As the reign of Elizabeth (1558-1603) was coming to a close, we find a draft for an act of Parliament for a new version of the Bible: “An act for the reducing of diversities of Bibles now extant in the English tongue to one settled vulgar [common] translated from the original.” The Bishop’s Bible of 1568, although it may have eclipsed the Great Bible, was still rivaled by the Geneva Bible. Nothing ever became of this draft during the reign of Elizabeth, who died in 1603, and was succeeded by James I, as the throne passed from the Tudors to the Stuarts. James was at that time James VI of Scotland, and had been for thirty-seven years. He was born during the period between the Geneva and the Bishop’s Bible.

One of the first things done by the new king was the calling of the Hampton Court Conference in January of 1604 “for the hearing, and for the determining, things pretended to be amiss in the church.” Here were assembled bishops, clergymen, and professors, along with four Puritan divines, to consider the complaints of the Puritans. Although Bible revision was not on the agenda, the Puritan president of Corpus Christi College, John Reynolds, “moved his Majesty, that there might be a new translation of the Bible, because those which were allowed in the reigns of Henry the eighth, and Edward the sixth, were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the Original.”

The king rejoined that he “could never yet see a Bible well translated in English; but I think that, of all, that of Geneva is the worst. I wish some special pains were taken for an uniform translation, which should be done by the best learned men in both Universities [Oxford and Cambridge], then reviewed by the Bishops, presented to the Privy Council, lastly ratified by the Royal authority, to be read in the whole Church, and none other.”

Accordingly, a resolution came forth: “That a translation be made of the whole Bible, as consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and Greek; and this to be set out and printed, without any marginal notes, and only to be used in all churches of England in time of divine service.”

The next step was the actual selection of the men who were to perform the work. In July of 1604, James wrote to Bishop Bancroft that he had “appointed certain learned men, to the number of four and fifty, for the translating of the Bible.” These men were the best Biblical scholars and linguists of their day. In the preface to their completed work it is further stated that “there were many chosen, that were greater in other men’s eyes than in their own, and that sought the truth rather than their own praise. Again, they came or were thought to come to the work, learned, not to learn.” Other men were sought out, according to James, “so that our said intended translation may have the help and furtherance of all our principal learned men within this our kingdom.”

Although fifty-four men were nominated, only forty-seven were known to have taken part in the work of translation. The translators were organized into six groups, and met respectively at Westminster, Cambridge, and Oxford. Ten at Westminster were assigned Genesis through 2Ki; seven had Romans through Jude. At Cambridge, eight worked on 1Ch through Ecclesiastes, while seven others handled the Apocrypha. Oxford employed seven to translate Isaiah through Malachi; eight occupied themselves with the Gospels, Acts, and Revelation.

Fifteen general rules were advanced for the guidance of the translators:

1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the Truth of the original will permit.

2. The names of the Prophets, and the Holy Writers, with the other Names of the Text, to be retained, as nigh as may be, accordingly as they were vulgarly used.

3. The Old Ecclesiastical Words to be kept, viz. the Word Church not to be translated Congregation &c.

4. When a Word hath divers Significations, that to be kept which hath been most commonly used by the most of the Ancient Fathers, being agreeable to the Propriety of the Place, and the Analogy of the Faith.

5. The Division of the Chapters to be altered, either not at all, or as little as may be, if Necessity so require.

6. No Marginal Notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek Words, which cannot without some circumlocution [ie, further explanation], so briefly and fitly be expressed in the Text.

7. Such Quotations of Places to be marginally set down as shall serve for the fit Reference of one Scripture to another.

8. Every particular Man of each Company, to take the same Chapter or Chapters, and having translated or amended them severally by himself, where he thinketh good, all to meet together, confer what they have done, and agree for their Parts what shall stand.

9. As any one Company hath dispatched any one Book in this Manner they shall send it to the rest, to be considered of seriously and judiciously, for His Majesty is very careful in this Point.

10. If any Company, upon the Review of the Book so sent, doubt or differ upon any Place, to send them Word thereof; note the Place, and withal send the Reasons, to which if they consent not, the Difference to be compounded at the general Meeting, which is to be of the chief Persons of each Company, at the end of the Work.

11. When any Place of special Obscurity is doubted of, Letters to be directed by Authority, to send to any Learned Man in the Land, for his Judgement of such a Place.

12. Letters to be sent from every Bishop to the rest of his Clergy, admonishing them of this Translation in hand; and to move and charge as many skilful in the Tongues; and having taken pains in that kind, to send his particular Observations to the Company, either at Westminster, Cambridge, or Oxford.

13. The Directors in each Company, to be the Deans of Westminster, and Chester for that Place; and the King’s Professors in the Hebrew or Greek in either University.

14. These translations to be used when they agree better with the Text than the Bishops Bible: Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Coverdale’s, Whitchurch’s, Geneva.

15. Besides the said Directors before mentioned, three or four of the most Ancient and Grave Divines, in either of the Universities, not employed in Translating, to be assigned by the vice-Chancellor, upon Conference with the rest of the Heads, to be Overseers of the Translations as well Hebrew as Greek, for the better observation of the 4th Rule above specified.

The work began to take shape in 1604 and progressed steadily. The translators expressed their early thoughts in their preface as:

“Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one,.. but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against, that hath been our endeavor.”

They had at their disposal all the previous English translations to which they did not disdain:

“We are so far off from condemning any of their labors that travailed before us in this kind, either in this land or beyond sea, either in King Henry’s time, or King Edward’s…or Queen Elizabeth’s of ever renowned memory, that we acknowledge them to have been raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in everlasting remembrance.”

And, as the translators themselves also acknowledged, they had a multitude of sources from which to draw from: “Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, CHaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek, or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch.”

The Greek editions of Erasmus, Stephanus, and Beza were all accessible, as were the Complutensian and Antwerp Polyglots, and the Latin translations of Pagninus, Termellius, and Beza.

Four years were spent on the preliminary translation by the six groups. The translators were exacting and particular in their work, as related in their preface:

“Neither did we disdain to revise that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered: but having and using as great helps as were needful, and fearing no reproach for slowness, nor coveting praise for expedition, we have at the length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the work to that pass that you see.”

The conferences of each of the six being ended, nine months were spent at Stationers’ Hall in London for review and revision of the work by two men each from the Westminster, Cambridge, and Oxford companies. The final revision was then completed by Myles Smith and Thomas Bilson, with a preface supplied by Smith.

The completed work was issued in 1611, the complete title page reading:

“THE HOLY BIBLE, Conteyning the Old Testament, and the New: Newly Translated out of the Originall tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties Special Commandment. Appointed to be read in Churches. Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie. ANNO DOM. 1611.”

The New Testament had a separate title page, the whole of it reading:

“THE NEWE Testament of our Lord and Saviour JESUS CHRIST. Newly Translated out of the Originall Greeke: and with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties speciall Commandment. IMPRINTED at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie. ANNO DOM. 1611. Cum Privilegio.”

The King James Bible was, in its first editions, even larger than the Great Bible. It was printed in black letter with small italicized Roman type to represent those words not in the original languages.

A dedicatory epistle to King James, which also enhanced the completed work, recalled the King’s desire that “there should be one more exact Translation of the Holy Scriptures into the English tongue.” The translators expressed that they were “poor instruments to make GOD’S holy Truth to be yet more and more known” while at the same time recognizing that “Popish persons” sought to keep the people “in ignorance and darkness.”

The Authorized Version, as it came to be called, went through several editions and revisions. Two notable editions were that of 1629, the first ever printed at Cambridge, and that of 1638, also at Cambridge, which was assisted by John Bois and Samuel Ward, two of the original translators. In 1657, the Parliament considered another revision, but it came to naught. The most important editions were those of the 1762 Cambridge revision by Thomas Paris, and the 1769 Oxford revision by Benjamin Blayney. One of the earliest concordances was “A Concordance to the Bible of the Last Translation”, by John Downham, affixed to a printing of 1632.

The Authorized Version eclipsed all previous versions of the Bible. The Geneva Bible was last printed in 1644, but the notes continued to be published with the King James text. Subsequent versions of the Bible were likewise eclipsed, for the Authorized Version was the Bible until the advent of the Revised Version and ensuing modern translations. It is still accepted as such by its defenders, and recognized as so by its detractors. Alexander Geddes (d. 1802), a Roman Catholic priest, who in 1792 issued the first column of his own translation of the Bible, accordingly paid tribute to the Bible of his time:

“The highest eulogiums have been made on the translation of James the First, both by our own writers and by foreigners. And, indeed, if accuracy, fidelity, and the strictest attention to the letter of the text, be supposed to constitute the qualities of an excellent version, this of all versions, must, in general, be accounted the most excellent. Every sentence, every work, every syllable, every letter and point, seem to have been weighed with the nicest exactitude; and expressed, either in the text, or margin, with the greatest precision.”

As to whether the Authorized Version was ever officially “authorized”, Brooke Westcott, one of the members of the committee that produced the Revised Version, and the editor, with Fenton Hort, of an edition of the Greek New Testament, stated that:

“From the middle of the seventeenth century, the King’s Bible has been the acknowledged Bible of the English-speaking nations throughout the world simply because it is the best. A revision which embodied the ripe fruits of nearly a century of labor, and appealed to the religious instinct of a great Christian people, gained by its own internal character a vital authority which could never have been secured by any edict of sovereign rulers.”

This article was taken from the book “A Brief History of English Bible Translations”, by Dr. Laurence M. Vance.

The eight “Beatitudes” of Mat 5:3-12 are best understood and interpreted by the eight contrasts, or “Woes” of Mat 23:13-33:

In the OT, “Babylon” and “Assyria” are sometimes used interchangeably of the same political power:

• The two powers spoke essentially the same language. The cultures, religions, economics, and ambitions of these two cities were practically identical.

• In the time of Isaiah, Assyria conquered Babylon, and then in the time of Zedekiah Babylon destroyed Assyria.

• Sennacherib had captured and subjugated Babylon. “King of Babylon” = one of titles of kings of Assyria. Names are switched in Ezr 6:22; Lam 5:6; Zep 10:10,11; Isa 14:4,25; Mic 5:5; 4:10. Cp 2Ch 33:11; Amo 5:27 with Act 7:43.

• Nahum read Isa 47 as prophecy of Assyria, not Babylon. He was Isaiah’s contemporary: cp Nah 3:5,4,16 with Isa 47:2,3,9,15; Nah 1:15 with Isa 52:7; Nah 1:13 with Isa 47:6; Zep 2:13,15 with Isa 47:8; and Zep 2:14,15 with Isa 13:21,22.

• Nahum also alludes to the “whoredoms, witchcraft, etc” of “Babylon” (Nah 3:4,5,16 = Isa 47:3,9,15) when his subject is still the end of Nineveh.

• In the reign of Josiah, Pharaoh-necho went against “the king of Assyria” at Carchemish (2Ki 23:29) — actually Nabopolassar, the father of Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon.

• Stephen interchanged “Damascus” and “Babylon” in Act 7:43.

• In Isa 13:19 and often in Isa 14, “Babylon” is represented as the supreme world-power, exercising a cruel tyranny over many nations and esp over Israel. But in Isaiah’s day, Babylon was either a conquered state of the Assyrian empire or was making sporadic attempts at rebellion from the Assyrian yoke. Thus the “Babylon” here must be “Nineveh/Assyria”.

• The kings of Assyria took special pride in their domination of Babylon. Sargon records as one of his royal titles: “Viceroy of the gods of Babylon”. Tiglath-pileser proudly called himself “King of Babylon”.

We have recently passed a significant turning point in our daily activities. We have completed another year of our lives. Can we say that we have completed another year of service to our Lord? Or have we merely passed the time with our minds and energies intent only upon this life that will soon pass away? Let us remember the words of wisdom to be found in Isa 40:6-8:

“All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field. The grass withereth, the flower fadeth, because the spirit of the Lord bloweth upon it. Surely the people is grass. The grass withereth, the flower fadeth; but the word of our God shall stand for ever.”

According to the prophet Isaiah, the grass here represents all man-kind. We cannot console ourselves with the belief that this is speaking only of those who know not the Truth. Isaiah says… “all flesh”. He is speaking of each one of us — even though we understand the Truth and have accepted it in baptism. Just as the plants around us, we are each in the process of withering and fading away. “In Adam all die.” “Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” This sad decree set by God upon the head of Adam has never been lifted, and it applies with equal intensity to all of his descendants.

We know that (physically, at least) we are “in Adam”, that we must die. What is the use of God repeating the fact to us so many times throughout the Bible? Let us read again the last phrase in that quotation from Isaiah:

“The grass withereth, the flower fadeth, but the word of our God shall stand for ever.”

Here is the lesson God would have us to learn — that only in His eternal word is there any hope of life. Only in the Bible can we learn the secret of a satisfying and rewarding life in this present time. And only in the Bible can we learn how to obtain everlasting life in the future.

***

As mentioned just before, we have passed a significant point in our everyday life. We have completed another calendar year, but more importantly we have completed another reading of our Bibles with Robert Roberts’ “Bible Companion”. In the past year we have gone through the Old Testament once and the New Testament twice. Since we have accomplished this over the last 12 months, why not just put our Bibles away in a comer and find something else to read? We have given it a lot of attention in the past; we have read every bit of it carefully. Doesn’t it seem silly to start right over and read the same book again?

The only explanation we can give for such odd behavior is that we know the Bible to be unlike any other book that has ever been written. Jesus tells us, “The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” “Study the scriptures, for they are they that testify of me.” As Isaiah said, “The word of our God shall stand for ever.’ This is why we must be concerned with our Bible reading, and why we should be thankful for the works of John Thomas and Robert Roberts and many other brethren. The only other worthwhile books besides the Bible are the books that can faithfully help us to understand God’s Word better.

It is well worth noting that each of our three reading sections for the year closed with words of blessing. In Job and Malachi and Revelation, we must remember and ponder these blessings. And we must strive to see that they apply to us. If we knowingly turn our back upon the promises of our Father, all we can expect is shame and rejection when we stand before the Son of God.

Let us remember that such blessings as these do not come to us if we merely sit complacently and tell ourselves that “we have the Truth”. Unless we work eagerly to fulfill His requirements, we will be like the servant who hid the talent which his master left with him. What was said by his lord upon his return?

“Cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Mat 25:30).

Job

The first of the three instances of blessing occurs in the last chapter of Job. Job had been a righteous man all the days of his life. He had led his family in worship of God. He had taken up as his own the cause of the poor and the orphans. He had “feared God, and eschewed evil” (Job 1:8).

God caused many trials and sufferings to come upon His servant Job. Through this Job came to a more perfect realization of the power and majesty of his God. And he repented of his few presumptuous words and thoughts, and humbled himself before his Creator:

“Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes” (42:6).

In many ways Job typified our Saviour Jesus Christ. He endured many sufferings of a physical nature. And, possibly even more difficult, he endured the ignorance and false accusations of both his family and his friends. And in the end he proved to be a faithful servant, and he offered up sacrifice and prayed on behalf of his antagonistic friends.

In all these ways Job represented Christ. And since we are commanded over and over to be followers of Christ, these incidents in Job’s life may apply to us as well. We are tried and chastened, that our faith may be made more perfect. We may suffer embarrassment and ridicule from our friends and families if we try to live according to the Truth.

But if we, by “a patient continuance in well-doing”, are found to be worthy as Job was, then his blessings may apply to us:

“The Lord gave Job twice as much as he had before… So the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning… After this Job lived an hundred and forty years, and saw his sons, and his sons’ sons, even four generations” (Job 42:10,12,16).

Each of these things given to Job were wonderful gifts, but only very small in comparison to the crown of life which waits for us, and which these blessings represent.

Malachi

The second of the three blessings occurs in the last two chapters of Malachi. Malachi was the last of all the Old Testament prophets. He prophesied only about 400 years before the coming of Christ. The major portions of his message, like many of the prophets before him, concerned the children of Israel and their wickedness and neglect of God. Malachi accused both the common people and the priests: The commoners had offered polluted and feeble and worthless sacrifices to God, and had kept the best for themselves. Therefore they were lying and stealing from God. And the priests, by both word and deed, encouraged the people to do this:

“Ye (the priests) are departed out of the way: ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi” (Mal 2:8).

“Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed Me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed Thee? In tithes and offerings. Ye are cursed with a curse; for ye have robbed Me, even the whole nation” (Mal 3:8,9).

But even in the midst of such widespread hypocrisy and false worship, there remained a remnant of faithful ones who sought to obtain the blessings of their Lord:

“Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to another; and the Lord hearkened and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before Him for them that feared the Lord, and that thought upon His name. And they shall be Mine, saith the Lord of hosts, in the day when I make up My jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him” (Mal 3:16,17).

For us, the lesson is very clear. We live in the midst of a wicked generation of men who have corrupted God’s way upon the earth, just as men did in the time of Noah. We must encourage one another to stand against the currents of change around us and to continue toward our goal. We must come together and speak often to one another. As Paul expresses it:

“And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works; not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another; and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching” (Heb 10:24,25).

If we truly fear the Lord, then our names will be written in the book of remembrance, or the book of life. And we will become His jewels, or His “peculiar treasure” — as the margin of that verse indicates. In this way, we will fulfill God’s promise to Israel in the time of Moses:

“Now therefore, if ye will obey My voice indeed, and keep My covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto Me from among all peoples… and ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation” (Exo 19:5).

In Mal 4:2, the prophet offers a promise of the Messiah, “But unto you that fear My name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings.”

There is no doubt that Jesus, the Sun of righteousness, will arise one day soon — bringing eternal life to the saints and peace to the battered world. But let us remember that he will “arise” unto us individually only if we “fear His name” in the proper way, and only if we “speak often one to another”.

Revelation

The last section of the Bible Companion is the New Testament, which is practically concluded with these words of blessing, Rev 21:

“And I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth (ie, the former evil order of affairs) were passed away; and there was no more sea.” (That is, there were no more unregenerate persons, described in Isaiah as the troubled sea, which casts up mire and dirt — Isa 57:20.)

And in the 22nd chapter, in words which require no explanation: “And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it… was there the tree of life.”

But again, as always before, let us remember that these blessings are conditional: They are not blessings for everyone, but… “Blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book” (22:7). To have any hope, we must search the book of Revelation and all the rest of Scripture, and endeavor to keep all the sayings of God’s word.

The New Year

We have paused at the end of a year’s reading, to take stock of a few of the tremendous number of promises recorded in the Bible for our sakes. Let us keep these promises before our minds always, and never regard the daily readings as a chore to be performed, but instead as a God-given opportunity to approach to the mind of God, to receive strength and encouragement, and to learn of His ways and walk in the steps of His Son.

Now we begin a new year with the Bible before us. We read in Genesis of the awesome majesty and power of God in the Creation, and we see His constant concern that provision may be made for man, with the help of God, to overcome his own evil tendencies. In the sacrifice for Adam, the protection of Noah, and the calling of Abram — we continually see God’s love for us, and His purpose “to bring many sons to glory”.

In Psalms, we learn words of acceptable praise to our Heavenly Father. And we learn fresh admiration for His everlasting word of life:

“The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul; the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes” (Psa 19:7,8).

And finally in Matthew, we again begin to read of the life of the only-begotten Son of God — the focal point in God’s plan of redemption for those that fear His name:

“God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them” (2Co 5:19).

“For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh” (Rom 8:3).

We have come to the end of one year and we have begun the next. We must never, however, come to the end of our reading and study of God’s word. And we must always continue to put off the old man and put on the new man, by the “renewing of our minds”. But now for a moment we can stand at the summit, the crossroads of the word of God. We can see how every part is related, how it all combines in one glorious purpose. We can look both backward into history, and forward into the future as God unfolds it; and we may gain a glimpse of just a fraction of the greatness of our Father in Heaven.

“O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out. For of Him, and through Him, and to Him, are all things. To whom be glory for ever. Amen.”

The first great rebel against God, after the Flood, was Nimrod, “a mighty one” and “a mighty hunter”. Nimrod (the name in the Heb means “rebel”) was prob responsible for the building of the tower of Babel (Gen 11) — the first great symbol of man’s pride and worship of self. In fact, the building of Babel, in Shinar, and the building of Nineveh, in Assyria, are both attributed to this “great” (?) man.

Gen 14 gives a brief but interesting account of a confederacy of four kings from the east which attacked five kings in the land of Canaan, in the days of Abram — ie approx 2000 BC. The four kings were headed in Gen 14:1 by Amraphael of Shinar, which is the land of Babylon. (Some think “Amraphael” is simply another name for Hammurabi, the almost-legendary ruler of early Babylon, who promulgated civilization’s first great law code.) This army defeated its enemies and carried away spoils and captives, among which was Abram’s nephew Lot, but Abram and his servants mounted a daring raid to recover his nephew and other captives.

The kingdom of Assyria established a dominance over the ancient city of Babylon during much of the period from 850 to 700 BC. But in the 7th century BC Babylon began to rise again, and finally the tables were turned and she came to surpass Assyria as the dominant power in the whole of the Middle East. This empire is called by historians the Neo-Babylonian Empire. In a series of campaigns, King Nabopolassar and his son Nebuchadnezzar pushed back the Assyrians to the west and north and controlled the heartland of Mesopotamia. In 612 BC the Babylonians, aided by the Medes and the Scythians, destroyed the Assyrian capital of Nineveh (cp Nah 3). The retreating Assyrian army, bolstered by the armies of its former enemy Egypt, tried repeatedly to stem the tide, but in vain. In 605 BC Nebuchadnezzar, now at the head of the Babylonian forces, won a decisive victory at Carchemish on the northern Euphrates.

Judah, the southern Israelite kingdom with its capital at Jerusalem, now fell under the sway of Nebuchadnezzar (2Ki 24:1; 2Ch 36:1-10). From 605 to 586 BC Jewish kings continued to reign as “puppets” of the Babylonian overlord. But when the last, Zedekiah, attempted to reassert Jewish independence, Jerusalem was besieged and crushed by the Babylonians, assisted by legions from the neighboring Arab nations of Edom, Moab, Ammon, Syria, and the Philistines (2Ki 25:1-8; 2Ch 36:11-17; cp Jer 47-49). The city fell, the glorious Temple of Solomon — which had seen the very Presence of the Almighty — was left in ruins, some of the Jews were enslaved and carried away to Babylon, and others were scattered to the four winds (2Ki 25:9-17; 2Ch 36:17-20).

Babylon continued as the dominant power in the area, and as the oppressor and “treader-down” of Israel, until 539 BC, when it was conquered by the Medes and Persians of Cyrus. But the city itself was not destroyed; it became one of Cyrus’ capitals, and he appropriated to himself the coveted title “King of Babylon”. More than 200 years later, it was still a trading center of great importance when visited by Alexander the Great (IBD 1:246).

In fact, the city of Babylon was never really destroyed, but rather fell victim to a sort of benign neglect — sinking bit by bit, century by century, further into decay. There were, however, both Jews and Christians living in Babylon in NT times and beyond (cp 1Pe 5:13 and Josephus, Ant 15:2:2 and 18:9:5-9). A Jewish traveler of the 12th century reported, for example, that there existed an active synagogue within a mile of the ruins of Nebuchadnezzar’s temple of Marduk [M. Allen, “Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary of”, Jewish Quarterly Review 17 (1905), 514-530]. It is historically confirmed that, from its beginnings, Babylon has never totally ceased to exist. This simple fact has tremendous impact on the interpretations of certain Bible prophecies.

Such prophecies speak of the fall of Babylon as one of the great events of the Last Days, and an event seemingly associated with the return of Jesus Christ and the establishment of God’s Kingdom on the earth again. To a certain extent, some prophecies (such as Jer 50 and 51) have already been fulfilled with the defeat of Babylon by Cyrus in 539 BC. Sometimes it is even proposed that Cyrus himself, as the conqueror of Babylon, was AN “Anointed One”, or “Christ”, sent by God to destroy evil Babylon (cp Isa 44:28; 45:1; Dan 6:28). There is certainly some merit in this idea. Cyrus’ conquest of Babylon did fulfill Bible prophecy. However, certain of the relevant prophecies may have a further fulfillment, since the NT prophecy about the fall of Babylon necessitates another fall of the city — a fall that is demonstrably yet future.

Some of the relevant OT prophecies are discussed in light of possible further fulfillment, and the Rev passages are examined for the best interpretation possible:

The modern-day Iraq of Saddam Hussein occupies the same territory as the OT Neo-Babylonian Empire of Nebuchadnezzar. And the links between Saddam’s Iraq and Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylon are even more pronounced, since for some time the government of Iraq has been involved in a massive archaeological reconstruction of ancient Babylon. The modern restoration of Babylon began in 1978 and was, at least until the gulf war began, scheduled for completion in 1994. There is no information about damage to the project from allied bombing of Iraq; but ancient Babylon, 40 miles of so south of Baghdad, is not known to be near any major strategic sites and so may have been spared.

As of February 1990, over 60 million bricks had been laid in the reconstruction of Nebuchadnezzar’s city. Despite the objections of archaeologists, Saddam Hussein has insisted on rebuilding directly over the most ancient ruins. His reconstruction includes the Southern Palace of Nebuchadnezzar, a Greek theater, many temples, Nebuchadnezzar’s Throne Room, and a model of the famed Ishtar Gate. He plans also to rebuild the legendary Hanging Gardens and several artificial hills, including one to be called “The Tower of Babel”. Why such infatuation with an idea? It has been said: “President Hussein’s decision to rebuild Nebuchadnezzar’s Palace… is the centerpiece of a campaign to strengthen Iraq’s nationalism by appealing to history… Mr. Hussein’s campaign also serves subtler ends; it justified Iraq’s costly war with Iran as the continuation of Mesopotamia’s ancient feud with Persia. And it portrayed Saddam Hussein as successor to Nebuchadnezzar, Babylon’s mightiest ruler” (Paul Lewis in the New York Times, April 19, 1989). And Saddam himself has referred to: “Nebuchadnezzar, the national hero who was able to defeat the enemies of our nation in the land of Canaan [Palestine, or Israel] and to take them as prisoners of war to Babylon. What we need now is to increase awareness in this regard” (quoted in the Babylonian International Festival brochure for September 22, 1987).

And so a rebuilt Babylon is Saddam’s way of conjuring up the magic of Arab unity and greatness, and authenticating his call for the Arab nations to help him accomplish what his hero Nebuchadnezzar accomplished before him: i.e. the destruction of a Jewish Jerusalem.

“The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up… The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air… God remembered Babylon the Great and gave her the cup filled with the wine of the fury of his wrath” (Rev 16:12,17,19).

David Levin wrote to the Tidings, and his letter was published as a follow-up to my article [see Lesson, One body, implications of the ]. In it he wrote:

“George wrote: ‘each member BELONGS to all the others’. The word BELONGS stands alongside the idea of BELIEVES in defining the one body in Christ. Too many of us, myself included for many years, averred that the body of Christ was to be defined as ‘those of a common belief system’. Only in the past several years have I come to appreciate the principle of BELONGING as equally necessary in circumscribing a worldwide body of Christ.

“The analogy of the natural body requires us to discretely demarcate our membership. None of our natural bodily members offers its services to the body on a part-time basis, nor do we tend to share body parts between two or more bodies! In the spiritual body, one cannot have part-time status, nor can one claim membership in more than one body. Our natural bodies are discrete operating organisms; likewise, the body of Christ.

“Our situation in North America today shows the need to use both belief and belonging in defining our community. We have brothers and sisters who share our belief system, yet remain outside (either completely alone or in small factions) for a variety of reasons. Some simply do not want to be part of a larger group. Some have no sense of community, thinking that their belief alone suffices to position them within the one body.

“All would become part of the one body if we used belief as the sole criteria of defining the one body, as we exclude no one from the body of Christ who shares the same belief system. But can we include those who make no commitment to belong to one body? If we did, we would have a non-discrete and vague body. We would have some who claim common belief, but would have no commitment to a single community, as they would claim freedom to join in fellowship with others who make no such commitment.

“Therefore, BELIEF alone cannot organize a community. Our factionization proves that. So many do share the same hope — but remain apart because they have no sense of BELONGING. Many brothers and sisters lament the thought of excluding anyone of like faith, but what can we do if someone shares our faith but not our commitment to one body? If one does not commit to belonging to one body, that individual must bear his or her own conscience on the matter.

“I would like to reinforce George’s thesis: to constitute a body, each member must commit to belonging to each other. This principle has wider application than just settling ‘fellowship’ issues. Commitment to belonging to one worldwide community undergirds all our cooperative service, mutual edification, and outreach. On these two principles — BELIEF and BELONGING — hang the integrity of the body of Christ.”

“With a mighty voice he shouted: ‘Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great!’ ” (Rev 18:2).

The whole prophetic narrative of the Bible is in many ways a tale of two cities: Babylon and Jerusalem. There are times when Babylon masquerades as Zion — a false city of God with a false Messiah leading her. And there are times when Zion in her apostasy has appeared as Babylon. But in the final conflict of the last days, these two cities will be literally pitted against each other. Zion will briefly succumb under the might and pride of Babylon, to rise again in eternal glory. It was in Babylon where Nimrod first built the tower of Babel, the first organized rebellion against God; and it was there that God first entered into open judgment of flesh and humanity en masse. And it is here likewise that His purpose with sin and His true people will likewise be fulfilled. Babylon was also called Su-anna, “the holy city”. Yet “the holy city” is Jerusalem, thus making Babylon a fake Zion. Herodotus says the city was square, just as new Jerusalem.

Unfulfilled Prophecies: “Babylon, the jewel of kingdoms, the glory of the Babylonians’ pride, will be overthrown by God like Sodom and Gomorrah” (Isa 13:19). And yet Babylon was never suddenly overthrown like Sodom and Gomorrah in their fiery destruction. It was conquered by the Medes and Persians and fell into decline, but it was not violently destroyed. Likewise: “The Lord will have compassion on Jacob; once again he will choose Israel and settle them in their own land… They will make captives of their captors and rule over their oppressors… On the day the Lord gives you relief from suffering and turmoil and cruel bondage, you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon: How the oppressor has come to an end! How his fury has ended!… All the lands are at rest and at peace; they break into singing” (Isa 14:1-4,7).

When Babylon is ultimately destroyed, Israel will finally be at Peace and will dwell in safety. Israel has been a nation since 1948, but not for one day has the nation of Israel known real peace or ease. It has never been able to claim all the lands God promised the Israelites, and Israel’s Arab neighbors have been a constant threat and danger.

There is the assumption by many that all the OT prophecies about ‘Babylon’ were fulfilled in the overrunning of Babylon by the Medes. However, there are many details of those prophecies which did not have a total fulfillment, and thus what the Medes did as but a partial, incipient fulfillment of what is going to come in the last days. This also requires that ‘Babylon’ be understood as literal Babylon — for it was against her that the prophecies were uttered in the first place. And quite clearly, the prophecies of Revelation against ‘Babylon’ are extensions of those of the Old Testament. We therefore are encouraged to see the ‘Babylon’ of Rev as the Babylon of the prophets — ie literal Babylon.

Unfulfilled details, which require a latter day fulfillment:

• Literal Babylon decayed due to the ravages of time, whereas Babylon was to fall “suddenly” in her prime (Jer 51:8; Rev 18: “one hour”). This must be future in its fulfillment. Rev. 18:22; 14:8 both speak of “Babylon is fallen” as applying to a latter day scenario. And yet these words come directly from Isa 21:9 and Jer 51:8, prophecies about literal Babylon being destroyed suddenly — a destruction which is clearly future, seeing the city was never so suddenly destroyed in the past. The suddenness of the destruction is a keynote of these prophecies.

• It is not true that Babylon has been uninhabited “forever”. “The city of Babylon has never ceased to exist. Although its name was changed on two occasions, it has never been totally unpopulated. Hillah presently has 250,000 citizens and was built almost entirely of bricks from the parts of the old city of Babylon” (Joseph Chambers, A Palace For The Antichrist 146). Note too that the Babylonian Talmud was written by Jews living in Babylon in the 6th century AD. 1 Pet 5:13 implies there was even an ecclesia there in the first century.

• “For the Lord will have mercy upon Jacob, and will yet choose Israel, and set them in their own land: and the strangers shall be joined with them, and they shall cleave to the house of Jacob. And the people shall take them [the Babylonians], and bring them to their place: and the house of Israel shall possess them in the land of the Lord for servants and handmaids: and they shall take them captives, whose captives they were; and they shall rule over their oppressors” (Isa 14:1,2). This passage has never been fulfilled yet. It will be in the last days; and at this time, as Is. 14 goes on to detail, Babylon [literal Babylon, in the context] will fall.

Other prophecies about the sudden destruction of literal Babylon — which can only be latter day in their application — are also the basis for the words of Rev about latter day Babylon. Consider: (a) “Thou that art given to pleasures, that dwellest carelessly, that sayest in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me: I shall not sit a widow, neither shall I know the loss of children” (Isa 47:8), compared with: “How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously…for she hath said in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow” (Rev 18:7). (b) “But these two things shall come to thee in a moment in one day, the loss of children, and widowhood” (Isa 47:9), compared with: “Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death and mourning” (Rev 18:8). (c) “Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up” (Isa 47:13), compared with: “For by thy sorceries…” (Rev 18:23).

The Babylon of Rev is the Babylon of Jeremiah and Isaiah, literal Babylon, which awaits her full punishment. This conclusion is strengthened once it is appreciated how the harlot Babylon of Rev 17, loud, gaudy, decked with jewelry and painted face, is replete with reference to Semiramis, the goddess / mother of Nimrod, and one of the patron gods of literal Babylon.

The antichrist is a mimic of the true Christ; his kingdom is a parody of God’s Kingdom. And the King of Babylon claiming “I am and none else beside me” are the very words of Yahweh — the King of Babylon is clearly to be identified with the man of sin, who sits as God in God’s temple (2Th 2). But the similarities run deeper. The Babylonian epic of creation is a parody of the Genesis account; the flood has its counterpart in the epic of Gilgamesh; and the Code of Hammurabi, an early ruler of Babylon, was clearly an anti-law of Moses. And Saddam Hussein’s supporters greet him as the Messiah of the Arab world (Chambers 45). Now Saddam may pass off the scene, but the point is that a similar charismatic leader could arise and be the antichrist.

The accounts of the latter day invasion of Israel all feature a single charismatic individual, who will be destroyed personally by the Lord Jesus at His coming. This is Paul’s “man of sin”, Daniel’s aggressive king of fierce countenance, Ezekiel’s Gog, the chief prince. It is also the person referred to by Micah: “And this man [Messiah] shall be the peace, when the Assyrian shall come into our land” (Mic 5:1,2). The Lord Jesus will save His people in the latter days from an “Assyrian”. It has been shown that Assyria and Babylon are used almost interchangeably in Scripture. Gog was a Jew who apostatized and went to live in Assyria / Babylonia, according to 1Ch 5. This is why he has the appearance of spirituality; and he may even be an Arab Christian. 2Th 2 describes him as “the son of perdition”, exactly the phrase used about Judas, the false disciple of Jesus. Notice how Tariq Aziz [Iraqi foreign minister at the time of writing] and other leading members of the Iraqi cabinet are in fact Arab Christians, not Muslims.

(Adapted from LD, by DH)