"When did the RCC begin?"

[StanJ]

Where in the Bible does it say "The CAtholic Church is the mother of harlots"?
Inquiring minds wanna know

You may not really want to.
http://lifehopeandtruth.com/prophecy/revelation/revelation-17/

 

[epostle1]

Kelpha31,

I haven't read those links, and don't intend to unless it has something useful to add to what I am about to say.

I look at the verses you provided and not one of them justifies calling a priest "father". It seems what you have done is used a search engine and e erytime the word "father" is mentioned in the Bible, yoyv claim it as justification for going against Matthew 23:9.

Wrong. You don't understand hyperbole. Jesus was not speaking literally.
Some of the verses (like 1 john 2:13) he is speaking to "dads".... Grown men who have gotten a woman pregnant and have kids. He wasn't addressing Church elders in this verse. That is evident because he talks to "young men" and "children" in the same verse. Theses verses don't apply to Catholic Priests.... Especially because they don't get married and have sex. Right!?!?

Do I have to re-post the numerous verses where church elders are called "fathers"??? Only to have you ignore them? Your dig on celibacy is a red herring.

Other verses are talking about forefathers like Abraham and David. This is not justification to call your local Priest a father because he is not your forefather. You two probably aren't even blood relatives.
Other verses are simply making a comparison. Not justifiable either.

You miss the whole point of the Patriarchs being called "father", sometimes by God Himself. I can't make you read my post.

Added comment: overall, its a pretty small thing to complain about. I'm more concerned with those who try to defend it. You are going to accuse heretoeternity of twisting the scripture (and believe me.... I am NOT a supporter of what he says most of the time) and yet.... Look at what you provide as scripture against what the Catholic Church does, which the Bible says not to do.

I posted nothing contrary to the Church. Having trouble finding "father" in scripture? According to your eisegesis, students in your church have no business calling their teachers "teacher": Matthew 23:8 forbids it on the same idiotic grounds as your take on Matt. 23:9.

1 Cor. 4:15 - Paul writes, "I became your father in Christ Jesus."
Deal with it.
https://web.archive.org/web/20160305195339/http://scripturecatholic.com/the_priesthood.html

 

[heretoeternity]

Oh yes and the "infallible" pope wants to be called "holy" father....blasphemy anyone?

 

[kerwin]

I am speculating here but if the Dragon in Revelations is the Roman Empire is the Roman Empire then the Catholic Churches could well be the beast that the Dragon gives power to. I said churches because the Catholic Church acknowledges they are but one branch of the Catholic Churches but they teach they are the one that has stuck to the true doctrine.

Mind that Scripture lets us know that the Dragon is actually the serpent of the Garden.

 

[Mungo]

You may not really want to.
http://lifehopeandtruth.com/prophecy/revelation/revelation-17/

Try reading
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/hunting-the-whore-of-babylon

 

[Mungo]

Oh yes and the "infallible" pope wants to be called "holy" father....blasphemy anyone?

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/why-do-catholics-call-the-pope-the-holy-father-if-the-bible-says-only-persons-of-the-

 

[StanJ]

Try reading
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/hunting-the-whore-of-babylon

Did you read what I linked to? The article you link to is directly related to Hunt and I have never personally heard hunt speak or read any of his material so I don't know how accurate he is. The link I gave you, I did read, and it is accurate unlike the equivocal nature of catholic.com with most of it's articles. The common frame of reference in the article you linked to is 'even if', or 'may be'.

 

[ScaliaFan]

You may not really want to.
http://lifehopeandtruth.com/prophecy/revelation/revelation-17/

you're right, i don't want to. I've already delved into the theology and history and etc... and then, even better, i have my own life experiences to inform me that the Roman Catholic Church is the Church Christ founded. I do not need to go to that site or any other in search of Jesus. I have found Him...

"always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.." ?? no thanks

 

[epostle1]

heretoeternity, on 07 Sept 2016 - 12:28 AM, said:

Oh yes and the "infallible" pope wants to be called "holy" father....blasphemy anyone?

This betrays the usual fundamentalist inability to properly understand biblical language and its parameters. ...if the exact term doesn’t appear in Scripture, then it is invalid (never mind “Trinity” and “altar call” and a host of other terms). But even here he is inconsistent. “Vicar of Christ” never appears in the Bible, either, in that exact form, yet anti-Catholics somehow “know” that it can only describe the Holy Spirit. Both of these pseudo-arguments fall flat, as follows:

All one has to do to refute it is to note that there are such things as “holy men” referred to in the Bible.

• The writer of Hebrews calls the recipients of his epistle “holy brethren” (Heb 3:1).
• Peter refers to a “holy priesthood” (1 Pet 2:5) and
• “holy women” such as Sarah (1 Pet 3:5) and
• “holy prophets” (2 Pet 3:2; cf. Acts 3:21;
• Zechariah’s prophecy in Luke 1:70).
• John the Baptist is referred to as a “righteous and holy man” in Mark 6:20.
• Jesus refers to a “righteous man” in Matthew 10:41.

Therefore, men can be called “holy” in Scripture. That solves half of this “pseudo-problem.”

hetertoeternity calls this blasphemy.


Can men also be called “father”? Of course they can:

Acts 7:2 (RSV) And Stephen said: “Brethren and fathers, hear me. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham, . . .”
Romans 4:12 . . . the father of the circumcised . . . our father Abraham . . .
Romans 4:16-17 . . . Abraham, for he is the father of us all, as it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations . . .” (cf. 9:10; Phil 2:22; Jas 2:21)
1 Corinthians 4:15 For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
See post #52 for 40 more "blasphemous" verses.

That solves the other half of the weak, insubstantial objection. If you can call a man “holy” and also (spiritual) “father”, then you can call a person both together (both being biblical), and the cheap “blasphemy” charge vanishes into thin air.

 

[ScaliaFan]

I am speculating here but if the Dragon in Revelations is the Roman Empire is the Roman Empire then the Catholic Churches could well be the beast that the Dragon gives power to. I said churches because the Catholic Church acknowledges they are but one branch of the Catholic Churches but they teach they are the one that has stuck to the true doctrine.

Mind that Scripture lets us know that the Dragon is actually the serpent of the Garden.

the Catholic Church, even if parts of it are sold out to the devil... let's just make that hypothetical argument 4 now... is the only antidote for... that evil... The RC Church is either the Church Chist founded or it is not... simple as that.

I am an expert on spirituality, been to many different churches, studied this and that... but more importantly are my experiences.. been in the Church, been out... you see what choice i have made... You apparently think i am too dumb to know what i am doing (i speak to anticatholics... if u r one, listen, if not...)

 

[ScaliaFan]

Oh yes and the "infallible" pope wants to be called "holy" father....blasphemy anyone?

protestant "churches" teaching that abortion is sometimes ok? blashphemy anyone?

protestant "churches" teaching that homosexuality is ok? blashphemy anyone?
protestant "churches" teaching that women can now have authority over a man in the church? blashphemy anyone?

protestant "churches" teaching that it is OK to vote for a pro-abortion person? blashphemy anyone?

protestant "churches" teaching that homosexuality is ok? blashphemy anyone?

 

[StanJ]

you're right, i don't want to. I've already delved into the theology and history and etc... and then, even better, i have my own life experiences to inform me that the Roman Catholic Church is the Church Christ founded. I do not need to go to that site or any other in search of Jesus. I have found Him...
"always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.." ?? no thanks

Oh I see... you were there where you? This is a typical reply of the inculcated. The fact that you base your faith on an institution of man and not on what Jesus said in his written word, shows why you won't educate yourself.
Sadly you continue to demonstrate that you have no idea what the word 'church' means. In FACT, Jesus never said He would build the Roman Catholic Church. Jesus said upon the confession that Peter made, HE would build HIS Church.

 

[epostle1]

Try reading
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/hunting-the-whore-of-babylon

Few Whore-duh-Babble-on Psychos will read it, they don't want anything to disturb their irrational hatred for the Catholic Church. It will take several pages to refute the scriptural and historical gymnastics committed by the biblically bankrupt "Life Hope and Truth" site. So I will just touch on a few favorites. It's basically the same material in Dave Hunt's book, "A Woman Rides the Beast'". Mungo, I use that site almost daily in the numerous forums I frequent, it nicely refutes the sheer stupidity of the trash that passes off as truth.

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.

​1) Biblical morons assert the Vatican sits on the seven hills of Rome. This is false. Pagan Rome, yes, but the Vatican? You have to cross the Tiber River to get to the seven hills. Anti-Catholics don't like maps.

2)Hunt tells us, "The woman is called a ‘whore’ (verse 1), with whom earthly kings ‘have committed fornication’ (verse 2). Against only two cities could such a charge be made: Jerusalem and Rome."

Here Hunt admits that the prophets often referred to Jerusalem as a spiritual whore, suggesting that the Whore might be apostate Jerusalem. Ancient, pagan Rome also fits the description, since through the cult of emperor worship it also committed spiritual fornication with "the kings of the earth" (those nations it conquered) To identify the Whore as Vatican City, Hunt interprets the fornication as alleged "unholy alliances" forged between Vatican City and other nations, but he fails to cite any reasons why the Vatican’s diplomatic relations with other nations are "unholy."

He also confuses Vatican City with the city of Rome, and he neglects the fact that pagan Rome had "unholy alliances" with the kingdoms it governed (unholy because they were built on paganism and emperor worship).
(this falsehood is committed frequently in here by the Babble-on crowd)
#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, on occasion, 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).

You can see 5 more key points addressed:
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/hunting-the-whore-of-babylon

 

[ScaliaFan]

Oh yes and the "infallible" pope wants to be called "holy" father....blasphemy anyone?

protestants ordain homosexual ministers... blasphemy anyone?

you may want to cede the point that WORDS are less damaging than ACTIONS

 

[ScaliaFan]

Few Whore-duh-Babble-on Psychos will read it, they don't want anything to disturb their irrational hatred for the Catholic Church. It will take several pages to refute the scriptural and historical gymnastics committed by the biblically bankrupt "Life Hope and Truth" site. So I will just touch on a few favorites. It's basically the same material in Dave Hunt's book, "A Woman Rides the Beast'". Mungo, I use that site almost daily in the numerous forums I frequent, it nicely refutes the sheer stupidity of the trash that passes off as truth.

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.

​1) Biblical morons assert the Vatican sits on the seven hills of Rome. This is false. Pagan Rome, yes, but the Vatican? You have to cross the Tiber River to get to the seven hills. Anti-Catholics don't like maps.

2)Hunt tells us, "The woman is called a ‘whore’ (verse 1), with whom earthly kings ‘have committed fornication’ (verse 2). Against only two cities could such a charge be made: Jerusalem and Rome."

Here Hunt admits that the prophets often referred to Jerusalem as a spiritual whore, suggesting that the Whore might be apostate Jerusalem. Ancient, pagan Rome also fits the description, since through the cult of emperor worship it also committed spiritual fornication with "the kings of the earth" (those nations it conquered) To identify the Whore as Vatican City, Hunt interprets the fornication as alleged "unholy alliances" forged between Vatican City and other nations, but he fails to cite any reasons why the Vatican’s diplomatic relations with other nations are "unholy."

He also confuses Vatican City with the city of Rome, and he neglects the fact that pagan Rome had "unholy alliances" with the kingdoms it governed (unholy because they were built on paganism and emperor worship).
(this falsehood is committed frequently in here by the Babble-on crowd)
#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, on occasion, 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).

You can see 5 more key points addressed:
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/hunting-the-whore-of-babylon

thanks 4 the info. I copied it to read later.

In the meantime, i appreciate your Trumpish way of speaking the truth w/o the PC garbage...

not sure it will do much good... they say Love never fails... but what does it mean to love our separated protestant brethren? If giving them the truth does not make them stop and think... how will some sweet sounding Oh-You-Just-dont-understand-but-I-will-keep-trying-to-patiently-teach-you type o'thing work?

hmmmmmmmmmmm

one of the great questions of life...

 

[StanJ]

protestants ordain homosexual ministers... blasphemy anyone?

you may want to cede the point that WORDS are less damaging than ACTIONS

So does the RCC. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. The RCC apparently also ordains a lot of pedophiles and sadists.

 

[brakelite]

Few Whore-duh-Babble-on Psychos will read it, they don't want anything to disturb their irrational hatred for the Catholic Church. It will take several pages to refute the scriptural and historical gymnastics committed by the biblically bankrupt "Life Hope and Truth" site. So I will just touch on a few favorites. It's basically the same material in Dave Hunt's book, "A Woman Rides the Beast'". Mungo, I use that site almost daily in the numerous forums I frequent, it nicely refutes the sheer stupidity of the trash that passes off as truth.

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.

​1) Biblical morons assert the Vatican sits on the seven hills of Rome. This is false. Pagan Rome, yes, but the Vatican? You have to cross the Tiber River to get to the seven hills. Anti-Catholics don't like maps.

2)Hunt tells us, "The woman is called a ‘whore’ (verse 1), with whom earthly kings ‘have committed fornication’ (verse 2). Against only two cities could such a charge be made: Jerusalem and Rome."

Here Hunt admits that the prophets often referred to Jerusalem as a spiritual whore, suggesting that the Whore might be apostate Jerusalem. Ancient, pagan Rome also fits the description, since through the cult of emperor worship it also committed spiritual fornication with "the kings of the earth" (those nations it conquered) To identify the Whore as Vatican City, Hunt interprets the fornication as alleged "unholy alliances" forged between Vatican City and other nations, but he fails to cite any reasons why the Vatican’s diplomatic relations with other nations are "unholy."

He also confuses Vatican City with the city of Rome, and he neglects the fact that pagan Rome had "unholy alliances" with the kingdoms it governed (unholy because they were built on paganism and emperor worship).
(this falsehood is committed frequently in here by the Babble-on crowd)
#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, on occasion, 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).

You can see 5 more key points addressed:
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/hunting-the-whore-of-babylon

I have never read one word of Dave Hunts books; reading yours and your church's responses to his charges against your church is the closest I have been to reading him; not sure if I should thank you for that. I do agree with Dave Hunt in some of his views, but not all. And the ones I agree with I disagree with his reasons. For example, and you bring this up yourself, the seven hills business. The Bible explains itself...it is its own expositor. So when any symbolism is portrayed through prophecy, that symbolism is explained elsewhere in scripture. We do tend to go very astray when we invent our own interpretations, as Peter said. Prophecy is of no private interpretation.
Revel. 17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
Now as you point out, The Vatican does not sit on seven hills, whereas the city of Rome mot assuredly does, and is renowned for that particular geographic feature. But the prophecy itself is NOT about cities. Its about churches. I fact the book of Revelation is about two churches, one represented by the virgin in Revelation 12, the other by the harlot. Why do I say this? Because as I said previously, symbols are explained in scripture.
John used a variety of colorful types and symbols to portray the elements involved in the final controversy between Christ and Satan: for example, a dragon, a lamb, and two fierce wild beasts. But the most prominent representation of the two sides centers in the two striking women described in chapters 12 and 17. No words could be found to identify more vividly the nature of the contending forces in this contest. On one side is the pure woman of Revelation 12, clothed in the glory of the sun, wearing a crown of stars, and standing on the moon. Here is represented the true church, the bride of Christ. The prophets had written, "I have likened the daughter of Zion to a comely and delicate woman." Jeremiah 6:2. "Say unto Zion, Thou art my people." Isaiah 51:16.
Also; Isaiah 54:5 For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.
6 ¶ For the LORD hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God....and
Hosea 2:19 And I will betroth thee unto me for ever; yea, I will betroth thee unto me in righteousness, and in judgment, and in lovingkindness, and in mercies.
20 I will even betroth thee unto me in faithfulness: and thou shalt know the LORD.
Later, Paul used the same symbolism of the church when he wrote, "I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ." 2 Corinthians 11:2.
So we see that in the OT, and in the new, God's people, that is His church, was likened to a woman, specifically a wife. However, when that wife proved to be unfaithful, the scripture didn't veer away from the symbolism....
On the other side, John wrote in Revelation 17 of the activities of a drunken, scarlet-clothed harlot, sitting upon many waters and holding a golden cup of abominations in her hand. Here is the antithesis of the pure woman of chapter 12. The woman still symbolizes a church, but one which has committed spiritual adultery.
Jeremiah 3:14 Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you...20 ¶ Surely as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband, so have ye dealt treacherously with me, O house of Israel, saith the LORD.
After describing all He had done for His people Israel, the Lord then goes on to describe her unfaithfulness, this from Ezekiel 16:15 ¶ But thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot because of thy renown, and pouredst out thy fornications on every one that passed by; his it was.
16 And of thy garments thou didst take, and deckedst thy high places with divers colours, and playedst the harlot thereupon: the like things shall not come, neither shall it be so....
....as a wife that commiteth adultery, which taketh strangers instead of her husband.
Her cup is filled with fornications. According to the Bible, this represents a turning away from Christ and unfaithfulness to His Word. "Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that friendship of the world is enmity with God?" James 4:4. Although married to Christ, this church has been disobedient to His Word, taken the teachings of the world, His enemy, and therefore become a spiritual harlot. The fornications in the cup would constitute false teachings and doctrines that would be contrary to Christ, the true husband.
Just as the book of Revelation classifies all the world's inhabitants as ultimately following Christ or the dragon, obeying truth or error, receiving the mark of the beast or seal of God, so it pictures every individual at the end of time on the side of the symbolic harlot or the side of the pure virgin.
So how does this all relate to the 7 mountains on which the woman sits? Much in the same way as she is seen elsewhere as riding the beast. The 7 hills do represent the city of Pagan Rome, and the beast represents the state or civil power. The Papal church did indeed receive its support (from Constantine on) from the state power. She rode upon the state beast, being supported by that beast, but at the same time holding the reign and guiding and leading the state power in the direction she chose. This was a particular hallmark of the papal power, its apostasy and harlotry with the kings of the earth, and her reliance on the state for support instead of trusting in her former Husband, Christ, from Whom she "has fallen has fallen", and played the harlot.

 

[brakelite]

Just remembered that Kepha has me on his/her block list....so the above may just go over his/her head. Probably do that anyway.

 

[mjrhealth]

it is not... simple as that.

Yes we all know its not, the proof is written all over the pages of History and even God has held account

Rev 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
Rev 6:10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
Rev 6:11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

But even if God himself sent the saints of Heaven to come and tell you of their plight, you would reject them because the truth is not in you.

Luk 16:27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
Luk 16:28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
Luk 16:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
Luk 16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

As it says, there is nothing new under teh sun.

 

[heretoeternity]

You forgot to mention Revelation 12...salvation is for those that have the testimony of Jesus, and follow the commandments of God...