HOME  Why its a mistake to give the Catholic Church support via membership or donations



Christianity boasts that the true faith, or at least enough of it to keep salvation possible, will always exist on the earth. This is a boast for they have a Bible that accuses everybody of hating Godís ways (Romans 3) and people of being experts at looking as if they are true disciples of the God they loathe. They all agree that loving God and believing what he has revealed is so unnatural to us because we were born fallen beings as a result of the rebellion of Adam and Eve that God has to give us his grace, that is his supernatural help, so that we might please him. Clearly then we should not be too surprised if we find the whole world is apostate from divine truth. The Bible says that Christians will corrupt and apostatise from the true faith of Jesus - if it doesn't say all will do this then it certainly says most will! That alone should disturb the Churches.

Texts that say the faith is once for all given and the gates of Hell will never prevail over the Church are not evidence that total apostasy cannot happen. Perhaps as the Mormons say, the truth needed to be rediscovered and the Church needs to be restored.  Jesus supposedly told the Mormon founder Smith that Christendom was apostate.

My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)óand which I should join.  I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: ďthey draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.Ē  He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time.


Even believing historians struggle with how the New Testament reshapes the story of Jesus to suit the agenda of apostles and scripture-mongers.  For example, Christ means a real political king - one who is going to authorise executions and wars and taxes.  Jesus never did any of that.  The evidence is that if he existed he did not claim to be Christ which explains why he would not tell anybody in the Gospel of Mark that he was the Christ.  Christianity turns him into a spiritual king but even Moses was that and it makes Jesus nothing special. Christianity is not really Christianity.  The word Christ has been redefined so much that clearly this religion is in danger in the light of the Bible.  The First Letter of John says that there is no salvation or holiness in anybody who does not accept Jesus as the Christ.
The Bible certainly says that most of the Church will leave the faith and create a fake Church. And it also says that after this everybody else with throw in their lot with the apostates as well.
Ezekiel 7:26 speaks of a time when prophetic visions will be desired and when the law will perish from the priest meaning that the priest ignores it. Context in verse 21 shows the prophecy has not been fulfilled. It says the wicked of the earth will take the spoil of Israel. This never happened. Christians will have to believe the time for this is yet to come. It speaks of apostasy.

Amos 8:11,12 has God saying that he will send a famine on the land, not a famine of food but of hearing the word of God and that the people will be scattered and search all over the world for the word of God and not find it. Catholics say these verses simply say that because Israel at the time was disobedient God was making this vow to them. But it predicts complete apostasy and the way it starts off saying that these days will come. Both these show that it cannot be proved to refer to Amos generation. The Jews were never accused of apostasy before the time of Christ. It is saying that one day that truth will be so corrupted than even the Jews wonít be able to get any of it. It predicts complete apostasy for the world.
Micah 3 also predicts that nobody will get an answer from God one day. It refers to the prophets of those days who were leading the people astray but can be read as referring to all the false prophets throughout all time as well. The prophets who will cover their lips for shame for God is not speaking to them and they have no way of hearing from him meaning there are no true prophets are in the future. This could only be fulfilled after the time of Jesus Christ.
Isaiah 24:5-9 says that the people of the earth have changed the ordinances of God which means a change of religion. God strikes the earth with a curse for all have gone astray and the curse devours the earth and punishes the world with fire leaving only a few left. Those that are left are said to have no joy. The true faith gives joy so they donít have it or anything like it. This section predicts total apostasy.
Isaiah 7 has the prophet asking King Ahaz what sign God will give him. He says he will not tempt God. So the prophet says he will get a sign where a girl conceives and bears a son and calls him Emmanuel and warns that after the birth Israel will experience such desolation and poverty that it will barely have anything. Matthew says the prophecy is about the birth of Jesus. But it is not for it is a sign for Ahaz and the events predicted did not occur after Jesus but before. The Christians say that Matthew would not made made a mistake or lied for people could check him out and see the prophecy in context. So they argue that Matthew spiritualised the text. He was taking a figurative meaning from it for the purpose of his argument rather than the literal meaning. If so then the poverty and desolation of Israel it predicts must refer to the spiritual desolation and utter poverty of the Church the new Israel. It is predicting apostasy if you accept this stuff about figurative or spiritual meaning.
Jesus told his twelve apostles in Matthew 10 that they will be persecuted for believing in and serving him in the future and that all will hate them. He said the same thing in Luke 21. He tells his followers that they will be betrayed by close loved ones and some will be put to death and you will be hated by all men - meaning virtually all men or the near 100% majority - "on account of my name". My name means my authority more than just the name of Jesus.

St Paul wrote, "But if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away". The Pentecostals say he only means there will be no use for these gifts in Heaven. Others think he is telling us why there are no such gifts now and that those who say they have them are deluded. Knowledge in fact seems to refer to religious knowledge. Simple as that. It will be done away which to me suggests Christianity is being prophesied to fall into apostasy. Religious knowledge cannot pass away in Heaven for it would be confirmed there.
1 Timothy 4:1-3 says, "Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth."

Why does he emphasise that the Spirit has clearly said this? It would stand to reason that no matter what kind of group is formed in this world be it religious or not that error and lies will creep in. The reason for the emphasis is that the apostate faith will look good. It will be a good copy. Perhaps some Catholics may see that the some is referring to the priesthood which certainly is guilty of lies and enabling lies and won't marry and keeps away from foods at times. Paul is clear the the food rules are about ingratitude to God - he knows those who make the rules claim they are about self-discipline and giving something up for God but he does not buy that.

Paul says here that in the last days, people would depart from the faith and obey the doctrines of devils. This is a prediction of a huge apostasy worse than any other for Christians have always been corrupting the faith. The last days refers to the whole period after Christ for John said that the people living in the first century were living in the last days (1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Timothy 3; 2 Peter 3). Apostasy would start as soon as Paul dies (Acts 20). Catholics would say that this refers to the small bands of heretics who left the Church during the early years. But the epistles mention that Paul had extremely serious problems with heretics before he died so when Paul warned the people about what would happen after he died even though apostasy was common before it he must have had a huge and terrible and unimaginable apostasy in mind. It must have been unique when it was spoken of as if it was worse than the apostasy that was taking place when he was speaking.
There can be no doubt that since apostasy is something that happens all the time in every sect and is the scourge of every religion that the big apostasy in Christianity must be massive and involve nearly everybody if not all. The big apostasy must be worse than any other apostasy for men are not attracted to the gospel message by nature (1 Corinthians 2:14) and because Satan is a master of deception and hates Christianity. The apostasy is so grave and obviously horrific and must seem to be about to destroy the faith that it is presented as a sign that the second coming of Christ is nigh. It does warn that most of what is presented as Christianity is not Christianity at all.
Matthew 24:9-10 has Jesus telling the disciples, "You will be arrested, persecuted and killed. You will be hated by ALL men because of me. And then many will abandon the faith." This implies that the vast majority of people will hate the apostles. If the apostles are dead, they could be hated by all men now. That would imply complete apostasy. It is clear that Matthew 24 speaks of most people being haters of Jesus and therefore apostates. They may invent a version of Jesus of their own but they still hate the real one. Earlier Jesus said that God will preserve those who persevere to the end. Jesus is only promising that. But its possible there will be nobody persevering.
Jesus tells his Jewish opponents, You will look for me, but you will not find me; and where I am, you cannot come." John 7:34
What did [Jesus] mean when he said, 'You will look for me, but you will not find me,' and 'Where I am, you cannot come'?" John 7:36
Once more Jesus said to them, "I am going away, and you will look for me, and you will die in your sin. Where I go, you cannot come." John 8:21
So that was said to the Jews - and the same startlingly was said to his own disciples.
Jesus said, "My children, I will be with you only a little longer. You will look for me, and just as I told the Jews, so I tell you now: Where I am going, you cannot come." John 13:33
Acts 20:29-31 has Paul saying that after he dies wolves will arise even within the Christian fold to corrupt the faith and he has warned them about this for three years with tears. The way Paul teaches this as so urgent and something to be constantly remembered shows that it was to be a very serious apostasy indeed and not far away. He said this to the Church in Ephesus and some use that to object that this does not infer that the whole Church will be troubled by apostasy but only the Ephesian wing. But the way he speaks in general terms of the Church of God that Jesus purchased with his blood indicates that he was telling the Ephesians what would happen to the general Church. He is speaking to the Church as a whole through the Ephesians just like the people can speak of and to his Church as a whole but directly to the people of Mexico.

2 Timothy explains how Paul had nobody to take his side the first time he had to defend himself. What does he refer to? How long ago was it? The answers do not matter as much as Paul being on trial for his faith. A religion that disregards one of its major figures is one that deserves to be suspected of apostate leanings.
2 Thessalonians 2:3 states that you must let nobody deceive you by any means for the day Christ will come cannot come unless a falling away or apostasy happens first. Now the letters of Paul, and indeed lots of places in the New Testament, talk about believers who turned away from the faith and started teaching heretical doctrines including such ideas as that the resurrection of Christ was doubtful and that Jesus died and rose again so that we could sin as we wished and so on. The Church had its apostates from the beginning. Christians today would have you think that it is saying that some people will try to deceive you into thinking nobody will apostatise. That makes no sense. If you take the verse to be referring to complete apostasy then it makes perfect sense.
2 Thessalonians 2 speaks of a future apostasy of the Church with no hint that it will involve only some members of the Church and not all. It says the deceiver the son of perdition will sit in the Temple of God as if he is God. That means that those who have the true faith will be led astray by having a false teacher who they regard as infallible in their midst. The temple stands for the Church which is the Temple of God. It is a clear declaration that the whole Church will leave the faith. If this is wrong - which it isn't - then most and some of the Church will leave then it follows that the Church will still exist but be smaller. The loyal remnant would then be the Temple of God. But Paul says the Devilís man will sit in this Temple and preside over it. What he is saying here is that even the holiest Church will go over to the Devil. The Temple of God will go over to the Devil so that it will be the Temple of God no more. There is no other Temple of God so the entire faith is apostate.
1 Timothy 4 says that the Holy Spirit says that in the latter days some will leave the faith and start listening to Devils. These doctrines include banning marriage and forbidding to eat meat. Some say this refers to those who commit these specific heresies. It describes one part of the apostasy which will take many forms. It does not imply that the rest will remain true to the faith and that the apostasy will be incomplete. It does not mean that this apostasy will take place in the distant future for the New Testament considers the whole time between the apostles and the coming of Christ at the end of the world to be the latter days or the last days. That apostasy and people forbidding marriage and meat eating in the name of Christ was happening in those days. That was the days the prophecy had in mind. To say that some will apostatise does not exclude the possibility that all will apostatise later. The same can apply to 2 Peter 2:1-3. It warns that false teachers will arise among "yourselves" and lead "many" astray. That is speaking in the present and near future. It does not say if there will be a complete apostasy in the future or not.
2 Timothy 3 speaks of how men in the last days will have a form of godliness but deny the power of God by the way they teach and live their lives. 2 Timothy 4 tells Timothy to preach the gospel fervently for the time will come when they wonít listen to it. He gives no hint that he means some and not all so he means all.  
The First Epistle of John, an apostle or authorised teacher created by Christ, taught that it was the final hour. He mentioned that antichrist was to come during the last hour. He says nothing about him being there yet. But he said that the proof that it was the last hour was the huge number of antichrists, people who denied that Jesus was the Christ or that he was a real man going about after having left the Church (2:18,19). This must have been one huge apostasy to make him think it was near the end especially when the Church had been suffering apostates from the beginning. He was certain that antichrist wasn't far off. Antichrist means not one who necessarily opposes Christ but one who stands in his place - in other words, one that acts like a Christ without his authority. The pope claims to be Vicar of Christ (one who stands in the place of Christ and who has his authority to teach and bar people from Heaven and control their salvation) and his priests and bishops claim to be other Christs. It is uncanny how there is a good match. If you believe the letter of John was written by God then you have to believe the Roman Catholic Church fulfilled his prophecy. The idea that apostasy was so great that it had to be the final hour or final time before the end of the world suggests that the apostasy will remain very powerful until the very end. It means most Christians will be fakes.
John writes that the antichrist is the one who denies that Jesus came in the flesh. The Roman Catholic Church says that the physical body of Jesus was not really his body. The real body is his substance which is not material at all. A body that has no parts or appearances is not a body at all. The Church uses its doctrine of substance being immaterial to "explain" how the priest can turn bread and wine into Jesus's body without anything physically changing. The Church is the antichrist.
Here is another way to put all this: The Roman Church says that the body of Jesus is not what saves us but a spiritual force that it falsely calls a body is. The bread at communion is turned into Jesus without any physical change taking place. This means that the real Jesus is not his body but a spiritual entity. It is this Jesus who saves us and who feeds us at communion. This matches the teaching of the heretics in the first century who said that Jesus did not come in the flesh. The First Epistle of John says that these heretics are antichrists. The Catholic Church is antichrist. It denies that the physical Jesus saves or is of any importance despite pretending that it believes Jesus came in the flesh. It pays lip-service to that teaching. It is only lip-service. John 6 then should not be taken by the Catholic Church to be saying that Jesus intended to turn bread into his body and drink into his blood.
John's same epistle said that because God lives inside true believers they don't need a teacher for God teaches them. Christianity today depends on academics and priests and theologians and pastors and popes to teach. That need is a sign of apostasy. It is a sign that the Church prefers what men say to what God says. If Peter was the rock the Church was built on, then later on he was not the only one. The papacy is a sign of apostasy for it claims to exist for the sake of teaching the people.
There is no Bible text that says there will be any believers on earth when Jesus comes. The First Letter of Paul to the Thessalonians chapter 4 says that the dead will rise first when Jesus returns and the living will be caught up to him. This can be taken as hypothetical and Paul uses "we" to describe the living believers which appears to support this. Paul was hypothesising what form the coming would take if it happened in his lifetime. Some say it does not contradict the view that there will be a total apostasy and that there will be true believers at the time Jesus returns.
The Bible says that a huge apostasy will occur. It must mean a huge apostasy of the vast majority for apostasy has been happening since the start. So the one it refers to is an extremely bad one. Perhaps a complete one. The complete apostasy idea is what fits the Bible the best and is explicitly taught. 
When the Catholic Church is so big and Churches like the Orthodox Churches of the east and many forms of Anglicanism are Catholic and the Bible says we must expect Jesus back anytime that is a warning bell because the Bible tells us that a huge apostasy must happen before Christ can return. Jesus said that we must be ready at all times for the Son of Man will return when we least expect it. These Churches because of their immense size must be apostate.

Roman Catholicism is not apostolic or built on the foundation of the apostles but is apostate. Any religion that claims to be apostolic condemns itself just by making that claim because it canít be built on the apostles but on what people have said the apostles taught. The difference is huge.
Jesus once wondered if there would be any faith on earth when he came back.

It is significant that the gospel of Mark - chapter 16 - has the risen Jesus promise signs that will follow believers which are listed as the gift of tongues, the power to handle snakes safely and be immune to poison and cure the sick but they are absent which must indicate that todays Christians are not true believers. If Jesus is the real deal it does not mean that Christianity is the real deal.
Jesus told the Jews that if he alone says he is the Son of God and the mouthpiece of God his testimony is invalid so he cited John the Baptist's testimony. Jesus says he cites it not that he accepts human testimony but that the people may be saved (John 5:31-33). He didn't regard his own disciples who supposedly witnessed his miracles as any good for providing testimony. That is significant. And it is dishonest to say, "This testimony is human and its no good but I will quote it anyway to save you." Mercenary! Anyway Jesus was asserting that real followers were nearly impossible to come by! He even said that the Jews did not have the love of God in them! That is very strong! We would expect him to say that they didn't have much love for God in them but he says they didn't love God at all!
Matthew says that a man asked Jesus to tell him the way to eternal life. The man called him good teacher. Matthew says Jesus retorted, "Why do you ask me about what is good? Only God is good!" Jesus meant that there would be a very very powerful tendency in humankind to distort God and God's ways. He was stern. The Churches say he didn't like the man calling him good because it implied that he was just a man who really cares and can teach what is good in spiritual affairs. They say he was being approached as good in the human sense and he didn't like that. They say he wanted to be called not good in the way a man can be good but good in the way God is good. The alternative is to say that Jesus denied he was good and so that he was God - the Churches of course reject that interpretation. If Jesus didn't like being called good in the human sense, he must expect us to hate being called good or thought good or relied on as an authority for knowing what good is. If he couldn't stand it and he was the Son of God, then we who are not like him should find it even more intolerable than he did! If the Church interpretation was right, then Jesus was indicating that it is dangerous to treat any man as an authority on God or God's ways. He was saying grave apostasy would be inevitable and most would go for it. Of course the Church ignores the logical conclusion of its interpretation!
Jesus said that the way to damnation is wide and the way to salvation is narrow and that many would try to enter the narrow gate and not be able. You are not really trying to enter if you are bent on rejecting Godís ways so Jesus is saying that you can try and still not get in because you are in the wrong religion. An all-powerful God could arrange things in such a way that most will have the truth or enough of the truth so God must want most people to be in error. God could have made all people believe that they have been born Catholics even if they have not been for he is almighty and lets us be deluded anyway. Thus, he is antichrist and anti-religion.
Jesus said in Matthew 12 that if a demon leaves the body of a man and the man stays evil that he will come back with more demons after wandering the earth looking for a place to stay and it is like this with his generation. Clearly there was no scarcity of people fit for possession when the whole generation was evil and in danger of possession. They must have been very evil indeed. Jesus talks as if the demons go looking to live in somebody worse and if they find none they go back to the man they left and recommend that other demons join them so the man ends up worse than at the beginning. So Jesus is saying the evil will get worse and worse and worse. When the Jewish leaders said he was casting out demons by the power of the prince of devils Jesus replied that if the prince does that his kingdom will fall down. So Satan needs to possess to have a kingdom and the Bible describes him as king of the world and the god of this world. So he must possess most people.
Demons have the destruction of the truth brought by Jesus as their supreme goal therefore Christianity would be apostate with only a handful of true believers if any. Demons have no need to dwell inside anybody for tempting is enough unless they are planning supernatural fraud and to make the person see false visions and to give the person delusional experiences of God. Not many visions are reported so the latter is what they are up to.

The Catholic claim that Protestantism is a hoax for it was not known before the Reformation would prove nothing even if it were correct for Jesus could preserve enough truth so that some could get saved by faith alone by accident.

The Bible says that most of the Church will leave the faith and create a fake Church. The Book of Revelation is clearest on this.

The only verse in Revelation that seems to say different is "The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, which said: "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah, and he will reign for ever and ever" (11:15).  The answer is that Revelation is thinking ahead at this point.  Later on it discusses the false religion of Babylon which fools people with its magic and promises Babylon will perish and be replaced by the reign of God.  The meaning is that there is no kingdom until after that.  So the verse does not say the kingdom is in the world now but say it is absent.  Read the verse in context.  You will see it refers to a time following when two prophets will be slain in Jerusalem by the beast.

Revelation 1:7 says ALL the tribes of the earth will grieve when Jesus returns. Obviously he is not too welcome! Jesus said the same thing in Matthew 24:3, 30. Revelation speaks of Jesus having seven stars which it explains are the seven churches. These stars are in his right hand meaning these Churches despite the scathing criticism he has for them are precious to him. Jerusalem and Rome are excluded from the list of Churches as if they were already considered apostate and given over to Satan. Revelation uses the number seven to signify completeness and perfection. All scholars agree with this.
Some think that the seven churches is just a device that means whole Church though only seven places where the Church was were mentioned. But that is stretching the symbolism too far. If that was all the book meant then why name the Churches? Why did Jesus tell the author to send a different letter to each Church? Some believers will say that the author choosing some centres and not others proves nothing. The author selected those centres and did it in such a way as to make up seven centres. Each centre had a letter to promote. His selection proves that these places were thought to have the correct Christian doctrine and to be part of the true Church. Far from thinking that Peter who reigned over the Church in Jerusalem was a pope, far from thinking that Peter went to Rome to rule the whole Church as pope, Revelation indicates that the Church in Jerusalem and Rome was apostate.
Two prophets are described as being two witnesses in Revelation 11.  This is following the law of Moses that every testimony depends on two witnesses which is clearly a hint that Christianity at that time is apostate when that was all that was available.  The witnesses are slain in Jerusalem which Revelation says is "figuratively known as Sodom" and "where their Lord was crucified" in the same chapter. Revelation says they have the power to strike the earth with any torment or plague they wish. They destroy their enemies by doing miracles. But after they have given their message from God, the beast of the abyss will come and kill them. Their bodies will lie in Jerusalem and be viewed by every tribe on earth for three days and a half. They are refused burial.  The implication is that they and their message were hated by the whole world so nobody would bury them. Then the prophets rise from the dead at the end of the three and a half days in the sight of their enemies and ascend to heaven on a cloud. It is plainly said the whole earth rejoiced and exchanged gifts in celebration of their death for the prophets TORTURED everybody on earth (Revelation 11:10). The hatred roused against them shows that attempts to say they harassed rather than tortured are dubious. Some translations try to soften the fact that the prophets were very cruel and vicious. The Christian God is essentially vindictive. The way the God of the book of Revelation gives the prophets the power to do whatever harmful miracles they want is a clear statement that the book of Revelation regards hatred for the sake of God as a good thing!! God is described as having begun to reign after the prophets give their message and die and go to Heaven (11:17). This implies that apostasy was rife. He barely had a Church when the prophets lived.
None of this has happened yet so the Christian has to hold it is still to come. 

It is interesting how Revelation gives us a pile of hard to decipher symbolism and then tells us that Sodom is a metaphor for Jerusalem!  It is as if it wants us to be sure it is being condemned!

Revelation shows that only two people will belong to God or speak for God during the time of darkness and apostasy. So the prophets have to teach not the pope. The prophecy exposes the Catholic lie that the papacy will never pass away until the end of the world and will never lead the Church into apostasy.
The New American Bible Catholic Edition surmises that the two prophets were Peter and Paul. But it was never claimed that their bodies were displayed anywhere let alone in Jerusalem or that they rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven. Also, they were not the only prophets. And Paul did not die in Jerusalem but Rome. Peter was more low-key than Paul so why would Peter be singled out for mention? And how could Christians be expected to believe that there were only two real apostles or prophets then? What about the others? What about the author of Revelation the contemporary of Peter and Paul who claimed to be a prophet?
Revelation 6:14 speaks of the heavens rolling up like a scroll and vanishing and all the islands and mountains being moved around. This happened as a result of Jesus the Lamb opening the sixth seal causing the sun to become black and the moon to look like blood. We read that all the kings of earth hid as a result. It says all those who had power and authority did the same - meaning those who had religious power as well. That would include the pope. Revelation uses much symbolism. The heavens and the mountains are Old Testament images representing godless religious powers (Isaiah 34:4 and Nahum 1:5). If we read Isaiah 34:4, 5 which inspires the symbolism we read how the heavens are scrolled up and then when God's sword has drunk its fill in the Heavens it will descend in judgement. So the heavens are scrolled up - this must be the heavens where God dwells meaning there is no way in there anymore and the word of God is not taught and only apostasy is taught. In Revelation, the sun becoming black refers to the word of God being covered up so that there is no religious light in the world.
Revelation speaks of a world superpower headquartered by Rome that does magic and bewitches the world with charm and beauty called the Whore of Babylon. No hint is given that the whore is a commercial operation or a political one though it is involved in selling and buying and politics. It is a religious organisation because whore is what the Bible calls a group of Christians who depart the faith and became fake Christians. Strictly speaking the Bible calls the Whore the Harlot not the Whore but Whore of Babylon is a popular term. Harlot means temple prostitute who sells her body for religious reasons. The harlot is a religion. Revelation says its prophecies will start coming true soon and the harlot will rule before Jesus returns. Since the Bible is clear that we must be ready all the time for Jesus coming back and expect him any time we have to assume the Roman Church is the harlot or at least all false religions are the harlot and Rome is using occult power to empower them in her struggle against God. But it is more natural that when Revelation refers to the harlot who works from Rome and her harlot daughters that the harlot in Rome is one religion.
Roman Catholicism refers to herself as her and she and mother Church. Pagan Rome never used the feminine symbolism. Roman Catholicism is the harlot.
Pagan Rome forced itself on the kings of the ancient world. Catholic Rome presented herself to the kings and the kings came to her. This matches the statement of Revelation that the harlot prostituted herself with the kings of the world. The kings were her clients.
The Catholic teaching that Jesus is fully in all the wafer makes it fully plain that people can believe that Jesus' penis is in their mouths when they receive communion. The Eucharist can be described as being Jesus' penis. This is religious style sex abuse. Pagan Rome never used temple prostitutes or perverse erotic rites. No wonder Revelation uses the sexual and religious connotations of a harlot to describe Catholic Rome.

The whore works with the great beast her god who forces the whole world to worship a false god and kills anybody that doesn't. The number of the beast is 666. This is usually thought to refer to the Roman Emperor Nero. Let's suppose that. If its Nero then it is not Nero as he was back then. Nero committed suicide by cutting his own throat but we read that the beast has this wound healed so this is resurrected Nero we have. This is a Nero with tremendous occult powers (Revelation 13:14). For a Christian, it predicts the return of Nero and his becoming pope. Satan had a throne and gave it to this resurrected Nero (Revelation 13:2). This throne must be in Rome meaning the papal throne. Revelation 14:12 says the saints are sustained and comforted in Heaven by the thought that the worshippers of the beast will suffer great torment in a pool of sulphur. The book indicates that it is a duty to hate the whore and the beast. Revelation 18:6 quotes a voice from Heaven commanding that the whore be paid back double for all the evil she ever did.
Page 37 of The Book of Revelation for Dummies rejects the idea that the 666 is about Nero. The reasons it says this is because the book was designed for a non-Jewish audience so Revelation translating Nero Caesar's name into Hebrew to add the letters to come up with 666 doesn't seem plausible. But on page 218 we read that non-Jews did know the system. Also Revelation depends heavily on Old Testament prophecy and the Jewish scriptures. It uses Hebrew devices despite being written for non-Hebrews. Another problem is how you have to change the usual spelling of Caesar to get the 666.
7 in Revelation stands for perfection and so 6 stands for imperfection and fallen from God (page 218, The Book of Revelation for Dummies). The 6 is next to the 7. This suggests that the evil may not be very obvious and may even look good. That is why it is best described as imperfect than evil. Imperfection is less easy to spot than evil is. The best evil masquerades as imperfection if it cannot manage to masquerade as good. The 666 suggests imperfection or defiance of God three times over. If 6 stands for imperfection and hidden evil then the 666 man or men must stand for imperfection that is three times more subtle and clever. The papacy has certainly managed to look fairly good despite its evil. Revelation says that the beast kills all who refuse his name or the number of his name. The name suggests that we have here a spiritual leader who wants all to accept him and the number of his name being the 666 suggests he wants people to receive evil sacraments from him to become captive to the supernatural power of evil. This fits the pope and his insidious and superficially innocuous evil better than the Roman Emperor who was evil outright.
Incidentally Rome was always stronger and more advanced than Jerusalem as a city which is why Revelation 18:18 proves the falsity of Catholic claims that the whore is Jerusalem. There we read that the mourners of the destroyed whore were saying no other city could ever have compared with her. Jerusalem is thought to be meant when the book condemned a city as Sodom or Egypt but at the same time the city is referred to as the beloved city (Revelation 20:9.
The Book of Revelation predicts that when the Whore of Babylon controls religion on earth that Godís angel will proclaim the gospel by appearing to everybody on earth who will see him in Heaven (Revelation 14:6). God does not teach the gospel this way unless he has no friends on earth who would do it. Jesus said that those who donít see his miraculous self and believe are more blessed than those who do (John 20:29).
Revelation says the whore is drunk on the blood of the saints. The Roman Catholic Church killed far more Christians than pagan Rome ever did. The author of Revelation says the whore killed some saints in his day and she will be around until the end of the world. This indicates that the whore was working on and through the Roman Empire before she developed the papacy and into her fully grown state. There can be no doubt that Catholicism is accused by the Book of Revelation of being the whore of Babylon for no organisation in Rome will ever have the power that she has.
Most Christians take Revelation 20 in a figurative sense. It says that an angel came down from Heaven and bound Satan for a thousand years so that during that time he would not be able to fool the nations. Then we read that those who had died for Jesus and had not received the mark of the beast on their foreheads and hands came to life and reigned with Jesus for one thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until after this time. Of those who rose first, Revelation says that the second death has no power over them but they shall be priests of God and of Christ. The second death is being thrown into the pool of burning sulphur (Revelation 21:8). After this reign Satan is released and deceives the world and gathers the nation for a world war. After that the last judgement takes place.
This chapter stands by itself.
Satan was bound but it never says when this binding took place except that it took place after the martyrs died. Those martyrs who refused to accept the mark of the beast reign with Jesus but we are not told where. It may mean in Heaven. But we read that no additions to their number were made in the thousand years. This implies that apostasy reigned on earth. God bound Satan up so that the apostasy is simply inexcusable and means that the religions of the world preferred to deceive themselves than to honour the truth. The dead that rose at the end of the thousand years are not said to be holy. In fact Satan gets released when they rise and he uses them in his world war.
The binding of Satan is traditionally and logically surmised to refer to the truth of God being issued throughout the world. There being no true Christians on earth while the martyrs reigned would indicate that the Churches were distorting and keeping people away from that truth and away from salvation.
The Mark of the Beast indicates some kind of religious ritual that prevents salvation and marks one as damned. The Roman Church claims to mark people's souls with its sacraments. Catholic baptism is supposed to mark the soul for all eternity.
The Church did kill people for refusing its baptism. Revelation indicates that rejecting the Mark of the Beast is of supreme importance for it singles this out.

The Bible says Christianity as it came from Christ has vanished from the earth.