Whore of Babylon

[Alex_G]

Why do many anti-catholics believe that the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon of Revelation 17 and 18?

I know the thread starter is totally inactive now, but seeing as the thread is live i felt inclined to chip in.

When it comes to interpretation of texts, namely The Book of Revelation, one can either take a literal and historic perspective or one of prophesy. I of course believe that the prior is the most sensible and accurate way to engage with the content of the book, understanding it as a way of teaching people of the time certain moral truths and warning them of evils that existed in plain sight. Hence the revelatory nature of the text. Imagining that the text's aim is in predicting specific things far into the future is less sound an interpretation.

As for the Catholic Church and the whore of Babylon, my understanding is that the whore represented Rome. She rode the multi-headed beast, covered in rich cloth, gold and jewels. She represented ultimate materialism. Her desire to display wealth and ostentation is depicting the Roman life that seeks luxury and opulence. The violence of the character riding the beast also represents the curiosity and interest people have in that as seen in Roman life too (eg the gladiators and also the slaughter of christians by Nero). Both these features of society were seen as a problem by the author, and the books message is one of resisting this way of life, and not just going with the flow. That like resisting the alluring nature of the whore, one must keep a strong resolve.

With the protestant reformation its no surprise that they invoked the whore of Babylon to voice their reservations about the Pope and the Catholic Church's practices; namely being too caught up in material wealth; wearing lush robes and gold adorations everywhere in their places of worship. Additionally the corruption and violence of the Church having the kings of Europe in their pocket, and the nature of the violent crusades.

Essentially its this new protestant perspective that claims the Catholic Church as fallen ill to the evils characterised by the whore of Babylon, to which they arn't entirely wrong about.

 

[Shiranui117]

I would recommend the Christian Greek Scriptures.

Yeah, those tell us next to jack about Christian history, hate to break it to you. Outside of giving a cursory overview of the Apostle's early days preaching, St. Paul's travels and the Council of Jerusalem, the NT tells us precious little about the history of the Church.

 

[Pegg]

Yeah, those tell us next to jack about Christian history, hate to break it to you. Outside of giving a cursory overview of the Apostle's early days preaching, St. Paul's travels and the Council of Jerusalem, the NT tells us precious little about the history of the Church.

but it tells us a lot about the history of Jesus....and thats the only person we need to know about.


I must just add, the scriptures tell us about the foundation of Christianity and Jesus disciples who were with him face to face. What they did after his death and how they organised themselves are found in the Greek scriptures. We are supposed to be following 'their' example and model and we can do that by examining closely their writings.

 

[metis]

The issue in debate was not whether to follow Jesus but what Jesus and the apostles taught that were not abundantly clear to the early church, and thus to us today. A literalist approach is an easy but rather nonsensical approach to scripture since it misses the point of how ancient Jews wrote back then.

In no way am I suggesting that a Christian should ignore Jesus' teachings, just that there are some areas of conjecture, which is clearly evident if one spends some time actually studying especially the 2nd century writings. To me, the main brunt of his teachings seem to be quite obvious: compassion and justice for all.

 

[kjw47]

The issue in debate was not whether to follow Jesus but what Jesus and the apostles taught that were not abundantly clear to the early church, and thus to us today. A literalist approach is an easy but rather nonsensical approach to scripture since it misses the point of how ancient Jews wrote back then.

In no way am I suggesting that a Christian should ignore Jesus' teachings, just that there are some areas of conjecture, which is clearly evident if one spends some time actually studying especially the 2nd century writings. To me, the main brunt of his teachings seem to be quite obvious: compassion and justice for all.

You left the most important---Jesus pointed his followers to his God and Father--thus so do his teachers. The Father was #1 in everything to Jesus.

 

[metis]

You left the most important---Jesus pointed his followers to his God and Father--thus so do his teachers. The Father was #1 in everything to Jesus.

Yes, but don't forget that most of Jesus' teachings actually dealt with the issues of compassion and justice towards our fellow man (and woman of course). The Sermon on the Mount is a classic example of this. Obviously, it's not an either/or thingy, which relates to Jesus' response as to which was the greatest commandment of all, and he didn't give just one of them.

 

[kjw47]

Yes, but don't forget that most of Jesus' teachings actually dealt with the issues of compassion and justice towards our fellow man (and woman of course). The Sermon on the Mount is a classic example of this. Obviously, it's not an either/or thingy, which relates to Jesus' response as to which was the greatest commandment of all, and he didn't give just one of them.

Jesus gave us one of his most ultra important teachings on the sermon on the mount when he taught-------- Therefore, keep on seeking first the kingdom and his(YHWH(Jehovah) righteousness, and all these other things will be added( sustenance, covering, spirituality)

If Jesus taught these two things must come first in ones daily life--Trinitarians need to ask---why are we not being taught this ultra important truth from Jesus? Why are we being taught to seek Jesus righteousness first?

 

[metis]

Jesus gave us one of his most ultra important teachings on the sermon on the mount when he taught-------- Therefore, keep on seeking first the kingdom and his(YHWH(Jehovah) righteousness, and all these other things will be added( sustenance, covering, spirituality)

If Jesus taught these two things must come first in ones daily life--Trinitarians need to ask---why are we not being taught this ultra important truth from Jesus? Why are we being taught to seek Jesus righteousness first?

The "kingdom" was never viewed as being just a place for an individual, so when Jesus referenced this, he undoubtedly was referring to people who are righteous, along with God of course. In Matthew 25, he says it all so bluntly.

My wife is Catholic, and they are taught about the "kingdom" and the necessity of both loving and following God and Jesus, plus dealing with one's neighbor as one's self. It's a package deal, and if one doesn't believe in both, then they've abandoned the gospel.

 

[kjw47]

The "kingdom" was never viewed as being just a place for an individual, so when Jesus referenced this, he undoubtedly was referring to people who are righteous, along with God of course. In Matthew 25, he says it all so bluntly.

My wife is Catholic, and they are taught about the "kingdom" and the necessity of both loving and following God and Jesus, plus dealing with one's neighbor as one's self. It's a package deal, and if one doesn't believe in both, then they've abandoned the gospel.

Catholicism serves a non existent trinity---Jesus serves the true God-his Father--John 20:17, rev 3:12--- A follower of Jesus--does what Jesus did.

 

[savagewind]

Catholicism serves a non existent trinity---Jesus serves the true God-his Father--John 20:17, rev 3:12--- A follower of Jesus--does what Jesus did.

Like cure the sick and expell demons.....and live without a home.....and walk on water....and the best one of all! turns water into wine, but not any wine.

 

[Shiranui117]

but it tells us a lot about the history of Jesus....and thats the only person we need to know about.


I must just add, the scriptures tell us about the foundation of Christianity and Jesus disciples who were with him face to face. What they did after his death and how they organised themselves are found in the Greek scriptures. We are supposed to be following 'their' example and model and we can do that by examining closely their writings.

Yes, and they organized themselves into a hierarchical church with clergy (bishops, priests and deacons) and laity. Their worship was liturgical and standardized, and involved prayers of intercession, prayers for the sick, hymns, Psalms, an often and regularly celebrated Eucharist, and had the sacraments of baptism for the remission of sins and entry into the Church, confirmation for the sending of the Holy Spirit, ordination into one of the orders of the clergy, anointing of the sick, and confession. All of these things are clearly laid out in the Scriptures, and no scholars dispute this. I can readily cite all of these.

 

[metis]

Catholicism serves a non existent trinity---Jesus serves the true God-his Father--John 20:17, rev 3:12--- A follower of Jesus--does what Jesus did.

I don't obviously support the Trinitarian concept, but Catholicism does teach that it's essential to follow the teachings of Jesus, so I think you've gone too far with the above.

 

[kjw47]

I don't obviously support the Trinitarian concept, but Catholicism does teach that it's essential to follow the teachings of Jesus, so I think you've gone too far with the above.

The trinity religions are an illusion--leading those away from the true God. Catholicism does not teach Jesus' truths. Not a single trinity religion does.. Their translations are filled with errors from centuries ago--few have a clue.

 

[Shiranui117]

The trinity religions are an illusion--leading those away from the true God. Catholicism does not teach Jesus' truths. Not a single trinity religion does.. Their translations are filled with errors from centuries ago--few have a clue.

What part of "The Trinity was expressed in Greek by Greek-speaking Christians using the original Greek manuscripts of the Greek NT, long before any translations into English" don't you understand? The Trinity isn't built on English translations. It's built on what Christ Himself and the Holy Spirit Himself revealed to the Apostles, what the Apostles taught their students, and the Koine Greek-speaking Christians' interpretation of Koine Greek Scriptures.

 

[kjw47]

What part of "The Trinity was expressed in Greek by Greek-speaking Christians using the original Greek manuscripts of the Greek NT, long before any translations into English" don't you understand? The Trinity isn't built on English translations. It's built on what Christ Himself and the Holy Spirit Himself revealed to the Apostles, what the Apostles taught their students, and the Koine Greek-speaking Christians' interpretation of Koine Greek Scriptures.

This is what Jesus taught one must do first daily in their lives

Therefore, keep on seeking first the kingdom and his( YHWH(Jehovah) righteousness and all these other things will be added. ( Sustenance, covering, spirituality)

Ultra important if Jesus said first--no other known name belongs where Jesus said--HIS-

Jehovah is being hidden in the trinity religions for the most part--but Jesus taught at John 17:1-6-- One must know him( Father-= one who sent Jesus (John 5:30)- as THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and know Jesus to get eternal life( but not the HS) proving--no equality)verse 6 = YHWH(Jehovah)

How many days does a trinity based believer wake up and their hearts send a message through their brains--what can I do to promote the kingdom and Jehovahs righteousness like Jesus taught?

 

[metis]

The trinity religions are an illusion--leading those away from the true God. Catholicism does not teach Jesus' truths. Not a single trinity religion does.. Their translations are filled with errors from centuries ago--few have a clue.

Actually, the New American Bible, which is the main Catholic Bible used here in the west, is considered by translators to be one of the best. Also, for you to say "Catholicism does not teach Jesus' truths" is simply nonsense on steroids. The vast majority of what you hear and read with the J. Witnesses is taught in the RCC, and I know that as a fact.

As far as errors are concerned, the Witnesses have some as well, partially from a misunderstanding of ancient Hebrew and partially from a lack of knowledge of early church history and tradition.

You have been brainwashed, which is the by-product of cults, and until you actually do some studying outside of your Kingdom Hall and Watchtower, you'll continue on with believing non-truths. I have studied the Witness literature, talked to a great many of them over the years, but I also have studied Catholic teachings as well. You two are not anywhere near as far apart as you believe, so it's clearly only the brainwashing that's affected your opinion of the RCC.

BTW, just a reminder-- I ain't Catholic-- so I have no irons in this fire with the exception of just trying to deal with the truth where ever that may take me.

 

[metis]

How many days does a trinity based believer wake up and their hearts send a message through their brains--what can I do to promote the kingdom and Jehovahs righteousness like Jesus taught?

I have to admit that the above is one of the most vile statements I've seen here at this website. You not only are negatively judging an entire church, you're negatively judging all the people who may attend that church. How despicable.

You may disagree with some of their teachings, and that's all fine and dandy, but to judge others on the basis that you have is pathetically deplorable. And it makes no sense to do so since there is absolutely no way that you can prove yourself correct-- nor can Catholics prove themselves correct-- and it's because the faiths themselves are just that-- faiths. "Faith" by definition, do not rely on empirical proofs.

So, if you truly believe in Jesus, let me suggest that when he said "judge ye not...", maybe he wasn't kidding.

 

[Shiranui117]

This is what Jesus taught one must do first daily in their lives

Therefore, keep on seeking first the kingdom and his( YHWH(Jehovah) righteousness and all these other things will be added. ( Sustenance, covering, spirituality)

Ultra important if Jesus said first--no other known name belongs where Jesus said--HIS-

And we do seek God's kingdom first. It's unfortunate that the Jehovah's Witnesses don't agree with the first Christians about Who exactly Jesus is in relation to His Father, however.

Jehovah is being hidden in the trinity religions for the most part

Absolutely false.

--but Jesus taught at John 17:1-6-- One must know him( Father-= one who sent Jesus (John 5:30)- as THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and know Jesus to get eternal life( but not the HS) proving--no equality)verse 6 = YHWH(Jehovah)

And he who knows the Son knows the Father, for the Father and the Son are one. And the Spirit gives life as well--2 Corinthians 3:6.

How many days does a trinity based believer wake up and their hearts send a message through their brains--what can I do to promote the kingdom and Jehovahs righteousness like Jesus taught?

Every single day and every hour of every day and every moment of every hour of every day. The Gospel commands echo constantly through my heart, and I am immediately aware whenever I violate them--even having no pocket change to give to each and every one of the multitude of beggars I encounter walking through the city makes me feel guilty, even though I know my own finances are beginning to run very thin. I try my best to grow closer to God and become Who He wants me to be, to love Him more and to let the light of Christ shine ever brighter in me and through me to others. My thoughts turn again and again to God and where I stand with Him and if there's anything I can do to improve my walk with Him and conform myself to His will for my life.

Believing in the Trinity doesn't make us take lightly Jesus' teachings. It makes us take His teachings all the more seriously.

 

[Pegg]

Yes, and they organized themselves into a hierarchical church with clergy (bishops, priests and deacons) and laity.

umm, no. That 'hierarchy' came much later...it was well after Jesus instructions had already been written down.

The change in 'management' is actually evidence of how far they had fallen from the Apostles teachings.
For example, in the 2nd century they began to separate between the terms “overseer” (Gr., e·pi′sko·pos) and “older man,” or “elder” (Gr., pre·sby′te·ros), these terms are used in the greek scriptures to refer to the same position of responsibility, but sometime in the 2nd century they began to take on different meanings.

The History of the Christian Religion and Church, During the Three First Centuries, explains what happened: “In the second century .*.*.*, the standing office of president of the presbyters must have been formed, to whom, inasmuch as he had especially the oversight of every thing, was the name of [e·pi′sko·pos] given, and he was thereby distinguished from the rest of the presbyters.”

This was the beginning of various positions within the congregations. Bishops became the ruling authority in each congregation...the presbyters (who were ones such as the older men with positions of oversight assigned by the apostles) became the under priests of the Bishop. And the rest of the congregation became the 'laity' or passive believers.

McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia: “From the time of Cyprian [who died about 258*C.E.], the father of the hierarchical system, the distinction of clergy and laity became prominent, and very soon was universally admitted. Indeed, from the third century onward, the term clerus .*.*. was almost exclusively applied to the ministry to distinguish it from the laity. As the Roman hierarchy was developed, the clergy came to be not merely a distinct order .*.*. but also to be recognised as the only priesthood.”

Their worship was liturgical and standardized, and involved prayers of intercession, prayers for the sick, hymns, Psalms, an often and regularly celebrated Eucharist, and had the sacraments of baptism for the remission of sins and entry into the Church, confirmation for the sending of the Holy Spirit, ordination into one of the orders of the clergy, anointing of the sick, and confession. All of these things are clearly laid out in the Scriptures, and no scholars dispute this. I can readily cite all of these.

thats all very nice, but the changes they made do not reflect the mind of Christ.

And if we look at the fruits of the church today, and the pompous displays and riches she has amassed, I think Christ & God would be very disappointed in what they see.

 

[metis]

"A bishop (English derivation from the New Testament Greek ἐπίσκοπος, epískopos, "overseer", "guardian") is an ordained or consecrated member of the Christian clergy who is generally entrusted with a position of authority and oversight." -- Bishop - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Those apostles in turn selected other men to succeed them as the bishops ("episkopoi", Greek for "overseers") of the Christian communities, with whom were associated presbyters ("presbyteroi", Greek for "elders") and deacons ("diakonoi", Greek for "servants"). As communities multiplied and grew in size, the bishops appointed more and more presbyters to preside at the Eucharist in place of the bishop in the multiple communities in each region. The diaconate evolved as the liturgical assistants of the bishop and his delegate for the administration of Church funds and programmes for the poor. Today, the rank of "presbyter" is typically what one thinks of as a "priest", although technically both a bishop and a presbyter are "priests" in the sense that they share in Christ's ministerial priesthood and offer sacrifice to God in the person of Christ." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_(title)

"Does a rose by any other name...?".

My suggestion to J.W.'s: if you don't like the Catholic Church, let me recommend you don't go to one.