Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary Revelation 13:3

"And [I saw] one of his heads as though it had been smitten unto death; and his death-stroke was healed: and the whole earth wondered after the beast;" — Revelation 13:3 (ASV)

The beast has a fatal wound, but the wound is healed. This results in great, worldwide influence, acceptance, and worship of both the beast and the dragon. This verse is important and requires careful exegesis because of the widespread Nero redivivus viewpoint that is read into the wounded head .

There are a number of features of John’s description that are inconsistent with both the Nero redivivus and the Roman Empire interpretations.

(1) It should be observed that the wounded “head” of v.3 is elsewhere in the chapter a wound of the whole beast (vv.12, 14). A wound inflicted in a former and rejected emperor is not a wound inflicted on the whole empire. If the reference is to Nero, it is difficult to see how his self-inflicted wound could have hurt the whole empire or how the healing of his throat enhanced the authority of the beast or the dragon’s war against the saints.

(2) The fatal wound must be carefully examined. “Wound” (GK 4435) everywhere else in Revelation means “plague,” in fact, a divinely inflicted judgment (9:18, 20; 11:6; 15:1ff.; 16:9, 21; et al.). Elsewhere in the NT the word is used of “beatings” or official “floggings” (12:48; Acts 16:23, 33; 2 Corinthians 6:5; 2 Corinthians 11:23).

In 13:14 we find that the beast was wounded “by the sword” (GK 3479), which supposedly refers to Nero’s dagger. But elsewhere in Revelation, “sword” (a) refers symbolically to the divine judgment of the Messiah (1:16; 2:12, 16; 19:15, 21); (b) is the sword of the rider on the red horse and equals divine judgment (6:4, 8); and (c) is a sword used as a weapon against the saints of God (13:10). We are, then, nearer to John’s mind if we see the sword, not as referring to an emperor’s death, but as the symbol of God’s wrath that had struck a death blow to the authority of the beast (and the dragon), yet which had been deceptively covered up or restored (for a probable antecedent, see Isa 27:1).

(3) The correct identification, therefore, of the beast’s enemy will enable us to understand what event John had in mind in the death blow. Everywhere in the book the only sufficient conqueror of the beast and the dragon is the slain Lamb, together with his faithful saints (12:11; 19:19–21).

Moreover, what dealt this death blow to the dragon and the beast is Jesus’ life, especially the crucifixion, resurrection, and exaltation (1:5; 5:9; 12:11; cf. Lk 10:17-24; 11:14–22: Jn 12:31-33; Colossians 2:15; also Ge 3:13ff.). That event is the mortal wound of the beast. The same paradox found in ch. 12 appears here in ch. 13. While the dragon is defeated and cast out of heaven through the blood of Jesus (cf. 12:11), he still has time and ability to wage a relentless war against the people of God (12:13ff.).

Similarly, the beast has been dealt a fatal blow by the cross of Christ and still has time and ability to wage war against the saints. He appears to be alive and in full command of the scene; his blasphemies increase. What the sea beast cannot accomplish, he commissions the earth beast to do (vv.11ff.). All three—the dragon, the sea beast, and the earth beast—are in collusion to effect the same end: deception that leads the world to worship the dragon and the sea beast and the destruction of all who oppose them. (4) It is this description that leads to a final reason why identifying the beast exclusively with any one historical personage or empire is probably incorrect.

In John’s description of the beast, there are numerous parallels with Jesus that should alert us to the fact that John is seeking to establish, not a historical identification, but a theological characterization: Both wielded swords (2:12, 16; 13:10); both had followers on whose foreheads were inscribed their names (13:16–14:1); both had horns (5:6; 13:1); both were slain (5:12; 13:3, 8); both had arisen to new life and authority (1:18; 11:15–16; 13:3–4); and both were given (by different authorities) power over every nation, tribe, people, and tongue, and over the kings of the earth (1:5; 7:9; 13:7; 17:12).

The beast described here is the great theological counterpart to all that Christ represents. Therefore, it is easy to understand why many in the history of the church have identified the beast with a future, personal Antichrist. While the references in the Johannine literature may be taken as supporting the view that the Antichrist is manifested in multiple persons and was a reality present in John’s day (1Jn 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2Jn 7), Paul’s description in such personal terms of the coming “man of lawlessness” (2 Thessalonians 2:3–4, 8–9) has led the majority of ancient and modern interpreters to adopt the viewpoint that it is a personal Antichrist. It is not necessary to understand Paul’s apocalyptic language as describing a personal Antichrist. Moreover, John says that in the false teachers “the antichrist” was actually present (2Jn 7).

But the question must remain open as to whether John in the Apocalypse points to a single archenemy of the church—whether past or future—or to a transhistorical reality with many human manifestations in history.

Thus the imagery would function similarly with regard to the image of the woman of ch. 12 or the harlot of ch. 17. If such is the case, this does not mean that John would have denied the earthly historical manifestations of this satanic reality; but it would prevent us from limiting the imagery merely to the Roman Empire or to any other single future political entity.