Jews are Going Home,Signs of the Times are Everywhere

Hizikyah · Jan 17, 2015

I don't disagree with all you say, but wan to say this;

I agree that Yahweh allows and nothing happens if He doesn't allow it, and certainty there are times where I believe He uses "leaders" to punish people for evil their ways, but I do not think He always PLACES these men in power, but allows it.

Hosea 8:4, "They made kings, but not through me. They set up princes, but I knew it not. With their silver and gold they made idols for their own destruction."

Acts 4:26, "The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers were gathered together, against Yah and against his Anointed."

For the people asked for "leaders/kings" in the first place:

1 Samuyl 8:7-20," Yahweh answered Samuyl, and said: Listen to all the words the people speak to you, for they have not rejected you; they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them. Just as they have done to Me from the day I brought them out of Egypt, to this very day, they are now doing to you--they are forsaking Me in order to serve god(s) So, listen to them. However, solemnly forewarn them and let them know how the king who will reign over them will behave toward them. Samuyl spoke all the words of Yahweh to the people who had asked him for a king. Samuyl said; This is how the king you desire to reign over you will behave: He will take your sons and appoint some of them to serve with his chariots--some will drive his chariot horses, and others will run in front of his chariots. He will appoint captains for his army--captains over thousands and captains over hundreds. Your sons will plow his ground, others will bring in his harvest, and others will manufacture weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. He will take your daughters and appoint them to be his perfumers, cooks, and bakers. He will seize your best fields, vineyards, and olive groves, and give them to his officials. He will demand a tenth of your grain and your vintage, and he will give it to his officers and attendants. He will take your menservants, your maidservants, your finest young men, and your donkeys, and will put them to his own use. He will demand a tenth of your sheep, and you, yourselves, will become his servants. You will cry out in that day because of the king you wanted for yourselves, but in that day Yahweh will not listen to you. However, the people refused to listen to Samuyl's warning, and answered; No, we want a king to reign over us. We want to be just like all the other nations. We want a king to judge us and lead us in our battles."

kaylagrl · Jan 17, 2015

JesusistheChrist said:

Actually, I was referring to kaylagrl because she mentioned what she sees in the OT.

Anyhow, God's Word is for all of us and here is how Daniel responded when Nebuchadnezzar asked him to interpret his dream:

Daniel chapter 4

[18] This dream I king Nebuchadnezzar have seen. Now thou, O Belteshazzar, declare the interpretation thereof, forasmuch as all the wise men of my kingdom are not able to make known unto me the interpretation: but thou art able; for the spirit of the holy gods is in thee.
[19] Then Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, was astonied for one hour, and his thoughts troubled him. The king spake, and said, Belteshazzar, let not the dream, or the interpretation thereof, trouble thee. Belteshazzar answered and said, My lord, the dream be to them that hate thee, and the interpretation thereof to thine enemies.
[20] The tree that thou sawest, which grew, and was strong, whose height reached unto the heaven, and the sight thereof to all the earth;
[21] Whose leaves were fair, and the fruit thereof much, and in it was meat for all; under which the beasts of the field dwelt, and upon whose branches the fowls of the heaven had their habitation:
[22] It is thou, O king, that art grown and become strong: for thy greatness is grown, and reacheth unto heaven, and thy dominion to the end of the earth.
[23] And whereas the king saw a watcher and an holy one coming down from heaven, and saying, Hew the tree down, and destroy it; yet leave the stump of the roots thereof in the earth, even with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field; and let it be wet with the dew of heaven, and let his portion be with the beasts of the field, till seven times pass over him;
[24] This is the interpretation, O king, and this is the decree of the most High, which is come upon my lord the king:
[25] That they shall drive thee from men, and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field, and they shall make thee to eat grass as oxen, and they shall wet thee with the dew of heaven, and seven times shall pass over thee, till thou know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.
[26] And whereas they commanded to leave the stump of the tree roots; thy kingdom shall be sure unto thee, after that thou shalt have known that the heavens do rule.
[27] Wherefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable unto thee, and break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor; if it may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity.

Daniel called this THEN WICKED KING "my lord" and he sought the "lengthening of Nebuchadnezzar's tranquility" or peace. Is that the attitude being demonstrated here? Hardly. Furthermore:

THE MOST HIGH RULES IN THE KINGDOM OF MEN AND GIVES IT TO WHOMSOEVER HE WILL!

Who raised up Pharaoh?

GOD DID!

"And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, for to shew in thee my power; and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth." (Exodus 9:16)

Who raised up the king of Assyria?

GOD DID!

Isaiah chapter 10

[5] O Assyrian, the rod of mine anger, and the staff in their hand is mine indignation.
[6] I will send him against an hypocritical nation, and against the people of my wrath will I give him a charge, to take the spoil, and to take the prey, and to tread them down like the mire of the streets.
[7] Howbeit he meaneth not so, neither doth his heart think so; but it is in his heart to destroy and cut off nations not a few.
[8] For he saith, Are not my princes altogether kings?
[9] Is not Calno as Carchemish? is not Hamath as Arpad? is not Samaria as Damascus?
[10] As my hand hath found the kingdoms of the idols, and whose graven images did excel them of Jerusalem and of Samaria;
[11] Shall I not, as I have done unto Samaria and her idols, so do to Jerusalem and her idols?
[12] Wherefore it shall come to pass, that when the Lord hath performed his whole work upon mount Zion and on Jerusalem, I will punish the fruit of the stout heart of the king of Assyria, and the glory of his high looks.
[13] For he saith, By the strength of my hand I have done it, and by my wisdom; for I am prudent: and I have removed the bounds of the people, and have robbed their treasures, and I have put down the inhabitants like a valiant man:
[14] And my hand hath found as a nest the riches of the people: and as one gathereth eggs that are left, have I gathered all the earth; and there was none that moved the wing, or opened the mouth, or peeped.
[15] Shall the axe boast itself against him that heweth therewith? or shall the saw magnify itself against him that shaketh it? as if the rod should shake itself against them that lift it up, or as if the staff should lift up itself, as if it were no wood.

Who raised up Nebuchadnezzar?

GOD DID!

"And now have I given all these lands unto the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, my servant; and the beasts of the field have I given him also to serve him." (Jeremiah 27:6)

Who raised up Pontius Pilate?

GOD DID!

John chapter 19

[10] Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?
[11] Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.

Who raised up Barack Obama?

GOD DID!

Romans chapter 13

[1] Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
[2] Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
[3] For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
[4] For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
[5] Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
[6] For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
[7] Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

Granted, this portion of scripture speaks of "rulers who are not a terror to good works", but we're told elsewhere to even "honor" WICKED RULERS like Nero in Peter's day. Anyhow:

THERE IS NO POWER BUT OF GOD: THE POWERS THAT BE ARE ORDAINED OF GOD!

Does this mean that all "powers" are good? No, not in the least, but it does mean that we are to "honor" them for their position, just the same. When "push comes to shove", we are to obey God more than men.

Can WICKED RULERS repent? You tell me:

Jonah chapter 3

[4] And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.
[5] So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.
[6] For word came unto the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes.
[7] And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water:
[8] But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands.
[9] Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not?
[10] And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

Of course, Jonah would have much preferred GOD'S WRATH TO COME UPON THESE PEOPLE...and that sounds eerily close to some of the heart attitudes here.

10 When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.
Quote...Of course, Jonah would have much preferred GOD'S WRATH TO COME UPON THESE PEOPLE...and that sounds eerily close to some of the heart attitudes here.

If Muslims accept the Lord,wonderful!! I know missionaries that are overseas now trying to win some to the Lord.But to continue to try and accept them as they are sends their souls to hell.You must let them know the truth.That they are in a false and demonic religion.And hey if they want to continue in it I say have at it.But do it in your own country and live at peace with the world.But they cant do that because their Koran tells them to make jihad.Gods wrath will come upon them whether I want it to or not.He wont allow the Muslims to hate and murder his chosen people.If he did that would make him a liar.

JesusistheChrist · Jan 17, 2015

Hizikyah said:

I'm surprised (?) that you would cite me Acts 4:26 which reads in the following manner IN ITS FULLER CONTEXT:

Acts chapter 4

[23] And being let go, they went to their own company, and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them.
[24] And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is:
[25] Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things?
[26] The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ.
[27] For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
[28] For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

IOW, what Herod, Pilate, the Gentiles and the people of Israel did in relation to being "gathered together against the Lord and against his Christ" or "against his anointed" was a fulfillment of what God had prophesied through the mouth of His servant David way back in Psalm 2:

Psalm 2

[1] Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
[2] The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
[3] Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

Yes, God had "determined before", by His own "counsel", that Herod, Pilate, the Gentiles and the people of Israel would reject His "anointed" or His "Christ", even as it came to pass. God's response to the same?

[4] He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
[5] Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
[6] Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
[7] I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

God laughs at their futile attempts to somehow thwart His eternal plans and purposes in relation to His "anointed", Jesus Christ, and foretells them that even though they will "take counsel together" to crucify Jesus, God will still raise Him from the dead and He will yet be His "king upon my holy hill of Zion". Yes, the Father prophetically says to the Son, "Thou art my Son; THIS DAY HAVE I BEGOTTEN THEE" and "this day" of Christ's "begetting" is the "day" in which He was raised from the dead:

Acts chapter 13

[29] And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.
[30] But God raised him from the dead:
[31] And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.
[32] And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers,
[33] God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

Yes, according to scripture, Jesus Christ was "begotten" on the day in which He was raised from the dead. Continuing on with the second Psalm, we read:

[8] Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
[9] Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

Having been raised from the dead or "begotten", the Father promises the Son "the heathen for His inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for His possession" which He shall "break with a rod of iron" and "dash in pieces like a potter's vessel" AT HIS RETURN. Not only this, but those of us who are "joint heirs with Christ" will share in doing the same, even as He promised:

Revelation chapter 2

[25] But that which ye have already hold fast till I come.
[26] And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
[27] And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.

Yes, even as Jesus "received of His Father" a promise to have "power over the nations" at His return, so, too, will those who "overcome and keep His works unto the end" share in the same power during His coming Millennial Reign. Finishing out the second Psalm and bringing this back to "the kings of the earth", we read:

[10] Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
[11] Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
[12] Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

IOW, in light of the fact that Christ and His true, overcoming disciples will have "power over the nations" at His return, the "kings" and "judges of the earth" are admonished to "serve the LORD WITH FEAR and rejoice WITH TREMBLING" and to "kiss the Son, lest He be angry and they perish from the way when His wrath is kindled but a little". There is a coming kingdom of God and we need to be preparing for the same ourselves and also forewarning others of the same.

Anyhow, I've got to run out for a bit, but I'll address your other citation later.

JesusistheChrist · Jan 17, 2015

kaylagrl said:

10 When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.
Quote...Of course, Jonah would have much preferred GOD'S WRATH TO COME UPON THESE PEOPLE...and that sounds eerily close to some of the heart attitudes here.

If Muslims accept the Lord,wonderful!! I know missionaries that are overseas now trying to win some to the Lord.But to continue to try and accept them as they are sends their souls to hell.You must let them know the truth.That they are in a false and demonic religion.And hey if they want to continue in it I say have at it.But do it in your own country and live at peace with the world.But they cant do that because their Koran tells them to make jihad.Gods wrath will come upon them whether I want it to or not.He wont allow the Muslims to hate and murder his chosen people.If he did that would make him a liar.

The Jews are NOT God's "chosen people" in the manner in which you apparently believe them to be and I'll prove as much to you, FROM SCRIPTURE, before this weekend is through (God willing, of course).

Jeff_56 · Jan 17, 2015

the Jews are Yahweh's chosen people.

it is written, Yahweh entrusted Scripture to the Jews, (and 'most all' gentiles in the usa (maybe whole world, but i live in the usa) haven't got even basic understanding that Jewish believers have, even in Jesus).

it is written, Yahweh brought salvation to the world through the Jews, and so it is.

they are being gathered together by Yahweh. He entreated them gently at first, and they wouldn't leave their 'comfortable' lives in other countries; so He sent more devastating persuasion, and they willingly began returning...... their restoration will mean LIFE to the world, more than the world has seen since the first 143 years after Yahshua walked the planet earth in person....

Yahweh spoke, for His people:
it is written (and remains forever unchanged and unchangeable) whoever blesses you, I will bless, and whoever seeks to hurt you, I curse, declares Yahweh the One and Only Creator.

Hizikyah · Jan 17, 2015

JesusistheChrist said:

I was quoting Acts in support to my saying

Hizikyah said:

Of course NOTHING is done if the Most High does not allow it

but that ignores:

Hosea 8:4, "They made kings, but not through me. They set up princes, but I knew it not. With their silver and gold they made idols for their own destruction."

JesusistheChrist · Jan 17, 2015

Jeff_56 said:

the Jews are Yahweh's chosen people.

it is written, Yahweh entrusted Scripture to the Jews, (and 'most all' gentiles in the usa (maybe whole world, but i live in the usa) haven't got even basic understanding that Jewish believers have, even in Jesus).

it is written, Yahweh brought salvation to the world through the Jews, and so it is.

they are being gathered together by Yahweh. He entreated them gently at first, and they wouldn't leave their 'comfortable' lives in other countries; so He sent more devastating persuasion, and they willingly began returning...... their restoration will mean LIFE to the world, more than the world has seen since the first 143 years after Yahshua walked the planet earth in person....

Yahweh spoke, for His people:
it is written (and remains forever unchanged and unchangeable) whoever blesses you, I will bless, and whoever seeks to hurt you, I curse, declares Yahweh the One and Only Creator.

You don't know what you're talking about and, again, I'll prove as much, FROM SCRIPTURE, before this weekend is through.

JesusistheChrist · Jan 17, 2015

Hizikyah said:

How does Acts 4:26 "support" that saying?

Acts 4:26 is talking about Herod, Pilate, the Gentiles and the children of Israel "gathering together against the LORD and against His anointed/Christ" and not about "leaders punishing people for their evil ways".

Anyhow...

Hizikyah said:

I'm not "ignoring" anything. I said that I would address this later and I'll do so now.

For starters, who, CONTEXTUALLY, are the "they"? There's no need to guess:

Hosea chapter 8

[3] Israel hath cast off the thing that is good: the enemy shall pursue him.
[4] They have set up kings, but not by me: they have made princes, and I knew it not: of their silver and their gold have they made them idols, that they may be cut off.

CONTEXTUALLY, Israel is the "they" who "have set up kings, but not by me" and "have made princes, and I knew it not". Well, what does that mean? Did the God Who "declares the end from the beginning and from ancient times the things that are not yet done" (Isaiah 46:10) not foresee/foreknow this? Of course, He did. In fact, He said the following through Moses BEFORE the second generation of Israelites who came out of Egypt ever stepped foot within "the promised land":

Deuteronomy chapter 17

[14] When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me;
[15] Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.

Yes, God FOREKNEW that the Israelites would cry out for a king, thereby rejecting Him as their True King:

I Samuel chapter 8

[1] And it came to pass, when Samuel was old, that he made his sons judges over Israel.
[2] Now the name of his firstborn was Joel; and the name of his second, Abiah: they were judges in Beer-sheba.
[3] And his sons walked not in his ways, but turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment.
[4] Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah,
[5] And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.
[6] But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.
[7] And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
[8] According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.
[9] Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.

Again, Israel had been forsaking the LORD the True King "since the day that He brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day", so this really wasn't a new development and God certainly wasn't surprised by the same. In fact, He foretold of this day, even as I already cited from Deuteronomy 17:14-15. Seeing how Israel rejected their True King by choosing an earthly king, I'm quite confident that this at least in part explains how "they have set up kings, but not by me" (Hosea 8:4). Beyond this, even when Saul was chosen to be the first king and even when the kingdom was eventually given to David and his descendants, there was a division in the kingdom between the two southern tribes and the ten northern tribes, but even that was of the LORD:

I Kings chapter 11

[26] And Jeroboam the son of Nebat, an Ephrathite of Zereda, Solomon's servant, whose mother's name was Zeruah, a widow woman, even he lifted up his hand against the king.
[27] And this was the cause that he lifted up his hand against the king: Solomon built Millo, and repaired the breaches of the city of David his father.
[28] And the man Jeroboam was a mighty man of valour: and Solomon seeing the young man that he was industrious, he made him ruler over all the charge of the house of Joseph.
[29] And it came to pass at that time when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, that the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him in the way; and he had clad himself with a new garment; and they two were alone in the field:
[30] And Ahijah caught the new garment that was on him, and rent it in twelve pieces:
[31] And he said to Jeroboam, Take thee ten pieces: for thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel, Behold, I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to thee:
[32] (But he shall have one tribe for my servant David's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake, the city which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel);
[33] Because that they have forsaken me, and have worshipped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Milcom the god of the children of Ammon, and have not walked in my ways, to do that which is right in mine eyes, and to keep my statutes and my judgments, as did David his father.
[34] Howbeit I will not take the whole kingdom out of his hand: but I will make him prince all the days of his life for David my servant's sake, whom I chose, because he kept my commandments and my statutes:
[35] But I will take the kingdom out of his son's hand, and will give it unto thee, even ten tribes.
[36] And unto his son will I give one tribe, that David my servant may have a light alway before me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen me to put my name there.
[37] And I will take thee, and thou shalt reign according to all that thy soul desireth, and shalt be king over Israel.
[38] And it shall be, if thou wilt hearken unto all that I command thee, and wilt walk in my ways, and do that is right in my sight, to keep my statutes and my commandments, as David my servant did; that I will be with thee, and build thee a sure house, as I built for David, and will give Israel unto thee.
[39] And I will for this afflict the seed of David, but not for ever.
[40] Solomon sought therefore to kill Jeroboam. And Jeroboam arose, and fled into Egypt, unto Shishak king of Egypt, and was in Egypt until the death of Solomon.

From this point onward, there were assassinations and such which led to changes in kings, but, even then, God wasn't caught off guard by any of it. IOW, when He says "but not through me" and "but I knew it not", it seems to simply indicate that Israel didn't first consult Him in regard to certain matters, but not that He truly "knew it not".

Anyhow, we're getting off topic here...

JesusistheChrist · Jan 17, 2015

kaylagrl said:

Hi, kaylagrl.

Whether you've ever heard my explanation before or not, if we let the Bible interpret itself, then there is only one possible candidate who can fulfill all that is written in relation to "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH" (Revelation 17:5) and that one candidate is JERUSALEM. God helping me, I'll make a series of posts to prove my claim. I'll now begin with this:

Revelation chapter 17

[1] And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:
[2] With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
[3] So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
[4] And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
[5] And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
[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.

First of all, in verse 3, we are introduced to TWO DIFFERENT ENTITIES:

1. A woman.
2. A scarlet colored beast.

They are NOT one and the same, even though many people erroneously conflate the two. No, there is a "woman" and there is ALSO a "scarlet colored beast" upon which she sits. Although I won't discuss this on this particular thread, I'll tell you plainly that I'm firmly convinced by both scripture and recorded history that the "scarlet colored beast" is the Vatican/the Papacy, but that is another topic for another day. In this thread, I'm going to seek to prove to you and others the identity of the "woman".

Secondly, whoever this "woman" is, she is "drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus" (Revelation 17:6). If we continue reading on to chapter 18 of the book of Revelation, then this "woman", "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH" (Revelation 17:5), and her insatiable taste for blood is a little bit further described. Yes, we read:

"And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth." (Revelation 18:24)

Yes, whoever this "woman" is, God holds her accountable not only for "the blood of the saints", "the blood of the martyrs of Jesus" and "the blood of prophets", but also for "the blood...of all that were slain upon the earth". If we're to believe scripture and to let the Bible interpret itself, then, again, there is only one city upon the face of the earth who all of this could possibly be referring to and that one city is JERUSALEM. We read:

"Nevertheless I must walk to-day and to-morrow, and the day following: for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem." (Luke 13:33)

Those are the recorded words of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, and He said that "it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem". IT CANNOT BE! Therefore, when we read of how "in her was found the blood of prophets" (Rev. 18:24), this "her" must be JERUSALEM.

"Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:" (Acts 7:51-52)

Again, it was the Jews of Jerusalem who not only persecuted the prophets, but who also slew them. As such, when we read of how "in her was found the blood of the prophets" (Rev. 18:24), this "her" can only be referring to JERUSALEM.

"For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sin always: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost." (I Thessalonians 2:14-16)

Same scenario. Yes, once more, it is the Jews of Judaea or those of Jerusalem who have "both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets". Once more, when you read of how "in her was found the blood of the prophets" (Rev. 18:24), this "her" can only be referring to JERUSALEM.

Remember, now, that whoever this "woman" is, she was also held accountable by God for "the blood...of all that were slain upon the earth" (Rev. 18:24). Wow! I wouldn't want such an accusation leveled against me, would you? Well, again, there's only one city upon the face of the earth who is worthy of this charge and I'll let Jesus Christ tell you exactly which city that is:

"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: 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. 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. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord." (Matthew 23:34-39)

Again, those were the words of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, and He said that upon Jerusalem would "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". Yes, Jesus Christ cried, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets" and, again, "in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth" (Rev. 18:24) and this "her" or this "woman" is JERUSALEM and JERUSALEM alone.

Well, that's just an introduction. There are multiple ways to prove that the "woman" or "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH" is JERUSALEM and this is but one of them.

JesusistheChrist · Jan 17, 2015

"And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters: With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication. So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. 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." (Revelation 17:1-6)

Somebody once said (I'm paraphrasing) that to attempt to understand the New Testament without having a foundational understanding of the Old Testament first is like trying to build a roof on a house without first building the house underneath it to support it. IOW, when we come to the book of Revelation (or any part of the New Testament, for that matter), that is not the place to begin our quest for truth, especially since there are multiple references to the Old Testament found throughout this New Testament book. These New Testament references as to how this "woman" is "arrayed" have deep significance, IF one understands what was written in the Old Testament and especially in regard to the high priest and how he was "arrayed". We read:

"And take thou unto thee Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office, even Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron's sons. And thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother for glory and for beauty. And thou shalt speak unto all that are wise-hearted, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, that they may make Aaron's garments to consecrate him, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office. And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a broidered coat, a mitre, and a girdle: and they shall make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office. And they shall take gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen. And they shall make the ephod of gold, of blue, and of purple, of scarlet, and fine twined linen, with cunning work. It shall have the two shoulder-pieces thereof joined at the two edges thereof; and so it shall be joined together. And the curious girdle of the ephod, which is upon it, shall be of the same, according to the work thereof; even of gold, of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen." (Exodus 28:1-8)

I'll stop here for now and then come back to the Old Testament description of the high priest's garments in a minute. The high priest's garments contained the following:

gold
blue
purple
scarlet
fine twined linen

Now, compare how the high priest was "arrayed" to how this "woman" was "arrayed" in the book of Revelation:

"And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls..." (Revelation 17:4)

Okay.

Both the high priest and "the woman" share the following:

gold
purple
scarlet

Right now, it seems as if this "woman" is missing both "the blue" and "the linen", but "the linen" can be found in a further description of this "woman" in the next chapter of Revelation where we read:

"The merchants of these things, which were made rich by her, shall stand afar off for the fear of her torment, weeping and wailing, And saying, Alas, alas, that great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls!" (Revelation 18:15-16)

Well, there's the "fine linen", but we're still missing "the blue"...and for good reason. Allow me to explain. In the Old Testament, there were many "types" given. IOW, certain things were "types" or "representations" of other things and the colors which we're presently examining were certainly numbered among such "types". In reference to the significance of "the blue" in scripture, we read:

"And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and bid them that they make them fringes in the borders of their garments throughout their generations, and that they put upon the fringe of the borders a ribband of blue: And it shall be unto you for a fringe, that ye may look upon it, and remember all the commandments of the LORD, and do them; and that ye seek not after your own heart and your own eyes, after which ye use to go a-whoring: That ye may remember, and do all my commandments, and be holy unto your God." (Numbers 15:37-40)

Through Moses, God instructed the children of Israel to put "a ribband of blue" or a twisted thread of blue upon the fringe of the border of their garments and this "ribband of blue" was to be a reminder unto them to "remember all the commandments of the LORD and do them" so that they would not "go a-whoring" after other gods. With such in mind, it is extremely significant that the only color which is missing from the "array" of this "woman" or "harlot" or WHORE in Revelation is "blue". IOW, now matter how "religiously arrayed" this "woman" is, her distinguishing feature is that she doesn't "keep the commandments of God" (which is exactly what the missing "blue" represents) and has therefore "gone a-whoring" (She is, after all, "THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS"). Here's where it gets really interesting. This same exact "woman" is also described in Revelation chapter 12 and, more interestingly, this "woman" has "a remnant" which is also described. Yes, we read:

"And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." (Revelation 12:17)

Did you catch that? Even though most of those who comprise "the woman" have no "blue" in their "array" or attire in that they don't "keep the commandments of God", "the remnant" of this "woman" or the Jews who will be saved in the last days do have "blue" in their "array" or attire in that they "keep the commandments of God". Again, it is this "keeping of the commandments of God" which distinguishes "the remnant" from "THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS".

Furthermore, this "woman" of Revelation chapter 17 is also contrasted with the Old Testament high priest in another manner. Yes, we read:

"And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH." (Revelation 17:5)

In stark contrast to what this "woman" has written upon her forehead, the Old Testament high priest bore the following inscription upon his own forehead:

"And thou shalt make a plate of pure gold, and grave upon it, like the engravings of a signet, HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD. And thou shalt put it on a blue lace, that it may be upon the mitre; upon the forefront of the mitre it shall be. And it shall be upon Aaron's forehead, that Aaron may bear the iniquity of the holy things, which the children of Israel shall hallow in all their holy gifts; and it shall be always upon his forehead, that they may be accepted before the LORD." (Exodus 28:36-38)

Whereas the high priest bore the inscription of "HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD" which was fastened to his mitre by "a blue lace" (another reference to keeping the commandments of God) and worn "always upon his forehead", this "woman" from Revelation chapter 17 bears the following inscription upon her forehead:

"And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH." (Revelation 17:5)

Anyhow, THIS is what is actually being described here and, once again, it all points back to JERUSALEM. Look, whoever this "woman" is, she is not only a "harlot" or a "whore", but she is "THE MOTHER of harlots". IOW, through her "harlotries" and "fornicators", she gave birth to other "harlots" and, again, the same could easily be said of JERUSALEM. Anyhow, there are many more indicators and descriptors throughout the book of Revelation which all point directly to JERUSALEM as well, so I've by no means covered all of them. In fact, I've just barely scratched the surface so far. I will add more as both God and time allows me to.

JesusistheChrist · Jan 17, 2015

Whoever this "woman" or "harlot" is, she's also repeatedly described as being a "great city" in the book of Revelation. Here, then, is an exhaustive list of every place in the book of Revelation where the words "great city" appear:

"And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth. These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth. And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed. These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will. And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them. And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified." (Revelation 11:3-8)

The very first reference to "the great city" in the book of Revelation plainly states that it is "where also our Lord was crucified". Where, then, was Jesus crucified? Pilate sentenced Jesus to be crucified while he was at the Praetorium (Mark 15:16) and there are two possible locations for the same and they are both in JERUSALEM:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilate's_court

The actual crucifixion took place at Golgotha (Mark 15:22) which very well may have been right outside of Jerusalem's gate (Heb. 13:12). Before I move on, would anybody here (or elsewhere) like to claim that either "the Pope" or "the apostate church" is "THE GREAT CITY...WHERE ALSO OUR LORD WAS CRUCIFIED"?!? It's NONSENSE, folks. Continuing on in Revelation, we read:

"And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication." (Revelation 14:8)

Here, "that great city" is referred to as "Babylon" and her fall is attributed to the fact that "she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication". Well, where have we read that before? Right here:

"And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters: With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication. So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH." (Revelation 17:1-5)

Notice the comparisons between the two:

"Babylon...that great city" (Revelation 14:8)

"BABYLON THE GREAT" (Revelation 17:5)

Again:

"...she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication" (Revelation 14:8)

"With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication" (Revelation 17:2)

"...having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filtiness of her fornication" (Revelation 17:4)

IOW, "Babylon...that great city" and "BABYLON THE GREAT" are one and the same and they are both referring to JERUSALEM and to none other as I've already begun to document in my previous posts. This will become even more apparent in a moment. Incidentally, please remember that JERUSALEM was already "spiritually called Sodom and Egypt" (Revelation 11:8), so being referred to as "Babylon" or "BABYLON THE GREAT" falls right in line with the same and is what she is referred to "spiritually" here as well. Continuing on, we read:

"And I heard a great voice out of the temple saying to the seven angels, Go your ways, and pour out the vials of the wrath of God upon the earth. And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image. And the second poured out his vial upon the sea; and it became as the blood of a dead man; and every living soul died in the sea. And the third angel poured out his vial upon the rivers and fountains of waters; and they became blood. And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus. For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy. And I heard another out of the altar say, Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments. And the fourth angel poured out his vial upon the sun; and power was given unto him to scorch men with fire. And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory. And the fifth angel pour out his vial upon the seat of the beast; and his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain, And blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds. And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared. And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty. Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame. And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon. And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air; and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, It is done. And there were voices, and thunders, and lightnings; and there was a great earthquake, such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great. And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell: and great Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of wine of the fierceness of his wrath." (Revelation 16:1-19)

Once more, we not only see that "the great city" and "great Babylon" are one and the same, but we also see how "they have shed the blood of saints and prophets" and this refers specifically to those of JERUSALEM as I previously documented. Again, Jesus said that "it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem" (Luke 13:33) and "it cannot be" means "IT CANNOT BE"! Again, those who "shed the blood of saints and prophets" (Revelation 16:6) were those of JERUSALEM and no place else. Incidentally, what we've just read describes the pouring out of the seven vials of God's wrath upon the earth and between vials number 6 and 7 being poured out, Jesus says:

"Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame." (Revelation 16:15)

IOW, Jesus hasn't come yet "as a thief in the night" and He's still heard instructing His saints to "watch". Yes, this is but one of multiple texts which disprove the alleged "pre-tribulation rapture" which is never coming and never promised in scripture. Anyhow, moving on:

"And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth." (Revelation 17:18)

Again, this "woman" is the same exact "woman" from earlier on in this chapter or the same exact "woman" who is described in Revelation 17:1-5 and she is JERUSALEM. Although this "woman" or this "great city" is not presently "reigning over the kings of the earth", she will be in the rapidly approaching end times and I'll be happy to explain that as well. Continuing on:

"And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power; and the earth was lightened with his glory. And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies. And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partaker of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities. Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double. How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow. Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine: and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her. And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning, Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come. And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over her; for no man buyeth their merchandise any more: The merchandise of gold, and silver, and precious stones, and of pearls, and fine linen, and purple, and silk, and scarlet, and all thyine wood, and all manner vessels of ivory, and all manner vessels of most precious wood, and of brass, and iron, and marble, And cinnamon, and odours, and ointments, and frankincense, and wine, and oil, and fine flour, and wheat, and beasts, and sheep, and horses, and chariots, and slaves, and souls of men. And the fruits that thy soul lusted after are departed from thee, and all things which were dainty and goodly are departed from thee, and thou shalt find them no more at all. The merchants of these things, which were made rich by her, shall stand afar off for the fear of her torment, weeping and wailing, And saying, Alas, alas, that great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls! For in one hour so great riches is come to nought. And every shipmaster, and all the company in ships, and sailors, and as many as trade by the sea, stood afar off, And cried when they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, What city is like unto this great city! And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing, saying, Alas, alas, that great city, wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness! for in one hour is she made desolate. Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her. And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all. And the voice of harpers, and musicians, and of pipers, and trumpeters, shall be heard no more at all in thee; and no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he be, shall be found any more in thee; and the sound of a milstone shall be heard no more at all in thee; And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived. And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth." (Revelation 18:1-18)

Five times in this chapter we read of this "great city" and all five instances point directly to "Babylon" and there's simply no doubt as to who, exactly, "Babylon" is.

"For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her..." (Revelation 18:3)

"...in the cup which she that filled fill to her double." (Revelation 18:6)

"And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her..." (Revelation 18:9)

Yep, compare these verses with those we've already covered in Revelation 14:8, 17:2 and 17:4 and you will see that they're all describing one and the same "great city" or one and the same "woman" and that "great city" or "woman" is JERUSALEM and JERUSALEM alone.

"And saying, Alas, alas, that great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls!" (Revelation 18:16)

Yep, this is that same "great city" or that same "woman" whose "array" (Revelation 17:1-5) is missing one color in relation to the high priest of old and that one color is "blue" which speaks of the keeping of the commandments of God.

"Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her." (Revelation 18:20)

"And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and all that were slain upon the earth." (Revelation 18:24)

Again, there is only one possible "great city" which God could avenge the holy apostles and prophets of and only one "great city" which could possibly be held accountable for "the blood of prophets and of saints and all that were slain upon the earth" and that "great city" is JERUSALEM (Matthew 23:35) and JERUSALEM alone.

If you're not convinced by now, then this ought to seal the deal for you. Yes, we're given one other descriptor of this "great city" in the chapter which we just read, namely this:

"...and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies" (Revelation 18:3)

"The merchants of these things, which were made rich by her..." (Revelation 18:15)

"And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing, saying, Alas, alas, that great city, wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness!..." (Revelation 18:19)

Friends, we're given a precise list in this chapter of exactly what "these things" are by which the merchants of the earth were made rich by selling "these things" to the inhabitants of this "great city". Yes, the list can be found in verses 11 through 13 and if I took the time to do so (I don't have it available to me at the moment), then I could show you how that every one of "these things" on this list are directly related to either the building of a temple, the sacrifices which take place in a temple, the ointments used in a temple, the shewbread used in a temple, etc., etc., etc. Gee, I cannot imagine where the Bible tells us that a temple normally is located? It couldn't be in JERUSALEM, could it? You'd better believe that it could be and will be once more in the future.

Well, there is one last place in the book of Revelation where the words "great city" appear and this last reference ought to put the proverbial cherry on top of the proverbial cake:

"And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed unto me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God." (Revelation 21:10)

Yes, friends, there is another "great city" coming, "the holy Jerusalem" or the "new Jerusalem", which will one day descend from heaven to replace the old Jerusalem or the old "great city".

There you have it. Every verse in the book of Revelation which mentions that "great city" and every single reference speaks of JERUSALEM and of no other "great city". As such, I'd advise you all to discard any teachings which assert that this "great city" is anything else but JERUSALEM.

Hopefully, you'll all prayerfully consider these things before God...even if they fly directly in the face of your presently held beliefs or certain teachings or doctrines of your church or denomination.

JesusistheChrist · Jan 17, 2015

There is another very pertinent portion of scripture which greatly aids us in determing exactly who "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT" is. Although it's not found in the book of Revelation, I'll cite the same now and then offer some commentary in relation to the same over a series of four posts. First, here is the pertinent portion of scripture:

"By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand. The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son." (I Peter 5:12-13)

To my understanding, there are at least four different factors in what we just read which offer us insight as to exactly where this "Babylon" is that Peter was writing from and all four, in my estimation, point directly to JERUSALEM and not in the least bit towards Rome or the apostate church. The four factors are as follows:

1. Silvanus, by whom the epistle was apparently delivered.

2. Peter, who wrote the epistle.

3. Marcus or Mark, who was apparently with Peter wherever he was writing from.

4. The "you" to whom Peter was writing.

I'll only cover Silvanus in this post, but, before I do, I need to mention that "Silvanus" and "Silas" are one and the same person in the New Testament. Yes, the Greek word "Σιλᾶς", which is translated as "Silas" (this name appears 13 times in the New Testament)...

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/...gs=G4609&t=KJV

...is a contraction of the Greek word "Σιλουανός", which is translated as "Silvanus" (this name appears 4 times in the New Testament)...

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/...gs=G4610&t=KJV

...and I believe that this will become apparent as we look at the actual instances in scripture where both names appear.

"Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren: And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greetings unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia: Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law; to whom we gave no such commandment: It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. So when they were dismissed, they came to Antioch: and when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the epistle: Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation. And Judas and Silas, being prophets also themselves, exhorted the brethren with many words, and confirmed them. And after they had tarried there a space, they were let go in peace from the brethren unto the apostles. Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still. Paul also and Barnabas continued in Antioch, teaching and preaching the word of the Lord, with many others also." (Acts 15:22-35)

Here are the first 4 instances in the New Testament where "Silas" is mentioned and we know the following about him from the same:

1. He was sent out FROM JERUSALEM (and he was a Jew - Acts 16:20) which is where this council was being held (Acts 15:2, 4).

2. He was known by PETER who was one of the apostles in attendance at said council IN JERUSALEM (Acts 15:7, 14).

3. He went FROM JERUSALEM to Antioch and remained there for a season.

No hint of "Silas" going to or from Rome here.

"And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do. And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark. But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work. And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus; And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God. And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches." (Acts 15:36-41)

Here is the 5th mention of "Silas" in the New Testament and we see him departing from Antioch with Paul and going through Syria and Cilicia. Once more, we see Silas nowhere near Rome. Furthermore, please note that Barnabas took "John, whose surname was Mark" with him to Cyprus and that Paul didn't want Mark to go with them because he had "departed from them from Pamphylia". Well, where did "John, whose surname was Mark" depart to?

"Now when Paul and his company loosed from Paphos, they came to Perga in Pamphylia: and John departing from them returned to Jerusalem." (Acts 13:13)

When Paul was in Pamphylia, "John, whose surname was Mark" departed from him and "returned TO JERUSALEM". Remember that when we come to "Marcus" or "Mark". IOW, here's one instance where Mark was clearly in Jerusalem. Back to Silas:

"And when her masters saw that the hope of their gains was gone, they caught Paul and Silas, and drew them into the marketplace unto the rulers, And brought them to the magistrates, saying, These men, being Jews, do exceedingly trouble our city, And teach customs, which are not lawful for us to receive, neither to observe, being Romans. And the multitude rose up together against them: and the magistrates rent off their clothes, and commanded to beat them. And when they had laid many stripes upon them, they cast them into prison, charging the jailer to keep them safely: Who, having received such a charge, thrust them into the inner prison, and made their feet fast in the stocks. And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God: and the prisoners heard them. And suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison were shaken: and immediately all the doors were opened, and every one's bands were loosed. And the keeper of the prison awaking out of his sleep, and seeing the prison doors open, he drew out his sword, and would have killed himself, supposing that the prisoners had been fled. But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm: for we are all here. Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" (Acts 16:19-29)

Here are the 6th, 7th and 8th mentions of "Silas" in the New Testament and we find him with Paul in Philippi (Acts 16:12). Again, he's still nowhere near Rome and, as I've already mentioned, he is a Jew (I'll explain why this might be very significant in a moment). Seeing how we see "Silas" in Phillipi, I'll now cite the first place where "Silvanus" is mentioned in the New Testament:

"For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea." (II Corinthians 1:19)

This verse is of great significance for at least the following two reasons:

1. This epistle was written by Paul FROM PHILIPPI where he was imprisoned with "Silas".

2. Paul told the Corinthians that he had preached among them with "Silvanus" and Timotheus and we'll see how "Silas" and Timotheus were with Paul in Corinth in a moment (Acts 18:1, 5). IOW, "Silas" and "Silvanus" are, indeed, the same person.

Back to "Silas":

"Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ. And some of them believed Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few. But the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason, and sought to bring them out to the people. And when they found them not, they drew Jason and certain brethren unto the rulers of the city, crying, These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also; Whom Jason hath received: and these all do contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, one Jesus. And they troubled the people and the rulers of the city, when they heard these things. And when they had taken security of Jason, and of the other, they let them go. And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few. But when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was preached of Paul at Berea, they came thither also, and stirred up the people. And then immediately the brethren sent away Paul to go as it were to the sea: but Silas and Timotheus abode there still." (Acts 17:1-14)

Here are the 9th, 10th and 11th mentions of "Silas" in the New Testament and we find him first at Thessalonica and then at Berea. Again, he is still nowhere near Rome. Seeing how he is seen here at Thessalonica, I'll now cite the second and third instances in the New Testament where "Silvanus" is mentioned:

"Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians which is in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ." (I Thessalonians 1:1)

"Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:" (II Thessalonians 1:1)

Seeing how Paul was preaching in Thessalonica with "Silas" (Acts 17:4), Paul mentioned "Silvanus" while writing to the Thessalonians because "Silas" and "Silvanus" are one and the same person. Not only this, but I Thessalonians and II Thessalonians were both penned by Paul while he was in Athens and we'll see in just a moment that "Silas", who is "Silvanus", was there with him.

"And they that conducted Paul brought him unto Athens: and receiving a commandment unto Silas and Timotheus for to come to him with all speed, they departed. Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry." (Acts 17:15-16)

Here is the 12th mention of "Silas" in the New Testament. Again, Paul addressed his readers in Thessalonica in both his first and second epistles which were written from Athens with greetings from himself, "Silvanus" and Timotheus and Paul was in Athens with "Silas" and Timotheus. Again, "Silas" and "Silvanus" are one and the same person. Additionally, we can add Athens to the places where "Silas" or "Silvanus" was found, but we still see absolutely no mention of Rome in Silas' or Silvanus' journeys.

Now, let's look at the 13th and final mention of "Silas" in the New Testament:

"After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth; And found a certain Jew name Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome): and came unto them. And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers. And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks. And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ." (Acts 18:1-5)

Here, we find Paul in Corinth with "Silas" and Timotheus and, again, Paul wrote the following to the Corinthians:

"For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea." (II Corinthians 1:19)

Paul preached in Corinth with "Silvanus" and Timotheus and we just read where Paul was in Corinth with "Silas" and Timotheus, so, once again, "Silas" and "Silvanus" are one and the same person. Also, I personally find it interesting that Luke recorded how that "Claudius (Caesar) had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome". With such being the case, I find it highly unlikely that "Silas" or "Silvanus", who was a Jew (Acts 16:20), ever travelled into Rome himself.

Well, that's all 13 of the instances where "Silas" is mentioned in the New Testament and we've also already covered 3 of the 4 instances where "Silvanus" is mentioned in the New Testament, so let's now look at the final mention of "Silvanus":

"By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand. The church which is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son." (I Peter 5:12-13)

Peter wrote this epistle "by Silvanus" and he wrote it from "Babylon".

Since we know that Peter knew "Silas" who is "Silvanus" and seeing how they were both in Jerusalem together at least one time...

Since we see "Silas" or "Silvanus" travelling many places, but none of which were Rome or literal "Babylon"...

I'm certainly more apt to conclude that Peter was writing from Jerusalem as opposed to allegedly writing from Rome.

Anyhow, this is but one of four factors which I've mentioned, so I would ask that you wait until I've fully presented the scriptural evidence in relation to the other three factors before making your own final determinations. Thanks.

JesusistheChrist · Jan 17, 2015

In this post, I'll seek to document Peter's whereabouts to see if he was ever in either Jerusalem or Rome.

Before Christ's ascension back to heaven, He commanded His apostles "that they should not depart FROM JERUSALEM, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me" (Acts 1:4). Of course, Peter obeyed such a command and was numbered among those who were in the upper room praying (Acts 1:15) IN JERUSALEM. On the day of Pentecost, we see Peter preaching IN JERUSALEM (Acts 2:14). We next find Peter ministering to the lame man at the temple IN JERUSALEM (Acts 3:1-11) and then Peter continued on to preach to the people IN JERUSALEM (Acts 3:12-26). As a result of said preaching, Peter was imprisoned IN JERUSALEM (Acts 4:1-6), preached to his captors IN JERUSALEM (Acts 4:8-12) and was eventually set free, only to return to his own company (Acts 4:23) IN JERUSALEM. We then find Peter IN JERUSALEM where believers brought the monies of things sold and laid them down at the apostles' feet (Acts 4:34-5:11). Next, we find "multitudes out of the cities round about unto JERUSALEM, bringing sick folks" hoping "that at the least the shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow some of them" (Acts 5:15-16). Again, we see Peter getting arrested and "put in the common prison" (Acts 5:19) only to be set free by an angel of the Lord and to "speak in the temple" IN JERUSALEM "to the people all the words of this life" (Acts 5:20). Of course, when hauled again before his captors, Peter answered the following charge:

"Saying, Did we not straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled JERUSALEM with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us. Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men." - (Acts 5:28-29)

Yes, Peter filled JERUSALEM with his doctrine because JERUSALEM is the only place that he had been thus far since Christ's ascension back to the Father in heaven. Peter did begin to travel, however, and we next find him in Samaria:

"Now when the apostles WHICH WERE AT JERUSALEM heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus)." - (Acts 8:14-16)

Yes, Peter travelled FROM JERUSALEM to Samaria, but he still hadn't seen so much as a postcard from Rome, had he? No, he had not. We next find Peter at Lydda (Acts 9:32), which I understand to be about 32 miles from Jerusalem and "nigh to Joppa" (Acts 9:38) or about 5 miles east of Joppa. Peter then "tarried many days in Joppa" (Acts 9:43) until the time came that men were sent unto him from Cornelius, who dwelt in Caesarea (Acts 10:1), and Peter went away "from Joppa" (Acts 10:23) and met with Cornelius in Caesarea (Acts 10:24).

Of course, after his encounter with Cornelius, Peter returned "TO JERUSALEM" (Acts 11:2) and related the events of what transpired between him and Cornelius to the Jews gathered there (Acts 11:2-18). We next find Peter imprisoned again IN JERUSALEM (Acts 12:1-11), only to be set free by an angel once more. Where did Peter go when he was set free? You guessed it..."to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark" (Acts 12:12) and we all know where that house was, don't we? Yep, it was IN JERUSALEM and not in Rome. In Peter's final mention in the book of Acts, we find him IN JERUSALEM (Acts 15:2) as one of the speakers (Acts 15:7) in the council being held there. But wait, there's more. Yes, we also know that Paul travelled TO JERUSALEM to see Peter (Galatians 1:18) and then travelled again TO JERUSALEM to see Peter many years thereafter (Galatians 2:1-10). Of course, Paul also mentioned how that Peter travelled at some point in time to Antioch (Galatians 2:11), but this same Paul, while commending, greeting or saluting a long list of saints IN ROME (Romans 16:1-15) never even mentioned Peter. Go figure. Ironically, Paul did mention "Cephas" (Peter - John 1:42) to the saints at Corinth (I Corinthians 1:12, 3:22, 9:5, 15:5), but not a single mention of Peter to the saints at Rome. That kind of makes you wonder, doesn't it? Not only this, but I also might add how that Paul wrote some of his epistles while imprisoned IN ROME and he never mentioned Peter in any of those epistles, either.

Well, with these Biblical truths in mind, I'll go with the rather safe assumption that when Peter was writing from "Babylon"...

"By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand. The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son." (I Peter 5:12-13)

...he was, in all probability, writing FROM JERUSALEM. Incidentally, although I initially stated that there are at least four factors which all point directly towards "Babylon" being JERUSALEM, I really should have said that there are at least five factors which all point directly towards "Babylon" being JERUSALEM. Yes, as I've already documented, there are many references to either "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT" or "Babylon the great" in the book of Revelation and every single one of them points directly towards JERUSALEM.

JesusistheChrist · Jan 17, 2015

"By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand. The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son." - (I Peter 5:12-13)

I've already covered Babylon, Silvanus and Peter in previous posts, so I'll now cover "Marcus" or Mark in this post.

"And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch. And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar. Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judaea: Which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul." - (Acts 11:27-30)

Paul and Barnabas, having heard from a prophet FROM JERUSALEM that there was coming a great dearth throughout all the world, received "relief" (monies, etc.) from the disciples in Antioch and delivered it to the elders in Judaea which is where JERUSALEM is located. I'll come back to this in a moment. As I already mentioned in my brief study of Peter's whereabouts, "now about that time" (Acts 12:1), Peter was arrested IN JERUSALEM, only to be set free by an angel of the Lord. Once free, here is where Peter went:

"And when he had considered the thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying." - (Acts 12:12)

Of course, this house was IN JERUSALEM. Now, before somebody even bothers to argue that this only proves that Mark's mother's house was IN JERUSALEM and not that Mark himself was IN JERUSALEM, I'll offer the following:

"And Barnabas and Saul returned FROM JERUSALEM, when they had fulfilled their ministry, and took with them John, whose surname was Mark." - (Acts 12:25)

Again, Barnabas' and Saul's "ministry" was their bringing the "relief" from the disciples in Antioch unto the elders IN JERUSALEM (Acts 11:27-30). Now, having "fulfilled their ministry" or having given said "relief" to the elders IN JERUSALEM, we see Barnabas and Saul departing FROM JERUSALEM and taking Mark with them. IOW, Mark was obviously IN JERUSALEM at this time.

"Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus. And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to their minister." - (Acts 13:1-5)

Barnabas and Saul were sent out as missionaries unto Seleucia (a port town of Antioch), Cyprus and Salamis (a city on the east coast of Cyprus) and we know that "John, whose surname was Mark" (Acts 12:25) was with them at least in Salamis and probably in Seleucia and Cyprus as well. In any case, he wasn't in Rome...at least not yet. Continuing on, we read:

"Now when Paul and his company loosed from Paphos, they came to Perga in Pamphylia: and John departing from them RETURNED TO JERUSALEM." - (Acts 13:13)

Here, we see "John, whose surname was Mark" (Acts 12:25) departing from Pampylia and RETURNING TO JERUSALEM. Yes, this "John" is definitely "Mark", for we read:

"And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do. And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark. But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work. And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus; And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God. And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches." - (Acts 15:36-41)

Yes, this same "John, whose surname was Mark" is the same "John" who "departing from them", while they were in Pamphylia, "RETURNED TO JERUSALEM" (Acts 13:13). It's interesting to note that there may have been a bit of nepotism here in that Barnabas and Marcus were related:

"Aristarchus my fellow-prisoner saluteth you, and Marcus, sister's son to Barnabas, (touching whom ye received commandments: if he come unto you, receive him);" - (Colossians 4:10)

Yes, not only was Marcus related to Barnabas, but it's also rather apparent that Paul and Marcus (Mark) resolved their dispute at some point in time because Paul is the author of this epistle to the Colossians and he is actually recommending Mark unto the Colossians. Additionally, seeing how Paul wrote this epistle as a prisoner IN ROME, it does seem that Marcus was there with him IN ROME. Paul also apparently placed Marcus IN ROME, when he wrote:

"There salute thee Epaphras, my fellow-prisoner in Christ Jesus; Marcus, Aristarchus, Demas, Lucas, my fellow-labourers." - (Philemon 23-24)

Again, seeing how Paul wrote this epistle as a prisoner IN ROME, it does seem rather apparent that Marcus was there IN ROME with him. Finally, Paul wrote:

"Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry." - (II Timothy 4:11)

Again, while a prisoner IN ROME, Paul wrote to Timothy and asked him to bring Mark with him TO ROME. Whether or not either one of them ever got there before Paul was executed, I'm not sure, but Paul certainly did request Mark's presence IN ROME.

Well, the only other thing that I have to add about Marcus or Mark at this time is this:

"The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son." - (I Peter 5:12)

Here, Peter referred to Marcus as his "son" and it is generally considered that this means that Mark was born again through Peter's preaching or that Peter had "begotten him through the gospel" (I Cor. 4:15). It's also pretty much agreed that this is the same Mark who authored the gospel of Mark and that he (Mark) received his gospel message through Peter. If this is true, then this would indicate to me that Mark must have spent some time with Peter, too, as opposed to his time spent with Paul and Barnabas, and he is mentioned as being with Peter here in "Babylon". As such, although Mark can be placed both IN JERUSALEM where Peter mostly resided and IN ROME where Paul spent some time as a prisoner, I think that we ought to consider that Marcus was actually IN JERUSALEM with Peter as opposed to being IN ROME with Peter (and Paul), especially since there is nothing in the book of Acts or the epistles to my present knowledge that even remotely suggests that Peter was ever IN ROME and especially since Paul never addressed Peter when writing to the church AT ROME and never mentioned Peter in any of his epistles which were written FROM ROME.

Anyhow, when we look at the four factors covered thus far...

1. "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT" or "that great city, Babylon"

2. Silvanus or Silas

3. Peter

4. Mark or Marcus

...then all four of them definitely point TO JERUSALEM and only one of them, Mark, points TO ROME in any fashion and, even then, in relation TO PAUL and not in relation TO PETER who mentioned Marcus as being with him in "Babylon".

Well, I'll make one more post in which I'll briefly address the "you" to whom Peter was writing and then I'll take a breather.

JesusistheChrist · Jan 17, 2015

"By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand. The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son." - (I Peter 5:12-13)

In this post, I'll briefly address the "you/ye" to whom Peter was writing from "Babylon". First, let's determine exactly who these "you/ye" were:

"Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied." - (I Peter 1:1-2)

First of all, these "strangers" aren't "strangers" in the sense that they're "strangers from the covenants of promise" (Ephesians 2:12) or that they're unsaved, but instead "strangers" in the sense that they're "strangers and pilgrims" (I Peter 2:11) who are "passing the time of their sojourning here in fear" (I Peter 1:17). IOW, they're Christians who recognize that this present heaven and earth aren't they're final destination (II Peter 3:13).

Secondly, these "strangers" or Christian pilgrims were "scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia". Well, what does this mean? The underlying Greek word which is here translated as "scattered" is "διασπορά" or "diaspora" and it relates to either the "scattering" of Jews from Israel into Gentile nations or the "scattering" of Christians among the Gentiles:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/...gs=G1290&t=KJV

I never claimed to be too bright apart from the Lord's help, but it seems to me that if Peter was writing to those who had been "scattered" among the Gentiles (Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia), then he must have been writing to those who were "scattered" from somewhere IN ISRAEL and I think that I know exactly where that somewhere IN ISRAEL was:

JERUSALEM.

IOW, it would seem odd to me to see Peter writing to those who were "scattered" among Gentile nations if he was writing from a Gentile nation, ROME, himself. Anyhow, we do read of the following in the book of Acts:

"And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles." - (Acts 8:1)

Well, there's one "scattering" FROM JERUSALEM and this "scattering" excluded the apostles of which Peter was one. IOW, Peter remained IN JERUSALEM while others were "scattered". Although this particular "scattering" only went as far as "the regions of Judaea and Samaria", we do read of an additional "scattering" which was the direct result of this same persecution IN JERUSALEM:

"Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only. And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus." - (Acts 11:19-20)

Again, these people were all "scattered" FROM JERUSALEM, so what were they doing IN JERUSALEM before this "scattering" began? Well, I'd suggest that those who were "scattered" included the following:

"And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God." - (Acts 2:5-11)

Again:

"Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers." - (Acts 2:41-42)

Although I don't know of any way to properly ascertain as to how many of these three thousand souls which were saved on the day of Pentecost and continued in the apostles' doctrine (and Peter was not only an apostle, but the apostle whose sermon was instrumental in relation to their repentance and salvation) were either "Jews or proselytes" (Acts 2:10) who were present on the day of Pentecost, they obviously were one or the other or, most likely, a combination of the two. Could it be, then, that these were some of the same "you" to whom Peter was writing? IOW, could it be that these were some of the same men who got saved IN JERUSALEM only to be later "scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bythinia" (I Pet. 1:1)? In any case, they were obviously "scattered" from somewhere and the most likely "somewhere" is JERUSALEM. If they were indeed "scattered" FROM JERUSALEM, even as others obviously were (Acts 8:1, 11:19-20), then ought we not to at least consider that Peter was writing to them from the very same place where they were "scattered" from? IOW, ought we not to at least consider that Peter was writing to them FROM JERUSALEM? Anyhow, it's definitely a possibility and it definitely has some scriptural merit to it, but I cannot even begin to imagine that when Peter wrote FROM BABYLON to those who had been "scattered" that they were somehow "scattered" FROM ROME. Seriously, people...if you're still clinging to the totally unscriptural notion that "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT" is somehow Rome, then this would be as good as time as any to forsake such a notion. Again, I've already shown how that "Babylon" refers directly to JERUSALEM AND TO NO OTHER in the book of Revelation, so it's no great stretch to imagine that Peter referred to JERUSALEM as "Babylon" in the same manner in which his fellow apostle John did.

Well, it's time for my breather...maybe.

JesusistheChrist · Jan 17, 2015

kaylagrl said:

Well, kaylagrl (others)...you've heard PART of my explanation now and although the Bible does say that "all Israel shall be saved", IT IS NOT TALKING ABOUT ALL NATURAL ISRAEL, BUT RATHER ABOUT WHAT THE BIBLE CALLS "THE ISRAEL OF GOD" (Galatians 6:16).

Again, the Bible speaks of two different Israels and two different Jerusalems and the failure to properly distinguish between the two has led to all sorts of heresies (Dispensationalism, pre-tribulation rapture, national salvation for natural Israel, etc., etc., etc.).

Well, I'm ready for some Chinese food...I think that I've earned it.

keepitsimple · Jan 17, 2015

JesusistheChrist said:

Absolutely positively ! Of this, there is no doubt whatsoever. And it is painful to read the occasional quip from some saying that if things do not come to pass regarding today's "nation of Israel" per dispensational theology teachings, then ... "God is a liar". I am surprised by nothing anymore.

Sophia · Jan 17, 2015

keepitsimple said:

And yet God did not lie when He sent John the Baptist as Elijah to prepare the way for the Lord. Our God fulfills all His Promises... Just not always in the literal way we expect. Spiritual blindness caused by literal hermeneutic was the downfall of the Pharisees. Allegorizing Scripture for the sake of political, economical, and societal gain was the downfall of the Saducees. There is a balance between the literal and and the liberal. And that balance is submission to the Spirit.

kaylagrl · Jan 17, 2015

JesusistheChrist said:

Please save your time.I simply dont believe your way of viewing Scripture.The Jews are still Gods chosen and I dont know how anyone who reads Romans 11 can argue that point.But please dont go to the bother on my behalf,it wont change my mind.

Sophia · Jan 17, 2015

kaylagrl said:

Where in Romans 11 do you get that they are still God's Chosen?
You do understand the argument Paul is making, right? The OT was revealed to the Jews, and is to their benefit. And Christ is born of the Jews. If one is cut off, they are not of God. If one is grafted in, then they are of God.
The plan of God's salvation was revealed to, and worked through the Jews.
Race has been ELIMINATED as a factor of being one of God's Chosen People, and it is revealed in Hebrews that race was NEVER a factor, only a means.

Jews are Going Home,Signs of the Times are Everywhere

Hizikyah

Senior Member

kaylagrl

Guest

JesusistheChrist

Guest

JesusistheChrist

Guest

Jeff_56

Banned

Hizikyah

Senior Member

JesusistheChrist

Guest

JesusistheChrist

Guest

JesusistheChrist

Guest

JesusistheChrist

Guest

JesusistheChrist

Guest

JesusistheChrist

Guest

JesusistheChrist

Guest

JesusistheChrist

Guest

JesusistheChrist

Guest

JesusistheChrist

Guest

keepitsimple

Guest

Sophia

Guest

kaylagrl

Guest

Sophia

Guest