Series: “Little Gems from Our Study of the Book of Revelation”
UPDATE: This post was written when I understood the scarlet beast of Revelation 17 to be the same as the sea beast of Revelation 13:1-10, the seven kings of Revelation 17:10 to be the first seven Roman emperors, and the 10 horns of Revelation 17:12-14 to be the rulers of Rome’s 10 Senatorial Provinces. I now understand the seven kings to Revelation 17:10 to be the family dynasty of Hezekiah the Zealot, and the 10 horns to be 10 Jewish generals (named by Josephus) who were appointed around January 67 AD to oversee specific territories and to prepare for war with Rome. This post will be updated accordingly when time allows.
The following study was published yesterday in The Fulfilled Connection (TFC) Magazine, and is adapted from our study of Revelation 17 (Part 1):
In Revelation 17, John was shown a woman known as “Babylon the Great”, “the mother of harlots,” and “the great city.” This woman/city has been interpreted in various ways, from the Roman Catholic Church, to New York City, to modern Iraq, to the church in America, etc. This article will discuss a number of reasons why “Babylon the Great” was first century Jerusalem and old covenant Judaism. In doing so, we will look at the first six verses of Revelation 17.
The fall of Babylon was first announced in Revelation 14:8, and Revelation 11:8 identified “the great city” as the place “where also our Lord was crucified,” which, of course, was Jerusalem. Revelation 17-19 describes Babylon’s fall in more detail. This is then followed by a description of the bride, the wife of Jesus, who stands in contrast to the harlot. Note how the following passages deliberately contrast each other:
A. Revelation 17:1: “Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, ‘Come, I will show you the judgment of the great prostitute who is seated on many waters.’”
A. Revelation 21:9: “Then came one of the seven angels which had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues and spoke to me, saying, ‘Come, I will show you the Bride, the wife of the Lamb.’”
B. Revelation 17:3: “And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was full of blasphemous names.”
B. Revelation 21:10: “And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great, high mountain, and showed me the holy Jerusalem coming down out of heaven from God.”
In Revelation 17:2, Babylon is prosecuted for its sexual immorality, by which “the dwellers on earth” and “the kings of the earth” were made guilty. Notice that the reference to “the kings of the earth” here is distinct from the reference to “the kings of the whole world” in Revelation 16:14, where that reference was to the provincial kings of the Roman Empire. In an earlier 3-part series, I discussed 20 instances in Revelation where the phrase “those who dwell on the earth” refers to first century Israel rather than to everyone on the planet (see Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3).
Verse 3: John then sees a woman sitting on a scarlet beast with seven heads and ten horns. One of my previous articles, “Ten Fulfilled Prophecies Concerning the Beast from the Sea,” makes the case that the beast was Nero in the specific sense and the Roman Empire in the general sense. The fact that the woman is sitting on the beast suggests a very close relationship between the woman and the beast, who are both distinct in their identity. On this topic, I wrote the following elsewhere regarding the woman (Jerusalem) riding the beast (Rome):
In what sense might Jerusalem have sat on the beast that would ultimately turn on her and destroy her (Rev. 17:3, 9, 16-18)? Israel had enjoyed a good relationship with Rome until the Jewish revolt began in 66 AD, and Judaism was recognized as a valid religion within the Roman Empire. Josephus wrote of this relationship, “It seems to me to be necessary here to give an account of all the honors that the Romans and their emperors paid to our nation [Israel], and of the leagues of mutual assistance they have made with it” (Antiquities, 14.10.1-2). The Jews frequently took advantage of this relationship to induce persecution against Jesus and His followers (Luke 23:2; John 18:28-31, 19:15; Acts 4:27, 16:20, 17:7, 18:12, 21:11, 24:1-9, 25:1-2). W.H.C. Frend even writes that “the promptings of orthodox Jews in the capitol had something to do with” Nero’s decision to begin persecuting Christians in 64 AD (The Rise of Christianity [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984], 109; quoted in Kenneth Gentry, Before Jerusalem Fell, 2002, p. 63).
Kenneth Gentry suggests that the beast was the color scarlet for any of the following reasons:  The robes worn by Roman emperors were red in color  Rome, led by Nero, was responsible for shedding much blood among God’s people  Nero was famous for his red beard.
Verses 4-5: The woman wore purple, scarlet, gold, jewels, and pearls. She had in her hand a golden cup “full of abominations and the impurities of her sexual immorality.” Her forehead proclaimed that she was “Babylon the great, mother of prostitutes and of earth’s abominations.” According to Todd Dennis, the founder of the Preterist Archive,
…the description of the harlot’s attire (purple, scarlet, gold, jewels, and pearls) was nearly identical to the ephod worn by the high priest (Revelation 17:4; cf. Exodus 28:5-21). The golden cup she held was likely symbolic of the temple vessels, the greatest part of which were gold and silver, according to the Jewish historian Josephus (Wars 5.4.4). On Aaron’s forehead was the inscription “Holy to the Lord” (Exodus 28:36). The harlot’s forehead, on the other hand, bore the title “Babylon the great, mother of prostitutes and of earth’s abominations” (Rev. 17:5).
In Jeremiah’s day, Judah (with its capital of Jerusalem) was prosecuted because it had “played the whore with many lovers” and “polluted the land with…vile whoredom” (Jeremiah 3:1-2). Like Israel in John’s day, Judah prior to its fall in 586 BC had “the forehead of a whore” (verse 3).
Duncan McKenzie’s article has helped me to understand that “Babylon the Great” here was more than just a physical city. It was also a religious system full of abominations, old covenant temple-based Judaism. In Revelation 18 God commands His people regarding Babylon, “Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues” (Rev. 18:4). We know from Revelation 1 that John’s immediate audience didn’t live in Jerusalem, but in Asia Minor. So this was not a command to flee from the city of Jerusalem.
God’s message was about breaking completely free from old covenant temple-based Judaism. Babylon represented not only Jerusalem, but also the unfaithful community which had rejected Jesus and the new covenant. Both physical Jerusalem and temple-based Judaism were judged and destroyed in 70 AD. In Daniel 9:26-27 we see that it is on “the wing of abominations” that one comes “who makes desolate” (see also Rev. 17:16, Matt. 23:38). This was related to the destruction of “the city and the sanctuary” (Daniel 9:24). The abominations of the earth (land) were the apostate practices of old covenant Judaism.
As mentioned earlier, John was shown a contrasting picture of two women: the harlot of chapters 17 and 18, and the bride in chapter 19 clothed with “fine linen, bright and pure…the righteous deeds of the saints” (see verses 1-8). One (the harlot) persecuted the other (the bride, Christ’s Church). What is most fascinating is Paul’s own contrasting of two women in his epistle to the Galatians:
Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not listen to the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and one by a free woman. But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through promise. Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. For it is written, “Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear; break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in labor. For the children of the desolate one will be more than those of the one who has a husband.” Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. But just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now. But what does the Scripture say? ”Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.” So, brothers, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman (Galatians 4:21-31).
Just as Paul wrote in Galatians 4, we see in Revelation that God casts out and destroys the harlot (Revelation 18:21), but the bride inherits the Lamb as her husband.
Verse 6: The woman is said to be “drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.” This same charge was laid upon those of “the earth” in the previous chapter (Rev. 16:1), where it was said that “they have shed the blood of saints and prophets (16:4-7).” In chapter 18 we also see that “in her was found the blood of prophets and of saints, and of all who have been slain on the earth” (18:24), and that the “saints and apostles and prophets” were told to rejoice over her destruction (18:20). Who was responsible for shedding all the blood of the prophets, apostles, and the saints, according to Jesus, and who would receive judgment as a result? The answer can be found in Matthew 23:
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets and decorate the monuments of the righteous, saying, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets’” Thus you witness against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell? Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, so that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. Truly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! See, your house is left to you desolate (Matthew 23:29-38).
The harlot is not a 21st century entity, but was the first century old covenant community. As God’s people, those of us who are in Christ today have the privilege of being part of the pure woman, God’s bride.
15 thoughts on “The Harlot of Revelation 17 and its Relationship to Old Covenant Israel”
Hello Adam and yes as Ezekiel did say about aholah and aholabah the harlots born in Egypt—-and the younger sister not learning any thing from her older sister did indeed experience her judgment during the jewish roman wars (66 to bar kochba in 135)—-old things died away and all things made new i simply bow before the lord acknowledging him as king of kings and lord of lords —–well beyond my human capacity for understaning thanks
Very good! I like how the author connected like language of Old and New testament. The author did a great job connecting like-language among the authors of the New testament, leaving little doubt they were referencing the same subject. The comparison of Hagar and Sarah was very revealing! Great job!
Thanks, Brad. I’m glad you were blessed by this post. Yes, Paul’s allegory in Galatians 4 is indeed very revealing. Somehow, years ago, I passed over it numerous times without realizing its significance.
[…] a recent post, “The Harlot of Revelation 17 and Its Relationship to Old Covenant Israel,” we examined the first six verses of Revelation 17. There we were introduced to “a scarlet […]
I have held this position on Babylon the Great, but if the “Judgement” of the Great Whore took place in 70AD, then we have a problem with this interpretation, as John’s “revelation” was not given to him until around 90AD.
Zionism/Israel is indeed a counterfeit Israel. Was the 70AD judgement a prelude to a final and more severe judgement of Judaism/Zionism when the Lord Returns.
isleander, there was a time when I only knew about the position that John wrote the book of Revelation around 95-96 AD. It’s based mainly on a statement made by Irenaeus, in which it’s not clear whether he was speaking of John’s death or the time he received his visions (he didn’t give a date, in any case).
I’ve become convinced that John wrote Revelation prior to Jerusalem’s destruction in 70 AD. There is external evidence behind this idea, but the internal evidence (within the text) is even more plentiful and important. Here are six posts which deal with the dating of the book of Revelation:
As just one example of internal evidence, John was told in Revelation 17 that five of seven kings had fallen, “one is,” and one was yet to come who would only reign a short time. Nero was the sixth emperor of Rome, the one “who is” (i.e. was) when John received this vision. He ruled from 54 AD – 68 AD. The next emperor, Galba, indeed only reigned for seven months before he was assassinated. That was known as “the year of four emperors,” until Vespasian took over in late 69 AD, gave stability to Rome again, and resumed the war against Israel.
PJ gave what is probably the best reason why a double fulfillment is not possible. Here’s an article that lists several other reasons as well:
This has been a difficulty for many, who like myself see the testimonies of (the Book of) Revelation as being fulfilled in 70AD.
This appears to be the main objection when people are presented with the 70AD scenario.
Thanks for the Links, I will study them closely.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Quote: Was the 70AD judgement a prelude to a final and more severe judgement of Judaism/Zionism when the Lord Returns”
Not according to Jesus’ words isleander.
Matthew 24: 21- ” For at that time there will be great tribulation, the kind that hasn’t taken place from the beginning of the world until now and never will again!”
If you’ve never read an account of the destruction of Jerusalem, I’d like to recommend this little book written by George Peter Holford. It was written in the 1800’s.
The Destruction of Jerusalem: http://www.amazon.com/The-Destruction-Jerusalem-Irresistible-Christianity/dp/0967831725
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for the book details.
Babylon – the world system of Roman Empire, re-incarnated in British Empire, mutated into the USA empire and their Frankenstein creation, the modern state of Israel … these have long been my uneducated and undogmatic thoughts… still not unconvinced of this tbh…
Hi Sam. I believe that what you’ve expressed here is a position within what is known as Historicism (although it may be a minority position to say that modern Israel is part of Babylon).
What do you think about some of the points in this post, particularly the relationship between Matthew 23:29-37 and Revelation 16:3-6, 17:1-6, 18:20-24?
Thanks for your reply. firstly let me say I have always deliberately avoided both the study of and the controversy around various and conflicting interpretations of Revelation and the related Biblical prophesies. This is primarily because of the vast diversity of often complex theories between often scholarly sources. ‘Be ready, for ye know not the hour’ is enough for me to be honest.
Zionism (and it’s various associated end-times prophetic theories is the only reason I have begun to reluctantly and slowly engage with prophetic interpretation) – previously I have opposed this evil (Zionism) from a political and humanitarian perspective. Now I am more concerned with how this heresy blatantly contradicts both Old and New Testament theology and morality, and more particularly the relationship between the Old and New Covenants and the revelation of Christ with all it’s spiritual implications and subsequent moral and political outworkings. I am also starting to suspect that the end result of this heresy may be even more serious than we yet realise.
My background is political and my academic area is history, maybe this explains my ‘Historicism’, maybe it is just my lack of knowledge. I find the subject matter somewhat overwhelming to be honest, and think I will continue to gradually imbibe and absorb information on this subject at a snails pace. The study of the Covenants and the teaching of Christ will be my main focus.
Apologies for diverting from the original subject matter.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Quote from Sam:
“Zionism (and it’s various associated end-times prophetic theories is the only reason I have begun to reluctantly and slowly engage with prophetic interpretation) – previously I have opposed this evil (Zionism) from a political and humanitarian perspective. Now I am more concerned with how this heresy blatantly contradicts both Old and New Testament theology and morality, and more particularly the relationship between the Old and New Covenants and the revelation of Christ with all it’s spiritual implications and subsequent moral and political outworkings. I am also starting to suspect that the end result of this heresy may be even more serious than we yet realise”
Sam, your suspicions align with my own. Zionism, in particularly Christian Zionism and how it has infiltrated the Church, is a deception we are only beginning to see the results of. Where or how it will culminate, at this point only God knows. I do believe the end results will not only effect the Church, but specific nations…..the United States being one. And not for the better.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Sam. You’re welcome, and thank you for your follow-up response as well. I know what you mean when you speak of “the vast diversity of often complex theories between often scholarly sources.” I agree with you about the serious nature of the implications of modern Zionism, embraced by so many Christians despite its incompatibility with the new covenant established by Christ.
No apology needed. I don’t think you diverted from the subject matter all that much. Since you’re interested in the old and new covenants, you may find the following post here to be of interest (if time allows):
Other posts that deal with the transition of the covenants in Revelation include these (especially #4):