• Table of Contents

---

• About the Author

---

• Preface to the Book

---

• The Last Words in Old Testament Prophecy

---

• PART I. - The Parousia in the Gospels

---

• Parousia in the Synoptical Gospels

---

• Prophetic Intimations of the approaching Consummation of the Kingdom of God:

---

• The Prophecy on the Mount examined:

---

• Our Lord's declaration before the High Priest

---

• Prediction of the Woes coming on Jerusalem

---

• Prayer of the Penitent Thief

---

• Apostolic Commission, the

---

• The Parousia in the Gospel of St.John.

---

• Appendix to Part I

---

• PART II. The Parousia in the Acts and the Epistles.
  • In the Acts of the Apostles.

  ---

  • In the First Epistle to the Thessalonians

  ---

  • In the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians

  ---

  • In the First Epistle to the Corinthians

  ---

  • In the Second Epistle to the Corinthians

  ---

  • In the Epistle to the Galatians

  ---

  • In the Epistle to the Romans

  ---

  • In the Epistle to the Colossians

  ---

  • In the First Epistle to Timothy

  ---

  • In the Second Epistle of Timothy

  ---

  • In the Epistle to Titus

  ---

  • In the Epistle to the Hebrews

  ---

  • In the Epistle of St. James

  ---

  • In the First Epistle of St. Peter

  ---

  • In the Second Epistle of St. Peter

  ---

  • In the First Epistle of St. John

  ---

  • In the Epistle of St. Jude

  ---

• Appendix to Part II

---

• Part III. The Parousia in the Apocalypse.
  • The First Vision.

  ---

  • The Second Vision..

  ---

  • The Third Vision.

  ---

  • The Fourth Vision.

  ---

  • The Fifth Vision.

  ---

  • The Sixth Vision.

  ---

  • The Seventh Vision.

  ---

• Summary and Conclusion

---

• Appendix to Part III.

---

• Afterword by Russell

---

• All the Comparative Scripture Charts Combined

THE PAROUSIA

Grk/Heb Fonts

PDF

by James Stuart Russell

The Fourth Vision

VISION OF THE SEVEN MYSTIC FIGURES.

Rev. 12 — Rev. 13 — Rev. 14

The catastrophe of the trumpet vision lands us in the very same crisis as the catastrophe of the seven seals. They are both different representations of the same great event. But there is still room for fresh representations; and the next vision ushers in a completely different set of symbols, though belonging to the same period and relating to the same events. Its place, between the seven trumpets and the seven vials, enables us very distinctly to define its limits; and it closes, like the other visions, with a very marked catastrophe. It differs from them, however, in not being so expressly characterised by the number seven, though it is not difficult to see that it really consists of that number of principal figures or characters, all of them being symbolical representations. These are, —

1. The woman clothed with the sun;

2. The great red dragon;

3. The man-child;

4. The beast from the sea;

5. The beast from the land;

6. The Lamb on Mount Sion;

7. The Son of man on the cloud.

We call this vision, therefore, the vision of the seven mystic figures. It occupies the next three chapters—Rev. 12, Rev. 13, Rev. 14. It is of the utmost consequence for the correct interpretation of these apocalyptic visions that we keep stedfastly in mind the limits of the area to which we are restricted by the terms of the Book. It is only a point in historical time and geographical space, —the consummation of the Jewish age. The theatre of action, and the greater number of dramatis personae, must always be sought at the central spot, where is the focus of the interest, —Jerusalem and Judea. It is rarely that we have to travel beyond this region, although occasionally remoter elements are introduced, when they have a special relation to the principal theme.

1. The Woman clothed with the Sun.

Rev. 12:1, 2—‘And there appeared a great wonder [sign] in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: and she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.’

Rev. 12:5—‘And she brought forth a man child, who shall rule all the nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.’

It is not surprising that this representation of the woman who brings forth a man child destined to rule all the nations, who is caught up to God and to His throne, etc., should at the first view suggest the Virgin Mother and her Son, who was no sooner born than He was persecuted by the murderous jealousy of Herod, ‘who sought the young child to destroy him;’ and who ascended to the throne of God. Nevertheless, such an interpretation at once breaks down, being wholly incompatible with the subsequent representations in the vision. There is nothing in the history of Mary corresponding to the persecution of the woman by the dragon; to her flight into the wilderness after the ascension of her Son; to the flood of water cast out by the serpent to destroy her; and to the war made upon ‘the remnant of her seed.’

There is another objection which is fatal to this interpretation. It is outside the bounds which the Apocalypse itself expressly draws around its scene and time of action. It is not among the things ‘which must shortly come to pass.’ If we were taken back to look at symbolical representations of the birth of Christ, we should not be upon apocalyptic ground. To leave this ground is to travel out of the record, to forsake the terra firma of historical fact, and to launch out upon a shoreless sea of conjecture, without a compass or a guiding star.

We have no difficulty, therefore, in accepting the common opinion that the woman clothed with the sun is representative of the Christian church. But his alone is too vague a statement. It is the persecuted church, the apostolic church, the church of Judea, that is here symbolised. That is to say, it is the Hebrew-Christian church in the closing days of the Jewish age.

The emblems with which the woman is adorned will not seem incongruous or extravagant when we remember the lofty language in which the prophet Isaiah addresses Israel: ‘Arise, shine, for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee,’ etc. (Isa. 60) That the apostolic church should be resplendent as the sun, that the moon should be beneath her feet, is only in keeping with all that is spoken in the New Testament of the dignity and glory of the bride of Christ.

But that which identifies the woman in the vision as the Hebrew-Christian church is the crown of twelve stars upon her head. That this is emblematic of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel seems beyond question; and it therefore fixes the reference of the vision to the church of Judea.

2. The great Red Dragon.

Rev. 12:3, 4—‘And there appeared another wonder in heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.’

There is no possibility of doubt respecting the identity of this symbol. The dragon is ‘that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan,’—the ancient and inveterate foe of God and of His people. He is represented as possessing vast authority and power; ‘having seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems upon his heads;’ for he is ‘the god of this world,’ ‘the prince of the power of the air;’ ‘the accuser of the brethren;’ ‘the deceiver of the whole world.’ This malignant enemy of the cause of Christ stands ready to devour the child of which the woman is about to be delivered.

3. The Man Child.

Rev. 12:5—‘And she brought forth a man child, who shall soon rule all the nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up to God and to his throne.’

Alford affirms that ‘the man child is the Lord Jesus Christ, and none other.’ He further says that ‘the exigencies of this passage require that the birth should be understood literally and historically of that birth of which all Christians know.’¹ And yet he holds that the mother is ‘the church;’ that ‘the Blessed Virgin cannot possibly be intended.’ These two suppositions are incompatible, and mutually destructive. It seems indeed natural at first sight to assume that Christ must be intended, but further consideration will show that it cannot be so. The church is never said to be the mother of Christ, nor Christ to be the Son of the church. The church is the bride, the wife, the body, the house of Christ, but never the mother. Christ is the King, the Head, the Husband of the church, but never the Son or Child. He is the Son of God, and the Son of man; but never the Son of the church. There would be an incongruity and impropriety in such a figure from which the sense of fitness revolts.

We believe the key to this symbol is to be found in Isa. 66, which is the original source from which the figures are derived. Jerusalem is there represented as a woman in travail, who is delivered of a man child: (Rev. 12:7, 8) ‘Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child. Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.’ It is impossible to believe that the resemblance between these passages is merely casual; and we are therefore greatly assisted in the interpretation of the vision by the analogous representations in the prophecy. As the man child, or the children of Zion, in the prophecy, signify the faithful in the land, or in Jerusalem, so the man child born of the persecuted woman in the Apocalypse denotes the faithful disciples of Christ in Judea, or even in Jerusalem itself. This explanation harmonises the seeming incongruities of the passage, and gives an intelligible and reasonable sense to the whole representation. The Hebrew-Christian church is personified as the persecuted parent of a persecuted offspring; she gives birth to a man child, but a man child that is also a nation, according to the words of the prophet. This man child is destined ‘to rule the nations with a rod of iron, and is caught up unto God, and to his throne.’ These are statements which seem to many only applicable to the Son of God Himself; but they are in truth affirmed in the Apocalypse to be the privilege and reward of every faithful disciple: ‘To him that overcometh will I give power over the nations, and he shall rule them with a rod of iron’; (Rev. 2:26, 27) ‘To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne’. (Rev. 3:21) It is therefore not unwarrantable to apply these expressions, lofty as they are, to the faithful disciples of Christ.

The safety of her offspring being thus secured, provision for the persecuted mother is made by God.

Rev. 12:6—‘And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.’

This anticipatory of the fuller statement in Rev. 12:13-16, where we are told that ‘to the woman were given the two wings of the great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.’

This allusion to the period of time during which the woman is preserved furnishes a clue to the interpretation of this part of the vision. It will be seen that it is the same space of time during which Jerusalem is trodden under foot by the Gentiles, and during which the two witnesses utter their prophecy. That is to say, these different designations of time, —forty-two months, a thousand two hundred and threescore days, and a time, and times, and half-a-time, are all equivalent to three years and a half, which is known to have been the duration of the Jewish war. It is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that these different events coincide with the period of the Jewish war, and cover the same duration, being contemporaneous events. Is there then, it may be asked, any historical fact corresponding to the symbols in the vision, namely, the persecuted woman, the mother of the man child, fleeing into the wilderness from the face of the dragon, and preserved in safety there during a space of time equal to three years and a half? We think there is; and we shall endeavour to present the veritable facts which, as we believe, answer to the symbolic representation.

Our Lord distinctly forewarned His disciples that when they saw certain specified signs of the approaching catastrophe, especially when they saw ‘Jerusalem compassed about with armies,’ and ‘the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place,’ they should, without loss of time, escape from the doomed city, and ‘flee to the mountains.’ So hasty was to be their flight that they were even to disregard their property, and only care for personal preservation. (Matt. 24:15-18) We have the testimony of Josephus also that many of the Jews at the commencement of hostilities with Rome abandoned Jerusalem as they would a sinking ship. It is presumable that the Christian population, who had been so expressly warned of what was coming, would quit the city; and there appears to be no reason to question the fact that as a body they did retire, and sought refuge in Peraea, beyond the Jordan, a district which we are informed by Josephus is generally desert, and might therefore be properly styled ‘the wilderness.’²

This, then, is how the symbols shape themselves into history. The church of Jerusalem, the mother church as it may well be called, and the fruitful mother of a multitude of spiritual children, is subjected to severe and grievous persecution, stirred up by Satan, the malignant adversary of Christ and of His people. Whether the man child caught up to God and to His throne symbolizes the martyred sons of the church referred to in Rev. 12:11, who, ‘though condemned by men in the flesh, were justified and crowned by God with life eternal in their spirit’, (1 Pet. 4:6) we will not decide, though we think it probable. The mother church, however, though deprived of her first-born, is still persecuted by the dragon. Never was the persecution hotter than when the period of the Jewish revolt arrived and the army of Rome appeared before the gates of Jerusalem. Warned of God, the church of Jerusalem abandoned the city, and fled as on eagle’s wings into the wilderness beyond the Jordan, where a safe retreat was found during the period of the war and the siege. Baffled in his attempt to crush the cause of Christ in Jerusalem, the dragon vents his rage by discharging a flood of malignant wrath after the fugitive Christians, —which, however, does them no harm, —and then turns to molest and persecute ‘the remnant of the woman’s seed,’ or disciples in other parts of the earth or the land.

If it be said that there is an incongruity in representing the persecuted Christians of the church of Jerusalem by the double figure of the woman and the man child, one of whom is caught up into heaven, while the other flies for refuge to the wilderness, we answer, that it is an incongruity inseparable from the use of such symbols. Zion and her children in the prophecy of Isaiah are virtually identical; and the same is true of the woman and the man child. We speak of England and her people when we really mean the same thing by both expressions; and it would be an over-fastidious criticism that would object to such language, which, if not logically correct, adds greatly to the dramatic and poetical effect of the description.

Alford, although he feels quite perplexed about the interpretation of the vision as a whole, gives his opinion in favour of our explanation of a very important part of the symbols. His words are, —

‘I own than, considering the analogies and the language used, I am much more disposed to interpret the persecution of the woman by the dragon of the various persecutions by Jews which followed the ascension, and her flight into the wilderness of the gradual withdrawal of the church and her agency from Jerusalem and Judea, finally consummated by the flight to the mountain on the approaching siege, commanded by our Lord Himself.’³

Strange that, having found one historical fact that so well corresponded with the symbol, the critic did not seek in the same quarter for more, which would no doubt have resulted in a luminous exposition of the whole; but he is led away by the ignis fatuus of a syllabus of universal church history in the Apocalypse, unaccountably ignoring the express statements of the book itself with reference to the very restricted period within which its visions must be fulfilled.

We come next to the conflict between the dragon and the champion who appears in defence of the persecuted woman:—

Rev. 12:7-9—‘And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, and prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.’

It does not appear that this transaction, —the conflict between Michael and the dragon, —was represented to the Seer in vision. It is not introduced by the usual formula in such cases, ‘And I saw, and behold’ [eidon kai idou], but related more in the manner of a historian. Nor are we informed of the particular time or occasion of the conflict being fought. Indeed, the whole transaction is mysterious, and outside the range of earthly things; the scene of it is ‘in heaven;’ the combatants are spiritual beings, —‘the principalities and powers in heavenly places;’ although it is reasonable to suppose that the event has an intimate bearing upon the history of the apocalyptic period which is the subject of the vision. It is evidently introduced to explain the intense hostility of the dragon against the church of Christ; and this circumstance seems to imply that the casting out of Satan here referred to took place shortly before the outbreak of persecution against the Christians. It is important to remember that ‘Michael’ is in all probability to be identified with the Son of God. The reader is referred to the satisfactory proof of this identity adduced by Hengstenberg.⁴

We are not to conceive of this conflict as one of physical force, like Milton’s battles in ‘Paradise Lost,’ but rather as a moral and spiritual victory gained by truth over error, by light over darkness, by the Gospel over sin and unbelief. Probably there is an intimate connection between the casting out of Satan here referred to and the words of our Lord to His disciples when they brought back the report of their successful mission as evangelists, —‘I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven’; (Luke 10:18) and, again, ‘Now is the judgment of this world, now shall the prince of this world be cast out’; (John 12:31) and, again, ‘For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil’.(1 John 3:8) Translating the symbols into common language, they appear to signify that the progress of Christianity in the land aroused the hostility of Satan and his emissaries, and led to more active persecution of the disciples of Christ.

The victory Michael and his angels is celebrated by a triumphant proclamation in heaven, which does come within the purview of the vision.

Rev. 12:10, 11—‘And I heard a great voice in heaven saying, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ; for the accuser of our brethren is cast out, which accused them before our God day and night. And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.’

In all this we have the expression of the general truth that, in the long and deadly conflict with Jewish enmity, intensified by satanic malice, Christ fought for His persecuted disciples and foiled the attacks of their adversaries. How distinctly St. Paul recognised the presence and activity of an infernal power in the malignant hostility which opposed the Gospel may be seen in his remarkable words, ‘We wrestle not with flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places’. (Eph. 6:12) Divested of its symbolical imagery, the vision shows that the efforts of Satan to crush the truth of God were foiled and defeated, and only led to the more signal and decisive triumph of the kingdom of Christ.

Satan, balked of his prey and knowing that ‘he hath but a little while,’ for the consummation is now very near, departs, as we have seen, to make war with the remnant of the woman’s seed, ‘who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus’. (Rev. 12:17)

4. The First Wild Beast.

Rev. 13:1-10. —‘And he stood upon the sand of the sea. And I saw a wild beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads, and upon his horns ten diadems, and upon his heads names of blasphemy. And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as it were the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his throne, and great authority. And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world [land] wondered after the beast. And they worshipped the dragon because he gave the power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? Who is able to make war with him? And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. If any man have an ear, let him hear. He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.’

We now enter upon an investigation full of interest, but also full of difficulty; though that difficulty is greatly mitigated by the known limits of the area within which we are restricted, and where we must look for the personage now introduced upon the scene, and who plays so important a part in the sequel.

The true reading of the first verse is now admitted to be estayh [he stood], namely, the dragon. This is not unimportant. The dragon, foiled in his attempt to destroy the woman and her seed, stations himself on the sands of the sea, looking out for a potent auxiliary enlisted in his service.

Nor is he long in making his appearance. A portentous monster is beheld coming up out of the sea, —he is designated yhrion [a wild beast], already named by anticipation in Rev. 11:7. The description of this monster is very minute, so that his identification ought to be easy. Let us note the particulars of the description:—

• The beast comes from the sea.
• He has seven heads, and ten horns, with ten diadems upon his horns.
• He bears names of blasphemy upon his heads.
• He unites the characteristics of all the beasts seen by Daniel. (Dan. 7)
• He is invested by the dragon with his delegated power.
• One of his heads is mortally wounded; but the deadly would is healed.
• He receives the homage of the whole world.
• Divine honours are paid to him.
• He blasphemes God, and wars against the saints.
• The duration of his power is limited to forty-two months.
• His number is ‘the number of a man,’ and is declared to be ‘six hundred threescore and six.’ (In Rev. 17. other particulars are added, which complete the description of the beast, although it must be confessed they do not tend to make the discovery of his identity easier.)
• He was, and is not, and shall again come. (Rev. 17:8)
• He ascends out of the abyss, and goes into perdition. (Rev. 17:8)
• He is a king: one of seven, and yet the eighth. (Rev. 17:11)

It would be strange if such a number of marked and peculiar characteristics could be applicable to more than one individual, or if such an individual could be so obscure as not to be immediately recognised. He must be sought among the greatest of the earth; he must be the foremost of his day, the observed of all observers; he must fill the highest throne and rule the mightiest empire. His period, too, is fixed: it is in the last days of the Jewish polity, close upon the final catastrophe. The mystery stands revealed even by its own self-solution. This portentous wild beast, this potentate of the world, this plenipotentiary of Satan, can be no other than the master of the world, the Emperor of Rome, ‘the man of sin,’—NERO

Let us now see how the particulars of the description agree with the character of Nero.

• None will dispute his claim to the title ‘wild beast.’ If ever man deserved that name it was the brutal monster that disgraced humanity by his infamous cruelties and crimes. St. Paul gives him a similar designation: ‘I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion’.(2 Tim. 4:17)⁵
• By his rising out of the sea is probably meant that the beast is a foreign power. We are to regard him from a Jewish point of view; and in Judea Nero would of course be a transmarine sovereign.
• The seven heads and ten crowned horns of the beast are the symbols of his plenary power and universal dominion.
• The names of blasphemy inscribed upon his heads signify the assumption of the prerogatives of deity.
• The union of the characteristics of the four beasts in Daniel’s vision indicates that the dominion of the beast embraces the kingdoms represented in that vision.
• The possession of the delegated power of the dragon implies the subserviency of the beast to the interests of Satan. He is the dragon’s legate.
• One of his heads being wounded to death implies the violent end of the individual symbolised by the beast.
• As a matter of course, it would be true of the Roman emperor that he received the homage of the whole world, and idolatrous worship would be paid to him.
• History tells us that Nero was the first of the emperors who persecuted Christians.
• The duration of that first and bitter persecution accords with the period of forty and two months, or three years and a half, mentioned in the vision. (If we adopt the reading of the Codex Sinaiticus, ‘it was given unto him to do what he will for forty and two months,’ it would evidently imply that his cruel policy of persecution would be limited to that period. Now, as a matter of fact, the persecution by Nero began in November A.D. 64, and ended with his death in June A.D. 68, that is as nearly as possible three years and a half.)⁶

Postponing for the moment the consideration of the next and crucial question, —‘the number of the beast,’ we may here pause to observe how precisely all this tallies with the character of Nero. We might, at first, be disposed to think, with Bossuet, that the visionary beast signifies ‘the Roman Empire, or more properly Rome herself, the mistress of the world, —Rome pagan, and the persecutor of the saints.’ But as we proceed we are satisfied that it is not an abstraction, but a real person, that is here described, or, at least, the Imperial power embodied in the most ferocious and brutal of its representatives, the Emperor Nero. Every point of the description identifies the criminal. It was this execrable tyrant who first let loose the hell-hounds of persecution on the unoffending Christians of Rome. More like a wild beast than a man, he glutted his bloodthirsty propensities with the murder of his brother, his mother, and his wife. The incendiary of his own capital, he falsely imputed his crime to the innocent Christians, whom he put to death in vast numbers and with unheard-of barbarities. Wielding the mightiest power on earth, he used it for the indulgence of the basest vices, and made himself the slave of the most brutal passions. He arrogated to himself the prerogatives of deity, and claimed and received the worship due to God. His inordinate vanity made him greedy of admiration; it led him to perform as an actor on the stage, to drive as a charioteer in the circus, to contend in the Olympic games. ‘The world wondered after the beast.’ We are told that he received no less than eighteen hundred crowns for his victories. Dio Cassius relates that he entered Rome in triumph, and was hailed with acclamations by the senate and people, who offered him the most abject adulation. He was greeted with shouts of ‘Victories Olympic! Victories Pythian! Thou August! Thou August! Nero the Hercules! Nero the Apollo! Sacred Voice! Eternal One!’ [Eiv ap aiwnov]⁷

Much more obscure is the apparently paradoxical statement respecting the deadly wound of the beast which was nevertheless healed. Of course, if it was healed it was not deadly; and if it was deadly it could not really be healed. To require a literal fulfilment of an impossibility would manifestly be unreasonable, yet the explanation ought to reconcile the seeming contradiction. Now, it is a curious fact that a plausible explanation of the paradox has been given. Nero died a violent death, —died by a wound from a sword, inflicted either by his own hand or by that of an assassin. It is needless to say that the wound was mortal; but there was undoubtedly a very general belief at the time that he did not die, but was somewhere in concealment, and would ere long reappear, and recover his former power. Tacitus alludes to the popular belief (History, chap. ii. 8), as does also Suetonius (Nero, chap. lvii.). There is nothing improbable in the supposition that such a note of identity, embodying the general belief, might be employed as it is in the vision; at all events, no other explanation supplies so reasonable and satisfactory a solution of the problem.⁸

The Number of the Beast.

We now come to the question which has exercised the ingenuity of critics and commentators almost since the day it was first propounded, and which even yet can hardly be said to be solved, viz. the name or number of the beast. Without wasting time on the various answers that have been given, it may suffice to make one or two preliminary remarks on the conditions of the problem.

• It is evident that the writer considered that he was giving sufficient data for the identification of the person intended. It is also presumable that he meant not to puzzle, but to enlighten, his readers.
• It is equally evident that the explanation does not lie on the surface. It requires wisdom to understand his words: it is only the man ‘who hath understanding’ that is competent to solve the problem.
• It is plain that what he intends to convey to his readers is the name of the person symbolised by the beast. His name expresses a certain number; or, the letters which form his name, when added together, amount to a certain numerical value.
• The name or number is that of a man, —i.e. it is not a beast, nor an evil spirit, nor an abstraction, but a person, a living man.
• The number which expresses the name is, in Greek characters, cc e v, or in numerical value six hundred threescore and six.

We have already, on entirely independent grounds, arrived at the conclusion that by the apocalyptic beast is intended the reigning emperor, Nero. It is his name, therefore, that ought to fulfil, not indeed obviously, nor without some research, yet satisfactorily and conclusively, all the conditions of the problem. That emperor’s name would be written in three ways, according as it was expressed in one or other of the three languages, the Latin, the Greek, or the Hebrew: in Latin, Nero Caesar; in Greek, Nerwn Kaisar; in Hebrew, roqnwrn.

St. John was not writing to Romans, nor in the Latin tongue, so that the first form may be at once set aside. He was writing, however, in Greek, and to readers well acquainted with Greek, though most of them probably of Jewish blood. It is probable that most of them would at once, and instinctively, pronounce the dreaded name. If so they would feel at a loss, for the Greek letters Nerwn Kaisar would not make up the numbers required.

But if this had been all that was necessary, the name would have lain upon the surface, patent and palpable to the dullest apprehension. It would have required neither wisdom nor understanding to read the riddle. The reader must try another method. St. John was a Hebrew, and though he wrote in Greek characters, his thoughts were Hebrew, and the Hebrew form of the Imperial name and title was familiar to him and to his Hebrew-Christian friends both in Asia Minor and Judea. It might not unnaturally occur to the reflecting reader to calculate the value of the letters which expressed the emperor’s name in Hebrew. And the secret would stand disclosed:—

The numerical value of Nero Caesar in Hebrew