7 Reasons Why “Babylon the Great” was Jerusalem

by Tiresias 74 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  stirred but not shaken

  TD, kaik: All this is educational and revealing. Things like the Hasmonean dynasty, John Hycanus, Hellenization, sects and parties, taxation, etc. Outside reading form well informed sources..helps put a lot of things in perspective. But I think we (I) may have hijacked the OP. Sorry..but i think it is somewhat related.

  Fisherman: Required: "important" = "Too many cooks spoil the broth". Cliche = "A trite or overused expression or idea."(Dictionary) Here's another..one that I was guilty of as a JW: "My mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts". Not any more, I'll keep learning and sorting-with a relatively open mind. All too often we get presented with the facts, whatever their source, and we are unwilling to accept them. The inquiring mind will still investigate what's presented, especially if the source displays validity. "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still". Ben Franklin. That sort of described me when I was first awakening.
• 

  stirred but not shaken

  Last post had some typos. I think that's John Hyrcanus.

  Tiresias: I remember reading that too. Does anyone remember the information about how those in the temple area were smelting gold and some of it dripped or filtered down in the foundation stones and over the years had accumulated, and that the Roman armies were intent on taking apart those stones to get that gold? I don't remember the source of that. It is interesting if true, given Jesus' prophecy about those stones.
• 

  Tiresias

  Hello Stirredbutnotshaken,

  Regarding the melted gold, I just completed an exhaustive search of Josephus and found nothing, notwithstanding the number of references to the event in his War VI,6,1. Curious! I'll resume my search later on and update you accordingly.

  Thank you!

  Bye for now!

  T.
• 

  Tiresias

  Hello Stirredbutnotshaken ,

  I searched for a detailed description of Jerusalem's destruction but discovered but an enormous gap between "Caesar gave orders" and "the wall was laid even with the ground." Well, I gave it my best shot! What is remarkable about the siege is Titus' initial intention to preserve as much of the city as possible, impressed as he was with its splendor. But, as far as I can determine, it was the obstinacy of the Jews and the rage of the Roman soldiers that was the real tinderbox. Interestingly, both Titus and Josephus ascribe the Roman victory to divine intervention.

  "Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and temple, but should leave as many of the towers standing as were of the greatest eminency; that is, Phasaelus, and Hippicus, and Mariamne; and so much of the wall as enclosed the city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to lie in garrison, as were the towers also spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valor had subdued; but for all the rest of the wall, it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind."

  Bye for now!

  T
• 

  kaik

  Jewish temple and city of Jerusalem were two different world. Jerusalem was very poor. It was backward province without any influence outside its provincial boundary and outside of major Roman centers, road, and ports. Even majority of Jews lived outside Judea. Alexandria had 3x as many Jews than Jerusalem. Temple was different, because it had wealth accummulated for the past 80 years and was beneficiary of Herod and many other Jews who donated money there. Even NT does not deny it, and Jesus was disgusted with the commercialization of the temple rites. Pagan temples in Greece were nothing more than treasury of the Greek states and some like Delphi was target of sack as far from Celts in France.

  Overall sacking and destruction of Jerusalem barely paid for the cost of the Roman warfare. These costs are easy to trace by monetary circulation of the Roman coinage in each time and measure silver and gold content in it. Juduea had probably boosted Roman economy by two years or so with its wealth. For comparison, Persian sacking persian capital and with it treasury postponed economic decline of Roman Empire by 40 years. Trajan's conquest of Dacia boosted gold and silver by 25 - 30 years. Jerusalem did not had economy to produce and generate wealth. Roman and all preindustrial civilizations were agricultural. Judea agriculture was too small to play role that would challenge major trading hubs of the time, plus it was not a port city, and laid outside major trade routes. From Egypt there was port of Berenice than handled Indian trade. On Meditteranean there was Alexandria, Ephesus, Antionch, and Athens that trades with entire known world as far as China. For John of Patmos who was aware of these major places in the Eastern Mediterranean, Jerusalem was rather secondary city within larger Roman Empire.