Isaiah 13: 20 - 22

[askandanswer]

Did Isaiah get it wrong?

(Old Testament | Isaiah 13:19 - 21)

9 ¶ And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.

20  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.

21  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.

 

Hussein regime

 

In 1983, Saddam Hussein began rebuilding the city on top of the old ruins. (Consequently, artifacts and other finds may be under the city.) Hussein invested in both restoration and new construction in Babylon, as well as Ninevah, Nimrud, Assur and Hatra, to demonstrate the magnificence of Arab achievement.^[30] He installed a portrait of himself and Nebuchadnezzar at the entrance to the ruins, and reinforced the Processional Way—a large boulevard of ancient stones—and the Lion of Babylon, a black rock sculpture about 2,600 years old.

.

Present-day

 

Following the invasion of Iraq, the area around Babylon came under the control of US troops, before being handed over to Polish forces in September 2003.^[31] US forces under the command of General James T. Conway of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force were criticized for building the military base "Camp Alpha", with a helipad and other facilities on ancient Babylonian ruins following the Iraq War. US forces have occupied the site for some time

See also

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JmbC633_ds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5_v_uxAwR0

This extract from Wikipedia, and the two youtube clips are just three examples of how Babylon has been rebuilt and inhabited and there is no sign at all that the new Babylon is inhabited by wild beasts, doleful creatures or dancing satyrs.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, askandanswer said:

Did Isaiah get it wrong?

I'll take a wag at it.

Possible explanations:

1. Yup, he got it wrong.  Things like that have happened in the Bible.  Nothing wrong with that.  It still has a pretty good track record.
2. The reference was that the city of Babylon, not the city of Baghdad would never be inhabited.  Babylon never recovered.
3. Isaiah's description is merely imagery describing its destruction being complete, and that the glory of Babylon would never recover.
4. The "forever" or "never" (depending on the translation) was not literal, but simply meant "for the foreseeable future".  Obviously, during the Millennial era all the places of the earth would become a paradise.  So, it can't be taken to be literal.
5. Babylon still is not inhabited.  Saddam's rebuild was never complete.  The current military bases (the actual structures where people live) cover only a small portion of the city, it is mostly open space.  And depending on the translation we look at, the military bases would satisfy the prophecy.
6. Isaiah's prophecy was referring to a parallel destruction at the Second Coming.  Thus the destruction of Babylon (as the ancients saw it) would be the type and shadow of the destruction at the Second Coming.  Thus the modern Babylon (the world) will never be seen again when Christ comes in his glory.

It is difficult to determine exactly what, where, when, etc of Isaiah's prophecy because the history is not "clean" on its destruction or habitation.  For instance, the Assyrians already destroyed Babylon prior to Isaiah's prophecy.  But then it was rebuilt and became the superpower we know of in our history books.  But then the Medes came and destroyed it.  UTTERLY destroyed it.  But people lived there for hundreds of years.  It dwindled generation after generation until it was famed for being desolate.  Gradually, people would pass through and recognize how bad it was. And many would report that it was a place that you simply did not want to pass through.

[askandanswer]

Thanks Carb. Interesting and thought provoking