THE BOOK OF REVELATION PART 17

Just who is the Harlot of Babylon?

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 17 :1 And there came one of the seven angels, who had the seven vials, and spoke with me, saying: Come, I will shew thee the condemnation of the great harlot, who sitteth upon many waters, 2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication; and they who inhabit the earth, have been made drunk with the whine of her whoredom.

 

 

 

The first thing to note is that John is not just told by the Angel that he is simply about to show him the great harlot but that he will show him the condemnation of the great harlot. The Greek word is Krima and indicates a sentence that has already been handed down. The harlot has already been found guilty and John is present, not for the crimes, not even for the trial, but for the sentence. The harlot is being sentenced in 68 AD (I will demonstrate that that is when this is written).

 

 

 

This is the first proof that John's vision refers to an entity that existed in 68 AD when his vision occurred, and said entity had committed crimes before then.

 

 

 

The first premise of anti-catholic interpretation of these chapters is that this vision refers to something in the distant future, long beyond John's years. As you will see, that is a man-made construct that runs directly counter to the text.

 

 

 

Verse 1 says the harlot sits on the many waters (peoples, nations et v15) It is a combination of the Greek word Kathemi- meaning to sit and a modifier that specifically denotes present tense. Present tense, folks. 68 AD. Verse 2 says The Kings of the earth have had intercourse. Have had intercourse. This is from the Greek word porneue and a modifier indicating active tense. These things are occurring even as John sees the vision in 68 AD.

 

 

 

Anti-catholics who say the harlot is the Catholic church, literally must explain why John is using the wrong words here and this is actually a far-future event. The same is true with "they who inhabit the earth" Present tense. "Have been made drunk" Active tense. That the whore, the kings and the inhabitants of the earth all existed in the 1st century is unarguable from the standpoint of the etymology of the words.

 

 

 

Since the whore represents the religious world having spiritual intercourse with the pagan world, the allusion of Jerusalem and Pagan Rome, respectively, is impossible to escape and there are just pages and pages of Scripture to support this.

 

 

 

In Isaiah Chapter 1, the prophet heralds a warning that he specifies as pertaining to Jerusalem. In verse 21, He says:

 

 

 

21 How is the faithful city, that was full of judgment, become a harlot? justice dwelt in it, but now murderers.

 

Jeremiah 3:6 6 And the Lord said to me in the days of king Josias: Hast thou seen what rebellious Israel hast done? she hath gone out of herself upon every high mountain, and under every green tree, and hath played the harlot there.

 

There are many others I could cite but the point is clear. In God's Holy Word, Israel in general and Jerusalem were referred to as the harlot too many times to count.

 

 

 

We continue.....

 

 

 

3 And he took me away in spirit into the desert. And I saw a woman sitting upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. 4 And the woman was clothed round about with purple and scarlet, and gilt with gold, and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand, full of the abomination and filthiness of her fornication. 5 And on her forehead a name was written: A mystery; Babylon the great, the mother of the fornications, and the abominations of the earth.

 

 

 

First, we must address the beast because this is a typology that cannot be missed. In Revelation 12, we first see the Seven-headed, ten horned beast that wages war against the Child of God and His Mother. That beast is specifically identified as Satan. Here again, in chapter 17, we see the seven-headed, ten horned beast but as we will see, it is associated with "Kings of the earth". In other words, this beast is a Kingdom that the Whore (Jerusalem) was currently riding upon in a spiritual sense. Again, the woman is sitting- present tense. This kingdom, by comparison, represents the very evil and malice of Satan himself as it is portrayed as the same dragon. This kingdom can be none other than pagan Rome.

 

 

 

Detractors of the Catholic church like to seize on verse 4 and the golden cup- which they allude to the communion chalice, and the purple and scarlet- which they infer to be the official colors of the Catholic church. Let me deal with the last point first. The official colors of the Catholic church are Gold and White. True, Priestly vestments have been Red and Purple but they have also been Gold, White, Black, Green, Rose and multiple other colors. This allusion is very tenuous at best. They have a slightly stronger argument in the inference of the golden cup but it is still only an inference. It doesn't hold up.

 

 

 

You will notice that they often do not even mention the precious stones and pearls? Did they forget about those or just couldn't make the allusion fit?

 

 

 

I'll tell you where you find all these things. In Exodus Chapter 25 in the materials for the Temple in Jerusalem.

 

 

 

The Purple and Scarlet yarn is found in many verses- verse 4 for example. The precious stones appear in verse 7. Look it up folks! The golden cups are right there in verse 29 and gold is throughout the chapter. The only clue missing is the pearls which seem to refer to the woman's vanity and certainly cannot be ascribed to the Catholic church. So, some ascribe Gold, Golden cups, precious stones and Purple and Scarlet to the Catholic church by inference. The Bible, however, assigns these things-specifically to Jerusalem and the Temple.

 

 

 

Wouldn't it be strange for so-called Biblical Christians to dismiss proof that comes straight from the pages of Scripture?

 

 

 

What about her name? Babylon?

 

 

 

The term is used derisively, of course. It is not referring to the actual historical nation of Babylon. Our opponents obviously concede this point because they try to juxtapose it to Rome and, by consequence, the Catholic church that they posit as an offshoot of that Roman empire. That's where the anticatholic paradigm hits a brick wall. Foundational to their refutation of Peter as the first Pope is the blanket denial that Peter was ever in Rome. This contention on their part is historically untenable but it also presents them the Biblical problem.

 

 

 

In Chapter 5 of his first epistle, Peter says

 

 

 

13 The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you: and so doth my son Mark.

 

 

 

This puts our anti-catholic friends in quite a pickle. They either have to admit that Babylon refers to Jerusalem (the elected church) or admit that Peter was in Rome. That's their only 2 options. However, since pagan Rome, having never been God's people, could thus not be guilty of spiritual adultery, the conclusion is inescapable.

 

 

 

The Whore is Jerusalem, mother of all whores and abominations.

 

 

 

Let us continue:

 

 

 

6 And I saw the woman drunk with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. And I wondered, when I had seen her, with great admiration.

 

 

 

This is another verse for anticatholics to latch on by inference. They will bring up the inquisitions and the crusades and all the killing done by crooked kings on all sides, multiply it by 10,000 and juxtapose it all on the woman as an indictment of the Catholic church.

 

 

 

They are once again hoisted by their own petard and the plain etymology of the words, for they would clearly argue that the Catholic church did not even exist in 68 AD. That the greek term portrays the woman's drunken state as present tense- 68 AD is inescapable. They can infer that this points forward centuries but the greek verbiage doesn't support that. However, a similar verse that comes later, really slams the door on their arguments.

 

 

 

For now, though they can argue that this verse can be applied to the Catholic church, there is no arguing that it can be applied to Jerusalem who had killed many Christians by this point, Stephen being just one.

 

 

 

Let's continue.

 

 

 

7 And the angel said to me: Why dost thou wonder? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast which carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns. 8 The beast, which thou sawest, was, and is not, and shall come up out of the bottomless pit, and go into destruction: and the inhabitants on the earth (whose names are not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world) shall wonder, seeing the beast that was, and is not. 9 And here is the understanding that hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, upon which the woman sitteth, and they are seven kings: 10 Five are fallen, one is, and the other is not yet come: and when he is come, he must remain a short time. 11 And the beast which was, and is not: the same also is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into destruction.

 

 

 

First, with respect to the Beast, John is again alluding it with the Devil. While He calls Jesus "He who was and is and is to come", the devil is he who was and is not. This is the demonic character of the beast in general, again reflecting back to chapter 12. Later, you will see him draw the lens in closer by looking at the heads of the beast.

 

 

 

Verse 9 is very important and the anti-catholics always get it wrong. I'm using an accurate translation that gets it right. The woman sits on 7 mountains (the Greek word Oros) not on 7 hills (the Greek word Boonos). This is not Rome. It certainly isn't the Vatican which sits on it's own, 8th hill on the other side of the Tiber river.

 

 

 

For people of John's day, it would have been automatic for them to recognize the city on 7 mountains- Jerusalem. They are the Mount of Olives, Mount Scopus, Mount of Corruption, Mount Ophel, the Original Mount Zion, the New Mount Zion and the Mount on which the Antonia Fortress was built.

 

 

 

Once again, the harlot is proven to be Jerusalem.

 

 

 

The Kings, on the other hand, belong to the beast, not the harlot. 5 have fallen, one is, one to come.

 

 

 

The first 5 Roman emperors were Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Nero. All 5 were dead by the end of 68 AD. Nero is the beast whose name adds up to 666, the number announced in chapter 13. The sixth king, who was emperor when this book was written was Galba. The 7th was Otho. This proves that John wrote this book in 68 AD during the reign of Galba and the "Fall of Babylon" he was warning so urgently about was the destruction of Jerusalem by Vespasian who John allegorically calls an 8th king and a reincarnation of the fallen beast- Nero.

 

 

 

12 And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received royal power, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together with the beast. 13 These are of one mind and give over their power and authority to the beast; 14 they will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are called and chosen and faithful.”

 

These 10 Kings seem to represent some type of temporary alliance with Rome. Conscripts, if you will. That they reign for an hour is a way of saying they are insignificant.

 

 

 

and, here is the evidence of this....

 

 

 

15 And he said to me: The waters which thou sawest, where the harlot sitteth, are peoples, and nations, and tongues. 16 And the ten horns which thou sawest in the beast: these shall hate the harlot, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and shall burn her with fire. 17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled. 18 And the woman which thou sawest, is the great city, which hath kingdom over the kings of the earth.

 

 

 

In verse 16, we see that the Roman Beast turns on the whore and burns her with fire. This happens in 70 AD. I am often amused when zealous anti-catholics call the church both the beast and the whore as if the church could wage war on herself!

 

 

 

The woman herself is identified as "The Great city" and that great city is identified in Revelation 11:8 as a spiritual Sodom and Egypt to go along with her derisive title of Babylon. The verse also clearly tells us that it is the city where Our lord was crucified, and we all know that that city was Jerusalem. By virtue of this one chapter, Jerusalem is proven to be the Harlot. We prove the case even more in Chapter 18 which will be our next episode.