Chapter Eleven

The Two witnesses





11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.


A “reed is a common name for many kinds of tall, slender grass plants.  The word also commonly refers to the stems of these plants, which are often jointed in many places.  The stems may be as slender and fragile as straw, or they may be as thick and sturdy as bamboo.”[1]  Because of the reed’s properties of usually being straight, slender, and lightweight, it was used extensively in the past as a measuring stick.  There are even references to this in the Old Testament.  “In the man’s hand a measuring reed of six cubits long by the cubit and an hand breadth: so he measured the breadth of the building, one reed; and the height, one reed” (Ezekiel 40:5).


The reed that John was given was like a rod, which shows it was strong and sturdy.  With this reed John was told to measure the temple, the altar, and the people who worship at the altar.  The temple and altar were essential to worship under the Old Law, but what do they have to do with the Christian era?  We have just seen in the previous chapter that the Bible has been returned to the common people, and the Bible is still the main character of our story here.  This reed which John was given is the Bible.  It is the standard and authority for all spiritual matters.  It is the “measuring rod” which is used to determine if man’s actions measure up to God’s standards.  And now that it has been given back to all men they once again have the opportunity to use it to “measure” all churches to see which one actually belongs to the Lord.


The temple, the altar, and the people which worship at the altar, are all symbols of items involved in New Testament worship.  John has been instructed to measure them with the Bible to see if they are as they should be.  The temple is the Church, the altar is the method of worship of the Church, and the people who worship are Christians.  The Church as a whole, the method of worship, and the personal lives of Christians all fall under the authority and direction of the Bible.  If these things do not “measure up” when compared to the divine measuring reed, the Bible, they will be rejected by God.


This is just like when you catch certain species of fish.  You are required to measure them and if they are not of a certain size you must throw them back.  You measure that fish with a recognized standard, a ruler.  It will measure the fish in inches, and then you compare that measurement with the official regulations and determine whether or not you can keep the fish.  The Church, and all aspects of Christian’s lives, must come up to the standards set forth in God’s word.  Christ said, “He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day” (John 12:48).  We will also see this same principle taught later in Revelation.  “And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works” (Revelation 20:12).



11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.


John was to measure the Church, its method of worship, and the lives of Christians with God’s word.  Certainly there would be many people who do not claim to be Christians.  These people would be clearly outside the temple, or the Church, which Christ had established.  Thus they were likened to Gentiles who, in the time of the Law of Moses, were refused access to the Temple.  However, there were many who appeared as if they might belong to the Lord’s Church but a close examination would reveal otherwise.  These are the one’s John will be required to measure; those in counterfeit churches.


The Apostle Paul spoke of Christians spiritually being Jews.  “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God” (Romans 2:28-29).  The Church is now spiritual Israel, the worship of the Church the spiritual altar, and Christians spiritual Jews.


All those outside the temple, or Church, make no claim to be Christians and therefore do not need to be measured.  Under the Old Law Gentiles were allowed in the court but not in the Temple itself.  Similarly, those outside the temple here are spiritual Gentiles, that is, non-Christians.  Just as entry into the Temple didn’t mean a Jew was righteous, neither does being part of ‘any’ church make someone a Christian.  Many belong to churches that are in error, but all still claim to be in the Lord’s Church.  These will have to be measured to show that they do not fit the pattern.  But those who are irreligious, or who follow a completely false religion are the Gentiles who do not require a measurement to show they fail to meet God’s standards.  If you need a 10 foot length of 2 X 4 when you are building something, you wouldn’t even bother to measure a piece which was only as long as your foot.  You would automatically realize that it was insufficient to meet your needs and you would look elsewhere.  Similarly, there was no need for John to waste his time measuring those who were outside so-called “Christendom” when they obviously will fail to measure up.


But when you are searching for your piece of 2 X 4 you will measure anything that appears to the eye to be near ten feet.  It might turn out to be nine or eleven when it is measured with the ruler, but you did not know until you checked it against the standard.  This same principle must be applied to all of the “Christian” denominations.  If there is but one pattern for all to follow, the Bible, then there can logically be but one right way, that is, the Bible way.  Any other way must of necessity be the work of man and therefore cannot possibly be right.  The wise man Solomon said, “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death” (Proverbs 14:12).  And furthermore, Christ said, “But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matthew 15:9).


The “holy city” is the Lord’s Church.  The “they” referred to in this verse are the gentiles or, more specifically, the Catholic Church, which will “tread under foot” the Lord’s Church for forty-two months.  We have seen previously that in prophesy a day is equivalent to an actual year.  We also saw that a prophetic month contains exactly thirty days.  So forty-two months in prophesy would be 1,260 actual years.  The Lord’s Church was to be oppressed and persecuted by the Roman Church for a period of 1,260 years.  This period corresponds roughly to what is known as the Dark Ages.  This is definitely not the only place we will see this period of time mentioned, it also shows up later in this chapter and in both of the next two chapters and even in the book of Daniel.  That is a total of six times.  Apparently God has an important message for us and wants to be sure we do not miss it.  The particulars of this period will be discussed at the appropriate time as the story continues to unfold.



11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.


This is the second occurrence of the 1,260 year period.  Here it is said that God’s “two witnesses” shall prophesy in sackcloth during this period.  Sackcloth was “a course cloth, of a dark color, usually made of goat’s hair.  It was worn customarily by mourners, often, if not habitually, by prophets, and by captives.”[2]  Since these two witnesses prophesied for over a thousand years, we certainly are not considering actual men.  During this 1,260 year period the only thing that stood totally in defiance of Rome, and testified of God’s will, was the Bible itself.  Here spoken of as two witnesses, making reference to the Old and New Testaments.


Christ said that the “gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations” (Matthew 24:14).  Here He establishes the New Testament as a witness.  He also said, “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me” (John 5:39).  Here He speaks of the Old Testament as testifying of Him, or in other words, it was a witness for Him.  So the Lord shows that both Testaments are witnesses of God, and we can easily understand the meaning of this statement.  Both Testaments testify of the nature of God, and of His dealings with man.  During this 1,260 year period the Bible was “clothed in sackcloth,” which means it was a prisoner of Rome.  It continued to be a witness of God to those who were fortunate to have access to it, but for the most part it was kept hidden away.



11:4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.


Now the two witnesses are referred to as olive trees and candlesticks standing, or testifying, for God to the whole earth.  This is very similar to a prophesy of Zechariah.  “Then answered I, and said unto him, ‘What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof?’ And I answered again, and said unto him, ‘What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?’ And he answered me and said, ‘Knowest thou not what these be?’ And I said, ‘No, my lord.’ Then said he, ‘These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth’” (Zechariah 4:11-14).  Here we see two “anointed ones” who stand by the Lord.  They are faithful to God and testify of His will.


There is also a significance to referring to the witnesses as olive trees.  Olive trees are some of the longest living trees in the world.  In fact “there are olive trees in Palestine which probably date back to the beginning of the Christian era.”[3]  Olive oil was used in the lamps of the temple.  “Command the children of Israel, that they bring unto thee pure oil olive beaten for the light, to cause the lamps to burn continually” (Leviticus 24:2).  The idea is that olives represent strength and endurance.  These are qualities to be found in these two witnesses.  The Bible was suppressed, but could not be destroyed.



11:5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.


We have already said the witnesses are the Old and New Testaments which testify of God and Christ, but how can any man do these witnesses harm?  Anyone who claims that the Bible teaches something which it does not, has the effect of harming these witnesses.  Certainly you would not appreciate it if people went around telling others that you had said a certain thing, when in truth, you had not.  Despite the lack of factual basis, the “stories” told about you could greatly damage your reputation and harm your influence.


The same is true of the Bible.  It is damaged when men go around perverting and corrupting what it teaches.  Here it says that fire will consume these false teachers.  Notice the similarity of this verse to a passage the Apostle Peter wrote.  “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.  And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.  And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not” (II Peter 2:1-3).


“And if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed,” does not refer to the way an enemy of the Bible will die physically, it refers to the fires of Hell, which will be part of the second, or spiritual, death.  The Apostle Paul mentioned the use of fire in the destruction of the enemies of God.  “When the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (II Thessalonians 1:7-8).  All who live in opposition to the Bible will be destroyed by fire in Hell for ever.


We see that the “fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies.”  This is simply a reference to the fact that the Bible proclaims the eternal fate of all its enemies, the enemies of God, to be death by fire.  Fire does not literally proceed from the Bible, or from anyone else’s mouth for that matter, but the proclamation of their doom does proceed from the “mouth” of God, the Bible.



11:6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.


These witnesses, the Old and New Testaments, are said here to have miraculous powers.  Power to do such things as cause a drought, power to turn water into blood, and the power to bring about many other plagues.  We can read accounts of all these very things in the Bible.  “And Elijah the Tishbite, who was of the inhabitants of Gilead, said unto Ahab, ‘As the Lord God of Israel liveth, before whom I stand, there shall not be dew nor rain these years, but according to my word’” (I Kings 17:1).  “And the Lord spake unto Moses, ‘Say unto Aaron, “Take thy rod, and stretch out thine hand upon the waters of Egypt, upon their streams, upon their rivers, and upon their ponds, and upon all their pools of water, that they may become blood; and that there may be blood throughout all the land of Egypt, both in vessels of wood, and in vessels of stone”’” (Exodus 7:19).


Incidents such as these are exactly what is being referred to here.  In the Bible are records of many prophesies and their fulfillments.  When a man of God said a certain thing was going to happen it always happened.  It did not happen because of the man, but because of God who was the power behind the man.  These men were speaking for God, and thus any prophesy they made was bound to come true.  The Bible is just a written record of these proceedings.  But the Bible also contains prophesies which have yet to be fulfilled.  And these carry the same guarantee as all of those that have already occurred.  So when we read these predictions in Revelation we can be absolutely positive they will happen exactly as described.  These two witnesses cannot be wrong.  There are no unfulfilled prophesies which speak of drought or the turning of water into blood.  These two things are merely given as examples because they actually happened.  The idea is that just a certainly as those things did happen, the prophesies of the Bible that do remain unfulfilled will likewise happen.

 


11:7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.


In chapter ten we saw the angel come down from Heaven and deliver the Bible to the common people.  The Bible, here spoken of as the two witnesses, then testified of God’s will, which brought about the Reformation.  Of course Satan, who is the beast from the bottomless pit, will not take all of this lightly.  He will fight the opening of the Bible tooth and nail.  And here we are told that he was successful because he “shall overcome them, and kill them.”  This does not mean the Bible will be totally destroyed, but that it will lose its power.  This statement will be put in better focus as our story continues.


We are told here when Satan will win this victory over the Bible.  This passage will turn out to be key in confirming some other dates later on.  All of this is to occur “when they shall have finished their testimony.”  The testimony he refers to here is the same as that mentioned in verse three where it was referred to as prophesy.  These two witnesses are to prophesy for 1,260 years and then will be killed at the end of that time.



11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.


We now see that the two witnesses will be killed and their bodies left to rot in the streets.  This shows a great disrespect and even hatred for the Bible.  The horrible event is to happen in a “great” city.  The city is compared to Sodom, Egypt, and Jerusalem, being the city where Christ was crucified.  The city under consideration is not one of these places, they are just used to denote the character of this great city.  This is why it is referred to as a city “which spiritually is called....”  Its literal name will be different from these three.


Sodom was one of the most evil and wicked cities that has ever existed.  It was so evil in fact, that God destroyed it and its neighbor Gomorrah with fire and brimstone from heaven.  “And the Lord said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous.  Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven” (Genesis 18:20, 19:24).


Egypt represents oppression of God’s people.  For over 200 years the Children of Israel served as slaves in the land of Egypt, before God finally delivered them by the hand of Moses.  “And the Lord said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in Egypt, and have heard their cry by reason of their taskmasters; for I know their sorrows” (Exodus 3:7).


Jerusalem represents rejection of God and Christ.  God continually sent prophets to the Children of Israel only to have them slain in Jerusalem.  Finally He also sent His Son, who also was slain in Jerusalem.  “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!” (Matthew 23:37).


Before we set out to find this great city, we should give a little thought to the word “city” first.  It appears many times in Revelation and is used in a variety of ways.  It is used to represent the Lord’s Church, Heaven, and even the Roman Catholic Church.  Nowhere can we find a reference where the word city definitely refers to a literal city.  I believe that as with everything else in Revelation, this term too is symbolic.  We will just have to wait and see from history what actually fits with all the details and is therefore our “city.”


The “city” which is under consideration here, is characterized by wickedness, oppression of God’s people, and rejection of God.  We now need to look for a place and time in history when this occurred.  We can narrow our search somewhat by realizing where we are in history at this point in our narrative.  In the previous chapter we saw an angel bring the Bible to the earth for the benefit of the common man.  We gave an approximate date of 1400 for this occurrence.  This allows us to restrict our search to events that took place after this time which makes our task much easier.


In looking at the history of Europe in the centuries following 1400, there is one event which stands out above the rest.  It occurred in the latter half of the eighteenth century.  Most of the civilized world was in chaos at this time, revolution was sweeping the European continent, and had even spread to Asia and America.  But the most powerful country in the world at that time, had yet to succumb to the pressures of change.  Finally, in 1789, France followed the rest of Europe into revolution.  The French Revolution is the most studied political upheaval in history.

 

“The French Revolution was of major importance for the world.  That was partly because it had repercussions throughout most of Christendom, both in Europe and America.  Paris, where the Revolution centered, was the most populous city of Western Europe and for a century or more France had been the most powerful realm in that region.  So sweeping a series of changes could not fail to have effects of primary importance in the rest of Western civilization.”[4]

 

“The French Revolution had violently ruptured the organic unity of the Roman Catholic Church and the most powerful state in the Roman Catholic orbit.”[5]

 

“The purpose of our story does not require even an outline of the course of the French Revolution.  We need only point out the immediate effects upon Christianity.  These effects were especially serious for the Roman Catholic Church.  They dealt it severe blows.”[6]

 

Here we can see the significance of the French Revolution and its impact on Catholicism.  It will become quite apparent through the history which will be quoted hereafter, that the French Revolution brought the Roman Catholic Church to its knees.  It dealt Catholicism a blow from which it has never recovered.  We will also be able to see that France is indeed the place where the Bible lay dead in the streets.

 

 

11:9 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.


The two witnesses were killed, their bodies left in the streets for three and one-half days, and everyone who passed by did not care enough to give them a descent burial.  This shows a total lack of respect for these two witnesses on the part of the residents of this great city where they were slain.


We have already been told that this city is very wicked and that it will reject God and oppress His people, therefore it is only natural that they would also be against His two witnesses, the Bible.  After all, the Bible is God’s expression of Himself to man.  Anyone who had no respect for God would certainly have no respect for His Word.


The Bible will be disgraced and ridiculed, just as a person would be disgraced by having their dead body left unburied.  Even in ancient times it was considered to be a great insult to someone not to give them a descent burial.  This is evidenced by the following passage: “And when they had stripped him, they took his head, and his armor, and sent into the land of the Philistines round about, to carry tidings unto their idols, and to the people.  And they put his armor in the house of their gods, and fastened his head in the temple of Dagon.  And when all Jabesh-gilead heard all that the Philistines had done to Saul, they arose, all the valiant men, and took away the body of Saul, and the bodies of his sons, and brought them to Jabesh, and buried their bones under the oak in Jabesh, and fasted seven days” (I Chronicles 10:9-12).  These men risked their lives to give Saul and his sons a descent burial, this shows how important it was to them.


The fact that the bodies of the two witnesses were allowed to lay in the streets of the city for three and one-half days shows that they were to be held in contempt and disgraced.  But the three and one-half days is prophetical, and translates into three and one-half literal years.  This shows that we are not dealing with real men, since their bodies would not last that long when left exposed to the elements.  So what we are really seeing is that the Bible will be “dead” in the streets of France for a period of three and one-half years.  And we will find historical evidence that this very thing did occur.



11:10 And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth.


Many people were happy to see the Bible dead.  This was a reason to celebrate for them, and they rejoiced to see the Bible disgraced.  It was said that these two prophets tormented “them that dwelt upon the earth.”  Many groups and individuals disliked the Bible and considered it to be utter foolishness; just a bunch of superstitions and myths.  They considered men who followed such fallacies as ignorant and unlearned.  They also felt that the presence of Christianity, or more properly, Catholicism, which was an apostate form of Christianity, as their national religion was a disgrace and even a threat to their country.  The Bible actually “tormented” the intellectuals and men of learning because they could not stand to see the power this collection of “myths” had over the general population.  So when Christianity was banned they were overjoyed, and literally began to celebrate.



11:11 And after three days and an half the Spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them.


After a three and one-half year period the two witnesses came back to life.  In other words, the Bible will regain its influence, and Christianity will bounce back.  This will cause consternation and dismay among those who sought to destroy it.  Many will also fear for the future of their country since Christianity had become closely identified with their enemies.


Now, through presenting numerous citations of history, I will attempt to convey the mood of the French Revolution, and to explain the role of Christianity in this series of events which shook the world.  In its infancy the French Revolution did not involve religion, its nature was purely political and economic, but this quickly changed.

 

“The French Revolution began as a reasonable protest against a state of affairs in which all the social machinery was operated for the advantage of the privileged classes.  It was not at first antireligious.  The States-General, which met on May 4, 1789, opened with a mass and a sermon by a bishop, who spoke of the miseries of the poor and urged a reduction in taxation—but not too much reduction.”[7]

 

Thus, for a short period after the inception of the Revolution, things were more or less normal from a religious perspective.  And it appears that the turn against Christianity was not planned, but merely a consequence of a series of very powerful events.  It all began innocently enough on August 4, 1789, when the French Assembly issued the “Declaration of the Rights of Man.”  This document was in some ways similar to the United States “Bill of Rights.”  This document broke the Catholic strangle hold on religious matters.  Although they retained their dominant position, they lost their monopoly.  Of course this was a move which Rome would not view passively.

 

“The religious provisions of the ‘Declaration of the Rights of Man’ occasioned more debate than any other articles.  No one dreamed of a separation of church and state; even the philosophes took a Roman Catholic establishment for granted.  The Assembly acknowledged only one national religion, the Roman Catholic.  There could be no full religious liberty, consequently, among human rights in France, although liberty of conscience was probably the basic liberty in the Anglo-American countries.  Protestants were, however, granted the right of public worship for the first time.

 

For reasons of his own Pius VI delayed for months any indication as to his attitude to the loss of his annates, or to the ‘Declaration of the Rights of Man.’ He foresaw that popular sovereignty, if it won its way, would deprive him of his feudal holdings in French lands, Avignon and Venaissin.  On March 29, 1790, however, he delivered himself at some length in a secret consistory on the ‘Declaration of the Rights of Man.’  This pronouncement is interesting as the first in the long list of papal condemnations of liberalism and democracy in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.  The Pope rejected several of the Rights in particular, for example, that the law represented the general will; that all citizens should be represented in the formation of legislation; that religious opinion should have any rights; and that non-Roman Catholics should have equal right to municipal, civil, and military offices.  The ideas of popular sovereignty and government responsible to the people were condemned along with toleration of non-Roman Catholics.  The papal court aligned Roman Catholicism with the traditions of absolutism and inherited rights of rule, as well as with the traditional social classes.”[8]

 

The stand taken by the pope put him squarely against the Revolution and its goals.  And as we can now see in hindsight, it put Rome in opposition to what became one of the most powerful movements of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, democracy.  This stance put the pontiff at odds, not only with the French government, but also caused the alienation of many of the citizens of France, who had heretofore been loyal Roman Catholics.  The people were put in a position to choose between the Church and their beloved Fatherland.  And considering the strength of the nationalistic spirit in France at that time, it is no wonder that the pope found himself being cast aside by most Frenchmen.


All of this caused the beginning of an anti-Christian sentiment in France, that would eventually lead to great persecution of the Catholic clergy, seizure of Church property, and the establishment of a new state religion, the worship of Reason.  For a short period of time France was filled with wickedness, God was rejected, and Christians were oppressed.  This time and place definitely fits the prophesy of Revelation.

 

“In 1793 Christian worship was abolished, the existence of God was formally denied, and the worship of the Religion of Reason was set up.  The Christian Lord’s Day was replaced by the setting apart of every tenth day for rest and sport.”[9]

 

Clearly, revolutionary France possessed the characteristics of Sodom, Egypt, and Jerusalem as our prophesy spoke of.  Now all that remains is to see if the remainder of the details coincide with the annuls of history.


Before the repudiation of Christianity, and the establishment of a new state religion, came a period of legislative action against Catholicism.  The desire among most people still was not to destroy Christianity, but to reshape it into a religion more suitable for the new France.

 

“In February 1790, the Assembly declared monastic vows taken after October 28, 1789 suspended, and refused to allow any more to be taken.  In May of 1790 came the report of the comite ecclesiastique appointed in August 1789 by the Assembly to arrange church affairs in accordance with the new constitution of the state.”[10]

 

Based on this report, the state took over much of the Church in France by passing the “Civil Constitution of the Clergy.”  Included in this was the method of selection of the bishops and cures, and the number and area of diocese.  At this point the French government sought to control, not to eradicate, the Catholic Church.  But this whole situation was destined to quickly digress to a battle of wills—neither side willing to cede much to the other—ominous clouds hung on the horizon for Christianity.


On October 30, 1790, a manifesto was issued by a cardinal and twenty-nine bishops, which essentially refuted the right of the civil government to legislate church affairs.  The Assembly then sought to force the issue by requiring an oath on the part of the French clergy ‘to the law and constitution,’ in January, 1791.

 

“The pope was slow to express himself, as he had been on the ‘Declaration of the Rights of Man.’  In the spring of 1791 he complained of the Civil Constitution, and implored the bishops not to take the oath.  In April the pope annulled all elections to clerical office, called the Constitution ‘heretical and schismatical’ and ordered signers to retract within forty days.  Many who had taken the oath now felt constrained to retract it, and the church was sharply divided into ‘jurors’ and ‘nonjurors’—a schism which was to last, in fact, for a decade.  Diplomatic relations between France and the Vatican were broken off and the pope’s effigy was burnt at the Palais Royal.  The oath to the “Civil Constitution of the Clergy” was proving to be the major occasion of civil war.”[11]

 

The pope found the attitude and actions of the French leadership untenable.  He continued to fight against them, but this simply resulted in a further widening of the political and religious chasm separating the two sides.


The Assembly was eventually replaced by the Committee as the ruling body of France.  The Committee first met on September 22, 1792, the first day of the French Republic.  Hereafter, the deterioration of the relations between Rome and France seemed to accelerate.  Then a series of unexpected events struck the final blows and sealed the fate of the now much maligned Christian religion.

 

“At the same time the Convention was enforcing and even increasing in severity the laws against refractory, or non-juring priests—that is the papalists.  Their papalism seemed really intolerable now that the Pope was siding with the enemies of France.  A serious incident occurred.  Basseville, a French diplomat, secretary of legation at Naples, had been sent to Rome to protect the interests of French merchants there.  He hoisted the tricolor flag over his house.  His servants wore the tricolor cockade.  The Roman mob killed him (13th January 1793).  The murders went unpunished, and this led to the belief that the Papal Government was concerned in the murder.  An explosion of wrath took place at Paris against the Pope, who was regarded as the soul of the coalition against France.  The non-juring clergy, who had been so devoted to the hostile Pope, were still further discredited, and a part of this discredit perhaps fell upon the Constitutional Church, which, though it had separated itself from the Pope on certain points of discipline, venerated him as ‘the visible head of the Universal Church,’ and loudly disavowed any idea of schism.  In France the murder of Basseville was an injury to the Catholic religion itself.  It was one of those events which rendered possible an attempt to destroy Christianity.


But what most harmed religion at that moment was the part manifestly taken by non-juring priests in the insurrection at La Vendee.  No doubt the raising of 300,000 men was the immediate occasion of the insurrection, on account of the reluctance which the Vendeans felt to engaging in military service far from home.  But these armed rebels called themselves ‘Royal and Catholic armies.’  The priests fanned the flame, while the royalists turned the insurrection to their own profit.  The civil war in La Vendee, by which Republican France was stabbed in the back at the very moment when she was struggling with foreign foes, was the danger point of the Revolution—a danger which might have been fatal—and of this the people, in Paris and the towns especially, were well aware.  It was a crime against the fatherland, the young fatherland so religiously adored—a crime which seemed horrible and inexpiable.  The priests were thought to be the accomplices or even the instigators of the crime.  The non-juring clergy were the enemy, and if the religion which had such ministers was not yet identified with the foe, it nevertheless incurred suspicion through the attitude of these unpatriotic priests.

 

Of all the events that wrought the frame of mind which resulted in the attempt to dethrone Christianity, the insurrection at La Vendee, by its clerical form, was the chief, the most influential.  I might almost say that without La Vendee there would have been no Worship of Reason.  The immediate result of the insurrection was an increased severity in the laws against non-juring priests.”[12]

 

By this time the hatred of Christianity was rampant in France.  The seeds of the move to destroy Christianity had not only been planted, but were by now, growing wildly.  But it was not only the Catholics who suffered this affront.  As usually happens in tumultuous and violent times like this, witch hunts are far too common.  Even the Protestants were included in the wave of anti-Christian sentiment.

 

“They extended their suspicions, though less noisily, to the protestant clergy...Marron, the pastor of a Calvinistic Church in Paris, was arrested as a moderate on 21st September 1793 and kept in prison for several days.”[13]


“Till now the people had distinguished between good priests and bad.  Now they began to think that there were no more good priests.  The Catholic religion was discredited in the eyes of many militant patriots.  They said that if religion was a hindrance to national defence, an obstacle in the way of Revolution, then religion must be abolished.  The idea was spread by the anxiety of exasperated patriotism.  The unbelief of certain followers of the philosophers, certain journalists, clubmen and municipal officers in Paris, blew these first sparks of destructive free-thought into a conflagration.”[14]

 

As time went on Christianity was seen to be a serious threat to the very survival of the fatherland by many French citizens.  The philosophers and intellectuals turned this to their advantage and incited the complete overthrow of Christianity.  We will find a three and one-half year period during which Christianity was greatly persecuted, and forms of idolatry were practiced throughout France.  This coincides with the “three and one-half days” predicted for the “death” of the Bible.  We will not find that the persecution suddenly sprang from no where one day, and then completely vanished exactly three and one-half years later.  Reality does not work this way.  Instead we will see the rise of an anti-Christian sentiment, which eventually led to the complete overthrow of Christianity.  We will be able to pinpoint an incident which marked the “death” of the Bible on August 10, 1793.  Then approximately three and one-half years later (actually three years six months and nine days later) on February 19, 1797 we will see another event which marked a drastic change in the attitude of the French government toward Christianity.  This is when the Bible “stood upon its feet again.”

 

“It was in the late Summer and Autumn, however, that the great persecution of the church came.  This persecution made manifest for the first time in the modern world the revival of pagan tribalism which is today, perhaps, the real religion of the majority of men in all Western culture.  If Continental liberalism is the enduring heritage of the first phase of the Revolution, that of the second is nationalism.”[15]

 

The “Summer and Autumn” were those of 1793.  It was then that the persecutions of Christianity, and the moves to secularize the state took off like a rocket.  There was one particular event that occurred during this time which marked the beginning of the reign of the “worship of Reason.”  It was the festival of August 10, 1793.  Prior to this point every festival had always contained elements of Christianity.  But here for the first time we find Christianity to have been totally replaced by paganism and idolatry.  For all practical purposes the Bible lay dead in the streets of Paris that day as the Parisians celebrated the goddess of Nature.

 

“The Convention itself had for some time past assumed a ‘philosophic’ attitude which furnished the occasion or the incentive to audacious acts.  The festival of 10th August 1793 was the first of the national fetes which had a purely civic or, as we should say, secular character.  Herault de Sechelles, a member of the Convention, who presided, seemed to deify Nature, whose statue was honored by libations.”[16]

 

“Conscious substitution of the new faith for the old began in the provinces in the summer of 1793.  The first purely civic festival came in August of that year, when libations were poured out to a statue of ‘nature.’ In the Ice de France Brutus replaced St.  Blaise.  Similarly, busts of Marat and Le Peletier replaced those of saints in homes.  Various district representatives now began to parade to the bar of the Convention to announce their apostasy for Christianity.  Bishop Gobel and eleven priests took off cross and ring and put on red cap in the Convention.  Most ecclesiastical members of the Convention, including the Protestant pastors, did the same.  Pastor Marron brought in four silver communion chalices, condemned theology, and paid tribute to the ‘eternal and immortal principles of fact and morality.’ Numerous resignations of vicars and cures occurred all over France.  The Convention printed Chenier’s speech which recommended ‘one universal religion...the altar of our country, our mother and our deity.’


The report of the Committee on the Republican calendar revision in October 1793 was partly anti-Christian.  They recommended the elimination of saints days and Sundays as symbols of the Christian philosophy of history, and the substitution of holidays for purely naturalistic objects of ‘true national wealth.’  Foreigners were horrified.”[17]


“In November violent deChristianization provoked an unexpected disturbance and inaugurated the final crisis.  During the course of the crisis, which lasted all winter, the attitude of the Committee changed several times.


The causes of the movement were deep-seated.  Except for a certain number of ‘red cures,’ the constitutional priests had been alarmed by the religious consequences of August 10.  Approving neither the death of the king nor the fall of the Girondins, they became suspect; and on October 25, 1793, the Convention, in codifying the penalties against refractory clergy, also ordered the deportation of constitutional clergy who were denounced by six citizens.”[18]


“Since there were doubts that the state could dispense with the church, and since the majority of sans-culottes themselves might be lacking in respect for religious ceremonies, this revolutionary cult, which had evolved since 1789 and heretofore had been associated with that year, was gradually set up in opposition to the traditional form of worship.


For the first time the festival of August 10th, 1793, was purely secular.  The new religion endowed itself with symbols and a form of liturgy, honored the ‘holy Mountain,’ and venerated its martyrs, Lepeletier, Marat, and Chalier.  On 3 Brumaire, Year II (October 24, 1793), on recommendations by Romme and Fabre d’Eglantine, the Convention adopted the revolutionary calendar.  It attempted to deChristianize daily life by substituting the date of September 22, 1792, the first day of the Republic, for the Christian era; by replacing references to religious ceremonies and the saints with names borrowed from tools and products familiar to the French; and above all, by eliminating Sunday in favor of the Tenth Day (decadi).  On 15 Brumaire, Year II (November 5, 1793) a report by Marie-Joseph Chenier on civic festivals constituted the prelude to the official organization of the national religion.”[19]

 

The movement, now firmly established, quickly enveloped the entire country.  Soon Christianity was considered an evil mistake of the past which had now finally been righted.  Steps were taken to insure that this dreaded menace was put to rest for good.  Even Catholics were forced to worship in secret if they were able to worship at all.  They were now getting a taste of the treatment they had given to the Lord’s Church for over a thousand years.

 

“The establishment of the republican era—that is, the substitution of the republican calendar for the Gregorian (decrees of 5th October) —was a political move, but it was also antireligious, as appears from the reports of Fabre d’Eglantine and of Romme, which are full of philosophic attacks upon dogma.  To substitute other dates and other festivals for the usual ones, to abolish Sunday and substitute the tenth day, to replace the names of the saints by those ‘of objects which constitute true national wealth,’ was to tear from Catholicism a part of its adornments and prestige, nay, to drive it violently out of the ordinary life of the nation.  This decree horrified foreigners: they thought that France had already destroyed Christianity within its borders.


The Committee of Public Instruction of the Convention had become a home of propaganda against Catholicism.  Gregoire states that Fourcroy said to him, repeating the phrase of Voltaire: ‘This infamous religion must be crushed.’  On 26th June 1793 Lakanal had proposed, in the name of Committee, a series of national festivals, which in due course took the place of religious festivals.”[20]


“...the convention applauded, and had printed, a speech in which Marie-Joseph Chenier, in the name of the Committee, proposed to substitute the religion of the fatherland for Catholicism: ‘Wrench,’ he said, ‘the sons of the Republic from the yoke of theocracy which now weighs upon them...then, freed from prejudice and worthy to represent the French nation, you will be able, on the ruins of fallen superstitions, to found the one universal religion, which has neither secrets nor mysteries, whose one dogma is equality, whose orators are the laws, whose pontiffs are the magistrates, which asks no incense from the great human family to burn save before the altar of our country, our mother, and our deity.’”[21]


“The center of anti-Roman Catholic propaganda was now the Convention of Public Instruction, which was organizing a national system of education which recommended that no more clergy or nuns were to be appointed as teachers.  With this organization of a national school system began what has become the hottest single issue of church and state controversy in nearly every Western country.


The culmination of this movement came with the conversion of the churches into ‘temples of reason’ which could with equal accuracy be called ‘temples of nationalism.’  The movement took its cue from the famous ceremony at Notre Dame in Paris.  The statue of the virgin was replaced by an actress in blue and to her Chenier’s hymn was addressed:

 

Come holy liberty, inhabit this temple

Become the goddess of the French people.

 

When the Paris commune asked to have Notre Dame permanently converted to a ‘Temple of Reason,’ the Convention gave its permission.  The whole ceremony was repeated for the Convention, whose president and secretary embraced the ‘Goddess of Liberty.’  Some two-thousand towns similarly turned their parish churches into ‘temples of reason’ and even the rural communes followed suit.  In Paris the ceremony had been rather playful, but in the provinces it was a sincere affirmation of deism and patriotism, and the Goddesses of Reason were the flower of the bourgeoisie.  The Convention followed rather than led the movement.


Roman Catholic worship continued over the winter in private chapels, and when these were closed in the spring of 1794, it was largely secret.  Sometimes country people met with the schoolmaster to sing hymns.  In March 1794 mass was still said openly in 150 parishes.  But the greater part of the French nation had broken the habit of Christian religious observance and seemed indifferent to its loss.


In June of 1794 occurred another pageant of religion, Robespierre’s Fete de l’etre supreme.  The closing of Christian churches increased after this festival.


Late in 1794 the direct attack on Christianity by doctrinaire deistic nationalism passed into a new phase which shortly came to resemble the American system of separation of church and state with religious liberty.  As was to be the case with the U.S.S.R. in the twentieth century, the Convention found it advantageous in its foreign negotiations not to seem too irreligious.  A new policy of killing Christianity off by cultural strangulation was devised.  Clerical salaries, which had been paid during the Terror, were cut off in September 1794.  The crucial pressure now was to be in the field of education, in which the new free and compulsory elementary schools were purged of religious teaching.  Instead was substituted the study of the ‘Declaration of the Rights of Man,’ the Constitution, and ‘Republican morals.’  Normal schools and a polytechnical school had been organized to complete the system.  Thus it was hoped that by a monopoly on indoctrination of the new generation, something like Rousseau’s ‘civic religion’ could replace Christianity.”[22]

 

This attitude of toleration for Christianity was not by far the end of the persecution.  The Convention had simply changed its methods of attempted eradication.  Their determination was still as strong as ever.

 

“After the Terror came a conservative reaction and in 1795 a new constitution placed the state under the government of a Directory.  Religious freedom was proclaimed, but the Directory and its regime were anti-Christian.”[23]

 

“The Committee replied...: ‘Let religious ideas alone and they will fall by themselves.  It is persecution which gives rise to those horrible wars called sacred.’  In a circular letter...the Committee said to its representatives: ‘No doubt the triumph of truth over falsehood is sure; let us hasten it, but do not let us be too precipitate, however grievous it may be to have to contend with opinions which good sense ought to have swept away with the dust of wrecked monarchy....Those whom ancient prejudice still blinds must be enlightened.’  A blow must be struck at ‘those scoundrels who preach of heaven the better to devour the earth.’”[24]

 

Although Christianity was still the target of persecution, it was Catholicism which was the real target, Protestants were rarely molested.  But even before this religious toleration began in 1795 the Protestants had found themselves suddenly freed from the persecutions of Rome which had shackled them for many centuries.  And they were much better off facing the persecutions of the French government than they had been facing that of the papacy.

 

“Little was heard of the other Christians, the two Protestant sects—Calvinists and Lutherans—under Separation.  The same may be said of the Jews.  Both Protestants and Jews submitted to the laws and silently enjoyed the liberty accorded them after centuries of persecution.  The government seems to have had no need to trouble about any of them.”[25]


“The philosophers and rationalists proceeded with the movement for the abolition of Christianity, in which they had the support of the Government.


The idea of the Directory, at any rate sometimes, was that its part was more than that of umpire in the rivalry of churches.  It had a philosophical and political bias against the Roman Catholic Church.  The clearest expression of its purpose is found in its letter to General Bonaparte, Commander of the Army in Italy, dated 13 Pluviose of the year V, and signed by La Revelliere-Lepeaux, Barras and Reubell.  They told him that ‘the Roman religion would always be the irreconcilable enemy of the Republic.’  It must be struck in France; it must be struck in Rome.  ‘There are, no doubt,’ they said, ‘means which can be employed at home to diminish its influence insensibly, either by legislation or by institutions which will efface old impressions by substituting new ones more agreeable to the actual order of things, more conformable to reason and a sound morality.  But there is one thing even more essential to the attainment of the end desired, and that is to destroy, if possible, the center of unity of the Roman Church; and it is for you, who unite in your person the most distinguished qualities of the general and of the enlightened politician, to realize this aim if you consider it practicable.”[26]

 

The great French general Napoleon, was thus empowered to make all possible attempts to crush Catholicism at its base.  Napoleon soon led his army deep into Italy, eventually taking most of the Papal States away from the pope, much to the chagrin of Pius VI.

 

“The General of the Army in Italy was Bonaparte.  When he won his notable successes against Sardinia and Austria in 1796, the Directory instructed him to take the city of Rome and despoil the Pope.  The papal court called for terms.  The Directory required, however, not merely an indemnity, but an explicit retraction of all the violent expressions in bulls and briefs about the Revolution.  This Pius VI could not agree to, and he broke the truce by appealing to Austria to attack the French.  Napoleon at once moved further into the papal states and set even more stringent terms.  By these France took the better half of the papal states and a large indemnity.  This seizure of the papal lands was the beginning of the end of the Temporal Power, an ending which was to be the focus of Roman Catholic interest throughout the nineteenth century.”[27]

 

Napoleon had been directed by the Directory to destroy the papacy if possible.  But by this time, although still just an army officer, his success had made him probably the most powerful man in France.  He knew that he could bypass the orders of the Convention if he so chose.  So looking ahead to his own political future, instead of trying to destroy the Pope, realizing his political clout all over Europe, Napoleon chose to make him an ally.

 

“The general of the Camaldulenses arrived at the Vatican at the moment when the Pope was about to enter his carriage and to leave Rome.  The prince, cheered by the message brought by that ecclesiastic, relinquished his intention of quitting the capital, dismissed Busca, the secretary of state, and despatched Cardinal Mattei, the prelate Galeppi, Marquis Massimi, and his nephew, the Duke of Braschi, to Tolentino, to treat with the French general.  They had full powers to treat, provided the general required no sacrifice connected with the faith.  The treaty was thereby rendered perfectly easy, for on the articles of faith the French general laid no stress whatever.  The treaty was concluded in a few days, and signed at Tolentino on the 1st of Ventose (February 19).  Its principal conditions were these.  The Pope revoked all treaties of alliance against France, acknowledged the Republic, and declared himself in peace and good understanding with her.  He was to disavow the murder of Basseville, and to pay three hundred thousand francs for the benefit of his heirs and of others who had suffered by the same event.


While this treaty was negotiating, Bonaparte had contrived to awe the court of Naples, and to rid himself of it.  Before he left Tolentino he performed a remarkable act, and one which demonstrated his personal policy thus early in his career.  Italy, and the Papal states in particular, were full of exiled French priests.  These unfortunate men, retired in convents, were not always received there with much charity.  The ordinances of the Directory forbade their stay in countries occupied by our armies; and the Italian monks were not sorry to be delivered from them by the approach of our troops.  These unfortunate men were reduced to despair.  Long separated from their country, exposed to the disdain of foreigners, they wept at the sight of our soldiers.  They even recognized some of them, whose ministers they had been in the villages of France.  Bonaparte was easily moved; besides, he was anxious to appear exempt from every kind of revolutionary and religious practice; he issued an order commanding all the convents of the Holy See to receive the French priests, to subsist them, and to give them pay.  Thus, instead of putting them to flight, he improved their condition.  He wrote to the Directory, explaining the motives which had induced him to commit this violation of its ordinances.  ‘By continually hunting down these unfortunate men,’ said he, ‘you force them to return home.  It is better that they should be in Italy than in France; they will be useful to us there.  They are less fanatical than the Italian priests; they will enlighten the people, who are excited by all means against us.  Besides,’ added he, ‘they weep on seeing us; how is it possible not to pity their misfortunes!’ The Directory approved of his conduct.  This act and this letter were published, and produced a very strong sensation.”[28]

 

This incident changed, almost overnight, the way in which Christianity was viewed within the Republic.  Although it was still some two and one-half years before Napoleon would assume the reigns of power in a coup d’etat, he already possessed the power and influence to cause the Directory to change its harsh policy towards Christianity.  In many ways Napoleon was already the leader of France.  Thus three years, six months, and nine days, after the infamous festival of August 10, 1793, the Bible suddenly came back to life with the treaty Napoleon signed with the pope on February 19, 1797.  The Directory dared not cross Napoleon who had only to march his troops to Paris and depose them.  Which, incidentally, he eventually did.  History clearly shows us that after this time the worship of Catholics and Protestants alike returned to normal.  At least as normal as it could be after such a series of dramatic events.

 

“The Protestants also resumed public worship.  By 1797 most of the old parishes were restored.”[29]

 

The events which occurred in revolutionary France during this time are unparalleled in modern history.  Never have such abrupt changes in attitude occurred over religious or any other matters of such significance.  Christianity, which had been the national religion for centuries, was discarded, and then embraced again in less than four years.  No other event in history would even come close to matching so perfectly the French Revolution’s agreement with the prophesies of Revelation.



11:12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither.  And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.


After the two witnesses lay dead in the streets of France for three and one-half years they were called up into Heaven by a voice.  Their enemies beheld them as they triumphantly ascended into Heaven in a cloud.  The enemies of the Bible see it brought back to life and now it is placed out of their reach in Heaven.  Now they will no longer have access to it so that they might do it harm.


This story is remarkably similar to Christ’s ascension into Heaven after His resurrection.  “And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight” (Acts 1:9).  Christ ascended into Heaven, triumphant over sin and death, after Satan’s best attempts to defeat Him.  Likewise here, the Bible has won out over Satan’s wicked attempts to destroy it, it has been resurrected from the dead, and ascends victoriously into Heaven.  This does not mean that the Bible was actually removed from the earth.  This picture of the Bible ascending into Heaven is merely symbolic of its victory over evil.  In ascending into Heaven the Bible has been placed out of Satan’s reach.



11:13 And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven.


“And the same hour,” means that at the same time that the Bible lay dead in the streets of Paris, a great earthquake occurred.  As we have already seen in Revelation an earthquake is symbolic of some great upheaval or conflict.  This upheaval, whatever it is, will result in the death of seven-thousand men, and will frighten those who remain.  We are told that seven-thousand men will be killed, but from what we have seen thus far we should not be looking for that exact number.  This number will very likely just turn out to be symbolic and represents the idea that a great multitude will be slain.


Quite often in the Bible you will find that a large number is used figuratively, and is not at all meant literally.  For example, Psalm 50:10 says, “For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.”  We know that every creature upon the face of the earth belongs to God.  But if we took the number in this verse literally, the cattle upon hill number 1,001, and those upon hill number 1,002, etc., would not belong to God.  So we see that the number one-thousand is symbolic and is really used to represent every hill.


Another example is Psalm 105:8.  “He hath remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations.”  How long is a generation?  Smith’s Bible Dictionary says it is about thirty or forty years.[30]  If we were very conservative and took a generation as twenty years, one-thousand generations would still be twenty-thousand years!  Clearly this is not the case.  So here again we see that one-thousand is used, not in a specific way, but in a symbolic way.  Therefore we do not have to find exactly seven-thousand people slain in this period we are looking for.  All we need is a “large” number of men slain.


When we examine history we indeed find a time of great unrest and violence during the French Revolution.  It is known as the “Reign of Terror.”  This period was also filled with severe religious persecutions.  The following passage gives a brief explanation of the Reign of Terror.

 

“On April 6 the Convention established the Committee of Public Safety as the executive organ of the Republic and reorganized the Committee of General Security and the Revolutionary Tribunal.  Agents were sent to the departments to supervise local execution of the laws and to requisition men and munitions.  During this period rivalry between the Girondists and the Montagnards became increasingly bitter.  A new Parisian outburst, organized by the radical journalist Jacques Rene Hebert (1755-94) and his extremist colleagues, forced the convention to order the arrest of twenty-nine Girondist delegates and the Girondist ministers Pierre Henri Helene Marie Lebrun-Tondu (1763?-93) and Etienne Claviere (1735-93) on June 2.  Thereafter the radical faction in control of the government of Paris played a decisive role in the conduct of the Revolution.  On June 24 the convention promulgated a new constitution, the terms of which greatly extended the democratic features of the republic.  The document was never actually put into effect, however.  Leadership on the Committee of Public Safety passed, on July 10, to the Jacobins, who completely reorganized it.  Three days later the radical politician Jean Paul Marat, long identified with the Jacobins, was assassinated by the aristocrat Charlotte Corday, a Girondist sympathizer.  Public indignation over this crime considerably broadened the Jacobin sphere of influence.  On July 27 the Jacobin leader Maximilien Robespierre was added to the Committee of Public Safety, and soon became its dominant member.  Robespierre, aided by Louis Saint-Just, Lazare Carnot, Georges Couthon (1755-94), and other prominent Jacobins, instituted extreme policies to crush any possibility of counterrevolution.  The powers of the Committee were renewed monthly by the National Convention from April, 1793, to July, 1794, a period known in history as the Reign of Terror.


From a military standpoint, the position of the republic was extremely perilous.  The enemy powers had resumed the offensive on all fronts.  Mainz had been recaptured by the Prussians, Conde-Sur-L’Escaunt and Valenciennes had fallen, and Toulon was under siege by the British.  Royalist and Roman Catholic insurgents controlled much of the Vendee and Brittany.  Caen, Lyons, Marseille, Bordeaux, and other important localities were in the hands of the Girondists.  By a new conscription decree, issued on Aug.  23, the entire able-bodied male population of France was made liable to conscription.  Fourteen new armies, comprising about 750,000, were speedily organized, equipped, and rushed to all fronts.  Along with these moves the committee struck violently at internal opposition.  On Oct. 16 Marie Antoinette was executed, and twenty-one Girondists were beheaded on Oct.  31.  Beginning with these reprisals, thousands of royalists, nonjuring priests, Girondists, and other elements charged with counterrevolutionary activities or sympathies were brought before revolutionary tribunals, convicted, and sent to the guillotine.  Executions in Paris totaled 2639; more than half (1515) of the victims perished during June and July, 1794.  In many of the outlying departments, particularly the main centers of royalist insurrection, even harsher treatment was meted out to traitors, real and suspect.  The Nantes tribunal, headed by Jean Baptiste Carrier (1756-94), which dealt most severely with those who aided the rebels in Vendee, sent more than 8000 persons to the guillotine within three months.  In the whole of France, revolutionary tribunals and commissions were responsible for the execution of almost 17,000 individuals.  Including those who died in overcrowded disease-ridden prisons and insurgents shot summarily on the field of battle, the victims of the reign of terror totaled approximately 40,000.  All elements of the opposition suffered from the terror.  Of those condemned by the Revolutionary tribunals, approximately 8 percent were nobles, 6 percent were members of the clergy, 14 percent belonged to the middle class, and seventy percent were workers or peasants charged with draft dodging, desertion, hoarding, rebellion, and various other crimes.  Of these social groupings, the clergy of the Roman Catholic Church suffered proportionately the greatest loss.  Anticlerical hatred found further expression in the abolition, in October, 1793, of the Julian calendar, which was replaced by a republican calendar.  As part of its revolutionary program, the Committee of Public Safety, under the leadership of Robespierre, attempted to remake France in accordance with its conceptions of humanitarianism, social idealism, and patriotism.  Striving to establish a “Republic of Virtue”, the committee stressed devotion to the republic and to victory and instituted measures against corruption and hoarding.  In addition, on Nov.  23, 1793, the Commune of Paris, in a measure soon copied by authorities elsewhere in France, closed all churches in the city and began actively to sponsor the revolutionary religion known as the Cult of Reason.  Initiated at the insistence of the radical leader Pierre Gaspard Chaumette (1763-94) and his extremist colleagues (among them Hebert), this actually accentuated growing differences between the centrist Jacobins, led by Robespierre, and the fanatical Hebertists, a powerful force in the convention and in the Parisian government.”[31]

 

It is quite easy to see how this matches the description found in our verse.  The earthquake described the Reign of Terror itself.  Both of the phrases “the tenth part of the city fell,” and “were slain of men seven thousand,” symbolically denote the grave consequences the Reign of Terror had on France.  The name “Reign of Terror” itself should give us a very good indication of the atmosphere in France during this period of time.  There should be little doubt that the “remnant were affrighted.”  Anyone was subject to be grabbed, tried, and executed by reason of the slightest suspicion.  If you notice in the above reference for those whom the dates of their birth and death are listed, they all died during this period of time.  Not even the politically powerful were immune to the madness and insanity which had gripped France during this time.


“Gave glory to God,” does not mean that all of France suddenly became Christians.  All it signifies is that when people saw that Christianity was not even phased by all of the things it had been put through, and that it had easily won out over the Cult of Reason, the goddess of Nature, and even the entire Age of Enlightenment, they were, to say the least, impressed.  Many had thought that the end of Christianity was near.  They assumed that reason and understanding would triumph over the silly myths and superstitions, which to them was all that Christianity was.  But when they saw that, instead of falling, Christianity had bounced back with remarkable quickness, many would be inclined to believe that God had a hand in the turn of events.  And certainly those who already believed in God would give Him the glory for the “resurrection” of Christianity in France.



11:14 The second woe is past; and, behold, the third woe cometh quickly.


Here we are finally told that the second woe is past.  In reality it was finished at the end of chapter nine, but all the material from the beginning of chapter ten until now was not technically part of the third woe.  All of these events took place prior to the third woe, and actually “set the stage” for it to occur.  It was needful for God to show us these things before He began the third woe, so that the events would make more sense to us.


Since God wanted to present some intermediate material to us which was part of neither woe, He had the choice of putting this verse before or after that material.  If this statement had been located in the beginning of chapter ten we would have assumed that all of the material immediately following it was part of the third woe, when in fact, it was not.  It would have been harder to make a distinction that way, than the ways it actually appears.  The context clearly shows that the second woe was over at the end of chapter nine.



11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.


We have previously mentioned that the seventh trumpet would not reveal to us some great world event, but instead would reveal seven vials, just like the seventh seal revealed the seven trumpets.  These seven vials will be used to destroy the secular power of the apostate Roman Church.  With the power of Rome broken, Satan’s hold on the governments of the world will be greatly reduced.  For many centuries the nations of Europe had been in allegiance with Rome.  They had not only consented to the abominations of Rome, but in many instances had actually joined in.  They had often acted as Rome’s executioners.  The Catholic clergy would not kill anyone themselves, actually Church law forbade them to shed blood, but would turn over convicted heretics to civil governments for execution, usually by burning at the stake.


The statement that “The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord,” does not mean that everyone became members of the Lord’s Church.  But it does symbolize the turn away from the apostate religion of Rome, towards Christianity.  Governments that had for centuries joined with Rome in the persecution of true Christians, now worked to protect their rights.  These nations became places where Christianity could grow and flourish.  This idea will be greatly elaborated on in chapter twenty.


“There were great voices in heaven.”  We are not told whose voices these were.  It could have been the angels, the four creatures, or someone else.  But regardless of their identity they were faithful to God.  They were glad to see the “beginning of the end” of spiritual Rome.  “He shall reign for ever and ever,” denotes the everlasting nature of the Kingdom of God.  “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end” (Luke 1:32-33).  The end of this world does not even signal the end of the Kingdom of Christ.  Rather than ending, the Kingdom, or the Church, will then be turned over to God, and will ascend into Heaven.  “Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power” (I Corinthians 15:24).



11:16 And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon their faces, and worshipped God,

11:17 Saying, We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned.


The twenty-four elders, which were first introduced in chapter four are again seen here worshipping God.  They have been explained previously to represent the Old and New Covenants.  The fathers of the twelve tribes of Israel from the Old, and the twelve Apostles from the New.  Upon seeing God preparing to take vengeance upon the Catholics, who have oppressed Christianity for many centuries, the twenty-four elders are very thankful and begin to praise and worship God.  They make reference to God’s eternal nature as one who was, and is, and always will be.  Unlike everything we know in the physical world around us, God has neither a beginning nor an ending, which makes Him unique among all creatures.


God always had the power to defeat Satan, and his puppet the pope, but He chose not to do so for a long time.  Finally, as the twenty-four elders point out, “thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned.”  Why God chose to allow Rome to have power for so long only He knows.  Certainly He had His reasons, and it is not the place of man to question them.  God has always been known for His patience and longsuffering.  Perhaps He was still hopeful that Rome would repent of its wickedness.  But they did not, and the final result of this struggle, which was never in doubt, was that righteousness overcame unrighteousness.  Satan was defeated once again.



11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.


Several things in this verse seem to indicate that we might be considering the end of the world.  But we will see many things occur after this, therefore this cannot be the end.  So what do all of these statements have reference to?  It is again speaking of God’s judgment on spiritual Rome.


“The nations were angry” describes the feelings of the European nations as God’s judgment on Rome begins.  All of the nations had, in the past, supported Rome, and most of them were still doing so.  Since shortly after the fall of Rome in A.D. 476, the popes exerted tremendous power and influence in the affairs of Europe.  A relationship both economic and political had developed between Rome and the nations of Europe.  This relationship was advantageous for both sides.  Certainly neither side wished it to be disturbed since it would mean they would suffer loss.  Therefore the nations were angry to see the turmoil coming upon the Catholic Church.  They were extremely dismayed at what they saw in revolutionary France, and things will just continue to worsen for the papacy and all of her partners in crime.


“Thy wrath is come,” has reference to the wrath of God.  The time has now come for God to pour out His great wrath upon Rome.  “The time of the dead, that they should be judged,” does not mean the Day of Judgment, which will occur at the end of the world.  When the fifth seal was opened in chapter six we saw the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God, under the altar.  In the next verse they asked, “How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?”  They asked that their blood be “judged” and avenged.  These saints would be “judged” worthy and righteous, when their murderers, Rome, were made to suffer for their crimes.  The thought is the same in our present verse.  The dead, more exactly the righteous dead, should be “judged,” and when found worthy, their murderers should be punished.


The reward to the prophets, the saints, and those who fear God’s name, is the same as just mentioned in the previous paragraph.  The reward is God’s vengeance and punishment of those who have oppressed and murdered His people for centuries.  Every righteous person would be made very happy to see spiritual Rome toppled.  This would seem like a reward to them for their faithful service.


“Shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.”  The two occurrences of the word “destroy,” both come from the same Greek word “diaphtheiro.”  Diaphtheiro is defined by Strong’s as, “to rot thoroughly, i.e. (by implication) to ruin (passively decay utterly, figuratively pervert):-corrupt, destroy, perish.”[32]  To fit the context the second occurrence could be better rendered as corrupt.  So God was about to destroy those who “corrupt” the earth.  This is exactly what the Catholics had done.  They had spread their false doctrines over the entire world, and had met any and all opposition with violent repression.  But now God was about to bring an end to all of this.  The “destroyers” were about to be destroyed.



11:19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.


This is just another reference to the opening of the Bible to the common people, and the corresponding effect it had on the Catholics.  Under the Old Law the temple was the place of worship.  Inside the temple, inside the Most Holy Place to be exact, the ark of the covenant was kept (Exodus 26:33-34).  One of the items it contained was the two tables of stone upon which had been written the ten commandments (I Kings 8:9).  Comparing this with the Christian age, we have the Church, which has the Law of God written in their hearts and minds.  “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them” (Hebrews 10:16).  The Church holds up the Bible to be the sole authority for all spiritual matters.  So looking at the Church one would see God’s word personified.


The giving back of the Bible to the common people led to tremendous problems for Rome, and eventually to her downfall.  What we have pictured in this verse is the Bible being open to the view of anyone who desires to look at it.  This leads to a revival of the Lord’s Church.  It has been present since its foundation in the first century.  But for 1,260 years it had been hiding in the wilderness in order to escape Catholic oppressions.  Now, suddenly, the situation has changed to the point where the Church can come out of hiding.  The world can now see the Lord’s Church again for the first time in over a thousand years.  The Church was not meant to be hid, but persecution had forced it.  Now the Church could exemplify the words of Jesus: “Ye are the light of the world.  A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.  Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.  Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 5:14-16).  Men could once again see the light.  The “temple of God” was opened for all to see.


The “lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail,” show us the way the Reformation seemed to Rome.  The thing which they had feared and fought against for so long had finally come.  The Lord’s Church was now free to publicly teach the Bible and many people were believing it.  This was Rome’s worst nightmare come true.  Subsequent chapters will provide the details of Rome’s fall and all of the judgments that God brought against it.

 

 


[1] World book, 1985, s.v. “reed.”

 

[2] Davis, 1983, s.v. “sackcloth.”

 

[3] Ibid., s.v. “olive.”

 

[4] Kenneth S. Latourette, A History of Christianity, (New York, NY: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1953), p. 1008.

 

[5] James H. Nichols, History of Christianity 1650-1950: Secularization of the West, (New York, NY: The Ronald Press Company, 1956), p. 123.

 

[6] Latourette, 1953, p. 1009.

 

[7] Archibald G. Baker, A Short History of Christianity, (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1940), pp. 185-6.

 

[8] J. Nichols, 1956, pp. 112-3.

 

[9] Robert H. Nichols, The Growth of the Christian Church, (Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster Press, 1941), pp. 252-3.

 

[10] J. Nichols, 1956, p. 114.

 

[11] Ibid., p. 116.

 

[12] A. Aulart, Christianity and the French Revolution, (New York, NY: Howard Fertig Inc., 1927) pp. 96-8.

 

[13] Ibid., p. 100.

 

[14] Ibid., pp. 100-1.

 

[15] J. Nichols, 1956, p. 118.

 

[16] Aulart, 1927, pp. 102-3.

 

[17] J. Nichols, 1956, pp. 118-9.

 

[18] Georges Lefebvre, The French Revolution from 1793 to 1799, (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1964), pp. 76-7.

 

[19] Ibid, p. 77.

 

[20] Aulart, 1927, pp. 103-4.

 

[21] Ibid., p. 104.

 

[22] J. Nichols, 1956, pp. 125-6.

 

[23] Latourette, 1953, p. 1010.

 

[24] Aulart, 1927, p. 115.

 

[25] Ibid., p. 150.

 

[26] Ibid., pp. 150-1.

 

[27] J. Nichols, 1956, pp. 125-6.

 

[28] M. A. Thiers, The History of the French Revolution, (New York, NY: D. Appleton and Company, 1980), pp. 108-9.

 

[29] J. Nichols, 1956, p. 122.

 

[30] Smith, 1986, s.v. “generation.”

 

[31] Funk & Wagnall’s, 1973, s.v. “French Revolution.”

 

[32] Strong, 1982, s.v. “Greek #1311.”