Part 13 (1/2)
13. And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.
14. And to the woman were given two wings of a 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.
15. And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16. And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon east out of his mouth.
17. And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of G.o.d, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
In this vision we have a series of events covering exactly the same period of time as that of the preceeding one; namely, a history of the church up to and including her flight into the wilderness, and of the same opposing dragon. In this description, however, the events are more perfectly detailed.
Because this dragon was called the Devil and Satan, many have been led into the idea that it signified the Prince of darkness himself. But surely we could not suppose that Beelzebub has any such appearance as this dragon. The foregoing explanation concerning his heads and horns shows conclusively that the Pagan Roman empire is meant, and not Beelzebub. Why, then, was it called the Devil and Satan? Among the Hebrews the term _Satan_ was frequently used in a very liberal sense and applied to different objects, signifying merely an adversary or opposer.
According to Young's a.n.a.lytical Concordance the Hebrew word for Satan is translated _adversary_ in a number of texts, a few of which I will refer to. Num. 22:22: ”And the angel of the Lord stood in the way for an _adversary_ [Satan, Heb.] against him.” Here an angel of the Lord is called a Satan to Balaam. In 1 Sam. 29:4 David is called an adversary (Heb. Satan) to the Philistines. In 2 Sam. 19:22 certain opposers are said to be adversaries (Satans, Heb.) unto David; while in 1 Kings 11:25 a certain man was said to be an adversary (Satan) to Israel all the days of Solomon. A number of other instances could be given if necessary. In the New Testament, also, the term _Satan_ is sometimes used to signify merely an opposer. ”But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan.” Mat. 16:23. In 1 Cor. 10:20 Paul declares ”that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to _devils_.” Paganism stood as the great opposer of Christianity, hence was a Satan (adversary) unto it; while the apostle denominated its religious rites as devil-wors.h.i.+p. I do not question the fact that the spirit of Beelzebub was manifested in the thing; but the dragon itself was the empire, as is proved by the heads and the horns. However, the Devil and the agency through which he works are often used interchangeably. Satan and the serpent in Eden stand in the same relation as do Satan, or Beelzebub, and Paganism in the New Testament; hence to bind Paganism was to bind the Devil and Satan in one important sense.
The dragon would be a beast from the natural world (if such a creature actually existed) and as such could represent nothing more than a civil empire; but in the vision under consideration he is represented as accompanied by _angels_ actuated by his spirit and defending his cause.
By this combination of symbols is set forth the politico-religious system of the empire--a religion that denied the doctrine of the one exclusive G.o.d and the divinity of Jesus Christ. It was the religion of _infidelity_. It was the dragon as a false religious system that Christianity attacked, and not the State itself. The following quotation from Butler's Ecclesiastical History will show the relation of Christians to the empire:
”The Romans were accustomed to tolerate all new religions if they took their place by the side of those already existing, and if they did not cast reproach upon them.... But Christianity, by its very nature exclusive in its claims ... was offensive to the Romans and to the State. A religion which cast contempt upon the religions and rites sanctioned by the laws, and endeavored to draw men away from them, seemed to express thereby contempt and hostility for the State itself.
Hence Christianity was branded as a malignant superst.i.tion, and Christians spoken of as the enemies of the human race.... From the letter of Pliny to Trajan, it was evidently recorded as an _religio illicita_, and the mere fact of being a Christian was counted of itself a crime.... The exclusiveness of Christianity seemed also to place its disciples in a position of direct disloyalty to the emperors and the State. 'The emperor was ex-officio _Pontifex Maximus_; the G.o.ds were national. Cicero declares as a principle of legislation, that no one should be allowed to wors.h.i.+p foreign G.o.ds, unless they were recognized by public statute. Maecenas thus counselled Augustas: Honor the G.o.ds according to the customs of your ancestors, and compel others to wors.h.i.+p them. Hate and punish those who bring in strange G.o.ds.' As the Roman empire was founded on the absolutism of the State, and made nothing of personal rights, Christianity, which first taught and acknowledged them, would be peculiarly offensive to the State. Moreover, the conscientious refusal of Christians to pay divine honor to the emperor and his statutes, and to take part in idolatrous ceremonies at public festivals ... and their constant a.s.sembling themselves together, brought them under the suspicion and obloquy of the emperors and the people.” Pp. 49, 50.
The dragon was stationed in the same heaven where the woman appeared.
This signifies his exalted position in the world. While the dragon was in the height of his power and glory, Michael (Jesus Christ--Jude 9; 1 Thes. 4:16; John 5:28) and his followers appeared on the scene, and a fierce battle for supremacy ensued, resulting in the final victory of the hosts of Michael. That it was against the dragon as a religious system that the Christians fought is proved by the kind of weapons they employed. ”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.” Christianity never sought to overturn the civil empire, but did with all the power of truth oppose the huge system of error sustained by it and gained such decisive victories that the cry was heard, ”Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our G.o.d, and the power of his Christ; for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our G.o.d day and night.” The Devil himself suffered a severe defeat when his favorite agents, the dragon and his followers, were cast down from their lofty position and Christianity was exalted instead. Says Butler: ”The final victory of Christianity over heathenism and Judaism, and the mightiest empire of the ancient world, a victory gained without physical force, by the moral power of faith and perseverance, of faith and love, is one of the sublimest spectacles of history, and one of the strongest evidences of the divinity and indestructible life of our holy religion.” P. 40.
But the fact that many Christians lost their lives in this conflict (verse 11), insomuch that the man-child is represented as being caught up unto G.o.d (verse 5), shows that the dragon employed also the arm of civil power in his opposition to the growing truth. The rapid increase of Christianity, despite the violent opposition and persecution of the Pagan party, can be no better represented than by a quotation from the notable Apology of Tertullian, who wrote during the persecution by Septimus Severus, about the end of the second century.
”Rulers of the Roman Empire,” he begins, ”you surely can not forbid the Truth to reach you by the secret pathway of a noiseless book. She knows that she is but a sojourner on the earth, and as a stranger finds enemies; and more, her origin, her dwelling-place, her hope, her rewards, her honors, are above. One thing, meanwhile, she anxiously desires of earthly rulers--not to be condemned unknown. What harm can it do to give her a hearing?... The outcry is that the State is filled with Christians; that they are in the fields, in the citadels, in the islands. The lament is, as for some calamity, that both s.e.xes, every age and condition, even high rank, are pa.s.sing over to the Christian faith.
”The outcry is a confession and an argument for our cause; for we are a people of yesterday, and yet we have filled every place belonging to you--cities, islands, castles, towns, a.s.semblies, your very camp, your tribes, companies, palace, senate, forum. We leave to you your temples alone. We can count your armies: our numbers in a single province will be greater. We have it in our power, without arms and without rebellion, to fight against you with the weapon of a simple divorce. We can leave you to wage your wars alone. If such a mult.i.tude should withdraw into some remote corner of the world you would doubtless tremble at your own solitude, and ask, 'Of whom are we the governors?'
”It is a human right that every man should wors.h.i.+p according to his own convictions ... a forced religion is no religion at all.... Men say that the Christians are the cause of every public disaster. If the Tiber rises as high as the city walls, if the Nile does not rise over the fields, if the heavens give no rain, if there be an earthquake, if a famine or pestilence, straightway they cry, Away with the Christians to the lion.... But go zealously on, ye good governors, you will stand higher with the people if you kill us, torture us, condemn us, grind us to the dust; your injustice is the proof that we are innocent. G.o.d permits us to suffer. Your cruelty avails you nothing.... The oftener you mow us down the more in number we grow; the blood of Christians is seed. What you call our obstinacy is an instructor. For who that sees it does not inquire for what we suffer? Who that inquires does not embrace our doctrines? Who that embraces them is not ready to give his blood for the fulness of G.o.d's grace?”
Another writer has said: ”The church in this period appears poor in earthly possessions and honors, but rich in heavenly grace, in world-conquering faith and love and hope; unpopular, even outlawed, hated and persecuted, yet far more vigorous and expansive than the philosophies of Greece, or the empire of Rome; composed chiefly of persons of the lower social ranks, yet attracting the n.o.blest and deepest minds of the age, and bearing in her bosom the hope of the world; conquering by apparent defeat and growing on the blood of her martyrs; great in deeds, greater in sufferings, greatest in death for the honor of Christ and the benefit of generations to come.”
This triumph of early Christianity over Paganism was a theme worthy of the song. ”Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our G.o.d, and the power of his Christ.” Even before the death of the apostles, according to the younger Pliny, the temples of the G.o.ds in Asia Minor were almost forsaken. No wonder, then, that even the inhabitants of heaven were called upon to rejoice at so great a victory attained by the followers of the Lamb. But the same voice also says, ”Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.” This represents the violence of the Pagan party upon its defeat, being exasperated to the exercise of greater opposition and cruelty wherever the means and the power were still in their hands. Cast down from his exalted position in the heavens--the religious sphere--his ecclesiastical prestige lost, he had no place to abide but in the earth--the political kingdom--whence he took up arms, and ”woe to the inhabitants of the earth.” But ”the days of Paganism in the empire were numbered.” The Devil knew that he had but a short time, therefore he came down in great wrath. This is in accordance with the facts of history. Paganism did not die an easy death, but struggled hard and long.
When cast from his high position, however, the dragon ”persecuted the woman which brought forth the man-child.” The true idea expressed in the original is that he _pursued_ the woman, and this signification is indicated by what follows--”To the woman were given two wings of a 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.” The _time_ as a definite period signifies one year; hence a time, times, and half a time would be three and one-half years, or twelve hundred and sixty days, as before explained. There is an apparent incongruity or contradiction of statement in reference to the symbols here; but it is a contradiction that when rightly understood throws light upon the whole subject. It will be noticed that the woman and Michael with his angels symbolize the same object--the people of G.o.d.
Under the latter figure they were triumphant and the dragon was defeated. Yet after he was cast down, he turned upon the woman and pursued her, and thus, the church appeared to be the defeated party.
According to this, then, the Pagan party is represented as _prevailing_ soon after he met _defeat_ and the church apparently _defeated_ soon after her period of _triumph_. Here again we have two separate symbols of the same object in order to represent two of its different phases.
This is explained satisfactorily by noticing carefully the facts. The woman, who is always the true church composed of holy people, was at first identical with the visible church, or the great body of Christians, and in this condition was successful in spreading the pure gospel and casting down the powers of iniquity symbolized by the dragon.
But the dragon politically, as symbolized by his being a beast from the natural world, with heads and horns, remained in power for some time, his religious prestige only being lost. Christianity did not attempt to cast down the dragon in the sense of destroying the civil empire. As is well known, a great spiritual declension followed the period of the church's greatest triumph, which decline drove the woman, or the true church, into the wilderness; hence to all appearances the church became a defeated party. About this same time, the dying cause of Paganism revived for a season in terrible severity in the latter part of the third century; hence to all appearances the dragon was triumphant. This supreme effort of Paganism's to regain its former position will be better understood in connection with what follows regarding the flood which he cast out of his mouth. But that the dragon was not permanently triumphant is shown by the fact that he afterwards resigned his power and position unto the beast. Chap. 13:2.
As to the meaning of the ”two wings of a great eagle” given the woman to aid her in her flight, I am not able to say positively. Some apply them to ”the grace and providence of G.o.d which watched over the church”; others to the ”spiritual gifts of faith, love,” etc., which, like supporting wings, bore the church above her enemies. But I can not see how the wings of a great eagle can properly symbolize such things. They are not drawn from the right source. Perhaps nothing more is intended by the wings than to denote the fact of her successful flight. That this idea is the correct one seems quite clear when we consider the fact that the remarkable deliverance of the Israelites from Egyptian bondage is set forth under the same figure, that of eagles' wings. ”Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how _I bare you on eagles' wings_, and brought you unto myself.” Ex. 19:4. With the wings of such a powerful bird she was able to escape, so that the dragon could not overtake her.
”And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood. And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.” Here is a peculiar combination of symbols from different departments--the serpent, a flood of water, the woman, and the earth. The last two as allies is a very unusual circ.u.mstance. Some refer the flood of waters to heresies that arose in, or was connected with, the hierarchy about this time; but in that case how could it be said that it was the serpent that cast it out?
Others apply it to errors that the Pagan party introduced baptized with the name of Christianity, when they professed to become converts at a later period. It is certainly an appropriate _figure of speech_ to say a flood of error or of false doctrine; but whether a flood of water is a proper _symbol_ of the same is another question. I do not think it is.