The identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18 has been debated for centuries. While many interpretations exist, one view that has gained popularity in recent years is the preterist identification of Babylon as first-century Jerusalem. However, this interpretation faces significant challenges when examined closely. Let’s explore why Babylon in Revelation cannot be equated with Jerusalem of the first century.
The Preterist View of Babylon
Preterists believe that most of Revelation’s prophecies were fulfilled in the events surrounding the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. They argue that Babylon in Revelation 17-18 symbolically represents Jerusalem, which was judged by God for rejecting Christ.
Some key arguments preterists use to support this view include:
- Jerusalem is called “the great city” in Revelation 11:8, so Babylon the “great city” must also be Jerusalem.
- Only Jerusalem killed both Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostles (Rev 18:20,24).
- Jesus said all the righteous blood would come upon Jerusalem (Matt 23:35-36).
- The harlot imagery fits Jerusalem’s unfaithfulness to God.
- The destruction of Babylon parallels Jesus’ prophecies about Jerusalem’s fall.
While these arguments may seem compelling on the surface, they break down under closer scrutiny. Let’s examine why the Babylon = Jerusalem view is problematic.
Problems with Identifying Babylon as Jerusalem
Inconsistent Hermeneutics
Preterists often employ a dual hermeneutic, interpreting some passages literally and others symbolically to fit their view. For example, they take “the great city” literally in Revelation 11:8 to identify Jerusalem, but then interpret Babylon’s worldwide influence symbolically. This inconsistency undermines their approach.
Global vs. Local Language
Revelation describes Babylon’s influence as truly global:
- “The kings of the earth committed adultery with her” (Rev 17:2)
- “All nations have drunk the wine of her adulteries” (Rev 18:3)
- “The merchants of the earth grew rich from her excessive luxuries” (Rev 18:3)
This universal language doesn’t fit Jerusalem’s limited influence in the first century. As Dr. Andy Woods notes, “It is also fatal to the preterist view that the influence of Jerusalem was at its lowest in the two centuries preceding A.D. 70, whereas Babylon’s demise in Revelation 17–18 is an immediate fall from great power and prosperity.”
Economic Descriptions Don’t Fit
Revelation 18 portrays Babylon as the center of worldwide commerce and trade. Yet Jerusalem was not a major economic power in the first century. It was not a port city and was geographically removed from main trade routes. The detailed economic descriptions in Revelation 18 simply do not match Jerusalem’s situation.
Sudden vs. Gradual Fall
Revelation depicts Babylon’s destruction as sudden and complete:
“In one hour such great wealth has been brought to ruin!” (Rev 18:17)
Jerusalem’s fall, however, was a prolonged siege lasting several years (66-70 AD). This does not match the immediacy of Babylon’s judgment in Revelation.
Finality of Destruction
Revelation states that Babylon “will never be found again” (Rev 18:21) after its destruction. Yet Jerusalem was rebuilt after 70 AD and still exists today. This permanence of judgment doesn’t fit Jerusalem’s history.
Idolatry Issues
Revelation portrays Babylon as steeped in idolatry. But first-century Judaism had largely abandoned idolatry after the Babylonian exile. This major sin was not characteristic of Jerusalem in Jesus’ day.
Unfulfilled Old Testament Prophecies
Many Old Testament prophecies about Babylon’s ultimate destruction (e.g. Isaiah 13-14, Jeremiah 50-51) have never been literally fulfilled. The preterist view leaves no place for these prophecies to be realized if Babylon is equated with Jerusalem which fell in 70 AD.
The Better Alternative: Future Babylon
Rather than forcing Revelation’s Babylon to fit first-century Jerusalem, a more consistent interpretation sees it as a future literal city that will dominate the world economically and politically in the end times. This view aligns with the global language used to describe Babylon and allows for the literal fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies.
As Dr. Charles Dyer explains, “The Babylon in these chapters, though it might have religious aspects, is one that will exist geographically and politically.” This future Babylon will likely arise in the same geographic region as ancient Babylon, becoming a center of worldwide rebellion against God before facing divine judgment.
Conclusion
While the preterist interpretation of Babylon as Jerusalem may seem attractive at first glance, it ultimately fails to account for the details given in Revelation and creates more problems than it solves. A literal future Babylon better fits the biblical descriptions and allows for a more consistent interpretation of prophecy.
As we study Revelation, we must be careful not to force symbolic meanings onto the text when a literal reading makes sense. By taking God’s Word at face value, we can better understand His plans for the future and live in light of Christ’s return.
