Babylon on Seven Hills — Food For Thought

It is commonly assumed that Babylon in Revelation must be Rome. This is a false view, however, as I demonstrate in my book Who Is This Babylon.

One of the key “arguments for the Rome = Babylon view is that Revelation says the Harlot city sat on seven hills. Now, of course, no one doubts that Rome sat on seven hills, but, as food for thought, it needs to be considered that Jerusalem also sat on seven hills!

Ted Pike, an opponent of modern day Israel and her exaggerated influence on American politics, has sent out an email identifying Israel as Babylon. I reject Pike’s modern futurism, and have even offered to debate him, but he refused.

Nonetheless, in his mailer, he does present some interesting and important information about the identity of Jerusalem as Babylon in the first century. I am cutting and pasting part of that article here as “food for thought.”

Begin Quote: Yet even from earliest post-apostolic times, Christians have misread Revelation’s prophecy. They thought Babylon the Great meant Rome, which has traditionally been described as sitting on seven hills. Yet the city of Rome encompasses many more than seven hills. This is not true of Jerusalem. Ernest L. Martin, Ph.D. points out: the City of Jerusalem as it existed in the time of Christ Jesus was also reckoned to be a ‘City of Seven Hills.’ This fact was well recognized in Jewish circles. In the Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer, an 8th century A.D. midrashic [Talmudic] narrative (Section 10), the writer mentioned without commentary (showing that the understanding was well known and required no defense) that, “Jerusalem is situated on seven hills.” (“The Seven Hills of Jerusalem” (End of Quote).

What is important for the modern student to do– as much as is possible– is to get into the mind of the first century audience and writers. While this citation is not definitive proof, it is nonetheless intriguing and worth consideration. For more on this, be sure to see my book on Babylon.