City of Seven Hills

[Stumpmaster]

The 7 heads which are 7 mountains previously wore crowns (Rev 12:3). Do literal mountains wear crowns? or have authority?

It should be noted the Beast from the Sea has 3 more Crowns than the Dragon, and they are on its horns, signifying the sovereignty of its enforcement in play.

 

[No Pre-TB]

It should be noted the Beast from the Sea has 3 more Crowns than the Dragon, and they are on its horns, signifying the sovereignty of its enforcement in play.

I'm not sure what you mean by the above as "its enforcement in play". Yes, the beast of the sea has 10 horns and the crowns are on the 10 horns instead of the 7 heads whose authority was removed.

 

[ewq1938]

Here's something to help:

CEV Rev 17:9-11 Anyone with wisdom can figure this out. The seven heads that the woman is sitting on stand for seven hills. These heads are also seven kings.

This is false. The beast rises with all 7 heads but 5 of the 7 kings had fallen in the past at John's time leaving only 6 and 7 left which is two kings, 3 if you count the 8th. The beast does not rise with 1, 2 or 3 heads.

 

[ewq1938]

If you take the mountains literally, then you are required to interpret the entire passage literally

No. Heads are the symbology but hill/mountain is the literal explanation, Rev 17. The woman is symbology. Your conclusion that literal cannot be in the same sentence as symbol is made up by you.

 

[Davy]

I understand that Babylon cannot be Jerusalem. It isn't even a literal city at all.

I'm LOL at you guys arguing over points that do not align with Bible Scripture.

Rev 17:3-5
3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.

4 And 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:

5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
KJV


Rev 17:18
18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.
KJV

The Babylon Harlot of Revelation IS... JERUSALEM fallen into an IDOL worship state by the coming Antichrist. God first used those harlot metaphors in Ezekiel 16 about Jerusalem.

 

[Stumpmaster]

This is false. The beast rises with all 7 heads but 5 of the 7 kings had fallen in the past at John's time leaving only 6 and 7 left which is two kings, 3 if you count the 8th. The beast does not rise with 1, 2 or 3 heads.

It's not false. The sea the beast rises from is the sea of sinful humanity where the beast has been operating from since antiquity. The Book of Revelation discloses the climax of its blasphemous empire with the actualising of satanic tyranny.

Isa 57:20 But the wicked are like the troubled sea, When it cannot rest, Whose waters cast up mire and dirt.

Rev 17:15 Then he said to me, "The waters which you saw, where the harlot sits, are peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues.

It requires a mind with wisdom to comprehend the metaphorical imagery and symbolic representations that depict the unfolding consequences of the Fall caused by Adam.

 

[ewq1938]

It's not false.

Then why didn't you try to prove what I said wrong?

 

[No Pre-TB]

No. Heads are the symbology but hill/mountain is the literal explanation, Rev 17. The woman is symbology. Your conclusion that literal cannot be in the same sentence as symbol is made up by you.

Then you are telling me there "are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth". And if the mountains are literal as you say they are, then the women sitting on all 7 mountains at one time is also literal. It is part of the same context. Either both are literal or both are symbolic. I know people that think they are both symbolic, but never have I ever heard anyone say one is and one is not, anywhere, on any sentence or context in Revelation. It is a scriptural fact that both heads and mountains were known as part of or encompassing a kingdom regardless of if you think it applies to this. Feel free to believe what you want, I'm not telling you "No, wrong" and any other negative. I'm only saying I don't see that and I'm not alone. I've never seen anyone advertise that is how scripture or prophecy should be interpreted.

Youve stated your point, I stated I don't see it that way. No need to keep hitting this dead horse.

 

[PinSeeker]

It requires a mind with wisdom...

Which is personified as ~ portrayed in the form of ~ a beautiful, desirable woman in Proverbs, and is a gift of the Holy Spirit, according to Paul in 1 Corinthians 12. But wisdom, of course, is not a literal woman.

Grace and peace to all.

 

[ewq1938]

Then you are telling me there "are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth". And if the mountains are literal as you say they are, then the women sitting on all 7 mountains at one time is also literal. It is part of the same context. Either both are literal or both are symbolic.

No, that is incorrect. Both do not have to be literal.


Rev 19:21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

Christ is literal but a flying horse from heaven? Not literal. A sword from his mouth? Not literal. Literal and non-literal can appear in the same verse.

 

[Timtofly]

Has it been considered that the Woman in Revelation 12 has morphed into the Woman of Revelation 17?

The Roman argument that they are the original Church Jesus founded ie, the woman in Revelation 12. It has now been corrupted and become the whore of Revelation 17 who panders to the political powers of the World; the process involving the adoption of pagan teachings and practices into her repertoire.

She woos the whole world with her seductive methods.....quite a different arrangement to Islamic methods/ practices.

Should we find every religion on earth represented within the boundaries of Jerusalem? More than likely. The point is that these 10 leaders of the world are dead set in removing religion totally. They are eliminating God and promoting atheism, or that Satan is God. Destroying religion out of Jerusalem, is not destroying Jerusalem, but her tendency at that point to invite all religions into her chambers.

"And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth."

So yes, the woman Israel of chapter 12 is still found in the shell of Jerusalem. But those 42 months are the most depraved and despicable of all time. The AoD is the epitome of an apostate religion, and then the removal of even the thought of religion replaced by Satan worship alone.

This chapter is just the rest of the world conforming to the desires of Satan, and these 10 kings will do anything in following Satan, even to the battlefield of Armageddon.

 

[No Pre-TB]

Christ is literal but a flying horse from heaven? Not literal. A sword from his mouth? Not literal. Literal and non-literal can appear in the same verse.

I don’t see literal and symbolic in that passage. Only symbolic. The same with the mountains. The Bible shows a head was the kingdom(mountain) and its king. Revelation specified that the 7 heads are 7 mountains(kingdoms) and there are 7 kings. My opinion in parentheses is based off of scripture that calls mountains kingdoms.

2 examples: God’s mountain that covers the whole world is a kingdom. The destroying mountain was Babylonian.

Again, we are beating the horse.

 

[Stumpmaster]

Then why didn't you try to prove what I said wrong?

You should realise that yourself.

 

[ewq1938]

No, that is incorrect. Both do not have to be literal.

I don’t see literal and symbolic in that passage. Only symbolic. The same with the mountains. The Bible shows a head was the kingdom(mountain) and its king.

No, the bible uses the symbolism of a horn for that. Heads/mountains symbolize something else.

Revelation specified that the 7 heads are 7 mountains(kingdoms) and there are 7 kings.

Some faulty manuscripts do that but the correct ones do not. If that was correct, Rev 13:1 would have a beast with 1-3 heads because the other heads had fallen in the past.

My opinion in parentheses is based off of scripture that calls mountains kingdoms.

2 examples: God’s mountain that covers the whole world is a kingdom. The destroying mountain was Babylonian.

Rev does not say mountains are kingdoms.

 

[No Pre-TB]

Rev does not say mountains are kingdoms.

Are you denying scripture showing mountains as kingdoms?

Some faulty manuscripts do that but the correct ones do not. If that was correct, Rev 13:1 would have a beast with 1-3 heads because the other heads had fallen in the past

Correct in your view. Not correct in others. The heads have no more authority. Their kings fall, the kingdoms no longer have sway. Is Babylon alive today? Is Media Persia? Is Greece a major power? No. They arnt.

No, the bible uses the symbolism of a horn for that.

Why are you on the subject of horns? Mountains are the issue. Let me say this a third time, you’re beating a dead horse. It’s dead. Still no reason to take the women symbolic and the mountains she sits on as literal.

 

[ewq1938]

Are you denying scripture showing mountains as kingdoms?

In Rev, mountains/heads are where kingdoms are located not kingdoms themselves. Horns are used for kings that have kingdoms.

Correct in your view. Not correct in others. The heads have no more authority. Their kings fall, the kingdoms no longer have sway. Is Babylon alive today? Is Media Persia? Is Greece a major power? No. They arnt.

Scripture says most of the kings/kingdoms fell in the past. This is not true of any of the 7 heads which are fully in tact, one healing from a wound but none fallen. The 7 heads of the beast are not the 8 consecutive kings of Rev 17.

Why are you on the subject of horns? Mountains are the issue.

And on those mountains are 10 kingdoms. That means the mountains cannot also be kingdoms.

Let me say this a third time, you’re beating a dead horse. It’s dead. Still no reason to take the women symbolic and the mountains she sits on as literal.

The woman is symbolic because there is no woman. The mountains are the explanation of the symbolism so obviously that's literal. You seem not to understand that symbolism can be explained in literal terms and is here:

Rev 17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

 

[No Pre-TB]

The woman is symbolic because there is no woman. The mountains are the explanation of the symbolism so obviously that's literal. You seem not to understand that symbolism can be explained in literal terms

The mountains are heads and are not part of the women. The mountains are part of the beast. The beast with its mountains carry her. Physical mountains have no part in a symbolic picture.

What would 7 literal mountains have to do with a murderous beast? Geographically, nothing. You seem to still deny a head is a kingdom and its king (Isaiah 7:8-9). Such as Syria with Damascus and its king. And this is why Rev 17 says the 7 heads are 7 mountains and there are 7 kings. Each head has 2 parts. The spiritual harlot dwells where those 7 kingdoms are, not mountains as Vesuvius or Rushmore etc. otherwise go live where there are no literal mountains and you’ll know the harlot isn’t there. That is poor form.

 

[ewq1938]

You seem to still deny a head is a kingdom and its king (Isaiah 7:8-9). Such as Syria with Damascus and its king.

I don't "seem" to, I do deny it as far as the symbolism Rev employs. Heads are not kingdoms in Rev, they are mountains which in the Greek just means land that rises up, not necessarily mountains like we think of in English. They are land masses where ten kingdoms exist. The 7 mountains are likely the 7 continents to represent that the beast rules over the entire world, something no empire/kingdom has yet done.

And this is why Rev 17 says the 7 heads are 7 mountains and there are 7 kings. Each head has 2 parts. The spiritual harlot dwells where those 7 kingdoms are, not mountains as Vesuvius or Rushmore etc. otherwise go live where there are no literal mountains and you’ll know the harlot isn’t there. That is poor form.

You need to study the Greek words involved before replying. That is poor form.

 

[No Pre-TB]

Heads are not kingdoms in Rev, they are mountains which in the Greek just means land that rises up, not necessarily mountains like we think of in English. They are land masses where ten kingdoms exist. The 7 mountains are likely the 7 continents to represent that the beast rules over the entire world, something no empire/kingdom has yet done.

Are they literal mountains as you said previously or are they continents? Which is it? Seems like you are confused about your own answer. Mountains are figurative of Kingdoms. As one puts it, Babylon is called a destroying mountain, Jer 51:25, in majestic contrast to which stands Mount Zion, "the mountain of the Lord's house" (Isa 2:2), and the heavenly mount; Re 21:10, "a great and high mountain … and that great city, the holy Jerusalem." So in Da 2:35, the stone becomes a mountain—Messiah's universal kingdom supplanting the previous world kingdoms.

You need to study the Greek words involved before replying. That is poor form.

Your hermeneutics doesn't make sense. Answer my question please.

If the 7 mountains are literal and its where the harlot sits, then we can go live in a place void of mountains and know we are not living where the harlot is. That is basic deductive logic. By your own premise, it does not stand. All the church would need to do is physically relocate to a plain, even though Babylon sat in a plain and was considered to be a mountain, which many also consider to be one of the heads.

 

[ewq1938]

Are they literal mountains as you said previously or are they continents? Which is it?

Both are correct.

Seems like you are confused about your own answer. Mountains are figurative of Kingdoms.

No, horns are figurative of kingdoms not the lands where kingdoms are established.

If the 7 mountains are literal and its where the harlot sits, then we can go live in a place void of mountains and know we are not living where the harlot is. That is basic deductive logic.

No, it's not logic and it ignores the Greek words used and their meanings. I have already explained all fo this but you proceed as if I didn't.

By your own premise, it does not stand. All the church would need to do is physically relocate to a plain, even though Babylon sat in a plain and was considered to be a mountain, which many also consider to be one of the heads.

Plane not plain.

You make the common mistake of confusing the English meaning rather than use the Greek meaning. We are not talking about the concept of mountains in English.