Was "Babylon The Great" a Symbolic Name for Jerusalem?

March 22, 2014 | PhilipFreneau

[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

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>This would mean that Peter wrote his first epistle from Jerusalem and not Rome or the real Babylon.<<<

>>>1 Peter 5:13 The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son.<<<

The notion that Babylon represents Rome was made up out of thin air. There is no evidence of that connection, whatsoever; and there is certainly no evidence Peter wrote his epistle from Rome. In fact, there is not a whisper about Peter ever being in Rome. If you know of any, it would be much appreciated if you present it.

Peter and James appeared to spend their time in Jerusalem until the end; and there are some who believe they were the two witnesses who were killed in Jerusalem. If they were, it answers a lot of questions about the two witnesses.

Anyway, I will continue to believe that Peter wrote his epistle from "Babylon the Great," which was Jerusalem, until I see some evidence to the contrary.

Philip

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>No. Supercessionism is sick.<<<

Explain yourself.

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>“Babylon the Great” represents “worldly” culture that has rejected the true God for materialism, affluence and comfort. It is not a literal single city, but any place with an idolatrous materialistic character and worldview.<<<

Where does it say that?

Philip

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>Babylon is symbolic of Man’s effort to replace or overthrow God.<<<

Where does it say that?

>>>Jerusalem? No. Why? Because God has a special place for Jerusalem, not based on it’s or it’s inhabitant’s behavior.<<<

Is that why it was completely destroyed and leveled in 70 AD, to the point that soldiers plowed salt into the soil? The word desolate took on a new meaning after the destruction of Jerusalem and the accompanying slaughter and starvation that killed over 1.1 million people. It doesn’t sound so special to me.

New Jerusalem, on the other hand, now that sounds special.

>>>Once God makes a promise, it’s done.<<<

What was that promise?

Philip

[editor-surveyor]

>> “Was “Babylon The Great” a Symbolic Name for Jerusalem?” <<

.
No, definitely not.

“That Great city called Sodom and Egypt, wherein our Savior was crucified...” (Rev 11)

Babylon is the Biblical name of Satan’s global system, that he has nurtured since Cain was cast out to the wilderness.
.

The catholic church is the ecclesiastical branch of Mystery Babylon. (there are two separate operational branches to Babylon, as pointed out by Alexander Hislop; that is why Isaiah prophesied “Mystery Babylon is fallen is fallen.” There will be two separate falls, centered on two separate cities.)
.

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>Babylon is the Biblical name of Satan’s global system, that he has nurtured since Cain was cast out to the wilderness.<<<

Where can that be found in the scriptures?

>>>The catholic church is the ecclesiastical branch of Mystery Babylon. (there are two separate operational branches to Babylon, as pointed out by Alexander Hislop; that is why Isaiah prophesied “Mystery Babylon is fallen is fallen.” There will be two separate falls, centered on two separate cities.)<<<

When did the catholic church kill all the prophets?

Philip

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>Catholic apologist Karl Keating confirms that Rome was known as Babylon and cites 1 Peter:5:13 The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son.. 1 The Catholic Encyclopedia states, “It is within the city of Rome, called the city of seven hills, that the entire area of Vatican State proper is now confined.” [The Catholic Encyclopedia ( Thomas Nelson, 1976), under the heading, “Rome.”]<<<

When did the catholic church kill all the prophets?

Philip

[editor-surveyor]

>> “Babylon the Great” represents “worldly” culture that has rejected the true God for materialism, affluence and comfort. <<

.
No, it is more than that. It is Satan’s web of control of all Earthly endeavor, secular, and ecclesiastical.
.

[editor-surveyor]

Considering that Peter specifically calls out the Hebrew settlements of the area that was then known as Babylon as the intended recipients of the epistle, I suspect that was where he was when he wrote it.
.

[editor-surveyor]

>> “When did the catholic church kill all the prophets?” <<

.
The catholic church slaughtered all the real followers of Yeshua, and all the Jews, that they could find, from the fourth through fifteenth centuries.
.

The description of Babylon in The Revelation is easily recognized as the Vatican, and the British royal family.
.

[editor-surveyor]

And who sits “as a queen” in Jerusalem?
.
.

[Still Thinking]

Sure, because by that time Judaism was no longer the true religion (post Pentecost). Anyway, the form of Judaism still extant by that time was hopelessly corrupt anyway. That’s why the native branch of the olive tree would be chopped off and another grafted in.

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>The catholic church slaughtered all the real followers of Yeshua, and all the Jews, that they could find, from the fourth through fifteenth centuries.<<<

But no prophets? No apostles? I guess we can strike the catholic church from the list of potential Babylon the Greats.

>>>The description of Babylon in The Revelation is easily recognized as the Vatican, and the British royal family.<<<

You are kidding, right?

Philip

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>And who sits “as a queen” in Jerusalem?<<<

It doesn’t say “who.” It says “she,” “the city.” She was also labeled a Harlot, just like Jerusalem by the old testament prophets.

Read some of Josephus’ works. Jerusalem was the “showcase of the middle east,” in its day. It was a splendid city: maybe even “A Queen” among cities.

No matter. The written word is all that matters. We have to determine which city was responsible for the blood of the prophets, and we will find Babylon the Great.

Philip

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>Sure, because by that time Judaism was no longer the true religion (post Pentecost). Anyway, the form of Judaism still extant by that time was hopelessly corrupt anyway. That’s why the native branch of the olive tree would be chopped off and another grafted in.<<<

Good post! I also recall reading that some of the natural branches would also be grafted back in. To me that can only mean one thing: God is no respecter of persons.

Philip

[editor-surveyor]

Read it again. It definitely is a real queen.

[editor-surveyor]

Rome slaughtered ALL of the apostles.
.

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>Considering that Peter specifically calls out the Hebrew settlements of the area that was then known as Babylon as the intended recipients of the epistle, I suspect that was where he was when he wrote it.<<<

I recall that Peter wrote his epistle to strangers scattered throughout Asia Minor, including Proconsular Asia. What areas are you referring to?

Philip

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>Rome slaughtered ALL of the apostles.<<<

You forgot to include your sarcasm tags. You are kidding, right?

Philip

[editor-surveyor]

If you look up the word used for “strangers” in the Greek text, you will see that he was speaking to his Hebrew cousins is the area below the Black sea.