The Great Whore of the Revelation (chp 18)

[Guest shiloh357]

Once again, you are taking a passage speaking about Israel prior to the captivity in Babylon and comparing it, out of its original context, to Revelation 17 and you have absolutely no hermeneutic/textual justification.

Kind of like when you take passages written during the Babylonian captivity telling of the return of Israel to the land and apply it to end times when in fact is is talking about the restoration of the land prior to Christ's birth. Through this event ALL nations have been blessed.

Sorry KatyAnn, but I have done no such thing. You misapplied those passages to post Babylonian captivity. We have been thruogh this before, and just a cursory examination of those passages demonstrates that they were not speaking of the return from Babylon.

[nebula]

I believe the whore of Revelation is unfaithful Israel.

OK, why would the merchants of the earth mourn the destruction of "unfaithful Israel"?

[Guest shiloh357]

Folks can ONLY speculate, but most scholars suggest it is either the Roman empire, which fell in 476, or first century Jerusalem, which fell in 70 AD.

That can only be true if Rev. 17-18 has been fulfilled and we are now living in the Mellenium. If this is so, then the fulfillment of the Mellenial prophecies are the biggest let-down in all of history.

Exactly right, Neb. If this is the Millennium today, it is the biggest failure in the history of the universe.

[Guest shiloh357]

The article written by Mr. Anthony claiming that Jerusalem is the whore of Revelation is in short a theological trainwreck. The article, as it will be demonstrated pays no attention to even the most basic rules of biblical interpretation. Mr. Anthony works from an assumption that Jerusalem is the whore/woman and then sets out to prove that assumption. It would be analagous to a judge rendering a decision in court and then going back to his chambers to find a law that supports his decision. Mr. Anthony's interperative method runs in the backward direction of how proper hermeneutics operate.

The Woman is called "Sodom" and "Egypt" and "Babylon" (Revelation 11:8; 17:5, 14:8, 18:10, 21).

The Woman is located where Jesus was crucified (Revelation 11:8).

The Woman's dwelling place becomes a River of Blood (Revelation 14:20).

The Woman is Split into 3 Divisions (Revelation 16:19).

The Woman "sits on many waters" (Revelation 17:1) and these "waters" are diverse peoples (Revelation 17:15).

The Woman has fornicated with the Heathen World against God (Revelation 17:2, 18:3, 18:9).

The Woman is born along on a Beast (Revelation 17:3).

The Woman is the Mother of all Whores and Abominable Atrocities (Revelation 17:5).

The Woman is Drunk on the Blood of O.T. & N.T. Saints (Revelation 17:6, 18:24, 18:20).

The Woman is responsible for the death of the Prophets and Apostles (Revelation 17:6, 18:20, 18:24).

The Woman sits on 7 Mountains (Revelation 17:9).

The Woman is a dwelling place of devils (Revelation 18:2).

The Woman is a Prison for Evil Spirits (Revelation 18:2).

The Woman is a Cage, full of Dirty Birds (Revelation 18:2).

The Woman has a Full Cup of Iniquities (Revelation 18:5).

The Woman is Doubly Judged (Revelation 18:6).

The Woman considers herself a Queen (Revelation 18:7).

The Woman still considers herself Married (Revelation 18:7).

The Woman was Rich and Mourned when Judged (Revelation 18:10, 16-19).

The Woman merchandised the Souls of Men (Revelation 18:13).

The Woman is pronounced Desolate (Revelation 18:19).

The Woman's sound of Joy is taken away (Revelation 18:22).

The Woman's position of Creativity is taken away (Revelation 18:22).

The Woman's authority as someone equipped to Judge is removed (Revelation 18:22).

The Woman's Light-Bearing ability is snuffed out (Revelation 18:23).

The Woman's Bridegroom has Divorced Her (Revelation 18:23).

The Woman's Engagement/Marriage has been annulled/abrogated (Rev 18:23).

The Woman is called "This/That Great City" (Revelation 11:8, 14:8, 16:19, 17:18, 18:10, 16, 18, 19, 21, 21:10).

The Woman = Jerusalem

The above is case in point. The woman is assumed and then the author strings together different verses from different areas of Revelation to support the assumption. The whore of Revelation, named "Mystery Babylon" is found mentioned in Revelation 17 and 18. When examining the texts of the verses he provides, a substantial amount of these verses have nothing to do with the identification of the whore/woman in Revelation 17 and 18.

Again, everytime "Babylon" is mentioned, the assumption the author is working from is that the reference is Jerusalem. In the entire list, he provides no Scripture that positively identifies Jerusalem as Mystery Babylon. Verses like Revelation 11:8, 14:8, 16:19, 18:5, et al., do not provide any means of identifying who Mystery Babylon is. It is only assumed by the author and thus, that assumpumption is then read into every place where Babylon is mentioned in the book of Revelation.

The most compelling evidence that the woman is Jerusalem is that scripture says it's where Jesus was crucified! (Revelation 11:8). Compare Jerusalem before her Judgment: (Revelation 11:8) and after Her Judgment (Revelation 21:10).

No, the text does not say that. The text nowhere says the woman is the location of Jesus crucifixion. The author provides Rev. 11:8 and Revl 21:10. There are several problems here with the author's use of these two verses.

1. No mention is made of a woman/whore

2. It is not called "Babylon," but rather the names Egypt and Sodom are applied allegorically and rightly so since the anti-Christ will make Jerusalem his headquarters, the seat from which he will rule. Sodom speaks of wickedness and Egypt speaks of oppression, both of which will characterize the anti-Christ's rule.

3. The Jerusalem mentioned in Rev. 21:10 is not the earthly Jerusalem, but is a different city called "The New Jerusalem" and it descends out of heaven.

4. Rev. 11:8 and 21:10 are two verses in two different contexts talking about completely dissimilar things. They are not parallell pasages that can be rightly compared.

There are two Jerusalem's. One was the literal, fleshly type of the true, spiritual Jerusalem. One was the Zion of Israel - the abode or rallying point of God's chosen nation, the other was the true Zion - the Abode of God and by extension the spiritual Home/Abode of His people where they are written and their spirits assemble before Him in awe and worship.

The Bible does not make that kind of distinction. Israel, the "fleshly" nation is God's nation, and He has declared that it will remain such (Jer. 31:35,36). When Jesus returns to "fleshly" Israel, He will restore the kingdom to her and rule from Jerusalem on the throne of David. In the Scriptures God is always dealing with earthly Jerusalem and is today, busy restoring Israel/Jerusalem just as He promised He would do. There is no "fleshly Zion vs. "true Zion" comparison/contrast in the Bible.

Jerusalem was once the Beautiful City of God, but now she has become a den of devils and full of idolatries and filthy abominations.

That reads like it could have come from the anti-Semitic writings of Martin Luther. It demonstrates the true source of the "Jerusalem = The whore of Revelation": Anti-Semitism.

God also uses the term "this great city" to refer to Jerusalem in the Old Testament (Jeremiah 22:6-9).

Nineveh is called "That great city" twice in Jon. 1: 2 and 3: 2 and a third time in Jon. 4:11. The cities of Gibeon and Resen are also called "great cities." Jerusalem is not the only city referred to in that fashion.

The Woman has killed the Saints - the Prophets, Apostles, and Jesus (Revelation 11:8; 17:6; 18: 20,24).

Jerusalem has killed the Saints - the Prophets, Apostles, and Jesus (Matthew 23:29-36; Luke 6:22-23, 26; 11:47-52; 13:28,33-34; Acts 2:23,36; 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 7:51-52; Romans 11:2-5; 1 Corinthians 2:7-8; 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15, James 5:10).

Again, we see the sloppy hermeneutics being applied. Working from a preconceived assumption, verses are simply strung together with no hermeneutic treatment.

The blood of the saints and martyrs mentioned in Revelation clearly refers to those saints who were martyred under the regime of the anti-Christ.

What is also apparent from the above is the anti-Semitic charge of deicide. The author states that the woman (whom heJerusalem, i.e. "the Jews") killed Jesus. The Jews did not kill, murder, martyr, excecute, or in any way take Jesus life. Jesus' death was a sacrifice in which Jesus died the very minute He intended to. No one took His life; He gave it freely.

It must also be pointed out with reference to the death of the saints, that far more, even tens of millions of Christians, were killed AFTER 70 AD for their faith in Christ by Rome and subsequently the Roman "church" than were ever killed prior to 70 AD. Only an anti-Semite would try to pretend that Jerusalem is the chief murderer of the saints.

The "Dragon" was the source of power and authority for the Beast (also referred to as the serpent, the Devil, and Satan at Revelation 12:9, 20:2). Were the Romans ever called "children of the devil"? The Jews were: (John 8:44; Acts 13:10; 1 John 3:10)! The Jews were also called "serpents" and "offspring of vipers" (Matthew 23:33)! And that same verse (Matthew 23:33) condemns them to a fiery end similar to the end of the Beast and his followers (Revelation 19:19-21)!

Again, we have more Jew hatred. The Jews were never called the "children of the devil." Jesus said to his enemies in the Sanhedrin "you are of your father the devil. Jesus NEVER used that kind of terminology to refer to the Jewish people en masse. Jesus rebukes and terms like, "vipers" were aimed only at His enemies not at the entire nation. The only people who use such terminology to refer to the Jews are Jew hating anti-Semites.

The 7 Mountains (Revelation 17:9) refer to Jerusalem, not Rome. The seven mountains upon which Jerusalem was built are Mount Zion, Mount Ophel, Mount Moriah, Mount Bezetha, Mount Acra, Mount Gareb, and Mount Goath.

Okay, now we have another hermeneutic problem. The woman who is riding the beast is, according to the author Jerusalm. The beast has seven heads according to 17:7. If the woman is Jerusalem, the beast with seven heads cannot be Jerusalem as well. Jerusalem is not carrying Jerusalem. The beast and the whore are two different entities. So, to make the seven hills represent the seven heads, Jerusalem would have to be the beast and not the whore. So which is it?

Revelation 21:2, "And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."

When was the Old Jerusalem destroyed? 70AD. So when should the "new Jerusalem" have been established? 70AD. Aren't the followers of Christ now the "bride" of Christ? Yes. In 721 B.C., God divorced Himself from the adulterous, harlot wife and gave to His Son a new Bride in 70 A.D.! That's Us!

I would be more kind to the author if he wasn't such an anti-Semite. The church is not the New Jerusalem. If the New Jerusalem is on earth, it would put us beyond the Millennium and into the New Heavens and New earth, where there is supposed to be no more death, or cyring or pain. If the author was correct, the world should be getting better not worse. If this is the New Heavens and New Earth, it is a failure. BTW, the Church is never called the "Bride of Christ" That designation is reserved for the Israel the author hates so much.

Ezekiel 16

Ezekiel 16 is very compelling evidence that Jerusalem is the whore.

No, it is not. Ezekiel 16 refers not to a future Jerusalem, but to Jerusalem's former sin when she, as a city, became a spiritual harlot and chased after other gods. However, it is a real stretch to use this passage to justify claiming that Jerusalem is the whore of Revelation. Israel/Jerusalem has already been judged for the sins she committed prior to the Babylonian captivity. It is very anti-Semitic to imply that Jerusalem bears the title of "THE whore." This is true particularly when we are not actually given the identity of the whore in the book of Revelation.

That is because the "city" referred to as the whore is not a literal city, but an evil world system under the reign of the anti-Christ.

The woman is called "Mystery Babylon..." Because it is mystery, we cannot positively identify her at this time.

..."Mother of harlots and abominations..." This cannot refer to Israel/Jerusalem. The "mother" or "source" of these things was Babylon not Jerusalem.

We can ascertain, however, from Revelation 17 that the whore cannot be Jerusalem for the following reason.

1. Jerusalem is not the "mother" of harlots and abominations." These things find their source in the Babylonian religious system.

2. The whore sits on many waters which represents many tongues, nations and peoples. Hardly a description of Jerusalem.

3. Jerusalem is not a city that reigns over the kings of the earth. Jerusalem has never had that kind of power or influence today or at any time in history.

It is tragic that such an anti-Semitic artile would even be posted in the first place. Israel/Jerusalem has been consistently compared to the worst regimes in world history. Even today, man compare Israel and the Jewish people to the Nazis, or the Bolsheviks, the apartheid regime of South Africa, and now we even have "Christians" who want to compare or identify Israel with the most vile religious system that has ever existed in the world. The article is a good example of sloppy exegesis and an irrational hatred of Israel and the Jewish people.

[Massorite]

Hey everyone,

The other question is what is the great whore of the Revelation? I have a theory that many others also have that says that the Catholic "church" is the great whore of Revelation chapter 18, which does seem to fit the criteria pretty well considering "mystery" is another name for the sacrements, it is pretty wealthy (as many other religions are that go against doctrines of the Bible), it has a well-known and definitly accepted history of killing and persecuting Christians who opposed the beliefs of the Catholic "church", etc.

That has possibly been discussed to no-end, which is alright, we all have different interpretations of God's Word, even though the Bible says that there is only one true interpretation of it. However, I was in my Revelation class last night and the thought came "Could Islam in fact be the "great whore". Now, to say that the great whore is only the Catholic church is probably limiting that particular aspect in Scripture, and I've heard some say that it is possibly the Mormon cult, or any other cult, but I'm wondering if it coudl possibly be Islam also.

Any thoughts?

Crystal

What we do know is that at the time of the great whore we as the people of God will be within her 18:4 so it will be a world wide entity. In verse 7 the bible tells that the whore claims to be a Queen who is not a widow

A queen who is not a widow speaks of a king consort which

is something less than a king. The only way a queen can rule

over a kingdom is if the king has already reigned and died, in

which case the queen would reign in his stead. But this case the queen

has set herself up as a ruling queen without ever being married

to a king. In doing so she will set herself up in total opposition

to the one true and only King of kings and Lord of lords.

Here a city stripped of inhabitants and riches is represented

as a widow and the word

[nebula]

Folks can ONLY speculate, but most scholars suggest it is either the Roman empire, which fell in 476, or first century Jerusalem, which fell in 70 AD.

That can only be true if Rev. 17-18 has been fulfilled and we are now living in the Mellenium. If this is so, then the fulfillment of the Mellenial prophecies are the biggest let-down in all of history.

...assuming, of course, that the millenial interpretation is the correct one.

OK, if what we are living in today is the fulfillment of anything prophesied between Rev. 19-22, it is the biggest let-down in history.

[nebula]

[The Woman = Jerusalem

OK - so why are the merchants of the earth mourning the destruction of Jerusalem?

vs. 3 - "...and the merchants of the earth grew rich from her excessive luxuries."

Since when was this descriptive of Jerusalem?

[Guest shiloh357]

It is really quite irrelevant concerning your "opinion" in what you consider the "rules "of biblical interpretation, which are grossly in error.

It is not what I consider the rules of biblical interpretation to be, anymore than than the rules of English grammar are what I consider them to be. That is just stupid.

The rules of literary analysis are universal and that is what hermeneutics are. The fact is that he violates the most basic rules of literary analysis the most basic is context. He tries to tie Scriptures together that occur in different contexts, are dealing issues completely foreign to the subject matter of Revelation (such Ezkiel 16) and he provides exactly zero exegesis.

If he were using the same sloppy methods to analyze a biography on Martin Luther King, he would be laughed into the ground and the author of the book might have grounds to sue him.

It is quite obvious that Mr. Anthony has provided overwhelming scriptural references that makes a very good case that cannot be brushed off except with your usual hermeneutic mumble jumble, which is the false preassumption you are working from.

Oh, he provides a lot of Scripture, but that is doesn't really mean anything when the Scriptures he presents are not material to the subject matter under discussion.

Any one can provide hundreds of verses and string them together like lights on a Christmas tree. That does not take any skill at all and just because he uses a lot of Scripture, it does not follow that he has provided overwhelming evidence of anything particularly if the verses he offers do not really have anything to do with the subject matter.

The fact remains that the identity of Mystery Babylon is not known at this time. There are several competing theories, but the one naming Jerusalem is the weakest and the least likely.

[Guest shiloh357]

What a bunch of hogwash. The fact is U violate the most basic of biblical rules in intepretation and analysis with your man made theories.

MY man-made theories. Which theories did I create? And which rules of hermeneutics did I violate in the process of making up these said theories?

You cannot refute scripture so you attack the messenger. Why am I not surprised?!

Actually I refuted His article. I have no need to refute Scripture. What I refuted was his mishandling of the Scriptures and his disregard for the rules of literary analysis.

Case in point: He states that the seven mountains refer to Jerusalem when in the text of Rev. 17, the seven heads of the beast are called seven hills. The seven mountains refer to the beast, not to Jerusalem or what he calls the whore. It is clear from the text that the hills are not to be taken as literal hills in verse 10, which tells us that the seven hills are seven kings or kingdoms five which are fallen and one which is to come. He simply does not pay any attention to the text in his attempt to demonize Jerusalem as the whore.

The basic biblical rule for intepretation of scripture comes from Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, that you, by your own words do not acknowledge:

Thy Word is Truth. John 17:17

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself. John 16:13.

Complete nonsense. When God created the Bible, He used our own literary methods to communicate to us. The Bible uses many different literary forms and devices such as prose, poetry, short storiy narratives, proverbs, prophecies, parables, allegory, metaphors, similies, symbolism, foreshadowing and others. God communicated to us using means that we can comprehend and test.

The presence of hermeneutics is not the absence of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit guides us in the pursuit of interpretation. Biblical interpretation is not some mystical, subjective excersize. It is as much a intellectual pursuit as it is a spiritual one.

An honest student of Scripture will acknowledge that we simply do not have enough evidence in Scripture to positively identify the whore of Revelation.

Jesus' own words:

Matthew 23:33-37 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Verily I say unto you, ALL THESE THINGS SHALL LCOME UPON THIS GENERATION.

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee,

I suppose in your mind Jesus in antisemitic also

Nonsense. Jesus was not indicting every Jew, it was the religious leaders who were his enemies in the Sanhedrin that Jesus directed terms like "vipers" and what not.

NOTE IN REVELATION ABOUT WHORE:

Revelation 18:24 And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.

Two different parties can never be guilty of "all" of the same thing. Jesus said Jerusalem was guilty of all of the blood shed on earth, and so was the whore in Revelation.

Baloney. Jesus dd NOt say that Jerusalem is guilt of "all the blood shed on the earth." Jesus said to the religious leadershhip that they and their predecessors were guilty of the righteous blood from Abel to Zachariah the Priest. No place does the Bible hold the Jewish people responsible for ALL the blood ever shed on earth. Such an assertion is anti-Semitic.

[kari21]