The Whore Of Babylon On The Phone

I get unsolicited phone calls and emails all the time, but yesterday’s was a first. While I was out of the office, someone I don’t know called my work number and left a voicemail saying that she urgently wants to talk with me about…the whore of Babylon.

Part of me feels that perhaps this is a Republican voter who just noticed for the first time that there is a striking resemblance between this depiction of the Roman Empire found in the Bible’s Book of Revelation and the United States in the present day. If so, she might need encouragement to continue thinking along those lines.

I’ve nonetheless decided not to return the call. But let me share some things that on that topic, including some blog posts that I’ve written previously that relate to this topic. First, Rachel Held Evans wrote: “America’s no ancient Babylon or Rome, I know that. But America’s no kingdom of God either.”

Revelation 17 played a decisive role in changing my entire approach to the Book of Revelation:

Is Revelation 17:9-10 the Decisive Evidence against the End-Times view of Revelation?

I also wrote about that in a post whose title makes it seem dated, as all “end times” approaches to the Book of Revelation quickly do. Unfortunately, just like the inerrantist approach that served to justify slavery, then subservience of women, then denial of equal rights based on religion and sexuality, the fruits of the approach are shown to be bad and yet those who interpret the Bible in this way seem to think (despite Jesus’ famous saying) that the tree can nonetheless be good.

How I Know Barack Obama Is NOT The Antichrist

See too:

Reading Revelation from the Margins and from a Position of Power

The Bible, Barack Obama, and American Business

Merely a Remake

Also of possible related interest:

Ken Schenck is blogging his way through the Book of Revelation. He hasn’t made it up to the Whore of Babylon (or better, “Babylon the Prostitute”) yet.

There’s a call for papers on “Allegory and Futurity: Prophesy, Eschatology, and the Possibilities of Political Subversion”