In this was to be exhibited the patience and faith of the saints, who, amid all their persecutions, made a wonderful manifestation of these. Of the many thousands put to death, or subjected to satanic cruelties for their faith, only a very few apostatized. Says Mr. Lord:
“Of those who, under the insupportable agonies and distraction of the scourge and the rack, recanted, or promised a recantation, a large proportion immediately on being released from the sufferings which had overcome them, abjured their retractions, re-professed with redoubled energy the faith of Christ, and met without faltering the hideous death to which they were immediately hurried. Such is their [pg 178] uniform history in whatever age they fell, or to whatever nation or rank they belonged.”—Exp. of Apoc., p. 385.
If there was no other evidence of their constancy, faith, and patience, the horrid instruments of torture which were resorted to to terrify them, testify to their adherence to their principles, which required such engines for their subversion.
The end of this beast, will be effected by his being cast alive into the lake of fire and brimstone, when the Lord shall make war with him, 19:20. This is also the end of Daniel's fourth beast, whose body is to be given to the burning flame (Dan. 7:11), and of the scarlet-colored beast on which the woman was seated, which is to go into perdition, 17:8.
The Two-Horned Beast.
“And I saw another wild beast ascending out of the earth, and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke like a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first wild beast, in his sight, and causeth the earth and those, who dwell in it, to worship the first wild beast, whose deadly wound was healed. And he performeth great signs, so that he causeth fire to come down from heaven into the earth in the sight of men. And he deceiveth those, who dwell on the earth, by means of the signs which it was given him to perform in the sight of the wild beast; saying to those, who dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the wild beast, that had the wound by a sword, and did live.”—Rev. 13:11-14.
The coming up of another beast must symbolize the rise of another government. As the two-horned beast exercises its power before (ενωπιον) i.e. in the presence, of the first beast, it is a contemporary power, and must necessarily symbolize a kingdom outside of the territory of the ten-horned beast. Within that territory it would be one of the horns of that beast; but a separate beast requires a separate territory. As it arises out of the earth, while it is outside of the territory occupied by the ten kingdoms, it must exist within that occupied by the former Roman empire, and commence its existence during a period of settled government.
All the forms of Roman government symbolized by the dragon, were also symbolized by the wild beast; and as the deadly wound of the former was healed in the latter, the two constitute one beast. As that is called the “first beast,” the rise of the kingdom symbolized by the two-horned beast must have been subsequent to the commencement of the Roman empire. And as it caused those who dwell on the earth to worship that beast after its deadly wound was healed, it must have arisen anterior to the healing of that wound; and, consequently, before the succession of the ten kingdoms to the sovereignty of Rome, with which it held an intimate relation.
The only kingdom which has arisen within the geographical locality, and at the epoch [pg 180] required by these conditions of the symbol, is the Eastern Roman empire; which, consequently, is the government represented by the two-horned beast.
The imperial heads of Rome date from the battle of Actium, B. C. 31; but the Eastern empire was not commenced, till A. D. 324, when Constantine removed the seat of empire from Rome to Constantinople. Rome was, previous to that removal, the undisputed queen of nations, and Constantine was without a rival. Why he should abandon Rome, the citadel and throne of the Cæsars, for an obscure corner of Thrace, has never been satisfactorily explained. Says Dr. Croly: “The change of government to Constantinople still perplexes the historian. It was an act in direct repugnance to the whole course of the ancient prejudices.”