| An Alphabetical Analysis Volume 8 - Prophetic Truth - Page 55 of 304 INDEX | |
Hislop, in his Two Babylons, writes:
'I am persuaded that the whole perplexity that commentators have
hitherto felt in considering this passage, has arisen from supposing
that there is a proper name in the passage, where in reality no proper
name exists. Asshur is the passive participle of a verb, which, in its
Chaldee sense, signifies "to make strong", and, consequently, signifies
"being strengthened", or "made strong". (Even in Hebrew this sense
seems to be inherent in the verb, as may be concluded from the noun te
-ashur, the name of the box -tree in Isaiah 60:13). Read thus, the
whole passage is natural and easy ... A beginning naturally implies
something to succeed, and here we find it (Gen. 10:11); "Out of the
land he went forth, being made strong, or when he had been made strong
(ashur), and builded Nineveh"'.
One is reminded of Uzziah, whose name means 'Jah is strong', who was
'marvellously helped, till he was strong', but alas, when he was strong, his
heart was lifted up to his destruction (2 Chron. 26:15,16). The Babylonian
name Bab -il means 'the Gate of God', but the Hebrew signifies 'confusion'.
Oppert differed from Sayce, and maintained that the word Babel itself meant
'confusion', while Pinches wrote:
'I am inclined to think ... it is imitative, something like the English
word, babble'.
Urquhart says Bab -ilu, the Semitic Babylonian form of the name, was an
afterthought. This distortion of the meaning of names is no accident, it is
a part of the deceptive policy of Satan. It will be remembered that when
Jude refers to Enoch, in his epistle, he is careful to add 'the seventh from
Adam' (Jude 14), for Cain's son was also called Enoch (Gen. 4:17). Both
lines had a Lamech, and both are associated with the number seven:
'If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and
sevenfold' (Gen. 4:24).
Lamech the father of Noah lived 'seven hundred and seventy-seven years' (Gen.
5:31). Not only so, other names appear in the two lines that support the
idea of intentioned confusion.