Who is the Whore of Babylon ????? (Jesus, ritual, Earth, crucified)

[ben d]

The explanation that I find the most reasonable is as follows.
The word 'whore' is being used as a metaphor for the 'selling' of something sacred.
The principle behind sex is a sacred, but if sex is sold or traded for money, this is prostitution.
Similarly the purpose of human civilization is a sacred one, but when Babylon subverted this sacred purpose to place emphasis on wealth, power, and self glory, then it became a 'whore'.
Subsequently, kingdoms (and their associated religious culture) everywhere in time and place have been serving their own self interest rather than giving honour to Whom rightly deserves it.
Babylon in this metaphorical context is a corrupt religious institution, and is also the mother of all whores, meaning that this corruption has continues through the ages to now in present worldly institutions.

[Muffled]

Originally Posted by ben d

"Alexander’s death in 323BC created enormous problems. There were no plans for a succession. The king had shown less interest in securing his empire than acquiring it. On his deathbed he had been asked: "To whom do you leave your kingdom?" and had replied, unhelpfully, "To the strongest".

His son by Roxana was born in August and was named Alexander IV; he became nominal king along with the incapable Philip III Arrhidaeus.

In practice, General Perdiccas assumed command in Babylon, Antipater in Macedonia. Ptolemy 1 soon made himself master of Egypt, Antigonus 1 the "one-eyed" took control of Asia Minor, and a few years later Seleucus 1 took control of the east.

Twenty years of warfare ended at the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BC, in which Seleucus and his allies defeated Antigonus. Alexander’s short-lived empire was divided into three major kingdoms: Ptolemaic Egypt, the Seleucid Empire, and Macedon." (Source Encyc. Encarta)

Please note that these three kingdoms are contemporary, not sequential.




Some anomalies with this listing. Consider the following..

The Seleucid Empire existed from 323BC to 64BC.
The Ptolomaic Empire existed from 323BC to 30BC.
The Roman Republic existed from 510BC to 27BC. It took over from the Seleucid in 64BC and from the Ptolomaic in 30BC.
The Roman Empire existed from 27BC to 475AD (Western Part) However the eastern part continued as the Byzantine Empire until 1453AD
The Ottoman Empire existed from 1299AD to 1922AD.



Correct, since as the piece above points out , the original conquered territories of Alexander were divided into three, Ptolomaic, Seleucid, and Macedon.
However the Roman Republic was also a contemporary to these and by 64BC had conquered the Seleucid territories and by 30BC completed the takeover.
It was only in the time frame from around 27BC that it is known officially as the Roman Empire.
So what I am saying is that Roman Republic can be considered a fourth Kingdom contemporary with the three Greek, but eventually was transformed into the Roman Empire, and became the sixth head of the beast.
In other words the Roman Republic (510BC to 27BC) is distinct from the Roman Empire (27BC to 475AD) The Roman Republic was a political form of the Roman state from 510 BC to 27 BC following the expulsion of Lucius Tarquinius Superbus, the last of the kings of Rome.

My Bible has a "Between The Testaments" history. It says: "Judea was first subject for a time to Antigonus" This was 323BC to 320BC. It is hardly worth a mention. At 320BC the Ptolemies took over until 198BC. In 198BC the Seleucids took over until 164BC when the Maccabean kings ruled until the Roman empire took over leaving the Maccabean line as surrogates.

It appears the Seleucids come in as #5 then just before the Romans. This still leaves the Ottomans as #8 and it still corresponds to the Arab Confederation.

[Muffled]

Originally Posted by ben d

Muffled, thank you for your contribution, this is a subject that is normally left to the scholarly (scribes) to tell us what it all means.
Therefore it is incumbent on you provide some verifiable reference to the statements you have made if they are to be considered as an alternative to and by scholars.
Still for those of who do not stand on ceremony, intuition will process all inputs.

I did badly remember the Islamic group since they weren't the Seleucids as I listed them in #7. Here is what Wikipedia had to say:
The Land of Israel was captured from the Byzantine Empire around 636 CE during the initial Muslim conquests. Control of the region transferred between the Umayyads,[31] Abbasids,[32] and Crusaders over the next six centuries, before falling in the hands of the Mamluk Sultanate, in 1260

The Ottomans took over from the Mamluks and as far as I am concerned they all could be considered the same beast and #7 making Israel #8.

It leaves a lot of room for conjecture depending on how you count empires. In any event The Islamic empires are the last conquering empires before Israel became a nation again and correspond to the Arab Confederacy of todays world.

[ben d]

Originally Posted by Muffled

I did badly remember the Islamic group since they weren't the Seleucids as I listed them in #7. Here is what Wikipedia had to say:
The Land of Israel was captured from the Byzantine Empire around 636 CE during the initial Muslim conquests. Control of the region transferred between the Umayyads,[31] Abbasids,[32] and Crusaders over the next six centuries, before falling in the hands of the Mamluk Sultanate, in 1260

The Ottomans took over from the Mamluks and as far as I am concerned they all could be considered the same beast and #7 making Israel #8.

It leaves a lot of room for conjecture depending on how you count empires. In any event The Islamic empires are the last conquering empires before Israel became a nation again and correspond to the Arab Confederacy of todays world.

Yes, it does leave a lot of room for conjecture which is why I raised the intuition angle..
There are many diverse opinions/interpretations in circulation that make it impossible to arrive at a consensus view.
Therefore the best one can do is consider all of it and allow the light of intuition to sort it out (if possible).

[.lava]

hi,

forgive my ignorance. i am still trying to understand.

you're speaking of Bible.
Revelation tells about seven beasts & ten horns. so that represents 17 places?
what do these empires/countries stand for? i mean why Bible tells about them?
do you think knowledge of Revelation is related to today's world and countries?

[ben d]

Hi .lava..
Yes, you speak for me too..
But FWIW, this is my present understanding..

The Beast itself represents the concept of secular imperial rule.
The Seven heads of the beast represents the historical kingdoms/empires that have arisen and fallen in sequence, beginning with Babylon (the land of modern day Iraq).
The Ten heads are associated with the seventh head and represent a confederation of nations.

Most scholars of prophecy would agree that we are in the time of the seventh head with ten horns but there is little consensus as to what worldly authority it is.
For example the JW consider it to be the United Nations.
Some protestant denominations, consider it to be the modern European Union as an outgrowth of the Holy Roman Empire.
Other groups see it as the Anglo/USA/Zionist Israel alliance.

[.lava]

Originally Posted by ben d

For example the JW consider it to be the United Nations.
Some protestant denominations, consider it to be the modern European Union as an outgrowth of the Holy Roman Empire.
Other groups see it as the Anglo/USA/Zionist Israel alliance.

i think these three is related. i mean, they are not independent from each other.

[ben d]

Yes,..I agree.

[lockyfan]

Originally Posted by Don Penguinoini

No-one answering the question i see.

Then what is your answer?

I say the empire of false religion, and it is bible based my answer.