Posted on 03/22/2014 1:35:03 PM PDT by PhilipFreneau
Was "Babylon The Great" a Symbolic Name for Jerusalem?
Recall that Jesus said:
"… it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem" (Luke 13:33.)
That is a very important statement to keep in mind when considering the following passages: and later in the same chapter of Luke, Jesus added:
"…I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute: That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation; From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation." (Luke 11:47-51 KJV)
That is pretty clear. Jerusalem is responsible for the blood of all the prophets, and at least some of the apostles. There is more in Matthew:
"Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in yoursynagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation." (Mat 23:34-36 KJV)
So, Jerusalem was not only responsible for the blood of all the prophets (and some apostles;) but for all the righteous blood shed upon the earth. And vengeance for that blood was required of the generation that Jesus was speaking to.
We all know that is exactly what happened within that generation: the Roman armies completely destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD, fulfilling this prophecy by Jesus:
"And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down." (Mat 24:1-2 KJV)
But how do those verses compare to those on Babylon the Great found in the Revelation?
In the Revelation, Babylon the Great is also called the great whore, the mother of harlots, the great city, and the woman. In the context of blood responsibility, John mentions this:
"And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration." (Rev 17:6, KJV)
The first martyr of Jesus was Stephen, if I recall correctly; and there were many more. The next chapter reveals additional facts:
"And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth." (Rev 18:24, KJV)
But, according to Jesus, Jerusalem is supposed to be responsible for the blood of all the prophets; and Jerusalem is responsible for all the righteous blood? Yet, in the following verse we see that God avenged the blood of the apostles and prophets on Babylon the Great.
“Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her.” (Rev 18:20, KJV)
And recall the first scripture at the top:
"… it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem" (Luke 13:33.)
So what do we know:
1. Jerusalem killed many of the apostles, yet their blood was avenged on Babylon the Great
2. Jerusalem is responsible for the blood of all the prophets, yet their blood was avenged on Babylon the Great.
3. Jerusalem was responsible for the blood of all the righteous, yet Babylon the Great was responsible for "all that were slain on the earth."
There are many other references in the Revelation that tie Babylon the Great to old Jerusalem. This is one of many:
"And their dead bodies [the two witnesses] shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified." (Rev 11:8 KJV)
It seem our Lord Jesus Christ was killed in both Babylon the Great and Jerusalem. It is difficult to imagine Babylon the Great being any other city than Jerusalem.
Philip
>>>You see Revelation and OT prophecies complete circa 70AD? You do therefore claim Revelation was penned at least 2-4 years prior to that? You have stated the second coming of Christ happened after the fall of Jerusalem circa 70AD? And the first resurrection at the same time and that was for the early Jewish Christians?<<<
You still have it wrong; and no my understanding hasn’t changed. If you throw away the notion that I am a preterist, you might get it right.
Please tell me what I posted is incorrect.
>>>Please tell me what I posted is incorrect.<<<
This part:
>>>You should tell them that the Bible is all time past, 70AD fulfilled all prophecies<<<
>>>You see Revelation and OT prophecies complete circa 70AD?<<<
I don’t believe that; and you should know better than that by now. Haven’t you been paying attention?
Philip
>>>Unless they allegorize so much of scripture as to render it totally meaningless. Which is what preterists do.<<<
I thought that was the realm of the dispensationalists? How else could one come with a different Antichrist every week, and create an enormous book industry based on false prophecies, unless everything was allegorized?
LOL!
“Marcus” was John Mark, the author of the second gospel.
Peter was known to have traveled extensively in the area known as Babylon to the people of Jerusalem. There was no longer a city there called Babylon, it was sacked long before, but the name referred to the general area now called Turkey and Syria.
You might want to stop laughing, and recognize that preterism involves no scholarship whatsoever, and lacks even a single scripture upon which to rest.
.
>>>“Marcus” was John Mark, the author of the second gospel.<<<
Isn’t that speculation?
>>>Peter was known to have traveled extensively in the area known as Babylon to the people of Jerusalem.<<<
Where can I find that?
>>>There was no longer a city there called Babylon, it was sacked long before, but the name referred to the general area now called Turkey and Syria.<<<
I thought it was in Mesopotamia between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in what is now known as Iraq?
Anyway, I believe the destruction of ancient Babylon was prophesied in Isaiah 13 & 14 and Jeremiah 50 & 51.
Philip
>>>You might want to stop laughing, and recognize that preterism involves no scholarship whatsoever, and lacks even a single scripture upon which to rest.<<<
With all due respect, that is right up there with the least scholarly thing I have ever read.
Philip
Babylon was not only a city, but also a state/nation...not only a religious center but also political, economic...
And Babylon has had one ruler through time..
The physical or spiritual Babylons of todays all have Satan as their god too..
And yup, Jerusalem is in there.. so is Rome, NYC, DC, the list is exhaustive...
The religious, political and economic centers throughout this world are not Messiah led...
And some cities/states/nations claim to be followers of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And they are not..
So, yup, Jerusalem could be considered one in this age too..they certainly seem to think america should have any say in what they should do with their land or neighbors - that is proof enough for me considering I don’t see how America isn’t a Babylonian country in our own right...
Pick any city/state/nation with any religious, political and economic clout in this world today and they are under the control of the god of this world., not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob..
>>>Babylon was not only a city, but also a state/nation...not only a religious center but also political, economic...The physical or spiritual Babylons of todays all have Satan as their god too.. And yup, Jerusalem is in there.. so is Rome, NYC, DC, the list is exhaustive...<<<
I think I understand your point; but can you provide any scriptural support for you interpretation? I believe the Babylon the Great in the Revelation is a prophetic, poetic narrative of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
Philip
I have no doubt in my mind that you are an expert in “least scholarly”.
At least admit to them you believe the second coming and first resurrection is time past.
>>>I have no doubt in my mind that you are an expert in “least scholarly”.<<<
I have a long way to go. I have only been researching dispensational doctrine, books and articles for about six months. Reading unintelligible gibberish like yours does, however, provide further evidence of the complete lack of scholarship by dispensational advocates.
Do you have anything to add to the thread, or you going to continue these childish games? If you are so brainy, why not dispute my original post, line by line?
You can’t. You know dispensationalism falls flat on its face in both scholarship and historical acceptance, because it is not biblical. All you and your cohorts can do is try to discredit me with aspersions and redirection, in vain attempts to keep the new readers from learning the truth about the new-age cult called Dispensationalism.
Philip
>>>At least admit to them you believe the second coming and first resurrection is time past.<<<
Why don’t you come clean?
Nothing new under the sun...
It is cycles... written ‘in the stars’ and the awesomeness of prophecy from our Creator is that we can see the past fulfillments, present applications and warnings and future unfulfilled..
Revelation 18 is tough to see as Jerusalem in 70 AD as the place merchants of the world would ‘weep’ over...
As for ‘come out of her My people... I can see that being a warning for people to flee Jerusalem physically as much as it could be to get out of NY physically or the command to not participate in the ways of Satan and his provinces of bBylonian religion, business or economics...
If revelation 18 isn’t speaking of the future city that houses the political power of the world (UN) , the economic center of the world ( wall street) and a center of the religion of ‘secular humanism’, which is the state religion of this ‘heritage’ nation, I would be the first to admit, I was wrong...
PS.. some read Daniel 9 and think it speaks directly to ‘His people’ and Jerusalem’s specific destruction but not just in 70 AD as scholars note, but on a 70 jubilee scale as Israel was decreed out of mankind’s 120 jubilees ( genesis 6).. I do not know where people stand on where we are on the 70 jubilees scale but 3450 years is 69 of those jubilees..
We are all still here and so is sin- so the kingdom hasn’t come on earth as it is in heaven..that is an unfulfilled prayer and prophecy.. and it will be answered and fulfilled..
when?
No idea - I just prayer I am wake to see the signs of times and seasons and be one of the wise virgins if it occurs in my lifetime..
What generation was that? When did it start and when were they all gone?
Acts 2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
Was that only those of a certain age? When did that generation end. Are there no other “generations” that are untoward?
Luke 17:25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.
Did every person alive at that point reject Christ? In other words did that entire “generation” of people reject Christ as Christ said they would? Or were the apostles and other believers not part of that generation?
Luke 16:8 And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.
Matthew 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
Did those alive at that time kill all the prophets and Zechariah? According to your definition of generation that would have to be the case.
Your narrow view of the meaning of “generation” causes all kinds of problems understanding scripture.
Please explain how those alive “of a certain age” who Jesus was talking to were the ones who killed Zechariah.
Sure. The second coming of Christ is yet to be. The first and second resurrection is yet to be. All on God’s timeline. Revelation was penned after the sacking of Jerusalem 70AD.
There clean and has been my position all along.
Cynical Bear's word's are in Blue
>>>Matthew 12:39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:<<<
>>>What generation was that? When did it start and when were they all gone?<<<
It was the generation explained in the verse following your verse. This is your verse in context:
"But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Mat 12:39-40 KJV)
What generation saw the sign of Christ's resurrection? The one he was speaking to.
>>>Was that only those of a certain age? When did that generation end. Are there no other “generations” that are untoward?<<< >>>Luke 17:25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.<<< >>>Did every person alive at that point reject Christ? In other words did that entire “generation” of people reject Christ as Christ said they would? Or were the apostles and other believers not part of that generation?<<< >>>Luke 16:8 And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.<<< >>>Matthew 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.<<<
>>>Acts 2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.<<<
Cynical Bear: when Jesus said "this generation," he always meant the people alive when he said it. And as if Jesus anticipated charlatans like Darby and Scofield would come along and try to corrupt his plain and simple language, Jesus explained it in other ways:
"These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand . . . But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come." (Mat 10:5-7, 23 KJV)
In this next example Jesus said it in two different ways, so there would be no ambiguity:
"For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." (Mat 16:27-28 KJV)
"Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power." (Mark 8:38, 9:1 KJV)
Are some of those he spoke to still alive, Cynical Bear? No. It can only mean that some of those alive at the time he spoke lived to see him coming in his kingdom. Using normal grammatical rules and definitions for the words "this generation," any of those Jesus' age and younger could have seen him coming in his kingdom.
>>>Did those alive at that time kill all the prophets and Zechariah? According to your definition of generation that would have to be the case.<<<
Jesus argued that same point with the scribes and Pharisees; and like you, I don't think they believed him either:
"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous." (Mat 23:29-30 KJV)
Jesus said the scribes and Pharisees claimed they would not have been partakers in the blood of the prophets. But Jesus indicated they were just like their fathers, and as evil as they come:
"And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?" (Mat 23:30-33 KJV)
Here Jesus explains that they will (like their fathers) kill some of the prophets he sends them, and they will persecute others. And of course, they had Jesus killed, the prophet of all prophets:
"Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:" (Mat 23:34 KJV)
Here he warns them that all the righteous blood would be required of that generation: the generation of those he was talking to:
"That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation." (Mat 23:35-36 KJV)
He summarizes some of their crimes and some of their punishment, here:
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate." (Mat 23:37-38 KJV)
Luke wrote similar things, but also mentioned the apostles they murdered and persecuted:
"Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute: That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation; From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation." (Luke 11:49-51 KJV)
Like I said, the blood of all the prophets was on Jerusalem's head. It could not have also been on Babylon the Great's head, unless they were the same city.
>>>Your narrow view of the meaning of “generation” causes all kinds of problems understanding scripture.<<<
You can do better than this, Cynical Bear.
>>>Please explain how those alive “of a certain age” who Jesus was talking to were the ones who killed Zechariah.<<<
Anyone who has read the scriptures knows that Jesus never said that generation killed Zechariah. Therefore, I must assume you are reading from some worthless dispensational talking points. I recommend you throw them, and that corrupt Scofield Reference "Bible," in the trash; and read the plain Word, for a healthy change.
Philip
>>>There clean and has been my position all along.<<<
I know what your position is. I don’t understand why you believe it, but I know what it is.
You mischaracterized my position more than once. Come clean.
Philip
>>>Revelation 18 is tough to see as Jerusalem in 70 AD as the place merchants of the world would ‘weep’ over...<<<
Before we take this debate any further, I recommend you do two things:
1. Read the works of the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus. You will be astonished at what you learn about the city of Jerusalem in the mid-first century, before its destruction. It was a very extravagant, expensive city: the showcase of the middle east. No exaggeration necessary.
2. Learn what the New Testament considered to be the “whole world” in those days. Start with Luke 2:1.
Thanks,
Philip
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.