Jeremiah's prophecy is NOT about a "dead city called Babylon"!

Michael Totten, a "foreign correspondent and foreign policy analyst", writes a blog about his travels in the Middle East. He recently (July 8th, 2009) posted an article describing a walk-about he took in Baghdad, Iraq with several U.S. soldiers, prior to the troop withdrawal from Iraqi cities. One of the soldiers made the statement, "When we pull out of this country, this place is going to burn." Totten was less pessimistic.

And so I wrote a comment to his article on his blog site:

Staff Sergeant Christianson said, "When we pull out of this country, this
place is going to burn." But you weren't so sure: "No one can know if it really
will burn," you said.

But Jeremiah the prophet saw it burning 2,600 years ago: "Summon the
(hordes) against Babylon,... encamp against her on every side, let there be no
escape... For your day has come, the time when I shall punish you... I shall set
fire to (the) cities, and it will devour all (the) environs" (Jer. 50:29-32).

Then an Iraqi stopped you: "Please don't hand us over to the Iraqi Army,"
he said. "Look," your escort lieutenant said, "We aren't just going to abandon
you."

Unfortunately, the Lieutenant doesn't know the rest of Jeremiah's prophecy,
for after the cities burn, the occupiers are most certainly going to abandon
Iraq -- "(Babylon's) high gates will be set on fire, so the peoples will toil
for nothing... 'We applied healing to Babylon, but she was not healed; forsake
her and let us each go to his own country, for her judgment has reached to
heaven'" (Jer. 51:58,9).

It is fated by the Prophet!

Totten replied to me by e-mail, stating, "I don't think biblical prophecy about a dead city called Babylon has anything to do with the modern city in the same location. " (Bold emphasis mine.)

So I wrote back: "The Jeremiah 50-51 prophecy is not about any one city, dead or modern. Never was. It is about the land. The 'land of the Chaldeans.' The nation."

Totten's reply exemplifies how pervasive the totally erroneous viewpoint has become, that Jeremiah's prophecy against "Babylon" -- as found in chapters 50 through 51 in the bible -- deals narrowly with a single city once also called "Babylon."

But the words of Jeremiah's prophecy themselves define what is "Babylon", the subject of the prediction of doom -- "The word which the LORD spoke concerning Babylon, the land of the Chaldeans, through Jeremiah the prophet" (Jer. 50:1). Babylon, the Babylon of Jeremiah's prophecy in these two chapters in the bible, is defined right there in the prophecy itself -- "Chaldea will become plunder" (Jer. 50:10), not just some one city also called at one time 'Babylon'.

According to James E. Smith of Florida Christian College, Chaldea is synonymous with the Babylonian empire:

CHALDEA, CHALDEANS

In Jeremiah's day Chaldea was synonymous with Babylonia.
Forty-six references are made to this land and people in Jeremiah. [1]

According to history-world.com, Babylonia was the "ancient country of Mesopotamia... lying between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers."

So when Jeremiah writes of "Babylon", he is not just speaking of some "dead city" once the capital of ancient Babylonia, he is speaking of the "land" of Babylon, the nation, the "country", that aligns with the region once populated (and still is) by the peoples known as the "Chaldeans" --

"Behold, (Chaldea) will be the least of the nations, a wilderness, a parched land, and a desert" (Jer. 50:12).

"I am going to punish the king of Babylon AND HIS LAND" (Jer. 50:18).

"It is a work of the Lord GOD of hosts in the LAND OF THE CHALDEANS... There is a sound of fugitives and refugees from the LAND OF BABYLON" (Jer. 50:25,28).

It is not just against one "dead city", it is against the "cities", plural -- "I shall set fire to his cities" (Jer. 50:32), "her cities have become an object of horror" (Jer. 51:43).

It is against "the whole land" -- "And her whole land shall be put to shame, and all her slain will fall in her midst" (Jer. 51:47).

Jeremiah's prophecy of doom on Babylon is not about some one time dead city of long ago, it is about the land, the nation, the country, that resides over the region of the land of the Chaldeans, between the Tigris and the Euphrates. It is about the present-day country called Iraq.

Iraq is Babylon of Jeremiah 50-51.

The LAND of Babylon, not just the one-time capital city also called Babylon


A prevelant dogma held by certain mainstream 'biblical scholars' is that Jeremiah's prophecy of doom and desolation upon Babylon as described in chapters 50-51 refers narrowly and only to Nebuchadnezzar's capital city of the ancient Babylonian Empire, the city once known as Babylon. They point to the uninhabited ruins of that ancient long-gone city as proof Jeremiah's prophecy was fulfilled long ago, and has no relevance towards any other entity.


The problem with that viewpoint is that Jeremiah's prophecy specifically refers to "the LAND of Babylon" (Jer 50:28), "Babylon, the LAND of the Chaldeans" (Jer 50:1), and not simply to the capital city of the ancient Babylonian Empire also once called Babylon.


On the WikiAnswers web site, a poster asked this question: "Is Babylon no more today inhabited fulfilling Jeremiah 50 v39?" The first answer was given as, "A failed prophecy, since present-day Iraq is quite occupied." I then answered, in part, "A prophecy unfulfilled is not failed, but simply yet future. But the first answer is correct in this -- Babylon is 'present-day Iraq.'"


A third poster objected to both our answers: "Since Babylon refers to a particular city and not to a nation or to an empire this prophecy began to be fulfilled when Babylon was indeed captured by Cyrus the Mede. It has not been inhabited in any significant way since and is today a tourist attraction and archeological site..."

Here the poster states the false premise that Jeremiah's prophecy refers narrowly to "a particular city" when that is simply not true. The poster audaciously accuses both of us previous posters of ignorance of "what the Bible says"(!) -- writing:

"This is another example (in the first comment above) of a mis-interpretation of the Bible, either deliberate or ignorant (not actually reading or bothering to find out what the Bible says) being used to allege that the Bible is in error. It is nothing but entirely accurate. Babylon, in terms of the original prophecy, has indeed been judged."


Here then was my response to that answer: "The original question posed refers specifically to the prophecy of Jeremiah 50, which states, "Concerning Babylon, the LAND of the Chaldeans..." (Jer 50:1) not just the one-time capital city also called by the name "Babylon." It is repeated: "For a nation has come up against her out of the north; it will make her LAND an object of horror..." (vs 3), not just the 'city' uninhabited.

"All through the two chapters, the identification of Babylon as the "land", the nation, the empire, and not just the one-time capital city also once called Babylon, is repeated over and over: "Chaldea" -- not just the city of Babylon -- "will become plunder..." (vs 10); "Behold she will be the least of the nations," -- not least of the 'cities' -- "a wilderness, a parched LAND, and a desert..." (vs 12); "I am going to punish the king of Babylon and his LAND..." (vs 18) not just his 'city'; The noise of battle is in the LAND..." (vs 22); "It is a work of the Lord GOD of hosts in the LAND of the Chaldeans..." (vs 25) not just the one-time capital 'city' also called at one time "Babylon."

"There is a sound of fugitives and refugees from the LAND of Babylon..." (Jer 50:28); that means from the country, the empire, the nation, not just the one-time capital city also once called Babylon.

"I shall set fire to his CITIES," -- plural, not just some one city -- "and it will devour ALL his ENVIRONS" (Jer 50:32).

"His purposes which he has purposed against the LAND of the Chaldeans..." (Jer 50:45).

"Foreigners... (will) devastate her LAND... Devote all her army to destruction, and they will fall down slain in the LAND of the Chaldeans..." (Jer 51:2-4).

"I will repay Babylon and ALL THE INHABITANTS OF CHALDEA.." (vs 24) not just the inhabitants of the one-time capital city once also called Babylon.

"The purposes of the LORD against Babylon stand, to make the LAND of Babylon" -- not just the city -- "a desolation without inhabitants..." (vs 29).

"The sea has come up over Babylon; she has been engulfed with its tumultuous waves. Her CITIES" -- plural, not just one -- "have become an object of horror, a parched LAND and a desert..." (vs 42-43).

"AND HER WHOLE LAND WILL BE PUT TO SHAME..." (vs 47)

It is so ironic that the third poster would conclude that "this is another example (in the first comment above) of a mis-interpretation of the Bible, either deliberate or ignorant (not actually reading or bothering to find out what the Bible says)", when the bible says over and over and over again that this Babylon of Jeremiah 50-51 is referring to the "whole land" of Babylon, and not just to the one-time capital city also called at one time Babylon.

The "land of the Chaldeans" has never been un-occupied, and so Jeremiah's prophecy is of a future time. The assertion of this weblog is that we are in the time of Jeremiah's judgment right now, and the events of the present occupation and upheaval in Iraq will prove it out, or disprove it. So far, the events of the invasion and occupation, the fall of Baghdad and the capture and execution of Saddam have proven it out.

Next up, Babylon burning. Then the abandonment. Then the defeat and plundering by the Kurds. Then the flood. Then the drought. And finally, complete desolation and uninhabitableness.

And there's nothing we can do about it, but watch.

Babylon Land of the Chaldeans is not Mystery Babylon the Great

So I watched the History Channel's presentation of Decoding the Past: Prophecies of Iraq, and, of course, found the scholars confusing the Jeremiah 50-51 prophecy of Babylon's ultimate desolation with the description of the destruction of the "great harlot" -- MYSTERY Babylon the Great -- in Revelation 17-18. Simply, if Revelation 17-18 were talking about literal Babylon the nation, as Jeremiah 50-51 is, by name -- "Babylon, the land of the Chaldeans" (Jer. 50:1) -- there would be no "mystery" to the identification of who the "great harlot" is, for she would simply be Babylon, the land of the Chaldeans.

But John "wondered greatly" about her, and the angel said, "I shall tell you the mystery of the woman..." (Rev. 17:7). In other words, the angel is going to reveal what the actual literal thing the symbol of the "Mystery, Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots" represents. And so the angel tells John the actual identity of this "Babylon the Great," a previously unknown entity figuratively symbolized in the vision by a woman clothed in scarlet: "The woman whom you saw is [literally] the great city which reigns over the kings of the earth" (Rev. 17:18). The woman "sits on many waters," (Rev. 17:1) and the waters symbolize "peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues" (Rev. 17:15). In other words, this city "sits on" -- read that as dominates -- peoples and other nations and tells all the other kings of the earth what to do. And as one reads further, one finds the city dominates through her vast consumeristic commercial power.

Another angel comes to John, and throughout the entire chapter of 18 describes in effusive language the "city" the figure represents, so as to provide a clear identification of what "city" it is, at the time the events of the Revelation will be occurring. This city is whichever city fits the description at the time of the events that take place. She is the city whose destruction causes "the merchants of the eath (to) weep and mourn over her, because no one buys their cargoes any more" (Rev. 18:11). Great is this wailing, so that they were "crying out, and weeping and mourning, saying, 'Woe, woe, the great city in which all who had ships at sea became rich by her wealth...'" (Rev. 18:19). (If the city existed at the time of John, the angel might even have told him what it was called.)

Even though this city "sits on" -- read, dominates -- the peoples of the world, still the kings of the earth "committed acts of immorality with her," (Rev. 17:1, 18:3), and her "merchants were the great men of the earth" (Rev. 18:23). Compared to the rest of the world, she "lived sensuously... (having) all things that were luxurious and splendid" (Rev. 18:9,14). She did not live and rule by military power, or even political power -- she ruled by her merchants and her commercial buying power.

When the bible says Jerusalem, it is talking about the capital city as representative for the nation, Judah (today, Israel). When the bible says Babylon, it is talking about the capital city as representative for the nation, Babylon (today, Iraq). When the bible says Damascus, it is talking about the capital city as representative for the nation, Assyria (today, Syria). And when the bible says "the great city which reigns over the kings of the earth," it is talking about the capital city as representative for the nation, the "great [nation] which reigns over the kings of the earth," dominating all peoples everywhere. And if that domination is through economic and commercial power, that capital city is the commercial capital of that nation.

Beside the fact that the two Babylons -- the one of Jeremiah 50-51 and the one of Revelation 17-18 -- are not the same thing at all in the first place, there is another reason to distinguish Jeremiah's destruction of the land of Babylon from the destruction of Mystery Babylon the Great; and that is the timing of the fulfillment of each prophecy. According to the angel, the timing of the events of the Revelation to John deal with the "great day of (the) wrath" (Rev. 6:17), the "great day of the wrath of the LORD" Isaiah talked about repeatedly throughout his book that comes immediately preceding the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. The Apostle Paul said that this "day of the LORD" could not come until the departure in the "gathering together" came first, and the son of lawlessness was revealed (2 Thess. 2:1-5). Since none of that has yet happened, the great day of the wrath of the LORD is still yet future.

On the other hand, the timing of Jeremiah's prophecy against the land of the Chaldeans is related to the return of the Jews to the land of Israel -- "In those days and at that time... the sons of Israel will come, both they and the sons of Judah as well; they will go along weeping as they go, and it will be the LORD their God they will seek. They will ask for the way to Zion, turning their faces in its direction; they will come that they may join themselves to the LORD in (the) everlasting covenant that will not be forgotten" (Jer. 50:4-5).

That everlasting covenant is the promise made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, that the land of Canaan would be given to them and their descendants as an "everlasting possession" (Gen. 17:7-8), and if the Jews were not yet back in the land, Jeremiah's prophecy of Babylon's destruction could not be occurring right now.

History Channel: Ancient Babylon is now known as modern-day Iraq

In that one statement, they got it right. The hypothesis that Jeremiah's ancient prophecies of doom on Babylon may be playing out in modern-day Iraq has not escaped the attention of the History Channel. An episode of Decoding the Past: Prophecies of Iraq [link to archived site updated 08-29-08] will run on Monday, November 13th at 11am and again at 5pm. [link to archived youtube videos updated 09-01-10:]



The producers, however, give nod to those who say the prophecies deal strictly with the ancient capital city, also called Babylon: "It was one of the greatest cities ever depicted in biblical text. Hebrew prophets of the Bible all predicted its destruction -- as many as 150 years before it happened. And, when in 539 BCE, Babylon fell to Cyrus the Great of Persia, the prophets were thought to have been proven correct."

As I've noted already, however, Jeremiah's prophecy is explicit in its description of doom upon the entire "land of the Chaldeans" and all her "cities... and... environs", not just upon the single city. And this argument has not gone unnoticed by the History Channel: "Ancient Babylon is now known as modern-day Iraq, and eerily similar parallels exist between the prophecies of Babylon and the events of the late 20th and early 21st centuries--including both Gulf Wars and the downfall of Saddam Hussein. Is it possible that Biblical prophecies are playing out in modern times?"

I, of course, say yes, and am exploring those similarities between Jeremiah's curse on the land of Babylon and the events of the current coalition occupation of Iraq and its subsequent near-future events here in this weblog. My position is based on the premise that Jeremiah's decrees are against the "whole land" of the Chaldeans -- Iraq as a nation -- and not meant at all for just the one-time capital city long gone.

But I fear the idea remains stuck in the head for many, for the History Channel continues: "But scholars and academics have long debated the question of whether these ancient predictions were meant for the city of Babylon of more than 2,500 years ago, or whether they referred to a different Babylon, a future Babylon to be rebuilt where the old city once stood."

I say, forget the city once called Babylon, and forget a future rebuilt city on its ancient site, and take Jeremiah for what he said -- he is talking about Babylon the kingdom, the "land of the Chaldeans" (Jer. 50:1) -- now Iraq the nation -- and not just about the capital city of that ancient kingdom also called Babylon, a city now gone. He is talking about the "inhabitants of Chaldea" (Jer. 51:24), the whole region, not just the inhabitants of one ancient city. He is talking about "the land of the Chaldeans", not one city. He is talking about the "cities" and "all (the) environs" (Jer. 50:32) of Babylon, not just the one-time city called Babylon.

When people can come to take Jeremiah as if he said what he meant and meant what he said, then they may be able to figure out what he was talking about. It was the land of Babylon, not the city of Babylon. Like the state of New York, not just the city of New York. Like the country of Kuwait, not just the city also called Kuwait. There is more beyond Manhattan, however that may come as a shock to some.

I look forward to watching the History Channel's offering, but expect to be disappointed. Then I won't be disappointed.