You mean this is what you say.
1) Christian scholars overwhelmingly believe the reference to Babylon was a codeword for Rome . . . Early Christian writings (those of the Fathers and those of apocryphal writers) use Babylon as a code word for Rome or say that Babylon is a code word for Rome.
Did Paul and Peter and the other apostles have that code book? And all those people in Mesopotamia, and Asia Minor, and even in Rome? How come they didn't know about this code word? They weren't living in the magisterium's fantasyland back then.
And now you are reduced to citing mystics and gnostics as authoritative. That is merely further evidence of their confusion and the confusion of those who cite them as authoritative.
4) No one apparently denied the obvious until they, the Protestant Revolutionaries, wanted to separate themselves from the pope.
you mean, until they got Bibles in their hands and read them and saw that the Papal Magisterium had been lying to them for 1200 years.
5) You can't refute any of the above.
I just did and I will continue to do so below.
6) You have presented exactly no evidence against the above.
How about The Universal Standard Encyclopedia: Babylon: " . . . Even after the founding of of Baghdad, Babylon remained the capitol of the district. Later it became simply a village . . . ".
So Babylon in Peter's day was a village, a caravan stop as others have characterized it here. What a great place to start a church --- in a village that was a caravan stop carrying goods east and west and where all the people in the surrounding area of Babylonia [Mesopotamia]would come to trade and share the news carried by the caravaners. And furthermore, a great place to mail a letter that is to be delivered to the sojourners in Asia Minor along the way of those caravans headed to and from Rome.
So are you going to tell us that "Babylon" was not a real place in Peter's day?
You wrote:
“You mean this is what you say.”
No. That is what we know. Refute any of it if you can. Of course you can’t. Still you wasted our time with this:
“Did Paul and Peter and the other apostles have that code book?”
Did John when he used 666? No.
“And all those people in Mesopotamia, and Asia Minor, and even in Rome?”
No. Clearly none was needed. Only you and other Protestants deny what is known. You need a code book. We already have the knowledge.
“How come they didn't know about this code word?”
They did. Prove otherwise. Again, there are references to Rome as Babylon in apocrypha as well. They knew. You don’t.
“They weren't living in the magisterium's fantasyland back then.”
You’re the one in a fantasy land. Can you refute what I pointed out or not? You aren’t even trying.
“And now you are reduced to citing mystics and gnostics as authoritative.”
Nope. If you want to call mainstream Protestant scholars of the last 500 years “Gnostics” go ahead.
“That is merely further evidence of their confusion and the confusion of those who cite them as authoritative.”
You’re confused. I’m not.
“you mean, until they got Bibles in their hands and read them and saw that the Papal Magisterium had been lying to them for 1200 years.”
Nope. Most of the earliest Protestants actually believed “Babylon” in 1 Peter was a code word for Rome. Also, they always had Bibles.
“I just did and I will continue to do so below.”
No, actually you didn’t refute anything. All you did was dispute it. That is not refutation. You really don’t know how logical argumentation works do you? Do you need us to help you with that too? That’s okay, we’re used to schooling Protestants anyway.
“How about The Universal Standard Encyclopedia: Babylon: " . . . Even after the founding of of Baghdad, Babylon remained the capitol of the district. Later it became simply a village . . . ". “
That in no way refutes anything I posted since I never once questioned the actual existence of the city. LOL!!! Is that the best you can do? You refute something that isn’t even asserted by me? Hilarious. You just can’t do this.
“So Babylon in Peter's day was a village, a caravan stop as others have characterized it here. What a great place to start a church --- in a village that was a caravan stop carrying goods east and west and where all the people in the surrounding area of Babylonia [Mesopotamia]would come to trade and share the news carried by the caravaners. And furthermore, a great place to mail a letter that is to be delivered to the sojourners in Asia Minor along the way of those caravans headed to and from Rome. So are you going to tell us that "Babylon" was not a real place in Peter's day?”
I never once said it wasn’t a real place. Why do you lie about what I said? Listen, I don’t mind you embarrassing yourself by trying to refute obviously known history, but there’s absolutely no reason to lie about what I said. I never once said there was no Babylon. I never once said that Babylon no longer existed, had no population in it, etc. Don’t lie about what I said. Do you think you can muster up the integrity to actually deal with what I said rather than making things up out of thin air?