The City of Babylon.

[Salty]

Revelations reflects the optimism of God working redemptively through the lamb presently as well as in the future, where the context demands for it to be taken literally and where context demands for it to be symbolic.

 

Most would agree that the function of Old Testament prophecy was to cause God's people to repent and bring them back to their covenant so that the covenant curses would stop and the covenant blessings would begin. The same understanding and LOGIC then must be demanded in understanding Revelations which Salty seems to be absent off with this childish remark below.

 

Your way of thinking suggests that even the locusts of Rev.9 are monsters coming in the last days, because there has never been any such literal locusts with faces of men, teeth as lions, etc.

 

 

 

You're totally off subject with those statements, you are just 'venting', and not giving anything towards edification as a brother in Christ. Our Lord Jesus would call your response idle words.

 

You apparently don't know when God's Word is using metaphorical speech and when It's not, so you choose to treat God's metaphors as literal things, when He's simply using a metaphor to point to... something literal. There is a difference you know.

 

The locusts of Rev.9 is a 'metaphor'. But He uses it to point... to something literal. In the OT prophets He first showed what that was. But you have not read it, it's obvious for all to see.

[ncn]

This thread is locked until the personal attacks have been removed

[ncn]

I am re opening this thread but have deleted some personal attacks.

There have been some good posts and interesting ones on it. 

 

 

Debate the subject, not the person. It is possible to disagree about a doctrine or subject under discussion without insulting the person with whom you are debating.

Also remember that the fact that a person disagrees with you does not mean they are attacking you as a person.

Respect each other in the love of God!

 

This is the main reason that threads get stopped, shut down, and even deleted! Users that cannot respect others will be banned. (Lev. 19:18)

 

If you know you are butting heads with another member, be the first to offer an olive branch and be the peacemaker.

If you notice that you are getting heated by another’s response, walk away from the thread until you know you have His peace back in your life over the issue.

 

Members that do not respect this will be banned from the thread. 

 

God Bless. 

 

Nigel. 

[098]

Babylon is not a political city of some sort. It is the great city (Rev 18). Cities in the Bible are pictures of the people associated with God. They are spiritual entities more than anything. The people associated with God are divided into two types. The Jerusalem above (saved persons) and the Jerusalem below (unsaved persons). The great city is variously called Jerusalem, Egypt, Sodom, and Ninevah, among others. It is no different with Babylon. 

[Salty]

 

@ncn

 

Thanks ncn, your a fair moderator 

 

@ Salty

 

You're totally off subject with those statements, you are just 'venting', and not giving anything towards edification as a brother in Christ. Our Lord Jesus would call your response idle words.

 

 

 

Far from it,  the genre placement of the Revelations has significant hermeneutic implications - Im shocked you would actually claim I'm going off topic when in fact, the interpretation of the Revelations is pre-determined by the genre classification itself. This might not have any meaning to you but it is very important in understanding the correct Herneneutics in how one approaches the interpretations of Revelations. See if you of the view, which you clearly are as you feel I should not  make literal interpretations at all as your  statement below.....

 

You apparently don't know when God's Word is using metaphorical speech and when It's not, so you choose to treat God's metaphors as literal things, when He's simply using a metaphor to point to... something literal. There is a difference you know.

 

 

....even though you view Revelations as future, you naturally gravitate to an apocalyptic point of view. Your entire approach to the book of Revelations is contradictory

 

Let me show you, this is future right and its not literal to your theory. Jerusalem who is Babylon will only be destroyed metaphorically, right?

 

Therefore in one day her (Jerusalems) plagues will overtake her (Jerusalem): death, mourning and famine. She (Jerusalem) will be consumed by fire, for mighty is the Lord God who judges her(Jerusalem). ... In one hour your(Jerusalems) doom has come! … When they see the smoke of her (Jerusalem) burning, they will exclaim, 'Was there ever a city like this great city (Jerusalem)(Revelation 18:8, 10 and 18)?

 

Rev18: 21 Then a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea, saying, “Thus with violence the great city Babylon (Jerusalem) shall be thrown down, and shall not be found anymore. 22 The sound of harpists, musicians, flutists, and trumpeters shall not be heard in you anymore(Jerusalem). No craftsman of any craft shall be found in you (Jerusalem) anymore, and the sound of a millstone shall not be heard in you (Jerusalem) anymore

 

 

So when Jesus comes down to earth and rule, that must also metaphorical? its not literal? or do we pick and choose what is literal and what is symbolic to fit our theories?

 

Perhaps the best approach is to follow the correct hermeneutic implications and take our cue from the pages of Scripture and call Revelations for what it is: prophecy  Revelation 1:19: “Therefore, write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things."

 

Should I take what John just said metaphorically or literally?

 

 

If I recall, the subject under discussion was about the locust army of Rev.9. In answer, I will wait to see those locust monsters that have teeth like lions, hair like women, breastplates of iron, and faces of men. What a WILD sight that will be IF it were meant literally! But of course those descriptions are not meant in the literal image sense, but in the type of working... sense.

 

So like I said, you apparently don't understand the idea of when God uses metaphors and symbols to point to literal things or events, but you're not alone in that.

[Marilyn C]

Hi Salty,

 

Actually the topic under discussion is `the city of Babylon,` & I think it has passed its used by date. If you want to discuss the `locusts,` you could start another thread & then people would see it. When other topics are started, different from the main topic often people don`t realise it & could miss out on an interesting discussion.

[Salty]

Hi Salty,

 

Actually the topic under discussion is `the city of Babylon,` & I think it has passed its used by date. If you want to discuss the `locusts,` you could start another thread & then people would see it. When other topics are started, different from the main topic often people don`t realise it & could miss out on an interesting discussion.

 

Yes, sorry for that. But the discussion between inchrist and I a few posts ago was about the locusts of Rev.9. See post #149. And I don't recall who started that specific topic of the locusts. But I was not the only one who participated, so don't you think you ought to give me a little bit of break instead singling me out only to jump on?

[Marilyn C]

Hi Salty,

 

I`m sorry you felt I singled you out. It was only because you had just said that the subject under discussion was the locusts. I also jumped in & made a comment too I think further back. Not trying to pin you Salty. You are a valued member of this lively group here down in the depths of Eschatology. I`m an organiser & like to have things neat & tidy, so thus I like to have threads where people can see the topic & read mainly about it.  Friends in this wonderful discussion of God`s truth.

[Salty]

Hi Salty,

 

I`m sorry you felt I singled you out. It was only because you had just said that the subject under discussion was the locusts. I also jumped in & made a comment too I think further back. Not trying to pin you Salty. You are a valued member of this lively group here down in the depths of Eschatology. I`m an organiser & like to have things neat & tidy, so thus I like to have threads where people can see the topic & read mainly about it.  Friends in this wonderful discussion of God`s truth.

 

You show your bias against me by trying to single me out, probably so you can try to get me thrown off this forum. Do you do that to all who disagree with you? You know as well as I do that's it's impossible for a thread to always stay on the topic and limited scope you may want.

 

But when you single me out, while not doing the same with others here, then I will continue to complain about that bias you show.

 

 

Now here it is... prior to post #80 inchrist and I were discussing Babylon as a metaphor for the "great city" pointing to Jerusalem. I raised the idea of Biblical metaphors about Babylon being used to point to Jerusalem early on in this thread, using the comparison of Sodom and Egypt in Rev.11:8 applied 'spiritually'... to Jerusalem for the end.

 

Then inchrist asked me to do this in Post #80:

 

quote by inchrist:

"Isa 14:22-26

 

Please go to Isa 14:4 4That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, ( is this going to be now a metopher?)"

 

 

By that inchrist asked me to address that specific Isaiah 14 Scripture about the proverb against the king of Babylon, which is God speaking a parable about Lucifer. So that meant changing the subject from the city of Babylon, to the idea of 'metaphor' in regards to the king of Babylon in Isaiah 14. The discussion went from Babylon put for Jerusalem in Revelation to the king of Babylon proverb in Isaiah 14, off topic obviously (per your own personal requirements), and into metaphor discussions.

 

But I don't really see that discussion of Biblical 'metaphors' being off topic at all, especially since the subject I MYSELF raised early on was in regards to Babylon being used as metaphoric symbol in Revelation to point to Jerusalem in fallen worship state by the coming Antichrist.

 

Apparently you don't like anyone raised that kind of thought about Jerusalem, so complaining about leaving the thread topic is how you're trying to stop mention of that? That's what it appears to be, again showing your bias, but not against me only, but against the very Holy Writ of God, because symbolic metaphor is a major instruction tool our Heavenly Father uses in His Word.

 

Probably won't do any good, but I issued a report on you doing this singling out of me, while inchrist was also participating in the metaphor discussion, and you said nothing to him/her. I'm getting tired of your singling me out with your bias while you try to act like you're being nice.

[ENOCH2010]

Wow!!! calm down Salty, this is a Christian forum.