Alterations of the bible through history

[Woodznutz]

Babylon, the Mother of Harlots: Time To Come Out!

In the Bible, Babylon is not only an historical empire ruled by Nebuchadnezzar, but it is also a symbolic representative of Satan’s kingdom – the mother of prostitutes: MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH (Revelation 17:5 NIV84).

comeandreason.com

Following that line of thought Jerusalem must be considered another "Babylon" because of Judaism. Jews today still impose the Law to enforce their religion.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Bibles need a rewrite every50 years or so.

how often are science books rewritten? almost yearly? does science still teach that "opposites attract"?

 

[alang1216]

Can't find any pertinent passages, eh.

I can't find any passages that state either Israel or Jerusalem is the whore of Babylon. Can you?

 

[alang1216]

Following that line of thought Jerusalem must be considered another "Babylon" because of Judaism. Jews today still impose the Law to enforce their religion.

That is hardly unique to Israel. Until relatively recently there were severe restrictions on what stores can be open on Sundays right here in VA. I bet some 'blue' laws still exist in other US states.

 

[Donald H]

how often are science books rewritten? almost yearly? does science still teach that "opposites attract"?

What science books could you be referring to that are reprinted?

 

[Frankeneinstein]

What science books could you be referring to that are reprinted?

if the science was wrong then they wouldn't be reprinted now would they...and why the need to qualify your claim?

 

[Frankeneinstein]

What science books could you be referring to that are reprinted?

does science still teach/claim that "opposites attract"?

 

[Donald H]

does science still teach/claim that "opposites attract"?

Yes and no neinstein. This is above your level of understanding and below my interest in teaching you.

 

[norwegen]

I can't find any passages that state either Israel or Jerusalem is the whore of Babylon. Can you?

Yep. They're all over the Scriptures.

Whereas Christ was the true vine (Jn 15:1), Jerusalem was a useless vine (Ez 15). Through Christ, the branches remain faithful to God in the abiding holy city. Harlotry, on the other hand, characterized the ancient idolatrous city. When the idea is posited to Christians that the whore of Babylon was Jerusalem, they tend to think of modern Jerusalem and have difficulty making the historical leap to the first-century city and consequently shudder to think of present-day Jerusalem in such negative light. But they can rest easy, as Jerusalem after AD 70 does not factor into the biblical narrative. Jerusalem, the present-day capital of the present-day Israel, is not the whore of Babylon; Jerusalem, the ancient capital of ancient Judea, was. Without the temple and a rebellious citizenry, Jerusalem is not a harlot; with the temple and a rebellious citizenry, it was.

The New Testament identifies two Jerusalems. One is the ancient city in Palestine that was God’s unfaithful bride. The other is the heavenly city from above that is His faithful bride. The modern capital of Israel is neither of these brides; modern-day Jerusalem relates to the New Testament narrative no differently than any other modern city in the world does.

Neither was Rome ever called Babylon. The Imperial City, in fact, never even appeared on ancient Israel’s radar until the New Testament era. That city is never mentioned in the Old Testament. She was never the city in union with God; she was never in a position to betray Him and thus earn the name harlot.

The great Babylon was metaphorically called Sodom; it was the city where the Lord was crucified (Rv 11:8). The only city in the Bible other than historical Sodom itself that was ever called Sodom is Jerusalem (Is 1:10; Jer 23:14; Ez 16:44-48). The righteous Israelites would not have known if Rome had a history of drunkenness and sexual immorality. They would have seen this trait in Jerusalem, though. Prone to idolatry, Jerusalem had become an unfaithful city, and Isaiah laments its descent into adultery (Is 1:21), as do Ezekiel (chapter 16) and the whole host of righteous prophets. The ancient city (the holy people under the Old Covenant) was once wed to the Father (Jer 31:32), but over and over again she proved herself an adulterous bride who broke covenants and engaged in debauchery.

Nowhere does the Bible make such allusions about Rome. Jesus was not crucified in Rome or at the behest of any Roman institution. And he wasn’t crucified in the real Babylon either; Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem. Ancient Jerusalem was the whore of Babylon, the unfaithful bride, the city that murdered the prophets and messengers of God and refused to abide in the one most high (Mt 23:37). Referring to Jerusalem as Babylon was simply a way of describing this city of debaucheries.

Jesus told an audience of scribes and Pharisees in Jerusalem who actually acknowledged their ancestral murderers that they themselves would murder and persecute the faithful (Mt 23:29-36). In Acts 7:51-53, Stephen leveled the same charge against them and, true to form, these Jews stoned him to death. Hearkening to the prophets, Stephen echoed Christ’s admonition to this wicked generation that the Jews had always been unfaithful, that they had always taken up with the likes of such idols as Moloch, Rephan, Sikkuth, and Kiyyun (Acts 7:42-43; cf. Amos 5:25-27). So, infuriated, they did with Stephen what they did with Jesus. They were not shy about their murderous inclinations. The generations of wickedness in the ancient city reached a high point in this final, evil generation, as evidenced in the wars.

Witch hunts and persecutions emanated from Jerusalem, the symbolic Babylon where the Lord was crucified. Stephen and Paul were only two of the Christians whom the Jews persecuted in this city and her tributaries throughout Judea. The adulterous city consumed the entire land of milk and honey. On this beast Jerusalem, once a mighty and seductive center of commerce adorned with purple and scarlet, the colors of priestly garments, sat a woman “drunk with the blood of the saints.” On Jerusalem sat a spirit of harlotry and bloodlust.

 

[BothWings]

There could be a possibility of some greater intelligence but there's no way it could be something relating to the Christian superstitious nonsense.

And furthermore, their religion is evil in that it supports human slavery. Bibles need a rewrite every50 years or so.

But I do note that nobody will face the humiliation that comes with claiming to be a 'literal' believer.

Likely it was slave-owners who DID rewrite the Bible inorder to support their institution and cast fear into the hearts of the slaves.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Yes and no neinstein.

now theres a biblical type explanation

This is above your level of understanding and below my interest in teaching you.

you were asking me to explain/teach it to you...but we both know that example exposes your argument and that is why you have no interest in it.

 

[Donald H]

Likely it was slave-owners who DID rewrite the Bible inorder to support their institution and cast fear into the hearts of the slaves.

That's an interesting theory on which I would like to hear more .

 

[surada]

Following that line of thought Jerusalem must be considered another "Babylon" because of Judaism. Jews today still impose the Law to enforce their religion.

Rome had no contact with Babylon. Jerusalem is on seven hills. Martin Luther wanted to slander Rome. Until he came along Israel was the whore of Babylon... Whoring after false gods. It's repeated throughout the Old Testament.

 

[Donald H]

The bible does not say how old the earth is. The history of mankind in its pages is about-6041 years.

That's also wrong.
But you are to be commended for your assertion!

And now for the 'kill'!

 

[surada]

Yep. They're all over the Scriptures.

Whereas Christ was the true vine (Jn 15:1), Jerusalem was a useless vine (Ez 15). Through Christ, the branches remain faithful to God in the abiding holy city. Harlotry, on the other hand, characterized the ancient idolatrous city. When the idea is posited to Christians that the whore of Babylon was Jerusalem, they tend to think of modern Jerusalem and have difficulty making the historical leap to the first-century city and consequently shudder to think of present-day Jerusalem in such negative light. But they can rest easy, as Jerusalem after AD 70 does not factor into the biblical narrative. Jerusalem, the present-day capital of the present-day Israel, is not the whore of Babylon; Jerusalem, the ancient capital of ancient Judea, was. Without the temple and a rebellious citizenry, Jerusalem is not a harlot; with the temple and a rebellious citizenry, it was.

The New Testament identifies two Jerusalems. One is the ancient city in Palestine that was God’s unfaithful bride. The other is the heavenly city from above that is His faithful bride. The modern capital of Israel is neither of these brides; modern-day Jerusalem relates to the New Testament narrative no differently than any other modern city in the world does.

Neither was Rome ever called Babylon. The Imperial City, in fact, never even appeared on ancient Israel’s radar until the New Testament era. That city is never mentioned in the Old Testament. She was never the city in union with God; she was never in a position to betray Him and thus earn the name harlot.

The great Babylon was metaphorically called Sodom; it was the city where the Lord was crucified (Rv 11:8). The only city in the Bible other than historical Sodom itself that was ever called Sodom is Jerusalem (Is 1:10; Jer 23:14; Ez 16:44-48). The righteous Israelites would not have known if Rome had a history of drunkenness and sexual immorality. They would have seen this trait in Jerusalem, though. Prone to idolatry, Jerusalem had become an unfaithful city, and Isaiah laments its descent into adultery (Is 1:21), as do Ezekiel (chapter 16) and the whole host of righteous prophets. The ancient city (the holy people under the Old Covenant) was once wed to the Father (Jer 31:32), but over and over again she proved herself an adulterous bride who broke covenants and engaged in debauchery.

Nowhere does the Bible make such allusions about Rome. Jesus was not crucified in Rome or at the behest of any Roman institution. And he wasn’t crucified in the real Babylon either; Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem. Ancient Jerusalem was the whore of Babylon, the unfaithful bride, the city that murdered the prophets and messengers of God and refused to abide in the one most high (Mt 23:37). Referring to Jerusalem as Babylon was simply a way of describing this city of debaucheries.

Jesus told an audience of scribes and Pharisees in Jerusalem who actually acknowledged their ancestral murderers that they themselves would murder and persecute the faithful (Mt 23:29-36). In Acts 7:51-53, Stephen leveled the same charge against them and, true to form, these Jews stoned him to death. Hearkening to the prophets, Stephen echoed Christ’s admonition to this wicked generation that the Jews had always been unfaithful, that they had always taken up with the likes of such idols as Moloch, Rephan, Sikkuth, and Kiyyun (Acts 7:42-43; cf. Amos 5:25-27). So, infuriated, they did with Stephen what they did with Jesus. They were not shy about their murderous inclinations. The generations of wickedness in the ancient city reached a high point in this final, evil generation, as evidenced in the wars.

Witch hunts and persecutions emanated from Jerusalem, the symbolic Babylon where the Lord was crucified. Stephen and Paul were only two of the Christians whom the Jews persecuted in this city and her tributaries throughout Judea. The adulterous city consumed the entire land of milk and honey. On this beast Jerusalem, once a mighty and seductive center of commerce adorned with purple and scarlet, the colors of priestly garments, sat a woman “drunk with the blood of the saints.” On Jerusalem sat a spirit of harlotry and bloodlust.

Excellent explanation. I think many Christians haven't even read the Bible.

 

[alang1216]

Yep. They're all over the Scriptures.

Whereas Christ was the true vine (Jn 15:1), Jerusalem was a useless vine (Ez 15). Through Christ, the branches remain faithful to God in the abiding holy city. Harlotry, on the other hand, characterized the ancient idolatrous city. When the idea is posited to Christians that the whore of Babylon was Jerusalem, they tend to think of modern Jerusalem and have difficulty making the historical leap to the first-century city and consequently shudder to think of present-day Jerusalem in such negative light. But they can rest easy, as Jerusalem after AD 70 does not factor into the biblical narrative. Jerusalem, the present-day capital of the present-day Israel, is not the whore of Babylon; Jerusalem, the ancient capital of ancient Judea, was. Without the temple and a rebellious citizenry, Jerusalem is not a harlot; with the temple and a rebellious citizenry, it was.

The New Testament identifies two Jerusalems. One is the ancient city in Palestine that was God’s unfaithful bride. The other is the heavenly city from above that is His faithful bride. The modern capital of Israel is neither of these brides; modern-day Jerusalem relates to the New Testament narrative no differently than any other modern city in the world does.

Neither was Rome ever called Babylon. The Imperial City, in fact, never even appeared on ancient Israel’s radar until the New Testament era. That city is never mentioned in the Old Testament. She was never the city in union with God; she was never in a position to betray Him and thus earn the name harlot.

The great Babylon was metaphorically called Sodom; it was the city where the Lord was crucified (Rv 11:8). The only city in the Bible other than historical Sodom itself that was ever called Sodom is Jerusalem (Is 1:10; Jer 23:14; Ez 16:44-48). The righteous Israelites would not have known if Rome had a history of drunkenness and sexual immorality. They would have seen this trait in Jerusalem, though. Prone to idolatry, Jerusalem had become an unfaithful city, and Isaiah laments its descent into adultery (Is 1:21), as do Ezekiel (chapter 16) and the whole host of righteous prophets. The ancient city (the holy people under the Old Covenant) was once wed to the Father (Jer 31:32), but over and over again she proved herself an adulterous bride who broke covenants and engaged in debauchery.

Nowhere does the Bible make such allusions about Rome. Jesus was not crucified in Rome or at the behest of any Roman institution. And he wasn’t crucified in the real Babylon either; Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem. Ancient Jerusalem was the whore of Babylon, the unfaithful bride, the city that murdered the prophets and messengers of God and refused to abide in the one most high (Mt 23:37). Referring to Jerusalem as Babylon was simply a way of describing this city of debaucheries.

Jesus told an audience of scribes and Pharisees in Jerusalem who actually acknowledged their ancestral murderers that they themselves would murder and persecute the faithful (Mt 23:29-36). In Acts 7:51-53, Stephen leveled the same charge against them and, true to form, these Jews stoned him to death. Hearkening to the prophets, Stephen echoed Christ’s admonition to this wicked generation that the Jews had always been unfaithful, that they had always taken up with the likes of such idols as Moloch, Rephan, Sikkuth, and Kiyyun (Acts 7:42-43; cf. Amos 5:25-27). So, infuriated, they did with Stephen what they did with Jesus. They were not shy about their murderous inclinations. The generations of wickedness in the ancient city reached a high point in this final, evil generation, as evidenced in the wars.

Witch hunts and persecutions emanated from Jerusalem, the symbolic Babylon where the Lord was crucified. Stephen and Paul were only two of the Christians whom the Jews persecuted in this city and her tributaries throughout Judea. The adulterous city consumed the entire land of milk and honey. On this beast Jerusalem, once a mighty and seductive center of commerce adorned with purple and scarlet, the colors of priestly garments, sat a woman “drunk with the blood of the saints.” On Jerusalem sat a spirit of harlotry and bloodlust.

Not buying it. I think you're rewriting both history and scripture.

• You wrote "Jerusalem after AD 70 does not factor into the biblical narrative" yet Revelation was written decades after that date.
• Ironic that Jesus choose to celebrate Passover in the Whore of Babylon.
• Rome was likely the city where Paul was martyred. The exact details of St. Paul’s death are unknown, but tradition holds that he was beheaded in Rome and thus died as a martyr for his faith. His death was perhaps part of the executions of Christians ordered by the Roman emperor Nero following the great fire in the city in 64 CE. It is known that St. Paul was imprisoned in Rome and wrote several of his epistles (letters) during his captivity there.
• Jerusalem was the first center of the church, according to the Book of Acts

 

[surada]

Not buying it. I think you're rewriting both history and scripture.

• You wrote "Jerusalem after AD 70 does not factor into the biblical narrative" yet Revelation was written decades after that date.
• Ironic that Jesus choose to celebrate Passover in the Whore of Babylon.
• Rome was likely the city where Paul was martyred. The exact details of St. Paul’s death are unknown, but tradition holds that he was beheaded in Rome and thus died as a martyr for his faith. His death was perhaps part of the executions of Christians ordered by the Roman emperor Nero following the great fire in the city in 64 CE. It is known that St. Paul was imprisoned in Rome and wrote several of his epistles (letters) during his captivity there.
• Jerusalem was the first center of the church, according to the Book of Acts

Revelation isn't prophecy. It's a symbolic narrative of what happened in the first century. Nero died in June of 68 AD. Jerusalem is referred to as the harlot all through the Old Testament.

I think maybe you've been sidelined by Cyrus Scofield.

 

[shockedcanadian]

That's also wrong.
But you are to be commended for your assertion!

And now for the 'kill'!

For all your dislike of Christianity and religion you should thank their contributions to progress in society. Yes, there were some horrors in history, but, the moral compass of society, "Good vs evil" has been defined through religion, contrasting Gods view vs Satsns.

 

[alang1216]

Revelation isn't prophecy. It's a symbolic narrative of what happened in the first century. Nero died in June of 68 AD. Jerusalem is referred to as the harlot all through the Old Testament.

Did I miss the second coming and the resurrection of the dead?

I think maybe you've been sidelined by Cyrus Scofield.

I think maybe you should read more Bart Erhman.

 

[norwegen]

You wrote "Jerusalem after AD 70 does not factor into the biblical narrative" yet Revelation was written decades after that date.

Perhaps Revelation is the Revelator's short look back in history to illustrate the Parousia. And I would hazard that it could well have been written in the late 60s AD. I'm not buying your story that you cannot substantiate (do you have a story?).

Ironic that Jesus choose to celebrate Passover in the Whore of Babylon.

He loved the city. Yet he cursed it for killing prophets. He lamented it, for it would soon be desolate. The city he loved was faithless; how he wanted to gather its people under his wings, but he couldn't. It was wicked.

Rome was likely the city where Paul was martyred. The exact details of St. Paul’s death are unknown, but tradition holds that he was beheaded in Rome and thus died as a martyr for his faith. His death was perhaps part of the executions of Christians ordered by the Roman emperor Nero following the great fire in the city in 64 CE. It is known that St. Paul was imprisoned in Rome and wrote several of his epistles (letters) during his captivity there.

Blah blah blah. Irrelevant.

Jerusalem was the first center of the church, according to the Book of Acts

The Jerusalem Council convened there in AD 50 or 51. Christians (converted Jews) met there, not the Pharisaic Jews. Jesus accused Jews of transgressions in the city. Jews had him crucified. Jews killed Stepehen for saying what Jesus said, that they were unfaithful.


Now tell us all because we're curious (at least I am) why the Christians would have allied with the Judeans in their war with Rome? A war simply between two sides would have been just another war, yet this one - the Great Revolt - served a covenantal purpose. Christianity suddenly was outpacing Judaism in popularity. More subtly, it was the Parousia as the Revelator related it.

Why would a virtual non-entity in Jewish history - the Romans, who had only recently been in contact with Judea - all of a sudden be the subject of their sacred text? Or even the antithesis of the sacred teachings?