The original George Morrish lived 1814-1911 and was a printer at 20
Paternoster Square, London, EC4.
George Morrish – the printer – and his daughter Hannah, 1848-1945, compiled 'A New and Concise Bible Dictionary' in 1899.
G.A.R.
A New and Concise Bible Dictionary embracing some special features, to which are added some New Testament synonyms
Man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of Jehovah doth man live. (Deut. 8: 3; Matt. 4: 4)
The principal object in bringing out this Bible Dictionary is to give in a concise form information on subjects not usually found in such works, namely:-
This is simply the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ to this earth, which naturally implies that He has already been here once. "Now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself . . . . and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin [or apart from sin] unto salvation." Heb. 9: 26-28. The 'second advent' therefore is clearly a scriptural expression. Scripture speaks of many momentous and solemn events connected with the second coming of Christ which will be found under the different headings connected with this subject.
There are two aspects of the coming of the Lord Jesus which should never be confounded, namely, His coming for His saints, and His coming with His saints. These events may be thus illustrated. Suppose a large town or province revolted from allegiance to its sovereign, and refused to acknowledge his authority. After many warnings the sovereign raises an army to punish the rebels; but he knows that in that city there are many true subjects who loyally acknowledge his title and claims. When approaching the city he secretly calls out all those loyal ones, who gladly go out to meet him. He storms the city, and entering with those that have already joined him, he punishes the rebellious, and rewards those that had been faithful. Now, as the coming of the sovereign would be a day of joyful deliverance to one class, so it would be followed by judgement on the others. We find both these aspects of the coming of the Lord Jesus plainly revealed in the scripture. 1 Thess. 4: 15-18 speaks of Christ coming for His saints to their everlasting joy; and Jude 14, 15 speaks of Christ coming to execute judgement on His enemies. Another distinction to be noticed is that when Christ comes for His saints, including both the living and the dead, He will not actually come to the earth for them. The above passage in 1 Thessalonians says that the saints will be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. This is often called the RAPTURE. It will be a meeting far too sacred for the eyes of the wicked to behold — it will be in the clouds. No separation will ever take place: those that are thus caught up will be for ever with the Lord. But the important aspect of the Resurrection and Rapture of the saints is, that it is God's answer in those that believe to the all-glorious worth of His own Son.
This is the bright hope of the Christian. There is no event revealed in scripture that must take place before the Rapture of the saints. They should, therefore, be expecting the return of the Lord at any moment to fetch all His saints away together. John 14: 1-3; 1 Thess. 1: 9, 10.
In other scriptures it is revealed that there will be an interval between the Rapture (the catching away of the saints), and the Lord's coming, to the earth. For instance, in 2 Thess. 2 we learn that the day of the Lord cannot come till the Antichrist is revealed, because the Lord is going to destroy that wicked one when He comes. Then in Rev. 8. we find that the Antichrist will co-operate with another 'beast,' the head of the future Roman empire; and in Dan. 9. that this latter power will make a covenant with Israel and will break the covenant in the midst of the week: all which intimates that this apparent triumph of wickedness will spread over at least seven years, otherwise spoken of as the last week of the seventy weeks of Daniel. See SEVENTY WEEKS.
That the Lord Jesus will actually come to the earth is plainly revealed in Acts 1: 11; "This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven." "His feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east." Zech. 14: 4. "The Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple … but who may abide the day of his coming?" Malachi 3: 1, 2.
For the events connected with the Second Advent see APPEARING; DAY OF THE LORD; JUDGEMENT; KINGDOM; MILLENNIUM.
This conqueror is not mentioned by name in scripture, but his kingdom is certainly referred to in prophecy, principally in Daniel, some 200 years before he was born. It is first spoken of as a part of the great image seen in a dream by Nebuchadnezzar; it is foreshadowed by the belly and thighs, which are of brass, a depreciation in the character of the kingdom in comparison with the empires of Babylon and of the Medes and Persians, though it was larger in extent: it "shall bear rule over all the earth." Dan. 2: 32, 39. It is also compared to a leopard which had four heads and four wings of a fowl. The leopard is distinguished for its blood-thirstiness and tearing its prey : this indeed magnifies the contrast in the millennium when it will lie down with the kid. Isa. 11: 6. Also remarkable for its swiftness of action: 'their horses also are swifter than the leopards.' Habakkuk 1: 8. These characteristics exactly agree with the character and actions of Alexander. The four heads and four wings refer to the extension of the kingdom to the four winds of heaven, as it was divided among four of his generals after his death. Dan. 7: 6. Again in Dan, 8., where the kingdom of Media and Persia is compared to a ram, Greece is compared to a he goat, with a great horn, which is its first king, Alexander, Dan. 8: 21. Here again we get his character described: so swift that he 'touched not the ground,' he rushed against the ram 'with choler,' cast him to the ground and stamped upon him. Dan. 8: 5-8. In Zech. 6: 2, 3, the four great monarchies are alluded to, and the third, the kingdom of Greece, is compared to a chariot with white horses.
Alexander the Great, son of Philip II. and Olympias, was born at Pella B.C. 356; became king of Macedon on the assassination of his father in 336: subdued the Greeks in 335; defeated the Persians, 334; took Tyre; conquered Syria and Egypt, and founded Alexandria 332; defeated Darius in 331; conquered Parthia, Media, Bactria, and invaded India, 330-324, sought fresh conquests, but died at Babylon in 323. These dates show the rapidity of his conquests, agreeing with the above scriptures. As to his cruelty let one instance suffice: at the capture of Tyre which then belonged to Persia, provoked by the long resistance and valiant defence, 8,000 of the inhabitants were massacred, 2,000 being crucified: of the rest, except those who escaped by sea, 30,000 were sold into slavery, the king and the chief magistrates were spared, doubtless as trophies. This was the work of the 'leopard' of scripture. While besieging Tyre Alexander sent to demand the submission of the Jews; but was told they were faithful vassals of Darius. After the conquest of Gaza, the conqueror marched to Jerusalem. The high priest Jaddua, being warned of God in a vision, hung the city with garlands and went forth in his robes with the other priests and the people in white to meet the king. On seeing these Alexander was arrested, fell to the ground and then embraced the high priest. In reply to an astonished courtier, Alexander said he did not worship the priest, but the name on his frontlet, and explained that he had seen in a vision a figure resembling this very priest, who told him to conquer Persia. He granted the Jews in Palestine, Media and Babylonia the free enjoyment of their laws and exemption from tribute during the Sabbatical year. Such is a rapid sketch of how prophecy and history agree. The empire of Greece had thus to do with God's ancient people the Jews, and formed a link in the chain of kingdoms until the Messiah Himself appeared and laid the foundation for His kingdom that shall endure for ever.
The learned are not agreed as to the derivation of the word shaddai and its signification: some giving it as 'all bountiful,' others 'all sufficient,' 'all mighty,' etc. This is not at all surprising, for any name of God must be above mere human learning or definition, yet it was the ground of faith to those who had the revelation. The name first occurs in Gen. 17: 1; God said to Abraham "I am the Almighty God." This links it with the Patriarchs: it is the name by which God was known to them; and except to them, and in Job where it occurs very often, it is seldom found in the O.T. The title 'the Almighty' without the name of God being added, occurs first in Jacob's address to his twelve sons before he died: the blessings upon Joseph were to be by "'the Almighty,' . . . . blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts and of the womb." Gen. 49: 25. Balaam uses the name in Num. 24: 4; Naomi also in her lamentations. Ruth 1: 20, 21. See also Ps. 68: 14; Ps. 91: 1; Isa. 13: 6; Ezek. 1: 24; Ezek. 10: 5; Joel 1: 15.
In the N.T. the name Lord Almighty occurs in 2 Cor. 6: 18 in a quotation from Jeremiah, and a few times in the Revelation, but only once as 'the Almighty' in Rev. 1: 8: "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty." On the whole it is clear that the name was one of special relationship with the Patriarchs as that of Jehovah was with Israel . This is plainly declared: "I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob by the name of GOD ALMIGHTY; but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them." Ex. 6: 3. That of Father is now the revealed name of God by which Christians know Him, being brought by the work of Christ and through the operation of the Spirit into the relationship of children, and of sons. See John 20: 17; 1 John 3: 1; Gal. 4: 4, 5.
The name Almighty will appear again when God works out his purposes in power and judgement. It was revealed in connection with promises made in time, as Father is in connection with eternal counsels. The four living creatures cry day and night "Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come." Rev. 4: 8. See also Rev. 21: 22.
The words malac aggelos, signify 'messenger.'
1. It is used for the mystic representation of the divine presence, as in Gen. 31: 11-13. "The angel of God" spake unto Jacob saying, "I am the God of Bethel." "The angel of Jehovah" spake to Hagar and said, "I will multiply thy seed exceedingly that it shall not be numbered for multitude." Gen. 16: 7-11. "The angel of Jehovah" spake to Abraham saying, "By myself have I sworn," etc. Gen. 22: 11, 15,16. Three 'men' drew near to Abraham's tent. One said Sarah should have a son: at which Sarah laughed, and Jehovah said, "Wherefore did Sarah laugh?" Two of the three left, and were called 'angels' at the gate of Sodom, while Jehovah, the third, talked with Abraham. Gen. 18: 1-33: cf. also Ex. 3: 2, 6-15; Num. 22: 22-35. Jacob, in blessing the sons of Joseph, said, "The Angel which redeemed me from all evil bless the lads." Gen. 48: 16. It is generally believed that it was the second person in the Trinity who appeared as a man in the O.T. It is no doubt the same who is called 'the mighty angel' in Rev. 10: 1-3.
2. The intelligent spiritual beings who are constantly referred to in scripture as God's messengers both as carrying good tidings and, as executors of God's judgements. We know little of their nature: "of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire," Heb. 1: 7; and man is described as being a little inferior to the angels. Ps. 8: 5 ; Heb. 2: 7. There are apparently gradations in rank among them, described as principalities and powers, of which Christ as Man is now the head. Col. 2: 10. Twice we meet with 'archangel:' an archangel's voice will accompany the rapture of the church, 1 Thess. 4: 16; and 'Michael the archangel' contended with Satan about the body of Moses. Jude 9. He with his angels will fight with the dragon and his angels and cast them out of heaven. Rev. 12: 7, 8. Gabriel is the only other name of an angel revealed to us: he appeared to Daniel, to Zacharias, and to Mary: he said that he stood in the presence of God. Dan. 8: 16; Dan. 9: 21; Luke 1: 19, 26.
Though we are unconscious of the presence of angels we know that they are ministering spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall inherit salvation, Heb. 1: 14: cf. Ps. 34: 7; and we read also that they ministered to the Lord when He was here. Matt. 4: 11; Mark 1: 13; Luke 22: 43. There are 'myriads' of these angels, Matt. 26: 53; Heb. 12: 22; Rev. 5: 11; and they are described as 'mighty,' 'holy,' 'elect,' 2 Thess. 1: 7; Mark 8: 38; 1 Tim. 5: 21: they do not marry, Mark 12: 25. We are not told when they were created, but doubtless they are referred to as 'the sons of God' who shouted for joy when God created the earth. Job 38: 4-7.
The law was given by their ministry, Acts 7: 53; Gal. 3: 19; Ps. 68: 17; and they had to do with proclaiming the birth of the Saviour, Luke 2: 8-14; and they attended at the resurrection. Matt. 28: 2; John 20: 12. Angels are not the depositaries of the revelation and counsels of God. They desire to look into the things testified by the Spirit of Christ in the prophets, and now reported by the apostles in the power of the same Spirit. 1 Peter 1: 12. The world to come is not to be put in subjection to them, but to man in the person of the Son of man, Heb. 2: 5-8; and the saints will judge angels. 1 Cor. 6: 3. It is therefore only a false humility that would teach the worshipping of angels. Col. 2: 18. When John fell down to worship the angel in the Revelation, being overpowered by reason of the stupendous things revealed, he was on two occasions restrained from worshipping his 'fellow servant,' as in Rev. 19: 10 ; Rev. 22: 9.
In Ps. 8: 5 the word is elohim, 'God:' the name of God being given to the angels as His representatives: cf. Ps. 82: 6. In Ps. 68: 17 it is shinan 'repetition;' reading "even thousands upon thousands." In Ps. 78: 25 it is abbir, 'mighty:' "every one did eat the bread of the mighty" margin.
3. FALLEN ANGELS.
a. We read of angels who kept not their first estate,' but left their own habitation, and are kept in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgement of the great day. Jude 6. God spared not the angels who sinned. 2 Peter 2: 4. The nature of their sin may be referred to in Gen. 6: 2. Their punishment and that of Sodom and Gomorrah is held up as a warning against fleshly indulgence, and despising government. 2 Peter 2: 10; Jude 6-8.
b. Besides the above which are kept in chains we read of angels connected with Satan. The great dragon and his angels will be subdued by Michael and his angels, and be cast out of heaven. Rev. 12: 9. The lake of fire, or Gehenna, has been specially prepared for the devil and his angels, though, alas, man will also be cast therein. Matt. 25: 41. Abaddon or Apollyon is the name of 'the angel of the bottomless pit,' Rev. 9: 11, that is, 'the abyss,' not hell, which, as seen above, is the place of punishment. Isa. 14: 12-16 and Ezek. 28: 14-19, may throw some light on the fall of Satan, but whether the fall of those called 'his angels' was brought about by the same cause and at the same time is not revealed. Scripture is quite clear that all of them will be overcome and eternally punished.
4. The term 'angel' is used metaphorically for a mystical representative. When Peter was delivered from prison, and knocked at the door, those who had been praying for his release said, "It is his angel." Acts 12: 15. They supposed Peter was still in prison, and that the one at the door was his representative, his spirit personified, perhaps with very vague ideas of what they really meant. In Revelation 2, 3, the addresses to the seven churches are made to the angel of each. It signifies the spirit and character of the assembly personified in its mystical representative, each one differing from the others, according to the state of the assembly. The messages, though addressed to churches existing at the time, no doubt set forth the state of the church in its varied phases ever since apostolic times down to its entire rejection as the responsible witness for Christ at the close of the dispensation.
The name antikristos signifies an opposer of Christ. It is used only by John in his first and second epistles, though those opposed to Christ are referred to by others under different names. It is important to distinguish between an antichrist and the antichrist. John says, "as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists;" whereas "he is the antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son." 1 John 2: 18, 22. He is the consummation of the many antichrists. To deny Jesus Christ come in the flesh is the spirit or power of the antichrist, but it eventuates in a departure from the special revelation of Christianity: 'they went out from us.' 1 John 2: 19; 1 John 4: 3; 2 John 7. Now this clears the ground at once of much that has obscured the subject. For instance, many have concluded that Popery is the antichrist, and have searched no farther into the question, whereas the above passage refutes this conclusion, for Popery does not deny the Father and the Son; and, in Revelation 17, 18, Popery is pointed out as quite distinct from 'the false prophet,' which is another name for the antichrist. It is fully granted that Popery is anti-christian, and a Christ-dishonouring and soul-deceiving system ; but where God has made a distinction we must also do so. Besides Popery there were and there are many antichrists, which, whatever their pretensions, are the enemies of Christ, opposers of the truth, and deceivers of man.
As to the Antichrist, it should be noticed that John makes another distinction between this one and the many. He speaks of the many as being already there, whereas the one was to come; and if we turn to 2 Thess. 2: 3-12 we read of something or some one that hinders that wicked or lawless one being revealed, although the mystery of iniquity was already at work. Now there has been no change of dispensation since this epistle was written, and John wrote much later, from which we learn that the revelation of the antichrist is still future, though doubtless the mystery of iniquity is getting ripe for his appearing; that which hindered and still hinders the manifestation of the antichrist is doubtless the presence of the Holy Spirit on earth. He will leave the earth at the rapture of the saints.
This passage in Thessalonians gives us further particulars as to this MAN OF SIN. His coming is after the working of Satan, that is, he will be a confederate of Satan, and be able to work signs and lying wonders with all deceit of unrighteousness in them that perish. Those that have refused the truth will then receive the lie of this wicked one. We get further particulars in Rev. 13: 11-18, where the anti-christian power or kingdom is described as a beast rising out of the earth, having two horns as a lamb, but speaking as a dragon. Here again we read that he will do great wonders, making fire come down from heaven, with other signs or miracles.
In the description in Thessalonians he opposeth himself against all that is called God or that is worshipped, and sits down in the temple of God, and sets forth himself as God. The Jews will receive him as their Messiah, as we read in John 5: 43. In the above passage in the Revelation this counterfeit of Christ's kingdom is openly idolatrous. He directs the dwellers on the earth to make an image of the beast (named in ver. 1, the future head of the resuscitated Roman empire) to which image he gives breath, that it should speak, and persecutes those who will not worship the image. He also causes all to receive a mark on their hand or their forehead that they may be known to be his followers; and that none else should be able to buy or sell. We thus see that in the Revelation the anti-christian power called also 'the false prophet' will work with the political head, and with Satan — a trinity of evil — not only in deceiving mankind, but also, in Rev. 16: 13-16, gathering together by their influence the kings of the earth to the battle of that great day of God Almighty. The three are cast into the lake of fire Rev. 19: 20; Rev. 20: 10.
In the O.T. we get still another character of this wicked one. In Dan. 11: 36-39 he is called 'king.' Here he exalts himself and speaks marvellous things against the God of gods. He will not regard the God of his fathers (pointing out that he will be a descendant of Israel, probably from the tribe of Dan, cf. Gen. 49: 17), nor "the desire of women" (i.e. the Messiah, of whom every Jewess hoped to be the mother): he exalts himself above all. Here again he is an idolater, honouring a god that his fathers knew not. In Zech. 11: 15-17 he is referred to as the foolish and idol shepherd, who cares not for the flock, in opposition to the Lord Jesus the good Shepherd.
This man of sin will 'do according to his own will' — just what the natural man ever seeks to do. In contrast to this the blessed Lord was obedient, and came not to do His own will. May His saints be ever on the watch against the many false prophets in the world, 1 John 4: 1, and be loyal to their absent Lord, behold His beauty in the sanctuary, and reproduce Him more down here in their earthen vessels.
There were several kings bearing this name who ruled over Syria, and though they are not mentioned by name in scripture, some of their actions are specified. These are so clear and definite that sceptics have foolishly said that at least this part of the prophecy of Daniel must have been written after the events! The Greek kingdom, the third of the four great empires, was, on the death of Alexander the Great, divided among his four generals, and this resulted principally in a series of kings who ruled in Egypt bearing the general name of PTOLEMY, and are called in scripture 'Kings of the South;' and another series, called 'Kings of the North,' who bore the general name of either SELEUCUS or ANTIOCHUS. Both the Ptolemies and the Seleucidae began eras of their own, and some of the kings of each era had to do with Palestine and the Jews. The following is a list of the kings, with the dates when they began to reign, noticing the principal events that were prophesied of them in Daniel 11.
B.C.
320 Ptolemy I, Soter. He takes Jerusalem. Era of the Ptolemies begins.
312 SELEUCUS I, Nicator. He re-takes Palestine. Era of the Seleucidae begins.
283 Ptolemy II, Philadelphus. The O.T. translated into Greek.
280 ANTIOCHUS I, Soter.
261 ANTIOCHUS II, Theos. He was at war with Ptolemy, but peace was restored on condition that Antiochus should put away his wife Laodice and marry Berenice the daughter of Ptolemy. This was done, but on the death of Philadelphus he restored Laodice; but she, fearing another divorce, poisoned her husband, and then caused the death of Berenice and her son. See Dan. 11: 6.
247 Ptolemy III, Euergetes. He revenged his sister's death, being 'a branch of her roots;'. and carried off 40,000 talents of silver, etc. 'Shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north,' and carry away their precious vessels of silver and gold. Dan. 11: 7-9.
246 SELEUCUS II, Callinicus.
226 SELEUCUS III, Ceraunus.
223 ANTIOCHUS III, the Great.
222 Ptolemy IV, Philopater. War between Ptolemy and Antiochus. Ptolemy recovers Palestine. Dan. 11: 10-12.
205 Ptolemy V, Epiphanes (5 years old). Antiochus seized the opportunity of the minority of the king to regain the country. Dan. 11: 16. He also joined with Philip of Macedonia to capture other portions of the dominions of Ptolemy. But Rome was now growing in power, and on being appealed to by Egypt for protection, Antiochus was told he must let Egypt alone. In the meantime an army from Egypt had re-taken Palestine; but Antiochus, on his return, again obtained the mastery there. Wishing to extend his dominions in the west he proposed that Ptolemy should marry his daughter Cleopatra, that she might serve her father's ends; but she was faithful to her husband. Daniel thus speaks of it: "He shall give him the daughter of women, corrupting her, but she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him." Dan. 11: 17. Antiochus took many maritime towns, but after many encounters he was compelled by Rome to quit all Asia on that side of Mount Taurus, give up his elephants and ships of war and pay a heavy fine.Antiochus had great difficulty in raising the money, and on attempting to rob a temple at Elymais he was killed. Dan. 11: 18, 19.
187 SELEUCUS IV, Philopator, succeeded. His principal work was the raising of money to pay the war-tax to Rome. He ordered Heliodorus to plunder the temple; but Heliodorus poisoned him. He was thus 'a raiser of taxes,' and was 'destroyed neither in anger, nor in battle.' Dan. 11: 20. Heliodorus seized the crown but was destroyed by Antiochus IV.
181 Ptolemy VI, Philometor. He was a minor, under his mother and tutors.
175 ANTIOCHUS IV, Epiphanes. He was not the rightful heir. He 'obtained the kingdom by flatteries.' He called himself Epiphanes, which is 'illustrious;' but he was such 'a vile person' that people called him Epimanes, 'madman.' Dan. 11: 21-24. He invaded Egypt and was at first successful: cf. Dan. 11: 25, 26. The two kings entered into negotiations, though neither of them was sincere in what they agreed to: their hearts were to do mischief, and they 'tell lies at one table.' Dan. 11: 27. Then Antiochus returned to his land with great riches: his heart was 'against the holy covenant,' and he entered Jerusalem and even into the sanctuary and took away the golden altar, the candlestick, the table of showbread, the censers of gold, and the other holy vessels and departed. 'At the appointed time he shall return and come toward the South,' Dan. 11: 29; but he was stopped by Rome; 'ships of Chittim,' ships from Macedonia, came against him; and in great anger he returned and vented his wrath on Jerusalem. He sent an army there with orders to slay all the men and sell the women and children for slaves. This was to a certain extent carried out. The walls were also thrown down and the city pillaged and then set on fire. He then decreed that the Jews should forsake their religion, and all should worship the heathen gods. To ensure this at Jerusalem with the few that still clung to the place, an image of Jupiter Olympius was erected in the temple and on an altar sacrifices were offered to this god. This was in B.C. 168 on the 25th of the month Chisleu. Daniel relates "They shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate." Dan. 11: 31: cf. also Dan. 8: 9-12 where the 'little horn' refers to Antiochus Epiphanes. Bleek, Delitzsch, and others consider that in Dan. 8: 14, the 2,300 'evening, morning,' margin, refer to the daily sacrifice, which is spoken of in Dan. 8: 11, 12, 13; and that by 2,300 is meant 1,150 days: cf. also Dan. 8: 26. The dedication of the temple was on the 25th of Chisleu, B.C. 165, and the desecration began some time in the year 168. Dan. 11: 32b, 33-35 refer to the change that soon took place under Judas Maccabeus and his brothers, commencing B.C. 166, and in 165 the temple was re-dedicated. In B.C. 164 ANTIOCHUS V. Eupator succeeded to the throne; and in 162 DEMETRIUS SOTER; but they were not powerful against Judaea, and in B.C. 161 an alliance was made by Judaea with Rome. The historical notices in Daniel end at Dan. 11: 35.
It will be seen by the above that the records of history agree perfectly with the prophecy, as faith would expect them to do. It is only unbelief that has any difficulty in God foretelling future events. Without doubt some of the acts of Antiochus Epiphanes are types of the deeds of the future king of the North — referred to in other prophecies as 'the Assyrian' — in respect to the Jews and Jerusalem.
The great kingdom of Assyria was situated near the river Tigris, having Armenia on the North, Mount Zagros and Media on the east, Babylonia on the south, Syria and the Syrian desert on the west; but its boundaries were doubtless not always the same. Nineveh became its capital. The first allusion to Assyria is found in Gen. 2: 14, where we read that one of the rivers of Paradise went "toward the east of Assyria," or "went eastward to Assyria," margin.
The name of Assyria appears to have arisen from its first capital, Asshur (now called Kalah Sherghat) on the Tigris. Apparently a monarchy was established there by some from Babylonia, and there were several kings before SHALMANESER I. (about B.C. 1300), whose family kept the throne for six generations until TIGLATH-PILESER I. (about B.C. 1130), who may be said to be the founder of the first Assyrian Empire. He beautified Nineveh and carried his arms in various directions. After him the kingdom became feeble until RIMMON-NIRARI II., B.C. 911, but his victorious career was excelled by his grandson, the great ASSUR-NATSIR-PAL, B.C. 883, who made conquests over the Phoenicians and the 'Kaldu' (Chaldeans).
SHALMANESER II succeeded, B.C. 858. He carried his arms still farther. We have his conquests told by himself on three monuments in the British Museum, one of which is known as the Black Obelisk. If the names are correctly interpreted he mentions as allied against him Benhadad king of Syria and Ahab king of Israel. These were defeated at the battle of Karkar, B.C. 853. Hazael of Damascus was also defeated; and from Yahua, the son of Khumri, that is, Jehu, whom he incorrectly calls son of Omri, king of Israel, he received tribute; but of this scripture says nothing.
The next king who invaded Syria was RIMMON-NIRARI III B.C. 810. He extended his victories to what he calls, 'the shore of the sea of the setting sun,' which is doubtless the Mediterranean, and imposed tribute on the Phoenicians, Israelites, Edomites, Philistines, and the king of Damascus. After this king the power of Assyria waned for a time.
The next king of note was TIGLATH -PILESER II. or III. B.C. 745, who is considered to have founded the second Assyrian kingdom. He consolidated the various dependencies, turbulent populations were removed, and the empire was divided into provinces, each of which paid a fixed annual tribute. In his inscriptions occur the names of Jehoahaz (Ahaz) of Judah; Pekah, and Hoshea of Israel; Reson (Resin) of Damascus; and Hiram of Tyre. The name of Merodach-baladan is also found. Hamath was taken and then all Palestine was at his feet. He attacked those on the east of the Jordan, and carried away the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh. 1 Chr. 5: 26. Ahaz sought his alliance against Rezin the king of Damascus. Rezin was slain and the city taken; and there Ahaz met the king of Assyria. 2 Kings 16: 1-10; 2 Chr. 28: 16-21. He also made himself master of Babylonia; but this afterwards gained its independence under Merodach-baladan. Some Assyrian scholars take Tiglath-pileser (whose name appears to have been Pulu) to be the same person as the Pul mentioned in the Bible; but this does not at all agree with the dates of scripture, and in 1 Chr. 5: 26 the names of Pul and Tiglath-pileser are mentioned as of two persons. See PUL.
In B.C. 727 SHALMANESER IV. succeeded to the throne. Hoshea king of Israel was subject to him; but on being found in treaty with the king of Egypt, Samaria was besieged. 2 Kings 17: 3-5.
In B.C. 722 SARGON succeeded, and apparently it was he who captured Samaria. An inscription of his at Khorsabad reads, "I besieged the city of Samaria and carried away 27,280 men who dwelt there into captivity, and took fifty chariots from among them, and ordered the rest to be taken. I set my judges over them, and imposed upon them the tribute of the former kings." He also placed colonists in Samaria, but it is supposed by the names of the places mentioned from which these were sent, that this was not done immediately. Sargon captured Carchemish, punished the king of Syria, flayed alive the king of Hamath, and then successfully overcame So or Sabako. Sargon is mentioned in Isa. 20: 1 as sending his general to Ashdod, who took it. An inscription also mentions the fall of the city. Sargon defeated Merodach-baladan in Babylonia, but was assassinated in B.C. 705. He was called SHARRU-KENU, that is, 'faithful king.'
SENNACHERIB succeeded Sargon his father, B.C. 705. Hezekiah had been tributary; but on his revolting Sennacherib took the fenced cities of Judah, and then Hezekiah sent him the treasures of his own house and the house of the Lord. Still Jerusalem was attacked, and profane speeches made against the God of Israel. Hezekiah humbled himself before God, and the angel of the Lord smote of the Assyrians 185,000. Sennacherib returned to his land and was eventually murdered by two of his sons. 2 Kings 18: 13 - 19: 37. In Sennacherib's own account he says, "Hezekiah himself I shut up like a bird in a cage in Jerusalem, his royal city . . . . in addition to his former tribute and yearly gifts I added other tribute and the homage due to my majesty, and I laid it upon them." The above date would clash with the date of Hezekiah, but it is probable that Sennacherib was co-regent with his father some nine years before he reigned alone.
A tablet shows Sennacherib sitting on a throne to receive the spoils of the city of Lachish. It is supposed he lived 20 years after he left Palestine before he was assassinated. He says nothing of the loss of his army, and perhaps never recovered the shock.
ESAR-HADDON succeeded, B.C. 681. He is said to have reigned from the Euphrates to the Nile. He also conquered Egypt, and divided it into 20 provinces, governed by Assyrians. According to an inscription he claimed the sovereignty of Babylon, and held his court there. This accounts for him, as king of Assyria, carrying Manasseh captive to Babylon. 2 Chr. 33: 11. He is mentioned also in Ezra 4: 2 as having sent the colonists into Judaea. After reigning about 10 years he associated with him his son the noted ASSUR-BANI-PAL. Egypt was again conquered. He gathered a famous library at Kouyunjik, the terra cotta tablets of which have been preserved. Assur-bani-pal died about B.C. 626. The glory of the Assyrian kingdom was permanently departing, and about B.C. 606 Nineveh was taken and destroyed. Nahum 1 - 3.
There are many monuments and inscriptions on tablets which the learned are deciphering; but the difficulties of distinguishing the proper names on the Assyrian monuments are shown by M. Joachim Menant, who gives as an instance one sign which may be read kal, rip, dan, or lip, being one of the signs called 'polyphones.'
The following list of kings is from Rawlinson, Sayce, and other Assyrian scholars. The early dates are uncertain and several of the later dates do not agree with the usual chronology of scripture.
ASSYRIAN KINGS. B.C. The Assyrians were idolaters: from the inscriptions the names of hundreds of gods can be gathered.
The Assyrian language was a branch of the Semitic, and came from the Accadian. It was written in Cuneiform or wedge-shaped characters.
Assyria was used by God as His rod to punish His guilty people Israel, and then, as in other instances, the rod itself, for its pride and wickedness, had to bear God's judgement. See Isa. 10: 5-19; Isa. 14: 25; Ezek. 31: 3-17; Nahum 3: 18, 19; Zeph. 2: 13. Some of the passages that speak of the kings of Assyria are prophetic, and refer to the still future, when as 'kings of the north' they will again have to do with Israel and will be judged of God. The indignation against Israel ceases in the destruction of the Assyrian: see Isa. 10: 12; Isa. 14: 25; Isa. 30: 27-33. One remarkable passage speaks of Assyria with Egypt and Israel as being brought into blessing, Isa. 19: 23-25, "Whom the Lord of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance." We thus see that the Assyrians have a large place in scripture both in the past and in the future, doubtless because they have had, and will yet have, to do with Jehovah's earthly people, "the Israel of God." The Assyrian is the over-flowing scourge of God's anger because of Israel's connection with idolatry.
The word 'atonement' occurs but once in the N.T. and there it should be 'reconciliation,' and the verb in the preceding sentence is so translated: "If when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life … through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the reconciliation," katallage Rom. 5: 10, 11. On the other hand, in Heb. 2: 17 the A.V. has "to make reconciliation for the sins of the people:" here it is propitiation,' ilaskomai. If the word atonement is not found in the N.T., atonement in its true meaning is spoken of continually, as 'ransom;' 'bearing our sins in his own body on the tree;' 'Christ our passover is sacrificed for us;' 'Christ … being made a curse for us;' 'He suffered for sins, the just for the unjust;' and, to use the language of faith, 'with his stripes we are healed;' 'He was delivered for our offences;' 'He was manifested to take away our sins.'
In the O.T. we have the word 'atonement' continually, but 'propitiation' not at all; 'expiation' twice in the margin, Num. 35: 33; Isa. 47: 11. But the same word, kaphar, though generally translated by 'make atonement,' is employed for 'purging' and occasionally for 'cleansing,' 'reconciling,' 'purifying.' The word kaphar is literally 'to cover,' with various prepositions with it; the ordinary one is 'up' or 'upon.' Hence in 'atoned for him ' or 'his sin:' he or his sin is covered up: atonement is made for him or for his sin. Atonement was made upon the horns of the altar: the force is 'atonement for.' With the altar of incense atonement was not made upon it, but for it; so for the holy place, and for or about Aaron and his house: the preposition is al.
The same is used with the two goats. The sins were seen on the sinless goat, and expiation was made in respect of those sins. The how is not said here, but it is by the two goats making really one, because the object was to show that the sins were really laid upon it (that is, on Christ), and the sins carried away out of sight, and never to be found. If we can get our ideas, as taught of God as to the truth, into the train of Jewish thought, there is no difficulty in the al. In either case the difficulty arises from the fact that in English for presents the interested person to the mind; on is merely the place where it was done, as on an altar; whereas the al refers to the clearing away by the kaphar what was upon the thing al which the atoning rite was performed. Clearly the goat was not the person interested, nor was it merely done upon it as the place. It was that on which the sins lay, and they must be cleared and done away. The expiation referred to them as thus laid on the goat. As has been said, the how is not stated here, but the all-important fact defined that they were all carried away from Israel and from before God. The needed blood or life was presented to God in the other, which did really put them away; but did much more, and that aspect is attached to them there. This double aspect of the atoning work is of the deepest importance and interest, the presenting of the blood to God on the mercy seat, and the bearing away the sins. The word kaphar, to make atonement, occurs in Ex. 29, 30, 32; Lev. 1, 4-10, 12, 14-17, 19, 23; Num. 5, 6, 8, 15, 16, 25, 28, 29, 31; 2 Sam. 21: 3; 1 Chr. 6: 49; 2 Chr. 29: 24; Neh. 10: 33.
A short notice of some other Hebrew words may help. We have nasa, 'to lift up,' and so to forgive, to lift up the sins away in the mind of the person offended, or to show favour in lifting up the countenance of the favoured person. Ps. 4: 6. We have also kasah, 'to cover,' as in Ps. 32: 1, where sin is 'covered': sometimes used with al, as in Prov. 10: 12, "love covereth all sins," forgives: they are out of sight and mind. The person is looked at with love, and not the faults with offence.
But in such words there is not the idea of expiation, the side of the offender is contemplated, and he is looked at in grace, whatever the cause: it may be needed atonement, or simply, as in Proverbs, gracious kindness. We have also salach, 'pardon or forgiveness.' Thus it is used as the effect of kaphar, as in Lev. 4: 20. But kaphar has always a distinct and important idea connected with it. It views the sin as toward God, and is ransom, when not used literally for sums of money; and kapporeth is the mercy seat. And though it involves forgiveness, purging from sin, it has always God in view, not merely that the sinner is relieved or forgiven: there is expiation and propitiation in it. And this is involved in the idea of purging sin, or making the purging of sin (ilaskesthai, exilaskesthai, ilasmon poiein); it is in God's sight as that by which He is offended, and what He rejects and judges.
There was a piaculum, 'an expiatory sacrifice,' something satisfying for the individual involved in guilt, or what was offensive to God, what He could not tolerate from His very nature. This with the heathen, who attached human passions or demon-revenge to their gods, was of course perverted to meet those ideas. They deprecated the vengeance of a probably angry and self-vengeful being. But God has a nature which is offended by sin. It is a holy, not of course a passionate, one; but the majesty of holiness must be maintained. Sin ought not to be treated with indifference, and God's love provides the ransom. It is God's Lamb who undertakes and accomplishes the work. The perfect love of God and His righteousness, the moral order of the universe and of our souls through faith, is maintained by the work of the cross. Through the perfect love not only of God, the giver, but of Him, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, propitiation is made, expiation for sin, its aspect being toward God, while the effect applies to us in cleansing and justifying, though it goes much farther.
Expiation is more the satisfaction itself which is made, the piaculum, what takes the wrath, and is devoted, made the curse, and so substituted for the offender, so that he goes free. And here the noun kopher comes to let light in on the inquiry. It is translated 'ransom, satisfaction,' and in 1 Sam. 12: 3 a 'bribe.' So in Ex. 21: 30 a kopher (translated 'sum of money') is laid upon a man to save his life where his ox had killed his neighbour; but in Num. 35: 31 no kopher was to be taken for the life of a murderer; for (ver. 33) the land cannot be cleansed, kaphar, but by the blood of the man that shed blood as a murderer. This clearly shows what the force of kopher and of kaphar is. A satisfaction is offered suited to the eye and mind of him who is displeased and who judges; and through this there is purgation of the offence, cleansing, forgiveness, and favour, according to him who takes cognisance of the evil.
A word may be added as to the comparison made between the two birds, Lev. 14: 4-7, and the two goats, Lev. 16: 7-10. The object of the birds was the cleansing of the leper; it was application to the defiled man, not the kopher, ransom, presented to God. It could not have been done but on the ground of the blood-shedding and satisfaction, but the immediate action was the purifying: hence there was water as well as blood. One bird was slain over running water in an earthen vessel, and the live bird and other objects dipped in it, and the man was then sprinkled, and the living bird let loose far from death, though once identified with it, and was free. The Spirit, in the power of the word, makes the death of Christ available in the power of His resurrection. There was no laying sins on the bird let free, as on the goat: it was identified with the slain one, and then let go. The living water in the earthen vessel is doubtless the power of the Spirit and word in human nature, characterising the form of the truth, though death and the blood must come in, and all nature, its pomp and vanity, be merged in it. The leper is cleansed and then can worship. This is not the atonement itself towards God, though founded on it, as marked by the death of the bird. It is the cleansing of man in death to the flesh, but in the power of resurrection known in Christ who once died to sin.
So also the Red Heifer, Num. 19: 1-22, was not in itself an act of atonement, but of purification. The ground was there laid in the slaying and burning of the heifer. Sin was, so to speak, consumed in it, and the blood was sprinkled seven times before the tabernacle of the congregation. When Christ died sin was, as it were, all consumed for His people by the fire of judgement, and all the value of the blood was before God where He communicated with the people. All that was settled, but man had defiled himself in his journey through the wilderness, and must be cleansed. The witness that sin had been put away long ago by Christ undergoing what was the fruit of sin was brought by the living power of the Holy Spirit and the word, and so he was purified. But the act of purifying is not in itself atonement; for atonement the offering is presented to God. It is a kopher a ransom, a satisfaction, to meet the infinite, absolute perfection of God's nature and character, which indeed is there alone brought out. Thereby atonement is made and the very Day of Atonement is called kippurim. The priest made an atonement in respect of the sins; and it had the double aspect of presenting the blood before God within as meeting what He was, and bearing His people's sins and carrying them away never to be found. We must make the difference of an un-rent veil and repeated sacrifices, and a rent veil and a sacrifice offered once for all. This is taught in the Epistle to the Hebrews.
There is still one case to be noticed, but it was merely a principle confirming the real character of the kaphar, making atonement. In Ex. 30: 11-16 it was ordered that when the people were numbered, each, rich or poor, should give half a shekel as a kopher ransom, for his soul or life. This had nothing to do with sin, but with ransom, that there might be no plague — a recognition that they belonged to God all alike, and could have no human boast in numbers, as David afterwards brought the plague on Israel. This was offered to God as a sign of this, and shows what the force of kaphar, making atonement, is.
We have no atonement in connection with the meat offering: we get the perfectness of Christ's person, and all the elements that constituted it so as man, and there tested by the fire of God, which was even to death, the death of the cross, and all a perfect sweet savour, and perfect in presenting it to God a sweet savour, but no kopher, ransom: for that we must have blood-shedding.
The essence then of atonement is, firstly, a work or satisfaction presented to God according to, and perfectly glorifying, His nature and character about sin by sacrifice; and secondly, the bearing our sins; glorifying God even where sin was and in respect of sin (and thus His love is free to go out to all sinners); and giving the believer, him that comes to God by that blood-shedding, the certainty that his sins are all gone, and that God will remember them no more.
This was one of the most solemn days in the whole year, being, in common with the Sabbath, the only occasion on which the people were commanded to cease from work entirely. On the day of atonement they were also to afflict their souls, and that by a statute for ever. Lev. 16: 29-31. The time of the year in which the day fell — the tenth day of the seventh month — is very significant, especially when viewed in connection with the other feasts. See FEASTS.
The rites prescribed for the Day of Atonement are given in Lev. 16; Lev. 23: 26-32; Num. 29: 7-11. In the first we have a detailed account of the peculiar work appointed for the high priest on that day; in the second, we learn what had been shortly expressed in chap. 16, how the people should comport themselves on that day; and in the third we are told of certain sacrifices which were to be offered up besides those spoken of in Lev. 16. In this passage we learn that the Day of Atonement was a gracious provision in order that the relationship of the people with the holy God who dwelt among them might be maintained.
The points to be noticed are:
1. The entrance into the holy place. Aaron, on account of the failure of his sons in the priestly office, could not enter there at all times, but, as the representative of the people, once a year on the Day of Atonement, and he must enter alone. Even then he went in not for communion, but for the cleansing of the defilements of a people among whom God dwelt. He must put on the holy linen garments, and must enter with a cloud of incense and with blood, lest he die. For the contrast to this for the Christian, see Heb. 9: 7-12.
2. Aaron must offer sacrifices for himself and his house: a young bullock for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering. Aaron and his sons represent the saints who now form the church as a company of priests, and were thus, in the type, distinct from the people (Israel) as an earthly company who formed the camp.
3. For the congregation two goats were taken for a sin offering, and a ram for a burnt offering. On the two goats the lot was cast, and the one on whom the lot fell was for Jehovah, and was offered as a sin offering. This, as with the bullock for Aaron and his house, was the atonement offering Godward. The other, after being presented before the Lord, was brought forth: on him Aaron laid both his hands and confessed over him "all the iniquities of the children of Israel and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat," Lev. 16: 21, which was then sent away into the wilderness, a land of forgetfulness. In the two goats we have the two sides of atonement, namely, that which meets the character and holiness of God, and that which meets the need of the sinner as to the removal of his sins.* See the preceding article.
* Note there is no scapegoat for the priestly family: they belong to the inside, where God is glorified. The earthly saints will have 'the forgiveness of sins' in the new covenant at the end of days. In connection with them prominence is given to the scapegoat aspect — sins remembered no more.
4. Atonement was made for the holy place, for the tabernacle, and for the altar, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel.
The day of Atonement being once a year — once every year, by a perpetual statute — stands in strong contrast to the one perfect sacrifice of the Lord Jesus, by which the believer is perfected in perpetuity. See Heb. 10: 1-18.
The reiterated injunction to afflict their souls in connection with this great day has an important prophetical bearing as to the Lord's earthly people Israel. If the blowing of trumpets on the first day of the seventh month suggests that testimony from the Lord which shall arouse the nation from their long spiritual slumber, the Day of Atonement points to the moral effect produced in them when they shall look upon Him whom they have pierced, and mourn for Him. They will also at this time learn and confess that He was wounded for their transgressions. Cf. Zech. 12: 10-14; Isa. 53; Ps. 51.
Nimrod's BABEL was doubtless in some way connected with the renowned city of Babylon and of the kingdom of which it was the capital. The Hebrew is Babel, the same for Babel and Babylon. In Gen. 11: 2, it speaks of Babel being built in a plain in the land of Shinar, which they reached by travelling from the east; this reads in the margin travelling 'eastward,' a reading preferred by many and by the Revisers. This direction agrees well with the locality of Babylon on the river Euphrates.
Historians speak of the great size of the city, though they are not agreed as to its dimensions. It had 25 gates on each side, and from the gates were streets which crossed one another at right angles. The houses were not built close together, so that there was ample room inside the city for gardens and even fields and vineyards. The walls were said to be 75 feet thick and 300 feet in height; and the gates were of brass. The river Euphrates ran through the city; but on the banks of the river strong walls were built with gates of brass; there was also a bridge from side to side near the centre of the city. A lake was formed outside the city into which the waters of the river could be turned when the water rose too high, and deep ditches filled with water surrounded the walls of the city.
We also read of 'hanging gardens' which Nebuchadnezzar built for his wife Amyitis, or Amyhia, daughter of a Median king, to give the place a measure of resemblance to the mountains and wooded hills of her native country. These gardens are supposed to have been built in terraces of different heights.
In several particulars scripture corroborates the statements of the historians. In Jer. 50: 11 of Babylon it is said, 'O ye destroyers of mine heritage, because ye are grown fat as the heifer at grass, and bellow as bulls;' its broad walls are mentioned, Jer. 51: 12, 58; its gates of brass and bars of iron, Isa. 45: 2; and Nebuchadnezzar boasted of the 'great Babylon' which he had built by the might of his power and for the honour of his majesty. Dan. 4: 30.
Among the relies recovered from the various mounds of ruins are some bricks with the names of the kings Neriglissar and Labynetus stamped upon them, but the great majority of those found bear the name of Nebuchadnezzar. Babylon was built with bricks, there being no stone at all near, and in later years the mounds were ransacked for bricks for other cities.
Of the early governments in Babylon but little is known with certainty. Berosus, as arranged by Rawlinson, gives from B.C. 2458 to 625 various dynasties of Medes, Chaldaeans, Arabs, and Assyrians; and lastly Babylonians from B.C. 625 to 538.
Babylon and Assyria are much blended together in history, sometimes being independent one of the other, and at other times being tributary to one another. In B.C. 745 Tiglath-pileser may be said to have founded the later kingdom of Assyria, and among his victories he became master of Babylonia, as the kingdom of Babylon was called. About 721 Merodachbaladan became king of Babylon, and in 712 he sent ambassadors to Hezekiah on hearing of his sickness. This is recorded in 2 Kings 20: 12, where he is called Berodach-baladan. In B.C. 702 Sennacherib king of Assyria expelled Merodach, and Babylon was governed by viceroys from Assyria. In B.C. 681 Esar-haddon became king of Assyria but held his court at Babylon, to which place Manasseh king of Judah was carried prisoner about B.C. 677. 2 Chr. 33: 11. About B.C. 625 Nabo-polassar revolted from the king of Assyria and established the later kingdom of Babylon. He with Cyaxares (the Ahasuerus of Dan. 9: 1) founder of the Median kingdom, attacked and took Nineveh, and put an end to the Assyrian rule. Nebuchadnezzar, co-regent with Nabo-polassar, took Jerusalem, and carried many captives and the holy vessels to Babylon, about B.C. 606. In B.C. 604 Nabo-polassar died and Nebuchadnezzar reigned alone. In B.C. 603 Jehoiakim revolted and in 599 Nebuchadnezzar again took Jerusalem, and Ezekiel was carried to Babylon: this is called the great captivity. 2 Kings 24: 1-16. Mattaniah was left as king in Jerusalem, his name being changed to Zedekiah: he reigned 11 years. 2 Kings 24: 17-20. Having rebelled against Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, after a siege of eighteen months, once more took Jerusalem, destroyed the city and burnt the house of the Lord, bringing the kingdom of Judah to an end: B.C. 588. 2 Kings 25: 1-26. For the personal history of the king see NEBUCHADNEZZAR. In B.C. 561 Nebuchadnezzar died. He was the 'head of gold' in Daniel's great image. The glory of the later Babylonian Empire virtually began and ended with him. The succession of kings was somewhat as follows:
KINGS OF BABYLON. Babylon has a large place in the O.T. with reference to its intercourse with Israel, in nearly every chapter of Jeremiah, from 20 - 52, Babylon is mentioned. Babylon is also of note as being the first of the four great empires prophesied of by Daniel. The kingdom of the Lord, established in the house of David, and maintained in Judah, had for the time come to an end because of iniquity, and the 'times of the Gentiles' had begun.* Of Nebuchadnezzar it was said, "Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength and glory … Thou art this head of gold." Dan. 2: 37, 38. Babylon was God's instrument by which Judah was punished; and then because of the pride and wickedness of the king of Babylon he also was brought under the rod of the Almighty.
* The times of the Gentiles will end when the power returns to Judah, the house of David, in the person of the Lord Jesus.
The destruction of Babylon was fully foretold in scripture, though some of these prophecies may refer also to still future events, namely, the overthrow by the Lord (typified by Cyrus) of the last holder of Nebuchadnezzar-like authority, namely, the beast, the last head of the revived Roman empire. Isa. 13: 6-22; Isa. 14: 4-23; Isa. 21: 2-9; Isa. 47: 1-11; Jer. 25: 12-14 and Jer. 50, 51. Its downfall was unexpected. For 24 years after the death of Nebuchadnezzar Babylon continued the seat of the imperial court. In B.C. 538 the city was taken in a remarkable way. A night was chosen when the inhabitants were about to hold a festival, when the whole city would be given up to drunkenness and debauchery. The water of the river was diverted from its bed so as to render it shallow enough to let the troops pass along. The gates were found open, and the city was taken.
This also was prophesied of in scripture: it specifies that Cyrus was God's shepherd, and He had holden him to subdue nations: God would loose the loins of kings to open before him the two-leaved gates; and the gates should not be shut: the gates of brass should be broken, and the bars of iron be cut asunder. Isa. 45: 1, 2. Again the suddenness and unexpectedness of the attack is also mentioned: "evil shall come upon thee; thou shalt not know from whence it riseth: and mischief shall fall upon thee; thou shalt not be able to put it off: and desolation shall come upon thee suddenly, which thou shalt not know." Isa. 47: 11. We also find that it was on the night of the revelry of Belshazzar's feast that the king was slain. Dan. 5: 30.
The monuments show that Babylon was taken by Gobryas the general of Cyrus, and that the capture of the city was, as some think, aided by treachery among its inhabitants. Dan. 5: 31 says, "Darius the Median took the kingdom." This king has not been found mentioned by name on the monuments, but he is well accredited as king in Daniel. He was probably ASTYAGES, who was a Median king. He had been conquered by Cyrus, who may have found it to his advantage to let him reign at Babylon as long as he lived. Astyages being a Mede and Cyrus a Persian agree with the second great empire being called by the two names. Persia gained the ascendancy, and Babylon was a royal residence during part of the year. There were occasional revolts, in the putting down of which the city was more and more destroyed. In the year B.C. 478 Xerxes returning from his inglorious invasion of Greece passed through the city, robbed the temple of Belus of its wealth and left its lofty towers a heap of ruins. In B.C. 324 Alexander the Great attempted to rebuild that edifice, and employed 10,000 men; but his sudden death, before the ruins had been cleared away, left it still in desolation.
Scripture is very decisive as to the utter destruction of the city: "Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation: neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there; neither shall the shepherds make their fold there: but wild beasts of the desert shall lie there, and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures; and owls shall dwell there, and satyrs shall dance there. And the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces." Isa. 13: 19-22.
Now vast mounds extend for miles. If Hillah (about 32 27' N, 44 25' E) be taken as a centre, the mounds extend northward about 3 miles. About 6 miles S.W. of Hillah stands the celebrated heap known as Birs Nimrood, supposed to be the site of the ancient temple of Belus. There are three large piles on the east of the river: the Mujelibe or Mukallibe, the Kasr or palace, and the Amran.
The moral features of Babylon were idolatrous corruption and worldliness, which will be seen in full manifestation in Babylon the Great. It is the place where the people of God get into captivity through dalliance with the world.
In the N.T. Babylon is mentioned in 1 Peter 5: 13. There is evidence in Josephus that there were many Jews in the district forty years after Christ. On the occasion of the gathering at Jerusalem in Acts 2: 9-11 mention is made of the Parthians, Medes and Elamites; and when Peter commences his epistle, supposing he was in the district of Babylon, he naturally puts Pontus first and then passes on to Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. There can be no reason therefore to doubt that the ancient district of Babylon is alluded to by Peter, where, through God's grace, there were some of the 'elect.'
This is also called "MYSTERY," "THE MOTHER OF THE HARLOTS AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH." Rev. 17: 5. Some great religious system is alluded to, with whom the kings of the earth had had illicit intercourse, and by whom the merchants of the earth had been made rich. It had also been guilty of shedding the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus It is compared to a woman arrayed in purple and scarlet, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a cup in her hand, full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication. Could there possibly be drawn a more vivid and life-like portrait of the worldly and idolatrous system of the apostate Church, whose centre is at Rome, than is here drawn by the pen of the Holy Spirit ? To make it doubly sure as to who is represented by the description it is added "The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth," Rev. 17: 9, 'the seven-hilled city' being a well-known appellation of Rome.
It is further revealed that the ten horns (the ten kingdoms of the future Roman empire) will make war with the woman, make her desolate and naked, will eat her flesh and burn her with fire. Heaven, the apostles and prophets are called on to rejoice over the fall of that seductive and soul-destroying system: cf. Rev. 14: 8; Rev. 16: 19; Rev. 17: 1-18; Rev. 18: 1-24; Rev. 19: 1-3.
It should be noted that though Papal Rome is one of the worst of the antichrists, and the one that has had sway for the longest period; yet she is not what is called in scripture the Antichrist or Man of sin: she is rather the anti-church. He also is found in the Revelation as a beast, having two horns like a lamb, and speaking as a dragon; and also as the false prophet. Rev. 13: 11; Rev. 20: 10. See ANTICHRIST.
The inhabitants of Babylon or its districts. Ezra 4: 9; Ezek. 23: 15, 17, 23. Thousands of tablets have been discovered which throw great light upon the social life and character of the Babylonians. They were an educated people. Some tablets appear to be Geological, Geographical, and Mathematical; and many others are records of contracts, loans, marriages, dowries, purchase of slaves, etc. Their Astronomy was mixed up with Astrology. Many tablets show that they held that the stars and signs of the heavens foretold events, agreeing with God's message to Babylon "Let now the astrologers, the star-gazers, the monthly prognosticators stand up and save thee." Isa. 47: 13. Many magical and incantation tablets show that they were in great fear of evil spirits: they called upon 'the spirit of heaven' and 'the spirit of earth' to deliver them. Their religion has been described as the worst possible form of nature worship, and their gods seem to have been countless. These tablets, made thousands of years ago, now reveal how Satan succeeded in keeping the Babylonians completely under his dominion.
Used figuratively to express the overwhelming sufferings which the Lord Jesus endured in order to accomplish the purpose for which He came to the earth; He was 'straitened' until that work was accomplished. Luke 12: 50; John 12: 27. When the sons of Zebedee asked to sit on the right and on the left of the Lord in His glory, He at once referred to the cup He had to drink, and asked if they could drink of that cup, and be baptised with the baptism He was to be baptised with. They, ignorant of the depths of suffering involved in the question, said they could. In one sense they should share in His sufferings — the non-atoning sufferings, from the hand of man; but the places they sought were not His to give. Mark 10: 38-40.
The Greek is baptisma, from baptizo, to dip, plunge, wash, etc. The ordinance of Baptism:
1. JEWISH. In Heb. 6: 2 (baptismos) the Hebrew believers were exhorted to leave 'the doctrine of baptisms;' and in Heb. 9: 10 we read of 'divers baptisms or washings,' but which is followed by the words "imposed until the time of reformation," which 'time' is referred to as 'Christ being come.' This shows that the baptisms referred to were some part of the Jewish ritual, in which there were many washings and bathings; but none of these washings signified fully the baptism of the N.T., which as an initiatory ordinance places the baptised in a new position: the Red Sea (1 Cor. 10: 2) was a figure of this. It was the Jewish washings that the Hebrew believers were exhorted to leave, or not to be laying again as a foundation.
Further, it has often been said that the Jews received their proselytes by baptism. Of this we have no record in the O.T., and Josephus, who details the rites necessary for the reception of a proselyte, makes no mention of baptism. It is true that Maimonides says that proselytes were thus received; but he was not born till A.D. 1135, and was thus far too late to know what took place so long before when contemporary writers are silent on the subject.
2. BAPTISM BY JOHN. This was specially in the Jordan, to which the multitudes went out, and which is spoken of again and again as the baptism 'of repentance.' Mark 1: 4; Luke 3: 3; Acts 13: 24; Acts 19: 4. He challenged the multitudes who came to be baptised that they should bring forth 'fruits worthy of repentance.' Matt. 3: 8; Luke 3: 8. He baptised those who came 'confessing their sins,' Matt. 3: 6; and he exhorted the people to believe on Him who would come after him," that is, on Christ Jesus." Acts 19: 4: cf. John 1: 29, 36. The godly remnant by John's baptism took separate ground from the national body, in expectancy of Messiah's coming: they judged themselves, and cleared themselves of the sinful condition of the nation. The Lord was baptised by John, thus taking His place among the repentant in Israel, not as confessing sins, but as fulfilling righteousness, as He said, "Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness" Matt. 3: 15.
3. CHRISTIAN BAPTISM. We have seen that John the Baptist preached the baptism of repentance. During the Lord's ministry before the cross, some were baptised to Him as Messiah. John 4: 1. After His death and resurrection Peter preached, not repentance, but the rejected Jesus as exalted, and made Lord and Christ. When they were pricked in heart, he said to them, 'Repent,' etc., but the baptism was to the remission of sins because the work was now done which gave it fully: they were baptised to the remission of sins — administratively and governmentally. Acts 2: 38.
Rom. 6: 3, 4 gives the meaning of Christian baptism to saints who had been baptised long before. It treats of the death of Christ (the sinless One,) as death to sin and to the state man was in, and draws conclusions from it for us inasmuch as He is risen. They were baptised to His death, that is, they have a part in it — they are alive to God in Him risen (and consequently also alive to Him risen — not to law), and hence sin was not to reign any longer; but there is no resurrection with Him in these verses. Baptism is prefigured by Israel's passage through the Red Sea, not by their crossing Jordan, though resurrection is added in Col. 2: 12, as leaving sins behind: "Having forgiven you all trespasses." It is individual, and reception into the profession of Christianity: "one Lord, one faith, one baptism." The signification of baptism goes further in Colossians than in Romans, but is always connected with a status upon earth, and not with heavenly privileges. It saves, 1 Peter 3: 21; we wash away our sins in it, Acts 22: 16; we go into death in it; and in Col. 2: 12, it is added, we 'are risen:' hence also it is individual. The church as such has never to be brought into death, its very origin is in the resurrection of Christ, Col. 1: 18: it is first-born in the new creation.
It is clear that Baptism, though in a certain aspect it places the recipient in a resurrection status, giving Christ for our life, never takes us out of the earth; but puts us in the position of christian responsibility in it, according to newness of life, as it is said, "so we also should walk in newness of life." There is a warning in 1 Cor. 10: 1-6. They were baptised, etc., "but with many of them God was not well pleased." A mere sacramental position is not enough: we have to "continue in the faith, grounded and settled." Col. 1: 23. We are called, as baptised, to walk in this world as dead and risen again, as in a wilderness. It is the expression of the outward visible church in its profession: "one Lord, one faith, one baptism." In baptism we have a good conscience by the resurrection. 1 Peter 3: 21. We wash away our sins in it, calling on the name of the Lord, Acts 22: 16; we are received by it into the responsible place of God's people in this world.
With Peter, Christian Baptism seems more connected with the kingdom of heaven: cf. Matt. 16: 19; Acts 2: 38; Acts 10: 48: with Paul it was connected rather with the house of God when he did use it. Paul had a new commission. He is not found, like Peter, ministering in the midst of a known people who had promises, calling souls out of it to repentance, that they should receive remission and be separated from the untoward generation. Paul takes up man as man (though owning the Jews) and brings him into God's presence in light. For the Gentiles it was, even in testimony, a wholly new resurrection state, not merely a good conscience through the resurrection; and baptism, which gives a status on earth founded on resurrection, forms no part of Paul's testimony, any more than of the mission in John 20: 21-23; and Paul tells us himself, that he was not sent to baptise.
Faith sees that when God brings a man into privileges on earth, he does not separate his household from him, for example, Gen. 7: 1, etc. Under Christianity this surely holds good: see 1 Cor. 7: 14: and we see households were baptised by Paul.
At the end of Matthew's gospel we have a commandment connected with baptism and apostolic mission to the Gentiles exclusively, but then there is nothing of repentance or remission. It is simply discipling all the nations, baptizing and then teaching them. Matt. 28: 19, 20. (This passage contemplates in its full sense a work to be done at the end of the age by the Jewish remnant toward the Gentiles. Christian Baptism now is for Jews and Gentiles alike, that by it they should lose their standing as such, and being committed to the death of Christ be brought into Christian profession, leaving those distinctions behind them.) The direction in Luke 24: 47 is repentance and remission of sins. In Mark 16: 15, 16 salvation belonged to him who believed and was baptised; for if he was not, he refused to be a Christian.
Scripture gives no definite teaching as to the mode of baptism, the great point being what the recipients of the ordinance were baptised to: cf. Acts 19: 3. The idea conveyed by the word is 'washing,' as with the priests of old (Ex. 29: 4), rather than 'sprinkling,' as with the Levites. Num. 8: 7.
As to the formula used, some have supposed that because we read in the Acts that persons were baptised 'to the name of the Lord Jesus,' the instruction given in Matt. 28: 19 to baptise "to the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," was superseded. But this does not follow: baptism is always to some person or thing. The disciples found at Ephesus had been baptised to the baptism of John, Acts 19: 3; the Israelites had been baptised to Moses; and those baptised in the Acts were to the name of the Lord Jesus as Saviour and Lord; and there is no reason why this should not be combined with the words found in Matthew, and a person be baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus unto the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. In Acts 2: 38 the preposition is ??? (?? in MSS B,C,D); in Acts 10: 48 it is ??; and elsewhere it is ???.
4. BAPTISED FOR THE DEAD. This occurs in 1 Cor. 15: 29. Some maintain that the Corinthian saints had fallen into the error of holding that if some of their number had fallen asleep without being baptised, others could be baptised for them, and that Paul was condemning this. But in the language he uses there is no condemnation. If 1 Cor. 15: 20-28 inclusive be read as a parenthesis, 1 Cor. 15: 18 explains 1 Cor. 15: 29; and 1 Cor. 15: 19 explains 30-32. Thus, if there be no resurrection, those "fallen asleep in Christ are perished . . . . else what shall they do who are baptised for the dead?" Why step into their place in the ranks, and be in jeopardy every hour, like soldiers in a war, if the dead rise not? What advantage was it for Paul to have fought with beasts at Ephesus if the dead rise not? The allusion in the 'jeopardy every hour' and in the 'fighting' is to those in danger, as soldiers in a war.
This is distinct from baptism with water. John's baptism is contrasted with it, Acts 11: 16; Matt. 3: 11. Christian baptism, though distinct, was in view of the reception of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2: 38), but does not confer it. Acts 19: 5, 6. Baptism of the Holy Spirit took place at Pentecost: the Lord said to His disciples, "Ye shall be baptised with the Holy Ghost not many days hence," Acts 1: 5; so that at Pentecost the saints were all baptised by the one Spirit into one body. 1 Cor. 12: 13. This agrees with the church having been begun at Pentecost, and tells us that no one can be a part of the body of Christ until he is indwelt by the Holy Spirit, being initiated into the one body formed, characterised, by the baptism of the Holy Spirit once for all.
Biblia. This name is from the Greek through the Latin, and signifies 'The Books.' The whole is also called 'The Scriptures,' and once 'The Holy Scriptures,' that is, 'the Sacred Writings,' distinguishing them from all others. The advent of the Lord Jesus, who was the great subject of the scriptures, John 5: 39, and in whom as 'Son' God spoke, after a silence of 400 years, naturally led to a division of the sacred writings into two parts, called the Old and New Testaments. The 'Old Testament' is mentioned as being read in 2 Cor. 3: 14; but the term 'New Testament,' as applied to the collection of books that commonly bear that title, does not occur in scripture. There was also a change in the language in which the various books of the two Testaments were written. The Old was written in Hebrew, except Ezra 4: 8 to Ezra 6: 18; Ezra 7: 12-26; Jer. 10: 11; Dan. 2: 4 to Dan. 7: 28: these portions being written in Chaldee or Aramaic. The books of the New Testament were written in Greek (without now taking into consideration whether the Gospel by Matthew was originally written in Aramaic). The glad tidings of salvation was for the whole world, and the language most extensively known at that time was chosen for its promulgation.
The Old Testament may be considered as dividing itself into: The Jews divided the Old Testament into three parts: 3. The Writings (Kethubim, or Hagiographa, 'holy writings'), including The books are in this order in the Hebrew Bible. The above triple division is doubtless alluded to by the Lord, in Luke 24: 44, "All things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me;" cf. Luke 24: 27. 'The Psalms' being the first book in the third part, may have been used as a title to express the whole of the division.
The Talmud and later Jewish writers reckon twenty-four books in the O.T. To make out this number they count the two books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles as one book each; Ezra and Nehemiah as one; and the twelve Minor Prophets as one. The earlier Jews reckoned the books as 22, according to the letters in the alphabet: they united Ruth with Judges, and Lamentations with Jeremiah. But all such arrangements are arbitrary and fanciful.
The 'oracles of God' were committed to Israel, Rom. 3: 2, and they have been zealous defenders of the letter of the O.T. For a long time it was thought that their great care and exactitude in copying had preserved the manuscripts from error; but it has been abundantly proved that those copyists erred, as all others have erred in this respect, and numerous errors have been discovered in the MSS, though many of them are seen at once to be mistakes of the pen, some doubtless caused through the similarity of the Hebrew letters, and are easily corrected. Other differences can be set right by the preponderance of evidence in the MSS themselves now that many of these have been collated.
Besides such variations there are other deviations from the common Hebrew text that profess to have some amount of authority. They are commonly called Keri and Chethib, q.v.
As to the text of the NEW TESTAMENT there is no particular copy that claims any authority, though the Received Text (Elzevir, 1624) was for a long time treated 'as if an angel had compiled it,' as one expressed it. But the undue respect for that text has passed away, and every translator has to examine the evidence for and against every variation, in order to know what he shall translate.
He has before him
1. Many GREEK MANUSCRIPTS: some 40 being called Uncials because of being written all in capital letters (though some of this number are only portions or mere fragments), and are represented by capital letters, A, B, C, etc. They date from the fourth to the tenth century. There are also hundreds of Cursives (those written in a more running hand), for the most part of later date than the uncials, a few of which are of special value. They date from the tenth century to the fourteenth, and are represented by numerals.
2. ANCIENT VERSIONS, which show what was apparently in the Greek copies used for the versions: the Old Latin, often called Italic; the Vulgate; Syriac; Egyptian, called the Memphitic and the Thebaic; the Gothic; Armenian; and AEthiopic. These Versions date from the second to the sixth century.
3. THE FATHERS, which are useful as showing what was in the Greek copies from which they quoted: they date from the second century.
The variations in the Greek Manuscripts are very numerous, yet the Editors (men who have attempted to discover what God originally caused to be written) — though each formed his own plan as to which of the above witnesses he would examine — have come to the same judgement in the great majority of the variations. In such cases we are doubtless safe in leaving the commonly received text. In other places their conclusions differ, and in a few cases nearly all the Editors have been obliged to declare the reading as doubtful. Though this is to be deplored, for we should desire to ascertain in every instance the actual words which God caused to be written, yet it is a matter of deep thankfulness that the variations do not in the least affect any one of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. These all stand forth in sublime and lucid grandeur as parts of the will of God Himself, notwithstanding all that men have done to obscure or nullify them.
The above must suffice as to the text of the Old and New Testaments. Under the name of each book will be found what are considered the leading thoughts therein, but a few words are now added as to the whole Bible.
It is 'the word of God,' an unfolding of unseen things — a revelation of the nature of God morally, and the history, divinely penned, of man His creature, first as innocent, and then as fallen, with its consequences. It shows man's responsibility and how man has been tested in various ways, each test resulting, alas, in his failure. It manifests that if man is to be saved and eternally blessed, it must be by a work done for him by another. This was graciously accomplished by the Son of God becoming a man and dying a sacrificial death on the cross, which glorified God and met the question of man's responsibility.
The word reveals that there was a counsel respecting the second Man in eternity, it also reveals that when the mediatorial kingdom of the Lord Jesus as Son of Man has been finished, God will again in eternity become all in all. In the mean time, according to the eternal purpose of God, many are being brought to Himself through faith in the atoning death of the Lord Jesus, being quickened by the Spirit, and made new creatures in Christ Jesus. The Lord Jesus is awaiting the time when He will come to fetch His saints, to carry out all God's purposes, and to punish those that know not God, and who obey not the gospel.
The Bible also reveals the character of Satan since his fall, as being a liar and murderer; he is the great enemy of the Lord Jesus and of man, and he deceived our mother Eve. It also details the future eternal punishment of that wicked one with those who are obedient to him.
The choice of Israel and the wonders wrought for their deliverance from Egypt, together with their history in the land of promise, their expulsion and captivity, and their future tribulation and blessing in the same land, occupy a large part of the Bible.
Christ in type, antitype, and prophecy, is the centre of the whole Book: "All things were made by him and for him." He is pointedly referred to in the 3rd chapter of Genesis, and gives His parting word to His saints in the last chapter of the Revelation.
The N.T. brings out not only the history of redemption by the death of Christ, but gives the doctrine of the Church in its various aspects, showing that Christianity is an entirely new order of things — indeed a new creation. Those who form the church are instructed as to their true position in Christ, and their true position in the world, with details to guide them in every station of life. The Revelation gives the various phases of the church at that time (though prophetic of its condition to the end) with warnings of the evils that had already crept in. This is followed by the many and varied judgements that will fall upon Christendom and the world, reaching to the eternal state of the new heavens and the new earth.
This is but a brief and incomplete sketch of the contents of the Bible, for who can in few or indeed in many words describe that wonderful God-made Book? It is an inexhaustible mine: the more it is explored, the more is the finger of God manifest everywhere, and new treasures are revealed to the devout, calling forth their praise and adoration. See INSPIRATION.
Introduction
Preface – Original
PREFATORY NOTE
Advent, Second
Alexander the Great
Almighty
Angels
Antichrist
Antiochus
Assyria
Shalmaneser I. 1300
Tiglath-Adar I., his son 1280
Bel-kudur-utsur (Belchadrezzar) his son 1260
Assur-narara and Nebo-dan 1240
Adar-pal-esar (Adar-pileser) 1220
Assur-dan I., his son 1200
Mutaggil-Nebo, his son 1180
Assur-ris-ilim, his son 1160
Tiglath-pileser I., his son 1140
Assur-bel-kala, his son 1110
Samas-Rimmon I., his brother 1090
Assur-rab-buri ?
Assur-zalmati ?
Assur-dan II 930
Rimmon-nirari II., his son 911
Tiglath-Adar II., his son 889
Assur-natsir-pal, his son 883
Shalmaneser II., his son 858
Samas-Rimmon II., his son 823
Rimmon-nirari III., his son 810
Shalmaneser III. 781
Assur-dan III. 771
Assur-nirari 753
Pulu, usurper, Tiglath-pileser II. or III 745
Ulula (Elulaeos) of Tinu, usurper, Shalmaneser IV. 727
Sargon, usurper 722
Sennacherib of Khabigal, his son 705
Esar-haddon, his son 681
Assur-bani-pal (Sardanapalus) his son 668
Assur-etil-ili-yukinni, his son ? 626
Esar-haddon II. (Sarakos) ?
Fall of Nineveh ? 606
Atonement
Atonement, Day of
Babylon
B.C.
625 Nabo-polassar.
606 Nebuchadnezzar, co-regent.
604 Nabo-polassar dies. Nebuchadnezzar reigns alone.
561 Evil-Merodach succeeds. He raises up Jehoiachin
559 Neriglissar succeeds. Perhaps the same as one of the princes
556 Laborosoarchod succeeds. Reigned 9 months and is slain.
555 Nabonidus or Nabonadius (also called Labynetus), a usurper:
538 Babylon taken, and Belshazzar slain. End of the Empire of Babylon.
Babylon the Great
Babylonians
Baptism
Baptism of the Holy Spirit
Bible
1. The Pentateuch, or five books of Moses.
2. The Historical Books, including Joshua to the end of Esther.
3. The Poetical Books, Job to the end of Song of Solomon.
4. The Prophetical Books, from Isaiah to Malachi.
1. The Law (Torah), the five books of Moses.
2. The Prophets (Nebiim), including Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel,
a, the Psalms, Proverbs, Job;
b, Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther;
c, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, 1 and 2 Chronicles.