are evidently symbolic. Some of the most im portant passages are 14:8; 16:19; 17:5; 18:2, 10, 21. In 17:5 Babylon is designated as musterion. This undoubtedly indicates that the name is to be understood figuratively. A few interpreters have believed that Jerusa lem was the city that was designated as Babylon, but most scholars hold that Rome was the city that was meant. That interpre tation goes back at least to the time of Ter- tullian. This interpretation was adopted by Jerome and Augustine and has been com monly accepted by the church. There are some striking facts which point to Rome as the city that is designated Babylon. (1) The characteristics ascribed to this Baby lon apply to Rome rather than to any other city of that age: (a) as ruling over the kings of the earth (17:18); (b) as sitting on seven mountains (17:9); (c) as the center of the world’s merchandise (18:3, 11-13); (d) as the corrupter of the nations (17:2; 18:3; 19:2); (e) as the persecutor of the saints (17:6). (2) Rome is designated as Babylon in the Sibylline Oracles (5:143), and this is perhaps an early Jewish portion of the book. The comparison of Rome to Babylon is common in Jewish apocalyptic literature (see 2 Esd. and the Apoc Bar).
spoiled by much of her building material being carried to other places. 2. The vision of the ephah (Zech. 5:5-11) lifted up and carried to the land of Shinar is said to support the theory of Babylon rebuilt. This vision is rather difficult to in terpret as far as its details are concerned, but the general teaching seems to be a condemnation of the commercial spirit acquired by the children of Israel while in Baby lon. There is no statement here concerning a rebuilt Babylon. The “house in the land of Shinar” is built for a flying ephah, or measure, containing a woman. If these are symbolic, and they can be nothing else, then the house must be symbolic also. The advocates of a rebuilt Babylon confess their poverty of material when they use such a Scripture as this for support. Doctor Wm. F. Roadhouse has elaborated upon the vision of Zech. 5:5-11, and sees it as a prophecy that the liberal money-making Jews will return to a rebuilt Baby lon. He believes the orthodox Jews will return to Pales tine. The woman of the ephah is to be identified with the “ woman of Babylon” or Rev. 17. This woman (a system controlled by liberal apostate Jews) rules for a time from Babylon over the Gentile nations of the world, but is finally crushed by the beast. ( Seeing the “ Revelation pp. 147 ff.) It is sufficient to answer that the Scriptures teach the return of the Jews to Palestine — not to Babylon. To divide the Jew into apostate and orthodox groups is a dubious procedure. An orthodox Jew is apostate from the Standpoint of the New Testament. With Anti-semi- tism world wide, and more intense than at the present day, it is hard to imagine how any group of Jews could obtain world-wide power over the Gentile nations. The theory of Mr. Roadhouse would seem to have been man ufactured as a cloak for Anti-semitism. 3. The contention that Babylon will be rebuilt because it is the logical commercial center of the world, the land is fertile and rich in minerals, etc., is not proof but only a statement of what seems probable. The wish is the father of this kind of reasoning. Whether or not Babylon is to be rebuilt must be settled on authority of the Scrip tures or not at all. 4. The suggestion that rebuilt Babylon is to be identified with the bride of Anti-christ, just as the bride of Christ is identified with the New Jerusalem, is not an argument but an analogy. Just as satisfactory an analogy can be discovered if Babylon in the Book of Revelation means the city of Rome, as the church has generally believed. This concludes the analysis and refutation of the principal arguments for a revived Babylon, but there are still other objections to the theory. If Babylon is to be rebuilt and destroyed just before the millennium, then the description of the site’s being inhabited by wild beasts is a picture of millennial con ditions. But from such passages as Isa. 11:6-9; 65:25; and Ezek. 34:25, it has been concluded that there will be no wild beasts during the kingdom age, but that there will be a restoration of conditions in nature such as ob tained in Eden. The prophets’ picture of the desolation of Babylon does not fit into the millennium, then, but belongs to the past and present, as has ususally been be lieved. The final objection to a rebuilt Babylon is that the mystery Babylon of Rev. 17, 18 seems clearly to refer to Rome. This interpretation dates from earliest times and is widely accepted by both futurist and preterist. It is based upon considerations which appear conclusive. An excellent summary of the case is given by A. W. For tune: “ All the references to Babylon in Revelation
(3) Rome was regarded by both Jews and Christians as being antagonistic to the king dom of God, and its downfall was confident ly expected. This conception is in accord with the predicted downfall of Babylon (Rev. 14:8; 18:2, 10-21). As Babylon had been the oppressor of Israel, it was natural that this new power, which was oppressing the people of God, should be designated as Baby lon.” ( The International Standard. Bible Ency. article, “Babylon in the N. T.” ) Scholars have also identified Rome as the inheritor of the idolatry and mystery worship of old Babylon:
“The literal Babylon was the beginner and supporter of tyranny and idolatry; first by Nimrod, or Ninus, and afterward by Nebu chadnezzar; and therefore, in Isa. 47:12, she is accused of magical enchantments from her youth or infancy, i.e. from her very first ori gin as a city or nation. This city and its whole empire were taken by the Persians under Cyrus; the Persians were subdued by the Macedonians, and the Macedonians by the Romans; so that Rome succeeded to the power of Old Babylon (italics in the origi nal). And it was her method to adopt the worship of the false deities she had con quered; so that by her own acts she became the heiress and successor of all the Babylon ian idolatry, and of all that was introduced into it by the intermediate successors of Babylon, and consequently of all the idola try of the earth.” ( Cyclopaedia, M ’Clintock and Strong, article, “ Babylon.” ) (See also The Two Babylons by Alex Hislop.)
In the face of such evidence it seems clear that the Babylon of Revelation is Rome, or definitely related to Rome. The theory that Babylon must be rebuilt is both contrary to Old Testament prophecy and entirely un necessary as far as the Book of Revelation is concerned.
28
THE KING 'S BUSINESS
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker