Reader!—The subject we wish to investigate, is, COMING OUT OF BABYLON. You should not be prejudiced against the investigation; for it is a doctrine of the Bible. God has proclaimed it; and commanded us to obey his mandate—pronouncing the most dreadful woe upon all who shall knowingly disobey. Let us therefore fear not the result of searching for the truth on this as well as on all other subjects, nor dread the consequences of embracing and proclaiming it to others, when sure we have found it. With these preliminaries we will inquire,
1st. What is the Babylon out of which God calls his people? John answers the question. In Rev. xvii, 3—5, he says, "So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness; and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet colored beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was arrayed in scarlet-color, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication. And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH."
Here we are plainly told what is Babylon; yet a question arises whether the 'woman' which is called Babylon and the 'beast' which carrieth her are to be identified as one and the same power; if so then it is contended that Papal Rome is the Babylon which this figure represents. But if they represent different powers, then Babylon, must be constituted of something more than the Church of Rome. That the woman represents one thing and the beast another, is clearly evident from the fact,
'1st. That their physical constitution is different. One is a beast, having seven heads and ten horns; while the other is 'a woman having a golden cup in her hand.'
2d. Their seats are different. The beast has the seat of the Dragon, Rev. xiii, 2, which was at Rome but the woman has her seat on 'many waters,' which are peoples and multitudes and nations, and tongues. Compare Rev. xvii, 1, 15.
3d. Their office is different. The beast carries, while the woman is carried. Rev. xvii, 7.
4th. They are intoxicated by different means.—The Kings and inhabitants of the earth, represented by the ten horned beast, 'have been made drunk with the wine of her (the woman's) fornication'; but the woman was 'drunken with the blood of the saints, and martyrs of Jesus.' Rev. xvii, 2—6.
5th. The woman committed fornication with the Kings of the earth (the ten horns of the beast.) Did she commit fornication with herself? She did, if the woman and beast were but one power.
6th. The angel describes them as two distinct powers. He says, verse 7, 'I will tell the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her.' Then in several verses which follow, a minute and distinct description of the beast is given; and the woman is not identified with the beast any farther than being carried by it. In verse 18 the woman is as distinctly or separately described. She is said to be 'that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth.' It is admitted that the 'kings of the earth' are represented by the horns of the beast. How then can the woman be the beast, when it is said she reigns over it? They are doubtless two distinct powers, and in order rightly to understand the subject under discussion, it will be necessary to learn what each represents.
The beast in Chapter xvii and xviii, and the Dragon in the xiii, represent Rome under all of its forms, from its rise down to the final destruction of all earthly governments. The dragon, and the beast in both cases, bear nearly the same description. Each has 'seven heads and ten horns.' Consequently they must be symbolized of the same power. Rome is that power. It bore the character of the Dragon while Pagan idolatry was the religion of the nation, kingdom or empire. This continued until A. D. 508, when Paganism fell, and Christianity corrupted, soon became the religion of the state. At this time the seven headed and ten horned beast came up, Rev. xiii, 1. And A. D. 538 'the Dragon gave the beast his power, seat, and great authority.' Verse 2.—See the decree of Justinian, published in many of our standard works. This state of the beast was to 'continue forty and two months,' (Rev. xiii, 5,) or 1260 years. During this term of time the 'Beast,' which is always the representative of political power, holds the pre-eminence. It should not be overlooked that the beast wears crowns on his ten horns, during this 1260 years, see chap. xiii, 1. This shows that political power had the pre-eminence.
But when John saw the beast again (chap. xviii,) it is humbled—a woman is seated upon and guides it. It has yet its 'seven heads and ten horns,' but it has no crowns, and instead of having 'THE name of blasphemy,' as in chap. xiii, it is now 'FULL of names of blasphemy.' (Rev. xvii, 3,) clearly denoting it to be the last form of all earthly governments. It is the 'eighth' (verse 11) and last form of the beast, ready to 'go into perdition,' verse 8.
When does John see this 'eighth,' this last, this 'scarlet-colored,' 'seven headed and ten horned' beast, 'humbled,' shorn of his crowns, and under the control of a dissipated woman, 'the MOTHER OF HARLOTS?' It could not have been at any time during the '42 months,' or 1260 years from the time it took its seat in A. D. 538; for during that term of time the supremacy was vested in the beast, not in the woman; for John says, Rev. xvii, 7, 8, 'and power was given unto him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. And all that dwell on the earth shall worship him,' &c. And besides, during this time the beast wore crowns, verse 1. Then John's last view of the beast must have been after the close of the 1260 years of its supremacy. Well, when would that be? Count 1260 years from A. D. 538, and it brings us to 1798. What marked this period? The 'Beast,' POLITICAL ROME, was humbled at this time by the French, and its supremacy over the saints lost, never to be regained. The 'WOMAN' then took her 'seat' upon 'many waters,' and since then 'reigneth over the kings of the earth.' Chap. xvii, 1, 18.
We view the case thus. Rome was symbolized by the 'Great Red Dragon,' while connected with Pagan idolatry; by the 'crowned' ten horned beast, while connected with Christianity corrupted; and by the 'scarlet colored beast,' with no crowns on its horns, while under the guidance of the 'woman.'—The latter is the eighth and last form of the beast. Rev. xvii, 11.
Having as we believe, ascertained what the 'beast' is, we next inquire, what does the 'woman' symbolize? It symbolizes the nominal church. 'For the Lord hath called thee a woman'—Isa. liv, 6. A woman clothed with the sun!—Rev. xii, 1. These and other passages speak of the church under the similitude of a 'woman,' which we think no one will deny. But is the harlot woman in Rev. xvii, the same with the 'woman clothed with the sun,' in chap. xii? We think they are the same, with the exception that her last state is a state of dissipated prostitution, or apostasy.
It is admitted, and long advocated by all Protestants, that the Church has apostatized from its primitive purity. Paul predicted that there should come a 'falling away' before the man of sin should be revealed, (2 Thess. ii,) and we think this same falling away is referred to by John in Rev. xii, in the history there given of the 'woman.' He first sees her 'clothed with the sun,' &c. But she soon 'flees into the wilderness,' a place of disorder and darkness, (Jer. ii, 31,) a fit place for the earth to help her.—God should have been her only help. Eagle's wings are also given her. The wings of an unclean, proud and destructive bird, such as were plucked from the proud king of Babylon, Dan. xii. Did God give his pure church such wings that she might escape from her enemies into the wilderness? We cannot believe it; neither does John say he did. But he says 'to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle.' Then who did give them? 'The earth helped the woman,' we think gives the correct answer.
All this we think took place under the reign of Pagan Rome; and that her 'wilderness' state, the 'place prepared of God,' did not commence until the rise of the beast in chapter xiii, which was to continue forty-two months, the same length of time that the woman was to be in the wilderness. Doubtless both cases refer to the same time. The woman does not fly while in the wilderness, but 'fled into it.'—The wilderness is her place, prepared of God, where they 'shall feed her for a time, and times, and half a time,' or 1260 years.
It is thought by those of an opposite view, that the woman should be viewed in the light of purity while in her 'place,' the 'wilderness,' because God prepared it for her. But has not God 'prepared the place' for the 'devil and his angels?' Certainly: and must they therefore be pure? No one will contend for this: Neither do we believe the woman was pure while in 'her place' 1260 years. Far from it. She was holding unlawful connection with the beast, or kings of the earth, during this time.—'THEN fed her,' (Rev. xii: 6,) not God. With what did they feed her? 'And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus,' Rev. xvii: 6. Blood, then was her food! The beast shed it, and the woman drank and became intoxicated with it. She lived in a state of dissipation and fornication with the kings of the earth while in 'her place.' With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication—Rev. xvii, 2. If this is not her character, why does John tell of her being the 'MOTHER OF HARLOTS,' verse 5? In her state or 'place' of concubinage, and since she has taken her seat on the beast, she has brought forth a numerous progeny of illegitimate daughters, who have soon imitated the example of their mother, or great grand-mother, and like her have become harlots.
We view the case of the woman (the nominal church) thus: She apostatized under Pagan Rome—entered upon her wilderness state A. D. 538.—Here John leaves her in her place for 1260 years, holding unlawful connection with, but subject to the kings of the earth. The beast during this time held the reigns of government; it wore crowns. At the end of the 1260 years, A. D. 1798, John is carried in vision, 'into the wilderness,' (Rev. xii, 3,) and sees the woman just where he left her in chap. xvii: but how wide the contrast between her first, and last58character and condition: At first she was clothed with the sun, the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.' Rev. xii. She had no daughters—was a pure woman. But now she is a drunken harlot; a mother not of one, but of many harlot daughters, and guides the beast which carries her, or holds the supremacy over the state, just as an artful mistress controls the will and destinies of her deceived and fallen paramours. Has not the church held this station over the kings and rulers of the earth since A. D. 1798? The facts in the case prove that she has. She 'sits upon many waters,' (which 'are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues'—Rev. xvii, 15,) and reigneth over the kings of the earth; not by physical power, but by artifice, cunning, and deception. Her influence is felt and submitted to in every legislative body of the world. Kings, Queens, and rulers whose aid and influence she seeks, and who are among her most liberal supporters, and actually 'carry her,' are nevertheless guided by her artful and polluted hand.
Having, as we believe, obtained a correct understanding of the 'beast' and of the 'woman' under consideration, we are prepared to consider the question.
What is the Babylon out of which God calls his People?
'The Advent Shield,' p. 116, answers this question in the following language:
'Babylon, then, is now comprised in the present kingdoms of the world—'the peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues'; the many nations which John saw, on which the woman sat—'the kings of the earth,' over which 'that great city,' Rome, reigned. Babylon now, not only comprises all earthly power and dominion, but embraces everything which is anti-christian in its tendencies.'
To this answer we offer the following objections:
1st. If, as the 'Shield' says, the 'kingdoms of the world' are 'comprised in Babylon,' how can the 'woman, that great city,' BABYLON, reign over those kingdoms? It is folly to talk of a city reigning over itself.
2d. The kings of the earth 'committed fornication with' the woman, or Babylon—Rev. xvii, 2. If the 'Shield' is correct, the kings committed fornication with themselves.
3d. 'For ALL NATIONS have drunk of the wine of the wrath of HER fornication'—Rev. xvii, 3. If, as the 'Shield' says, the kingdoms are 'comprised in Babylon,' then they have drunk of their own, not of another's wine.
4th. The kings of the earth are to bewail the final fall of Babylon—Rev. xviii, 9, 10. But if the 'Shield' is correct, she will bewail her own fall!
5th. John makes a clear distinction between the kings or kingdoms of the earth, and Babylon, (see Chaps. xvii and xviii,) but the 'Shield' makes none.
Those objections we deem sufficient to settle the point, that the 'Shield' has not given the correct answer to the important question under consideration; we must therefore look for another answer.
Mr. Hotchkiss, of this city, in a recent discourse defined Babylon to be exclusively Papal Rome. Not a few adopt his views; and we believe they are now generally entertained by the different Protestant sects. To this answer we object:
1st. Because Rome papal does not answer the definition of the term, babylon. As Mr. Hotchkiss justly contended, Rome, or the Catholic Church, is a 'unit.' She is one in name, doctrine, ordinances, and all her work. But Babylon signifies 'confusion or mixture.' It cannot therefore be applicable, exclusively to the Catholic Church. It should not be forgotten that there is meaning in the name, Babylon. God has given the name, and rightly applied it: It does not fitly apply to the Catholic Church.
2d. The catholic church, abstractly, has its seat at Rome; but Babylon has her seat upon 'many waters.' Rev. xvii, 1.
3d. The catholic church, abstractly, does not reign, neither has she ever reigned over the whole earth; but Babylon, or 'where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues,' (Rev. xvii, 15,) which embrace the whole earth.
4th. If the 'mother of harlots,' the church of Rome, abstractly considered is Babylon, then her harlot daughters are left out of the question. Then why did John call her not only 'MOTHER,' but 'mother of harlots?' As well might a mother be called the whole family, as to call the church of Rome, Babylon.
Having shown what we think BABYLON is NOT we will attempt to tell what we believe it to be. We believe it IS THE NOMINAL CHURCH.
In Rev. xii, John saw the woman (the church) fly into the wilderness—the next time he beholds her, she has upon her head 'MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.'
In explaining what this woman is, in Rev. xvii, 5, the explaining angel says in verse 18, 'And the woman which thou sawest is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth.' This explanation is the strongest proof that those present, who believe 'that great city' is literal Rome. They say the woman is a figure, the explanation is literal, therefore the city must be literal—it must be Rome. Their reasoning would be good if the explanation told us that, 'that great city' was Rome; but as it does not, neither is Rome anywhere in the Bible called 'Mystery Babylon' nor 'that great city'; therefore it is a mere assumption to say that Rome is that great city.
What then is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth? If the angel was talking of what then existed, it could not have been the city of Rome; for the kings of the earth did not then exist; for Rome was in its imperial form and the kingly form did not arise until some centuries after John saw this vision. And certainly the literal city of Rome does not reign over the kings of the earth now, neither is there any propriety in calling it 'Mystery Rome or Babylon,' nor 'that great city.' There are other cities far greater than Rome; and it would be as proper to call them Mystery London, Mystery Paris, Mystery Pekin, Mystery Vienna, Mystery New-York, &c., as to call the literal city of Rome a Mystery; there is no more mystery about it than any other city or town built of wood, brick and stone.
The angel says, the woman is 'that great city'—but does not tell us in the explanation, what that great city is. To ascertain this fact we must consult other portions of the divine oracles. Under the seventh vial we are told, Rev. xvi, 19, that 'the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell; and great Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath.' It is true that we are not here told what 'that great city' is, only that it is 'great Babylon;' but we are clearly taught that the 'cities of the nations' are one thing, and 'that great city' or 'great Babylon' is another thing. 'The great city was DIVIDED,' but the 'CITIES of the NATIONS FELL.' Rome is one of the cities of the nations, and cannot, therefore, be 'that great city.'
In Rev. xiv, 8, 'that great city' is brought to view. 'And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wrath of her fornication.' We admit that in this case we are not told what Babylon is but we are taught that it is not identified with the 'ALL NATIONS.' The city of Rome is identified with one of the 'all nations,' and cannot therefore be 'that great city,' which has 'made all nations drink her wine.'
Again, in Rev. xi, 8—13, speaking of the two witnesses, John says, 'And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, where our Lord was crucified.' 'And a tenth part of the city fell.' There can be no dispute but that the 'great city,' in this case is Babylon; so our brethren have preached and published to the world; and they have taught us that the 'street of the city,' and the 'tenth part of the city which fell,' was France. They have also taught that it fell in A. D. 1798, or near that time. If France was a tenth of Babylon in A. D. 1798, what were the other nine tenths? Why, our brethren have taught us that the other nine divisions or the Roman Western Empire, constitute the other nine tenths of the great city. How then, can the city of Rome be that great city? It cannot. Neither can the Catholic Church, exclusively, be that city; for at the time the witnesses were slain in one of the streets of the city, and a tenth part of it fell, at that time, a part of the ten divisions were Protestant in their religion; and a part Catholic.
We then learn of what Babylon was constituted in A. D. 1798. It was all the Protestant and Catholic religions embraced in the ten divisions of the Roman Western Empire, which includes all the Catholic and Protestant churches of the world. They constitute 'that great city' or 'Mystery Babylon,' represented by the Mother of Harlots, and her apostate daughters.
Once more: In the text under consideration John says, 'the great city' is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.' The city of Rome is no where either literally or spiritually called thus, neither was our Lord crucified there; but we do find that the nominal church is called Sodom and Gomorrah, and no one will deny that our Lord was crucified by the church. Speaking of the church in her apostasy, Isa. (v, 10,) says, 'Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom; and give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.' And in verse 12, he says, 'How is the faithful city become an harlot! it was full of judgment; righteousness, lodged in it; but now murderers.' For this, judgments are threatened, and a purging away of her dross is promised; and in verses 26, 27 and 28, the prophet adds, 'And I will restore thy judges as at the first, and thy counsellors as at the beginning; afterward thou shalt be called, the city of righteousness, the faithful city. Zion shall be redeemed with
judgment, and her converts with righteousness, and the destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the Lord shall be consumed.'
Here God's people, or 'Zion' is represented as once being the 'faithful city;' but has become 'an harlot,' or as John says, the 'Mother of harlots,' 'Mystery Babylon,' 'Jezebel' and her 'children,' the 'great whore,' 'that great city,' spiritually called Sodom and Egypt,' or as Isaiah says, 'Sodom and Gomorrah.'
Apply these titles to Rome, and all is darkness, and insurmountable difficulties rise before us; but apply them to the nominal church, which is composed of all human ecclesiastical organizations, and all is clear; the fallen condition of that body perfectly answers the character these titles give; and the reasons come home to God's people, with redoubled force, why they should fully separate themselves, or come out from such corrupt influences.
There can be no question but that the 'woman' is symbolical of the church, and as she is called Babylon, there can be no dispute but that the church is Babylon. What church? We can make no distinction no further than the figure will justify. It is a mother and her daughters—a family of harlots. We admit the mother represents the Catholic Church, the eldest member of the family; and we believe the daughters symbolize the Protestant sects. If they do not, pray what do they represent? No one of an opposite view has yet been able to answer this question. We can see no resemblance between the 'mother,' a unit, and a 'great city.' But the 'whole family' most strikingly represents that city. Take the whole and the figure is perfect; leave out the children and it is imperfect.
This view of the subject we think is strengthened by what is said relative to the church in Thyatira.—In chapter ii, mention is made of that 'woman Jezebel' 'her fornication'—'her great tribulation'—and it is said, 'I will kill her children with death; and ALL THE CHURCHES shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts; and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.' Here the 'children' of the 'woman' are identified with 'ALL THE CHURCHES,' which are to be 'KILLED WITH DEATH;' and to 'every one of you' [the churches] will be given according to your works.
We believe the 'woman Jezebel' and 'her children,' in chapter ii, and the 'mother of harlots' and her daughters, in chapter xvii, are symbolical of all the churches, and as the mother of harlots is called Babylon, it is evident to us that 'ALL THE CHURCHES' constitute the Babylon out of which God now calls his people.
But the question may arise, how can the daughters be included when the name Babylon is exclusively inscribed on the head of the mother? The same objection, with nearly, if not the same propriety, might be offered against the 'beast' representing all the kingdoms of the world. It had its origin—received its power—and has its seat at Rome, yet no one denies but that it symbolizes ALL the kingdoms of the world. So with the 'mother of harlots'—she is the chief tower in the city, or member of the family, and it was proper to inscribe upon her head the name of the fraternity or city.
Babylon comes from Babel, and signifies 'confusion, or mixture,' Gen. x, 10, and xi, 9. The account there given will illustrate the case under consideration. Chapter xi, begins with an account of the earth being of one language; and goes on to tell that the people journeyed eastward—they came to a plain—made brick to build them a tower and city—God confounded their language, and 'scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth. And the name of it (the tower) was called, Babel,' or as the margin reads 'confusion.'
It should be remembered that the tower was called 'Babel' or 'confusion.' With this inscription upon it, we will suppose a traveler understanding the meaning of terms, visits the tower. He sees the inscription in large capitals, and expects to find the tower answering to the names it bears: but his disappointment is great, when instead of 'confusion,' he finds perfect, order, system, and mechanism, in the formation of the brick, the plan and construction of the tower. Why, says he, there is no 'confusion' here, and the name the tower bears is inappropriate indeed. But, cries the voice of Him who inscribed it, 'Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth and from thence did the lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.' Gen. xi, 9. Ah! cries the traveler, I perfectly understand it now. The name is truly appropriate, and has its location where it properly belongs. It is inscribed on the tower, because 'THERE' God confounded the language of the PEOPLE, and from 'THENCE' were they scattered. The confusion therefore must be looked for among the people scattered over the whole earth.
The application is easy. The church commenced59building her a tower and a city, under the influence of Catholicism. God confounded her language and scattered her; or differently, they have sprung up; each has built a tower, and attempted to build a city; they too have been confounded and scattered. Hence the work of tower and city building, confounding and scattering has gone on until perfect 'confusion' reigns throughout christendom. The great city is complete; and reaching far above it, many towers is seen the one first reared by the 'mother' of the city. And upon her tower the name of the city is properly inscribed, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS, AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. It is inscribed upon the 'mother's' tower, because, as in the case of Babel, the type, 'THERE' the work of confounding, and from 'THENCE' the scattering commenced.
Again, God calls HIS PEOPLE out of Babylon. Rev. xviii. 4. Where are his people? Until quite recently they were in the different churches; some doubtless are there yet—many, thank the Lord, have come out in obedience to his call. Babylon, then, must be that place where God's people are found at the time they are called to come out of her; and as they were in the churches with scarcely an exception, at the time the cry to come out was made, the conclusion is irresistible that the churches are the Babylon under consideration.
The influence the church has over the world, is a strong evidence in our favor. She dictates its laws, and guides its destinies by her deceptive hand. No one of the sects does this work alone; it is done by the influence of them all. It is the whole 'great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth'—Rev. xvii, 18. She reigns by artifice, cunning and deception, as an artful woman rules her deceived and fallen paramours.
That the churches are Babylon is further evident from the fact, that no other view of the subject makes a perfect harmony in the prophecies of John. With this view we can see 'the woman' go into the wilderness A. D. 538; and remain there 1260 years, until A. D. 1798; when she takes her seat upon the 'beast,' a dissipated harlot, surrounded with a family of daughters of like character; all of which constitutes the corrupt influence which now controls the affairs of the nations of the globe, and will, until the great city they represent, together with the kings of the earth over which she reigns, be destroyed at the coming of the Lord of glory.
Finally, the facts in the case answering to the strict definition of the term Babylon, is conclusive evidence that the churches, or nominal church constitute the Babylon under consideration. When we look at the confusion or mixture in the names, creeds, doctrines, worship, ordinances, practices, and so forth of the sects, we involuntarily exclaim, oh! what a Babylon! And when we see her corruptions, we wonder not that God calls his people out of her, and threatens, in the most fearful language, her speedy and everlasting destruction.
The Fall of Babylon.
Having shown that the nominal church, comprising all human ecclesiastical organizations, is Babylon, out of which God calls his people, the next point to be considered is the fall of Babylon.
The 'Advent Shield' places this event in the future, to take place at the actual coming of Christ. On pages 116 and 117 it is said, 'that the fall of Babylon is the end of Satan's supremacy in the earth, when Michael will stand up to reign.' And in speaking of 'coming out of Babylon,' on page 118, it is said, 'Thus when the wicked are to experience the fierceness of the wine of the wrath of God, the righteous will all receive the invitation to meet their Lord in the air, and will not suffer for the sins of the wicked, nor receive of her plagues.'
We are constrained to take a different view of the subject, because,
1st. Babylon exists after her fall; for after her fall is announced, in the same verse it is said, 'and is become the habitation of devils,' &c. Rev. xviii, 2.—Her fall, then, could not, as the Shield says, 'be the end of Satan's supremacy.'
2d. God's people are called upon to come out of her after the fall and deep corruption of Babylon are announced, (verses 2 and 4.) But, according to the Shield, this call must be made at or before the fall.
3d. After her fall, Babylon proudly says, 'I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow,' (v. 7.) If the Shield is correct, she says this before her fall.
4th. The call, 'Come out of her, my people,' clearly implies a voluntary act on the part of those who hear; it is optional with them to come out or remain in Babylon, for to the call is added, 'that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues,' (verse 4.) But there can be no option, or volition, with the creature in his resurrection, change from mortality to immortality, and being 'caught up to meet the Lord.' The two cases are entirely different in their nature. The call 'Come out of her' implies a voluntary act; while being 'caught up' implies a passive act. The Shield makes both to be one, and a passive act.
5th. The Shield blends all these events in one—places them in the future, at the actual coming of Christ. Hence Babylon has not yet fallen, and 'become the habitation of devils,' and the voice 'Come out of her, my people,' has not yet been heard. But Jesus makes a clear distinction in the events, as the following testimony will show:
After telling what Babylon is, in Rev. chap. xvii, commencing with the 18th chap. John says, 'And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power, and the earth was lighted with his glory. And he cried mightily, with a strong voice, saying, 'Babylon the great is fallen is fallen! and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and the cage of every unclean and hateful bird. For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth have waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies, (or 'power,' as the margin reads.) And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities. Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled, fill to her double. How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her; for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow. Therefore shall her plagues come to one day—death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire; for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her.'
1st. We learn from this testimony, that Babylon was first to fall, and became deeply corrupt: verse 2.
2d. After that fall and corruption, God's people are commanded to 'come out of her:' verse 4.
3d. After that call is given, Babylon becomes proudly exalted, and contemplates 'no sorrow,' but undisturbed dominion as a queen of universal power: verse 7.
4th. But at this time of her proud expectations, she is to be 'utterly burned with fire,' or finally destroyed: verse 8.
That the fall of Babylon, and her destruction, are different events, is evident from what John says of her, after the occurrence of each of these events. He speaks of Babylon after her fall, as having 'become the habitation of devils'—of God's people being called out of her—of her being threatened with plagues—her sins reaching to heaven—God remembering her iniquities—and of her glorifying herself, and saying in her heart, 'I sit a queen, and shall see no sorrow.'—see Rev. xviii, 2—7. All these things are said of her after her fall has taken place. Surely, then her fall cannot be her destruction. But of her destruction it is said, 'She shall be utterly burned with fire, and shall be found no more at all,' verses 8 and 21.
The fall of Babylon, we consider, consists in her final rejection of the truth; and her destruction will be her punishment for that rejection and her corruption. But it may be asked, Can a power fall, and not be destroyed? One example, of many which might be named, will show that it can. The Jews, as a nation, fell before their destruction. They rejected Christ; who told them the last time he left the temple, that their house was left unto them desolate. And again, 'If thou hadst known, in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace; but now they are hid from thine eyes.' But Paul speaks directly to the point: 'Have they stumbled that they should fall?' 'Nay if the fall of them be the riches of the world.' (Rom. xi, 11, 12.) When did the Jews fall? At the time salvation came unto the gentiles. 'Through their fall, salvation is come unto the gentiles.' Rom. xi, 11. When did salvation come unto the gentiles? All admit it came at the first advent of Christ. When were the Jews as a nation, destroyed? Near forty years after they fell, or their final rejection of the truth. Their fall was gradual; but final, when they rejected the Son of God.
So with Babylon, or the nominal church—its fall has been gradual. Truths after truths have been presented to the church, but she has rejected them, until the last and most glorious of all—the COMING OF CHRIST—has been treated with as much contempt as was the doctrine of his first coming by the proud and sin-hardened Jews. And since this last, this crying sin, the fall of the church has not only been visible to others, but its chief organs have proclaimed the mournful fact throughout Christendom. We give the following testimony in justification of our position:
Elder R. Turnbull, missionary in Europe, says, 'everywhere—in France, Italy, Switzerland, Germany—a dead formality seems to prevail. The heart of religion has been worn out by speculation, or benumbed by constant iteration of mere forms and ceremonies; the consequence of which is, that in most places, it is nothing more than a hideous skeleton, hung up in terrorem, or exhibited to the people as a curiosity.'
Such is the condition of the church in the eastern world; and is it any better in our own boasted land of Bibles? Our opponents being judges, it is not.—A late number of the Congregational Journal remarks as follows:
CHURCH OF THE REV. ALBERT BARNES.—At a recent meeting of the Presbytery of Philadelphia, Rev. Mr. Barnes, pastor of the 1st Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia, whose notes are so extensively used in our families and Sabbath schools, stated, that he had been in the ministry, for twenty years, and never, till the last communion, had he administered the ordinance without receiving more or less to the church. But now there are no awakenings, no conversions, not much apparent growth in grace in professors, and none come to his study to converse about the salvation of their souls. With the increase of business, and the brightening prospects of commerce and manufactures, there is an increase of worldly-mindedness. Thus it is with all denominations.
'Thus it is with all denominations;' and will they deny the charge? Let them speak for themselves:
"The Puritan (Orthodox) of this city, (Boston) not long since informed its readers that there had not been known such a state of coldness for some twenty years. Zion's Herald made a similar statement, and endeavored to fix the blame upon 'Millerism;' and we have been told that at the recent protracted meeting held by Mr. Knapp, at the Tremont Baptist (Mr. Colver's) church, the failure was ascribed to the same cause."—Ad. Herald.
The Christian Palladium for May 15th speaks in the following mournful strains:
'In every direction we hear the dolorous sound, wafting upon every breeze of heaven, chilling us like the blasts from the ice-bergs of the north—settling like an incubus on the breasts of the timid, and drinking up the energies of the weak; that lukewarmness, division anarchy and desolation are distressing the borders of Zion. Perhaps it is so. What then? Do we well, like the howling women of ancient days, to rend our flesh—our hair, and fill the whole atmosphere with our wailings?'
'It is but a few passing months since the whole extent of our wide spread country rang with triumphant peals of joy borne upon the wings of numerous religious periodicals, and spontaneously overflowing from every Christian heart. Not a lip but was shouting the victories of the cross, or joining in the triumphant songs of the redeemed. And is the whole scene now so changed? Is God's whole Israel routed and flying before their uncircumcised enemies? And is it to be at the end of long years that Zion's walls are again to be built? I do not believe it. I cannot think that God's hosts are thus broken, routed and flying from an overpowering foe.' *
The next point in order to be noticed, is the call for God's people to
Come Out of Her.
1st. That the Bible does speak of a call for God's people to come out of "Mystery Babylon" is evident from the following testimony: "My people, go ye out of the midst of her, and deliver ye every man his soul from the fierce anger of the Lord." Jer. li, 15. If this testimony refers directly to "Mystery Babylon," (and there is very good reason that it does) then the proof is clear that such a call is made; but if it refers to literal Babylon, the testimony is not invalidated; for there can be no dispute but that literal Babylon was a type of mystery Babylon, and by comparing the above command with one which there can be no dispute about its applying to mystery Babylon, we find the type and anti-type perfectly agree. In reference to mystery Babylon it is said, "And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, come out of her, my people that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." Rev. xviii, 4. This testimony fully settles the point that the Bible speaks of a call for God's people to come out of Babylon.
2nd. The nature of the call. We say call, but it is more properly an imperative command, given by the Most High to his people; threatening the severest penalty in case of their neglecting or refusing to obey it. Hence, Jeremiah, li, 45, assigns as a reason why God's people should "go out of her," that every man might deliver his soul from the fierce anger of the Lord. And John says, come out of her, "that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." Rev. xviii, 4. Also, we think the same penalty is threatened in Rev. xiv, 9, 10. After the fall of Babylon is announced, the "third angel followed saying with a loud voice," "If any man worship the beast and his image and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb."60[Concluded on page 64.]