The “Great City” of Revelation 11

Durham on why Revelation 11’s “Great city” is Rome and not Jerusalem:

“This great City is set out in three properties, which are spiritual, that is, mystically to be understood; So, 1 Corinth. 11, they all eat that spiritual food, &c. that is, something represented by these names, which is to be understood in a spirituall sense and not literally, but as she is called MYSTERIE, BABYLON, &c. Chap. 17:5 because their is a mysterious resemblance, so here she is called spiritually Sodom, that is, for luxury, pride, fulnesse of bread and spirituall uncleannesse, abominable, Ezek. 16:2. Egypt, that is, having and exercising a spirituall tyrannie over Gods people, and abounding in spirituall Idols, as, Egypt did in a more grosse way, for which Israel could not sacrifice among them. 3. It is said, that our Lord was crucified there; not literally, but spiritually as the word before cleareth, and as that word also doth clear that is, either not only was He crucified at Jerusalem, but also there, or it is spiritually Egypt, also spiritually our Lord was crucified there, which cannot agree to Jerusalem, neither to Egypt nor Sodom at that time literally taken: neither were it any mysterie, or spiritually to be understood of Jerusalem (which never getteth the name of the great City) literally. And it is rather designed by that paraphrase, where our Lord was crucified, than by Jerusalem, because mystically the true Church is still in this Book set out by that. This part of the description agreeth to Rome, 1. In that under its dominion, Christ was crucified, and by its Authority, to wit, by a President of theirs Pontius Pilate; for, He was delvered to the Gentile. 2. In respect; of His Members, Ordinances, &c. there He had been long persecuted and crucified in them and put to open shame, Heb. 6:6. In the street of this city, that is, publickly by their Authority, as malefactors used to be in the streets: this is not private murther, but open avowed persecution. See for this, Petrarcha, lib. Epist, sine titulo Epist. 16. who wrote three hundred years since.”

(Durham, Commentary on Revelation, 418)

Source: https://puritanboard.com/threads/historicist-hermeneutic-no-longer-feasible.93406/, comment 2

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s