I wrote this, this morning in addressing some full preterists on when the millennium began. I modified this a little to address some of what we are talking about. Anyway some of what I wrote below relates to what you are talking about, some does not. Hope it makes some sense!

I will be addressing the sequence of Revelation 19-20 in general. First it is important to look at what people’s paradigms will and will not allow. This is important because it will let you know where they are likely to be less than objective (at which point you need to evaluate very carefully what they are saying).

For example, the “orthodox” partial preterist’s paradigm will not allow for an AD 70 beginning of the resurrection. Thus they have to somehow twist the meaning of scriptures like Daniel 12:1-7 and Rev. 11:3-18 which show the resurrection and judgment as beginning right after the great tribulation.

Now full preterists have their own creed. It is the de facto creed that all prophecy was fulfilled by AD 70. If they deny this they are no longer a full preterist (and most of them would rather eat a bug and die rather than let that happen!) This is important because full prets have to make the millennium end before AD 70. If the millennium begins at AD 70 (as I and JS Russell propose) then there is still prophecy awaiting fulfillment (the final disposal of Satan in the lake of fire, Rev. 20:7-10).

Anytime one’s paradigm is on the line, one is often less objective. This is true for partial prets on the timing of the resurrection; this is true of full prets on the timing of the millennium. I of course have my own paradigm (that the Second Advent happened at AD 70, which was the beginning of the millennium and resurrection) but it is so close to full preterism that I would have no problem embracing full preterism—if that is what I saw Scripture teaching. And for the last 25 years that is not what I see Scripture teaching.

Let me start with the parallels between the little horn of Daniel 7 and the individual beast of Revelation.

1. The little horn/beast is an eighth ruler (three horns are removed before the little eleventh horn making him an eighth ruler, Dan. 7:8; Rev. 17:11). Titus was the eleventh Caesar, he was a general when he destroyed Israel (a little horn); the three horns removed are Galba Otho and Vitellius. How is Nero an eleventh horn, how is he an eighth horn. (He was the sixth Caesar.)

2. The little horn/beast speaks great blasphemies against God (Dan. 7:8, 11, 20, 25; Rev. 13:5-6). Talmud records Titus doing this in the Temple (cf. 2 Thess. 2:4), see Gittin 51b

3. The little horn/beast wages war against the saints and overcomes them (Dan. 7:21; Rev. 13:7). You want to say this is Nero in Rev. 13 but it sure isn’t Nero in Dan. 7 (unless you can make him a little eleventh horn). It is the dwellers on the Land that the beast focuses on (Rev. 13:8, 12, 14). Yes, the saints are differentiated from the dwellers on the Land (Rev. 13:7-8) but the main focus is still the Land. Anyone would not acknowledge Titus Flavius Vespasianus (the name of both father and son) as Lord would be put to death. The great tribulation would come on the whole world but would focus on the dwellers on the Land (Rev. 3:10; cf. Dan. 12:1-7; Matt. 24:15-22). Nero never even set foot in the Land. Notice that the whole thing of the mark of the individual beast happens after the corporate beast had died and come back to life (Rev. 13:3, 14). This is after the death of Nero when Rome went through its death throes with Galba Otho and Vitellius (remember 3 horns are pulled out before the little 11th horn not after him). The corporate beast would come back to life with the ascension of Vespasian and then the beast from the abyss that would work through Titus. Also note that the head and the hand (Rev. 13:16) specifically relates to Jewish worship (Duet 6:8).

4. The little horn/beast has a three-and-a-half-year reign of terror (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 13:5). Nero is the wrong three and a half years. The great tribulation always ends at AD 70 (cf. Dan. 7:21-22; Dan. 12:1-2, 7; Rev. 11:2)

5. The little horn/beast is defeated in AD 70 by the coming of God/Christ (Dan. 7:21-22; Rev. 19:11-20). This did not happen at the AD 68 death of Nero.

6. The little horn/beast is thrown into the lake of fire at the time of the Second Coming (Dan. 7:11; Rev. 19:19-21).

7. The kingdom of God is fully established (what the NT shows as the beginning of the millennium) at the AD 70 defeat of the little horn/beast (Dan. 7:7-11, 21-27; Rev. 19:11-20:4).

I want to focus on point 7. The sequence of Daniel 7:21-22 could not be clearer.

I was watching and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them, until the Ancient of Days came, and a judgment was made in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom.
Daniel 7:21-22

Daniel 7 clearly shows a premillennial sequence; it is right after the AD 70 coming of God to defeat of the Antichrist (the little horn) that the saints possess the kingdom. This parallels the sequence of Revelation 19:11-20:4. It is right after the AD 70 coming of the Word of God to defeat the Antichrist (the beast, Rev. 19:11-21) that the saints possess the kingdom (as the millennium begins; Rev. 20:1-4; cf. Dan. 7:7-11). Notice how Daniel 7 shows God’s people having gone through the great tribulation just prior to possessing the kingdom (i.e., the little horn prevailing against the saints in verse 21; cf. v. 25). It is the same in Revelation 20:4; one of the groups that come alive at the beginning of the millennium consists of those who had been killed for not taking the mark of the beast.

Then I saw thrones, and those seated on them were given authority to judge. I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Revelation 20:4

Thus, Revelation 20:4 also contains a clear reference to God’s people having gone through to the great tribulation of AD 67-70 (cf. Rev. 13:7-18); they had been killed by the Antichrist. That speaks of an AD 70 beginning of the millennium not an AD 30 beginning (the martyrs of the beast coming back to life at AD 30 does not make sense; they would not even be killed for another 37 or so years!)
This sequence of God’s people fully inheriting the kingdom at AD 70 is also shown in Luke 19.

Now as they heard these things, He spoke another parable, because He was near Jerusalem and because they thought the kingdom of God would appear immediately. Therefore He said: “A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and to return. So he called ten of his servants, delivered to them ten minas, and said to them; ‘Do business until I come.’ But his citizens hated him, and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We will not have this man to reign over us.’ And so it was that when he returned having received the kingdom, he then commanded these servants, to whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading. Then came the first saying, ‘Master, your mina has earned ten minas.’ And he said to him, ‘Well done good servant; because you were faithful in a very little, have authority over ten cities.’ And the second came, saying, ‘Master, your mina has earned fine minas.’ Likewise he said to him, ‘You also be over five cities . . . But bring here those enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, and slay them before me.’”
Luke 19:11-19, 27; cf. Matthew 19:28

Jesus received worldwide dominion in AD 30 (Matt. 28:18); this equates with the nobleman going away to receive his kingdom. Jesus would return forty years later to fully share that dominion with his followers at his parousia (which equates with the long journey of the nobleman prior to his return). Note the destruction of the subjects that did not want the nobleman to rule over them (i.e., the Jews; cf. John 1:11-12; 19:15-22). This is referring to the AD 70 destruction of the Jewish nation at the full establishment of God’s kingdom (cf. Dan. 12:1-7; Matt. 8:11-12; 22:1-10; Rev. 11:15-18). This was the time of the parousia, the time when Jesus’ followers shared in his reign as the saints inherited the kingdom of God (Dan. 7:21-27; Rev. 19:11-20:4 cf. Matt. 21:33-45).

Yes, there I go again. Once again, your reply is both thought-provoking and appreciated. And, as you said, this interpretation is complex. I do see that the ten horns (ten kings) pursue the harlot (Rev. 17:16-17), which I agree with you is to be identified as not only the city of Jerusalem but also Old Covenant, temple-based Judaism. At the same time, the reason I viewed verse 14 as speaking of persecution against the Church is because of the similarities between that verse and Acts 9:1-5, which read as follows:

”But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?’ And he said, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ And He said, ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting…’”

Jesus took the persecution of His body, His followers, personally. That’s what I naturally see happening here in Rev. 17:14, where we read:

”They [the ten kings] will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with Him are called and chosen and faithful.”

Would Jesus take it personally if an entity targets those who have rejected Him and are marked for judgment; i.e. would He take it personally in the same way as He took personally the persecution of His faithful people at the hands of Saul? That’s the question in my mind.

This is related to the same barrier I have in regarding “the saints” (Rev. 13:7, 10) as a reference to anyone but faithful followers of Jesus. After all “the saints” are called to endurance and faith (verse 10), something which is only possible for believers. “War” is waged against them (verse 7), just as it is against the Lamb (Rev. 17:14). I believe you addressed this briefly, but I don’t remember where. I don’t know so much about Titus having the authority to go after followers of Christ throughout the Roman empire during the reign of Nero, the three emperors who ruled briefly after him, or during the beginning of Vespasian’s reign (69 AD ); or that he conquered them in any significant way. I do know about Nero’s systematic targeting of believers in Christ, and of his barbarity in putting many of them to death. I’m referring to verse 7, which says, “Also it [the beast] was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them…” My difficulty is in conceiving of an inspired author of Scripture (John), in the New Testament era no less, referring to mainly unregenerate Jews as “saints” (even if this is, as it certainly appears to be, a reference back to Daniel 7:25).

I know that Titus spoke blasphemous things against the God of heaven, whom even the apostate Jews claimed to be following (I’ve now read what you wrote about that on page 117 in your book). On page 120 of your book, you wrote with regard to Daniel 7:25, “Daniel would have understood the saints of the Most High to be his people, the Jews (cf. Dan. 9:24; 12:1), although in the NT the concept of saints is expanded to include believing Gentiles as well as Jews (cf. Rev. 13:7).” Isn’t the NT concept of “saints,” though, strictly confined to those who trust in Christ for salvation, regardless of ethnic background? Or are we saying the same thing? I’ve read what you quoted from Severus (also on page 120 of your book) about Titus’ misguided aim to destroy both Judaism and Christianity in one swipe by destroying the temple in Jerusalem, and am pondering on that. I wonder if there is any more evidence out there of his systematic “conquering” (Rev. 13:7) of God’s people (the body of Christ)?

1. In Daniel, the little horn of chapter 7 is an eighth horn (after three horns are removed before him). Given this, it would seem more consistent for the Antichrist to be an eighth head on the beast. I believe the reason he is not, is to give the Antichrist (the individual beast) seven heads, thus mimicking the Lamb (with seven eyes and horns, Rev. 5:6) and showing himself as God (cf. 2 Thess. 2:4).

2. Many of those who do not believe Daniel is a true prophecy base their belief on an a priori assumption that there is no such thing as true prophecy. Those who hold this assumption have their minds already made up; in their thinking Daniel can’t contain true prophecy because there is no such thing as true prophecy. Because of this assumption they believe that Revelation must be a reinterpretation (or possibly a sharing of common literary tradition) of the pseudo prophecies of Daniel. The assumption that there is no such thing as true prophecy is imbedded in much of modern day scholarship.

3. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 729. Beale seems to imply that the reason that John makes so many references to Daniel is because John saw himself as in a parallel situation as did the writer of Daniel (who Beale thinks was talking about the second century BC). My position is that the fourth beast that Daniel had prophesied about was Rome and that John was being given more information supplementing Daniel’s prophecies about this empire that would be in existence when kingdom of God was fully established.

4. Tacitus writes the following on Vespasian brief time of being a miracle worker:
In the course of the months [of early AD 70] which Vespasian spent at Alexandria [Egypt], waiting for the regular season of summer winds when the sea could be relied upon [so he could set sail for Rome to assume his position as Emperor], many miracles occurred. These seemed to be indications that Vespasian enjoyed heaven’s blessing and that the gods showed a certain leaning towards him. Among the lower classes at Alexandria was a blind man whom everybody knew as such. One day this fellow threw himself at Vespasian’s feet, imploring him with groans to heal his blindness. He had been told to make this request by Serapis, the favorite god of a nation much addicted to strange beliefs. He asked that it might please the emperor to anoint his cheeks and eyeballs with the water of his mouth. A second petitioner, who suffered from a withered hand, pleaded his case too, also on the advice of Serapis: would Caesar tread upon him with the imperial foot? At first Vespasian laughed at them and refused. When the two insisted, he hesitated . . . Vespasian felt that his destiny gave him the key to every door and that nothing now defied belief. With smiling expression and surrounded by an expectant crowd of bystanders, he did what was asked. Instantly the cripple recovered the use of his hand and the light of day dawned again upon his blind companion. Both these incidents are still vouched for by eye-witnesses, though there is now nothing to be gained by lying. Tacitus, The Histories, 1, 10, trans. Kenneth Wellesley (New York: Penguin Books, 1975), 263-264.
Vespasian began performing his “many miracles” at the exact time that my position theorizes that the seventh demonic king began working through him (the time when the corporate beast came back to life with Vespasian’s accession to the throne in December of AD 69). This is something Vespasian had not done before this time and would not do after. By the time Vespasian came back to Rome in the second half of AD 70 he was no longer performing these miracles. To see Suetonius’ version see, Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars, Vespasian, 7. Suetonius says it was a lame man, not a man with a withered hand, that was healed—these were Messianic miracles, cf. Matt. 11:5.

5. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 681.

Well, there you go again (said with a Ronald Regan voice You are putting a Nero spin on the beast, the 10 horns do not help the beast persecute the church, they help the individual beast destroy the harlot (Rev. 17:16, it was Titus who destroyed the harlot not Nero!)

Here is something from my chapter on Rev. 13. After that I give a little something from my ch. on Rev. 17. Let me first give you my summary.

To summarize, the symbolism of the ten horns of the beast shifts somewhat in Revelation 17. In chapter 13 the ten horns have crowns and represent the ten Caesars (Julius-Vespasian). In Revelation 17 the ten horns do not have crowns and represent the client kings that would be given authority for a short time to assist Titus in his destruction of harlot Israel. (Rev. 17:12-13, 16)

A REVIEW OF THE RULERS PORTRAYED IN DANIEL AND REVELATION

Before I discuss Revelation 13 in detail I shall first give a review of the rulers of the fourth empire in Daniel 2 and 7 and how they relate to the rulers represented by the corporate beast in Revelation. As I mentioned earlier, Revelation is an elaboration of the prophecies of Daniel, not a reinterpretation. Both books are talking about the time of great tribulation that would happen right before the AD 70 full establishment of the kingdom of God.

While it is clear that Revelation is influenced by the book of Daniel (Beale estimates that approximately two-thirds of all the OT references in Revelation 13 come from Daniel), the nature of this influence is debated. If Daniel is mainly dealing with the events of the second century BC and its images are being re-used in Revelation simply because of similarities between that time and John’s time, then looking at Daniel will be of little help in understanding the specifics of Revelation. If on the other hand Daniel is true prophecy relating to the same end of the age events (in chapters 2, 7, 9 and 11:36-12:13) that are portrayed in Revelation, then Daniel can be of immense value in supplying information about the rulers (the heads and horns of the beast) that we find in Revelation.

In my overview of the rulers of Daniel and Revelation I will be referring to the Roman Caesars; keep in mind, however, that ultimately the rulers shown in these two books are the spiritual rulers behind these Caesars not simply the human rulers (cf. Eph. 6:12).

The fourth kingdom portrayed in Daniel 2 (the legs and feet of Nebuchadnezzar’s image, Dan. 2:33, 40-42) speaks of the confederation of spiritual rulers behind the first ten Caesars of the Roman Empire (represented by the ten toes of the image, Dan. 2:40-45) While we are not specifically told that Nebuchadnezzar’s image had 10 toes, when we see the fourth beast of Daniel 7 (which corresponds to the legs and feet of Daniel 2) it has ten horns (Dan. 7:7). It is thus safe to conclude that the image in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream had ten toes. The kingdom of God would be fully established early in the reign of the tenth Caesar of Rome (Vespasian AD 69-79). The rulers of Daniel’s fourth empire (Rome) are referring to the demonic rulers behind the following Caesars (I have included Titus, the little eleventh horn):

1. Julius Caesar (49-44 BC)
2. Augustus (31BC- AD 14)
3. Tiberius (AD 14-37
4. Gaius a.k.a. Caligula (AD 37-41)
5. Claudius (AD 41-54)
6. Nero (AD 54-68)
Galba (AD 68-69———
Otho (AD 69)————- 3 horns pulled out (Dan. 7:8)
Vitellius (AD 69)———
7. Vespasian (AD 69-79)
8. Titus in AD 70, the little eleventh horn of Dan. 7

Daniel 7 adds a little eleventh horn (Titus) to the count of the ten rulers (Dan. 7:7-8). Titus would become the 11th Caesar (reigning from AD 79-81) but Daniel and Revelation are showing him in AD 70 at the time he destroyed the Jewish nation. At that time he was just a general, the son of the emperor, hence his designation as an eleventh “little horn.” (Dan. 7:8). Daniel 7 modifies Daniel 2 in that it shows that the real power would not reside in the tenth ruler, the one on the throne in AD 70 (Vespasian) but in the little eleventh horn (Vespasian’s son Titus).

Daniel 7 shows this little eleventh horn which comes up among the first ten rulers (Dan. 7:7-8). With the rise of the eleventh horn three of the first ten horns are removed (Dan. 7:7-8). The removal of three horns refers to the failed reigns of Galba, Otho and Vitellius, the three short-lived emperors that came and went in AD 68-69. The removal of these three rulers left Daniel’s fourth beast with eight rulers, which is how Revelation 17:7-11 shows the corporate beast; it is composed of eight kings.

THE ANTICHRIST AS AN ELEVENTH/EIGHTH RULER

The concept of the little horn of Daniel 7 being an eleventh/eighth ruler (depending if one counts the three rulers removed before him) is maintained in Revelation. The individual beast can be counted as either an eleventh ruler or an eighth ruler. If one is looking at the physical rulers symbolized by the ten horns of the corporate beast (which in Revelation 13:1 have ten crowns and represent the ten Caesars, Julius through Vespasian) then the individual beast is an eleventh ruler. Titus would be the eleventh Caesar. If one is looking at spiritual rulers (the seven heads of the corporate beast) then the individual beast is an eighth demonic king (Rev. 17:7-11). He was the demonic spirit of Antichrist that was about to come out of the abyss and work through Titus. Thus, the horns of the corporate beast in Revelation 13 refer to ten physical rulers (Julius-Vespasian) with the beast itself being an eleventh ruler (Titus in AD 70).

The heads refer to the seven demonic rulers that were behind these Caesars with the beast itself being an especially powerful eighth demonic king.
Apparently the reason that Galba, Otho and Vitellius could not hang onto the Roman throne is because there was no demonic ruler behind them; that is, none of the three had a corresponding head on the beast. They came on the scene during the year and a half when the corporate beast was mortally wounded (at Nero’s death in mid AD 68, Rev. 13:3). With Nero’s death, the confederation of demonic rulers behind the imperial throne was put out of commission. This left the Roman Empire like a ship without a rudder (cf. Rev. 16:10 where darkness is poured out on the throne of the beast). With the accession of Vespasian in December of AD 69 the corporate beast would come back to life as Vespasian went to sit on the throne and Titus (the individual beast) came to destroy the unfaithful Israel and her Temple (harlot Babylon, Rev. 17-18).

To summarize, in Revelation 13 the seven heads of the corporate beast refer to seven demonic kings while the ten horns refer to the first ten Caesars they worked through. The beast itself is an eleventh ruler if one is counting human rulers; he is an eighth ruler if one is counting spiritual rulers.

THE CORPORATE BEAST IN REVELATION 17

In Revelation 17 the beast is again shown with its seven heads and ten horns but it has no crowns on the horns as it did in Revelation 13. As in Revelation 13, the heads represent spiritual rulers; they are demonic kings (the eighth of these kings coming out of the abyss Rev. 17:8-11). The lack of crowns on the ten horns in Revelation 17 is significant and represents a shift in the meaning of the horns in that chapter (which I will explain shortly). We are told in Revelation 17 that the seven heads are seven (demonic) kings; five had fallen, one was currently ruling, a seventh would have a short reign, after which, the beast (who was an eighth king) would come out of the abyss (Rev. 17:8-11).

The five fallen kings were the five demonic rulers that worked through Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Gaius and Claudius, the one ruling was the demonic ruler that was working through Nero (Revelation was written towards the end of Nero’s reign, c. AD 65). The seventh king that would have a short reign (Rev. 17:10) was the demonic ruler that would work through Vespasian. Apparently this demonic ruler only reigned for a short time, probably the months from when Vespasian was proclaimed Emperor in December of AD 69 to March of AD 70 when Titus left Egypt for his second coming to the Holy Land (cf. Dan. 11:42-45). While this proposition does not lend itself to empirical validation, the fact that supernatural forces were working through Vespasian during this short time is evidenced by his sudden ability to do miracles (e.g., making the lame walk and the blind see). Vespasian’s miraculous powers during these few months of late AD 69 and early AD 70 was impressive enough that both Suetonius and Tacitus wrote about them.

The eighth demonic king, the individual beast, would come out of the abyss sometime in early spring of AD 70 to work through Titus as he destroyed unfaithful Israel on the ultimate day of the Lord. In Revelation 17 neither the heads nor horns have crowns on them, but we are told that the heads are kings (Rev. 17:8-11).

Revelation 17’s the focus is on the individual beast and his destruction of harlot Babylon. In contrast, Revelation 13’s focus is on the corporate beast and how it died and came back to life with the coming of the individual beast (Rev. 13:1-7). The reason that the horns of the beast have no crowns in Revelation 17 is probably because they represent the Roman client kings and authorities that assisted Titus (the individual beast) in his destruction of harlot Israel (Rev. 17:12-17). We are told that these authorities were to “receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast” (Rev. 17:12), thus they have no crowns. I will discuss this further when I get to Revelation chapter 17.

To summarize, the symbolism of the ten horns of the beast shifts somewhat in Revelation 17. In chapter 13 the ten horns have crowns and represent the ten Caesars (Julius-Vespasian). In Revelation 17 the ten horns do not have crowns and represent the client kings that would be given authority for a short time to assist Titus in his destruction of harlot Israel. (Rev. 17:12-13)

I have painted with broad brushes in my overview of the complex subject of the relation between the horns of Daniel’s fourth beast and the heads and horns of the beast in Revelation. The interpretation I have presented is complex but I am afraid that (as the saying goes) that is the nature of the beast. As Revelation says in talking about the heads of the corporate beast, “This calls for a mind that has wisdom: . . .” (Rev. 17:9, NRSV). Again the key to the identification of the rulers that make up the corporate beast of Revelation is found in Daniel 7; this is why Revelation 13 contains so many references to Daniel 7.

Here is a little something from my chapter on Rev. 17.

THE HORNS OF THE INDIVIDUAL BEAST
We are told that the ten horns of the beast are ten kings who receive authority with the individual beast for “one hour as kings” to help in the destruction of the harlot (Rev. 17:12-13, 16). It is important to note that the ten horns of the beast in Revelation 17 do not have crowns on them like the ten horns of the corporate beast do in Revelation 13:1. In Revelation 13:1 the ten horns of the corporate beast have crowns on them because in that context they represent the same ten emperors (Julius to Vespasian) that the ten horns of Daniel’s fourth beast do (Daniel 7:7). In Revelation 17 the focus is on the individual beast and his destruction of the harlot. The horns here receive authority “as kings” to assist the individual beast. Thus, the ten horns in this chapter probably represent the allied authorities and client kings that assisted Titus in his destruction of the Jewish nation.

Of the Roman governors and authorities that helped Titus in the destruction of the harlot there were at least four client kings of Rome. These were, Antiochus IV of Commagene (not to be confused with the second-century BC Antiochus IV Epiphanes), Herod Agrippa II of northern Palestine (cf. Acts 25:13-26:32), Sohaemus of Emesa, and Malchus II of Nabataea (Arabia). Wellesley writes the following about the kings and authorities that united with Titus in AD 69—he mentions at least seven client rulers.

The Flavians soon received the support of a number of native rulers, among them Sohaemus, sheikh of Homs, a fertile and independent enclave in the province of Syria . . . also Antiochus IV Epiphanes, ruler of Commagene east of Cilicia . . . Then Titus’ traveling companion, King Agrippa II, sheikh of Anjan and Golan . . . After this, we are not surprised to learn that the governors of all the provinces of Asia Minor, though disposing of no legionary garrisons, had promised such support in supplies, facilities and auxiliary forces as they could give and Vespasian might require. Among them were the proconsul of Asia, Gaius Fonteius Agrippa, and the legate of Galatia-with-Pamphylia, Lucius Nonius Calpurnius Asprenas . . . In addition, there was Cappadocia, still a procuratorial province governed by a knight without the legionary garrison which Vespasian himself was to give it; its governor in 69 is unknown, and equally unknown is the governor of Pontus, added to Bithynia five years before. In late July [of AD 69] Vespasian, Mucianus, Titus and the commanding and senior officers of the legions, together with the potentates who supported the Flavian cause, met to formulate precise plans at Beirut.

Of the gathered Flavian forces, approximately 15,000-20,000 went with Mucianus to secure Rome (he would pick up other forces on his march to Rome). The majority went with Titus. By the time Titus’ forces were gathered at Caesarea, the strength of his army was approximately 50,000-60,000.
With the picture of a beast with horns in mind, consider Josephus’ description of Titus and the advancing Roman army and how the allied kings were at its head.

Titus advanced into enemy territory behind a vanguard consisting of the contingents of the kings and the whole body of auxiliaries. Next to them came the road-builders and camp-measurers, then the officers’ baggage; behind the troops which protected them came the commander-in-chief, escorted by his lancers and other picked soldiers , and followed by the legionary cavalry. These marched before the engines and behind them the tribunes and prefects of cohorts with a picked escort. After them came the eagle surrounded by the standards, preceded by their trumpeters, and after them the solid column, marching six abreast. The servants belonging to each legion followed in a body preceded by the baggage train. Last of all came the mercenaries and their guards in the rear. Heading his forces forward in the orderly array, according to Roman custom, Titus advanced . . . .

The allied kings were at the head of the Roman beast; they were its horns. We are told that God had “put it into their hearts to fulfill His purpose, to be of one mind, and to give their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God are fulfilled” (Rev. 17:17).

In Revelation 17:16 we are told that these kings would “hate the harlot, make her desolate and naked, eat her flesh and burn her with fire.” Tacitus notes the hatred some of the allied troops had for the Jews.

Waiting for him [Titus] in Judea were the three legions that had long served under Vespasian-the Fifth, Tenth, and Fifteenth. To this force he added the Twelfth from Syria and the drafts from the Twenty-Second and the Third brought up from Alexandria. He was attended by twenty cohorts of allied infantry and eight regiments of cavalry, as well as by the two kings Agrippa and Sohaemus and the supporting forces offered by King Antiochus. Then there were strong levies of Arabs, who felt for the Jews the hatred common between neighbors . . . .

Revelation 17:16 says that the harlot would be stripped naked and burned with fire. Burning was the sentence of death prescribed in Leviticus for a harlot who was the daughter of a priest, “The daughter of any priest, if she profanes herself by playing the harlot, she profanes her father. She shall be burned with fire” (Leviticus 21:9). The punishment of harlot Babylon is burning; she was of the priestly class and had profaned her heavenly Father. The Temple and much of Jerusalem were destroyed by fire in the holocaust of AD 70. Aune notes the following about Revelation 17:16 and its OT allusions to the destruction of Jerusalem:

This is an allusion to Ezek 23:26-29, where Jerusalem is compared to a woman stripped naked and to Ezek 23:25 where the survivors of Jerusalem will be burned with fire. Several OT prophets . . . also threaten the harlot Judah with being stripped naked (Jer 13:26-27; Ezek 16:37-38; 23:10, 29; Hos 2:5, 12).

You’re correct. I do need to read your book, chapter 7 in particular. Thank you again for this insightful information. Do you have any thoughts on Revelation 17:12-14 and the 10 horns representing those who had not yet received royal power when John wrote Revelation?

Revelation 17:12-14 (English Standard Version)

12And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received royal power, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together with the beast. 13These are of one mind, and they hand over their power and authority to the beast. 14They will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are called and chosen and faithful.”

My own viewpoint up to this point, as mentioned earlier, is that they were 10 provincial Roman leaders who helped to oversee the persecution of the Church at that time. These 10 horns seem to be distinct from the 10 horns seen in Daniel’s vision (Dan. 7:7-8), because of the description given by John versus the description given by Daniel of the 10 horns he saw. Is that how you would see this (Rev. 17:12-14) as well?

Many futurists are still waiting for Satan to be cast out of heaven (Rev. 12:1-9). If that is true then he is still accusing us day and night before God’s throne (Rev. 12:10). How is it I am the heretic when I say this is just plain wrong. Satan was kicked out of heaven at the cross (John 12:31-32). He had a short time at that point(Rev. 12:12) till he was bound for the millennium at AD 70 (the end of “a time and times and half a time” Rev. 12:13-14; cf. Dan. 12:7).

By the way, most people say my book is pretty easy reading.

Duncan

Here is a little summary for you (You really should read my book If nothing else read my chapter on Daniel 7. I believe it is the single most important chapter of Bible prophecy.

SUMMARY OF THE ANTICHRIST PROPHECIES OF DANIEL
THAT WERE FULFILLED BY TITUS

Keeping in mind that the Antichrist was ultimately the demonic ruler from the abyss that worked through Titus (cf. Rev. 11:7; 17:8), the following are the prophecies of Daniel concerning the Antichrist that were fulfilled in Titus:

1. Although Titus would become the eleventh Caesar of Rome (the fourth beast), he was only a general when he destroyed the Jewish nation, hence his designation as a little (eleventh) horn (Dan. 7:7-8). This agrees with the traditional Jewish understanding of the little horn of Daniel 7 (e.g., Rashi). See here http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16490/showrashi/true

2. Vespasian and Titus were victorious over three rulers (Galba, Otho, and Vitellius) in their takeover of the Roman Empire in AD 69 (the year of four emperors). These were the three horns removed before the little eleventh horn (Dan. 7:8). According to Roman historians, Titus was a major force behind the Flavian takeover of the empire.

3. The little eleventh horn was to speak great blasphemies against the Most High God (Dan. 7:8, 11, 20, 25). Jewish sources say that Titus spoke extraordinary blasphemies against God when he captured the Temple (cf. Dan. 11:36-37; 2 Thess. 2:4; Rev. 13:5-6).

4. The Antichrist was to have a three-and-a-half-year reign of terror (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 13:5). Titus persecuted Daniel’s people for a time, times, and half a time (three-and-a-half years, or forty-two months), from March/April AD 67 to August/September AD 70 (cf. Rev. 11:2). This time period ended with the shattering of the Jewish nation (Dan. 12:7).

5. Titus and his father changed the times of religious observance and rules of Jewish law when they set up the equivalent of a new Sanhedrin in Yavneh (Dan. 7:25).

6. Titus was the one who the demonic prince to come worked through in his destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (Dan. 9:26).

7. The coming of Titus was associated with abominations (i.e., idols). He came on the wing of an army full of abominations (the images of Caesar on the Roman standards); this resulted in the Jewish nation being made desolate (Dan. 9:27; cf. 12:6-11).

8. Titus exalted himself above every god when his troops sacrificed to his name/image as they worshiped the Roman standards in the Temple (Dan. 11:36-37; cf. 2 Thess. 2:4).

9. The destruction of the Jews by Titus was assisted by the help of a foreign god named Sarapis; this god was not one of Titus’ ancestors’ gods. In recognition of this, Sarapis was elevated to the position of one of the Roman gods (Dan. 11:38-39).

10. After Titus’ destruction of the Jewish nation in AD 70, the land of Israel was divided up by the Romans and leased out for profit (Dan. 11:39).

11. Titus first invaded the Holy Land in AD 67 with his father. In late AD 69 Titus and Vespasian were in Egypt securing its precious things to help finance their takeover of the Roman Empire (Dan. 11:40-43).

12. In mid-AD 69 Titus was given sole authority over Syria (the domain of the king of the North) as well as Judea. In the spring of AD 70, with tidings from the north (a revolt in Germany) and east (the continuing revolt in Judea) troubling him, Titus invaded the Holy Land from Egypt (Dan. 11:44). This was the Antichrist’s second coming to the Holy Land.

13. In the final siege of Jerusalem, Titus set up his camp between the Mediterranean Sea and the glorious holy mountain of God (Dan. 11:45; cf. 9:26). It was at Jerusalem that the demonic king of the North (cf. Dan. 10:13), the spirit of Antichrist working through Titus (cf. 1 John 4:3), met its end as it was destroyed in the lake of fire (Dan. 7:11; cf. Rev. 19:20).

14. The length of time between the abomination of desolation (the coming to sacred Jewish soil of the one who would make desolate, Dan. 9:27 NKJV) until the shattering of the power of the Jews was 1,290 days (Dan. 12:6-11). Titus came to the Holy Land around February of AD 67; 1,290 days later the Jewish nation was left shattered.

Duncan
The Antichrist and the Second Coming 249-251

Enjoy your guests and your weekend.Duncan’s book will be arriving in a few days – that should keep me occupied for a year or two maybe three!

He’s been great.His take on the Demise of Satan [comment # 8] on this page was scripturally (this is not a word i know) excellent!

Adam you said

” I have a feeling that we will continue to explore whether or not the New Testament, aside from the words of Jesus, promises a coming beyond 70 AD (outside of the idea that He comes for His own at the time of their physical death).”

Amen and Amen! God bless you Adam

Seroled

Just a quick heads up… If this discussion (or any other) carries on into the second half of this week (which is fine), don’t be surprised if I don’t respond for a few days. I’ll be entertaining guests from out of town Wednesday-Friday (plus working each day), and then I’ll be out of town myself for the weekend without internet access. Just wanted to throw that out there real quick…

Seroled, you said:

Seriously though i have come to the conclusion that Jesus in his own words did not promise a coming beyond A.D.70.

I believe I’m with you there. And we’re in good company, then, for this is what Jonathan Edwards said on this subject (in his work titled “Miscellany #1199″):

Tis evident that when Christ speaks of his coming; his being revealed; his coming in his Kingdom; or his Kingdom’s coming; He has respect to his appearing in those great works of his Power Justice and Grace, which should be in the Destruction of Jerusalem and other extraordinary Providences which should attend it [So in Luke 17:20 – 18:8].

I have a feeling that we will continue to explore whether or not the New Testament, aside from the words of Jesus, promises a coming beyond 70 AD (outside of the idea that He comes for His own at the time of their physical death).

Duncan, on this note, I don’t know if you caught a question that I asked you elsewhere about Revelation 20:7-10… But, knowing that you believe there is no future corporate coming of Christ (I hope I’m saying that accurately), and also knowing that you believe (as I do) that this passage is future, how do you view the transition from the events of this passage to the eternal state? Fire will come down from heaven (verse 9) and consume the enemies of the saints. If there’s no Second Coming and no physical rapture (a physical catching away of God’s people who are alive) at this point, what else do you see as happening here? How are those who are alive at that time joined together with those who have previously died in Christ and gone on to their reward? Thanks for any feedback you may have on this.

I’m sorry that you had trouble posting to the blog earlier. Thanks for taking the extra time to post all this, regardless of the trouble. I hope that doesn’t happen to you again. I’ve had a similar thing happen to me when posting elsewhere (not on this blog), and have now generally learned when posting longer comments to type them out and save them ahead of time.

The writings of Daniel which you’ve brought into this discussion are very interesting indeed. I admit that when my Bible study group went through the book of Revelation, in the second half of last year and in the early part of this year, we didn’t utilize the book of Daniel very much. Our study was intense enough as it was, but Daniel’s writings clearly do play a key role when it comes to the content of Revelation. I’m looking forward to the day when I can do a serious study of the book of Daniel, but for now I appreciate what you’ve brought to the table here.

I agree with you about the shift at verse 36 of Daniel 11. For a time I considered Philip Mauro’s viewpoint that this section (or at least some portion of verses 36-45) had to do with Herod the Great (e.g. Mauro believed that where verse 44 says “…he shall go out with great fury to destroy and devote many to destruction…” it referred to Herod’s command to destroy all children below the age of two). But it seems there are holes in his theory (I still have a lot of admiration for Mauro, though).

Your examples from Daniel of demonic rulers being shown to be in authority over empires (e.g. Daniel 8:24-25, 10:20) are helpful. These are also good points:

That the little horn of Daniel 8 fights against the stars, the (angelic) host of heaven and even God, also points to him ultimately being a spiritual ruler (Dan. 8:8-11)… The beast of Revelation clearly refers to a spiritual ruler; he would come out of the abyss (Rev. 11:7; 17:8), which is the abode of demons (cf. Rev. 9:1-12; 20:1-3).

This is also very informative:

At Daniel 11:36 we are no longer being shown Antiochus IV but rather the Antichrist (i.e., Titus). I believe this for four reasons. First, the description of the king of the North suddenly begins not to fit the historical facts of Antiochus IV starting at verse 36. Second, the language used about the king of the North starting at verse 36 parallels that which has traditionally been associated with the Antichrist. For example, the king of Daniel 11:36 is said to “exalt and magnify himself above every god.” Paul, in elaborating on this ruler, describes the man of lawlessness as the one “who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God” (2 Thess. 2:3-4).

Third, the king of the North is defeated at the time that events associated with the Second Coming take place (e.g., the abomination of desolation, Dan. 12:11; 9:27; cf. Matt. 24:15; the great tribulation and resurrection, Dan. 12:1-2; cf. Matt. 24:16-21; 25:35-46). The king of the North being defeated at this time is consistent with other places in Scripture that show the Antichrist being defeated by the Second Advent (Dan. 7:20-22; 2 Thess. 2:1-8; 1 John 2:18; Rev. 19:11-21). Finally, it is said that the king of Daniel 11:36 speaks “blasphemies against the God of gods.” This blasphemous attitude of the Antichrist corresponds to the “pompous words against the Most High” that the little horn of Daniel 7 speaks (v. 25), as well as to the beast from the sea of Revelation 13 opening “his mouth in blasphemy against God” (Rev. 13:5-6). These are all references that have been traditionally (and I believe correctly) associated with the Antichrist.

One day I need to make a comprehensive chart bringing into consideration all these things (the Biblical descriptions of the beast/the little horn/the man of lawlessness, and how they do or do not fit Nero and Titus). I find visuals like that to be helpful. Right now my head kind of hurts considering all these things, with pieces of the puzzle here and there, but this isn’t entirely a bad thing. What you wrote here is a start:

Anyone who is not incorporating Daniel 7 into the 8 kings will also get lost:

1. The little horn/beast is an eighth ruler. The little 11th horn becomes an 8th ruler when 3 rulers are removed before him (Dan. 7:8; Rev. 17:11). Galba Otho and Vitellius came before Titus and after Nero (these short lived rulers came right after the death of Nero).

2. The little horn/beast speaks great blasphemies against God (Dan. 7:8, 11, 20, 25; Rev. 13:5-6).

3. The little horn/beast wages war against the saints and overcomes them (Dan. 7:21; Rev. 13:7).

4. The little horn/beast has a three-and-a-half-year reign of terror (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 13:5) which is ended by the parousia (see below).

5. The little horn/beast is defeated in AD 70 by the coming of God/Christ (Dan. 7:21-22; Rev. 19:11-20).

6. The little horn/beast is thrown into the lake of fire at the time of the Second Coming (Dan. 7:11; Rev. 19:19-21).

7. The kingdom of God is established (what the NT shows as the beginning of the millennium) at the AD 70 defeat of the little horn/beast (Dan. 7:7-11, 21-27; Rev. 19:11-20:4).

And your conclusion, I have to admit, would be pretty hard to get around:

It seems pretty clear that the little 11th horn and the individual beast are the same. I can easily show you how Titus was the eleventh Caesar. I doubt Gentry can show how Nero was an 11th ruler.

I wonder if Gentry has attempted to do this in any of his writings? I haven’t read much from him on Daniel either.

I also wonder why John, in Revelation 17, never seems to mention 10 emperors (instead he mentions seven, with an eighth yet to come which “belongs to the seven”) or the three fallen horns. He does mention 10 horns (verse 12), but they hadn’t yet received authority at the time he wrote this, and they seem to be 10 Roman provincial leaders as many have proposed. Is that how you view the 10 horns of Rev. 17:12-14, by the way? I don’t remember if you’ve mentioned this before or not…

Anyone who is not incorporating Daniel 7 into the 8 kings will also get lost:

1. The little horn/beast is an eighth ruler. The little 11th horn becomes an 8th ruler when 3 rulers are removed before him (Dan. 7:8; Rev. 17:11). Galba Otho and Vitellius came before Titus and after Nero (these short lived rulers came right after the death of Nero).

2. The little horn/beast speaks great blasphemies against God (Dan. 7:8, 11, 20, 25; Rev. 13:5-6).

3. The little horn/beast wages war against the saints and overcomes them (Dan. 7:21; Rev. 13:7).

4. The little horn/beast has a three-and-a-half-year reign of terror (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 13:5) which is ended by the parousia (see below).

5. The little horn/beast is defeated in AD 70 by the coming of God/Christ (Dan. 7:21-22; Rev. 19:11-20).

6. The little horn/beast is thrown into the lake of fire at the time of the Second Coming (Dan. 7:11; Rev. 19:19-21).

7. The kingdom of God is established (what the NT shows as the beginning of the millennium) at the AD 70 defeat of the little horn/beast (Dan. 7:7-11, 21-27; Rev. 19:11-20:4).

It seems pretty clear that the little 11th horn and the individual beast are the same. I can easily show you how Titus was the eleventh Caesar. I doubt Gentry can show how Nero was an 11th ruler.

Satan was not destroyed in terms of ceasing to exist at the cross; rather, he was neutralized, his spiritual authority destroyed (cf. John 12:31-32; 1 John 3:8). Vine writes the following on this: “Katargeō = to render inactive, or useless, as the barren fig tree did the ground it occupied, Luke 13:7, and as the death of Christ makes ineffective, prospectively, the power of the Devil, Hebrews 2:14.”45 In a similar manner to how Satan’s position of authority was destroyed at the cross, so the man of lawlessness had his dominion taken away at the parousia, as God’s people inherited the kingdom of God (cf. Dan. 7:21-27).

As I have said previously, ultimately the Antichrist was not Titus but the demonic spirit working through Titus (i.e., the demonic prince of the Roman people, Dan. 9:26). This was the spirit of Antichrist (1 John 4:3), the beast from the abyss (Rev. 11:7; 17:8). It was this demonic spirit, not Titus, that was cast into the lake of fire at Jesus’ Second Coming (Dan 7:11; Rev. 19:11-21). With this in mind, it is not correct to refer to Titus as the Antichrist after AD 70, as the Antichrist spirit working through Titus was destroyed by Jesus’ parousia in the autumn of AD 70. According to Paul, the demonic rulers of the pre-AD 70 age would be “coming to nothing” (katargeō, 1 Cor. 2:6) at Christ’s Second Coming (cf. Rom. 16:20; Rev. 11:15-18).

I am breaking this into thirds to see if the blog will take it.

2 Thess 2:8 does not say that Satan is destroyed at that time, it says the man of sin is neutralized.

THE DESTRUCTION OF THE ANTICHRIST
In 2 Thessalonians 2:8-9 Paul discusses the revelation and then destruction of the Antichrist.

8. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of his mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.
9. The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders.

The lawless one would be revealed only when whatever was restraining the evil forces that would work through him was taken out of the way. Just as Jesus would be revealed at his Second Coming, verse 8 (Gr. parousia; cf. 2 Thess. 1:7), so too would the man of lawlessness be revealed at his own coming, verse 9 (Gr. parousia).

Wanamaker refers to the Antichrist’s parody of Jesus’ parousia as “the anti-parousia.”43 I believe the parallel between the two parousiai goes even further. Titus’ AD 70 invasion of the Holy Land from Egypt (cf. Dan. 11:40-45) was his second coming to the Holy Land, his first coming being in conjunction with his father in AD 67. Unlike Jesus’ Second Coming, which resulted in salvation (Heb. 9:28), the second coming of Titus resulted in desolation; he would be allowed to prosper until God’s wrath against Israel was accomplished (Dan. 11:36; 12:7; cf. 9:27).

The second advent of Titus was the revelation of the man of lawlessness; it would lead to the destruction of the Antichrist spirit working through him (2 Thess. 2:8). At first there appears to be a problem with saying Titus was the man of lawlessness, seeing as Titus was not killed in AD 70. Second Thessalonians 2:8 says that Jesus’ parousia would “destroy” the lawless one. If Titus was the man of lawlessness, how is it he was not killed at Jesus’ parousia? Discussing the word “destroy” (Gr. katargeō) in 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming”), Vine writes:

lit. to reduce to inactivity (kata, down, argos, inactive) . . . In this and similar words no loss of being is implied, but loss of well being . . . [Thus,] the Man of Sin is reduced to inactivity by the manifestation of the Lord’s Parousia with His people.44