1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Babylon of Revelation......

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Grasshopper, Jul 11, 2003.

Top Posters
  1. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,385
    Likes Received:
    23
    This discussion came up on another thread. I thought I would start it fresh here. It is my belief it can only be known through a past-fulfillment view. Here is an article on the subject.

    Babylon the Great of Revelation
    by Don K. Preston

    Everyone agrees that the book of Revelation predicts the fall of Babylon; what they do not agree upon is the identity of Babylon. Some say it is Rome, Roman Catholicism, a modern day world-wide church, or apostate Christianity as a whole. One thing is certain, the interpretation of Revelation and thus much of the Bible, hinges upon who Babylon is or was.

    In Revelation the coming of Christ, the New Creation, judgment and resurrection are associated with the fall of Babylon. To mistakenly identify Babylon is to incorrectly interpret these issues. Whatever one makes Babylon to be these issues are inextricably linked with her fall! Can we identify Babylon? Yes indeed!

    Revelation 16:6; 17:1-6; 18:20, 24 tell us that Babylon was drunk with the blood of the prophets. This is a critical point! The term "the prophets" appears 88 times in the New Testament. The overwhelmingly normal usage of the term refers to Old Testament prophets.

    Now the city of Rome, the Roman Catholic church, apostate Christianity, nor any modern world-wide church ever persecuted Old Testament prophets! But Babylon of Revelation did, therefore none of these can be identified as Babylon; it is just that simple! What city persecuted the Old Testament prophets and filled the Cup of her Sin by so doing? It was Jerusalem.

    Comparing Matthew 23 with Revelation plainly reveals this. In Matthew 23:31 Jesus said it was Jerusalem that had killed the prophets; in Revelation it is Babylon. In Matthew 23:32 Jesus said the Jews were about to fill the cup of their sin by continuing to persecute those sent to her; in Revelation 17 Babylon has filled her cup by persecuting not only the prophets of old but the followers of Jesus as well, 17:6. In Matthew 23:35 Jesus said Jerusalem was guilty of "all the blood shed on the earth," 23:35; in Revelation 18:24 Babylon bears the guilt for "all the blood shed on the earth." In Matthew 23:36 Jesus said judgment on Jerusalem for killing the prophets would come in his generation; in Revelation Jesus said "Behold, I come quickly" 22:6, 10, 12, 20. Such parallels are not accidental!

    Finally, the Great City Babylon is "spiritually called Sodom," Rev. 11:8; and the only city in the Bible--other than historical Sodom--that is ever called Sodom is Jerusalem, Isaiah 1:10; Jer. 23:14, Ezek. 16:44f. Babylon is also "where the Lord was crucified" Rev. 11:8. Jesus was not crucified in Rome, or by the Catholic church; Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem!

    Avenging the Prophets


    One of the major themes of Revelation is the avenging of the martyrs. This theme is stated in chapter 6:9ff; 11:11-19; 17:4-6; 18:20, 24, to cite a few passages. The judgment of Revelation is on "Babylon" the city "drunken with the blood of the saints" and "all those slain on the earth," 17:6; 18:24. Who was Babylon?

    Many believe it was Rome because the city was said to "sit on many waters" 17:2; and to rule over the kings of the earth, 17:18. But "waters" in Revelation often signifies "people" or nations instead of "H2O." See Revelation 13:1ff where the beast arose out of the "sea." Further, the city of Jerusalem was "supreme, and presided over all the neighboring country as the head does over the body" so says Josephus the Jewish historian of the first century. He also called Jerusalem "the great city" Every designation of "Babylon" in the book of Revelation was used by secular writers of the first century to describe the city of Jerusalem!

    More importantly, as just seen, Jesus defined Jerusalem as the persecuting city drunken with the blood of the saints. In Matthew 23:31-39 Jesus said it was Jerusalem that had slain the prophets through the ages. He said he would send them prophets and they would slay them also. He also said the blood of the martyr's all the way back to Abel would be judged in that generation, vss. 35-36! Read Matthew 23:29-36 side by side with Revelation 18 and see the perfect correlation.

    The Bible places the blame for persecuting the church squarely at the feet of Israel/Jerusalem; not on Rome!

    It was the Sanhedrin that beat Peter and John, Acts 4-5; and stoned Stephen, Acts 6-7. The Jews instigated a "great persecution" against the church in Jerusalem, Acts 8. Saul the persecutor of the early church had letters of authority from the High Priest to persecute Christians, Acts 9:2-3. Even Herod, when persecuting the church did so to please the Jews, Acts 12:1-3. The Jews in Antioch stirred up the city against Paul, Acts 13:50. The Jews stirred up the Gentiles to persecute Paul in Iconium and Derbe, Acts 14:4ff, 19f. At Thessalonica the Jews "set all the city in an uproar" attempting to kill Paul, Acts 17:5f. The Jews attempted to involve the Romans against Paul but they refused to persecute him, Acts 18:12ff. The Romans actually rescued Paul from the Jews, Acts 21:27-40.

    While the Gentiles participated in persecution against the early church, blame for instigating the persecution was pointed by Biblical writers at the Jews "who have both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men," 1 Thessalonians 2:15f.

    If Revelation was written in A.D. 95-98 as is generally suggested, Rome had only persecuted the church for about four years! Nero, at the instigation of the Jews, persecuted the church from approximately A.D. 64-68. It is now being admitted that Domitian did not actually persecute the church! Are we to believe that Revelation ignores Jerusalem, the city that had persecuted the saints for centuries, and focuses on the destruction of a city that had persecuted the saints for only four years?!?

    If Babylon was Jerusalem of the first century as we have suggested then the modern ideas of a coming Armageddon, a millennium, and "end of time" judgment are false concepts. What more evidence is there that Babylon was Jerusalem of the first century?

    In Revelation 14:6f John's vision revealed an angel with the gospel to preach to all the world with the message of the soon coming judgment on Babylon. When the gospel had been preached to all the world we find the coming of the Lord in judgment because the sin of the land was full, vs. 14ff. The elements of concern here are 1.] the preaching of the gospel into all the world; 2.] the filling of the measure of sin; 3.] the soon coming of the Lord. Notice the comparison chart of Revelation 14 and Matthew.

    Mat. 23-24 Revelation 14
    Preaching to all the world, 24:14 Preaching to all the world, 14:6
    Message of judgment, 23:34-35
    Message of judgment, 14:7
    Filling the measure of sin, 23:32 Harvest is fully ripe, 14:15f
    Judgment in Jesus' generation, 23:34; 24:34
    The hour of his judgment has come, 14:7


    This chart shows the perfect harmony between Jesus' prediction against Jerusalem and Revelation's prediction of coming judgment against "Babylon." Can it be shown that the gospel was preached into all the world before Jerusalem fell?

    In Romans 10:18; 16:25-26 the apostle said, about 60 A.D., that the gospel had been preached to all the nations in all the world. In Colossians 1:5-7, 23, about 63-64 A.D., he said the gospel had been preached "to every creature under heaven." In Titus 2:11 he said the gospel had appeared to all men. If we are going to accept scripture the Bible says the gospel was preached in all the world before the fall of Jerusalem!

    Now unless one can demonstrate that there were to be two great commissions to be preached into all the world, declaring the imminent coming judgment upon two cities that were about to fill the measure of sin by persecuting the saints of God, then consistency demands that we identify Babylon as Jerusalem of the first century. It was Jerusalem that was to fill the measure of her sin by killing the prophets; Jerusalem that Jesus said the gospel would be preached world-wide before her fall; Jerusalem that was to see his coming in his generation. Babylon was first century Jerusalem.
     
    #1 Grasshopper, Jul 11, 2003
  2. Tim

    Tim New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2001
    Messages:
    967
    Likes Received:
    0
    Grasshopper,

    Good article (but of course, I pretty much agreed with it anyway).

    1st century Jerusalem seems to fit textually better than any other city to me.

    I doubt if it will convince the futurists though. The wildest of their interpretations I've heard to date is New York City.

    Tim
     
    #2 Tim, Jul 11, 2003
  3. BrianT

    BrianT New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    The wildest I've heard is Tulsa, Oklahoma. And I've heard it several times. [​IMG] Their most convincing argument is that Babylon is a "whore" in Revelation, and that's basically what you get if you spell Tulsa backwards. Yes, these people were serious. [​IMG]
     
    #3 BrianT, Jul 11, 2003
  4. stevenlynch

    stevenlynch New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2003
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tulsa!?!

    Somebody better tell fgm.

    Must be that false doctrine of Arnold Murray.


    I appreciate the article...but it dismisses Rome a little too easy, and smacks of anti-semitism.

    SEE: Dave Hunt's work "A Woman Rides the Beast"

    Steve
     
    #4 stevenlynch, Jul 11, 2003
  5. Gunther

    Gunther New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Messages:
    616
    Likes Received:
    0
    It seems to me to be another attempt of preterists to convince people that their system is biblical.

    Several problems exist with this article:

    1. He is starting with an unknown to interpret the rest of the book. Always a warning flag.

    2. In Revelation 5:10, during a scene in heaven, it is said that the saints would rule with Christ on the EARTH.

    3. In Revelation 1, it says that the judgment is for the entire world and that all nations of the world would experience it.

    4. It does not adequately address why sin and suffering exist in the supposed New Heavens and New Earth.

    This really just a start.

    Btw, people who do not believe that modern day Jews are God's people are not anti-semetic. I don't believe they are and I am premillenial.
     
    #5 Gunther, Jul 11, 2003
  6. Me2

    Me2 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2002
    Messages:
    1,348
    Likes Received:
    0
    here's another related article

    web page

    I found this to be highly informative
     
    #6 Me2, Jul 12, 2003
  7. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    RE : Christ was not crucified in Rome.

    In every Church of Rome one will find an altar where mass is "celebrated" with a graven image of Christ on a cross above that altar.

    As far as I know the Church of Rome is the only Church who does this.

    HankD
     
    #7 HankD, Jul 12, 2003
  8. ColoradoFB

    ColoradoFB New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    0
    Parody mode on:

    Well, as a former resident of Tulsa, I could almost buy it! After all, it is the home of Oral & Richard Roberts, Carlton Pearson, Billy Joe Daugherty, and Kenneth Hagin is nearby in Broken Arrow! [​IMG]
     
    #8 ColoradoFB, Jul 12, 2003
  9. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    OK, before ya'll throw tomatoes at me, ponder this for a moment - just a moment:

    Suppose, just suppose, the Babylon spoken about in prophecy is the REAL ancient Babylon !! :eek:

    Can't be, you argue. Ancient Babylon is in ruins. Well, consider this: What if the Babylon spoken about is not only a world religious system, but is a government system as well. Just consider the unrest in Baghdad right now.

    Just consider this possibility: What if the UN moved it's headquarters to Baghdad / Babylon ????

    We only see history up to the present time, with Biblical CLUES as to how End Time Prophecy will be. But God knows the beginning and the end. What if, through some unforeseen events to us, the UN headquarters end up in Babylon - to "oversee" events happening throughout the Middle East and the rest of the world ? :eek:

    Is there anyone on this Board (oh, yes, I guess there is, cause I peeked at the Poll results on Spiritual Warfare [​IMG] ) who thinks the demonic spiritual powers are any less in present day Iraq than they were in the time of Nimrod or Daniel?

    Did you know they discovered an ancient harp with a gold Baal (calf head) on it just a few years ago? Did you know that only about 6 years ago, they unearthed the ancient "treasures of Nimrod?" There was much concern over what happened to these treasures during the Iraq war. National Geographic finally went over & located them, buried deep in a vault 2 stories underground in the Central Bank of Iraq.

    Don't you think it is incredulous that after all of these thousands of years, just when we are heading towards the End Times of Prophecy, these things were discovered intact? I do, even though I'm not sure what it all means. I just think it's incredible.

    And have you ever done a geneology study about Nimrod / Nebuchadnezzar & the Sumarians, ancient Babylon, etc. ???

    Interesting stuff though I'm just starting to look into it.

    And just because you might be post-trib is no reason to throw tomatoes at me, either. So there. [​IMG]
     
    #9 LadyEagle, Jul 12, 2003
  10. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Good point SheEagle.

    Consider Israel which had dissappeared as a geographical nation until 1947/8.

    HankD
     
    #10 HankD, Jul 12, 2003
  11. Tim

    Tim New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2001
    Messages:
    967
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gunther's quote,"Btw, people who do not believe that modern day Jews are God's people are not anti-semetic. I don't believe they are and I am premillenial."
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Gunther, thanks for the voice of reason there. Dave Hunt once stated that amils and their ilk were "of the synagogue of Satan". That sort of blew his credibility for me.

    I'll get back to your points later, Lord willing.

    Tim
     
    #11 Tim, Jul 12, 2003
  12. Alexandra Spears

    Alexandra Spears New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2003
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's the Catholic church. The city on seven hills (Rome/Vatican), sitting on many waters (Cathlocism has people of every ethnicity/race).

    It was the Catholic church that brought us the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the Holocaust (yes Hitler WAS Catholic! And the Vatican had its dirty little fingers in that pie too). What church (besides Catholic) has had that kind of power? The Dark Ages were "dark" because the Catholic church ran the show! Bible-believing Christians had to go underground. They were persecuted along with the Jews.

    Just take a good look at history.
     
    #12 Alexandra Spears, Jul 14, 2003
  13. ColoradoFB

    ColoradoFB New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are many interpretations of The Revelation among Christians today, as witnessed by the lack of agreement on what the book actually means and all the divergent views on will Christians go through a great tribulation or not. I think to categorically state it is the Roman Catholic Church is fine if it is also stated that is one's personal opinion. To state that it is a fact, is putting one's own interpretation out as the word of God. Bottom line...we can discuss and speculate, but no one knows but God.
     
    #13 ColoradoFB, Jul 14, 2003
  14. Graceforever

    Graceforever New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2001
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    0
    I disagree with you slightly, grasshopper, although, it's no big deal.... I don't think Babylon was 1rst century, only... I believe it was then, and is now, a symbol of the world, the false church/religion, false prophets, apostate Christianity, in all ages, as a whole, etc....

    For one thing, Jesus wasn’t crucified in Jerusalem, but outside the city… The world….

    Hebrew’s 13:11 For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp. 12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. 13 Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach. 14 For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come.

    Then in the book of John….. “This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.”
     
    #14 Graceforever, Jul 16, 2003
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...