The Biblical Argument for the Rebuilding of Babylon
Dr. Charles Dyer
Introduction
Whyexamine the biblical argument for the rebuilding of Babylon at the Pre-TribStudy Group? Apart from the fact that both topics explore issues ineschatology, is there any common ground? It is this author's opinion that thehermeneutical issues surrounding Babylon are the same issues that affectdispensationalism and pretribulationalism. The approach one uses to interpretbiblical prophecy lies at the heart of both topics.
Formost of Scripture conservative evangelicals argue for historical, grammatical,literal interpretation.[1] However, when they come to"prophetic" passages many change their hermeneutical approach.
Thoughdispensationalists believe in literal interpretation, no one wants to be accusedof being a "wooden literalist." Literal interpretation allows forfigures of speech and symbolic language, and all who claim to interpretliterally still interpret some passages, images. or events symbolically.
Thepurpose of this paper is to examine the biblical prophecies relating to therebuilding of Babylon. However, a larger goal of this study is to explore theissue of literal interpretation as it relates to Babylon. The paper willattempt to ask and answer three questions on the prophecies concerning Babylon.
Why Do Protestants Interpret BabylonSpiritually?
The Influence of Luther and Calvin
TheReformation marked a turning point in interpreting Scripture. Luther and Calvinbroke with the allegorical method that had dominated the church since Jeromeand Augustine[4] and beganinterpreting Scripture in its grammatical! historical context. That is not tosay that these early reformers were able to make a clean break with theallegorical method of interpretation. However, they did champion thegrammatical/historical method for forming doctrine. Luther summarized hisdistinction between using the allegorical method for illustration and using thegrammatical/historical method for interpretation.
Letus forewarn here concerning allegory that it may be handled wisely in the Spirit.For playing games with the Sacred Scriptures has the most injuriousconsequences if the text and its grammar are neglected. From history we mustlearn well and much, but little from allegory. You use allegory asembellishment by which the discourse is illustrated but not established. Lethistory remain honest. It teaches, which allegory does not do. But this is whatit means to teach: to instruct the conscience about what and how it shouldknow, to nourish faith and the fear of God. In history you have the fulfillmentof either promises or threats. Allegory does not pertain to doctrine, but todoctrine already established it can be added as color. The painter's color doesnot build the house .... Even so faith is not established by means ofallegories.[5]
Luther'sdedication to the historical meaning of the text resulted in his understandingof the doctrine of justification by faith. However, Luther was also a productof his times. In the midst of his struggles with Rome he was convinced that hispresent conflict had been predicted by the prophets.
Theappearance of the church under the papacy was exceedingly wretched. It has nowrevived again, and I am of the opinion that the last three woes in theApocalypse have now passed and better times are beginning. I know for sure thatthis age, in which we now are, is better than the age in which the Jews wereliving at the time of Christ. However, the saying of Christ, "Then therewill be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning" [Matt.24:211, I understand to apply to the tribulation of the godly and not to thetribulation of the world when the pope persecuted the church. "If thosedays had not been shortened," the passage continues, "no human beingwould be saved" [Matt. 24:221. This means that if our Lord God hadn'tintervened through the gospel, the pope would have destroyed everything, andthe gospel and the sacraments would have been lost together with the HolyScriptures. Although there were great scandals among the Jews, under the papacyit was worse. For in former times only one people was thrown into confusion,but under the papacy the whole world was unsettled. "He takes his seat inthe temple of God" [II Thess. 2:41. However, as I have said, the church isbetter off now than it was then.[6]
Luther'swillingness to employ an allegorical or spiritual interpretation coupled withhis belief that the prophecies of the end times were unfolding in his day ledhim to find specific references to the pope and the Roman Catholic Church-inthe Antichrist and Babylon!
Butwe, because we flee from and avoid all such deviltry and novelty and hold fastonce more to the ancient church, the virgin and pure bride of Christ-we arecertainly the true and ancient church, without any whoredom or innovation. This[Roman] church has therefore, remained till now, and it is out of it that wehave come. Indeed, we have been born anew of it as the Galatians were of St.Paul [Gal. 4:19]. We too were formerly stuck in the behind of this hellishwhore, this new church of the pope. We supported it in all earnestness, so thatwe regret having spent so much time and energy in that vile hole. But God bepraised and thanked that he rescued us from the scarlet whore [Revelation 17].
Noman can believe what an abomination the papacy is. A Christian does not have tobe of low intelligence, either, to recognize it. God himself must deride him inthe hellish fire, and our Lord Jesus Christ, St. Paul says in II Thessalonians2 [:8], "will slay him with the breath of his mouth and destroy him by hisglorious coming." I only deride, with my weak derision, so that those whonow live and those who will come after us should know what I have thought ofthe pope, the damned Antichrist, and so that whoever wishes to be a Christianmay be warned against such an abomination.[8]
Calvin,born 26 years after Luther, carried the Reformation in new directions with thepublication of his Institutes of the Christian Religion in 1536. Calvin adoptedLuther's view that the pope was the Antichrist and the Roman Catholic Churchwas Babylon.
Therefore,while we are unwilling simply to concede the name of the Church to the Papists,we do not deny that there are churches among them. The question we raise onlyrelated to the true and legitimate constitution of the Church, implyingcommunion in sacred rites, which are the signs of profession, and especially indoctrine. Daniel and Paul foretold that Antichrist would sit in the temple ofGod (Dan. ix. 27; 2 Thess. ii. 4); we regard the Roman Pontiff as the leaderand standard-bearer of that wicked and abominable kingdom. By placing his seatin the temple of God, it is intimated that his kingdom would not be such as todestroy the name either of Christ or his Church. Hence, then, it is obviousthat we do not at all deny that churches remain under this tyranny; churches,however, which by sacrilegious impiety he has profaned, by cruel domination hasoppressed, by evil and deadly doctrines like poisoned potions has corrupted andalmost slain; churches where Christ lies half-buried, the gospel is suppressed,piety is put to flight, and the worship of God almost abolished; where, inshort, all things are in such disorder as to present the appearance of Babylonrather than the holy city of God.[9]
The Historical Assumptions aboutBabylon's Fall
WhileLuther and Calvin saw a prophetic application of Babylon to Rome, both basedtheir identification primarily on the "Babylonian harlot" ofRevelation 17. As near as can be determined, both Luther and Calvin assumed theOld Testament prophecies of Babylon's fall were fulfilled historically whenBabylon fell to Cyrus in 539 B.C. Luther identified the army
being mustered together for war against Babylon in Isaiah 13:4 as "thesoldiery and armed host of the Persians and Medes."[10]When Isaiah predicted that the Jews would return to the land after Babylon'sfall (Isa. 14:1-4), Luther says, "All these things were done under Cyrus,king of the Persians, who permitted the Jews conquered by the Babylonians toreturn to their own land."[11]
MostProtestant interpreters since Luther and Calvin have followed them in assumingthat the Old Testament prophecies of Babylon were fulfilled historically.McDowell listed a series of eight specific prophecies on the destruction ofBabylon from the Old Testament, and he concludes by stating categorically,"All eight predictions have been fulfilled."[12]Even critical scholars associate the various Old Testament"prophecies" with the fall of Babylon to Cyrus.[13]Certainly the consensus of opinion is that the Old Testament prophecies werefulfilled historically when Babylon fell to Cyrus. What Did Happen to BabylonHistorically?
Beforeexamining the specific Old and New Testament prophecies about Babylon, one mustfirst know the history of this city. The second section of this paper willtrace Babylon's history from the time of Isaiah through today. The goal of thissection is to use all available historical sources to answer the question: Whatdid happen to Babylon historically? Babylon's Temporary Destruction bySennacherib (689 B.C.)
Beginningwith Merodach-baladan, Babylon and Assyria entered a period of conflict muchlike that experienced between Israel/Judah, and Assyria. Sennacherib conductedseveral campaigns against Babylon to bring the rebellious city back under hiscontrol.[14] Following the final conflict withMushib-Marduk Sennacherib ordered his troops to destroy Babylon. "I madeits destruction more complete than that by a flood. That in days to come, thesite of that city, and (its) temples and gods, might not be remembered, Icompletely blotted it out with (floods) of water and made it like ameadow."'[15] Babylonremained in ruins throughout the remainder of Sennacherib's reign (the nexteight years, 689-681 B.C.). The Babylonian Chronicle notes this period bysimply recording, "Eight years there was no king in Babylon."'
Sennacherib'sson, Esarhaddon, was in charge of administering the region of Babylon while hewas crown prince. After becoming king in 681 he began rebuilding Babylon andrestoring the ancient temples.[17] The work was not completed until669-the year Esarhaddon died.
Babylon's Fall toCyrus (539 B.C.)
TheNeo-Babylonian Empire can be traced to Nabopolassar who seized the throne ofBabylon in 626 B.C. He led the attack that destroyed the city of Nlneveh in 612B.C., and he ruled until 605 B.C. His son, Nebuchadnezzar, is the king whobrought the Neo-Babylonian empire to its zenith of power. Nebuchadnezzarreigned 605-562 B.C., and he was responsible for destroying the kingdom ofJudah and for beginning the "times of the Gentiles" (Dan. 2).
FollowingNebuchadnezzar's death the Neo-Babylonian empire began its decline. The next 23years saw four kings ascend the throne (not including Belshazzar who reigned ascoregent with his father). The end of the Neo-Babylonian empire came at thehands of Cyrus in 539 B.C. The Babylonian Chronicle provides a concise accountof Babylon's fall.
Inthe month Tishri when Cyrus (II) did battle of Opis on the [bank oJ] the Tigrisagainst the army of Akkad, the people of Akkad retreated. He carried off theplunder (and) slaughtered the people. On the fourteenth day [i.e., October 10,539 B.C.1 Sippar was captured without a battle. Nabonidus fled. On thesixteenth day [i.e., October 12, 539 B.C.] Ugbaru, governor of the Gut!, andthe army of Cyrus (II) entered Babylon without a battle. Afterwards, afterNabonidus retreated, he was captured in Babylon. Until the end of the month theshield-(bearing troops) of the Gull surrounded the gates of Esagil. (But) therewas no interruption (of rites) in Esagil or the (other) temples and no date(for a performance) was missed. On the third day of the month Marchesvan [i.e.,October 29, 539 B.c.] Cyrus (II) entered Babylon .... were filled before him.There was peace in the city while Cyrus (II) spoke (his) greeting to all ofBabylon.[18]
TheBabylonian Chronicle account is corroborated by an inscription found on a claybarrel. The inscription was an edict by Cyrus explaining why the gods hadallowed him to capture Babylon. The inscription concludes by recording Cyrus'sgenerous treatment of both the people of Babylon and the gods that had beenheld captive in Babylon.
WhenI entered Babylon (DIN.TIRkI) as a friend and (when) I established the seat ofthe government in the palace of the ruler under jubilation and rejoicing,Marduk, the great lord, Induced] the magnanimous inhabitants of Babylon(DIN.TIR) [to love me], and I was daily endeavouring to worship him. Mynumerous troops walked around in Babylon (DIN.TIR'') in peace, I did not allowanybody to terrorize (any place) of the [country of Sumer] and Akkad. I strovefor peace in Babylon (Ka.dingir.ra') and in all his (other) sacred cities. Asto the inhabitants of Babylon (DIN.TIR''), [who] against the will of the gods[had/were .... I abolished] the corve (lit.: yoke) which was against their(social) standing. I brought relief to their dilapidated housing, putting(thus) an end to their (main) complaints. Marduk, the great lord, was wellpleased with my deeds and sent friendly blessings to myself, Cyrus, the kingwho worships him, to Cambyses, my son, the offspring of [my] loins, as well asto all my troops, and we all [praised] his great Igodheadi joyously, standingbefore him in peace.
All the kings of the entire world from the Upperto the Lower Sea, those who are seated in throne rooms, (those who) live inother [types of buildings as well as] all the kings of the West land living intents, brought their heavy tributes and kissed my feet in Babylon (u.an.na).(As to the region) from... as far as Ashur and Susa, Agade, Eshnunna, the townsZamban, Me-Turnu, Der as well as the region of the Gutians, I returned to(these) sacred cities on the other side of the Tigris, the sanctuaries of whichhave been ruins for a long time, the images which (used) to live therein andestablished for them permanent sanctuaries. I (also) gathered all their(former) inhabitants and returned (to them) their habitations. Furthermore, Iresettled upon the command of Marduk, the great lord, all the gods of Sumer andAkkad whom Nabonidus has brought into Babylon (u.an.nak1) to the anger of thelord of the gods, unharmed, in their (former) chapels, the places which makethem happy.
May all the gods whom I have resettled in theirsacred cities ask daily Bel and Nebo for a long life for me and may theyrecommend me (to him); to Marduk, my lord, they may say this: "Cyrus, theking who worships you, and Cambyses, his son ............. all of them Isettled in a peaceful place... ducks and doves .... I endeavoured tofortify/repair their dwelling places .... [19]
Babylon's LaterHistory (530 B.C.-A.D. 1975)
Babylon'slater history can be traced through the Medo-Persian and Greek periods byfocusing on several key historical points. Cyrus was followed to the throne byCambyses (530- 522), Pseudo-Smerdis (522), and Darius I (522-486). At the timeof Cambyses's death two revolts took place in Babylon. According to Herodotus,when Darius was finally able to put down these revolts he tried to weakenBabylon to prevent further insurrection. "Having mastered the Babylonians,Darius destroyed their walls and reft away all their gates, neitherof
which things Cyrus had done at the first taking of Babylon: moreover heimpaled about three thousand men that were chief among them; as for the rest,he gave them back their city to dwell in. "[20]
Thereis some question as to whether Darius destroyed all the walls of the city oronly the gates and, perhaps, portions of the outer wail on the eastern side.Herodotus visited Babylon about 450 B.C. approximately 70 years after Darius'sattack. From his eyewitness description it appears that the gates of the citywere no longer in place but most (if not all) of the walls were still standing."Further, at the end of each road there was a gate in the riverside fence,one gate for each alley: these gates also were of bronze, and these too openedon the river. These [outer] walls are the city's outer armour; within themthere is another encircling wall, well nigh as strong as the other, but narrower."
Herodotus'seyewitness account also calls into question later accounts of Babylon's destructionat the hands of Xerxes (485-465 B.C.). Arrian records that "the temple ofBelus was in the midst of the city of Babylon, in size immense, and made ofbaked brick with bitumen for mortar. This temple, like the other shrines ofBabylon, Xerxes razed to the ground, when he returned from Greece. "[23]Perhaps the accounts can be harmonized by assuming that Xerxes damaged orransacked the temple of Marduk proper without destroying the entire complex orthe tower structure. In any case, the walls of Babylon, the temple complex ofMarduk, and the tower of Babel were still in existence after the time of Xerxeswhen Herodotus visited the site, though they may have been in some state ofdisrepair.
Babylonalso played a significant role in the life of Alexander the Great. Having"conquered the world," Alexander returned to Babylon. He was busymaking the city his chief city in the eastern part of his empire when he died.According to Strabo, Alexander began repairing and rebuilding the tower ofBabel. "Alexander intended to repair this pyramid; but it would have beena large task and would have required a long time (for merely the clearing awayof the mound was a task for ten thousand men for two months), so that he couldnot finish what he had attempted[24]When Alexander's general, Hephaestion, died, Alexander "ordered a pyre tobe made ready for him in Babylon at a cost of ten thousand talents.
Thecentral mound consists of debris of broken bricks, among which an artificialplatform was found, marked by traces of a great conflagration. These ruins arebelieved to mark the site of the funeral pyre erected by order of Alexander forthe funeral of Hephaestion. The northernmost mound, c. 16 m high, consists ofnothing but brick rubble, artificially heaped up. Some of the brick fragmentsbear Nebuchadnezzar's name and record the building of Etemenanki. Indeed itwould seem that this is the actual debris removed by Alexander when he decidedto rebuilt I sic] the ziggurat, which was in ruins when he reached Babylon.
Alexander'splan was to establish Babylon as his chief city in the east. "Alexanderdug a harbour at Babylon, large enough to be a roadstead for a thousand shipsof war, and dockyards on the harbour."[27]A Greek theater was also constructed in Babylon that could seat 4,000, It isunclear who built the theater. But its location in Humaira near the funeralpyre and the debris from Etemenanki point to the time of Alexander for itsconstruction.[28] ButAlexander's plans for Babylon were cut short when he died in Babylon at the ageof 32.
Afterthe division of Alexander's empire among his generals Babylon was seized bySeleucus in 312 B.C. Seleucus later founded the city of Seleucia further northon the Tigris River, and this city replaced Babylon as the capital city of theempire. Yet Babylon remained an important religious and political center. BothSeleucus and his son, Antiochus 1, retained the title "king ofBabylon."[29]
TheParthians pushed into Mesopotamia between 166 and 122 B.C. and eventuallyestablished their capital at Ctesiphon.[30]During the Parthian era Ctesiphon became the civil center, Seleucia remainedthe commercial center, while Babylon continued as the religious center.Josephus records that a large number of Jews were still living in Babylonduring the Parthian period. "When Hyrcanus was brought into Parthia, theking of Phraates treated him after a very gentle manner, as having alreadylearned of what an illustrious family he was; on which account he set him freefrom his bonds, and gave him a habitation at Babylon, where there were Jews ingreat numbers."[31]
Whitsonbelieves Josephus is mistaken in his identification of Babylon as the sitewhere Hyrcanus was settled. "The city here called 'Babylon' by Josephusseems to be one which was built by some of the Seleucid, upon the Tigris; which,long alter the utter desolation of Old Babylon was commonly so called, just asthe later adjoining city Bagdat [sic) is often called by the same old name ofBabylon."[32] If Whitsonis correct, then Josephus's reference to Babylon has no merit because Josephuswould have confused Babylon with either Seleucia or Ctesiphon. However,Josephus seems to know the difference between all three cities. Later in hisaccount he records an incident where "a pestilence came upon these [Jews]at Babylon, which occasioned new removals of men's habitations out of thatcity; and because they came to Seleucla, it happened that a still heaviercalamity came upon them."[33]Josephus had earlier demonstrated his familiarity with Seleucia by describingit as "the principal city of those parts, which was built by SeleucusNicator .. . .[34]"'Alter describing the massacre of 50,000 Jews who had fled from Babylon toSeleucia, Josephus reports that those who managed to escape "retired toCtesiphon, a Grecian city, and situated near to Seleucia, where the king [ofParthia] lives in winter every year .. . .[35]The point here is that Josephus clearly distinguishes between the three citiesof Babylon, Seleucia, and Ctesiphon. When Josephus refers to Jews living inBabylon, one should assume that Josephus knew which city he had in mind.
Strabo(63 B.C.-A.D. 24) reported that Babylon, while still in existence in his day,was in decline. "What is more, Seleuceia at the present time has becomelarger than Babylon, whereas the greater part of Babylon is so deserted thatone would not hesitate to say what one of the comic poets said in reference tothe Megalopolitans in Arcadia: The Great City is a great desert.'"
Pliny(A.D. 23-79) gives a similar report on the condition of Babylon in his day. Thecity had lost most of its former glory, but it still maintained its religioussignificance. 'The temple of Jupiter Belus in Babylon is still standing-Beluswas the discoverer of the science of astronomy; but in all other respects theplace has gone back to a desert, having been drained of its population by theproximity of Seleucia.. ."[38]
Whileone cannot be dogmatic, it seems likely that a Jewish community continued toexist in Babylon during the first century A.D. On the day of Pentecost Jewsfrom "Mesopotamia" gathered with others from the diaspora inJerusalem (Acts 2:9). Some of those other Jews who gathered came from"Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia" (Acts 2:9-10).Jewish believers from these areas are included with Gentiles as the recipientsof Peter's first epistle which he wrote to those "scattered throughoutPontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia" (1 Pet. 1:1). Havingwritten to these believers among the diaspora Peter, the apostle to the Jews(cf. Gal. 2:8-10), closes his epistle by extending a greeting from "she[i.e., the church] who is in Babylon" (1 Pet. 5:13). While some see thisas a coded reference to Rome,[39]It hardly seems necessary for Peter to use such coded language. It seems morelikely that Peter, while visiting one enclave of Jewish believers in Babylon,wrote a letter to another enclave of Jewish and Gentile believers in AsiaMinor.[40]
Withthe close of the New Testament the information on Babylon becomes very sparse.Writers quote Dio who says Trajan visited Babylon in A.D. 116 and found"nothing but mounds and stones and ruins."[41]However, Dlo's account should not be accepted uncritically. First, he also saysTrajan offered sacrifices to Alexander "in the room where he haddied."[42] If true,this implies that (a) some buildings were still standing and (b) someone stilllived in Babylon who could point out the room to Trajan. Second, Dio alsorecords Trajan's visit to the pit where the bitumen was mined for Babylon. Hedescribes the pit as a place where deadly vapors "destroy any terrestrialanimal and any winged creature" who might venture in except "humanbeings that have been emasculated. The reason for this I cannot understand."
Thenext western source that can be clearly identified in Babylon is the Jewishtraveler from Spain, Benjamin of Tudela who visited the site 1,000 years afterTrajan. He left a fascinating account of his travels to the Middle East,including a visit to Baghdad, Babylon, arid Hula.
Fromthence [i.e., Ras-al-Ain which was two days from Baghdad] it is one day toBabylon. This is the ancient Babel, and now lies in ruins; but the streetsstill extend thirty miles. The ruins of the palace of Nebuchadnezzar are stillto be seen; but people are afraid to venture among them on account of theserpents and scorpions with which they are infested. Twenty thousand Jews livewithin about twenty miles from this place, and perform their worship in thesynagogue of Daniel, who rests in peace. This synagogue is of remote antiquity,having been built by Daniel himself; It is constructed of solid stones andbricks. Here the traveller [sic] may also behold the palace of Nebuchadnezzar,with the burning fiery furnace into which were thrown Hananiah, Mishael, andAzariah; it is a valley well known to every one. Hillah, which is at a distanceof five miles, contains about ten thousand Jews and four synagogues ....
Benjaminof Tudela's description is a complex picture of a city largely in ruins butwhich still has some measure of habitation. He mentions that people are afraidto venture into Nebuchadnezzar's palace; but he then describes Daniel'ssynagogue, which is close to Nebuchadnezzar's palace in the city, and says itis visited by 20,000 Jews.
Benjaminof Tudela's description fits well with the descriptions of Pliny and otherancient writers. Much of the ancient city of Babylon was in ruins. However, thesite was still inhabited and still held religious significance. But laterwestern writers seems to paint a more desolate picture of Babylon. For example,in 1574 the German traveler, Rauwoif, traveled to Mesopotamia and wrote of hisexperiences. His description of the "ruins of Babylon" is moretypical of the writings of later Europeans who describe Babylon as totallydesolate and uninhabited.
Thevillage of Elugo, now lieth on the place where formerly old Babylon, themetropolis of Cha1da, was situated. The harbour is a quarter of a league'sdistance from it, where people go ashore in order to proceed by land to thecelebrated city of Bagdat, which is a day and a half's journey from thenceeastward on the Tigris .... Just before the village of Elugo is the hillwhereon the castle stood, and the ruins of its fortifications are stillvisible, though demolished and uninhabited. Behind it, and pretty near to it,did stand the tower of Babylon.-It is still to be seen, and is half a league indiameter; but so ruinous, so low, and so full of venomous creatures, whichlodge in holes made by them in the rubbish, that no one durst approach nearerto it than within half a league, except during two months in the winter, whenthese animals never stir out of their holes.[45]
Rauwolf'sdescription of Babylon's utter desolation, while vivid and dramatic, is alsoincorrect. The "village of Elugo" which he identified as ancientBabylon is known today as Al Falligah.. It is on the Euphrates River and wasthe spot where travelers left their boats to continue by land to Baghdad.
Notmuch information on Babylon during the remainder of the Middle Ages can befound, but there is information that the city has been inhabited in the ModernEra, from at least the 1700s. Koldewey, the German archaeologist responsiblefor much of the work which has been done at Babylon, makes an interestingcomment on the villages around the city. He described the site of the city andits ruins in this way:
At the bend of the Euphrates, between Babil andKasr lie the ruins of the former village of Kweiresh, whose population migratedelsewhere a hundred years ago. The walls of mud brick still overtop the heapsof debris.
The modem village of Kweiresh lies close to theKasr, to which we must now turn our attention. The most northerly house ofKweiresh is the headquarters of our expedition (Fig. 12), called by the Arabs"Kasr abid" [italics added].[47]
Koldeweymakes two important statements. First, he states definitely that a village wasexisting in his day within the walls of the ancient city of Babylon. Heheadquartered in this village as he excavated the nearby ruins. Second,Koldewey reports the existence of another village (with the same name) that hadalso existed within the city of Babylon a century earlier. Since he gives onlyan approximate date of abandonment, there is no way to determine how long thatearlier city had existed in Babylon; but the permanence of the structures wouldsuggest an extended history. Koldewey presents a detailed map of Babylon'sruins (see map on the next page) in which he shows the location of both theancient village pf Kweiresh as well as the modem village. Both are in the heartof what was once ancient Babylon.[48]
Babylon Today
Koldeweyhas shown that Babylon was still inhabited at least at the time of hisexcavations in the early 1900s. However, what is the status of Babylon today?In 1978 Mrs. L. Glynne Dairos, Assistant Secretary of the British School ofArchaeology in Iraq, responded to a question from this writer on the existenceof any modern villages within the walls of the ancient city. She wrote,"There are three modem settlements situated inside the walls of ancientBabylon. The government of Iraq does indeed plan to restore much of Babylon andhas indeed made a start on certain buildings."[49]
Tounderstand what is happening in Babylon today one must first understand thepolitical ambitions of Saddam Hussein. During the Iran/Iraq War Saddam Husseinused the city of Babylon as a visual aid to remind the Iraqi people of thehistory of conflict between Iraq and Iran and of the territorial ambitions ofthe Iranians. As Paul Lewis wrote in the New York Times International,"President Hussein's decision to rebuild Nebuchadnezzar's Palace at the heightof a war he almost lost was the centerpiece of a campaign to strengthen Iraqinationalism by appealing to history .... Mr. Hussein's campaign also servedsubtler ends: it justified Iraq's costly war with Iran as the continuation ofMesopotamia's ancient feud with Persia. And it portrayed Saddam Hussein assuccessor to Nebuchadnezzar, Babylon's mightiest ruler."
Ineffect, Saddam Hussein used Babylon as an Iraqi Alamo or Masada. His decisionto rebuild Babylon forced the people to focus on a grand era in Iraq's historythat was destroyed by the same enemy who again threatened the nation. It is noaccident that the Babylon being rebuilt by Hussein was the Babylon ofNebuchadnezzar. As early as 1986 Michael Dobbs, writing in the Washington Post,noticed that the restoration of Babylon had become a political (not merely anarchaeological) undertaking. The Iraqis view Babylon somewhat differently [thanthe Bible]. For the Iraqi government, the Babylonian Empire is a source ofnational pride and inspiration for the grueling six-year-old war withneighboring Iran, Iraq's hereditary enemy. President Saddam Hussein has orderedthat no expense be spared to restore the city to its ancient splendor."
BuildingBabylon became synonymous with rising to the threat of the Iranians andasserting Iraq's "manifest destiny" to lead the Arab nations toglory. Now, instead of just building Babylon as an archaeological park, Babylonbecame the focal point of Iraqi nationalism which had replaced the earlierBaathist goal of Arab nationalism. By early 1987 plans were underway to holdthe first annual Babylon Festival to celebrate the glory of Babylon, whichincluded an emphasis on Saddam Hussein and Iraq. It is no accident that theopening of the festival was scheduled for September 22, 1987-seven years to theday after Iraq's invasion of Iran.[52]
Whilethe Babylon Festival was announced as a cultural event featuring musicalgroups, symposia, and other cultural activities, the festival had much deeperpolitical overtones. This writer attended the first Babylon Festival as aninvited participant. One could not help but notice the emphasis placed onSaddam Hussein and the comparisons made between Saddam Hussein andNebuchadnezzar. The official seal of the Babylon Festival featured theportraits of Saddam Hussein and Nebuchadnezzar side by side. The portraits weredesigned to stress physical similarities between the two men. The officialtheme of the Festival was "From Nabukhadnezzar [sic] to Saddam HusseinBabylon Undergoes a Renaissance."
Onthe opening night of the Babylon Festival Mr. Latif Nssayif Jassim, Minister ofInformation and Culture, spoke to the audience that had gathered. His speechfocused on the political and historical conflict between Iraq and Iran and thepart played by Babylon in that conflict.
However,the Persian [i.e., Iranian] mentality in our neighbourhood, prompted by deep-rooted hatred and aggressiveness tried to quench the flame of civilisation inthis city of Babylon. Hence the city came under the attack of the Persian rulerKurash (Cyrus) who, before 2,500 years, laid siege to this town. The siegelasted long and the town remained strong. It was not until Cyrus hadcollaborated with the Jews inside the city that he was able to tighten thesiege round the city and subsequently to occupy it .... Today we are living inthe midst of Khomeini's aggression which has extended over a span of sevenyears during which Khomeini had allied himself with the Zionists in an attemptto enter Baghdad and other Iraqi cities and to destroy them as was the casewith Babylon .... It [i.e., rebuilt Babylon] will serve as a living example ofthe grandeur of the Iraqis to pursue their path for more glories.
Thiswriter's visits to Babylon in 1987 and 1988 confirm that much of the site isbeing rebuilt by Saddam Hussein. (See map on the following page.) Hussein'sagenda in rebuilding Babylon has nothing to do with Bible prophecy, but it haseverything to do with his desire to promote his political agenda in the MiddleEast.
Oldpolicies have always ignored the status of Babylon when they createdpsychological and scientific barriers between Iraqis and their leaders inancient times. No one has ever mentioned the achievements of"Hammurabi," the founder of the first organized set of law in humanhistory. Or "Nebuchadnezzar," the national hero who was able todefeat the enemies of the nation on the land of "Kennan" [i.e.,Canaan] and to take them as prisoner of war to Babylon. What we need now is toincrease awareness in this regard.[54]
Thethird annual Babylon Festival was held in September 1989, but the fourth annualfestival scheduled for September 1990 was canceled following Iraq's invasion ofKuwait. Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm became the dominanttopic in that region of the world. When the smoke of battle cleared, many feltthat Saddam Hussein's days were numbered. But amazingly he has survived longerthan the U.S. President who masterminded the coalition against Iraq.
Butwhat about Babylon? The city was not damaged during the bombing in OperationDesert Storm. It was included on a list of sites off limits to bombing becauseof historical or archaeological importance. Work on the reconstruction ofBabylon stopped following the invasion of Kuwait, but the reconstructionalready completed remained intact. Within months after the end of OperationDesert Storm an article appeared in the New York Times describing theresumption of work at Babylon.
Oneof President Hussein's favorite prestige projects has been the rebuilding ofKing Nebuchadnezzar's great southern palace in Babylon according to the designsof German archaeologists early this century .... Reconstruction has been moreor less complete for a year now. And while archaeologists may bicker over details,this immense set of interconnecting chambers and courtyards surrounded bycrenelated fortifications is more interesting for visitors than the pile of mudthat used to be all there was to see at Babylon.
Today,however, the southern temple [sic, palace] is a desolate spot. Power and waterhave been cut off by the allied bombing, and its shops, museums and restaurantsare closed. But work is under way on a series of three huge viewing platformsjust outside the walls of Nebuchadnezzar's Babylon from which visitors wIlL.beable to look down at new excavations Iraq is planning.
"Thisis the personal orders of the President," said Iraq's Director General ofAntiquities, Mouyad Said.[55]
OnAugust 27, 1992, this writer received a fax from the Iraqi Interest Section ofthe Algerian Embassy. The fax read in part, "On the occasion of the FourthBabylon Festival, the symposium of Babylon architecture will be held fromSeptember 1, 1992 to September 6, 1992 In Baghdad. We are please to invite youto participate in this symposium"[56]On June 28, 1993, another letter was received inviting this writer to "theFifth Annual Babylon Festival to be held from September 22, 1993 to October 6,1993."[57] The war mayhave slowed Saddam Hussein down, but it did not put an end to his plans torestore the city of Babylon.
What Does the Bible Say about Babylon?
Havingtraced Babylon's history from the time of Isaiah till today, this paper mustnow turn to the Bible to place Babylon's history in prophetic perspective.Three Old Testament prophecies and one New Testament prophecy concerningBabylon will be briefly examined to determine what, if any, propheticsignificance they might have.
IsaIah 13-14
InIsaiah 13-23 the prophet turns from Judah to deliver God's message to thesurrounding Gentile nations. It is as if the prophet is telling these nations,"If God hasn't spared His own people, what makes you Gentiles think youwill escape?" This section is so large that it is often difficult todetermine Its structural significance. It often helps first to list the nationsin order and to make any observations on the overall structure before examiningthe particular messages. The nations addressed by Isaiah are as follows:
Babylon (13:1-14:23)-45verses
Assyria (14:24-27)---4verses
Philistia (14:28-32)-5verses
Moab (15:1-16:14)-23verses
Damascus and Samarla(17:1-14)-14 verses
Cush (18:1-7)-7 verses
Egypt (19:1-25)-25verses
Egypt and Cush(20:1-6)--6 verses
Babylon (21:1-10)-10verses
Edom (2i:11-12)-2 verses
Arabia (21:13-17)--5verses
Jerusalem (22:1-25)-25verses
Tyre (23:1-18)-18 verses
Fourprinciples of Bible study can help in evaluating this list of nations. Thefirst principle is the principle of chiasm. If a list is structured as achiasm, whatever is at the beginning and end of the chiasm or whatever is inthe center of the chiasm might be that which the author is stressing. Thisprinciple does not apply to IsaIah 13-23 because the list is not structured asa chiasm. The second principle is the principle of perceived order in a list.Whatever the author places first or last in his list might be important. Isaiahplaced Babylon first, and he placed Tyre last. The third principle is the lawof proportion. In any list the author will spend more time on those items heintends to emphasize. If Cush and Egypt are counted as a unit, then the threenations on which Isaiah spends most of his time are Babylon (45 verses), Egyptand Cush (38 verses), and Jerusalem (25 verses). The fourth principle is theprinciple of repetition. If an author repeats an item in his list, it could beimportant. In Isaiah 13-23 one nation is repeated twice-Babylon (13-14; 21).
Thispreliminary review of Isaiah 13-23 points out the importance of Babylon inIsaiah's messages against the nations. Isaiah begins his series of messageswith Babylon, he spends more time on Babylon than on any other nation, and hehas two separate messages against Babylon in the list. Thus Babylon must beimportant in the theme Isaiah is developing.
However,before continuing one key issue must be explored. Some scholars have arguedthat the prophecies against Babylon in Isaiah 13-14 are actually focusing onAssyria and its king instead of Babylon. If this is true, then Isaiah'sprophecies against Babylon might have no significance for the future ofBabylon. But why do these scholars see Assyria rather than Babylon in Isaiah13-14? Three basic reasons are given. First, the structure of Isaiah 13-23argues for ldentifying Assyria with Babylon. Each of Isaiah's messages againstthe nations is introduced with the word "oracle" ("an oracleconcerning Babylon," etc.). But after describing the destruction ofBabylon in 13:1-14:23, Isaiah does not use the word "oracle" todescribe God's judgment against Assyria (14:24-27). "Many interpreters feelthat these verses are a separate section. But it seems preferable to see themas part of the oracle beginning in 13:1 "[58]Thus, the argument goes, Isaiah identifies the real subject of this oracle,Assyria, as he draws the oracle to a conclusion.
Second,identifying Babylon as Assyria would fit better historically in light ofAssyria's dominant position on the international scene. "Many commentatorshave assumed that Isaiah's message in 13:1-14:27 about the fall of Babylonreferred to its fall to Medo-Persia in 539. However, it seems better to seethis section as pertaining to the Assyrian attack on Babylon in 689. This tiesin better with the Assyrian threat Isaiah had written about in 7:17-8:10,beginning with the attacks under the rule of Tiglath-Pileser III(745-727)."[59] Assyria,not Babylon, was the nation threatening Judah in Isaiah's day, and it wouldmake more sense for Isaiah to start his list of nations with Assyria.
Third,identifying Babylon as Assyria can be justified since the kings of Assyria tookon the title "king of Babylon." "But wasn't Sennacherib king ofAssyria rather than Babylon? He was king of both because Babylon was a vassalof Assyria from the end of the 10th century B.C. Occasionally the vassal rulerover Babylon revolted against Assyria, but in 728 Tiglath-Pileser III,Assyria's aggressive ruler from 745-727, was crowned king of Babylon ....Sargon 11(722- 705) and Sennacherib (705-681), later Assyrian monarchs, alsocalled themselves kings of Babylon."[60]Thus the "king of Babylon" in Isaiah 14 would, in reality, have beenthe current king of Assyria.
Howstrong are the arguments for identifying Babylon as Assyria in Isaiah 13-14?Each of the arguments is not as strong as it might first appear. First,Isaiah's use of the term "oracle" cannot be used to associate Assyriawith Babylon. Isaiah does not consistently use "oracle" to separateeach message against the nations. In 17:1 Isaiah introduces a new nation withhis standard phrase: "An oracle concerning Damascus." Damascus and theArameans lived northeast of Judah and were a constant source of trouble to theIsraelites. However, in Isaiah 18:1 the prophet shifts to another nation-but hedoes not begin this new section with the word "oracle." "Woe tothe land of whirring wings, along the rivers of Cush, which sends envoys by seain papyrus boats over the water" (18:1-2). Cush was the land south ofEgypt in the area today known as Sudan. There is no way Cush can be identifiedwith Damascus, but Isaiah moved from one nation to the other without using"oracle" to introduce the break. Not using "oracle" betweenBabylon and Assyria in 14:24 is no more unusual than not using"oracle" between Damascus and Cush in 18:1. The absence of the word"oracle" does not demand that one link together Babylon and Assyria.
Second,assuming that Babylon must be equivalent to Assyria because Assyria was thedominant nation in Isaiah's day limits God's ability to speak to events thatwere still future. Such a position does not take into account the fact thatBabylon was theologically significant from God's perspective (cf. Gen. 11:1-9).Nor does it account for Isaiah 39 where God predicts that Babylon would be thenation that would destroy the kingdom of Judah. (A prophecy made while Assyriawas still the dominant power internationally.) God can predict more thancurrent events, and Babylon is later identified as the nation that will destroyJudah.
Third,claiming that the kings of Assyria took the title "king of Babylon"is not entirely correct. While some at times did take this title, this does notseem to be the rule during much of the time Isaiah was prophesying. In theOriental Institute Prism Inscription (often called the Taylor Prism)Sennacherib gives a quite full listing of his titles: "Sennacherib, thegreat king, the mighty king, king of the universe, king of Assyria, king of thefour quarters (of the earth): the wise ruler (lit, shepherd, 'pastor'),favorite of the great gods, guardian of the right, lover of justice; who lendssupport, who comes to the aid of the needy, who turns (his thoughts) to piousdeeds; perfect hero, mighty man; first among all princes, the powerful one whoconsumes the insubmissive, who strikes the wicked with the thunderbolt. ,."[61]His title in the Nebi Yunus inscription is very similar: "Palace ofSennacherib, the great king, the mighty king, king of the universe, king ofAssyria, king of the four quarters (of the world): favorite of the great gods;wise sovereign, provident prince, shepherd of peoples, ruler of widespreadnations, am I."[62]Of all the titles Sennacherib took in these inscriptions, "king ofBabylon" was not one of them.
Boththe Oriental Institute Prism and the Babylonian Chronicle support thecontention that Sennacherib did not assume the title "king of Babylon"as a permanent title. In the Oriental Institute Prism Sennacherib describes hisdefeat of "Merodach-baladan, king of Babylon" in 703 B.C.
Merodach-baladan-13years (721-710, 703 B.C.)
B8-ibni-3 years (702-700B.C.)
Assur-nlin-shum-6 years(699-694 B.C.)
Nergal-ush&ib-1 yearand six months (693 B.C.)
Mushib-Marduk-four years(692-689 B.C.)
Eight years there was noking (689-681 B.C.)[65]
Somekings of Assyria did claim the title "king of Babylon," but it wasusually for a short period of time and was not automatically taken. Tiglath-pileserIII claimed the title the final two years (729-727 B.c.) of his 19-year reign.Shalmaneser V claimed the title for most of his reign (726-722 B.C.). Sargon IIclaimed the title in the later part of his reign (710-705 B.C.), andSennacherib may have claimed the title at the very beginning of his reign (704B.C.). Isaiah prophesied from 739 to 686 B.C. From 739 to 700 B.C. (the periodwhen the prophecies against the nations were likely given), the Assyriansclaimed the title "king of Babylon" 14 years while 26 years the titlewas held by someone other than the king of Assyria. From 703 B.C. to 681 B.C.(the time when Babylon's destruction occurred) Sennacherib did not claim thetitle "king of Babylon."
OttoKaiser includes one final distinction between the prophecies against Babylonand Assyria that indicate the two are to be kept distinct. "But a furtherdifference is immediately obvious: whereas Babylon is to be annihilated in itsown country, the Assyrians are to fall in the Holy Land."
Butwhat does Isaiah say about Babylon in this initial prophecy? Isaiah providesthree specific keys on the nature of the fulfillment one should expect for thisprophecy. Each of these will be examined briefly.
Thetiming of the destruction. Isaiah's first key focuses on the timing ofBabylon's destruction. Having described the massing of the armies to attack(13:2-5) Isaiah announces that "the day of the LORD is near; it will comelike destruction from the Almighty" (13:6). While the "day of theLORD" could refer to any time in history when God intervenes in judgment(cf. Amos 5:18-20), Isaiah uses eschatological imagery that seems to go beyonda mere temporal judgment in his day. Otto Kaiser, who does not hold to Isaianicauthorship, still recognizes the universal themes of judgment used by hisso-called "proto-apocalyptic redactor." "Obviously the personresponsible for the chapter as we have it was prepared to tolerate the tensionwhich results from the interweaving of prophecies of a local and a universalfuture event.[67]
Isaiahdefines the "day of the LORD" as a time of universal cataclysmicjudgment. As he returns to the "day of the LORD" theme in 13:9 hedescribes it as "a cruel day, with wrath and fierce anger-to make the landdesolate and destroy the sinners within it." His description ofsupernatural signs in the heavens is very similar to that of Joel and,depending on when one dates the prophecies of Joel, could be borrowed from thatprophet.
Isaiah13:9-10 See, the day of the LORD is coming.. The stars of heaven and theirconstellations will not show their light. The rising sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light.
Joel3:14b-15 For the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision. The sun and moon will be darkened, andthe stars no longer shine.
The"day of the LORD" judgment in Isaiah 13 extends beyond just Babylon.The purpose for the day is to "punish the world for its evil, the wickedfor their sins" (13:11). God's judgment on this day encompasses the world.After the judgment humanity will be "scarcer than pure gold" (13:12).Isaiah concludes his description on the time of judgment by stating it will bea time when God will shake both the heavens and the earth (13:13). While thiscould be a figure of speech, it also conjures up imagery of supernatural signsin the heavens and great earthquakes on earth that seem symbolic of the lastdays (Zech. 14:3-7; Matt. 24:7, 29 [which quotes Isa. 13:10]; Rev. 6:12-14).
Thenature of the destruction. Isaiah began with Babylon, but his imagery of the"day of the LORD" soared from "Babylon" (13:1), to"the whole country" (13:5), to "the world" (13; 11), to"the heavens... and the earth" (13:13). However, beginning in 13:14Isaiah returns to describe the nature of the destruction about to be inflictedon Babylon. Babylon is to experience total annihilation. "Whoever iscaptured will be thrust through; all who are caught will fall by the sword.Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will belooted and their wives ravished" (13:15-16). Isaiah pictures a blood baththat will engulf warriors and women, soldiers and civilians.
In13:17 Isaiah names one specific group participating in this attack. "See,I will stir up against them the Medes . . . ." Because Isaiah mentions theMedes many interpreters have assumed the fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy tookplace in 539 B.C. when Cyrus and the Medo- Persian empire captured Babylon.However, a careful comparison of Isaiah 13 with the events of 539 B.C. showthat this passage was not literally fulfilled at that time. Isaiah describesthe Medes as those "who do not care for silver and have no delight ingold" (13:17b). Instead the purpose for the attack by the Medes will be tokill the inhabitants of Babylon. "Their bows will strike down the youngmen; they will have no mercy on infants nor will they look with compassion on children"(13:18). While the Medes were part of the army that captured Babylon, they didnot attack or kill the inhabitants of the city. Both the Babylonian Chronicleand Cyrus's own account record the peacefulness of Babylon's fall. Cyrus wrote,"My numerous troops walked around in Babylon (DIN.TIRk) in peace, I didnot allow anybody to terrorize (any place) of the [country of Sumerl and Akkad.I strove for peace in Babylon (K.dingir.ra') and in all his (other) sacredcities." [68]TheBabylonian Chronicle adds, "Until the end of the month the shield-(bearingtroops) of the Guti surrounded the gates of Esagil. (But) there was nointerruption (of rites) in Esagil or the (other) temples and no date (for aperformance) was missed. On the third day of the month Marchesvan (i.e.,October 29, 539 B.C.] Cyrus (II) entered Babylon .... There was peace in thecity while Cyrus (II) spoke (his) greeting to all of Babylon. "
Theresults of the destruction. Isaiah focuses on two specific results of theattack against Babylon. First, he describes the permanence of Babylon'sdestruction. Babylon "Win be overthrown by God like Sodom andGomorrah" (13:19). By comparing Babylon's destruction to that of Sodom andGomorrah Isaiah conjurs up a vivid image of total annihilation. Sodom andGomorrah were suddenly, totally, and permanently destroyed. Following theirdestruction they were never reinhabited.
Isaiahfollows his pronouncement with three specific images that help define theextent of Babylon's destruction. (a) Babylon will never again experiencelong-term habitation. "She will never be inhabited or lived in through allgenerations" (13:20a). Yet this could imply some type of semipermanentoccupation, so Isaiah narrows the image still further. (b) Babylon will neveragain experience even short-term habitation. "No Arab will pitch his tentthere" (13:20b). Nomadic settlers would often pitch their tents for months(sometimes even years) in one location before moving when supplies of water orgrass for grazing became depleted. Babylon will not even experience theshort-term occupation of nomadic settlers. But Isaiah adds a third illustrationto reduce further the scope of habitation. (c) Babylon will never againexperience any human habitation. "No shepherd will rest his flocksthere" (13:20c). Shepherds were constantly on the move to find enough grazingland for their flocks. As they led their flocks from their semi-permanentdwelling places, they would often find themselves at the end of the day farfrom their tents. When darkness came, the shepherds would find a suitable spotfor a sheepfold to bed their flock down for the night. At the break of dawn theshepherd and his flock would then move on. Isaiah is saying that Babylon willnot even serve as a dwelling place for an individual for a single evening.
Isaiah'simagery builds to a climax. Babylon's destruction will rival that of Sodom andGomorrah. Once this destruction has come Babylon will never again experiencelong-term habitation ("generations"). Babylon won't even experiencetemporary, short-term habitation ("tents"). Babylon won't experienceany habitation ("no shepherd will rest his flocks"). Isaiah has usedthe most dramatic imagery available to announce to his readers that one resultof Babylon's fall will be her sudden, complete, and permanent destruction.
InIsaiah 14 the prophet describes a second result of Babylon's fall. In some way
Babylon's destructionwill serve as a catalyst for God's restoration of His people. "The LORDwill have compassion on Jacob; once again he will choose Israel and will settlethem in their own land. Aliens will join them and unite with the house ofJacob" (14:1). Babylon's fall is connected with God's restoration of Hispeople to the land.
WhenBabylon fell to Cyrus in 539 B.C. Jews were allowed to return to the land ofJudah. Could this return be what Isaiah had in mind? The remainder of IsaIah 14implies that the answer is no. The return described by Isaiah is not merely aphysical return of a remnant who would still remain under Gentile domination."And the house of Israel will possess the nations as menservants andmaidservants in the LORD's land. They will make captives of their captors andrule over their oppressors" (14:2). Isaiah describes a return in whichIsrael becomes the dominant nation who will extend sovereign control over herformer adversaries. One need only read Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, or Zechariah torealize that this was not the situation following Babylon's fall to Cyrus in539 B.C.
Theprophecies of Isaiah 13-14 were not fulfilled literally in 539 B.C. Babylon didfall, the Medes were involved, and a remnant from Israel did return to theland. However, Babylon continued to flourish as a city rather than beingdestroyed, the inhabitants of Babylon were not slaughtered, the day of the LORDdid not extend to the world, and Israel did not return to the land makingcaptives of her former captors. Either Isaiah's prophecies were not intended tobe taken literally or else this prophecy has not yet been fulfilled.
Jeremiah 50-51
Acentury alter Isaiah penned his prophecy against Babylon, the city rose tobecome the center of power in the ancient Near East. Under NebuchadnezzarBabylon's influence extended from Persia to Egypt. In Judah the young prophetJeremiah predicted that Babylon would attack and destroy Jerusalem. Jeremiah'spredictions came true in 586 B.C.
TheBook of Jeremiah is not in order chronologically. Instead, the book follows athematic development. "Take a scroll and write on it all the words I havespoken to you concerning Israel, Judah and all the other nations" (Jer.36:2). Chapters 2-45 focus on God's words to "Israel and Judah" while46-51 focus on God's word to "all the other nations,"
Asin Isaiah, one should look at the overall structure of Jeremiah's messagesagainst the nations to determine where he is placing his emphasis. The nationsaddressed by Jeremiah include:
Egypt (46:1-28)-28verses Philistia (47:1-7)-7 verses
Moab (48:1-47)--47verses
Ammon (49:1-6)-6 verses
Edom (49:7-22)--16verses
Damascus (49:23-27)--5verses
Kedar and Hazor(49:28-33)-6 verses
Elam (49:34-39)-6 verses
Babylon (50:1-51:64)-i10 verses
Nochiastic structure is evident, and no nations are included twice in the list.The nations listed first and last are Egypt and Babylon so these could besignificant. (Egypt is the nation that supported Judah in her rebellion againstBabylon, and Babylon is the nation that ultimately destroyed Judah.) The law ofproportion supports the fact that Babylon is the dominant focus in the section.Of the 231 verses devoted to the nations, 110 of the verses (47.6%) focus onGod's judgment against Babylon. But what does Jeremiah say about Babylon?Jeremiah provides two specific keys on the nature of the fulfillment one shouldexpect for this prophecy. Each of these will be examined briefly.
Thetiming of the destruction. After announcing God's message "concerningBabylon and the land of the Babylonians" (50:1), Jeremiah describes anattack that will "lay waste her land" (50:3). Beginning in 50:4Jeremiah supplies a specific time marker to help identify when this destructionof Babylon will happen. "'In those days, at that time,' declares the LORD,'the people of Israel and the people of Judah together will go in tears to seekthe LORD their God.'" In the days of Babylon's destruction Israel andJudah will experience a national regathering to the land.
Jeremiah'suse of the phrase "in those days and at that time" ('MT 1 'r) is
significant. The prophetuses this phrase in whole or in part nine times in his book, including twice inchapter 50. Of the seven occurrences outside Jeremiah 50, six of theoccurrences have clear eschatological implications. The only exception isJeremiah 5:18.
Jeremiah 3:16 "Inthose days, when your number have increased greatly in the land," declaresthe LORD, "men will no longer say, The ark of the covenant of the LORD.'It will never enter their minds or be remembered; it will not be missed, norwill another one be made."
Jeremiah 3:18 "Inthose days the house of Judah will join the house of Israel, and together they will come from a northernland to the land I gave your fore fathers as an inheritance."
Jeremiah 5:18 "Yeteven in those days," declares the LORD, "I will not destroy you completely."
Jeremiah 31:29 "Inthose days people will no longer say, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and thechildren's teeth are set on edge.'"
Jeremiah 31:33 'Thisis the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time,"declares the LORD. "I will put my law in their minds and write it on theirhearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people."
Jeremiah 33:15 "Inthose days and at that time I will make a righteous Branch sprout from David'sline: he will do what is just and right in the land."
Jeremiah 33:16 "Inthose days Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will live in safety. This is the name by which it will becalled: The LORD Our Righteousness."
Jeremiah 50:4 "Inthose days, at that time," declares the LORD, "the people of Israeland the people of Judah together will go in tears to seek the LORD theirGod."
Jeremiah 50:20 "Inthose days, at that time," declares the LORD, "search will be madefor Israel's guilt, but there will be none, and for the sins of Judah, but nonewill be found, for I will forgive the remnant I spare."
Jeremiahpredicts that in the days of Babylon's destruction Israel and Judah will returnto the land. A limited return to the land took place under Zerubbabel afterBabylon fell to Cyrus, but is this the return to which Jeremiah is referring?The specifics of the passage seem to argue against the return under Zerubbabelbeing the fulfillment. First, Jeremiah indicates that this return will involve"the people of Israel and the people of Judah together" (50:4). Thisphrase links the remnant from both the northern and southern kingdoms andimplies a return of all Jews to the land. Eight times Jeremiah links futurelanguage ("in those days" I'rTr MMI M M'MM] or "days arecoming" I'; 'r Mill) with a reuniting of Israel and Judah.
Jeremiah 3:18 "Inthose days the house of Judah will join the house of Israel, and together theywill come from a northern land to the land I gave your forefathers as aninheritance."
Jeremiah 23:56 "Thedays are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will raise up to David arighteous Branch .... In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will live insafety."
Jeremiah 30:3 "Thedays are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will bring my peopleIsrael and Judah back from captivity and restore them to the land I gave theirforefathers to possess."
Jeremiah 31:27 "Thedays are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will plant the house ofIsrael and the house of Judah with the offspring of men and animals."
Jeremiah 31:31 "Thetime is coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenantwith the house of Israel and with the house of Judah."
Jeremiah 33:14 "Thedays are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will fulfill thegracious promise I made to the house of Israel and to the house of Judah."
Jeremiah 50:4 "Inthose days, at that time," declares the LORD, "the people of Israeland the people of Judah together will go in tears to seek the LORD theirGod."
Jeremiah 50:20 "Inthose days, at that time," declares the LORD, "search will be madefor Israel's guilt, but there will be none, and for the sins of Judah, but nonewill be found, for I will forgive the remnant I spare."
Second,Jeremiah indicates that the return to the LORD following the destruction ofBabylon will be both physical arid spiritual. Not only will Israel and Judahreturn physically to the land, "They will come and bind themselves to theLORD in an everlasting covenant that will not be forgotten" (50:5).Jeremiah used the phrase "everlasting covenant" in 32:40 where it wasparallel to the New Covenant. The return following the destruction of Babylonwill bring a spiritual revival to the Jews.
Jeremiahadds additional information on this spiritual revival in 50:20. "'In thosedays, at that time,' declares the LORD, 'search will be made for Israel'sguilt, but there will be none, and for the sins of Judah, but none will befound, for I will forgive the remnant I spare." The return of Israel andJudah will be accompanied by a removal of their sin and guilt. This did nothappen during the return under Zerubbabel. One need only read Ezra, Nehemiah,Haggal, Zecharlah, or Malachi to see the sin that plagued the remnant who hadreturned to the land. But Jeremiah's vision of Babylon's destruction isassociated with a spiritual renewal among the people of Israel and Judahunprecedented in history.
Theresults of the destruction. In addition to providing some time elementsassociated with Babylon's fall, Jeremiah spends a great deal of time focusingon the results of the destruction that God will pour out on this city. Jeremiahmakes at least four specific statements on the results of Babylon's fall.
1. Babylon'spopulation will be killed. "Attack the land of Merathaim [i.e.,"double
rebellion"]and those who live in Pekod. Pursue, kill and completely destroy them"(50:2 1). "Come against her from afar. Break open her granaries; pile herup like heaps of grain. Completely destroy her and leave her no remnant. Killher young bulls; let them go down to the slaughter! Woe to them! For their dayhas come, the time for them to be punished" (50:26-27). "Summonarchers against Babylon, all those who draw the bow. Encamp all around her; letno one escape" (50:29). "Therefore, her young men will fall in thestreets; all her soldiers will be silenced in that day" (50:30). "Donot spare her young men; completely destroy her army. They will fall down slainin Babylon, fatally wounded in her streets" (51:3-4). "The whole landwill be disgraced and her slain will all lie fallen within her" (51:47).
2. Babylon'sbuildings will be plundered and her fortifications will be destroyed. "So
Babyloniawill be plundered; all who plunder her will have their fill" (50:10)."She surrenders, her towers fall, her walls are torn down" (50:15)."No rock will be taken from you for a cornerstone, nor any stone for afoundation, for you will be desolate forever" (51:26). "Her dwellingsare set on fire; the bars of her gates are broken" (51:30)."Babylon's thick wall will be leveled and her high gates set on fire"(51:58).
3. Thecity and country will remain uninhabited. "No one will live in it; bothmen and animals will flee away" (50:3). "Because of the LORD's angershe will not be inhabited but will be completely desolate" (50:13)."'As God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah along with their neighboring towns,'declares the LORD, 'so no one will live there; no man will dwell in it"'(50:40). 'The land trembles and writhes, for the LORD's purposes againstBabylon stand-to lay waste the land of Babylon so that no one will livethere" (51:29). "Babylon will be a heap of ruins, a haunt of jackals,an object of horror and scorn, a place where no one lives" (51:37)."Her towns will be desolate, a dry and desert land, a land where no onelives, through which no man travels" (51:43). "So Babylon will sinkto rise no more because of the disaster I will bring upon her. And her peoplewill fall" (51:64).
4. Onlythose who flee from the city will be spared. "Flee out of Babylon; leavethe
landof the Babylonians" (50:8). "Flee from Babylon! Run for your lives!Do not be destroyed because of her sins. It is time for the LORD's vengeance;he will pay her what she deserves" (51:6). "Come out of her, mypeople! Run for your lives! Run from the fierce anger of the LORD"(51:45).
Ifthese descriptions are taken at face value, Babylon's fall results from abloody battle that devastates the city. Only those wise enough to follow God'swarning and flee before the battle begins will be spared. Once the battle isover Babylon will remain permanently desolate. These descriptions do not matchBabylon's fall to Cyrus in 539 B.C. That fall was relatively peaceful andinvolved almost no death or destruction.
Twoadditional observations must be made on Jeremiah's description of the resultsof Babylon's fall. First, Jeremiah compares Babylon's fall to that of Sodom andGomorrah. In doing so, Jeremiah is identifying his destruction of Babylon withthe one prophesied nearly a century earlier by Isaiah (Jer. 50:39-40: Isa.13:19-20). Second, Jeremiah specifically commands those who are God's people toflee from Babylon before this attack begins. Daniel had access to theprophecies of Jeremiah (cf. Dan. 9:2), and he was in Babylon the night it fellto the Medo-Persians (Dan. 5:30). If Jeremiah's prophecy was being fulfilledthat night, should not Daniel have already fled from Babylon? Either Daniel wasunfamiliar with Jeremiah's warning, or he chose to ignore Jeremiah's warning,or he did not identify Jeremiah's warning with the attack under way againstBabylon in his day.
Jeremiah'sprophecies were not fulfilled when Babylon fell to Cyrus in 539 B.C. The citywas not destroyed, nor were the people killed. The city and surrounding landremained inhabited and productive. Israel and Judah did not combine a physicalreturn to the land with a spiritual return to the LORD to be joined to Him inan everlasting covenant. Like Isaiah 13- 14, either Jeremiah 50-Si were notintended to be taken literally or else this prophecy has not yet beenfulfilled.
Zechariah 5:5-11
Thethird Old Testament prophecy relating to Babylon is Zechariah 5:5-11. Zechariahbegan his ministry in 520 B.C. to the remnant who had returned from Babylonwith Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest. This group returned to Jerusalem in538 B.C. when Cyrus permitted the remnant to return and to build their temple.However, shortly after beginning the rebuilding of the temple in 536 B.C. thepeople halted their work because of local opposition. One purpose for Godraising up the prophet Zechariah was to encourage the people to resume theirwork on the temple of the Lord (Ezra 5:1). However, Zechariah looked beyond thetemple to describe events leading up to both the first and second coming of theMessiah.
Zechariah'sprophecy relating to Babylon is part of his series of eight night visions whichform the first segment of his work (1:7-6:8). The prophecy itself is theseventh of the eight night visions. There is some evidence that these eightnight visions are arranged in a chiastic structure. [70]
A. Therider and horses among the myrtle trees (1:7-17)
(Godis upset with nations who have oppressed Israel)
B. Thefour hoi1ii and four craftsmen (1:18-21)
(Thenations who have scattered Judah will be judged)
C. Theman with the measuring line (2:1-13)
(Jerusalem will be physically restored)
D. Cleangarments for the high priest (3:1-10)
(Israel will be blessed when the Branch comes)
D' Thegold lampstand and two olive trees (4:1-14)
(God will empower His servants to complete thework)
C' Theflying scroll (5:1-4)
(The land will be purged of sinners)
B' Thewoman in the basket (5:5-11)
(Evilwill return to the land of Shinar)
A' Thefour chariots (6:1-8)
(God will conquer thenations who have opposed Israel)
InZechariah's seventh night vision a "measuring basket" (lit."ephah"] appears before the prophet. Inside the basket is a woman.The angel speaking with Zechariah identifies the woman in the basket:"This is wickedness" (Zech. 5:8). One key question is the location ofthis wickedness. Zechariah identifies it as the iniquity (or"appearance" I "of the people throughout the land" (5:6).
WhetherZechariah is referring to the wickedness in the land of Israel or thewickedness of the entire earth, one point is clear in the passage. Thiswickedness was being held in check in Zechariah's day. A "cover oflead" had to be raised off the ephah before Zecharlah could gaze at thispersonification of evil. As soon as he had seen the woman who represented eviland she had been identified, "he pushed her back into the basket andpushed the lead cover down over its mouth" (5:8). Whatever this wickednessrepresented, God was not allowing it to escape in Zechariah's day.
AsZechariah gazed at the basket it was carried away by two additional angelicbeings. Zechariah turned to his angelic guide and asked, "Where are theytaking the basket?" (5:10). What was to be the final destiny of thiscontainer of evil? The angel's answer was very precise: To the country ofBabylon" Flit. "to the land of Shlnar"l. Shinar occurs seventimes in the Old Testament. Four of the occurrences are in Genesis where it isassociated with the city of Babel established by Nimrud following the flood(Gen. 10), with the tower of Babel (Gen. 11), and with the coalition of nationsthreatening the land God promised to Abram (Gen. 14). Isaiah 11:11 uses it in alist of places from which God will regather His people in the Messianic age.Daniel 1:2 identifies Shinar as the location to which Daniel and his friendswere carried by Nebuchadnezzar. In short, every occurrence of Shinar identifiesit as the land associated with Babylon.[72] Zechariah saw wickedness flying back toBabylon.
Theangels were taking wickedness to Babylon "to build a house for it"(Zech. 5:11). Some have translated "house" as "temple,"
Zechariahpenned these words 19 years after Babylon's fall to Cyrus. If the prophecies ofIsaiah and Jeremiah had been fulfilled in the fall of Babylon, then Zechariah'swords seem out of place. However, if the prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah werenot fulfilled when Cyrus captured the city, then Zechariah's vision couldrelate in some way to those earlier prophecies. God was holding wickedness incheck, but there would come a time when wickedness would once again have adwelling place in Babylon.
Twospecific points of note on Zechariah 5:5-11 must be made in closing. First,
Zecharlah personifies asa woman the evil that will one day dwell again in Shinar. Could this be theunderlying imagery behind descriptionof Babylon in Revelation 17? Second, if Zechariah's eight night visions are ina chiastic structure, then the end-time evil in Shinar (5:5- 11) is parallel insome way to the vision of four evil empires ("horns") that oppressJudah until they are removed by the Lord. Zecharlah's four nations are suspiciouslyparallel to Daniel's four Gentile powers that control Jerusalem during the"limes of the Gentiles" (Dan. 2; 7). The final Gentile power (thefourth horn) of Zecharlah would be parallel to the "feet of iron andclay" of Daniel 2 or the "fourth beast" of Daniel 7. But howcould wickedness in Shinar (Zech. 5) be associated with the fourth Gentilepower (Zech. 1)? Once again Revelation 17 may provide the answer. Johndescribes the evil woman named Babylon astride the "beast" that isparallel to the fourth beast of Daniel 7. Both Babylon and the fourth empireare associated in John's end- time vision as Zechariah's chiastic structurewould suggest.
Butwhile these parallels are interesting, one cannot make any positiveidentification from Zecharlah alone. Having examined the three key OldTestament prophecies on Babylon, this study must now turn to John's vision ofBabylon in the Book of Revelation. It is this writer's belief that John pullstogether the threads of numerous Old Testament prophecies, including theprophecies of Babylon.
Revelation 17-18
Onekey factor in interpreting God's prophetic program is the identification of theeschatological Babylon described by the Apostle John in Revelation 17-18. Thesetwo chapters occupy a significant portion of the Book of Revelation, and theyprovide a graphic account of God's future judgment on evil. However,interpreters face many problems in trying to identify the end-time system ofevil pictured in these two chapters. What is the "Babylon" describedby John in these two chapters?
Therelationship between Revelation 17 and 18 is crucial to a proper understandingof the Babylon referred to in both. Do Revelation 17 and 18 separately describetwo distinct Babylons, as many Bible teachers have long held? Those who holdsuch a position believe that Revelation 17 describes "ecclesiastical"Babylon which will be destroyed by the Antichrist in the middle of theTribulation period and that Revelation 18 describes "economic"Babylon-the capital of the Antichrist that will be destroyed at the end of theTribulation period. Or, do these two chapters unite in presenting the fall of asingle Babylon, whatever that Babylon might be? These questions must beanswered.
Thedistinctions between the chapters. Any attempt to understand the relationshipbetween Revelation 17 and 18 must take into account several distinctions thatappear between the two chapters. Primarily because of these distinctions manyexpositors argue for the identification of two Babylons in the chapters. Fourarguments against the unity of the two chapters have been advanced by variousauthors.
(a)Different settings. The first difficulty faced in trying to identify thesubject of these two chapters is the different settings for each chapter. Thechapters tell of two visions introduced by two different angels. Chapter 18begins, "After this I saw another angel coming down from heaven." Theproblem centers on the expression "after this" (peTd raDra). Johnused this phrase a number of times in the Book of Revelation, and several timesit indicated a major break between events. "The phrase is of greatimportance in Revelation 1:19 and 4:1 .... The phrase.. . suggests that afterthe events described in Revelation 17 have run their course, the judgment of BabylonFin chapter 18] has still to occur."[75]
Doesuse of the phrase "after this" (J.IETd TaI'rra) demand a gap betweenthese chapters? John used this phrase 10 times in the Book of Revelation. Sixtimes it occurs with a word of perception, and four times it does not. When thephrase is used with a verb of perception ("I saw," "Iheard") It simply indicates the time sequence in which the visions wererevealed to John. This is the temporal use of /.LETI i-ai)ra. In this usageJohn was indicating that the time sequence was in his observation of thevisions and not necessarily in the unfolding of future events. When John wantedto indicate a gap of time in future events, he did not include a verb ofperception. The 10 occurrences are as follows:
Temporal Use
4: la "After this Ilooked, and there before me was a door open in heaven."
7:1 "After thisI saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth...
7:9 "After thisI looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count.
15:5 "After this I looked andin heaven the temple, that is, the tabernacle of the Testimony, wasopened."
18:1 "After this I sawanother angel coming down from heaven."
19:1 "After this I heard whatsounded like the roar of a great multitude in heaven ........
Eschatological Use
1:19 "Write, therefore, whatyou have seen, what is now and what will take place later."
4: lb "Come uphere, and I will show you what must take place after this."
9:12 "The first woe is past:two other woes are yet to come."
20:3 "He threw him into theabyss... to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousandyears were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time."
Thefour references not associated with verbs of perception do indicatechronological distinctions between future events. However, those with verbs ofperception only indicate the order in which the parts of the vision are viewedby John. Thus the mere presence of /1E7d MUM in 18:1 does not indicate achronological distinction between the chapters. It only shows that the eventsrevealed to John by the second angel were shown after he had viewed the womanon the beast.
(b)Different destroyers. A second alleged distinction between Revelation 17 and 18is the apparent difference between the destroyers of Babylon. The Babylon ofchapter 17 is destroyed by kings whereas the Babylon of chapter 18 is destroyedby fire. The destruction of the "harlot Babylon" occurs in 17:16,which says, "The beast and the ten horns... will hate the prostitute. Theywill bring her to ruin and leave her naked . .. ." The destruction of the"commercial Babylon" occurs in 18:8, which says, "Therefore inone day her plagues will overtake her: death, mourning and famine. She will beconsumed by fire, for mighty is the Lord God who judges her."
Asecond distinction in destroyers between the chapters has also been suggested.The destruction is a contrast not only between the 10 kings and fire, but alsobetween a destruction by man and a destruction by God. "The great harlotis destroyed by the ten kings (Rev. 17:16b); but the city of Babylon [chap. 18]is destroyed by God"[76]
Ifthese two distinctions are valid, then any attempt to view the chapters as aunit will be doomed to failure. However, are these distinctions consistent withthe text? A careful evaluation shows that they are not. For example, it is heldthat the "harlot Babylon" of chapter 17 was destroyed by men whilethe "commercial Babylon" of chapter 18 was destroyed by fire. Thisdoes not explain 17:16b, which says, "They will... burn her withfire." Thus in reality the Babylon in both chapters is destroyed by fire.
Thedistinction is made between man's destruction (chap. 17) and God's destruction(chap. 18). This, however, fails to account for 17:17, which explains thedestruction of the harlot by the beast and 10 kings as stemming initially fromGod. "For God has put it into their hearts to accomplish his purpose . . .." Both chapters do ascribe the destruction to God.
Revelation17 and 18 are more similar than many expositors believe. A chart shows that, infact, the chapters do not have different destroyers.
Revelation 17 Revelation18
Object of destruction "Babylonthe great "Babylonthe great O
Destruction Thegreat city" greatcity, Babylon" (18:10)
Instrument of "Thebeast and the ten (notgiven)
Destruction hornsyou saw" (17:16)
Means of "Theywill burn her "Shewill be consumed
Destruction withfire" (17:16) byfire" (18:8)
Source of "ForGod has put it into "Formighty is the
Destruction theirhearts to accomplish LordGod who judges her
Hispurpose" (17:17) (18:8)
Thischart shows that the only distinction to be found is the instrument ofdestruction. Chapter 17, focuses on the human instrument while chapter 18 doesnot. If the chapters are viewed synthetically, the alleged distinctions betweenthe destroyers vanish. In their place stand a unified whole with each chapterfocusing on a different aspect of one destruction.
(c)Different responses. A third distinction between Revelation 17 and 18 is thedifferent responses to the destruction that are ascribed to the kings of eachchapter.[77]The response of the kings in chapter 17 is recorded in 17:16. "The beastand the ten horns you saw will hate the prostitute. They will bring her to ruinand leave her naked; they will eat her flesh and burn her with fire." The"ten horns" are identified in 17:12 as "ten kings."
Incontrast to the hatred and destruction of Babylon by the kings of chapter 17,the kings of chapter 18 respond by mourning. "When the kings of the earthwho committed adultery with her and shared her luxury see the smoke of herburning, they will weep and mourn over her" (18:9).
Twoopposite responses are attributed to the kings of each chapter. However, thereis an explanation apart from assuming two Babylons. An alternative is to assumethat two distinct groups of kings are in view in the two chapters. As Ladd hasobserved, "The kings of the earth [in 18:9-101 are to be distinguishedfrom the 10 kings who joined with the beast to war against the Lamb(17:12-14)."[78] Thus thekings who hate Babylon (17:16) are those 10 kings who unite with the beast toplot her overthrow. The remaining kings of the earth (18:9-10) are engaged incommerce with Babylon, so they mourn when their source of revenue is destroyed.This view is consistent with the particulars of the text but still seeks toharmonize the two chapters.
(d)Different character. The final difference between the chapters is the differentcharacter of each Babylon that is described. Chapter 17 is said to be religiousin nature while chapter 18 is more commercial. Many feel that these differencescan best be explained by the existence of two Babylons in the chapters."Revelation 17 sets forth a religious power centered at the seven-hilledcity of Rome exerting control over all people until the Antichrist has nofurther use for its existence, while the city of Babylon [chapter 18] is agreat commercial center controlling trade and commerce on a worldwidescale."[79]
Isthere a difference in character between these chapters? Chapter 17 contains avision with an interpretation. Babylon is referred to in the vision as a womanriding a beast. In a sense a vision is a word picture. However, the fact thatsomething is presented in a pictorial fashion does not mean that it has noconcrete reality. The nation Israelis no less Israel because it is pictured asa woman in Revelation 12. Likewise Babylon is no less Babylon even though it ispictured as a harlot. The key to the vision in chapter 17 is the divineinterpretation given in 17:7-18. This gives the concrete reality behind thevision. What then is the truth about the harlot? Does she represent a religioussystem, a spiritual prostitute? Revelation 17:18 suggests that the answer is no:"The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of theearth."
Babylonis pictured as a woman in chapter 17. However, when God identifies the woman toJohn, He tells John that the woman represents a city. Therefore the entireargument crumbles because the chapters do contain the same character. Bothchapters are talking about a city. This may not automatically mean that theBabylons in the two chapters are identical, but it certainly cannot be used toargue against such an identification.
Fourdistinctions between chapters 17 and 18 have been examined. Not one of the fourdistinctions contains compelling evidence for making a division between thechapters. The different settings are merely temporal aspects connected withJohn's viewing of the visions. Supposed differences between the destroyersvanish when the chapters are viewed synthetically. The different responses bythe kings are explained by the existence of two distinct groups of kings withinthe chapters, and the alleged different character of the chapters actuallyvanishes when the spotlight of God's interpretation is focused on the woman inchapter 17.
Thespecific parallels between the chapters. A detailed examination of Revelation17-18 uncovers a number of parallels between the two chapters. These can bestbe viewed in chart form.
THE DESIGNATION
The name is the same "Babylonthe Great" (17:5) Babylonthe Great" (18:2)
The identity is the same "Thewoman . is the great "Woe!Woe, 0 great city"
city"(17:18) (18:10)
Howeverone wishes to interpret the Babylon of Revelation 17, he or she mustacknowledge that the divine identification of the prostitute in Revelation 17is a city, not a mystical system. These two chapters each present a city thathas the same name in the same general context. The most natural interpretationis to take the cities as identical unless there is compelling evidence to thecontrary.
THE DESCRIPTION
The clothing is the same "The woman was dressed in "Woe!Woe, 0 great city, purpleand scarlet, and was dressed in finelinen,purple glitteringwith gold, andscarlet, and glittering preciousstones, and pearls" withgold, precious stones (17:4a) andpearls" (18:16)
Both hold a cup "Sheheld a golden cup in "Mixher a double portion herhand, filled with fromher own cup" (18:6)
abominable things and the
filthof her adulteries"
(17:4b
BothBabylons are identified as a city, and both are described in the same fashion.Apart from the addition of "fine linen" in chapter 18, both citiesare arrayed with exactly the same materials. Also both are associated with acup that each possesses. Instead of seeing two different cities that happen tohave the same name and the same description, it is easier to assume theexistence of only one city.
THE DEEDS
The relationship to "Withher the kings of "Thekings of the earth
kings is the same theearth committed committed adulterywith adultery"(17:2) ofher adulteries" (18:3)
The relationship to the "TheInhabitants of the "Forall the nations have
nations is the same earthwere intoxicated drunkthe maddening wine withthe wine of her of heradulteries" (18:3) adulteries"(17:2)
The relationship to "Isaw that the woman was "Inher was found th blood
believers is the same drunkwith the blood of the ofprophets and of the saints,the blood of those saints,and of all who had whobore testimony to beenkilled on the earth" Jesus"(17:6) (18:24)
TheBabylons in both chapters perform the same functions. Each commits fornicationwith the kings of the earth and causes all the nations of the earth to fallinto a drunken stupor. Each also persecutes God's remnant who stand inopposition to evil. One cannot distinguish a political Babylon from a religiousBabylon through a comparison of their deeds because the deeds are identical.
THE DESTRUCTION
The means of "Theywill bring her to ruin "Shewill be consumed by
destruction is the same ...andburn her with fire" fire"(18:8)
(17:16)
The source of the "ForGod has put it into "Godhas remembered her
destruction is the same theirhearts to accomplish crimes.formighty is the
his purpose" (17:17) LordGod who judges her" (18:5, 8)
Thesefinal similarities surround the destruction of both Babylons. Physically bothare destroyed by fire. And in both instances God is the ultimate source ofdestruction.
Theparallels between the chapters are impressive. Each chapter refers to a citywith the same name. Each describes a city in the same fashion. Each mentions acity that performs the same deeds, and each refers to a city that is destroyedin the same manner. These descriptions, going beyond mere similarity, pointtoward unity. Two distinct cities could hardly be described in such a similarway. It is better to view the chapters as two descriptions of the same city.
Thelarger context. The larger context in which Revelation 17 and 18 are positionedalso underscores the parallelism between the chapters. The larger contextactually begins in 14:8, which first predicts an angel flying in mid-heavenproclaiming proleptically, "Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great, whichmade all the nations drink the maddening wine of her adulteries." Severalof the phrases used here are later repeated in Revelation 17 and 18. The title"Babylon the Great" is used in all three chapters; and theproclamation "Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great" is repeated in18:2. The reference to the nations being intoxicated with the "wine of heradulteries" is also found in 17:2 and 18:3. This one proclamation isfulfilled by chapters 17 and 18, and yet there is only one Babylon in view in14:8.
Thenext appearance of Babylon occurs during the outpouring of the seventh bowl inchapter 16. Part of the judgment is that "God remembered Babylon the Greatand gave her the cup filled with the wine of the fury of his wrath"(16:19). Again only one Babylon is in view. Immediately after thispronouncement John recorded the destruction of "Babylon the Great" inchapters 17-18. What is important is that chapters 17-18 are an expansion of16:19, which seems to refer to the destruction of a city called Babylon whichis pictured as a literal city.
Thelarger context begins before chapters 17-18, but it does not end there. Thesubject of the fall of Babylon extends beyond these chapters into chapter 19.Revelation 19:1-5 presents the "Hallelujah Chorus" in heavenfollowing the destruction of Babylon. As Ladd has noted, "The firstparagraph of chapter nineteen continues the celebration of the fall of Babylonand consists of a song of thanksgiving in heaven that God had judged the greatharlot."[80]
Chapter19 begins with the phrase "After this"-referring to the visions ofchapters 17- 18. In 18:20 the author calls on heaven to rejoice over the fallof Babylon; chapter 19 describes heaven's response to that call. The first partof the heavenly praise focuses on the prostitute of chapter 17. The multitudesays, "He has condemned the great prostitute who corrupted the earth byher adulteries. He has avenged on her the blood of his servants" (19:2).In response to the angels' call to rejoice over the fall of Babylon in 18:20the heavens do respond-with a song of praise for the judgment of the harlot.The implication is that the harlot of chapter 17 and the Babylon of chapter 18 areidentical.
Thesong of praise continues in 19:3, which says, "And again they shouted:Hallelujah! The smoke from her goes up for ever and ever.'" The referenceto the smoldering city is drawn from chapter 18, in which the kings of theearth and the shipmasters are said to look on "the smoke of herburning" (18:9, 18). The praise song in heaven over the fall of Babylonincorporates elements from both chapter 17 and chapter 18, and yet it seems tobe a song celebrating just one fall and doing so in response to the command of18:20. Again this larger context can be understood best if chapters 17 and 18are viewed as a unit that looks forward to the destruction of a single city ofBabylon.
Theinterpretive keys within the chapters. John's picture of a prostitute astride ascarlet beast in chapter 17 could be entitled "Beauty on the Beast."The vision is described in the first 6 verses and then interpreted in the next12 verses. Chapter 18 focuses on the response of individuals to Babylon's destruction.Within the two chapters are four interpretive keys that are crucial to theidentification of Babylon.
(a)The description of Babylon as a harlot. The first interpretive key is thedescriptive identification of Babylon in 17:1 as "the great prostitute,who sits on many waters." This allusion to a prostitute has caused many toidentify Babylon as a false religious system. "The frequently recurringallusion to harlotry... is an echo of the Old Testament prophets, who used theterm to describe the infidelity of man to God, especially in connection withidolatry."[81]
Admittedlythe figure of a prostitute was used in the Old Testament to describe idolatry.However, the figure was also used in the Old Testament to show more than justreligious apostasy. Literal cities such as Nineveh (Nahum 3:4), Tyre (Isa.23:16-17), and Jerusalem (Ezek. 16:1, 15) were characterized as beingprostitutes. "In the context of Revelation 17 and 18 the image is not thatof religious profligacy but of the prostitution of all that is right and noblefor the questionable ends of power and luxury."[82]
Babylonis identified as a prostitute. But the reference is not to her spiritualnature. Rather the focus is on the prostitution of her values for economicgain. The figure of a harlot was never applied to a religious system only. Itwas always used to describe a city or nation (Jerusalem, Israel, Samaria,Nineveh, or Tyre). Why did John describe Babylon as a harlot? One reason was tocontrast Babylon and Jerusalem. Two cities in Revelation are described as"great"-Jerusalem and Babylon. John, through his use of literaryparalles, highlights the contrast between the destruction of Babylon and thefinal triumph of Jerusalem.
Destruction of Babylon Establishmentof Jerusalem
Revelation17:1, 3-5, 18 Revelation21:1-11, 27
One of the seven angelswho had the seven Oneof the seven angels who had the
bowls seven bowls full of the seven last plagues
came and said to me, came and said to me,
"Come, I will showyou the punishment of "Come, I will show you the bride, the wife the great prostitute . .. ." ofthe Lamb."
Then the angel carriedme away in the Andhe carried me away in the Spirit to a
Spirit into a desert mountaingreat and high
The woman was dressed inpurple and Itshone with the glory of God, and its
scarlet and wasglittering with gold, brilliance waslike that of a very precious
precious stones, andpearls jewel,like a jasper, clear as crystal
This tulle was writtenon her forehead: A and[he] showed me the Holy City, mystery, Babylon the Great, The mother of Jerusalem,coming down out of heaven prostitutes and of the abominations of the fromGod .... Nothing impure will ever earth .... The woman you saw is the great enterit, nor will anyone who does what is city that rules over the kings of theearth. shamefulor deceitful ....
(b)The explanation of Babylon as a mystery. The second interpretive key centers onthe name written on the harlot's forehead. More specifically, it revolvesaround the explanation of the word (myst&iort) in 17:5. Babylon isdescribed as a "mystery."
Twoproblems must be resolved before this interpretive key can be properlyunderstood. The first is the determination of the grammatical relationshipbetween the word pumptor and the title of the woman. According to Robertsonpvcmptou could be taken "either in apposition with ortoma["name"] or as part of the inscription on her [i.e., theprostitute's] forehead."[83]So either John could be saying that the name on the woman is "MysteryBabylon the Great" or he could be saying that the name, "Babylon theGreat," which is written on the woman's forehead, Is a mystery. Of the twopossibilities, the second offers the best explanation within the context. Wheneverthe woman is named elsewhere in the chapters she is simply called "Babylonthe Great" not "Mystery Babylon the Great" (e.g., 14:8: 16:19;18:2).
Thesecond problem that must be resolved is the exact nature of the mystery. Inwhat sense is this Babylon a mystery? Many feel that the occurrence of"musterion" means that Babylon is to be interpreted symbolically orfiguratively.[84] However,the idea of equating "musterion" with something mystical cannot be borne out inthe New Testament usage of the word. The word "musterion" does not denote thequality or character of the truth; rather it focuses on the availability ofthat truth.
Butwhereas "mystery" may mean, and in contemporary usage often doesmean, a secret for which no answer can be found, this is not at all the connotationof the term rnysterion in classical and biblical Greek. In the New Testamentmysterion signifies a secret which is being, or even has been, revealed, whichis also divine in scope, and needs to be made known by God to men through HisSpirit. In this way the term comes very close to the New Testament wordapokalypsis, "revelation." Mysteriort is a temporary secret, whichonce revealed is known and understood-a secret no longer.[85]
Callingthe harlot's name a mystery does not automatically mean a spiritual or mysticalsystem of evil as opposed to a literal "brick and mortar" city. Bydesignating Babylon as a "mystery" God was indicating to John thatthe vision being given had not been made known before. To understand the"mystery" in its context one must examine 17:7-18, for in theseverses God reveals the meaning and significance of the vision.
The"mystery" that John saw was two end-time world powers (the prostituteand the beast on which she was riding) in existence at the same time. The OldTestament did point to the rise of Rome which was to rule the world just priorto the establishment of Christ's kingdom (Dan. 2:40-45; 7:23-27: 9:26-27).However, the Old Testament also predicted the restoration of Babylon as a majorpower in God's future prophetic program (Isa. 13-14; Jer. 50-51: Zech. 5:5-11). But how could both of these empires exist simultaneously and fit intoGod's program for the world? That was the "mystery" revealed to John.After viewing the vision (Rev. 17:1-6), the angel said to John, "I willexplain to you the mystery (yucrnpio) of the woman and of the beast sherides" (17:7).
(c)The identification of Babylon as a city. There is no lack of opinion concerningthe identification of the prostitute called Babylon. However, most of the identificationsdo not begin with the divine interpretation of the vision given at the end ofchapter 17. In 17:18 the angel interpreted the harlot to John: "The womanyou saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth."Whatever else is said about the prostitute, God identifies her first as a city,not an ecclesiastical system.
Thedivine interpretive key in 17:18 identifies the Babylon of chapter 17 as acity. It is a city of worldwide importance, for it is said to reign over theother kings of the earth. It is true that the identification can go beyond thecity to the system it controls. However, the interpretation given to Johnfocused only on the identification of Babylon as a city. In the secularizedWest, society separates "church" and "state," but no suchseparation existed in antiquity. Babylon may have a religious aspect (forexample, she persecutes believers), but this does not argue against Babylonbeing a literal city.
(d)The location of Babylon on seven hills. The beast on which the woman is sittingis described as having seven heads. When the angel interpreted this part of thevision to John he said, "This calls for a mind with wisdom. The sevenheads are seven hills [mountains] on which the woman sits. They are also seven kings.Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, hemust remain for a little while" (17:9-10). What are the seven hills onwhich the woman is sitting? The traditional understanding of the seven hills isthat they refer to the city of Rome, known in John's day as the seven-hilledcity.[86]
Thisview that the seven hills refer to Rome has some serious flaws. The first flawis the assumed relationship between the woman and the hills. The seven headsare associated with the beast, not the woman. There is a distinction betweenthe woman and the beast; and it is the beast that has the seven heads. Theangel said, "I will explain to you the mystery of the woman and of thebeast she rides, which has the seven heads" (17:7). If the seven hillsrefer to Rome, then the most that can be determined is that the Antichrist'sempire will be centered in the city of Rome. It does not identify the locationof the prostitute because she is not an organic part of the beast.
Somemight argue that the harlot is still to be associated with the city of sevenhills because they are described in 17:9 as "seven hills on which thewoman sits." However, the prostitute's sitting on the seven hills is areference to her control or influence not to her location. In 17:1 the woman issitting on "many waters." These are interpreted in 17:15 as"peoples, multitudes, nations, and languages." The purpose of thispart of the vision is not to show Babylon's location or else the city wouldhave to be parceled out throughout the world. Rather, the prostitute sitting onthe waters is a reference to her control or influence over all the nations ofthe world. The woman is also said to sit on the entire beast (17:3). This wouldgo beyond just the seven heads to include the Antichrist and the kings alliedwith him. Again the reference is to her control or influence, not to herlocation. If the harlot's sitting clearly indicates control or influence twicein the chapter, is it not inconsistent to give that same figure a different meaningwhen it occurs for a third time? It is far more consistent to view the harlot'ssitting as indicative of her control over the seven mountains, rather thanhaving it point to her physical location.
Evenif the seven hills are taken as a reference to Rome, that identification cannotbe used to associate the harlot with Rome. The woman and the seven heads aredistinct; and the position of the woman indicates control, not location.However, there is evidence to believe that the seven hills could refer to somethingother than the city of Rome. To understand properly the symbolism of the sevenmountains one must go beyond the Greco-Roman society in which John wrote to theJewish heritage in which he was raised. John was a Jew, and the Book ofRevelation must be interpreted in light of the Old Testament. As Jenkins hassaid, "The book of Revelation is the most thoroughly Jewish in itslanguage and imagery of any New Testament book. This book speaks not thelanguage of Paul, but of the Old Testament prophets Isaiah, Ezekiel, andDaniel."[87]
Tounderstand the seven mountains one must go to the Old Testament to see how thissymbol was used. The word "mountain" was often a symbolic referenceto a kingdom or national power. The following Old Testament passages show thisusage of the word.
"In the last daysthe mountain of the LORD's temple will be established as chief among themountains; it will be raised above the hills, and all the nations will streamto it" (Isa. 2:2).
"'I am against you,0 destroying mountain, you who destroy the whole earth,' declares the LORD. 'Iwill stretch out my hand against you, roll you off the cliffs, and make you aburned-out mountain'" (Jer. 51:25). [The Lord is here speaking to thenation of Babylon: see Jer. 50:1. Jeremiah 50-51 are quoted extensively inRevelation 17-18.]
"But the rock thatstruck the statue became a huge mountain and filled the whole earth.
In the time of thosekings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed,nor will it be left to another people. It will crush all those kingdoms andbring them to an end, but it will itself endure forever" (Dan. 2:35, 44).[God identified the mountain as the everlasting kingdom He will set up.] Thefigure of a mountain is used in the Old Testament to refer to a kingdom.However, there is yet another reason for identifying the seven mountains inRevelation 17 as a reference to seven kingdoms.
Thisinterpretation is to be preferred because it best explains the dualidentification of the seven heads as both mountains and kings.
Ifthe seven mountains are applied to Rome, then the seven kings must be sevenrulers of Rome. However, there is some difficulty in relating the known historyof Rome's rulers to the seven kings of the vision. One must leave out threeRoman emperors (Galba, Otho, and Vitellius) to have the history of Rome fitJohn's chronology. But this is not sound interpretation. "Such a procedureis arbitrary, for Galba, Otho and Vitellius, unimportant as they may have been,were bona fide emperors and were recognized as such by ancienthistorians."[88]
Thedivine interpretation associates each head with both a mountain and a king.This can best be explained by viewing the "mountain" as a figure ofspeech that refers to a kingdom and the king who was ruling it. Thisrelationship is most clearly illustrated in Daniel's interpretation ofNebuchadnezzar's dream in Daniel 2. "You are the head of gold. After you,another kingdom will rise, inferior to yours" (Dan. 2:38b-39). Danielwrote that the head of gold was a king, but that the breast and arms of silverwere another kingdom. Daniel was obviously viewing the kingdom of Babylon aspersonified in the king that stood before him. Thus he could switch from theking to the kingdom with no inconsistency. The Apostle John is using the ideasof kingdoms and rulers in the same way. The seven heads which are identified as"mountains" and "kings" in Revelation 17:9-10 refer toseven empires and their kings rather than to the city of Rome.
Thefour interpretive keys within Revelation 17-18 provide vital information on theidentity of Babylon. Babylon is first and foremost a literal city that willdominate the world. It will be characterized as a harlot that prostitutes hermoral values for material luxury. The entire city is viewed as a mystery inthat her future position, relationship to the Antichrist, and ultimatedestruction by the Antichrist had not been known before John's vision.Evidently Babylon will exert influence or control over seven nations, the Antichrist'sgrowing empire, and eventually the entire earth. These keys do not unlock somemystical system of religion that will infiltrate the world. Rather, they openthe door of prophecy on a brick-and-mortar city intoxicated with power andluxury. The Babylon in these chapters, though it might have religious aspects,is one that will exist geographically and politically.
Therelationship to the Old Testament prophecies on Babylon. An examination of
Revelation 17-18 showsthat there is but one Babylon in view. That Babylon is a city that will extendits control throughout the world. However, the city itself still needs to beidentified. Chapters 17 and 18 provide little insight by themselves into theidentity of the city, but through a comparison with other passages a positiveidentification is possible.
Thekey to identifying the Babylon of Revelation 17-18 is to isolate and interpretthe Old Testament themes John was drawing on in these chapters. One central OldTestament passages on which Revelation 17-18 is constructed is Jeremiah 50-51.This is the passage to which John alluded most frequently.
John'suse of Jeremiah 50-51 can be observed by listing the many parallels between thepassages. These parallels fall into three categories: the description, the destruction,and the response. Each category will be presented in chart form. Following thechart will be a brief analysis of the significance of those parallels.
The Description
Compared to a golden "Babylonwas a gold cup in "Thewoman . held a
cup theLORD's hand" (Jer. goldencup in her hand" 51:7a). (Rev.17:4; cf. 18:6).
Dwelling on many "Youwho live by () many "Come,I will show you the
Waters waters"(Jer. 51:13). punishmentof the great
Prositiutewho sits on
Manywaters" (Rev. 17:1)
Involved with nations Thenations drank her wine; "andthe inhabitants of
therefore,they have now theearth were intoxicated gone mad" (Jer. 51:7b). withthe wine of her
adulteries"(Rev. 17:2b).
Named the same "Thisis the word the LORD "Babylon thegreat" (Rev.
Spokeconcerning (17:5)
Babylon and the land of the
Babylonians" (Jer. 50:1). "Woe!Woe, 0 great city, 0
Babylon, city of power" (Rev.18:10).
TheBabylon of Jeremiah 50-51 and the Babylon of Revelation 17-18 are describedsimilarly. Both are described in terms of a golden cup that influences thenations that partake of its contents. Both are also said to dwell on manywaters. Obviously John was employing the terminology used by Jeremiah. Jeremiahwas prophesying the destruction of the literal city of Babylon, and John wasprophesying the destruction of a city with the same name.
The Destruction
Destroyed suddenly "Babylon will suddenly fall "Thereforein one day her andbe broken" Per. 51:8). plagueswill overtake her:
death,mourning and famine"(Rev. 18:10).
Destroyed by fire "Herdwellings are set on "Thebeast and the ten
fire"(Jer. 51:30). horns will eat her flesh
and burn her with fire ....
Shewill be consumed by fire" (Rev. 17:16; 18:8).
Never to be inhabited "Itwill never again be "Withsuch great violence
inhabited" (Jer. 50:39). thegreat city of Babylon willbe thrown down, never tobe found again"
(Rev. 18:21).
Punished according to "Repayher for her deeds: do "Giveback to her as she deedsto her as she has done" hasgiven; pay her back (Jer.50:29). doublefor what she has done"(Rev. 18:6).
Fall illustrated "Whenyou finish reading "Thena mighty angel picked thisscroll, tie a stone to it upa boulder the size of a
and throw it into the large millstone and threw it Euphrates.Then say, 'So into thesea, and said: 'With willBabylon sink to rise no suchviolence the great city more'"(Jer. 51:63-64). Babylonwill be thrown
down, never to be found again'"(Rev. 18:2 1).
Johnand Jeremiah each described a city that is destroyed suddenly and completely. Acity in full blossom is plucked up never to reappear. The destruction is meted outby God for past deeds and is pictured as a rock sinking in a body of water torise no more.
The Response
God's people to flee "Fleefrom Babylon! Run for "ThenI heard another voice yourlives!" (Jer. 51:6). fromheaven say: 'Come out ofher, my people, so that "Comeout of her my people! you willnot share in her Runfor your lives! Run sins,so that you will not fromthe fierce anger of the receiveany of her plagues" LORD"Per. 51:45). (Rev.18:4).
Heaven to rejoice "Then heavenand earth "Rejoiceover her, 0 heaven!
and all that is in them will Rejoicesaints and apostles shoutfor joy over Babylon, and prophets! Godhas forout of the north judgedher for the way she destroyerswill attack her,' treatedyou" (Rev. 18:20). declaresthe Lord" Per.
51:48).
Jeremiahand John recorded the same response to the destruction of their city. Those onearth are warned to flee from the destruction that has now been promised. Inheaven there is a call to rejoice, for the destruction signals God's victoryover a godless city.
Theultimate identity of Babylon in Revelation 17-18 depends on John's use ofJeremiah's prophecy. Was John describing the same event or simply using"biblical language" to describe a different event? It was shownearlier that Jeremiah 50-51 describes a still-future destruction of the literalcity of Babylon. Jeremiah directed his prophecy against "Babylon and theland of the Babylonians" (50:1). As noted earlier in this paper, severalkey elements of Jeremiah's prophecy have never been fulfilled literally. Johnpredicted the destruction of a city with the same name as the city inJeremiah's prophecy, having the same physical characteristics as the city inJeremiah's prophecy, and destroyed in the same manner as the city in Jeremiah'sprophecy.
Inaddition to Jeremiah 50-51, John also seems to be borrowing imagery fromZechariah 5:5-11. Zechariah saw wickedness personified as a woman. John views awoman who "held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable thingsand the filth of her adulteries" (Rev. 17:4). Zechariah predicted thatwickedness would one day dwell again in Shinar, and John identifies a citynamed "Babylon the Great" that he describes as "the mother ofprostitutes and of the abominations of the earth" (Rev. 17:5). Zechariah'svision implies that God will someday allow wickedness to become reestablishedin Babylon. John pictures Babylon back in existence and describes the woman asthe source of all wickedness that has been on earth.
Theseparallels lead to the conclusion that John, Jeremiah, and Zechariah arepointing to the future destruction of the same city. John so identified hisprophecy with the unfulfilled prophecies of Jeremiah that the association isunmistakable. Therefore the identity of the Babylon in Revelation 17-18 is thefuture rebuilt city of Babylon on the Euphrates River in present-day Iraq.Babylon will once again be restored and will achieve a place of worldwideinfluence only to be destroyed by the Antichrist in his thirst for power.
Conclusion
Itis this author's belief that the Old Testament and New Testament prophecies ofBabylon, when interpreted literally, have never been fulfilled. There has neverbeen a time historically when Baylon has been totally desolate and devoid ofhuman habitation. Babylon's fall is said to coincide with God's restoration ofHis people and their entering into an everlasting covenant with Him.
PerhapsBabylon can serve as a lesson and an encouragement to dispensationalists.Prophecies that appeared incapable of having a literal fulfillment (whether itbe the reestablishment of Israel or the rebuilding of Babylon) make more senseas the time for their fulfillment draws closer.
Ofcourse, literal interpretation is not the exclusive property ofdispensationalists. Most conservatives would agree with what has just beensaid. What, then, is the difference between the dispensationalists' use of thishermeneutical principle and the nondispensatlonalists'? The difference lies inthe fact that the dispensationalist claims to use the normal principle ofinterpretation consistently in all his study of the Bible.[89]
Thosewho hold to a pretribulational rapture and a dispensational theology would dowell to continue to stress the literal interpretation of prophecy whilereexamining their own interpretations to make sure they are being consistentthemselves. The literal method of interpretation must remain the hallmark ofdispensationalism. The rebuilding of Babylon is simply another example of howliteral interpretation can unlock God's prophetic Word.
[1] 'Thus Berkhof devotes a chapter to grammaticalinterpretation and a second chapter to historical interpretation (LouisBerkhof, Principles of Biblical Interpretation [Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,1950], pp. 67-132). Mickelsen discusses "context," language,"and "history and culture" in his section on general hermeneutics (A.Berkeley Mickelsen, Interpreting the Bible [Grand Rapids: Wm. B. EerdmansPublishing Co., 19631, pp. 99-177).
[2] Mickelsen describes three possible approaches: (a)"literal fulfillment of all details," (b) "the symbolic meaningof an entire prophecy." and (c) "equivalents, analogy, orcorrespondence" (Mickelson, Interpreting the Bible, pp. 296-98). He optsfor the third method because a literal interpretation of passages such as Ezekiel40-48 "should be abhorrent to everyone who takes seriously the message ofthe book of Hebrews" (Ibid., p. 298).
[3] The literal interpretation of Scripture readilyadmits the very large place which figurative language has in the Scriptures.... Literal interpretation does not mean painful, or wooden, or unbendingliteral rendition of every word and phrase" (Bernard Ramm, ProtestantBiblical Interpretation, revised ed. [Boston: W. A. Wilde Co., 1956], p. 141).
[4] "it becomes clear from these late church fathersthat Jerome, Vincent, and Augustine paved the way for two emphases that were toendure for more than a thousand years- allegorization and churchauthority" (Roy B. Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation [Wheaton, IL: VictorBooks, 19911, p. 41). Ramm says, 'The allegorical system that arose among thepagan Greeks, copied by the Alexandrian Jews, was next adopted by the Christianchurch and largely dominated exegesis until the Reformation.. ." (Ramm,Protestant Biblical Interpretation, p. 28).
[5] Jaroslav Pelikan, ed. Luther's Works, Vol. 16,Lectures on Isaiah 1-39 (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1969), pp.136-37.
[6] Theodore G. Tappert, ed., Luther's Works, Vol. 54,Table Talk, "Beware of Melancholy
and Trust God," No.461, February 19, 1533 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967), pp. 76-77.
[7] Eric W. Gritsch, ed., Luther's Works, Vol. 41, Churchand Ministry III, "Against
Hanswurst,"(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966), pp. 206-7.
[8] lbid., "Against the Roman Papacy, An Institutionof the Devil," pp. 273-74.
[9] John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion,trans. Henry Beveridge (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962),2:313-14.
[10] Luther, Isaiah 1-39, p. 133.
[11] Ibid.,p. 138.
[12] Josh McDowell, comp. Evidence That Demands a Verdict:Historical Evidences for the
Christian Faith (ArrowheadSprings, CA: Campus Crusade for Christ International, 1972), p. 319. Thespecific prophecies are: (a) Babylon to be like Sodom and Gomorrah, (b) neverinhabited again, (c) tents will not be placed there by Arabs, (d) sheepfoldswill not be there, (e) desert creatures will infest the ruins, (1) stones willnot be removed for other construction projects, (g) the ancient city will notbe frequently visited, and (h) covered with swamps of water (Ibid., p. 315).
[13] 0ne example among many is Otto Kaiser who datesIsaiah 13 to the postexilic period because of its description of Babylon's fallto Cyrus. "An older, late pre-exilic or more probably exilic prophecy maylie behind 13:2-22. In its present form it is post-exilic, and its outlookallows us to describe it as proto-apocalyptic. The taunt on the fall of thetyrant in 14:b-21 is also likely to be a product of the post-exilic period.Interest in the fate of Babylon did not come to an end with the conquest of thecity by Cyrus in the year 539" (Otto Kaiser, Isaiah 13-39. A Commentary,trans. by R. A. Wilson, The Old Testament Library [Philadelphia: WestminsterPress, 1974], p. 2).
[14] In fact, Babylon was first on Sennacherib's list ofrebellious cities to attack. "In my first campaign I accomplished thedefeat of Merodach-baladan, king of Babylonia. ." (Daniel DavidLuckenbill, The Annals of Sennacherib, 2 vols. [Chicago: University of ChicagoPress, 19241, 2:24).
[15] 1bid., 2:84.
[16] Ibid., 2:161.
[17] The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia.. 1979ed., s.v., "Babylon," by D. J.
Wiseman, 1:385.
[18] A. K. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles inTexts from Cuneiform Sources, ed. A. Leo Oppenheim (Locust Valley, NY: J. J.Augustin Publisher, 1975), pp. 109-10.
[19] James B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern TextsRelating to the Old Testament, 3d ed. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton UniversityPress, 1969), p. 316.
[20] Herodotus 3.159.
[21] Ibid. 1.180-81. Italics added to emphasize verbtenses.
[22] Ib1d. 181. "In the midmost of one divisionstands the royal palace, surrounded by a high and strong wall; and in themidmost of the other is still to this day the sacred enclosure of Zeus Belus, asquare of two furlongs each way, with gates of bronze. In the centre of thisenclosure a solid tower has been built, of one furlong's length and breadth; asecond tower rises from this, and from it yet another, till at last there areeight."
[23] Arrian Anabasis of Alexander 7.17.1. Strabo (63B.C.-A.D. 24) seems to agree with Arrian when he writes, "Here too is thetomb of Belus, now in ruins, having been demolished by Xerxes, as it is said.It was a quadrangular pyramid of baked brick, not only being a stadium inheight, but also having sides a stadium in length" (Strabo Geography16.1.5). However, Strabo's account is both late and unreliable. He confuses thetemple of Marduk with the tower of Babel. Based on his knowledge of Egypt heassumes that the tower structure marked a tomb (as did the Egyptian pyramids).
[24] Strabo Geography 16.1.5.
[25] Piai- Anabasis of Alexander 7.14.8.
[26] Joan Oates, Babylon, revised ed. (New York: Thamesand Hudson, 1986). pp. 159-60.
[27] Anaba.sis of Alexander 7.19.4.
[28] So Oates writes, "The Greek theatre in Babylonwas first built at or not long after the time of Alexander and wasreconstructed under his Seleucid successors" (Oates, Babylon, p. 143).
[29] Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts, p. 317. Aninscription from the time of Antlochus I reads in part, "I am Antiochus(An-ti-'u-ku-us), the great king, the legitimate king, the king of the world,king of Babylon (Eu), king of all countries, the caretaker of the temples ofEsagila and Ezlda, the first(-born) son of king Seleucus (Si-lu-uk-ku), theMacedonian (a-'Ma ak-ka-du-na-a-a), king of Babylon."
[30] So Strabo writes, "Now in ancient times Babylonwas the metropolis; but Seleuceia is the metropolis now, I mean the Seleucelaon the Tigris as it is called. Near by is situated a village called Ctesiphon,a large village. This village the kings of the Parthians were wont to maketheir winter residence, thus sparing the Seleuceians, in order that theSeleuceians might not be oppressed by having the Scythian folk or soldieryquartered amongst them. Because of Parthian power, therefore, Ctesiphon is acity rather than a village.. ." (Strabo Geography 16.1.16).
[31] Josephus Antiquities of the Jews 15.2.2.
[32] William Whitson, trans. Josephus. Complete Works(Grand Rapids: Kregel
Publications, 1978), p. 315.
[33] Josephus Antiquities 18.9.8.
[34] Ibid.
[35] Ibid.18.9.9.
[36] Strabo Geography 16.1.5.
[37] Ibid. 16.1.6.
[38] Pliny Natural History 6.30.121-22.
[39] So Selwyn writes that Babylon is "a soubriquetfor Rome .... The objection to the Mesopotamian Babylon being intended is thatthere is no local tradition of any Apostle other than St. Thomas beingassociated with those parts .... In the case of I Peter, reasons of prudencemay have dictated the use of the symbolic name, as the letter might have topass the censorship of police officers" (Edward Gordon Selwyn, The FirstEpistle of St. Peter [New York: Macmillan & Co., 1964], p. 243).
[40] wuest cites six reasons for understanding Babylon inits literal sense. One reason is that "the other geographical referencesin First Peter have ia-undoubtedly the literal meaning, and it would be naturalto expect that Peter's use of the name Babylon' would be literal also"(Kenneth S. Wuest, Wuest's Word Studies [Grand Rapids: Wm. B. EerdmansPublishing Co., 19661, 2:132-33).
[41] Cassius Dio Cocceianus Dio's Roman History 68.30.
[42] Ibid.
[43] Ibid. 68.1-3.
[44] The Travels of Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela. A.D.1160-1173," Thomas Wright, ed. Early
Travels in Palestine, reprinted. (New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1968), p. 100.
[45] As cited by Thomas Newton, Dissertations on theProphecies (London, J. F. Dove, n.d.), pp. 140-41.
[46] Pilgrims and other travelers from the west wouldjourney inland through what is
today Syria until theyreached the Euphrates River. They would float downriver to Al Falljah and thentravel due east approximately 40 miles to Baghdad. For a map showing Al FaUjahand describing its historic significance see Lands of the Bible Today withDescriptive Notes (Washington, DC: National Geographic Society, 1967).
[47] Robert Koldewey, The Excauations at Babylon,trans. By Anges S. Johns (London:Macmillan and Co., 1914), p. 22.
[48] Ibid., fig. I. See map on next page.
[49] L. Glynne Dairos, Assistant Secretary of the BritishSchool of Archaeology in Iraq, to Charles H. Dyer, Dallas, 15 August 1978. Personal files of Charles H. Dyer,Dallas Texas.
[50] New York Times International, April 19, 1989, p. 4-Y.
[51] Washington Post, December 1, 1986, p. A- 11.
[52] Starting the festival on the day that Iraq began thewar by invading Iran was, as the Baghdad Observer, the official English-languagenewspaper in Iraq, observed, "not a mere coincidence" (BaghdadObserver, September 23, 1987, p. 1).
[53] Baghdad Observer, September 23, 1987, p. 2.
[54] Quote attributed to Saddam Hussein in BabylonInternational Festival brochure for September 22, 1987.
[55] Paul Lewis, "Dollars Can Still Get You Scotchand Waterford Crystal in Baghdad," NewYork Ttrnes,Mayl2, 1991, p. 10.
[56] Personal correspondence from Dr. Mouayyad SaidDamerji, Head of the Babylon Festival Organizing Committee, to Dr. Charles H.Dyer, 27 August 1992.
[57] Personai correspondence from Khalid J. Shewayish,Chief of Iraq Interests Section at the Embassy of the Republic of Algeria, toDr. Charles H. Dyer, 28 June 1993.
[58] John A. Martin, "Isaiah," The Bible KnowledgeCommentary, Old Testament (Wheaton,IL: Victor Books, 1985), p. 1062.
[59] Ibid., p. 1058.
[60] Ibid., p. 1061.
[61] Luckenbill, The Annals of Sennacherib, 2:23.
[62] Ibid., p. 85.
[63] Ibid., p. 24.
[64] Ibid., p. 35.s
[65] Ibid., "Excerpts from the BabylonianChronicle," pp. 158-61. For a concise listing of the rulers and theirdates see Faraj Basmachi, Treasures of the Iraq Museum (Baghdad: Ministry ofInformation, Directorate General of Antiquities, 1976), P. 84.
[66] Kaiser, Isaiah 13-23, p. 2.
[67] Ibid. p. 9.
[68] Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to theOld Testament, p. 316.
[69] Grayson, Assyrian and Babylon Chronicles in Textfrom Cuneiform Sources, pp. 109-10.
[70] Baldwin, though she sees a slightly differentchiastic structure in the eight night visions, notes the presence of chiasmthroughout the Book of Zechariah (Joyce G. Baldwin, Haggal, Zechaah. Malachi,The Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries [Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press,19721, pp. 80-81, 92-93). Instead of the pattern a b c d d c b' a she seesthepattern abbccbba(Ibid., p.80).
[71] The difference between "appearance/resemblance" (NASB, KJV) and "wickedness" (NW) Is based on atextual variation. Ken Barker presents a succinct summary of the problem andthe likely solution. "' ('lam) presents a text-critical problem. As itstands, it means "their eye" [i.e., their appearance), which does notyield a good sense (cf. the parallel in v. 8, where the woman in the basket isinterpreted as wickedness personified). NW, probably correctly, follows oneHebrew MS, the LXX, and the Syrlac in reading ) ('an-, "theiriniquity"). (The pronominal suffix refers to the people, perhaps withspecial reference to the godless rich.) The only significant variation betweenthese two readings is the waw instead of the yod. Even here it should be bornein mind that in many ancient Hebrew MSS the only perceptible difference betweenthe two letters is the length of the downward stroke. A long yod and a shortwaw are virtually indistinguishable" (Kenneth L. Barker, "Zechariah,"In The Expositor's Bible Commentary, vol. 7, Daniel-Minor Prophets [GrandRapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1985], p. 635).
[72] Barker concludes that Shinar "roughlycorresponded to ancient Babylonia" (Barker, "Zechariah," p.635).
[73] Baidwln assumes the reference must be to a temple."Another temple will be erected,
perhaps a ziggurat like thetower of Babel. . ." (Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, p. 129).Barker, though more tentative in his identification, still suggests that theword is "perhaps referrln to a temple or ziggurat" (Barker,"Zecharlah," p. 635).
[74] Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, AHebrew and English Lexicon of
the Old Testament, s.v., pp.108- 10.
[75] Kenneth W. Allen, The Rebuilding and Destruction ofBabylon," Bibliotheca Sacra
133 (January-March, 1976):25.
[76] Ibid., p.26.
[77] In observing these different responses Tenneycomments, "Why should the kings both hate her and then bewail her fate attheir hands? Perhaps the explanation lies in the difference between religiousand commercial Babylon" (Merrill C. Tenney, Interpreting Revelation [GrandRapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 19571, p. 85).
[78] George Eldon Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation ofJohn (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1972), p. 235.
[79] Allen, "The Rebuilding and Destruction ofBabylon," p. 26.
[80] Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, p. 244.
[81] Merrill C. Tenney, Interpreting Revelation, p. 83.
[82] Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation (GrandRapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1977), P. 307.
[83] Archibald Thomas Robertson, Word Pictures in the NewTestament, 6 vols. (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1933), 6:430.
[84] Ibid. Robertson wrote, "In either case themeaning is the same, that the name Babylon is to be interpreted mystically orspiritually (cf. prteymatik 11:8) for Rome."
[85] The New Bible Dictionary, 1974 ed., s.v."Mystery," by S. S. Smalley, p. 856. Barker agrees with Smalley."The Greek term, however, refers to a mystery of divine nature thatremains hidden from human beings because their normal powers of comprehensionare insufficient. Nonetheless, these mysteries are intended for human beingsand when known prove profitable to them" (The International Standard BibleEncyclopedia, 1986 ed., s.v., "Mystery," by G. W. Berker, 3:451-52).
[86] Mounce writes, "There is little doubt that afirst-century reader would understand this reference in any way other than as areference to Rome, the city built upon seven hills" (Mounce, The Book ofRevelation, pp. 313-14).
[87] Ferrel Jenkins, The Old Testament in the Book ofRevelation (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1976), P. 22.
[88] Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, p.229.
[89] Charles Caidwell Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today(Chicago: Moody Press, 1965), p. 89.