The Fall of Babylon the Great – The Roman Catholic Church

I will not deny that from time to time priests do wear scarlet and purple. However they also were green and white and many other colours. The papal colour is white not scarlet or purple as you seem to be suggesting.

The Bible is a collection of books, not a single book when analysing it and reading it you have to read it within the context of the time and also within the narrative framework. Just as I wouldn’t read The Harry Potter as if it were a non fiction. So I can’t read the Song of Song’s which is love poetry as if it were science fiction. Understand the context and don’t misinterpret things.

The Pope doesn’t claim to be God. God is the head of The Church all Catholics worship God, not The Pope.

I appreciate your reading the article, but I thought I would highlight some bits for you as it states quite clearly that the whore is either Pagan Rome or Apostate Jerusalem. With the most likely conclusion being Apostate Jerusalem

When the Whore falls we read, “‘Rejoice over her, O heaven! Rejoice, saints and apostles and prophets! God has judged her for the way she treated you’. . . . In her was found the blood of prophets and of the saints, and of all who have been killed on the earth” (18:20, 24). This shows that the Whore persecuted not just Christians, but apostles and prophets. Apostles existed only in the first century, since one of the requirements for being an apostle was seeing the risen Christ (1 Cor. 9:1). Prophets existed as a group only in the Old Testament and in the first century (Acts 11:27–28, 13:1, 15:32, 21:10).

Since the Whore persecuted apostles and prophets, the Whore must have existed in the first century. This totally demolishes the claim that Christian Rome or Vatican City is the Whore. Rome was not a Christian city at that time, and Vatican City did not even exist, so neither of them could be the Whore. Furthermore, Fundamentalists continually (though wrongly) claim that Catholicism itself did not exist in the first century, meaning that based on their very own argument Catholicism could not be the Whore!

Fundamentalists are fond of conjecturing that in the last days there will be a “revived Roman empire,” such as the one that persecuted Christians in the first century. Yet they never draw the inference that this empire would be headed by a revived pagan Rome, with the bishop of Rome leading the Christian underground, just as he did in the first century.

Still, Revelation 18:20 and 18:24 prove that the Whore had to be a creature of the first century, which, in the Fundamentalist view, the Catholic Church was not. Thus, on their own view, their identification of the Catholic Church with the Whore is completely impossible! Only ancient, pagan Rome or apostate Jerusalem could possibly be the Whore.

The Catholic Church cannot be the Whore. We are told that the heads “are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come.” If five of these kings had fallen in John’s day and one of them was still in existence, then the Whore must have existed in John’s day. Yet Christian Rome and Vatican City did not. Remember that when revelation was written between 75- 90 AD Christianity was nothing more than many groups of people calling themselves followers of Christ with vastly different opinions and beliefs, the Vatican City was also not in existence at this point. However, pagan Rome did have a line of emperors, and the majority of commentators see this as the line of kings to which 17:10 refers. Five of these emperors are referred to as having already fallen, one as still reigning in John’s time, and another yet to come. Since Jerusalem had no such line of kings in the first century, this gives us evidence that the Beast (though not the Whore) is Rome. The whore being Apostate Jerusalem.

Regarding your point about the inquisition – Again I will not deny that certain people have done ‘bad’ things in the name of religion such as the inquisition. St. Paul said we hold the treasure in earthen vessels. We hold within us the truth about God, but Man is like the earthen vessel, fragile, weak, susceptible to sin and temptation. Like the vessel we can break and crack, but through penance and reconciliation we can be healed. Many bad things have been done by ‘religious’ people and in the name of ‘religion.’ For example the crusades and the inquisition. All of these things are and were of course terrible. But it doesn’t change the essential truth that Jesus is the Son of God and that he died on the cross and was resurrected to save mankind from sin. You also mention salvation by Jesus alone as I’m sure you are aware The Catholic Church believes in salvation through faith and good works. If you have faith in God but fail to live out your faith treating people with contempt, not helping the poor, rejecting those around you who are in need, failing to cloth the poor or feed the hungry do you think God will look favourable on you? Remember Jesus said whatever you do to the least of my brothers that you do unto me.

Regarding the term ‘father’ Jesus is not forbidding us to call men “fathers” who actually are such—either literally or spiritually. To refer to such people as fathers is only to acknowledge the truth, and Jesus is not against that. He is warning people against inaccurately attributing fatherhood—or a particular kind or degree of fatherhood—to those who do not have it.

As the apostolic example shows, some individuals genuinely do have a spiritual fatherhood, meaning that they can be referred to as spiritual fathers. What must not be done is to confuse their form of spiritual paternity with that of God. Ultimately, God is our supreme protector, provider, and instructor. Correspondingly, it is wrong to view any individual other than God as having these roles.

“You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 2:1); “But Timothy’s worth you know, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel” (Phil. 2:22).

The Star of David is a symbol heavily associated with Judaism and Israel, it has been used since the second temple period, so to suggest this is in fact a symbol of the occult is highly peculiar.

I hate to be the one to break it to you but Catholicism is Christian. We don’t worship the Sun, and not all monstrance’s are surround by ‘a sun,’ the same can also be said of the IHS.

As for the statue of St. Peter we will have to agree to disagree on that methinks.

i was a catholic convert to a christian attending morning and evening services at a Assembly of God church, i’ve learn so much about the bible ever since i started going to this church than the catholics, i have this mission to do because my family are all catholics and i want them to convert because the coming of our Savior is near by………..please help me and pray for this mission of mine to go thru.