Peter's Babylon

[mosheli]

(Not sure if this is better under Letters to the Congregations or First Century Believers or The Land or Early Christian Thinking or Hebraic Roots of Christianity. If you want to shift it you can.)

There was a thread/topic in a Christian forum about evidence for Peter in Rome which sparked this post. The verse in 1 Peter 5 saying "Greets you she in Babylon elected with (you)" was quoted and is seen by some to be evidence for Peter having been in Rome since Babylon in Revelation/Apocalypse is seemingly implied to be Rome (7 hills/mountains, etc). (Though the verse only seemingly may imply that Peter was in Babylon, it might be possible that Peter was only passing on greetings from Babylon but wasn't there himself?) This made me do some investigation and as a result I came to find that for various reasons it looks like it is possible that Peter's Babylon is a name for Jerusalem. So I thought I would throw out the question here of whether you think this is possible or not, or what/where you think his Babylon was.

(I know there is already a thread on Who/what is Babylon but its first post says it is about Babylon of Revelation, not the one of 1 Peter (or 1 Kefa), though some posts/comments do mention Peter's one. So I thought this should be a different thread since it might be abit off topic in the other one.)

I don't think that Babylon in Revelation is Jerusalem, but I think that in 1 Peter Peter used the name Babylon as a sort of label for Jerusalem of the time similar to the "Sodom and Egypt" one in Revelation, and that the applying of the name/label/epithet Babylon was for a reason relating to some bad connotation that the Old Testament Babylon/Babel represents/typifies, like some saying it represents "oppression/captivity".

There doesn't seem to be much evidence for Peter/Cephas having been in Rome. Some of the traditional evidence for him being there might really relate to Paul in Rome, eg Hermes' house might relate to Paul being identified with Mercury in Acts 4:12 and Paul's rented house in Acts 28:30(or it might relate to Nero's golden house?) Peter's alleged crucifixion in Rome would really be Paul's.
There is maybe less reason than hitherto assumed for Rome to be called Babylon at that time (though Rome did even then have some similarities to Babylon such as: all roads lead to Rome; Cato expelled moneylenders, spoke against alien influences; Cicero calls Rome a city formed from confluence of nations; Lucan says Rome not peopled by its own citizens but by scourings of world; "complaint of indigenous natives that capital had attracted vices of the universe & manners of opposite nations"; Constantius marvels at the haste with which all human beings of the world flock to Rome).

There also doesn't seem much evidence for Peter having been at the Babylon in Mesopotamia.

But there are some reasons for thinking that Peter's Babylon was Jerusalem.
Peter was apostle to the Jews, Paul to the gentiles.
Peter addressed his letter to those scattered in Asia Minor, which seems to me make sense that he was writing from where they are scattered from (or from the viewpoint of Jerusalem).
There are some similarities of Babel/Babylon and Jerusalem:

Babylon is whence nations dispersed in Genesis 11. Its end is a flood in one of the prophets.
Jerusalem is from whence the Diaspora/flood of Jews happened. (Though Peter must have written before the destruction of Jerusalem of 70 or Diaspora of 132/135 because it is not likely he was in Roman Jerusalem after then.)
Peter wrote to those "scattered".
("Reverse of division of languages at Babel" at Pentecost in Acts.)

Babylon in Revelation has 7 hills/mountains.
Jerusalem is supposed to be built on 7 hills/mountains (Scopus, Olivet, Mt of Corruption, Ophel, Original Mt Zion, New Mt Zion, the hill on which Antonia fortress was built). (Though this is dubious since 3 of them are outside the ancient city walls.)

Babylon: Peter there (1 Peter 5).
Jerusalem: Peter was there (Acts 1-5, 8, 11, 15, Gal 1, 2).

Babylon: Kasdim/Chaldean/Aramaic/Syriac:
Jews/Christians: Aramaic, Syria.

Babylon: in Asia.
Jerusalem: in Asia.

Babylon: god/idol Succoth-Benoth. Bel. Merodach/Marduk.
Israelites/Jews: Sakkuth (Amos 5). Succoth. Baal. Mordechai.

Babylon: Babel, "gateway of God".
Jews: Zerubbabel. Babylonian Talmud? City of God's historical & prophetic plan.

Ephesus the 1st of the 7 churches on Revelation 1-3 seems to be an analogous match for Jerusalem since many details of Ephesus are analogous to details of Jerusalem, which means the 1st church age is the early church centered at Jerusalem (not at Rome).
It makes sense that Jerusalem was the original center of Messianism/Christianity not Rome ("Pergamos"?), and it still is; and Peter/Cephas was the leader of the apostles (and James was leader of the community and was at Jerusalem). There seems no reason or sense in Peter going to Rome.
Peter/Cephas also means rock/stone and may perhaps correspond with the Shetiyah on the temple mount?

There are also similarities between Ephesus and Babylon. Details of Ephesus include:
- shrine/temple of many-breasted divine mother Diana/Artemis/Ashera (virgin goddess).
- destroyed by an inundation.
- important commercial city. Noted for commerce.

So I think Peter's Babylon was a name/label for Jerusalem then, and that there are 3 different Babylons of Genesis 10, 1 Peter, and Revelation. (I'm not saying the true Messianic Jerusalem is Babylon, rather that Peter/Kefa used it as a epithet for the contemporary unsaved Jerusalem.)
John saying "bear you where you do not wish" may not mean Rome, the context and translation and meaning of the verse could mean something else.

[alon]

- Kefa/Peter is fine, since that is where your referenced text is. -

In the greeting he tells who he is writing to:

1 Peter 1 (ESV) Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

The author here is Simon Peter, as he identifies himself with the first word of the text. Then he tells us who he is writing to: "To those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia." All these are in the region of modern eastern Turkey, including Asia. The text does not refer to the continent of Asia.

The tone of this letter is entirely inspirational. Peter is trying to encourage them to stay the course, hold fast to their salvation. So I do not see any negative connotation in his referring to "She who is at Babylon." 
 
1 Peter 5:13 She who is at Babylon, who is likewise chosen, sends you greetings, and so does Mark, my son.

He clearly says this woman is chosen, meaning she is a sister in Yeshua, and she is sending greetings. He also passes along greetings from "Mark, my son." Nothing negative there. So in my opinion these are greetings being passed along, and I see no reason for coded messages or especially a negative reference to Yerushalayim or Rome. A negative remark like that would be out of character for the letter.

Thankfully Kefa is not as long winded or as complex a thinker as Rav Shaul. Keep it simple with Peter. I tend to read him mostly in the peshat.

[mosheli]

Good points Alon. I feel abit stupid now! (It was not such a great find after all!)

I didn't notice before that the "she" could be an individual, I automatically/habitually thought it was "she" for a church/congregation.

So from your understanding/view, do you mean/think that Peter/Kefa was not in Babylon himself but was just passing a greeting on from the she in Babylon? Or do you think it means Peter was also in "Babylon" himself, and if so then is it the literal Babylon in Iraq (since you point out Peter is more simple/straight forward and not complex), or a "code" name for Rome or Yerushalayim or other?

Do you see any similarity of 1 Peter 5:13 with John 2:1 and/or 2:13? If the elect lady of 2 John 1 is Mary as Chuck Missler suggested, then might the "she" of 1 Peter 5 possibly even be Mary?

If Peter is simple not complex then I see now that Mark (John Mark son of Mary?) is Peter's actual son? Or does he use "son" like "children" in 1 Corinthians 4:14, and like Timothy (son of a Jewess and Grecian in Acts 16:1) is Paul's "child" in 1 Cor 4:17 and in 1 Timothy 1:2 & 1:18 & 2 Timothy 1:2 & 2:1, and children Galatians 4:19 and Ephesians 5:1, and Titus is Paul's child in Titus 1:4 and Onesimus is Paul's child in Philemon 1:10, and John's little children in 1 John 2:1-28, 3:7-18, 4:4, 5:21? Though I assume Gaius is John's child in 3 John 1:4?

[mosheli]

Edit:

On thinking it doesn't make much sense Peter saying she (individual) who is in Babylon greets you, bcause who is the she and why so prominent to greet from Babylon or Rome?* If it was an individual she it must be someone in the bible like Mary in Jerusalem/Israel, but then the Babylon name/epithet wouldn't make sense as much for just an individual as for a congregation.
It says "elected with (you)", which seems maybe odd if she is an individual and Peter's recipients are people.

It also maybe doesn't make sense my previous idea that it meant Peter was also in Babylon with the she, because I now see that the words "she who is in Babylon" mean she was in and he was not in.

So my provisional theory now is the she was a (Jewish) messianic/christian congregation* in Babylon Iraq or "Babylon"/Rome but Peter was not also there himself or writing from there.

Though it may still be possible that the she is a congregation* and that Peter's words do imply association of Peter and the she in Babylon/"Babylon" and that Peter was also there.

* the she is elect/chosen like the lady in 2 John 1 & 13. Does this mean favoured like Mary (not in Catholic sense just in Matthew/Luke verses sense), or elect/chosen like a congregation/church of messianics/christians, or elect/chosen/saved like individual messianic/christian?

Summary:
- was the she an individual or a congregation/community/church? If an individual who could this woman be to be so prominent to mention?
- was Peter also in Babylon or not?
- was Babylon the literal one in Iraq, or was it a epithet. If an epithet is it Rome, or Jerusalem or other?
- if the she was a prominent individual and if Babylon was in Iraq or Italy where in the bible is such a women there?

[alon]

Jun 15, 2021 2:06:57 GMT -8 mosheli said:

Good points Alon. I feel abit stupid now! (It was not such a great find after all!)

I didn't notice before that the "she" could be an individual, I automatically/habitually thought it was "she" for a church/congregation.

So from your understanding/view, do you mean/think that Peter/Kefa was not in Babylon himself but was just passing a greeting on from the she in Babylon? Or do you think it means Peter was also in "Babylon" himself, and if so then is it the literal Babylon in Iraq (since you point out Peter is more simple/straight forward and not complex), or a "code" name for Rome or Yerushalayim or other?

Do you see any similarity of 1 Peter 5:13 with John 2:1 and/or 2:13? If the elect lady of 2 John 1 is Mary as Chuck Missler suggested, then might the "she" of 1 Peter 5 possibly even be Mary?

If Peter is simple not complex then I see now that Mark (John Mark son of Mary?) is Peter's actual son? Or does he use "son" like "children" in 1 Corinthians 4:14, and like Timothy (son of a Jewess and Grecian in Acts 16:1) is Paul's "child" in 1 Cor 4:17 and in 1 Timothy 1:2 & 1:18 & 2 Timothy 1:2 & 2:1, and children Galatians 4:19 and Ephesians 5:1, and Titus is Paul's child in Titus 1:4 and Onesimus is Paul's child in Philemon 1:10, and John's little children in 1 John 2:1-28, 3:7-18, 4:4, 5:21? Though I assume Gaius is John's child in 3 John 1:4?

No reason to feel stupid. You have an inquiring mind, and obviously are not mentally lacking. But sometimes we do tend to overcomplicate things. And digging for the deeper meanings in scripture is a worthwhile endeavor. But sometimes, and especially with religion we can tend to read in too much to the text.

We are not told in what regard Peter refers to Mark as his son, or if he had a son named Mark, or if this is Mary's son, which would mean they were married. So I'll say no to the last one- which is me reading into scripture now. Not knowing these things, it would be difficult to relate this to any of those other scriptures.

Edit:

On thinking it doesn't make much sense Peter saying she (individual) who is in Babylon greets you, bcause who is the she and why so prominent to greet from Babylon or Rome?* If it was an individual she it must be someone in the bible like Mary in Jerusalem/Israel, but then the Babylon name/epithet wouldn't make sense as much for just an individual as for a congregation.
It says "elected with (you)", which seems maybe odd if she is an individual and Peter's recipients are people.

It also maybe doesn't make sense my previous idea that it meant Peter was also in Babylon with the she, because I now see that the words "she who is in Babylon" mean she was in and he was not in.
True. We are 

So my provisional theory now is the she was a (Jewish) messianic/christian congregation* in Babylon Iraq or "Babylon"/Rome but Peter was not also there himself or writing from there.

Though it may still be possible that the she is a congregation* and that Peter's words do imply association of Peter and the she in Babylon/"Babylon" and that Peter was also there.

* the she is elect/chosen like the lady in 2 John 1 & 13. Does this mean favoured like Mary (not in Catholic sense just in Matthew/Luke verses sense), or elect/chosen like a congregation/church of messianics/christians, or elect/chosen/saved like individual messianic/christian?

Summary:
- was the she an individual or a congregation/community/church? If an individual who could this woman be to be so prominent to mention?
- was Peter also in Babylon or not?
- was Babylon the literal one in Iraq, or was it a epithet. If an epithet is it Rome, or Jerusalem or other?
- if the she was a prominent individual and if Babylon was in Iraq or Italy where in the bible is such a women there?

She in the singular, you in the plural? Some translations do say it refers to the church. But the form used in the Greek can be masculine, feminine, or neuter, and would probably indicate an individual rather than a group, as it is singular. Still it is possible to refer to a group as such. But I do not speak Greek, so all I can go on are references. As for his being in Babylon, Peter was sent to that region, so if referring to Babylon as the region he was there. But I don't recall him being in the city of Babylon. Might be interesting to research.

If an individual, we are not told who she was. So I don't know, and wouldn't care to speculate.

I think it is literally Babylon, but could be a regional denotation. 

[mosheli]

It looks to me like Peter was just passing along greetings from church in Rome/"Babylon" but was not there himself (he was likely in Jerusalem/Israel).

1 Peter 5:13

is similar to and might even be refering to

Hebrews 13:24
Philippians 4:22
Titus 3:15
2 Timothy 4:21

and/or

2 John 13
3 John 14.

The singular and plural cases and grammar is unclear to me not being fluent in Greek and not being educated/learned enough in English language (names for types of words, senses, grammar, etc). biblehub.com/interlinear/1_peter/5.htm

I see no evidence for Peter being sent to Babylon(ia) in bible. And even what sources I've checked don't show much evidence for Peter in Babylon(ia) or even of much of a church there (though it is said the church there is one of the oldest and was founded in 1st century).

John Mark was son of Mary and cousin of Barnabas, so if he was Peter's son then Mary was sister of Nabas and was wife of Peter. Unless there was another Mark, but it seems unlikely for Peter to give a son that name unless the Mark was an added name given the John (like extra/other name Peter given/added to Simon). From Bible is it unclear where Mark was after last being seen heading for Cyprus in Acts.

Silvanus/Silas is also difficult to say where he was after last being seen at Corinth in Acts.