Seven Hills and Seven Kings is the 5th in a series of articles on the Book of Revelation. The identity of the seven kings in Revelation 17 is an ongoing contention among Biblical scholars. It creates a stumbling block for those who interpret the events described in Revelation in chronological order. Correctly identifying the seven kings in Revelation 17 will clear up several chronological difficulties. If you have not read the first two articles (Rules of Revelation I &2), I recommend you do so. You will see the continuation of those principles I laid out in interpreting this wonderful prophecy.
In the 3rd article (The Two Beasts), I gave a brief introductory answer to the question of how one head of a beast can receive a mortal wound. The seven heads are seven kings of one beast, the Roman Empire, meaning one of the seven will receive a mortal wound but miraculously mend it.
The two beasts of Revelation 13 describe both an Empire and a Caesar, or a kingdom and a king, being the personification of his kingdom. The identification of the kingdom as the Empire of Rome and the king (or Caesar) of this empire, first symbolized in chapter 13, alluded to in verses 1-4, is confirmed in chapter 17, verses five, and the focus of this article is verse 10.
Before we can move on to identifying the list of kings in chapter 17 and their respective places in the prophecy, there is another matter that I must attend to—the dating of the composition of the book of Revelation. There are two primary schools of thought regarding Revelation’s dating. The first and most widely accepted date is just before the death of the Apostle John, around the year AD 95.
The second school of thought is that Revelation was composed before AD 70, around AD 67-68. Why choose AD 70 as a dividing point? AD 70 is a pivotal moment in the history of both Judaism and Christianity. In AD 70, Titus destroyed the Temple of Jerusalem. I am in the camp of the pre-70 school of thought.
There are valid arguments and historical references supporting both schools, pre- and post-70, and whichever side you fall on does not change the value of the core message of Revelation. Revelation is an apocalyptic prophecy about the return of the Lord Jesus and the end of the sin that has plagued mankind since the Garden of Eden. However, the dating does affect how we interpret the symbolism in Revelation.
I will only briefly give my reasons for being in the pre-70 camp, as a full discussion on the matter is outside the scope of this article. However, I will refer to them in future articles. Follow the symbolic interpretations I have presented in previous articles, and you will see that my position of pre-70 fits and eliminates many of the unanswered questions left by the post-70 camp.
The first reason I am in the pre-70 camp is in Revelation 1:9, the same verse in which the post-70 camp begins its position: “I, John, both your brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the island that is called Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.”[1] The verse does not tell us when John was on Patmos or why John was there, making banishment a supposition. Even if we concede that John was banished to Patmos, the verse does not tell us who banished him. John could have just as easily been banished by Nero as by Domitian.
The second reason I do not subscribe to the post-70 or 95 camp is that their main argument is rooted in one verse of Irenaeus’s writings, “Against hearses 5:30:3.” You would think that since most Biblical scholars are in the post-70 camp, there would be quite a volume of historical evidence to support their position. However, after examining the references they use, they all find their origin in Irenaeus Against Hearses 5:30:3.
The quoted verse in Irenaeus is not definitive. Here is the verse I refer to, “For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign.” So, is Irenaeus saying John recorded the Revelation around 95, or is he saying John was seen around 95? It is weak wording on which to build a position. Do you agree? Not to mention that Irenaeus is not a historian, as he contradicts himself on dates and persons in other sections of his writings.
Many historical accounts and traditions have been built and accepted for decades solely on dubious and isolated sources and later proven wrong. For example, accepted tradition says John’s banishment to the Isle of Patmos was to work in the mines. The problem is that no archeological or physical proof exists that any mining operation occurred on Patmos.
I could cite many other reasons, but I will conclude with one. The book of Revelation does not mention the Temple’s destruction. Incredibly, such an event, which had supposedly already happened without any mention, reference, or hint in Revelation, defies reason. Even if Revelation omitted the Temple’s destruction in the vision, it would have garnered mention in the messages to the seven churches that comprised the Bishopric of John or in one of his epistles.
I refer again to Revelation 1:19, “Write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after this.” (Italics mine). If Revelation had been witnessed and recorded in AD 95, John and everyone in the seven churches would have known about it for 25 years, and again, for it to have gone unmentioned is unconscionable.
We will begin identifying the seven kings using the context provided in Revelation chapter 17, verse 9, which provides us with a geographical location, “Here is the mind which has wisdom: The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits.” The city of Rome rests on seven hills and is often historically called the ‘city on seven hills.’ This geographical context confirms the kings listed in verse 10 are kings (or Caesars) of Rome.
On to the subject at hand, the identity of the seven kings. There are eight mentioned in verse 10. However, to understand the identity of the 8th king, we must correctly identify the first 7, which will provide a solid base for the identity of the 8th. ”There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time.” [2]This verse, even as brief as it is, gives us meaningful information about the kings of Rome. It tells us there are seven total and a mysterious eighth. It also tells us five have fallen, and one is or exists at the time of Revelation’s vision. This verse is a stumbling block for the post-70 camp because the chronological order of Roman Emperors (or kings) is upset by the “one is” portion of the verse. The post-70 (or 95) camp must accept Domitian as the one ‘who is’ because he was Emperor from AD 81 -96.
The problem with this is obvious. Domitian was the twelfth Caesar (or king) following chronological order. So, if we accept Domitian as the one who is, what about the others between Nero and Domitian? Do they not count? Or should we jump over them as insignificant? Another glaring question is why all the secrecy surrounding the number of the beast if it was Nero since he would have already been dead for some 27 years? Even Irenaeus dodged the identity of the beast ‘who is,’ [3] but does refer to the “one who shall come.”
Most Biblical scholars also consider Nero king number five because they begin chronological counting with Augustus Caesar, concluding him as the first true Emperor. But Julius Caesar was the first to adorn the title of Caesar. He was also the first emperor worshiped as a god,[4] along with Roma, the traditional mother god of Rome. Interestingly, Julius Caesar would not allow himself to be considered or worshiped as a god in Italy or, more specifically, in Rome. He did lay the groundwork for emperor worship in the provinces of Rome, mainly in Asia Minor. Augustus, building on this groundwork, is credited for the establishment of emperor worship. And like so many times in history, the person who lays the groundwork is overlooked, and their successor gets the credit, or blame, for the outcome.
Another portion of verse 10, “five have fallen,” caught my attention and added support to the determination of Nero to be the 6th king, the one ‘who is.’ Five of Nero’s predecessors were dead, so why the terminology ‘five have fallen?’ Why not just say five have died or five are dead? “The Greek verb (piptó) describes a descent, which can be controlled (to lower) or not (to fall), or it describes some kind of figurative descent: into calamity, ruin or the superior control of someone or something.” [5] Just as a man descends further and further into moral and spiritual decline without God, the ‘five have fallen’ describes the spiritual descent of the first five kings, beginning with Julius Caesar and culminating in open physical Christian persecution conducted at the hands of the 6th king, the number of a man, the self-made image of a god, the one ‘who is’ during John’s Day.
If we correctly begin counting the emperors (or kings) with Julius Caesar, Nero is number 6. He is the one ‘who is.’ His five predecessors ‘have fallen’ or have continued the path of moral decline. This chronology aligns perfectly with the pre-70 camp. It no longer requires any skips, jumps, or ignores in the list of the first six kings. The determination brings us to ask, ‘Who is number seven?’
Let us begin with what is given to us literally. Again, one of my rules for the interpretation of Revelation, in fact, Biblical prophecy in general, is the literal trumps the symbolic, even if both exist in the same verse. “The other has not yet come.” The seventh has still not appeared to date, though you can rightfully apply anti-christian attributes to several evil leaders between then and now. We also know from the same verse (17:10). “And when he does come, he must continue for a short time (italics mine).”
In Biblical prophecy, “A short time” often relates to suffering, trials, or temporary hardships for the faithful. “For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows he has a short time.”[6] But this ‘short time’ has no exact definition regarding length. Biblical scholars often tie it to the 42 months in Daniel or the “one thousand, two hundred and sixty days” in Revelation (3-1/2 years calculated using a 30-day month), but we cannot be sure if the two time periods are the same. However, I believe the ‘short time’ is 42 months.
If the association of the two periods is correct, Nero’s actions fit within this 42-month time frame. Nero began his persecution of Christians shortly after July 64 AD and ended because he was now on the run, just before he died in 68 AD. The period of persecution, as history records, also narrows the timeframe for the vision of Revelation between 64 and 68 AD.
The fear and dread of Nero were so intense that even after his death, rumors persisted that he was not dead, but he faked his death and retreated to Persia. While in Persia, Nero is believed to be forming an army to return and conquer Rome by force and, afterward, wreak vengeance on all his enemies, resuming his reign of terror. These rumors were not just idle passing gossip but widely accepted because of their mention in prophetic (non-Biblical) accounts such as the Sibylline oracles (compiled from 150 BC- 180 AD). [7]
The rumors that Nero was still alive were so widespread they even gained a name, Nero Redivivus. Early Christians recognized Nero as the ‘antichrist’ and feared Nero had faked his own death. “For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way,”[8] alludes to Nero, whose actions portray the deeds of the Antichrist. It would be fair to say some early Christians believed that Nero was not only Antichrist incarnate, but they also assumed “that he shall rise again and be Antichrist.” [9] The rumors surrounding Nero’s demise and return indirectly give reference to the 7th king, the ‘one to come.’
I disagree with those from the post-70 camp who think the 6th king, the one ‘who is,’ refers to Domitian mainly because their most potent argument is that John wrote the book of Revelation at or around AD 95. Nothing else they offer fits the sequence or symbolism of Revelation.
Beyond the dating of the book around AD 95, there is a glaring truth that they cannot sidestep, and that is, there are no historical accounts of widespread Christian persecution under Domitian like there was under Nero. How can Domitian qualify to be the beast, the 6th king, without a lengthy history of Christian persecution? He cannot. He does portray some ‘anti-christian’ qualities, which we will address in a future article, but for now, the named facts and others disqualify Domitian as the 6th king.
There is one opinion of the post-70 camp we should make note of. Some think the head of the beast, who received a mortal wound, is Nero, but the beast (the empire) recovers in the person of Domitian. Although I see the possible connection, there is not enough additional evidence to accept this conclusion. Some symbolism here is worthy of investigation, but I still do not think Domitian is the recovered beast. No, the 7th, the one ‘yet to come,’ will be the final beast, empowered by the spirit of the Antichrist, orchestrated by Satan.
Verse eleven even names the primary beast, the power behind the earthly beast. “The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to perdition.” This beast cannot be a man, for man cannot be one who was, but is no longer, but will return. It can only be a spiritual being who ultimately goes to perdition. The Greek term (apóleia) rendered perdition means destruction, extermination, not just physical death as you would attribute to a man.
The 6th king was Nero, the 7th is the ‘one to come.’ He will be the final Antichrist, as Nero was the precursor. The spirit of the Antichrist will indwell him. How will this 7th king be heralded and accepted as the promised savior of mankind? Through a contrived resurrection, a false messiah. And lest you think this deception could not and would not happen, I can only say let history be our guide. The rumors of Nero being alive and his return were foretold, retold, and believed for well over a century. There were even those claiming to be Nero and managed to gather a following. [10]
History does not lack accounts of the admiration of despots, even when they lead their admirers to their own demise. Not only will people accept him as the savior of humanity, but they will also wish for his leadership, just as those in Nero’s day wished he would return so they could enjoy the fruits, handouts, and entertainment he provided at the general populace’s expense. Dio Chrysostom voiced the desire for him to return in the first century. “For so far as the rest of his subjects were concerned, there was nothing to prevent his continuing to be Emperor for all time, seeing that even now everybody wishes he were still alive. And the great majority do believe that he is, although in a certain sense he has died not once but often along with those who had been firmly convinced that he was still alive.” [11]
Having established the identities of the seven kings, the identity of the 8th is all that remains and, by now, should be self-evident. We have already alluded to his identity. The 8th king is the power behind the earthly beast. He is the great beast, Satan, who has sent the spirit of Antichrist throughout the earth. We are further told he (the great beast, Satan himself) is one of the seven. The spirit of the Antichrist is how he makes and works in the world through an emperor and a kingdom.
The final king, the one ‘yet to come,’ will undoubtedly share the same characteristics and actions as his predecessors. He will arise during conflict and restore peace, and all will seem right with the world until halfway through his reign. An assassination attempt will take place, seemingly succeeding, which will deceive the world, and then his reign of terror against God’s elect will begin.
Between the first century and now, men and perhaps women, perceived as the Antichrist, failed in world domination; hence, they were not the ‘one to come.’ In the context of times past, it would have been tough to obtain world prominence and dominance in a short period. Still, we must remember Nero was already Caesar when his actions revealed his descent into debauchery. However, in our day, with our dependence on technology and mass media, circumstances can change very quickly. Think how much of our life routine depends on technology and how much we take it for granted until it is gone. The recent coronavirus outbreak is just one example of how rapidly the routine lives of all nations of Earth can be brought to a halt.
We should constantly be on the lookout for any leader’s phrase, ‘it’s for the good of all,’ when attached to any changes to the social structure and legal system. Anytime ‘it’s for the good of all’ is proclaimed, it will be at the expense of the minority, and Christians, true Christians, will be that minority.
There is more to come.
+ There are no comments
Add yours