3. Those in heaven were blasphemed, by the ascription to them of the

attributes and prerogatives of God; and by representing them as being well pleased with the bestowal on them of divine honors. Saint-worship by the Papists and demon-worship by the Pagans are alike. They both ascribe the same attributes to the spirits of the departed,—all the gods of the heathen being the ghosts of their departed heroes. A revival of this blasphemy, is subsequently symbolized by the frog-like spirits which emerge from the mouths of the beast, the dragon, and false prophet, 16:13,—see p. 255.

In connection with and in obedience to this mouth, the beast warred with the saints, and overcame them. Dissenters from the Papacy were subjected to unheard of cruelties and persecutions. And they whose names were not written in the book of life, sustained their rulers in these oppressive acts. In paying more deference to the edicts of government than to the requirements of Jehovah, they blasphemously bestowed on the beast an homage which was due only to God.

The revelator being shown what was to be endured by the saints during a long period of oppression, now receives an annunciation to which all were to listen,—all who had ears to hear. It was the announcement, that “if any one leadeth into captivity, he will go into captivity: if any one killeth with the sword, he must be killed with the sword.” Most commentators have considered this as applicable to the fate of the wild beast,—that its end was to be effected by the sword and captivity, as it had in the same way tyrannized over the saints. Mr. Lord offers some reasons for supposing that it was a caution to the saints not to resist with the sword the attacks of enemies, nor to retaliate by making captives of the subjects of the beast who should fall into their power. He says:

“The prediction that he who led into captivity should himself become a captive, and he that slew with the sword be himself slain, had a signal fulfilment in the slaughter and vassalage of all those who attempted to deliver themselves by force from the religious tyranny of the European monarchs.

“The Albigenses were nearly exterminated by the cruel armies against which they attempted to defend themselves, and the small number that remained after the devastation of their fields, the conflagration of their cities, and the promiscuous slaughters to which they were subjected, were either forced to conform to the Catholic church, or driven into other lands. The Waldenses perished in far greater numbers by the sword, in their struggles for preservation and freedom, than by the fires of martyrdom; and sunk, after their contests, to a still more hopeless vassalage to their persecutors. The resort to the sword by the Bohemians and the Huguenots of France, to defend their religious freedom, resulted, after vast slaughters, in their defeat and helpless subjection to the tyranny from which they endeavored to extricate themselves. And the Protestants of Switzerland, Germany, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, and Great Britain, who succeeded in delivering themselves from the dominion of their ancient tyrants, instead of securing thereby their religious liberty, only placed themselves, by the nationalization of their churches, under the tyranny of Protestant rulers in place of Catholics.”—Exp. of Apoc. p. 384.

In this was to be exhibited the patience and faith of the saints, who, amid all their persecutions, made a wonderful manifestation of these. Of the many thousands put to death, or subjected to satanic cruelties for their faith, only a very few apostatized. Says Mr. Lord:

“Of those who, under the insupportable agonies and distraction of the scourge and the rack, recanted, or promised a recantation, a large proportion immediately on being released from the sufferings which had overcome them, abjured their retractions, re-professed with redoubled energy the faith of Christ, and met without faltering the hideous death to which they were immediately hurried. Such is their uniform history in whatever age they fell, or to whatever nation or rank they belonged.”—Exp. of Apoc., p. 385.

If there was no other evidence of their constancy, faith, and patience, the horrid instruments of torture which were resorted to to terrify them, testify to their adherence to their principles, which required such engines for their subversion.

The end of this beast, will be effected by his being cast alive into the lake of fire and brimstone, when the Lord shall make war with him, 19:20. This is also the end of Daniel’s fourth beast, whose body is to be given to the burning flame (Dan. 7:11), and of the scarlet-colored beast on which the woman was seated, which is to go into perdition, 17:8.

The Two-Horned Beast.

“And I saw another wild beast ascending out of the earth, and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke like a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first wild beast, in his sight, and causeth the earth and those, who dwell in it, to worship the first wild beast, whose deadly wound was healed. And he performeth great signs, so that he causeth fire to come down from heaven into the earth in the sight of men. And he deceiveth those, who dwell on the earth, by means of the signs which it was given him to perform in the sight of the wild beast; saying to those, who dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the wild beast, that had the wound by a sword, and did live.”—Rev. 13:11-14.

The coming up of another beast must symbolize the rise of another government. As the two-horned beast exercises its power before (ενωπιον) i.e. in the presence, of the first beast, it is a contemporary power, and must necessarily symbolize a kingdom outside of the territory of the ten-horned beast. Within that territory it would be one of the horns of that beast; but a separate beast requires a separate territory. As it arises out of the earth, while it is outside of the territory occupied by the ten kingdoms, it must exist within that occupied by the former Roman empire, and commence its existence during a period of settled government.

All the forms of Roman government symbolized by the dragon, were also symbolized by the wild beast; and as the deadly wound of the former was healed in the latter, the two constitute one beast. As that is called the “first beast,” the rise of the kingdom symbolized by the two-horned beast must have been subsequent to the commencement of the Roman empire. And as it caused those who dwell on the earth to worship that beast after its deadly wound was healed, it must have arisen anterior to the healing of that wound; and, consequently, before the succession of the ten kingdoms to the sovereignty of Rome, with which it held an intimate relation.

The only kingdom which has arisen within the geographical locality, and at the epoch required by these conditions of the symbol, is the Eastern Roman empire; which, consequently, is the government represented by the two-horned beast.

The imperial heads of Rome date from the battle of Actium, B. C. 31; but the Eastern empire was not commenced, till A. D. 324, when Constantine removed the seat of empire from Rome to Constantinople. Rome was, previous to that removal, the undisputed queen of nations, and Constantine was without a rival. Why he should abandon Rome, the citadel and throne of the Cæsars, for an obscure corner of Thrace, has never been satisfactorily explained. Says Dr. Croly: “The change of government to Constantinople still perplexes the historian. It was an act in direct repugnance to the whole course of the ancient prejudices.”

The indifference with which Constantine viewed the country of the Cæsars, was regarded by Gibbon as the cause of removal.

He transferred the customs and forms of the Roman government, and there exercised all the powers of the empire,—the Italians still obeying the edicts which he condescended to address from Constantinople to the Senate and people of Rome. The western division continued dependent on the eastern head, till the death of Theodosius, A. D. 395. His two sons, Arcadius and Honorius, “were saluted by the unanimous consent of mankind, as the lawful emperors of the East, and of the West,”—the European boundary being “not very different from that which separates the Germans from the Turks.”—Gibbon, v. 2, p. 199. Gibbon calls this “the final and permanent division of the Roman empire.” But its existence as a beast more properly dates from the removal of Constantine.

Its two horns like a lamb, must symbolize two divisions of the kingdom. These may be contemporary, like those symbolized by the ten horns (17:12), or successive, like the two horns of the ram, Dan. 8:3, 20. From the history of the Eastern empire, the latter is the more probable; and its historical resemblance to the government symbolized by the ram, may be the reason of the comparison to “horns like a lamb.” As Persia was a government outside of Media, and succeeded to its sovereignty, so did the kingdom of the Turks originate outside of the Eastern empire, and at length come in, occupy its territory, and succeed to its sovereignty, A. D. 1253. With this view, the horns would symbolize the kings of Eastern Rome and of Turkey. See pp. 99-104.

Its dragon-like speech shows it to be a blasphemous, persecuting power, like that which persecuted the woman, 12:17. Though the Greek empire claimed to be Christian, a successor of Constantine, Julian the Apostate, renounced Christianity, endeavored to restore the Pagan service in Constantinople, and “declared himself the implacable enemy of Christ.” He assumed the character of Supreme Pontiff, and thus placed himself at the head of the Pagan worship. He labored incessantly to restore and propagate those dragonic rites, and even thought to disprove the predictions of Christ by rebuilding the temple of Jerusalem. “He affected to pity the unhappy Christians, as mistaken in the most important object of their lives; but his pity was degraded by contempt, his contempt was embittered by hatred; and the sentiments of Julian were expressed in a style of sarcastic wit which inflicts a deep and deadly wound whenever it issues from the mouth of a sovereign.” And he intimated that they might have occasion “to dread, not only confiscation and exile, but fire and the sword.”—Gibbon.

The successors of Julian, though Christian in name, issued cruel and tyrannical edicts. Valens embraced Arianism, and bitterly persecuted the Orthodox party. Justinian established Catholicism by arms. Theodosius proscribed Paganism by the infliction of severe penalties. Marcian and Leo “enforced, with arms and edicts, the symbols of their faith,” and it was declared that “the decrees of the synod of Chalcedon might be lawfully supported, even with blood.” And after the accession of the Mohammedan power, religious intolerance towards dissenting creeds was still more rigidly enforced.

The Eastern empire exercised all the power of the Western. The original organization of its government was the same, and it had the same titles and prerogatives. Gibbon says of Julian: “The spirit of his administration, and his regard for the place of his nativity, induced him to confer on the senate of Constantinople the same honors, privileges, and authority which were still enjoyed by the senate of ancient Rome.”

It caused worship to be bestowed on the first beast, by extending to the Latin rulers that aid which enabled them to perpetuate their system of tyranny, to legislate over the laws and subjects of Jehovah, and to claim the obedience which only God can demand. The arms of Justinian, both in the East and West, caused the Roman name to be respected, and its favor sought for.

The wonders to be performed by it, may be as yet involved in some obscurity. But by these it is identified as the power which afterwards became the seat of the False Prophet. When the “beast” is taken, “the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image,” is cast with him “into a lake of fire burning with brimstone,” 19:20. This identifies the two-horned beast as the Mohammedan kingdom. It also proves that the Romanic Turkish government will continue till the Second Advent.

Among the wonders it would perform, making fire come down from heaven is specified. John does not intimate that he saw, in vision, fire thus descend. The fact is spoken of; and therefore it is not necessarily symbolic, but may refer to literal fire. Gibbon, in speaking of “the novelty, the terrors, and the real efficacy of the Greek fire,” for which the Eastern empire was so famous, says:

“The important secret of compounding and directing this artificial flame was imparted by Callinicus, a native of Heliopolis, in Syria, who deserted from the service of the caliph to that of the emperor. The skill of a chemist and engineer was equivalent to the succor of fleets and armies; and this discovery or improvement of the military art was fortunately reserved for the distressful period, when the degenerate Romans of the East were incapable of contending with the warlike enthusiasm and youthful vigor of the Saracens. The historian who presumes to analyze this extraordinary composition, should suspect his own ignorance and that of his Byzantine guides, so prone to the marvellous, so careless, and, in this instance, so jealous of the truth. From their obscure, and perhaps fallacious hints, it should seem that the principal ingredient of the Greek fire was the naphtha, or liquid bitumen, a light, tenacious, and inflammable oil, which springs from the earth, and catches fire as soon as it comes in contact with the air. The naphtha was mingled, I know not by what methods, or in what proportions, with sulphur, and with the pitch that is extracted from evergreen firs. From this mixture, which produced a thick smoke and a loud explosion, proceeded a fierce and obstinate flame, which not only rose in perpendicular ascent, but likewise burned with equal vehemence in descent or lateral progress; instead of being extinguished, it was nourished and quickened by the element of water; and sand, urine, or vinegar, were the only remedies that could damp the fury of this powerful agent, which was justly denominated by the Greeks, the liquid, or maritime fire. For the annoyance of the enemy, it was employed with equal effect by sea and land, in battles or in sieges. It was either poured from the rampart in large boilers, or launched in red-hot balls of stone and iron, or darted in arrows and javelins, twisted round with flax and tow, which had deeply imbibed the inflammable oil; sometimes it was deposited in fire-ships, the victims and instruments of a more ample revenge, and was most commonly blown through long tubes of copper, which were planted on the prow of a galley, and fancifully shaped into the mouths of savage monsters, that seemed to vomit a stream of liquid and consuming fire. This important art was preserved at Constantinople, as the palladium of the state; the galleys and artillery might occasionally be lent to the allies of Rome; but the composition on the Greek fire was concealed with the most jealous scruple, and the terror of the enemies was increased and prolonged by their ignorance and surprise. In the treatise of the administration of the empire, the royal author suggests the answers and excuses that might best elude the indiscreet curiosity and importunate demands of the barbarians. They should be told that the mystery of the Greek fire had been revealed by an angel to the first and greatest of the Constantines, with a sacred injunction, that this gift of heaven, this peculiar blessing of the Romans should never be communicated to any foreign nation; that the prince and subject were alike bound to religious silence under the temporal and spiritual penalties of treason and sacrilege; and that the impious attempt would provoke the sudden and supernatural vengeance of the God of the Christians. By these precautions the secret was confined, above four hundred years, to the Romans of the East; and at the end of the eleventh century, the Pisans, to whom every sea and every art were familiar, suffered the effects, without understanding the composition, of the Greek fire. It was at length either discovered or stolen by the Mohammedans; and, in the holy wars of Syria and Egypt, they retorted an invention, contrived against themselves, on the heads of the Christians. A knight, who despised the swords and lances of the Saracens, relates, with heartfelt sincerity, his own fears and those of his companions, at the sight and sound of the mischievous engine that discharged a torrent of the Greek fire, the feu Gregeois, as it is styled by the more early of the French writers. It came flying through the air, says Joinville, like a winged long-tailed dragon, about the thickness of a hogshead, with the report of thunder, and the velocity of lightning; and the darkness of night was dispelled by this deadly illumination.”—Hist. Rome, vol. III., pp. 465-467.

Its use is thus described by the same author, when the Greeks turned its power against the Saracens, at the siege of Constantinople, A. D. 718:

“The Greeks would gladly have ransomed their religion and empire, by a fine or assessment of a piece of gold on the head of each inhabitant of the city; but the liberal offer was rejected with disdain, and the presumption of Moslemah was exalted by the speedy approach and invincible force of the natives of Egypt and Syria. They are said to have amounted to eighteen hundred ships: the number betrays their inconsiderable size; and of the twenty stout and capacious vessels, whose magnitude impeded their progress, each was manned with no more than one hundred heavy-armed soldiers. This huge armada proceeded on a smooth sea and with a gentle gale, towards the mouth of the Bosphorus; the surface of the strait was over-shadowed, in the language of the Greeks, with a moving forest, and the same fatal night had been fixed by the Saracen chief for a general assault by sea and land. To allure the confidence of the enemy, the emperor had thrown aside the chain that usually guarded the entrance of the harbor: but while they hesitated whether they should seize the opportunity or apprehend the snare, the ministers of destruction were at hand. The fireships of the Greeks were launched against them: the Arabs, their arms and vessels, were involved in the same flames, the disorderly fugitives were dashed against each other, or overwhelmed in the waves; and I no longer find a vestige of the fleet, that had threatened to extirpate the Roman name.”—Ib., p. 464.

It deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by its miracles. This deception resulted in the creation of:

The Image of the Beast.

“And it was given to him to give breath to the image of the wild beast, that the image of the wild beast should even speak, and to cause, that as many as would not worship the image of the wild beast, should be killed. And he causeth all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free and the bond, to receive a mark on their right hand, or on their forehead. And that no one might buy or sell, but he, who had the mark, the name of the wild beast, or the number of his name.”—Rev. 13:15-18.

This new creation is not another beast, but the image of one. An image is only the likeness of something. As the beast symbolizes a political power, its image must symbolize some analogous power of a different nature; and this likeness can only be found in a religious government.