Adam Maarschalk
Recently, I had the opportunity to talk with outstanding prophecy student and blogger, Adam Maarschalk. Adam has been actively researching biblical prophecy for more than a decade. In 2009, he began regularly writing posts for his blog “Pursuing Truth” where he primarily discusses trends in the interpretation of biblical eschatology. Most recently, he has been dedicating a large portion of his posts to some interesting research he’s done regarding the infamous beasts which are recorded in the book of Revelation. He spoke on this topic in March 2017 at the Blue Point Bible Conference in Long Island, New York. He has also been invited to present three times on the monthly “Preterist Conference Calls” podcast with Jordan Hardgrave. Many of these can be viewed at the YouTube channel which bears Adam’s name.
I’d encourage anyone to check out Adam’s research on any of these resources. He has some really interesting ideas.
Not only is his research intriguing but even if you don’t agree with his conclusions, you’re sure to find encouragement in his infectious enthusiasm for fulfilled prophecy and his charitable demeanor. Adam has been a true blessing to me. I can’t tell you how refreshing it is to talk with someone who shares such a passion for eschatology and is also so willing to dialogue openly and honestly on the subject.
I was first introduced to Adam via some discussions I was involved with through theos.org, a forum hosted by bible teacher, Steve Gregg. In response to one of my comments, someone had posted a link to Adam’s research. After checking it out, I was immediately very impressed. Not only with his research and presentation style, but also the overall spirit of his approach and his sincere dedication to seeking spiritual truth.
Following that, I posted a few comments on his blog and to my surprise he actually posted a genuine reply! A prophecy pundit who actually takes the ramblings of total strangers seriously? This was indeed a rare find. I just knew I had to contact him for a more in depth discussion. And, wouldn’t you know it, he even graciously (and indiscriminately) agreed to that as well!
The following is the transcript of the riveting interview that ensued:
Carmine: Adam, thank you so much for joining me today. It’s a real privilege to talk with you.
Adam: You’re welcome, and it’s also a privilege to talk with you. Thank you as well for having me with you and for hosting this discussion.
Carmine: Like yourself, I have many difficulties with how most Christians today understand biblical prophecy, especially as it relates directly to events of our present time. This study is something that’s become kind of a consuming passion for us both. Your studies, at least the ones that I’ve heard and read, seem to focus primarily on the book of Revelation. Now, many individuals from within my sphere of influence who are reading this are probably only familiar with the idea that the book of Revelation describes some pretty disturbing events that are still in the future with respect to our present time. It’s not uncommon at all for people to understand it in terms of events surrounding a future globally unified government and economy controlled by an evil, almost divinely charismatic Anti-Christ. This figure is someone who is expected to cause all people to worship him as God and have them identify themselves with him and all for which he stands by receiving a mark on their forehead or right hand. A decision that will ultimately condemn them to an eternity apart from the true God. Of course, that’s an oversimplification but those are some core tenets that would be immediately recognizable by most I think.
However, shocking as it may sound, this popular view is being cast into serious doubt by many people today. Is that correct?
Adam: Yes, it is. It sounds like you’re primarily describing the premillennialist framework which has become more popular during the last 200 years of church history than it was in earlier church history. That framework has long been challenged by amillennialists and postmillennialists. In recent years it’s also facing a more vigorous challenge by those who, like myself, hold to preterism, the belief that most or all prophecy has already been fulfilled. We can trace preterist teachings all the way back to the late first century AD, but it’s a movement that has become more systematic in recent decades.
Carmine: And are these just uneducated laymen? Are any serious and well respected biblical scholars adopting this view?
Adam: I’ve observed a wide spectrum when it comes to the education level of those who hold this view. Among us are men and women with doctorate degrees and some who are considered scholars, like Dr. R.C. Sproul, Dr. Kenneth Gentry, Dr. Don K. Preston, Dr. Jonathan Welton, and others. They have adopted either what is known as “partial preterism” or what is known as “full preterism.”
Carmine: For the benefit of my readers who are unfamiliar with this alternative view of prophecy, could you please summarize this shift in trends and the reasons behind the movement?
Adam: Sure. This movement takes seriously the time statements found throughout the New Testament. Even many critics of this movement recognize that Jesus and the apostles believed and taught that the Great Tribulation and other events of “the last days” would take place in their own generation. The preterist movement believes that they were not in any way wrong or mistaken for believing and teaching this way. Instead, many in our own day hold faulty presuppositions about the nature of apocalyptic events foretold in the New Testament, and these presuppositions often don’t take into account how the Old Testament used similar language to describe apocalyptic events that were fulfilled centuries before the birth of Christ (e.g. the Medo-Persian takeover of Babylon predicted in Isaiah 13).
The preterist movement takes note of the clear statements made by Jesus about the judgment which was soon going to fall on His own adulterous generation, as well as His clear statements about the soon arrival of the kingdom of God. It was because of these statements that [1] James could say the Judge was already standing at the door (James 5:8-9) [2] Peter could say “the end of all things” was at hand (I Peter 4:7) [3] John could say that it was “the last hour” (I John 2:18), etc.
Regarding reasons behind this movement, I believe this movement answers some notable individuals who have mocked not only popular eschatology, but even the New Testament itself. Besides the constant date setting we’ve all seen, which is embarrassing enough, there are those who have directly challenged Christians by saying that Jesus and the apostles gave false prophecies.
For example, in 1927 the British philosopher Bertrand Russell gave a speech which was later turned into a pamphlet titled, “Why I Am Not a Christian.” One of his main arguments was that Jesus clearly promised to return within the lifetime of His disciples, but failed to do so. Here is what Russell said:
“He certainly thought that His second coming would occur in clouds of glory before the death of all the people who were living at that time. There are a great many texts that prove that. He says, for instance: ‘Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of Man be come.’ Then He says: ‘There are some standing here which shall not taste death till the Son of Man comes into His kingdom’; and there are a lot of places where it is quite clear that He believed that His second coming would happen during the lifetime of many then living. That was the belief of His earlier followers, and it was the basis of a good deal of His moral teaching… In that respect clearly He was not so wise as some other people have been, and he was certainly not superlatively wise” (Source).
Similarly, C. S. Lewis, a well-known Christian author, made this surprising statement about the words of Jesus and the expectation of the disciples:
“The apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proven to be false. It is clear from the New Testament that they all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And, worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, ‘this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.’ And he was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else. This is certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible.” (Essay: “The World’s Last Night” (1960), found in The Essential C.S. Lewis, p. 385.)
If Jesus and the apostles were wrong about eschatology, then what else were they wrong about? Of course, I don’t believe they were wrong, and I believe that preterism makes more sense of their words than any other system of eschatology.
Carmine: Is this trend something you have always bought into?
Adam: No, not at all.
Carmine: Could you tell us a little bit about that journey? What beliefs did you formerly hold, what caused you to question those beliefs, and how have they changed as a result?
Adam: I grew up in a church that taught dispensationalism and the pre-tribulation rapture view. I personally adopted that view and I even told a few people at my high school that I was 100% sure the rapture and the Great Tribulation would begin by the year 2000. I began to let go of that belief system sometime around 2005, but for a few years I simply shifted to the post-tribulation rapture view, which says that Christians will go through a future tribulation period lasting seven years.
Then in 2009 I was introduced to a study on Daniel’s 70 Weeks prophecy which pointed out that the “he” of Daniel 9:27 was Jesus, not an antichrist figure. Jesus made a covenant with many for the forgiveness of sins (Matt. 26:28). He brought an end to sacrifice and offering by Himself becoming the ultimate sacrifice (Heb. 10:10; I John 2:2). With a new understanding of Daniel 9:24-27, I realized that there are no Scripture passages which predict a 7-year tribulation. This launched me toward the fulfilled view of eschatology, also known as preterism. I began to take seriously the many time statements concerning “last days” events, which were already at hand and prophesied to take place soon from the viewpoint of Jesus and the apostles. There was a great tribulation predicted in Scripture, but it was to last 3.5 years, according to Daniel and John, and it took place during the Jewish-Roman War (AD 66 – AD 73), leading up to the destruction of the temple in AD 70.
Carmine: After becoming convinced of the preterist view of biblical prophecy, you then began to have some difficulties even with those interpretations too. Could you tell us a little about that?
Adam: Well, I never have accepted the idea that the 1000 years of Revelation 20 began around AD 30 and ended by AD 70, as many preterists believe. For one thing, according to Revelation 20:4, the ones who reigned for 1000 years were those who were beheaded for refusing to worship the beast. Yet, as preterists say (and I agree), the 42 months of persecution and beheading (Rev. 13:5-8) took place at the beginning of the Jewish-Roman War (AD 66 – 73). So that’s when the 1000 years would begin, not end. This is also confirmed when we see that Satan is later cast into the lake of fire where the beast and false prophet already were (Rev. 20:10). Admittedly, Revelation 20 is a difficult chapter. I do have ideas on what is represented by the 1000 years, but I’ll save that for another time.
Within the last year, I have abandoned the view I previously held, and which seems to be held by most preterists, concerning the beast of Revelation. I used to believe that the beast was the Roman Empire, generally, and Nero, specifically.
Carmine: Specifically with regard to the beast of Revelation, could you summarize the main difficulties you see with identifying Rome as the beast which emerges from the sea?
Adam: Sure. Just to begin with, here are a few reasons:
[1] The beast from the sea ends up being cast into the lake of fire, and the birds feed on the flesh of its followers (Rev. 19:20-21). That didn’t happen to the Roman Empire, to the city of Rome, or to the Roman soldiers.
[2] According to Revelation 13:10, the saints were to take courage in the fact that, although the beast would take people captive, the beast himself would go into captivity. This also didn’t happen to Rome.
[3] Revelation 13:11-17 describes a second beast, later called “the false prophet” (Rev. 16:13, 19:20, 20:10) working closely with and on behalf of the first beast, and even performing signs and wonders. Josephus repeatedly spoke of false prophets working closely with (and even hired by) a certain group of people and claiming to perform signs and wonders, but it wasn’t Rome that they worked with.
[4] In Revelation 17:16 John was told that the 10 horns of the beast would make the harlot desolate, eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. The harlot was also called “the great city” and in Revelation 11:8 the great city was first identified as the place “where our Lord was crucified,” i.e. Jerusalem. Well, in “The Wars of the Jews” by Josephus, it’s very apparent that he repeatedly blamed a certain group of people for the destruction of Israel, Jerusalem, and the temple. That group of people was not the Romans.
Carmine: And you feel recorded history presents us with a better candidate than Rome, correct? Could you talk a little about who you think that may have been?
Adam: Yes. I believe it was Israel, and the Zealot movement and leaders in particular. It was Israel and Jerusalem that became like a bloody lake and a fiery inferno, fulfilling the picture of the lake of fire in Revelation 19:20 (and Daniel 7:11). It was the Jewish Zealots who were taken captive after several years of taking others captive (Rev. 13:10). It was the Zealots who Josephus repeatedly blamed for the destruction of Israel, Jerusalem, and the temple (Rev. 17:16).
It was the Zealots who worked closely with the false prophets, killing anyone who wouldn’t go along with their war agenda (Rev. 13:11-17). It was the Zealots who achieved a stunning and unexpected war victory at the outset of the war, being hailed as heroes and nearly invincible (Rev. 13:4), and who then brutally persecuted their opponents for the next 3.5 years (Rev. 13:5-8) before their ultimate defeat at the hands of Titus and the Romans. It was Israel and the Zealots whose throne and kingdom was plunged into darkness with sores and great pain (Rev. 16:10).
Carmine: Interesting. Now, your research seems to center predominantly on the study of the Book of Revelation. But you do touch a little on the book of Daniel. Could you talk a little about the role Daniel plays in your interpretation?
Adam: Sure. Daniel 2 details Nebuchadnezzar’s dream concerning four kingdoms and Daniel’s interpretation of that dream. Similarly, Daniel 7 details Daniel’s dream about four beasts and what he learns about them, especially the fourth beast. We see that at the time of the fourth kingdom, a stone would strike the feet of Nebuchadnezzar’s image and the entire image would be crushed (Dan. 2:34-35, 44-45). This would happen at the time of the setting up of God’s kingdom (Dan. 2:35, 44). Likewise, we see that the fourth beast would be destroyed and burned (Dan. 7:11). This would happen at the time when God’s kingdom would be given into the hands of the saints (Dan. 7:18, 22, 27).
These visions parallel what Jesus said in Matthew 21:43-45 (the Parable of the Tenants) to the religious leaders of Israel about a stone falling on their nation and crushing them to powder, and about the kingdom being taken from them and given to a fruit-bearing nation. They also seem to parallel the details in the book of Revelation about a beast persecuting God’s people for 3.5 years (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 13:5-8), the downfall of the beast (Rev. 19:20), and the establishment of God’s kingdom (Rev. 11:15).
Now in the book of Daniel we can easily see the transition from the first kingdom (Babylon) to the second kingdom (Medo-Persia), described in Daniel 5:30-31. We can also see the transition from the second kingdom to the third kingdom (Greece) described in Daniel 8:1-7. However, Daniel is only shown the destiny of the Greek kingdom up until the breaking of Antiochus Epiphanes (Dan. 8:25), and this also seems to be the case in Daniel 11 (note verse 32). Many believe that the fourth kingdom was Rome. Yet the perfect time to predict Rome’s conquest of Greece would have been in either Daniel 8 or Daniel 11, since Macedonia was established as a province of the Roman republic in 146 BC, but Daniel didn’t do that.
If Rome was the fourth kingdom foreseen in Daniel 2:40-43 and Daniel 7:7, then the book of Daniel never described the transition from the third kingdom to the fourth kingdom as it did for the previous kingdom transitions. So my thought is this: What if the description of the Maccabees in Daniel 11:32-35 has everything to do with the transition from the third kingdom to the fourth kingdom? What if Israel was about to be under no one’s dominion at all?
Carmine: I agree with you. As I’ve studied prophecy myself, my confidence that the 4th kingdom of Daniel is Rome has also been seriously brought into question, although I think my path to gaining this understanding is quite different from yours. I think my conclusions are somewhat different too. This poses something of a dilemma for me. As I’m sure you know, Daniel’s authenticity and historical reliability is seriously questioned by critical scholars, Christian and secular alike. Much of my research has been in response to such criticisms. I talk in great detail about this on my YouTube channel “Daniel Reloaded.” As a result of these studies, I personally think I would interpret Daniel quite differently.
Among other things, while I would agree that Daniel’s 4th beast is not Rome, I’m not sure that I’m convinced that Daniel’s 4th kingdom and Revelation’s beast of the sea are to be seen as the same entity. This is contrary to the view you present of Daniel. Despite this, I do think you make some really good points regarding the beast of Revelation.
So, here’s the question this raises for me. In your opinion, with regard to your understanding of Revelation, how critical is directly correlating its beast with Daniel’s 4th beast? Is it possible to hold your view on Revelation while holding a different view on Daniel?
Adam: That’s a good question. At this time I don’t see it as possible, but I want to keep an open mind. There are certainly some sections in Daniel that I need to understand better, and when I (hopefully) do I’ll see what that reveals. Earlier I noted parallels that I see between Daniel and Revelation (e.g. the timing of the establishment of God’s kingdom, and 3.5 years of persecution). There’s also the parallel of 10 horns on the fourth beast (Dan. 7) and on the beast seen in John’s visions (Revelation 13 and 17).
However, there are also differences, or at least things which Daniel covers that John doesn’t cover and vice versa. For example, Daniel 7 speaks of “a little horn” while John doesn’t. Daniel 7:8, 20, 24 speaks of three of the 10 horns being plucked up while John doesn’t single out three horns at all. John discusses seven heads on the beast (Rev. 13:1 and 17:9-11), but Daniel doesn’t mention seven heads.
Carmine: Are there any indicators in Daniel that stand independent from Revelation that would indicate to you that Daniel’s beast is not Rome.
Adam: As I mentioned earlier, the book of Daniel doesn’t speak of Rome conquering Greece (or anyone) the way that it depicts the Medo-Persian takeover of Babylon and Greece’s takeover of Medo-Persia. That silence regarding Rome seems to speak volumes. Also, Jesus drew on the language of Daniel 2 and 7 in the Parable of the Tenants, but He didn’t apply it to Rome. (He applied it to Israel instead. See the beginning of this article for more details.)
| Daniel 2:34-35, 44 | Daniel 7:23, 27 | Matthew 21:43-45 | |
| A. | “a kingdom” | “the kingdom” | “the kingdom” |
| B. | “given to the people, the saints of the Most High” | “given to a nation bearing the fruits of it” | |
| C. | “a stone”; “the stone” | “this stone” | |
| D. | “struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them to pieces”; “crushed together” | “ will grind him to powder” | |
| E. | “a fourth kingdom on earth” | “He was speaking of them” |
Here’s even more on that same point. This is taken from that same post:
In Matthew 21:43-45 Jesus stunned the religious leaders of Israel by telling them that the kingdom of God would be taken out of their hands and given to another nation. His statement, however, didn’t come out of nowhere. Compare the words of Jesus to what is said in Daniel 2 and 7, where we read about the transition from the fourth kingdom to the everlasting kingdom of God. I’ve letter-coded and highlighted the parallels (A, B, C, D, and E):
“Therefore I say to you, [A] the kingdom of God will be taken from you and [B] given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. And whoever falls on [C] this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it [D] will grind him to powder. Now when the chief priests and Pharisees heard His parables, they perceived that [E] He was speaking of them” (Matt. 21:43-45).
“You watched while [C] a stone was cut out without hands, which [D] struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold were [D] crushed together, and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; the wind carried them away so that no trace of them was found. And [C] the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth… And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up [A] a kingdom which shall never be destroyed … The fourth beast shall be [E] a fourth kingdom on earth, which shall be different from all other kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, trample it and break it in pieces… Then [A] the kingdom and dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven, shall be [B] given to the people, the saints of the Most High. His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom…” (Dan. 2:34-35, 44; 7:23, 27).
Carmine: Do you feel that Rome has any role in the prophecies of Revelation or Daniel at all? If so, what role would that be?
Adam: Yes. I believe that Rome was the instrument of God’s judgment against unfaithful Israel. For example, it was during the 5-month Roman siege of Jerusalem in AD 70 that the Jewish Zealots and their followers tried to hide in the caves and rocks of the mountains (Rev. 6:15-17; Luke 23:27-30). The first and second trumpet judgments, which were characterized by fire and blood (Rev. 8:7-9), were fulfilled when “Galilee was all over filled with fire and blood” (Wars 3.4.1; see also Wars 3.9.3 and 3.10.9) because of Rome’s response to Israel’s revolt. The giant hailstones that fell during the seventh bowl judgment (Rev. 16:21) were the 75-100 pound white-colored stones that the Romans launched into the temple complex during the siege in AD 70 (Wars 5.6.3).
Carmine: Ok. Wow. This is all very interesting Adam. Thank you so much for taking the time to talk today. I think everyone who reads this will have a more than adequate taste of what they can expect from your research. Again, I’d encourage anyone who finds this topic interesting to check out your work. Could you tell people again where they can learn more about your research?
Adam: You’re welcome, and thank you again for hosting this discussion. My website can be seen at www.adammaarschalk.com, and my ongoing study about the beast of Revelation can be seen at www.adammaarschalk.com/beast-of-revelation.
Carmine: Adam, again, thank you so much for chatting with us today. It’s been a real pleasure. I’d love to do this again some time.
Hi, I am very interested in what you both have to say on this topic. Is it possible that Rome and Israel are both in view here? Perhaps Revelation is revealing Rome and Daniel Israel’s corrupt leaders, both being in view during this time?
Hi Claire,
Great to hear from you and thank you for your question! As you probably gathered from the interview, Adam and I share differing interpretations of Daniel’s four kingdom’s so our answers to your question will likely be quite different. I will share my perspective. Hopefully Adam will be able to respond later with his thoughts.
With regard to Daniel’s 4th kingdom, my research has this far convinced me that while Israel and Rome do have important roles in the prophecies of Daniel with regard to his 4th kingdom, neither of them seem to be the 4th kingdom itself and are not the primary objects of judgement in view.
I believe the available evidence most strongly supports that ancient Greece was the 4th kingdom. This view is shared by preterists like Hank Hanegraaff as well as most modern critical scholars. Unlike critical scholarship though, I don’t believe this interpretation invalidates Daniel’s authenticity or accuracy in the least. When biblical symbolic precedents are considered (e.g. ‘whirlwinds’ and the cardinal directions from where God’s judgement and blessings flow), it becomes quite understandable why there has been so much confusion in correctly identifying this kingdom.
Regarding Revelation’s beast from the sea, the most complete theories I have seen identify this as ancient Rome. They also however identify this beast and Daniel’s 4th kingdom as being the same entity. I don’t however see this correlation as necessary or compelling.
Adam’s research raises some very good points about why Rome doesn’t quite fit the description of Revelation’s beast from the sea. Some of these points stand even without his correlation of Revelation’s Beast from the sea with Daniel’s 4th kingdom. I’m still undecided on this identification but ancient Rome and ancient Israel definitely seem to fit the evidence better than any other theories I’ve encountered.
Please let us know if you have any further questions. We’d be happy to discuss!
Hi Carmine,
Glad to find this site of yours – there can’t be too many websites promoting the Preterist viewpoint.
There is one insurmountable proof for the identity of the Sea Beast that Revelation gives to us: it is based on the SEAT OF THE DRAGON being given to that Sea Beast in Revelation 13:2. This SEAT was a THRONE (thronos). There is one very important verse in Revelation 2:13 identifying just where that seat / throne was located, and it was in PERGAMOS. Therefore, if we know who or what that Pergamos throne was given to, we have the Sea Beast identified. This throne in the city of Pergamos was never given to Israel, but it WAS given to the Roman republic back in 133 BC by a dying Attalus III who had no heir, and decided to bequeath his entire kingdom to the Roman republic in order to keep his Pergamum kingdom intact under Rome’s powerful protection.
To me, this is absolutely rock-solid proof that the Sea Beast is none other than Rome. I have posted a bit lengthier comment about this point on the gracecentered.com website under a post in their end-times forum called “The leopard-bear-lion ‘beast’ of Revelation 13” (particularly reply 31). I post anonymously there under the name of “3 Resurrections”, to avoid unnecessarily offending men who take umbrage at a woman voicing an opinion on biblical matters to a mixed-gender audience.
Hi Claire,
Thank you for your interest in this topic and for your question. To add to Carmine’s thoughtful response, I would say that Rome and Israel are both at least somewhat in view here. Even though I don’t believe that the beast of Revelation or Daniel’s 4th beast were Rome, I would say that:
[1] Rome was the instrument that God used to finish the destruction of the beast of Revelation and of Jerusalem.
[2] The clay in Daniel’s 4th beast (Daniel 2:32-43) came about when Israel was no longer 100% independent (as during the Maccabean era) and was instead subject to the Herodian dynasty (i.e. made a client state of Rome).
In the book of Revelation, I don’t really see much about Rome other than being an entity that carried out some of the seal, trumpet, and bowl judgments and played a role in the capture of the beast and false prophet (Rev. 19:17-21).
Hi Patricia!
Great to hear from you! Thanks for visiting and for the points you bring up. I appreciate your enthusiasm for fulfilled prophecy, your dilligent research, thorough explanations and gentle persuasion. Our recent interactions on Adam’s blog have been enjoyable.
Regarding my views on Revelation’s Sea Beast, I personally don’t find identifying it as 1st century Rome particularly problematic. There is a lot to commend such theories. The theory that this Beast was the Zealot leadership as put forth by Adam is interesting and seems to have quite a bit of merit itself, although not without some difficulties (as your points above illustrate).
My main point of contention with both theories at the moment is not so much in the physical identity of the Sea Beast of Revelation. It’s that both theories (and most other theories I’ve studied) see the identities of the Sea Beast and the 4th kingdom of Daniel as being equivalent. I personally have not encountered compelling evidence that such an equivalence exists.
Of course, I could be wrong and I’m certainly up for discussions on the subject and even for changing my mind if that’s where the evidence leads. I’m glad you have expressed an interest in particpating and sharing your views. I look forward to many more discussions.
Best regards,
Carmine
Hi again Carmine,
Thank you for the feed-back – it’s a real gift when someone is able and willing to sacrifice some of their limited free time to engage in a discussion – from whatever viewpoint.
You mention that you have not encountered “compelling evidence” that Daniel’s 4th kingdom and the Rev. 13 Sea Beast are the same. For myself, that compelling evidence would consist of these two entities having the exact same origin: they both emerge from the sea – the “GREAT SEA”, to be exact (Dan. 7:2-3 cp. Rev. 13:1), which was the Mediterranean in both cases.
As an aside, when we pay attention to the origination point of the beasts, this is what tells me that Revelation actually describes THREE beasts having some similar features, but separate histories (i.e., the Sea Beast of Rev. 13:1, the Land Beast of Rev. 13:11, and the Scarlet Wilderness Beast of Rev. 17:3). I wrote at some length about these three different beasts on the gracecentered.com Preterist forum in a post I called “The Sea Beast….The Land Beast….and The Scarlet Beast”. If you add the 4th creature into the mix (Satan, the Dragon), you have a total of 4 beasts operating on the earth in those closing days of the Old Covenant – a sort of corrupted mirror-image on earth of the 4 beasts in heaven from Rev. 4:6-9 that cry “Holy, holy, holy” around the clock.
Adam’s research on the Zealot cause is superb on his website; it’s just that, unlike his view, I connect those Zealot-led episodes of history with the 3rd, SCARLET BEAST’S identity, since this independent kingdom / nation of Israel which came into being after the Maccabean victories was the only beast with a pattern of “WAS, IS NOT, and YET IS” for its state of existence – totally unlike the other two beasts.
Like yourself, Carmine, I try to hold all my theories and opinions with an open hand, knowing that they could very well contain errors somewhere in the mix. I actually feel sorry for those such as Dr. Gentry, who have painted themselves into an exegetical corner by putting their views in print. After investing so much time and capital in publishing their work, if they need to revise those opinions later, it becomes a real problem to alter them. Those such as you and I still have the advantage of an easier adjustment if and when it’s required.
Hi Patricia,
These are some interesting observations. They may very well have some significance. I will have to research them and read more of what you’ve written on these topics elsewhere. I have found the links to the sources. I will review them as I have time.
Regarding the connection between the Sea Beast of Revelation and the 4th Beast of Daniel 7, could you please clarify the reasoning behind this conviction? All of the beasts in Daniel 7 came from “the Great Sea/Mediterranean Sea”. I’m not sure how that serves as compelling evidence that the identification of the 4th beast is any particular entity or ties it so specifically to the Sea Beast of Revelation. This evidence may just as easily be applied to identifying the 4th Beast in Daniel as Greece and the Sea Beast of Revelation as Rome.
Hi Carmine,
You are generous enough to say that you will consider what I’ve written here and elsewhere. That’s actually more than my immediate family has time to do, even for my husband, who is an ordained minister. His adamant Historicist position doesn’t allow him to read or consider any of my Preterist views as having any merit, so I am driven to the internet to find someone – anyone – who is willing to engage on these topics. Over two years ago, I quietly bowed myself out of a 16-year Southern Baptist membership where my husband still serves as an elder. Any type of in-depth discussion that challenged the status quo didn’t seem to be welcomed, and I could find no one who was equally ravenous for digging into the hard questions with me.
Preterism is not just an obsession with me by now – it has opened up an indispensable lifeline of communication with my heavenly Father where I can finally feast and drink directly from His inexhaustible supply. For now, it’s refreshing not to be limited by having a rigidly controlled message doled out on Sunday morning in a venue that allows very little time for interchange, either before or afterward. The muzzle is off now, thank God. If I didn’t have to operate a home-based business to help keep peanut butter on the table, I would be tempted to sit online and discuss preterist-flavored topics all day long. In this respect, as you have noticed for yourself, Carmine, Adam’s website has been a source of profound blessing for encouraging an open, respectful exchange of differing views on some of these topics.
Back to your question concerning the “Sea Beast as 4th Beast” conundrum. You said: “This evidence may just as easily be applied to identifying the 4th beast in Daniel as Greece, and the Sea Beast of Revelation as Rome. This is where a careful reading of John Evans’ book would give a better answer than I can. The very purpose of his book was to cover this debate over the identity of the 4th beast of Daniel as being either Rome or Greece. (Wow!…I just checked Amazon’s cost for his book – $116 – $541 for a used paperback copy!) For a really brief look at some of my points regarding a bit of this debate, check out comments #41 and #43 at this link: http://www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/end-times-forum/10-toes-of-iron-and-miry-clay/. A gentleman there was suggesting that the 4th beast was a Seleucid/Ptolemies blend for the iron and clay mixture in Daniel’s statue.
Carmine, let’s say you have no difficulty in seeing the Sea Beast in Rev. 13 as embodied by Rome in the days Revelation was written. Let’s say you can also acknowledge that what Daniel “sealed up” until “the time of the end” (Dan 12:4) regarding the 4th beast in his generation was exactly what was UNSEALED by John in Revelation when the “time of the end” had arrived. Does this not equate the 4th beast from the Great Sea in Daniel as being identified with that Sea Beast revealed in Revelation 13?
What Daniel once sealed up about these 4 beasts arising from the Great Sea was UNSEALED and manifested as the Rev. 13 Sea Beast who possessed characteristics from ALL the 3 former beasts by that point in history. This composite being containing features of the 3 former beasts from the Great Sea in Daniel 7, absorbed into the one Rev. 13 Sea Beast, is an absolutely vital point when it comes to understanding the 666th “birthday” of the Sea Beast. This Sea Beast was 666 YEARS OLD at the time John was writing Revelation in AD 59. You may have read where I touched on this concept in Adam’s post of “The 1000 years: Four charts and a couple ancient quotes”. That 666 number helped John’s readers understand that all those who had not given homage to any of the Sea Beast’s kingdoms since Nebuchadnezzar’s time were those who had God’s seal in their foreheads – not the Beast’s mark. (This was ever since 607 BC when Jerusalem’s first deportation occurred, which began the 70-year exile period, and the time Nebuchadnezzar had been the first to demand worship of his kingdom’s golden image.)
In turn, this information about how old the Sea Beast actually was when John wrote Revelation (666 years total by then) will impinge on how one interprets the millennium. There were those from out of that literal thousand-year period of physical temple worship (967 BC until the First Resurrection in AD 33) who in their lifetime had not given homage to the Sea Beast during the years it had existed (from 607 BC all the way until Christ’s return for the 2nd resurrection on Pentecost day in AD 70). That Pentecost day in AD 70 was when the entire divine council of angelic “Watchers” was disbanded. They had been operating in the nations ever since the division of nations at the tower of Babel (Deut. 32:8). That is how this statue of Daniel’s could have disintegrated all at one time, even though the Roman empire itself continued to exist for many years after AD 70: the evil, demonic realm that had been part of the divine council, operating within all of these kingdom/nations as fallen members of the council, was destroyed to dust along with its leader, Satan, by the close of AD 70. Demonic evil has “passed out of the land” ever since then (Zech. 13:2).
As for the righteous members of the angelic divine council – as the “elect angels” they continued to exist, but their function as “Watchers” over the nations was taken off their to-do list. As Hebrews 2:5 said, the world that was coming after the end of those Old Covenant days would not be “in subjection” to the angels anymore. Instead, that divine council power was going to pass over to Christ, who would “inherit all nations” (as Ps. 82:8 and Rev. 11:15 puts it), and who would be crowned with “many crowns” by then (Rev. 19:12). Therefore, since we are “fellow heirs” with Christ, then we, the saints, also share in His inheritance of all the nations. We, too, share in His “shepherding all nations with a rod of iron” (Rev. 12:5 and 2:27). This iron rod is a sign of unbreakable power for a kingdom that hasn’t and never will pass to another (Dan. 2:44). This was also when “the time came when the saints possess the kingdom” – a fulfillment of Daniel 7:22,27.
So, Carmine, to sum up an answer to your closing statement – yes, in a certain sense, the 4th beast in Daniel IS connected with Greece. But it is also connected with the Medes and Persians, and it is also connected with the Chaldeans and the Romans as well, because everyone of these 4 beast kingdoms were part of a worldly Sea Beast system that demanded worship from everyone. Those who belonged to the children of faith with God’s seal in their foreheads were the overcomers who took no part in this worship – everyone from Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, up to Antipas and those like him in the last days of the Old Covenant Age.
Sorry, Carmine, this answer to your question kind of wandered all over the landscape, but maybe it lets you know more about how I’m processing these things.
Thanks for letting me vent!
Hi Patricia,
I have been reading some of Evans’ articles on preteristarchive.com. I also read your comments on the “ten toes and miry clay” thread. I understand your correlation of Daniel’s sealing of the prophecy and the seals being broken in Revelation. While I can understand how this would be support that the prophecies regard the same time periods, I still can’t see how an equivalence between the beasts is assured. Granted, there is some overlap in the time frames being covered as I think portions of Daniel 7, 9 and 12, Matthew 24, Luke 21, Revelation all pertain to 70 A.D. I just don’t see enough biblical evidnce to support that Rome was the 4th kingdom of Daniel. I do think Rome undoubtedly had a role in the “time of the end” though.
I’d like to be clear that unlike most liberal scholar’s who question Daniel’s authenticity and status as a true prophet based on the idea that Daniel doesn’t predict anything beyond the 2nd century b.c. and the erroneous accounts of Darius the Mede, I believe no such thing. Despite my belief that the 4th kingdom was Greece\Syria, I think Daniel was an authentic prophecy written around 600 B.C. This, as I’m sure you gathered, is the position Dr. Gurney takes. I’m glad you were able to check out his work and that you’ve found it helpful in learning more about the intertestamental period.
I will say I don’t agree with Dr. Gurney on everything, especially his views on Daniel 9 and his identification of Darius the Mede (I actually plan to write some posts or create some videos about my own theory on who this man was in the near future). But in general, I think he’s correct on the identification of Daniel’s kingdom’s.
To help move our discussion along, I’ve uploaded my last 2 posts regarding Daniel 11:36-45. These posts are essentially a transcript of the YouTube video included at the top of each. I uploaded this video almost a year and a half ago now. Please review this material and take some time to meditate on it. I would appreciate your feedback on how, if at all, it changes your leanings in identifying “the king”, the “King of the North”, and the “King of the South” both before and after the midpoint of v. 40. If you agree a transition of the sort for which I argue must take place in these verses (even if you don’t agree with the identities of the earthly referents), how might that change your identification of these entities or view of what’s going on with the thrones and the 4th beast in Daniel 7?