How shall the nations come to hate whore Babylon?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Professor
The angel explicating the vision given John in Revelation 17:16, 17:

And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled. [emphasis added]​

See how the E.U. nations respond to the report: How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline. I have often wondered what Babylon could do to so outrage the coalition of "10" nations they would desire to destroy her. This could be a beginning.
 
If the US is the whore, then I believe there is more than enough reasons for other nations to hate this country besides this pipeline incident.
 
The whore in Revelation is seated upon seven hills. I.e. Rome. America will have her downfall, but I don't think the apocalyptic whore has much to do with it.
 
Hello Charles,

The Rome on seven hills was not destroyed as depicted in Rev 17:16,17; 18:1-24; there are different manifestations of "Babylon" in Scripture, the Roman Empire being one. The Babylon that shall be destroyed as seen in Rev 17:16,17 and Revelation 18 is not ancient Rome, but the final end of time manifestation of the world system against God and His people that shall be utterly destroyed at the eschaton.
 
Hello Charles,

The Rome on seven hills was not destroyed as depicted in Rev 17:16,17; 18:1-24; there are different manifestations of "Babylon" in Scripture, the Roman Empire being one. The Babylon that shall be destroyed as seen in Rev 17:16,17 and Revelation 18 is not ancient Rome, but the final end of time manifestation of the world system against God and His people that shall be utterly destroyed at the eschaton.
I don't think the Rome depicted in Revelation 17 is ancient Rome, but the Roman Catholic Church. The language of a "whore" in Scripture is often connected to an apostate Church, such as in the book of Hosea, where the whore Gomer is a depiction of the Church's unfaithfulness. Combining the imagery of an apostate Church with the location of Rome "on seven hills" (Rev. 17:9), and the Roman Church is the only good candidate for the prophecy. In terms of what you say about "a world system against God," I don't think that's necessarily wrong, insofar as civil governments have often allied with Rome to fulfil further their evil ends. Here in Peru, supposedly a secular country, the state schools teach Roman Catholic doctrine in religion class. That's the norm in many countries. There are many other ways in which Rome and corrupt governments have and do still come together to oppose Christ.
 
The angel explicating the vision given John in Revelation 17:16, 17:

And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled. [emphasis added]​

See how the E.U. nations respond to the report: How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline. I have often wondered what Babylon could do to so outrage the coalition of "10" nations they would desire to destroy her. This could be a beginning.
Our class tonight was on chapter 17. So the whore and the beast together are summed up as the system of the world that is against God, and one turns on the other and eats its own.

With all of the history the world has been through, what leads you to think this situation has any significance?

Thanks!
 
Charles, in post 5 when you say of the whore Babylon it is the Roman Catholic Church, and thus her utter destruction at the hands of the beast and his ten nation coalition must be as depicted in Rev 17:16 – "And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire." – as well Rev 18:8,9,10:

"Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her. And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning, Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come."​

How would you explicate that? And what school of interpretation would you use?

And Peter in his first epistle at 1 Pet 5:13, what is the Babylon he is referring to there? "The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son."
 
Last edited:
Ryan, have you read any contemporary Amil commentaries on Revelation, such as Dennis E. Johnson's Triumph of the Lamb? Or GK Beale's, The Book of Revelation (New International Greek Testament Commentary)?

When you say, "With all of the history the world has been through, what leads you to think this situation has any significance?" I'm not one to throw a book at one when in a discussion, but to understand the history of the world in light of God's final prophecy, does take some study. Even William Hendriksen's early More Than Conquerors has a fairly brief and clear interpretive method typical of the modified idealist / Amil approach Beale and Johnson use.

What kind of class is it you are in (at church, I gather) that doesn't exposit the text and answer such questions as yours?
 
Ryan, have you read any contemporary Amil commentaries on Revelation, such as Dennis E. Johnson's Triumph of the Lamb? Or GK Beale's, The Book of Revelation (New International Greek Testament Commentary)?

When you say, "With all of the history the world has been through, what leads you to think this situation has any significance?" I'm not one to throw a book at one when in a discussion, but to understand the history of the world in light of God's final prophecy, does take some study. Even William Hendriksen's early More Than Conquerors has a fairly brief and clear interpretive method typical of the modified idealist / Amil approach Beale and Johnson use.

What kind of class is it you are in (at church, I gather) that doesn't exposit the text and answer such questions as yours?
Thank you so much for the thoughts. I have read through Revelation quite a few times, and have been through a few classes, but have not read any in-depth books. So the class is very thorough and expository from an amil perspective, but our teacher offered no real interpretation of what specifically that means apart from its symbolic meaning. Which I honestly don't know how he would really know apart from direct Revelation from God.

I guess that's been my concern over the years of listening to different Christians say different symbols represent specific events going on currently in history. I hear so many interpretations from so many perspectives. I guess I'm just wondering what critical evidence there is to assume that interpretation. Thanks!
 
Hello again, Ryan,

When you say, "With all of the history the world has been through, what leads you to think this situation has any significance?" I suppose the briefest and most cogent reply would be: "The Book of Revelation is the history of the world from the first advent of Christ till the end of the age." The symbols are not that hard to understand, as the Amil commentators are fairly agreed as to their respective meanings. Other schools may differ, but may easily be refuted.

One of the maxims of Revelation interpretation is that most of the symbols have their basis in the Old Testament. For example, in Revelation 21:16 where the angel was showing John the city of New Jerusalem, John said, "And the city lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal."

What we're seeing there is that the celestial city is depicted as a perfect cube. The only other place in all of Scripture where we see a perfect cube is in 1 Kings 6:20 (with an allusion in Ezek 41:4), and that one place is none other than the Holy of holies! The meaning of the symbol of New Jerusalem as a cube is that the entire city is now the Holy of holies, that is, the entire earth – for all the new earth is the temple of God, as are all the living stones of individual believers around the world in it.

Beale goes into minute details as regards the OT source of many of the symbols – his is a large work, some 900+ pages (on a steep sale at the moment on Amazon!), and most useful as a reference for looking up various details. Perhaps the best work to start with would be Johnson's book mentioned above, as he goes into this study of the symbols a lot.

Revelation is extremely pertinent to our times, as I believe we are nearing the end. And Biblical wisdom gives the heart much strength in troubled times.
 
I have often wondered what Babylon could do to so outrage the coalition of "10" nations they would desire to destroy her.
Kings do not like other kings who are more powerful.

Rev. 17:18 And the woman that you saw is the great city that has dominion over the kings of the earth.
 
Thank you so much! From your post I've seen in the past, I can tell you are very educated in that book. Do you have any concise notes that you can share with me? My life is very demanding of my time, so the time that I have to read, is generally just the Bible at this point. I honestly wouldn't be able to read through a larger work right now. I would appreciate any concise notes you may have and are willing to share. Thanks!
 
Hello Ryan, here are some notes in a handout – for week 1 of a class on Revelation. It should help a lot (only 16 pages). If you like it I can give you 4 more weeks worth. I was co-pastor in a 1689 Baptist church for a while (no I'm not a Baptist, but was helping a friend in need of help) where I taught this.
 

Attachments

  • Week 01 Revelation class.pdf
    233.1 KB · Views: 0
This kind of speculation is really familiar to me... It honestly rings like dispensationalism. Now I know you don't hold that view of the church or of the millennium, but I do wonder how you would respond to the charge of newspaper exegesis.
I don't know what my own view of this is, but the pope hypothesis and idealist interpretations seem to be the most reasonable ones.
 
This kind of speculation is really familiar to me... It honestly rings like dispensationalism. Now I know you don't hold that view of the church or of the millennium, but I do wonder how you would respond to the charge of newspaper exegesis.
I don't know what my own view of this is, but the pope hypothesis and idealist interpretations seem to be the most reasonable ones.

That's always a danger, to be sure, but the pope hypothesis is the same thing in reverse. They simply read the Bible by reading church history and saying this is that. It is not sensational, to be sure, but it is the same principle.

Idealism suffers from the fact that it is largely arbitrary and robs the book of historical referents and urgency.
 
That's always a danger, to be sure, but the pope hypothesis is the same thing in reverse. They simply read the Bible by reading church history and saying this is that. It is not sensational, to be sure, but it is the same principle.

Idealism suffers from the fact that it is largely arbitrary and robs the book of historical referents and urgency.
I don't think I disagree with anything here. I was quite recently a dispensationalist, so I don't have it all together. I have some problems with all four positions - I would list them but that would derail the thread. Futurism is probably the one I have the most problems with, but when I stopped believing the hebrew roots stuff I threw the Sabbath with the bathwater so maybe it's right anyway.
 
I don't think I disagree with anything here. I was quite recently a dispensationalist, so I don't have it all together. I have some problems with all four positions - I would list them but that would derail the thread. Futurism is probably the one I have the most problems with, but when I stopped believing the hebrew roots stuff I threw the Sabbath with the bathwater so maybe it's right anyway.

To be sure, futurism and dispensationalism aren't the same thing. I am a futurist but not a dispensationalist. Even amils like Augustine and Aquinas were futurists on issues like the Antichrist.
 
As has been noted, in my opinion, there is too much speculation going on here:

- Competing theories of who blew up the pipeline with nothing substantiated yet
- The significance of blowing up said pipeline (E.U. knows who its daddy is, if it was the U.S. the silence has been defeaning)
- Identity of the whore of Babylon as the U.S. (maybe, maybe not)

I believe being overly speculative on the identification of Biblical prophecies has a long history in the church and has unfortunately served to undermine our credibility. I think we need to be much more cautious less we be found guilty of misinterpreting the word of God based on the lastest headlines - Headline Hermeneutics (TM)

What kind of class is it you are in (at church, I gather) that doesn't exposit the text and answer such questions as yours?

Maybe his church believes that wisdom dictates one be more restrained, cautious, and careful about connecting current events to 2,000 year old prophecies that have been misidentified many times in the past?
 
Hello Jim,

You opined,
As has been noted, in my opinion, there is too much speculation going on here:

- Competing theories of who blew up the pipeline with nothing substantiated yet
- The significance of blowing up said pipeline (E.U. knows who its daddy is, if it was the U.S. the silence has been defeaning)
- Identity of the whore of Babylon as the U.S. (maybe, maybe not)

I believe being overly speculative on the identification of Biblical prophecies has a long history in the church and has unfortunately served to undermine our credibility. I think we need to be much more cautious less we be found guilty of misinterpreting the word of God based on the lastest headlines - Headline Hermeneutics (TM)

Maybe his church believes that wisdom dictates one be more restrained, cautious, and careful about connecting current events to 2,000 year old prophecies that have been misidentified many times in the past?
In other words, it is always safer to be vague and ambiguous, and not even bother to study the literature in-depth and broad extent before writing off any detailed analyses. It is obvious that whatever prophecies are in Revelation will at some point be clear in hindsight, but it may be too late for many – for those lulled by the armchair skeptics.

And just because something is in the headlines ought not per se to disqualify it from consideration. After all, there are only two players capable of destroying the pipeline, Russia or the U.S. If the latter, which in my view is more likely, it is highly significant. But okay, it is arguable. But noteworthy nonetheless.

Even the "secular seers" – as I call them – keenly discern massive and broad dystopian agendas on the move pretty much across the globe. They only lack the vision to discern the common source of them – the Pit of Hell. Or one who is orchestrating said agendas for his last gasp move before he is consigned to the lake of fire.

As for myself, I differ from – or more accurately, add to – the Amil consensus on one point: the nature – the actuality – of an historically tagged event in Revelation 9:15: "And the four angels were loosed, which were prepared for an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year, for to slay the third part of men", which the commentators are agreed that this wording definitely signifies an historical event related to both the 5th and 6th trumpet judgments of Revelation chapter 9. The commentators do not venture to say what exactly the event is (which is wise of them, not knowing), though I maintain it can be understood. I'll attach the paper, New Insights in Amillennial Eschatology on this point, which does interact with said commentators.

If it is sound, it gives us a rough idea as to where we are in the timeline of the end events. Please always keep in mind that at some point we will be in that final timeline. The "It can't be now" view is as bad as the thoughtless "It must be now." It takes discernment and careful examination. At some point it will indeed be now.
 

Attachments

  • New Insights in Amillennial Eschatology 2.15.19.pdf
    208.7 KB · Views: 0
Charles, in post 5 when you say of the whore Babylon it is the Roman Catholic Church, and thus her utter destruction at the hands of the beast and his ten nation coalition must be as depicted in Rev 17:16 – "And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire." – as well Rev 18:8,9,10:

"Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her. And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning, Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come."​

How would you explicate that? And what school of interpretation would you use?

And Peter in his first epistle at 1 Pet 5:13, what is the Babylon he is referring to there? "The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son."
I'm not particularly sure how that will look, as I don't think it's happened yet. I'm sure the fulfillment will bring greater clarity. I tend to follow the historic postmillennial school of interpretation.
 
And the Babylon Peter refers to?
The first letter of Peter is a different book than Revelation and is not apocalyptic literature. There is no reason for Babylon to be taken figuratively in 1 Peter 5:13 and mean Rome. The literal city in Mesopotamia was favored by John Calvin, the translators of the Dutch States Bible and the commentary of Matthew Henry.
 
Hello Klaas,

One writer (Richard Neuhaus) on the topic of Babylon, touching on Peter's connection to it, says this:

The overwhelming consensus of the early Church fathers and of contemporary scholars is that in 1 Peter “Babylon” is a symbol for Rome, and that Peter is writing from Rome.​
The connection between Peter and Rome is virtually unchallenged until the 16th century Reformation when Calvin and Erasmus tried to dissociate the apostle Peter from the papacy in Rome. Moreover, the Roman connection is supported by 1 Peter’s specific reference to Mark who is strongly linked with Rome (see Col. 4:10, 2 Tim. 4:11), and by 1 Clement, a letter written in Rome about 96 a.d.​
_____

Charles,

Is not your view more confession-driven as opposed to Scripture-driven? The old Westminster Standards were highly focused on Roman Catholicism (and with good cause in those days); the American Revision used by the OPC etc has a different view of this as seen in Chapter 25 Of the Church 6 as regards the pope being the antichrist. He is an antichrist, and the current pope is showing the world unvarnished wickedness. Nonetheless, Babylon is greater than RC. And Scripture paints a different picture – in Revelation 17 and 18 – of the nature of Babylon, and her destruction.

Those who see Rome and its pope alone as antichrist may well be blindsided if and when another arises from a different sector. Even so, 2 Thess 2:3,4 ff, indicates we should be careful in this matter:

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.​
 
Last edited:
I share Steve's approach. We do run the risk of speculation, but skeptics run the risk of inaction. In any case, we are moving towards a cashless society and global government. Whether or not that fulfills prophecy, it is an open attack on liberty.
 
I share Steve's approach. We do run the risk of speculation, but skeptics run the risk of inaction. In any case, we are moving towards a cashless society and global government. Whether or not that fulfills prophecy, it is an open attack on liberty.

As I tried to point out here previously, even if it does not fulfill prophecy, the push towards lockdowns, mask mandates, mandatory vaccines, vax passports, a cashless society, digital ID, and even microchipping is, at the very least, a crude imitation of the mark of the beast.
 
As I tried to point out here previously, even if it does not fulfill prophecy, the push towards lockdowns, mask mandates, mandatory vaccines, vax passports, a cashless society, digital ID, and even microchipping is, at the very least, a crude imitation of the mark of the beast.

Right. I don't think those actions are necessarily Antichrist. But they are necessary to have in place so that Antichrist can have a global government.
 
The language of "all" and "whole world" in Revelation 12-19. To be sure, as a good Calvinist, I know that all doesn't mean all, so it might not be the whole world.
One problem with futurists (not necessarily futurism) is that one can speculate until the morrow, but often extra-scriptural assumptions and traditions sneek in. I wonder how akin non-dispensational futurism can be to dispensationalism. There is certainly much cross-pollination as these applications of the apocalypse to the EU and US are quite common in certain dispensationalist circles, usually the more outlandish ones.
To be sure, this can also be a fault with historicism and even preterism, but I am less familiar with those.
 
One problem with futurists (not necessarily futurism) is that one can speculate until the morrow, but often extra-scriptural assumptions and traditions sneek in. I wonder how akin non-dispensational futurism can be to dispensationalism. There is certainly much cross-pollination as these applications of the apocalypse to the EU and US are quite common in certain dispensationalist circles, usually the more outlandish ones.
To be sure, this can also be a fault with historicism and even preterism, but I am less familiar with those.

I didn't do any speculation. I noted the universal referents in Revelation 12-19 and I pointed out that the current globalist agenda is deleterious to liberty. I specifically did not identify the two. In fact, I intimated that such an identification right now would be wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top