Is the Beast a Man?

IS THE BEAST A MAN?

Or An Empire

With any usage of the word "antichrist" employed within a post, there is usually someone who berates me or another poster by saying the word "antichrist" only appears in 1 John and 2 John. Of course I know that fact quite well and I also know the so-called antichrist we generally refer to in the Revelation is actually called the "beast".  This is not the only beast in scripture.  Daniel 7 has four beasts that arise from the sea and they are all conspicuously described as empires.  Is it possible the beast referenced in Revelation 13 is also an end-times empire and not an actual individual, although a beast empire will have a leader or ruler? 
 At an old blog site I frequently visited in the past called Watchmen Bible Study which is not associated with the Jehovah’s Witnesses (still online but not active since 2010).  The administrator and primary poster, Nick Goggin, produced an article which included a commentary of Revelation chapter 13.  In this commentary, he stated the beast is an empire and not a person, although some translations appear to refer to the beast as a person in later sections of the chapter.  Mr. Goggin is not totally out to lunch as I initially thought because, although the KJV uses the pronouns “he” and “him” to address the beast, literal translations such as Green’s Literal Version and Young’s Literal Version translations use the pronoun “it” to reference the beast. 

There is no reason, scriptural or otherwise – in my opinion, the beast cannot be an empire although most prophecy students (and most of the civilized world) have been conditioned (perhaps brainwashed) to think of the beast as the antichrist or a person who will sit in some future Jewish temple and declare himself to be “god”.  Some people believe the actual temple will not be rebuilt because the temple is the Christian believer.  Keep in mind that some Jewish Rabbis consider Jews to be “one with god” and trans-genetic futurists believe mankind will evolve to godhood.

The beast which rises from the sea in 13:1-2 is a composite of the initial three beasts that emerge from the sea in Daniel 7:3-6:  the first was like a lion (with eagle’s wings); the second was like a bear (raised up on one side); and the third was like a leopard (with four wings of a fowl). 

The beast in Revelation 13 has ten horns as did the fourth beast of Daniel 7.  It is also described as having composite animal parts of the three Daniel 7 beasts: body of a leopard; feet of a bear; and the mouth of a lion similar to the first three beasts of Daniel 7.  If you read the recent post AC Arising out of Syria, that particular author considered these three beasts, prior to their amalgamation, as Russia, the bear, Britain and the USA as the lion, and Islam as the Leopard, although there is no known association of a leopard and Islam other than maybe the characteristics of a leopard are considered similar to those of Islam.  These beasts rising from the sea are NOT the same empires (or countries) as the statue of Daniel 2 regardless of one’s prophetic proclivity. 

Daniel 7:3-7 KJV  (3)  And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another.  (4)  The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings…..(5)  And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side….. (6)  After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads…..  (7)  After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.

Revelation 13:1-2 KJV  And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.  (2)  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 the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

Is Symbolism Necessary?

Applying symbolism or symbolic representation to prophetic scripture is a process that most of us try to avoid as much as possible, although some instances must be considered symbolic.  Something necessary to state is that Biblical typology appears firmly entrenched in Christian doctrinal studies.  The Old Testament has been said to represent every aspect of Jesus Christ.  Symbolic representation and typology must play a big part.  At the Emmaus road journey, Jesus had much to say concerning his fulfillment of the Old Testament, and I will assume that many examples were symbolic and typologic.  How I wish that monologue was written down for us today.

Lately I have considered that Russia might be that beast (although doubtful) which was supposedly put to death during Reagan's term and now seems to have been resurrected to the status of an elite word power. It is also possible Russia could be considered the king of the north which is a more likely possibility.  In addition Russia could be the Daniel 7 beast that appears as a bear.  At the moment, Russia appears to be attempting to correct the Khazarian’s plan to minimize or eliminate Russia as a world power and to limit their expansion throughout the Middle East. 

On the other hand the USA was an elite world power performing the dirty military work for the Khazarian Jews (Israel and the city of London banking sector) destabilizing various countries around Israel apparently for the expansion of Israel.  The government now appears to be in a second place military position due to the military might of Russia. If the USA has a resurrection of military power with an influx of Khazarian money, since the Jews appear to have all the money, it might in the near future be considered the beast. The Khazarian Jews (or Israel) could be the false prophet since they are false Jews with no relation to the Semitic Abraham but rather to Japheth, Ashkenaz, and Khazar.  It is also possible the roles of the USA and Israel could be reversed with the USA as the false prophet and Israel as the beast.  A more positive identification will depend on future events, particularly in the Middle East (in my opinion).  Agree or not, Biblical scripture and prophecy always seems to revolve around the nation of Israel and the Middle East.

I realize this requires much of prophecy to be figurative or even symbolic rather than a literal absolute.  However, that may be the case.  It actually may be more literal than thought but just not in the manner we have been taught, thought, or heard for the past several years.  After coming to the conclusion the Gog-Magog invasion has already taken place with the Khazarian Ashkenazi Jews and Edomites invading Canaan after the Balfour declaration during the 30’s and 40’s, more semi-literal interpretations may necessarily be needed or perhaps different understandings of the prophecies we have learned over the years.  The Gog-Magog invasion is actually quite literal, just not in the manner as considered by exegetes and Bible teachers.

The manner that other prophetic Revelations fit into the above proposed scenario tie in is uncertain at the moment, but it may be ascertained before long.