The whore of Babylon

  • Thread starter Thread starter AndrewL
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Reply to Post 41

RodK:
"When the author of revelations refers to harlotry, it certainly seems to me that the issue is not that the whore of Babylon was once in covenant with God; "

A; You totally ignored my argument that when the Bible speaks of spiritual adultery , it consistently refers to unfaithfulness to a covenant made with God.

RodK: " rather she is symbolic of an institution that has aped Christianity and morphed it into something that is offensive to God. You see that as having occurred within the Catholic Church. But as I have already demonstrated, the antichrist must be someone that denies that Jesus is the Messiah and that He is God. The Catholic Church just doesn’t fit the mold. "

A: I never said that the Catholic church is the antichrist , but that she is the spiritual adulteress who , although professing a belief in Christ through baptism ( a sign of covenant ) in His name, is not faithful to Him .

RodK:” Rosenberg went so far as to draw up a program for the “National Reich Church”. In his plan, Christian places of worship would be confiscated by the state. All crosses, crucifixes and Bibles would be ejected. On the altar, or the pulpit, the only thing permitted would be a copy of “Mein Kampf” along with a sword. In place of the cross, the swastika would preside. "

A; The Pope also replaced the Cross with a statue of a Buddha on the altar in Assisi, 1986.

RodK:" It is interesting to me that Rosenberg, himself a henchman for the antichrist, saw both the Roman and Protestant Church as a common enemy. Read the book. And when you get finished with that one, get some material on the French Revolution. And when you have done that, read about the persecution of the early Church under pagan Rome. There you will find your whore of Babylon. There you will find your antichrist. There too will you find the future form of the whore of Babylon and the preeminent antichrist to come. "

A: The Nazi’s and the French Revolution are not a city on seven hills known as Babylon. The Nazi’s, the French Revolution and Pagan Rome do not have a covenant with Christ, so they cannot be justly accused of spiritual adultery which the Whore is said to commit in Rev 17 .

Praying for you .
 
I hope people don’t forget about AndrewL, he’s made a good effort to respond, now launch the counter-strike please.

In summary, Rome is not Vatican, Vatican is not Rome. The Catholic Church began with Jesus, not with Constantine. And Nihil Obstat does not mean Jimmy Akin is infallible, but he’s pretty darn close. :rolleyes: 😃

Carry on…

Phil P
 
I’ve came back to this thread after one month but so far no one has heeded Philvaz admonition to counter-strike …

I shall reply to Phil’s arguments ( note that none of his arguments defend Akins’ point that the Whore is either Pagan Rome or Jerusalem … )

PhilVaz : " In summary, Rome is not Vatican, Vatican is not Rome. The Catholic Church began with Jesus, not with Constantine. And Nihil Obstat does not mean Jimmy Akin is infallible, but he’s pretty darn close. "

A:Back to the prophecy in Rev 17, the whore refers to the city that has comitted adultery. A city that claims a covenant relationship with the God of the Bible. All the rest of the features ( Babylon , city on seven hills ) points to Rome . And Rome is a Roman Catholic city , housing the Roman Catholic church and the headquaters ( the Vatican city ) . Rome represents the Roman Catholic church. So even if the prophecy does not specifically refers to Vatican ( which sits on one hill ) , it doesn’t matter. It is already specific enough in pointing to Rome , which houses the headquaters of the Roman church and represents the Roman church . . And my point that the whore cannot refer to Jerusalem or Pagan Rome, which is the error in Akin’s article, has not been refuted so far …

PhilVaz : " Salvation by works is condemned by the Council of Trent "

A: I did not say The Roman Catholic church teach salvation by works ( you have to read my reply a little more carefully ) , but " salvation by works in addition to faith " . In another words , the Catholic church teach that neither faith alone and works alone are enough, but one must have " faith plus works " . This is the error . Salvation is by faith alone. This is taught by the Church Jesus founded. The Roman church became apostate when she departed from this.

Post 52 :
" AndrewL << But neither of these two quotations cancel out his error in his acknowledgement that all these different religions are “praying to the same God.” And his action of replacing the Cross in a church (a building that is dedicated to Christ ) with a statue of the Buddha is certainly abdomination of the worst kind. >>
PhilVaz : " I’m sorry but you’re going to have to quote the Pope directly and document what you say. Others here may be more knowledgeable on the Assisi event. I suspect you are getting your information from Dave Hunt or similar persons. Quote the Pope directly as I have, or direct me to a primary source where you are getting your information. "

A: Alright . Here it is :

Documentation that the Pope declared that all the different religions “prayed with one voice to the Lord.”
Ut Unum Sint, Encyclical of John Paul II, 76, May 25, 1995, Pauline Books

Photo showing that the Pope replaced the Cross in a church with a statue of the Buddha in Assisi 1986 : deceptioninthechurch.com/jp2.htm

PhilVaz :" And Nihil Obstat does not mean Jimmy Akin is infallible, but he’s pretty darn close "

A:Like I wrote , wrongly inferring that the whore is Jerusalem or Pagan Rome is a doctrinal error . It implies that the Bishop who authorized the Nihl obstat to be in error . And although nihil obstat may not represent the official Vatican view (as Phil argued here ), the Roman Catholic church has generally interpreted this passage to mean Jerusalem or Pagan Rome , so the Roman Catholic church is in error .
 
40.png
PhilVaz:
AndrewL << The unfaithfulness of the Pope to Christ and his abominations 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 Assisi, 1986 . >>

Sounds like something out of the Dave Hunt playbook. [Here’s a clever reply (http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p30.htm) in the style of Screwtape Letters. John Paul preached this at Assisi:

"…I profess here anew my conviction, shared by all Christians, that in Jesus Christ, as Savior of all, true peace is to be found, ‘peace to those who are far off and peace to those who are near’ " (Cf. Eph 2.17).

and

“His birth was greeted by the angels’ song: Glory to God in the highest and peace among men with whom He is pleased” (Cf. Lk 2:14). He preached love among all, even among foes, proclaimed blessed those who work for peace (Cf. Mt 5:9), and through His death and resurrection He brought about reconciliation between heaven and earth (Cf. Col.1:20). To use an expression of Paul the Apostle, ‘He is our peace.’ " (Eph.2:14).

You’re saying the book of Revelation was predicting some event that happened in 1986? Amazing. What about the Popes, the bishops of Rome, martyred for their faith in the first 300 years of Christianity? Does Revelation have anything to say about them?
Click to expand...

I think some televangelists could be eligible 🙂 - at least he never preached a “prosperity gospel”: a gospel which is not stamped with the Cross, is no Gospel at all. In the CC, it’s impossible to escape the Cross and the Crucifix 😃​

Phil P
Click to expand...
##The trouble with (mis)categorising the book, as prophecy instead of apocalyptic, is that the book becomes comprehensible for a generation long after that to which it was addressed.

But how could persecuted churches in the first century be expected to understand a book that was saying:
  • The Papacy in 1798 was the beast that was wounded, yet lived
  • the UN is the beast
  • the USA is the beast
  • Napoleon was the 666
  • Pius IX was the 666
  • Kaiser Wilhelm II was the 666
  • Hitler was the 666
  • Prince Charles is the 666
The great dragon is:
  • the dragon in the heraldic crest of Gregory XIII
  • Communist China
  • there is no way that all of these could be correct. At the very least, if Napoleon is the 666, no one else can be: not unless the 666 can be reincarnated, or has more lives than a cat[holic]. This diversity destroys the unity of the primary meaning.
The image of the beast is:
  • The definition of the Immaculate Conception in 1854
  • the barcode on cheque-cards
If the Revelation is about modern life, why does it fail to mention ear-piercing ? This diversity of interpretations means that the book was not clear to those who thought that Pius IX was the 666 - they were wrong, because he has now been dead for 126 years: yet here we are. So what confidence can the current generation have that they are soon to see the beast, dragon, or harlot revealed ?

And what conceivable good would it do to first-century Christians, to tell them about barcodes or Prince Charles ? That is as sensible as suggesting that Nahum foresaw the motor-car. It’s only a pity that he didn’t specify whether he foresaw Cadillacs, Volvos, or Nissan Micras: if he had said, that might have shown whether the US would keep its motor industry 🙂 The result of such intepretations, is to make the book speak to one generation - until, of course, that generation’s beast, dragon, and harlot turn out to have been misidentified - and to be mute to all others: most of all, to the very generation for which it was written.

It would have saved a lot of time if God had inspired the writer to use ASCII or to encrypt the book properly: then nobody would have been able to make head or tail of it, & a lot of very silly and baseless interpretations and anguish could have been avoided.

Could this be a prophecy of the Olympics ? -

Dan 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, [even] to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

What happens if, by the time the 666 shows up, the CC has become a model of indisputably Christian holiness, and left all her bad habits a long time behind her ? Maybe the USA will become a blood-drenched tyranny & “haunt of every foul thing” instead. That’s the problem with long-range forecasting - it’s deterministic: another reason not to think the book is a forecast of far future events. ##
 
666 obviously refers to Nero as this explains why some texts had 616. I just find it amusing that whereas Luther tried to dismiss Revelations, his followers are now obsessed by it.
 
first, I want to reason very carefully about this particular subject because the end results of this interpretation may have some unforeseen consequences. It is not my intention to portray in a negative context the particular religion or beliefs of anyone.

with that said I wish to forward my observations in the most objective way that I can express them.

the term"The whore of babylon" is being used in reference the book of Revelation chapter 17, if i’m not mistaken.

I believe that what needs to be done is to determine the particular context of the words in themselves and conclude on what the writter is actually saying.
  1. "In sacred scripture , God speaks to man in human way. To interpret scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive ot what the human authors truly wanted to affirm and to what God wanted to reveal to us by thier words. In order to discover the sacred author’s intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of thier time and culture. "
this quote articulates my method better than I can, and I will be brief and direct and I expect you to look up the scriptual quotes.

What did ST.John mean when he wrote about who was the Whore? IF we read closer and "take into account the conditions of …time and culture"we may find that the identity of the whore is really a solveable and explainable mystery; that is if you can find the clues, and St. John gave us several clues.

compare Rev. 17.4 to Ex.28.5

to percecution did she aid Nero in persecuting the early Church?
Read Acts chpter 9

and compare Hosea chapter 2 to Acts chapter 7: verses 42 -54

and to her punishment I see a parallel with Lev.21:9

and the book of ezekiel uses the term harlot specificly chapter16

I dont expect anyone to accept these observations , Its just what I found and I have to conclude that belive it.
I hope it helps.
 
if we add just 600 more replies this thread may be the anti-christ!?!?!?
 
Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Doesn’t John say there that his book is prophetic in nature, dealing with future events? Wasn’t it written about 96 A.D. when Jerusalem lay in ruins, having been destroyed in 70 A.D.? Doesn’t that eliminate Jerusalem and Judaism as being the subject of Rev. 17?

Doesn’t Paul in 2 Thess. 2:3-8 say the man of sin (the antichrist) was still to come, that he would rise within the church (the temple of God -1 Cor 3:16), and that he would be destroyed at the second coming? Doesn’t that eliminate Nero, who was never a Christian, and died in 68 A.D.?

Didn’t the church fathers interpret the restrainer of the man of sin (2 Thess. 2:7) to be the pagan Roman empire, and when that fell, the man of sin would soon be revealed? And doesn’t the vision of Daniel 7 prophesy that the little horn power would arise after the fall of the 4th empire, the pagan Roman empire? (The pagan Roman Empire met its demise in 476 A.D.)
 
Greetings and Blessings to you Andrew!

I’m glad to see that you have read what Jimmy Akin has written on the subject of the Whore of Babylon. I don’t agree with the conclusion about apostate Jerusalem either. However in the spirit of charity I would have to make the following point regarding the interpretation of Biblical prophecy;

There is something about Bible prophecy which we need to remember. Bible prophecy is rarely understood until it is fulfilled. God gives a prophecy and people believe it. But they usually have no idea what He means. It is only when the prophecy comes to pass that people grasp what God really meant.

Look for example at the fulfilled prophecies regarding the Birth of Jesus Christ, no one until the event happened and very few after that put together the prophecies with the actaul fulfillment until some time later.

Also, there are at least three main schools of thought in escatology and each has a different interpretation of the Whore of Babylon. Which is right? Only God knows and He will reveal it to all in due time.

Anyway, something to think about.

Christ’s Blessings to you,
Richard
 
40.png
Richard_Hurtz:
Look for example at the fulfilled prophecies regarding the Birth of Jesus Christ, no one until the event happened and very few after that put together the prophecies with the actaul fulfillment until some time later.
Click to expand...
Not true. The magi from the east that visited Bethlehem had understood Daniel 9, specifically verse 25, and knew from that prophecy when to anticipate the birth of the Messiah.
40.png
Richard_Hurtz:
Also, there are at least three main schools of thought in escatology and each has a different interpretation of the Whore of Babylon. Which is right? Only God knows and He will reveal it to all in due time.
Click to expand...
That you are uncertain does not mean the truth is not already known.
 
40.png
AndrewL:
I read James Akins’ articles " Hunting the Whore of Babylon catholic.com/library/Hunting_the_Whore_of_Babylon.asp " and "The Whore of Babylon (catholic.com/library/whore_of_babylon.asp )"and found the arguments invalid . He presented the thesis that the Woman is either Pagan Rome or apostate Jerusalem , and has nothing to do with the Roman Catholic church .Since these articles are stamped NIHIL OBSTAT and IMPRIMATUR by the Vatican , I would assume that this is the official Roman Catholic view . If it can be proven that the Woman is not Pagan Rome or Apostate Jerusalem, then the labels “ NIHIL OBSTAT and IMPRIMATUR” are false , and the Roman Catholic church would be in error .

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 .

”
Click to expand...
First, my brother in Christ, let me assure you that the Holy Mother Church is NEVER in error when it comes to Biblical Interpretation. YOUR interpretation may be in error…but NEVER the Holy Mother Church. So, if Mr. Aikin’s writings have been approved by the magisterium that means that his theological thesis’ are in line with the teachings of the Holy Mother Church, do not, in any way go AGAINST the teachings of the Church and therefore are not a heresy.

You cannot prove the Church is in error, ever, because you cannot prove something that is impossible.

Now, as to the first part of your critique. It is interesting. You claim that it is a “well known fact” that Jerusalem was NEVER refered to as Babylon by early Christians. Yet, you do not offer any proof of this - would you please do so? I would like you to please offer secular historical writings by world recognized historians - at least three - to support this assertion. Until you do, the rest of your arguments fall apart.

Thank you for your search for the TRUTH!!!
 
Here is an interesting take on the Whore of Babylon:

wcg.org/lit/church/history/broadening.htm

and from that article:

John Higham, an expert on the hysterical form of superpatriotism known as nativism, explains the atmosphere in which a Hislop could flourish:

Protestant hatred of Rome played so large a part in pre-Civil War nativist thinking that historians have sometimes regarded nativism and anti-Catholicism as more or less synonymous… Generation after generation of Protestant zealots have repeated the apocalyptic references of the early religious reformers to the Whore of Babylon, the Scarlet Woman, the Man of Sin, to which they have added tales of lascivious priests and debauched nuns… The Catholic empires that had seemed to block national aspirations in the eighteenth century had given way; but in their place the nineteenth century brought a flood of Catholic immigrants… The most excited patriots detected a vast European plot headed by the Pope.12

The OP(s) claim that ‘early Christians’ refered to Rome only as Babylon is, apparently a false claim. This is a fairly RECENT PROTESTANT claim, fueled by anti-Catholic bigotry and not rooted in true early Christian beliefs or writings.
 
“Babylon,” from which Peter addresses his first Epistle, is understood by learned annotators, Protestant and Catholic, to refer to Rome - the word Babylon being symbolic of the corruption then prevailing in the city of the Caesars.

Source: Faith of Our Fathers, by James Cardinal Gibbons, 111th printing, Published by TAN Books and Publishers, INC., P.O. Box 424, Rockford, Illinois 61105, Copyright 1980, page 87.​

Code: 
  But Boettner is wrong when he claims "there is no allusion to Rome in either of [Peter's] epistles". There is, in the greeting at the end of the first epistle. The church here in Babylon, united with you by God's election, sends you her greeting, and so does my son, Mark." (1 Peter 5:13). Babylon is a code word for Rome. It is used that way six times in the last book of the Bible ... Eusebius Pamphilius, writing about 303, noted that "it is said that Peter's first epistle, in which he makes mention of Mark, was composed at Rome itself; and he himself indicates this, referring to the city figuratively as Babylon. [Historia ecclesiastica  2, 15, 4.]
Source: Catholicism and Fundamentalism, by Karl Keating, copyright 1988, published by Ignatius Press, San Francisco, ISBN 0-89870-195-3, library of Congress number 87-82939, page 200.
 
greg samsa:
first, I want to reason very carefully about this particular subject because the end results of this interpretation may have some unforeseen consequences. It is not my intention to portray in a negative context the particular religion or beliefs of anyone.

with that said I wish to forward my observations in the most objective way that I can express them.

the term"The whore of babylon" is being used in reference the book of Revelation chapter 17, if i’m not mistaken.

I believe that what needs to be done is to determine the particular context of the words in themselves and conclude on what the writter is actually saying.
  1. "In sacred scripture , God speaks to man in human way. To interpret scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive ot what the human authors truly wanted to affirm and to what God wanted to reveal to us by thier words. In order to discover the sacred author’s intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of thier time and culture. "
this quote articulates my method better than I can, and I will be brief and direct and I expect you to look up the scriptual quotes.

What did ST.John mean when he wrote about who was the Whore? IF we read closer and "take into account the conditions of …time and culture"we may find that the identity of the whore is really a solveable and explainable mystery; that is if you can find the clues, and St. John gave us several clues.

compare Rev. 17.4 to Ex.28.5

to percecution did she aid Nero in persecuting the early Church?
Read Acts chpter 9

and compare Hosea chapter 2 to Acts chapter 7: verses 42 -54

and to her punishment I see a parallel with Lev.21:9

and the book of ezekiel uses the term harlot specificly chapter16

I dont expect anyone to accept these observations , Its just what I found and I have to conclude that belive it.
I hope it helps.
Click to expand...

“Great minds think alike” 😃 - there is a lot of use of Ezekiel, as you point out. The lament over BtG is taken from one of Ezekiel’s oracles against Tyre, in chapter 23​

Those other references should help a good deal in explaining the book.

There is also a parody theme: “Who is like the beast ?”, and “What city is like that great city ?”, as against the angel called “Who-is-like-God”.

The identification of the beast with the Papacy does not account for the words in 13.4. If they are read as a satanic parody of Mi-cha-el, “Who is like God ?” (12.7), they gain considerably in force. ISTM that whilst the book is written in Greek, the thought is in Hebrew (as the likely use of ge for aretz suggests). Trying to make the book fit the Papacy only leads to a lot of rather forced and wild speculation, which, however ingenious, is shown to be ingenious rather than well-founded every time the current beast or whore fails to live up to expectations. If Louis XIV is the beast, Napoleon is unlikely to qualify. And if Mohammed is the false prophet beast, Luther can’t be. Diocletian can’t be, if Pius VI was. 🙂

There really must be a list of interpretations somewhere - where else would one find George Bush, Ellen White, David Hasselhoff & Barney the Dinosaur being lumped together ?

Me, I think it’s Christina Aguilera 🙂 It’s about time the ladies got a look-in. ##
 
The only truly ‘great city’ in New Testament times was Rome.

Source: Catholicism and Fundamentalism, by Karl Keating, copyright 1988, published by Ignatius Press, San Francisco, ISBN 0-89870-195-3, library of Congress number 87-82939, page 201.
 
Gee–I always thought the whore was NYC! I ‘knew’ her personally.LOL!–nicolo
 
40.png
LSK:
Here is an interesting take on the Whore of Babylon:

wcg.org/lit/church/history/broadening.htm

and from that article:

John Higham, an expert on the hysterical form of superpatriotism known as nativism, explains the atmosphere in which a Hislop could flourish:

Protestant hatred of Rome played so large a part in pre-Civil War nativist thinking that historians have sometimes regarded nativism and anti-Catholicism as more or less synonymous… Generation after generation of Protestant zealots have repeated the apocalyptic references of the early religious reformers to the Whore of Babylon, the Scarlet Woman, the Man of Sin, to which they have added tales of lascivious priests and debauched nuns… The Catholic empires that had seemed to block national aspirations in the eighteenth century had given way; but in their place the nineteenth century brought a flood of Catholic immigrants… The most excited patriots detected a vast European plot headed by the Pope.12

The OP(s) claim that ‘early Christians’ refered to Rome only as Babylon is, apparently a false claim. This is a fairly RECENT PROTESTANT claim, fueled by anti-Catholic bigotry and not rooted in true early Christian beliefs or writings.
Click to expand...

That might explain the popularity of the book once it found its way into the USA - Hislop, as a Presbyterian and a Scot, was far more impressed by events such as:​

  • the attempted assassination of Queen Isabella II of Spain (1852)
  • the definition of the Immaculate Conception (1854)
  • the Indian Mutiny (1857-8)
  • he mentions these things, which is how we know. 1850s Protestant Britain was very keen on discerning signs of the approaching end in such events as these, and in the Risorgimento - because the progress of Italian unification indirectly affected the status of the Papal States: Pius IX was not alone in finding a Catholicism minus the Papal States all but unimaginable.
    But nowhere does the USA and its troubles find a mention in his book. 🙂
It would be interesting to read the USA critics of “Romanism” - they were very numerous. What they worried about was the prospect of a Protestant country being flooded by stubbornly unProtestant immigrants; and the prospect of the European powers using immigration to undermine the US. And there was always the “man of sin” in the Vatican to worry about - which is why people still fuss about the murder of Lincoln, and Pius IX’s letter to President Jefferson Davis: it was taken as one more piece of evidence of the Papacy’s character, not unreasonably.

[includes historical studies of US anti-Catholicism] ##
 
Eusebius Pamphilus, Historia ecclesiastica (Church History), Book II, Chapter XV, The Gospel According to Mark.
  1. … And Peter makes mention of Mark in his first epistle which they say that he wrote in Rome itself, as is indicated by him, when he calls the city, by a figure, Babylon, as he does in the following words: “The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son.”
ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-01/Npnf2-01-07.htm#P938_461218
 
40.png
adventistnomore:
First of all, the Nihil Obstat and Impratur was not assigned by the Vatican itself… it usually isn’t), but by individual bishops or church administrators. Read the Nihil Obstat and Impratur:

NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL***, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego***, August 10, 2004

Both indiviuals are from the diocese of San Diego, and represent that diocese – not the Vatican.
Click to expand...
Further, they are simply assessments by the censor and bishop in question that the writing does not go against Catholic teaching. It is not even an infallible assessment – sometimes IMPRIMATURS are withdrawn upon further investigation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top