10 kings

[MorningGlory]

 

So to me, they can not be 10 demonic kings who give their kingdom to the beast .. which demonic kings are & already long time united and already agree as one with Satan anyway .. which leaves only one other option .. they must be men.

 

 

So I was wondering .. does anybody disagree with the above discernment?

 

 

Thanks.

 

I agree that the ten kings are mortal men or women. 

[Last Daze]

 

 

 

I do agree with you that there are fallen angels presiding over nations Daze, but we really don't know the type of "leadership structure" Satan has in place is the problem .. what I mean is .. look at what Daniel also said at the end of 10:13 .. "and I remained there with the kings of Persia".. kings .. plural .. kings of Persia at that.. which raises some questions of it's own concerning "type of demonic leadership structure" Satan has in place ..

 

 

Hey Serving,

 

Granted we know very little about the "leadership structure" of the kingdom of darkness.  It's not a science that we can observe and I'm certain we couldn't understand it in its entirety anyway.  Some concepts we just know "about" because of our limited capacity to understand.  We are given glimpses and we just have to work with what we know.  Whether there is a difference between a "prince" and a "king" and what that difference might be or how many does it take to rule a spiritual kingdom...I'm not going to be dogmatic about it simply because we just don't know.  And I'm reluctant to make delineations on assumptions.

 

 

What I mean is this .. you mentioned Persia for example, Daniel ch8 describes her as a ram .. a ram is a beast .. & this ram represented physical Persia, not the spirit side .. and this ram also had two horns, and those horns stood for human kings .. not angelic kings .. that whole beast imagery then only dealt with the physical .. then we had Greece, the Leopard, and again, the Leopard represented the physical as did it's notable horn .. not forgetting the 4 heads of the Leopard representing 4 human men .. isn't this a prophetic theme being set down for the sake of those (us) who live in the physical to identify said beasts and their horns so as to be able to see God's prophetic arm at work in the world around us?

 

 

Why is it an either / or situation??  How can you say with absolute certainty "this ram represented physical Persia, not the spirit side"?  What precludes it from being both?  How do you separate it?  Why is it so odd that a supernatural beast should spawn a natural beast?

 

Persia is a ram.  Persia is a bear (if you see it as the second beast of the four beasts).  Persia is a chest and arms of silver.  Context.  The beasts in Revelation 13; one comes up out of the abyss and is a fallen angel, the other comes up out of the earth and is a human.  Both are beasts.  Again, context.

 

 

Hey Daze, these 10 horns in question are attached to the 4th beast which came out of the same sea as the other 3 beasts before it right .. so it & it's horns must be made up of the same substance as the other beasts wouldn't you agree? (sea means peoples & nations & tongues & multitudes ..meaning .. flesh) wouldn't the 10 horns be a physical representation too since they are part of the physical beast anatomy being expressed?

 

 

The sea symbolically represents the abyss, not people, nations, tongues, multitudes.  That's where the harlot sits.  Is it ever called a sea?  Or just waters?  Here is an unmistakable direct correlation referring to the sea as the abyss:

 

Then I saw a beast coming up out of the sea  Revelation 13:1

The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to destruction.  Revelation 17:8

 

The prophecy of the four beasts is the supernatural perspective of these kingdoms.  The great statue is the natural perspective.  Why are the legs of iron and the feet of iron and clay referred to as the fourth kingdom when they are clearly not the same kingdom?

 

 

Again, I agree there is a spiritual side to this too .. but to me, the spirit side is not included in the descriptive .. seeing the 10 horns seem to stick with the theme of purely physical manifestations that the angel laid out to Daniel .. again, I am quite prepared to hear your reasons using scriptures as to how you are discerning when the 10 horns are being portrayed as humans opposed to identifying when they are representing the spirit kings .. (also, does this mean that 3 spirit kings get kicked to the curb too? Again, how do we discern the difference?

 

 

Let me try and do a better job of clarifying how I see it.  The human kings reign for one hour.  What I mean by "kicked to the curb" is that they no longer reign, not that they all got destroyed.  Three of the ten human kings are pulled out by the roots by the false prophet.  The ten spirit kings couldn't care less because its part of the plan.  It is inferred that the three human kings no longer exist because anything that I've seen pulled out by the roots dies.  So, if three are gone then how do all ten fight against the Lamb?  Well, it must be a reference to the spirit kings.  Again, context.

 

It's not an exact science and I'm not going to split hairs about it.  If you wish to discuss any of the individual points, I'd be happy to but lets please do it in bite-sized chunks.

[Last Daze]

 

  Furthermore, all the hierarchies of evil angels under Satan have already been cast down to the earth (see Rev 12).

What is the relevance of that statement to the point in question?

 

 

I do believe that every nation on earth is ruled over by demonic princes under one king

This statement was in the OP and while it is true for the present, it will not be true after Revelation 12 is fulfilled.  Since Revelation 13-17 comes after that, it will not be true at that time also.  All the evil spirits will lose their power in the heavenlies and will be cast down to the earth before the Beast takes control of the world.

 

 

Are you saying that after Satan and his angels are kicked out of heaven that they no longer have influence on earth?  Or am I misunderstanding?

[Openly Curious]

So to me, they can not be 10 demonic kings who give their kingdom to the beast .. which demonic kings are & already long time united and already agree as one with Satan anyway .. which leaves only one other option .. they must be men.

 

 

So I was wondering .. does anybody disagree with the above discernment?

 

 

Thanks.

 

I agree that the ten kings are mortal men or women. 

I believe these ten kings are literally physcial leaders who are mortal men who have their own kingdoms in the earth during the end time events.

However I am not oposed to women having authority and having powerful positions and having great influence in the earth at all at any level. But I have to use a little logic here in the interpretation of the word "kings" that is used in the scripture that is used to describe these leaders. They are refered to kings and the word "King" is usually referenced to a "male" leader and not a female leader. Usually when a woman is in place of power or leadership over a nation she is referred to as a "Queen". Knowing this difference I believe that these kings will be "MEN" or male leaders and not referring to women leaders at all in this particular scripture. Again not coming against women in leadership positions just believe the kings here will be mortal men and not women Queens.

[Serving]

 

 

So to me, they can not be 10 demonic kings who give their kingdom to the beast .. which demonic kings are & already long time united and already agree as one with Satan anyway .. which leaves only one other option .. they must be men.

 

 

So I was wondering .. does anybody disagree with the above discernment?

 

 

Thanks.

 

I agree that the ten kings are mortal men or women. 

 

 

 

Greetings Morning Glory ..

 

 

Thanks for answering & sharing your view ..

 

 

God bless.

[Serving]

Hi Last Daze,

 

 

 

 

Granted we know very little about the "leadership structure" of the kingdom of darkness.  It's not a science that we can observe and I'm certain we couldn't understand it in its entirety anyway.  Some concepts we just know "about" because of our limited capacity to understand.  We are given glimpses and we just have to work with what we know.  Whether there is a difference between a "prince" and a "king" and what that difference might be or how many does it take to rule a spiritual kingdom...I'm not going to be dogmatic about it simply because we just don't know.  And I'm reluctant to make delineations on assumptions.

 

 

 

No problem .. It was just an observation I was putting out there Daze  .. my focus was not on the difference between prince & king, because Satan also has been called both prince & king so I see them as interchangeable .. my focus was on Gabriel being held & being amongst the Persian kings .. I was just giving some more insight to the overall. 

 

 

 

 

Why is it an either / or situation??  How can you say with absolute certainty "this ram represented physical Persia, not the spirit side"?  What precludes it from being both?  How do you separate it?  Why is it so odd that a supernatural beast should spawn a natural beast?

Persia is a ram.  Persia is a bear (if you see it as the second beast of the four beasts).  Persia is a chest and arms of silver.  Context.  The beasts in Revelation 13; one comes up out of the abyss and is a fallen angel, the other comes up out of the earth and is a human.  Both are beasts.  Again, context.

 

 

The angel explains is why I am certain the beasts are concerning the physical Daze .. I mean, these events did occur just as the visions foretold ..

 

 

 

Daniel 8:16 And I heard a man's voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.

 

 

 

Daniel 8:20-22  The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

 

 

 

 

The sea symbolically represents the abyss, not people, nations, tongues, multitudes.  That's where the harlot sits.  Is it ever called a sea?  Or just waters?  Here is an unmistakable direct correlation referring to the sea as the abyss:

 

Then I saw a beast coming up out of the sea  Revelation 13:1

The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to destruction.  Revelation 17:8

 

 

Did you notice this bro ..

 

 

When we are introduced to the Harlot rev ch17 earlier in  .. she is sitting on a beast

 

 

But, when the angel explains the meaning of the symbolism to John later in (the beast was a major part of that symbolism) .. the Harlot is now revealed as sitting on the waters in place of the beast & that was the explanation from the angel not from me .. & the angel explained the waters as, basically, all men .. so all men represented together in one visual metaphor .. think about it .. all men metaphorically gathered together like the waters .. sounds like one big sea / ocean to me ..

 

 

The bottomless pit (abyss) indeed speaks of a spiritual meaning to me too .. but it is still manifesting in the physical .. so there is more to it for sure .. but that is another topic & you asked me to keep it brief so I will !!

 

 

 

The prophecy of the four beasts is the supernatural perspective of these kingdoms.  The great statue is the natural perspective.  Why are the legs of iron and the feet of iron and clay referred to as the fourth kingdom when they are clearly not the same kingdom?

 

 

As above .. the waters can likewise be seen as a sea when all the waters are gathered together for the purposes of visual prophetic representation .. and since the four beasts come up out of the sea .. well ..  to me,  the sea means peoples & nations etc .. so it speaks to me of a human source .. anyway .. those 4 beasts represented 4 actual human kings that did rule Daze, for example, the bear, from memory, was Artaxerxes?

 

 

And he was far richer than the kings before him too  .. that to me is significant bro .. who are these kings from the same kingdom that were before him if we are speaking of angels? & not only that, do angels need / use money / riches to you Daze? 

 

 

Two important points I think ..

 

 

Anyway, my reply has probably gotten too big for you now .. but my last 2 points about that 4th kings personal riches & the other kings from the same kingdom that came before him are the ones I hope you focus on.

 

 

God bless.

Edited June 14, 2015 by Serving

[Last Daze]

 

Thanks for the reply Serving,

 

 

The angel explains is why I am certain the beasts are concerning the physical Daze .. I mean, these events did occur just as the visions foretold ..

Daniel 8:16 And I heard a man's voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.

Daniel 8:20-22  The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

 

 

I think what might explain our difference in views is that where you see a strictly physical fulfillment, I see a physical fulfillment with its roots in the spiritual.  Where you try to delineate between the physical and spiritual and make it "either or", I see them as intertwined; a kind of "cause and effect" if you will.  I'm not denying that there are physical fulfillments to these beasts.  I just don't think that's the complete picture.

 

 

Did you notice this bro ..

When we are introduced to the Harlot rev ch17 earlier in  .. she is sitting on a beast

But, when the angel explains the meaning of the symbolism to John later in (the beast was a major part of that symbolism) .. the Harlot is now revealed as sitting on the waters in place of the beast & that was the explanation from the angel not from me .. & the angel explained the waters as, basically, all men .. so all men represented together in one visual metaphor .. think about it .. all men metaphorically gathered together like the waters .. sounds like one big sea / ocean to me ..

 

 

I understand that line of reasoning but I don't see it as trumping the sea = abyss verses I posted earlier.  The sea / abyss speaks to origin with the phrase "came up out of".  The harlot did not come up out of the waters; neither did the beast.  She sits on many waters.  She sits on the seven heads which are Satan's crown kingdoms.  She sits on the beast.  Where she sits is a reference to the scope of her influence.  She influences peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues.  She has for millennia.  It comes as no surprise that she sits on the beast and that her ungodly influence is global.  It seems to me that the beast is not the sum of all people but that he has authority over such and the harlot influences such.

 

It was also given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them, and authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him.  Revelation 13:7

 

 

As above .. the waters can likewise be seen as a sea when all the waters are gathered together for the purposes of visual prophetic representation .. and since the four beasts come up out of the sea .. well ..  to me,  the sea means peoples & nations etc .. so it speaks to me of a human source .. anyway .. those 4 beasts represented 4 actual human kings that did rule Daze, for example, the bear, from memory, was Artaxerxes?

 

 

And he was far richer than the kings before him too  .. that to me is significant bro .. who are these kings from the same kingdom that were before him if we are speaking of angels? & not only that, do angels need / use money / riches to you Daze?

 

but my last 2 points about that 4th kings personal riches & the other kings from the same kingdom that came before him are the ones I hope you focus on.

 

 

I'm not sure why you give more precedence to the "waters" in Revelation being synonymous with "the sea" when the sea is more directly a reference to the abyss.  Compare Deuteronomy 30:11-14 with Paul's paraphrasing of it in Romans 10:5-8.

 

What's to focus on?  I agree.  I've never denied that there are natural manifestations of supernatural influence.

 

As long as you see the natural / supernatural connection as a dichotomy that scripture addresses only as either one or the other then there's probably no sense continuing and I certainly don't want to take the road to Snarkyville.

[Serving]

 

 

Thanks for the reply Serving,

 

 

The angel explains is why I am certain the beasts are concerning the physical Daze .. I mean, these events did occur just as the visions foretold ..

Daniel 8:16 And I heard a man's voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.

Daniel 8:20-22  The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

 

 

I think what might explain our difference in views is that where you see a strictly physical fulfillment, I see a physical fulfillment with its roots in the spiritual.  Where you try to delineate between the physical and spiritual and make it "either or", I see them as intertwined; a kind of "cause and effect" if you will.  I'm not denying that there are physical fulfillments to these beasts.  I just don't think that's the complete picture.

 

 

Did you notice this bro ..

When we are introduced to the Harlot rev ch17 earlier in  .. she is sitting on a beast

But, when the angel explains the meaning of the symbolism to John later in (the beast was a major part of that symbolism) .. the Harlot is now revealed as sitting on the waters in place of the beast & that was the explanation from the angel not from me .. & the angel explained the waters as, basically, all men .. so all men represented together in one visual metaphor .. think about it .. all men metaphorically gathered together like the waters .. sounds like one big sea / ocean to me ..

 

 

I understand that line of reasoning but I don't see it as trumping the sea = abyss verses I posted earlier.  The sea / abyss speaks to origin with the phrase "came up out of".  The harlot did not come up out of the waters; neither did the beast.  She sits on many waters.  She sits on the seven heads which are Satan's crown kingdoms.  She sits on the beast.  Where she sits is a reference to the scope of her influence.  She influences peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues.  She has for millennia.  It comes as no surprise that she sits on the beast and that her ungodly influence is global.  It seems to me that the beast is not the sum of all people but that he has authority over such and the harlot influences such.

 

It was also given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them, and authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him.  Revelation 13:7

 

 

As above .. the waters can likewise be seen as a sea when all the waters are gathered together for the purposes of visual prophetic representation .. and since the four beasts come up out of the sea .. well ..  to me,  the sea means peoples & nations etc .. so it speaks to me of a human source .. anyway .. those 4 beasts represented 4 actual human kings that did rule Daze, for example, the bear, from memory, was Artaxerxes?

 

 

And he was far richer than the kings before him too  .. that to me is significant bro .. who are these kings from the same kingdom that were before him if we are speaking of angels? & not only that, do angels need / use money / riches to you Daze?

 

but my last 2 points about that 4th kings personal riches & the other kings from the same kingdom that came before him are the ones I hope you focus on.

 

 

I'm not sure why you give more precedence to the "waters" in Revelation being synonymous with "the sea" when the sea is more directly a reference to the abyss.  Compare Deuteronomy 30:11-14 with Paul's paraphrasing of it in Romans 10:5-8.

 

What's to focus on?  I agree.  I've never denied that there are natural manifestations of supernatural influence.

 

As long as you see the natural / supernatural connection as a dichotomy that scripture addresses only as either one or the other then there's probably no sense continuing and I certainly don't want to take the road to Snarkyville.

 

 

 

Hi Daze,

 

 

There are many references to the sea's = people .. I was in no way nor at any point anywhere near snarkyville I assure you bro .. I purposely used less direct scriptures for the sake of the theme, hoping to gently build on them as we progressed hoping you would investigate them yourself is all instead of coming across as a know it all shoving it down your throat ..

 

 

Again, there are many references to the seas equalling peoples, here is but a few for you to consider ..

 

 

Psalms 65:7 Which stilleth the noise of the seas, the noise of their waves, and the tumult of the people.

 

 

Psalms 93:4 The LORD on high is mightier than the noise of many waters, yea, than the mighty waves of the sea.

 

 

2 Samuel 22:5 When the waves of death compassed me, the floods of ungodly men made me afraid;

 

 

Jeremiah 51:42 The sea is come up upon Babylon: she is covered with the multitude of the waves thereof.

 

 

Zechariah 10:11  And he shall pass through the sea with affliction, and shall smite the waves in the sea, and all the deeps of the river shall dry up: and the pride of Assyria shall be brought down, and the sceptre of Egypt shall depart away.

 

 

As you can see, my points are not based on assumptions, but on the things I have read in the scriptures which themselves formed the picture in my mind .. & not my personal assumptions. 

 

 

Notice the waters was indeed likened to the sea?

 

 

Anyway .. thanks brother.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Serving

[Last Daze]

I was in no way nor at any point anywhere near snarkyville I assure you bro ..

 

I saw this as being the junction to Snarkyville:

 

& not only that, do angels need / use money / riches to you Daze?

 

Just didn't want to go there.

 

I guess we interpret things differently.

 

Blessings.

[WilliamL]

... I just want to bring up something about the 10 kings of Daniel & Revelation regarding the views of whether they are human or angelic rulers ..

 

 

But first,

 

I'd like to confirm that I do understand & I do believe that every nation on earth is ruled over by demonic princes under one king .. Satan, & that Satan himself has allotted these fallen angels each their own dominions within their groups or units ...

This premise is incorrect. The spiritual princes of the nations are not demons, they are angelic beings. Demons are those earthly spirits which came out of the Nephilim when they died.

 

The angelic princes, while certainly being under the sway of Satan, have not yet been cast down: they still reign in heavenly places. When God arises in judgment on the Day of the Lord, he will first judge these angelic princes/principalities:

 

Ps. 82:1 God stands in the congregation of the mighty [literally, of El/God];

He judges among the gods.

 

...6 I said, “You are gods,

And all of you are children of the Most High.

7 But you shall die like men,

And fall like one of the princes.”

 

8 Arise, O God, judge the earth;

For You shall inherit all nations.

 

Is. 24:21 It shall come to pass in that day

That the LORD will punish on high the host of exalted ones,

And on the earth the kings of the earth.

 

This was the same pattern established at God's last great judgment, when he also judged gods:

 

Ex. 12:12 ‘For I will pass through the land of Egypt on that night, and will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD.