“The head of this image was of fine gold… You, O king, are the head of gold.”

Then SCJ would use this to point to the interpretation that “head” is the leader of a kingdom, like Nebuchadnezzar. SCJ would also then use the following logic to justify their interpretation, that if head means leader or king, then in Revelation head would also mean a leader or king, aka a pastor.

“And behold, another, like a leopard, with four wings of a bird on its back. And the beast had four heads, and dominion was given to it.”

Here, “heads” symbolize different rulers within a kingdom (e.g., the four divisions of Greece under Alexander’s generals).

SCJ would then borrow the pattern to argue that “heads” are always “ruling authorities”, and then they would spiritualize it.

• “Head” = pastor with authority
• “Horn” = person without authority

“And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads…”

They would combine this with Daniel 7:7-8 and claim:

The “heads” represent seven pastors or leaders of the beastly organization (false churches).

Each “head” has a name of blasphemy → “Pastors who speak lies against God’s truth.”

“This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; they are also seven kings.”

SCJ seizes on the word “kings” → “leaders with authority.”

But since they interpret “king” as “pastor,” they conclude:

“The heads are seven pastors, and the horns are their followers”.

“Christ is the head of the body, the church.”

“The husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church.”

These verses would also confirm that the “head” means “one with authority” in a relationship. SCJ takes this legitimate metaphor and extends it universally:

→ “Every ‘head’ in prophecy = a religious leader.”

When examining how the Bible uses the word “head” (rosh in Hebrew), it becomes clear that the term is consistently tied to authority, rank, or leadership in a political or positional sense—not to someone who teaches God’s word or reveals spiritual secrets. Shincheonji (SCJ) often reinterprets passages containing the word “head” as symbolic of a spiritual leader or “promised pastor,” claiming that “head” refers to one who possesses or imparts divine revelation. However, the biblical contexts of these verses do not support that view. Each instance demonstrates that “head” refers to rulership, dominance, or prominence, not to prophetic instruction or revelation.

In Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, the “head of gold” represents the Babylonian Empire and its king. Daniel states plainly that God granted Nebuchadnezzar power and dominion, elevating his kingdom above others. The “head” is therefore symbolic of political supremacy, identifying Babylon as the foremost among earthly empires. There is no spiritual dimension of teaching or revelation here—only an acknowledgment of worldly power granted by God. SCJ’s use of “head” to suggest a spiritual figure who interprets God’s hidden word is a distortion of the text’s plain meaning. In this context, “head” marks the top position in a hierarchy, not a revelator of divine mysteries.

Isaiah’s words to King Ahaz describe the political structures of the nations threatening Judah. “The head of Syria is Damascus” means the capital city holds authority over the nation, and “the head of Damascus is Rezin” identifies the ruling monarch. Both uses refer to geopolitical leadership—the place and person in charge. Isaiah’s statement outlines the earthly power dynamics of the time, not a spiritual chain of revelation. SCJ’s claim that such “head” passages symbolize a hierarchy of spiritual authority or a modern “promised pastor” ignores the context entirely. Isaiah’s prophecy deals with national politics and territorial rule, not hidden spiritual teachings.

This verse forms part of the blessings and curses of the Mosaic covenant. To be “the head” signifies that Israel would be in a position of advantage and leadership among nations if they obeyed God’s commandments, while being “the tail” would mean subjection and defeat. The imagery contrasts national prominence versus subordination. It has nothing to do with revealing divine truth or being appointed as a spiritual mediator. By interpreting “head” here as a reference to a single individual who possesses God’s revelation, SCJ imposes a meaning foreign to the passage. The verse describes collective national blessing and authority, not the rise of a prophetic figure.

In the New Testament, the term “head” (kephalē in Greek) carries deep metaphorical and theological significance, especially in describing Christ’s relationship to the Church and God’s order of authority. However, these passages still maintain the consistent biblical meaning of “head” as source, leader, or authority, not as a symbolic reference to a human “pastor” who reveals secret knowledge. Shincheonji (SCJ) misinterprets these verses by spiritualizing them into parables that supposedly point to a “promised pastor” who acts as the head through whom believers must connect to God. In reality, these texts point directly and exclusively to Christ’s authority and supremacy, not to any human mediator or teacher.

Paul declares that God “put all things under [Christ’s] feet and gave Him as head over all things to the church.” Here, “head” expresses Christ’s universal authority and His role as the source of life and direction for the Church. It conveys sovereignty, not secrecy. Christ is the one through whom the Church receives spiritual growth, guidance, and unity. SCJ’s reinterpretation of this verse—as though “head” represents a human figure appointed to rule over the church—fundamentally misplaces authority. The passage exalts Christ’s supremacy as divine, not the rise of a new human representative. To claim otherwise is to substitute the authority of the Son of God with that of a man, which directly contradicts the purpose of Paul’s teaching.

Paul explains, “The head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.” This verse outlines God’s order of headship—a relational and functional hierarchy rooted in divine design, not a hidden metaphor about revelation. “Head” here describes authority and responsibility within relationships, demonstrating how leadership and submission coexist within God’s structure. It does not depict a chain of spiritual intermediaries. SCJ’s interpretation turns this into a coded message about a spiritual figure who mediates between God and believers, which distorts Paul’s plain meaning. The passage is about God’s order and unity, not a secret hierarchy of revelation through a “pastor.”

In Colossians, Paul warns against false teachers who rely on mystical visions instead of holding fast to Christ, “the Head, from whom the whole body… grows with a growth that is from God.” Here, “Head” clearly refers to Christ as the spiritual source of nourishment and unity for the Church, which is described as His body. The false teachers are condemned precisely because they separate believers from direct dependence on Christ. Ironically, SCJ’s doctrine commits the same error—it instructs followers to rely on a human leader rather than on Christ Himself. Paul’s teaching emphasizes that spiritual vitality comes from remaining connected to Christ, not from attaching oneself to a man who claims to be His representative.

Across these passages, “head” consistently refers to Christ’s supreme authority, divine leadership, and sustaining relationship with His people. It represents the source and ruler of the Church, not a human teacher or pastor. The New Testament’s metaphorical use of “head” points believers back to Christ alone as the One who governs, nourishes, and unites His body. Shincheonji’s interpretation—that “head” is a parable for a man through whom all spiritual understanding flows—fundamentally inverts the biblical message. In Scripture, the Head is Christ Himself, not a pastor standing in His place.

In prophetic and apocalyptic literature, the term “head” is used symbolically—but the Bible itself defines the meaning. In these contexts, “heads” represent kingdoms or kings, not individual pastors or spiritual figures. Shincheonji (SCJ) frequently takes these passages and reinterprets them to claim that “heads” refer to church leaders or “pastors” within their own framework of history and prophecy. However, Revelation explicitly provides the interpretation, leaving no room for speculative or parabolic meanings. When Scripture explains its own symbols, human reinterpretation is both unnecessary and misleading.

In Daniel 7, the vision of beasts represents successive world empires, and the mention of multiple “heads” corresponds to divisions of political power or kingly authority. The leopard with four heads in Daniel 7:6, for example, symbolizes the Greek Empire and its division under four rulers following Alexander the Great’s death. The same symbolic logic carries into Revelation, where John sees a beast rising from the sea with seven heads and ten horns (Revelation 13:1). Later, Revelation 17:9–10 explicitly defines the meaning of these heads: “The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. They are also seven kings.” The text interprets itself—there is no ambiguity. The “heads” signify kingdoms and kings, representing geopolitical powers that oppose God, not pastors or church leaders.

Shincheonji’s reinterpretation of these passages to refer to “pastors” or spiritual figures within their own narrative ignores the plain, inspired explanation provided within Scripture. The consistent pattern—from Daniel to Revelation—shows that “heads” denote earthly rulers and kingdoms within prophetic visions of world history and judgment. To read these as “parables” about modern religious figures is to replace the Bible’s interpretation with a human invention. Revelation already defines the symbol clearly, leaving no doctrinal basis for SCJ’s claim that “heads” represent pastors or spiritual authorities.

Shincheonji (SCJ) collapses distinct biblical genres—historical and apocalyptic—into their own modern church framework. In Scripture, apocalyptic imagery like “heads” clearly refers to kings and kingdoms, representing political powers in conflict with God’s people. SCJ, however, forces this imagery into a modern ecclesiastical context, claiming that these “heads” symbolize pastors or religious leaders in their organizational system. This approach disregards the historical setting and genre of the text, replacing the intended global and imperial scope of Daniel and Revelation with a narrow, institution-centered allegory.

Revelation 17:9–10 explicitly defines the meaning of “heads”: “The seven heads are seven mountains… they are also seven kings.” The author of Revelation leaves no ambiguity—“heads” represent kings or kingdoms. SCJ disregards this inspired explanation, substituting their own interpretation to fit their doctrine. This is not merely a difference in interpretation; it’s a rejection of the author’s stated definition. Ignoring the Bible’s internal explanations undermines Scripture’s authority and replaces divine revelation with human reinterpretation.

SCJ operates within a self-referential interpretive loop—they use their own symbolic dictionary to explain the Bible, rather than allowing the Bible to interpret itself. Once their system defines a term, that meaning is imposed across all passages, regardless of context. This circular reasoning makes the doctrine unfalsifiable, since every verse is filtered through SCJ’s own framework. Instead of seeking the author’s intent, SCJ’s theology begins and ends with its own assumptions, effectively making the text serve the system rather than the system serve the text.

The notion that the “heads,” “horns,” and “beasts” in Revelation represent pastors and evangelists comes not from Scripture, but from SCJ’s organizational hierarchy. They project their church structure—tribes, leaders, and evangelists—into the apocalyptic visions to legitimize their authority and claim fulfillment within their group. This is a clear case of doctrinal eisegesis (reading ideas into the text) rather than exegesis (drawing meaning from the text). By injecting their hierarchy into biblical prophecy, SCJ turns Revelation into a mirror of its own structure rather than a revelation of God’s redemptive plan in Christ.

SCJ’s interpretation of “heads” in Daniel and Revelation fails on multiple fronts: it collapses literary genres, ignores the text’s own explanations, relies on circular definitions, and imports man-made doctrine into the biblical narrative. These errors collectively distort Scripture’s meaning and shift authority from God’s Word to SCJ’s interpretive system.