Questions for those who think the RCC is the Whore.

Just a few questions for those who think the Roman Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon.

Who is the Scarlet Beast?
Who are the 7 kings?
Who are the 10 horns?

More questions will follow depending on answers.
Repost because of site issues.

 

[miamited]

Where in Revelation is the "warning to us" about people groups?

Hi again Paul Timothy

Do you mean do the Scriptures use the word 'people group'? No. But it's talking here about a beast, and throughout the book of Daniel, beasts are used to describe nations, which are, uh,...people groups? Or have we found a nation of one?

Look, I'm all ears. You keep asking questions concerning my comments and I'm happy to answer. But if your position is that I'm wrong, how about filling in a bit as to what you believe is right? But in these passages of kings, kings represent nations and nations are comprised of people groups. Now, you can act silly if you want about 'what' a 'people group' defines. But I think kings and nations pretty well covers it.

Oh, and it isn't necessarily a 'warning' to us, so much as just a prophecy to us.

When did I say "together"? So no one other than royalty can wear purple? And is purple for royalty exclusive to the RCC?

I suppose that statement has a point beyond the hyperbole that you're using "So, no one other than royalty can wear purple?" Please, let's try to be a bit more logical in our discussions. Sure, anyone can wear purple. But the Scriptures 'describe', -- you do know what that means, right?-- this woman is described, thusly:

The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries.
Surely you're not so simple that you can't see that the description is of a woman dressed in purple and scarlet. That is what this passage says, right? Yes? No?

Your point is not clear.
When did I "argue the 1st point"? I asked a question or two.

Sigh. Your first point was asking me why I felt it needed to be 'people or religious groups'. Then your third and fourth point was about nations and kings...people groups! I remember Jesus asking of some why his words were not clear to them.

Ah but it is not about God's time frame or sight

Ahhh, but the entirety of the Scriptures is about God's time frame and sight.

I just am saying that a case can be made against an ancient wrong being attributed to current states of affairs.

Oh, I heard what you were saying. And I will continue to ask you to expound on what your are saying to include 'why' you think any of my understanding is wrong? I get it that you're just asking questions and I'm just giving you the answers that fit perfectly with the Scriptures.

You just mushed 2 separate passages together in an attempt to mislead.

Excuse me? That passage that you quoted is Revelation 17:10-12. They are actually written one sentence immediately after the other in the Scriptures. Now, if you see that as 'mushing', ok.

Why did you not include the verse references... would that have made the attempt too obvious?

Whatever you believe, must be the truth for you. Now you want to accuse me of being somehow devious in merely copying and pasting Scripture verses.

If my argument jumps around it is only because I am following your lead.
I am just responding to you.

Whatever friend. Look, I'm all ears if you want to offer some alternatives to my understanding, but to accuse me of trying to use the Scriptures in some unworthy way, is really a pretty low scrape, without a shred of proof to back it up. Go for it!

I will gladly discuss it further if you start a thread on that topic and I find the discussion interesting enough to engage with.

Well, since you're the newer member, I'll be gracious. I can't imagine that anything that I say would pique your interest.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Paul Timothy]

Hi again Paul Timothy

Do you mean do the Scriptures use the word 'people group'? No. But it's talking here about a beast, and throughout the book of Daniel, beasts are used to describe nations, which are, uh,...people groups? Or have we found a nation of one?

Yes there is a nation of one.
Am I arguing this point? No. I am asking if you have a Biblical reference that might broaden or narrow your definition of people group.

Look, I'm all ears. You keep asking questions concerning my comments and I'm happy to answer. But if your position is that I'm wrong, how about filling in a bit as to what you believe is right? But in these passages of kings, kings represent nations and nations are comprised of people groups. Now, you can act silly if you want about 'what' a 'people group' defines. But I think kings and nations pretty well covers it.

Where in the Bible is the passage that says the "kings represent nations"?
I don't see that anywhere in the text of Revelation.
If I say England is a monarchy that have had 7 queens... 5 have passed... one is... and one will come for a short time... do I mean that England has 7 nations under it's control?

Oh, and it isn't necessarily a 'warning' to us, so much as just a prophecy to us.

I was quoting your post... so why are you changing your words?

I suppose that statement has a point beyond the hyperbole that you're using "So, no one other than royalty can wear purple?" Please, let's try to be a bit more logical in our discussions. Sure, anyone can wear purple. But the Scriptures 'describe', -- you do know what that means, right?-- this woman is described, thusly:

The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries.
Surely you're not so simple that you can't see that the description is of a woman dressed in purple and scarlet. That is what this passage says, right? Yes? No?

I never said the description was incorrect... just your interpretation.

Sigh. Your first point was asking me why I felt it needed to be 'people or religious groups'. Then your third and fourth point was about nations and kings...people groups! I remember Jesus asking of some why his words were not clear to them.

These are questions... if you can't answer them then just say so.

Ahhh, but the entirety of the Scriptures is about God's time frame and sight.

Nope. Not as I see it and you have not provided anything to contradict my opinion.

Oh, I heard what you were saying. And I will continue to ask you to expound on what your are saying to include 'why' you think any of my understanding is wrong? I get it that you're just asking questions and I'm just giving you the answers that fit perfectly with the Scriptures.

I don't think your answers fit with scripture.
Also I don't think you have answered a single question of mine in this post so far.

Excuse me? That passage that you quoted is Revelation 17:10-12. They are actually written one sentence immediately after the other in the Scriptures. Now, if you see that as 'mushing', ok.

You put Rev 17:1-2 right before Rev 17:10-12.
Smooshing a lot of the context out of it.
If you think 7 verses is one sentence... that would be a huge run-on sentence.

Whatever you believe, must be the truth for you. Now you want to accuse me of being somehow devious in merely copying and pasting Scripture verses.

With 7 missing verses.

Whatever friend. Look, I'm all ears if you want to offer some alternatives to my understanding, but to accuse me of trying to use the Scriptures in some unworthy way, is really a pretty low scrape, without a shred of proof to back it up. Go for it!

Hey, if you made an honest error then fine. But 7 missing verses is a bit of a stretch without explanation.
I think the burden of proof is on you.
Or have I made a mistake?

Well, since you're the newer member, I'll be gracious. I can't imagine that anything that I say would pique your interest.

God bless,
Ted

I am always interested in Truth. Try to use that.

 

[miamited]

Hi Paul Timothy

What does 'is' mean? LOL! It's been fun. Look, I don't know, I've just read the prophecies of the Scriptures and whenever the Scriptures make a prophecy about 'kings', it is talking about nations. No, before you ask your next silly question, Jesus is not a 'kings', Jesus is a 'king'. If you've got something to add besides another question from a slow mind, I'm all ears.

God bless,
Ted

 

[miamited]

I am always interested in Truth. Try to use that.

Says the participant who hasn't yet posted any.

God bless,
Ted

 

[miamited]

One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits by many waters. With her the kings of the earth committed adultery, and the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.”
Note please: the kings of the earth...committed adultery with her. Not the kings of Rome.

Right... also these kings are not called the heads of the Beast.

They are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while. The beast who once was, and now is not, is an eighth king. He belongs to the seven and is going to his destruction. “The ten horns you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but who for one hour will receive authority as kings along with the beast".
Nothing that I read in all of that indicates that these kings will necessarily be over Rome.

You just mushed 2 separate passages together in an attempt to mislead.
Why would you do that?
Why did you not include the verse references... would that have made the attempt too obvious?

Oh my! Yes, the first quotation from the opening of chapter 17 concerns the woman riding the beast. The second quote concerns the kings that have been in question. I was not using both texts to make the same point, but to answer both of the points that have been in question in this discussion. That's why it is done in two quote boxes and not one, as I might do if I were attempting to make God's word say what it isn't intending to say. As you apparently think I have done.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Paul Timothy]

Hi Paul Timothy

What does 'is' mean? LOL! It's been fun. Look, I don't know, I've just read the prophecies of the Scriptures and whenever the Scriptures make a prophecy about 'kings', it is talking about nations. No, before you ask your next silly question, Jesus is not a 'kings', Jesus is a 'king'. If you've got something to add besides another question from a slow mind, I'm all ears.

God bless,
Ted

What point are you trying to address with the "is" question?
When other prophecy says "kings" is it followed or preceded by any descriptor?
"kings of the earth" would be much different than "and there are seven kings".
The first would be far reaching and would possibly(not always) reference kingdoms.
If the prophecy says "the kings of the earth lead their countries to ruin" would that mean that the nations lead their own nations into ruin?

Are you saying that the passage in Rev 17 can NOT be read as individual kings that are kings of the Beast nation?
Five past rulers of the Beast nation... one that is currently ruling... and one that will rise after the 6th?

If the kings are nations then what is the Beast? Is a Beast usually something in prophecy or just an amorphous blob that can mean anything?

The devil is in the details and many gloss over the details so they give him a place to hide.
Are you trying to hide the devil in the details or are you willing to drag him out of the details and expose him?

 

[Paul Timothy]

Says the participant who hasn't yet posted any.

God bless,
Ted

What have I not posted... Truth?
Have you asked me for any that is appropriate for this thread?
If you start another thread I will gladly engage with your conversation.
Until then lets try to honour the original post.

 

[miamited]

Until then lets try to honour the original post.

As far as I am aware, all of my posts have honored the original post. The title explaining 'who' is being asked to mull the questions.

Questions for those who think the RCC is the Whore.​

Just a few questions for those who think the Roman Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon.

Who is the Scarlet Beast?
Who are the 7 kings?
Who are the 10 horns?

I believe that all of my posts have touched on those subjects. If you've got something stuck in your craw that I'm not responding fairly, please explain.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Paul Timothy]

As far as I am aware, all of my posts have honored the original post. The title explaining 'who' is being asked to mull the questions.

Questions for those who think the RCC is the Whore.​

I believe that all of my posts have touched on those subjects. If you've got something stuck in your craw that I'm not responding fairly, please explain.

God bless,
Ted

Do you think the RCC is the Whore?

 

[RBDERRICK]

Also those that do not look for the Tribulation will be surprised.

If you don't think that... then be prepared for a surprise.

True. Righteous Abel was no doubt surprised by his own evil brother.

Antichrist false apostles making war with the saints begins with talk and ends with bloodshed.

 

[RBDERRICK]

Same tribulation time period. I don't have them confused.

Confusion is between the last tribulation of man against the righteous, and the great tribulation of God against the wicked. The first resurrection separates the two time periods at the Lord's coming again.

 

[Paul Timothy]

Confusion is between the last tribulation of man against the righteous, and the great tribulation of God against the wicked. The first resurrection separates the two time periods at the Lord's coming again.

Yep... the way you say things does sound confusing.
Maybe explain yourself so I don't get lost in the fog.

 

[miamited]

Do you think the RCC is the Whore?

Hi all,

Well, as one late to the party, I've long believed that the descriptors given of the woman riding the beast, points to the RCC. The seven hills and the colors that she wears don't really seem to fit with other people groups or religious affiliations that one might match these descriptors to. I do know, that as a supposed 'christian' group, the RCC has murdered more saints than any other. But that was in a time quite a while ago. But the RCC is still the leading killer of saints that sits on seven hills and is adorned in purple and scarlet. As far as I'm able to find.

That the kings of the earth are somehow deeply impacted by the woman on the beast, let's consider that right now the Pope is sending emissaries to Ukraine and Russia to try and impact this conflict there. That also in those days when the RCC was responsible for the killing of so many saints, they pretty much held sway over most of the European nations leaders.

Anyway, we'll see how it all works out.

God bless,
Ted

My first post on this thread. I have to say, I'm really surprised at this question to me.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Paul Timothy]

My first post on this thread. I have to say, I'm really surprised at this question to me.

God bless,
Ted

Ok... so what is the Scarlet Beast?
Who are the kings that rule over the Scarlet Beast?
Who are the 10 horns that are not kings/have no power yet... but are part of the Scarlet Beast?

 

[RBDERRICK]

Yep... the way you say things does sound confusing.
Maybe explain yourself so I don't get lost in the fog.

It's clear enough. You prefer a fog.

 

[RBDERRICK]

This is just way to much to sift through

True. I accept the comment. Sometimes I get to wordy.

The Republic and Imperial Rome never ruled over kings, but only made provinces out of past kingdoms. Rome doesn't qualify politically and militarily as a great city ruling over kings of the earth.

so all I will say is that Biblical history of nations and all the Empires, with the last one that has been revived will answer the question of who the whore of Babylon is and the beast she rides on.

That great city is spiritually Sodom and Egypt, where our Lord was crucified: Jerusalem. (Rev 11:8, 17:18)

 

[Paul Timothy]

It's clear enough. You prefer a fog.

So you don't want to explain?
Just another insult?

 

[for_his_glory]

True. I accept the comment. Sometimes I get to wordy.

The Republic and Imperial Rome never ruled over kings, but only made provinces out of past kingdoms. Rome doesn't qualify politically and militarily as a great city ruling over kings of the earth.


That great city is spiritually Sodom and Egypt, where our Lord was crucified: Jerusalem. (Rev 11:8, 17:18)

I can agree, but I was talking more about the Roman Empire governing power that was always over Jerusalem.

 

[miamited]

Ok... so what is the Scarlet Beast?
Who are the kings that rule over the Scarlet Beast?
Who are the 10 horns that are not kings/have no power yet... but are part of the Scarlet Beast?

I don't know. What is the Scarlet Beast?
I don't know. Who are the kings that rule over the Scarlet Beast. Although I don't think that's what the Scriptures say, but we'll go with your interpretation.

They have one purpose and will give their power and authority to the beast.
Seems to me that the Beast rules over the kings, but hey, as you've so well pointed out, I've been wrong before. So again, we'll go with your interpretation.
The Scriptures say they are kings. Guess that's a typo. But the Scriptures say that they are kings, but have not yet received a kingdom.
"The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth.”

Hmmm. The woman is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth. What great city rules over the kings of the earth. A city, not a state or territory or nation. A city that rules over the kings of the earth. Only one I can think of that has held sway over the kings of the earth. Oh, that sits on seven hills?

God bless,
Ted

 

[Paul Timothy]

I don't know. What is the Scarlet Beast?

That is my question to you. This is your theory we are exploring.

I don't know. Who are the kings that rule over the Scarlet Beast. Although I don't think that's what the Scriptures say, but we'll go with your interpretation.

What do you think a head of a beast does to the beast?
Does not the head rule the beast?
The heads are called kings. Do not kings rule a country?

They have one purpose and will give their power and authority to the beast.

Please provide references so we can compare the same verses.
That is the horns not the heads and the heads are the kings.
Please separate the ideas better so we don't argue over something that the Bible does not say.

Seems to me that the Beast rules over the kings, but hey, as you've so well pointed out, I've been wrong before. So again, we'll go with your interpretation.
The Scriptures say they are kings. Guess that's a typo. But the Scriptures say that they are kings, but have not yet received a kingdom.
"The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth.”

Hmmm. The woman is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth. What great city rules over the kings of the earth. A city, not a state or territory or nation. A city that rules over the kings of the earth. Only one I can think of that has held sway over the kings of the earth. Oh, that sits on seven hills?

God bless,
Ted

The hills are the kings we are talking about and you have confused them with the horns.
So then the hills/kings are Italy and Italy will rise up and destroy Rome?
That is what you are claiming?