The Harlot of Revelation who rides the Beast

[8thdaypriest]

I am going to add one more point to my previous post. The woman of Revelation 12 clearly begins as the Old Testament Church, the Jewish Church. Nowhere in the Old Testament is she described as being the daughter of a priest. But in Revelation 17, the woman there MUST be the daughter of a priest because being burned is the law only for the daughter of a priest. No other woman was sentenced that way by law that I know of anywhere else in the Bible. Thus, the woman in Revelation 12 is not the daughter of a priest while the woman of Revelation 17 is the daughter of a priest. She is the daughter of the original church that is married to Jesus, who is God, and he (Jesus) is the symbolic husband of the church. Thus, the two women cannot be the same woman no matter how much a person may wish them to be the same woman. It is impossible for her to be both the daughter of a priest and not be the daughter of a priest, so they cannot be the same woman.

You got me thinking with this one wendys.

I believe the Sinai Covenant was a marriage covenant with the LORD (pre-incarnate Son of God). The LORD said, "I am married to you."

He divorced the 10 Tribes (Israel), the wicked sister of Judah. Does SHE turn into the Harlot of Revelation??

But Christ was not yet made a priest when He divorced Israel.

When the "husband" died on the cross, a "new" marriage covenant was needed because Romans 7 says a woman is under the law of her husband, only so long as the husband lives.

So He was betrothed to the New Testament Congregation.

AND He is a priest. The New Testament Congregation is His betrothed "wife" - NOT His "daughter".

So is the Harlot woman the "daughter" of Christ our High Priest? Or is she the "daughter" of the Aaronic priesthood? Or is she the daughter of a pagan priesthood?

I'm just not following the symbolism.

[wendys]

8thdaypriest,

The basic principle here is that when you are looking for a definition of something in Revelation, first look nearby for the definition. You should do that in Daniel, so likewise do that in Revelation. For example, in Daniel 2, Daniel defines the metals for us as both kings ("King Nebuchadnezzar, you are the head of gold!") and kingdoms ("...after you shall come another kingdom inferior to you...." So, likewise, in Revelation, look nearby for the definition. It might not be in the same chapter, but it will likely be nearby.

Now, we do have a definition close by in Revelation. In Revelation 12, we have the woman which is obviously not a harlot, so she is commonly called the pure woman. This pure woman, after the birth and resurrection of Jesus, is the New Testament Church. It says that she is persecuted by the dragon beginning right after the resurrection of Jesus and later this persecution continues so that she is sent into the wilderness for 1260 days. We don't know exactly what happens to her, but the dragon goes off to plan a new war against the remnant of her children.

Now, in Revelation 17, a woman appears on the beast. Many are tempted to think that she is the woman of Revelation 12, but that is not possible because the woman of Revelation 12 is not the daughter of a priest of any kind. However, the information of Revelation 17 shows us that this woman MUST be the daughter of a priest because she is to be burned for her harlotry.

What I do know is that the woman of Revelation 12 is married to Christ, and he is a priest after the resurrection, as you pointed out.

Now, Revelation 17 has a woman who has to be the daughter of a priest (otherwise she would not be burned for her harlotry). So, we must look for a woman nearby in Revelation who is the wife of a priest and who has children. The nearest such woman is the woman of Revelation 12, for she is the wife of a priest, she has children, and any daughter of hers that becomes a harlot must be burned for such an act because she is also the daughter of a priest.

Thus, the woman of Revelation 17 is the daughter of the woman of Revelation 12, whose husband, a priest, is also the father, and we know he is Jesus. In other words, the father of the woman of Revelation 17 is Jesus. The father of the woman of Revelation 17 is not a pagan priest and she is not the daughter of the Aaronic priesthood. Her father is Jesus and the mother is the woman of Revelation 12, both of which have this daughter AFTER Jesus returns to heaven and is our high priest in heaven.

Am I making myself a little more clear with this? I hope so!

[JoeMo]

Rachel,

It amazes me that you and I have arrived at many of the same conclusions independently. Because of your exquisite scholastic and analytical skills, I consider your posts confirmation of what I have come to believe.

That being said, I like to keep an open mind towards things; and I reserve the right to say I am wrong; or to change my mind (or add new things to my list of reasonable scenarios), presented sufficient evidence.

[8thdaypriest]

Rachel,

I like to keep an open mind towards things; and I reserve the right to say I am wrong; or to change my mind (or add new things to my list of reasonable scenarios), presented sufficient evidence.

Ditto

[8thdaypriest]

I keep thinking about the original 12 tribes = Israel.

Israel splits into two sisters = Israel and Judah (Hosea).

Both are messed up!

Both are said to have committed "adultery" with idolatry.

Only a remnant of the original tribes are "pure in heart".

Could it be that New Testament Israel (You do realize that believers are grafted IN to Israel and unbelievers are "cut off" FROM Israel).

Anyway - Is this a type?

Could it be that New Testament Israel (traditionally called "the church" or congregation) also SPLITS.

Again making 2 "sisters".

One branch is polluted with idolatry (wine mixed with alcohol).

The other branch stays relatively "pure" in doctrine, especially regarding idolatry and "the commandments of God".

Another thought:

Jerusalem is called "daughter of Zion".

How exactly do we define "Zion".

[wendys]

8thdaypriest,

I agree with you that in the Old Testament, Israel and Judah are pictured as sisters. And I also would be inclined to follow the same line of thinking in Revelation EXCEPT that the symbolism is changed there to mother-daughter relationship rather than sisters. I am not sure why God changed it, but he did. For this reason, I cannot follow the same pattern as is used in the Old Testament.

It may be that one reason God changed it is because he saw that in our day the Catholic Church would be saying that it is the "mother church," which indeed it is the mother church to many of the Protestant Churches in the world today. Of course, it refuses to admit that it is itself also a daughter. I don't know for sure that this is the reason God changed the symbolism, but it seems to be a likely reason for it.

Whatever the case, I have to work with what God gives us.

[8thdaypriest]

In Revelation 17:16, the "ten horns" (kings) burn the Harlot and make her "desolate".

That is exactly how the prophecy of Daniel 9 ends.

"Even until the consummation which is determined, is poured out upon the desolate."

I've been reading the 70 weeks prophecy over and over and over.

I copied the text and colored, and enlarged, etc. etc. etc.

I'm just wondering if it is a dual prophecy.

It's a prophecy of the TRUE Messiah, but it is also a prophecy of the FALSE one.

The TRUE Messiah is cut off after 62 weeks.

But there seems to be ANOTHER anointed prince who shows up at 69 weeks.

HE makes a covenant (treaty) with "many" for 1 week.

But in the middle of THAT 70th week,

he brings an end to sacrifice and offering, (suggesting to me that the Temple WILL be restored)

and sets up the abomination of desolation.

Sure is beginning to look like the 70th week is separate from the 69

and takes place at "the end of the war".

Which fits with the "two witnesses".

They prophesy for 1260 days (and no one can hurt them)

then the Beast ascends and makes war on them for the second half of the "week".

I'm getting sleepy. It's 11:38 here.

Blessings

Rachel Cory

Prophecy Viewpoint