E. The Beast From The Earth (13:11-18)
E. THE BEAST FROM THE EARTH (13:11-18)
The beast is not alone. John turns his attention to a second beast, the henchman of the first. In that he secures worship of the image of the first beast (V.12) the second seems to stand for a priesthood. If we find an illustration of the first beast in the Roman Empire we will see the imperial priesthood in the second. Unhappy results always follow when state power is allied to a false priesthood. This second beast is seen by some as a parody of the Holy Spirit, with its miracles and its fire from heaven (v.13).
11. The second beast came up out of the earth. His origin in the familar earth makes him less mysterious than the first which came from the sea. He is less fearsome, for he has but two horns whereas the first had ten, and seven heads besides (v.i). Like a lamb (cf. Mt. 7:15) seems to be a parody of Christ which is further brought out when this beast is called ‘the false prophet’ (16:13; 19:20; 20:10). It is possible also that we should understand the two (of the horns) as in contrast with the two witnesses (ch.11). All in all this beast looks like a dreadful parody of the truth. He spoke like a dragon; his speech resembles that of the evil one.
12. He is formidable. He has all the authority of his predecessor. But he is in no sense a rival for he makes people worship the first beast. It is not easy to see what the earth means in distinction from its inhabitants in worshipping. Probably the combination simply stresses totality. The whole world is caught up in this worship of the beast, characterized again as the one whose fatal wound had been healed. Clearly this made a tremendous impression.
13. Magic was common among first-century priesthoods as a means of impressing the gullible. So this beast does (habitually, present tense) great and miraculous signs. This noun is sometimes used in Revelation of the visions John sees (12:1,3; 15:1), but a number of times also for miracles. In this sense it always denotes miracles worked by evil powers (here, v.14; 16:14; 19:20), a sharp contrast with the Fourth Gospel where it is a characteristic word for the miracles of Jesus. This may be a further example of the parodying of the good. The term indicates that the miracles are not aimless wonders. They have a deep significance and are part of Satan’s plan (cf. Mk. 13:22; 2 Thes. 2:9). An example is the making of fire to come down from heaven. This is not said to have destroyed the beast’s enemies or the like. It is apparently simply meant to arouse admiration.
14. By his miracles he deceives people and establishes his position. The inhabitants of the earth in this book seems to mean unregenerate mankind (see note on 6:10). The beast can deceive only unbelievers. There is an important spiritual truth here. If anyone serves God with all his heart he will not be taken in by the empty miracles of the deceiver. But one who turns from God predisposes himself to believe the lies of the second beast. Was given characteristically emphasizes the derivative nature of this beast’s power. His miracles were done on behalf of the first beast which may be another example of parody, for the two witnesses stood ‘before the Lord of the earth’ (11:4), the Greek preposition both times being en
pion. There is an implication of a readiness to serve and obey. The second beast instructs his followers to set up an image to the first, who is characterized yet once more by his recovery from his deadly wound.
pion. There is an implication of a readiness to serve and obey. The second beast instructs his followers to set up an image to the first, who is characterized yet once more by his recovery from his deadly wound.15. John will not allow us to forget for one minute the derivative nature of the beast’s power; it was given. The second beast is now permitted to give breath to the image of the first, so that it spoke. There are many stories of speaking images in the ancient world. Kiddle reminds us that ‘the breath of life’ is associated with the Creator-God and continues, ’When the priests of Antichrist have thus animated their idol, they have acted a blasphemy exceeding that of all previous idolators; this is the magician’s most impious usurpation of God’s power.’ Grammatically it is the image which causes the death of the non-worshippers. But perhaps we should understand a change of subject so that it is the second beast who made the image speak and caused the death of those who refused to worship it.
16. He now caused a mark to be set on all people on the right hand or forehead. The listing of various classes, small and great (for which see note on 11:18) etc., is a way of stressing totality. No-one was exempt. The choice of right hand or forehead is presumably for conspicuousness. It could not be hidden. It may also be meant as a travesty of the Jewish custom of wearing phylacteries (little boxes containing extracts from the Bible) on the left hand (or forearm) and on the head. It is probably also a parody of God’s seal (7:3; 14:1). The precise significance of the mark is uncertain. Barclay sees several possibilities: if from the branding of domestic slaves, ‘it means that those who worship the beast are the slaves, the property of the beast’; if from the custom of soldiers branding themselves with the name of a favourite general, ‘it means that those who worship the beast are the devoted followers of the beast’; if from the use of sealing contracts, ‘it will mean that those who worship the beast accept the law and the authority of the beast’; if from the mark stamped on coinage, ‘it will again mean that those who bear it are the property of the beast’; if from the certificate that a man had sacrificed to Caesar, ‘the mark of the beast may be the certificate of worship, which a Christian could only obtain at the cost of denying his faith and being false to his Lord. Once he had that certificate he was labelled as a worshipper of Caesar and a denier of Christ’.
17. The purpose (so that; Gk. hina) of the mark is that no-one should engage in trade without it. Could (dyn
tai) is stronger than “hinder’ or the like. It points to a total prohibition, which would make it impossible for people without the mark to buy even necessities like food. It is thus impossible for those who oppose the beast even to live. The mark is explained as the name of the beast or the number of his name; this leads into the next verse.
tai) is stronger than “hinder’ or the like. It points to a total prohibition, which would make it impossible for people without the mark to buy even necessities like food. It is thus impossible for those who oppose the beast even to live. The mark is explained as the name of the beast or the number of his name; this leads into the next verse.18. This calls for wisdom is a pause for emphasis (cf.17:9). The following important statement provides a means by which the intelligent reader (one who has insight) can compute the beast’s number. The only clues John gives are that it is man’s number and that it is 666 (or, as some MSS have it, 616). Most students work from the fact that in the ancient world (where people lacked our convenient arabic numerals) it was usual to employ letters to denote numbers. In Greek the first nine letters of the alphabet were used for the units, the next for the tens and so on.91 The problem then is to find a name which gives a total of 666 when the numbers signified by its letters are added up.
The possibilities are almost endless. In modern times the most favoured solution is ‘Nero Caesar’ (if the final letter be omitted to give the equivalent of the Latin spelling of the name the total is 616, the variant reading). But to get this result we must use the Greek form of the Latin name, transliterated into Hebrew characters, and with a variant spelling at that (the vowel letter y has to be omitted from qysr). This solution has its attractions, but no-one has shown why a Hebrew name with an unusual spelling should be employed in a Greek writing. It is also to be borne in mind that in the ancient world when Nero was a considerable figure (the Nero redivivus myth is thought by many critics to underlie parts of Revelation), this solution was apparently never thought of. Irenaeus mentions (and fails to adopt) the view that Lateinos, i.e. the Roman Empire, was meant. He mentions also euanthas and teitan (=the emperor Titus?) and favours the latter.
Other solutions are put forward, but none has won wide acceptance. It is possible that such solutions are on the wrong lines and that we should understand the expression purely in terms of the symbolism of numbers. If we take the sum of the values represented by the letters of the name lesous, the Greek name ‘Jesus’, it comes to 888; each digit is one more than seven, the perfect number. But 666 yields the opposite phenomenon, for each digit falls short. The number may be meant to indicate not an individual, but a persistent falling short. All the more is this likely to be correct if we translate ‘it is the number of man’ rather than ’a man’. John will then be saying that unregenerate man is persistently evil. He bears the mark of the beast in all he does. Civilization without Christ is necessarily under the dominion of the evil one.