How Bad Was The Captivity?

 The Background

From Wiki:

After the Battle of Carchemish in 605 BCE, the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II besieged Jerusalem, which resulted in tribute being paid by the Judean king Jehoiakim.[1] In the fourth year of Nebuchadnezzar II's reign, Jehoiakim refused to pay further tribute, which led to another siege of the city in Nebuchadnezzar II's seventh year (598/597 BCE) that culminated in the death of Jehoiakim and the exile to Babylonia of his successor Jeconiah, his court, and many others; Jeconiah's successor Zedekiah and others were exiled when Nebuchadnezzar II destroyed Jerusalem in his 18th year (587 BCE), and a later deportation occurred in Nebuchadnezzar II's 23rd year (582 BCE). 

What I want to discuss here is how the Babylonians treated civilians after conquering another nation. I do not doubt women and children were killed during the fighting; the Allies killed women and children in WW2.

After the fighting, the Babylonians did not slaughter the entire population, they did not enslave them all. Most of the Hebrews were allowed to live on pretty much as normal, with only the most influential, including the rulers and priests, going into exile.

That is far more advanced than the reports in the Bible of what the Hebrews did. I appreciate those stories are probably not true, but they do reflect the morality of the people nevertheless - that is what the Hebrews would have done, and would consider the right thing to do, if they were in that situation.


Who Was Deported?

Only a relatively small number of Hebrews were forced to relocate. The majority were allowed to stay.

Nebuchadnezzar, the king of the Chaldeans, only deported the most prominent citizens of Judah: professionals, priests, craftsmen, and the wealthy. The "people of the land" (am-hares ) were allowed to stay.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-babylonian-exile

Estimates vary, but 10,000 seems a fair ball-park figure.

This was no classless society. The professionals, priests, craftsmen, and the wealthy were the important people, those left behind were the common folk who did not really count.


How Were The Deportees Treated?

It is not clear exactly how they were treated, but some of them rose to have considerable influence in the royal court, so it was not that bad for many of them.

It is assumed that they had to render labour to the Babylonians, but generally they enjoyed a great deal of freedom (Noth, 1996: 296). Some of the exiles, like Daniel and his three friends rose to positions of power within the Royal Court of Babylon (Dan. 2:48-49) and many others became wealthy (cf. Ezra 1:4, 6; 2:68-69). Later, during the Persian period Jews like Mordecai (Esther 2:19-23), Esther (7:1-10) and Nehemiah (Neh. 2:1-10) all found themselves in key positions in the government and were able to act on behalf of their people because they took Jeremiah's advice.

https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_exile.html


According to Pearce, despite the melancholic tone of Psalm 137, life in Babylon was actually pretty good for many of the Judahite deportees.

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/ancient-cultures/ancient-near-eastern-world/how-bad-was-the-babylonian-exile/


Also of note is that the Jewish king was, eventually, released from prison and given considerable honours.

2 Kings 25:27 Now it came about in the thirty-seventh year of the exile of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the twelfth month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, that Evil-merodach king of Babylon, in the year that he became king, [q]released Jehoiachin king of Judah from prison; 28 and he spoke kindly to him and set his throne above the throne of the kings who were with him in Babylon. 29 So [r]Jehoiachin changed his prison clothes, and [s]had his meals in [t]the king’s presence regularly all the days of his life; 30 and as his allowance, a regular allowance was given to him by the king, a portion for each day, all the days of his life.


Compared To...

The Babylonians were remarkably good people for there time. Compared to the Hebrews...

Deut 20:16 Only in the cities of these peoples that the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave anything that breathes alive. 17 Instead, you shall [l]utterly destroy them, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, just as the Lord your God has commanded you, 18 so that they will not teach you to do [m]all the same detestable practices of theirs which they have done for their gods, [n]by which you would sin against the Lord your God.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Southern Baptist Convention Position on Abortion

Evangelical Christians in the US are very strongly anti-abortion. However, it was not always so. As recently as 1970 the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) - the largest Protestant denomination in the US - advocated for legalising abortion. A Complete Reversal The landmark law case in the US was Roe v. Wade, in 1973, and abortion has been legal since that time. Jane Roe was the pseudonym of the woman wanting the abortion; Henry Wade the district attorney who stood for the state, prohibiting it. Roe was represented by two attorneys; one was Linda Coffee, a member of the SBC. The Baptist Press interviewed her after the successful conclusion of the trial. The decision of Roe v Wade was generally regarded as a good one by the SBC. To evangelicals of that time abortion was seen as a Catholic issue. You can find a list of abortion-related resolutions made by the SBC from 1971 onwards  here . It is clear that in 1971 they saw abortion - quite reasonably - as undesirable, but it ...
Read more

Hinman's "Argument From Transcendental Signifier"

ETA (23/Jun/20): I have just heard Joe is in hospital. I wish him a speedy recovery. All the best, Joe. This is an argument for God that Joe Hinman has presented several times on various of his sites: http://www.doxa.ws/Ontological/TS2.html https://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2020/05/transcendental-signifier-argument.html http://religiousapriori.blogspot.com/2011/06/transcendental-signifier-argument.html http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2018/01/premises-4-7-ts-argumet.html The argument is a seven step syllogism: 1. Any rational, coherent, and meaningful view of the universe must of necessity presuppose organizing principles (Ops) 2. OP's summed up in TS 3. Modern Thought rejects TS outright or takes out all aspects of mind. 4. Therefore, Modern thought fails to provide a rational, coherent, and meaningful view of the universe. 5. minds organize and communicate meaning 6. Therefore universal mind, offers the best understanding of TS 7. Concept of God unites TS with universal m...
Read more

Kent Hovind: Third wife in three years?

Kent Hovind is, perhaps the very worst of the creationists, so it is with some interest I note that he is now on this third wife in three years. For many years he was married to Jo Hovind, who ended up going to prison for a year due to her involvement in tax fraud. Once Kent got released from his rather longer prison sentence, it was not long before Jo filed for divorce (early 2016) - possibly to distance himself from any further gaol sentences. A few months later, 24th Sptember 2016, and he married Mary Tocco - not a full marriage, but a covenant before God. It looks like she got various assurances that Kent's new business was entirely honest before she got married. However, she later cam to realise that that was not really the case, and, again to avoid ending up in prison , she left him in November 2017. http://kehvrlb.com/mary-tocco-on-leaving-kent-hovind Less than a year later and he has a new wife, Cindi Lincoln, a former friend of Mary's. It is not clear if they ...
Read more