Revelation 17 - 18

Revelation — Steve Gregg

Next in this series

Revelation 19

00:00

Revelation 17 - 18

RevelationSteve Gregg

In this presentation, Steve Gregg delves into the symbolism of Babylon in Revelation 17-18. He notes that while some interpret the harlot in these chapters as the Roman Catholic Church or a coalition of apostate faiths, it is equally likely that the term refers to Jerusalem as a great city and a harlot who cheated on Yahweh. Gregg draws connections to Jeremiah 2:20 and Ezekiel 16:23 to support this interpretation. He also explores the difficult passage in verses 7-11 and cautions against relying too heavily on futurist interpretations that have yet to come to fruition.

Transcript

Tonight we're at the beginning of Revelation chapter 17. This section of Revelation is a new section. The book divides into various segments.

Many of them are three chapters long. Not all of them. This one is.

Chapters 17, 18, and 19 are really one segment. And we are introduced in chapter 17 as if we've never heard of her before. We're introduced to the harlot.

Now, I don't know that we have heard of the harlot before this point, but we've certainly heard of Babylon. And the harlot is Babylon. So we see Babylon depicted to us under a new image here.

We encountered Babylon in chapter 14 the very first time with a simple announcement in chapter 14 verse 8 when another angel followed saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen. That great city. Because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.

Now we're going to find exactly the same announcements made in chapter 17 and 18. But the thing is in chapter 17 and 18 we get a proper introduction. We actually have a depiction of this city Babylon.

And some explanation. The explanation is not altogether lucid. But it's perhaps better than having none at all.

And so we do not have in verse 8 of chapter 14 any real information except that Babylon is fallen at that point. And since we see Babylon unfallen in chapter 17, this again underscores the fact that the chapters of Revelation are not necessarily depicting things in their chronological sequence. That Babylon would be declared to be fallen already in chapter 14 and yet unfallen in chapter 17 would underscore that fact.

Also in chapter 16 which we just completed in our last session, at the very end when the seventh bowl of wrath was poured out, we're told in verse 19, now the great city was divided into three parts and the cities of the nations and I believe that the Greek manuscript says the city of the nations fell. And great Babylon was remembered before God to give her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath. Now one thing that's interesting about that is that when we first read of Babylon in chapter 14, there was a wine cup that she had made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.

And now she is going to drink of that cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath for her fornication. We will read of both the wine of his wrath and the wine of her fornication in the chapters ahead of us tonight. But while Babylon has been mentioned in passing twice previously, Babylon is significant enough in Revelation to deserve a whole section to herself and chapters 17 and 18 are devoted to her.

Chapter 19 celebrates her fall and then goes on from there. But who is Babylon? Now in Revelation, we will find as you take the big picture and we have not really seen the portion of Revelation where this comes out clearly yet. But as you look at the whole remainder of the book of Revelation, you'll find that there's a focus on two cities, both of which are depicted as women.

One is the spiritual Babylon, which is the subject of chapters 17, 18, 19 and the other is spiritual Jerusalem, which is the subject of chapters 21 and 22. And so we have a spiritual Babylon and a spiritual Jerusalem. Now the Babylon city is compared to a woman who is a harlot.

The Jerusalem city is dressed as a bride, adorned for her husband when she is seen coming out of heaven in chapter 21. So we have this contrast between two cities, which are also likened to two women. One city is Babylon, the other is Jerusalem.

However, those are not the real names of either of them. In other words, Babylon is not the historical earthly Babylon and Jerusalem is not the historical earthly Jerusalem. They are symbolic names.

And the contrast between a faithful bride and a harlot suggests that one has been unfaithful and one has been faithful to her bridegroom. Now, the identification of Babylon has always been tricky. Let's read what it actually says in chapter 17 where essentially almost all the information we need is there.

Well, maybe not all the information we need, but mostly all the information we're going to get. And in chapter 17, we read this. Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls, that's from the series in chapter 16 of the bowls of wrath.

One of those angels appears in this segment as well, came and talked with me saying to me, come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication and the inhabitants of the earth were made drunk with the wine of her fornication. So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast, which was full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication.

And on her forehead, a name was written, Mystery Babylon, the great, the mother of harlots and of the abominations of the earth. And I saw the woman drunk with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. And when I saw her, I marveled with great amazement.

But the angel said to me, why do you marvel? I will tell you the mystery of the woman and of the beast that carries her, which has the seven heads and the ten horns. The beast that you saw was and is not and will ascend out of the bottomless pit and go to perdition. I'm glad to have that cleared up.

And those who dwell on the earth will marvel whose names are not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world. When they see the beast that was and is not and yet is. Here is the mind which has wisdom.

The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. There are also seven kings. Five have fallen.

One is and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time. And the beast that was and is not is himself also the eighth and is of the seven.

And is going to perdition. The plot thickens. And the ten horns, which you saw, are ten kings who have received no kingdom as of yet.

But they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast. These are of one mind and they will give their power and authority to the beast. These will make war with the lamb and the lamb will overcome them.

For he is lord of lords and king of kings. Those who are with him are called chosen and faithful. And he said to me, the waters which you saw where the harlot sits are peoples, multitudes, nations and tongues.

And the ten horns which you saw on the beast, these will hate the harlot, make her desolate and naked, eat her flesh and burn her with fire. For God has put it into their hearts to fulfill his purpose. To be of one mind and to give their kingdom to the beast until the words of God are fulfilled.

And the woman whom you saw is that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth. Now, chapter 18 is a one long lament over the fall of Babylon. So we don't actually see her go down, but we are told in verse 16 that she will be hated and desolated and burned up and eaten by the ten horns on the beast.

And so I guess, although it says they will do that to her, I guess we're to assume that we've seen that happen now. And then in chapter 18, there is this lamentation, which is taken from passages in the Old Testament. The passages in the Old Testament are in their original setting about Babylon, about Tyre, about Edom and about Sodom.

Kind of mixed up together as a collage of phraseology and verses from these Old Testament passages, all now applied to this one city that has fallen. Now, what should we do with this information? The futurist view, of course, looks for a future identity of the harlot. And of course, the beast in the futurist view, in the dispensational view, is a future antichrist.

And the woman is riding on the beast. So her career must be somehow parallel to that of the antichrist. According to dispensationalism, chapter 13 of Revelation tells us that this beast blasphemes God for 42 months.

And that must be approximately the length of time that this harlot is in the picture. At the end of it, the beast, or at least the 10 kings that are subject to him, turn on her and destroy her. It's obvious that if this has not already happened, the identifying of this woman is almost impossible.

But many have thought that she represents the apostate church. Because she's a harlot. And the church is supposed to be faithful to Christ, like the bride in Revelation.

In contrast to the bride, who is a faithful church, this is the unfaithful church. Some have identified the harlot with the Roman Catholic Church. Those who hold the historicist view have always identified the beast and the harlot with the Roman Catholic papacy.

The beast being more or less the political functioning of the papacy, and the harlot the religious functioning of the papacy. That's the historicist view. The futurist sometimes likes this idea too, depending on how anti-Catholic they are.

They sometimes would like to say that the harlot is the Roman Catholic Church. Or maybe the Catholic Church joined with apostate Protestantism in some liberal coalition. Like perhaps the World Council of Churches, something like that.

In any case, like the Church of Laodicea, gone bad, the church gone bad. Others think that the harlot simply represents the world system. Though it's hard to know exactly how to fit that theory into this, because she's said to be the city.

Of course, she could be a figurative city. After all, the New Jerusalem is identified with the church, the bride of the lamb. And the church is not a literal city, but a figurative city, so to speak.

And so, some think that it's the church, the true city of God, against this apostate city, the world system. But why this would be distinguished then from the beast is not entirely clear. In any case, the various ideas that have been suggested by futurists are all entirely speculative, since they know that they can't be tested.

Whatever they may suggest, who knows? It could happen that way. That's the nice thing about the futurist view. You don't really have any danger of having your views tested by fact.

Because if it hasn't happened the way you say it's going to, there's always the future. Who can say what will not happen in the future? And so, the futurist view has the great advantage of being untestable against any actual objective realities. The historicist view, which sees this as the papacy, does have at least some connection with historical events.

The idealist view tends to take the harlot as sort of the world system in general, the spirit of the world. But the preterist view, which holds that the book of Revelation is primarily about the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, and the view that I've been essentially taking as we go through this, has had two different opposite views as to who the harlot is. One of the very popular views among preterists is that it is Rome.

And good arguments can be made for it being Rome. For example, the last verse of chapter 17 says, This is the great city which reigns over the kings of the earth. Certainly in John's day, and he does speak in the present tense, the city that could be said to rule over the kings of the earth was the city of Rome, the capital of the empire.

And so, many people think that that's the dead giveaway, this is a reference to Rome. Another thing about the city that seems to point to Rome is that in the lament in chapter 18, it is frequently mentioned how much the merchants are deprived. If the fall of Rome would mean that all the business they did at the empire's capital is over.

They've made themselves wealthy. Babylon is described as having a great deal of merchandise of gold and silver and precious stones and pearls and fine linen and purple and silk and scarlet and every kind of citron wood, every kind of object of ivory, every kind of object of most precious wood, bronze, iron and marble, cinnamon and incense. Obviously, an international trade seems to be centered here.

And that was just reading from chapter 18, verse 12 and 13. But Rome in John's day might seem to be the best candidate there. Although, frankly, Tyre would be even more so, more of a trade city than Rome.

But since Tyre is not one of the contestants here, Rome would seem to be a contender. Also, in chapter 18 and verse 20, it says, Rejoice over her, O heaven, and you holy apostles and prophets, for God has avenged you on her. And it is said that Rome is the city that killed the apostles.

And God, by causing this city to fall, is avenging the blood of the apostles. Paul and Peter both traditionally died in Rome. And perhaps other apostles, we don't know all of them, where they died.

But at least we know of two apostles that were killed in Rome. And therefore, their blood would be avenged by the fall of Rome. Beyond this, we have a statement that Peter makes at the end of 1 Peter, where he is closing down his epistle in 1 Peter chapter 5, and he sends greetings to the churches to whom he has addressed the epistle.

And he says to them in verse 13, 1 Peter 5.13, She who is in Babylon, elect together with you, greets you, and so does Mark my son. Now, Peter is sending greetings from the church that he is with, where he is, sending it out to the churches in the regions to which this letter went. And he sends greetings from the church he's at, and it says, She who is in Babylon.

That's a personification of the church in Babylon. Now, tradition has it that Peter spent his final years in Rome and died there. And if he speaks of the place where he's sending this letter from as Babylon, and he was in Rome, that would seem to say that the early Christians may have used Babylon as a code name for Rome.

Although there are other theories, some think he was actually writing from the city of Babylon, which in the first century had a small population. We don't ever read or have any traditions about Peter going up to that area to minister, but that doesn't mean he didn't. So we have Peter's reference to Babylon in a context that sounds like he's talking about Rome.

And then one other thing, and that is when we are being told who the beast, or who the woman is and the beast in chapter 17 here, Revelation 17, 9. It says, Here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. Now, the woman is the great city and she's sitting on seven mountains.

The ancient poets often spoke of Rome as the city that sat on seven hills. The city on seven hills. And here we're told this woman is a city that sits on seven mountains.

These indicators are thought by many scholars to point unmistakably to Rome. And obviously there's a good case for this. In fact, if there was not a better case for another contender, I would say there's a very solid case for Rome.

And it's a very respectable theory based on the evidence. But it's not the only contender and it's not the one that has, in my opinion, the strongest evidence. Now that would be up to you to decide.

In any case, even if Revelation is a book about the fall of Jerusalem, there could well be a discussion about the fall of Rome. Because Rome, too, was a player in the destruction of Jerusalem. It was the main player.

And it was also a player in the conflict between the forces of darkness and the church. Because after Jerusalem fell, it was the Roman emperors, more than anybody else, that persecuted the church and made martyrs of them. So there is, of course, the possibility that even a preterist interpretation of Revelation would be concerned to talk about Rome.

And there are some preterist interpreters like J. Adams and like Luis de Alcazar, who is sometimes said to be the founder of the preterist system. He is not, because the system is known to have existed a thousand years before his time. But those who are actually trying to dismiss the preterist system say he is the founder.

He was a Jesuit. And the very fact that he was a Roman Catholic is thought to discredit his system because he was a preterist and a Jesuit. But as I say, a thousand years before Alcazar, there were preterists.

And that was before there was a Roman Catholic system to generate it. But Alcazar and more modern Protestant preterists like J. Adams believe that the first half of Revelation is about the fall of Jerusalem and the second half is about the fall of Rome. Jerusalem and Rome were the first persecutors of the Church.

Jerusalem first, through the Sanhedrin, and then the Roman Emperors. And so it is thought by these authors fitting that Revelation should depict the judgment on both of these enemies of the Church. After all, Christians were killed by the Sanhedrin.

Our first martyr, Stephen, was by their own hands. They stoned him to death. And yet the Apostles Paul and Peter were killed by Roman Emperors or by Nero, one Emperor.

And therefore, to see the blood of the martyrs vindicated against Jerusalem and Rome would be a fitting subject matter. And it's frankly a scenario, a paradigm for Revelation that I don't find objectionable at all, except I think there's probably a better explanation. But the idea that this is Rome is one of the preterist viewpoints.

The other is, not surprisingly, that it is Jerusalem. And in my opinion, Jerusalem is a better candidate. This is, of course, left to anyone to decide for himself.

But I'll tell you why. Because in the symmetry of the book of Revelation there is a deliberate juxtaposition between two cities and two women. One woman who is faithful to her husband, one is unfaithful to her husband.

And there are two cities that have been in covenant relationship with God. One faithful and one unfaithful. The bride is the faithful one.

She is the new Jerusalem in Revelation 21 and 22. Jerusalem, which now is, that is the earthly Jerusalem, is the unfaithful one. And that has been brought up throughout the book of Revelation.

It is the city that is coming under judgment. One of the most important things that point to Jerusalem is that the woman is considered to be a harlot, which is not just like calling her a prostitute, which it is, but rather this is calling her by the specific name that God called Jerusalem by in the Old Testament when she was unfaithful to God, when she worshipped other gods. And she did that a lot.

And in Isaiah chapter 1 and verse 21, Isaiah is talking about Jerusalem and says how the faithful city has become a harlot. Jerusalem, once a faithful city in the days of David, now, Isaiah says, has become a harlot. A wife who was faithful to her husband has become unfaithful to her husband.

The word harlot here speaks specifically not just of an ordinary prostitute, but of a woman who has cheated on her husband, is no longer a faithful wife. And it is Jerusalem that Isaiah refers to this way. Over in Jeremiah chapter 2 and verse 20, speaking about Jerusalem, it says, For of old I have broken your yoke and burst your bonds, and you said, I will not transgress.

When on every high hill and under every green tree you lay down, play in the harlot. Again, he's talking about Jerusalem. Jerusalem was in covenant relationship with God, a wife to God.

But although they pledged loyalty to God, it really turned out that they went out and slept with every God passing by. And he says, you played the harlot. This is, of course, the whole message of Hosea, that Hosea described Israel as a harlot, and he married a woman who was a harlot.

We don't know that she was a harlot before he married her. Sometimes preachers say he went out and found a prostitute and married her. Actually, it just says he took a wife of harlotry, which might mean a woman who had already been a harlot, or a woman who was going to become a harlot, a wife who had just cheated on him.

And he did marry Gomer, and she cheated on him. And then he took her back, and this was his message, that God would be willing to accept repentant Israel, though they had been a harlot wife. In other words, in the Old Testament, Israel, and Jerusalem in particular, is called the harlot, or a harlot, and is likened to an unfaithful wife.

We will see a little later how that some passages in Ezekiel 16 and Ezekiel 23, a whole chapter in each case, two chapters in Ezekiel, are devoted to underscoring the harlotry of Jerusalem against God. So, when the readers of Revelation see that there is a harlot here, the first identification would be to Jerusalem, and especially if that has been the subject matter of the book in general, and especially if the two cities that are contrasted with each other are the faithful and the unfaithful wife of God. Jerusalem is the unfaithful one, and of course the church is the other.

Now, what's more, since there are only these two cities in juxtaposition, to introduce another city would imbalance the whole picture. Not that it couldn't be done, but it's not like Revelation necessarily to throw in something that is not as symmetrical as that would throw things off. There's two cities focused on, Jerusalem and the church, and that is how it is, two women, two wives, and to throw Rome in there, see Rome never really was married to God, so the fact that Rome worshipped other gods was not a matter of unfaithfulness to Yahweh, they never knew Yahweh, they never had a relationship with Yahweh, they never had a promise they made to Yahweh.

The harlot is the one who cheated on Yahweh, and Rome, bad as they were, pagan as they were, were not violating any covenant relationship that they had with God, they were not an unfaithful wife, because they had never been a wife to God. Now, also, the first time we heard the term that great city, or the great city, which we now hear again and again and again with reference to Babylon, was back in chapter 11. And in chapter 11, verse 8, which we have seen a number of times, because it's such a key verse for understanding what Revelation is talking about, Revelation 11, verse 8 says, And their dead bodies, that is the two witnesses, will lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

Well, the fact that the Lord was crucified there identifies the city unmistakably as Jerusalem, it is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, and it is called the great city. Likewise, Babylon is repeatedly called the great city. In chapter 14, verse 8, where we first encountered Babylon, in 14.8, it says, The announcement of the angels, Babylon is fallen, that great city, a term that had been previously used of Jerusalem.

In chapter 16, likewise, chapter 16, verse 19, Now the great city was divided into three parts. Great Babylon was remembered before God. When we get to the lament against Babylon, the reference to her as a great city is extremely frequently repeated.

In chapter 18, for example, verse 10, Alas, alas, that great city, Babylon. And verse 16, saying, Alas, alas, that great city. Verse 18, what is like this great city? Verse 19, Alas, alas, that great city.

And verse 21, thus with violence, the great city, Babylon. So, the expression, the great city, is always applied to Babylon, except the first time the term is used, where it's identified as a city that is symbolically called Sodom and Egypt, and perhaps Babylon too. After all, calling Jerusalem Babylon is no more out of line than calling it Sodom, or Egypt.

In fact, of course, we have said that the deliverance of the people of Israel from Egypt in the days of Moses, and the deliverance of God's people from Babylon in the days of Cyrus, both provide Old Testament paradigms for New Testament salvation. That the Exodus is a paradigm of Christ's deliverance of his people, which is why Moses and Elijah, when they appeared to Christ on the Mount of Transfiguration in Luke chapter 9, spoke to him, as it says in the Greek, of the Exodus that Jesus was about to accomplish in Jerusalem. Here's Moses, who led the children of Israel in the original Exodus, talking to Jesus about a second Exodus.

Likewise, the exiles returning from Babylon is treated as another kind of an Exodus, and another type and shadow of Christian salvation. So, Egypt and Babylon are the two historical oppressors of the Church, and the destruction of whoever it is being judged in the book of Revelation has repeatedly been likened to the judgment of Egypt because of the plagues. They're like the Egyptian plagues.

The plagues in Revelation are mimicry of the Egyptian plagues, and the judgment on the city has also been likened to the judgment on Babylon. For example, the drying up of the river Euphrates to make way for the kings of the east. That's how Babylon fell historically.

And now here, Babylon is the main paradigm. But we are told that the Egypt character in the book is the city where our Lord was crucified. Babylon is another Egypt.

And Jerusalem is, in the book, treated as Egypt and as Babylon, whereas the people of God who escape and are saved through Christ are like the Jews escaping from Egypt or from Babylon, either one. And that great city, then, is a term that is used for Jerusalem and for Babylon. Now, there's also this fact, and it sort of militates against Rome being Babylon, and that is that the city is often said to fall very suddenly.

For example, in chapter 18, verse 8, it says, Therefore her plagues will come in one day. In verse 10, it says, For in one hour your judgment has come. And likewise, verse 17, For in one hour such great riches came to nothing.

And in verse 19, For in one hour she is made desolate. In one hour, three times it says in one hour, and one time it says in one day, this is said to be a sudden fall. Jerusalem did fall suddenly.

Rome never has had a sudden fall. Rome kind of fell, of course. It succumbed to barbarian invasions, usually several waves of them over a period of decades.

Rome kind of crumbled gradually over a period of decades from successive invasions from Vandals and Huns and Ostrogoths and so forth, and finally it fell in 476, but not suddenly. It wasn't like a one day affair that surprised everybody. Jerusalem came down rather suddenly.

The siege itself was only five months, but the breaching of the walls marked an exact day that Jerusalem was conquered and fell. And therefore, it seems with the suddenness that is emphasized here, Jerusalem makes somewhat more sense. But perhaps the most important identifier is the frequent reference to blood guilt.

Because in chapter 17, verse 6, it says, I saw the woman drunk with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs. And then in chapter 18, verse 20, it says, rejoice over her, O heaven, and you, holy apostles and prophets, for God has avenged you on her. Not true.

A couple of the apostles, at least, were killed by Rome. But Jerusalem also was a killer of the saints and prophets and apostles. They didn't, with their own hands, kill James, but they encouraged Herod in that way, and he killed James.

They also encouraged Herod to kill Peter, though Peter escaped. Herod, under the Sanhedrin's encouragement, arrested Peter, intending to kill him, but an angel sprang him out of jail and he got away. Also, of course, they killed Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our profession.

But mostly it's important to note that this city has killed the prophets as well as apostles. And in chapter 18, verse 24, it says, And in her was found the blood of prophets and saints and of all who were slain on the land. Or the earth, the word can be translated either way.

And then in verse 2 of chapter 19, For true and just are your ways, are your judgments, because he has judged the great harlot who corrupted the earth with her fornication, and he has avenged on her the blood of his servants shed by her. So she is again and again and again said to be judged because of what she did to the martyrs. Now we've looked at these verses before, but we can hardly not look at them now in view of this frequent reference to this blood guiltness.

In Matthew chapter 23, Matthew 23, we've seen this recently, so I hope you don't get tired of seeing it, but this is directly relevant to identifying the harlot. Matthew 23, 29 says, Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous. And you say, if we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.

In other words, our fathers killed the prophets. We're kind of making up for it by decorating their tombs, making their tombs look pretty. We wouldn't have killed the prophets like our fathers did.

He says, therefore, your witness is against yourselves that you are the sons of those who murdered the prophets. You call them your fathers? Well, you are their sons. Fill up, then, the measure of your father's guilt.

Serpents, blood of vipers, brood of vipers, excuse me. How can you escape the condemnation of hell? Or Gehenna. Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes.

Some of them you will kill and crucify. Some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city. This is Jerusalem, and these are the people that Jesus sends them, that include apostles.

And on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come on this generation. He's saying, you, Jerusalem, have killed the prophets, and you're going to kill the ones I send you, including the apostles I send you.

And all that blood guilt from all time, from Abel on, is going to come on this generation. And it did. So the destruction of Jerusalem is emphatically said by Jesus to be the punishment for the blood of all the saints and prophets.

And that is what is again and again said of this woman. Now there are, what do we do with these matters where it looked like it was Rome? Especially chapter 17, verse 18, where it says, the woman whom you saw is that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth. Well, I've mentioned before the expression kings of the earth can be translated, the rulers of the land, meaning the land of Israel.

And this very expression is used to mean that. Kings of the earth, the same expression in Greek, is found in Acts chapter 4, verses 26 and 27. We've looked at it before.

We won't turn there again now for lack of time. There the apostles actually quoted Psalm 2, which used this expression, the kings of the earth. And the apostle said, this is referring to Pontius Pilate, Herod, the Jews and the Gentiles who crucified Christ.

That'd be the Sanhedrin and the Roman authorities. These were what? The rulers of the land of Israel. The kings of the earth, therefore, is a term that the apostles identify with the rulers of Israel, the rulers of the land.

And the city that rules over the rulers of the land is certainly Jerusalem, the capital city. But what about the reference to the merchandise and all the merchants weeping over the loss of this city? Well, it's true. There are some cities that this description would fit more admirably, but it's not saying that this city was the only or the most luxurious city or the wealthiest or the busiest trading center.

It's just saying that people from all over the world had gotten rich trading with her. And that is true. Jerusalem and almost all the major big cities probably had made a lot of money through merchandise.

And Jerusalem had, we know that. Josephus describes all the wares that were available for sale in the city. And so there's no reason to think that merchants would not find themselves deprived of trading opportunities with this city out of the way.

What about Peter calling Rome Babylon? Well, we don't know for sure that he did. We know he spoke of Babylon and it may be he was talking about Rome. And if he was, that's fine.

Peter didn't write Revelation. Peter might well have thought Rome was very much of a new Babylon, but it doesn't mean that he was commenting on the book of Revelation or telling us how, whether or not another city might be likewise a new Babylon. In the case of Revelation, we need to actually identify Babylon from internal evidence of how the flow of the book is going and what is being said about Jerusalem and so forth.

Previously that might influence us to see whether this is Babylon. Now what about the seven mountains? In verse nine of chapter 17, here's the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. Well, it's true that Rome is said to be the city that sits on seven hills.

And this may be a reference to those seven hills, but it's not the woman that has the seven heads. It's the beast. The beast can fairly readily be identified with Rome.

The woman is different than the beast. The woman sits on the beast. She is supported by the beast.

Jerusalem was supported and protected by being a province or the area was a province under Rome's protection and control. And the city was more loyal to Rome than to Christ. As I pointed out in an earlier lecture when Pilate said, shall I crucify your king? They said, we have no king but Caesar.

You know, in other words, Jesus isn't our king. Caesar is. That sounds like throwing their loyalty over to the side of the beast to Rome rather than the Messiah.

And she may sit on the beast that has the seven heads and the seven heads may indeed be the seven hills upon which Rome sits. She sits on Rome and it sits on seven hills. Anyway, these are some of the thoughts that might guide our inquiry.

I personally favor the Jerusalem identification. Many would favor the Rome identification. I think on balance, the Jerusalem identification is somewhat stronger.

Let's read it. Let's look at it. We've already talked about much of what's in it.

The woman is a harlot. She's sitting on the beast. The beast is, of course, the same beast we've seen previously in chapter 13.

He's got seven heads and 10 horns, kind of a dead giveaway. In this case, he is said to be a scarlet beast. The color of the beast was not mentioned previously in chapter 13, but it's clearly the same beast.

The one in chapter 13 was not. It's said to be a different color than scarlet. And in verse 5, it says, on her forehead a name was written.

Now, earlier, in chapter 14, verse 1, it says, So, they, we identified as the faithful remnant in Jerusalem who escaped before the Romans destroyed the city, which we know happened. The church in Jerusalem escaped. They were the ones with the father's name on their forehead.

The rest of the city that did not escape had another name written on their forehead. And it would appear that that name was not the name of God, but the name of Babylon, its new identity after rejecting the Messiah. And we see in verse 6, she was drunk with the blood of the martyrs.

Now, the angel claims to tell what the mystery is, but it's not at all clear. But there are some things that become more clear because, I mean, some things are going to remain unclear. Frankly, this passage, verses 7 through 11, is truly one of the most difficult passages to decipher, partly because symbols do double duty.

For example, the seven heads are seven mountains, and they are seven kings. So, I hear one set of symbols represents two seemingly entirely different things at the same time. So, this tells us this is going to be a rather complex thing if a single symbol can mean two different things simultaneously, seven mountains and seven kings.

Of course, mountains can represent kingdoms because in the Old Testament, that is sometimes the case. A mountain is a symbol for a kingdom. And maybe that's how we're going to understand the seven kings, not so much kings as kingdoms.

One of the popular ways that preterists understand the seven kings is to see them as the seven emperors. He says, five have fallen, one now is. That's the sixth is now, and the seventh is not yet come.

And so, there were, in fact, five emperors prior to Nero. There was Julius Caesar, there was Caesar Augustus, there was Caligula, there was Claudius, and I'm leaving, Tiberius was after, after Augustus was Tiberius, and then Caligula, then Claudius, and then there was Nero. So, Nero was the sixth of the emperors, and if five had fallen and one now is, that would mean that Nero was the one that now, at the time of writing, was the emperor.

This is a good possibility. I believe it is, in fact, true. However, another way of seeing those kings would be to see them as kingdoms, as Daniel sometimes refers to different empires as kings.

And it could be that the five that have fallen were the five kingdoms that had risen and fallen before Rome did. Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Media Persia, and Greece. These five empires had risen and ruled the general area independently of each other at different times, serially, and now Rome was the sixth, and John might be saying the sixth king now is.

That's the Roman Empire. In which case, he's not telling us anything about which emperor is reigning, but in any case, we are told about the ones after the present emperor. This is what is confusing here.

It's one of the things that's confusing. There's more than one. It says about the seventh, it says, well, verse 10, five have fallen, one now is, and the other, that's the seventh one, has not yet come.

And when he comes, he must continue a short time. And then it says, and the beast that was and is not is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven and is going to perdition. Now this is particularly difficult, because it sounds like it's saying the beast himself who has the seven heads is really an eighth head.

But he's of the seven heads. What in the world that language means is truly an unsolved mystery. But some think that Nero is the sixth king, and the seventh one would be Galba.

After Nero committed suicide, the next emperor was Galba, but he only reigned for six or seven months. And therefore it says the one that has not yet come will continue a short time. And the eighth, well, who is he? Well, some think that, you know, since the number seven suggests completeness, the eighth is simply a reference to all the rest kind of wrapped up together, all the remaining emperors that are not consequential to this particular vision, because this vision is going to be fulfilled in the reign of Galba, the seventh.

The rest of the kings that would, the emperors that came afterwards, they're not worthy of enumerating. We'll just call them the eighth combined. They make the eighth, but they're like the seven.

They're of the seven. They're of the same spirit, same office, same type. And so that's one way of looking at it.

Another way, if we see it as seven kingdoms, would suggest that the seventh kingdom would be that which comes against the Messiah when the devil is let out of his prison for a little while. And it will continue a little while, but will be destroyed by the second coming of Christ. But that is not, to my mind, as good a suggestion.

And I'm not sure any suggestion I've heard or can make is excellent. It's very difficult. The 10 horns are 10 kings that give their authority to the beast.

The number 10 may be symbolic or it may be literal. Some have tried to identify 10 actual European ethnicities that were in the Roman Empire into which it dissolved eventually. It may also be that 10 is simply a symbolic number, meaning a total number of all the kings that are part of the Roman Empire, part of the beast.

And about those horns, those other ethnic nations, it says they give their power to the beast. And it says in verse 17, that God has put it in their hearts to fulfill his purpose. Now, the idea of God putting it in the hearts of people to do bad things is a bit problematic.

But we have to remember that the Bible teaches that God puts it in the hearts of bad people to do certain bad things that are quite consistent with their character. God never takes a good person and makes them do a bad thing. Nor does he take a neutral person and make him do a bad thing.

But he'll take a pharaoh who's a tyrant and an evil persecutor, and he'll harden his heart so that he'll do bad things more than he would before. It is not unfair for God to take somebody who has determined his own course to be a course of rebellion and sin and evil and say, okay, since that's the course you're in, it's these specific evil things I will have you do because that will fulfill my purpose. Joseph's brothers were evil.

God seemingly directed them in the direction of selling Joseph into Egypt. And he said, you intended evil against me, but God meant it for good. Certainly Pilate and Judas and the Sanhedrin and Pontius Pilate were doing evil things when they crucified Christ, but it is said that they did exactly what God foreordained that they should do.

Not that they are blameless for it. They are to be blamed for it. But the thing is they were already wicked men.

For God to take wicked men who are already living a wicked life and say, okay, you want to be wicked? Here's the specific wicked thing that I'm going to use you to do. He's not damning somebody who would otherwise be good. He's not even making someone sin who would otherwise be sinless or righteous.

He's simply directing people whose whole life is sin into a direction of certain kinds of activities which happen to also be consistent with them, which will serve his purpose. These nations being an example, he put it into their hearts to fulfill his purpose. Not to be wicked.

They did that on their own. But since they were wicked, he says, okay, I can use that. And what does he use it for? To destroy Jerusalem.

To destroy the harlot. It says in verse 16, the ten horns which you saw on the beast, these will hate the harlot, make her desolate and naked and eat her flesh and burn her with fire. Rome, again, the fall of Rome doesn't seem to fit this so well.

Although some people would say it does. They'd say the ten horns would include the barbaric nations that came against Rome. But there's a problem there.

The barbarians who destroyed Rome had never sworn fealty to Rome. They never were part of the Roman Empire. That's why they were barbarians.

They were the ones the Roman Empire was still trying to conquer. They had not given their power to the beast, to Rome. And therefore, although the barbarians did eventually destroy and sack Rome and burn it even, they were not the same entities that had served Rome and had given their loyalty to Rome.

However, those that were loyal to the beast could sack Jerusalem and did, because it was these multi-ethnic Roman subjects that were part of the Roman army that did destroy Jerusalem. Anyway, some of these things are a little ambiguous, to say the least, and are not the easiest in the world to give certain answers about. But given the trajectory of the book in general, the identity of Babylon would seem to fit well with being Jerusalem, just as Egypt and Sodom are said to be Jerusalem.

And so that's where I go with this. Now, chapter 18, we will have very little comment to make except to say this is a long, protracted, one might even say boring chapter, because it is very repetitious and it is very archaic in its terminology because it's borrowing from Jeremiah and Isaiah and certain other Old Testament prophets. As I said, these are, the borrowings come from lament passages in the Old Testament prophets, but not always about the same entity.

There's some reference here to the fall of Sodom, the destruction of Sodom, but most of it comes from passages that are talking about the fall of Tyre in Ezekiel or the fall of Babylon in Isaiah or in Jeremiah or the fall of Edom in Isaiah and other passages. These various cities to which Jerusalem has been likened in the book of Revelation in some cases, and therefore the words of the laments against these cities that were like Jerusalem are gathered together into a collage of one long, almost monotonous lament. Now, I would say before we read it that the exact details of it may not be pressed too much because it's basically borrowing language about other cities, not Jerusalem.

However, I believe in general, it is supposed to resemble Jerusalem and its downfall. It says, After these things, I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was illuminated with his glory, and he cried mightily with a loud voice, saying, Babylon, the great is fallen, is fallen and has become a habitation of demons and a prison for every foul spirit and a cage for every unclean and hated bird. Now, as far as becoming a habitation of demons, we saw what Jesus said in Matthew chapter 12, verses 38 through 45.

He said, when an unclean spirit goes out of a man, it goes looking for a new home. And if it doesn't find one, it brings back seven worse spirits than himself. And the latter state of that man is worse than the first.

Then Jesus said, And so shall it be with this evil generation. So this generation, his own generation, would be like a man who had been delivered from demons but was repossessed by the demons and worse than before. Jesus came to that generation, casting out demons everywhere he went.

He essentially probably left the place mostly demon-free. He spent three and a half years going to all the villages, casting out all the demons. And so that generation had been delivered.

But in the end, the evidence is quite clear from what Josephus describes as the behavior of the people during the siege of Jerusalem, that they definitely had come under the influence of demons in a much bigger way than they had been before. The latter end of that man is worse than the first. And so shall it be with this generation.

They did become a habitation of demons and a prison for every foul spirit. Verse 3, For all the nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. The Jews had influenced all nations because they had been spread to all nations.

But it's not clear even what it means to drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. Does this mean that they have fornicated with her? Does it mean that they suffer consequences with her? The language is poetic and drawn out in a way that it makes it kind of difficult to know precisely what it is that's being said here. It says, The kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth have become rich through the abundance of her luxury.

Now, the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her. Look over to Ezekiel chapter 16. Ezekiel 16 is a long parable where Israel is likened to a baby girl abandoned at birth.

And God finds her, keeps her alive, brings her up until she's a grown woman, and she has become beautiful, so he marries her. But then she goes out and commits adultery with all the other men around, which are, of course, in the analogy, other gods. Jerusalem worshiped other gods rather than her true God.

And Ezekiel 16, verse 26, in the midst of telling that story, it says, You also committed harlotry with the Egyptians, your very fleshly neighbors, and increased your acts of harlotry to provoke me to anger. Then verse 28, You also played the harlot with the Assyrians because you were insatiable. Indeed, you played the harlot with them and still were not satisfied.

Verse 29, Moreover, you multiplied your acts of harlotry as far as the land of the traitor, Chaldea, and even then you were not satisfied. In other words, she's playing the harlot, so to speak, with all the nations around. With the Egyptians, with the Assyrians, with the Babylonians.

And there's another parable of the same sort in Ezekiel 23. Ezekiel 23 tells essentially the same story, but it talks about both nations, Israel and Judah. And there are two sisters who God is married to, and they also both cheat on him.

And it says in Ezekiel 23, 12, and this is talking about Jerusalem, who's symbolically called Aholabam. It says, She lusted for the neighboring Assyrians, captains and rulers, clothed most gorgeously, horsemen riding on horses, all of them desirable young men. And verse 17, Then the Babylonians came to her into the bed of love, and they defiled her with their immorality.

So she was defiled by them and alienated herself from them. Then verse 19, Yet she multiplied her harlotry in calling to remembrance the days of her youth, when she had played the harlot in the land of Egypt. Now again, this is Jerusalem playing the harlot with all the nations around.

And specifically it says the rulers, captains and rulers in verse 12. So to say of Jerusalem that she played the harlot, the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her is very much true if we're thinking of the nations, the kings of the nations around. Although kings of the earth can mean just the kings of the land, the rulers of the land of Israel.

And they participated with her in her idolatry. In any case, Jerusalem seems to still be the best candidate here. Also verse 4 says, this is Revelation 18.4, And I heard another voice from heaven saying, Come out of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues.

This exhortation to come out of Babylon is found in Isaiah chapter 48.20. To God's people to come out of Babylon because she's going to fall. Isaiah 48.20. It's also found in Jeremiah 50 and verse 8. It's also found in Jeremiah 51 verse 6. It's also found in Jesus teaching in Luke 21. When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, flee from her.

The Christians did flee from Jerusalem to escape its fall. Just as the people from Babylon were told to flee. But you know what? Christians didn't flee from Rome before it fell.

In fact, they stayed and took over. Rome became Christian, essentially. And the Christians didn't flee from Rome when it fell.

So to call the Christians to flee from her would fit Jerusalem because its downfall would have killed the Christians in it if they had stayed. But the fall of Rome did not result in the death or particular endangerment of the church as a group. So again, I'm thinking this is Jerusalem.

Verse 5. For her sins have reached to heaven and God has remembered her iniquities. Render to her justice she rendered to you. Repay her double according to her works in the cup which she has mixed, mix for her double.

In the measure that she glorified herself and lived luxuriously, in the same measure give her torment and sorrow. For she says in her heart, I sit as a queen, I'm no widow, and will not see sorrow. Therefore her plagues will come in one day, death and mourning and famine.

And she will be utterly burned with fire for strong is the Lord who judges her. And now we read of the lament of certain groups of people who are sorry to see her go. The first are the kings of the earth or perhaps the rulers of the land of Israel.

The kings of the earth or of the land who committed fornication and lived luxuriously with her will weep and lament for her when they see the smoke of her burning. Standing at a distance for fear of her torment saying, alas, alas, that great city Babylon, that mighty city, for in one hour your judgment has come. And then all the merchants of the earth or of the land will weep and mourn over her.

All the merchants in Israel no doubt did their business in Jerusalem. And they are now mourning over her, weeping and mourning just as the kings of the land did. For no one buys her merchandise anymore.

Merchandise of gold and silver and precious stones and pearls and fine linen and purple and silk and scarlet and every kind of citron wood, every kind of object of ivory, every kind of object of most precious wood, bronze, iron and marble and cinnamon and incense, fragrant oil and frankincense, wine and oil, fine flour and wheat, cattle and sheep, horses and chariots and the bodies and souls of men. Apparently slave trade as well. And the souls of men, it's hard to know exactly what that is, except to say perhaps she was corrupting people inwardly as well as, you know, selling people physically into slavery.

And the fruit that your soul longed for has gone from you and all the things which are rich and splendid have gone from you and you shall find them no more at all. The merchants of these things who became rich by her will stand at a distance for fear of her torment, weeping and wailing and saying, alas, alas, that great city that was clothed in fine linen, purple, scarlet and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls. For in one hour such great riches came to nothing and every ship master, now there's a new group of people going to mourn, the ship masters and the traders at sea, every ship master and all who travel by ship, sailors and as many as trade on the sea, stood at a distance and cried out when they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, what is like this great city? And they threw dust on their heads and cried out, weeping and wailing and saying, alas, alas, that great city in which all who had ships on the sea became rich by her wealth.

For in one hour she is made desolate. So there's three groups of people wailing here. They're all said to wail and lament or wail and weep.

First the kings of the land, then the merchants of the land and then the merchants at sea. So international traders too. Apparently the, you know, the Jewish merchants made a lot of their money trading at Jerusalem, but also international merchants did.

And so all of these groups say kind of the same thing. It says they see the smoke of her burning and they stand afar because they're afraid to come near because they may perish in the conflagration. And all of them say, amazing, this great city is falling in one hour.

And so this is a sort of a repeated chorus in a way. In verse 20, in contrast to the weeping, there's some people rejoicing. Verse 20, rejoice over her, oh heaven, and you holy apostles and prophets for God has avenged you on her.

Verse 21, then a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea saying thus with violence, the great city Babylon shall be thrown down and shall not be found anymore. This of course resembles what happened at the end of Jeremiah 52, where Jeremiah gave instructions to have a scroll that contained the judgments against Babylon tied to a stone and thrown into the Euphrates river with the announcement, thus shall Babylon fall and rise no more. It'll sink and rise no more.

So throwing this stone into the sea is very much like throwing that stone with the scroll attached to it in the river Euphrates and the same kind of announcement given Babylon's down. They're not getting back up again. And by the way, Jerusalem did fall and has not really risen again.

Sure, there's a city over there, but it doesn't have a temple. It's not a religious center at all for God's people. Never will be again.

It was once the queen of the cities of the earth because it was God's wife. That's not happening again. It's down, it's sunk.

It's not going to rise again. Rome on the other hand fell, but it's still going strong. Has been going strong pretty much ever since it was founded, since the days of Romulus and Remus.

Now the announcement is made in verse 22, The sound of the harpist, musicians, flutists, and trumpeters shall not be heard in you anymore. And no craftsman of any craft shall be found in you anymore. And the sound of a millstone shall not be heard in you anymore.

In fact, all these ordinary peaceful trades and so forth will not be happening there anymore. The light of the lamp shall not shine in you anymore. The voice of the bridegroom and the bride shall not be heard in you anymore.

There are still people getting married in Rome, but they were not in Jerusalem. There are now people getting married in Jerusalem, but after Jerusalem fell, there weren't any for a long time. Hundreds of years, over a thousand years.

And the light of a lamp shall not shine, it says. The bridegroom's voice will not be heard there. No weddings.

And your merchants were the great men of the earth for by your sorcery, all the nations were deceived. So all the nations were corrupted by the compromise made by Judaism, which actually became corrupted. Originally, it was God's religion, but it became Talmudism.

It became man's tradition. Jesus actually condemned those Jewish leaders for following traditions of men instead of God. It's like they've fallen away into sorcery.

By the way, Kabbalism, I suppose, could be, in some respects, resembling sorcery. Kabbalah is mysticism, and I don't know whether it has magic and such in it, but that might even be considered to be what they replaced real Judaism with. Many Jews, not all, have gone into the Kabbalah.

And in her was found the blood of prophets and saints and of all who were slain in the land. Now, I suppose this is the place we will stop. I actually wanted to go on into chapter 19 and complete it, but I don't have time tonight.

But it, of course, does continue here into the early part of chapter 19. And after all this singing and lamenting and so forth about Babylon dies down, in chapter 19 we'll see that there's rejoicing over the marriage of the Lamb because his wife has made herself ready. And so there's the wedding supper of the Lamb in verses 8 and 9 of chapter 19.

So this is in direct contrast, of course, to the harlot. And it's interesting that the harlot had to be executed, as it was, for her harlotry before this wedding could take place. Why? Because God won't have two wives at the same time.

His harlot wife is subjected to the penalties that fall upon adultery under the law. And then God can marry another. And that is the church, the bride we see here.

And we will have to wait until tomorrow to actually get into that chapter, much as I would like to do so tonight.