DAVE HUNT: THE LIES OF "A WOMAN RIDES THE BEAST" EXPOSED

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Status
Not open for further replies.

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Some anti-Catholics claim the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon of Revelation 17 and 18. Dave Hunt, in his 1994 book, A Woman Rides the Beast, presents nine arguments to try to prove this. His claims are a useful summary of those commonly used by Fundamentalists, and an examination of them shows why they don’t work.
Hunting the Whore of Babylon | Catholic Answers

I'm jumping ahead to lie #4 because the subject came up recently on another thread.

#4: Clothed in Purple and Red

Hunt states, "She [the Whore] is clothed in ‘purple and scarlet’ (verse 4), the colors of the Catholic clergy." He then cites the Catholic Encyclopedia to show that bishops wear certain purple vestments and cardinals wear certain red vestments.

Hunt ignores the obvious symbolic meaning of the colors—purple for royalty and red for the blood of Christian martyrs. Instead, he is suddenly literal in his interpretation. He understood well enough that the woman symbolizes a city and that the fornication symbolizes something other than literal sex, but now he wants to assign the colors a literal, earthly fulfillment in a few vestments of certain Catholic clergy.

Purple and red are not the dominant colors of Catholic clerical vestments. White is. All priests wear white (including bishops and cardinals when they are saying Mass)—even the pope does so.

The purple and scarlet of the Whore are contrasted with the white of the New Jerusalem, the Bride of Christ (Rev. 19:8). This is a problem for Hunt for three reasons:
(a) we have already noted that the dominant color of Catholic clerical vestments is white, which would identify them with New Jerusalem if the color is taken literally;
(b) the clothing of the Bride is given a symbolic interpretation ("the righteous acts of the saints;" 19:8); implying that the clothing of the Whore should also be given a symbolic meaning; and
(c) the identification of the Bride as New Jerusalem (Rev. 3:12, 21:2, 10) suggests that the Whore may be old (apostate) Jerusalem—a contrast used elsewhere in Scripture (Gal. 4:25–26).

Hunt ignores the liturgical meaning of purple and red in Catholic symbolism. Purple symbolizes repentance, and red honors the blood of Christ and the Christian martyrs.

It is appropriate for Catholic clerics to wear purple and scarlet, if for no other reason because they have been liturgical colors of the true religion since ancient Israel.

Hunt neglects to remind his readers that God commanded that scarlet yarn and wool be used in liturgical ceremonies (Lev. 14:4, 6, 49–52; Num. 19:6), and that God commanded that the priests’ vestments be made with purple and scarlet yarn (Ex. 28:4–8, 15, 33, 39:1–8, 24, 29).

Brokelight, you're wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreadOfLife

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,960
3,408
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gee - where are all of the "Catholic Church is theWhore of Babylon" proponents on this forum??
You would think they would have gobbled this up . . .
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gee - where are all of the "Catholic Church is theWhore of Babylon" proponents on this forum??
You would think they would have gobbled this up . . .

kepha31 began immediately with naming those who believe the whore of Babylon in (Rev. 17) is the Roman church as 'anti-catholic'. Or, what I call 'anti-Roman'.

I disagree with much that is taking place in the Protestant churches today. Does that make me 'anti-protestant'. No. But it means I disagree in areas where I believe Protestant churches are wrong.

Can you disagree with the Roman Church when you believe they are wrong? Please don't give me the bull about how you don't know what the 'Roman church is. You know exactly who I am addressing.

So, can you disagree with the Roman church as Hans Kung has disagreed?

Stranger
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,960
3,408
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
kepha31 began immediately with naming those who believe the whore of Babylon in (Rev. 17) is the Roman church as 'anti-catholic'. Or, what I call 'anti-Roman'.

I disagree with much that is taking place in the Protestant churches today. Does that make me 'anti-protestant'. No. But it means I disagree in areas where I believe Protestant churches are wrong.

Can you disagree with the Roman Church when you believe they are wrong? Please don't give me the bull about how you don't know what the 'Roman church is. You know exactly who I am addressing.

So, can you disagree with the Roman church as Hans Kung has disagreed?

Stranger
First of all, Stranger - when YOU refer to the "Roman Catholic Church" - you are simply referring to the Roman RITE. There are NINTEEN others in full communion with the Bishop of Rome.

I don't care if the rest of the world erroneously refers to it as the "Roman" Catholic Church (RCC). I don't make blatant mistakes - and I don't lie.

Now, that being said - my answer is "No", I am not a dissident like Hans Kung and I'm not going to allow you to hijack this thread.

Regarding Dave Hunt's "Whore of Babylon" manure - Kepha31's OP points out the inconsistencies and errors.
This isn't a matter of opinion - but fact and error.
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
First of all, Stranger - when YOU refer to the "Roman Catholic Church" - you are simply referring to the Roman RITE. There are NINTEEN others in full communion with the Bishop of Rome.

I don't care if the rest of the world erroneously refers to it as the "Roman" Catholic Church (RCC). I don't make blatant mistakes - and I don't lie.

Now, that being said - my answer is "No", I am not a dissident like Hans Kung and I'm not going to allow you to hijack this thread.

Regarding Dave Hunt's "Whore of Babylon" manure - Kepha31's OP points out the inconsistencies and errors.
This isn't a matter of opinion - but fact and error.

Your answer is not what I asked. I asked, 'can you disagree'. So, can you? What areas of doctrine or practice of the Roman Church do you disagree with? If you answer there are none, then I ask, again, can you disagree with them?

Stranger
 
  • Like
Reactions: LC627

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,960
3,408
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Your answer is not what I asked. I asked, 'can you disagree'. So, can you? What areas of doctrine or practice of the Roman Church do you disagree with? If you answer there are none, then I ask, again, can you disagree with them?

Stranger
Those Catholics who disagree doctrinally with the Catholic Church are called "Dissidents" or "Protestants".
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,960
3,408
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Your answer is not what I asked. I asked, 'can you disagree'. So, can you? What areas of doctrine or practice of the Roman Church do you disagree with? If you answer there are none, then I ask, again, can you disagree with them?

Stranger
And again - there is no "Roman Church". There is a Roman (Latin) "RITE".

If you are asking what areas of doctrine that I disagree with regarding to the teachings of the Catholic Church - there are NONE.
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
And again - there is no "Roman Church". There is a Roman (Latin) "RITE".

If you are asking what areas of doctrine that I disagree with regarding to the teachings of the Catholic Church - there are NONE.

Again I anticipated your answer. Which is why I asked, 'can you disagree'?

Stranger
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,960
3,408
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Again, you do not answer what I asked. Can you disagree?

Stranger
What else do you want me to say??
I already told you that a person who disagrees doctrinally is a dissident or a Protestant - and I am neither.
How else should I answer this for you??

Nothing is ever good enough for you . ..
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What else do you want me to say??
I already told you that a person who disagrees doctrinally is a dissident or a Protestant - and I am neither.
How else should I answer this for you??

Nothing is ever good enough for you . ..

Well, you could tell me that you cannot disagree. To disagree would be a dissident. But you don't want to say 'I cannot disagree'. You only say 'you don't disagree'.

I disagree with much of what Protestant teaches today. I can do so, still be Christian, still be Protestant.

You cannot disagree in your Roman faith, and still be Christian.

Stranger
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,960
3,408
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Yes, I am asking that. Are you allowed to disagree doctrinally and still be part of the Church?

Stranger
Those who disagree with Catholic doctrine are dissidents or outright Protestants.

We are bound to hold to the teachings of the Church (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23). For a Catholic to reject the doctrines of the Church is to reject Christ Himself (Luke 10:16).

This is why a dissident like Hans Kung cannot be considered a Catholic in good standing.
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Those who disagree with Catholic doctrine are dissidents or outright Protestants.

We are bound to hold to the teachings of the Church (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23). For a Catholic to reject the doctrines of the Church is to reject Christ Himself (Luke 10:16).

This is why a dissident like Hans Kung cannot be considered a Catholic in good standing.

Which means, you are not allowed to disagree with the Roman Church. Correct?

Stranger
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
A sure sign of a con artist is to claim the Vatican sits on the seven hills of Rome, therefore the CC must be the whore duh babble on. I think this is the greatest non-sequitur fallacy in all of funnymentalism.

First, many commentators, Catholic and Protestant, are inclined to think that Babylon is Jerusalem, not Rome.
Second, any map shows that the Vatican does not sit on any of the hills of Rome. In fact, one has to cross the Tiber River to get from the Vatican to the 7 hills. It requires at least 2 functioning brain cells to see the obvious.


400px-Seven_Hills_of_Rome.svg.png

Unfortunately, the insanity won't end anytime soon.
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Hunt's lie #1, 7 hills in detail:

Hunt argues that the Whore "is a city built on seven hills," which he identifies as the seven hills of ancient Rome. This argument is based on Revelation 17:9, which states that the woman sits on seven mountains.

The Greek word in this passage is horos. Of the sixty-five occurrences of this word in the New Testament, only three are rendered "hill" by the King James Version. The remaining sixty-two are translated as "mountain" or "mount." Modern Bibles have similar ratios. If the passage states that the Whore sits on "seven mountains," it could refer to anything. Mountains are common biblical symbols, often symbolizing whole kingdoms (cf. Ps. 68:15; Dan. 2:35; Amos 4:1, 6:1; Obad. 8–21). The Whore’s seven mountains might be seven kingdoms she reigns over, or seven kingdoms with which she has something in common.

The number seven may be symbolic also, for it often represents completeness in the Bible. If so, the seven mountains might signify that the Whore reigns over all earth’s kingdoms.

Even if we accept that the word horos should be translated literally as "hill" in this passage, it still does not narrow us down to Rome. Other cities are known for having been built on seven hills as well.

Even if we grant that the reference is to Rome, which Rome are we talking about—pagan Rome or Christian Rome? As we will see, ancient, pagan Rome fits all of Hunt’s criteria as well, or better, than Rome during the Christian centuries.

Now bring in the distinction between Rome and Vatican City—the city where the Catholic Church is headquartered—and Hunt’s claim becomes less plausible. Vatican City is not built on seven hills, but only one: Vatican Hill, which is not one of the seven upon which ancient Rome was built. Those hills are on the east side of the Tiber river; Vatican Hill is on the west.
(see map in the above post)
Hunting the Whore of Babylon | Catholic Answers
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Which means, you are not allowed to disagree with the Roman Church. Correct?

Stranger
There are many who have intellectual ascent to the Church's teachings, but for a variety of reasons, are unable to keep them. The same can be said for your church or Protestantism in general. I don't think you can call that disagreement. Catholics have a right to disagree, but we don't have a right to rebel. Disagreements are a regular occurrence, but we don't shoot our wounded. Excommunication follows the pattern of St. Paul: I Corinthians 5:1-5, Deuteronomy 6:13 and happens only in extreme cases.
http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-is-excommunication/
 

Stranger

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2016
8,826
3,157
113
Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
There are many who have intellectual ascent to the Church's teachings, but for a variety of reasons, are unable to keep them. The same can be said for your church or Protestantism in general. I don't think you can call that disagreement. Catholics have a right to disagree, but we don't have a right to rebel. Disagreements are a regular occurrence, but we don't shoot our wounded. Excommunication follows the pattern of St. Paul: I Corinthians 5:1-5, Deuteronomy 6:13 and happens only in extreme cases.
http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-is-excommunication/

Well, what happened to Hans Kung? If I remember right you or another said you were glad he was dead. Did you not? Yet now you say those in the Roman church can disagree.

Stranger
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Well, what happened to Hans Kung? If I remember right you or another said you were glad he was dead. Did you not? Yet now you say those in the Roman church can disagree.

Stranger
Kung is a known dissident. He was reprimanded for his radical views. He lost his mandate to teach theology. He was never excommunicated. That is not the only option. What's the point of singling out a rare exception?
Was Theologian Hans Küng Ever Excommunicated?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.