Refuting Mark Hitchcock’s

Babylon Identity Reasoning as to

 

Why He Thinks Babylon Must Be Iraq

 

 By 

R.A. Coombes

Author of "America, The Babylon" Volumes 1 & 2

 Editor's Note: This article is a refutation of the assertions made by Dr. Mark Hitchcock who is a Bible Prophecy book author, lecturer and an adjunct faculty member and professor at Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas, Texas. Dr. Hitchcock is also the pastor of Faith Bible Church in Edmond, Oklahoma. He has written a number of short books on Bible Prophecy including:

"The Late Great United States: What Bible Prophecy Reveals about America’s Last Days"

"Is America in Bible Prophecy?"

Dr. Hitchcock quoted several pages from "America, The Babylon" in his book, "Is America in Bible Prophecy" but he never once refuted any of the assertions he quoted from. Instead, he simply switched gears and stated that he believed Iraq to be the Babylon of Bible Prophecy and then went forward to explain his rational for such a conclusion.

While we have great respect for Dr. Hitchcock's knowledge and wisdom, we think it important to point out  a flaw in reasoning that Hitchcock and other noted prophecy commentators have held concerning the notion that the Babylon prophecies must be literally referring to ancient Babylon in Iraq. With this in mind, we present the following article which examines the primary contention given by Hitchcock and others for thinking Iraq of today must be the Babylon of future Biblical Prophecy fulfillment. It is not our intention to cast aspersion on Dr. Hitchcock or others, but rather to prompt all prophecy students to reconsider that interpretation in light of a refutation of such a premise as given by Dr. Hitchcock.

Dr. Hitchcock spoke at a Bible Prophecy Conference (date unknown) which was recorded onto video and  posted in seven parts at the YouTube online video website. Hitchcock spends about 1 minute or so dealing with the identity theory of Babylon as being the United States and explains why he rules out such a conclusion. The article below examines his remarks in this video and refutes Hitchcock's reasoning, categorically. The video section in question is on Part 2 at YouTube and begins at about the 2 minute and 10 second mark into the presentation on that page. His pertinent comments only run a little over one minute before moving on to other topics. You can watch this video at -   Then you can read our article below, which refutes Hitchcock's primary reason for thinking Iraq must be the Babylon of Revelation 17 and 18.

++++++++++++

Dr. Mark Hitchcock has published 2 books dealing with the subject of America in Bible Prophecy. Mark concludes in both books that America simply cannot be Babylon.

In a video lecture presentation on the subject, Mark addresses the issue of America being Babylon. The video was part of a broad speaking appearance where he addresses the question as to whether or not America is mentioned in Bible Prophecy.

 

Mark begins with one idea that Isaiah 18 is describing Babylon. He then moves on to briefly discuss the idea that some believe America is Babylon. Here is a transcript of his statement that took approximately 90 seconds to state and then moved on to another issue.  Watch at the 2 minute, 10 second mark in this video.

 

“Now another candidate is the prostitute there that is pictured, this great city, Babylon the Great in Revelation 17 and 18. In fact, it says at the end of Revelation 17 that Babylon is the great city which reigns over the kings of the earth. So whatever Babylon is, it’s a city.

 

Now a lot of people after 9-11 applied this to New York City and by extension to the entire country of the United States.

 

Now here to me is a very important issue just in Bible interpretation:

 

That the word Babylon, Babylonia, the different forms that word, occurs about 300 times in the Bible and every time up to the book of Revelation with one exception, I Peter 5:13, the word Babylon always means Babylon.

 

Now why, at the end of the Bible would God suddenly change the meaning when the book of Revelation is the book that is the unveiling? Why all of a sudden would the name Babylon be changed and it mean the United States or some other nation?

 

Now, I don’t want to get into this – I talk about it quite a bit in the book, (The Late Great United States) but I believe that Babylon is the literal Babylon.

 

Now I know Ed, earlier said that he believed Babylon was Rome and that’s another very valid view, but I take it that its going to be a literal Babylon that is going to be rebuilt in Iraq, right over there in the middle of two-thirds of the world’s oil.

 

 

So there you have the basic reason why Mark Hitchcock dismisses the idea that America could be the Babylon of Biblical Prophecy and why he thinks Iraq must be the Babylon of Revelation 17 and 18.

 

As someone who has researched and studied the subject extensively since 1987, I find such remarks astounding. Mark is a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary and has a doctorate from that seminary. He is now a professor at that same seminary.

What I find so amazing is that Mark essentially sets up the issue with a straw man argument and then it would seem, he quickly blows it away. His straw man argument takes the 9-11 event and tries to link it to those, like myself who propose the theory that the Babylon prophecies deal with the United States of America. Yet, no one that I know of, including myself has ever claimed any linkage between 9-11 and the Babylon Prophecies. In fact, my writings have always rejected such notions, but then my writings preceded the 9-11 event making Mark’s reference thoroughly invalid and incapable of logically dismissing the argument on the point of 9-11.

 

When Mark made this statement, he knew about my work and in an earlier book, “Is America in Bible Prophecy?” Mark quoted excerpts from my book (Volume 1) for a few pages. There was nothing in my work to ever even suggest a linkage to 9-11 in part because I wrote it four long years before 9-11 even occurred. “America, The Babylon” and what is now referred to as Volume 1 was first published in the spring of 1998, but the original draft was written in the late summer and early fall of 1997.

 

The next thing that Mark does that is a total surprise is that he skips over the key verse he cites, Revelation 17:18 and assumes the English translation “great city” simply means a city, without bothering to note the original Greek wording, which means much more than simply a city. The term in question is “hey megala, hey polis.”

While “polis” does indeed translate as “city” the Greek term, “megala” means more than our simple English word “great.” In it’s most literal form, it means “super in size, scope and power.’ The exact phrase conveys normally more than merely a city but rather the nation which that city represents, in other words, a nation. Yet, Mark didn’t bother to mention this concept. Perhaps Mark was unaware of this fact? If not, he should have taken more time to research it, or better yet, perhaps he should have read my book with greater care and study.

 

The greatest shock for myself, in viewing Mark’s statement, was Mark’s words about Bible interpretation. The gist of his remarks was simply the idea that the term Babylon in Revelation 17 and 18 must mean Babylon. Let’s review his remark again:

 

 

“That the word Babylon, Babylonia, the different forms that word, occurs about 300 times in the Bible and every time up to the book of Revelation with one exception, I Peter 5:13, the word Babylon always means Babylon.”

 

“Now why, at the end of the Bible would God suddenly change the meaning when the book of Revelation is the book that is the unveiling? Why all of a sudden would the name Babylon be changed and it mean the United States or some other nation?”

 

 

I would have thought that being a Seminarian and a Dallas Seminary professor, Mark would have been careful enough in his textual research and analysis to have paid close attention to the actual text of Revelation 17, particularly the use of the term “mystery” when the woman is named in verse 5 and again in verse 7

 

Verse 5

 

And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

 

Verse 7a

 

And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman,

 

 

The actual text tells us that the name of the woman is a “mystery.” Now what is meant by that term? The proper answer is to evaluate the original meaning of that word in its original Greek form, not necessarily the English word “mystery.”

 

The original Greek term used in both of the above cited verses is the term anglicized as “musterion.” The actual Greek word looks like this:

 

μυστηριον

 

What was the Greek meaning of this word back in the first century A.D.? To answer that, let’s turn to some reference sources such as the most well respected and used Koine-Greek-to-English Lexicons. We’ll start first with the basic or generic lexicon found in the back of Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible and we’ll cite the Strong’s Code Number for your easy reference.

 

Strong’s Lexicon - #3466

 

“From a derivative of – μυω = ‘to shut the mouth;’ … a secret or “mystery” (through the idea of silence imposed initiation into religious rites); a mystery.

 

Now remember, Strong’s definitions are just ‘generic’ and full-scale lexicons usually provide greater depth of meaning to many of the Greek words found in the New Testament. We’ll now examine in more detail, the various primary lexicons used by conservative Bible scholars and commentators.

 

The Analytical Greek Lexicon by Dr. Harold K. Moulton, 1977 edition, published by Regency Reference Library, A Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Page 273, Column 2a.  under the root = μυεω = ‘to shut the mouth’ – a matter to the knowledge of which initiation is necessary; a secret which would remain such but for revelation. i.e. “ a concealed power or principle. A hidden meaning of a symbol.”

 

 

Now, did you catch that last part???

 

“A hidden meaning of a symbol.”

 

God refers to the woman’s name as having a hidden meaning or the woman’s name as a hidden, symbolic meaning.

Now wait a minute.

Mark Hitchcock’s statement – assumes – that God intended the name Babylon to be Babylon because after all Revelation is about the ‘unveiling’ of the future.

Mark didn’t bother to recognize that the use of the term “ μυστηριον “ was God’s way of red-flagging the entire presentation and identity of the Babylon issue.

 

Babylon is to be understood as a “μυστηριον “ – a name with a hidden, symbolic meaning. It is God’s way of saying – “this Babylon isn’t your father’s Oldsmobile” to coin a modern-day advertising phrase for that now defunct car manufacturer, Oldsmobile.

 

In other words, God, in verse 5 is signaling to us all, and Mark Hitchcock included, that this entire passage about Babylon is indeed a  “μυστηριον “ – a name with a hidden, symbolic meaning.

 

Now if you doubt our Lexical definition from Dr. Moulton, let’s look at other Lexicons:

 

Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich and Danker (aka BAGD) Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Second Edition Revised 1977 from the Bauer 1958 fifth edition. Published by the University of Chicago Press.

 

Page 530 Column 1-A.

 

A secret, a Secret Rite, a Secret Teaching, a mystery. A religious technical term applied in secular Greek (predominately plural) mostly to the mysteries with their secret teachings, religious and political in nature, concealed within many strange customs and ceremonies. [BAGD then lists numerous citations as proof for this definition]

 

BAGD then continues –

“The Dionysiac Mysteries of the Hellenists and Roman Ages. The LXX (Greek translation of the Old Testament) and other versions of the Old Testament, use the word (of the heavenly secret) [more Jewish citations listed including Philo and Josephus.]

 

Then BAGD continues further:

“It is a loan word in rabbinical literature, and uses it to mean the secret thoughts, plans, and dispensations of God which are hidden from the human reasoning as well as from all other comprehension below the divine level and hence must be revealed to those for whom they are intended.”

 

Keep in mind that the BAGD Lexicon was the primary lexicon above all others in my days of study at the Moody Bible Institute of Chicago and Calvary Bible College and Seminary of Kansas City. Yes, we used other lexicons, but BAGD usually carried the greater weight of acceptance.

 

Another Lexicon is

Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, published 1977 by Baker Book House, Broadman Press, Nashville, Tenn.

 

See page 420 #3644 in Column 1-A

 

A hidden thing, a secret, a mystery. Generally mysteries, religious secrets confided to the initiated and not to be communicated by them to ordinary mortals.

 

1. A hidden or secret thing, not obvious to the understanding.

 

2. a hidden purpose or counsel, secret will

 

3. the mystic or hidden sense of a name such as Revelation 17:5

 

Are you seeing a definite, repetitive pattern to the definition by various lexicons? Are you yet convinced? Want more? We could cite more, such as Mounce’s Lexicon, Liddell & Scott as well as Moulton and Milligan’s Vocabulary of the Greek Testament.

 

One other point for consideration is that the word  “μυστηριον “ in the Greek text is in neuter gender, while the rest of the passage is in feminine gender. This means that the word  “μυστηριον “ is NOT a part of title of the woman. Instead it describes the woman and her title as being a  “μυστηριον “ or musterion. She is NOT: “Mystery Babylon the Great.” Mystery is not part of the title, yet all too often commentators will refer to the entire Revelation passage as being “Mystery Babylon” and this is incorrect, and its error is underscored by the Greek grammar. The woman’s name is a mystery and the name is:
“Babylon, The Great, The MOTHER OF THE HARLOTS and the ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

 

So let’s wrap up our look at Revelation 17: 5 and relationship to it being a mystery.

 

The term “μυστηριον “ serves a dual purpose in verse 5. It clearly indicates that the woman’s name and identity are a “mystery” not to be readily understood or interpreted in a the normal sense. Hence the word “Musterion” is a flag word telling us to not assume it is a physical reference to ancient Babylon. Let me repeat that for emphasis. “Musterion” is a flag word, warning us to NOT ASSUME that the term Babylon is a physical reference to ancient Babylon.

 

Why would an interpreter, like Mark Hitchcock and other commentators conclude the term Babylon must be ancient Babylon?

 

1. They are ignorant of the original Greek meaning of the term “musterion”
2. They ignore the meaning of “musterion”
3. They are too lazy to recognize to perform due diligence to fully research the original meaning of the Greek term and how it was used in the First Century A.D.
4. They are simply following in the footsteps of other commentators and assuming previous commentators were correct in their interpretation of “musterion.” In some cases, previous commentators interpretations date back to as early as the 19^th Century and assume the text is referring to ancient Babylon, although such an interpretation was not the prevalent view. The prevailing view since the Reformation was that Babylon must be Rome and the Roman Catholic Church.

 

In reality, the term “μυστηριον,“

serves as a dual interpretative role.

 

First of all, it describes the woman as “The Mother of the Harlots.” This gives us a name, yet not merely a name, but also an identifying title, which also was the title assigned to the chief Babylonian goddess known as Innana or Ishtar, depending on the early or late Babylonian dialect. Ishtar held many titles amongst her worshippers, including the title “Mother of the Harlots” and “The Great Whore.” Musterion is a part of the Ishtar religion. Ishtarism was a “mystery” religion, by its own definition.

 

Secondly, the use of “μυστηριον,“ becomes a flag word telling us that we’re dealing with a term that is not intended to be readily understood in a literal sense for ancient Babylon as the location of a future super-power nation.

 

So Mark Hitchcock’s assertion that we can take this Babylon of Revelation 17 and 18 as literally ancient Babylon, is invalid. Yes, normal interpretive rules concerning Babylon, outside of Prophecy can be a reference to a literal ancient Babylon, but here in Revelation 17 we see a direct, red flag warning us to not take this word literally, because it is a “μυστηριον" - a "mystery." If ancient Babylon is what God had in mind, why would He insert the term "mystery" to describe it?

 

Whatever this Babylon identity is, it is a “mystery” that is not to be easily understood. You can’t apply normal rules of interpretation because the term “mystery” will simply not allow for normal understanding. This is something that cannot be ignored, yet Mark Hitchcock ignores this critical red-flag word and continues to assume a normal, literal interpretation. Even so, Hitchcock is not alone in such interpretation. He’s merely following the idea presented in modern times by Dr. Charles Dwyer.

The only way you can fully understand Revelation 17 and 18 is to understand the original Greek text, the pagan religions of the First Century and their originations. Then one also needs to understand that the title “Mother of the Harlots” is a reference to the ancient Babylonian goddess known as Ishtar, and to her religion and its terminology, which was considered even by her worshippers to be a “mystery” or “musterion” religion full of secret doctrines including her doctrine of purification and sinlessness.

 

The term “Mother of the Harlots” refers to the temple priestesses of Ishtar.

What do the terms “harlot” and “whore” mean?

 

The term “harlot” or “whore” in Babylon was identified with a woman who handled priestly duties as an interim or a go-between the worshiper and the goddess. Those terms never referred to a woman engaged in the business of selling sex for money. Such a notion was a foreign concept in ancient Babylon. In fact, a woman trying to simply sell her body for sex would have found no customers as the Ishtar Temple provided such services in a ‘holy’ context eliminating the need for secular prostitution.

 

One of Ishtar’s most bizarre “mystery” doctrines involved salvation and purification. A follower of Ishtar could become purified from sin and achieve union with the goddess by engaging in sexual relations with a temple priestess, whose title was “whore” or “harlot.”

 

The sexual union involved intercourse and the body of the priestess (harlot/whore) was understood to become “possessed” by the spirit of the goddess and while the body was possessed by the goddess, the worshipper would then also be united with the goddess so that the three become as ‘one.’ This is part of the “mystery” doctrine of salvation in the Ishtar religion. It was not however the only “mystery” doctrine, but rather one of many occult-oriented mysteries of the Ishtar Temple.

As a result of this sexual union, the worshipper’s sins were said to be washed away in the sexual secretions and thus purified from sin. As a way of giving thanks to the goddess, the worshipper would give a thanksgiving offering to the goddess by placing one or more gold or silver coins into the temple collection box before exiting the temple.

 

This is how the concept of money for sex first came into existence. It is also how the idea of money connected to sex came to be called “prostitution” as well as the idea that a harlot was a woman who engaged in sex for money. The idea of prostitution as we know it today was unheard of in Babylon. There was no such thing as sex for money for the sake of sex in ancient Babylon. There was no need for that because the temple religion functioned in that capacity serving as a “holy” and religious function. Prostitution, in the ancient world was a means of attaining spiritual insight, purity and blessings from the Goddess. Is it any wonder why God forbade Israel from allowing prostitution, when prostitution was a competing and false avenue for ‘salvation?’

 

The Ishtar religion also invented the concept of money. The Ishtar temple created the first bank and banking system. The Ishtar Temple created the concept of money via coins – either gold or silver coins and created the idea of lending money with interest, including the concept of fractional reserve banking.

 

The Ishtar temple also established the concept of international trade and international merchants using the coinage of the Ishtar temple as a means for transacting business. Images of Ishtar and her ‘harlot’ priestesses appeared on coins. Merchants would periodically come to Babylon as part of their trading program to exchange and swap coinage and goods. They too, would engage in the mystery of purification as a way to obtain blessing for their business.  In Revelation 17 and 18, note the references to the woman and the merchants of the earth.

 

Another aspect of the Ishtar mystery doctrines involved the annual “Sacred Marriage” ritual. This ritual required the King to come to the Ishtar temple on New Year’s eve,  to engage in “holy” sex with the temple’s Chief High Priestess as a way of pleasing the goddess so that she would bestow fertility for that city or nation’s croplands and livestock for the coming year.

 

During this New Year’s eve “Sacred Marriage” rite, the citizens would engage in a a drunken orgy, encouraging the king to perform to Ishtar’s satisfaction.

 

Failure to please the goddess would result in the King being put to death as well as a lack of fertility in the crops and livestock for the New Year ahead. In Revelation 17 and 18, you see the reference to the relationship between the Kings of the Earth and the woman.

 

You should note the scriptural references to the inhabitants of the earth being made drunk with the wine of her fornication. This is a direct reference to the Ishtar religion’s “Sacred Marriage” rite and the people engaging in a drunken orgy outside the temple on New Year’s eve.

 

All of this was part of the “μυστηριον “ or mystery of the “Mother of the Harlots” known as the goddess Ishtar.

Not only was the Ishtar religion a “μυστηριον “ but the entire scripture of Revelation 17 and 18 itself is a “μυστηριον “ and we know this because of the usage of the term “μυστηριον “ as found in verse 7 of chapter 17.

 

Revelation 17: 7

 

“And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.”

 

If there was any doubt that Revelation 17 and 18 is a passage with a hidden meaning that indicates Babylon may not be the ancient Babylon, verse 7 should resolve that doubt.

 

The angel states: “I will tell thee the MYSTERY of the woman…”

Here again the word for mystery is “μυστηριον.”  So we have the simple fact that the woman is a mystery. At the end of chapter 17, we see that the woman is equated as being the “hey megala, hey polis” as in “great city.”

 

“And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.”

 

So the woman, identified earlier in verse 5 as “Babylon, the megala” and the “Mother of the Harlots” is equated as being the “megala polis” or super-in size, scope and power city-state-nation.

 

In other words, the woman IS the hey megala, hey polis and the hey megala, hey polis IS the woman.

 

The truly operative word in verse 18 is the Greek word “estin” which is a transitive verb and functions like the mathematical “equals” sign ( “ = “ ). 

The woman = the Mega-City/Nation.

 

So what does this mean? There are two points to consider.

 

First of all, the entire Revelation passage of chapters 17 and 18 are additional information to what was previously prophesied by Isaiah and Jeremiah. Isaiah 13, 14 and 47 deal with a future Babylon in the end-times. Jeremiah, chapters 50 and 51 also deal with a future Babylon of the end times. What we need to realize is that Revelation 17:18 is not a reference to a mere city but rather to an entire nation under judgment. Jeremiah refers to God’s judgment falling onto not just Babylon, but to ALL of Babylon’s cities and rural areas – meaning the nation itself, not merely the city of Babylon.

 

So, the full meaning of Revelation 17:18 and the term “hey polis, hey megal” is indeed a reference to a city-state-nation and not merely a city. The parallel prophecies of Jeremiah in chapters 50 and 51 confirm this by Jeremiah’s description, including the use of the plural term, “cities.”

 

Secondly, Revelation 17:18 means the woman is equated to the city/nation and vice versa. How so? To fully understand this, we have to further understand who Ishtar really was/is because we’ve already established from recognizing the name/title of Revelation 17:5 as being a reference to Babylon’s chief goddess, Ishtar.

 

Historical Background on Ishtar

Babylon's Chief Goddess

 

Ishtar was a Babylonian deity, whom the Babylonians described as one of the super-human entities which came down from the heavens in flying vehicles and established relationships with humanity, including sexual relations. The Babylonian descriptions found in their historical records by archaeologists, matches the Biblical story found in Genesis chapter 6 prior to the flood of Noah. Genesis 6 speaks of the “benai hahelohim” or “sons of God” as coming down and engaging in sexual relations with human females.

 

The term “benai haehelohim” is found only one other place in scripture and that is in Job chapter 2 where the ‘sons of God’ are stated as having been called into very presence of God “and Satan also came with them.” This happens twice in the Job narrative and the Hebrew terms indicate that these are regular, scheduled events of the benai hahelohim. This rules out of the idea that the benai hahelohim are human beings in Genesis 6, because no human can come before the throne of God and live and return to Earth. The benai hahelohim must be of the angelic realm. In the New Testament, Jude alludes to Genesis 6 as being fallen angels who engaged in sexual relations with human females.

 

So, with that in mind, we can then understand that Ishtar is in fact, a fallen angel. In Isaiah 14 we have Lucifer (Satan) being identified as the King of Babylon. It should be noted that the Queen of Babylon is none other than Ishtar. There apparently is some sort of mystical connection then between Satan and Ishtar.

 

By understanding that Ishtar is a fallen angel, certain other “mysterious” verses in Revelation 17 and 18 come into a sharp focus and can be easily understood.

 

Revelation 17:6

 

“And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.”

 

Also Revelation 18:24

 

“And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.”

 

 

Now, in 18:24 we find a peculiar verb tense for the word “slain.” It is a perfect participle which is an all-inclusive term of the past up to the present and future time frames.

It essentially means that whoever the woman is, she is guilty of the blood of all those innocents who have ever been killed. This means that the guilt of Abel’s blood as well as all the others (prophets and saints/believers) slain by her up to her judgment, and it ALL  falls upon her. She, Ishtar-the fallen angel, bears the blood guilt of all the innocent who were slain from the very beginning of human history. Based on the Greek grammar rules involving verse 24, this is the only explanation that makes sense. It is the only one that incorporates such a broad time frame.

 

Now when we understand the force of that perfect participle in 18:24 being effective throughout human history, then we can understand Revelation 17:6 to have the same application. It is this fallen angel who bears the guilt and blame for the prophets and saints and not an end-time city/nation. For those who think Babylon is the ancient Babylon of present-day Iraq, the same guilt issues applies as it does no matter which human identity is applied to the term Babylon.

 

So what do we have in the two chapters of Revelation?

 

We have a fallen angel being described in Revelation 17 and 18. This fallen angel has created a false “mystery” religion and our ability to understand the identity of the woman is in itself a “mystery” – meaning that the identity of the woman is not an open understanding to all. It’s a mystery. This means that the usual terms of interpretation no longer apply. So that God is not necessarily telling us that a future Babylon is ancient Babylon. It could well be that this Babylon is a new form of ancient Babylon that is located elsewhere.

 

 

 

CONCLUSION:

 

Our moral to this story is – NEVER ASSUME – anything for interpretation of all Bible Prophecy. When the text of scripture signals a non-literal interpretation, we must pay attention to that signal and not ignore it. In our case example, the term “μυστηριον “ is our signal indicating a non-literal interpretation for the identity of the term “Babylon.”

 

 

 

Follow Up Note For the Literalists

 

My 2-volume work: “America, The Babylon” is far more literal in interpretation than is the idea that ancient Babylon is the literal meaning of Revelation 17 and 18. Furthermore, my work provides a far better explanation for certain thorny issues dealing with the blood guilt of All who have ever been slain upon the earth, as the grammar of Revelation 18:24 states when using the perfect participle for “slain.”

 

What’s more, my books take a far more literal interpretation than any one else has ever dared. No one else, has made the connection of harlotry with literal sexual activity nor with the Ishtar religion. Instead, some try to connect this with the Roman Catholic Church and the mythical “Semiramis” goddess presented by the late Alexander Hislop.

 

There never was an historical “Semiramis” and what’s worse is that Hislop attempted to place “Semiramis” as the wife of Nimrod to which is a total falsehood. It is but one of a long line of falsehoods purported by Hislop in his flawed attempt to link the Roman Catholic Church to the woman of Revelation 17/18.

 

Another critical point for consideration that I bring forward in Volume 2 of America the Babylon is an entire chapter devoted to showing 58 reasons why the Prophetic, future Babylon cannot be ancient Babylon of modern-day Iraq. Since the publication of Volume 2, I have added 2 additional reasons and have included a separate article in my America The Babylon CD Rom.

 

The CD-Rom contains both volumes of “America, The Babylon” in PDF format along with an 80 minute MS Power Point audio-visual presentation. It also includes numerous smaller E-books and about 30 old, archived magazine prophecy study articles from prior editions of The Alpha-Omega Report website, prior to 2009.

 

There are hours upon hours of reading and research materials on this CD-Rom.

 

Also, within the 2 volumes are hundreds of internet web links taking you directly to source materials such as the U.S. Library of Congress and other government and educational websites. We even include links to websites that are promoting the worship of the goddess Ishtar today in American and around the world.

 

We also challenge the reader to not simply take my word or assertions for granted. Instead I urge the reader to follow all of the verification tools provided in the two books, including word definition of the Greek and Hebrew definitions using Strong’s Concordance Numbers, so even readers with no knowledge of the original Greek and Hebrew can still find some elements of verification of my word definitions of the original texts.

 

For anyone interested in obtaining the CD Rom – “America, The Babylon” it is no longer available for sale, but I do send out copies to anyone who makes a donation of $30 or larger to The Alpha-Omega Report website. For more details on donating to the website and obtaining a copy, visit this link for details on donating either online via Paypal or by sending a personal check through the U.S. Postal Service.

 

https://aoreport.com/donate.htm

-