Mecca is the Harlot, Not Rome

[yeshuasavedme]

So I'm supposed to take you over Paul?

Your posts are off topic, and do not make sense.

​

 

[Interplanner]

what doesn't make sense to me is to go direct from OT lines to modern news without the interp of the apostles.

that is futurism in a nutshell: to bypass the apostle's handling of the 2500 passages. I have been saying this for 9 months. D'ism, futurism and Judaism have a lot in common on this.

Be sure to say "...doesn't make sense to me in your posts" Otherwise you prop yourself up as sense.

In this case, I'm reporting that Paul had a reason for not going beyond the prophets in Acts 26, which meant beyond what Christ had interpreted of them. Luke is basically recording Paul's thoughts, and Luke says more about the DofJ and the things leading up to them than the others. Luke 24 and Acts 26 have a deep harmony about the OT, explained in sermon form in Acts 13.

If your question is what does this have to do with signs of the times, my reply is whose times? I've read a lot of Shobat; like many others, I think they only weaken their case by trying to guess the future. There are plenty of reasons to undercut Islam without trying to get at them from the future.

I left you a few questions anyway from Acts 8 (Stephen). I'm always surprised all the ways people find to bypass the apostles; this is another one, to find OT texts with which to roast Isalm instead of see what the apostles had to say.

The main feature of Bible study here is people trying to come up with their own direct system, rather than finding how the NT already has the Bible organized. They think they are supposed to be doing the direct work, not carrying the water of the apostles, which sound totally different.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

The Book of Revelation did not just "pop up" as the "revelation of Jesus Christ" without a foundation having already been laid, but unfortunately, that foundation was discarded by Rome in the 4th century -and Revelation almost was discarded- and our western Protestant Churches are satellites around the Roman Catholic Church, and so the foundation is lost to the west; but people try to interpret Revelation without the foundation it is laid upon.

The fascinating thing about the "last things" is that Enoch wrote about them before the flood, being the first eschatology writer by direct revelation from God; and that writing is the foundation upon which the doctrine of "last things" -as revealed in Moses and the prophets and by Jesus Christ, in His Gospel- is built upon.

 

[Douggg]

what doesn't make sense to me is to go direct from OT lines to modern news without the interp of the apostles.

that is futurism in a nutshell: to bypass the apostle's handling of the 2500 passages.

There's the problem, Inter. You have a misconception of what futurism is and is not intended to be. Futurism is not and never was intended to be a complete commentary on every verse of the bible. Futurism pertains to those portions of the bible that deal with the end times events surrounding Jesus's Return.

Futurism is not intended to address the old testament prophecies that were fulfilled with Jesus's first coming, such as him being the suffering servant in Isaiah 53. Much of the new testament is the testimony of the disciples to the nations regarding the spreading of the gospel. So pursuant to that great commission that's what they did. Now that the gospel has been spread to all the nations, we enter the end times, when the end times prophecies will be fulfilled regarding Jesus's Second Coming. Futurism focuses on those events.


Doug

 

[Interplanner]

but futurism 'sees' the future where their (the apostles) future (our past) is being talked about. When the (apostles) finally do talk about the future, there is none of the Judaica, none of the exactitude, none of the details that futurism thinks is our future.

This is why the most qualified NT backgrounds scholars I know would say things like "It is not a matter of figuring out what is distant future in Jesus' sayings. It is more a matter of figuring out what is about immediate situations vs. about the end of that generation 'that would see all these things' having to do with the DofJ.' This especially true of Luke, which is actually Paul's teaching. The things that relate to the DofJ are sprinkled through several chapters. They often tie into the missions of the 12 or 70.

The Thess rumor is answered by things expected to happen shortly. I don't know what exactly started the rumor, but it shows the atmosphere of a very soon return (as does the expression 'marana tha' and no expectation of a distant future return. So the details given have to do with the calamity in Jerusalem, just like Mt 24 & //s, which then expect a return 'immediately after.'

Passages that futurists "just know" are distant future, like Hos 2 ('fall on us'), are therefore said to be about the same disaster: Jesus quoted in Lk 23:28 to the women and their children right in front of him. None of the distant future leap and all its disjointed confusion.

That means that we would be relying on our own for future conclusions, which I'm not prepared to accept. Besides the flip flopping about various passages, I don't accept the completely different moral stance. The fact of the day of God's wrath and the brute necessity of it, are all that is needed to convey the Christian gospel, which is everlasting. We don't need to know if the 4th beast is pale green or gray, or how many horns are on the head of the beast that looks like 4 animals at once or something. I mean, surely you realize that half of the issue between pre and post trib is a confusion, a disintegration of the shear fact of God's wrath confused with some particular events.

It just doesn't make sense to have a sort of separate judgement of mankind take place with a representative 1% living on earth at a certain future time, when all of them will have to face the same judgement. It might be in the case of Israel and the DofJ. But this is done by futurists and so pre and post are unresolved, or one is accusing the other of holier than thouness. This is not the moral position of the apostles, and I will never accept it as historic NT teaching.

Paul did say there we weren't appointed to wrath, which we know from the Gospel, but that does not mean that 'wrath' is a future tribulation, for the same reason (all the people who would miss it who must still face judgement--the vast majority). He wasn't saying anything about either position, just that the business with Israel and the revealing of its worst character would take place and be over with.

btw, I don't think the current world is close to being reached as was the ancient world in the sense Paul used in Col 1 and 1 Tim 2. That would mean the "end" you speak of is inestimably far off, reducing the need for futurism all over again.

 

[Douggg]

but futurism 'sees' the future where their futre (our past) is being talked about.

Futurism is concerned about the end times when Jesus Returns, which was in their future, but not our past, as those events are still unfulfilled.

When they finally do talk about the future, there is none of the Judaica, none of the exactitude, none of the details that futurism thinks is our future.

That means that we would be relying on our own for future conclusions, which I'm not prepared to accept. Besides the flip flopping about various passages, I don't accept the completely different moral stance. The fact of the day of God's wrath and the brute necessity of it, are all that is needed to convey the Christian gospel, which is everlasting. We don't need to know if the 4th beast is pale green or gray, or how many horns are on the head of the beast that looks like 4 animals at once or something. I mean, surely you realize that half of the issue between pre and post trib is a confusion, a disintegration of the shear fact of God's wrath confused with some particular events.

Why go to the extent you do of depriving Jesus the glory that God will bestow upon him at His Second Coming to the body of the church? Where is the morality in that?

Get a bible that doesn't have man as the center. God is the center. The gospel saves man, but there is a larger picture.

It just doesn't make sense to have a sort of separate judgement of mankind take place with a representative 1% living on earth at a certain future time, when all of them will have to face the same judgement. It might be in the case of Israel and the DofJ. But this is done by futurists and so pre and post are unresolved, or one is accusing the other of holier than thouness. This is not the moral position of the apostles, and I will never accept it as historic NT teaching.

What? None of the apostles denied futurism. Revelation is the glorious revealing of Jesus to the world as Lord of Lords and King of kings which will put to an end all of the tyranny, suffering, and rebellion against God since the beginning of time.

Revelation 10:7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

btw, I don't think the current world is close to being reached as was the ancient world in the sense Paul used in Col 1 and 1 Tim 2. That would mean the "end" you speak of is inestimably far off, reducing the need for futurism all over again.

We are right at the door. As soon as the ten king ruling body forms in the EU that will be when the Antichrist will shorty appear as the little horn. It hasn't happen yet. So when "if" it does - will you be willing to convert?

Doug

 

[Bible2]

Interplanner said in post 25:

It is more a matter of figuring out what is about immediate situations vs. about the end of that generation 'that would see all these things' having to do with the DofJ.'

Note that Matthew 24 wasn't spoken immediately before even 70 AD, but some four decades before it. Also, Matthew 24:34 refers to the fulfillment of "all these things", all the events of the tribulation and Jesus' second coming and gathering together (rapture) of the church "immediately after" the tribulation (Matthew 24:29-31; cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, Revelation 19:2 to 20:6), which events Jesus had just finished describing in Matthew 24:2-31, and which he would later show in great detail in Revelation chapters 6 to 19. Matthew 24:34 didn't mean that the tribulation, second coming, and rapture would be fulfilled during the temporal generation alive at the time of Jesus' first coming, for none of those things was fulfilled during that temporal generation.

Instead, Matthew 24:34 could mean that the temporal generation which would see the 1948 AD reestablishment of Israel, which could be symbolized by the rebudding of the fig tree (Matthew 24:32-34, Hoses 9:10, Joel 1:6-7, Luke 13:6-9, Matthew 21:19,43), won't pass, that is, won't die off completely, until the future tribulation and second coming of Matthew 24 and Revelation chapters 6 to 19 are fulfilled. A temporal generation may not pass until seventy or eighty years (Psalms 90:10), or 120 years (Genesis 6:3).

This doesn't require that the second coming will occur right before, like one year, before that generation will pass: that is, 69, or 79, or 119 years after 1948: in 2017, 2027, or 2067. And if the tribulation which will immediately precede the second coming and rapture (Matthew 24:29-31; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8, Revelation 19:7 to 20:6) will last seven years (Daniel 9:27), the tribulation's first year didn't have to be in 2011, and won't have to be in 2021, or 2061, but could be in a future year (e.g. 2020) earlier than 2021.

Matthew 24:34 could also include the meaning that the figurative, all-times generation of the elect (Matthew 24:22, Luke 16:8b, Colossians 3:12; 1 Thessalonians 1:4) won't pass away from the earth during the future tribulation of Matthew 24 and Revelation chapters 6 to 18, but that some of the elect will survive (Matthew 24:22) until Jesus' second coming (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17; 1 Corinthians 15:21-23,51-53) "immediately after" the tribulation of Matthew 24 and Revelation chapters 6 to 18 (Matthew 24:29-31; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8, Revelation 19:7 to 20:6).

The rebudding of the fig tree (Matthew 24:32) can refer to the 1948 reestablishment of Israel, just as Jesus' cursing of the fig tree (Matthew 21:19) was symbolic of his curse on unbelieving, Old Covenant Israel (Matthew 21:43). The Israel that was reestablished in 1948 is the same Old Covenant Israel that Jesus cursed at his first coming, for it still rejects Jesus and still considers itself to be under the Old Covenant. This Israel merely "putting forth leaves" again (Matthew 24:32) in 1948 was nothing more than a restoration to what the fig tree in Matthew 21:19,43 had been before it was cursed forever by Jesus and then destroyed in 70 AD: a tree with leaves, but without any fruit. And the unbelieving, Old Covenant Israel that was reestablished in 1948 may never bear fruit, for it could be destroyed before Jesus' second coming, during a future war, by a Baathist army, just as it had been destroyed in 70 AD by a Roman army.

 

[Bible2]

Douggg said in post 26:

As soon as the ten king ruling body forms in the EU that will be when the Antichrist will shorty appear as the little horn.

The ten kings of the Antichrist's empire could include future kings of nations other than current EU nations. For in Daniel 7, the first three beasts (Daniel 7:3-6) represent the ancient empires of Babylon (lion), Medo-Persia (bear), and Greece (leopard). And the fourth beast, or fourth "king"/"kingdom" (Daniel 7:17,23), represents the ancient Roman Empire. And the ten horns/kings which come out of it (Daniel 7:7,24) could represent ten major kingdoms/nations today which came out the former territory of the Roman Empire, which consisted not only of Western Europe, but also the Middle East and North Africa. These ten nations could be Germany, the U.K., France, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Algeria, and Syria. The ten part-iron/part-clay toes of Daniel 2:42 could represent the same thing as the ten horns of Daniel 7:7. The Europeans could be the iron, and the Arabs and Turks could be the clay. In Daniel 2:43, the inability of the iron to mix with the clay could represent how, for example, there are many Turks living in Germany, but they remain separated in ghettoes within German cities. Similarly, there are many Algerians living in France, but they remain separated in ghettoes within French cities.

But despite this social separation, which could endure indefinitely, the people of Western Europe on the one hand, and the people of the Middle East and North Africa on the other, could still one day put aside their political separation and become united into one confederation. For Daniel 2:42 refers to the ten as a singular "kingdom". The person who brings this about could be the Antichrist. The arising of the "little" horn (Daniel 7:8, Daniel 8:9), which is "diverse" from the ten major nations (Daniel 7:24), could mean that the Antichrist will arise from a little country. And the little horn arising from "among" the ten major nations (Daniel 7:8) could mean that the Antichrist's country's territory used to be part of the Roman Empire. And before that, it was part of one of the four Diadochian Greek kingdoms which succeeded the Greek Empire of Alexander the Great (Daniel 8:8-9,21-25). The territory of these four kingdoms stretched from Greece over to Iran, and down into Egypt. So the Antichrist could come from the Middle East. He could be an Arab who will come from the little country of Lebanon, from the modern city of Tyre (Ezekiel 28:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:4).

The Antichrist could start out by claiming to be a Baathist. After becoming the leader of Lebanon, he could peacefully gain control of a Baathist confederation of three of the ten major nations (Daniel 7:24): Egypt, "toward the south" of Lebanon (Daniel 8:9), and Iraq and Syria, "toward the east" of Lebanon (Daniel 8:9). This confederation could also include the minor nation of a United Palestine, that is, a defeated Israel, "the pleasant land" (Daniel 8:9). This Baathist confederation could be put together in the future by an Iraqi Baathist General who could completely defeat and occupy Israel and Egypt (Daniel 11:15-17; in verse 17 the original Hebrew word translated as "daughter" is "bath"), but who could then mysteriously disappear (Daniel 11:19) shortly before the Antichrist arises on the world stage (Daniel 11:21-45). Years later, when the Antichrist gains control over all ten of the major nations, he could appoint kings over them (Revelation 17:12) who will defer to him (Revelation 17:13), like, for example, when Napoleon gained control over different nations, he appointed kings over them who would defer to him.

 

[Douggg]

The ten kings of the Antichrist's empire could include future kings of nations other than current EU nations. For in Daniel 7, the first three beasts (Daniel 7:3-6) represent the ancient empires of Babylon (lion), Medo-Persia (bear), and Greece (leopard). And the fourth beast, or fourth "king"/"kingdom" (Daniel 7:17,23), represents the ancient Roman Empire. And the ten horns/kings which come out of it (Daniel 7:7,24) could represent ten major kingdoms/nations today which came out the former territory of the Roman Empire, which consisted not only of Western Europe, but also the Middle East and North Africa. These ten nations could be Germany, the U.K., France, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Algeria, and Syria.

I think we went over this before. The muslim countries have a different agenda than Europe. There is no cultural common ground. The Europeans are advanced societies. They have a different currency than do Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Algeria, Syria.

The latter time of the EU is going to be formed.

The ten part-iron/part-clay toes of Daniel 2:42 could represent the same thing as the ten horns of Daniel 7:7. The Europeans could be the iron, and the Arabs and Turks could be the clay. In Daniel 2:43, the inability of the iron to mix with the clay could represent how, for example, there are many Turks living in Germany, but they remain separated in ghettoes within German cities. Similarly, there are many Algerians living in France, but they remain separated in ghettoes within French cities.

The Turks have been trying to join the EU for years. Do you know why they are not going to let Turkey in? It is because they don't want to be flooded with Muslims. The culture of Europe is ingrained with Roman Catholism and Protestantism - they don't want muslims.

But despite this social separation, which could endure indefinitely, the people of Western Europe on the one hand, and the people of the Middle East and North Africa on the other, could still one day put aside their political separation and become united into one confederation.

There is no reason. The middle east and north Africa are the Gog/Magog countries which are bent on destroying Israel. Europe does not have that mindset.

For Daniel 2:42 refers to the ten as a singular "kingdom". The person who brings this about could be the Antichrist. The arising of the "little" horn (Daniel 7:8, Daniel 8:9), which is "diverse" from the ten major nations (Daniel 7:24), could mean that the Antichrist will arise from a little country.

The little horn could mean that he is from a small country. "diverse" though is not talking about a diverse nation, but the little horn person. imo, it may be possible that the little horn have a banking background.

And the little horn arising from "among" the ten major nations (Daniel 7:8) could mean that the Antichrist's country's territory used to be part of the Roman Empire.

Well, it will be within that general European vicinity.

And before that, it was part of one of the four Diadochian Greek kingdoms which succeeded the Greek Empire of Alexander the Great (Daniel 8:8-9,21-25). The territory of these four kingdoms stretched from Greece over to Iran, and down into Egypt. So the Antichrist could come from the Middle East. He could be an Arab who will come from the little country of Lebanon, from the modern city of Tyre (Ezekiel 28:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:4).

The Antichrist has to be Jew who will have the credentials to lead the Europeans, and that they will accept him as someone who lead them out of their financial mess. Arabs are not viewed in that manner. For example, was Adolph Hitler an Arab?

Doug

 

[astein]

Mecca is the Harlot, Not Rome

The harlot is of the devil. It boils down to, wicked vs good.

 

[Bible2]

Douggg said in post 29:

The middle east and north Africa are the Gog/Magog countries which are bent on destroying Israel.

The Gog/Magog attack on Israel (Ezekiel chapters 38-39) won't occur until after the future millennium (Revelation 20:7-10), when there will be no defensive walls or fear of attack in Israel whatsoever (Ezekiel 38:11). This is the exact opposite of today's situation, when Israel is filled with very high defensive walls, and is in constant fear of attack. At the beginning of the millennium, all present-day weapons of war will be destroyed, and they won't be allowed to be remade during the millennium (Micah 4:3-4). That's why after the millennium, the Gog/Magog armies will employ only rudimentary, wooden weapons like bows and arrows, spears, shields, and clubs (Ezekiel 39:9), which, after the defeat of the Gog/Magog armies, will be able to be used as convenient firewood by the people living in Israel at that time, instead of them having to go out and collect or cut down firewood from the forest (Ezekiel 39:10).

The Gog in Revelation 20:8 is the same as in Ezekiel chapters 38-39: an individual human leader whose personal name is "Gog" (Ezekiel 38:3). He could be born near the end of the millennium, and he will be killed and buried at the end of the Gog/Magog attack (Ezekiel 39:11). The Gog/Magog armies are defeated by fire from heaven in both accounts of the attack (Ezekiel 38:22, Revelation 20:9). While the great white throne judgment (Revelation 20:11-15) will occur subsequent to the defeat of the Gog/Magog attack (Revelation 20:7-15), nothing requires (as is sometimes claimed) that the great white throne judgment has to happen immediately after the defeat of the attack. For there will be at least 7 years (Ezekiel 39:9b) between the defeat of the Gog/Magog attack and the great white throne judgment.

Also, the Gog/Magog attack won't have to (as is sometimes claimed) involve only the nations listed in Ezekiel chapters 38-39. Those nations could be just a sampling. For the "nations" (ethnos), or peoples, who will be involved in the Gog/Magog attack will come from all over the earth (Revelation 20:8). They will still be physically part of Jesus' worldwide kingdom, still legally under his rule, just as they had been during the preceding millennium (Psalms 72:8-11, Psalms 66:3, Psalms 2). But after the millennium, they will be deceived by Satan into committing the attack (Revelation 20:7-10).

Also, while the Gog/Magog attack on Israel won't occur until after the future millennium (Revelation 20:7-10, Ezekiel chapters 38-39), Israel could suffer a different attack at the start of the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24, which attack could result in Israel's total defeat and occupation (Daniel 11:15-17).

And Jerusalem could be attacked in the future at least 3 times before the millennium: once near the start of the future tribulation (Daniel 11:22), then again mid-tribulation (Daniel 11:31), and then at the tribulation's end (Daniel 11:45), right before Jesus' 2nd coming and the start of the millennium (Zechariah 14:2-21).

Douggg said in post 29:

The Antichrist has to be Jew who will have the credentials to lead the Europeans, and that they will accept him as someone who lead them out of their financial mess.

Note that nothing requires that the Antichrist has to be a Jew. The Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of the beast), during his future, literal 3.5-year worldwide reign (Revelation 13:5-18), won't support Judaism in its past and current form, insofar as Judaism worships YHWH (Deuteronomy 6:4-5), whereas the Antichrist will utterly revile YHWH (Daniel 11:36, Revelation 13:5). And Judaism rejects Lucifer/Satan as being evil (Zechariah 3:2, Isaiah 14:12), whereas the Antichrist will bring the world into the worship of Lucifer/Satan (the dragon) (Revelation 13:4, Revelation 12:9). And Judaism forbids the worship of any images (Leviticus 26:1), whereas the Antichrist will have an image made of himself to be worshipped (Revelation 13:15).

Regarding the idea of the Antichrist being Jewish by blood, both his parents could be Arabs (if his mother wasn't impregnated by Satan). But from some long-ago ancestor, the Antichrist could also have some Jewish blood in him, from the tribe of Dan (Genesis 49:17), which could be the reason that the tribe of Dan isn't included in the 12 tribes of the 144,000 (Revelation 7:4-8; there, "Joseph" stands for Ephraim: Numbers 1:32, Psalms 78:67, Ezekiel 37:16b,19).

The Antichrist could have grown up as a Druze Arab, in Lebanon, in the modern city of Tyre (Ezekiel 28:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:4). So he could at first present himself to the world as being of the (quasi-Islamic) Druze religion, which is waiting for the second coming of a God-man named "Hakim". The Antichrist's last name could be "Hakim", and he could at first present himself to the Druze people as the fulfillment of the second coming of this God-man. In this way, he could get the Druze to support him without question during an initial rise to power among the Arabs. The Druze Arabs could be the numerically "small people" of Daniel 11:23. The Antichrist could make them his completely-devoted bodyguard, and buy them many key positions of power within a future United Arab States (which the Antichrist could become the leader of in the first stage of his world takeover) and employ them as loyal spies at all levels of his United Arab government and military.

The Druze religion is very secretive. What it teaches to its higher-level initiates isn't even taught to its lower-level initiates. What it could teach to its higher-level initiates could basically be Gnosticism mixed in with the Hakim God-man idea. The Antichrist himself, while outwardly a Druze, could inwardly be a Gnostic Luciferian. He could be a highest-level initiate of a worldwide secret society which ultimately teaches Gnostic Luciferianism, but keeps this a secret even from its own members who haven't been initiated into its highest level.

 

[Lollerskates]

Who sits on 7 hills? Vatican City.

Who is its own nation church state? Vatican City.

What symbolizes a harlot/harlot in the bible? A Church of iniquity, idol worship and paganism.

Which one sits on 7 hills, and had 5 kings fall, one that is, and one yet to come, (who will reign for a little while?) Vatican City (5 popes since it became its own nation state in 1929, Pope John Paul II would be the one that IS in John's revelation. Pope Benedict XVI is the one yet to come, lasting a little while - 8 years. Then he quit.

And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition? Pope Francis I, already coming off as the People's Champ to believers and unbelievers alike.

The Vatican has a plethora of books, art, artifacts, and information hidden away. The Vatican is the Harlot.

 

[astein]

Who sits on 7 hills? Vatican City.

Who is its own nation church state? Vatican City.

What symbolizes a harlot/harlot in the bible? A Church of iniquity, idol worship and paganism.

Which one sits on 7 hills, and had 5 kings fall, one that is, and one yet to come, (who will reign for a little while?) Vatican City (5 popes since it became its own nation state in 1929, Pope John Paul II would be the one that IS in John's revelation. Pope Benedict XVI is the one yet to come, lasting a little while - 8 years. Then he quit.

And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition? Pope Francis I, already coming off as the People's Champ to believers and unbelievers alike.

The Vatican has a plethora of books, art, artifacts, and information hidden away. The Vatican is the Harlot.

Evil is the harlot friend. Who worships evil? Who attempts to give, regardless of great or small, for gain? The harlot. God is in complete control and the evil doers only decieve themselves.

 

[Lollerskates]

harlots in the bible represent an evil church/peoples that follow practices of many religions. Hence, Israel is described as a harlot when the people dabbled in pagan worship.

Virgins represent churches/people's that never left God.

 

[Bible2]

Lollerskates said in post 32:

Who sits on 7 hills? Vatican City.

In Revelation 17:9, the 7 mountains (or hills) which support Revelation's symbolic "Babylon" can be the 7 hills of Rome. For at the time of John the apostle in the first century AD, the Roman Empire was the chief support for what Revelation's "Babylon" represents: all of mankind's corrupt political (Revelation 17:18), economic (Revelation 18:11), and religious (Revelation 18:24) systems throughout the earth (Revelation 18:3) and throughout history (Revelation 17:9-10). At the same time, in Revelation 17:9, the 7 mountains can also represent 7 empires (Revelation 17:10). For an empire can be referred to symbolically as a mountain (Jeremiah 51:24-25, Daniel 2:35,44), and what Revelation's "Babylon" represents has been supported by 7 empires: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome, and (possibly) Islam.

The first 5 had fallen by the time of John the apostle in the first century AD: "five are fallen" (Revelation 17:10, Revelation 1:1b-2). The 6th (Rome) existed at the time of John: "one is" (Revelation 17:10). The 7th (possibly Islam) hadn't come by the time of John: "the other is not yet come" (Revelation 17:10). The empire of the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of the beast) will be a different, still-future, 8th head (Revelation 17:11), which will be a revival of one of the 5 empires that had fallen by the time of John (Revelation 17:8,10,11). It will be a revival of the empire of Babylon. The Antichrist will transform the present-day, rebuilt city of Babylon (in Iraq) into the capital of his empire, only to see it ultimately destroyed at Jesus' 2nd coming (Isaiah 13).

Before the 2nd coming, when the world is brought into the worship of Lucifer (the dragon, Satan) and the Antichrist, during the Antichrist's future, literal 3.5-year worldwide reign (Revelation 13:4-18, Revelation 12:9), the Antichrist will build their main temple in the city of Babylon. For a temple to "wickedness" will be built in Shinar (Babylonia) (Zechariah 5:8,11), and the Antichrist is called "that Wicked" (2 Thessalonians 2:8). Also, the dragon has been the god worshipped in the city of Babylon since ancient times.

The Antichrist may claim to be Nebuchadnezzar returned, and so reinstitute the system that Nebuchadnezzar set up whereby everyone had to worship an image or be killed (Daniel 3, Revelation 13:15). The Antichrist may also claim to be, at the same time, the return of Nimrod (the founder of Babylon: Genesis 10:8-10), and Hammurabi, and Asoka, and other famous rulers of the past. For he may claim that he has had many different "past lives" as various "enlightened" rulers.

Besides building a main temple in Babylon, the Antichrist will also sit (at least one time) in a future, 3rd Jewish temple in Jerusalem, and declare himself God there (2 Thessalonians 2:4, Daniel 11:36,31, Matthew 24:15, Revelation 11:1-2). The Antichrist could also sit (at least one time) in other religions' holiest shrines, and declare himself to be God there as well. For example, he could also sit in Islam's Kaaba in Mecca, in the Sikhs' Golden Temple in Amritsar, in Catholicism's St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican, etc.

Also, in Revelation 17:10, the 7 "kings" can refer to 7 empires, just as the 4 "kings" in Daniel 7:17 refer to 4 empires, Daniel 7:23 referring to the 4th (i.e. the Roman Empire).

Lollerskates said in post 32:

The Vatican is the Harlot.

While the corrupt aspects of the Vatican (and of other church headquarters) are included in what Revelation's symbolic "Babylon" (Revelation chapters 17-18) represents, it represents much more than just the corrupt aspects of the Vatican. For the Vatican just by itself doesn't reign over the kings of the earth (Revelation 17:18). Nor is the Vatican the only place where people buy merchandise (Revelation 18:11). Nor is the Vatican the place where all martyrs have been killed (Revelation 18:24). Nor has the Vatican just by itself corrupted the entire world (Revelation 18:3). Nor has the Vatican been continuously supported by the empires of fallen man throughout history (Revelation 17:9-10). Instead, Revelation's symbolic "Babylon" represents all of mankind's corrupt political (Revelation 17:18), economic (Revelation 18:11), and religious (Revelation 18:24) systems throughout the earth (Revelation 18:3), and throughout history (Revelation 17:9-10).

Nonetheless, the beast which comes up out of the earth (Revelation 13:11-16) represents the individual man who will become the Antichrist's False Prophet (Revelation 19:20, Revelation 16:13). And he could be a (secretly apostate) pope who at some point during his tenure will make a great push for peace and unity between Christianity and Islam. He could say something like: "Why do we fight each other? Are we not all the spiritual children of Abraham and of his God, the one God? Can't we lay aside our foolish, man-made differences of theology, which have done us no good at all, but only brought us hatred and violence, and unite into one religion of Abraham, one religion of peace, based on love for the one God and love for our fellow man? What's more important than this?"

He could be so skillful in elucidating what the moderate Muslims could call "the true, peaceful, loving nature of Islam", that he could be hailed by them worldwide as (in their words) "a Great Imam, come to rescue our beloved Islam from the bad reputation falsely given to it by the terrorists". In this way, a pope could come to hold high positions of power in two religions at the same time, which could be symbolized by the two horns of the False Prophet lamb (Revelation 13:11). This would be similar to how the 7 horns of the true-Jesus lamb in Revelation 5:6 could represent the true Jesus holding 7 positions of power at the same time (cf. Jesus wearing many crowns at the same time in Revelation 19:12). The False Prophet could even say that he is Jesus. (But he won't say that he's Christ, for the False Prophet and the Antichrist will deny that Jesus is the Christ, and will deny that Christ is in the flesh: 1 John 2:22; 2 John 1:7.)

Once the False Prophet by his amazing miracles has brought the world under his spell (Revelation 13:13-18, Revelation 19:20), including many Muslims and Christians who may not care much for scriptural dogma, but could go wild over his signs and wonders, he could begin to (in his words) "restore to the world the real message which was spoken by me (Jesus) at my first coming, and by the great prophet Mohammed, but which message became corrupted by power-hungry men when they copied and changed the early manuscripts of the Bible and the Koran". He could then gradually initiate the world into the Antichrist's Gnostic Luciferianism (1 John 4:3, Revelation 13:4-6), a religion which could have existed since ancient times in some "mystery" cults, and which still exists today in the highest degree of initiation of a worldwide secret society. The False Prophet could present his miraculously calling fire down from heaven (Revelation 13:13) as purported proof that Lucifer (the dragon, Satan) and the Antichrist are the true God (Revelation 13:4-8, Revelation 12:9), in an inversion of how back in Old Testament times, Elijah miraculously called fire down from heaven to prove that YHWH is the true God (1 Kings 18:37-39).

If a (secretly apostate) pope does become the Antichrist's False Prophet (Revelation 13:11-16, Revelation 19:20, Revelation 16:13), adherents of Catholicism will have to decide what their ultimate source of truth is: Is it the pope and the RCC, or God and the Bible? Many adherents of Catholicism who know God and the Bible well and hold to them as their ultimate source of truth will no doubt be utterly aghast at the false doctrines of a False Prophet pope. Such adherents of Catholicism could demand that he be removed for heresy and apostasy, and that the cardinals elect a new pope. But other adherents of Catholicism, including many cardinals, bishops, and priests, could be deceived (along with most of the rest of the world) into believing the False Prophet pope's false doctrines because of his ability to perform the most amazing miracles (Revelation 13:13-14, Revelation 19:20; cf. Matthew 24:24).

And so a great schism could arise within the RCC. Compare the Akita prophecy: "The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops". Many adherents of Catholicism could follow the False Prophet pope, while other adherents of Catholicism could reject him and eventually even elect their own, new pope, who they could declare to be the "True pope". But this new, "True pope" could then be murdered, along with many of his followers, by the False Prophet pope's soldiers. Compare the Third Secret of Fatima: "he [the pope] was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him, and in the same way there died one after another the other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious, and various lay people of different ranks and positions". Could the soldiers firing "arrows" be the Vatican's Swiss guards, whose weapons and colorful uniforms hark back to the Middle Ages?

After this slaughter, the False Prophet pope could manage to retain the papacy and full control of the Vatican, and through his (deceived) cardinals, bishops, and priests, retain full control of all RCC cathedrals, parishes, churches, etc., throughout the world. And when the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of the beast) obtains power over all nations, he and the False Prophet will make war against true, Biblical Christians (whether they're adherents of Catholicism or not) throughout the world, and will physically overcome them and kill them (by beheading) in every nation (Revelation 13:7-10, Revelation 14:12-13, Revelation 20:4-6, Matthew 24:9-13). It's only when the Antichrist has completely broken all the physical power of the true church (which consists of all true believers, whether they're adherents of Catholicism or not: Ephesians 4:4-6) that the future tribulation will end (Daniel 12:7b) and Jesus' 2nd coming will immediately occur, at which time he will resurrect and rapture (gather together) the church (Matthew 24:29-31; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8, Revelation 19:7 to 20:6). At his second coming, Jesus will tread the winepress of God's wrath alone (Isaiah 63:3, Revelation 19:15-21), and so he/God will get all the glory for defeating the power of evil on the earth (Deuteronomy 32:39-43), for he/God will not share this glory with the church (compare Isaiah 42:8-14, Isaiah 26:18).

 

[Douggg]

Who sits on 7 hills? Vatican City.

Who is its own nation church state? Vatican City.

What symbolizes a harlot/harlot in the bible? A Church of iniquity, idol worship and paganism.

Which one sits on 7 hills, and had 5 kings fall, one that is, and one yet to come, (who will reign for a little while?) Vatican City (5 popes since it became its own nation state in 1929, Pope John Paul II would be the one that IS in John's revelation. Pope Benedict XVI is the one yet to come, lasting a little while - 8 years. Then he quit.

And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition? Pope Francis I, already coming off as the People's Champ to believers and unbelievers alike.

The Vatican has a plethora of books, art, artifacts, and information hidden away. The Vatican is the Harlot.

The Vatican is the Harlot. But the popes are not any of the kings, the sixth was ruling at the time of John. Which the popes didn't exist back in his day.

Doug

 

[Lollerskates]

Every pope is, by definition Head of State for the sovereign city state of Vatican City. Sovereign.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/4685030/h...tory-of-alberto-rivera-a-former-jesuit-priest

It has been like that since Vatican City formed in 1929. President, king, Caesar, etc. are all the same.

 

[astein]

God have mercy on the innocent.

 

[Lollerskates]

And, the Vatican still controls the world. See the scribd article above.

 

[Douggg]

Every pope is, by definition Head of State for the sovereign city state of Vatican City. Sovereign.

how the vatican still controls the world 3 (a true story of alberto rivera - a former jesuit priest)

It has been like that since Vatican City formed in 1929. President, king, Caesar, etc. are all the same.

I agree that kings is the leader of some kingdom, regardless of title designation.

But the Pope was not in existence at the time of John to be the "one is".

Revelation 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.