Fr. Stephen De Young: We’ll go ahead and get started. When we get started in just a moment, we’ll be picking up at the beginning of chapter 17 of the Revelation of St. John.

When last we met, which was a little bit ago, we went through the seven bowls. We went through another cycle of seven. In that cycle of seven, we saw how the seven bowls sort of roughly corresponded to at least some of the plagues on Egypt, how there was this connection being drawn, that this is sort of a— This cycle was being presented as this cosmic Passover, where the righteous were being delivered from the kingdoms of this world.

But we also saw that those plagues that were coming out of the bowls of the wrath of God were explicitly aimed at trying to get the kingdoms of the world to repent. Again and again, we saw these horrible plagues befalling the people, and it said, “But they did not repent; instead, they blasphemed God.” So these things that were aimed at bringing about their repentance instead just caused them to be hardened in their rebellion against God and their hatred for God. That, too, is sort of paralleled to the exodus. Remember, as the plagues were going on, pharaoh hardens his heart and has his heart hardened, sort of back and forth, but it doesn’t get him to any kind of repentance or learning.

Q1: [Inaudible]

Fr. Stephen: Yes, even though that’s what they’re aimed at. And that’s an important distinction. Even the wrath of God when it’s poured out is there to bring about repentance, not just out of some kind of anger or vengeance or to do damage to these people for what they’ve done, but to try to get them to repent. That’s basically where we ended up at the end of chapter 16, was with the last bowl, which was hailstones, and men blasphemed God because of it.

So we talked about how, once again, like with all the cycles, these aren’t a series of things that are going to happen in the future. These are about the period between Christ’s ascension and his return; they’re about the messianic age. The point here is not telling us, “Hey, horrible things happen in the world.” We know that. [Laughter] We’re aware of that, all too aware of it. But to, again, try to give us a different perspective, that the reason God is allowing and even sending these things is to bring about repentance and ultimately to set us free from the control of the evil powers that govern the world.

Now, as we begin chapter 17, we’re coming to the culmination of this process, and that’s why we’re going to be dealing with Babylon again. We’ve already seen hints of this, remember. In fact, it was even mentioned briefly, as in the last cycle, as is St. John’s pattern. He introduces ideas and then blows them up. He mentioned, back at the previous cycle, Babylon. It mentioned, when were looking at the fall of the beasts, and we talked about the beasts and the symbolism there, that this was talking about empire and the world system, what’s called “the world” and a lot of other things, which isn’t the physical objects in the world. It’s not the material creation. Those things are good, and God created them good.

This is more “the world” as in the city of man. It starts with Cain building the first city. The world of human social relations that we’ve constructed, and which is actually, St. John has been arguing through the imagery of the beasts and that kind of thing, enlivened and motivated by these demonic spiritual forces, to bring about humanity’s destruction, not by any kind of— So as the Romans would have had it, Rome was the embodiment of the gods, of the divine, of all that was good and strong and beautiful and powerful and all of this. St. John is saying the opposite: no, it’s the embodiment of everything that seeks to destroy man and dehumanize man.

Those who become part of that system are going to be led to destruction by it, and the way to salvation requires standing apart from that system, that way of being in the world. As we come into chapter 17 and we have this imagery of the harlot, this is not a different entity or a different thing [from] the beast; this is a different cycle, so it’s a different set of imagery through which he’s developing some of the same themes.

That said, unless there’s any questions or comments or any more Harry Potter spoilers anybody wants to give—Snape kills Dumbledore; there, I said it—we’ll go ahead and pick up in the Revelation of St. John, chapter 17, verse one. [Laughter]

Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and talked with me, saying to me, “Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters, with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth were made drunk with the wine of her fornication.”

This is a little bit blunt in the symbolism category, but the idea here is we have this harlot who represents this spiritual force. The kings of the earth have come and fornicated with her and become drunk on her wine. This imagery that St. John is using here is imagery that’s actually drawn from the book of Proverbs. In the book of Proverbs— Most Jewish and early Christian wisdom literature is based on there being two ways. There’s the way that leads to life and the way that leads to destruction. One of the way that that’s described in Proverbs in particular is that those two ways are sort of personified as Lady Wisdom and Lady Folly. Lady Wisdom sort of leads people toward virtue, toward God, toward living one way in the world; and Lady Folly sort of seduces people into going down toward destruction.

St. John is now taking that imagery of folly, of foolishness, that seduces one toward destruction and is applying it now to this spiritual entity—and we’ll see a little more of whom he’s clearly talking about in a minute here. For the person reading these verses, that language is going to clue them into this figure of folly, of foolishness, in the Old Testament.

Verse three: “So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast, which was full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.” Who does that sound like? That’s the beast we already saw: seven heads, ten horns. That’s the beast out of the sea, and she’s sort of riding it; she’s riding it.

“The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication.” That’s even more graphic in Greek, but you see the juxtaposition here. She’s wearing these royal colors, these expensive colors. She has all this jewelry. This is, from a distance, attractive. But then she’s holding in her hand all of this filth related to her fornication.

What did we say that beast from the sea was when we were back there? We said, well, this is Rome, but it’s not just Rome.

Q1: [Inaudible]

Fr. Stephen: Right, it’s that this is this succession of empires as such. When St. John sees her, she’s sort of riding Rome. Rome is sort of the current embodiment in the world, as St. John is having the vision, of this spirit. The city of Rome was impressive, and the Roman Empire was impressive. They had accomplished these great feast. When you look at aqueducts that were carrying water for miles based on gravity, like the level of grade is barely measurable without digital tools, and they did it without digital tools to transport water. They accomplished all of these great feats. This is part of this from a distance very attractive and very impressive, until you find out how they did it, which was by murdering, enslaving, destroying. That there’s this dual nature to this, just like there’s that dual nature to folly. Nobody goes to destruction saying, “Yay! I’m going to go destroy myself!” But they’re seduced to it by something that looks good, that looks impressive, that looks powerful, that looks like something they want. But then what they get is the filthiness, the destruction.

Verse five: “And on her forehead a name was written: Mystery, Babylon the great, mother of harlots and of the abomination of the earth.” The name part is Babylon; the other parts are adjectives and titles. The mystery part is meant to identify her as this spirit that’s behind these things. This is what’s being revealed to St. John. People could see Rome and see what Rome is doing, but they don’t see the mystery; they don’t see the spiritual power that’s behind it, that’s animating it, that’s motivating it. That’s the mystery part.

Why Babylon? Well, Babylon, way back, was the first one. I’m not talking about the Neo-Babylonian Empire with Nebuchadnezzar; that’s sixth century BC. I’m talking about sixteenth century BC. I’m talking about before the Bronze Age collapse, like the pinnacle of Bronze Age civilization.

Q1: Hammurabi.

Fr. Stephen: Right, when Hammurabi was wearing sandals he got from Crete, when he was importing tin from Afghanistan and copper from Cyprus and smelting into bronze. This is the Babylon we’re talking about, this first great empire before the Bronze Age collapse. Hammurabi was from the Amuru people, which means “Western” in Akkadian, because they came from the area around Syria. But those are the same people that are called Amorites in the Old Testament. In what they said about themselves, they claimed that they still had the divine secrets that were revealed by the gods before the flood. That’s what the Amuru like Hammurabi said; that’s why they were destined to rule the world. They had this divine pre-flood wisdom. This is why the Old Testament has the Amorites like Sihon and Og, king of Bashan, as giants, that, no, they’re— And what are giants? The result of fornication with spiritual powers. That’s the same imagery we’re getting here.

The idea is behind these kings who are powerful on earth and who come to dominate other lands and establish these empires, there’s this evil spiritual force that they’re giving themselves over to. And in giving themselves over to it, yes, they’re getting power on earth, but they’re being moved by it, motivated by it, to create abominations, to commit these atrocities, these abominations on the earth. This is sort being— There’s been this spirit this whole time doing this, and this is behind the Persians and the Assyrians and Alexander the Great and his successors. This is what’s behind them and is motivating them, not, as they claimed, the gods who were about virtue and beauty and truth.

Verse six: “I saw the woman drunk with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. And when I saw here, I marveled with great amazement.” That’s another great translation! [Laughter] “Marveled with great amazement.” But he’s astonished. And so you see with that imagery the relationship between the saints, the holy ones, the holy and the righteous on the earth are always at enmity with this power.

We saw in 1 John, also written by St. John— Remember, he said, “Why did Cain kill Abel?” according to St. John—because Abel’s deeds were good and Cain’s were evil, and so Cain couldn’t abide Abel existing. Since Cain started the city of man, for St. John this has been a continuous thing. That spirit that’s active in the world, this demonic spirit, has always been opposed to and hated the righteous, or any holy person. For St. John, what happens to Christ in terms of being persecuted and vilified and crucified is sort of the fulfillment of that, but that pattern continues after, and that pattern was going on before. Yes, sir?

Q1: This is bringing to my mind in Genesis, the enmity between the woman and the snake. Is that in any way related, or would that be kind of like…?

Fr. Stephen: Well, that’s a direct prophecy of Christ, but that enmity is there. I mean, that’s always been the devil’s and evil’s goal, is to destroy humanity, to get humans to destroy each other, destroy themselves. That’s sort of what’s going on in Cain’s genealogy. Humans get metallurgy from these spirits. They don’t use it to make kitchen utensils, to help them feed people more efficiently; they use it to make weapons, to kill each other more efficiently. Yeah, and on and on. That’s a constant. And remember, he says in 1 John that Cain was “of the devil.” So there is a trajectory there, from the devil through Cain, and going onward.

Of course, blood drinking: very bad, no, no, in the Old Testament. [Laughter] I think we’ve talked a couple times a little bit about that at least, that the reason for that is that the blood has the life in it. What we see over the course of the early chapters of the Old Testament is human beings becoming increasingly predatory. The denial of drinking blood or eating non-properly prepared meat is trying to put a limit on that. In paradise, human beings eat the fruit of trees, so they’re not even harming the tree. You’re not even killing a tree; you’re just— Creation offered itself as food to man, and humanity is part of this thing. And then the curse that’s pronounced with Adam is: That’s not going to happen any more; you’re going to have to work and sweat to try to bring food out of the earth.

Then when Cain— Cain gets a worse curse than his father. Adam gets told, “Cursed is the ground because of you, and so you’re going to have to use sweat and toil.” Cain gets told, “You are cursed from the ground; the ground will not bring forth food for you.” Cain can’t farm is what that’s saying. This is why Cain goes and builds a city. He’s going to have to engage in commerce, etc., etc., in order to feed and provide for himself. He’s another step removed.

Then remember it’s only after— In the biblical story, it’s only after the flood when Noah gets off the ark that they’re given permission to eat animals.

Q2: This is something I’ve always wondered about, because Genesis does not say, as you quoted others saying, that Cain was evil from the get-go. It only says God prefers Abel’s animal offering to Cain’s offering for no reason.

Fr. Stephen: Well, it doesn’t even say that. Yeah, it says he accepted Abel’s and not Cain’s, yeah. It doesn’t give us a reason, but God then comes to Cain when Cain is getting jealous, and says, “Sin is crouching at your door. It’s trying to master you; you must master it.” Cain obviously fails at that, because he goes and murders his brother.

Q2: Because it’s not your business his offering got accepted.

Fr. Stephen: That’s the point— But that’s the point where he’s cursed. That’s the point where he’s cursed. He’s not cursed just because God didn’t like him or didn’t like his sacrifice; he’s cursed because he goes and murders his brother.

Q1: His answer is also actually really flippant, too. I hadn’t really thought about it untilthe other day. “Where’s your brother?” “Am I my brother’s keeper?”

Fr. Stephen: Yeah. I don’t know!

Q1: “Not my business.”

Fr. Stephen: Yeah. But so humans go [from] living in the garden kind of symbiotically with the rest of creation to having to work the ground by the sweat of their brow to eating animals to all kinds of things, but the prohibition on blood-drinking is meant to sort of put an end to that. If you’re going to kill an animal and eat it, there’s a certain way you have to treat it, there’s only certain animals you can eat. So there’s a respect for the animal that’s built in there. We’re very detached from that, because we don’t kill the animals we eat. Well, some people do. But even you, I imagine, not all of the meat you eat is your own hunting. [Laughter] Yeah. And you have a very different relationship with an animal when you raise it and then the day comes that you slaughter that animal and prepare it and eat it and use it to feed your family than when you go and buy it prepackaged at a grocery store.

Q2: How do you taste the difference?

Fr. Stephen: [Laughter] Yeah, but even beyond that. Even beyond the quality of the meat.

Q2: [Inaudible] ... raised your 4-H calf…

Fr. Stephen: The whole thing is placed in a different context.

Q3: Which chicken or which drumstick you had.

Fr. Stephen: There’s a now-infamous meme, where some poor woman, who’s now immortalized, replied to someone who had posted a picture of himself with a hunting trophy, with an animal he had just killed hunting, and said, “What’s wrong with you? Why don’t you just go get your meat at a store like everyone else so no animals will be hurt?” [Laughter] Yes. But so that’s sort of how we don’t have this connection with the fact that we have taken the life of another creature. And I wager a lot of us as modern people, like if I handed you a bunny and a life, would be hard-pressed to kill it. [Laughter] Like, emotionally. I chose a bunny on purpose, but still.

Q2: A bunny that’s just been killed, [Inaudible].

Fr. Stephen: So we have a very different relationship with it. But the idea is humanity is not supposed to be like a predatory animal. We’re called to a different relationship, and this is why, when it comes to fasting, we give up meat. This is why monastics don’t eat a lot of meat, because we’re trying to get away from that life feeding on life aspect of it. So the blood had to be disposed of, even for a sacrificial animal, in a very precise way. There was a lot of blood-drinking and that kind of thing in pagan sacrificial rituals.

But so this spirit is portrayed as just drinking the blood of the martyred saints, sort of feeding on it. That’s one more abomination in the mix there.

Verse seven:

But the angel said to me, “Why did you marvel? I will tell you the mystery of the woman and of the beast that carries her, which has the seven heads and the ten horns. The beast that you saw was and is not and will ascend out of the bottomless pit and go to perdition, and those who dwell on the earth will marvel, whose names are not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they see the beast that was and is not and yet is.”

So this just sounds like weird riddles, but this is a contrast being drawn between how Christ was identified: he who is and was and is coming. And you notice how that’s kind of flipped: “was, and is not, and will ascend out of the bottomless pit” is very different [from] Christ was and is and is coming again. And then there was and is not and yet is.

It depends on what your definition of “is” is. [Laughter] Remember, the verb “to be” has sort of special relevance in the Scriptures, because this is how God identifies himself to Moses, as “I am,” and then gives him the name Yahweh, which is the third-person singular: “He who is.” It is literally “he who causes to be,” but “he who is.” We used that at the end of vespers just now. We identified Christ as “he who is.” This is in our iconography of Christ. So that being verb— So the is not has a greater relevance. It’s like: Wait, does this guy exist or not? He is not and yet is? Like, what? [Laughter]

And we’re talking about the beast here, Rome, your empire. Your empire is the world. What are the big difference between them and God? They exist for a period of time, and then they don’t. God didn’t become God at some point; he’s not going to stop being God at some point in the future. But there was a time when Rome was a bunch of Etruscans banging around Italy and then there was a time when there was a Roman Republic and an Empire, and now there’s a time when there’s no Roman Empire.

Q1: But new empires keep coming: “and is.”

Fr. Stephen: Right, but even during that time when they exist, they don’t exist the way God exists, so you get that “is not.” So there’s was, they have a time; is not, meaning they don’t exist in the sense God exists, they have this tentative kind of existence that’s always contingent, it’s always on its way in or on its way out. Because remember in the ancient world, the opposite of is is not isn’t in the sense that you have being and then you have nothingness, you have non-fiction and fiction. The opposite of being is chaos. For Plato, the opposite of being is becoming, changing, flux. For Aristotle, non-being— Prime matter is non-being: it isn’t anything in particular. It could become something, but it isn’t anything. This is the same kind of idea here. So “is not” doesn’t mean doesn’t exist or is fictional; it means it’s just flux, chaos, which is the opposite of God. That’s the opposite of what it means that God is.