The Pulpit Commentary — Revelation — Section 525

Powers which were diverse and even politically hostile were yet ethically one power o ~ to the fundamental principles of righteoUBDess and peace, of purity and true gpillinesli.. The first wild beast, then, becomes the symbol of confederated and age- lµng,worlq.powers. 2. The second wild beast a1J alliecl toitA the first. 'Hie origin is not oi God• he is -Of the earth. He is more peaceable in his.appearance than the first beast, but his speech bew1ays him; the dragon-voice is his;and he revive& the worship of the irst wild beast. In him, therefore,~ oombined the· powers of the dr&g;)n and the first wild beast. Yet he yields homage to existing order; unlike the first wild ~ which rises .out of our ocean of disorder and tumult, he springs out of the earth.. He assumes in part, also, a Christian appearance; he is 88 a lamb. These features would lead 118 to expect ea·. power not wholly irreligiom-inde~. in some features Christian, yet practically pagan; observing order, yet arrogant; a second power resembling the first, yet possessing a more specious appearance t.o mankind. 11; is on this second wild beast that the seer bids us fasten our marked attention. It is ibis second wild beast who deceives by false wonders and false worship, and introduces a great and grinding tyranny. It is this second wild beast to whom is attributed the mysterioWI number 666. It is well now to turn back to earlier writings. Jn Dan. Yii. we read of a "little horn," and in the description there we find much that is •parallel with the description here (comp. Dan. vii. 8 with eh. xiii. 6; Dan. vii. 21 with eh, xiii 7). 'l'his "little horn" of Danial has been identified (comp. 'Excursus on Inter- l'.rtctation of 2 Thess. ii. 3-12 ') with the "man of sin" spoken of by St. Paul (2 ',J'hesa. ii. 8). Some think that the little horn of Dan. vii. is identical with the- horn uf eh. viii. Int.o this question we not have space to enter; it will be enough here to keep in mind that St. Paul looked for the manifestation of an antichrist; a man of sin,, whose type in ~l likelihood he found in the little horn of Dan. vii.; and that the picture of .the antichrist painted by St., Paul is that of a power not professedly irreligious; bµt yet claiming from mankind the homage due to God:(2 Thess. ii.·4). 'l'his seems quite in hannony with the characteristics of the second wild beast, who, it is to be remembered, is described (eh. xvi. 18; xix. 20; :u. 10) as the "false prophet." We :iµay, then, take the second wild beast as the picture of a power, cultw-ed, quasi• religiowi, borrowing much from Christianity, yet built upon anti:..Chrutian principles, and animated by an anti-Christian spirit.. 8. The identification of tM wild beast, falss prophet, or antid&rist. "Ye have heard that antiehrist shall come" (1 Jolm ii. 18). This is St.. Joh~s acknowledgment of the widespread belief that a great falling away !!hall precede the second coming of Christ. Here be is at one with St. Paul, but il is consiste11t with the spirit of St. John's thought that he should remind his hearers t.hat the apirit of antiohrist.was abroad already, and that in a present antagonmn to this spirit lay true Chrilltian duty; accordingly he indicates in more than one place what were some features of the antichristian spirit Sl John ii. 22; iv. 1-3). It is also significant tl!.at he uses the phrase, "false prophet,' reminding us onhe Apocalypse, which identifies, as we have seeu, the wild beast, or antichrist,,with the false prophet. 8~. John thus appears to regard the spirits and false prophets abroao. in his day as at least anticipatiQns ·of the great future antichrist and false prophet. Actually there were antichriets then in the world; but the prophetic ideal of all these was as· one great antichrist. In the Apocalyptic vision the scattered spirits grew into one great repreeent.ative opponent-the wild beast, the false prophet. Is there, then, no personal antichrist? It has. been ably argued (see 'Excursus on Prophecy of 2 'l'hess. ii.') that the man ·of sin must be an individual. There are certain expressions which semn to point to a single person, notably the remarkable use of the masculine gender when the wild beast is referred to (see oh. xiii. 6); but it seems more consonant with the symbolh1m of the Apocalypse to regard the wild beast 88 the figurative embodiment of the false, seductive, anti-Christian principle and spirit, which belongs to more ages than one, which reveals itself in diverse aspects, and yet always manifests the same hostility t.o the Divine Spirit. It must not, however, be supposed that this view denies a personal antichrist. On the contrary, it is perfectly in harmony with this view t.o l}ote that the wild-beast spirit has often culminated in an individual; the typical fore:. casts of antichrist have often been individuals. Antiochus Epiphanes, Herod, Nero, might fairly be regarded 88 the incaruation of the ungodly spirit. Similarly, in later ages, it is not to be wondered at that holy, Christ-taught men, groaning for the sorrow• rm. llIL 1-21.] THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. 688