This is from James Stuart Russell's Parousia (Pdf copy so the format is not great - Russell is not FP
And he causeth all, both small and
great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in
their right hand, or on their forehead; and that no men
might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of
the beast, or the number of his name.’
If our conclusions respecting the identity of the first beast are correct, it
ought not to be difficult to discover who is intended by the second beast. It
will be observed that in many respects there is a strong resemblance
between them: they are of the same nature, though one is supreme and the
other subordinate; but there are also points of difference. It will be proper,
however, in this case also, to bring into one view the various particular
characteristics which assist to identify the individual intended:---
1. The second beast rises up from the land.
2. He has only two horns, and they are like a lamb’s.
3. He speaks like a dragon.
4. He is clothed with the delegated authority of the first beast.
5. He compels men to pay homage, or worship, to the beast.
6. He pretends to exercise miraculous powers.
7. He rules with tyrannical force and cruelty.
8. He excludes from civil rights all who refuse abject submission to
the beast.
Looking at these characteristics it becomes at once perfectly clear that we
must seek the antitype to this symbolic figure in a man kindred character
with the monster Nero himself. He is evidently the alter ego of the
emperor, though his proportions are drawn on a smaller scale.
1. His rising out of the land, while the first beast rises out of the sea,
denotes that the second beast is a domestic or home authority,
ruling in Judea; while the other is a foreign power.
2. His having two horns like a lamb, while the first beast has ten,
denotes that his sphere of government is small, and his power
limited, compared with the other.
3. That he speaks as a dragon, or serpent, denotes his crafty and
deceitful character.
4. His being clothed with the authority of the first beast indicates that
he is the official representative and delegate of Nero in Judea.
At this point the individual is revealed to us. He can be no other than the
Roman procurator or governor of Judea under Nero, and the particular
governor must be sought at or near the outbreak of the Jewish war; and
here the history of the time throws a flood of light upon the inquiry.
There are two names which may vie with each other for the bad preeminence
of the original of this picture of the second beast,---Albinus and
Gessius Florus. Each was a monster of tyranny and cruelty, but the latter
outdid the former. Before Gessius Florus came into office the Jews
counted Albinus the worst governor who had ever ground them by his
oppression. After Gessius Florus came they thought Albinus almost a
virtuous man in comparison. Florus was a miscreant worthy to stand by
the side of Nero: a fit servant of such a master.
The reader will find in the pages of Josephus the story of the enormous
and incredible profligacy, fraud, treachery, and tyranny of this last and
worst of all the governors who represented the Imperial authority in Judea,
and will see how the historian traces to the misrule of this infamous man
the ruin that fell upon the nation.
It was his intolerable and Draconic
oppression that goaded the unhappy Jews into rebellion, and was the
proximate cause of the war which ended in the utter overthrow of
Jerusalem and her people. Josephus, indeed, has not preserved all the
facts, which, if we had them, would no doubt vividly illustrate all the
particulars in the apocalyptic portraiture of the second beast. But we
scarcely need them.
Force, fraud, cruelty, imposture, tyranny, are
attributes which too certainly might be predicated of such a procurator as
Florus. Perhaps the traits most difficult to verify are those which relate to
the compulsory enforcement of homage to the emperor’s statue and the
assumption of miraculous pretensions. Yet even here all we know is in
favour of the description being true to the letter.
Dean Milman observes:---
‘The image of the beast is clearly the statue of the
emperor;’ and he adds: ‘The test by which the martyrs were
tried was to adore the emperor, to offer incense before his
statue, and to invoke the gods.’ (See Review of Newman’s
Development of Christian Doctrine.)
Dean Alford’s remarks are also deserving of notice:---
‘The Seer is now describing facts which history
substantiates to us in their literal fulfillment. The image of
Caesar was everywhere that which men were made to
worship: it was before this that the Christian martyrs were
brought to the test, and put to death if they refused the act
of adoration . . .
‘If it be said, as an objection to this, that it is not an image
of the emperor, but of the best itself, which is spoken of,
the answer is very simple,---that as the Seer himself, in
chap. xvii. 11, does not hesitate to identify one of the
"seven kings" with the beast itself, so we may fairly assume
that the image of the beast, for the time being, would be the
image of the reigning emperor.’
To the same effect are the following observations of Dean Howson, which
are the more striking as being written without any reference to the passage
before us:---
‘The image of the emperor was at that time [under the
Empire] the object of religious reverence: he was a deity on
earth (‘Das aequa potestas’---Juv. iv. 71), and the worship
paid to him was a real worship. It is a striking thought that
in those times (setting aside effete forms of religion) the
only two genuine worships in the civilised world were the
worship of a Tiberius or a Nero, on the one hand, and the
worship of Christ on the other.’
We are now in a position to ask the verdict of every candid and judicial
mind on the question of identity which has been argued, as well as the
complete congruity and correspondence in all points between the symbols
in the vision and the historical personages whom, in our opinion, they
represent.
The time, the place, the scene, the circumstances, and the
dramatis personae are all in full accord with the requirements of the
Apocalypse. It is the eve of the great catastrophe, the final ruin of the
Judaic polity. The predicted persecution of the people of God, which was
to usher in the end, has broken out. A terrible triumvirate of evil is in
league against Christ and His cause. The dragon, the beast from the sea,
and the beast from the land,---Satan, the Emperor, and the Roman
procurator, are in active hostility against ‘the woman and the remnant of
her seed.’ Their time, however, is short; the hour of retribution is at hand;
and the very next scene discovers the champion and avenger of the
faithful, and shows the security and blessedness of His people.
1
1
