The Seven Churches

by Pahpa 33 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia
    The Reformers certainly identified the Roman Catholic Church as "Babylon the Great." They drew upon the symbolisms that seem to fit, at least, in their own minds. For example, John says that the "harlot" sits upon the seven headed beast each head representing "seven hills." Rome happened to be built upon seven hills. But, of course, if we take this literally, it would seem that the "beast" would represent Rome not the "harlot." And since it is the "beast" who destroys the "harlot", would this mean that Rome destroys the Roman Church?

    The view of the Reformers was derived from the original understanding that "Babylon" referred to Rome (cf. Tertullian, Against Marcion, 13, and other writings of the early church fathers), and the Society's identification is of course a still later development from the Reformers' views (i.e. Rome -> Roman Papacy -> Christendom -> "world empire of false religion").

    The seven hills indeed allude to the Septimontium of Rome, but there is much more to the image of Rome being built on seven hills. The author is explicitly alluding to the image of the goddess Roma, the patron and protectress of Rome (prefigured as the she-wolf who suckled Romulus and Remus), who was depicted on official coinage and in her temples as a woman seated on the seven hills. One coin dating to AD 78 was minted in Asia Minor which depicts both images of Roma (i.e. as a she-wolf and as a woman seated on the seven hills with a parazonium in her hand). This is a little detail that everyone who read Revelation in the late first century would have recognized but which is obscure today. The author very deftly subverts this sacred image of Rome by portraying the goddess as a gaudy whore.

    I think you are confused about the matter of the Beast. The Beast represents not Rome but the "kings" who rule it (v. 10), i.e. the line of Caesars. And it refers specifically to an eighth king who is at the same time an earlier king (v. 11), and this king hates Rome and will destroy it (v. 16). This exactly corresponds to the Nero redivivus rumor that was widespread ... especially throughout Asia Minor ... in the late first century, as it was widely reported in both Greco-Roman and Jewish writings (cf. Dio Chrysostom, Oratio 21.10, Suetonius, Nero 57, Tacitus, Historia 1.78, 2.8, Dio Cassius, Roman History 63.9.3, 66.19.3, Sibylline Oracles 3.64-74, 4.119-124, 5.137-154, 361-374, 8.68-72, 12.78-94, Ascension of Isaiah 4:1-4, Commodian, Instr. 41.7), that Nero was not really dead or that he would come back from the dead (cf. Revelation 13:3), and that he would return with the Parthian army and destroy Rome. Nero was infamous for burning down a sizeable part of Rome, and the fear was that he would return to finish the job. He is described as a "matricide", the "fugitive from Rome will come, brandishing a great spear, having crossed the Euphrates with many myriads" (Sibylline Oracle 4.138-139). There were many pretenders who appeared in AD 69 and AD 80 and 88, claiming to be Nero (cf. Lucian, Adversus Ignorantum 20, who refers to a "false Nero" (pseudonerón), a term that recalls the "false Christs" (pseudokhristoi) of Matthew 24:24, Mark 13:22, Justin Martyr, Dialogue, 35). The supernatural origin of Nero redivivus, implicit in Revelation 13, is also found in Sibylline Oracle 3.63-74, Ascension of Isaiah 4:1-14, which identifies Nero with Belial (= Satan), and the number of the Beast in 13:18 corresponds to "Nero Caesar" in Greek gematria. Nero redivivus fills the antichrist role in earlier Jewish-Christian apocalypses, cf. Didache 16:4: "Then the deceiver of the world shall appear as the Son of God, and shall do signs and wonders (= Revelation 13:13-14), and the earth shall be delivered into his hands and he shall do unlawful things such as have never happened since the beginning of the world". In short, the Beast represents the Caesars of Rome, the last of which will be a king who had ruled sometime in the past (= Nero redivivus) and who would complete his destruction of Rome.

  • Pahpa
    Pahpa

    Leolaia

    The historical interpretation really doesn't answer further questions that are raised. When the barbarian armies finally destroyed Rome as a world power the city remained and eventually became the center of the Catholic faith. Under the church it once again gained world recognition as a holy city. This hardly coincides with the total destruction of "Babylon the Great" as pictured in chapters 17 & 18. For example, "With such violence the great city of Babylon will be thrown down, never to be found again." (18:21) Rome remains.

    The fact is that nothing in the context of Revelation clearly identifies the symbols that are used. One can speculate by drawing on history or other prophetic books like Daniel. But It remains speculation.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    Pahpa,

    Ever heard of failed prophecies?

    Even the fall of Rome in 476 AD was far off the scope of Revelation. The book meant soon (in contrast to Daniel 12, the book was not to be sealed), not centuries.

    So with Daniel for the predicted outcome of the struggle under Antiochus. So with Mark and Matthew for the coming of the Son of Man immediately after the fall of Jerusalem. But failed prophecies remain as a text and later generations can't help trying to fit the loose seams into their own time.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    Those "further questions" are not really exegetical (i.e. interpreting the text in its own literary and historical context) but hermeneutic in their concern for interpreting the text in a way that maintains its contemporary relevance, passing over the rather short temporal scope of the book itself (cf. 1:1, 2:16, 3:11, 3:20, 17:10, 22:10, 12, 20). How the Roman Empire actually came to an end hundreds of years later is essentially irrelevant to a contextual analysis of the text. We had a similar discussion a few months ago on this board about the Tyre oracles in Ezekiel .... just because Tyre still exists inhabited today does not prevent the text from saying what it says.

    The fact is that nothing in the context of Revelation clearly identifies the symbols that are used.

    I disagree, the author goes to pains to identify what Babylon and the Beast represent with multiple clues for each...even explicitly interpreting what some of the symbols represent (cf. 13:18, 17:9-10, 18; compare the pesher-like interpretations in Daniel 8:20-22), which is unusual in the book as a whole. And as clear as the internal evidence is, the external context it equally decisive as well.

  • RR
    RR
    OK, sooooo who or what exactly is "Babylon the Great"? I always thought it was the Catholic Church!

    Babylon the Great IS the Papacy, and her daughters are the prostestant churches.

  • RR
    RR
    One has to be careful in being dogmatic in the interpretation of a highly symbolic book like Revelation. For example, if we accept Russell's (and the Bible Students ') view on this matter we also have to accept that we are living in the "end times." Russell erroneously predicted dates pertaining to those times and to Armageddon as part of his message to the church. So, we have to conclude he failed as a "Laodicean Messenger." Christians down through history have been convinced that their time was the "end time." But history proved it wasn't true. This pattern continued with the Adventist movement of which Russell and Bible Students were a part. And it continues today with Jehovah's Witnesses.

    While Russell was wrong (and admitted to it) as to the events, it doesn't negate the fact that we are living in the end times, one doesn't need dates to prove that, simply look around you!

  • lovelylil
    lovelylil

    Narkissos,

    I don't think the fall of Rome was off the scope of Revelation but simply that John wrote about the fall of Rome shortly after his day which was the Babylon the Great mentioned in Revelation. However Rome here also pictured the end time system. There will be a secular society with the qualites Rome had in its day which will oppress the Christian church again prior to the coming of Christ. And without this knowledge it may seem like John's interpretation falls short of complete fulfillment but I don't believe it has. This "babylon" (secular system) breaths life into the beast which in turn calls for all the earth to worship it. Whomever does not do so and take its mark will be killed. Many believe there is one last great persecution of the church.

    This system apparently is based on the type of Rome as it controls the political, secular and religious entities in the end times just like Rome had control over these systems in John's time. When this type of entity is brought to life again and breaths life into the beast, then and only then will it be completely annihilated and the total fulfillemnt of John's words will be complete. What this system is exactly, we don't really know at this time. Many see all kinds of things in these verses including the Catholic Church, the Papacy, etc. But to me its clear it is much greater than one religion it is a large system controling everything - religion, politics, commerce, etc. Lilly

  • Pahpa
    Pahpa

    Narkissos/ Leolaia:

    Yes, as a former JW I'm certainly aware of "failed prophecies." But do I understand that you feel that these same prophecies spoken by Jesus are in the same category? Doesn't the very context of Jesus' words indicate that in spite of the expectations of his followers many historical events were still in the future. (Matthew 24: 4-14) Doesn't Jesus warn his disciples not to be mislead by those who would speak of the immediacy of his coming? (Verses 23-26) If Jesus was speaking of two prophecies, one dealing with the destruction of Jerusalem and one that involved the "end of the age" as many Bible commentaries suggest wouldn't the latter fulfillment project far beyond the former?

    In John's case, Christ's instruction John to "Write therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later." (Rev. 1:19) If John, in the spirit, was transferred to the "Lord's day" could he not speak of the events as current as they unfolded to him?

    Certainly, Jesus' prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem proved accurate. So accurate that critics prefer to believe that these prophecies in Matthew, Mark and Luke must have been written after the fact. I guess in the long run it all comes down to whether or not one believes in Christ's words or prefers to believe the higher critics' views. In either case, it is a matter of faith.

  • Carmel
    Carmel

    There are other interpretations with justification that He was refering to the existing six major known religions of the world including, Hinudism, Buddhism, Sabianism, Judiasm, Zoroasterism, and Christian and the next one to come from the Arabian Prophet, Islam. Too many details to recount but there are texts one can refer to te see how the characteristics of each are described in John's brief letters that match those faiths.

    carmel

  • lovelylil
    lovelylil

    Pahpa,

    I agree with you. John expected all things to occur with the Babylon the Great (which was Rome) of his day but some of it was yet future. It will all eventually be fulfilled and it will be done in the manner God always intended for it to be fulfilled. And not one second before that. Lilly

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit