Babylon

[JohnnyP]

Another reason to possibly equate Babylon with Rome is that Babylon was represented in Daniel 7 as a lion. In Revelation 13, it is the mouth of the beast from the sea which is made out of lion flesh. Most people acknowledge that the beast from the sea is not Israel. Therefore, if Babylon refers to the same thing as the beast's mouth, then presumably Babylon was a gentile city and not Jerusalem. (The only way around this would be if Jerusalem were somehow the mouth of the beast from the sea, despite the difference in Jew-gentile classification.)

The beast's mouth is the thing that is speaking all the blasphemies.

Another way around this would be if, as JohnnyP alluded to, the whore is not actually Babylon itself, but merely a city which took the name of the beast. However, that interpretation seems a bit problematic because the whore is constantly called Babylon and nothing else is clearly called Babylon.

The Great City is feminine called Harlot of Babylon and also Babylon by taking its name instead of God's and also because Jerusalem actually sat on Babylon, as well as Greek and Roman land when they controlled it. That's why it's a little confusing, she isn't Gentile Babylon but spiritually she is called that, as well as Sodom and Egypt.

The Beast is masculine grown out of Babylon as a beast 7 times in brass and iron, as prophesied by Neb's own fall, being Greek and Roman entities. Brass and iron also being qualities of the 4th Beast also seen in Revelation.

Thus Jewish Harlot/Gentile Beast, she's the "wife" taking its name.

[eschaton]

What I was getting at is that it literally says that it is talking about "these things in the churches." It doesn't say anything about Rome, and Jerusalem is seen coming down from heaven. Caesar/idolatry/UN/secularism are only added in.

[JohnnyP]

What I was getting at is that it literally says that it is talking about "these things in the churches." It doesn't say anything about Rome, and Jerusalem is seen coming down from heaven.

First unless we refer to other books of the Bible to get the big picture, it's only going to be so much guessing.

From the start with Solomon's Jerusalem we see the potential Messianic Kingdom fall to Gentile idolatry -- harlotry. Ezekiel 23 specifically names unrighteous Jerusalem as the Harlot of Babylon. Versus righteous Virgin New Jerusalem of Jesus. That's pretty self-explanatory.

So instead of God the Harlot turns to Gentile things like idolatry. For the most part Gentiles represented the Seed of the Serpent, the Beast of the Field. Jews represented the Seed of the Woman.

Further in Daniel with Neb's fall to be a beast 7 times in brass and iron we can relate this to the Statue with brass belly and iron legs, and to Fourth Beast with brass nails and iron teeth, with 10 horns and in Revelation, 7 heads. All together it suggests that after gold Babylon is cut by silver Persia, brass Greek and iron Roman kingdoms will grow out from Babylon as a Beast 7 times.

Since they control the land of Jerusalem, she sits on those 7 heads. So she can also be called Babylon, Greece, Rome, etc.

So the 5 fallen can easily be seen as Greek Macedonian, Ptolemaic, Seleucid, Roman/Hasmonean, and Roman/Herodian, the 1 that is Roman/Byzantine, the 7th to come possibly Holy Roman Crusaders and the Kingdom of Jerusalem.

The 8th would also seem to be evolved out of western civilization but revived from one of the others wounded, I suspect like Roman/Herodian the first real antichrist, 2 Horns of the False Prophet that said Jesus is not Messiah and should die, that Caesar is the only king.

Versus 2 Olive Trees explained in Romans 11, righteous Jews and Gentiles.

Caesar/idolatry/UN/secularism are only added in.

They are examples of Gentile things as a replacement for the Messianic Kingdom of God. When you don't have that you have Gentile Babylon, Greece, Rome, secularism, atheism, idolatry. I don't think at this point we need to name a specific nation or person to understand that's the spirit of Antchrist, it pervades the modern world wherever faith in the Messianic Kingdom doesn't exist.

[eschaton]

I don't see how that applies to things within the churches.

[JohnnyP]

I don't see how that applies to things within the churches.

They don't necessarily, the Churches are still Churches at the time of the letters. One point of Romans 11 is that if you don't abide in righteousness you get cut off to be like unrighteous Harlot/Beast already existing. Same warning to the Churches.

[eschaton]

To me that is eisegesis rather than exegesis. Harlot/Beast already existing is interpretation, since at the time of writing these things were related to eons. IE, Barnabas, Hermas, Hippolytus. I don't think you find the beast and harlot directly related to Rome until centuries later with Victornius, even though Irenaeus and Tertullian may have hinted at it.

[JohnnyP]

To me that is eisegesis rather than exegesis. Harlot/Beast already existing is interpretation, since at the time of writing these things were related to eons. IE, Barnabas, Hermas, Hippolytus. I don't think you find the beast and harlot directly related to Rome until centuries later with Victornius, even though Irenaeus and Tertullian may have hinted at it.

The Harlot of Babylon is already named as unrighteous Jerusalem right here, no interpretation at all required:

Ezekiel 23:17 And the Babylonians came to her into the bed of love, and they defiled her with their whoredom, and she was polluted with them, and her mind was alienated from them.

As for the Beast, I showed from Daniel how its 7 heads relate to Greek and Roman entities controlling Jerusalem, and it also lines up historically.

An eisegetical interpretation would be more like a preterist view that Caesars are the 7 heads because Rome is known to sit on 7 hills or some such notion.

But I suppose if you require something in the Bible to say clearly (BLANK) IS THE BEAST then of course there's probably no point discussing it since it's not there, we already know it's presented as a riddle in Revelation 17:9-10.

[eschaton]

In Revelation the only mention of Jerusalem is as a symbol of the church (3:12, 21:2, 21:10). So if Babylon is figurative of Jerusalem, and Jerusalem is the church, what John says makes sense. This is written within the Book of Revelation itself.

Rev 1:11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.

Rev_2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.

Rev_22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

[squint]

In the interests of adding some openly stated scriptural facts about Babylon in relationship to eschatology:

Revelation refers to 'Mystery' Babylon. Any of us can view a physical city. Mysteries are beyond physical sight. IN the same way we may see the results of the 'mystery of iniquity' the source of iniquity is within the heart.

We are shown this fact about Babylon in Revelation:

Revelation 18:2
And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.

The statement pins Babylon on people, not a physically located city. Devils inhabit people. So do spirits.

This identical point is again made here in relationship to where the Whore of Babylon sits:

Revelation 17:15
And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

In short, the location is within people.

This theme can be expanded at length throughout the scriptures. It will remain pointless to point at Rome or Jerusalem (spiritually termed Sodom and Egypt, but NOT Babylon.)

And welcome to the twilight zone of allegorical eschatlogy! Those who are not versed in allegory will never and are not meant to understand. That's the way the scriptures are set up to view (via allegory) or to be blocked from views (using only the physical senses of understandings.)

It's much more interesting in the direction of allegory anyway.

[JohnnyP]

In Revelation the only mention of Jerusalem is as a symbol of the church (3:12, 21:2, 21:10). So if Babylon is figurative of Jerusalem, and Jerusalem is the church, what John says makes sense. This is written within the Book of Revelation itself.

Rev 1:11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.

Rev_2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.

Rev_22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

They are still churches though, they haven't been broken off. If they are broken off they become like the Harlot and the Beast, unrighteous Jews and Gentiles, that's the point of the warnings same as here:

Source: KJV

Romans 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off (Jewish Harlot), and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee (Gentile Beast).

Romans 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild (Gentile) by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural (Jewish) branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?

© Copyright Original Source

So they are either unrighteous Jewish/Harlot + Gentile/Beast, or righteous Jewish/Gentile Olive Trees, shown here:

Source: KJV

Revelation 11:4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

Revelation 2:5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.

© Copyright Original Source

Noting that in Revelation 2:5, the candlestick means still being in the church and not broken off. It's still all about those 2 righteous Jewish/Gentile Olive Trees with Jesus contrasted against the unrighteous Jewish Harlot/Gentile Beast against Jesus.

In the interests of adding some openly stated scriptural facts about Babylon in relationship to eschatology:

Revelation refers to 'Mystery' Babylon. Any of us can view a physical city. Mysteries are beyond physical sight. IN the same way we may see the results of the 'mystery of iniquity' the source of iniquity is within the heart.

We are shown this fact about Babylon in Revelation:

Revelation 18:2
And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.

The statement pins Babylon on people, not a physically located city. Devils inhabit people. So do spirits.

This identical point is again made here in relationship to where the Whore of Babylon sits:

Revelation 17:15
And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

In short, the location is within people.

This theme can be expanded at length throughout the scriptures. It will remain pointless to point at Rome or Jerusalem (spiritually termed Sodom and Egypt, but NOT Babylon.)

And welcome to the twilight zone of allegorical eschatlogy! Those who are not versed in allegory will never and are not meant to understand. That's the way the scriptures are set up to view (via allegory) or to be blocked from views (using only the physical senses of understandings.)

It's much more interesting in the direction of allegory anyway.

Ezekiel 23 already names unrighteous Jerusalem as the Harlot of Babylon. So when you say it's an allegory about people, there are still those people who somehow fit the descriptions given about the Woman. The real "mystery" about it is that people either seem to go everywhere else but the Bible trying to guess what it is, or they say it's too much of a mystery to be able to know.

Source: KJV

Revelation 17:6 And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.

Matthew 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

Revelation 18:3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.

Jeremiah 25:17 Then took I the cup at the LORD's hand, and made all the nations to drink, unto whom the LORD had sent me:

Jeremiah 25:29 For, lo, I begin to bring evil on the city which is called by my name, and should ye be utterly unpunished? Ye shall not be unpunished: for I will call for a sword upon all the inhabitants of the earth, saith the LORD of hosts.

1 Kings 10:10 And she gave the king an hundred and twenty talents of gold, and of spices very great store, and precious stones: there came no more such abundance of spices as these which the queen of Sheba gave to king Solomon.

© Copyright Original Source

Etc. As I posted to start with HERE.

She sits on 7 kingdoms, which are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. What are the 7 Beast kingdoms? As I've also discussed, they have qualities of brass and iron, which I've outlined to be Greek and Roman kingdoms controlling Jerusalem. That's how Jerusalem sits on them.

[eschaton]

Rather than depending on your own understanding (Pro 3:5), you might consider this from the church historian Eusebius.

“I think that this (i.e., the vision of Nebuchadnezzar) differs in nothing
from the vision of the prophet. For as the prophet saw a great sea, so the king saw a great image. And again, as the prophet saw four beasts, which he interpreted as four kingdoms, so the king was given to understand four kingdoms under the gold, and silver, and brass, and iron. And again, as the prophet saw the division of the ten horns of the last beast, and three horns broken by one; so the king, in like manner, saw in the extremities of the image one part iron and another clay. And besides this, as the prophet, after the vision of the four kingdoms, saw the Son of man receive dominion, and power, and a kingdom; so also the king thought he saw a stone smite the whole image, and become a great mountain and fill the sea. And rightly so. For it was quite consistent in the king, whose view of the spectacle of life was so false, and who admired the beauty of the mere sensible colours, so to speak, in the picture set up to view, to liken the life of all men to a great image; but (it became) the prophet to compare the great and mighty tumult of life to a mighty sea. And it was fitting that the king, who prized the substances deemed precious among men, gold, and silver, and brass, and iron, should liken to these substances the kingdoms that held the sovereignty at different times in the life of men; but that the prophet should describe these same kingdoms under the likeness of beasts, in accordance with the manner of their rule. And again, the king—who was puffed up, as it seems, in his own conceit, and plumed himself on the power of his ancestors—is shown the vicissitude to which affairs are subject, and the end destined for all the kingdoms of earth, with the view of teaching him to lay aside his pride in himself, and understand that there is nothing stable among men, but only that which is the appointed end of all things—the kingdom of God. For after the first kingdom of the Assyrians, which was denoted by the gold, there will be the second kingdom of the Persians, expressed by the silver; and then the third kingdom of the Macedonians, signified by the brass; and after it, the fourth kingdom of the Romans will succeed, more powerful than those that went before it; for which reason also it was likened to iron. For of it is said: “And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron; as iron breaketh and subdueth all things, so shall it break and subdue all things.” And after all these kingdoms which have been mentioned, the kingdom of God is represented by the stone that breaks the whole image. And the prophet, in conformity with this, does not see the kingdom which comes at the end of all these things, until he has in order described the four dominions mentioned under the four beasts.And I think that the visions shown, both to the king and to the prophet, were visions of these four kingdoms alone, and of none others, because by these the nation of the Jews was held in bondage from the times of the prophet.”

[JohnnyP]

Rather than depending on your own understanding (Pro 3:5), you might consider this from the church historian Eusebius.

“I think that this (i.e., the vision of Nebuchadnezzar) differs in nothing from the vision of the prophet. For as the prophet saw a great sea, so the king saw a great image. And again, as the prophet saw four beasts, which he interpreted as four kingdoms, so the king was given to understand four kingdoms under the gold, and silver, and brass, and iron. And again, as the prophet saw the division of the ten horns of the last beast, and three horns broken by one; so the king, in like manner, saw in the extremities of the image one part iron and another clay. And besides this, as the prophet, after the vision of the four kingdoms, saw the Son of man receive dominion, and power, and a kingdom; so also the king thought he saw a stone smite the whole image, and become a great mountain and fill the sea. And rightly so. For it was quite consistent in the king, whose view of the spectacle of life was so false, and who admired the beauty of the mere sensible colours, so to speak, in the picture set up to view, to liken the life of all men to a great image; but (it became) the prophet to compare the great and mighty tumult of life to a mighty sea.

And it was fitting that the king, who prized the substances deemed precious among men, gold, and silver, and brass, and iron, should liken to these substances the kingdoms that held the sovereignty at different times in the life of men; but that the prophet should describe these same kingdoms under the likeness of beasts, in accordance with the manner of their rule. And again, the king—who was puffed up, as it seems, in his own conceit, and plumed himself on the power of his ancestors—is shown the vicissitude to which affairs are subject, and the end destined for all the kingdoms of earth, with the view of teaching him to lay aside his pride in himself, and understand that there is nothing stable among men, but only that which is the appointed end of all things—the kingdom of God.

For after the first kingdom of the Assyrians, which was denoted by the gold, there will be the second kingdom of the Persians, expressed by the silver; and then the third kingdom of the Macedonians, signified by the brass; and after it, the fourth kingdom of the Romans will succeed, more powerful than those that went before it; for which reason also it was likened to iron. For of it is said: “And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron; as iron breaketh and subdueth all things, so shall it break and subdue all things.” And after all these kingdoms which have been mentioned, the kingdom of God is represented by the stone that breaks the whole image.

And the prophet, in conformity with this, does not see the kingdom which comes at the end of all these things, until he has in order described the four dominions mentioned under the four beasts.And I think that the visions shown, both to the king and to the prophet, were visions of these four kingdoms alone, and of none others, because by these the nation of the Jews was held in bondage from the times of the prophet.”

I agree with the identity of the metals. Where I'd disagree first is here:

Source: KJV

Daniel 7:19 Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet;

© Copyright Original Source

I know the common rule is to assume, "Ok the 4 metal kingdoms must line up to be the 4 beast kingdoms since there's 4 of each, right?" But that completely ignores the brass in the 4th beast. Why is it there?

So rather, I'd interpret it to mean that the 4th beast is composed of brass Greek and iron Roman kingdoms. The other thing is that while Eusebius notes that Nebuchadnezzar was puffed up and that some would rule like beasts and be fond of precious metals, Nebuchadnezzar's fall due to pride is overlooked as another prophecy of kingdoms, where being symbolic of gold Babylon cut by silver Persia, Babylon exists as a stump like a beast for 7 times in a band of brass and iron: 7 times of a beast in brass Greek and iron Roman kingdoms.

Source: KJV

Daniel 4:15-16 Nevertheless leave the stump of his roots in the earth, even with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field; and let it be wet with the dew of heaven, and let his portion be with the beasts in the grass of the earth: Let his heart be changed from man's, and let a beast's heart be given unto him; and let seven times pass over him.

© Copyright Original Source

Since Ezekiel 23 names the Harlot of Babylon as unrighteous Jerusalem, and since all other parallels fit, I think the most likely interpretation is that she sits on 7 Greek/Roman kingdoms grown out of the "stump" of Babylon as they ruled her: in a sense they are "seed" of Babylon, and since they "owned" her, she is also called "Babylon."

[eschaton]

UN/secularism is still reading too much into it for me.

[JohnnyP]

UN/secularism is still reading too much into it for me.

It is admittedly assuming that the revived Beast head that was wounded is in fact revived Israel aided by a great Gentile power evolved out of Western Civilization (Rome), 2 Jewish/Gentile horns of an antichrist that killed Jesus like we saw with Herod, Caiaphas, and other Jewish authorities agreeing with Pilate and Rome that Jesus shouldn't be Messiah. Only today many of the Jews in charge are in fact atheists and secular, basically the same as Nebuchadnezzar who took glory for himself, the same as Babylon.

I guess each person has to decide for themselves according to what they perceive, when it comes to prophetic fulfillment in their day and age, when you get right down to it. Many have been wrong, but sooner or later someone's got to be correct about it or else it's all kind of nonsense anyway, right.

[AlphaBravo]

A lot of preterists claim that "Babylon" refers to Jerusalem.

An interesting feature to note in the text of the Revelation is that it is never "Babylon".

It is always:

1. Babylon the great (megas)
2. Babylon, that great city (megas polis)
3. That great city (megas polis) Babylon
4. Great (megas) Babylon
5. That great city

This seems to me to be an intentional effort by the writer to make a veiled connection to Jerusalem when you consider that Jerusalem in Revelation is also the megas polis:

Rev 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.

Rev 21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God...

Peace.