Maybe they just moved the real Babylon to NY. WT is close-by, isn't it?
I thought NOBODY would ever rebuild or live in Babylon?....but.....
by oompa 21 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Doug Mason
So the Bible says that Babylon was going to remain uninhabited forever. But look, it's not true!
Before we pour scorn on God, however, we should first question our understanding of Scripture.
It is so important that we do not try to understand their words through the way that we think, speak, reason, understand, use logic, through our science or mathematics, and so on.
Discover their contemporary context. Work out who was writing, the point they were making, their idioms, their hopes, their very immediate audience, their use of language such as hyperbole, idiomatic speech and colloquialisms, their contemporary religious and political history, and so on.
Understand the motives, misunderstandings, and mistakes of the writer(s) and their later editors. For example, research terms such as "deuteronomist", and see which books are attributed to that source alone, and the motives of that source. This sheds light on contradictions in detail between say the books of Chronicles and Kings.
Failing to take such critical contextual matters into serious consideration causes people to think that the stories of Genesis 1, the Flood and such are literal records, rather than being stories (parables, even?) that were being used to carry a message to counter a specific need at their specific time.
These men and women were not writing about us. They were not writing to us. They were addressing their own political situations.
If one of them really did think Babylon (or Damascus) was going to be without any person living there (and one would need to prove that this is what they literally meant), then we would have to say the writer got it wrong. They made a mistake. But don't blame God for something that a man wrote.
Doug
-
oompa
Doug Mason: But don't blame God for something that a man wrote.
Not sure about your entire post Doug. It seems like you recommend a lot of contemplating and analysis to make the Bible somehow fit....and therefore actually be accurate somehow......and thus be Gods word to mankind.
But then you recognise that it is just writings of men......which is what I believe....mans words and not Gods........so where are you on this?...........oompa
-
DaCheech
http://images.google.com/images?&um=1&hl=en&safe=off&q=babylon+iraq+photos&&sa=N&start=0&ndsp=21
the watchtower is
alwaysnever right -
abbagail
As for Babylon never being rebuilt: The Isaiah scriptures, chapter 13, verses 19,20, re: Babylon never being inhabited, if you read it in context from chapter 13, verse 1, all the way through verse 22, you'll see that prophecy is talking about the "DAY OF THE LORD," ie, when God pours out his Wrath during the 2nd half of the Tribulation (the very end battle is what is called Armageddon to take place in the Valley of Jezreel, or Megiddo). It will be AFTER THAT TIME, after the "Day of the LORD" that Babylon will not be rebuilt or inhabited.
Good idea not to use the WT as your sole source of prophectic info! ;-D
Try this instead:
Quote: http://www.khouse.org/articles/2004/523/
[...]
Many Bible handbooks, dictionaries, and commentaries give you the impression that Babylon was "destroyed" in 539 B.C. But it is important to realize that when Cyrus the Great captured Babylon he was able to take it over without a battle . In fact, this feat is celebrated in the famed Cylinder of Cyrus that is featured in the British Museum in London (see photo http://www.khouse.org/images/artpics/celecyrus_500x276.jpg ).
Babylon served as a secondary capital of the Persian Empire for two centuries until Alexander the Great conquered the Persians in 325 B.C. He made it his capital; in fact, he died there.
Four of his generals then divided up the empire, and subsequently Babylon gradually atrophied over the centuries. Yet, when Robert Koldewey, the German archaeologist, excavated it at the end of the 19th century, he was able to hire local residents to assist him.
[...]
End Quote.
------------------------------
Great info, though. No shortage of humans in the area from your list. I had heard this past summer that Babylon was only something like 56-57 miles south of Baghdad, and that if it was a nothing place, why was some special fancy underground wiring being installed there (say, vs. Baghdad where the new USA colossal Embassy is?) I don't remember the type of wiring, but heard it in a talk by some prophecy guys last summer, who supposedly have defense contacts, etc.: http://www.torrentz.com/c3f250d853f2d43fab091326dfc35974003cb6a5
As for the actual distance, I just found this at the Jewish Encyclopedia:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?letter=B&artid=51
[...]
The ruins which have been identified with ancient Babylon lie about 50 miles south of the city of Bagdad and on the east bank of the Euphrates. They are located between 44° and 45° east longitude, and between 32° and 33° north latitude, and extend over five miles from north to south.
[...]
-----------------------------
Re: Babylon on the banks of the Euphrates River... The Int'l Herald Tribune reported back in 2006:
UNESCO intends to put the magic back in Babylon
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/04/13/news/babylon.php
---------------------------
And with Baghdad only a hop-skip-and-jump to Babylon, why is the USA building their largest-in-the-world embassy there? News reports from 2006 about that:
USA Today:
Giant U.S. embassy rising in Baghdad
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-04-19-us-embassy_x.htm
THE SITE HAS 21 STRUCTURES
The 104-acre complex — the size of about 80 football fields...
The massive new embassy, being built on the banks of the Tigris River, is designed to be entirely self-sufficient...
New U.S. Embassy in Iraq cloaked in mystery
Baghdad locale, slated to be completed in 2007, to be largest of its kind in the world, the size of Vatican City, with the population of a small town, its own defense force, self-contained power and water...
That embassy will be six times larger than the UN compound in New York, and two-thirds the acreage of Washington’s National Mall.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12319798/
One more hole to throw the USA's money into... ;-/
U.S. Embassy in Baghdad Not Yet Finished But Ready to Grow
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,277953,00.html
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2004/03/the-largest-embassy-ever-run-by-any-country.html
Apr. 15, 2008 update: After all the cost overrides, the delays, and the sub-standard work, the U.S. government took ownership of its new Baghdad embassy yesterday. The "certificate of occupancy" gives it the right to leave the Saddam Hussein palace it has been using and occupy the 27 buildings within the Green Zone, a move expected in late May or early June.
Apr. 25, 2008 update: It may have cost over US$700 million but the new embassy complex "does not have enough fortified living quarters for hundreds of diplomats and other workers, who must remain temporarily in trailers without special rooftop protection against mortars and rockets" writes Bradley Brooks in an Associated Press investigation. To make matters worse, the personnel might not move in until 2009.
[...]
----------------------
Babylon was the spot for the original rebellion by the first wanna-be world dictator, Nimrod and his Tower of Babel. Confusion then, and confusion will reign there in the future. Ordo Ab Chao.
Babylon was the seat of the Ancient Mystery Religions ... think: MYSTERY BABYLON in Revelation. It has been said the Bible interprets itself. If so, it would seem plausible that Babylon HAS TO BE REBUILT and will no doubt have a part to play in the Luciferian Mysteries being reestablished -- out in the wide open -- during the Trib.
/ag -
Farkel
Doug Mason,
:It is so important that we do not try to understand their words through the way that we think, speak, reason, understand, use logic, through our science or mathematics, and so on.
Sounds like the way politicians operate.
Farkel -
Doug Mason
Oompa,
I don't mind if you don't agree with all that I wrote. That's ok by me. I would be disappointed if someone thought they had to be a clone.
I am sorry I do not make myself as clear as I ought, so let me have another go.
The Scriptures are writings of men. So if the writer got it wrong, don't park the blame on his God (presuming an acceptance of a being with divine attributes) for that man's mistakes.
These writers had their own immediate agendas, they were writing in their own environment. Therefore they used the expressions, understandings, language, etc., of their own times -- mostly late Iron Age, in the case of the OT. That is not difficult to understand.
They were not writing to us, any more than they were writing to people living 500 years ago or in 500 years time. We must not impress our style of thinking, our reasoning, our logic, upon the original writers. And cognisance must also be taken of the people who came later and re-edited the words, sometimes introducing their own misconceptions to make the words fit their ideas.
The WTS makes the gross error of thinking that the Scriptures were written about them and to them, sometimes exclusively so. (This is called Pesher, if you want to investigate further.)
I am not saying we must make the Scriptures fit our ideas, but that we need to climb into the times, lives and language of the people living at the times the words were written and rewritten. There is no magic or anything controversial about that, I would have thought.
If one is a theist (a believer in a divine Being) then the relationship must be with that Person, not with a Book. The Scriptures are a human record of how people lived and responded to events, in the power politics where religion played a key and dominant part. The Bible is not a Systematic Theology. It does not set out doctrine. It is a history book, written by men. And even then they got the history very wrong, with contradictions between individual authors -- it is important then to determine the reasons for those disparities. One starting point would be to study the concept of the "deuteronomist".
I am sorry if this means work and study. But it does mean making a personal decision, and giving others the freedom to have their own understandings that result from their study and research. Oh what damage the trite and forced WT interpretations have wrought.
I know it is slightly out of context with your original topic of "Babylon", but have you read the book "Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why", by Bart D. Ehrman?
Doug
-
oompa
Doug, thanks for the further explanation....very thought provoking.........I will look into this Pesher thing, and I have thought about reading tha Misquoting Jesus book....so now probably will.....thanks.....oompa
-
Doug Mason
oompa,
I apologise for my incomplete response. Rather than only pointing to the direction that I believe must be taken when reading Scripture, I ought to have at least suggested some resources directly relevant to the OT. Two excellent books on the "Old Testament" that I particularly like are:
"Old Testament Survey: The Message, Forms, and Background of the Old Testament", 2nd edition, Lasor, Hubbard, Bush (published by Eerdmans), ISBN 978-0-8028-3788-2
"Dictionary of the Old Testament Historical Books", Arnold, Williamson, (published by Inter-Varsity Press).
I highly recommend them.
When a Scripture's contemporary situation is not taken into account, the reader could fall to fanciful speculation, such was done by another poster in this thread in regards to Isaiah 13. Such fantasies show complete disrespect for that grand document. Isaiah was speaking of the situation that was confronting the peoples of Judah and Jerusalem. Leave fantasyland to Disney, and see the enormous pressures that underscore Isaiah's utterances.
The following two passages are from the "OT Survey" book that I mention above. They discuss the contemporary situation that faced Isaiah, which included the role of Isaiah 13.
Compare the following passages against the speculative and irreverant mishandling of Isaiah 13 by that other poster.
Doug
-----------------------
[page 280]
About this time Pekah of Israel was overthrown, and his successor Hoshea paid tribute to Tiglath-pileser after the Assyrian king had inflicted horrible devastation on Damascus (732). When Tiglath-pileser died in 727, Hoshea refused to pay tribute to his successor, Shalmaneser V. Instead, Hoshea courted Egypt as an ally (2 Kgs. 17:4). Assyria moved against Israel and seized the king and his land, but was unable to take Samaria, the capital. After a three-year siege, Samaria fell (721) either to Shalmaneser or his successor Sargon II (who claimed the victory). A host of Israelites were then carried into captivity.The land was resettled by captives from other lands, including Babylonians (v. 24), which may partly explain Isaiah's intimate knowledge of Babylon. With the fall of the northern kingdom, Assyria extended its empire to the northern boundary of Judah.
It is this crisis which provides the backdrop for the messages of judgment and hope in chs. 7-14.
-----------------------[page294]
Because Zion belongs primarily to Yahweh and only secondarily to the people, God exercises full freedom in dealing with its crimes within and its military threats without. This freedom sets up the rhythm of judgment and hope that dominates [Isaiah] chs. 1-39.A prominent beat in that rhythm is the judgment of the nations that sets the context for judgment of Judah and Jerusalem. These were the nations whose religious and social practices God's people were tempted to imitate. They were also the nations who participated in or gloated over Judah's misfortunes: Babylon (13:1-14:23; 21:6-10), Assyria (14:24-27), Philistia (14:28-32), Moab (15:1-16:14), Damascus (17:1-14), Ethiopia (18:17; 20:1-6), Egypt (19:1-20:6), Edom (21:11-12), Arabia (21:13-17), and Tyre (23:1-18).
Most of these had also felt to a milder degree the pain of Assyrian conquest, whether under Tiglath-pileser Ill, Shalmaneser V, Sargon II (20:1), or Sennacherib.
The large space given to them in the book [of Isaiah] signaled clear messages to Judah: (1) their Lord was Ruler of the nations that did not yet call on his name; (2) those nations would be judged by Yahweh for their pagan worship, brazen pride, and inhumane treatment of their enemies; (3) yet they would also be used as part of God's process of purging his people of their transgressions of his will; (4) so sovereign was the Lord of Judah and Israel that they were to trust him, and not alien powers, for their military and political security, nor even rely on their horses and weapons; (5) above all, the empty worship, vain self-glory, and savage cruelty of the nations was to be deplored, not adopted by the covenant people.
------------------------- -
Satanus
Doug
'we need to climb into the times, lives and language of the people living at the times the words were written and rewritten. There is no magic or anything controversial about that, I would have thought.
If one is a theist (a believer in a divine Being) then the relationship must be with that Person, not with a Book. The Scriptures are a human record of how people lived and responded to events, in the power politics where religion played a key and dominant part. The Bible is not a Systematic Theology. It does not set out doctrine. It is a history book, written by men.'
Well said. Let's leave it at that. If the jewish god wants to speak to anyone, or to the whole human race, he can do so, anew.
S
