Yes, it was late last night so didn't fully get through the reasoning.
Revelation 17 is one that I've long wrestled with, not feeling fully convinced with any interpretation of either U.Smith or others.
I realize you are fully convinced what you have found is the truth. I however can't be "forced" into accepting any interpretation. I need to be convinced myself what is correct and so far the "kingdoms" building up the mystical/religious endtime Babylon make the most sense to me.
I've always been highly suspicious (long before you came) of any interpretation that tries to name a last person as pope or president, or antichrist, and yes, many DIFFERENT people, with different reasoning, have presented studies trying to identify these.
Yes, I realize you are focusing on the popes, not the presidents.
I realize you agree with the pioneers that the dragon's seven heads are the seven forms of Roman government.
You then seem to take the seventh dragon head (papal Rome) and divide it into seven new heads on papal beast in Rev. 13
(that one is confusing for me as it seems to make a very large number of popes -- those before 1798 -- into seven heads)
You then say the seventh head of Rev. 13 is actually a single pope ---Pius VI in 1798-- marking the end of 40 month (1260 year) period.
For the beast of Rev. 17 you start with the pope who received the Lateran Treaty, Pius XI, as the first of it's seven heads, and make all the seven heads, single popes, with the additional eighth being Pope Francis.
Now, it also puzzles me that you base so much on staying with the early pioneers interpretation, yet move totally away from their reasoning on several points.
1. In identifying the seven heads of the Rev. 13, and Rev. 17 beasts, the pioneers held that ALL three had the SAME seven heads of seven forms of Roman government.
2. The pioneers strongly disagreed that the seven mountains were the seven hills of Rome.
3. They maintained that Babylon is much larger than the Roman .
The inquiries therefore naturally follow: What is meant by the term Babylon? what is its fall? and how is it fulfilled? As to the etymology of the word, we learn something from the marginal readings of Gen.10:10 and 11:9. The beginning of Nimrod's kingdom was Babel, or Babylon; and the place was so called because God there confounded the language of the builders of the tower; and the word means confusion. The word is here used figuratively to designate the great symbolic city of the book of Revelation, probably with special reference to the signification of the term, and the circumstances from which it originated. It applies to something on which, as specifying its chief characteristic, may be written the word "confusion." {1897 UrS, DAR 647.4} (page 648 picture)
There are but three possible objects to which the word can be applied; and these are (1) the apostate religious world in general, (2) the papal church in particular, and (3) the city of Rome. In examining these terms, we shall first show what Babylon is not. {1897 UrS, DAR 649.1}
1. Babylon is not confined to the Romish Church. That this church is a very prominent component part of great Babylon, is not denied. The descriptions of chapter 17 seem to apply very particularly to that church. But the name which she bears on her forehead, "Mystery, Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth," reveals other family connections. If this church is the mother, who are the daughters? The fact that these daughters are spoken of, shows that there are other religious bodies besides the Romish Church which come under this designation. Again, there is to be a call made in connection with this message, "Come out of her, my people" (Rev.18:1-4); and as this message is located in the present generation, it follows, if no other church but the Romish is included in Babylon, that the people of God, as a body, are now found in the communion of that church, and are to be called out. But this conclusion, no Protestant at least will be willing to adopt. {1897 UrS, DAR 649.2}
2. Babylon is not the city of Rome. The argument relied upon to show that the city of Rome is the Babylon of the Apocalypse runs thus: "The angel told John that the woman which he had seen was the great city which reigned over the kings of the earth, and that the seven heads of the beast are seven mountains upon which the woman sitteth." And then, taking the city and the mountains to be literal, and finding Rome built upon just seven hills, the application is made at once to literal Rome. {1897 UrS, DAR 649.3}
The principle upon which this interpretation rests is the assumption that the explanation of a symbol must always be
650
literal. It falls to the ground the moment it can be shown that symbols are sometimes explained by substituting for them other symbols, and then explaining the latter. This can easily be done. In Rev.11:3, the symbol of the two witnesses is introduced. The next verse reads: "These are the two olive trees and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth." In this case the first symbol is said to be the same as another symbol which is elsewhere clearly explained. So in the case before us. "The seven heads are seven mountains," and "The woman is that great city;" and it will not be difficult to show that the mountains and the city are both used symbolically. The reader's attention is asked to the following points:- {1897 UrS, DAR 649.4}
(1) We are informed in chapter 13 that one of the seven heads was wounded to death. This head therefore cannot be a literal mountain; for it would be folly to speak of wounding a mountain to death. {1897 UrS, DAR 650.1}
(2) Each of the seven heads has a crown upon it. But who ever saw a literal mountain with a crown upon it? {1897 UrS, DAR 650.2}
(3) The seven heads are evidently successive in order of time; for we read, "Five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come." Revelation 17. But the seven hills on which Rome is built are not successive, and it would be absurd to apply such language to them. {1897 UrS, DAR 650.3}
(4) According to Dan.7:6, compared with DAn.8:8,22, heads denote governments; and according to Dan.2:35,44; Jer.51:25, mountains denote kingdoms. According to these facts, the version of Rev.17:9,10 given by Professor Whiting, which is a literal translation of the text, removes all obscurity: "The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sitteth, and they are seven kings." It will thus be seen that the angel represents the heads as mountains, and then explains the mountains to be seven successive kings, or forms of government. The meaning is transferred from one symbol to another, and then an explanation is given of the second symbol. {1897 UrS, DAR 650.4}
From the foregoing argument, it follows that the "woman" cannot represent a literal city; for the mountains upon which the woman sitteth being symbolic, a literal city cannot sit
651
upon symbolic mountains. Again, Rome was the seat of the dragon of chapter 12, and this was transferred to the beast (Rev.13:2), thus becoming the seat of the beast; but it would be a singular mixture of figures to take the seat, which is sat upon by the beast, and make that a woman sitting upon the beast. {1897 UrS, DAR 650.5}
(5) Were the city of Rome the Babylon of the Apocalypse, what nonsense should we have in chapter 18:1-4; for in this case the fall of Babylon would be the overthrow and destruction of the city, in fact, its utter consumption by fire, according to verse 8. But mark what takes place after the fall. Babylon becomes a habitation of devils, the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. How can this happen to a city after that city is destroyed, even being utterly burned with fire? But worse still, after all this a voice is heard, saying, "Come out of her, my people." Are God's people in Rome? - Not to any great extent, even in her best estate. But how many can we suppose to be there, to be called out, after the city is burned with fire? It is not necessary to say more to show that Babylon cannot be the city of Rome. {1897 UrS, DAR 651.1}
3. Babylon signifies the universal worldly church. Having seen that it cannot be any one of the only other three possible objects to which it could be applied, it must mean this. But we are not left to this a priori kind of reasoning on this subject. Babylon is called a woman. A woman, used as a symbol, signifies a church. The woman of chapter 12 was interpreted to mean a church. The woman of chapter 17 should undoubtedly be interpreted as signifying also a church. The character of the woman determines the character of the church represented, a chaste woman standing for a pure church, a vile woman for an impure or apostate church. The woman Babylon is herself a harlot, and the mother of daughters like herself. This circumstance, as well as the name itself, shows that Babylon is not limited to any single ecclesiastical body, but must be composed of many. It must take in all of a like nature, and represent the entire corrupt or apostate church of the earth. This will perhaps explain the language of Rev. 18:24,
652
which represents that when God makes requisition upon great Babylon for the blood of his martyrs, in her will be found "the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all" that have been slain upon the earth. The Greek Church is the established church of Russia and Greece; the Lutheran Church is the established church of Prussia, Holland, Sweden, Norway, and a part of the smaller German states; England has Episcopacy for her state religion, and other countries have their established religions, and zealously oppose dissenters. Babylon has made all nations drunken with the wine of her fornication, that is, her false doctrines; it can therefore symbolize nothing less than the universal worldly church. {1897 UrS, DAR 651.2}
The great city, Babylon, is spoken of as composed of three divisions. So the great religions of the world may be arranged under three heads. The first, oldest, and most wide-spread is paganism, separately symbolized under the form of a dragon; the second is the great Romish apostasy, symbolized by the beast; and the third is the daughters, or descendants from that church. Under this head comes the two-horned beast, though that does not embrace it all. War, oppression, conformity to the world, the worship of mammon, the creed-power, pursuit of pleasure, and the maintenance of very many errors of the old Romish Church, identify, with sad and faithful accuracy, the great body of the Protestant churches as an important constituent part of this great Babylon. {1897 UrS, DAR 652.1}
The reasoning in that book is interesting! Obviously he studied the prophecies deeply. But I think you and I should agree that while we hold them up as good Biblical scholars searching for truth and worthy to be studied yet their conclusions are not always the final answer.
Hopefully you can see that you, yourself, while accepting their starting point, have not followed their path in your interpretation.
Even U.Smith seems to be departing from the standard identification of the heads in the above quote -- He seemed to be saying three of the heads represent
1. Pagan Religions
2. Roman Church
3. Apostate Protestantism
thus putting dragon, 1st beast of Rev. 13 and 2nd beast in Rev. 13 as "heads"?????
Yet that doesn't really fit with his definition of "mountains" which he spends quite a bit of time defining earlier in that same section.
Anyway -- this post is long. I realize I only gave some background for my answers, but still haven't answered your questions, but will attempt to do so soon.