Scripture Studies Re "Babylon" Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5

[JHM]

Deleted

[k-pappy]

It got buried amoung the other topics...that's all.

Bond

[k-pappy]

It wasn't gone, you just missed it.  I saw it yesterday when I was digging for one my own topics.

Bond

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

I read it...  You should send a manuscript to Tim LaHaye.

There's too much here to pick apart specifics.  I don't want to invest that much time in this.

Suffice to say that I think you've missed the boat on most (though not all) of the Scripture you used, by willfully rejecting history as a source.

Re: our other discussion, you would do well to note that Isaiah is actually two books edited together.  Those prophecies in the 1st section of the book are not married to those in the 2nd part of the book.

While "Babylon" is sometimes figurative (Revelation), it is not ALWAYS figurative.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

And you Mr Shillelagh simply ignore those parts of Scripture which don't fit your own interpretation of the Bible.

I don't have a systematic theology or approach to end times.  My view is that I don't know what will happen in the future.  So please tell me, how can I bend scripture to fit a view I don't have?

Much like Preterists in that regard. I ask yoiu again : When since the Great Flood has the following EVER happened ?

See Isaiah 13 : 12 (Jerusalem Bible)
Isaiah 13 : 12 : "I will make men scarcer than pure gold, human life scarcer than the gold of Ophir.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

1) It doesn't say that the statement Re making men rare as the gold of Ophir refers only to the immediate district of Babylon.

Isa 13:1 ¶ The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see.
Isa 13:19   And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.

2) Damascus is currantly a city. The statement that it shall be "Deserted FOREVER" would indicate that this has not yet happened, not to mention the bit about Jacob, (the Jews) going hungry as a result of the destruction..

4) Again your interpretation is ignoring key parts of the passage regarding "Edom" : a) Its smoke shall go up FOREVER b) None shall pass through it FOREVER AND EVER

Improve your knowledge of the Bible by understanding this word:

3) The bit about Babylon sinking under the boisterous waves of the sea would seem to me to rather coincide with the statement in Revelation about :

Yes it does.  This should cause you to think that the events of Revelation will be like those that happened in the past.  Not that they somehow are the same event.

Nuclear Bombs = "Lightning and Thunder" triggering the Greatest earthquake since man has been on the earth, which in turn sends Babylon underwater.

What a pack of nonsense !!!!

It doesn't say that the statement Re (this) refers in any way to these things.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Oh you have a view alright; it is the Preterist view that all the stuff in Isaiah 13 refers to events that happened in the past. And that view is clearly rubbish.

You speak of what you do not know.

Preterists believe all Bible prophecy is already fulfilled.  I believe some of it is still future.
Preterists also believe in a cessation of prophecy and other "sign gifts."  I believe they continue to the present.
Preterists do not believe in a physical resurrection.  I do.
Preterists believe Revelation was written before 70AD and fulfilled in the First Jewish-Roman war.  I believe Revelation was written ca 95AD and that it was partially fulfilled in the events of the Second Jewish-Roman war, with some events still yet to take place.

But, for the events of Isaiah 13 - yes, I believe they were fulfilled within the age that they were written in.  And that is CLEARLY not rubbish, as a majority of Bible students also hold that view.

However, I also believe in multiple fulfillments of prophecy - that the Word of the Lord spoken and fulfilled in the past can and does also find fulfillment again and yet again here in the world.  (This was the point my other post was driving towards).

But by all means, continue to pigeon-hole me into whatever pre-conception you think fits best.  I'm sure that's the best way to go.

Jarrod

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Again I would point out with regard to Isaiah 13 : 12 It has NOT happened since the Great Flood.

Sure it has.  See the explanation in the actual text, verse 14:

Isa 13:12   I will make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir.  
Isa 13:13   Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger.  
Isa 13:14   And it shall be as the chased roe, and as a sheep that no man taketh up: they shall every man turn to his own people, and flee every one into his own land.  

Yes, that happened.  Cyrus king of the Medes (& Persians) did indeed set free all the captives of Babylon, liberating the slave and servant classes, and allowing them to return to their countries of origin. The event is recorded in the Bible, as well as on the Cyrus Cylinder, an artifact chronicling Cyrus' deeds in cuneiform.

And so, yes, in Babylon, owning a man became very very rare, and a slave prohibitively expensive, more valuable than gold was a man.

To say it refers only to the immediate environs of Babylon is adding to the Prophetic Scripture, in an unwarrented manner.

I don't have to add anything - the first verse of the chapter says that it is about Babylon rather specifically.  There is no reason to suppose that this has changed by the time we get to verse 12.  You do understand that Babylon is a region, right?  Babel is the city at the capital of that region.

Further even if it were applied in that manner it would not necessarily  be true, The Babylonian empire was destroyed, - TRUE, - But it is an unjustified extension to say that NEARLY ALL THE BABYLONIANS WERE KILLED when that happened unless you have concrete evidence of that.

The Nabonidus Chronicle records that there was a "slaughter" of "the inhabitants of Akkad" (Babylon) following the Battle of Opis.  

I'll give you this - it is a bit difficult to tell all of what happened.  Cyrus appears to have been rather exceptional at propaganda.

For instance, the records indicate that Babel (the city itself) was taken peacefully.  They also indicate that the city was sieged, and that Cyrus had to divert the Euphrates river in order to breach the walls.  These cannot both be true statements.  Diverting the Euphrates would be a Herculean task (joke intended), sort of like trying to divert the Mississippi river.  

Further, the records indicating the taking of the city was peaceful were in a foundation document in Esagila.  Unless the priests decided to dig up the foundations of the temple in order to put it there, the temple had to be rebuilt during this time.  If the city were taken peacefully, why was the temple rebuilt?

The records indicate that Cyrus won the battle of Opis in a route, destroying the army of Akkad.  They also indicate that the same army of Akkad obliterated their own city of Opis, afterwards, as punishment because the city supported Cyrus in the battle.  Again, both statements can't be true.

Re the beliefs of the majority of Bible students, truthfully I couldn't care less. My own reading comprehension has been tested as high as 1 in 33,333 people. Show me a Bible student with a reasonably close level of reading comprehension, and I will pay attention to what he or she says.

Hopefully, the translators had your reading comprehension, in 2 languages, one of them a dead language.  And a solid working knowledge of the various historical documents that weren't unearthed or translated until the 19th - 20th centuries (hope U weren't using the KJV!)

And, hopefully, your reading comprehension skillz include the ability to account for cultural and literary norms for the periods in which these were written.  Can you tell me 2 characteristics of epic poetry in Assyriology?  What is parallelism, and why does it occur in Hebrew?  What's the most common literary device in Hebrew?  Would you recognize any of the traditional openings of a cuneiform epistle, and what could you tell me about the sender and addressee by reading that opening?  What is the appropriate date to assign each of the prophecies in Isaiah to?  What is Deutero-Isaiah, and which of these prophecies does it apply to?  Where was Isaiah written from?  How does the scope of the prophecies of Isaiah compare to the other major prophets?

Also, why is it that "burning pitch" actually means "lava" and not "burning pitch?"  Why does "bitumen" actually mean "ash" again?  (and you're giving me grief for not believing the whole text is literal?)  Are you familiar with the geography of ancient Edom?  Have you accounted for the special geological properties of that region?    Can you tell me what empire was metaphorically referred to as "Edom" long after the Edomites ceased to be a people?  How did Edom eventually meet its end?  What's the difference between Edom and Idumea?

Jarrod

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Are you familiar with the geography of ancient Edom?  Have you accounted for the special geological properties of that region?   

Ready for a geography lesson?

Ancient Edom was located at the South extremity of the Dead Sea, and at the height of its power extended south to the Gulf.  It is the lowest elevation on earth, the climate is desert, and the weather is... well it was 135 degrees on a clear day in the summer when I visited there.

The area follows, almost exactly, the path of the Great Rift Valley - the fault line between the African plate and the Arabian plate that is literally splitting from the African plate.

In this picture, the Dead Sea is visible about 80% of the way to the top, near the center.  Ancient Edom is the area on the "line" south of it connecting it to the body of water:



Since this is a fault line, volcanic activity exists all along the fault:



Note that due to the way the plates are moving apart (low friction), these volcanos are not usually explosive, and seismic activity is infrequent, though it still occurs. 

The major volcanic activity along the fault area are sulfur springs - thermal springs containing high levels of sulphur, which they carry away from volcanic vents.  (I went to a hot bath at one.  It's extremely relaxing and more than a little fun.)  Such springs feed the Dead Sea, which is one of the reasons why it has such high mineral content.  Also, sulphur = brimstone.  That's kind of important to the prophecy.  And it's flammable.

Now, about bitumen (aka asphalt, aka tar, aka pitch).  It's a form of petroleum that occurs when the stuff is heated.  It seeps up through the ground naturally, especially in spots where there are already natural springs.

The Greek historian Diodorus Siculus described [the Dead Sea] in detail about A.D. 50:

It is a large sea which yields up much asphalt and from which a by no means negligible revenue is derived. The sea is about 500 stadia (90 kilometers) in length and 60 stadia (12 kilometers) wide. The water stinks and is exceedingly bitter so that fish cannot live in it. Every year a large quantity of asphalt in pieces over three plathrae (100 meters) float in the middle of the sea. The advent of asphalt is heralded 20 days before its arrival, for all around the sea the stench is wafted by the wind over many stadia and all the silver, gold and copper in the neighborhood becomes tarnished.

In short, bitumen (tar) and brimstone (sulphur) are already present in the hot springs that occur in ancient Edom.  They really do have rivers of bitumen and brimstone.

As for the threat to "make them like Sodom and Gomorrah," it's not idle - Gomorrah would have been within the borders of Edom if it had survived that long.  Sites along the Dead Sea show evidence still of having been struck by softball-size chunks of extremely pure sulphur (brimstone), with trace amounts of magnesium (hot fire there).  Thanks to the natives using a combination of bitumen and sand as a form of concrete in their construction, all their buildings would have been flammable as well, and a nice chunk of hot-burning sulphur laced with magnesium would have been plenty sufficient to set it into a blaze that they couldn't possibly have put out (particularly if the water was on fire, certainly possible with the floating petroleum byproducts).

So it probably doesn't mean lava.  It probably really does mean rivers of bitumen.  Flaming rivers of tar...not my idea of a good time.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

We have a fundamental disagreement here over "forever" that probably can't be solved.

To me, "forever" is "past Olam" which simply means "beyond seeing," that is, it's not within the scope of the prophecy.

The NT Greek translates using the word aion, sometimes translated "age."  It makes a clear differentiation between aion and forever, by calling forever "aionios aion" - that is "an age of ages."

And yes, I went to the Dead Sea, Masada and points south, down to the tip of the Red Sea.  It's a bleak drive.

Jarrod

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

I know it's originally Hebrew.  That's why I mentioned Olam: it's the Hebrew word. 

However, in most cases, the Greek Old Testament (LXX) points out the correct translation of the Masoretic text.  The Masoretes monkeyed with the Hebrew text we have today to a certain degree.  The LXX is actually an older text.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

I shall put the question to the experts at : "The Bible Schollars Forum". We shall see what they have to say about it.

Am I not "expert-y" enough for you?  Maybe I'll go register an account there and answer your question.     

By the way, you have not answered my last question to you in the : "Fallen Angels ( Look Just Like Humans )" thread.

Didn't realize there was anything there.  I'll look at it.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

All "experts" are just educated people with their own opinions.  Well... except apologists.  They're educated people with other people's opinions.  

At any rate, I wasn't attempting to prop myself up as some sort of expert for you.  Rather, I was commenting on the irony of appealing to an "expert opinion" from an Internet message board... on another Internet message board.  It seems to me to be a sort of "my message board is bigger than your message board" proposition, and I find it terribly funny. 

Yes I am familiar with quite a number of ancient texts.  For the most part, no, I am not capable of translating them from their original manuscripts.  I have a number of hours in Hebrew and Greek, and I am rather good at linguistic theory, but the rote learning required for the vocabulary just isn't there for me.  Nor do I consider myself good at deducing what ought to fit into those gaps in the text caused by the passage of time.

I've read more than my share of B-Greek, and am intimately acquainted with people who debate seemingly trifling matters of translation.  Thankfully, I've been delivered from that, though. 

Go get yer expert opinions.  If you can find a consensus, I'll be shocked.  The apologist will insist that Olam means forever.  The literalist may insist that it simply means 'beyond seeing.'  The expert will need to add some new point to the debate over the translation to stroke his ego, and stoke his reputation.  The honest man will admit that it's vague, if you can find one.  Those are notoriously rare among groups of "experts."

Jarrod

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Question then : Is the Peshitta copied from the Greek, or is the Greek copied from the Peshitta ?

My opinion is that the book of Matthew is original to the Syriac text, and none of the other books are.  So, with an important exception, I think mostly the Syriac copies the Greek.

I'm aware of textual evidence linking Luke to being original to Syriac, but I find myself unable to fathom that Luke, a Greek writing to a non-Hebrew audience from Western Asia Minor, would have written in Syriac, if he even knew that language.

The truth, though, is that WE DON'T KNOW for certain one way or the other.

And this is all a bit off-topic here, don't you think?