GCM Home | Bible Search | Rules | Donate | Bookstore | RSS | Facebook | Twitter

Author Topic: Bablylon  (Read 9192 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online winsome

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4305
  • Manna: 77
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2009, 02:04:59 AM »
There is another interpretation which fits a lot better.

Hi JHM,

I would be interested to know your interpretation

thanks

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Bablylon
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2009, 02:04:59 AM »

Online winsome

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4305
  • Manna: 77
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2009, 10:04:21 AM »
@ Winsome : You will find the link to what I posted about "Babylon" in the very last line in the post I made immediately before your post. i.e. Look at the last line in the post just before yours and click on that line. Here it is again :

http://www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/catholic-forum/scripture-studies-re-'babylon'-parts-1-2-3-(more-to-follow)/
 


Oops,

When I made my post I was at the bottom of the previous page. I hadn't noticed there was another page since I last looked.

I'll read it all.

Thanks

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Bablylon
« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2009, 10:04:21 AM »

Offline Fallen Knight

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 99
  • Manna: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #17 on: November 23, 2009, 09:39:20 PM »
The old Protestant anti catholic whore of Babylon claim again.  Crickey, you mean to tell me there are still some fundamentalist narrow minded fools out there still throwing this around??

Seems like someone is relying on Chic Magazines to provide them their scriptural learnings.

It's funny how most "serious" Christians Scholars of the Protestant line don't by into this one.

Unfortunately, some of the less educated ones still reckon they can run with it.

Oh well

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #18 on: November 24, 2009, 12:41:51 PM »
Quote
The old Protestant anti catholic wh*re of Babylon claim again.  Crickey, you mean to tell me there are still some fundamentalist narrow minded fools out there still throwing this around??

Seems like someone is relying on Chic Magazines to provide them their scriptural learnings.

It's funny how most "serious" Christians Scholars of the Protestant line don't by into this one.

Unfortunately, some of the less educated ones still reckon they can run with it.

Oh well

That's funny, I always thought the ones who had no argument but insults were the uneducated ones.  There are many millions the world over that still believe it.  While Rome's involvement in the politics of this world is ever on the increase, they will continue to have better reason for believing it.  The Protestant Reformers were not narrow minded fools.  They identified the Church of Rome for what she truly was, and is.  Many of them died at the hands of the same.  She would have burned every one of them at the stake if she could have.  Yet I, and they, are the ones who are supposed to be closed minded and ignorant.  Get a grip.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Bablylon
« Reply #18 on: November 24, 2009, 12:41:51 PM »

Offline Fallen Knight

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 99
  • Manna: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #19 on: November 24, 2009, 01:17:05 PM »
Dear Macca,
                    Your words, not mine:

"I always thought the ones who had no argument but insults were the uneducated ones"

Now read back over your past posts and see why I totally agree with you on this one. Lol

You tell me to get a grip. Well my answer to you is no. I don't have to. For I tell you to go away and study what it is you are saying. For you very obviously have no great idea of what you are talking about. It's just the same old anti catholic, hillbilly rubbish that's been going around amoungst uneducated Protestants for years.

For example, were you aware that over the 400 years of the Spanish Inquisition, there were approx 4000 killed. Now not for a moment am I saying this was right. But to hold it up as a Protestant argument is ridiculous.

Why??...................Because "PROTESTANT" Germany burned over 70,000 "witches", PROTESTANT England burned over 30,000. Your own PROTESTANT America had their own little fun in Salem I believe.
We could go on and mention the RAPINGS of nuns by Protestants and the murdering of Catholic Priests by PROTESTANTS, in fact it was illegal to be a Catholic in England.

I could of course point out to you that most PROTESTANT scholars will point out to you that the Babylon mentioned in the bible refers to Jerusalem and not the Catholic Church, but I fear there is no point.

You obviously prefer the sound of your own voice and mind over any real truth



Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Bablylon
« Reply #19 on: November 24, 2009, 01:17:05 PM »



Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #20 on: November 24, 2009, 04:53:51 PM »
Quote
Dear Macca,
                    Your words, not mine:

"I always thought the ones who had no argument but insults were the uneducated ones"

Now read back over your past posts and see why I totally agree with you on this one. Lol

You tell me to get a grip. Well my answer to you is no. I don't have to. For I tell you to go away and study what it is you are saying. For you very obviously have no great idea of what you are talking about. It's just the same old anti catholic, hillbilly rubbish that's been going around amoungst uneducated Protestants for years.

For example, were you aware that over the 400 years of the Spanish Inquisition, there were approx 4000 killed. Now not for a moment am I saying this was right. But to hold it up as a Protestant argument is ridiculous.

Why??...................Becau se "PROTESTANT" Germany burned over 70,000 "witches", PROTESTANT England burned over 30,000. Your own PROTESTANT America had their own little fun in Salem I believe.
We could go on and mention the RAPINGS of nuns by Protestants and the murdering of Catholic Priests by PROTESTANTS, in fact it was illegal to be a Catholic in England.

I could of course point out to you that most PROTESTANT scholars will point out to you that the Babylon mentioned in the bible refers to Jerusalem and not the Catholic Church, but I fear there is no point.

You obviously prefer the sound of your own voice and mind over any real truth

Wrong person. I'm Amo, not Macca.  To say that the Protestant Reformers were uneducated only reveals your ignorance of who many of them really were.  On the other hand, this is no argument at all.  Remember, the Lord used uneducated fisherman to turn the world upside down with the gospel message.  Your own Church elevated one of them to the highest office in this world in your own eyes.  This is not to mention the fact that education is not synonymous with truth.  There are, and have been many highly educated evil people.

Any Protestant that engaged in any of the activities you mentioned above could call themselves anything they want, but they were not true Christians.  Neither were any Roman Catholics that did so, or sanctioned the same.  What is a new covenant whore of a Church, but one that accepts the power of the state unto persecution, over the power of the Holy Spirit of God unto the spreading of the gospel of the kingdom of God.  As the Mother of harlots, Rome has had, and will have many daughters.

It took Protestantism hundreds of years to fully break away from the false doctrines and practices of the Church of Rome, not the least of which is the amalgamation of Church and state, which always results in persecution.  Many have never fully broken away, and many more are also slipping back.  Those who will not continue the protest, and the breaking away, will once again become faithful daughters of Rome, as many are.

As far as countries where Protestants outlawed being Catholic, you forgot to mention that Catholics first outlawed being Protestant in those same countries.  I suppose they felt that they were just returning equal treatment.  Of course they knew, that if Rome regained control of their country, they would themselves be outlawed, and either convert, leave, or die.  This all started in the supposed Christian faith with the Church of Rome, not Protestantism.  Protestantism is that movement which tried to break away from such abuse at the hands of the Church of Rome.  Unfortunately, they broke away to slow, and employed some of the same sinful habits of Rome.  On the other hand, what can you do with people, who once they gain control, will force themselves and there beliefs upon you with the threat of death?

You can deny it all you want, but these things were invented and carried out by the Church of Rome first, and then the infection spread.  She is the mother of it, and all those who support and practice the same, in the name of Christianity. 

As usual, the numbers you supplied concerning the Spanish inquisition are far lower than accounts recorded by others. In all fairness, I suppose I should post another message containing the oppositions numbers regarding the same. 

As far as your comments regarding what Protestant scholars today believe about Babylon, there is nothing I can do about the success of Romes counter reformation among many once Protestant Churches and leaders.  They have rejected the teachings and convictions of their forefathers in their walk back to Rome.  Nevertheless, this is a matter of biblical prophecy.  Rome must rise again on a worldwide scale before Christ returns.  Don't worry yourself about it though, that is just what this uneducated, ignorant of a fool Protestant thinks.

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #21 on: November 24, 2009, 05:27:05 PM »
In the course of the first year in which it was erected, the inquisition of
Seville, which then extended over Castile, committed two thousand
persons alive to the flames, burnt as many in effigy, and condemned
seventeen thousand to different penances. According to a moderate
computation, from the same date to 1517, the year in which Luther made
his appearance, thirteen thousand persons were burnt alive, eight thousand
seven hundred were burnt in effigy, and one hundred and sixty-nine
thousand seven hundred and twenty-three were condemned to penances;
making in all one hundred and ninety-one thousand four hundred and
twenty-three persons condemned by the several tribunals of Spain in the
course of thirty-six years. There is reason for thinking that this estimate
falls much below the truth. For, from 1481 to 1520, it is computed that in
Andalusia alone thirty thousand persons informed against themselves, from
the dread of being accused by others, or in the hope of obtaining a
mitigation of their sentence. And down to the commencement of the
seventeenth century, the instances of absolution were so rare, that one is
scarcely to be found in a thousand cases; the inquisitors making it a point,
that, if possible, none should escape without bearing a mark of their
censure, as at least suspected de levi, or in the lowest degree.

It was to be expected that the inquisitors would exert their power in
checking the cultivation of biblical learning. In 1490, many copies of the
Hebrew Bible were committed to the flames at Seville by the order of
Torquemada; and in an auto-da-fe celebrated soon after at Salamanca, six
thousand volumes shared the same fate, under the pretext that they
contained judaism, magic, and other illicit arts. Deza, archbishop of
Seville, who had succeeded Torquemada as inquisitor-general, ordered the
papers of Lebrixa to be seized, and passed sentence against him as
suspected of heresy, for the corrections which he had made on the text of
the Vulgate, and his other labors in elucidation of the scriptures. “The
archbishop’s object (says Lebrixa, in an apology which he drew up for
himself) was to deter me from writing. He wished to extinguish the
knowledge of the two languages on which our religion depends; and I was
condemned for impiety, because, being no divine but a mere grammarian, I
presumed to treat of theological subjects. If a person endeavor to restore
the purity of the sacred text, and point out the mistakes which have vitiated
it, unless he will retract his opinions, he must be loaded with infamy,
excommunicated, and doomed to an ignominious punishment! Is it not
enough that I submit my judgment to the will of Christ in the scriptures?
must I also reject as false what is as clear and evident as the light of truth
itself? What tyranny! To hinder a man, under the most cruel pains, from
saying what he thinks, though he express himself with the utmost respect
for religion, to forbid him to write in his closet or in the solitude of a
prison, to speak to himself, or even to think! On what subject shall we
employ our thoughts, if we are prohibited from directing them to those
sacred oracles which have been the delight of the pious in every age, and
on which they have meditated by day and by night?

Offline Fallen Knight

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 99
  • Manna: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #22 on: November 24, 2009, 06:57:24 PM »
Dear Amo,
                  Apologies for getting you mixed up with Macca, It’s just that you guys start to sound the same after a while. ( Same old attacks )
Firstly, if you actually read what I said, you’ll find I didn’t say the reformers were uneducated. I was speaking about many of their followers.

But on that note, Martin Luther, the man who started your whole Bible Only religion,  (1500 yrs after Christianity began) stated that all Jews were Pigs, that they worshipped Satan

Would you consider this “educated

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #23 on: November 24, 2009, 08:43:29 PM »
Quote
I believe the Bible says that :

Matthew 16 : 13 - 20 (Jerusalem Bible)
When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi he put this question to his deciples, 'Who do people say the Son of Man is ?' And they said, 'Some say he is John the Baptist , some Elijah , and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets' 'But you ,' he said 'who do you say I am ?'  Then Simon Peter spoke up , 'You are the Christ ,' he said 'the Son of the living God '. Jesus replied , 'Simon son of Jonah , you are a happy man !  Because it was not flesh and blood that revealed this to you but my Father in heaven . So now I say to you : You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church . And the gates of the underworld can never hold out against it . I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven : whatever you bind on earth shall be considered bound in heaven ; and whatever you loose on earth shall be considered loose in heaven .' Then he gave the disciples strict orders not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.

Since you have admitted that the Catholic Church made Peter, (an uneducated man), the first Pope, are you saying they were wrong to do so ? Did not Christ say that Peter was the rock on which he would found "HIS CHURCH" ? And that whatever Peter bound on earth would be bound in heaven ? So why do you ceaselessly attack "Christ's Church" ? Are you trying to get condemned ?

Five verses later, Christ reveals the reality of the situation.

Matt 16:22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.


It was what Peter said that Christ's Church is built upon, certainly not Peter, whom Christ called Satan, or any other man.  If verses 18&19 established Peter as the first pope, then verses 22&23 demoted him to Satan.  Since he was called Satan last, then I guess that is what should stick.  This is not the case though.  He is neither, it is the words which He spoke which are being addressed in both instances, and not the man himself.  If you insist on it being the man himself, then of course the last words Christ spoke concerning him should be the ones to hold true.  Of course, then it is also a self fulfilling prophecy, for a man has been put in the place of Christ.  This of course is anti-Christ, and is the original mind set of Satan, who wanted all the power of God without being like Him. 

Isa 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit
.






Offline desertknight

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Manna: 30
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #24 on: November 24, 2009, 09:01:56 PM »
It was what Peter said that Christ's Church is built upon, certainly not Peter, whom Christ called Satan, or any other man.  If verses 18&19 established Peter as the first pope, then verses 22&23 demoted him to Satan.  Since he was called Satan last, then I guess that is what should stick.  This is not the case though.  He is neither, it is the words which He spoke which are being addressed in both instances, and not the man himself.  If you insist on it being the man himself, then of course the last words Christ spoke concerning him should be the ones to hold true.  Of course, then it is also a self fulfilling prophecy, for a man has been put in the place of Christ.  This of course is anti-Christ, and is the original mind set of Satan, who wanted all the power of God without being like Him.

That is the most bizarre exegesis that I have ever heard.  In not one Christian tradition that I have ever heard of is the Apostle Peter believed to have been 'demoted' by Christ.  Not any Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, or Evangelical that I know of.  If you really believe this than I can't wait to here your explanation of all of Peter's clearly demonstrated favour with the Lord in the Acts of the Apostles.  That it is Peter's faith that caused the Lord to elevate him to leadership above the other Apostles is what is believed by us Catholics.  It is Peter's faith that the Church is built on, not the man Peter himself, who like all men, fell short and was sinful, hence our Lord's having to rebuke him.  St. Paul had to embarrass and browbeat Peter in order to arriving at the correct decision at the Council of Jerusalem, but once Peter decided, the other Apostles carried out his decision.   No Pope is some sort of divine totalitarian.  Decisions made by the Holy See are as hotly debated among the Bishops then, as today.  Popes have been great scoundrels and great saints.  It is the 'Church', the Mystical Body of Christ, that cannot be conquered by evil or sin, not any individual man.  After all, we aren't Mormons for crying out loud, the Pope is not a prophet, he is just a man.

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #25 on: November 24, 2009, 10:32:23 PM »
Quote
Dear Amo,
                  Apologies for getting you mixed up with Macca, It’s just that you guys start to sound the same after a while. ( Same old attacks )
Firstly, if you actually read what I said, you’ll find I didn’t say the reformers were uneducated. I was speaking about many of their followers.

Many of many peoples followers are uneducated.  This proves nothing.  If it did, the Catholic Church would certainly not have anything on any other group considering the uneducated masses of it’s own followers.

Quote
But on that note, Martin Luther, the man who started your whole Bible Only religion,  (1500 yrs after Christianity began) stated that all Jews were Pigs, that they worshipped Satan

Would you consider this “educated

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #26 on: November 24, 2009, 10:37:51 PM »
Quote
Your quote is correct; but your interpretation of that quote is "Twaddle"   . Peter was not trying to do anything evil. He was only trying to save Christ's life. Christ realizing he had to go through death in order to be the one who paid for the sins of those of mankind who are to be forgiven, would have none of it and castigated Peter for "Tempting" him. You are making a mountain out of a molehill; clutching at straws to salvage your own twisted beliefs. Time will tell who is right; and I sincerely believe that it will not be very long now.

I believe you are correct concerning the fact that we shall not have to wait to long to find out.  I eagerly await that event. 

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #27 on: November 24, 2009, 10:42:10 PM »
Quote
That is the most bizarre exegesis that I have ever heard.  In not one Christian tradition that I have ever heard of is the Apostle Peter believed to have been 'demoted' by Christ.  Not any Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, or Evangelical that I know of.  If you really believe this than I can't wait to here your explanation of all of Peter's clearly demonstrated favour with the Lord in the Acts of the Apostles.  That it is Peter's faith that caused the Lord to elevate him to leadership above the other Apostles is what is believed by us Catholics.  It is Peter's faith that the Church is built on, not the man Peter himself, who like all men, fell short and was sinful, hence our Lord's having to rebuke him.  St. Paul had to embarrass and browbeat Peter in order to arriving at the correct decision at the Council of Jerusalem, but once Peter decided, the other Apostles carried out his decision.   No Pope is some sort of divine totalitarian.  Decisions made by the Holy See are as hotly debated among the Bishops then, as today.  Popes have been great scoundrels and great saints.  It is the 'Church', the Mystical Body of Christ, that cannot be conquered by evil or sin, not any individual man.  After all, we aren't Mormons for crying out loud, the Pope is not a prophet, he is just a man.

Its late, I'm tired, I'll get back to you on the above.  I certainly agree with some of what you said.

Offline Fallen Knight

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 99
  • Manna: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #28 on: November 24, 2009, 11:35:36 PM »
JHM,
       I believe it may be I who you refer to on castigating each other's religion.

AMO,
        Just one more thing regarding the Spanish Inquisition. And this fits in well with JHM's mention of being HOT for the faith.

The Spanish Inquisition did not in fact involve any Protestants. It involved Muslims and Jews mostly. The Spanish had just completed an 800 year war to retake their country back for Christendom. It had been under Islam that whole time.

After 800 years of bloody fighting, the Christian Spanish wanted to ensure their counrty remained Christian. And so it sought to seek out any non-christians or those pretending to be. It wasn't actually started by the Catholic Church, but by the Christian King and Queen of Spain.

To put it into context. The US has only been in a cold war with Russia for a dozen years before they launched their "Reds under the bed" court cases in the 50's.

They were trying to ensure no convert communists were working in the US. Now imagine that the US had actually been invaded by the Russians and been held for 100 years before Free Americans fought and captured it back.

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #29 on: November 26, 2009, 06:39:28 AM »
Quote
@ AMO : Depending on where you live in the world you may find that day less pleasant than you expect. Christ also gave us to know that  : Because the church of Laodicea was neither "Hot" nor "Cold"; but rather "Lukewarm", he would "Spew it out of his mouth". In my view, you may think of the Irish as being "Hot". They kill each other over religion; as do people in the Middle East. In Latin American countries and the Phillipines, they re-enact the crucifixion at Easter time, with some volunteers being flogged and crucified. This too is being "Hot" over religion. In China, India, and the one time communist countries, they don't much believe in any of it. That is being "Cold" over religion.

Where in the world then are people "Lukewarm" over religion ? People who think they are rich and have everything ? Answer : North America !!  Bear in mind what you and Desert Knight, (I think it is), are castigating each others churchs for their acts in past, is being "Hot".

Ones physical location on earth will have nothing to do with whether the day of the Lord will be pleasant or not.  That will depend upon the condition of their heart.  Christ was in constant conflict with many of the religious leaders of His day, does that mean He was wrong for being so, certainly not.  God will judge our motives.  If it simply a matter of pride, and being right that motivates us, I would say that it will not be well with us on that day.  On the other hand, if it is because of genuine concern for the glory of God, and the salvation of others as it was with Christ, then all should certainly be well.  God will determine which it was for each one of us.

Rev 3:15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.


God would prefer that e were cold or hot, rather than lukewarm.  That is, on fire for the Lord, or not involved with the Lord at all.  It is those who are mediocre about their faith, which make God nauseated to the point of vomiting.