The Whore of Babylon

[gaelic cowboy]

A lot of crazy stuff has happened, how much is left to complete the picture...

Zero is left to complete the picture because its all tribal iron age mythmaking

[Rhyfelwyr]

Zero is left to complete the picture because its all tribal iron age mythmaking

And yet it's all happening all around us.

[Kadagar_AV]

Isn't it cute when people try to drag christian beliefs into an intellectual debate?

It's like having a worldview centered around the easter bunny, only, you dont get candy :(

WHERE IS MY CANDY, damnit!

[G. Septimus]

*MK Fatality music*

[Rhyfelwyr]

Isn't it cute when people try to drag christian beliefs into an intellectual debate?

It's like having a worldview centered around the easter bunny, only, you dont get candy :(

WHERE IS MY CANDY, damnit!

Well, it was a debate on Christianity in the first place...

Your problem, Rhyfelwyr, is that your position starts weakly.

You start with (my emphasis) and then go on to draw biased conclusions from woolly metaphors. Since Revelation has long been included in the Catholic bible (usually worth remembering that there are many differing collections used as bibles) one would be tempted to think the Roman Catholic Church doesn't subscribe to your interpretation.

I didn't ever read up on this stuff presuming the RCC was the whore of Babylon, in fact I used to presume it was a Christian church that was just a bit corrupted. The thing is, it doesn't just give obscure whoolly metaphors. If it just said something obscure about an unfaithful church or something generic like that, I would say fair enough, it could mean anything. But it says the beast is a city built on seven hills, the church built on it will be decked in scarlet and purple. As for what the Catholic Church thinks of it, well past theories include that Rome is indeed the beast (since tbh I think people have to twist things to think that it is not), but this beast was only Imperial Rome. Another theory is that Rome is the beast, but that the prophecy speaks of future apostacy within the Roman See. Interestingly, on that last point, there are some quotes from old Popes that certain things which more recent Pope's have done would be a sign that he is the antichrist.

Finally, one wonders why it is important to have the Catholics "defend" their position against your interpretation.

That's what debates are for. So far, my argument has been dismissed mostly on the grounds of Revelation being nonsense, but that doesn't work for Catholics when it's part of their holy scripture.

[PanzerJaeger]

What's ridiculous, my friend, is that anyone actually thinks there might be a beast of Revelation. Entertaining, but ridiculous.

Thank you.

[Louis VI the Fat]

What's ridiculous, my friend, is that anyone actually thinks there might be a beast of Revelation. Entertaining, but ridiculous.

Rubbish! The antichrist, this spawn of the whore of Babylon, is amongst us, and he's wearing the marks of the Beast. He's killed our Lord the Saviour already.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Banquo's Ghost]

That's what debates are for. So far, my argument has been dismissed mostly on the grounds of Revelation being nonsense, but that doesn't work for Catholics when it's part of their holy scripture.

It may well be part of their scripture, but most Roman Catholics that I know (being in a country full of 'em) don't take said scripture literally. Great story, lots of good stuff for working the guilt muscle, but not a political position.

Thank you.

Hi PJ! Good to see you back.

Rubbish! The antichrist, this spawn of the whore of Babylon, is amongst us, and he's wearing the marks of the Beast. He's killed our Lord the Saviour already.

I'm no theologian, but that looks like a Materazzi Daemon from the eighth circle of Hell.

[gaelic cowboy]

It may well be part of their scripture, but most Roman Catholics that I know (being in a country full of 'em) don't take said scripture literally. Great story, lots of good stuff for working the guilt muscle, but not a political position.

Here here well said

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Well, my Bible makes it clear the Whore is a City, not an institution. So the City is Rome, torn down by the Beast and Ten Kings.

If the prophecy refers to anything it surely refers to the sack of Rome, which has already come to pass.

[Major Robert Dump]

Well the antichrist was originally supposed to be Michael Ironside, but then the devil tricked him and wanted that guy from LOTR to be the antichrist, which prompted Michael Ironside to yell "You said I could be the chosen one!!!!!!1" and shoot the devil.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Well, my Bible makes it clear the Whore is a City, not an institution. So the City is Rome, torn down by the Beast and Ten Kings.

If the prophecy refers to anything it surely refers to the sack of Rome, which has already come to pass.

I agree this idea works on quite a lot of the levels, but still in some it doesn't appear to add up. I gave examples of the various sackings in the OP, but in each case their relationship with Rome isn't the way John said it should be. Also, if the sacking on Rome was what John prophecied, we should have been living on the new heaven and new earth by now!

As for the woman being the city (Rev 17:18?), I suppose that is correct (sorry if I caused confusion by making the city and not just the seven hills appear to be the foundation that the woman rides on). Although it is synonymous with the Church of Rome, since the latter is the means by which the woman does all the things said of her (exercising authority over the multitudes etc).

What's ridiculous, my friend, is that anyone actually thinks there might be a beast of Revelation. Entertaining, but ridiculous.

Hmm... you are not a hardline atheist are you? Would you call all religious beliefs ridiculous? If not, I don't see why my interpretation of Revelation has to be so absurd. Nowadays if you know nothing about the Bible or theology and just say that everything is an allegory then people will say wow isn't he knowledgeable and reasonable. But all I'm trying to do is make an honest understanding of what it's saying. If you'll concede the guy in the sky is there, then I don't see how this is far-fetched.

In my opinion, that's the real truth of Christian charity - finding it in one's heart to abandon long-held "interpretations" of hatred and find the way to peace when all about you want the much easier road of war.

Yeah, there is this sense due to the 'peace and tolerance' morality I was talking about earlier than somehow doing cartwheels to come to the conclusion that everyone is right is somehow the honest thing to do, always the hard path when its easy to descend into dispute. But this just isn't the reality much of the time. It would be much easier for me to join hands with the ecumenical movement instead of holding unpopular views, and just dismiss everything John says as an allegory that could mean anything - when in fact what I see in front of me is a very specific set of criteria for which only Rome fits the bill.

Also, your post holds the assumption that any interpretations which lead to dispute must be backward and wrong, something we are raised to believe as soon as we enter Primary School. The majority of replies haven't been about actually studying Revelation, instead just people saying its nonsense and that it can't be Rome. Why? Well just because Rome is such a big part of western culture and is so important both spiritually and politically, that it seems crazy to say that it could be the whore of Babylon. You have too many underlying assumptions, so whatever you see in Revelation can't point to Rome. Much the same way that if you tried to suggest to any Protestant in the 16th century that Rome wasn't the whore, then they would just dismiss you. Why? Because it's something that underlies such a huge part not just of obscure theology, but of the very world around them. I try not to get these ideas in the way of making an honest interpretation of what Revelation is saying (as you can imagine, I have influences which would sway me either way, what with being a Scottish Protestant on the one hand and we all know what it's known for lol, but at the same time being part of a modern liberal society that respects Rome as a spiritual centre).

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Also, I should point out that the anti-Christ isn't in Revelation, nor are "The Four Horsemen", there are four horsemen, true, but they aren't War, Pestilence, Famine and Death.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Also, I should point out that the anti-Christ isn't in Revelation, nor are "The Four Horsemen", there are four horsemen, true, but they aren't War, Pestilence, Famine and Death.

There is a lot of debate over whether the second beast is the antichrist (since it mimicks a lamb but speaks like a dragon), or whether in fact its two horns are symbollic of the two witnesses. Although, this thread isn't actually about the antichrist remember.

[miotas]

The anti-christ has already returned to earth, he's locked up in a mental institution.

[Hax]

(since it mimicks a lamb but speaks like a dragon),

We know it now, the Beast must live in Indonesia!



It could be Cute Wolf (as he's Roman Catholic!)...he might just be the "wolf in sheepsclothing" you've been looking for!

Quick, fetch my torches and pitchforks!

[gaelic cowboy]

Its well know that the beast lives on Craggy Island

It has claws as big as cups (Dougal)
It has four ears, two for listening and two "are sort of back-up ears". Some might be on the inside of its head (Dougal)
It has a retractable leg so it "can leap up at you better" (Dougal)
It has magnets on its tail, so "if you're made out of metal, it can attach itself to you" (Dougal)
It lights up at night (Dougal)
It has a tremendous fear of stamps (Dougal)
Its yawn sounds like Liam Neeson chasing a load of hens around inside a barrel (Dougal)
It has no mouth, but instead has four arses (Dougal)
It only has eyebrows on Saturdays (Dougal)
It lives "on the place where there should be moors" (Mrs. Doyle)
The locals think it is some sort of giant fox (Mrs. Doyle)
It makes a "terrible howling noise" (Mrs. Doyle)
It is the size of a jaguar (Hud)
It has got big white teeth, as sharp as knives (Hud)

[HoreTore]

That's Victoria Beckham, right?

[Cute Wolf]

It could be Cute Wolf (as he's Roman Catholic!)...he might just be the "wolf in sheepsclothing" you've been looking for!

Quick, fetch my torches and pitchforks!

Wrong --> I attend Dutch Reformed (Calvinist) Church.......
And for me, the Pope is just another a little misguided priest..... he will end up still in heaven btw, as the only thing you need to save you is believe in Jesus.....

[Lemur]

I think the moral of this story is that we all would have been a great deal better off if the Revelation of John had been classified as Apocrypha. And if someone had smothered Nostradamus in the crib, while we're at it.

[Cute Wolf]

I think the moral of this story is that we all would have been a great deal better off if the Revelation of John had been classified as Apocrypha. And if someone had smothered Nostradamus in the crib, while we're at it.

Hope Armageddon comes more than 1000 years from now... amen.....

[bobbin]

I think the moral of this story is that we all would have been a great deal better off if the Revelation of John had been classified as Apocrypha. And if someone had smothered Nostradamus in the crib, while we're at it.

It was consider that by some of the early chruch leaders, shame it never stuck.

[ajaxfetish]

Also, if the sacking on Rome was what John prophecied, we should have been living on the new heaven and new earth by now!

No kidding! Of course, Jesus did say something about 'this generation' not passing before his coming. I've heard that interpreted as the 'generation of mankind,' but that does seem a little farfetched, doesn't it? What would he say if it were the opposite? Don't worry about looking for signs, cause you'll be extinct by then, anyway? As I understand it, early Christians were ready for a second coming to happen any moment. And . . . it didn't. Now most of us are a little less edgy, just getting into a furor when some big calendar event hits, like the year 2000. What do we do if AD 7000 rolls around? The 7 seals/7000 years idea will be a little hard to sustain then, unless we're willing to start treating history with as much skepticism as geology. Ultimately, you just need to read your bible a little less literally, Rhyfelwyr. It could get you into trouble. Most of the prophecies you'll find are either gonna be things that had already happened when prophesied, or they'll be really vague and subjective, or they'll be things that happen all the time, like wars and natural disasters.

Ajax

[Rhyfelwyr]

No kidding! Of course, Jesus did say something about 'this generation' not passing before his coming. I've heard that interpreted as the 'generation of mankind,' but that does seem a little farfetched, doesn't it? What would he say if it were the opposite? Don't worry about looking for signs, cause you'll be extinct by then, anyway? As I understand it, early Christians were ready for a second coming to happen any moment. And . . . it didn't. Now most of us are a little less edgy, just getting into a furor when some big calendar event hits, like the year 2000. What do we do if AD 7000 rolls around? The 7 seals/7000 years idea will be a little hard to sustain then, unless we're willing to start treating history with as much skepticism as geology. Ultimately, you just need to read your bible a little less literally, Rhyfelwyr. It could get you into trouble. Most of the prophecies you'll find are either gonna be things that had already happened when prophesied, or they'll be really vague and subjective, or they'll be things that happen all the time, like wars and natural disasters.

Ajax

I don't usually tend to read it literally, I just felt like throwing this thread out there since I think people are too complecent in just dismissing everything as an allegory, and also in terms of their attitude to the ecumenical movement.

Also, I have came across the issue you raised with Jesus comments, and the most common explanation I have seen is that given the context in which he was speaking, he was referring to the first generation after the various other prophecies he had just mentioned had been fulfilled (in other words the first generation after Israel was founded, with the standard Biblical generation being seen as 70 years long). Alternatively, preterists say that Jesus did fulfil his prophecy and raptured all believers around 70AD. However, IMO, the most solid view is that of all the major Reformers that has apparently since been forgotten, aka partial-preterism, or the belief that Jesus spoke of events in 70AD, but given the nature of various other prophecies, this was a shadow of the later apocalyptic scenario, with the destruction of the temple following that old pattern of the Old Testament features foreshadowing their New Testament equivalent.

[gaelic cowboy]

I don't usually tend to read it literally, I just felt like throwing this thread out there since I think people are too complecent in just dismissing everything as an allegory, and also in terms of their attitude to the ecumenical movement.

So you believe in the ravings of a half mad if not full mad middle easterner who likely never met Jesus if he existed at all who in all probability was writing a piece of fiction likely stolen from the Book of Daniel.

This colection of fariy stories is nothing more than a reimagining of various apocaliptic writings it's the ancient equivalent of a Battlestar Galactica reboot.

[Centurion1]

protestants are just jealous of Catholics.

and spell check says to capitalize catholic but not protestants. therefore we are a proper noun and you are not.




superior in all ways there's a Catholics contribution.

[gaelic cowboy]

protestants are just jealous of Catholics.

and spell check says to capitalize catholic but not protestants. therefore we are a proper noun and you are not.




superior in all ways there's a Catholics contribution.

Lol

[ajaxfetish]

he was referring to the first generation after the various other prophecies he had just mentioned had been fulfilled (in other words the first generation after Israel was founded, with the standard Biblical generation being seen as 70 years long).

I wonder how popular that interpretation was before the mid 1900s. I can see it being forgotten pretty quickly after 2018. Everyone likes to keep 2nd coming revelations in the immediate future, and have been doing their best to keep them that way for the last two millennia. I'll stick to the 'coming like a thief in the night' idea. I expect my personal '2nd coming' to happen when I die. That, to me, is a much more immediate possibility, and requires just as much readiness on my part. The very idea of the 2nd coming seems almost like a diversion from the fact that we need to be doing our best to be moral in the here and now. Whether Christ returns tomorrow or 50,000 years from now doesn't make a shred of difference in how we should live today. I don't think trying to eke a meaning out of opaque prophecies intended for a long-dead audience will help too much, either.

Ajax

[Rhyfelwyr]

superior in all ways there's a Catholics contribution.

Bah! I care not for the wordly splenodour of the Vatican, since just about every aspect of its 'holiness' directly contradicts Biblical teachings. Oh, how great and splendid are their bishops (check Mat 23:5-6)! Look how piously the bow before God (check Mat 6:6)! Look how they chant 'Ave Maria' till they're blue in the face (check Mat 6:7)! Look at how their monks remove themselves from the world and live with such discipline (check Mark 7:8-9)!

I wonder how popular that interpretation was before the mid 1900s. I can see it being forgotten pretty quickly after 2018. Everyone likes to keep 2nd coming revelations in the immediate future, and have been doing their best to keep them that way for the last two millennia. I'll stick to the 'coming like a thief in the night' idea. I expect my personal '2nd coming' to happen when I die. That, to me, is a much more immediate possibility, and requires just as much readiness on my part. The very idea of the 2nd coming seems almost like a diversion from the fact that we need to be doing our best to be moral in the here and now. Whether Christ returns tomorrow or 50,000 years from now doesn't make a shred of difference in how we should live today. I don't think trying to eke a meaning out of opaque prophecies intended for a long-dead audience will help too much, either.

Ajax

Thanks for your good posts btw.

But as I said to PVC, remember, this thread isn't actually about a literal reading of the end of the world scenario with the antichrist, rather it is about the historicist position that the Church of Rome is the whore of Babylon. I understand what you're saying about us always thinking its the end of the world, but I would point out that ever since 1948 this is the first time we are seeing the situation prophecied as being able to have a literal fulfilment. Back in the Reformation days which everything else seemed to fit the bill, they glossed over the issue of Israel. Often, they adopted the idea that national Israel was symbolism for spiritual Israel, or the church of all believers. So when the Puritans in England thought the end was near, they tried to finish the puzzle themselves by making England the Israel spoken of, by resettling all the Jews that had been exiled to the Netherlands, and giving the Barebones Parliament 70 members to model the Jewish Sanhedrin. I just think it's intersting that today we have the scenario for a more literal fulfillment.

[gaelic cowboy]

this thread isn't actually about a literal reading of the end of the world scenario with the antichrist, rather it is about the historicist position that the Church of Rome is the whore of Babylon

Historicism is a school of interpretation which treats the eschatological prophecies of Daniel and Revelation as finding literal earthly fulfillment. Hmm seems pretty definite to me that you believe it's literal if you believe its historicist.