renewal?: The Meaning and Function of New

Creation in the Book of Revelation. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum
Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 307. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011.
351
Stichele, Caroline Vander. “Apocalypse, Art and Abjection: Images of the Great Whore.”
Pages 124-138 in Culture, Entertainment and the Bible. Edited by George Aichele.
Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 309. Edited by
David J. A. Clines and Philip R. Davies. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,
2000.
Strack, Hermann L., and Paul Billerbeck. Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud
und Midrasch. 6 vols. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1966.
Strand, Kenneth A. Interpreting the Book of Revelation: Hermeneutical Guidelines, with

Brief Introduction to Literary Analysis. Worthington, OH: Ann Arbor Publishers,
1976.
______. “Two Aspects of Babylon’s Judgment Portrayed in Revelation 18.” Andrews

_______. “A Further Note on the Covenantal Form in the Book of Revelation.” Andrews
Strelan, John G. Where Earth Meets Heaven: A Commentary on Revelation. Eugene, OR:
Wipf & Stock, 2007.
Sweet, J. P. M. Revelation. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1979.
________. Revelation. TPI New Testament Commentaries. Edited by Howard Clark Kee
and Dennis Nineham. Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1990.
Swete, Henry Β. The Apocalypse of St. John: The Greek Text with Introduction, Notes
and Indices. London: MacMillan, 1917.
Talbot, Louis T. The Revelation of Jesus Christ: An Exposition on the Book of Revelation.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1937.
Tatford, Frederick A. The Final Encounter: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation.

Newtown, Australia: Christian Outreach, 1983.
Tavo, Felise. “The Ecclesial Notions of the Apocalypse in Recent Studies.” Currents in
Biblical Research 1 (2002): 112-136.
_______. “The Structure of the Apocalypse. Re-Examining A Perennial Problem.”
Novum Testamentum 47 (2005): 48-68.
_______. Woman, Mother and Bride: An Exegetical Investigation into the “Ecclesial”
Notions of the Apocalypse. Dudley, MA: Peeters, 2007.
Teeter, Emily, and John A. Larson. Gold of Praise: Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honor of
Edward F. Wente. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilizations 58. Edited by Thomas
A. Holland and Thomas G. Urban. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.
Teixidor, Javier. The Pagan God: Popular Religion in the Greco-Roman Near East.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977.
Tenney, Merrill C. Interpreting Revelation. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957.
352
Thomas, David Andrew. “An Analysis of the Seventh Bowl of the Apocalypse.” The
Master’s Seminary Journal 5 (1994): 73-95.
_______. “Nero Redivivus.” Pages 91-109 in Revelation 19 in Historical and

Mythological Context. Studies in Biblical Literature 118. Edited by Hemchand
Gossai. New York: Peter Lang, 2008.
Thomas, Robert L. “The Structure of the Apocalypse: Recapitulation or Profession?” The

Master’s Seminary Journal 4 (1993): 45-66.
Thomas, Rodney Lawrence. Magical Motifs in the Book of Revelation. Library of New
Testament Studies 416. Edited by Mark Goodacre. New York: T & T Clark, 2010.
Thompson, Leonard L. The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1990.
_______. “Cult and Eschatology in the Apocalypse of John.” Journal of Religion 49

(1969): 330-350.
_______. “Ordinary Lives: John and His First Readers.” Pages 25-47 in Reading the
Book of Revelation: A Resource for Students. Edited by David L. Barr. Atlanta:
Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.
_______. Revelation. Abingdon New Testament Commentaries. Nashville: Abingdon,

1998.
_______. “A Sociological Analysis of Tribulation in the Apocalypse of John.” Semeia 36

(1986): 8-159.
Thundy, Zacharias P. Millennium: Apocalypse and Antichrist and Old English Monsters
c. 1000 A.D. Notre Dame: Cross Cultural Publications, 1998.
Tonstad, Sigve. “Appraising the Myth of Nero Redivivus in the Interpretation of

Revelation.” Andrews University Seminary Studies 46 (2008): 175-199.
Trench, Richard Chenevix. Synonyms of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989.
Trudinger, L. P. “Some Observations Concerning the Text of the Old Testament in the
Book of Revelation.” Journal of Theological Studies 17 (1966): 82-88.
Turcan, Robert. The Cult of the Roman Empire. Translated by Antonia Nevill. Oxford:
Blackwell, 1997.
Tyconius. The Book of Rules. Translated by William S. Babcock. Atlanta: Scholars Press
1989.
Van de Mieroop, Marc. The Ancient Mesopotamian City. Oxford: Clarendon, 1997.
Van der Toorn, K. “The Babylonian New Year Festival: New Insights from the
Cuneiform Texts and Their Bearing on Old Testament Study.” Pages 331-344 in
Congress Volume, Leuven, 1989. Edited by J. A. Emerton. Leiden: Brill, 1991.
Vanderwaal, Cornelis. Hal Lindsey and Biblical Prophecy. St. Catharines, ON: Paideia
Press, 1978.
353
Vanhoye, A. “L’utilisation du livre d’Ezéchiel dans l’Apocalypse.” Biblica 43 (1962):
436-476.
Vicchio, Stephen J. The Legend of the Anti-Christ: A History. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock,
2009.
Vlach, Michael J. “The Kingdom of God and the Millennium.” The Master’s Seminary
Journal 23 (2012): 225-254.
Vos, Louis A. The Synoptic Traditions in the Apocalypse. Kampen: J. H. Kok, 1965.
Wainwright, Arthur William. Mysterious Apocalypse: Interpreting the Book of

Revelation. Nashville: Abingdon, 1993.
Walker, Christopher, and Michael B. Dick. “The Induction of the Cult Image in Ancient
Mesopotamia: The Mesopotamian mīs pî Ritual.” Pages 55-121 in Born in
Heaven, Made on Earth: The Making of the Cult Image in the Ancient Near East.
Edited by Michael B. Dick. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999.
Walker, Norman. “The Origin of the ‘Thrice Holy’.” New Testament Studies 5 (1959):
132-133.
Wallace, Daniel B. The Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek

Grammar. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000.
Wallis, Faith. Bede: Commentary on Revelation. Translated Texts for Historians 58.
Edited by Sebastian Brock. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2013.
Walls, Jerry L.,ed. The Oxford Handbook of Eschatology. New York: Oxford University
Press, 2008.
Walvoord, John F. The Revelation of Jesus Christ. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott,
1966.
Wenham, David. The Rediscovery of Jesus’ Eschatological Discourse. Sheffield: JSOT,

1984.
Wesley, John. Explanatory Notes upon the New Testament. Philadelphia: Joseph
Crukshank, 1791.
West, Delno C., ed. Joachim of Fiore in Christian Thought: Essays on the Influence of
the Calabrian Prophet. New York: B. Franklin, 1974.
West, Delno C., and Sandra Zimdars-Swartz. Joachim of Fiore: A Study in Spiritual
Perception and History. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1983.
Westenholz, Joan Goodnick. “Inanna and Ishtar in the Babylonian World.” Pages 332-
347 in The Babylonian World. Edited by Gwendolyn Leick. New York:
Routledge, 2007.
Wheeldon, Jeff. “Angels and Supervillains: Apocalyptic Literature Reborn as Graphic

Novel.” Didaskalia 23 (2012): 27-48.
354
White, R. F. “Reexamining the Evidence for Recapitulation in Rev 20:1-10.”
Westminster Theological Journal 51 (1989): 319-344.
Whitney, K. William, Jr. Two Strange Beasts: Leviathan and Behemoth in Second
Temple and Early Rabbinic Judaism. Harvard Semitic Monographs 63. Edited by
Peter Machinist. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006.
Wilkins, Lauress L. The Book of Lamentations and Social World of Judah in the Neo-
Babylonian Era. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2010.
Wills, Lawrence M. The Jew in the Court of the Foreign King: Ancient Jewish Court
Legends. Harvard Dissertations in Religion 26. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1990.
Winter, Irene J. “Idols of the King: Royal Images as Recipients of Ritual Action in
Ancient Mesopotamia.” Journal of Ritual Studies 6 (1992): 13-42.
Witetschek, Stephen. “The Dragon Spitting Frogs: On the Imagery of Revelation 16.13-
14.” New Testament Studies 54 (2008): 557-572.
Witherington, Ben. Revelation. The New Cambridge Bible Commentary. Cambridge,

UK: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Wolters, Albert M. “Belshazzar’s Feast and the Cult of the Moon God Sîn.” Biblical
Research 5 (1995): 199-206.
Woods, Andrew M. “Have the Prophecies in Revelation 17-18 about Babylon been
Fulfilled? (Part 6).” Bibliotheca Sacra 170 (2013): 194-214.
Wright, G. Ernest. “The Significance of the Temple in the Ancient Near East, Part III.
The Temple in Palestine-Syria.” Biblical Archeologist 7 (1944): 65-77.
Young, Gary K. Rome’s Eastern Trade: International Commerce and Imperial Policy, 31
BC-AD 305. New York: Routledge, 2001.
Zahn, Theodor. Die Offenbarung des Johannes. Wuppertal, Germany: Brockhaus, 1986.
Zerbe, Gordon. “Revelation’s Exposé of Two Cities: Babylon and New Jerusalem.”
Direction 32 (2003): 47-60.
_______. “Revelation’s Exposé of Two Cities: Imperial Rome’s Reign of Greed vs. New
Jerusalem’s Reign of Justice.” Vision 15 (2014): 52-53.
Zettler, Richard L. The Ur III Temple of Inanna at Nippur: The Operation and
Organization of Urban Religious Institutions in Mesopotamia in the Late Third
Millennium B.C. Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient. Band 11. Berlin:
Dietrich Reimer Verlag, 1992.
Zurcher, J. R. Christ of the Revelation: His Message to the Church and the World.
Nashville: Southern Publishing Association, 1980.
355

Rebekah Yi Liu - The Background and Meaning of The Image of The Beast in Revelation 13.1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rebekah Yi Liu - The Background and Meaning of The Image of The Beast in Revelation 13.1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rebekah Yi Liu - The Background and Meaning of The Image of The Beast in Revelation 13.1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Andrews University

Digital Commons @ Andrews University

Dissertations Graduate Research

The Background and Meaning of the Image of the Beast in Rev.

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/dissertations

Part of the Biblical Studies Commons

THE BACKGROUNDS AND MEANING OF

Adviser: Dr. Jon Paulien

Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary

Title: THE BACKGROUNDS AND MEANING OF THE IMAGE OF THE

Name and degree of faculty adviser: Jon Paulien, Ph.D.

Date Completed: May 2016

This dissertation investigates the first century Greco-Roman cultural

image of the beast to his first century Greco-Roman readers.

Following the introductory chapter, the second chapter is a brief history of

present. This historical survey in Chapter 2 demonstrates that an in depth exegetical

Chapter 3 is a study of the image-of-the-beast motif within its immediate

context of Revelation 13. Chapters 4-6 provide a study of the image-of-the-beast

(Revelation 17, 18) in which this term is absent.

religious-economic-political power to impose false worship on Earth. The image of

Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary

THE BACKGROUNDS AND MEANING OF

Presented In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

APPROVAL BY THE COMMITTEE:

who has willingly taken upon himself the burden of solely

To My 11-year-old son Haojü:

And to my Lord Jesus Christ:

who has known me and searched my soul, and has nevertheless

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

3. EXEGESIS OF “THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST”

4. THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST IN REVELATION 14-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

5. THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST IN REVELATION 19 and 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . 204

6. THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST IN REVELATION 17 and 18 . . . . . . . . . . . 234

7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301

ABRL Anchor Bible Reference Library

AC Affirmation & Critique

AGI Archivio Glottologico Italiano

AJT Asia Journal of Theology

ANF Ante-Nicene Fathers

APB Acta Patristica et Byzantina

ASOR American Schools of Oriental Research

AUSDDS Andrews University Seminary Doctoral Dissertation Series

AUSS Andrews University Seminary Studies

BAR Biblical Archaeology Review

BBR Bulletin for Biblical Research

BDB Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. A Hebrew and

BFCT Beiträge zur Förderung christlicher Theologie

BLT Brethren Life and Thought

BSac Bibliotheca Sacra

BTB Biblical Theology Bulletin

BZAW Beiheft zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

CBC Cambridge Bible Commentary

CBET Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology

CBR Currents in Biblical Research

CCSL Corpus Christianorum: Series Latina. Turnhout: Brepols, 1953-

ChrT Christianity Today

COS The Context of Scripture. Edited by William W. Hallo. 3 vols. Leiden: