Announcement

Collapse

Eschatology 201 Guidelines

This area of the forum is primarily for Christian theists to discuss orthodox views of Eschatology. Other theist participation is welcome within that framework, but only within orthodoxy. Posts from nontheists that do not promote atheism or seek to undermine the faith of others will be permitted at the Moderator's discretion - such posters should contact the area moderators before posting.


Without turning this forum into a 'hill of foreskins' (Joshua 5:3), I believe we can still have fun with this 'sensitive' topic.

However, don't be misled, dispensationalism has only partly to do with circumcision issues. So, let's not forget about Innocence, Conscience, Promises, Kingdoms and so on.

End time -isms within orthodox Christianity also discussed here. Clearly unorthodox doctrines, such as those advocating "pantelism/full preterism/Neo-Hymenaeanism" or the denial of any essential of the historic Christian faith are not permitted in this section but can be discussed in Comparative Religions 101 without restriction. Any such threads, as well as any that within the moderator's discretions fall outside mainstream evangelical belief, will be moved to the appropriate area.

Millennialism- post-, pre- a-

Futurism, Historicism, Idealism, and Preterism, or just your garden variety Zionism.

From the tribulation to the anichrist. Whether your tastes run from Gary DeMar to Tim LaHaye or anywhere in between, your input is welcome here.

OK folks, let's roll!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Babylon

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Obsidian View Post
    A lot of preterists claim that "Babylon" refers to Jerusalem. Presumably, this argument would apply both to Revelation and 1 Peter. But is there any actual logic behind this idea? What does Babylon symbolize that could actually fit Jerusalem? I don't think you can just say, "Babylon was a bad city, and Jerusalem was a bad city." That is a shallow, childish comparison. I have never heard a preterist actually argue any symbolism.

    Here are the two main points of comparison that stand out to me:

    1. Babylon was an occupying power. Rome was an occupying power.
    2. Babylon destroyed the first temple. Rome destroyed the second temple.

    Also, Rome was the pagan inheritor of the kingdom represented by the statue in Daniel 2, which began with Babylon. And the idea that Jerusalem "reigneth over the kings of the earth" (Rev. 17:18) always seemed like a big stretch to me. But for now I would like to focus on any supposed parallels between Jerusalem and Babylon.
    I agree - Babylon was a euphemism for Rome in Jesus' time. And the verse quoted is the only solitary verse that seems to support "Babylon" as being Jerusalem. (...where also our Lord was crucified.) But without too much of a stretch it can also be said that Jesus was crucified in the house of Rome. To me it is much easier to deal with this one verse than to try to manipulate all of the other numerous verses that are clearly attached to Rome.

    Part of the Preterist argument is that Jerusalem was built on seven hills. Not so - Josephus says it was originally built on three hills but then Simon the Hasmonian cut the one hill (the original Zion) down to bedrock. So in Josephus's time Jerusalem was only built on two hills. They say Jerusalem was built on seven hills - not so. For example they will count the Mount of Olives (which has three peaks) but Jerusalem never built any houses there because for millennia it was used as a graveyard and was unoccupied. So was Jerusalem built upon the Mount of Olives - no. Rome however was physically built on seven hills and this has been noted many times in history.

    Comment


    • #32
      Hebrews actually seems to argue that Jesus was killed outside of Jerusalem.

      Hebrews 13:11-12 For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp. Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Obsidian View Post
        Hebrews actually seems to argue that Jesus was killed outside of Jerusalem.

        Hebrews 13:11-12 For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp. Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
        Golgotha, Gethsemane, Kidron, Hinnom, and the Gihon Spring are all outside the gates and walls but are still considered part of Jerusalem.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by AlphaBravo View Post
          Golgotha, Gethsemane, Kidron, Hinnom, and the Gihon Spring are all outside the gates and walls but are still considered part of Jerusalem.
          We need to continue on with Hebrews. It says further that we should go to him "Without the Camp." What was "The Camp"? The Camp was defined by Joshua as 2,000 cubits from the Arc of the Covenant (A radius of 3,000 feet). This was still practiced by the Jews of Jesus' day. Those who were travelling from any great distance were held in an area outside of the camp - a place called the head (mostly translated - the skull) - where they did the head count or census. This was "Without the Camp" and they had to go through a process of ceremonial cleansing for 7 days before they were allowed to proceed into this 3,000 foot radius. The Jewish (and Roman) place of execution was outside of this 3,000 foot radius. It was outside of this radius where Jesus was crucified. The Mipkad altar was also "without the camp."

          The Camp was the first level of sanctity. So technically speaking Jesus was not crucified in Jerusalem. He was crucified on top of the Mount of Olives to the east of the city. The prophet Zechariah alludes to the Crucifixion in Chapter 14 when he says that "On that day" His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives - a reference to the coming crucifixion. On that day is a phrase used by Zechariah about 23 times and each time it means the very day of the crucifixion. The mount of Olives from Jewish antiquity has been a graveyard and was basically uninhabited without homes or buildings. It was not a part of the city technically. Today it contains even more graves than ever before its slopes are covered with sarcophagui.

          Comment


          • #35
            I guess I'm not really sure where you are coming from. I will have to read back through your posts.

            My only purpose was to point out that there is no reason why Rev 11:8 cannot refer to Jerusalem as the geographic place where Jesus was crucified. In fact it seems to have the most obvious intention to do so.

            (8) 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. [Rev 11:8 KJV]


            There are plenty of references I think where Jerusalem is identified with the crucifixion. Here is one:

            (18) And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? (19) And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: (20) And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. [Luk 24:18-20 KJV]
            Last edited by AlphaBravo; 03-03-2015, 11:41 PM. Reason: posted at 1140 views

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by tabibito View Post
              You're quite right - but the arrow isn't pointing at Rome:

              1. Here Jerusalem is equated with Sodom and Egypt. The link with harlotry is consistent, as also to Jeremiah.
              2. It is most likely that Peter was writing from Rome - the way it is phrased doesn't show that he was referring to the city he was in at the time of writing. ... However, if he was writing from somewhere else, it could be referring to Rome.
              3. That isn't what I have understood, but you could be right. I'll check into it.

              I'm not a preterist, but after checking a long time ago, I've never considered Rome an option. From that determination, I jumped to the conclusion from that Jerusalem is the only other candidate. It seems that I need to dig deeper.
              ## Jerusalem is called Sodom in Isaiah 1.10:

              Hear the word of the Lord,
              you rulers of Sodom;
              listen to the instruction of our God,
              you people of Gomorrah!

              https://www.biblegateway.com/passage...01&version=NIV

              The judgement on BtG in Rev.17-18 is described in terms that recall the destruction of Sodom. Rev. 18.24 - "And in her was found the blood of prophets and of saints and of all who have been slain on the earth" recalls St Matthew 23.35: "34 Therefore, behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city, 35 so that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36 Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation."

              https://www.biblegateway.com/passage...3&version=NASB

              IMHO, "earth" can in several places in Revelation be understood as "land" - I think St John makes a point of using words (like *ge*) that can refer to the "earth" as known to him (= the Roman Empire), or to the "land" of Israel.

              Rev.8.8 is interesting:"The second angel sounded, and something like a great mountain burning with fire was thrown into the sea; and a third of the sea became blood, 9 and a third of the creatures which were in the sea and had life, died; and a third of the ships were destroyed."

              The "great mountain burning with fire" recalls Jer.51.25:

              "…24"But I will repay Babylon and all the inhabitants of Chaldea for all their evil that they have done in Zion before your eyes," declares the LORD. 25 "Behold, I am against you, O destroying mountain, Who destroys the whole earth," declares the LORD, "And I will stretch out My hand against you, And roll you down from the crags, And I will make you a burnt out mountain. 26 "They will not take from you even a stone for a corner Nor a stone for foundations, But you will be desolate forever," declares the LORD.…"

              http://biblehub.com/jeremiah/51-25.htm

              The "desolate" state of v.26 suits BtG. And Jerusalem.

              Talking of mountains, Jesus says this: "…22 And Jesus answered saying to them, "Have faith in God. 23 "Truly I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, 'Be taken up and cast into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says is going to happen, it will be granted him. 24 "Therefore I say to you, all things for which you pray and ask, believe that you have received them, and they will be granted you.…".

              http://biblehub.com/mark/11-23.htm

              ## A polemical inversion of the doctrine of Zion as as the "mountain of the LORD", perhaps ? Jesus replaces it with His Church that is "built on the rock", & not "overcome by the storm" (see St Matthew 7 & 16). Christ is the "head of the corner" of His Church - not of the earthly Jerusalem.

              Rev. 8.8 also recalls, & is a contrast with, the stone that fills the fills the earth in Daniel 2: "44"In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself endure forever. 45"Inasmuch as you saw that a stone was cut out of the mountain without hands and that it crushed the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver and the gold, the great God has made known to the king what will take place in the future; so the dream is true and its interpretation is trustworthy.""

              http://biblehub.com/daniel/2.htm

              Another hint that BtG is Jerusalem, either partly or wholly, is found in Rev.13: "10 If anyone is destined for captivity, to captivity he goes; if anyone kills with the sword, with the sword he must be killed. Here is the perseverance and the faith of the saints." This is a quotation of Jer.15.2. It describes what became of the Jews in Jerusalem in AD 70 aptly.

              And there is also this: "16 And he [= the second beast ?] causes all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free men and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hand or on their forehead,..."

              http://biblehub.com/revelation/13-16.htm

              - compare that with: "…7 You shall teach them [= "these words"] diligently to your sons and shall talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you lie down and when you rise up. 8 "You shall bind them as a sign on your hand and they shall be as frontals on your forehead. 9 "You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.…".

              http://biblehub.com/deuteronomy/6-8.htm

              Deut.6.8 compared with Rev 13.16 suggests that for the seer of Revelation these Jewish things had become marks of opposition to God & Christ. This would agree with Jesus' rejection of Peter's attempt in St. Matthew 16.20-24 to dissuade Him from the Cross as a temptation of the devil; & it also agrees with His treating the vision shown Him of "the kingdoms of the earth" as a temptation: "8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. 9 And he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.” 10 Then Jesus said to him, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written,“‘You shall worship the Lord your God and Him only shall you serve.’”

              11 Then the devil left Him, and behold, angels came and were ministering to him."

              https://www.biblegateway.com/passage...+4&version=ESV

              The Solomonic empire recalled by St Matthew 4.8, & described in 1 Kings 4.21: "20 Judah and Israel were as many as the sand by the sea. They ate and drank and were happy. 21 Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the Euphrates to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt. They brought tribute and served Solomon all the days of his life" - is not the Kingdom of Christ. See also Moses' vision of the Promised Land in Deut.34.

              STM that all these hints of & connections to Israel, Judah & Jerusalem point to an identification of BtG with Jerusalem - maybe not exclusively, but in part at least.
              Last edited by Rushing Jaws; 06-09-2015, 05:46 PM.

              Comment

              Related Threads

              Collapse

              Topics Statistics Last Post
              Started by eschaton, 05-08-2020, 10:59 PM
              60 responses
              3,865 views
              0 likes
              Last Post Dave L
              by Dave L
               
              Started by seanD, 03-26-2020, 12:05 PM
              67 responses
              5,085 views
              0 likes
              Last Post seanD
              by seanD
               
              Started by hamster, 07-05-2015, 01:07 PM
              118 responses
              31,472 views
              0 likes
              Last Post Dave L
              by Dave L
               
              Started by seanD, 02-05-2014, 03:15 PM
              58 responses
              9,608 views
              0 likes
              Last Post Cow Poke  
              Working...
              X