As Moses conveyed God's word to the people, an angel conveyed God's command not to take the Mark of the beast in the hand or forehead.



God's command through the angel is very clear: "If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God…" [Revelation 14:9, 10] Thus "The mark of the beast is exactly what it has been proclaimed to be. Not all in regard to this matter is yet understood, nor will it be understood until the unrolling of the scroll..."



"The time has come when through God's messengers the scroll is being unrolled to the world. The truth contained in the first, second, and third angels' messages ("If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God… [Revelation 14:9, 10]”).



Why limit the power of America?





When President Obama gives the political power to enforce the "mark" of the first beast, he will be antichrist and "carry forward the same cruel and blasphemous work," i.e., to wage war against the church and the law of God.






To become confused about Obama's role in Bible prophecy when it is so clearly spelled out is because of a failure to understand Daniel 7:17 and to fail to understand the transition from the papal beast to the earth-beast that is so clearly described in Revelation 13.

Since the last shall be first: who is the Beast?

Does Revelation 13 have two or three beasts?

Historically, the first beast has been seen by Bible students as the papal-beast. It is often pointed out with confidence that the symbolic kingdoms in Daniel 7: Babylon (lion's features), Medo-Persia (bear), and Greek (leopard) are the kingdoms that spiritually united with the papacy to form it.

While it is true that these kingdoms are present in papal-doctrines, if that is the only understanding applied to the beast it falls short of the endtime meaning.

The papal-beast that was wounded to death is not dead in John's description. It's deadly wound is healed.

Thus to understand the first beast, it healed state must be understood.

The ancient kingdoms were not healed. They are dead.

Thus the waymarks that point out the prophetic truth for past ages brings us up to the healed papacy: the papacy that yields its power to the earth-beast.

So as Daniel 7 depicted the 4th beast as pagan and papal-Rome, the first beast in Revelation 13 depicts ancient kingdoms and modern popes that bond with "horns" individuals (cf Daniel 8:20-21).

And the heads on the papal-beast depict popes:

Deuteronomy 33:5 "And he was king in Jeshurun, when the heads of the people and the tribes of Israel were gathered together."

Exodus 18:25 "And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens."



Revelation 13:3 "And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed:"

The papal-beast has 7-heads: rulers. One head (Pope Pius VI the ruler of the papal beast at the time) was wounded and a pope (Pius XI) received the healing.

And Pope John-Paul II received a deadly wound that almost killed him of which he survived: it was healed. And 42-months after 9/11/01 he died.

Rightly understood, this prophecy shows us exactly where we are in prophetic history.

The 7 popes that ruled the "healed papacy" as kings since 1929 were: Pius XI & XII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John-Paul I & II, and Benedict XVI. Thus there are 2 popes now instead of one head when the first papal-beast transitions to the earth-beast (America). Francis I frequently consults Benedict.

Benedict XVI was the last pope to rule the papal-beast solo. Thus he is the 7th head on the papal beast. Bush II was the American president whose rule aligned with Pope John-Paul II and Benedict (the last solo popes on the papal-beast).

Thus Bush II is the first horn on the earth-beast. And now that the transition from the first beast to the second beast of Revelation is completed: its 2 horns are Bush II (retired) and Obama (sitting president) and they look like the current papacy with Benedict (retired) and Francis I (sitting pope).The only thing that remains to complete the image to the beast is to implement national Sunday laws.

Was EGW saying that Revelation 13 was talking about systems or an individual?



Since EGW identified Pius VI as the individual in Revelation 13 that received the deadly wound,
wouldn't it follow that an individual must receive the healing of the deadly wound?

Regarding the papacy"


Regarding the mild mannered Pope Francis,



Regarding fear of the papal-beast:



IMHO: It looks like the Spirit of prophecy is well informed about matters of which SDA's are woefully ignorant.

But that is not what EGW says.

The "two horns like a lamb" well represent the character of our own Government, as expressed in its two fundamental principles,--Republicanism and Protestantism. These principles are the secret of our power and prosperity as a nation. Those who first found an asylum on the shores of America, rejoiced that they had reached a country free from the arrogant claims of popery and the tyranny of kingly rule. They determined to establish a government upon the broad foundation of civil and religious liberty. {ST, February 8, 1910 par. 6}

Republicanism and Protestantism. Not Bush II or Obama.

You are not the first to be confused. Lots of people mix up the LAMBLIKE characteristics of the horns described by EGW with the prophetic symbolism OF THE HORNS and forget that she supplements the Bible, but does not contradict it. Pray that the Holy Spirit will give you discernment.

I'm not sure that I could characterize Bush II and Obama with the characteristics of Republicanism and Protestantism. Nope, don't see it. Your comment does remind me of of a verse in a book that claims to be scripture: It says: "And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost." Moroni 10:4

Who else is just as confused as I am? Hm, here are a few...

Stephen Haskell: "and the two horns represent the two foundation principles of the government, Protestantism and republicanism"

AT Jones: "In that prophecy,—Revelation 13:11-18,—there was seen 'another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb.' We have always said, and it is the truth, that these two horns represent the two great principles that from the beginning characterized this nation; namely, Protestantism and republicanism."

AT Jones: "'The first beast' is the papacy. The image to the beast is an image of the papacy. The papacy is the union of church and state. The two horns like a lamb represent the two great characteristics of this nation,—Protestantism and republicanism,—both of which are directly antagonistic to a union of church and state. And for the union of church and state to be made in this nation is just as incongruous with the fundamental principles of the nation, as the speaking as a dragon is incongruous with the characteristics of a lamb. Thus the whole idea is suggestive of national apostasy from characteristic principles."

PT Magan: "A horn in prophecy signifies power, and the two great principles which have given power to the United States and made her what she is to-day are Protestantism and Republicanism. But Protestantism and Republicanism are both in their spirit pacific; that is, they are lamblike, hence the words, 'had two horns like a lamb.' It is obvious from this that should these two horns of power be plucked up, as it were, should they be abandoned, and Roman Catholic principles in things religious, and monarchical ideas in things civil, take possession of this government; then, at once, everything that is lenient and lamblike in the government would at that very moment disappear, and nothing but despotism be in their place. In other words, it is the prevalence of these two principles, Protestantism and Republicanism, which alone makes the government lamblike in its nature."

U Smith: "Its two horns fitly denote the two great branches of power that exist in this Republic, commonly designated Ecclesiastical and Civil, Religious and Political Protestantism and Republicanism, or Church and State."

U Smith: "For (1.) the two horns may belong to one beast, and denote union instead of division, as in the case of the ram (Daniel 8); (2.) a horn may denote a purely ecclesiastical element, as the little horn of Daniel's fourth beast; and (3.) a horn may denote the civil power alone, as in the case of the first horn of the Grecian goat. On the basis of these facts, we have these two elements, Republicanism and Protestantism, here united in one government, and represented by two horns like the horns of a lamb. And these are nowhere else to be found; nor have they appeared, since the time when we could consistently look for the rise of the two-horned beast, in any nation upon the face of the earth except our own."

EJ Waggoner: "'And he had two horns like a lamb.' We have seen that horns represent powers of any nature-civil or ecclesiastical. The first beast was a union of Catholicism and Paganism. The second a union of Protestantism and Republicanism. We owe our remarkable growth and prosperity as much to the former as to the latter. 'A State without a king, and a church without a pope,' or earthly head, was the ideal of our fathers. Lamb-like in profession and appearance."

J White: "No civil power could ever compare with Republicanism in its lamb-like character. The grand principle recognized by this form of power, is thus expressed: 'All men are born free and equal, and endowed with certain inalienable rights, as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.' Hence, all have a right to participate in making the laws, and in designating who shall execute them. Was there ever a development of civil power so lamb-like before? And what, in religious matters, can be compared with Protestantism? Its leading sentiment is the distinct recognition of the right of private judgment in matters of conscience. 'The Bible is the only religion of Protestants.' Was there ever in the religious world any thing to equal this in its lamb-like professions? Such we consider the meaning of the 'two horns like a lamb.'"

J White: "Its two horns represent the two leading principles of this government, Republicanism and Protestantism."

But why need anyone be confused? We have the sure word of Scripture:

Daniel 7:24 "And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings."

Daniel 8:20-21 "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."

Revelation 17:12 "And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast."

Very clearly, Thus saith the Lord Horns are symbolic of kings.

But you quote: AT Jones, PT Magan, U Smith, EJ Waggoner, and J White to contradict the Scriptures.

Of the many people who are fallible and imperfect, how many do you suppose it will take to change the Scriptures to mean what they think?

Have you not read?



Are you proposing that the understanding of the Adventist pioneers was infallible and can not be changed when more light comes on this topic?

Who are you going to believe the Scriptures or the pioneers.

When that question is posed to those in the Roman church, they place equal weight on the church fathers and the Scriptures. Are you proposing that Adventists should take a similar stance?

What position are you taking? The Bible only or the Bible and the church fathers?

Am I really confused? You say I am. What you are saying is that the Adventist understanding, including EGW's, has been wrong, and you are right, that the two-horned powers are GWB and BHO. I don't see a contradiction of the scriptures. Take the ten kings - you are claiming they are individuals. But they do not need to be individuals, they are kingdoms. You ask, "What position are you taking? The Bible only or the Bible and the church fathers?" Were the Adventist church fathers wrong in their interpretations of the Bible on this point, confirmed by EGW? I think not. The question you should have asked, "are you going to be me, his child?" Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I have not seen the evidence.

There is a difference between what I am saying and what you are hearing.

EGW speaks of the characteristics of the lamblike horns.

The horns are symbolic of men: that is Scripture.

The horn's characteristics - the men's claim to be...
that is not what the horns are, it is the characteristics of those that the horns depict.

The characteristics of the men (kings) ruling the nation is often seen as the characteristic of the nation.

But the Scripture is unbroken.

Cannot say the same for man's understanding of it.