THE “FALSE PROPHET” IN REVELATION
IS THE TWO-HORNED “BEAST”
OF REVELATION 13:11-18
--A. Ralph Johnson
A number of commentators have identified the “false prophet” of Revelation 19:20 and 16:13 with Mohammed. The scriptures clearly identify him as being the same as the two-horned “beast” of Revelation 13:11-18. This paper is an evaluation of the issues.
I. EVIDENCE THAT THE TWO-HORNED BEAST AND FALSE PROPHET ARE THE SAME.
A. There is a close relationship between the beast, false prophet and dragon in chapters 19 and 20, parallel to that between the dragon, the ten-horned beast and two-horned beast of chapters 12 and 13.
These three are introduced and work together against God’s people in 12 and 13. In 19 and 20 their end is described. If we fail to recognize the two-horned beast as the false prophet, we leave two questions unresolved.
1. Where did the false prophet come from? It is mentioned in chapters 16 and 19 but if we fail to see it as the two-horned “beast” we have no formal introduction. It just suddenly appears with the dragon and one of the beasts in 16:13 with no explanation. However, if we identify them as being the same, it is introduced in 13.
2. What happened to the two-horned beast? The woman, “Babylon,” is spoken of as having fallen but there is no description of the end of the two beasts of chapter 13 unless they are the “beast and false prophet” of chapter 19. The logical explanation is that the dragon, ten-horned beast and two-horned beast of chapters 12 and 13 are the same as the beast, false prophet and dragon which find their end in the lake of fire in 20:10.
B. The features of the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-18 are such as are very well characterized as a “false prophet.”
1. It had two horns like a lamb (like one impersonating Christ).
2. It “spoke as a dragon.” It spoke as the devil.
3. It made the earth and them that dwell in it to worship the first beast.
4. It did signs in the sight of the beast (the identical words found in 19:20 in reference to the “false prophet”).
5. It deceived those that dwell on the earth by the signs.
6. It made an image of the beast and caused people to worship it.
When we add to this, a comparisons with the “man of sin” in II Thes. 2, the “little horn” of Dan. 7, and the Pope who claims to be the infallible vice-regent of Christ on earth, the identification is overwhelming.
C. Revelation 19:20 clearly identifies the “false prophet” with the two-horned beast of Rev. 13:11-18, which did signs in the sight of the ten-horned beast.
It says, “And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought the signs in his sight, wherewith he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast and them that worshiped his image”
Consider the following comparisons.
|
Rev. 19:20 |
Rev. 13 |
|
“first beast” 12 |
“beast” 1, 2, 4, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18 |
|
And the beast was taken |
|
|
and with him |
|
|
the false prophet |
“another beast” 11 |
|
|
“spoke as a dragon” 11 |
|
|
“deceived them...saying” 14 |
|
that wrought signs |
“he does great signs 13 |
|
|
“signs which it was given him to do” 14 |
|
in his sight |
“in his sight” 12 |
|
|
“in the sight of the beast” 14 |
|
wherewith he deceived |
“he deceives them” 14 |
|
them that had received |
“he caused that there be given them” 16 |
|
the mark of the beast |
“a mark” |
|
|
“the mark, even the name of the beast” 17 |
|
and them that worshiped |
“worship” 15 |
|
his image. |
“The image of the beast” 15 |
|
|
“an image to the beast” 14 |
II. HOW IS IT THAT MOHAMMED SHOULD BE CONFUSED WITH THE “FALSE PROPHET” OF REVELATION 19?
An illustration of the problem is in identifying the symbols in Daniel, chapter seven, and Revelation, chapters 12 and 13. In our day an eagle represents the United States, a lion represents England, a bear represents Russia and a serpent represents China. It is therefore natural to draw a connection between those symbols and the ones in Scripture. However, God used these symbols for entirely different nations.
From our modern Christian perspective, Mohammed is viewed as the most influential false prophet of history and as having the greatest influence in opposition to Christianity. It is natural to think of him when we see that term in Revelation. However, Revelation comes from God and it is GOD’S view, not ours, that counts. What did God reveal about those words?
In 2Thes. 2:1-12 the Bible identifies a “man of sin, the son of perdition” who was to exalt himself above all that is called God, sitting in the temple of God. His coming was to be “after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceit of unrighteousness for them that perish.” God would send a “working of error” that those who follow him would “believe a lie.” What better description of a “false prophet?” But that was not Mohammed. The text indicates it is speaking of the Papacy.
The Papacy has throughout the centuries professed signs to confirm its authority. It claims to speak as the infallible voice of Christ, “The Most Holy Father,” “Lord of the Church.” It has relied upon false miraculous claims (Miracles through relics etc) to bolster its claims --even to the right to revive the Roman Empire by crowning emperors (Charlemagne, Otho, etc.) and form the church in the image of the Empire. Who is more a “false prophet” than he who claims to speak infallibly as the “vice-regent” of Christ?
Once some outstanding “authority” promotes an idea, it tends to be regarded as credible and therefore difficult to change. One follows another in perpetuating the error. Jesus struggled with the problem of the traditions of the Jews. The Catholic Church also has relied heavily upon tradition to maintain her errors. Paul, in both Romans and First Corinthians, warned against relying upon the wisdom of men. Today people repeatedly cite “the scholars” to justify every error.
There is often no amount of evidence that will convince a person who is determined to prove his case. The issue is no longer the evidence. It is the need to preserve status. All evidence is discounted, no matter how strong.
For example, the Bible tells of both the ten northern tribes and the Jews in the south being taken into captivity. However, only the tribe of Judah is clearly described as having returned. What became of the ten “lost” tribes has always mystified people.
When white men first discovered the natives in America they jumped to the speculation that these were the lost tribes of Israel. Many books were written upon the subject playing up every similarity, real or imagined. In fact, the whole Mormon Religion was spawned from the idea.
Others have sought to find them in the Saxons of England and the United States. Some have even placed them near the North Pole, or in Russia.
Likewise, since China has such a vast civilization, people have sought to discover some Biblical identification. We need to be very cautious about imposing our mental references to things we view as significant to what God views as important.
Early Islam is adequately represented in the fifth and sixth trumpets. Mohammed thus be the “star” that fell from heaven, opening the smoking pit. The Arab Saracens represent the “locusts” covering the land.
The Turkish empire is well represented by the loosing of the four winds at the Euphrates which brings on a stampeding herd of horses with fire and brimstone pouring from their mouths (Revelations chap. 9). This fits the downfall of the Eastern Roman Empire.
Using the literal term, “prophet” would have been contrary to the symbolic nature of the language being employed because Mohammed actually was a false prophet.
III. ARGUMENTS USED IN BEHALF OF THE “FALSE PROPHET” BEING MOHAMMED.
A. “IF THE FALSE PROPHET IS NOT MUHAMMAD THEN GOD FAILED TO INCLUDE THE MODERN WORLD-WIDE RESURGENCE OF ISLAM.”
ANSWER:
Not at all. The modern struggle with Islam is well represented in the drying up of the Euphrates and the coming of the kings from the sun rising (Rev.16:12). It comes to an end when the kings join in the war against the one that sat upon the white horse and are destroyed (19:17,18,21). It does not have to also be represented by the “beast” or the “false prophet.”
It is conceded that the grammar of 19:20 requires that the one doing the “signs in the sight of the beast” is the false prophet. Fred Miller maintains, “The word which is translated in KJV and ASV versions ‘wrought’ and in the NIV ‘performed’ is a masculine aorist participle and there is no doubt that in the text it modifies false prophet which is also a masculine noun.’ The text says the false prophet performed the signs.”[1] However, it is argued that, the statement that the false prophet performed the signs is, “part of a prepositional phrase and therefore is not, and cannot be the subject of the sentence. This means that the beast is the subject of the verb ‘he deceived.”’[2]
ANSWER:
This is incorrect. Both beast and false prophet were “taken.” Both are in the nominative case, subjects of the sentence, joined by the conjunction, “and.” If either were objects of a preposition they could not be nominative. Furthermore, “he deceived them” is not part of a preposition.
The grammatical factors may be seen more clearly by translating it, “The beast was taken, and also the false prophet with him, who did signs in his sight, with which he deceived those, who, received the mark.”
Rev. 19:20. “And the beast was taken,
|
Greek |
Kai |
epiasthee |
to |
theerion |
|
English |
And |
was taken |
the |
beast |
|
Strongs # |
2532 |
4084 |
3588 |
2342 |
|
|
cc/ch |
viap—3s |
dnns |
n-an-s |
|
|
coord conj |
verb indicative aorist passive 3person singular |
def article nom neut sing |
noun nom neuter singular |
and with him the false prophet...
|
kai |
met |
autou |
ho |
pseudoprofeetees |
|
and |
with |
him |
the |
false prophet |
|
2532 |
3326 |
846 |
3588 |
5578 |
|
cc |
pg |
npgn3s |
dnms+ |
n-nm-s |
|
coord conj |
prep gen |
noun pronoun genitive neuter 3person singular |
definite article nom masc singular |
noun nominative masculine singular |
who wrought signs in his sight
|
ho |
poieesas |
ta |
seemeia |
enoopion |
autou |
|
the one |
who worked |
the |
signs |
of it |
|
|
3588 |
4160 |
3588 |
4592 |
1799 |
846 |
|
dnms+ |
vpaanm-s |
danp |
n-an-p |
pg |
npgn3s |
|
definite article nominative masculine singular |
verb participle aorist active nomnative masculine singular |
definite article accusative neuter plural |
noun accusative neuter plural |
preposition genative |
noun pronoun genative neuter 3person singular |
with which he deceived them
|
en |
hois |
eplaneesen |
tous |
|
with |
which |
he deceived |
them |
|
1722 |
3739 |
4105 |
3588 |
|
pd |
aprdn-p |
viaa—3s |
damp+ |
|
preposition with dative |
adjective pronoun relative dative neuter plural |
verb indicative aorist active 3pers singular |
definite article accusative masculine plural |
that had received the mark of the beast”
|
labontas |
to |
charagma |
tou |
theeriou |
|
that had received |
the |
mark |
of the |
beast |
|
2983 |
3588 |
5480 |
3588 |
2342 |
|
vpaaam-p |
dans |
n-an-s |
dgns |
n-gn-s |
|
verb participle aorist active accusative masculine plural |
def art acc neut sing |
noun- acc neut sing |
def art gen neut sing |
noun gen neut sing |
When it says, “with which he deceived them,” the word, “which,” has reference to the “signs” that were done by the false prophet in the sight of the beast.
To concede that the signs were done by the false prophet but deny this means miracles is nonsense. In chapter 13 the identical Greek word is twice used and the miracle specified with regard to the two-horned beast. It says, “And he does great signs (semeia”[3]), that he should even make fire to come down out of heaven upon the earth in the sight of men and he deceives them that dwell on the earth by reason of the signs (“semeia”[4]) which it was given him to do in the sight of the beast...” (13:13,14). The fact that Islam has never been noted for doing miracles is itself evidence that this does not refer to it.
There can be no doubt that the text identifies the “false prophet” as the one which did the signs. There can be no doubt that the false prophet is said to have done this in the sight of the beast. It can only be referring to the two-horned beast that did signs in the sight of the ten-horned beast in chapter 13.
The beast with two horns like a lamb clearly fits the term, “false prophet.” He not only does signs and deceives people but also had two horns like a lamb (like Christ). This fits the papacy which professes to be the “vicar of Christ,” sitting on Christ’s earthly throne, speaking God’s truth infallibly “ex cathedra”—sitting in his official chair as head of the church, claiming authority over both East and West and over both church and state.
Think! If he claims to have infallible guidance to speak for God, but in fact speaks “as a dragon”--that is, falsely as the devil (13:11), is that not a false prophet? The many professed signs of his authority (appearances of Mary, healings in places such as Lourdes’s and miracles through relics of the saints) are legendary.
ANSWER: Nothing whatsoever is said of the ten-horned beast having come to an end before chapter nineteen. The fact is that out of 37 times the word “beast” (#2342 “Derion”) is used in Revelation, only once is it clearly applied to the one with two horns (13:11). Every other instance from chapter eleven on simply says, “beast” with no attempt to make any distinction, apparently expecting the reader to know which one. Since many of the statements clearly refer to the beast with ten horns, the natural conclusion is that whenever it is not otherwise specified, that is the one intended.
The ten-horned beast was well known from the time of Daniel. To distinguish the two, “false prophet” was used for the two-horned beast. Without this, each time it would require an awkward clarification as to which beast was intended. Nothing in 16:13, 19:19 and 20:4 indicates the “beast” is the one with two horns.
Furthermore, in 20:4 it speaks of the dragon being cast into the lake of fire in which the beast and false prophet are already. If this “beast” is not the one with ten horns, where was it and why was it not also mentioned as being there?
Likewise, the obvious triad relationship between the dragon, ten-horned beast and the two-horned beast of chapters twelve and thirteen definitely supports the conclusion that the dragon, beast and false prophet from which the frog-spirits came (16:13) are the same. There is not one sound reason otherwise. The whole theory to the contrary is an unfounded assumption.
“Who did the signs in the sight of the beast” is clearly intended to identify the false prophet. This refers us back to those exact words in chapter 13 concerning the two-horned beast. This may be seen by comparing construction of the two passages in Greek as follows.
Rev.19:20. And the beast was seized, and with it
|
English |
and |
was seized |
the |
beast, |
and |
with |
him |
|
Greek |
kai |
epiasthee |
to, |
theerion |
kai |
met’ |
outou |
|
Strongs # |
2532 |
4084 |
3588 |
2342 |
2532 |
3326 |
846 |
Rev.13:12. the first beast
|
the |
first |
beast |
|
tou |
prootou |
theriou |
|
3588 |
4413 |
2342 |
19:20. the false prophet who did the signs
|
the |
false prophet |
who |
did |
the |
signs |
|
ho |
pseudopropheetees |
ho |
poieesas |
ta |
seemeia |
|
3588 |
5578 |
3588 |
4160 |
3588 |
4592 |
|
another |
beast |
and |
it doeth |
signs |
great |
|
allo |
therion |
kai |
poiei |
seemeia |
megalala |
|
243 |
2342 |
2352 |
4160 |
4592 |
3173 |
19:20. Before it
|
before |
it |
|
enoopion |
autou |
|
1799 |
846 |
13:14. before the first beast
|
before |
the |
[first] |
beast |
|
enoopion |
toou |
[protou] |
theeriou |
|
1799 |
3588 |
|
2342 |
19:20. by which he deceived them
|
by |
which |
(he) deceived |
them |
|
en |
hois |
eplaneese |
tous |
|
1722 |
3739 |
4105 |
3588 |
13:14. and it deceives those
|
and |
it deceives |
those |
|
kai |
plana |
tous |
|
2532 |
4105 |
3588 |
19:20. that received the mark of the beast
|
that received |
the |
mark |
of the |
beast |
|
labontas |
to |
charagma |
tou |
theeriou, |
|
2983 |
3588 |
5480 |
3588 |
2342 |
13:16. that it may give them a mark
|
that |
it may give |
them |
a mark |
|
hina |
doosin |
autois |
charagma |
|
to |
1325 |
846 |
5480 |
19:20. and those worshiping the image of it
|
and |
those |
worshiping |
the |
image |
of it |
|
kai |
tous |
proskunountas |
tee |
eikoni |
autou |
|
2532 |
3588 |
4532 |
3588 |
1504 |
846 |
13:15. as many as would not worship the image of the beast
|
as many |
as not |
would worship |
the |
image |
of the |
beast |
|
hosoi |
ean-mee |
proskunesosi |
tee |
eikoni |
tou |
theriou |
|
3745 |
3362 |
4352 |
3588 |
1504 |
3588 |
2342 |
Consider especially the following parallels:
Rev. 19:20. “with him the false prophet that wrought signs in his sight
Rev. 13:14 he doeth great signs... in his sight
Rev. 19:20: whrewith he deceived them that had received the mark
Rev. 13:14, 16 of the beast, he deceiveth them that ... given them a mark
Those who insist on seeing Mohammed as the “false prophet”, sometimes try to maintain that the two-horned beast is Islam.
This cannot be for the following reasons:
The two-horned lamb-like “beast” made the earth to worship the ten-horned beast. Islam cannot fairly be said to have made the earth serve Rome. Rather, Islam ripped away a third of the world from Rome in its Arabic form and more in its Turkish form. It was the Papacy that had horns like a lamb and caused people to worship the Holy Roman Empire. (See Chap.17).
The mark of the ten-horned first beast, which the two-horned beast caused all to receive, best fits the Greek word, “LATEINOS,” reputed founder of the Latin empire. Greek letters are used as numbers. The numbers in this name add up to 666. Latin is the name of the people, the language, the empire and the church. It describes the whole of Rome to a T. Early Christians recognized this. Irenaeus who lived just a few years after John, suggested this as the likely explanation.[5] The Latin Empire, revived in the form of the Holy Roman Empire, was the seven-headed beast with ten horns. The prophet, Daniel, in chapter 7, described the Roman empire as having seven heads.
Mohammed never caused all to receive the Latin thinking (in their foreheads) and to render to the Latin Empire prime service (in their right hands). The most obvious meaning is that the fourth great ten-horned beast of Daniel, the Latin (Roman) Empire, was to be revived (“healed”). When it says the two-horned beast made an image of the beast it either refers to this or to forming the Latin Church into an image of the Roman imperial system. The Papacy is a false prophet and has caused the world to become servants of Rome. Mohammed was an adversary of Rome. He does not fit the picture.
Rev. 11:7 speaks of a “beast” that comes up “out of the abyss.” Rev. 13:1 says the ten-horned beast came up “out of the sea.” Some have questioned whether these are the same. This is settled by 17:8 where it says the ten-horned beast “is about to come up out of the abyss” which is clearly defined as being ruled over by the city of Rome.
This is neither the two-horned beast which comes “out of the earth” (13:11) nor the “star from heaven” which opened the pit of the abyss to release smoke from which locusts came forth (Rev 9:3, 7).
Coming out of the sea and the abyss are the same place. It simply means that it would be like a beast arising from the Mediterranean Sea.
Rev. 17:8
Strong: #12 abussos {ab’-us-sos}
¤ from 1 (as a negative particle) and a variation of 1037; TDNT - 1:9,2; noun feminine
¤ AV - bottomless pit 5, deep 2, bottomless 2; 9
¤ 1) bottomless 2) unbounded 3) the abyss 3a) the pit 3b) the immeasurable depth 3c) of Orcus, a very deep gulf or chasm in the lowest parts of the earth used as the common receptacle of the dead and especially as the abode of demons
2 Co. 11:25 uses a related word. “A night and a day I have been in the deep”
Strong #1037 buthos {boo-thos’}
¤ a variation of 899; noun masculine
¤ Authorized Version - deep 1; 1
¤ 1) the bottom or depth of the sea 2) the sea itself, the deep sea
Examples of “Abusso” the Septuagint show that it could refer to the sea.
Gen. 1:2 And the earth was waste and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep: and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Isa 51:10 Is it not thou that driest up the sea, the waters of the great deep; that madest the depths of the sea a way for the redeemed to pass over?
Jon 2:5 The waters compassed me about, even to the soul; The deep was round about me; The weeds were wrapped about my head.
Job 41:31 He maketh the deep to boil like a pot: he maketh the sea like a pot of ointment.
Job 38:16 Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?
Psa 106:9 He rebuked the Red Sea also, and it was dried up: So he led them through the depths, as through a wilderness.
Psa 42:7 Deep calleth unto deep at the noise of thy waterfalls: All thy waves and thy billows are gone over me.
Psa 33:7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as a heap: He layeth up the deeps in store-houses.
Gen 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
A. The beast and false prophet (two-horned beast of Rev. 13, associated with the beast and dragon) are cast into lake of fire in 19:20. In 20:4 the dragon is bound and the martyrs of Jesus, who already have been victorious over the beast and received not his mark, are reigning with Christ for 1,000 years. If this is chronological then the period could not begin until the “beast” and “false prophet” come to an end.
A-millennialists claim that the thousand years began when Jesus “bound” the “strong man” in Matthew 12:29. However, this was talking about his casting out demons during his life. It is an illustration to show that Satan cannot be casting out Satan. It is not dealing with the prophecies under consideration.
It is claimed that the “first resurrection” is when people are “raised with Christ” (Rom.6:4; Col.2:12; 3:3) in baptism. However, there is a serious problem in that Rev. 20:4 indicates the “first resurrection” takes place after they had refused to receive the mark and been beheaded for Jesus. This would be after they had lived a triumphant Christian life.
In order for the mark of the beast to already be refused at the beginning of the 1000 years, it cannot have begun as early as when Christ “cast out the strong man” when healing (Matt.12:29). The mark of the beast had not yet begun at that time. The thousand years begins when the nations are no longer deceived by the dragon (Rev.20:3).
In order for Rev 20:4 to speak of them as having refused to receive the “mark” of the ten-horned beast it must have already come to power. This could not have been earlier than the rise of the ten-horned beast, which was still future when John wrote in 96 AD (17:8-12).
Some a-millennialists would place the 1000 years as beginning with the close of the Western Roman Empire in 476 AD.
If the beast was the Holy Roman Empire then it would not have been before that. It appears that it coincides with the close of its power rather than the beginning.
Since the two-horned beast, is the one that makes an image to the beast and causes the “mark of the beast” to be received (13:11-18), they could not have been victorious over the beast before that. If the Holy Roman Empire were the image of the beast, it could not have been earlier than its rise. Here it is placed at its close. This places the beginning of the “thousand years” too late for the fall of Western Rome.
During the beast’s life they were pictured as being overcome (13:7). In 6:9-11 they had been martyred and told to be patient until their fellow-servants have finished their course. Now they are all raised and sit on thrones.
B. It contrasts a period when the dragon is bound, to a period when he is loosed. If “bind” refers to binding Satan in the lives of Christians, that would suggest that Satan was, for a little time, to be “loosed” in the lives of Christians! Surely it cannot mean that there was to be a time when Christians are no longer freed from sin. It obviously has to do with binding and loosing Satan outside the lives of Christians.
C. The account naturally sets forth a chronological relationship between chapters 19 and 20.
1. The Beast and false prophet are cast into the lake of fire (19:19-20).
2. The dragon is bound for a thousand years.
3. Those who participate in the first resurrection reign with Christ a thousand years.
4. At the end of the thousand years the dragon is loosed and the camp of the saints is compassed about.
5. Fire comes down and destroys the nations who are participants in this.
6. Devil that deceived them is cast into the lake of firs WHERE THE BEAST AND FALSE PROPHET ALREADY ARE!
7. The white throne appears and heaven and earth flee away.
8. Dead are judged.
9. New Earth & heaven
10. Wicked are in lake of fire.
Note: The Beast and false prophet go into lake of fire before the 1,000 years and at the end of that time it refers back to the fact that they are already there.
Note: There are some very interesting historicist Interpreters who seem to agree quite well on what has taken place until their time. Consider:
· Bishop Newton 1750
· Dodridge & Scott 1815