- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi david,
Religions are of men. Denominations are of men. What matters is the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God is in your midst. You cannot see the kingdom until you are born again. You must be born again to enter the kingdom. Jesus is the gate to the kingdom of heaven. The king leads and rules and teaches by his Spirit within the sons of God. It is not a case of here or there, in this building or that one. It is the worship of God in Spirit and truth by those sons. God knows those who are His. They too know those who are in Him too by the Spirit they share.
Mans own efforts to reach and please God are useless wasted energyHi Nick.
Individual men are “of men.” What matters is the kingdom of God, and telling others about it. (mat 24:14). The kingdom of God was in the midst of the religious leaders opposed to Jesus, as he was their king and he was in their midst. You cannot see the kingdom until you are born again. You must be born again to enter the kingdom. The king leads and rules and teaches. He has commanded his followers to 'teach,' to people of all the nations. (mt 28:19) He has “ordered us to preach,” and to give a “thorough witness.” (Acts 10:42)
It's wrong to follow men. It's wrong to follow yourself. Follow God.Quote (david @ Mar. 30 2006,05:35) Nick, any comment on my post in this thread on mar 29?
Hi david,
None.To david,
Quote (david @ Mar. 30 2006,18:03) Quote To david, Most non-christendom religions are not true and are doctrines of demons.
Hey t8. If only “most” are not true, can I ask: Which ones do you believe are true?
I have never come across one to date, but I haven't seen them all of course. In my experience they have all been about themselves and self-preservation is their nature. But to truly serve God we must be selfless and be aware of the other parts of the Body.We must be willing to lay our lives down for not only Christ but the brethren too. Instead all I see are denominations that probably wouldn't even raise a hand to help each other, never mind unity of the brethren which is the will of God.
I beleive that there has always existed the Body since it's creation, but part or maybe even most of the parts are imprisoned in Babylon just as Israel were slaves in Egypt.
God sent Moses to lead them out of Egypt. Who is leading believers out of Babylon? I certainly do not think that any denomination is. Rather I believe that God is and has been raising many people to lead his people out of bondage and slavery.
Of course just as Moses lead them out, some did nothing but question, complain and grumble. This question is to you the reader: Are you one of these people, or are you one who rejoices in the fact that God is calling his people out of Babylon?
Hi,
We know from colour symbolism that the whore is a system of human religion without the involvement of God[red=man, blue=God, mixture purple =religion-the whore is red and purple only]
The classic city of seven hills is Rome as any encyclopaedia will confirm.
So that is suggestive that that organisation is Rome based.You know what Nick that's what I thought but thanks to Scripture Seeker I found out what the Whore sits on are you ready “seven mountians” not hills!
Yeap all this time I thought she was on seven hills.
No matter the antichrist will be Jewish and the Pope will probably crown the antichrist. Thus the Pope and antichrist join together and sit on the mountians of Jerusalem.Rev 17:9 Here is the mind that hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth
That's the only way the Catholic church who fits every other description of the whore sits on seven Mountians.
What do you think?
Quote (kenrch @ April 01 2006,17:51) You know what Nick that's what I thought but thanks to Scripture Seeker I found out what the Whore sits on are you ready “seven mountians” not hills!
Yeap all this time I thought she was on seven hills.
No matter the antichrist will be Jewish and the Pope will probably crown the antichrist. Thus the Pope and antichrist join together and sit on the mountians of Jerusalem.Rev 17:9 Here is the mind that hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth
That's the only way the Catholic church who fits every other description of the whore sits on seven Mountians.
What do you think?
Hi Kenrch a point well worth checking.
3735.OROS a prim word. Mountain
Hill [2],mount, Mount, mountain[31], mountains[12]Asa you can see the word can mean 'hill' but is usually translated 'mountain' but should that be the case?
It is translated as “hill' in
Lk 4.29
“”..and led him to the brow of the HILL on which their city had been built, in order to throw him down the cliff”
and
Matt 5.14
” You are the light of the world. A city set on a HILL cannot be hidden”
Fair enough. Cities, including Jerusalem,are set on hills and not mountains.The NASB translators have tranlated the word as
“mountain“in almost every other place.Including as a place to graze pigs and sheep[Lk 8.32, Mk 5.11, Matt 18.12]. Sheep and pigs graze on hills.
The point is they could have equally translated the city as being on “seven hills”, and perhaps should have given that the other translations in relation to cities relate them to being on hills.
“The woman whom you saw is THE GREAT CITY, which reigns over the kings of the earth”*Do not mountains in the Bible often symbolize governments?
(Da 2:35, 44, 45; compare Isa 41:15; Re 17:9-11, 18.)
Babylon, by her military conquests, brought other lands to ruin and is, therefore, called a “ruinous mountain.” (Jer 51:24, 25) A psalm relating Jehovah’s activities against warring men depicts him as being “enveloped with light, more majestic than the mountains of prey.” (Ps 76:4) “The mountains of prey” may represent aggressive kingdoms. (Compare Na 2:11-13.) Regarding Jehovah, David said: “You have made my mountain to stand in strength,” probably meaning that Jehovah had exalted David’s kingdom and firmly established it. (Ps 30:7; compare 2Sa 5:12.) The fact that mountains may represent kingdoms aids one in understanding the significance of what is described at Revelation 8:8 as “something like a great mountain burning with fire.” Its resemblance to a burning mountain would suggest that it is associated with a form of rulership having a destructive nature like fire.
The prophecy of Daniel indicated that God’s Kingdom, after crushing all other kingdoms, would become a large mountain and fill the whole earth. (Da 2:34, 35, 44, 45) This meant that it would extend its blessed rule over the entire earth. Wrote the psalmist: “Let the mountains carry peace to the people, also the hills, through righteousness.” (Ps 72:3) In harmony with this psalm, the blessings that are spoken of in connection with God’s mountain, such as Jehovah’s banquet for all the peoples, would be
experienced on earth.—Isa 25:6; see also Isa 11:9; 65:25.*And is not Babylon the Great depicted as sitting on many waters, which means: “peoples and crowds and nations and tongues”?
REVELATION 17:1
“And one of the seven angels that had the seven bowls came and spoke with me, saying: “Come, I will show you the judgment upon the great harlot who sits on many waters,”
REVELATION 17:15
“And he says to me: “The waters that you saw, where the harlot is sitting, mean peoples and crowds and nations and tongues.”According to verse 3 in the same chapter, she is also seen sitting on a seven-headed wild beast—beasts being commonly used in the Bible as symbols of worldly political powers, or organizations.
Quote The church of the time thus became apostate by agreeing to accept these ADULTEROUS COMPROMISES WITH THE WORLD.
These are Nicks words in the “great apostasy” thread. (cap. added)Nick, I just wonder what you think of these words about the Harlot:
REVELATION 17:1-2
“And one of the seven angels that had the seven bowls came and spoke with me, saying: “Come, I will show you the judgment upon the great harlot who sits on many waters, WITH WHOM THE KINGS OF THE EARTH COMMITTED FORNICATION, whereas those who inhabit the earth were made drunk with the wine of her fornication.””
REVELATION 18:3
“For because of the wine of the anger of her fornication all the nations have fallen [victim], and THE KINGS OF THE EARTH COMMITTED FORNICATION WITH HER, and the traveling merchants of the earth became rich due to the power of her shameless luxury.””Hi Nick,
From page two answer number 19 from this subject
PLEASE read all of the answers they are all based on Gods word not my own! There are many scriptures but please take the time to read them!As far as the so called hills go….
19
According to this definition the word mountain could mean “hill”.Sorry but calling a mountain a hill is what I would class as twisting scriptures especially when scripture uses different words for both mountain and hill.
Why would John try to deceive us? Would the word of God allow this, it would be deceiving us especially when we know that Jerusalem has seven Mountains.
Even if the word Mountain is twisted to mean the word hill, the Vatican still has 8 hills, why does no one count Vatican hill?Please read the other 18 answers and take the time and pray on them.
God Bless
Interesting points of view on this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whore_of_Babylon
Partial quote below:
Roman Catholicism as the Whore of Babylon
Some pre-Reformation writers and most of the Reformers themselves, from Martin Luther (who wrote On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church), John Calvin, and John Knox (who wrote The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women) identify the Roman Catholic Church with the Whore of Babylon. This opinion influenced several generations in England and Scotland when it was put into the 1599 edition of the Geneva Bible. As a tradition, it continues through Scofield Reference Bible (whose 1917 edition identified “ecclesiastical Babylon” with “apostate Christendom headed by the Papacy”) and pro-Reformation writings such as those of I.M. Haldeman, and it is kept alive by contemporary figures such as Ian Paisley and Jack Chick. The “drunkenness with the blood of saints and martyrs”, by this interpretation, refers to the veneration of saints and relics, which is viewed by the Reformers as idolatry and apostasy. Those who accept this tradition use the phrase “Whore of Babylon” to refer to the Roman Catholic Church.
The Protestant reformers were not the first people to call the Roman Catholic Church the Whore of Babylon. There was a fairly long tradition of this kind of name-calling by opponents of the Papacy. Frederick Barbarossa published missives that called the Papacy the Whore of Babylon, and the Pope the Antichrist, during the course of his protracted quarrel with Pope Alexander III. Dante equated the corruption and simony in the office of the Papacy with the Whore of Babylon in Canto 19 of his Inferno:
Di voi pastor s'accorse il Vangelista,
quando colei che siede sopra l'acque
puttaneggiar coi regi a lui fu vista. . .(“Shepherds like you the Evangelist had in mind when he saw the one that sits upon the waters committing fornication with the kings.”)
When the Florentine tyrant Girolamo Savonarola also called the Papacy the Whore of Babylon, he meant something closer to the Reformers' usage. These claims, however, were based chiefly on social and political disagreements with Roman Catholic policy, or at their strongest accuse the Papacy of moral corruption. The Protestant reformers, by contrast, seriously considered the Papacy to be at least potentially the apocalyptic figure mentioned in Bible prophecy, and included the claim in Bible commentaries as well as polemics. They meant something more than to accuse the Roman Catholic Church of political or moral corruption; they claimed that as a church it taught a Satanic counterfeit plan of salvation, one that would lead its faithful to Hell rather than to Heaven.
Even more interesting page below. I don't expect anyone to read it all, (unless you are really hard-core), but maybe something useful can be gleaned from it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Two_Babylons
The Two Babylons was a religious pamphlet initially produced by the Scottish theologian Alexander Hislop in 1853, later expanded in 1858 and finally created as a book in 1919. Its central theme was that the Roman Catholic church was the new Babylon and that it was based on paganism. Due to this, Hislop stated that:
“she must be stripped of the name of a Christian Church altogether”
(Hislop, 1858).Although extensively footnoted, many commentators (in particular Ralph Woodrow) have noted that there are numerous misconceptions and factual errors in the document.
Brief summary
Hislop identified the Biblical figure of Nimrod with the Mesopotamian ruler Ninus. Based on this supposed connection, and on selected readings of the older legends, he created a new image of Nimrod as a central part of his theory that the Roman Catholic Church grew from Babylonian paganism. A summary of his ideas follows:According to ancient Egyptian and Babylonian traditions, his mother was Semiramis; sometimes Semiramis is referred to as the mother of Nimrod, and sometimes as his wife, leading to the belief that Nimrod married his mother. Also according to these traditions, Semiramis, who rose to greatness because of her son, was presented with a difficulty when her son died, so instead she pronounced him to be a god, so that she herself would become a goddess.
One story says that after Nimrod was killed, Semiramis claimed that an evergreen tree sprouted from a tree stump, which she said indicated the entry of new life into the deceased Nimrod; every year on the anniversary of Nimrod's birth (December 25) they would leave gifts at this evergreen tree. This is presented by some as a possible explanation the origin of the Christmas tree.
Even though Semiramis claimed to be a virgin she had another son, named Tammuz, who she said was the reincarnation of Nimrod. She became known as the “Virgin Mother”, “Holy Mother” and the “Queen of Heaven” and was symbolized by the Moon. So began the worship of Semiramis and the child-god, and the whole paraphernalia of the Babylonian religious system.
After the decline of Babylon, the religion was transported to Egypt where the people worshipped Isis and her son Osiris (otherwise known as Horus). The same mother and child deities appeared in Pagan Rome as Fortuna and Jupiter, and in Greece as Ceres, the Great Mother, with the babe at her breast, or as Irene, the goddess of Peace, with the boy Plutus in her arms.
Roman Catholicism and Babylonian mystery religion
Hislop starts by comparing the Babylonians mystery religions to the Roman Catholic church.He links them by quoting Revelation 17:4-5:
” 4And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
5And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. “
—biblegateway.comIn particular he emphasises the “MYSTERY” part of the verse and the golden cup that the women holds. Hislop draws an analogy between the Babylonian religious ceremonies and Roman Catholic practices. The Babylonians required the participation in ceremonies to be initiated into their “mysteries” by drinking “mysterious beverages”, which Hislop says dulled the partaker and opened them to concepts they would not accept in a normal state, and so the analogy he makes with the Roman Catholic church is that the priesthood gradually introduced concepts to Christianity that the original Christians would not have accepted. He further notes that, in 1825, Pope Leo XII released a Jubilee medallion with an image of the Pope on one side and an image of a woman — representing the Roman Catholic church — with a cross in one hand and a cup in the other hand. Hislop then provides evidence that foreign concepts have been introduced into the church, such as celibacy and the confessional. He cites evidence that several graves in the Roman catacombs have inscriptions that show that priests and elders were married, and alleges that the system of Roman Catholic confessional was borrowed from the Babylonians and is contrary to James 5:16:
” 16Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.”
—biblegateway.comHislop concludes the first chapter by observing that in much the same way that
“Chaldean priests were believed alone to possess the key to the understanding of the Mythology of Babylon, a key handed down to them from primeval antiquity, so the priests of Rome set up to be the sole interpreters of Scripture; they only had the true tradition, transmitted from age to age, without which it was impossible to arrive at its true meaning.”
—biblebelievers.comTrinity in Unity
After an involved explanation of how the Babylonian culture of idolatory influenced the Ancient Greeks in chapter 2, section 1, Hislop states that there is unity in the Godhead and then diverts attention to a discussion of his understanding of Hinduism and its relation to Genesis and Exodus. Hislop then gives evidence that concept of the Trinity existed in Babylonia (they employed the use of the equilateral triangle), in Hinduism (he states Indian Hindus represented their god with a statue that has three heads on one body under the name “Eko Deva Trimurtti”) and in Buddhism (he states that Japanese Buddhists worshipped an image of Buddha that had three heads and that had the name “San Pao Fuh”).Hislop focuses on the Babylonian understanding of the trinity. He explains that he believes the hieroglyphic meaning of the circle is zero, and that zero also signified “the seed” to the Babylonians. He cites Austen Henry Layard and concludes that “the triune emblem of the supreme Assyrian divinity shows clearly what had been the original patriarchal faith. First, there is the head of the old man; next, there is the zero, or circle, for “the seed”; and lastly, the wings and tail of the bird or dove; showing, though blasphemously, the unity of Father, Seed, or Son, and Holy Ghost.”
Hislop himself, however, did not reject the concept of the Trinity as held by most Christians. Rather, he affirmed the basic concept of the Tri-Unity of God as so common because it was part of the human psyche. “While overlaid with idolatry, the recognition of a Trinity was universal in all the ancient nations of the world, proving how deep mated in the human race was the primeval doctrine on this subject, which comes out so distinctly in Genesis.” (p. 18) He also calls Trinitarianism “the original patriarchal faith” and teaches that Assyrian, Babylonian, Hindu, and other trinities or triads are corruptions of the original human religion.
[edit]The Mother and Child, and the Original of the Child
In chapter 2, section 2, Hislop alleges that in the same way that first persons in the Godhead (or rather, the Father) was not worshipped by the Babylonians or the Indian Hindus, the Roman Catholic church no longer worships the Father but instead emphasises worship of the Mother and the Child. He states that the Babylonians “worshipped a Goddess Mother and a Son, who was represented in pictures and in images as an infant or child in his mother's arms” and that “[in] Egypt, the Mother and the Child were worshipped under the names of Isis and Osiris”. Further similarities are noted in other cultures: in India, as Isi and Iswara; in Asia, as Cybele and Deoius; in Pagan Rome, as Fortuna and Jupiter-puer, or Jup
iter, the boy; in Greece, as Ceres, the Great Mother, with the babe at her breast, or as Irene, the goddess of Peace, with the boy Plutus in her arms; and in Tibet, in China, and Japan where Hislop says that “Jesuit missionaries were astonished to find the counterpart of Madonna and her child as devoutly worshipped as in Papal Rome itself; Shing Moo, the Holy Mother in China, and a glory around her, exactly as if a Roman Catholic artist had been employed to set her up.”.
[edit]The Child in Assyria
Further on in section 2, under a new subsection entitled “The Child in Assyria”, Hislop explores the relationship of the ancient Babylonian mother and child and their similarities to the Roman Catholic church. He says that the Babylonian mother, who he says was worshipped as Rhea by other nations, was Semiramis. He further says that the son of Semiramis is Tammuz (from the Bible), or otherwise known as Bacchus by other classical writers. Hislop then notes that Ninus, the son of Belus or Bel, was the husband of Semiramis and thus Ninus was both the son and husband of Semiramis. Later in his text Hislop attempts to show how as Rhea was Semiramis this accounts for the confusion caused by the relationship between Isis and Osiris, who he says was represented in Egypt as both son and husband of his mother and thus the reason why the Indian god Isawara is represented as a baby at the breast of his wife, Isi or Parvati.Hislop says that Gnaeus Pompeius Trogus, a 1st century BC Roman historian, states that Ninus was king of the Assyrians, and thus he is clearly Nimrod. He backs up his hypothesis with accounts of Diodorus Siculus and on the basis of Genesis 10:11, where he says that Asshur was expelled by Nimrod and setup a kingdom that competed with him. Under the assumption that Ninus was Nimrod, and that Ninus is the son of Bel (who was said to have founded Babylon), Hislop states that Bel /Belus must have been Cush as Genesis 10:8 says that “Cush begat Nimrod”. From this he says that Cush is the son of Ham, or by his Egyptian name Hermes, or also known as Mercury. Hermes, says Hislop, was the original “prophet of idolatory” who caused the division of languages in Genesis 11. He says that the pagans recognised Hermes as the interpreter of the Gods.
Furthermore, Hislop links Janus (the Roman god of gates, doors, doorways, beginnings, and endings) to Cush, who he identifies as Bel “The Confounder”, via Janus's symbol, the club. He says the ancients called Janus “Chaos” and then states that this is the real origin of Vulcan's Hammer (which he connects to Jeremiah 50:23 — “How broken and shattered is the hammer of the whole earth! How desolate is Babylon among the nations!”). Hislop connects the Hebrew word used for scattering, Hephaitz, with the Greek form of the word Hephaizt, which he then connects to Hephaistos to Vulcan, “The father of the gods.” (it appears that Hislop made a mistake here, because Vulcan was son of Jupiter and Juno). Further, from these ideas he concludes that as “Hephaistos [was] the name of the ringleader in the first rebellion” he states compares the similarity of Hephaistos to Bel, the “Confounder of tongues”.
Hislop comes to the conclusion that Bel/Belus founded Babylon but Ninus or Nimrod built the city, and that as the historical Bel is Cush then the identity of Ninus and Nimrod are confirmed.
The Child In Egypt
CriticismThe evangelical minister Ralph Woodrow made the case in his book “Babylon Mystery Religion” that Roman Catholicism was a syncretic religion that had evolved from pagan Babylon. Mr. Woodrows ideas had been developed from even earlier tracts by 19th Century Scottish Minister Alexandar Hislop, most notably, his '”The Two Babylons”. Woodrow's modern writing style had caused his book (and Hislops theories) to become very popular among Evangelical Christians.
A history teacher challenged Woodrow, and called the integrity of Hislop's research into question. Mr. Woodrow began to diligently research the subject, and as he explored the theories of Hislop, began to discover that those ideas were either fraudulent, mis-interpretations, or had created false relationships where none actually existed. Eventually, Ralph Woodrow felt compelled to remove his book from print, and later wrote a second book “The Babylon Connection” to further explain and refute Hislops (and his own) mistaken ideas. Woodrow had now become a critic of Hislops 'pagan' theories.
My original book had some valuable information in it. But it also contained certain teachings that were made popular in a book many years ago, THE TWO BABYLONS, by Alexander Hislop. This book claims that the very religion of ancient Babylon, under the leadership of Nimrod and his wife, was later disguised with Christian-sounding names, becoming the Roman Catholic Church. Thus, two “Babylons”—one ancient and one modern. Proof for this is sought by citing numerous similarities in paganism. The problem with this method is this: in many cases there is no connection.
Mr. Woodrow went to the original source documents and found that the analogies, links, and suppositions that Hislop had made were strained and unfounded.
Because Hislop wrote in the mid-1800's the books he refers to or quotes are now quite old. I made considerable effort to find these old books and to check Hislop's references; books such as Layard's Nineveh and Its Remains, Kitto's Cyclopeidia of Biblical Literature, Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, as well as old editions of Pausanias, Pliny, Tacitus, Herodotus and many more. When I checked his footnote references, in numerous cases I discovered they do not support his claims.
As I did this [research], it became clear-Hislop's “history” was often only mythology… an arbitrary piecing together of ancient myths can not provide a sound basis for history. Take enough tribes, enough tales, enough time, jump from one time to another, from one country to another, pick and choose similarities-why anything could be “proved”!
Woodrow carefully explores the “sun god” theory that Hislop mounted against the Eucharist. He reveals the poor reasoning that tries to link the Eucharist to the sun god based on its round shape, while ignoring that the manna that God rained down on the Israelites in the dessert was also round (Exod. 16:14). He also shows how Hislop's arguments turn against themselves.
[It is important to note that Woodrow and the original author of this criticism are depending on one English translation or the Septuagint text of Exodus 16:14 to make this point. It is not supported in either the original Hebrew or in English translations based on the Masoretic.]
watta‘al šiḵḇaṯ haṭṭāl wᵉhinnê ‘al-pᵉnê hammiḏbār daq mᵉḥuspās daq kakkᵉp̱ōr ‘al-hā’āreṣ Ex 16:14 (transliteration of Hebrew Masoretic Text)
“And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness there lay a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground.” (Ex. 16.14, KJV)
“When the dew was gone, thin flakes like frost on the ground appeared on the desert floor.” (Ex. 16.14, NIV)
“When the layer of dew evaporated, behold, on the surface of the wilderness there was a fine flake-like thing, fine as the frost on the ground.” (Ex. 16.14, NASB)
“in the morning, it came to pass as the dew ceased round about the camp, that, behold, on the face of the wilderness was a small thing like white coriander seed, as frost upon the earth.” (Ex. 16.14, Brenton translation of the Septuagint)
[The word in question appears to be “kakkᵉp̱ōr”. It is a combination of “ka”, which means like or as, and “kkᵉp̱ōr”, which means frost or bowl. The context within the verse of “daq kakkᵉp̱ōr ‘al-hā’āreṣ”, makes sense translated “thin like frost on
the ground”. There is no Hebrew equivalent for the word “round” used in the KJV translation to be found in the Hebrew text. It appears to have been inserted by the translators, based on the reading of the Septuagint. Woodrow's assertion that the Manna from heaven came down in the form of round crackers is not supported by the Hebrew text. Therefore, his criticism of Hislop on this point cannot stand.There is no evidence, so far as I have been able to find, that, in the Babylonian system, the thin round cake…was ever regarded in any other light than as a symbol… [nor did they believe it was] changed into the god whom it represented” (Hislop) … the Catholics did not get the doctrine of transubstantiation from Babylon! On the other hand, it is the Protestants who regard the communion bread as a symbol!…In reality Babylon had nothing to do with it either way! — (Woodrow examining Hislop pg. 65)
Woodrow also shows how Hislop's creative numerology (which he describes as no more than mere superstition) could be used to make almost any name 'add up' to the mark of the beast, including the name “The Rev Alexander Hislop.” Woodrow reclaims (from supposed pagan origins) candles and lamps (which are used by Jews in the Old Testament), he also defends the practice of anointing with oil “…anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.” (James 5:14, 15 & Mat 6:13). Woodrow demonstrates the faulty logic that claims a Church steeple is a phallic symbol and the tower of Babel. According to Herodotus 425 B.C. Babel was a ziggurat shape, looking nothing like a steeple. (pg 28)
While seeking to condemn the paganism of Roman Catholicism, Hislop produced his own myths. Hislop theorized that Nimrod, Adonis, Apollo, Attes, Ball-zebub, Bacchus, Cupid, Dagon, Hercules, Januis, Linus, Lucifer, Mars, Merodach, Thithra, Molock, Narcissus, Oannes, Oden, Orion, Osiris, Pluto, Saturn, Teitan, Typhon, Vulcan, Wodan, and Zoraster were all one and the same. By mixing myths, Hislop supposed that Semiramis was the wife of Nimrod and was the same as Aphrodite, Artemis, Astarte, Aurora, Bellona, Ceres, Diana, Easter, Irene, Iris, Juno, Mylitta, Proserpine, Rhea, Venus, and Vesta.
Hislop taught that Tammuz (whom he says was Nimrod) was born on December 25, and that this is the origin of the date on which Christmas is observed. Yet his supposed proof for this is taken out of context. Having taught that Isis and her infant son Horus were the Egyptian version of Semiramis and her son Tammuz he cites a reference that the son of Isis was born “about the time of the winter solstice.” When we actually look up the reference he gives for this (Wilkinson’s Ancient Egyptians, vol. 4, 405), the son of Isis who was born “about the time of the winter solstice was not Horus, her older son, but Harpocrates. The reference also explains this was a premature birth, causing him to be lame, and that the Egyptians celebrated the feast of his mother’s delivery in spring. Taken in context, this has nothing to do with a December celebration or with Christmas as it is known today.
The subtitle for Hislop’s book is “The Papal Worship Proved to Be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife.” Yet when I went to reference works such as the Encyclopedia Britannica, The Americana, The Jewish Encyclopedia, The Catholic Encyclopedia, The Worldbook Encyclopedia – carefully reading their articles on “Nimrod” and “Semiramis” — not one said anything about Nimrod and Semiramis being husband and wife. They did not even live in the same century. Nor is there any basis for Semiramis being the mother of Tammuz. I realized these ideas were all Hislop’s inventions.
In another appeal to Wilkinson, Hislop says that a Lent of 40 days was observed in Egypt (which Roman Catholicism celebrates) . But when we look up the reference, Wilkinson says Egyptian fasts “lasted for seven to forty-two days, and sometimes even a longer period: during which time they abstained entirely from animal food, from herbs and vegetables, and above all from the indulgence of the passions” (Wilkinson, Ancient Egyptians vol. 1, 278) With as much credibility, we could say they fasted 7 days, 10 days, 12 days, or 42 days. Hislop’s claim appears to have validity only because he used partial information.
If we based claims on partial information, we could even prove from the Bible there is not God: “…’There is no God’” (Ps. 14:1). When the entire statement is read, however, it has a different meaning: “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’”
Current Following
Even though it is generally understood that Hislop's presentation of history was fashioned out of nothing more than myth and what he wanted to believe [citation needed], the comparison of the Roman Catholic Church to pagan religions is still made in the tracts, comic books, movies, and other media produced by Jack T.Chick's publication company Chick Publications. The specific description of Semiramis and her eventual return as Mary is made in the tract “Why is Mary Crying?” Despite general consensus otherwise from Roman Catholic scholars, Chick and his publication company still profess this and other unsubstantiated claims to be the honest truth.Quote (david @ Mar. 29 2006,05:42) T8 said: Quote “It is possible that a world sick of religious violence may turn to unity of all religions for world peace.” I believe that a “world sick of religious violence” and war and hatred will turn on religion, abolishing it, and that this will trigger the world saying: “Peace and Security,” and that this will be the beginning of the end of this system of things.
The United Nations purpose, as declared in their charter, chapter 1, article 1: “To maintain international peace and security.”
These are the first words of the “purposes of the United Nations.”
Has not religion always seemed to be a stumbling block to peace and security, their proclaimed purpose? Tolerance for religion is wearing thinner and thinner. Factions inside the U.N. are growing less tolerant of the cause of war and looking for a solution.REVELATION 17:15-18
“And he says to me: “The waters that you saw, where the harlot is sitting, mean peoples and crowds and nations and tongues. And the TEN HORNS that you saw, AND THE WILD BEAST, these WILL HATE THE HARLOT [Babylon the Great] and will MAKE HER DEVASTATED and naked, and will eat up her fleshy parts and WILL COMPLETELY BURN HER WITH FIRE. For God put [it] into their hearts TO CARRY OUT HIS THOUGHT, even to carry out [their] one thought by giving their kingdom to the wild beast, until the words of God will have been accomplished. And the woman whom you saw means the great city that has a kingdom over the kings of the earth.””This destruction of Babylon the Great by the “ten horns” and the “wild beast” may SEEM to bring peace. They may SAY “Peace and security!”
1 THESSALONIANS 5:2-3
“For you yourselves know quite well that Jehovah’s day is coming exactly as a thief in the night. Whenever it is that they are saying: “Peace and security!” then sudden destruction is to be instantly upon them just as the pang of distress upon a pregnant woman; and they will by no means escape.”But this call of ‘peace and security’ does not mean there is really true peace, or security. (Compare Jer 8:11; 23:16, 17, 19, 20.)
Just wondering what people’s thoughts are on this.
Hi david,
The whore has cosied up with politics since the time of Constantine. It is not a happy alliance though.Who crowns the Kings and Queens of England? The Archbishop of Canterbury. Who is greater, the one who is crowned or the one who places the crown?
It is her power which is greater than the power of any state government, and the world Governments tolerate it because they have to for now. Clearly there will come a time when they will turn on their tormentor when the beast comes to power.
Give any true follower of the whore the option of following their church leaders or obeying God sanctioned state authority and they will follow the instructions of their denominational leaders every time. You often see such influences being brought to bear before elections.
Hi SS,
You said
“One of the main reasons I looked into this subject was to defend the Catholic Church and to disprove that it is the Whore of Babylon. The earliest Christians leave their personal opinions in various writings, most of which is in direct opposition to the common fundamentalist, dispensationalist views.Let's start with the last question first, because the Catholic position is very simple: when the end is near, we will see the “signs of the times,” an apostasy from the true faith, and an Antichrist, whom many will see as a man of peace and wonders.
The antichrist
1Jo 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1Jo 2:23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.”Catholicism denies Jesus is the Son of God.
It teaches that Jesus is God.If the cap fits why not wear it?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 14 2006,20:27) Hi SS,
You said
“One of the main reasons I looked into this subject was to defend the Catholic Church and to disprove that it is the Whore of Babylon. The earliest Christians leave their personal opinions in various writings, most of which is in direct opposition to the common fundamentalist, dispensationalist views.Let's start with the last question first, because the Catholic position is very simple: when the end is near, we will see the “signs of the times,” an apostasy from the true faith, and an Antichrist, whom many will see as a man of peace and wonders.
The antichrist
1Jo 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1Jo 2:23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.”Catholicism denies Jesus is the Son of God.
It teaches that Jesus is God.If the cap fits why not wear it?
So what truth do the Catholics have? I used to think that they at least taught that Jesus was the Son?
They confess this in the Nicene Creed every Sunday.
What book is that in? Old or New Testament?
1Co 2:4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:
1Co 2:5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.
1Co 2:6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
