a bible, theology, politics, news, networking, and discussion site

Destruction from the north..Babylon?

UR and Babylon are located east of Jerusalem, (according to my Bible map) However, Frequently, the O.T. promised judgement as coming from The Chaldeans, Babylon, and King Nebuchadnezzar. (See Jeremiah 46: 24-26, for example.)
Even when it was to come upon egypt, it had to come from the east, to come around the Mediterranaen sea. Ur, of the Chaldees, and Babylon, was due east from Egypt, and east from
Jerusalem.
So, why does scripture frequently declare it as coming from the north?

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John Roberts on November 7, 2009 at 8:59pm: I believe Babylon is north of both Eqypt and Jerusalem, It is located in modern day Iraq. Armies from the north of both Jerusalem and Egypt will conquer Egypt.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by xulon on November 7, 2009 at 9:00pm: Because of the fertile crescent. Going straight East would be through inhospitable desert. So somebody coming over from Babylon would go north up the Euphrates then go East and come down into the Promised Land out of the North.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jack on November 7, 2009 at 9:07pm: John; I understand that Jerusalem was already destroyed, when Jeremiah made that prophecy, and the pronouncement against egypt, was filled shortly after Jerrry's prophecy. Are you referring to another prophecy?
Are our Bible maps terribly inaccurate?

John Roberts said:
I believe Babylon is both north of Eqypt and Jerusalem, It is located in modern day Iraq. Armies from the north of both Jerusalem and Egypt will conquer Egypt.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jack on November 7, 2009 at 9:14pm: Xulon; I didn't know that the Babylonians were such "wussies"! Couldn't they have merely "sucked it up" and shortened the trip by two thirds? :-)

xulon said:
Because of the fertile crescent. Going straight East would be through inhospitable desert. So somebody coming over from Babylon would go north up the Euphrates then go East and come down into the Promised Land out of the North.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by xulon on November 7, 2009 at 9:16pm: Nope. Plus there were probably other countries on the to-do list. so they map-quested it out and came at Jerusalem from the north.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Rey Reynoso on November 7, 2009 at 9:19pm: If the Babylonians went a straight line across, not only would they have to cross the Euphrates, they'd have to foot it through arid country with a supply train and eventually hit hill country.

If you go up the Euphrates or the Tigris, you'll encounter the Assyrian empire resting there and can move up north toward the island state of Tyre. When Alexander encountered them he ensured they were attacked by closing the gap from the mainland to the island. Then from Tyre you come down (without having to deal with rocky terrain to the east or even the Jordan) and can conquer with a steady support of supplies. Israel wouldn't even be a major battle ground; it'd just be a stomping thoroughfare on one's way towards the narrowest crossing into Egypt.

Of course, they could also mount a sea-faring force from Tyre but that puts too much power in the unknown element of the waters.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Rey Reynoso on November 7, 2009 at 9:26pm: The time it took me to type, xulon said the same thing with less words. ah well.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jack on November 7, 2009 at 9:44pm: So, earlier, when the Assyrians dominated the 10 northern tribes, Would/did they use the long or short route?
In any case, I thank you all, for the answer to my original confusion.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John Roberts on November 7, 2009 at 9:46pm: If you drew a line from north to south thru Jerusalem and from west to east, again thru Jerusalem, Babylon would be north of Jerusalem, No?; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jack on November 7, 2009 at 9:49pm: John; More like 087 degrees east. (90 degrees being true-east)

John Roberts said:
If you drew a line from north to south thru Jerusalem and from west to east, again thru Jerusalem, Babylon would be north of Jerusalem, No?; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John Roberts on November 7, 2009 at 9:54pm: even so it's still north.

Jack said:
John; More like 087 degrees east. (90 degrees being true-east)

John Roberts said:
If you drew a line from north to south thru Jerusalem and from west to east, again thru Jerusalem, Babylon would be north of Jerusalem, No?; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jack on November 7, 2009 at 10:06pm: Speaking of minutiae, we know that they had sun-dials, but when and where was the magnetic compass discovered? Scripture speaks of north, south, east, west, toward the sun-rise, and sun-set, but does it ever speak of north-east, south-west, etc? The Magi who visited the Messiah's house, nearly 2 years after His birth, followed His star, they didn't need a compass.

John Roberts said:
even so it's still north.

Jack said:
John; More like 087 degrees east. (90 degrees being true-east)

John Roberts said:
If you drew a line from north to south thru Jerusalem and from west to east, again thru Jerusalem, Babylon would be north of Jerusalem, No?; ▶ Reply to This