The whore of Babylon

[Tom]

AndrewL:

Akins tried to suggest that Jerusalem is the Babylon of Rev 17. The problem is , neither in the Bible nor among early Christians was Jerusalem ever known as Babylon. Only Rome is , and that is a well known fact .

I tend to agree that Jerusalem is not the Babylon referred to, doesn’t mean the Vatican is. BTW the “Roman” of the Catholic Church has little to do with geography, it was still the “Roman” rite while the seat of Peter was temporarily located in France. As has been stated already, the Vatican is not in “Rome”.

 

[Tom]

AndrewL:

Next, Akins use the “ great city” argument. He wrote , “ Revelation consistently speaks as if there were only one "great city” ” . Now what the author of Revelation did say was that there was a city which he referred to as “ the great city “ ( See Rev 16:19 ) , but he never said that there was only one great city and he never said that each time he mention that a city is a “ great city” he is referring to “ the great city “ ! There is certainly more than one great city in the world ! No doubt the Woman is a great city , and therefore she is referred to as such in the book of Revelation , but the author of Revelation did not say that the Woman is that great city which he refers to as “ the great city”.

I agree, I think the “great city” is San Fran Cisco.

 

[Tom]

AndrewL:

1. The association of Babylon and seven hills does not bring Jerusalem to mind . It is highly debatable as to whether Jerusalem sits on seven hills , and it was never well known in John’s context to refer to Jersusalem as Babylon .

Nor does it bring to mind the Vatican, since there are not seven hills in the Vatican.

 

[Tom]

AndrewL:

Next , the author tried to differentiate between Pagan Rome and Christian Rome . He wrote : “ Even if we grant that the reference is to Rome, which Rome are we talking about—pagan Rome or Christian Rome?”

Here I disagree with you. It is entirely possible for the reference to apply to Pagan Rome, not the Christian Rome nor the Vatican.

 

[Tom]

AndrewL:

Now , the separation of Rome into Pagan and Christian is entirely Akin’s and not the Bible’s. The Bible did not separate the woman’s history into pre-Christian and Christian. All it mention is this woman , this city on 7 hills known as Babylon , who ill-treated the apostles and prophets in John’s day, who would one day be a spiritual adulteress associated with the ultimate Antichrist ( the beast ) . It is therefore predicting the entire history of Rome, from Pagan to “Christian” all the way to the last days of the Beast with whom she would be associated .

You are guilty here of the same error you claim Akin makes by stating that “It is therefore predicting the entire history of Rome, from Pagan to “Christian” all the way to the last days of the Beast with whom she would be associated” I agree Akins is giving his understanding, as you are giving your understanding, neither of which is stated in Scripture. It is “My” understanding that Rev is referring to Rome, not the Vatican, and that indeed Rome fit the Scripture perfectly; the ultimate antichrist was the Roman Empire. It has been conquered by Jesus and His Catholic Church. The proximity of the Vatican to Rome symbolized the triumph of Christ over the antichrist Roman Empire.

 

[Tom]

AndrewL:

Pagan Rome cannot be accused of spiritual adultery . Akin’s point that “ Ancient, pagan Rome also fits the description, since through the cult of emperor worship it also committed spiritual fornication with “the kings of the earth” (those nations it conquered)” is not valid , since Pagan Rome is Pagan by definition and therefore does not have a relationship with Christ to began with and therefore cannot be justly accused of being unfaithful to Christ .

Incorrect, spiritual adultery applies to God, there was spiritual adultery prior to the incarnation.

 

[Tom]

AndrewL:

In the Bible, the imagery of a people or city committing adultery, or being labeled a harlot, is CONSISTENTLY a reference to COVENANT UNFAITHFULNESS.A multitude of passages in various prophetic books use the harlotry theme to condemn Israel for her sin. ( cf. Ezek 16:15, 17, 28, 35, 41; 23:1–21, 44; Isa 1:21; 57:3; Jer 2:20; 3:1; 13:27; Hos 2:2–5; 4:12, 15, 18; 5:4; 9:1; Mic 1:7) In fact, of the many passages that illustrate this constant theme, the only two exceptions to Israel being the referent are two prophecies against Tyre and Nineveh, both of which had formerly been in covenant with Yahweh.

You have just disproved your contention that spiritual adultery only applies to a Christian.

 

[Tom]

AndrewL:

The unfaithfulness of the Pope to Christ and his abdominations has been well documented eg Pope John Paul II gathering of the heathen to pray “ to the same God ” and replacing the Cross with the Buddha in Assis ,1986 .

Bearing false witness is a sin. I realize you are probably ignorant of the actual circumstances therefore partly not culpable of this sin, however you should research for the truth and not simply spread false statements as you are. I will pray for you

 

[Tom]

I’d like you to be a little more specific here please.

AndrewL:

the Rome who is called the bride to Christ and yet who is unfaithful to Christ

You are obviously referring (falsely) to the Catholic Church. Please, specifically how is the Catholic Church “unfaithful to Christ”?

 

[Tom]

AndrewL:

The Rome which exist from the 1st to the 4th century was obviously never associated with THE ultimate Antichrist ( the Beast of Revelation 17, who is the same as the Beast in Revelation 13 ) , who has yet to appear ! Yet we see that the Woman in Rev 17 is associated with that Antichrist .

The “ultimate Antichrist” is the reformation and those who follow it. They are the ones attacking the Church that Jesus established.

 

[Eden]

The Vatican is in Vatican City. Vatican City is not in Rome. Vatican City is its own country which borders the city of Rome.

vatican.va/vatican_city_state/index.htm

I feel obligated to tell you that the fact that you are promoting the idea that the Church founded by Christ is the Whore of Babylon would be very pleasing to the devil. Rather than immersing yourself in conspiracy theories, why don’t you read the early Church fathers to find out truth? The early Church fathers had no “agenda”. Ignatius of Antioch (the bishop who was martyred circa 107 A.D. on his way to Rome) describes very clearly the early Church and it’s not Protestant. Ignatius wrote his letters while John was still alive:

Contents of the Ignatian letters It is scarcely possible to exaggerate the importance of the testimony which the Ignatian letters offer to the dogmatic character of Apostolic Christianity. The martyred Bishop of Antioch constitutes a most important link between the Apostles and the Fathers of the early Church. Receiving from the Apostles themselves, whose auditor he was, not only the substance of revelation, but also their own inspired interpretation of it; dwelling, as it were, at the very fountain-head of Gospel truth, his testimony must necessarily carry with it the greatest weight and demand the most serious consideration. Cardinal Newman did not exaggerate the matter when he said (“The Theology of the Seven Epistles of St. Ignatius”, in “Historical Sketches”, I, London, 1890) that “the whole system of Catholic doctrine may be discovered, at least in outline, not to say in parts filled up, in the course of his seven epistles”. Among the many Catholic doctrines to be found in the letters are the following: the Church was Divinely established as a visible society, the salvation of souls is its end, and those who separate themselves from it cut themselves off from God(Philad., c. iii); the hierarchy of the Church was instituted by Christ (lntrod. to Philad.; Ephes., c. vi); the threefold character of the hierarchy (Magn., c. vi); the order of the episcopacy superior by Divine authority to that of the priesthood (Magn., c. vi, c. xiii; Smyrn., c. viii;. Trall., .c. iii);the unity of the Church (Trall., c. vi;Philad., c. iii; Magn., c. xiii);the holiness of the Church (Smyrn., Ephes., Magn., Trall., and Rom.); the catholicity of the Church (Smyrn., c. viii); the infallibility of the Church(Philad., c. iii; Ephes., cc. xvi, xvii); the doctrine of the Eucharist (Smyrn., c. viii), which word we find for the first time applied to the Blessed Sacrament, just as in Smyrn., viii, we meet for the first time the phrase “Catholic Church”, used to designate all Christians; the Incarnation (Ephes., c. xviii); the supernatural virtue of virginity, already much esteemed and made the subject of a vow (Polyc., c. v); the religious character of matrimony (Polyc., c. v); the value of united prayer (Ephes., c. xiii); **the primacy of the See of Rome **(Rom., introd.). He, moreover, denounces in principle the Protestant doctrine of private judgment in matters’ of religion (Philad. c. iii), The heresy against which he chiefly inveighs is Docetism. Neither do the Judaizing heresies escape his vigorous condemnation.

May God bless you on your journey to truth.

 

[Tom]

AndrewL:

“ Since the Whore persecuted apostles and prophets, the Whore must have existed in the first century. This totally demolishes the claim that Christian Rome or Vatican City is the Whore. Rome was not a Christian city at that time, and Vatican City did not even exist” are not valid .

you lost me here, I saw no proof or reasoning for your assertion. Why is it not valid?

 

[Ignatius]

AndrewL:

Now , the separation of Rome into Pagan and Christian is entirely Akin’s and not the Bible’s.

One more falacy in your logic is this; the conversion of Rome didn’t come until after the end of the Apostolic era in which the scriptures were closed. Additionally you should be aware that it is the Catholic Church, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, which determined the cannon of the New Testament. Look up the “Cannon of the New Testament” and research the Catholic Church councils of Hippo and Carthage.

Your brother in Christ.

 

[Ignatius]

Hay guys, where are the answers from AndrewL? Looks like he’s afraid to answere the responses to his own post.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

Tom:

I agree, I think the “great city” is San Fran Cisco.

Me too :clapping:

 

[Eden]

Ignatius:

Hay guys, where are the answers from AndrewL? Looks like he’s afraid to answere the responses to his own post.

It looks like AndrewL has not been online since around 5:30 this morning. Either the early bird catches the worm or just goes to bed late and sleeps in. If he’s in EST, the second explanation is more likely since he hasn’t been active since.

 

[adventistnomore]

Lol… Catholics are great… what else do we do on a Saturday moring but debate?

AndrewL,

It seems that one crux of your argument is the identification of spritual harlotry as (by necessity) a characteristic of apostasy among God’s people. I read your arguments with great interest, and would like to compliment you pentrating insights into the most common uage of the image of prostitution in the prophetic books of the Bible.

Nonetheless, I challenge that conclusion.

Chilton’s comments on the spiritual harlotry of Nineveh are correct. Having forsaken their reentence and turnign to God has made them harlots. Still, it is difficult to contend that Tyre “was converted to the worship of God.” 1 Kings 5 and 9 only establishes that Israel and Tyre enjoyed a political alliance, and perhaps that the people of Tyre accepted the worship of YHWH. No reference is made to the influence of that worship, nor to any rejection of other gods on the part of the Tyrans, such as would place them in a spiritual relationship with God. (A spiriual relationship with God demanded repentance for wicked acts and a turning towards the worshipof YHWH alone). In a Near Eastern culture so prone to worship many gods, including foreign ones, Chilton’s claim demands more evidence. This is especially needed in the lght that the account of Tyre’s destruction (Is. 23:16-17) has very strong parallels to the prophecy of Rev 17.

However, an examination of other prophetic books illustrates a stronger flaw in Chilton’;s argument. Many nations are described as women, including Babylon. (Ps. 137:8; Jer. 51, 33, etc.) In Isaiah 47, the prophet laments over the (once) “virgin daughter of Babylon/Chaldees,” (v.1) to whom Israel was once delivered as a punishment upon God’s people. Now God issues crushing rebukes for her “sensual” behavor, (v.8) pride, and sorceries. (v. 9-15) Once again, we have clear prallels to the vision of Babylon’s doom in Rev 17-18.

One should reaize that identifying pagan worship as adultery, sensuality, or prostitution is not exclusively applied to God’s people. This is because altough Israel had a singular covenant relationship with God, all nations have ALWAYS been under the demands of God’s law and universal covenant. (Isaiah 24:5) The disobedience of the nations reckons them a violators of God’s plan for the world. Therefore, it is an unnecessary to identify Babylon with an apostate portion of God’s people. Pagan nations that persecute God’s people, including Babylon, have been also been painted as harlots, irrespective of their lack of a specific covenant relationship with God.

I believe that in view of Rev 17:18 (as you contended), the image of Babylon certainly applies to the city of Rome. I do not, on the other hand, support your conclusion that this image cannot apply to pagan Rome. I not only believe it can, but that it does. Pagan Rome – not the Church of Rome – persecuted the apostles, a detail you did not consider important enough to spend any time discussing. As for the denial that pagan Rome is represented in this passage beause the city of Rome "was never utterly thrown down in one hour with violence, famine and fire to such an extent that she ‘shall be found no more at all,’’ I remind you that the city of Rome met its swift (though long-anticipated destruction) durng the Barbarian attacks of 476 CE. The collpase of imperial power in the Western Roman Empire was gradual in coming (as it was long under threat of invasion and faced insurrmountable difficulties within its infrastructure, as was the case Babylon, Nineveh, etc.) but like these powers, when its hour did arrive…it arrived with one potent stroke.

For the most part, Rome, the most feared city of the Mediterranean, was reduced to ruins (many of which still stand to this day). It was found guilty for the blood of martyrs – apostles, church fathers, Christians, etc. Even though it adopted Christianity as its official religion in the fouth-fifth century, its government was still marked with corruption and excess. After centuries of forebearance, the city of Rome was punished. The Christians of the period saw the barbarian invasions as the scourges of God upon Rome.

Still, the destrction of Rome as prophesied in Revelation 17 probably represents a larger destruction of God’s oppressors at the end of time, and should not be narrowly defined as the destruction of the city of Rome itself. Athough the woman is defined as the city of Rome, certain indicators within the passage seem to suggest that John especialy has in view a future antichristian power (v. 9-10), typified by the city of Rome, but representing the full spectrum of God’s last day enemies.

 

[adventistnomore]

P.S. Ex 34:15

“…otherwise you might make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land and THEY would play the harlot with their gods and sacrifice to their gods, and someone might invite you to eat of his sacrifice…”

Pagan nations do play the harlot.

 

[VociMike]

Andrew, you do not even understand what Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat mean, and so your entire argument falls apart.

 

[RodK]

AndrewL,

Those are interesting points.

If I take your point, your assertion is that apocalyptic Rome must be a religious entity, presumably one that was at one time in covenant with God. It seems that you have given this a great deal of thought. I will certainly study and pray about this matter.

However that being said, I think your conclusions have some obvious problems.

For starters, the early Church clearly identified the person of the antichrist with a particular Roman Caesar, and therein the whore of Babylon as pagan Rome itself. In the original Greek manuscripts of the Apocalypse of John, the number of the beast is given to be 666. But by the end of the second century Latin translations began appearing that identified the number as 616. Was it simply a misprint duplicated by many copyists along the way? Unlikely.

During the reign of Caesar Nero, to be Christian was a death sentence and he crucified them by the thousands. It was perhaps Christianity’s darkest hour. Now interestingly enough, the numeric sum of the name Caesar Nero in Greek is 666. Care to guess what the numeric sum of Caesar Nero in Latin is? That’s right 616. The Church identified Caesar Nero as the beast of Revelations and therein pagan Rome itself as the whore of Babylon. Certainly then you can see where it could in fact be said that pagan Rome had become “drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus”. (Revelation 17:6, RSV)

Now, this does not mean that Nero was the one and only antichrist. Oh no. When you study biblical typology the thing that jumps off the pages of the Holy Writ is that God believes in reuse. For example, the Old Covenant sacrifices of the Temple saw themselves at the culmination of Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac when they were themselves just types of the once for all sacrifice of Christ. Types pointing to types pointing to types until the referent itself is revealed. In that Nero was an antichrist, it can be surmised that he will not be the last, or even the worst.

But, if Nero is an antichrist type, and therein pagan Rome a type of the whore of Babylon, then clearly, the condition that the whore of Babylon must have at one time been in covenant with God is false. Was pagan Rome in covenant with God? No! Let me say it with emphasis: PAGAN ROME WAS NEVER IN COVENANT WITH GOD. And thus the argument doesn’t even get out of the starting gates. The only way to logically preserve your objection is to say that Nero was not an antichrist type, that these early Christians got it wrong. If that is what you believe, then that is what you believe. I will respectfully disagree with you.

It is interesting to me to note that whenever non-Catholics try to typecast the Catholic Church as the whore of Babylon and therein the Pope as the antichrist, they never reconcile these beliefs to anything outside of Revelations, especially John’s first epistle:

Children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come; therefore we know that it is the last hour. I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and know that no lie is of the truth. Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. (1 John 2:18,21-22)

Does the Catholic Church deny that Jesus was and is the Messiah? Does it deny of the Triune God? NO! I say it again: NO! The Catholic Church shouts these truths from rooftops. Can you produce the text of even one of the 265 Popes ever to say such a thing as this? The second that the Church denies or perverts these truths, I will be Catholic no more.

Continued …