>>596268
>Is it wise to try and figure out what this verse means?
Yes. However, anyone you ask you has a good understanding will tell you that understanding it is dependent on end-times prophecy elsewhere in scripture, in particular Daniel 9 and 12 and Olivet discourse (Mt. 24, Mk. 13, Lk. 22). Also parts of Luke 17, of 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 Corinthians 15 and many other prophecies including Genesis 3:15, Isaiah 13, 34, 66, Ezekiel 38-39 and Zechariah and others. It is like the other half of end-times prophecies, the last piece given making it possible to know more, but you need both halves. Reading carefully you will see callbacks to these OT prophecies in certain places, and noticing that and going to those places will give you more information to consider.
>Is Revelations chronological?
Almost, except that in Revelation 12 we move back to the birth of Christ, so you get much overlap between the timelines of 4-11 and 12-22.
>Does Revelations 13 happen after 12?
Yes
>>596945
>Because it is something that once was. a image of a person or beast, yet is not, because of being light particles, and yet is, because of appearing as light.
It's pretty clear that "was, and is not" is referring to the fact that the beast was alive and then died. After it resurrects, they will wonder at the beast because it just rose from the dead.
<Rev. 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
Recall Revelation 13:3 and 12
<And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.