The Whore of Babylon

**miotas** · 03-12-2010, 05:37

Why must the seven hills be referring to Rome, couldn't it just as easily be referring to Jerusalem?

**PanzerJaeger** · 03-12-2010, 06:15

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

Anyway, from the evidence given below, I think it is hard to deny the Church of Rome is Mystery Babylon the Great, and will give rise to the antichrist when he comes.

Is this serious? Do you really believe all this stuff or am I missing something?

**G. Septimus** · 03-12-2010, 06:17

Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger

Is this serious? Do you really believe all this stuff or am I missing something?

well, I don't believe this end of the world thing................

**Strike For The South** · 03-12-2010, 06:46

ha you used the word poppery

/drunk

**Banquo's Ghost** · 03-12-2010, 08:36

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

You start with

the Book of Revelation, which states that the Church of Rome is Babylon

(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.

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

**Philippus Flavius Homovallumus** · 03-12-2010, 09:45

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

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.

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

I think that is more or less the point I would make as well. Rhy, you start with the assumption that the Roman Church is Babylon.

Your basis for this is your Reformed theology, which casts the originator of Catholic theology as the Antichrist.

The problem is that the prophecy is extremely mercurial, and while it may refer to Rome in the authors mind, Isiah refers to Cyrus the Great in passages that have since been taken to refer to the Messiah.

**gaelic cowboy** · 03-12-2010, 11:38

Goes to say summit decides meh theres cows to feed so the cowboy logs off

**Rhyfelwyr** · 03-12-2010, 18:58

Originally Posted by 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!

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

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

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.

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

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.