Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

A. D. 1811.-Described by Rich as containing six or seven thousand inhabitants.

1833.-Mentioned by Major Skinner, with an increased population of twelve thousand inhabitants.

See 1 Peter v. 13. "The church that is at Babylon, elect together with you, saluteth you." That Babylon on the Euphrates is the city spoken of in this passage is now very generally conceded. (See, for example, Bengel in loco.)

"It is needless to understand Babylon to be a mystical designation of Rome or a Babylon in Egypt." (Kirchhofer Quellensammlung, 268.)

"Hence we see why Peter the Apostle of the circumcision went to Babylon-the Parthian Babylon. It was the head quarters of those whom he had addressed with such wonderful success at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, and who are named first in order by the inspired historian of the Acts.

"Hence we see why, being at Babylon, St. Peter addressed an Epistle to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. They were derived from Babylon-they were co-elect with the church there." (Wordsworth's Lectures on the Canon of Scripture, pp. 281, 282.)

66 'Babylon, from which the first of these Epistles was written (1 Peter v. 13) is supposed to be Babylon on the Euphrates, which, though in ruins, contained many thousand inhabitants, among whom were very many Jews. There is reason to believe that this Babylon is not intended." (Biblical Cyclopædia by Dr. John Eadie, Professor of Biblical Literature to the United Presbyterian Church.) See also Hug's Introduction, p. 635, American Translation.

no

It seems remarkable that the Apostle of the Circumcision

should have sent forth his Epistle from Babylon, and that one of the greatest instruments by which Satan has deepened the blindness of Israel, should have emanated from the same region, and bear the name of Babylon.

The date of the promulgation of the Babylonian Talmud is expressly stated by Bartolocci (Bibliotheca Rabbinica, vol. iv., p. 45) to have been A.D. 500. He states that it was completed in the year A.D. 468, but not promulgated "through the synagogues of the whole world, nor received by them until the year A.D. 500."

The passage is as follows:

"Post cujus [Rav Nachman Bar Huna] mortem Princeps Academiæ Soranæ renunciatus est hic noster Mar Bar Rav Ascè, qui in solio patris sui 13 annis sedit, usque ad annum 4228. Chr. 468. quo anno mortuus est.

"Tempore istorum Rabbinorum Præsidentium Academiæ Soranæ completum et absolutum fuit Talmud Babylonicum et ab Academiis Babylonicis approbatum, sed nondum obsignatum, et divulgatam per omnes orbis terrarum synagogas, neque ab eis receptum nisi anno 73 a morte Rav N Asce hoc est anno mundi 4260. Chr. 500."

EVIDENCE AS TO THE PRESENT CON

DITION OF THE RUINS OF BABYLON OF HILLAH IN THEIR

-POSITION
MIDST.

HAVING given in the preceding chapter a sketch of the gradual decay of Babylon, having seen that there is no reason to suppose that its site was at any period entirely depopulated, we have now to consider what the present actual condition of the plain of Babylon is. Is it true that Hillah, with its numerous population, with its gardens and dategroves, is encompassed both on the north-east and on the south-west, and on the east, with the ruins. of ancient Babylon? Are there besides the town of Hillah, villages also and date-groves found scattered amongst these ruins? Could we draw any plan of the walls of ancient Babylon without Hillah and these villages being included within their compass? Such is the character of the questions we have to consider.

Several European travellers have within the last sixty or seventy years examined the plain of Babylon. Their researches have made us minutely

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

EVIDENCE AS TO THE PRESENT CON

DITION OF THE RUINS OF BABYLON OF HILLAH IN THEIR

-POSITION

MIDST.

HAVING given in the preceding chapter a sketch of the gradual decay of Babylon, having seen that there is no reason to suppose that its site was at any period entirely depopulated, we have now to consider what the present actual condition of the plain of Babylon is. Is it true that Hillah, with its numerous population, with its gardens and dategroves, is encompassed both on the north-east and on the south-west, and on the east, with the ruins of ancient Babylon? Are there besides the town of Hillah, villages also and date-groves found scattered amongst these ruins? Could we draw any plan of the walls of ancient Babylon without Hillah and these villages being included within their compass? Such is the character of the questions we have to consider.

Several European travellers have within the last sixty or seventy years examined the plain of Babylon. Their researches have made us minutely

« AnteriorContinuar »