by Brian Godawa
These passages were drawn from a chart by C.N. Carrington on his article, “The Favian Testament” that details the oracles surrounding Vespasian as “the ruler” and their interpretations at the time. http://carrington-arts.com/cliff/FlavSyn.htm
[←4]
Vespasian secures the grain of Egypt:
Flavius Josephus, The Wars of the Jews 4.10.5, §605
“5. (605) So upon the exhortations of Mucianus and the other commanders, that he would accept of the empire, and upon that of the rest of the army, who cried out that they were willing to be led against all his opposers, he was in the first place intent upon gaining the dominion over Alexandria, as knowing that Egypt was of the greatest consequence, in order to obtain the entire government, because of its supplying corn [to Rome]; (606) which corn, if he could be master of, he hoped to dethrone Vitellus, supposing he should aim to keep the empire by force (for he would not be able to support himself, if the multitude at Rome should once be in want of food); and because he was desirous to join the two legions that were at Alexandria to the other legions that were with him.”
Flavius Josephus and William Whiston, The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1987), 693.
Nero dying is the Beast’s head mortally wounded because the entire history of the Julio-Claudian line was dead. But the Flavians starting a new dynasty revived the Beast of Rome:
Revelation 13:3
One of its heads seemed to have a mortal wound, but its mortal wound was healed, and the whole earth marveled as they followed the beast.
[←5]
Ten horns as ten client kings of Rome:
Revelation 17:12–17
12 And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received royal power, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together with the beast. 13 These are of one mind, and they hand over their power and authority to the beast. 14 They will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are called and chosen and faithful.” 15 And the angel said to me, “The waters that you saw, where the prostitute is seated, are peoples and multitudes and nations and languages. 16 And the ten horns that you saw, they and the beast will hate the prostitute. They will make her desolate and naked, and devour her flesh and burn her up with fire, 17 for God has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose by being of one mind and handing over their royal power to the beast, until the words of God are fulfilled.
“Though provincial governors are quite possibly in view, I am inclined, however, to see them as does Aune (951): “Here the ten kings represent Roman client kings.” Rome’s system of client kingship was such that kings (including even ethnarchs, tetrarchs, etc.) were appointed by Roman authorities from within various localities. They were responsible for keeping the peace, assisting Rome with defense, and ensuring the flow of tribute money to Rome. They would provide soldiers “as part of tribute, or through friendships and alliances” (Gilliver 2001: 24). During Nero’s rule “the client system of the East [including Judea] was then revealed at its most efficient” (Luttwak 1976: 112)…
“Archelaus himself recognized that “the power of disposing of it [his kingdom rule] belonged to Caesar, who could either give it to him or not, as he pleased” (Ant. 17:11:2 §312). Their rule was tenuous, so that John could say “they receive authority”; that authority was “with the beast”; and it was for “one hour.”
“Client kings, such as the Antiochus, Agrippa, Sohemus, Malchus, and Alexander provided auxiliary forces for Rome during the Jewish War (J.W. 2:18:9 §499–501; 3:4:2 §68; 5:1:6 §45) (cf. Aune 951; Stuart 2:327). Dio Cassius (65:4:3) mentions that the Roman siege of Jerusalem included “many slingers and bows that had been sent by some of the barbarian kings.” In fact, “a Roman army on campaign always included a complement of allies.... Rome relied very heavily on others for her cavalry forces” in that “such troops might have local knowledge of topography and the enemy, and could provide specialist fighting techniques appropriate to the situation” (Gillver 2001: 22; cp. Grant 1974: 77). The auxiliary forces in the empire after Augustus comprised about half of Rome’s military might (cf. Luttwak 1976: 16; cf. Tac., Ann. 4:5).” Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., The Divorce of Israel: A Redemptive-Historical Interpretation of Revelation Vol. 2 (Dallas, GA: Tolle Lege Press, 2016), 474-475.
The Ten Client Kings Named: We do not know them all, but Wellesley lists 8 of them (assuming Berenice is not counted as a king). Malchus of Nabatea makes the 9th (Wars of the Jews 3.4.2), and Tiberius Alexander, governor of Egypt makes 10 (Wars of the Jews 4.10.6): “Mucianus, governor of Syria; Sohaemus of Emesa, Antiochus IV, ruler of Comagene, King Agrippa, sheikh of Anjar and Golan; Berenice, widow of Herod of Anjar. “We are not surprised to learn that the governors of all the provinces of Asia Minor, through disposing of no legionary garrisons, had promised such support in supplies, facilities and auxiliary forces as they could give and Vespasian might require. Among them were the proconsul of Asia, Gaius Fonteius Agrippa, and the legate of Galatia-with-Pamphylia, Lucius Nonius Calpurnius Asprenas. Both In addition, there was Cappadocia, still a procuratorial province governed by a knight without the legionary garrison which Vespasian himself was to give it; its governor in 69 is unknown, and equally unknown is the governor of Pontus, added to Bithynia five years before.” Kenneth Wellesley, Year of the Four Emperors (Taylor and Francis, 2014) 123-124.
“According to David S. Clark,
“These ten horns were ten kings, not kings sitting on the throne of Rome, as I understand, but those kings and countries subjected by Rome, and which made the empire great. We know that Rome embraced at that time the countries of Europe that bordered on the Mediterranean Sea, and the northern part of Africa and considerable territory in Asia, and also in central Europe. Rome had conquered the world.
Adams writes that,
“the ten horns may represent the provincial governors and their provinces which at first gave support to Rome (vv. 12, 13), and in turn received their authority from her. They persecute Christians in carrying out her interdicts against them (v. 14). But in the end, it is these provinces which turned upon and destroyed Rome (v. 16).
According to Russell,
“on the whole, we conclude that this symbol signifies the auxiliary princes and chiefs who were allies of Rome and received commands in the Roman army during the Jewish war. We know from Tacitus and Josephus that several kings of neighboring nations followed Vespasian and Titus to the war.… It is not incumbent to produce the exact number of ten, which, like seven, appears to be a mystic or symbolic number.
Chilton writes:
“Rome actually had ten imperial provinces, and some have read this as a reference to them. It is not necessary, however, to attempt a precise definition of these ten subject kings; the symbol simply represents [quoting Terry] “the totality of those allied or subject kings who aided Rome in her wars both on Judaism and Christianity.”
Steve Gregg, Revelation, Four Views: A Parallel Commentary (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson Publishers, 1997), 414–416.
[←6]
Titus as Caesar:
It is important to understand Revelation by realizing that there are several representatives of the Beast of Rome. Though Vespasian becomes the new Caesar, Titus carries his title and represents Caesar’s very authority where he is. This explains why historically the prophecies about the Beast in Revelation are fluid in their application.
Cassius Dio, Roman History 65.1.1
“Such was the course of these events; and following them Vespasian was declared emperor by the senate also, and Titus and Domitian were given the title of Caesars. The consular office was assumed by Vespasian and Titus while the former was in Egypt and the latter in Palestine.”
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/65*.html
Upon Vespasian’s ascent to Caesar, he gave the title of Caesar to Titus: “There also had to be consulships for Ve
spasian and Titus, and a praetorship with imperium equal to a consul’s for Domitian. The young men were each honoured with the designation ‘Caesar.’” Barbara Levick, Vespasian (New York: Rutledge, 1999) 79.
“Vespasian bestowed the title of Caesar on Titus in AD 69. Roman historian Mary Smallwood writes the following on this. ‘The title ‘Caesar’ was conferred on both Vespasian’s sons [Titus and Domitian] when he became emperor.[From this point on in The Jewish War] Josephus frequently refers to Titus simply as ‘Caesar.’” (e.g., ‘the men on the the wall hurled insults at Caesar himself and at his father.’ The Jewish War, 5.11.2)” Duncan MacKenzie, Ph.D. The Antichrist and the Second Coming: A Preterist Examination Vol 2: The Book of Revelation (Xulon Press, 2012) 157.
Titus was called Caesar by Josephus:
Flavius Josephus, The Wars of the Jews 5.2.2, §63
[during the siege of Jerusalem] The enemy indeed made a great shout at the boldness of Caesar [Titus], and exhorted one another to rush upon him…”
Flavius Josephus and William Whiston, The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1987), 700.
Flavius Josephus, The Wars of the Jews 3.8.9, §401
[Josephus describing his dream] “Thou, O Vespasian, art Caesar and emperor, thou, and this thy son.”
Flavius Josephus and William Whiston, The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1987), 657.
[←7]
Three-fold division of Jerusalem:
Revelation 16:19
19 The great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell, and God remembered Babylon the great, to make her drain the cup of the wine of the fury of his wrath.
“Revelation speaks of a three-fold division in the city (16:19). We learn from Josephus (J.W. 5:1:4 §21) that “there were three treacherous factions in the city, the one parted from the other. Eleazar and his party, that kept the sacred firstfruits, came against John in their cups. Those that were with John plundered the populace, and went out with zeal against Simon. This Simon had his supply of provisions from the city, in oppositions to the seditious” (cp. Witherington 2001b: 359; Buchanan 119, 431, 530). This division was significant enough that even the Roman historian Tacitus mentions that “there were three generals, three armies” fighting inside Jerusalem (Hist 5:12:3). In fact, Josephus (J.W. 5:1:1 §3) sees this as “the beginning of the city’s destruction.” The problem of factionalism which eventually led to the three-fold division in Jerusalem.”
Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., The Divorce of Israel: A Redemptive-Historical Interpretation of Revelation Vol. 2 (Dallas, GA: Tolle Lege Press, 2016), 376-378.
“First, as a practical matter it seems virtually impossible that a quake could literally divide a city into three parts. Actual earthquakes do not divide cities, they desolate them by toppling buildings (Jer 51:29; Eze 38:19-20; Nah 1:5-6; Ac 16:26). Besides, this quake occurring in Jerusalem is called “a great earthquake, such as there had not been since man came upon the earth, so great an earthquake was it, and so mighty” (16:18b). Surely if literal (or even hyperbolical), this would not merely divide the city into three different parts. Interestingly, Josephus records an earthquake during Herod’s reign using similar hyperbolic language, and it certainly does not merely divide the city: “Then it was also that there was an earthquake in Judea, such a one as had not happened at any other time, and which earthquake brought a great destruction upon the cattle in that country. About ten thousand men also perished by the fall of houses” (Ant 15:5:2 §121–22; cp. J.W. 1:20:3 §370).
“Second, as a literary matter we note that every island and mountain disappears, which cannot be literal (see discussion below). The islands are even personified as fleeing away (ephugen), not collapsing into the sea (cf. Ps 46:2). All of them. And if all mountains disappeared, Jerusalem would have been absolutely devastated (not divided) because it was built on a mountain: “The city was built upon two hills, which are opposite to one another, and have a valley to divide them asunder; at which valley the corresponding rows of houses on both hills end” (J.W. 5:4:1 §136).
“Third, we find the fuller description of Babylon’s fall in Revelation 17–18, and “since the fall of Babylon takes place already in 16.19, it appears that Revelation 17:1–18.24 serves as a parenthetical expansion to describe and explain the Babylon theme in more detail”
[←8]
CHAPTER 1
Apollyon as Satan: “This angel is named only here in Revelation [9:11 as Apollyon], and elsewhere in the OT and early Jewish literature is mentioned only in 4Q280 10 ii 7:“[Cursed be you Angel of the Pit, and Spirit of Abaddon” (Kobelski, Melchizedek, 43–44). While in 4Q280 and related texts these two titles are alternate ways of describing Belial, in Revelation it is not at all clear that the angel of the abyss is a designation for Satan, for he is carefully named elsewhere with a selection of aliases in two different contexts (12:9; 20:2), and neither Abaddon nor the angel of the abyss is mentioned again. The fact that ἄγγελον is articular here, however, suggests that the author expected the readers to be familiar with this figure, i.e., that the angel of the abyss is none other than Satan-Belial.” David E. Aune, Revelation 6–16, vol. 52B, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998), 534.
“The “Destroyer” in Rev. 9:11 is either the devil himself or an evil representative of the devil; either alternative receives confirmation from Jewish exegetical tradition on Exodus (see below). Rev. 12:3–4 and 13:1ff. are compatible with this conclusion, since there the devil and the Beast respectively are pictured wearing royal diadems and leading evil forces. This is also in line with the same conclusion already reached about the angel’s identification in 9:1.” G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, Cumbria: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1999), 503.
“The title “angel of the abyss” is not found anywhere else in antiquity except in 2Q280. The demons this trumpet unleashes upon Jerusalem are under the dominion of a king whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in the Greek he has the name Apollyon (9:11b). …The following evidence suggests to me that this “king” is Satan: (1) John describes him both as a “king” as well as “the angel of the abyss” (from which come the demons; 9:1–3). In Scripture, Satan functions as an evil ruler of great power in the fallen world (Mt 4:8; Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 1Jo 5:19), and even as the ruler of demons (Mt 9:34; 12:24–27; Lk 10:17–18; Eph 2:2; cp. Jub. 11:15; 17:16; 18:9, 12; 48:2–15). In fact, the Bible calls fallen angels (demons) “his angels” (Mt 25:41; Rev 12:9). Later in Revelation, we see Satan appearing as a dragon with diadems, showing his kingship (12:3).
“(2) John refers to him as “the angel of the abyss [ton aggelon tēs abussou],” where the definite article suggests this angel is well-known. Satan is certainly a well-known figure in Scripture and in first-century Judaism. John even mentions him in Revelation four times before now (2:9, 13, 24; 3:9). (3) The symbolic names given to him, “Apollyon” and “Abaddon” (9:11b), both mean “destroyer,” which fits Satan’s character and work (1Co 5:5; Eph 6:11; Heb 2:14; 1Pe 5:8). This is true even in Revelation where he seeks to destroy Jesus at his birth (12:3–4) and then his saints (12:12–13, 17). Indeed, the name “Satan” means “adversary” which comports with the concept of “destroyer” – since he seeks a legal means to destroy God’s people (e.g., 2:9–10). So once again we see Satan’s work among the Christ-denying Jews, as per Christ’s declaration that their father is the devil (Jn 8:44) and that they are a “synagogue of Satan” (Rev 2:9; 3:9). They are now receiving their just desserts: Satan sends his demon army to sorely afflict them.
“John’s Greek abbadōn is a transliteration of the Hebrew ʾbaddōn, which appears in the Old Testament only in the Wisdom literature (Job 26:6; 28:22; 31:12; Ps 88:11; Pr 15:11; 27:20). It also appears four times in the DSS (NIDOTTE 1:226). It means “destruction” and in the LXX is always translated by apōleia (
“destruction, annihilation), except in Job 31:12 which translates it apolluein. In Job 31:12 it is the place of destruction, whereas elsewhere it parallels Sheol (Job 26:6; Pr 15:11; 27:20), death (Job 28:22), or the grave (Ps 88:11), and is thus strongly associated with death. The word “Apollyon” is apolluōn in the Greek: it is the present participle of apollumi, which means to “destroy.” Like the Hebrew ʾbaddōn it is often used to refer to killing (Mt 2:13; 12:114; 27:20; Mk 3:6; 9:41; 11:18; Lk 11:51; 12:33; 15:17; 17:27; 19:47). Satan himself virtually personifies death in Heb 2:14b: “who had the power of death, that is, the devil” (cp. 1Co 5:5).
“In addition to the designation “Apollyon” referring to Satan as the “destroyer,” the term has an “etymological connection” with the name of Apollo the sun god and may therefore allude to him (Smalley 234; cp. Caird 120; Sweet 170; TDNT 1:397; Beagley 54; Ford 152; Morris 128; Lupieri 163; M. Wilson 2002: 305; Boxall 145; Osborne 374). If so, Apollo would serve as a link to the Roman emperor Nero who held Apollo as his patron deity. Suetonius notes that Nero drove a chariot in the games (Nero 24:2) mimicking Apollo. Nero “was acclaimed as the equal of Apollo in music and of the Sun in driving a chariot” (Nero 53).” Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., The Divorce of Israel: A Redemptive-Historical Interpretation of Revelation Vol. 1 (Dallas, GA: Tolle Lege Press, 2016), 750-752.
