the whore of Babylon

  • Thread starter Thread starter viktor_aleksndr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
V

viktor_aleksndr

Guest
while i am thinking of what others are saying that the whore of babylon is in Rome a thought just pops out of my mind.

Could it be that John describes the Whore of babylon as the anti christ (which is of course the paganism in rome) but it is not really in Rome? Could it be possible that John use the word Babylon (Rome) for all the Jews and gentiles can relate to what he is talking about. Why?
  1. Is Hinduism or Buddhism or other sect that is worshipping idols familiar to the people at that time?
  2. If John states that pagans of India or China, would you think this will be an interest to the people at that time? I think the gentiles will say “where the heck is india or china?”
  3. Could it be that the place will just be symbolic? Like seven hills etc.
This is just my own idea of the whore of babylon thing.

But of course we know that the catholic church have interpreted or identified some of the people stated in the revelation such as the emperors and kings.
 
Babylon in Revelation has been interpreted by Catholics variously, including apostate Jerusalem, pagan Rome, or more generally as any and all the worldly powers that persecute the Church.

Personally, I favor the apostate Jerusalem interpretation but, I think, most of the Church Fathers favored the pagan Rome interpretation.
 
You might check out David Currie’s book, Rapture. He does a very good treatment of this topic, which favors the apostacy in Jerusalem in the Temple as the most likely suspect.
 
Todd Easton:
Babylon in Revelation has been interpreted by Catholics variously, including apostate Jerusalem, pagan Rome, or more generally as any and all the worldly powers that persecute the Church.

Personally, I favor the apostate Jerusalem interpretation but, I think, most of the Church Fathers favored the pagan Rome interpretation.
Click to expand...
I agree. The apostate Jerusalem interpretation makes the most sense when you look at the fact that the Apocalypse was written by St. John (or his followers) who would have lived to see the destruction of Jerusalem. However, for those of us living today, the “worldly powers that persecute the Church” fits as well.
 
I had posted a question simler to that if you would like to take a look at it. its called “What to tell a 7th-dayadventsabout the anti-christ”. It was really helpful to me.
 
Todd Easton:
Personally, I favor the apostate Jerusalem interpretation but, I think, most of the Church Fathers favored the pagan Rome interpretation.
Click to expand...
I do too, the garments worn by the whore of Babylon sound so much like the vestments of the Levitical Priests.
 
Wasn’t the Roman Empire more often considered the Whore of Babylon? If you look at the seven hills and the fact that Rome was often mentioned as Babylon.

Didn’t Peter use this phrase to secretly say he was in Rome at the time of a letter. Something like, “Greetings, from Babylon”?

NotWorthy
 
We all know that babylon is indeed is rome. But what if it is just a figure of speech? Babylon was used because Rome was famous before for paganism… And for all the people to understand or relate to the revelation he use the word babylon.

We’ll we can never say ei? It is really a mystery.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top