GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | RSS | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: Bablylon  (Read 9616 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mclees8

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5203
  • Manna: 135
    • View Profile
Bablylon
« on: Sun Nov 15, 2009 - 13:18:14 »






Knight >Kinda' like when they equate the Body of Christ, His Church, with the 'Harlot of Babylon', for we all know that the sign of an anti-Christ is the denial of our Lord.  Calling God's Church a wh*re would definitely 'fit that bill' so of course, no one who is a Christian would do that.



Mike>I do not know about others but I do not call the body of Christ a whore? The body is all believers, no Catholic or Protestant division  and is  how I  view the body of Christ . If you love and follow Christ and know Him as Lord and you do not love the world or your life in it, and only await the Lords second coming, then you are his church and not a whore. What then constitutes  the whore  that is spoken of in Rev 17.  Rev 17 does not speak to every believer, only a specific entity that calls itself Christian yet its interests and ambitions  are worldly. There is no two ways here. Christ and the world cannot be in the same bed together. Either your faith is solely in Christ Who is not of this world or you faith is in the world. You cannot hold hands with Christ on your right and hold hands with the world with your left.   

At the beginning of REV 17 The angel shows John the judgment of the great whore. That sits on many waters. Verse 15 says the waters represents peoples, and multitudes, nations and tongues. This is important to remember because it speaks to  an entity that has influence on a world scale. Not just any entity but one that is Christian because the New Testament only concerns itself with Christ church and does not speak to any other entity out side of it. Christ refers to his church as his bride and the use of the word whore then only speaks to a bride that has been unfaithful. Paganism or any other relgion or empire cannot be unfaithful because it does not know Christ in any relationship. So when the word says Whore that sits on many waters it is saying that this entity that claims to be his bride has its true affection in the world, and   its interests in power and influence globally. 1st John 2: 15 says Love not the world neither the things of it, for it any loves the world the Love of the father is not in him.    This is not private interpretation but simply states what is being said here.  The rest of Rev. 17  is specific in its description of this church and many things must be noted.

The second verse should noted for it says of the whore ( the apostate church )  With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.           
Now look at Rev 18: 3  For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance# of her delicacies.#

Note the emphasis on fornication with the kings of the earth and the merchants that wax rich through their intimate relationship. Listen,  this is not rocket science. The kings represent the leaders of the nations. And wealth is largely through trade and commerce. Also note that both 17,and 18 speak of Babylon  and speaks of government religion, and merchant trade system

1st  the apostate church is one of  power  and government which would plainly be in relationships with many  nations for trade and commerce. I never saw a government that didn’t seek economic wealth. The Vatican is a testimony of wealth.

2nd point the church is Christian  and not any other entity or religion. There is no other church outside of the RCC that fits  this description.

3rd point it is described in detail and no other entity even Christian fits that description except the RCC This is not personal interpretation. This church is clearly marked and is only described in detail here so that their can be no mistake as to its identity.  God wants his bride to know the church and why it is called the Great Harlot of Babylon.  Rev 18 is a clear call for his bride to recognize her and come out of her. Those who fail to recognize this church and the call to come out will be judged along with her and the government of this world.  I have said many times the word of god will be our indictment for life or death.  Yes death is serious and who wants that. 

Christian Forums and Message Board

Bablylon
« on: Sun Nov 15, 2009 - 13:18:14 »

Offline desertknight

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Manna: 30
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #1 on: Sun Nov 15, 2009 - 17:02:57 »
I do not know about others but I do not call the body of Christ a wh*re? The body is all believers, no Catholic or Protestant division  and is  how I  view the body of Christ . If you love and follow Christ and know Him as Lord and you do not love the world or your life in it, and only await the Lords second coming, then you are his church and not a wh*re.

I thank you for at least acknowledging that we Catholics love and follow Christ, (I assume you were doing so.), and as to what follows, you have answered the principle problem of equating the Catholic Church with the Babylon spoken of in Revelation in doing so.  Scripture very specifically tells us that the one who is Anti-Christ, the Babylon which will be spiritual, will also deny Christ, in fact scripture is even more specific than that...

1 John 2:22  "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is Antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son."

...that effectively excludes the Catholic Church.  Unless you can prove and provide evidence that the Catholic church has ever in the past or now, denied the divinity of our Lord, Jesus Christ, as incarnate God and denied that God exist, then to equate the Catholic Church with Rev. 17&18 is a serious blasphemy and sin.

 
Quote from: McL
At the beginning of REV 17 The angel shows John the judgment of the great wh*re. That sits on many waters. Verse 15 says the waters represents peoples, and multitudes, nations and tongues. This is important to remember because it speaks to  an entity that has influence on a world scale. Not just any entity but one that is Christian because the New Testament only concerns itself with Christ church and does not speak to any other entity out side of it. Christ refers to his church as his bride and the use of the word wh*re then only speaks to a bride that has been unfaithful.

Well, no.  You are making two huge, huge errors here.  1.  There are two Babylons spoken of in Revelation or more accurately two aspects of Babylon, as the name "Babylon" is meant to be emblematic.  So much of this guess work can be eliminated if one only understands that St. John is making clear reference to pagan Rome and apostate Jerusalem, the two persecutors of the Christian Church that he writes of.   'Anti-Christ's' and 'Babylon' have always been interpreted by the vast majority of biblical scholars and historians throughout the ages as the pagan Roman enemies of the Church and the Jews who were apostate from it and scripture is fairly specific in that.  2.  Why can it not be the Church that is refered to?  Because that would make a lie of other scripture.  It would make a mockery of the New Covenant that will not end until we are taken up.  The Bible cannot contradict itself.  Christ specifically stated when naming Peter as head of the Apostles that, "The Gates of Hell will never prevail against it."   At Pentecost Christ sent the Holy Spirit to "reside with the Church until the end of time."  The Church is stated in Holy Scripture as the "pillar of fire, pillar of truth".  Christ spoke of the Church as His Body, His bride, but there are two women of Revelation, the bride, His Church of Rev. 12 and the Harlot, the repudiators, of revelation 18, the bride of the Old Covenant, Jerusalem.  The repudiators, those who denied Christ, were the Jews, not His Church.  To claim otherwise states that Christ lied when he claimed that His Church would never have Hell prevail against it.  Those who claim His Church is "Babylon" are clearly and literally stating that the 'Prince of Lies',  the Anti-Christ, not only prevails against it, but will own it.  The blasphemy against God and the wh*re who "they are to come out of" is clear reference to Jerusalem and the persecution of the Church by the Jews with Roman assistance.   Who crucified our Lord?  

Quote from: McL
Paganism or any other relgion or empire cannot be unfaithful because it does not know Christ in any relationship. So when the word says wh*re that sits on many waters it is saying that this entity that claims to be his bride has its true affection in the world, and   its interests in power and influence globally. 1st John 2: 15 says Love not the world neither the things of it, for it any loves the world the Love of the father is not in him.    This is not private interpretation but simply states what is being said here.  The rest of Rev. 17  is specific in its description of this church and many things must be noted.

Again, the problem with your thesis is the the phrase "wh*re of Babylon" or just "Babylon" was used by far more early Christians than just St. John of Revelation, and they as he, very specifically referenced it to pagan Rome and apostate Jerusalem.  The Harlot is that women who says, God! God!, but sold Him to the Romans for crucifixion.  It was the common shorthand that Christians used for the pagan Roman Empire and the Jews collusion in Rome's persecution of Christ's followers.  Second, the depiction that Revelation gives of a power that controls kings, commerce, and has vast military power, well, whatever the Catholic church was in the past, (and it still would not really fit that description.), it clearly is not so now, unless your counting the 139 members of the Swiss Guard as an immense world military power.  ::smile::

Quote from: McL
The second verse should noted for it says of the wh*re ( the apostate church )  With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.            
Now look at Rev 18: 3  For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance# of her delicacies.#

Well, first, you have decided to add to the Bible.  "(the apostate church)", is simply your opinion, and as stated, a horrifically misguided one that Holy Scripture before Revelation categorically negates. Second, Vatican City has no power over other nations; it certainly does not reign over them. In fact, the Vatican’s very existence has been threatened in the past two centuries by Italian nationalism.
If one really wants to play guess work here, and I am not offering my own interpretation, I think what is being described is much more accurately that of a vast trading and financial power.  One that has real military power in it's hands.  One that puts a McDonald's or a television network or a bank or a big box store or a trading center, in practically every city in every country on earth, all backed by secret deals and diplomacy and a vast array of armies and weapons.  In short, I'll see your Catholic interpretation and raise you one American capitalist behemoth!   Think not?  Well, I don't really either as God has not made me a Church authority nor a prophet, but I can sure point you to a dozen Internet sites who argue their cause for the great "Babylon's" identity being "Wall Street" and not the Vatican, or you can try your fancy with those who claim it will be the very resurgent secular and apostate Israel that so many Fundamentalist and Pentecostals are sending boat loads of money to every week, or maybe it will be simply a new pagan age that is clearly already here.  I prefer to abide in Christ's Church, His Body, and not be afraid.  It is of no consequence to me who or what "Babylon" is and I actually give very little credence to the interpretation that I offered.

Quote from: McL
Note the emphasis on fornication with the kings of the earth and the merchants that wax rich through their intimate relationship. Listen,  this is not rocket science. The kings represent the leaders of the nations. And wealth is largely through trade and commerce. Also note that both 17,and 18 speak of Babylon  and speaks of government religion, and merchant trade system

Bingo!  See my last post.  I think you are right, now where does a Church that is in no way, shape, or form, a trading power or economic power fit in with that?  

Quote from: McL
1st  the apostate church is one of  power  and government which would plainly be in relationships with many  nations for trade and commerce. I never saw a government that didn’t seek economic wealth. The Vatican is a testimony of wealth.

2nd point the church is Christian  and not any other entity or religion. There is no other church outside of the RCC that fits  this description.

Silly, sorry, but that it just silly.  Again, the only apostate religion that is being referenced is those who blaspheme God or Christ, i.e.,  Jews were the clear inference, but it simply cannot mean authentic Christians, it simply does not fit.  No Catholic would think that of Christians who are conventional Protestants for that very reason.  There is no reference or statement in scripture or indication that it refers to Christ's Church, it clearly does not.  You keep saying that "it must be Christian, it has to be!" when every reference for "Babylon" used was as shorthand for Pagan Rome or apostate Jerusalem and every statement of the indomitable nature of Christ's Church is given to us in earlier scripture.  Second, to say, that the Babylon of Rev. is vast with trade and economic wealth and well, "hey, see all those fancy paintings and buildings in the Vatican...well that must be it!"   UH...no.  Revelation is talking about an economic power that the whole world will be controlled by and sorry, the Vatican under it's most ambitious Popes, was hardly that, and if it was, it was long, long ago.  

By the way, while I'm on it, you do know that the secret to the identity of the "Mystery"  cannot possibly be the Catholic church...

"This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; they are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he comes he must remain only a little while" (Rev. 17:9–10).

Problem:  Vatican City is not built on seven hills, but only one: Vatican Hill, which is not one of the seven upon which ancient Rome was built. Those hills are on the east side of the Tiber river; Vatican Hill is on the west.   Oh, and the Vatican, is not Rome.  It is an independent country.  Rome is in another country all together.  We are told that the heads "are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come." If five of these kings had fallen in John’s day and one of them was still in existence, then the wh*re must have existed in John’s day. Yet Christian Rome and Vatican City did not.
 
Quote from: McL
3rd point it is described in detail and no other entity even Christian fits that description except the RCC This is not personal interpretation.

Well of course it is!  How silly that you think it not.  

Quote from: McL
This church is clearly marked and is only described in detail here so that their can be no mistake as to its identity.  

And yet, again, dozens upon dozens upon dozens of religious "Christian" crack-pot groups have been making that very error for hundreds of years.  The one common denominator that history does clearly demonstrate, is that whatever is the popular "bogey-man" for that group and for that time, is the one that is "absolutely and irrefutably the identity of "Babylon"!  They know with complete certainty, just ask them.  Oddly, I'm wondering if you even realise that your interpretation has been out of fashion for some time now as for the very reasons that I stated earlier.  In a world that is obsessed by the Babylon in our midst, one of money, global economies, greed, pornography, social injustice, drugs, corruption, filth on television, on computers, a poisonous secular society, that somehow, you would still archaically site the one institution, the Catholic Church, that in many of these countries is at the forefront of spreading Christ's Gospel and faith in Him, and of fighting these things, as the "wh*re of Babylon".  I find that tragically odd.  Don't you feel just a wee bit dated?  

Quote from: McL
God wants his bride to know the church and why it is called the Great Harlot of Babylon.  Rev 18 is a clear call for his bride to recognize her and come out of her. Those who fail to recognize this church and the call to come out will be judged along with her and the government of this world.  I have said many times the word of god will be our indictment for life or death.  Yes death is serious and who wants that.

There are two women of Revelation.  The Holy Mother Church, in Revelations 12 and the Harlot who blasphemes, literally, repudiator of the Christ, i.e. Israel-Jerusalem.  Israel is described as a harlot in many texts of the Hebrew Scriptures: Isa. 1:21, Ezek 16, 23, Isaiah 57, Jeremiah 2-3 and Hosea 2.  The Apostle Peter identifies "Babylon" as Jerusalem...

1 Peter 5:13 "The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son."

"Apostles existed only in the first century, since one of the requirements for being an apostle was seeing the risen Christ (1 Cor. 9:1). Prophets existed as a group only in the Old Testament and in the first century (Acts 11:27–28, 13:1, 15:32, 21:10).

Since the wh*re persecuted apostles and prophets, the wh*re must have existed in the first century. This totally demolishes the claim that Christian Rome or Vatican City is the wh*re. Rome was not a Christian city at that time, and Vatican City did not even exist, so neither of them could be the wh*re. Furthermore, Fundamentalists continually, (though wrongly, and as the Church did exist, it certainly wasn't doing the persecuting of Apostles, the Romans and Jews were.), claim that Catholicism itself did not exist in the first century, meaning that based on their very own argument Catholicism could not be the wh*re!

Fundamentalists are fond of conjecturing that in the last days there will be a "revived Roman empire," such as the one that persecuted Christians in the first century. Yet they never draw the inference that this empire would be headed by a revived pagan Rome, with the bishop of Rome leading the Christian underground, just as he did in the first century. (And the increasing globalisation and secularisation of the planet seems to be heading that way.)

Still, Revelation 18:20 and 18:24 prove that the wh*re had to be a creature of the first century, which, in the Fundamentalist view, the Catholic Church was not. Thus, on their own view, their identification of the Catholic Church with the wh*re is completely impossible! Only ancient, pagan Rome or apostate Jerusalem could possibly be the wh*re."   Scripture is clear that the "New Israel" that is the church, will live undaunted until He comes again.  The old Israel became apostate in her denial of Christ, fell from God's grace, and cannot.  (I want to make perfectly clear that I mean no anti-semitism in saying this.  I think Revelation is a bit more broad and difficult to pin down than that, but I do mean to say that it is clearly what scripture meant, what St. John wrote of and what the early Church was experiencing under Roman/Jewish oppression.).  

Earlier chapters in revelation clearly make this case...

Revelation 17:15-18  "And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the wh*re sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the wh*re, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled. and the woman which thou sawest is that Great City, which reigneth over the kings of the earth."

 "Great City"? Which city is "the Great City"?

Revelation 11:8  "And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the Great City, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where our Lord was crucified.."

Was our Lord crucified in Rome?  
  

« Last Edit: Sun Nov 15, 2009 - 23:30:27 by desertknight »

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Bablylon
« Reply #1 on: Sun Nov 15, 2009 - 17:02:57 »

Offline mclees8

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5203
  • Manna: 135
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #2 on: Mon Nov 16, 2009 - 07:24:49 »
I do not know about others but I do not call the body of Christ a wh*re? The body is all believers, no Catholic or Protestant division  and is  how I  view the body of Christ . If you love and follow Christ and know Him as Lord and you do not love the world or your life in it, and only await the Lords second coming, then you are his church and not a wh*re.

I thank you for at least acknowledging that we Catholics love and follow Christ, (I assume you were doing so.), and as to what follows, you have answered the principle problem with equating the Catholic Church with the Babylon spoken of in Rev.  Scripture very specifically tells us that the one who is Anti-Christ, the Babylon which will be spiritual, will also deny Christ, in fact scripture is even more specific than that...

1 John 2:22  "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is Antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son."

...that effectively excludes the Catholic Church.  Unless you can prove and provide evidence that the Catholic church has ever in the past or now, denied the divinity of our Lord, Jesus Christ, then to equate the Catholic Church with Rev. 17&18 is a serious blasphemy and sin.

 
Quote from: McL
At the beginning of REV 17 The angel shows John the judgment of the great wh*re. That sits on many waters. Verse 15 says the waters represents peoples, and multitudes, nations and tongues. This is important to remember because it speaks to  an entity that has influence on a world scale. Not just any entity but one that is Christian because the New Testament only concerns itself with Christ church and does not speak to any other entity out side of it. Christ refers to his church as his bride and the use of the word wh*re then only speaks to a bride that has been unfaithful.

Well, no.  You are making two huge, huge errors here.  1.  There are two Babylons spoken of in Revelation or more accurately two aspects of Babylon, as the name "Babylon" is meant to be emblematic.  So much of this guess work can be eliminated if one only understands that St. John is making clear reference to pagan Rome and apostate Jerusalem, the two persecutors of the Christian Church that he writes of.   A far more clear understanding of his prophecy is to understand that the Church has battled evil and sin all of it's history.  We are specifically told not to worry of the 'hour or the day'.  We are specifically told that we are not to interpret prophecy on our own.  2.  Why can it not be the Church that is refered to?  Because that would make a lie of other scripture.  It would make a mockery of the New Covenant that will not end until we are taken up.  The Bible cannot contradict itself.  The "New Israel" that is the Church has inherited the promises of the Old Covenant.  Christ specifically stated when naming Peter as head of the Apostles that, "The Gates of Hell will never prevail against it."   At Pentecost Christ sent the Holy Spirit to "reside with the Church until the end of time."  The Church is stated in Holy Scripture as the "pillar of fire, pillar of truth".  Christ spoke of the Church as His Body, His bride.  To state that Christ married a bride who would be a wh*re is a tremendous blasphemy, for it blasphemes the very Body of Christ of which He is of "one flesh" and will never be divorced from.  It states that Christ lied when he claimed that His Church would never have Hell prevail against it.  Those who claim His Church is "Babylon" are clearly and literally stating that the 'Prince of Lies',  the Anti-Christ, not only prevails against it, but will own it.  The blasphemy against God and the wh*re who "they are to come out of" is clear reference to Jerusalem and the persecution of the Church by the Jews with Roman assistance.   Who crucified our Lord?  

Quote from: McL
Paganism or any other relgion or empire cannot be unfaithful because it does not know Christ in any relationship. So when the word says wh*re that sits on many waters it is saying that this entity that claims to be his bride has its true affection in the world, and   its interests in power and influence globally. 1st John 2: 15 says Love not the world neither the things of it, for it any loves the world the Love of the father is not in him.    This is not private interpretation but simply states what is being said here.  The rest of Rev. 17  is specific in its description of this church and many things must be noted.

Again, the problem with your thesis is the the phrase "wh*re of Babylon" or just "Babylon" was used by far more early Christians than just St. John of Revelation, and they as he, very specifically referenced it to pagan Rome.  That is not just some Catholic interpretation, that is the one you will find from any good work of Christian or Roman history.  It was the common shorthand that Christians used for the pagan Empire.  Second, the depiction that Revelation gives of of a power that controls kings, commerce, and has vast military power, well, whatever the Catholic church was in the past, (and it still would not really fit that description.), it clearly is not so now, unless your counting the 139 members of the Swiss Guard as an immense world military power.  ::smile::

Quote from: McL
The second verse should noted for it says of the wh*re ( the apostate church )  With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.            
Now look at Rev 18: 3  For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance# of her delicacies.#

Well, first, you have decided to add to the Bible.  "(the apostate church)", is simply your opinion, and as stated, a horrifically misguided one that Holy Scripture before Revelation categorically negates. Second, Vatican City has no power over other nations; it certainly does not reign over them. In fact, the Vatican’s very existence has been threatened in the past two centuries by Italian nationalism.
If one really wants to play guess work here, and I am not offering my own interpretation, I think what is being described is much more accurately that of a vast trading and financial power.  One that has real military power in it's hands.  One that puts a McDonald's or a television network or a bank or a big box store or a trading center, in practically every city in every country on earth, all backed by secret deals and diplomacy and a vast array of armies and weapons.  In short, I'll see your Catholic interpretation and raise you one American capitalist behemoth!   Think not?  Well, I don't really either as God has not made me a Church authority nor a prophet, but I can sure point you to a dozen Internet sites who argue their cause for the great "Babylon's" identity being "Wall Street" and not the Vatican, or you can try your fancy with those who claim it will be the very resurgent secular and apostate Israel that so many Pentecostals are sending boat loads of money to every week, or maybe it will be simply a new pagan age that is clearly already here.  I prefer to abide in Christ's Church, His Body, and not be afraid.  It is of no consequence to me who or what "Babylon" is and I actually give very little credence to the interpretation that I offered.

Quote from: McL
Note the emphasis on fornication with the kings of the earth and the merchants that wax rich through their intimate relationship. Listen,  this is not rocket science. The kings represent the leaders of the nations. And wealth is largely through trade and commerce. Also note that both 17,and 18 speak of Babylon  and speaks of government religion, and merchant trade system

Bingo!  See my last post.  I think you are right, now where does a Church that is in no way, shape, or form, a trading power or economic power fit in with that?  

Quote from: McL
1st  the apostate church is one of  power  and government which would plainly be in relationships with many  nations for trade and commerce. I never saw a government that didn’t seek economic wealth. The Vatican is a testimony of wealth.

2nd point the church is Christian  and not any other entity or religion. There is no other church outside of the RCC that fits  this description.

Silly, sorry, but that it just silly.  Again, the only apostate religion that is being referenced is those who blaspheme God or Christ, i.e., Pagans or Jews were the clear inference, but it simply cannot mean authentic Christians, it simply does not fit.  There is no reference or statement in scripture or indication that it refers to Christ's Church, it clearly does not.  You keep saying that "it must be Christian, it has to be!" when every reference for "Babylon" used was as shorthand for Pagan Rome or apostate Jerusalem and every statement of the indomitable nature of Christ's Church is given to us in earlier scripture.  Second, to say, that the Babylon of Rev. is vast with trade and economic wealth and well, "hey, see all those fancy paintings and buildings in the Vatican...well that must be it!"   UH..no.  Revelation is talking about an economic power that the whole world will be controlled by and sorry, the Vatican under it's most ambitious Popes, was hardly that, and if it was, it was long, long ago.  

By the way, while I'm on it, you do know that the secret to the identity of the "Mystery"  cannot possibly be the Catholic church...

"This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; they are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he comes he must remain only a little while" (Rev. 17:9–10).

Problem:  Vatican City is not built on seven hills, but only one: Vatican Hill, which is not one of the seven upon which ancient Rome was built. Those hills are on the east side of the Tiber river; Vatican Hill is on the west.   Oh, and the Vatican, is not Rome.  It is an independent country.  Rome is in another country all together.  We are told that the heads "are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come." If five of these kings had fallen in John’s day and one of them was still in existence, then the wh*re must have existed in John’s day. Yet Christian Rome and Vatican City did not.
 
Quote from: McL
3rd point it is described in detail and no other entity even Christian fits that description except the RCC This is not personal interpretation.

Well of course it is!  How silly that you think it not.  

Quote from: McL
This church is clearly marked and is only described in detail here so that their can be no mistake as to its identity.  

And yet, again, dozens upon dozens upon dozens of religious "Christian" crack-pot groups have been making that very error for hundreds of years.  The one common denominator that history does clearly demonstrate, is that whatever is the popular "bogey-man" for that group and for that time, is the one that is "absolutely and irrefutably the identity of "Babylon"!  They know with complete certainty, just ask them.  Oddly, I'm wondering if you even realise that your interpretation has been out of fashion for some time now as for the very reasons that I stated earlier.  In a world that is obsessed by the Babylon in our midst, one of money, global economies, greed, pornography, social injustice, drugs, corruption, filth on television, computers, a poisonous secular society, that somehow, you would still archaically site the one institution in many of these countries that is at the forefront of spreading Christ gospel and faith in Him, and of fighting these things, as the "wh*re of Babylon", is odd.  Don't you feel just a wee bit dated?  

Quote from: McL
God wants his bride to know the church and why it is called the Great Harlot of Babylon.  Rev 18 is a clear call for his bride to recognize her and come out of her. Those who fail to recognize this church and the call to come out will be judged along with her and the government of this world.  I have said many times the word of god will be our indictment for life or death.  Yes death is serious and who wants that.

"Apostles existed only in the first century, since one of the requirements for being an apostle was seeing the risen Christ (1 Cor. 9:1). Prophets existed as a group only in the Old Testament and in the first century (Acts 11:27–28, 13:1, 15:32, 21:10).

Since the wh*re persecuted apostles and prophets, the wh*re must have existed in the first century. This totally demolishes the claim that Christian Rome or Vatican City is the wh*re. Rome was not a Christian city at that time, and Vatican City did not even exist, so neither of them could be the wh*re. Furthermore, Fundamentalists continually, (though wrongly, and as the Church did exist, it certainly wasn't doing the persecuting of Apostles, the Romans and Jews were.), claim that Catholicism itself did not exist in the first century, meaning that based on their very own argument Catholicism could not be the wh*re!

Fundamentalists are fond of conjecturing that in the last days there will be a "revived Roman empire," such as the one that persecuted Christians in the first century. Yet they never draw the inference that this empire would be headed by a revived pagan Rome, with the bishop of Rome leading the Christian underground, just as he did in the first century. (And the increasing globalisation and secularisation of the planet seems to be heading that way.)

Still, Revelation 18:20 and 18:24 prove that the wh*re had to be a creature of the first century, which, in the Fundamentalist view, the Catholic Church was not. Thus, on their own view, their identification of the Catholic Church with the wh*re is completely impossible! Only ancient, pagan Rome or apostate Jerusalem could possibly be the wh*re."  




First nothing was mentioned about any denial of Christ. The deception here is your use of the word catholic. If your use of the word only to speak of the RCC I am not speaking of any institution. believers are believers. the good and the bad, or if you will the tares and the wheat exists through out this thing we call Christianity. And yes they can be mislead by teachers and leadership.  
Reffering to things like early pagan Rome and apostate Jerusalem do not fly
First the Jews who did not except Christ and did not enter in any faith realationship with Him so they cannot be unfaithful. Same thing goes for Pagan Rome. The bride of Christ enters a betrothal with Him. You cannot be unfaithful ( be a whore )to a realationship unless first  you enter into it. Can a lady  cheat on a man she has never excepted a ring from?
 You really need to read what i said . the new testiment only addresses the church of Christ and does not speak to any other entity or religion. Rev 17 is speaking about a christian church only Read it think about all the new testament and ask who is it speaking to.  I want to know where you get the idea that it speaks of pagan Rome or even the Jews. As i said they cannot be a whore in this topic.  

Next thing you say to  side stepis  that John was given a prophetic revelation and was not speaking of his present time. he was describing a church that only fits the RCC 400 hundred years before it was formed. Christ church was of no political  power and world influence during time Revelation was written.


As far as the rest of your side stepping I heard it all before. some of which are quite ridicules.  The papacy was the ruling religious government of the whole empire from 500AD to even beyond the Reformation. So they were very much into the world trade markets of that time. I would I know they are still much into the entiprize of the world today.

Christ church does not envolve the worlds business as a governing power.  It is not a global trade market or political influence. all this is Babylon with all its corruptions. It is about salvation of the soul  on a personal level only. Loving your neighbor is not being into goverment but it may apeal to government. for its needs

I know this must fly over your head because you just don't seem to get it.  

Oh yes, the persecuting and killng of the saints being the apostles is far out. that really lame  

God bless













Offline desertknight

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Manna: 30
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #3 on: Mon Nov 16, 2009 - 09:37:19 »
Quote from: McL
First the Jews who did not except Christ and did not enter in any faith realationship with Him so they cannot be unfaithful. Same thing goes for Pagan Rome. The bride of Christ enters a betrothal with Him. You cannot be unfaithful ( be a wh*re )to a realationship unless first  you enter into it. Can a lady  cheat on a man she has never excepted a ring from?
 You really need to read what i said . the new testiment only addresses the church of Christ and does not speak to any other entity or religion. Rev 17 is speaking about a christian church only Read it think about all the new testament and ask who is it speaking to.  I want to know where you get the idea that it speaks of pagan Rome or even the Jews. As i said they cannot be a wh*re in this topic.  

The problem with your critisim, McLees, is that the interpretation I gave is common and universally accepted regarding Revelation.  It is pretty obvious...

Revelation 17:5 and on her forehead was written a name of mystery: "Babylon the great, mother of harlots and of earth's abominations." 6 And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her I marveled greatly.

Revelation 18:21 Then a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea, saying, "So shall Babylon the great city be thrown down with violence, and shall be found no more... 24 And in her was found the blood of prophets and of saints, and of ALL who have been slain on earth."

Revelation 19:2 for his judgments are true and just; he has judged the great harlot who corrupted the earth with her fornication, and he has avenged on her the blood of his servants."


Matthew 23:34 Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, 35 that upon you may come ALL the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechari'ah the son of Barachi'ah [A to Z], whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. 36 Truly, I say to you, all this will come upon this generation. 37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! 38 Behold, your house is forsaken and desolate. 39 For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.'" (see also Luke 11:49-51)  

Where do I get it?  Same place most biblical scholars do.

Reve 16:19 And the great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell. And Babylon the great was remembered before God, to give her the cup of the wine of His fierce wrath.. 17:4 And the woman was clothed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a gold cup full of abominations and of the unclean things of her immorality... 16 And the ten horns which you saw, and the beast, these will hate the harlot and will make her desolate and naked, and will eat her flesh and will burn her up with fire.  

Jere 4:27 For thus says the Lord, "The whole land shall be a desolation, Yet I will not execute a complete destruction. 28 "For this the earth shall mourn, And the heavens above be dark, Because I have spoken, I have purposed, And I will not change My mind, nor will I turn from it." 29 At the sound of the horseman and bowman every city flees; They go into the thickets and climb among the rocks; Every city is forsaken, And no man dwells in them. 30 And you, O desolate one, what will you do? Although you dress in scarlet, Although you decorate [yourself with] ornaments of gold, Although you enlarge your eyes with paint, In vain you make yourself beautiful; [Your] lovers despise you; They seek your life. 31 For I heard a cry as of a woman in labor, The anguish as of one giving birth to her first child, The cry of the daughter of Zion gasping for breath, Stretching out her hands, [saying,] "Ah, woe is me, for I faint before murderers."  

Sound familiar?

Reve 16:19 And the great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell. And Babylon the great was remembered before God, to give her the cup of the wine of His fierce wrath.

Isai 51:17 Rouse yourself! Rouse yourself! Arise, O Jerusalem, You who have drunk from the Lord's hand the cup of His anger; The chalice of reeling you have drained to the dregs.

Luke 21:23 "Woe to those who are with child and to those who nurse babes in those days; for there will be great distress upon the land, and wrath to this people, 24 and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.  


Or this?

Rev. 17:2 The kings of the earth have had intercourse with her, and the inhabitants of the earth became drunk on the wine of her harlotry."

Rev. 17:6 On her forehead was written a name, which is a mystery, "Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and of the abominations of the earth."


Isaiah 1:1 The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem... 21. How the faithful city has become a harlot, she that was full of justice! Righteousness lodged in her, but now murderers. Ezekiel 16:2 "Son of man, make known to Jerusalem her abominations..."

Jeremiah 2:2 "Go and proclaim in the hearing of Jerusalem, Thus says the LORD, I remember the devotion of your youth, your love as a bride, how you followed me in the wilderness, in a land not sown... 20. "For long ago you broke your yoke and burst your bonds; and you said, 'I will not serve.' Yea, upon every high hill and under every green tree you bowed down as a harlot.


I'm actually amazed that you simply dismiss such obvious and commonly accepted biblical exegesis.


Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Bablylon
« Reply #3 on: Mon Nov 16, 2009 - 09:37:19 »

Offline mclees8

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5203
  • Manna: 135
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #4 on: Mon Nov 16, 2009 - 13:04:36 »
Quote from: McL
First the Jews who did not except Christ and did not enter in any faith realationship with Him so they cannot be unfaithful. Same thing goes for Pagan Rome. The bride of Christ enters a betrothal with Him. You cannot be unfaithful ( be a wh*re )to a realationship unless first  you enter into it. Can a lady  cheat on a man she has never excepted a ring from?
 You really need to read what i said . the new testiment only addresses the church of Christ and does not speak to any other entity or religion. Rev 17 is speaking about a christian church only Read it think about all the new testament and ask who is it speaking to.  I want to know where you get the idea that it speaks of pagan Rome or even the Jews. As i said they cannot be a wh*re in this topic.  

The problem with your critisim, McLees, is that the interpretation I gave is common and universally accepted regarding Revelation.  It is pretty obvious...

Revelation 17:5 and on her forehead was written a name of mystery: "Babylon the great, mother of harlots and of earth's abominations." 6 And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her I marveled greatly.

Revelation 18:21 Then a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea, saying, "So shall Babylon the great city be thrown down with violence, and shall be found no more... 24 And in her was found the blood of prophets and of saints, and of ALL who have been slain on earth."

Revelation 19:2 for his judgments are true and just; he has judged the great harlot who corrupted the earth with her fornication, and he has avenged on her the blood of his servants."


Matthew 23:34 Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, 35 that upon you may come ALL the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechari'ah the son of Barachi'ah [A to Z], whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. 36 Truly, I say to you, all this will come upon this generation. 37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! 38 Behold, your house is forsaken and desolate. 39 For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.'" (see also Luke 11:49-51)  

Where do I get it?  Same place most biblical scholars do.

Reve 16:19 And the great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell. And Babylon the great was remembered before God, to give her the cup of the wine of His fierce wrath.. 17:4 And the woman was clothed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a gold cup full of abominations and of the unclean things of her immorality... 16 And the ten horns which you saw, and the beast, these will hate the harlot and will make her desolate and naked, and will eat her flesh and will burn her up with fire.  

Jere 4:27 For thus says the Lord, "The whole land shall be a desolation, Yet I will not execute a complete destruction. 28 "For this the earth shall mourn, And the heavens above be dark, Because I have spoken, I have purposed, And I will not change My mind, nor will I turn from it." 29 At the sound of the horseman and bowman every city flees; They go into the thickets and climb among the rocks; Every city is forsaken, And no man dwells in them. 30 And you, O desolate one, what will you do? Although you dress in scarlet, Although you decorate [yourself with] ornaments of gold, Although you enlarge your eyes with paint, In vain you make yourself beautiful; [Your] lovers despise you; They seek your life. 31 For I heard a cry as of a woman in labor, The anguish as of one giving birth to her first child, The cry of the daughter of Zion gasping for breath, Stretching out her hands, [saying,] "Ah, woe is me, for I faint before murderers."  

Sound familiar?

Reve 16:19 And the great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell. And Babylon the great was remembered before God, to give her the cup of the wine of His fierce wrath.

Isai 51:17 Rouse yourself! Rouse yourself! Arise, O Jerusalem, You who have drunk from the Lord's hand the cup of His anger; The chalice of reeling you have drained to the dregs.

Luke 21:23 "Woe to those who are with child and to those who nurse babes in those days; for there will be great distress upon the land, and wrath to this people, 24 and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.  


Or this?

Rev. 17:2 The kings of the earth have had intercourse with her, and the inhabitants of the earth became drunk on the wine of her harlotry."

Rev. 17:6 On her forehead was written a name, which is a mystery, "Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and of the abominations of the earth."


Isaiah 1:1 The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem... 21. How the faithful city has become a harlot, she that was full of justice! Righteousness lodged in her, but now murderers. Ezekiel 16:2 "Son of man, make known to Jerusalem her abominations..."

Jeremiah 2:2 "Go and proclaim in the hearing of Jerusalem, Thus says the LORD, I remember the devotion of your youth, your love as a bride, how you followed me in the wilderness, in a land not sown... 20. "For long ago you broke your yoke and burst your bonds; and you said, 'I will not serve.' Yea, upon every high hill and under every green tree you bowed down as a harlot.


I'm actually amazed that you simply dismiss such obvious and commonly accepted biblical exegesis.


I don't care about what you think is universally excepted. Your scholars that only want to see a one sided idea. You misuse and abuse the same old scripture over and over. They are a matter of convieniece

The one about here whom I have sent is so misused. Jesus sent his apostles and what they taught was also written. anyone who succeeds them must be of the same humility and Charater that Christ also displayed just i I know peter did. Paul said follow me only as i followed Christ. can bishops get lost in selfish ambitions and pride, Yes and that they did.   You take scripture as if really applies to papacy. they were only a pseudo auhtority wareing  a cloak of righteousness. playing on the ignorant. they use scripture but hey are out of character, justifying their unrighteousness. They jumpt in bed with the world and this is why she is called the great harlot.   

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Bablylon
« Reply #4 on: Mon Nov 16, 2009 - 13:04:36 »



Offline rezar

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2731
  • Manna: 77
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #5 on: Mon Nov 16, 2009 - 13:32:47 »
I apologize, desertknight, for such embittered brothers in Christ.
I am a Protestant, die-hard Preterist, & Christian Universalist.

Babylon in Revelation was 1st century Jerusalem. And you are correct about "the Bride." Only a holy people could have ever claimed to have the bridegroom also. Pagan Rome was the Beast, not the woman in ch.17. The harlot was Israel of the flesh in the 1st century.

The Pope came about 400 yrs. after the close of the Bible.


Peace brother 

Offline desertknight

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Manna: 30
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #6 on: Mon Nov 16, 2009 - 19:30:38 »
I apologize, desertknight, for such embittered brothers in Christ.
I am a Protestant, die-hard Preterist, & Christian Universalist.

Babylon in Revelation was 1st century Jerusalem. And you are correct about "the Bride." Only a holy people could have ever claimed to have the bridegroom also. Pagan Rome was the Beast, not the woman in ch.17. The harlot was Israel of the flesh in the 1st century.

The Pope came about 400 yrs. after the close of the Bible.


Peace brother  


Thanks, rezar.  Although I don't agree with your last sentence and it is a topic for another thread, I appreciate your information.  I wish I could have been as clear and less long-winded in my posts.  Yours was clear, concise and only took a few sentences.  ::smile::
« Last Edit: Mon Nov 16, 2009 - 19:37:51 by desertknight »

Offline rezar

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2731
  • Manna: 77
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #7 on: Mon Nov 16, 2009 - 20:56:51 »
I apologize, desertknight, for such embittered brothers in Christ.
I am a Protestant, die-hard Preterist, & Christian Universalist.

Babylon in Revelation was 1st century Jerusalem. And you are correct about "the Bride." Only a holy people could have ever claimed to have the bridegroom also. Pagan Rome was the Beast, not the woman in ch.17. The harlot was Israel of the flesh in the 1st century.

The Pope came about 400 yrs. after the close of the Bible.


Peace brother 


Thanks, rezar.  Although I don't agree with your last sentence and it is a topic for another thread, I appreciate your information.  I wish I could have been as clear and less long-winded in my posts.  Yours was clear, concise and only took a few sentences.  ::smile::

Oh i can see why on that one. Well you have happy holidays there. Don't let any one steal the little baby Jesus from the manger display now, lol, no really!
                                                                                                           
                                                       

Offline desertknight

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Manna: 30
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #8 on: Mon Nov 16, 2009 - 22:36:30 »
Quote from: rezar
Oh i can see why on that one. Well you have happy holidays there. Don't let any one steal the little baby Jesus from the manger display now, lol, no really!
                                                                                                           
                                                       

My dog did that one year.   Chewed on baby Jesus something terrible.  Very embarrassing.  You have a happy season as well!  ::tippinghat::

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #9 on: Thu Nov 19, 2009 - 07:02:25 »
Quote
Bunch of drivel is all I have seen here. Unless you subscribe to the King James version of the Bible, or one of the various takeoffs from the King James, Babylon cannot be Jerusalem, Rome, or the Catholic Church. Why ? Because except for the King James and those one man efforts which emulate the King James, every Bible out there clearly states that the "Seven Heads are ALSO seven mountains AND seven Kings". You cannot equate the hills of Rome or Jerusalem to "KINGS" so try again. There is another interpretation which fits a lot better.

Your right, the seven mountains are seven kingdoms.  The seven kingdoms through which Satan has rebelled against the government of God in this world, which have been associated with God's people in this world, most often by way of persecuting the same. Rome is the harlot which rides two of these kingdoms by way of her whorish manipulation.  The beast that was, is not, and yet is, being the fifth and seventh beast of biblical prophecy.

The church of Rome is BABYLON THE GREAT, which rides both the fifth and seventh beast of biblical prophecy.  I say beast, and not beasts, because the fifth and seventh beast are the same.  It is Rome that manipulates both.  The fifth beast which received a deadly wound was the nations of Europe being ridden by Rome until 1798 when the pope was removed from his throne and exiled, and the papacy was thought to be at it's end.  The seventh beast is this entire world ridden by this revived and healed Rome, riding the backs of all the governments of this world. 

It is not the seven hills which Rome is on that identifies her as BABYLON THE GREAT, but rather the long trail of abusive history that she has left behind her.  This history identifies her as the same by fulfilling all the particulars of biblical prophecy in relationship to BABYLON THE GREAT.  Should you request it, I will gladly supply one post after another, after another, after another, with the historical evidence proving the same.

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #10 on: Fri Nov 20, 2009 - 06:25:32 »
Quote
Does the Catholic Church fit the following descriptions ?

As someone here pointed out it is the "Beast" who is an eighth that is one of the seven who in combination with the ten "Horns" will destroy the "Harlot" by fire.

Revelation 17 16-18 (Revised Standard Version)
“And the ten horns that you saw, they and the beast  will hate  the harlot; they  will make her desolate and naked, and devour her flesh and burn her up with fire, for God has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose

Offline desertknight

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Manna: 30
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #11 on: Fri Nov 20, 2009 - 13:47:07 »
Quote from: Amo
Not much time to address all the particulars of the above now, but enough to address the main flaw.  The second and final beast of biblical prophecy, which is manipulated by BABYLON THE GREAT, is a global entity.  It forces all upon the earth to worship the image it makes to the first beast of Revelation, while at the same time BABYLON THE GREAT commits fornication with all the kings of the earth.  The kingdom of this beast, and therefore BABYLON THE GREAT also, encompasses the entire world.  Therefore the judgment of the same is global in nature, and comes upon all that have worshiped the beast, and therefore entered into an illicit relationship with BABYLON THE GREAT also.

So how do you get from this very vague description to your certainty of the identity of the Catholic Church as 'Babylon'?  The Church may be 'universal', hence 'Catholic', but that is what we are called to be Biblically, "Make believers of all nations", but a "Global entity"?  One that "forces" all to worship the "beast"?  That certainly doesn't described my Church, it can't even get Catholics to stop using birth control and it certainly is no "global entity" anywhere, with any government.  Almost every single Catholic country on the planet is secular and a republic, most may have Catholic populations but their government's are hardly at the Church's service.  Most have governments that are positively hostile to basic Catholic teaching.  Is engaging in things like brokering peace between waring parties or advocating famine relief constitute, "fornicating with all the kings of the world"?  To call that a bit of a stretch is a vast understatement.  Remember, we are not talking about what my church may have engaged in, in the past, but what the identity is of this 'Babylon' of the end times.  I don't see as you're making much of a case for it being the Catholic Church.

Offline desertknight

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Manna: 30
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #12 on: Fri Nov 20, 2009 - 17:03:57 »
Well, desert knight we are onside re the Catholic Church. But looking at one of your previous posts, I got the impression you think it is Jerusalem. Please tell me I am wrong there, because that interpretation too, is "Twaddle". Holy smoke !! I just now realized that this whole thread is about : BABLYLON, (Babble-on?), not BABYLON; - I've been wasting my time.

I don't know specifically.  I said that I thought that both pagan Rome and Jerusalem are being alluded to in St. John's writing.  What I do know definitively about the 'end times' is this, when the end is near, the Gospel will have been preached to all nations, many Jews will be converted, and we will see the "signs of the times," an Antichrist, whom many will see as a man of peace and wonders. The elect (His Church, true Israel) will suffer a great Tribulation and many will be martyred. Then Jesus will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead in His final judgement of the world, the "Last Judgement." Our bodies will be glorified, and we will reign with Him, as heirs of our Father, forever and ever. It's not up to us to conjecture and speculate as to when this will happen, though we have eyes to see the signs of the times; it is ours to preach the Gospel and put on Christ.  That's all I really need to know as I fear not.  Why not let us in on the secret?   ::smile::

Pace


Offline mclees8

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5203
  • Manna: 135
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #13 on: Fri Nov 20, 2009 - 18:46:50 »
Well, desert knight we are onside re the Catholic Church. But looking at one of your previous posts, I got the impression you think it is Jerusalem. Please tell me I am wrong there, because that interpretation too, is "Twaddle". Holy smoke !! I just now realized that this whole thread is about : BABLYLON, (Babble-on?), not BABYLON; - I've been wasting my time.

I don't know specifically.  I said that I thought that both pagan Rome and Jerusalem are being alluded to in St. John's writing.  What I do know definitively about the 'end times' is this, when the end is near, the Gospel will have been preached to all nations, many Jews will be converted, and we will see the "signs of the times," an Antichrist, whom many will see as a man of peace and wonders. The elect (His Church, true Israel) will suffer a great Tribulation and many will be martyred. Then Jesus will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead in His final judgement of the world, the "Last Judgement." Our bodies will be glorified, and we will reign with Him, as heirs of our Father, forever and ever. It's not up to us to conjecture and speculate as to when this will happen, though we have eyes to see the signs of the times; it is ours to preach the Gospel and put on Christ.  That's all I really need to know as I fear not.  Why not let us in on the secret?   ::smile::

Pace


Well I sure don;t agree at all with with your Pagan Rome or Jerusalem theory but I certainly agree with the rest you have said. It will all come to light with time and Our Lords second coming.

Sorry for the type-O for Babylon. Babylon is not just a specific entity or a certain place but it represents all that is the world and all its ambitions are of it. It includes Governments Media , religions, including false Christianity, And the merchants center and  system.      
It is all that is self seeking. Those who seek power, prestige, and  wealth. Those follow after these ideals more than Christ. Jesus know his Bride and out of all this he will seperate them and the rest will be burned. This will not  have anything to do with what church one belongs to but every thing to do with who lves and looks to christ with a true and pure heart . All that is the world  which is Babylon, is  antichrist.

God bless


Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #14 on: Fri Nov 20, 2009 - 20:50:49 »
Quote
So how do you get from this very vague description to your certainty of the identity of the Catholic Church as 'Babylon'?  The Church may be 'universal', hence 'Catholic', but that is what we are called to be Biblically, "Make believers of all nations", but a "Global entity"?  One that "forces" all to worship the "beast"?  That certainly doesn't described my Church, it can't even get Catholics to stop using birth control and it certainly is no "global entity" anywhere, with any government.  Almost every single Catholic country on the planet is secular and a republic, most may have Catholic populations but their government's are hardly at the Church's service.  Most have governments that are positively hostile to basic Catholic teaching.  Is engaging in things like brokering peace between waring parties or advocating famine relief constitute, "fornicating with all the kings of the world"?  To call that a bit of a stretch is a vast understatement.  Remember, we are not talking about what my church may have engaged in, in the past, but what the identity is of this 'Babylon' of the end times.  I don't see as you're making much of a case for it being the Catholic Church.

For historical info proving the Church of Rome to be BABYLON THE GREAT, see my blogs BABYLON 1,2, &3.  It was to much info to put in a regular post.  For present info regarding the same, acknowledge the fact that Rome presently entertains diplomats from over 170 nations, and quite frankly has stuck her nose into the politics of virtually every nation on earth.  Those political environments that are presently hostile toward her, are ever being lured and enticed by her, to the detriment of the same. 

Meanwhile, in those political environments which are not hostile to her, she is actively involved in manipulating and controlling them to her own ends.  the United States being at the top of her list, being presently the most powerful.  Thus this nation has begun a downward spiral from which it will not recover.

Offline winsome

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5103
  • Manna: 91
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #15 on: Sat Nov 21, 2009 - 03:04:59 »
There is another interpretation which fits a lot better.

Hi JHM,

I would be interested to know your interpretation

thanks

Offline winsome

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5103
  • Manna: 91
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #16 on: Sat Nov 21, 2009 - 11:04:21 »
@ 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

Offline Fallen Knight

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 99
  • Manna: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #17 on: Mon Nov 23, 2009 - 22:39:20 »
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: Tue Nov 24, 2009 - 13:41:51 »
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.

Offline Fallen Knight

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 99
  • Manna: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #19 on: Tue Nov 24, 2009 - 14:17:05 »
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



Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #20 on: Tue Nov 24, 2009 - 17:53:51 »
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: Tue Nov 24, 2009 - 18:27:05 »
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: Tue Nov 24, 2009 - 19:57:24 »
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: Tue Nov 24, 2009 - 21:43:29 »
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: Tue Nov 24, 2009 - 22:01:56 »
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: Tue Nov 24, 2009 - 23:32:23 »
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: Tue Nov 24, 2009 - 23:37:51 »
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: Tue Nov 24, 2009 - 23:42:10 »
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: Wed Nov 25, 2009 - 00:35:36 »
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: Thu Nov 26, 2009 - 07:39:28 »
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. 




Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #30 on: Thu Nov 26, 2009 - 08:08:27 »
Quote
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.

I will have to look more into that claim.  Nevertheless, the inquisition was about forcing Catholicism upon non believers.  It had nothing to do with the gospel of Jesus Christ, which is about educated conversion, not mandated submission on pain of death for those who refuse.  It was Satanic, using intimidation, torture, and murder to force submission upon all.  Jesus came to serve and die for humanity, thereby revealing His love for the same, and the methodology to be employed by His followers.  Rome on the other hand chose to dominate, intimidate, torture, and murder humanity into compelled submission to her will.  There is no rocket science in seeing the different methodology between Christ and His Church, and Satan and his church.

Offline desertknight

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Manna: 30
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #31 on: Fri Nov 27, 2009 - 09:33:22 »
Quote
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.


I will have to look more into that claim.  Nevertheless, the inquisition was about forcing Catholicism upon non believers.  It had nothing to do with the gospel of Jesus Christ, which is about educated conversion, not mandated submission on pain of death for those who refuse.  It was Satanic, using intimidation, torture, and murder to force submission upon all.  Jesus came to serve and die for humanity, thereby revealing His love for the same, and the methodology to be employed by His followers.  Rome on the other hand chose to dominate, intimidate, torture, and murder humanity into compelled submission to her will.  There is no rocket science in seeing the different methodology between Christ and His Church, and Satan and his church.


Not only was it not about that, it was pretty much the opposite of that.  The Inquisition...

"Because of its objective — combating heresy — the Inquisition had jurisdiction only over baptised members of the (Catholic) Church (which, however, encompassed the vast majority of the population in Catholic countries). Secular, (non-Catholic Church), courts could still try non-Christians for blasphemy. (Most witch trials went through secular courts.)"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition

By the way, the "Spanish Inquisition" was neither conducted nor controlled by the Catholic Church.  It was an agency of the Spanish Royal government and was directly under the authority of the king.  Secular priests and orders participated in the investigations of heresy, but the Inquisition itself was entirely secular and part of the government.

"There were so few Protestants in Spain that widespread persecution of Protestantism was not physically possible. In the 1560s, a little over one hundred people in Spain were convicted of Protestantism and were turned over to the secular authorities for execution. From 1560 to 1599, two hundred more people were accused of being followers of Martin Luther. “Most of them were in no sense Protestants...Irreligious sentiments, drunken mockery, anticlerical expressions, were all captiously classified by the inquisitors (or by those who denounced the cases) as ‘Lutheran’

Offline desertknight

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Manna: 30
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #32 on: Fri Nov 27, 2009 - 20:33:15 »
Do not rely on wicked-pedia. They are the nitwits that claim FDR said of Somoza "He's a bastard; but he is our bastard. Actually it was harry Truman who said that. They also have a very warped and one sided view of the book "The Bible Code". If you are going to cite encyclopedias, please make it a reputable one, - like Encyclopedia Britannica.

Actually, the quote about Somoza is apocryphal.  It has been attributed to Dullas and Stimson as well.  

As far as Wiki goes, it is as good as it's contributors which is why those that say, "Never trust Wiki" obviously don't know how Wiki works.  Yes, you can run across bad info on Wiki when someone comes along and edits and article and you hit on it before anyone has reviewed it, but what I quoted is not from Wiki, it is from the respected historians and their works posted on Wiki that are cited and footnoted.  

I would use Britannica, but posters here have assured me that this secular respected encyclopaedia from a protestant country is in fact, part of the vast Catholic right-wing conspiracy.   ::smile::

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #33 on: Fri Nov 27, 2009 - 21:48:11 »
Quote
"Because of its objective — combating heresy — the Inquisition had jurisdiction only over baptised members of the (Catholic) Church (which, however, encompassed the vast majority of the population in Catholic countries). Secular, (non-Catholic Church), courts could still try non-Christians for blasphemy. (Most witch trials went through secular courts.)"

That is funny, you said this in an earlier post desertknight -

Quote
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.

I didn't know Muslims and Jews were baptized members of the Catholic Church.

Quote
By the way, the "Spanish Inquisition" was neither conducted nor controlled by the Catholic Church.  It was an agency of the Spanish Royal government and was directly under the authority of the king.  Secular priests and orders participated in the investigations of heresy, but the Inquisition itself was entirely secular and part of the government.

The king and queen of Spain were Roman Catholic.  The inquisition was invented by the Church of Rome, not the king and queen of Spain.




Offline desertknight

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 887
  • Manna: 30
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Bablylon
« Reply #34 on: Fri Nov 27, 2009 - 23:40:29 »
That is funny, you said this in an earlier post desertknight -

Quote
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.

I didn't know Muslims and Jews were baptized members of the Catholic Church.

Nope, not me.  You must have me confused with another poster.  I never said that.

Quote from: Amo
The king and queen of Spain were Roman Catholic.  The inquisition was invented by the Church of Rome, not the king and queen of Spain.

The Inquisition was, the Spanish Inquisition was not.  It's like saying that when Muslims argue that our invasion of Iraq was a "crusade".  Just because someone uses the same terminology does not make it the same thing, if it did, then we can assume they are right and George Bush, being a member, launched the Methodist Crusade into Muslim lands.   I don't think so.  That it was an inquisition carried out by a Catholic monarch and civil government with the Church's acquiescence is true, that it was the Church's, has clearly been proven not to be the case.  In any case it does not negate the collapsing of all the balderdash about "millions killed by the Catholic Church" nonsense.
« Last Edit: Sat Nov 28, 2009 - 00:05:39 by desertknight »

 

     
anything