The harlot and the beast?

I only posted this one because I feel it's kind of ironic in a big way, depending on each's views. Even still, it holds some impact on the belief systems of a great part of the world.

If the UN was "the Beast", would a moon goddess be a proper roll for "the Harlot"?

With United Nations climate negotiators facing an uphill battle to advance their goal of reducing emissions linked to global warming, it's no surprise that the woman steering the talks appealed to a Mayan goddess Monday.

Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, invoked the ancient jaguar goddess Ixchel in her opening statement to delegates gathered in Cancun, Mexico, noting that Ixchel was not only goddess of the moon, but also "the goddess of reason, creativity and weaving. May she inspire you -- because today, you are gathered in Cancun to weave together the elements of a solid response to climate change, using both reason and creativity as your tools."

W.P.


From what I can see, the goddess who claimed earth, war and rain, also seemed to claim the lives of young virgins. (as per Wiki )

the head town of the Chontal province of Acalan (Itzamkanac) venerated Ixchel as one its main deities. One of Acalan's coastal settlements was called Tixchel 'At the place of Ixchel'. The Spanish conqueror, Cortés, tells us about another place in Acalan where unmarried young women were sacrificed to a "goddess in whom they put great trust and hope", possibly again Ix Chel.

Dont get me wrong, I'm not relating this to say that another's beliefs are wrong. Afterall, Its considered a Mythology and not an active religion. Personaly, it doesnt bother me, but I do find it ironic as so many things seem to be now days. Lets just say, the worlds irony is so thick, you couldnt cut it with a hot knife.


Enjoy!

reply to post by theRhenn


The harlot symbolizes world's religions. They're symbolized by the harlot because they lay in bed with governments, instead of keeping separate. Among other things.

So according to this understanding, there will be an attack on world's religions and they will be banned/removed completely (from chapter 18 of revelation). Both kings and merchants will stand by idly as she meets her end.

Not a bad thing, if you ask me.

reply to post by theRhenn

As someone who has written on them both (ie harlot and beast), I can see the possibilities in this.
But they would both have to be responsible for putting Christians to death before the identification could be complete.
Conditions are not quite right yet for that development.

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by theRhenn

 

As someone who has written on them both (ie harlot and beast), I can see the possibilities in this.
But they would both have to be responsible for putting Christians to death before the identification could be complete.
Conditions are not quite right yet for that development.

Well, both governments and churches have persecuted those perceived to be true christians - e.g. those who exposed the false teachings of the church, for example, or those who did not support governments in war.

edit: revelation speaks of 3 groups, one is identified as kings (governments), another is identified by merchants (business I guess). The third group is sitting on many waters, and elsehwere in revelation it identifies waters as people. it's reasonable to conclude that this third group is religion, the three elements that rule over people.

reply to post by gandalph

I think in order to match the situation described in Revelation, which is modelled on the situation existing in the time of the Roman empire, they would need to be executing Christians for being Christians, on that specific charge.
That's where the circumstances are not parallel.

Originally posted by gandalph
The third group is sitting on many waters, and elsehwere in revelation it identifies waters as people. it's reasonable to conclude that this third group is religion,

If you means the "harlot" of ch17, who is destroyed in ch18, I've been discussing her in three different threads, taking a slightly different angle each time. I concluded that she represented;
a) the "unfaithful" version of God's people
b) the multi-religious culture which surrounded the church
c) the metropolis of the Beast, Rome itself.
There seem to be good reasons for all three interpretations, and I think she somehow combines them.

Originally posted by DISRAELI
they would need to be executing Christians for being Christians, on that specific charge.

Well, I'm not sure that would be required. Christ was executed for treason, not for claiming to be the son of God.

Christians were persecuted heavily in the first century, especially at the hands of Nero. Not for being Christian, but for allegedly being responsible for the fires of Rome.

Many students of the Bible were imprisoned in USSR or even in the US and Canada during world war 2 because they did not support their governments.

But mainstream churches worked with governments hand in hand, hence their prostitute-like relationship with them.

Originally posted by DISRAELI
If you means the "harlot" of ch17, who is destroyed in ch18, I've been discussing her in three different threads, taking a slightly different angle each time. I concluded that she represented;
a) the "unfaithful" version of God's people

Correct, the mainstream Christendom would fit this description.

b) the multi-religious culture which surrounded the church

That would partially include accepting pagan teachings as part of their own (saturnalia, festival of the dead, etc...)

c) the metropolis of the Beast, Rome itself.

That's interesting. Rome eventually evolved into the Holy Roman empire, which sort of morphed into Anglo-American empire. I don't know that the harlot would necessarily represent a political spectrum, since if it represented God's failed people, and since Christians were commanded not to be part of the world...

reply to post by gandalph

I've been reading up on this question, because I'm doing a thread on "drunk with the blood of the saints".
If you look at the celebrated correspondance between Pliny the Younger and Trajan, the actual charge involved in the criminal investigation is very definitely "being a Christian"- NOMEN IPSUM, "the Name itself".
Although the actual test for "Christianity" is an unwillingness either to curse the name of Christ or to offer sacrifice to the Emperor- and it could be argued that "not sacrificing to the emperor" is the equivalent of treason.

What happens in ch13 is called "a war on the saints". I would still say that anything which is going to match that description ought to involve active and conscious hostility to Christians as such, and various troubles in which some Christians happen to get involved for other reasons doesn't really constitute a good match.

Originally posted by gandalph
a) the "unfaithful" version of God's people

Correct, the mainstream Christendom would fit this description.

It's very likely that the church of John's time thought the Jews matched that description.
Compare Paul's description in Galatians of the "two Jerusalems".
My own suggestion for future interpretation was that the difference would emerge once an "antichrist" figure made his claim to be the returned Christ. The "faithful" would reject his claim, but the "unfaithful" would compromise. I suggested that this division would probably run within the various existing denominations, rather than between them

b) the multi-religious culture which surrounded the church

This was my reason for thinking there was something to be said for the OP suggestion.
While Protestants sometimes get obsessed with demonising the Catholic church, and Jehovah's Witnesses sometimes get obsessed with demonising the "mainstream churches", I think these are distractions.
There's an essentially hostile religious culture developing outside any kind of Christianity, preparing an attempt to engulf all of us.

Originally posted by DISRAELI
It's very likely that the church of John's time thought the Jews matched that description.

First century christianity, or the church of john's time, were prepared that false teachers would enter among them and subvert a good portion of their congregations. It's possible they thought the description referred to in revelation was applied to the jews, but it's also possible that they thought it would apply to those christians who were not. It appears that apostasy started to creep in toward the end of the first century.

Compare Paul's description in Galatians of the "two Jerusalems".

Do you know which passage off the top of your head?

My own suggestion for future interpretation was that the difference would emerge once an "antichrist" figure made his claim to be the returned Christ. The "faithful" would reject his claim, but the "unfaithful" would compromise.

I still am not sure that the "antichrist" was ever meant to be just one figure. There is one passage that talks about many antichrists, and it defines them as those who were from the same group as the first century christians, but who were not (as if they left, or turned against, or misled). Also, according to Christ's response, he mentioned that many would pretend to be him, thus not just one person.

I don't know if that will be on a grander scale, or something more local (such as preachers of various small suicidal sects all over the world).

I suggested that this division would probably run within the various existing denominations, rather than between them

That's interesting. Makes sense.

This was my reason for thinking there was something to be said for the OP suggestion.
While Protestants sometimes get obsessed with demonising the Catholic church, and Jehovah's Witnesses sometimes get obsessed with demonising the "mainstream churches", I think these are distractions.
There's an essentially hostile religious culture developing outside any kind of Christianity, preparing an attempt to engulf all of us.

Yeah, there are strong sentiments brewing, but I also think they are toward most strong religions (as in, those religions that have strong laws and that try to enforce them), whether it's christianity, or islam. There is a growing rebellion against authority, especially toward moral authority, as more and more people are concluding that they themselves are the masters of their lives and not some group.

It will be interesting to see what the political and religious scene will look like in a few decades.

Originally posted by gandalph

Compare Paul's description in Galatians of the "two Jerusalems".

Do you know which passage off the top of your head?

Galatians ch4 vv 22-26
There's a very suggestive similarity between this contrast of two women, and the implied contrast between the "woman in heaven" of ch11 and the "harlot". In my thread on the "other woman", I was developing the second contrast, on the basis of various OT texts.

I still am not sure that the "antichrist" was ever meant to be just one figure.

Yes, agreed. Revelation doesn't use the phrase "The Antichrist", and so neither do I. But I deliberately phrased it as "an" antichrist figure. The common interpretation of ch13 is that one of the Beasts would be such an antichrist figure, presumably the last and greatest of them all, and I think several hints in the chapter and elsewhere in Revelation do encourage that supposition.- especially when they are taken in conjunction with the ruler who "proclaims himself to be God" in both Daniel and 2 Thessalonians.

It will be interesting to see what the political and religious scene will look like in a few decades.

It will indeed!

Actually Christ was executed for blasphemy- for stating he was the Son of God Almighty.

One can also regard the 10 Horns and 7 Heads in a historical sense as well, many believe the Book of Revelation is a book regarding the entire beginning and end of time (though not written in chronological order, darn it )
There were 10 Caesers and 7 Herods between the Crucifixion of Jesus and the firm establishment of Christianity with the end of the Roman Caeser Empire.

Originally posted by thegoodearth
Actually Christ was executed for blasphemy- for stating he was the Son of God Almighty.

Well, this was the reason why the Jewish authorities wanted to get rid of him.
But I suspect gandalph is probably right about the official charge from the Roman viewpoint.
It's very likely that he was handed over to the Romans on the grounds that he was a rebel -"If you release this man, you are not Caesar's friend"

reply to post by theRhenn


As it was in the past then would there be symbolism today? The Old Testement:

Numbers 21

8And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.

9And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

As things unfold, perhaps behind our perception because we are so in tune to ourselves and our needs that we dont connect so well to others. Perhaps it's better said that every single soul is important, as GOD layed such punishment on Kain for killing his brother, surely one other soul can mean just as much. Over the years there have been murders by the millions. If GOD lives outside our time, all those believers pile up over the thousands of years. He's bound to have enough. Maybe the plagues and the first events we mild to us as we live outside the bad zone. We live in houses, we dont starve in 3rd world countries. We all millions and millions of people who eat and breath in comphort while millions the same starve. The ones in the front lines that go out there get killed when found. They definatly do what they feel is GODs work. Many, many died horribly. Even in the last decades and even today, christians are being persecuted. They seem to live peaceful in other countries, but seemingly in fear of being christian. The Jews have the same problem at the moment. In the US it doesnt really matter what religion you are. You're going to have "cliques" either way. If it isnt religion, it's liable to be something else.

There is and has been long percecution. I dont know if I believe in the rapture that many believe in. I think those that are taken away will be lucky to be alive at that point. You have to admit. There is a growing and dangerous divide between muslims and christians, and muslims and jews. Its bigger than racism. Religionism.


It seems if minor warnings are earthquakes, the hailstones should be a show. I'd hate to see the grand finaly! I was told once that if you wanted to get a point across, you have to explain it in 4 diffrent ways so everyone understood. GOD spoke in dreams twice to get a point across. History seemingly would repeat itself, as so much of the new testement reapeats the old, oftentimes ironicly, and very much symbology. I know we're not supposed to fall into such things, but being told not to do these things, yet at the same time looking out for signs as Im told in the end... very confusing

Originally posted by gandalph
reply to post by theRhenn

 

The harlot symbolizes world's religions. They're symbolized by the harlot because they lay in bed with governments, instead of keeping separate. Among other things.

So according to this understanding, there will be an attack on world's religions and they will be banned/removed completely (from chapter 18 of revelation). Both kings and merchants will stand by idly as she meets her end.

Not a bad thing, if you ask me.

And all three elements, the political (wild beast), religious (harlot), and commercial (traveling merchants) want domination over the people, and to enslave them. The wild beast, or governments have acted just that way as they have fomented war in the name of nationalism and patriotism, the "divine right of kings" etc. etc. It will continue to act oppressively against mankind, to enslave them, and send them to their slaughter heartlessly. The commercial system of things is set up to entrap and enslave people as well. The world's religions are also set up to enslave people. They are all wickedly oppressive systems and each work in tandem, under the control of their ruler, Satan, to keep the people enslaved in darkness and mislead.

When the wild beast does turn on the harlot, each one representing certain aspects of Satan's oppressive world, it will not be because Satan chooses it to happen, he will stand by helplessly as God himself maneuvers the political elements to turn on, expose (make naked) the worthless condition of the world's religions, and then viciously attack her and destroy her. In a perfect act of justice, the rulers with which the harlot had fornicated will execute her. Also this "sudden destruction" will start with the clergy of Christendom.

Originally posted by DISRAELI

Originally posted by gandalph
The third group is sitting on many waters, and elsehwere in revelation it identifies waters as people. it's reasonable to conclude that this third group is religion,

If you means the "harlot" of ch17, who is destroyed in ch18, I've been discussing her in three different threads, taking a slightly different angle each time. I concluded that she represented;
a) the "unfaithful" version of God's people
b) the multi-religious culture which surrounded the church
c) the metropolis of the Beast, Rome itself.
There seem to be good reasons for all three interpretations, and I think she somehow combines them.

Very good points!

The UN is a haven for many people. These people only know their liberators as the UN and they trust in them to protect them. Instead of trusting in GOD. The UN more of less protects people of many religions because they represent the combination of beliefs of each country. That could be the new rome, the new church.

I remember how jealous GOD was against the people that did not believe. It might be a big issue. The last straw, so to speak

Was she the first that presented something like this before in the UN? I know there have been alot of possible symbolic names representing the moon as well.

reply to post by theRhenn


The beast is seven people,that have relations with the "whore" (am i allowed to say that?). The beast the whore rides and the other beast in revalation are the same entity. In my opinion the ten horns are the car horns of the seven men. Revelation happens at the end of times and cars are already around. Now,this whore must have some connection with the lord because they say she has a name plate that reads the whore. Now the lord has a nameplate that reads,the king of kings,lord of lords. So the fact they are the only two people in the bible with nameplates gets me to thinking they made that known for a reason,kind of like they are stressing how much superior the lord is to the whore and how easily she is defeated.

reply to post by whipsandchainsamerica


huh?