wingnut-

1 hour ago, Steve_S said:

That's fair enough of course, however, I still want to narrow it down. I certainly expect that you will inspect it in a further post. However, the question, is do they apply specifically to Jerusalem. Other nations, etc., is fine, but I wish to get at the root. Are they about Jerusalem specifically?

The location is about Jerusalem, yes, that is where everyone is gathered prior to the fall of Babylon.

22 hours ago, Steve_S said:

Absolutely it is gone (I don't know by how long, though). Why would God need to be physically present to destroy something? Who was responsible for the destruction of Sodom? Two angels carried out the destruction, but Who was judging it? I think Babylon is definitely destroyed towards the end, but it certainly does not seem to be the final act.

I misread the original post of yours, for some reason I thought you said long gone but you did not say that, you said already gone, so I apologize for the confusion on my part.  As far as your questions above, I agree with what you are saying, God most definitely does not have to physically be there to destroy something.  However, the OT passages regarding Babylon point to Him using other means to do so, as in the armies from the north, the Medes.

What I need to figure out I guess is what you consider to be the final act, or what final act are we talking about.  Is your definition the end of the 70th week the final act, or does your definition of final act extend into the Millennial reign?

This is why I ask.

Revelation 16:17 The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and a loud voice came out of the temple, from the throne, saying, “It is done!” 18 And there were flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, and a great earthquake such as there had never been since man was on the earth, so great was that earthquake. 19 The great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell, and God remembered Babylon the great, to make her drain the cup of the wine of the fury of his wrath. 20 And every island fled away, and no mountains were to be found. 21 And great hailstones, about one hundred pounds each, fell from heaven on people; and they cursed God for the plague of the hail, because the plague was so severe.

This being the final event written in Revelation as far as wrath is concerned, and being connected to when God remembers Babylon, narrows down the timing a bit.  This also creates serious issues in the narrative if it is speaking of Babylon literally, and the reason is because of how God judges them in the OT passages and that this is done in a single day.  If it is the last day, which the 7th bowl/vial suggests, then there are logistical problems, because all the nations are gathered against Jerusalem, not Babylon.

Revelation 16:12 The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up, to prepare the way for the kings from the east. 13 And I saw, coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs. 14 For they are demonic spirits, performing signs, who go abroad to the kings of the whole world, to assemble them for battle on the great day of God the Almighty. 15 (“Behold, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake, keeping his garments on, that he may not go about naked and be seen exposed!”) 16 And they assembled them at the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.

Now the armies of the whole world are assembled at Armageddon at the 6th bowl, Babylon falls at the 7th bowl, so there are no armies to march to a different place.  Armageddon is laid out in chapter 19, and none of those armies escape that battle.  Once these armies assemble at Armageddon, they attack Jerusalem.

Zechariah 14  Behold, a day is coming for the Lord, when the spoil taken from you will be divided in your midst. 2 For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped. Half of the city shall go out into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. 3 Then the Lord will go out and fight against those nations as when he fights on a day of battle. 4 On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley, so that one half of the Mount shall move northward, and the other half southward. 5 And you shall flee to the valley of my mountains, for the valley of the mountains shall reach to Azal. And you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.

This must all take place in a single day according to the scriptures, so as I have been pointing out there is a contradiction.  Everyone, including the Lord, cannot be in Jerusalem and someone be in Babylon afterward.  Either the prophets are wrong about all the nations being gathered against Jerusalem, or the city in the OT passages cannot be literal Babylon.  Everything mentioned above in Zechariah 14 (except for the Lord on the Mt. of Olives) is prophesied about in those OT prophecies regarding Babylon.

22 hours ago, Steve_S said:

Are you asserting that the prophecies (that we have discussed thus far) in the old testament that pertain to Babylon are in fact in regard to Jerusalem at the time of the end?

I think when we break them down and look at them line by line it is clear they are about more than one nation.  I have no doubt that the Lord is going to judge the land of the Chaldeans just as He will judge the whole earth, but the passages themselves speak to something bigger than just the land of the Chaldeans.  In response to our other conversation here I am going to touch on some of what I mean.

On 11/17/2019 at 11:16 PM, Steve_S said:

I do not have a problem with viewing Zechariah 12 as a localized event. The prophet is fairly specific in regards to the situation at hand. I however, do think, that at this point in the prophecy, the Babylon mentioned in Revelation, whatever it is, is probably already gone.

As one moves into Revelation 19, it very much so seems that Babylon is long gone when Christ returns as the rider on the white horse. There are no chapter/verse divisions in Revelation as you know. John's letter would've went straight from 18 into 19 and shortly thereafter, to here:

Rev 19:2  For true and righteous are His judgments, because He has judged the great harlot who corrupted the earth with her fornication; and He has avenged on her the blood of His servants shed by her." 
Rev 19:3  Again they said, "Alleluia! Her smoke rises up forever and ever!" 

Babylon seems, very much to be a smoking ruin at this point, judged by God.

I am having a hard time understanding your view of things here.  You indicate Babylon is long gone by the time the Lord sets down on the Mt. of Olives, so you believe He destroys Babylon before He returns to earth?

33 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

Lines 1-4 speak of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. Has nothing to do with the end times. Towers and siegeworks were ancient tactics.

Line 7 summarizes the deliverance of Jerusalem per Zech. 14.

So what you believe is the first four verses are about one time, and everything that follows is unrelated?

On 11/17/2019 at 11:02 PM, Steve_S said:

I would have to disagree there. There are currently no cities that fit all of those areas. Jerusalem doesn't come close to precisely fitting the old testament prophecies regarding Babylon. You can point out a lot of vague similarities and even some that are more striking, but the differences at least outweigh them.

I specifically said the Babylon of Revelation.

On 11/17/2019 at 11:02 PM, Steve_S said:

I don't know if Babylon is going to be reconstituted or if it's some other city. However, I'm fairly certain it's not Jerusalem due to the fact that in almost all the prophecies regarding babylon it seems to be a physical wasteland such that people walk past it and lament it.

Every year the people of the earth will be required to come to His kingdom, this explains why people will have to walk past it and lament it, because it is in close proximity.  Ancient Babylon is outside the boundaries of the Millennial kingdom and since it is on the Euphrates river that would not be an area anyone would be trying to cross to get into the land.

On 11/17/2019 at 11:02 PM, Steve_S said:

The land was left desolate after the Babylonian exile. It was renewed to a degree (one could certainly make a typological argument here and many do) and the old was considered to have been turned into the new. That is how every single scripture reads regarding Jerusalem going into the millennium. Change, yes, even geological changes, but, still the same dirt for all intents and purposes, the same land promised to Abraham.

I agree that the land was left desolate after the Babylonian exile, and that is in large part the proof of what I'm saying here.  People, as you point out, make typological arguments about what constitutes "desolate" by their definition of desolate, but isn't it God's definition that matters?  I mean, when God said Jerusalem was desolate after the Babylonian exile, and later scriptures from the prophets define the conditions that existed as desolate, then that is God's definition of desolate which would also apply to the state of Babylon.

On 11/17/2019 at 11:02 PM, Steve_S said:

I'm not saying dogmatically that it is going to be Babylon. But you say the only city that fits all those areas is Israel. I disagree with this. The only city that *truly* would fit everything with the knowledge that we have now is Babylon itself.

First, to avoid an overload of information, we should probably just stick to the argument I am making, which is in regards to the Babylon of Revelation and the proofs for that being Jerusalem.  Because for example, there is nothing in the prophecies regarding ancient Babylon where God assigns them a double portion.  There is only one city in scripture that is told they will get a double portion, and that is Jerusalem.

47 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

No, religion is not ruled out. False religion is what Babylon was founded on: rebellion against God, exercised by both a kingdom of man AND pagan religion.

And the city cannot be Jerusalem, because as has been pointed out many times, this Babylon city is to be destroyed, and Jerusalem is never prophesied to be destroyed in the End Times.

Isaiah 29  Ah, Ariel, Ariel,
    the city where David encamped!
Add year to year;
    let the feasts run their round.
2 Yet I will distress Ariel,
    and there shall be moaning and lamentation,
    and she shall be to me like an Ariel.
3 And I will encamp against you all around,
    and will besiege you with towers
    and I will raise siegeworks against you.
4 And you will be brought low; from the earth you shall speak,
    and from the dust your speech will be bowed down;
your voice shall come from the ground like the voice of a ghost,
    and from the dust your speech shall whisper.

5 But the multitude of your foreign foes shall be like small dust,
    and the multitude of the ruthless like passing chaff.
And in an instant, suddenly,
6     you will be visited by the Lord of hosts
with thunder and with earthquake and great noise,
    with whirlwind and tempest, and the flame of a devouring fire.
7 And the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel,
    all that fight against her and her stronghold and distress her,
    shall be like a dream, a vision of the night.

On 11/17/2019 at 4:28 PM, Steve_S said:

Are you contending that only what constituted old testament boundaries of Judah is in view with regards to the punishment in Revelation 17-18 then, or all of Israel?

I couldn't say for certain that it is going off OT boundaries, or if what is in view are the new boundaries given in Ezekiel for the Millennial kingdom.  The most specific I can get is from the Zechariah 14 passage where only Judah territory is in view, from Geba in the north to Rimmon in the extreme south.  As mentioned in another part of the conversation, it appears to me this is done in stages, the restoration of the land, and scripture states that He begins with Judah.

Zechariah 12:7  “And the Lord will give salvation to the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem may not surpass that of Judah. 8 On that day the Lord will protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the feeblest among them on that day shall be like David, and the house of David shall be like God, like the angel of the Lord, going before them. 9 And on that day I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem."

On 11/17/2019 at 4:28 PM, Steve_S said:

This was fulfilled in history by both the Assyrians under Sennacherib and the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar. What armies during the end of the tribulation will be besieging Jerusalem with siege towers and siegeworks? This is why it's important to look at the specifics of these prophecies. This sort of warfare has not been waged for hundreds of years and if you look at Revelation 18, there are no siegeworks:

Ok, so you said this is response to the passage from Isaiah 29 I posted, citing that it was related to a historical event.  However, this prophecy speaks to the future and I just didn't post more of it for the sake of longevity, but I will show you now why this is not a historical event.

Isaiah 29  Ah, Ariel, Ariel,
    the city where David encamped!
Add year to year;
    let the feasts run their round.
2 Yet I will distress Ariel,
    and there shall be moaning and lamentation,
    and she shall be to me like an Ariel.
3 And I will encamp against you all around,
    and will besiege you with towers
    and I will raise siegeworks against you.
4 And you will be brought low; from the earth you shall speak,
    and from the dust your speech will be bowed down;
your voice shall come from the ground like the voice of a ghost,
    and from the dust your speech shall whisper.

5 But the multitude of your foreign foes shall be like small dust,
    and the multitude of the ruthless like passing chaff.
And in an instant, suddenly,
6     you will be visited by the Lord of hosts
with thunder and with earthquake and great noise,
    with whirlwind and tempest, and the flame of a devouring fire.
7 And the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel,
    all that fight against her and her stronghold and distress her,
    shall be like a dream, a vision of the night.

There are 2 problems with associating this with history.  One, the Assyrians never made it to Jerusalem to set up siege works, God destroyed their army in their camp before they ever reached the city.  Two, the Babylonians were not destroyed, they won the battle for Jerusalem.

On 11/17/2019 at 4:28 PM, Steve_S said:

Again, specifics, important! Is this going to be a prolonged siege or is it coming to happen in one day?

Death, mourning, and famine, all in one day. Is it a siege or does it happen in a day?

As far as who it is that sets up siege works against Jerusalem I would say it is clearly the nations that come up against her in the last days.  We are talking about an apocalyptic time so having to resort to historical means to take a city is completely plausible if modern technology is stifled by lack of electricity and other such technologies being available.

As for how long, I can't say, scripture does not tell us one way or the other at what point the enemies encamp all around Jerusalem, it just tells us that they do.  It wouldn't appear to be for too long of a period to me though, but that is just my best guess.

On 11/17/2019 at 12:12 PM, Alive said:

What do you students of end time prophecy think of the core ideas that this guy outlines.

I would say he sees things nearly the same as I do.

7 hours ago, Steve_S said:

Part of the issue I'm having is that there is massive jumping back and forth between passages and contentions being made before previous contentions are settled. I understand that this is warranted to a degree when discussing prophecy, but it is also certainly feasible to just keep it to a few verses of scripture at a time. I much prefer to inspect the minutiae of the scripture before moving on, simply because I believe God is *incredibly specific* with regard to His prophecies (and indeed all of His scriptures). If God is very specific, we should be very specific (this is the outlook I have on all scripture, not just prophecy).

No problem, let's just slow it down and focus on one thing, works for me.

7 hours ago, Steve_S said:

If you will recall, this started with your contention that Isaiah 40 was somehow proof that this is a country-wide situation.  These are the verses you posted.

Isa 40:1  "Comfort, yes, comfort My people!" Says your God. 
Isa 40:2  "Speak comfort to Jerusalem, and cry out to her, That her warfare is ended, That her iniquity is pardoned; For she has received from the LORD's hand Double for all her sins." 
Isa 40:3  The voice of one crying in the wilderness: "Prepare the way of the LORD; Make straight in the desert A highway for our God. 
Isa 40:4  Every valley shall be exalted And every mountain and hill brought low; The crooked places shall be made straight And the rough places smooth; 
Isa 40:5  The glory of the LORD shall be revealed, And all flesh shall see it together; For the mouth of the LORD has spoken."

Ok, so I'll just give a brief summary from scripture of how this reads to me and how I understand it.

Zechariah 12:10  [ Him Whom They Have Pierced ] “And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and pleas for mercy, so that, when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn.

This is the emotion from the Jewish people that is going on, and Isaiah I believe addresses that in the first 2 verses by how the Lord responds to His people.  Verses 3-5 are speaking to the restoration of the land, most expositors take the Zechariah 14 passage and make it a worldwide thing, despite the specifics Zechariah gives.  While I tend to agree with them that this is a global event and not just a regional one, I am not willing to agree that Zechariah states that because he does not.  Perhaps the cleansing of the whole earth is done in stages because the Lord says His kingdom begins the size of a mustard seed, and clearly His reign begins in the land promised to Abraham's seed.

7 hours ago, Steve_S said:

Firstly, one specific question, just so I understand where you're coming from on this. Is your claim was that this has to be speaking of more than just Jerusalem because of God saying "My people?"

I believe He is speaking to the survivors at Jerusalem, words of comfort. 

7 hours ago, Steve_S said:

It hope it is not difficult to see why someone earnestly searching the scriptures and just taking the words therein to have literal meanings (that are discernible outside of usually easily identifiable metaphorical contexts) may have trouble believing how on earth these chapters could actually, strangely, and without any contextual indication, be speaking of Jerusalem and not Babylon.

I understand completely, that is why I held the position myself for my entire life up until a few years ago.  I understand exactly why there is an issue.  What I said before is that there are contradictions, and when that happens only one of the two can be true.  Where my understanding begins and ends on this are specifics regarding the Babylon of Revelation, and that there is only one city that fits all of those areas.

8 hours ago, Steve_S said:

I'm entirely befuddled by this interpretation. Is the city destroyed by the forces arrayed against or or not? Do they take the city, or not?

Yes they take the city, it tells us in verse 2 the city will be taken.  They do not completely destroy the city though, there is going to be a massive earthquake when the Lord sets down on the Mt. of Olives, this is where the people who flee go.  Whether the forces remain in the city or not remains to be seen.

2 hours ago, Steve_S said:

This is how the actual chapter reads if you just read it without attempting to wedge it into a broad eschatological narrative. That is the main problem with spiritualizing vast swaths of scripture to fit a presupposition. Eventually you have to start making the text say things it just doesn't say and this is one of those cases.

If all information is not taken into account, then the right conclusion can never be arrived at.  I am also not spiritualizing vast swaths of scripture, the passage begins speaking of comfort for the people, then says speak tenderly to Jerusalem.  Of course the most important aspect that has been completely overlooked is that Jerusalem receives the double portion.

Isaiah 40:Comfort, comfort my people, says your God.
2 Speak tenderly to Jerusalem,
    and cry to her
that her warfare is ended,
    that her iniquity is pardoned,
that she has received from the Lord's hand
    double for all her sins.

The reason both the people and the city are mentioned is because everywhere in prophecy it is sectioned off specifically as Judah and Jerusalem.  Ephraim is given different prophecies regarding this time, as are other peoples.  Judah and Jerusalem though go hand in hand together, this is consistency.  Nearly 200 times in scripture the two are said interchangeably.   The first 5 chapters of Isaiah are regarding judgement against Judah and Jerusalem.  In many of the occasions these two are said together in scripture it specifies Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

The reason the people are being comforted and it says speak tenderly and cry to her is because they believed earthly Jerusalem was sacred to the Lord, which it was at one point, but that city has been destroyed and rebuilt several times over now.  What exists there in the end times is flat out blasphemy and direct worship of satan from within what is supposed to be God's temple.  This is what God has in store for her, per Isaiah.

Isaiah 29  Ah, Ariel, Ariel,
    the city where David encamped!
Add year to year;
    let the feasts run their round.
2 Yet I will distress Ariel,
    and there shall be moaning and lamentation,
    and she shall be to me like an Ariel.
3 And I will encamp against you all around,
    and will besiege you with towers
    and I will raise siegeworks against you.
4 And you will be brought low; from the earth you shall speak,
    and from the dust your speech will be bowed down;
your voice shall come from the ground like the voice of a ghost,
    and from the dust your speech shall whisper.

1 hour ago, Steve_S said:

It doesn't remove them from from the equation. The context specifies Jerusalem. He is speaking to His people in Jerusalem. If you are going to extend the context to *everywhere* his people are, then that goes out past Jerusalem and Judah even, anywhere Jews are living would have to be in view.

It is important to take into account everything that happens throughout these last seven years.

Revelation 6:7 When he opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature say, “Come!” 8 And I looked, and behold, a pale horse! And its rider's name was Death, and Hades followed him. And they were given authority over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword and with famine and with pestilence and by wild beasts of the earth.

Most likely this is where it begins, but anything that follows I am not claiming in any particular order.  Starting with the fourth seal, 25% of the earth is subject to this, that doesn't mean 25% of the earth's population is killed, just that they are subjected to the possibility from this horseman.  Bottom line, a lot of people are going to die.

Revelation 8:10 The third angel blew his trumpet, and a great star fell from heaven, blazing like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water. 11 The name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters became wormwood, and many people died from the water, because it had been made bitter.

No idea how many, but a lot of people die here.

Revelation 9:13 Then the sixth angel blew his trumpet, and I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar before God, 14 saying to the sixth angel who had the trumpet, “Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates.” 15 So the four angels, who had been prepared for the hour, the day, the month, and the year, were released to kill a third of mankind.

One third of mankind is killed by this trumpet, and in my view this is very near the end.  On top of all the deaths in this aspect you also have all the deaths resulting from the war on the saints, so suffice it to say by the time we get to the end the population of the earth is going to be greatly diminished.  So by the time we get to the 6th trumpet, remember it is one third of however many are left alive.

Besides all this death that has been occurring, we also have a lot of gathering going on at the end.  Everyone it would seem is being drawn to this area, whether for good or evil.  The unholy trio is gathering people to fight at Armageddon, and God is gathering people as well, some for resurrection, and He is also gathering the Jewish people.

Deuteronomy 30  “And when all these things come upon you, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before you, and you call them to mind among all the nations where the Lord your God has driven you, 2 and return to the Lord your God, you and your children, and obey his voice in all that I command you today, with all your heart and with all your soul, 3 then the Lord your God will restore your fortunes and have mercy on you, and he will gather you again from all the peoples where the Lord your God has scattered you. 4 If your outcasts are in the uttermost parts of heaven, from there the Lord your God will gather you, and from there he will take you. 5 And the Lord your God will bring you into the land that your fathers possessed, that you may possess it. And he will make you more prosperous and numerous than your fathers. 6 And the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live. 7 And the Lord your God will put all these curses on your foes and enemies who persecuted you.

In Revelation chapter 11 we are told that Jerusalem is overrun and trampled by the gentiles, scripture indicates that the majority of the remnant will flee at that time.  According to Revelation 12 they flee to the wilderness, which is confirmed by both Isaiah and Hosea.  When we come to the very end, the day of His return, there appear to be many Jews in the city of Jerusalem to me.  So, did those that fled earlier return at some point near the end, or did other Jews from around the world just come because they were drawn there?

If you're asking me to completely understand everything that God is doing at this time, I can't, and neither can anyone else.  Verse 7 from the Deuteronomy passage though clarifies that this gathering of the Jews does not just happen at the end, but prior to when He takes the cup from them, and turns it on their enemies.  I would imagine that His faithful remnant will find themselves back in the land before it is over.  Jerusalem becomes a magnet at the end, a cup of staggering for the wicked.

1 hour ago, Steve_S said:

I'm still confused a bit by your interpretation then. Are you claiming that the passages in Isaiah and Jeremiah (that have not come to pass yet with regards to Babylon) are specifically in reference to this future "destruction of Jerusalem." This should be answered in simple terms.

Yes.  The entire land is made desolate and then God restores it, with a new landscape.

18 minutes ago, Steve_S said:

Where does it specify "Chaldean kingdom" with regards to this in Daniel 5?

Daniel 5:30 That very night Belshazzar the Chaldean king was killed. 31  And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old.

13 hours ago, Steve_S said:

My main question here, is how on earth is it possible that this Jersualem, this specific Jerusalem that Jesus is physically standing in and lamenting, will one day, see Him again... if it is destroyed?

The city is still there when Jesus returns to the earth.  The beast and the kings do not destroy it, they attack it and set it on fire and assault the people, Jesus is the one who purifies the land with His wrath.

Revelation 11 tells us that the city is split in two, and Zechariah tells us this.

Zechariah 14  Behold, a day is coming for the Lord, when the spoil taken from you will be divided in your midst. 2 For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped. Half of the city shall go out into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. 3 Then the Lord will go out and fight against those nations as when he fights on a day of battle. 4 On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley, so that one half of the Mount shall move northward, and the other half southward. 5 And you shall flee to the valley of my mountains, for the valley of the mountains shall reach to Azal. And you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.

So the question is, half the city goes out into exile, is that half of the city or half of the people?  Because it says the rest (which would have to be the other half of the people)  shall not be cut off from the city.  At the very least, half of the city is still standing.

13 hours ago, Steve_S said:

It has to if it is being spiritualizied and use to prove something else in another chapter written 700 years later. However, in the specific context, it doesn't say the kingdom, it says the city and there is not one single thing throughout the entire chapter itself, absent trying to wedge it into a different meaning elsewhere in the scriptures, that says otherwise.

The very first verse says "comfort, comfort my people", I am not sure how you can remove them from the equation.

13 hours ago, Steve_S said:

You say it's the lake of fire, but that's not written specifically anywhere in the scripture. If the old testament prophecies about Babylon indeed ultimately mean only that this spiritual Babylon, i.e. Jerusalem end up in the lake of fire (with ostriches and such), then we are swiftly reaching an expositional point where words are definitionless and literally almost mean nothing.

Not really, it is simply following what is written, the verse you posted tells us that this is the case.

Revelation 18:2 And he called out with a mighty voice,

“Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great!
    She has become a dwelling place for demons,
a haunt for every unclean spirit,
    a haunt for every unclean bird,
    a haunt for every unclean and detestable beast.

The scripture I posted tell us that the beast, the false prophet, satan, wicked people, and fallen angels all are put into the lake of fire, this becomes their permanent habitation, their dwelling place for eternity.  Everything unclean will be thrown into the lake of fire.

We also know that right now, at this moment, there is no lake of fire here on earth.  The verse tells us that fallen Babylon becomes this habitation that presently does not appear on the planet, but is certainly here at the conclusion of Armageddon.

13 hours ago, Steve_S said:

What specific part of Revelation 17 or 18 leads you to believe that a kingdom is in view here? Again, is this being read into the text? Revelation specifies a city, nothing else.

Revelation 17:8 The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to rise from the bottomless pit and go to destruction. And the dwellers on earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world will marvel to see the beast, because it was and is not and is to come. 9 This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; 10 they are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he does come he must remain only a little while. 11 As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth but it belongs to the seven, and it goes to destruction.

Mountains are symbolically used to represent kingdoms in scripture, for example, God refers to His kingdom Zion as His holy mountain.

Psalms 48  Great is the Lord and greatly to be praised
    in the city of our God!
His holy mountain, 2 beautiful in elevation,
    is the joy of all the earth,
Mount Zion, in the far north,
    the city of the great King.
3 Within her citadels God
    has made himself known as a fortress.

Babylon itself is described as a mountain.

Jeremiah 51:24 “I will repay Babylon and all the inhabitants of Chaldea before your very eyes for all the evil that they have done in Zion, declares the Lord.

25 “Behold, I am against you, O destroying mountain,
declares the Lord,
    which destroys the whole earth;
I will stretch out my hand against you,
    and roll you down from the crags,
    and make you a burnt mountain.
26 No stone shall be taken from you for a corner
    and no stone for a foundation,
but you shall be a perpetual waste,
    declares the Lord.

There were 7 heads, so 7 kingdoms, and 5 of them were fallen kingdoms, one existed at the time John wrote Revelation, and one more would rise after it but would be brief.  Then the angel tells us that the beast is an eighth but it belongs to the seven.  So, kingdoms have everything to do with it because that eighth kingdom of the beasts will be Babylon of Revelation.  This is displayed in the passage from Jeremiah, God will repay Babylon for all the evil they have done in Zion, and also speaks to this destructive kingdom as destroying the whole earth.

All the evil that is done in Zion is referring to the desolation of the temple, the erection of the image of the beast, the worship of the beast, and the war on the saints which are all carried out from this city.

13 hours ago, Steve_S said:

I see no evidence that there is a reestablished kingdom of Babylon in the classical sense. But, even if it were, that's not a problem.

Dan 5:25  "And this is the inscription that was written: MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN. 
Dan 5:26  This is the interpretation of each word. MENE: God has numbered your kingdom, and finished it; 

Dan 5:27  TEKEL: You have been weighed in the balances, and found wanting; 
Dan 5:28  PERES: Your kingdom has been divided, and given to the Medes and Persians." 

Whose kingdom? Belshazzar's. Who was Belshazzar?

Belshazzar was a Chaldean, like his father before him and those before him, the Chaldean kingdom came to an end, Babylon.  As of that night it became the kingdom of Darius the Mede, later shared with the Persians, an entirely separate kingdom.  Their kingdom would later fall to the Greek kingdom, which would later fall to the Roman kingdom.  When Babylon conquered Assyria the Assyrian kingdom was done as well, this is how we have 5 fallen kingdoms.

13 hours ago, Steve_S said:

The kingdom of babylon had not went anywhere as an entity, it had simply switched hands. It was the royal line which Belshazzar ended that was finished and he was only the fourth generation in this line (most likely, anyway).

It was no longer Babylon, it was now part of the Mede/Persia kingdom.  Ancient Babylon is one of the 5 fallen kingdoms represented by the 7 heads in Revelation, just like Assyria which it conquered.

On 11/14/2019 at 10:37 PM, Steve_S said:

In reading through your post. I think I must get it out there that we may define literally differently. Of course, there is a necessity to understand that there is metaphor. So for instance, if the scripture says a beast with 7 heads and 10 horns, then one would obviously take that metaphorically, particularly when interpretations are given of that beast.

However, if the scripture literally says the word Babylon multiple times through several chapters in reference to a literal physical city that still existed at that time, it is incredibly difficult for me to view it as anything *but that.*

I don't think we do honestly, 2 years ago I also believed it would be Babylon based on the same literal understanding you are using today.  The difference really comes down to how we view what happened to ancient Babylon and whether or not it can be restored as a kingdom.  Based on what we are told in Daniel 5 I don't believe it is possible for a restored Babylon.  God said their days were numbered, and that very night a Mede took over the kingdom.  I just don't see how that can be undone.  Because of that fact, there must be another explanation.

On 11/14/2019 at 10:37 PM, Steve_S said:

Ah, but therein lies another problem. We can say "mother of harlots" rather than mother of all harlots. That once again opens up a number of other possibilities which are far stronger. I see no problem with removing "all" from the title. However, I also see nowhere in the text that requires "unique" harlots or "worse" harlots either. That's the real problem. As you say, the text literally just says "mother of harlots." There is no impetus to read Jerusalem into that.

I agree that it leaves open other possibilities, the purpose was to establish that Jerusalem does in fact qualify, not that no one else does.  From Ezekiel 16 itself we see that Samaria and Sodom both qualify, but Sodom was eliminated of course, and Samaria has not been a kingdom since the Assyrian invasion.  If there are other mother of harlots in scripture, we can certainly consider the possibility.  The mother of harlots designation is just one thing that points at Jerusalem though.

On 11/14/2019 at 10:37 PM, Steve_S said:

I read back a bit and did find this part (I am often trying to respond to these far faster than I should lol). I'd like to focus on one verse.

Isaiah 40:2  Speak tenderly to Jerusalem, and cry to her that her warfare is ended, that her iniquity is pardoned, that she has received from the Lord's hand double for all her sins.

Now, if this is a direct allusion to Jerusalem receiving a double portion in a Revelation 17-18 sense, why is comfort being spoken? Jerusalem would be a smoking ruin with nothing left, yet, it was pardoned?

Isaiah begins this in verse 1 though as referencing His people, so in this instance based on context it does not appear to apply to the city itself, but moreso the kingdom.

Isaiah 40  

Comfort, comfort my people, says your God.
2 Speak tenderly to Jerusalem,
    and cry to her
that her warfare is ended,
    that her iniquity is pardoned,
that she has received from the Lord's hand
    double for all her sins.

3 A voice cries:
“In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord;
    make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
4 Every valley shall be lifted up,
    and every mountain and hill be made low;
the uneven ground shall become level,
    and the rough places a plain.
5 And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed,
    and all flesh shall see it together,
    for the mouth of the Lord has spoken.”

On 11/14/2019 at 4:38 PM, Steve_S said:

Rev 18:2  And he cried mightily with a loud voice, saying, "Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and has become a dwelling place of demons, a prison for every foul spirit, and a cage for every unclean and hated bird!

Whatever Babylon is, it is an actual place. If is the current Jerusalem being thrown down at the end of the current age and just prior to the Millennial reign, then we have to believe that it is going to be a physical place going forward. Birds can't live in metaphors.

Is there, in the midst of the reconstituted canaan that has Israel dwelling there in peace and safety, going to be a literal city of ruins that is inhabited by demons?

Yes, it is called the lake of fire, which also is consistent with the Jewish Gehenna, where rubbish is disposed of outside the city.  The next question would be, how do we know that?

Revelation 19:3 Once more they cried out,

“Hallelujah!
The smoke from her goes up forever and ever.”

Revelation 19:20 And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence[e] had done the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur.

The lake of fire is there for the beast and the false prophet at the conclusion of Armageddon, and satan and the rest of the wicked join them at the end of the Millennium.

Revelation 20:10 and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Revelation 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

Revelation 21:8 But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.”

And later we are told that they are outside the city.

Revelation 22:14 Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. 15 Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

13 minutes ago, angels4u said:

You will  find it again, this topic keeps me busy trying to find out if Babylon is a city in the endtimes, I tend to believe that it is  But not all speakers agree on this topic, what do you think of this article? 

 

The eighteenth chapter speaks of a "City," a literal city, called "Babylon the Great." That the "Woman" and the "City" do not symbolize the same thing is clear, for what is said of the "Woman" does not apply to a city, and what is said of the "City" does not apply to a woman.

I think he is very confused angels, just from what I quoted above he makes the same mistake that those who want to turn the woman into "religion" make, he disregards what the angel specifically gives as the interpretation for the woman.

Revelation 17: 18 And the woman that you saw is the great city that has dominion over the kings of the earth.”

6 highlighted words undo his entire argument, period.

His confusion enters because of failure to grasp the timing and to take into account all the information we have gained from within scripture.  What trips so many people up is they cannot understand how the beast and the kings can turn on the woman and destroy her.  It is really very simple when you consider the when, and the why.

Start with the why.

Revelation 12:17 Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. And he stood on the sand of the sea.

Satan has always wanted to changed God's plan, convinced by doing so he can somehow win the war.  A large part of that throughout history has been to claim Jerusalem, as he does not understand the difference between earthly Jerusalem and the heavenly Jerusalem.  From the moment he is cast down to the earth he wants to destroy the Israelites, but God won't let him.  This makes him furious, but he has overrun the city already by this point and takes out his frustration on Christians instead.  The remnant of Jews are protected for 1260 days exactly, so that leads us to the when part.

Revelation 17:15 And the angel said to me, “The waters that you saw, where the prostitute is seated, are peoples and multitudes and nations and languages. 16 And the ten horns that you saw, they and the beast will hate the prostitute. They will make her desolate and naked, and devour her flesh and burn her up with fire, 17 for God has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose by being of one mind and handing over their royal power to the beast, until the words of God are fulfilled.

The city of Jerusalem was overrun by the gentiles 3.5 years earlier, which is why you see the multitude, nations, and languages represented.  We are now at the end, the war on the saints is over and so is the protection for the woman, so the enemy can now do exactly what he originally intended to do by destroying the Jewish people and the city, the kingdom of Israel if you prefer.  The end is near, the signs of Jesus' coming are in the sky and the enemy knows it is almost over so he sets about doing what God has willed for him to do.

So the why is because this is what God intends for him to do, and the when can only be carried out once the time of protection is over.  This is why it happens at the very end, which that author also is confused about trying to claim Babylon falls twice.  John tells us when it falls, right at the end.

On 11/14/2019 at 4:34 PM, Steve_S said:

This is with regards to a very specific thing, not actual physical lineage:

Eze 16:36  Thus says the Lord GOD: "Because your filthiness was poured out and your nakedness uncovered in your harlotry with your lovers, and with all your abominable idols, and because of the blood of your children which you gave to them, 
Eze 16:37  surely, therefore, I will gather all your lovers with whom you took pleasure, all those you loved, and all those you hated; I will gather them from all around against you and will uncover your nakedness to them, that they may see all your nakedness. 

They participated in child sacrifice, which is one of the things that caused God to order them to do away with the Amorites in the first place. God told Abraham that they had to tarry in Egypt specifically until the iniquity of the Amorites was complete or had come to full fruition.

Yes, and what those verses indicate to me is that the deeds of the people, which were not just limited to child sacrifice, but also idolatry and intermarriages with the Canaanites are what is in question here.  So we are not simply talking about a city, but a kingdom, which includes city, king, and the people that live within it.

On 11/14/2019 at 4:34 PM, Steve_S said:

But, since we are on Ezekiel 16 and it is being used as a proof text as part of an argument to show that Jerusalem will be destroyed forever, this is the question I have, what does this mean?

Eze 16:59  For thus says the Lord GOD: "I will deal with you as you have done, who despised the oath by breaking the covenant. 
Eze 16:60  "Nevertheless I will remember My covenant with you in the days of your youth, and I will establish an everlasting covenant with you. 
Eze 16:61  Then you will remember your ways and be ashamed, when you receive your older and your younger sisters; for I will give them to you for daughters, but not because of My covenant with you. 
Eze 16:62  And I will establish My covenant with you. Then you shall know that I am the LORD, 
Eze 16:63  that you may remember and be ashamed, and never open your mouth anymore because of your shame, when I provide you an atonement for all you have done," says the Lord GOD.' "

I would say this applies to the overall context of the chapter, which is dealing with a kingdom.  I don't imagine you believe the actual city committed these offenses anymore than I do.  What we are really talking about here is a kingdom.

On 11/14/2019 at 4:34 PM, Steve_S said:

So the physical Jerusalem that exists now, this doesn't apply?

The argument for a physical Jerusalem comes mostly from one specific chapter in Zechariah.  So the question is, what exactly is Zechariah speaking of?

Zechariah 14:10 The whole land shall be turned into a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem. But Jerusalem shall remain aloft on its site from the Gate of Benjamin to the place of the former gate, to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the king's winepresses. 11 And it shall be inhabited, for there shall never again be a decree of utter destruction. Jerusalem shall dwell in security.

First he tells us what John tells us, along with other prophets like Isaiah, that the land is turned to a plain, the mountains are brought down and the valleys are raised.  The area he speaks of begins with Geba, which was located about 5 1/2 miles north of Jerusalem in the territory of Benjamin.  No one seems to agree on exactly where Rimmon was located, but in the book of Joshua we see it is part of Judah's allotment, one of 29 cities located at the extreme south along the border of Edom.  That border went all the way down to what was known as the Gulf of Aqaba, which is the right arm of the Red Sea that extends up to define the Sinai peninsula.

Then Zechariah speaks about the Benjamin Gate.  Scripture speaks of a Benjamin gate 3 times in the book of Jeremiah (20:2, 37:13, 38:7).  The only other two times it is mentioned in scripture are Zechariah 14 above, and Ezekiel 48:32, which is in relation to the Millennial kingdom in which there are 12 gates, all of which are named after the 12 tribes of Israel.

There are currently 8 gates in Jerusalem, named the following, Jaffa Gate, Zion Gate, Dung Gate, Golden Gate, Stephen's Gate, Herod's Gate, Damascus Gate, and New Gate.  All 8 of those gates were built by the Turkish sultan Suleiman the Magnificent in the early 16th century, and it seems highly unlikely to me that they have any association to the gates Zechariah speaks of.

There was also a tower of Hananel at one point, it is spoken of in Jeremiah 31:38, and twice in Nehemiah (3:1, 12:39).  The fact that it no longer stands also speaks to the Millennial kingdom and the place Christ went to prepare for us, and has nothing to do with modern day Jerusalem.  An interesting sidenote, Hananel literally means "God has been gracious".

Zechariah also says in the passage that there will never again be a decree of utter destruction, which points to the city which exists today being utterly destroyed.

34 minutes ago, angels4u said:

The topic is very interesting and I'm studying a little more,I'm listening to David Hocking right now..

It is indeed interesting, I am about to try my third attempt to respond to Steve on one particular post, the first two times now I have lost everything lol.