The Three Unclean Spirits

Berean · Posted: Sun Sep 29, 2002 12:50 pm Post subject: The Three Unclean Spirits

I really enjoyed Eugene Shubert's post on the three unclean spirits. I can see that it is a valid and reasonable explanation of them. Here are some additional thoughts that may apply as well.

Often the three unclean spirits are identified as the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet. But that’s not what the text says. The three unclean spirits come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.

The dragon, which gave his power, and his seat, and great authority to the beast, has long been identified as Satan working through the ancient Roman Empire and its religion, paganism. The beast, of course, is Catholicism, and the false prophet is apostate Protestantism. With the Protestant churches being the daughters of the great whore, the succession of spiritual influences from Paganism to Catholicism to apostate Protestantism is complete.

To identify these three unclean spirits, we must notice from whence they come. They come “out of the mouth.” What comes out of our mouths? Words. Our mouths are the channel for what we say. The context seems to indicate that the three unclean spirits are three unclean teachings, which came first out of the mouth of paganism, then out of the mouth of Catholicism, then out of the mouth of apostate Protestantism. The use of the word “spirits” in reference to teachings is not new. 1 Corinthians 14:32 uses it that way. “And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.” Substitute the word “teachings” for “spirits” and Paul’s words are clear: The teachings of each new prophet are subject to the criteria of established prophets.

In 1 John 4:1 the writer of Revelation says, “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” Substitute the word “teaching” for “spirit.” Isn’t he really saying, Believe not every teaching, but test the teachings that you hear? The apostle then supplies two tests. The first has to do with the human nature of Christ (1 John 4:2, 3). Antichrist would teach that Jesus did not come in our flesh. The second teaching to check is a confession that Jesus is the Son of God (verse 15).

So, back to our passage in Revelation 16:13, we are going to understand unclean spirits to be unclean teachings. Their dissemination is described to be “like frogs.” The only other place we find frogs in the Bible is in reference to the plague of frogs in Egypt. Notice the description in Exodus: “And the river shall bring forth frogs abundantly, which shall go up and come into thine house, and into thy bedchamber, and upon thy bed, and into the house of thy servants, and upon thy people, and into thine ovens, and into thy kneading troughs.” “And the frogs came up, and covered the land of Egypt.” Exodus 8:3, 6. The picture we get here is that the frogs were everywhere. So the three unclean teachings of Revelation 16:13, originating in the mouth of the dragon, would become pervasive everywhere.

“For they are the spirits of devils.” Verse 14. These must be the “seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils” that “in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to.” 1 Timothy 4:1. So we could read, “For they are the doctrines of devils working miracles.” Understanding “spirits” in Revelation 16:14 to denote teachings or doctrines makes a lot of sense, because devils really don’t have spirits. And if you ignore the comma that the translators inserted after the word “devils,” it is clear that the devils, not the “spirits,” are working the miracles.

With Babylon being the hold of every foul teaching, which ones are indicated in Revelation 16:13? They would have to have come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. Of all the doctrines taught in popular churches today, how many of them originated in ancient paganism, were absorbed into Catholicism, and continue to be mouthed by Protestants? Actually only three. While a good number of today’s customs may have pagan origins, the only doctrinal beliefs to have come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet, are Trinitarianism, the natural immortality of the soul, and Sunday sacredness.

These three teachings supply the common points upon which the “whole world” will “gather” or unite (Revelation 16:14). For Satan’s purposes, these three points are all they need, for the first one strikes at the nature of God, the second at the nature of man, and the third at the sign of their relationship. Together they comprise the concentrate for Babylon’s wine of which all nations shall drink. Commentators generally feel that the word “he” in Revelation 16:16 would be better translated “they.” These three teachings will gather the world together.

“There has been for years, in churches of the Protestant faith, a strong and growing sentiment in favor of a union based upon common points of doctrine. To secure such a union, the discussion of subjects upon which all were not agreed—however important they might be from a Bible standpoint—must necessarily be waived.”(Great Controversy, p. 444)

“When the leading churches of the United States, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are held by them in common, shall influence the state to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions, then Protestant America will have formed an image of the Roman hierarchy, and the infliction of civil penalties upon dissenters will inevitably result.” (Ibid., p. 445)

Inspiration identifies two of the doctrines that will be used to unite the world. “Through the two great errors, the immortality of the soul and Sunday sacredness, Satan will bring the people under his deceptions.” (Ibid., p. 588) And it goes almost without saying that the central creed of the popular churches, the doctrine of the trinity, already functions as the primary point of common belief.

As a side note, “trinity” means “tri-unity.” The prefix “tri” (three) plus the Latin word “unus” (one) forms the word “triune.” God is viewed as a tri-union. While it may be a clever concept, you won’t find God described that way in the Bible. Yet through centuries of tradition since the Council of Constantinople (A.D. 381), that’s the way people have been taught to think of God.

In the following statement, James White enumerates four teachings that Protestants have inherited from the Catholic Church.

“The greatest fault we can find in the Reformation is, the Reformers stopped reforming. Had they gone on, and onward, till they had left the last vestige of Papacy behind, such as natural immortality, sprinkling, the trinity, and Sunday-keeping, the church would now be free from her unscriptural errors.” (Review and Herald, February 7, 1856)

Since a high percentage of evangelicals today reject the practice of sprinkling, it is unlikely to become a common point of doctrine to unite the world. And with no evidence of sprinkling being widely practiced in ancient paganism, we are safe to rule it out as a player in Revelation 16. That leaves from James White’s list the same doctrines we identified earlier, natural immortality, the trinity, and Sunday keeping—all three of which are held by nearly all Christians today.

The three messengers, or promoters, of these errors are, in historical order, the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet. God also commissions three global messengers, the three angels of Revelation 14, one following another, to proclaim the truth on these three points and warn the world of Babylon’s wine.

Let me know what you think.

Eugene Shubert · Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2002 10:25 pm Post subject: Re: The Three Unclean Spirits

Your interpretation of the three demons’ messages is natural immortality, the trinity, and Sunday keeping. I fail to see how we can both be right.

Nicolas · Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2003 3:54 am Post subject:

Hi,
I believe that the post of Berean is quite interesting but I can't agree with his/her conclusion as to the inclusion of the Trinity as an end-time heresy. There is no such denoucing in any of the writ. of EGW. She did mention Sunday Sacredness together with the Immortality of the Soul as end-time heresy which will be denounced by the End-time Church. But there is no trace of the Trinity as being an heresy, a deadly one which much be combatted by the End-time church. I believe that if it was such a poisonous teaching which has been deceiving million of soul for two millenium, her criticism of this teaching will have been more numerous and with much more emphasis than the Immortality of the Soul and Sunday Sacredness put together. But there is no such evidence. There is no testimony from the pioneers, esp. by the fact that they did denouced the teaching, that she endorsed and encouraged their denoucing.

To the contrary, what we read in her writing goes much hand-in-hand with that Trinitarians believe. The writ. of James White, U. Smith were not inspired. I believe that sincere as they were, there were sincerely wrong.

God Bless You.
Nicolas MARIE.