-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Great Whore is Religious Rome
- Thread starter The Biblicist
- Start date
- Status
This is exactly what I was talking about in my last post.
"God's old creation is Israel."
"Israel is thus to be de-created."
Nonsense statements like these, originating from allegoric and fanciful interpretations of the Scripture lead to heresy.
Here are some other examples:
The second goat on the day of atonement represented Satan as he bore our iniquities taking them into the wilderness. (Who believes that?)
--from allegorization of Scripture.
Jesus went down to hell after he died and made a bargain with the devil. He and the devil worked out a plan together to make an atonement for our sins. (More allegorization) This is Benny Hinn.
Icon: You can make the Bible say anything you want to when you take it down this road of allegory, and that is the road that Chilton took. It is wrong.
We need to get back to the OP. It has been believed by Protestants throughout centuries that the Pope/Vatican is the whore of Revelation 17. Pick up any commentary from the 19th-20th century and read its comments on Revelation 17 and see if this is true or not.
IMO, only the political expediency of ecumenism has forced some denominations to take its eyes off of Rome as being the Great Whore that it really is. Other than Islam what other religion fits this description:
Revelation 17:6 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.
--"Drunk with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus."
--Add up all those that have been martyred at the hands of the RCC through various Crusades and Inquisitions and it is only the RCC that fits this bill.
And it doesn't stop. It continues to this day. Not even the UN can stop the persecution of the RCC. Even today the RCC is in the news once again:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/pope-says-finds-mythology-surrounding-him-offensive-says-095201355.html
They never stop. It goes on and on.
It doesn't really matter. The "whore" is the second beast who sits on the first beast--the false prophet who sits on the antichrist. In Revelation 13 she is able to do signs, wonders, miracles, etc. Israel never had that power. Israel never had the power to draw all nations to itself. It doesn't fit.
Regardless of the connection to the Book of Revelation, the holy see is still as apostate as ever. This, is spite of reformations and counterreformations and councils. Usurpers do not become authorized with age.
True churches called the pope the antichrist in the early centuries. And they rejoiced to see him come on the scene--their redemption was drawing near.
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
True churches called the pope the antichrist in the early centuries. And they rejoiced to see him come on the scene--their redemption was drawing near.
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
Last edited by a moderator:
Protestant
Well-Known Member
A Short Church History Lesson
In the interest of enlightening Christians ignorant of the centuries of contentious prophetic interpretive debates between the Roman Catholic Church and the dissenting Protestants I will quote from The Original and True Rheims New Testament of Anno Domini 1582.
With the advent of numerous English language Bibles published by the Protestants in the 16th century, many of them annotated, as well as the proliferation of Protestant commentaries on the Revelation denoting the Pope Antichrist, his church Mystery Babylon, the French Jesuits took up the challenge to issue their responses by publishing the first authorized annotated Roman Catholic edition of the New Testament in English.
By examining the testimony of the Jesuits’ summation of the Protestant interpretation of Revelation 17 it will be obvious to all that:
1. The Protestants were united in their interpretation.
2. Wolves in sheep’s clothing have infiltrated the modern evangelical church perverting the truth, all of which throws the spotlight of guilt away from the Pope and his false church, to the delight of the Devil, and to the shame of their deceived disciples.
“In the end of St. Peter’s first epistle, where the Apostle dateth it at Babylon, which the ancient writers (as we there noted) to be meant of Rome: the Protestants will not in any wise have it so, because they would not be driven to confess that Peter was at Rome. [n.b. Detailed explanations as to why Protestants did not believe Peter in Rome, or Bishop of Rome or first Pope can easily be found online.] But here for that they maketh for their opinion, that the Pope is Antichrist, and Rome the seat and city of Antichrist, they will needs have Rome to be this Babylon, this great whore, this purple harlot. For such fellows, in the exposition of holy Scripture, be led only by their prejudicate opinions and heresies, to which they draw all things without all indifferency and sincerity.”
The commentary then goes on to argue that pagan Rome was meant as Mystery Babylon, not the Church of Rome. In addition, the Jesuits admit that some in their Church view Mystery Babylon as Jerusalem:
“The Church in Rome was one thing, and Babylon in Rome another. Peter sat in Rome, and Nero sat in Rome. But Peter in the Church of Rome: Nero, as in the Babylon of Rome……Whereby it is plain that, whether Babylon or the great whore do here signify Rome or no, yet it cannot signify the Church of Rome…..And if, as in the beginning of the Church, Nero and rest of the persecuting Emperors (which were figures of Antichrist) did principally sit in Rome, so also the great Antichrist shall have his seat there as it may well be (though others think that Jerusalem rather shall be his principal city)…..” (Prepared and Edited by Dr. William von Peters, Ph.D.; © 1998)
Here we have the Jesuit-inspired Preterist and Futurist views combined.
Preterist in that Babylon is identified with pagan Rome or Jerusalem.
Futurist in that the Antichrist has not yet come and is certainly not the Pope.
Yet hundreds of years before the Reformation Christian dissenters were neither Preterists nor Futurists.
They were Historicists, as were the Protestant Reformers, who understood the historic fulfillment of the Papacy and Roman Catholic Church as the prophesied Antichrist and Mystery Babylon the Great.
In the interest of enlightening Christians ignorant of the centuries of contentious prophetic interpretive debates between the Roman Catholic Church and the dissenting Protestants I will quote from The Original and True Rheims New Testament of Anno Domini 1582.
With the advent of numerous English language Bibles published by the Protestants in the 16th century, many of them annotated, as well as the proliferation of Protestant commentaries on the Revelation denoting the Pope Antichrist, his church Mystery Babylon, the French Jesuits took up the challenge to issue their responses by publishing the first authorized annotated Roman Catholic edition of the New Testament in English.
By examining the testimony of the Jesuits’ summation of the Protestant interpretation of Revelation 17 it will be obvious to all that:
1. The Protestants were united in their interpretation.
2. Wolves in sheep’s clothing have infiltrated the modern evangelical church perverting the truth, all of which throws the spotlight of guilt away from the Pope and his false church, to the delight of the Devil, and to the shame of their deceived disciples.
“In the end of St. Peter’s first epistle, where the Apostle dateth it at Babylon, which the ancient writers (as we there noted) to be meant of Rome: the Protestants will not in any wise have it so, because they would not be driven to confess that Peter was at Rome. [n.b. Detailed explanations as to why Protestants did not believe Peter in Rome, or Bishop of Rome or first Pope can easily be found online.] But here for that they maketh for their opinion, that the Pope is Antichrist, and Rome the seat and city of Antichrist, they will needs have Rome to be this Babylon, this great whore, this purple harlot. For such fellows, in the exposition of holy Scripture, be led only by their prejudicate opinions and heresies, to which they draw all things without all indifferency and sincerity.”
The commentary then goes on to argue that pagan Rome was meant as Mystery Babylon, not the Church of Rome. In addition, the Jesuits admit that some in their Church view Mystery Babylon as Jerusalem:
“The Church in Rome was one thing, and Babylon in Rome another. Peter sat in Rome, and Nero sat in Rome. But Peter in the Church of Rome: Nero, as in the Babylon of Rome……Whereby it is plain that, whether Babylon or the great whore do here signify Rome or no, yet it cannot signify the Church of Rome…..And if, as in the beginning of the Church, Nero and rest of the persecuting Emperors (which were figures of Antichrist) did principally sit in Rome, so also the great Antichrist shall have his seat there as it may well be (though others think that Jerusalem rather shall be his principal city)…..” (Prepared and Edited by Dr. William von Peters, Ph.D.; © 1998)
Here we have the Jesuit-inspired Preterist and Futurist views combined.
Preterist in that Babylon is identified with pagan Rome or Jerusalem.
Futurist in that the Antichrist has not yet come and is certainly not the Pope.
Yet hundreds of years before the Reformation Christian dissenters were neither Preterists nor Futurists.
They were Historicists, as were the Protestant Reformers, who understood the historic fulfillment of the Papacy and Roman Catholic Church as the prophesied Antichrist and Mystery Babylon the Great.
DHK
DHK...thank you for your response and standing your ground.Also thank you for redirecting Van back to scripture than his hobby horse attack in the other thread:applause::thumbs: Now let's take a look...
DHK.....it is proper to voice a concern or warning when anyone seeks to give meaning to allegorical ,and metaphorical language..
If you notice in the examples you offer...like Origen...his ideas were fanciful and brought to the bible from outside of scripture.I believe Chilton seeks to offer interpretations taken from God's usage in scripture of the same language which I will show you by simply opening up the verses he offered.
Gentile powers are shaken as well: Every mountain
and island were moved out of their places
Job 9:5-6;
5 Which removeth the mountains, and they know not: which overturneth them in his anger.
6 Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.
14:18-19;
18 And surely the mountains falling cometh to nought, and the rock is removed out of his place.
19 The waters wear the stones: thou washest away the things which grow out of the dust of the earth; and thou destroyest the hope of man.
28:9-11;
9 He putteth forth his hand upon the rock; he overturneth the mountains by the roots.
10 He cutteth out rivers among the rocks; and his eye seeth every precious thing.
11 He bindeth the floods from overflowing; and the thing that is hid bringeth he forth to light.
Isa. 41:5, 15-16;
5 The isles saw it, and feared; the ends of the earth were afraid, drew near, and came.
15 Behold, I will make thee a new sharp threshing instrument having teeth: thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them small, and shalt make the hills as chaff.
16 Thou shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry them away, and the whirlwind shall scatter them: and thou shalt rejoice in the Lord, and shalt glory in the Holy One of Israel.
Ezek. 38:20;
20 So that the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the heaven, and the beasts of the field, and all creeping things that creep upon the earth, and all the men that are upon the face of the earth, shall shake at my presence, and the mountains shall be thrown down, and the steep places shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground.
Nab.1:4-8;
5 The mountains quake at him, and the hills melt, and the earth is burned at his presence, yea, the world, and all that dwell therein.
6 Who can stand before his indignation? and who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? his fury is poured out like fire, and the rocks are thrown down by him.
7 The Lord is good, a strong hold in the day of trouble; and he knoweth them that trust in him.
8 But with an overrunning flood he will make an utter end of the place thereof, and darkness shall pursue his enemies.
God’s “old creation,” Israel, is thus to be de-created,
as the Kingdom is transferred to the Church, the New Creation (cf. 2 Pet. 3:7-14).
These ideas he is addressing are from the scriptural language used...not from outside the bible.....he then states that this judgement on the "old creation" is in contrast with the "new creation"
DHK...you might not agree, but it is a valid thought based on the verses offered.
Because the rulers in God’s Vineyard have killed His Son, they
too will be killed (Matt. 21:33-45). The Vineyard itself will be broken down, destroyed, and laid waste (Isa.5:1-7).
This is solid and no one can deny this.
In God’s righteous destruction of Israel, He will
shake even heaven and earth (Matt. 24:29-30; Heb.
12:26-28) in order to deliver His Kingdom over to His
new nation, the Church.
here is the language of Hebrews 12;
25 See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven:
26 Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven.
27 And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.
28 Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:
29 For our God is a consuming fire.
The writer in hebrews uses the same allegorical language to contrast shaking of the earth and heavens.....something being destoyed against the Kingdom which already was here...which cannot be removed...
"God's old creation is Israel."
"Israel is thus to be de-created."
DHK...I agree but that does not mean symbols cannot be properly matched in scripture....
You have pre-mill books on your shelf that suggest that the scorpions in revelation are Apache helicopters...so it is not a one way street at all..is it?
DHK...thank you for your response and standing your ground.Also thank you for redirecting Van back to scripture than his hobby horse attack in the other thread:applause::thumbs: Now let's take a look...
Here are some other examples:
DHK.....it is proper to voice a concern or warning when anyone seeks to give meaning to allegorical ,and metaphorical language..
If you notice in the examples you offer...like Origen...his ideas were fanciful and brought to the bible from outside of scripture.I believe Chilton seeks to offer interpretations taken from God's usage in scripture of the same language which I will show you by simply opening up the verses he offered.
Gentile powers are shaken as well: Every mountain
and island were moved out of their places
Job 9:5-6;
5 Which removeth the mountains, and they know not: which overturneth them in his anger.
6 Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.
14:18-19;
18 And surely the mountains falling cometh to nought, and the rock is removed out of his place.
19 The waters wear the stones: thou washest away the things which grow out of the dust of the earth; and thou destroyest the hope of man.
28:9-11;
9 He putteth forth his hand upon the rock; he overturneth the mountains by the roots.
10 He cutteth out rivers among the rocks; and his eye seeth every precious thing.
11 He bindeth the floods from overflowing; and the thing that is hid bringeth he forth to light.
Isa. 41:5, 15-16;
5 The isles saw it, and feared; the ends of the earth were afraid, drew near, and came.
15 Behold, I will make thee a new sharp threshing instrument having teeth: thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them small, and shalt make the hills as chaff.
16 Thou shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry them away, and the whirlwind shall scatter them: and thou shalt rejoice in the Lord, and shalt glory in the Holy One of Israel.
Ezek. 38:20;
20 So that the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the heaven, and the beasts of the field, and all creeping things that creep upon the earth, and all the men that are upon the face of the earth, shall shake at my presence, and the mountains shall be thrown down, and the steep places shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground.
Nab.1:4-8;
5 The mountains quake at him, and the hills melt, and the earth is burned at his presence, yea, the world, and all that dwell therein.
6 Who can stand before his indignation? and who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? his fury is poured out like fire, and the rocks are thrown down by him.
7 The Lord is good, a strong hold in the day of trouble; and he knoweth them that trust in him.
8 But with an overrunning flood he will make an utter end of the place thereof, and darkness shall pursue his enemies.
God’s “old creation,” Israel, is thus to be de-created,
as the Kingdom is transferred to the Church, the New Creation (cf. 2 Pet. 3:7-14).
These ideas he is addressing are from the scriptural language used...not from outside the bible.....he then states that this judgement on the "old creation" is in contrast with the "new creation"
DHK...you might not agree, but it is a valid thought based on the verses offered.
Because the rulers in God’s Vineyard have killed His Son, they
too will be killed (Matt. 21:33-45). The Vineyard itself will be broken down, destroyed, and laid waste (Isa.5:1-7).
This is solid and no one can deny this.
In God’s righteous destruction of Israel, He will
shake even heaven and earth (Matt. 24:29-30; Heb.
12:26-28) in order to deliver His Kingdom over to His
new nation, the Church.
here is the language of Hebrews 12;
25 See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven:
26 Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven.
27 And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.
28 Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:
29 For our God is a consuming fire.
The writer in hebrews uses the same allegorical language to contrast shaking of the earth and heavens.....something being destoyed against the Kingdom which already was here...which cannot be removed...
"God's old creation is Israel."
"Israel is thus to be de-created."
DHK...I agree but that does not mean symbols cannot be properly matched in scripture....
You have pre-mill books on your shelf that suggest that the scorpions in revelation are Apache helicopters...so it is not a one way street at all..is it?
I offered you two sections in post 178. and post 181.......did you look at them?
respond to them and show what you say are weird ideas:wavey:
if you cannot do that...you have no basis to comment as you do.If you can show it then you gain credibility.
Biblicist, and DHK, have credibility because they look at the material, interact with it, then give their view..
I want you to take it line by line, and show if you can how these ideas are.."weird"
Last edited by a moderator:
The view is still very popular that it will be a "revived Roman Empire," a leader in Rome, or perhaps symbolic of the European Union, from whence the Antichrist shall come. But that is the political leader, the one-world leader.
Who is the religious leader, the leader of the one-world religion, the false prophet, who will work alongside the antichrist? True believers have always considered that religious leader to be the Pope.
"A whore" is one who prostitutes herself. It is a symbol of an apostate religion, not a political force.
Even to believers James writes these harsh words:
James 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.
The enemy is the world. Whoever is a part of the bride of Christ commits adultery when the bride befriends itself, walks closely, and gets in bed with "the world." They have taken their eyes off Christ.
So is every historian in existence as no such evidence exists or can exist as it is self-contradictory. If he is wrong here, his whole theory falls flat, and he is wrong.
He admits that one of the seven is already in power with Rome and yet John denies any of the seven "receive power" as yet but only "with the beast" in that "one hour."
12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
Just try to fit into revelation though just how can the Great Whore by Jerusalem, or Isreal, for John said these were events still yet to come at dating of His revelations, and this was given to him by God at end first Century?
Also, when didi the 144,000 jewish billy grahams get unleased upon the earth, if jersualem and isreal was seen as being kaput in plans of God already?
Who was the great army to march in from east in those days?
when did all the armies of the earth gather up to jerusalem , a LITERAL physical city, and try to overthrow the messiah, to wage a real war here on earth against Him then?
just cannot spiritualize all of the prophetic elelments away!
Protestant
Well-Known Member
Yes, it is very popular. Many fictitious novels have been written by multi-millionaires to support that view. The Charismatics in particular hold that interpretation.
The Protestant Reformers understood the Papacy to herald the Pseudo-Christian ‘Holy’ Roman Empire.
The Pope’s Roman Caesars’ title, Pontifex Maximus, is evidence that he is, in effect, a continuation of their dynasty.
Furthermore, history relates how Popes acting as Emperors of their ‘Christian’ World Empire deposed and enthroned kings, ultimately claiming the doctrine of the ‘two swords’ as proclaimed by Boniface 8th in his bull, Unam Sanctum:
“We are informed by the texts of the gospels that in this Church and in its power are two swords; namely, the spiritual and the temporal.”
In addition, history relates how the Popes commanded the secular authorities to carry out their reign of terror on the ancient and not so ancient dissenting Christians.
In order for a speculated one-world leader to rule a speculated one-world government several improbable events must take place:
1. All nations must peacefully agree to relinquish their sovereignty. If they do not peacefully agree, then they will fight to the death. In which case there will be no more world for the one-world leader to rule.
2. The United States, known for its defense of freedom around the world, must make a radical reversal of policy in welcoming a dictatorship.
3. Americans must also reverse their in-bred detestation of being 'told what to do'. They must agree to no longer live by the credo 'Live Free or Die.’
4. Congress, who cannot agree on much smaller challenges such as raising the debt ceiling and scaling back expenditures, would have to somehow come together and pass laws which contradict the very Constitution they claim to uphold.
In order for there to be a speculated one-world religion several more improbable events must take place:
1. Enemies since the dawn of time must now renounce their god/gods and mutually embrace a new one. Arabs and Jews come to mind.
2. Al Qaeda and all radical Muslim jihadists must now embrace the United States, the ‘Great Satan’, and worship this new god together in brotherhood and harmony.
3. The United States Congress and its citizens must renounce the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Not sure what you believe, but it is a very popular belief which teaches that all true Christians will not be forced to convert to the new religion because they have been conveniently ‘raptured’ out of harm’s way.
If that be the case, how sad the millions of martyrs murdered for their faith were not deemed worthy by their Lord to escape tribulation at the hands of the Papacy!
Then Christ’s words, ‘In the world you will have tribulation’, do not apply to us ‘favored’ Christians in the 21st century?
The 'secret' Rapture, two-stage return of Christ is not a doctrine which I embrace....as I am sure you can tell. <grin>
Actually the ancient Christian dissenters and Protestant Reformers always considered the Pope in power to be the Antichrist, not some second fiddle false prophet.
Nor did they ever consider another, completely different Antichrist to arise at the end of time.
I will post some of their testimonies. They are quite enlightening!
Amen. Spiritual fornication is certainly the central theme, whether it be with idols or other religions…..or through love of money. (Indulgences for sale, anyone?)
Amen. Christ admonishes us that the world will hate His disciples, as it hated Him.
If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.
It’s problematic for the Pope that the world loves him.
It’s also problematic for Billy Graham that the world loves Billy, who, in turn, also loves the Pope.
the writer fits in all these events and says the book of revelation was written before the destruction of the temple and 70ad.
MANY evalgelical/Conservative commentaries see it in mid 90's though!
Chilton dates the book sometime before A.D. 70 and yet John denies that the ten kings had arisen and received power at the time of writing. There is no extent history in print that suggests that Rome joined ten kings in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
Chilton suggests that the already existent "ten imperial provinces" may be the identity but these already existed, but the ten kings in Revelation had "not yet risen" according to John. So this suggestion fails by Chilton.
Chilton provides no other suggestions and so his interpretation is in limbo without any historical support. He is simply wrong and it is obvious he is wrong. His whole argument concerning the dating of Revelation is suspect to error. Alford takes his arguments for an early dating to the cleaners!
I would hate to base my salvation on the tenuous date of one book of the Bible.
As I have said before: All of Preterism crumbles when the fictitious date of 70 A.D. is proven wrong.
I am aware of that...but it has been pointed out that these men all read one common source to come up with the date.Others see evidence of an early date.
I am still waiting for you to answer the two posts I offered you.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Biblicist
Others do also
yes,,,but the temple was not yet destroyed yet either....whatever was the 10 kings could have made this alliance subsequent to the completed writing...I do not know.
What I see is a discussion about the date, and an avoidance of the scriptural points about Jerusalem.
I do not know that we have to look outside of scripture to get a complete answer on this.If Jerusalem and Rome are clearly identified through symbolic language....perhaps ten is being used for the full contingent of enemies.
John writes this as a warning to the churches,as Jesus had warned of these things in Mt.24...that is why John speaks of what was to happen shortly.....in their lifetime...so Chiltons suggestion is still viable.
Others do also
yes,,,but the temple was not yet destroyed yet either....whatever was the 10 kings could have made this alliance subsequent to the completed writing...I do not know.
What I see is a discussion about the date, and an avoidance of the scriptural points about Jerusalem.
I do not know that we have to look outside of scripture to get a complete answer on this.If Jerusalem and Rome are clearly identified through symbolic language....perhaps ten is being used for the full contingent of enemies.
John writes this as a warning to the churches,as Jesus had warned of these things in Mt.24...that is why John speaks of what was to happen shortly.....in their lifetime...so Chiltons suggestion is still viable.
Ken Gentry has offered much on these things.
- Status