2 Women in Prophecy?!?

[Oska2]

I dont need to twist it. I just need to read the rest. Give it a try.

Revelation 11:8
And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified..

I have followed all the posts but they don’t seem to get an answer to the thread.
In all my researches, I’ve come to understand that the book of Revelation is symbolic. The moment you take it literally, you miss the point and you can move very far.

In the passage you have posted, it talks of Sodom and Egypt where also our Lord was crucified.
But Jesus was not crucified in either Sodom or Egypt, but in Jerusalem.
The style used in Revelation is figurative speech like when we say, “as sweet as honey”, or even “the kings of football” meaning the unbeatable team.

Sodom and Egypt are used symbolically in reference to what precipitated the crucifixion of Jesus. Religious system of the pharisees and the high priest is likened to Egypt’s religiosity which contested with the true God of Moses. Sodom’s judgement is likened to Israel’s judgement for disobeying God. Infact the word sodomy is derived from Sodom.

Its only through such kind of approach that we can understand the book of Revelation fully.
The Catholic Church has dogmatized that the woman in Rev. 12:1 is Mary in heaven. That’s how every Catholic should believe whether its true or not. This strengthens the tradition that Mary was taken up to heaven body and soul. However, the section that says, “the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared by God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days” is not much explained.
The other woman in Rev: 17 is declared to symbolically imply Jerusalem or literal Babylon.

Am greatly distressed by how much the book of Revelation is trivialized. If we truly love Christ, we should endeavor to understand what His revelation is all about and what it says to us and about our time.
I’ll chose to understand it for I love Christ, and I’ll appear before the throne of Judgement alone, not as a group. May the Grace of God be with us all.

 

[Gloria_de_G]

Mt. Goath, Mt. Gareb, Mt. Acra, Mt. Bezetha, Mt. Zion, Mt. Ophel, and Mt. Moriah.

Anything else??

Well dear Metal, why not to mention the Mt. of Olives, and if you are mentioning Mt. Goath, which is by the death sea, why not to mention the Mount of Temptation which is closer?? Sorry, I live here and I know that Jerusalem is not surrounded by seven mountains or hills but by many. Why to be choosy, just to try to match the prophecy?

And also the great city, which is called symbolically Sodom or Egypt, because of their innocuous behavior, is where there Lord was crucified, yes Jerusalem. But certainly all these makes difference from the Great Prostitute who is sitting on seven hills, which tradition until now and in the maps today shows to be in Rome and the Vatican happens to be at the center of Rome…

If you want to see more about this go here

The Metaphor of Prostitution in the Identification
of Babylon in Revelation 17–18

also go here: (you can click)The Great Prostitute? The Whore of Babylon? Who is?

Hope this helps to put things right,
Gloria

.

 

[Gloria_de_G]

I was thinking about another thread that I was discussing with a few other people and it got me thinking…
There are 2 women in Revelation…
The first one is in Rev. 12
verse 1: And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars
Now I was told that this woman was use to indicate Mary… OK fine… lets roll with that… the woman here is a literal woman described as giving birth to Christ who would rule with a Rod of Iron… ok cool… this point I will not debate either…
The Other woman in Revelation:
Chaoter 17
2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
So we have 2 women here… one is interpretted literally as Mary… so is the other woman to be taken literally as well? Is there literally (or was there literally) a woman who represented the Whore of Babylon? Or is she to be taken symbolically? If so why, if we are to still accept the first woman as literal?? Why the transition from literal to symbolic? What grounds did we interpret it that way? Are there other scriptures that do the same thing?
What do you all think?

Dear J, here is something that my husband wrote in the Review Biblique about the woman in chapter 12. May be you will be interest to read it:
THE MYSTICAL INTERPRETATION OF
REVELATION 12
An article published in Revue Biblique, Vol 114–4 (2007), 594–614

In the love of Christ and His Revelation,
Gloria

.

 

[onemangang]

The woman in Revelation 12 that you may have been taught to be Mary, is not limited to being about Mary alone, but also spiritual Israel, the Church!

The other woman in Revelation 17 that is riding the beast (Ancient Rome) she is the whore, who is Jerusalem!

Here is a quick view from catholic answers tract below

catholic.com/tracts/the-whore-of-babylon

God bless!

 

[Oska2]

The woman in Revelation 12 that you may have been taught to be Mary, is not limited to being about Mary alone, but also spiritual Israel, the Church!

The other woman in Revelation 17 that is riding the beast (Ancient Rome) she is the whore, who is Jerusalem!

Here is a quick view from catholic answers tract below

catholic.com/tracts/the-whore-of-babylon

God bless!

I wonder how the original recipients of the letter of Revelation, the 7 churches of Asia interpreted it. These Churches were of gentiles (Greeks) though there were Jews in the same Churches.

Rev:1:1: The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John.

By then, Jerusalem had already been destroyed and the temple burnt down as it was written around AD90, while Jerusalem was destroyed in AD70.
If the whore is Jerusalem, it would make no sense as it was already destroyed and the Revelation was about things in the future

 

[onemangang]

I wonder how the original recipients of the letter of Revelation, the 7 churches of Asia interpreted it. These Churches were of gentiles (Greeks) though there were Jews in the same Churches.

Each one had a message, but I think Jesus was giving a warning about impending trials and tribulations, soon to take place.

Rev:1:1: The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John.

Must shortly come to pass. I believe Jesus meant what He said

By then, Jerusalem had already been destroyed and the temple burnt down as it was written around AD90, while Jerusalem was destroyed in AD70.
If the whore is Jerusalem, it would make no sense as it was already destroyed and the Revelation was about things in the future

Why do you assume Revelation was written around A.D. 90?

I think there is ample evidence showing otherwise!

Historical Artifacts bearing witness to a pre-70 A.D. writing of the book of Revelation.

The “Syriac version” of the New Testament, which dates back to the second century A.D., states that Revelation was written during the reign of Nero making a date of 64-68 A.D.

The “Muratorian Fragment,” dating back to 170-190 A.D., states that this work of John was written during the reign of Nero.

The “Aramaic Peshitta” version has a remark that places its date prior to 70 A.D. The title page of Revelation states this work of John was written right after the reign of Nero.

The “Monarchian Prologues,” that dates back to 250-350 A.D., claims that Paul also wrote to these seven churches (possibly Romans which was a “circular letter,” it went out to many addressees) following John’s Book, thus, placing the book of Revelation even before some of the other Pauline epistles.

A quote, arguably attributed to Papius (130 AD), states that John the Apostle was martyred before the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70

From a previous posting of mine showing an early date of Revelation

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8994044&postcount=6

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8994047&postcount=7

God bless!

 

[Oska2]

Each one had a message, but I think Jesus was giving a warning about impending trials and tribulations, soon to take place.
God bless!

Thanks for the great insight from several commentaries.
My concern is that Jesus would have sent the letter of Revelation to at least one church in Jerusalem as the prophetic message was to affect Jerusalem to a greater extent including the destruction of the temple.
If the letter of Revelation was contained to only in the 7 churches in Asia, (current day Turkey), then the people of Jerusalem were caught unawares. They would never have realized that there had been a prophecy of an impending attack.
Also, most of the people in the 7 Churches had not seen Jesus and did not know much about the temple in Jerusalem. They had been founded by Apostle Paul during his missionary journeys and were struggling to remain true to the new faith in Christ.

 

[onemangang]

Thanks for the great insight from several commentaries.
My concern is that Jesus would have sent the letter of Revelation to at least one church in Jerusalem as the prophetic message was to affect Jerusalem to a greater extent including the destruction of the temple.
If the letter of Revelation was contained to only in the 7 churches in Asia, (current day Turkey), then the people of Jerusalem were caught unawares. They would never have realized that there had been a prophecy of an impending attack.
Also, most of the people in the 7 Churches had not seen Jesus and did not know much about the temple in Jerusalem. They had been founded by Apostle Paul during his missionary journeys and were struggling to remain true to the new faith in Christ.

If. St John wrote Revelation before the tribulation, which I believe he did, then that would give people almost a year to get the letter to Jerusalem before the war, and over 4 years before the fall of the temple!

It was more than just the fall of the temple, but the end of an age (an EON) as people would know it, thus strengthening people’s faith in Christ, by the word of prophetic fulfillment!

I also think St. Paul prophesied of Nero but that can be a later discussion!

God bless!

 

[Oska2]

T

The other woman in Revelation 17 that is riding the beast (Ancient Rome) she is the whore, who is Jerusalem!

God bless!

The whore could not be Jerusalem, who is riding on the ancient Rome. Reason is that, when Jerusalem was killing the prophets, it was not under Rome. Rome came far much later.

Also Israel had Northern Kingdom at Samaria and the Southern Kingdom at Jerusalem. Prophet Elijah & Elisha were not in Jerusalem but in Samaria. All these shows its not talking about Jerusalem.
I wonder why would Jesus would spend alot of time on matters that are overtaken by events. he must have been talking of important future events. And as we know Jesus used to talk in parables that were difficult to understand immediately. Even on his way to Golgotha, Luk:23:31: he said, “For if they do these things to a green tree, what shall be done to the dry?”

 

[onemangang]

The whore could not be Jerusalem, who is riding on the ancient Rome. Reason is that, when Jerusalem was killing the prophets, it was not under Rome. Rome came far much later.

I guess John the Baptist doesn’t qualify as a prophet then

Jesus Praises John the Baptist

matthew 11:7 As they went away, Jesus began to speak to the crowds concerning John: “What did you go out into the wilderness to behold? A reed shaken by the wind? 8 Why then did you go out? To see a man** clothed in soft raiment? Behold, those who wear soft raiment are in kings’ houses. 9 Why then did you go out? To see a prophet?[c] Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. 10 This is he of whom it is written,

‘Behold, I send my messenger before thy face,
who shall prepare thy way before thee.’

Also Israel had Northern Kingdom at Samaria and the Southern Kingdom at Jerusalem. Prophet Elijah & Elisha were not in Jerusalem but in Samaria. All these shows its not talking about Jerusalem.
I wonder why would Jesus would spend alot of time on matters that are overtaken by events. he must have been talking of important future events. And as we know Jesus used to talk in parables that were difficult to understand immediately. Even on his way to Golgotha, Luk:23:31: he said, “For if they do these things to a green tree, what shall be done to the dry?”

Really? Is it even necessary to post Scriptures about Jerusalem, or disobedient Israel being refered to as a Harlot?

There are plenty!

God bless!**

 

[Oska2]

Really? Is it even necessary to post Scriptures about Jerusalem, or disobedient Israel being refered to as a Harlot?

There are plenty!

God bless!

Thanks OneManGang,
Lets look at the texts more closely,
Rev:17:1:…I will show unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sits upon many waters:
Rev:17:2: With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
Rev:17:5: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

Let me pause for the sake of space.
Verse 2 talks of the kings of the earth & the inhabitants of the earth. If we take the word earth literally, it would imply, Europe, America, Africa & Asia. Jerusalem at the time of Jesus had not extended her influence to those lands, it never did. Thus its disqualified.
Verse 5 has several names. Let me take the portion of the name; ‘BABYLON THE GREAT’. Babylon had an empire that would be significant to a Jew. First they attacked the Jews, 2nd; destroyed the temple and the wall, 3rd; took the Jews to captivity in Babylon, 4th; forced them into servitude and idolatry. Daniel was put in a den of lions for failing to bow down to an idol.
The word Babylon was a bitter reminder of captivity and idolatry.

Am wondering why the harlot would have the bad name of Babylon and be referring to Jerusalem, the city of David.
If Jerusalem is portrayed as a harlot, then God would be likening paradise to a harlot because He calls it the NEW JERUSALEM.