Archived
Post
|
Let's
review the Biblical evidence...
The Woman Is A City On Seven Hills
Revelation 17:
9And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The
seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman
sitteth.
18And the woman which thou sawest is that great
city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.
Only one city:
- Sat on the Roman empire as its ruler
- Was known to sit on 'seven hills'
- Reigned over the kings of the earth
That city was Rome.
Just as no other city but Rome was understood by
the city on seven hills, so the ‘Babylon’ of the
Apocalypse was always understood to be Rome.
The following Patristic witnesses are relevant here.
I have cited the Loeb classification number as the
refence.
| QUOTE
|
'So, again, Babylon, in {the writings
of} our own John, is a figure of the city
Rome.
For she is equally great and proud of her
sway.'
Tertullian, c. 197, 3.162
|
| QUOTE
|
'That powerful state that presides
over the seven mountains and very many
waters has inherited from the Lord the
designation of a prostitute.'
Tertullian, c.198, 4.24
|
| QUOTE
|
'By a similar usage, in the writings of
our John, Babylon is a figure of the city
of Rome.
For Rome is like Babylon in being great and
proud in royal power and in warring against
the saints of God.'
Tertullian, c. 207, 3.333
|
| QUOTE
|
'We are called away from even dwelling
in that Babylon of John's Revelation.
How much more so its pomp!'
Tertullian, c. 212, 3.101
|
| QUOTE
|
'Tell me, blessed John - apostle and disciple
of the Lord - what did you see and hear concerning
Babylon?
Arise and speak! For it sent you into
banishment.'
Hippolytus, c. 200, 5.211
|
| QUOTE
|
'…the great overthrow of Babylon, that
is, the Roman state.'
Victorinus, c. 280, 7.35
|
Later witnesses agreed:
| QUOTE
|
'The earliest extant Commentary on the
Apocalypse is by a Bishop and Martyr of Pannonia,
Victorinus, in the third century. He says,
"the city of Babylon, that is, Rome; the
City on seven hills, that is, Rome; and the
Kings of the Earth will hate the Harlot, that
is, Rome."
Not to mention more authorities, the same
language is echoed from the East in the commentaries
of two Bishops of Cappadocia, Andreas and
Arethas; the former of whom expounded
the Apocalypse in the sixth century; and from
Italy and Rome itself by Cassiodorus,
first a Senator of that city, and then an
Ecclesiastic; and from Africa by Primasius,
a Bioshop of Adrumetum, in the sixth century.’
Christopher Wordsworth, ‘Is not the Church
of Rome the Babylon of the Book of Revelation?’,
1914.
|
Later Catholic doctors and theologians agreed:
| QUOTE
|
‘St. John in the Apocalypse calls Rome
Babylon; for no other city besides Rome reigned
in his age over the Kings of the Earth, and
it is well known that Rome was seated upon
Seven Hills.'
Cardinal Bellarmine , ’De Rem. Pont.’,
c. III 2, Preterea, Tome I, page 232,
Colon 1615.
|
| QUOTE
|
'It is confessed by all that Rome is signified
in the Apocalypse by the name of Babylon.'
Cardinal Baronius, ‘Annals’, section xvi,
page 344.
|
| QUOTE
|
'The features are so marked, that it is
easy to decipher Rome under the figure of
Babylon.'
Prelate Bossuet, 'Pref. sur l'Apocalypse',
1627-1704.
|
| QUOTE
|
‘There is no room for doubt that by the
Babylon of the Apocalypse is meant the city
of Rome. And down to the time
of the Reformation it was the unanimous
judgment of all writers... that
the Babylon of St. Peter's Epistle
is the same Rome.’
Jesuit Sylvester J. Hunter, ‘Outline of
Dogmatic Theology’, volume I, page 410.
|
| QUOTE
|
'St. John in the Apocalypse calls Rome
Babylon; for no other city besides Rome reigned
in his age over the Kings of the Earth, and
it is well known that Rome was seated upon
Seven Hills.'
Cardinal Bellarmine , ’De Rem. Pont.’,
c. III 2, Preterea, Tome I, page 232,
Colon 1615.
|
Bellarmine does not agree with your interpretation.
| QUOTE
|
'It is confessed by all that Rome
is signified in the Apocalypse by the name
of Babylon.'
Cardinal Baronius, ‘Annals’, section xvi,
page 344.
|
Baronius does not agree that the 'Babylon is
Rome' view is a minority view.
| QUOTE
|
'The features are so marked, that it is
easy to decipher Rome under the figure of
Babylon.'
Prelate Bossuet, 'Pref. sur l'Apocalypse',
1627-1704.
|
Bossuet does not agree with your interpretation.
| QUOTE
|
‘There is no room for doubt that by the
Babylon of the Apocalypse is meant the city
of Rome. And down to the time
of the Reformation it was the unanimous
judgment of all writers... that
the Babylon of St. Peter's Epistle
is the same Rome.’
Jesuit Sylvester J. Hunter, ‘Outline of
Dogmatic Theology’, volume I, page 410.
|
Let's see:
- Irenaeus
- Tertullian
- Hippolytus
- Victorinus
- Papias
- Eusebius
- Clement of Alexandria
- Augustine
Baronius says that 'all' agree that Rome
is Babylon, and Hunter later says that the agreement
that Babylon is Rome is 'unanimous'. Of
those Fathers who wrote on the subject, all of
them understand Babylon to be Rome. All of them.
Then, after these earliest of the Fathers, we add:
- Andreas of Caesarea (6th century)
- Cassiodorus of Rome (5th to 6th centuries)
- Primasius of Adrumetum (6th century)
- Arethas of Cappodocia (860)
- Joachim de Fiore (1191)
- Eberhard II of Salzburg (1240)
- Jesuit Luis de Alcasar (16th century)
- Jesuit Francisco Ribera (1590)
- Cardinal Bellarmine (16th-17th centuries)
- Cardinal Baronius (1600)
- Prelate Bossuet (1690)
- Bishop Walmsley (1771)
- Jesuit Manuel de Lacunza y Díaz (1790)
- Frere Lambert (1806)
- Jesuit Sylvester J Hunter (19th century)
...all of whom insist that Rome is the Babylon
of Revelation.
Let's see what the good old site 'Catholic
Answers' has to say:
| QUOTE
|
What the Bible Says
|
Wow! What a good start! Let's see 'What
the Bible Says', shall we?
| QUOTE
|
Boettner is also wrong when he claims “there
is no allusion to Rome in either of [Peter’s]
epistles.” There is, in the greeting at the
end of the first epistle: “The Church here
in Babylon, united with you by God’s election,
sends you her greeting, and so does my son,
Mark” (1 Pet. 5:13, Knox).
Babylon is a code-word for Rome. It is
used that way six times in the last book of
the Bible and in extra-biblical works like
the Sibylline Oracles (5:159f), the Apocalypse
of Baruch (2:1), and 4 Esdras (3:1). Eusebius
Pamphilius, in The Chronicle, composed about
A.D. 303, noted that “It is said that Peter’s
first epistle, in which he makes mention of
Mark, was composed at Rome itself; and that
he himself indicates this, referring to the
city figuratively as Babylon.”
|
Hey, I'm impressed! But let's read on:
| QUOTE
|
Consider now the other New Testament citations:
“Another angel, a second, followed, saying,
‘Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great, she
who made all nations drink the wine of her
impure passion’” (Rev. 14:8). “The great city
was split into three parts, and the cities
of the nations fell, and God remembered great
Babylon, to make her drain the cup of the
fury of his wrath” (Rev. 16:19). “[A]nd on
her forehead was written a name of mystery:
‘Babylon the great, mother of harlots and
of earth’s abominations’” (Rev. 17:5). “And
he called out with a mighty voice, ‘Fallen,
fallen is Babylon the great’” (Rev. 18:2).
“[T]hey will stand far off, in fear of her
torment, and say, ‘Alas! alas! thou
great city, thou mighty city, Babylon!
In one hour has thy judgment come’” (Rev.
18:10). “So shall Babylon the great city be
thrown down with violence” (Rev. 18:21).
|
Sure, but is this Rome or the capital of the Babylonian
empire?
| QUOTE
|
These references can’t be to the one-time
capital of the Babylonian empire.
|
Oh, ok.
| QUOTE
|
That Babylon had been reduced to an inconsequential
village by the march of years, military defeat,
and political subjugation; it was no longer
a “great city.” It played no important part
in the recent history of the ancient world.
From the New Testament perspective, the
only candidates for the “great city” mentioned
in Revelation are Rome and Jerusalem.
|
Ooh, Rome or Jerusalem! But which?
| QUOTE
|
“But there is no good reason for saying that
‘Babylon’ means ‘Rome,’” insists Boettner.
But there is, and the good reason is persecution.
|
Hey look, they say it's Rome!
| QUOTE
|
The authorities knew that Peter was a leader
of the Church, and the Church, under Roman
law, was considered organized atheism. (The
worship of any gods other than the Roman was
considered atheism.) Peter would do himself,
not to mention those with him, no service
by advertising his presence in the capital-after
all, mail service from Rome was then even
worse than it is today, and letters were routinely
read by Roman officials. Peter was a wanted
man, as were all Christian leaders. Why encourage
a manhunt? We also know that the apostles
sometimes referred to cities under symbolic
names (cf. Rev. 11:8).
|
Well, what more needs to be said?
Wrote
this to franklin a while back
| QUOTE
|
Hell is not a place of torment but the grave
where the dead sleep.
"Hell" means 'covering' hence the
term helmet - something that covers your head.
The grave covers a dead body.
Funny, cause in Revelation it speaks of a
woman sitting on seven mountains.
The woman refers to the mother church - the
Roman Catholic Church. The seven hills are
actually seven volcanos which are brewing
under Rome.
Not so long ago somebody's underground
pipes in their backyard in Rome were searing
together due to the heat under the ground
from these volcanos. Guess who the somebody
was? The Pope!
When Christ comes back and Armageddon is in
full swing these volcanos are gonna errupt
and the Vatican and all it's glory are
going to the very place they preach - a fiery
place of eternal damnation!!
|
|
