Vespasian as The Beast of Revelation

 I’m writing this as still primarily a Futurist but simply as a thought experiment.  I decided it would be fun to see if I could argue for a 70 AD Fulfillment of Revelation better than actual Preterists do.  But perhaps also elements of how I make this argument could prove Typologically useful to Futurists and other more niche forms of Preterism that are less focused on the 1st Century (I mostly wrote this before the Epiphany that inspired the prior on this blog, but I wanted to share my work anyway).

First of all I have come to take the language of Revelation 17:11 as saying that the 8th King is the Individual person The Beast passages are about even when still during the reigns of the first 7.  

Caesarea Maritima means Caesarea “by the sea”, and it was also a very sandy location.  It was always the Roman Provincial Capital of Judea and as such played an important role in the 66-73 AD War including as a location Vespasian used as a base of operations.  

The Seven Heads are further explained in Revelation 17 as being Seven Kings.  Roman Emperors didn’t like to admit they were Kings but we see in John 19:15 that Jews in Judea didn’t care about their semantics.  Why Kings would be represented as Heads is perhaps explained by the language of Bible Verses like 1 Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 5:23 and Colossians 1:18 where Christ is The Head of The Church and God The Father is the Head of Christ, but there's also Hebrew Bible precedent for Kings as Heads in 1 Samuel 15:17 and Isaiah 7:8-9.  Your Head is a person who holds authority over you, hence why the 8th King which is The Beast isn’t an 8th Head.

Vitellius from the year of the 4 Emperors was never recognized in the East, the Roman Armies of the East chose Vespasian as soon as Otho was dead.  So for example when looking at the Archaeological record of the Roman Pharaohs we see that Vespasian was the 8th and the first 7 were Augustus, Tiberius, Calgiula, Claudius, Nero, Galba and Otho who did indeed have the shortest reign.  Vespasian was born during the reign of Augustus so each of those 7 had also personally been Vespasian’s Head.

I no longer believe the 6th King being associated with the present is meant to be a clue to when Revelation was written, rather for this theory I think it has to do with Revelation 17’s point in the narrative following the 7th Bowl of Wrath.  There was a major Earthquake during the reign of Galda which Suetonius refers to having been considered an Omen of his coming demise, that could be identified with the Earthquake of the 7th Bowl.  

Back to where we left off in chapter 13.  The 10 Horns, Leopard, Bear and Lion imagery are evoking Daniel 7.  Daniel 7 was primarily fulfilled by Intertestamental History, Revelation is picking up later with a Rome that has annexed most of the Greek Empire and portions of Babylon and Persia.  The 10 Horns we also know represent lesser kings allied with the Beast, these are likely various local Client Kings and Tribal Leaders who assisted Vespasian in the Conquest of Judea like Antiochus IV Epiphanes of Commagene.

The Mortal Wound being Healed could have multiple meanings.  Vespasian did suffer a serious wound during the Siege of Yodfat that Josephus makes a big deal out of.  But it’s seemingly associated with one of the specific Seven Heads, most of them died violently but Vespasian presented himself as the Heir of Otho.

For Revelation 13:5 the YLT says “Make War” where the KJV says “Continue” and I think that is more accurate to the Greek.  This is about the Authority Vespasian was given to carry out the War against Judea.  There are two ways we could count the 42 months, we could begin them with when Vespasian was first formally placed in charge of the Campaign on September 22nd 66 AD ending it in March of 70 AD.  In April of 70 the War continued but now with Vespain fully established as sole Emperor and his son the one actively carrying out the Campaign in Judea.  Or we could say the 42 months started when Vespasian actually arrived in Judea seemingly in Spring of 67 then continued to September of 70 AD when the Siege of Jerusalem was fully completed.

Vespasian was in Alexandria when he was proclaimed Emperor, and as such was the only Roman Pharoah ever consecrated by proper Egyptian Ceremonies, much of which symbolically Deified him.

Verse 7 of chapter 13 repeats language from chapter 11 verse 7.  If you watch Historia civillis YouTube video on The Roman Triumph and then read Josephus’s description of Titus and Vespasian’s Triumph in celebration of Conquering Judea in Wars of The Jews Book 7 Chapter 5 Section 5, the possibility that Revelation 11:7-10 could be describing that Triumph with the Two Witness representing executed leaders of the Jewish Revolt will be become quite compelling.

Revelation 13:10 is about Captivity which is obviously relevant to 70 AD.

The Beast out of The Earth called elsewhere The False Prophet I think could have been Tiberius Julius Alexander.  Many have argued “out of the Earth” in contrast to “out of the Sea” implies a Jewish background for the second Beast as opposed to the Gentile Background of the First, and Alexander fits that even though he was considered an Apostate.  He had formerly been a Governor of Judea but was Prefect of Egypt when the War started and was vital to Vespasian becoming Emperor due to the control that position gave him over the Empire’s Food Supply.  And he was involved in that Ceremonial Deification of Vespasian as Pharaoh as well which did include performing false Miracles.

When the Image of The Beast is introduced in verse 14 many translations wrongly say the Image was “made”, but the Greek doesn’t use a word for Create here, it should read that they Set Up the Image, meaning the Image could be something that already existed.

In Genesis 5:3 Seth is called the Image and Likeness of Adam as his son.  Multiple New Testament passages further connect Jesus as the Image of God to Him being The Son of God, like Romans 8:29 and Colossians 1:15.  So there is Biblical Precedent for a person’s Image being their Son.

The Image of The Beast in this model would be Titus the Son of Vespasian who had the same full name and was also elevated by Tiberius Julius Alexander who joined him in the Conquest of Judea where he was proclaimed Imperator after destroying Jerusalem.

The name identified by the number 666 can’t be Nero because that’s based on Aramaic/Hebrew Gematria and Revelation is in Greek with this number clearly echoing 888 as the Isopsephy value of Iesous.  Nero in Greek has an Omega in it so Nero can never work, the same goes for trying to make Nero fit the 616 variant.  It is also verified by Chapter 39 of Suetonius Life of Nero that the Isopsephy associated with the name of Nero was 1005.

If the 616 Variant is correct (which I consider unlikely) that probably points to Theos Caesar and/or Dios Caesar which were used for the Deified Roman Emperors in the Eastern Provinces, but in that context it doesn’t apply to only one.  Revelation 13:1 and 17:3 do seem to imply the Blasphemous Name associated with this Beast is on each of the heads and not merely an individual name.

I don’t know how to make 666 fit Vespasian, but I also have come to doubt it literally refers to the actual name.  I still think Iapetos is the best name for 666, ways to make that poetically fit Vespasian are possible.  

Some even question the practice of using Isopsephy/Gematria entirely and suggest like other symbols in Revelation the key is its Hebrew Bible precedent.  666 as a number has two notable appearances, being associated with Solomon in 1 Kings 10:14 and 2 Chronicles 9:13 but also with Nebuchadnezzar's Image in Daniel 3.  The Builder of The Temple and its destroyers, and one could also call Solomon spiritually a destroyer based on his moral failures the next chapter records.  Daniel seems more directly the source material of Revelation then Kings or Chronicles.  Nero was Emperor when the Rebellion started but wasn’t personally involved.  Nebuchadnezzar was personally involved in all his Sieges of Jerusalem and the first one was while still serving under a prior King.

That leads us to the matter of Jerusalem as Babylon.  The arguments for it are well known but in the past my issue with holding that view at the same time as The Beast being Rome was that I misunderstood Revelation 17 as implying Babylon held power over The Beast, but I now know the text doesn’t describe her as Riding the Beast.  Berenice in her affair with Titus seems frankly like a good personification of the Harlot.  The word “kill” isn’t actually used in Revelation 17 or 18 (and with Jezebel in chapter 2 only her children are killed), the City is destroyed by the people represented by The Harlot still live on to, in my view, eventually become the Bride of chapter 19 and Lamb’s Wife of Chapter 21.

Revelation 17 also strictly speaking says the Ten Horns hate Babylon and destroy her with fire not the Beast himself.  This could be relevant to how Vespasian was in Rome when the final Siege happened but also Titus himself did not want to Destroy the Temple, his troops and allies got out of control.  I also have considered that because of how the word “Wilderness” is used in Revelation this final destruction of Babylon refers to the fall of Masada.

Translation issues in Revelation that could be important.

They involve the Subject of The Beast and comes from chapters 13 and 17.

In Revelation 13:5 the KJV says The Beast will "continue" 42 month.  That reading being my default understanding of the verse has always lead me to interpreting it as saying the end of the 42 months must be when the Beast is defeated in Revelation 19 and they begin when the Mortal Wound is healed.  Since the meaning of "Continue" in my mind meant his life and reign being prolonged past the point when it should have ended.

But I recently checked the Young's Literal Translation and it says that The Beast was given authority to "make war" for 42 months.  Now this is not actually a perfectly hyper literal translation because the Greek word for War isn't in the verse, but it is elsewhere in the chapter and associated with The Beast in other chapters.  For example in both Revelation 11:7 and 13:7 the phrase "make war" appears, and in both the word for "make" is the Greek word translated "Continue" in 13:5, in fact the same word is translated lots of other ways as well.

I think the "make war" appearances are actually best translated "wage war".  In 13:7 the waging of war is defined as something The beast is given power or authority to do.  And 13:4 was also about the Beast's prowess in warfare. So it makes sense that what The beast "makes" or "wages" in those other verses is what is probably the context of verse 5.

The next is not a criticism of the KJV, but more the way we casually talk about Revelation 17 that may not even be supported by any actual translation.  And that is how we often refer to the Woman as Riding the Beast.  The Language the text uses is that The Beast is carrying the Woman.  And this difference is significant in terms of who can be presumed to have the agency in this situation.

The third is perhaps not a matter of a single word.  But I'd already argued on this Blog that I think the Miracles or Wonders that the later part Revelation 13 attributes to the Second Beast are meant to be believed by those being deceived to be performed by the First Beast.  But I didn't much try to support that with anything in the actual text of Revelation 13 but from inferences drawn by other prophecies I then assumed to be about the same persons.  I'm now more skeptical of a lot of those assumptions about what passages are and aren't about the "Antichrist", but instead have been thinking about what it means that the miracles are performed "in the sight" of The Beast, or "before the beast" in the YLT.

Such language exists in The Hebrew often about the relationship between The LORD and His Prophets or Anointed Ones.  In those Contexts is about how what the Agents of God are able to do what they do because of Power or Authority given to them by God or Jesus.  The natural perversion of that would be a False Prophet attributing his miracles to the person he's seeking to deceive the world into thinking is a god.

However another issue near here is about the Image of The Beast.  The KJV says that the Second Beast convinced the people to "male" an Image of the Beast but other translations say something like "set up" which I think is more accurate looking at the Greek verb itself.  The issue is the "make" translation had at times lead me to think the Image is something that didn't exist already prior to this, but the Greek is actually NOT using a word for Create. So it could be referring to doing something with an Image that was already there.

I now believe the Image of The Beast is going to be an NFT project of some sort.

And the Mark of The Beast and Number of the Beast will also be connected somehow.  

I am NOT identifying it with anything specific that already exists, it probably doesn't already exist, so don't just throw Chris White's little flowchart at me, I disagreement with aspects of that anyway but regardless that's only applicable when someone is pointing at something specific that's already in operation.

Why have I come to believe this?  It builds naturally off theories I've always leaned towards about the Mark being a Microchip and the Image being at least in part an A.I. on the Internet.  As well as my Whore of Babylon is Capitalism position

Folding Ideas has a great video on NFTs and how dystopic it would be if they succeeded call Line Goes Up, he's a Secularist, but that video has informed what I no suspect about the role NFTs will play in the Destiny of Capitalism.

I'll genuinely be surprised if I no Bible Prophecy internet scholars have already considered this possibility.  I have no predictions on details or anything.  I just now feel this is a possibly we need to start considering.

The Golden Calf and The Image of The Beast

I've talked previously on this Blog about understanding the Image of the Beast in the context of Adam being made in the Image of God.  And I stand by that to an extent.  But in making that argument I had overlooked a detail of Revelation 13:14 talking about the Second Beast.

And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

I had made a flat out wrong statement that there was no account of the Image being created, and for that I feel really stupid.

I have argued reasons before to see a repeat of much of the History of Exodus and Numbers going on here.  So I looked over Exodus 32 to see if there is any compelling parallel between the phraseology used of The Golden Calf and of the Image of The Beast in Revelation 13, and couldn't exactly find a sufficient smoking gun.  In Exodus it is the people who came to Aaron, in Revelation it is the Beast's idea.

But a passage that does later repeat verbatim language from Exodus 32 is 1 Kings 12:26-33, specifically in 28, when Jeroboam decided to go into Idolatry.

Whereupon the king took counsel, and made two calves of gold, and said unto them, "It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem: behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt."

He made his own Golden Calves, and repeats what was said of The Golden Calf in Exodus 32, and also proclaimed his own Feast.

Jeroboam was of the Tribe of Ephraim, and was just given kingship over Ten Tribes, and one Calf was set up at Bethel in territory allotted to Ephraim.  I have a post on this blog arguing the key to understanding the Fourth Beast could be Moses Prophecy about Joseph in Deuteronomy 33.  Because of it's making Joseph an animal that is of a similar kind to a Calf, and possibly alluding to Ten Horns of Ephraim and One of Manasseh.

Jeremiah 31:18 uses the same word translated Calf to describe Ephraim.  Hosea 10:11 says Ephraim is a "Heifer", the feminine form of this word in the Hebrew (not the same word for Heifer used of the Red Heifer).

And I'm now noticing that Exodus 32:20 and Deuteronomy 9:21, could be compared to Daniel 7:11.  The Calf at Bethel was destroyed by Josiah. 

Britam and British Israelists have noted the Calf's association with Ephraim, and from that have among other things sought to see a reflection of this in the Greek Myth of Europa and Zeus taking the form of a Bull  (Some Artistic depictions of this myth have depicted Europa riding the Bull, like at the EU headquarters.)  Some of these Lost Tribes speculators have even imagined that Jeroboam might have claimed to have been fathered by YHWH in the from of a Calf, he was a Widow's Son.

It may be both this and my earlier speculation could be true.  The Golden Calf was a type of the Image of the Beast.

But I can no longer think the Image is simply him being Resurrected by the False Prophet, since the Image had to be made.  But perhaps it will be made via cloning or something?  The Beast is Osiris and the Image is Horus, or something like that.

You may notice, this potentially makes Aaron of all people a type of the Beast from the Earth.

Exodus 7:1 does have Yahuah say that he made Moses a God to Pharaoh and Aaron his Prophet.  So in-spite of Aaron being usually associated with a different office, he is called a Prophet once.  Number 12 involved both Aaron and Miriam citing their Prophetic status presumptuously.  Plenty of Prophets have descended from Aaron, including Samuel and John The Baptist.

Remember, in New Testament times the Priesthood had become Corrupt, Caiaphas and Ananias sought to have Jesus Crucified.

But this could also hint at the Beast from the Earth being a counterfeit High Priest.  Like Kore who challenged Aaron's Priesthood, or the Priesthood created by Jeroboam, a Priest of which named Amaziah during the reign of Jeroboam II of the House of Jehu is mentioned in Amos 7.  Or people like Menelaus in the time of the Maccabees.  Or the Maccabees themselves if you view them more negatively once they take over the Priesthood.

If The Beast from the Earth claims to be Jesus as I've speculated he might.  Jesus is our High Priest after the order of Melchizedek according to Hebrews.  And some Fringe Theorists who want to say Jesus wasn't an Heir to David argue Luke implies Him to have Aaronic descent.

And I've already speculated that Exodus 28:36 and 39:30 may be possibly relevant to the Mark of the Beast subject.  Those verses are about Aaron's Crown.

Rabbinic Jewish eschatological expectations have sometimes said there could be up to four Messiahs.  Ben-David and Ben-Joseph as the Princely or Kingly ones.  Elijah as the Prophet. And a Priestly Messiah, sometimes called the "War Priest" citing Deuteronomy 20.

Islamic Eschatology mentions a descendant of Aaron mediating a peace between the Muslims and the Romans.

The False doctrine of Two Adams

I've talked about the Gap Theory before on this Blog.  Starting with my Fall of Satan post.  Where I discussed it's ancient's precedents.  But the key difference between the Ancient and Medieval versions, and the more Pseudo-Scientific version that emerged in the late 18th Century.  Is where the Gap is.

The idea of a Gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 you won't find in any pre-modern concepts.  Instead the Gap was usually placed between Genesis 2:3 and 2:4.  It's tied to the idea that the Adam of Genesis 1 and the Adam of Genesis 2 were not the same Adam.

Sometimes there is an attempt to gain New Testament support for such a doctrine by quoting when Paul called Jesus the Last Adam, saying the first Adam created was the last to enter our world.  However Paul was just talking about typology here, Jesus is another Adam because as in Adam all die, so in Jesus all shall live again.

In Kaballah and Gnosticism and other mystical traditions.  The Genesis 1 Adam is often called something like Adam Kadmon.  He might be a sort of Cosmic Man, or an ancestor of the gods like Izanagi.  Philo of Alexandria linked Adam Kadmon to the Logos.  But there may also be versions where he's just the progenitor of what we would now call a Pre-Adamic race.  Adam Kadmon is also sometimes defined as being the pre-incarnate Messiah.

There are two main philosophical ideas that are important to understanding the Creation of Adam, being made in God's Image, and being made from the Dust of the Earth.  But when you make the Adam of Genesis 1 and the Adam of Genesis 2 separate, those two ideas no longer refer to the same creation.  Genesis 1's Adam is the Image of God, and Genesis 2's is made from the dust of the earth, with the word for earth being Adamah.  This is how the Genesis 1 Adam can become a Cosmic Man, or tie into a Platonic idea that our world is just in inferior replication of a Spiritual realm.

This two Adam theology can also be analogized to Egyptian mythology.  Where the Genesis 1 Adam could be identified with Atum, who's name has a phonetic similarity to Adam, and who has some Cosmic Man traits with the Sun being one of his eyes.  And every soul was believed to come from his Ka.  While the Genesis 2 Adam could be identified with Geb/Keb/Seb, who's name has a similar meaning to Adam, Earth.  And who had a son named Seth and another son who was murdered by his brother.

Today the standard Young Earth Creationist approach to explaining how the allegedly separate Creation accounts fit together is to call Genesis 2 starting in verse 4 a more detailed account of part of what happened on day 6.  I kind of lean toward that still, but have considered that the day refereed to in Genesis 2:4 could be the Eight Day.   But I will never consider any compromise that has death before Adam Sinned in Genesis 3.

This dual Adam theory can also play a role in false belief systems where Jesus does have a Pre-Existence but is a created being, like the Jehovah's Witnesses and Origen.  It may not always be brought up in such systems, but the door is there to say that the Genesis 1 Adam is Jesus.  And that's the main reason I'm uncomfortable with making Genesis 2 the eight day, because it leaves that door open.  But I would never use that Adam was created "male and female" in Genesis 1 as an argument against that, since I have argued Jesus has a Feminine aspect.

Yet on the other hand I tend to oppose the Pre-Exstence of Human Souls in general as much as I support the Pre-Existence of Jesus.  So I also wouldn't like saying Genesis 1 was the creation of Adams' Soul and Genesis 2 of his body.  That can also lead to Gnosticism.  So that's a second reason to not go with the 8th Day theory.

The idea that Genesis 2 starting in verse 4 is the Eight Day of creation, is one I'd consider only in the context of how that might fit Traducianism. The view that Adam's was the only Soul/Spirit directly Created by God from scratch, just as obviously his Body was the only one directly created by God from scratch.  And that other souls are formed from the Souls of their parents, just as their bodies are, basically that Souls reproduce like bodies do.  And Eve was cloned from Adam.  A view I'm kind of leaning towards at the moment.

When studying these issues you'll find the word "Creationism" used with a different meaning, referring not to belief in a literal interpretation of Genesis.  But to belief that each individual Soul/Spirit is directly created by God from scratch at the conception or birth (or somewhere in-between) of every individual person.

But either way, Jesus individual Pre-Existence is because He is God, it's part of how He's distinct from other humans.  In John 1 The Word created everything, while in Genesis 1 Adam was the last thing created on Day Six.

I want now however to address those who think viewing most of Genesis 2 as more details on Day Six is somehow an absurd torturing of the text.

It makes sense when you understand that Genesis was mostly much earlier accounts edited together by Moses.  Genesis 25 records the Death and Burial of Abraham before the births of Jacob and Esau, even though the timeline based on math from this same chapter tells use they were born before before Abraham died.  Genesis isn't always strictly chronological.

Genesis 2:4 says "These are the generations of the Heavens and the Earth".  Occurrences in Genesis of "These are the generation of..." are often taken to indicate a change in the Pre-Mosiac source text, though I think they may not quite account for all of them.  There seems to be disagreement on if these verses should mark the end of the previous section or beginning of the next section.  Either way, we have one right here where it should be.

If you want to consider how these doctrines might play a role in the End Times deception.  The Two Beasts of Revelation may be an attempt to echo two Adams.  The second Beast comes from the Earth, and then gives life to the Image of the first Beast.  Either way, I have already considered how The Image of the Beast doctrine could tie into an attempt to make "The Antichrist" a counterfeit "Last Adam".  In my Which Beast is actually in control post, and my Can Sunday Worship be the Mark of the Beast post, where I explain that if you want to tie the Mark to a day of the Week, it should be the Sixth Day not the first.

Update December 7th 2017: The Image of God

In 2 Corinthians 4:4 Paul calls Christ the "Image of God".  That is an aspect of the Jesus as Genesis 1 Adam argument I wasn't aware of before.  And now it's enough to totally recalibrate how open I am to it.  And he says it again in Colossians 1:15.

However, Genesis 9:6 uses the phrase "Image of God" for the Adam who's blood is shed when you commit murder.  So that ties that title to the same Adam we descend from.  So what Paul is talking about is probably still just in the context of Jesus as the Son of Adam.

Update August 10th 2018: Genesis 5 also makes it difficult to separate the Genesis 1 Adam and Genesis 2 Adam.

And Psalm 8 clearly talks about the Dominion given to Adam in Genesis 1 and attributes it to Enosh Ben Adam from Genesis 4 and 5.

Which Beast is actually in Control?

I'm still highly skeptical that the Islamic Anitchrist model will be how things play out.  But I also remain firmly confident that the Mahdi prophecy was made for the purpose of being a potential seed for the Antichrist.  The Abomination of Desolation itself shouldn't be expected in such false prophecies though, these are merely potential plans to set the stage for it, the Abomination is when the mislead ends and the real agenda is revealed.

Chris White in his criticism of the Islamic Antichrist theory, has among other things criticized the desire of Christians to misrepresent Islamic Eschatology so that Isa (Muslim Jesus) is subordinate to The Mahdi.  And all that is very good.

Here is the thing, is our traditional assumption that the Second Beast is subordinate to the First Beast possibly wrong?

For starters if either is being possessed or indwelt by Satan it would be the Second Beast, that's the one speaking with The Dragon's voice. 

The First Beast is defined as the object of worship.  But that could be consistent with being a mere figure head, a flesh and blood Idol for the people to focus on while someone else holds the real power.  In George Orwell's 1984 the possibly exists that Big Brother isn't even real, or who he's based on is long dead.  He's now merely a poster, a Face of the Party designed to be an object of both adoration and fear.

The First Beast is a political system, his Empire, not just the individual.  So the whole "Who is able to make war with him" I feel is explained in chapter 17 where it seems clear the 10 Horns are the source of his military power. The individual of the Eight King may not be a military figure at all.  The other major reason for seeing The Antichrist as a conqueror is Daniel 11:36-45 which I've discussed elsewhere.

The First Beast remains a central object of discussion after the Second Beast is introduced, that helps make it seem like he's more important.  But perhaps what we're told after the Second Beast is introduced is meant to help us better understand what was said before.

At the beginning we're told The Dragon gave his Power and Authority and his Seat/Throne to the First Beast.  But in Verse 12 it's the Second Beast who "exerciseth all the Power of the First Beast".  It's the Second who speaks with The Dragon's voice.  He's the architect of the Mark system.

In the first part of my False Prophet study I discussed the possibility that many Prophecies outside Revelation we assume are about The Antichrist could really be The False Prophet.  Including that the title Son of Perdition might belong to the False Prophet.  I saw at least one website long ago argue that the Second Beast not the First is the one we should apply the title Antichrist too.

 I argued in the third part of my False Prophet study that that term Antichrist could in fact require both Beasts put together.  John defines the Antichrist heresy as denying the Deity of Christ.  So the ultimate expression of that could be two individuals, one claiming to be God and not Jesus, and the other claiming to be Jesus and not God.  And that is an even more Ironic deception if even the False Jesus is in fact closer to having godlike powers then the false god.

At the beginning of the Book of Kings people like to see Adonijah as a type of The Antichrist, a usurper to the Throne of David.    But Adonijah was a pawn, a puppet, Joab (the type of Satan) and Abithar the Priest (False Prophet) are the real players of that Game of Thrones, opposed by Nathan and Zadok, and also Bathsheba.

Let's discus the mystery of The Image of The Beast.  Today we're obsessed with seeing this through a SciFi lens, wanting to see it as a Robot/Android, or a Hologram, or an Artificial Intelligence program on the Internet.  I myself have been guilty of that in the past, preferring the A.I. theory.  But I noticed reading Revelation 13 today it never describes the Image being made, just the Second beast giving Life to it.

Let's use Scripture to interpret Scripture, and go back to the first use of the term Image.  Genesis tells us Adam was made in the Image of God.  So there is a Scriptural precedent for describing a body of flesh as an Image.

And many including Chris White have conjectured independent of considering that, that The False Prophet will be responsible for The Beast's resurrection/mortal wound healing, or at least be publicly given the credit for it.

What if the Image of The Beast in Revelation 13 is the same thing as the Eight King in Revelation 17?  One of the first 7 Kings, probably one of the first 5, in some way "resurrected".

It's been confusing to me in the past about whether when the Man of Sin stands himself in the Temple and deifies himself as II Thessalonians 2 describes, or when the Image of Revelation 13 is set up is the more precise Abomination event.  But what if those are not separate things at all?

In the past I'd suggested the resurrection of the Antichrist is like an early form of the second resurrection.  Lately I've been rethinking the nature of the second resurrection (not in a way that conflicts with being Premillenal and Futurist).

What if the Eight King's resurrection is more like the original concept of a Zombie (before George A Romaro)?  A dead body that has been reanimated, but merely to be the pawn of the Witch-doctor who reanimated it.