Understanding Who and What is the Babylon of Revelation.

[Phoneman777]

Revelation 17:1-5
1 And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:
2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
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.

The physical city of Babylon was originally built by Nimrod after the flood and was by the Euphrates River. The name Babylon came from the Tower of Babel that was constructed there and means "the portal of the gods", or "gate of the gods". Jesus is the spiritual husband of the church therefore if a church unites with or receives favors of one who is not her husband, she commits spiritual adultery.

Here we see Babylon is called the “great whore” who committed fornication or spiritual adultery. The “many waters” she sits on are the countless people she has deceived and “made drunk” with her doctrines. The “kings of the earth” represent civil powers or the power of the state. When churches lose the power of the gospel to transform hearts and lives they turn to the power of the state to support their doctrines and thus they commit spiritual fornication.

We see this repeated in many verses in Revelation...
Revelation 14:8
8 And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.

Revelation 16:19
19 And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell: and great Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath.

The name Babylon or "the portal of the gods" in a sense portrays a means of access to the gods that is contrary to Gods plan. Access is granted through the system and not by faith in Jesus Christ. It is a system where salvation by works replaces salvation by faith. Numerous verses in the book of Revelation warn against Babylon, and admonish Gods people to come out of Babylon.
Revelation 18:1-5
1 And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power; and the earth was lightened with his glory.
2 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
5 For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.


The unclean and hateful birds reference the counterfeit spirit of demons that would power the system and lead people to believe that they are working with the power of God when it is a deception masquerading as truth. In verse 4, John hears "another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." This warns Gods people not to become entangled with this "Mystery Babylon" so they are not "partakers of her sins" or her abominations to avoid the "her plagues".

The Babylon is not the physical Babylon but spiritual Babylon as we see even Peter used it.
1 Peter 5:13
13 The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son.

Peter wrote these words when literal Babylon no longer existed. The woman that rides the beast also has all the identifying features as we see, "the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet color, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication". The great prostitute is obviously not a good woman and has issues that go beyond just a few mistakes. Just as ancient Babylon depended on the Euphrates River for its existence, so will end-time Babylon rely on the support of the masses to enforce her plans. So must discern and understand who and what is this spiritual Babylon?

If we're going to identify what Babylon is, we need to read about it in the context of the NWO which is found in Revelation 18:14 - it speaks of the the three facets of it: Kings of the Earth which represents one-world govt; Merchants of the Earth which represent one-world economy; and "Babylon" which can only represent one-world religion - religion aligned against God and His people.

That religious system is none other than the papacy, satan's depository for all false doctrine, including New Age, Occult, Eastern Mysticism, Ancient Mystery Sun Worship religion...perfected and set up right there in the midst of Christianity...and O, how the Protestant world misses Rome "like a boy running away from home but still carrying in his pocket a picture of his mother or a lock of her hair".

None of the Protestant Reformers taught this eschatological Jesuit "left behind" Futurist or Jesuit Preterist nonsense that is spilling out all over the place today...they taught Protestant Historicism and backed it up with the unquestionable authority of God's Word.

 

[Marty fox]

The generation Jesus was talking to had not killed the prophets who lived hundreds of years before them. But Jesus told them whoever kills prophets or saints is equally responsible for the blood of all prophets and all saints - whether it be the Jewish leaders of the first century killing the saints, or any church who kills the saints at a later stage (i.e Babylon the Great who will be responsible for the blood of all prophets and all saints slain by those who claim to be acting for God).

You misunderstand what Jesus is saying.

Of course those actual people at that time did not kill the prophets who lived before them but some of Jerusalem as in the leaders of Jerusalem over time did

My point is that Jesus in His own words tied Jerusalem directly to Babylon the great

 

[Marty fox]

They did not kill the prophets, and they had not yet murdered any saints.

Jesus was only saying that those who make themselves responsible for the righteous blood of His elect are equally responsible for the blood of all murdered prophets and saints as those who killed the prophets are.

That includes The Vatican because it shed the blood of many saints during the Reformation wars, and even before that. Burning one of the first people who translated the Bible into English on a stake.​

But the Vatican didn’t kill the prophets only Israel killed both the prophets and the saints

 

[Marty fox]

You're saying that Babylon the Great = Israel of the Old Testament. Or that's what it appears you are saying

And I'm not "accusing" you of any crime. Not nice to say I'm "accusing" you:

I didn’t say that you were accusing me I said that I’m not sure if you are accusing me

 

[Marty fox]

Pretty hard for "The Beast" of Revelation to have been fulfilled in your Preterist 70AD Roman destruction of Jerusalem, when the very book of Revelation was written in 96AD about 26 years after your claim

When Was The Book Of Revelation Written?​

Author: Wayne Jackson, Christian Courier

Traditionally, the book of Revelation has been dated near the end of the first century, around A.D. 96. Some writers, however, have advanced the preterist (from a Latin word meaning “that which is past”) view, contending that the Apocalypse was penned around A.D. 68 or 69, and thus the thrust of the book is supposed to relate to the impending destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70).

A few prominent names have been associated with this position (e.g., Stuart, Schaff, Lightfoot, Foy E. Wallace Jr.), and for a brief time it was popular with certain scholars. James Orr has observed, however, that recent criticism has reverted to the traditional date of near A.D. 96 (1939, 2584). In fact, the evidence for the later date is extremely strong.

In view of some of the bizarre theories that have surfaced in recent times (e.g., the notion that all end-time prophecies were fulfilled with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70), which are dependent upon the preterist interpretation, we offer the following.

External Evidence​

The external evidence for the late dating of Revelation is of the highest quality.

Irenaeus​

Irenaeus (A.D. 180), a student of Polycarp (who was a disciple of the apostle John), wrote that the apocalyptic vision “was seen not very long ago, almost in our own generation, at the close of the reign of Domitian” (Against Heresies 30). The testimony of Irenaeus, not far removed from the apostolic age, is first rate. He places the book near the end of Domitian’s reign, and that ruler died in A.D. 96. Irenaeus seems to be unaware of any other view for the date of the book of Revelation.

Clement of Alexandria​

Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 155-215) says that John returned from the isle of Patmos “after the tyrant was dead” (Who Is the Rich Man? 42), and Eusebius, known as the “Father of Church History,” identifies the “tyrant” as Domitian (Ecclesiastical History III.23).

Even Moses Stuart, America’s most prominent preterist, admitted that the “tyrant here meant is probably Domitian.” Within this narrative, Clement further speaks of John as an “old man.” If Revelation was written prior to A.D. 70, it would scarcely seem appropriate to refer to John as an old man, since he would only have been in his early sixties at this time.

Victorinus​

Victorinus (late third century), author of the earliest commentary on the book of Revelation, wrote:

Jerome​

Jerome (A.D. 340-420) said,


To all of this may be added the comment of Eusebius, who contends that the historical tradition of his time (A.D. 324) placed the writing of the Apocalypse at the close of Domitian’s reign (III.18). McClintock and Strong, in contending for the later date, declare that “there is no mention in any writer of the first three centuries of any other time or place” (1969, 1064). Upon the basis of external evidence, therefore, there is little contest between the earlier and later dates.

Internal Evidence​

The contents of the book of Revelation also suggest a late date, as the following observations indicate.

The spiritual conditions of the churches described in Revelation chapters two and three more readily harmonize with the late date.

The church in Ephesus, for instance, was not founded by Paul until the latter part of Claudius’s reign: and when he wrote to them from Rome, A.D. 61, instead of reproving them for any want of love, he commends their love and faith (Eph. 1:15) (Horne 1841, 382).

Yet, when Revelation was written, in spite of the fact that the Ephesians had been patient (2:2), they had also left their first love (v. 4), and this would seem to require a greater length of time than seven or eight years, as suggested by the early date.

Another internal evidence of a late date is that this book was penned while John was banished to Patmos (1:9). It is well known that Domitian had a fondness for this type of persecution. If, however, this persecution is dated in the time of Nero, how does one account for the fact that Peter and Paul are murdered, yet John is only exiled to an island? (Eusebius III.18; II.25).

Then consider this fact. The church at Laodicea is represented as existing under conditions of great wealth. She was rich and had need of nothing (3:17). In A.D. 60, though, Laodicea had been almost entirely destroyed by an earthquake. Surely it would have required more than eight or nine years for that city to have risen again to the state of affluence described in Revelation.

The doctrinal departures described in Revelation would appear to better fit the later dating. For example, the Nicolaitans (2:6, 15) were a full-fledged sect at the time of John’s writing, whereas they had only been hinted at in general terms in 2 Peter and Jude, which were written possibly around A.D. 65-66.

Persecution for professing the Christian faith is evidenced in those early letters to the seven churches of Asia Minor. For instance, Antipas had been killed in Pergamum (2:13). It is generally agreed among scholars, however, that Nero’s persecution was mostly confined to Rome; further, it was not for religious reasons (Harrison 1964, 446).

None of this is biblical authority but man’s assumptions

I have books showing that it was before 70AD including some early church fathers but again they are not biblical authority either

 

[Marty fox]

The key note is mother of all harlots… idolatry.
Idolatry existed before Israel.

As noted here….

The picture of the woman, as described, may be regarded as the "drop-curtain." But the initiated are those who will be admitted behind it, and learn "the depths of Satan:" and, behind the scenes in his own great theatre, will learn what Satan's religion means as they "worship the Dragon."

The uninitiated will see only the curtain— the wonderful city. Compare Prov. ix. 13-18, where both are shown and may well be applied to the passage here.

Idolatry was no mere sin into which people gradually sunk; but it was the creation, by Satanic wisdom, of a mighty system, which he intended to us, and to lead up to his own worship.

Nimrod was used as the great founder of this marvellous scheme of Satan. Babylon was his city (Gen. x. 10). Would not Cain's city before the flood answer to the people of that day, the same end as Babylon did afterwards (Gen. iv. 17)? Each would be the capital of their respective idolatrous systems. The words "Cain went out from the presence of the Lord" are very significant. So is the name of Cain's city. He called it "Enoch," which means initiated. 350 The corruption of mankind spoken of in Gen. vi. must have led to abnormal forms, which would account for the half-human, or super-human beings, which became the Nephilim, the Rephaim, and Anakim of Scripture; the Titans of the Greeks. It would account for the worship of Ishtar, Isis, Ashtaroth, and all the abominations of spiritual harlotry.

Yes idolatry existed before Jerusalem but the point is here is that she was the harlot to God she was Gods people who whored herself out to other nations read Ezekiel chapter 16. Also take note of post #38 fro Truth 7t7 she can only be Jerusalem

 

[grafted branch]

Internal Evidence​

The contents of the book of Revelation also suggest a late date, as the following observations indicate.

The spiritual conditions of the churches described in Revelation chapters two and three more readily harmonize with the late date.

The church in Ephesus, for instance, was not founded by Paul until the latter part of Claudius’s reign: and when he wrote to them from Rome, A.D. 61, instead of reproving them for any want of love, he commends their love and faith (Eph. 1:15) (Horne 1841, 382).

Yet, when Revelation was written, in spite of the fact that the Ephesians had been patient (2:2), they had also left their first love (v. 4), and this would seem to require a greater length of time than seven or eight years, as suggested by the early date.

Another internal evidence of a late date is that this book was penned while John was banished to Patmos (1:9). It is well known that Domitian had a fondness for this type of persecution. If, however, this persecution is dated in the time of Nero, how does one account for the fact that Peter and Paul are murdered, yet John is only exiled to an island? (Eusebius III.18; II.25).

Then consider this fact. The church at Laodicea is represented as existing under conditions of great wealth. She was rich and had need of nothing (3:17). In A.D. 60, though, Laodicea had been almost entirely destroyed by an earthquake. Surely it would have required more than eight or nine years for that city to have risen again to the state of affluence described in Revelation.

The doctrinal departures described in Revelation would appear to better fit the later dating. For example, the Nicolaitans (2:6, 15) were a full-fledged sect at the time of John’s writing, whereas they had only been hinted at in general terms in 2 Peter and Jude, which were written possibly around A.D. 65-66.

Persecution for professing the Christian faith is evidenced in those early letters to the seven churches of Asia Minor. For instance, Antipas had been killed in Pergamum (2:13). It is generally agreed among scholars, however, that Nero’s persecution was mostly confined to Rome; further, it was not for religious reasons (Harrison 1964, 446).

The church at Philadelphia was kept from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. If this hour of temptation wasn’t events that occurred in 70AD, which would be the case if Revelation was written in 96AD, then what was the event that came upon all the world?

That event had to happen during the lifetime of those at Philadelphia or your arguments about the church’s at Ephesus, Laodicea, and Pergamum can’t be correct because those arguments are all based on assumptions of what was happening during their lifetimes.

Here’s a question that should be easy to answer and solidify a 96AD writing of Revelation. What was the event, that came upon all the world and tried them that dwell upon the earth, that happened after 96AD and prior to 200AD?

 

[Truthnightmare]

Yes idolatry existed before Jerusalem but the point is here is that she was the harlot to God she was Gods people who whored herself out to other nations read Ezekiel chapter 16. Also take note of post #38 fro Truth 7t7 she can only be Jerusalem

The scripture does not say “Harlot of God”

Revelation 17

and upon her forehead was a name written: Mystery, Babylon the Great, Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth.

Also Judah did exactly what Israel did, are they not also the mother?

No… the mother of harlots is false religion it is false religion that will sit over the whole earth not Israel.

Rev 17:15
15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. (KJV)

 

[Zao is life]

Of course those actual people at that time did not kill the prophets who lived before them but some of Jerusalem as in the leaders of Jerusalem over time did

My point is that Jesus in His own words tied Jerusalem directly to Babylon the great

Well you haven't given any scripture where He did. The only scripture you quote is where Jesus holds any religious leader of His people who makes himself guilty of the blood of His people, responsible for all the righteous blood ever shed - because their actions and motives are the same as those who murdered the prophets

That does not even suggest (let alone prove) that the blood of prophets and saints being found in Babylon the Great means it's talking about the 1st century religious leaders of God's people.

It's just an assumption you make.

 

[Zao is life]

But the Vatican didn’t kill the prophets

Neither did the 1st century religious leaders of the Jews.

only Israel killed both the prophets and the saints

Jesus holds any religious leader of His people who makes himself guilty of the blood of His people (including the Vatican), responsible for all the righteous blood ever shed - because their actions and motives are the same as those who murdered the prophets.

That does not even suggest (let alone prove) that the blood of prophets and saints being found in Babylon the Great means it's talking about the 1st century religious leaders of the Jews.

The 1st century religious leaders of the Jews did not murder the prophets.

What you say above is just an assumption you make, and your assumption ignores the Revelation's identification of the harlot as "many waters where the harlot sits" which is "peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues". Rev.17:15

It's not the Jews. It's not the Israel you claim it is.

 

[Zao is life]

But the Vatican didn’t kill the prophets only Israel killed both the prophets and the saints

Jesus says the Vatican killed the prophets and the saints. He says so where He tells the religious leaders of the 1st century that the time is coming when they are going to kill His disciples and are therefore equally as responsible for the blood of all prophets and all saints as those who killed the prophets are guilty.

Jesus is not speaking only to the religious leaders of His people who lived in the 1st century, and to say it only applies to them denies and ignores the Revelation's identity of Babylon the Great/the harlot as a city sitting on many waters which are peoples, nations, multitudes and tongues - not 1st century Jerusalem.

 

[grafted branch]

Jesus holds any religious leader of His people who makes himself guilty of the blood of His people (including the Vatican), responsible for all the righteous blood ever shed - because their actions and motives are the same as those who murdered the prophets.

David was guilty of killing Uriah the Hittite according in 2 Samuel 12:9. Is David guilty of all the righteous blood shed?

No. This shows your statement is not completely accurate.

 

[Zao is life]

David was guilty of killing Uriah the Hittite according in 2 Samuel 12:9. Is David guilty of all the righteous blood shed?

No. This shows your statement is not completely accurate.

Did David acknowledge his sin, confess it to God and plead for forgiveness?

Yes, he did.

Did God forgive him?

Yes, he did.

Did those who were ever responsible for the blood of saints acknowledge their sin, confess it to God and plead for His forgiveness?

Yes - Paul did.

Did God forgive Paul?

Yes, He forgave Paul.

This shows your argument is without merit.

God holds those religious leaders of His people who are guilty of shedding the blood of His people equally as guilty for the blood of all the prophets and saints as those who killed the prophets are - because the motives and actions are the same.

You want to pin it on the 1st century leaders of the Jews alone.

And all of you who do this ignore the Revelation's identity of Babylon the Great as a city seated by many waters which represent multitudes, peoples, nations and languages so that you can continue to pin Babylon the Great onto people not identified in the Revelation as Babylon the Great.

But you will continue to argue, rather than allow scripture to interpret scripture, because you're a Partial Preterist, and that's what Preterists and Partial Pretersists do, so I won't be debating this any more with you.​

 

[grafted branch]

But you will continue to argue, rather than allow scripture to interpret scripture, because you're a Partial Preterist, and that's what Preterists and Partial Pretersists do, so I won't be debating this any more with you.

Wow, seriously, no more debating?

What makes sense is when Jesus died all the righteous blood shed was placed on Jerusalem and they became the scapegoat that was sent into the wilderness.

 

[Ziggy]

I have books showing that it was before 70AD including some early church fathers but again they are not biblical authority either

I believe John the Baptist was given the vision and while he was on the Island of Patmos awaiting to be beheaded, he gave it to someone whom I'm going to say is Paul.
Because it is Paul who testifies of the mystery and the revelation given to him to share with others.

John is the first to proclaim the Lamb of God. He is the first to proclaim the Kingdom of God.
When he is asked concerning who told him to come baptising...
Jhn 1:29
The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
Jhn 1:30
This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.
Jhn 1:31
And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.
Jhn 1:32
And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.
Jhn 1:33
And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
Jhn 1:34
And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

Who sent John to manifest Jesus through the act of baptism?

I understand there is a lot of controversy over who wrote the book of Revelation.
I believe it was given to John the baptist who gave it to Paul, who reveals these things in his letters.

Maybe this transaction of the vision happened while Paul was in the third heaven...

2Co 12:1
It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.
2Co 12:2
I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth such an one caught up to the third heaven.
2Co 12:3
And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth
2Co 12:4
How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.
2Co 12:5
Of such an one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but in mine infirmities.
2Co 12:6
For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of me.

I believe the vision Paul saw, came from John the baptist who was given the vision by God concerning the Lamb of God.

Rev 1:1
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
Rev 1:2
Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
Rev 1:3
Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

Jhn 1:34
And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

That's how I hear it.
Hugs

 

[RedFan]

I believe John the Baptist was given the vision and while he was on the Island of Patmos awaiting to be beheaded, he gave it to someone whom I'm going to say is Paul.

First I'm hearing that John the Baptist was ever on Patmos. Are you perhaps confusing him with John the Evangelist?

 

[Truth7t7]

None of this is biblical authority but man’s assumptions

I have books showing that it was before 70AD including some early church fathers but again they are not biblical authority either

The information provided clearly shows a 96AD writing of the Revelation, many reformed preterist have walked away from reformed theology because of it

 

[Ziggy]

First I'm hearing that John the Baptist was ever on Patmos. Are you perhaps confusing him with John the Evangelist?

Well. I don't exactly know what prison Herod had John in. It doesn't say.
All we do know is he waited there a long time.

Mar 1:14
Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
Mar 6:17
For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife: for he had married her.
Mar 6:27
And immediately the king sent an executioner, and commanded his head to be brought: and he went and beheaded him in the prison,

I don't know the location of John's prison. It doesn't say.
But I appreciate that it could be John the Evangelist, but to me it John the baptists falls more inline with scripture.
Thank you
Hugs

 

[Truth7t7]

The church at Philadelphia was kept from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. If this hour of temptation wasn’t events that occurred in 70AD, which would be the case if Revelation was written in 96AD, then what was the event that came upon all the world?

That event had to happen during the lifetime of those at Philadelphia or your arguments about the church’s at Ephesus, Laodicea, and Pergamum can’t be correct because those arguments are all based on assumptions of what was happening during their lifetimes.

Here’s a question that should be easy to answer and solidify a 96AD writing of Revelation. What was the event, that came upon all the world and tried them that dwell upon the earth, that happened after 96AD and prior to 200AD?

The 7 churches seen in the Revelation are representing the church today as a figurative symbolism

The verse right after Jesus states he comes quickly in the second coming, where has that happened in history?

It's a future coming that will be seen by the world

Revelation 3:10-11KJV
10 Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.
11 Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.

 

[RedFan]

Well. I don't exactly know what prison Herod had John in. It doesn't say.
All we do know is he waited there a long time.

Mar 1:14
Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
Mar 6:17
For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife: for he had married her.
Mar 6:27
And immediately the king sent an executioner, and commanded his head to be brought: and he went and beheaded him in the prison,

I don't know the location of John's prison. It doesn't say.
But I appreciate that it could be John the Evangelist, but to me it John the baptists falls more inline with scripture.
Thank you
Hugs

Rev. 1:9 says its author, John, was on Patmos. I am pretty sure John the Baptist was not that author. He lost his head decades before that work was written.