Al Baghdadi.

[wingnut-]

2 hours ago, Steve_S said:

I'd have to strongly disagree with that interpretation. It doesn't specifically say the kingdom of Babylon. It says the "Glory of kingdoms," i.e. the city of Babylon is the glory of the kingdoms which it controls.

 

Ok. Let me try and clarify, which I can hopefully do without being too lengthy.  The Babylon that is referred to in the future, is in connection with the spiritual connotations, so I'll start there and incorporate both Isaiah 13 and Jeremiah 50 into this.

 

Isaiah 13:19 And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms,
    the splendor and pomp of the Chaldeans,
will be like Sodom and Gomorrah
    when God overthrew them.

 

Jeremiah 50:40 As when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighboring cities, declares the Lord, so no man shall dwell there, and no son of man shall sojourn in her.

 

The connection to Jerusalem.

 

Ezekiel 16:2 “Son of man, make known to Jerusalem her abominations,

Ezekiel 16:26 You also played the whore with the Egyptians, your lustful neighbors, multiplying your whoring, to provoke me to anger. 27 Behold, therefore, I stretched out my hand against you and diminished your allotted portion and delivered you to the greed of your enemies, the daughters of the Philistines, who were ashamed of your lewd behavior. 28 You played the whore also with the Assyrians, because you were not satisfied; yes, you played the whore with them, and still you were not satisfied. 29 You multiplied your whoring also with the trading land of Chaldea, and even with this you were not satisfied.

Ezekiel 16:46 And your elder sister is Samaria, who lived with her daughters to the north of you; and your younger sister, who lived to the south of you, is Sodom with her daughters.

 

Symbolically Jerusalem is linked to Sodom and Egypt in Ezekiel 16 which really a complete reading is necessary for the full picture.  Then this is touched on in Jude, and specifically stated in Revelation.

Jude 1:5 Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. 6 And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day— 7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

 

Revelation 11: 8 and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city that symbolically is called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified.

 

The symbolic connection to Babylon of Revelation is further on display in Ezekiel 16, where Jerusalem is said to have committed the greatest of abominations, greater than all others, and is also identified as a mother of harlots, as well as the biggest harlot ever.

 

Jeremiah 50:29 “Summon archers against Babylon, all those who bend the bow. Encamp around her; let no one escape. Repay her according to her deeds; do to her according to all that she has done. For she has proudly defied the Lord, the Holy One of Israel.

 

Revelation 18:6 Pay her back as she herself has paid back others,
    and repay her double for her deeds;
    mix a double portion for her in the cup she mixed.

 

The double portion that is promised to Babylon is only attributed to one other place in scripture.

 

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.

 

Hosea 10:10 When I please, I will discipline them,
    and nations shall be gathered against them
    when they are bound up for their double iniquity.

 

Jeremiah 16:18 But first I will doubly repay their iniquity and their sin, because they have polluted my land with the carcasses of their detestable idols, and have filled my inheritance with their abominations.”

 

2 hours ago, Steve_S said:

The biggest problem with it, though, is that all Israel, parts of Egypt, and much of Assyria were all parts of the babylonian empire. If it is necessary to read this as having a totally future fulfillment in the millennium and it is literal, and involves the kingdom of Babylon, not just Babylon itself, then all of those would necessarily have to be empty, which is, of course, not an option, as all are mentioned as being quite populated.

 

I am assuming you are talking about the uninhabited aspect in regards to this, perhaps you misunderstood what I am trying to say.  When I was referring to the overall kingdom of ancient Babylon I was referring to a city within that region, as the angel was specific that Babylon of Revelation is a city.  So that city will be uninhabited, but the area from the Nile to the Euphrates River is the land given to Abraham's seed and that is where the Lord's kingdom will be established.

It cannot be present day Jerusalem because it is going to be destroyed, and it is not large enough for Ezekiel's temple which is the Millennial temple.  As Jesus told us in scripture, His kingdom is not of this world.  It is also important to remember that at the beginning of the Millennium there will not be a ton of people, also in scripture He tells us that it will begin the size of a mustard seed and grow.

 

God bless

[Steve_S]

7 minutes ago, wingnut- said:

It cannot be present day Jerusalem because it is going to be destroyed, and it is not large enough for Ezekiel's temple which is the Millennial temple. 

I suppose my main question is, are you claiming that the actual location of where Jerusalem is will change and that the location where it currently sits will remain entirely uninhabited through the millennium?

[Steve_S]

12 minutes ago, wingnut- said:

The symbolic connection to Babylon of Revelation is further on display in Ezekiel 16, where Jerusalem is said to have committed the greatest of abominations, greater than all others, and is also identified as a mother of harlots, as well as the biggest harlot ever.

This is really where it breaks down. Where outside of Revelation is the phrase "mother of harlots" used? I would only be willing to draw that line secondarily, not primarily.

I would also probably at least consider making the argument that "mother of harlotry" could well be referring to the tower of babel the first *true* post-flood rebellion against God, and that happened at Babylon.

Also, the vast majority of the false gods that Israel engaged in spiritual harlotry with were also babylonian in origin (molech, baal, etc.), again, making Babylon the mother in that case.

Jerusalem itself did not birth idolatry. In fact, I think one could make an argument that it was set apart before Israel was there.

[wingnut-]

1 hour ago, Steve_S said:

I suppose my main question is, are you claiming that the actual location of where Jerusalem is will change and that the location where it currently sits will remain entirely uninhabited through the millennium?

 

I think there is a distinct difference between earthly Jerusalem and Zion, His holy city.  There are quite a few issues with the conventional wisdom in regards to Jerusalem that exists right now.  For one, we know that there are some major earthquakes that occur at the end, and those quakes have a direct impact on that city.  There are also these events that tells us the land will be forever changed.

 

Isaiah 24:10 The wasted city is broken down;
    every house is shut up so that none can enter.
11 There is an outcry in the streets for lack of wine;
    all joy has grown dark;
    the gladness of the earth is banished.
12 Desolation is left in the city;
    the gates are battered into ruins.
13 For thus it shall be in the midst of the earth
    among the nations,
as when an olive tree is beaten,
    as at the gleaning when the grape harvest is done.

 

Deuteronomy 32:43 “Rejoice with him, O heavens;
    bow down to him, all gods,
for he avenges the blood of his children
    and takes vengeance on his adversaries.
He repays those who hate him
    and cleanses his people's land.”

 

This is the kingdom of the Lord, which will be set up by Him.

 

Daniel 2:44 And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall the kingdom be left to another people. It shall break in pieces all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever, 45 just as you saw that a stone was cut from a mountain by no human hand, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold. A great God has made known to the king what shall be after this. The dream is certain, and its interpretation sure.”

 

John 18:36  Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.”

[wingnut-]

1 hour ago, Steve_S said:

This is really where it breaks down. Where outside of Revelation is the phrase "mother of harlots" used? I would only be willing to draw that line secondarily, not primarily.

 

I'm guessing you didn't read Ezekiel 16 lol.  Ok, so here is where it speaks about Jerusalem and her daughters in comparison to her sisters and their daughters, it does not say mother of harlots specifically but does include Jerusalem's daughters.

 

Ezekiel 16:30 “How sick is your heart, declares the Lord God, because you did all these things, the deeds of a brazen prostitute, 31 building your vaulted chamber at the head of every street, and making your lofty place in every square. Yet you were not like a prostitute, because you scorned payment. 32 Adulterous wife, who receives strangers instead of her husband! 33 Men give gifts to all prostitutes, but you gave your gifts to all your lovers, bribing them to come to you from every side with your whorings. 34 So you were different from other women in your whorings. No one solicited you to play the whore, and you gave payment, while no payment was given to you; therefore you were different.

 

Ezekiel 16:44 “Behold, everyone who uses proverbs will use this proverb about you: ‘Like mother, like daughter.’ 45 You are the daughter of your mother, who loathed her husband and her children; and you are the sister of your sisters, who loathed their husbands and their children. Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite. 46 And your elder sister is Samaria, who lived with her daughters to the north of you; and your younger sister, who lived to the south of you, is Sodom with her daughters. 47 Not only did you walk in their ways and do according to their abominations; within a very little time you were more corrupt than they in all your ways. 48 As I live, declares the Lord God, your sister Sodom and her daughters have not done as you and your daughters have done. 49 Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did an abomination before me. So I removed them, when I saw it. 51 Samaria has not committed half your sins. You have committed more abominations than they, and have made your sisters appear righteous by all the abominations that you have committed. 52 Bear your disgrace, you also, for you have intervened on behalf of your sisters. Because of your sins in which you acted more abominably than they, they are more in the right than you. So be ashamed, you also, and bear your disgrace, for you have made your sisters appear righteous.

53 “I will restore their fortunes, both the fortunes of Sodom and her daughters, and the fortunes of Samaria and her daughters, and I will restore your own fortunes in their midst, 54 that you may bear your disgrace and be ashamed of all that you have done, becoming a consolation to them. 55 As for your sisters, Sodom and her daughters shall return to their former state, and Samaria and her daughters shall return to their former state, and you and your daughters shall return to your former state. 56 Was not your sister Sodom a byword in your mouth in the day of your pride, 57 before your wickedness was uncovered? Now you have become an object of reproach for the daughters of Syria and all those around her, and for the daughters of the Philistines, those all around who despise you. 58 You bear the penalty of your lewdness and your abominations, declares the Lord.

[wingnut-]

1 hour ago, Steve_S said:

Jerusalem itself did not birth idolatry. In fact, I think one could make an argument that it was set apart before Israel was there.

 

Israel though did something the other nations did not, they were God's faithless bride as Ezekiel spelled out in chapter 16.  There is also Ezekiel 23 to consider as well.  Here are a few snippets from that chapter, again, another chapter you should really read over in total.

 

Ezekiel 23  The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “Son of man, there were two women, the daughters of one mother. 3 They played the whore in Egypt; they played the whore in their youth; there their breasts were pressed and their virgin bosoms handled. 4 Oholah was the name of the elder and Oholibah the name of her sister. They became mine, and they bore sons and daughters. As for their names, Oholah is Samaria, and Oholibah is Jerusalem.

 

Ezekiel 23:36 The Lord said to me: “Son of man, will you judge Oholah and Oholibah? Declare to them their abominations. 37 For they have committed adultery, and blood is on their hands. With their idols they have committed adultery, and they have even offered up to them for food the children whom they had borne to me. 38 Moreover, this they have done to me: they have defiled my sanctuary on the same day and profaned my Sabbaths. 39 For when they had slaughtered their children in sacrifice to their idols, on the same day they came into my sanctuary to profane it. And behold, this is what they did in my house.

 

Ezekiel 23:43 “Then I said of her who was worn out by adultery, ‘Now they will continue to use her for a whore, even her!’ 44 For they have gone in to her, as men go in to a prostitute. Thus they went in to Oholah and to Oholibah, lewd women! 45 But righteous men shall pass judgment on them with the sentence of adulteresses, and with the sentence of women who shed blood, because they are adulteresses, and blood is on their hands.”

46 For thus says the Lord God: “Bring up a vast host against them, and make them an object of terror and a plunder. 47 And the host shall stone them and cut them down with their swords. They shall kill their sons and their daughters, and burn up their houses. 48 Thus will I put an end to lewdness in the land, that all women may take warning and not commit lewdness as you have done. 49 And they shall return your lewdness upon you, and you shall bear the penalty for your sinful idolatry, and you shall know that I am the Lord God.”

[Steve_S]

7 hours ago, wingnut- said:

I'm guessing you didn't read Ezekiel 16 lol.  Ok, so here is where it speaks about Jerusalem and her daughters in comparison to her sisters and their daughters, it does not say mother of harlots specifically but does include Jerusalem's daughters.

I have indeed read it. Harlotry in the sense that it is being spoken of in that and every other chapter regarding God's relationship with Israel is Idolatry, of course. The issue with bringing Ezekiel 23 into it is that Jerusalem is specified as being a sister not a mother:

Eze 23:2  "Son of man, there were two women, The daughters of one mother.

Eze 23:4  Their names: Oholah the elder and Oholibah her sister; They were Mine, And they bore sons and daughters. As for their names, Samaria is Oholah, and Jerusalem is Oholibah.

Is the claim that Jerusalem is her own daughter? The issue is that if this is all tied together and definitively points to Jerusalem being the "Mother of Harlots" mentioned in Revelation, then it necessarily *has* to all be consistent. This is not consistent.

[wingnut-]

4 hours ago, Steve_S said:

Is the claim that Jerusalem is her own daughter?

 

No, Jerusalem and her daughters are spoken of in Ezekiel 16 passage.

 

Ezekiel 16:48 As I live, declares the Lord God, your sister Sodom and her daughters have not done as you and your daughters have done.

 

Ezekiel 16 tells us that Jerusalem is a harlot, and a very unique harlot, it also tells us that her offenses (as well as her daughters offenses) are greater than Sodom and her daughters.  We know of course what Sodom is infamous for, sexual immorality.  Jerusalem (and her daughters) in this passage are said to be worse than Sodom, symbolically linking Jerusalem to Sodom as delineated in Revelation 11.  The symbolic link to Egypt is in regards to idolatry where they first learned to dabble in foreign gods and never departed from that.  This is spelled out in both chapters of Ezekiel 16 and 23.

 

4 hours ago, Steve_S said:

The issue with bringing Ezekiel 23 into it is that Jerusalem is specified as being a sister not a mother

 

The purpose for bringing the Ezekiel 23 passage is two-fold.  One because it speaks to the symbolic link to Egypt as far as the source of Israel's idolatry, and two because it points to the identity of the woman riding the beast in Revelation 17, which is Oholibah, Jerusalem.

[Steve_S]

22 minutes ago, wingnut- said:

The purpose for bringing the Ezekiel 23 passage is two-fold.  One because it speaks to the symbolic link to Egypt as far as the source of Israel's idolatry, and two because it points to the identity of the woman riding the beast in Revelation 17, which is Oholibah, Jerusalem.

The great difficulty with this is that Oholibah is not even mentioned as being the chief harlot between the two mentioned in Ezekiel 23, but Samaria is. Note that it was Samaria that was carried off first, not Judah.

Secondly, in the case of egypt, using that reasoning, that would make egypt the mother. I cannot recall any biblical imagery that envisions the a mother as a "worst" or "chief" of something, rather than the progenitor or originator of something.

My question is still why Jerusalem is referred to as a daughter of harlorty in Ezekiel 23 if one of them is the "mother" of all harlotry.

Consistency is incredibly important in exegesis of things such as this and that is a wild, basically, off the charts, inconsistency.

Is there any biblical precedent outside of this very specific case that would prove that it is warranted to take a "mother" as "chief" of something rather than the *originator* of something?

[Steve_S]

12 hours ago, wingnut- said:

I think there is a distinct difference between earthly Jerusalem and Zion, His holy city.  There are quite a few issues with the conventional wisdom in regards to Jerusalem that exists right now.  For one, we know that there are some major earthquakes that occur at the end, and those quakes have a direct impact on that city.  There are also these events that tells us the land will be forever changed.

This was in response to a question - I suppose my main question is, are you claiming that the actual location of where Jerusalem is will change and that the location where it currently sits will remain entirely uninhabited through the millennium?

The land will be forever changed, yes. That's not what I'm asking. The land may change, but that geographic area will still exist. Is the claim that that specific geographic area will be uninhabited perpetually? That is what the bible states with specificity with regards to Babylon. Just trying to understand that specific aspect.

Also, with regards to Zion, I would have to disagree quite strongly with that. Zion is specifically delineated as the City of David (which still exists, right now).

1Ki_8:1  Now Solomon assembled the elders of Israel and all the heads of the tribes, the chief fathers of the children of Israel, to King Solomon in Jerusalem, that they might bring up the ark of the covenant of the LORD from the City of David, which is Zion.

Zion is certainly and obviously interchanged for Jerusalem at times throughout the scriptures, but I see no scriptural impetus for the claim that Zion is some sort of separate entity that has no physical place on earth currently.