The Revelation of Jesus Christ - The Herald

In this Scripture we are considering it should be understood that the angel is giving a
rapid survey from 96 AD even to the end. In his explanation of this part of the vision he
states what actually occurred in history a few centuries from St. John's day. This was, first,
that the Roman Empire did at that time become divided into ten kingdoms; and, second,
that these same kingdoms did subsequently receive power as kings with the beast through
its Papal head. It was not long after Papacy's exaltation and establishment, 539 AD, as all
historians are agreed, that these ten kingdoms did become of one mind by becoming
Roman Catholic, and by so doing gave their power and strength to the beast (Papacy) for
centuries. But some see a difficulty here and say, It reads that they received authority as
kings "one hour" with the beast, and how could one hour apply to so long a period in
history? In reply we would say first that it is a fact of history which cannot be successfully
disputed that the ten kingdoms did receive power from Papacy, they having previously
become Roman Catholic, and that this perfectly fulfills the prophecy. It is also equally true
that nearly all the other features of the vision have met their fulfillment. Furthermore, it is
generally admitted that the "hour" mentioned cannot refer to symbolical time, that is, to
fifteen days or to a literal hour. it will be seen then that in either method of interpreting the
vision it will be necessary to examine carefully the words translated "one hour," and thus
discover, if possible, its meaning.
Mr. Elliott, who was an eminent Greek scholar, as well as commentator, rendered these
words: "The ten horns are ten kings which receive power at one and the same time with the
beast." He says that this is the true, as it is the most natural, rendering. He further states
that it is in this sense that the patristic expositors generally understood it; and as regards
modern expositors, he says, it has so been explained by persons of the most differing
schools of interpretation; so of the Roman Catholic expositor Bossuet; as well as
Protestants, Mede, Daubuz, Vitringa, Whiston, etc.; so among living expositors, the
Futurist Burgh, as well as anti-Futurist Wordsworth, and spiritualist, I. Williams. Mr.
Elliott further enlarges:
"There is no doubt that accusatives of time may signify duration; but seldom, I believe,
except after verbs signifying action such as may imply time [here it evidently does not]:
e.g., Matt. 20:12, 'They worked one hour'; Matt. 26:40, 'to watch one hour.' Not often after
verbs . . . of action instantly completed. In most cases of the latter character the accusative
of time, marks the time at which, not the time for which. So John 4:52, 'Yesterday at the
seventh hour the fever left him.'
"That the numeral . . . even by itself, often bears the sense of the same is indubitable. As the
point is one of considerable importance let me give a few examples from both the Old and
the New Testament (O.T. Septuagint) 'We dreamed both of us in one and the same night, he
and I' (Gen. 41:11); 'We are all the sons of one and the same man' (Gen. 42:11); In the New
Testament Phil. 2:2, 'of one mind,' or more literally, 'thinking the one and same thing'; Eph.
4:4,5, where the sense is evidently, not that the Christians had each but one Lord,
numerically, instead of the many lords of the heathen; or but one baptism, numerically, in
contrast with the various baptisms of the Jews; but that they were united by the bond of
one and the same Lord, one and the same baptism and one and the same hope. And so, indeed,