PDA

View Full Version : Damascus shall be a ruinous heap (isaiah 17:1)



David M
12-15-2012, 03:50 AM
We cannot keep all of God's word in the forefront of our mind and in particular all the words of God that are prophecy. The reason to keep re-reading the word of God is so these things are brought to mind. Only now, because there is civil war in Syria and we see the devastation taking place in the city of Damascus are we reminded (if we had read them) of the words found in Isaiah 17:1; The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

Are we now witnessing the final fulfillment of those words of prophecy? All of the chapter 17 needs to be carefully read and understood. The figurative language has to be thought about in order to see what it is telling us. It is not for naught that these words have been recorded and preserved. They either tell us of past lessons to learn or give us signs of what is to come and can be seen as God fulfilling prophecy as these word are associated with events that take place.


Towards the end of the chapter, I was struck by the imagery pertaining to the nations. We might be familiar with prophecy of Jesus which says (Matt 24:38); For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, (39) And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

We have the promise of God that He would not destroy the earth again with a flood. However, it does not mean that God would not severely punish mankind again. We have the word of God in which we are told that there is to come a day of judgment and a day of vengeance in which God's wrath will be poured out on the nations, but not by way of a flood as it was in the time of Noah. However, the imagery of the flood is retained to keep in mind the judgment of God to come.

The end of chapter 17 says; (12) Woe to the multitude of many people, which make a noise like the noise of the seas; and to the rushing of nations, that make a rushing like the rushing of mighty waters! (13) The nations shall rush like the rushing of many waters: but God shall rebuke them, and they shall flee far off, and shall be chased as the chaff of the mountains before the wind, and like a rolling thing before the whirlwind.
As I read this, I see that the nations are likened to a great flood. All the nations cover the earth. The nations are like seas. Figuratively, the seas are covering the whole earth and now the nations are described as "rushing" about. Hence the seas ebb and flow across the land as it did in the time of the Great Flood when great destruction to land and people was done. A great reduction in the earth's population will be caused in the time to come when God uses the natural elements to bring destruction on the nations. With all the events we see happening and we know from God's word what must happen before the return of Jesus, so we see that we are living in a time near to the return of Jesus. The picture presented to us of the nations likened to seas flooding the earth is just another reminder and shows the underlying pattern and consistency of God's word.

You might ask; how are the nations seen as "rushing"? One might think that this is a sign of modern transport by which we jet around the world and cover great distances quickly in our motor cars. The other way of seeing this situation unfolding is to consider the great nations like America, Britain, and Russia and the European forces "rushing" to send warships and submarines to the Middle East. God will draw all nations into the Middle East. All nations will be affected by what takes place in the Middle East. We are told to watch and as we watch, if we know what signs to look for and know what prophecies have yet to see their complete fulfillment, so we can be assured that God's word is alive and active.

I trust you find this food for thought.



David

David M
06-17-2013, 10:17 PM
Damascus was destroyed. The Annals of the Assyrians confirms this. You also didn't read the link very well. Page 12:

Tiglath-pileser III destroyed 591 cities of 16 districts of Damascus (Ann 23:16’-7’). Ann 18 and 24 mention a total of 13,520 deportees (36); however, their fragmentary status does not allow specifying where the deportees came from. These numbers do not include the captured soldiers mentioned in Ann 23:6’-7’. Biblical sources mention the deportation from Ijon, Abel-beth-maacah, Janoah, Kedesh, Hazor, Gilead, Galilee, and the land of Naphtali (2 Kgs 15,29). The Chroni- cler’s account mentions the deportation of the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh (1 Chr 5,26) and the deportation of Beerah, the chieftain of the Reubenites (1 Chr 5,6).

Sorry you misread. Damascus was totally destroyed.

Also Damascus was NOT left in tact. Israel was left intact.


In 732 BC, the kingdom of Damascus lost its independence and existence, its holdings carved up into Assyrian provinces. Israel, on the other hand, was allowed to survive, albeit reduced to a fraction of its former size and cut off from the sea. Tiglatpileser put it under the rule of a new king, Hoshea, chosen to serve as a loyal executor of Assyrian interests.

Israel's northern territories came under direct Assyrian rule. The newly established province of Megiddo centred around the city of the same name and included also the coastal regions with the harbour of Dor.

Read it for yourself. http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/aebp/essentials/countries/israel/




That is NOT the conclusion supported by evidence and history. Isaiah is NOT future. To think Isaiah is future is to ignore the overwhelming evidence that Isaiah was speaking of the OT times.

Also like I proved above you only cherry picked what you wanted to confirm. Damascus was utterly destroyed. The Annals of the Assyrians says the destruction was so great that it looked like "like hills over which the flood had swept".

Therefore your conclusions are still wrong.

Hello L67

In reply to this post and specifically do with the destruction of Damascus, I have brought your post into this thread where it belongs.

I see from your quote again that is was 591 cities and 16 regions of Damascus which were destroyed and that is I agree a devastation of the region. What were these 591 cities? For the word "cities", would the word "villages" be more appropriate?

I quoted from the same web page as the facts above are stated, it also said that the HQ of the invading Assyrian army was set up in Damascus. This tells me that the main city of Damascus was not destroyed.

Here is the url to book/website you sent me to and I have extracted the part which does not indicate the City was destroyed.
http://www.biblicalstudies.ru/OT/Dubovsky.pdf

In this phase Tiglath-pileser III turned finally against Damascus,
captured it, and executed Rezin (2 Kgs 16,9). Then he established his
temporarily seat there and received the homage of the vassal rulers
(Ahaz’s visit to Damascus 2 Kgs 16,10)

I have been looking for other commentaries about Damascus and one I found said simply; "Damascus was destroyed". This would agree with your conclusion, and many could easily think this from just reading this one article. However, that article is misleading and the majority of articles I have read say nothing of the complete destruction of the main city of Damascus. In agreement with what I have read and heard spoken of Damascus, here is an article in which it summarizes the history or the City of Damascus;
http://beforeitsnews.com/prophecy/2013/03/does-bible-prophecy-foretell-the-destruction-of-damascus-2445560.html

Damascus is one of the oldest continuously inhabited cities on earth. It has been attacked, besieged, and conquered. But Damascus has never been completely destroyed and left uninhabited.

I leave readers to go to the link to read the whole article. The part I have quoted, agrees with what I have been saying in my replies to you and that the webpage you sent me to, does not clearly indicate that the main city of Damascus was destroyed.

It is expected by Bible scholars that Isaiah 17:1 is in the process of being fulfilled now and we shall have to wait and see the outcome. How long this will take, we do not know and so we can only watch and see what happens.


All the best

David

L67
06-18-2013, 12:36 PM
Hello L67

In reply to this post and specifically do with the destruction of Damascus, I have brought your post into this thread where it belongs.

I see from your quote again that is was 591 cities and 16 regions of Damascus which were destroyed and that is I agree a devastation of the region. What were these 591 cities? For the word "cities", would the word "villages" be more appropriate?

No cities would be the appropriate word.


I quoted from the same web page as the facts above are stated, it also said that the HQ of the invading Assyrian army was set up in Damascus. This tells me that the main city of Damascus was not destroyed.

Here is the url to book/website you sent me to and I have extracted the part which does not indicate the City was destroyed.

No matter how much you refuse to accept the evidence I have given, it doesn't change it's validity. You keep looking for ways to confirm your preconceived bias. This proves that. You focus on one part of the whole 18 page document that you think confirms your beliefs. Sorry you're wrong. You have to go read your history. You have to understand the time period in which Isaiah was prophesying. Tiglath-pileser III attack on Damscus in 734-732BC was exactly in Isaiah's day. It lines up perfectly. It would be absurd to say Isaiah was talking about events thousands of years into the future. History confirms it.


I have been looking for other commentaries about Damascus and one I found said simply; "Damascus was destroyed". This would agree with your conclusion, and many could easily think this from just reading this one article. However, that article is misleading and the majority of articles I have read say nothing of the complete destruction of the main city of Damascus. In agreement with what I have read and heard spoken of Damascus, here is an article in which it summarizes the history or the City of Damascus;

This is not my conclusion. This is histories conclusion. The info is there. I gave it to you.


I leave readers to go to the link to read the whole article. The part I have quoted, agrees with what I have been saying in my replies to you and that the webpage you sent me to, does not clearly indicate that the main city of Damascus was destroyed.

It is expected by Bible scholars that Isaiah 17:1 is in the process of being fulfilled now and we shall have to wait and see the outcome. How long this will take, we do not know and so we can only watch and see what happens.

You actually believe a stupid conspiracy theory website that has no fact checking? What is a matter with you? This just goes to show the lengths Christians will go to confirm their bias at all cost. You obviously aren't interested in facts. Nothing you have ever presented has ever supported your argument. You are making stuff up when you say that the main city of Damascus was not destroyed.

You ignore the writings of an accomplished professor and post crap from a conspiracy theory website? Again, what is a matter with you? Do you have anyone with these credentials that support your argument?

http://www.biblico.it/professori/dubovsky.html


Prof. Peter DUBOVSKY, S.J.

Birth

May 29th 1965, Piešťany, Slovakia
Personal:

Member of the Society of Jesus
Roman Catholic Priest ordained in June 1997

Education:

Harvard Divinity School, Cambridge MA (1999-2005)
Specialization: Hebrew Bible – Degree: Th.D.

Pontificio Instituto Biblico, Rome (1996-99)
Specialization: Biblical studies– Degree: S.S.L., Magna cum laude

École Biblique et Archaeologique Française de Jerusalem, Jerusalem
Spring semester of 1998– Special studies in Archaeology and Geography of Israel

Hebrew University of Jerusalem (summer 1995) – Specialization: Biblical Hebrew

Pontificia Universit* Gregoriana, Rome(1993-96) –
Specialization: Theology – Degree: Bachelor, Magna cum laude

Theological Institute of St. Aloisius, Bratislava (1991-93) – Specialization: Philosophy

Slovak Technical University, Bratislava (1983-88)
Specialization: Biochemistry
Degree: Master of Sciences, Summa cum laude

Professional experience:

Prof. of the Old Testament exegesis at Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome, spring semester 2006-;
Prof. of the Old Testament Exegesis and Hebrew at Trnava University (Slovakia) 2004-08;
Prof. of the Old Testament Studies at Trnava University (Slovakia), spring semester of 1999-2000;
Prof. of Religion at Collegio Massimo in Rome, 1992-3;
Research assistant at the Slovak Academy of Science 1989-90.

Awards and grants:

Dean’s Dissertation Fellowship in 2003, Harvard Divinity School
Pheiffer’s grant in 2001, Harvard University
Pheiffer’s grant in 2000, Harvard University
Winner of the International Competition in Biochemical Technologies in 1987, Prague

Field experience:

Eastern Turkey, May 2004, survey of Urartian fortresses
Israel, March-May 2004, collecting information on Neo-Assyrian remains
Syria, Summer 2002, three weeks of field work
Greece and Turkey, Summer 2001, six weeks of field work under the guidance of Prof. H. Koester (Harvard University) and other distinguished European archaeologists
Israel, Leon-Levy expedition 2000, seven weeks of field work in Ashqalon under the direction of Prof. L. Stager (Harvard University)
Jordan, June 1998, field work under the guidance of professors of École Biblique et Archaeologique Française de Jerusalem
Israel, Spring semester 1997/8, field works organized by École Biblique et Archaeologique Française de Jerusalem

Professional organizations:

International Association for Assyriology
Catholic Biblical Association
Society of the Biblical Literature

Bibliography
Monographs:

Dubovský, P. Hezekiah and the Assyrian Spies: Reconstruction of the Neo-Assyrian Intelligence Services and Its Significance for 2 Kings 18–19, Biblica et Orientalia 49. Roma: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2006.

Edited volumes:

Dubovský, P. ed., Genezis: Preklad a komentár. KSZ I. Trnava: Dobrá Kniha 2008.
Varšo, M. Abdiáš, Jonáš, Micheáš. Edited by P. Dubovský, KSZ II. Trnava: Dobrá kniha, 2010.

Book sections:

Dubovský, P. “Aktualizovanie Dekalógu v starovekom Izraeli.” In Legislat*vne Texty Biblie III, edited by Pavol Farkaš, 58-64. Bratislava - Nitra: UK Bratislava, 2009.
Dubovský, P. “Genesis 39 and the Tale of the Two Brothers.” In Bible et Terre Sainte, edited by J. E. Aguilar Chiu, 47-61. New York; Washington: Peter Lang, 2008.
Dubovský, P. “Súčasné exegetické prúdy versus teológia a pastorácia dnes.” In Fórum pastoráln*ch teologů VII: Jak vykládat P*smo Svaté, 19-26. Olomouc: Centrum Aletti, 2008.
Brodňanská, E., P. Dubovský, and H. Panczová. O Nepravej ženskej kráse. Bratislava: Teologická fakulta Trnavskej univerzity, 2007. (About False Women’s Beauty – Translations and Introduction to Tertulian’s writings)
Dubovský, P. “Neo-Assyrian Warfare: Logistics and Weaponry During the Campaigns of Tiglath-Pileser III.” In Proceedings of the International Symposium: Arms and Armour through the Ages, edited by M. Novotná, W. Jobst, M. Dufková, K. Kuzmová and P. Hnila, 61-67. Trnava: Trnavská Univerzita, 2006.
Dubovský, P. “*truktúra patriarchálnej rodiny v Starom Zákone a jej vplyv na nerozlučnosť manželstva.” In Rodina v súčasnom svete, 9-18. Bratislava: TF TU, 2006. (The Structure of Israelite Patriarchal Family)
Dubovský, P. “Melchizedek a jeho obeta v dejinách biblickej interpretácie.” In Sväté P*smo a Bož*kult: Zborn*k z konferencie s medzinárodnou účasťou, edited by P. Fedor, 39-58. Svit: Katol*cke Biblické Dielo, 2006. (Melchizedek and his Offer: History of Interpretation)
Dubovský, P. “Rovnosť v teórii, nerovnosť v praxi: Pohľad Biblie na postavenie muža a ženy.” In Muž a žena z personalistického hľadiska, edited by J. Letz and A. Démuth, 51-58. Trnava: FF TU, 2005. (Gn 1 and Gn 2: Equality in Theory and Oppression in Practice)
Dubovský, P. “Protoevanjelium a mariologická Interpretácia.” In Úcta k presvätej bohorodičke na kresťanskom Východe, 175-89. Košice: Centrum Spirituality Východ-Západ Michala Lacku, 2005. (Gn 3,15: Iconographic Interpretation of the Hebrew Vocabulary)

Articles:

Dubovský, P. “Riping Open Pregnant Arab Women: Reliefs in Room L of Ashurbanipal’s North Palace.” Or 78, no. 3 (2009): 394-419.
Dubovský, P. “Historicko-kritická metóda a jej uplatnenie v teologickej reflexii na Slovensku.” StBiSl (2008): 8-17.
Dubovský, P. “Assyrian Downfall through Isaiah’s Eyes (2 Kings 15-23): The Historiography of Representation.” Bib 89 (2008): 1-16.
Dubovský, P. “Conquest and Reconquest of Muṣaṣir in the 8th Century BCE.” SAAB XV (2006): 141-46.
Dubovský, P. “Tiglath-pileser III’s Campaigns in 734-732 B.C.: Historical Background of Isa 7, 2 Kgs 15-16 and 2 Chr 27-28.” Bib 87 (2006): 153-70.
Dubovský, P. “Poklady na Slovenských farách: Latinský text Frankfurtského vydania.” In Studia Biblica Slovaca 2006, edited by B. *trba, 108-144. Svit: Katol*cke Biblické Dielo, 2006. (Discovery of Pagnino’s Bible in Slovakia)
Dubovský, P. “Poklady na Slovenských farách: Frankfurtské vydanie Vatableho úpravy Pagninovho latinského prekladu Biblie.” In Studia Biblica Slovaca 2006, edited by B. *trba, 145-60. Svit: Katol*cke Biblické Dielo, 2006. (Analysis of Pagnino’s Latin Bible)
Dubovský, P. “Postmoderná kr*za hodnôt a Kniha Kazateľ.” Teologický časopis IV/2 (2006): 35-50. (Postmodern Crisis and Qohelet)
Dubovský, P. “Výklad Svätého P*sma: hermeneutický model založený na teórii štyroch kultúr.” In Studia Biblica Slovaca 2005, 17-38. Svit: Katol*cke Biblické Dielo, 2005. (New Hermeneutic Model Based on the Theory of the Four Cultures of the West)
Dubovský, P., and M. Sova. “Návrh transliterácie a prepisu hebrejských spoluhlások a samohlások do slovenčiny.” In Studia Biblica Slovaca 2005, 73-76. Svit: Katol*cke Biblické Dielo, 2005. (Transliteration of Hebrew into Slovak Language)
Dubovský, P. “A Sociological Reading of Slavery Legislation in the Covenant Code and Other Biblical and Extra-Biblical Documents.” Studia Aloisiana (2004): 59-75.
Dubovský, P. “Cosmology in 1 Henoch.” Arch*v Orientáln* 68 (2000): 205-218.
Dubovský, P. “Roveto Ardente.” Studia Aloisiana (1999): 45-62.

Book reviews:

Garbini, G. Scrivere la storia d’Israele: Vicende e memorie ebraiche (Biblioteca di storia e storiografia dei tempi biblici 15; Brescia: Paideia, 2008) in CBQ 72 (2010): 109-110.
Abate, E. La fine del regno di Sedecia (Textos y studios «Cardenal Cisneros» de la Biblia Pol*glota Matritense 76; Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cient*ficas; Madrid 2008) in Estudios B*blicos 67 (2009): 511-13.

Talks and lectures:

November 11th-23rd, 2010, Did Shalmaneser Conquer Samaria. SBL in Atlanta.
October 8th-9th, 2010, Rhetorical and Historico-Critical Analysis of Mark. New Testament Seminar in Nitra, Slovakia.
September 10th-11th, 2010, Divine Anger in the Book of Exodus. Conference on Exodus *– Modern Interpretation of an Ancient Book in Badin, Slovakia.
July 31st-August 2nd, 2010, Samaritan Lions. CBA Meeting in Los Angeles.
July 26th-30th, 2010, Angry Gods Intervene into Human History. 56th RAI in Barcelona.
February 12th-14th, 2010, Legal Texts of Ex 21-24. Exodus Seminar in Badin, Slovakia.
January 14th-15th, 2010, Mark 14: Literary Analysis. New Testament Seminar in Badin, Slovakia.
December 14th-17th 2009, The Last Days of Elam: Analysis of ABL 280. Susa and Elam: Archaeological, Philological, Historical and Geographical Perspectives in Gent, Belgium.
October 9th, 2009, Aktualizovanie Dekalógu v starovekom Izraeli (Actualization of the Decalogue in the Ancient Israel), Third Congress on Legislative text of the Bible in Nitra, Slovakia.
August 1-4th, 2009, Causes of the Downfall of Samaria; CBA Meeting in Omaha, USA.
June 30th-July 4th, 2009, Before the Fall; SBL International Meeting in Rome
September 24th-26th, 2008, Exegesis of Ex 19; Exodus Seminar in Badin (Slovak Reublic).
July 20th-25th, 2008, The Direct Control of the King: The Role of qiāpu Officials in Neo-Assyrian administration; 54th RAI in Würtzburg.
May 13th, 2008, Trends in Modern Exegesis, International Symposium on Theology and Bible in Olomouc (Czech Republic).
December 21st, 2007, Assyrian Spies in Iraq; Faculty Seminar Organized by the Department of Classical Archaeology at TF TU, Trnava.
November 16th-19th, 2007, Cult Area in Korocu Kale: The Results of Archaeological Survey in Eastern Turkey in 2004; Cult and Sanctuary in Antiquity: International Archaeological Congress in Časta, Slovakia, organized by Universities and Institutes of Classical Archaeology Trnava-Konya-Bursa and Slovak Archaeological Society.
November 12th-14th, 2007, The Books of Kings in the Light of the Cuneiform Documents; A Series of Lectures at Four Universities in Slovakia organized by the Slovak Ministry of Education.
November 24th, 2006, Structure of Patriarchal Family in the Old Testament and and its Influence on marriage; 2nd Conference on Family in the Contemporary World in Bratislava.
September 14th, 2006, The siege of Jerusalem from the Assyrian Point of View; Meeting of Studia Biblica Slovaca in Bad*n.
July 17th-21st, 2006, The Role of Intelligence Services in Planning Campaigns: A Case-Study of the Urarto-Cimmerian War and Sargon’s 8th Campaign; 52e Rencontre Assyrologique Internationale in Münster.
November 26th, 2005, Protoevangelium and its Mariological Interpretation; International Conference Organized by the Center of Spirituality East-West of Michal Lacko in Košice.
November 20th, 2005, Arms and Warfare Techniques in the Neo-Assyrian Period; International Symposium Arms and Armour Through the Ages (form the Bronze Age to Late Antiquity) organized by Universities and Institutes of Classical Archaeology Trnava-Konya-Bursa and Slovak Archaeological Society.
October 14th, 2005, Equality in theory inequality in praxis: biblical view of man and woman; International Colloquium Man and Woman from a personalistic point of view organized the Philosophical faculty of Trnava University.
April 28th, 2005, Mechanics of Neo-Assyrian Empire: Reconstruction of the Neo-Assyrian Services during the 8th and 7th century B.C.E.; faculty seminar at Trnava University.
April 25th, 2005, Melchizedech in the context of Gn 14 and Later Interpretations; International Conference Bible and Cult organized by KBD and GBF Prešov.
December 13th, 2004, Post-modern Values in the Context of the Book of Qohelet; faculty seminar at the Catholic University of Slovakia in Ružomberok.

And then we have another university that says the same thing. http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/aebp/essentials/countries/israel/

In 732 BC, the kingdom of Damascus lost its independence and existence, its holdings carved up into Assyrian provinces. Israel, on the other hand, was allowed to survive, albeit reduced to a fraction of its former size and cut off from the sea. Tiglatpileser put it under the rule of a new king, Hoshea, chosen to serve as a loyal executor of Assyrian interests.

Israel's northern territories came under direct Assyrian rule. The newly established province of Megiddo centred around the city of the same name and included also the coastal regions with the harbour of Dor.

This confirms exactly like Isaiah says. I'm sorry your doctrine has deceived you into thinking Damascus being destroyed is a future event.

David M
06-19-2013, 06:34 PM
Hello L67



This is not my conclusion. This is histories conclusion. The info is there. I gave it to you. You gave me a link to a website article that did not say the main city of Damascus was destroyed. It could not have been if Tiglath Pileser set up his headquarters there. That is what it says, so what do you make of those words? You have to give me more evidence that the main city of Damascus was completely destroyed and not just the surrounding districts.



You ignore the writings of an accomplished professor and post crap from a conspiracy theory website? Again, what is a matter with you? Do you have anyone with these credentials that support your argument? I do not doubt this man is very accomplished. Give me the part of his work that shows the main city of Damascus was destroyed. This is not just about what you or I believe, it is a matter of getting the history books correct. I have read many articles and with the exception of one so far, they do not say the main city of Damascus was destroyed. I am not being selective, I have gone looking for the evidence and in the books and websites I have visited, the majority do not say what you are saying. That web page you sent me to did not say it. It makes no difference you saying; " I am right and you are wrong". Let someone else add their comment and give us what evidence they can find to say whether Damascus was completely destroyed or not. I am wanting to see the evidence and then I will be satisfied.

I accept the Damascus region was severely damaged and that would have impacted on the prosperity of the region, but did the main city of Damascus ever stop from being a center for trade?

All the best

David

David M
06-19-2013, 06:49 PM
Here is what the UNESCO website has to say about Damascus. This is just an extract taken from the page. As far as I know this is not a religious website and certainly not a " a stupid conspiracy theory website".

http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/20


Long Description

Damascus is considered to be the oldest city as well as the oldest capital of the world. It is the cradle of historical civilizations, constituting a beacon of science and art over time, and a historical encyclopaedia which tells a great part of the history of humanity. In the same way, it represents a historical reference for comparing the systems of architecture and town planning over several thousand years.

Founded in the 3rd millennium BC, Damascus is one of the oldest cities in the Middle East. Dominated to the west by Mount Qasiyun and bounded to the east by the desert, Damascus was founded, with the name of Palmyra, in an oasis that was very fertile thanks to the presence of the River Barada, a meeting place for cultures and caravans. It was the capital of an Aramaic kingdom (11th-7th centuries BC), often at war with the kings of Israel and temporarily conquered by King David. After being defeated twice by the Assyrians, it was definitively conquered by Nebuchadnezzar in 600 BC. It fell into Persian hands in 530 BC, and then in 333 BC it was annexed to the empire of Alexander the Great. The two adjoining areas were unified by the Romans, during the reigns of Septimius Severus and his son Caracalla (AD 197-217). The city was enclosed by a single ring of enclosure walls that are still be identified. After the interval of rule by the Sassanid Parthians, in 636 its fate was sealed permanently as part of the Arab world, becoming the prestigious and monumental capital of the Umayyad caliph. The city then began to expand outside the enclosure walls and enjoyed a time of particular economic prosperity, which continued despite its loss of capital status under the Mameluke dynasty and the devastation wrought during the Mongol incursion.

David

L67
06-20-2013, 04:46 AM
Here is what the UNESCO website has to say about Damascus. This is just an extract taken from the page. As far as I know this is not a religious website and certainly not a " a stupid conspiracy theory website".

http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/20

Long Description

Damascus is considered to be the oldest city as well as the oldest capital of the world. It is the cradle of historical civilizations, constituting a beacon of science and art over time, and a historical encyclopaedia which tells a great part of the history of humanity. In the same way, it represents a historical reference for comparing the systems of architecture and town planning over several thousand years.

Founded in the 3rd millennium BC, Damascus is one of the oldest cities in the Middle East. Dominated to the west by Mount Qasiyun and bounded to the east by the desert, Damascus was founded, with the name of Palmyra, in an oasis that was very fertile thanks to the presence of the River Barada, a meeting place for cultures and caravans. It was the capital of an Aramaic kingdom (11th-7th centuries BC), often at war with the kings of Israel and temporarily conquered by King David. After being defeated twice by the Assyrians, it was definitively conquered by Nebuchadnezzar in 600 BC. It fell into Persian hands in 530 BC, and then in 333 BC it was annexed to the empire of Alexander the Great. The two adjoining areas were unified by the Romans, during the reigns of Septimius Severus and his son Caracalla (AD 197-217). The city was enclosed by a single ring of enclosure walls that are still be identified. After the interval of rule by the Sassanid Parthians, in 636 its fate was sealed permanently as part of the Arab world, becoming the prestigious and monumental capital of the Umayyad caliph. The city then began to expand outside the enclosure walls and enjoyed a time of particular economic prosperity, which continued despite its loss of capital status under the Mameluke dynasty and the devastation wrought during the Mongol incursion.


David

Thank you for proving my point. That was precisely in Isaiah's day. And that confirms everything else I have posted.

L67
06-20-2013, 05:35 AM
Hello L67

You gave me a link to a website article that did not say the main city of Damascus was destroyed. It could not have been if Tiglath Pileser set up his headquarters there. That is what it says, so what do you make of those words? You have to give me more evidence that the main city of Damascus was completely destroyed and not just the surrounding districts.

You are changing your argument David. You originally asked me when was Damascus left a ruinous heap. After I thoroughly proved that(even though you deny plain evidence) you have moved on to another argument. You're grasping at straws David.



I do not doubt this man is very accomplished. Give me the part of his work that shows the main city of Damascus was destroyed. This is not just about what you or I believe, it is a matter of getting the history books correct. I have read many articles and with the exception of one so far, they do not say the main city of Damascus was destroyed. I am not being selective, I have gone looking for the evidence and in the books and websites I have visited, the majority do not say what you are saying. That web page you sent me to did not say it. It makes no difference you saying; " I am right and you are wrong". Let someone else add their comment and give us what evidence they can find to say whether Damascus was completely destroyed or not. I am wanting to see the evidence and then I will be satisfied.

I accept the Damascus region was severely damaged and that would have impacted on the prosperity of the region, but did the main city of Damascus ever stop from being a center for trade?

No, David this is about you trying to confirm your beliefs. This is plain as day. I have caught you changing your argument from "when was Damascus left a ruinous heap", to "when was the main city" of Damascus destroyed".

You are making up the "when was the main city of Damascus destroyed". Because the Bible never mentions any such thing.

Isaiah 17 17 The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

2 The cities of Aroer are forsaken: they shall be for flocks, which shall lie down, and none shall make them afraid.

3 The fortress also shall cease from Ephraim, and the kingdom from Damascus, and the remnant of Syria: they shall be as the glory of the children of Israel, saith the Lord of hosts.

http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/aebp/essentials/countries/israel/

In 732 BC, the kingdom of Damascus lost its independence and existence, its holdings carved up into Assyrian provinces. Israel, on the other hand, was allowed to survive, albeit reduced to a fraction of its former size and cut off from the sea. Tiglatpileser put it under the rule of a new king, Hoshea, chosen to serve as a loyal executor of Assyrian interests.

Israel's northern territories came under direct Assyrian rule. The newly established province of Megiddo centred around the city of the same name and included also the coastal regions with the harbour of Dor.

The 18 page document confirms Damascus was destroyed and left a ruinous heap, as does the Annals of the Assyrians. The link above also show that Damascus lost its existence like Isaiah said.

You have no more argument to make David. You can either accept this or you can live in denial.

David M
06-20-2013, 03:14 PM
Thank you for proving my point. That was precisely in Isaiah's day. And that confirms everything else I have posted.



Hello L67

No it does not. It proves that Damascus was conquered. I have never denied that. It does not confirm the city of Damascus was made a ruinous heap. The city survived and continued. The cities in the regions about Damascus were destroyed, but the city which was Damascus was not destroyed. I have not changed my argument. The city changed hands, but the city was not destroyed. The Isaiah fulfilment was only in part at that time and the complete fulfilment has not happened. Damascus remains a city to this day and we shall have to wait and see what becomes of Damascus. The verse in Isaiah says; Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

"Taken away from being a city" and becoming a "ruinous heap" simply did not happen when you say it did. Again, you have to show me evidence of that happening. I have found no article in which that is said and the article you sent me to first writing about Tiglat-pileser III did not say the city was destroyed, but it was made his headquarters. I have to keep recalling this point until you give me evidence to the contrary.

All the best

David

L67
06-20-2013, 06:05 PM
Hello L67

No it does not. It proves that Damascus was conquered. I have never denied that. It does not confirm the city of Damascus was made a ruinous heap. The city survived and continued. The cities in the regions about Damascus were destroyed, but the city which was Damascus was not destroyed. I have not changed my argument. The city changed hands, but the city was not destroyed. The Isaiah fulfilment was only in part at that time and the complete fulfilment has not happened. Damascus remains a city to this day and we shall have to wait and see what becomes of Damascus. The verse in Isaiah says; Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

"Taken away from being a city" and becoming a "ruinous heap" simply did not happen when you say it did. Again, you have to show me evidence of that happening. I have found no article in which that is said and the article you sent me to first writing about Tiglat-pileser III did not say the city was destroyed, but it was made his headquarters. I have to keep recalling this point until you give me evidence to the contrary.

All the best

David

Yes it does. I have given you the evidence but you refuse to accept any of it. You absolutely will not even try to understand any of the evidence I have given you. Instead you look for bogus sources that only confirm your beliefs.

According to the Assyrian Annals, we read that the destruction of Damascus was so great that it left hundreds of sites looking "like hills over which the flood had swept". It is well known fact among historians that the reduction of the much of city to rubble was widespread and extended into Syria and the Transjordan.

From the 18 page document I gave you. http://www.biblicalstudies.ru/OT/Dubovsky.pdf

This is all based on the Bible and the historical Annals of the Assyrians.


According to Table 1. Aram and Israel seem to suffer the most serious repercussions of the rebellion. Summ. 4:16’ mentions that Tiglath-pileser III deported from Israel “all his (Pekah’s) people”. As for Aram, Tiglath-pileser III deported 800 people from the home of Rezin ([URUx]-ha-a-da-ra), 750 captives from South-syrian cities Kurus≥s≥a and Sama, and 550 from Meturna (Ann 23:13’-5’). Moreover, Tiglath-pileser III destroyed 591 cities of 16 districts of Damascus (Ann 23:16’-7’). Ann 18 and 24 mention a total of 13,520 deportees(36); however, their fragmentary status does not allow specifying where the deportees came from. These numbers do not include the captured soldiers mentioned in Ann 23:6’-7’. Biblical sources mention the deportation from Ijon, Abel-beth-maacah, Janoah, Kedesh, Hazor, Gilead, Galilee, and the land of Naphtali (2 Kgs 15,29). The Chroni- cler’s account mentions the deportation of the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh (1 Chr 5,26) and the deportation of Beerah, the chieftain of the Reubenites (1 Chr 5,6).

In tributes and gifts Tiglath-pileser III received at least 80 talents of gold and 2,800 talents of silver (see Table 1.). Besides this, he seized the property of kings Hiram, Hanunu and queen Samsi and the property of at least 14,320 people. Tiglath-pileser III’s army had also devastating impact on the region. According to the biblical sources the Assyrian army captured these cities: Ijon, Abel-beth-maacah, Janoah, Kedesh, and Hazor (2 Kgs 15,29)(37). According to Assyrian sources the Assyrians captured 14 major cities whose names appear in the inscriptions or on the reliefs from Nimrud and 621 smaller cities. This resulted in the destruction of 16 Aramean districts and 16 Israelite districts. The destructive impact of the Neo-Assyrian invasion is docu- mented by archaeological surveys and excavations. Z. Gal surveyed Galilee and showed that the region was destroyed in the late 8th century B.C. and most of the cities were never rebuilt. A similar picture emerges from the several excavations conducted in Golan, Gilead, and Galilee(38). Several cities such as Dan, Hazor, Chinnereth, Betsaida, Tel Hadar, ‘En gev, Beth-Shean, Kedesh, Megiddo, Jokneam, Qiri, Acco, Keisam, Shiqnona, and Dor were destroyed in the 8th century B.C. Some of them were left abandoned for many years(39).

Aram lost its independence and was annexed to Assyria. At the head of this new Assyrian province was appointed an Assyrian eunuch
governor of the Damascus province (Summ. 4:7’-8’; 9:3-4)(40). This province included Transjordan, in particular Gilead, and the territory down to Abel-Shittim. Thus, Transjordan did not revert to Israel. After the defeat of the Syro-Ephraimite coalition Transjordan fell under the direct control of a new Damascene province(41).

The Assyrians left behind them not only ruined cities but also the monuments recalling their sovereignty. Tiglath-pileser III erected a victory stele in Gaza and “counted it among the great gods” (Summ. 8:16’; 4:10’-1’)(52) Besides the stele, Tiglath-pileser III also left behind some living reminders of his might. Appointing Ibidi’ilu as the “Gatekeeper facing Egypt” (Summ. 4:34’; 7:6’; 13:16’), Tiglath- pileser III established his control over the border with Egypt and received information about the development in the region on a regular basis(53)


This review of the aftermaths of Tiglath-pileser III’s campaigns indicates that the Assyrians used several means to keep the territory under their control. The destruction of the cities, heavy tributes, and pillaging of entire regions economically debilitated the region. Even though the numbers of deportees are imprecise, Tiglath-pileser III’s massive deportation of the local inhabitants and their substitution with exiles from another parts of the Empire weakened local resistance. Finally, the administrative reorganization strengthened Assyrian control and kept the royal court in Nineveh informed about the most recent developments in the Levant on a regular basis. Thus, the combination of sophisticated logistics with good administration was one of the prerequisites of successful Assyrian control of the Levant.

This link confirms this as well. http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/aebp/essentials/countries/israel/

In 732 BC, the kingdom of Damascus lost its independence and existence, its holdings carved up into Assyrian provinces. Israel, on the other hand, was allowed to survive, albeit reduced to a fraction of its former size and cut off from the sea. Tiglatpileser put it under the rule of a new king, Hoshea, chosen to serve as a loyal executor of Assyrian interests.

All of this ties into what Isaiah was prophesying about. It is completely absurd to even think Isaiah is a future fulfillment.

David M
06-21-2013, 05:42 AM
Hello L67
You can forget all that you put in print and emboldened in red. You have given me the evidence that supports my case in the pdf document of Dubovsky.


Yes it does. I have given you the evidence but you refuse to accept any of it. You absolutely will not even try to understand any of the evidence I have given you. Instead you look for bogus sources that only confirm your beliefs.

According to the Assyrian Annals, we read that the destruction of Damascus was so great that it left hundreds of sites looking "like hills over which the flood had swept". It is well known fact among historians that the reduction of the much of city to rubble was widespread and extended into Syria and the Transjordan.

From the 18 page document I gave you. http://www.biblicalstudies.ru/OT/Dubovsky.pdf

This is all based on the Bible and the historical Annals of the Assyrians.
I am not accepting the bits of evidence you give me that do not clearly state the city of Damascus was destroyed.

Here is a quote found on page 160 of the 18-page extraction from the book.
13. A close reading of Ann 23 indicates that Tiglath-pileser III won the battle in the field but was unable to capture the headquarters of the rebellion — Damascus (21). He destroyed the environs of Damascusand captured several cities in Southern Syria/Northern Transjordan.


There you have confirmation of what I have been saying. This actually reads slightly different to what I read in that first article you sent me to, in which I thought it was Tiglath-pielser III who set up headquarters in Damascus. Anyway, this confirms, once again, the main city that was Damascus was NOT destroyed.

All the best
David

L67
06-21-2013, 07:59 AM
Hello L67
You can forget all that you put in print and emboldened in red. You have given me the evidence that supports my case in the pdf document of Dubovsky.


I am not accepting the bits of evidence you give me that do not clearly state the city of Damascus was destroyed.

Here is a quote found on page 160 of the 18-page extraction from the book. 13. A close reading of Ann 23 indicates that Tiglath-pileser III won the battle in the field but was unable to capture the headquarters of the rebellion — Damascus (21). He destroyed the environs of Damascusand captured several cities in Southern Syria/Northern Transjordan.

There you have confirmation of what I have been saying. This actually reads slightly different to what I read in that first article you sent me to, in which I thought it was Tiglath-pielser III who set up headquarters in Damascus. Anyway, this confirms, once again, the main city that was Damascus was NOT destroyed.

All the best
David

Thank you for proving my point that you only want to confirm your bias. You are 100% dishonest in your approach to accepting evidence. In fact, you don't care about the truth at all. This is what Christians do. They take things out of context and twist words. That is exactly what you have done. You have been caught red handed. It's game over for you David.

That quote is incomplete.

b) Second Phase: first attack against Damascus and the conquest of Transjordan (13th palû) This part of the campaign is described in Ann 23 and Summ. 9 and 13. Aclose reading of Ann 23 indicates that Tiglath-pileser III won the battle in the field but was unable to capture the headquarters of the rebellion — Damascus(21). He destroyed the environs of Damascus and captured several cities in Southern Syria/Northern Transjordan.

That was the second phase and the first attack against Damascus.

There was a third phase and another attack on Damascus. Thank you again for showing how dishonest you are. I have shown beyond all doubt that Isaiah has been confirmed. I like have said many times you only care about confirming your dogmas. That is how we know you aren't dealing with any truth that might be in the Bible. You simply aren't open to anything that contradicts your dogmas. That is delusion in it's purest form.

L67
06-21-2013, 09:12 AM
And let me add this.

EDIT This is on page 10

First, Tiglath-pileser III did not attack the epicenters of the rebellion (Damascus and Samaria) in a direct confrontation at the very beginning of his intervention but aimed his first campaign (14th palû) at conquering Tyre and coastal Philistia. Such an unexpected strategy caught Tyre and coastal Philistia off guard and Tiglath-pileser III quickly gained a strong foothold on the Mediterranean coast(29). Since the Assyrian army leaned heavily on its chariotry and cavalry, the decision to attack the coastal region first took into consideration the fact that the flat coastal terrain would allow the fast advance of Assyrian troops. This would not have been the case, if Tiglath-pileser III had decided to move his army through Israelite hills.

Only after this Blitzkrieg did Tiglath-pileser III venture on his first attack against the epicenter of the coalition — Damascus. After winning the field battle, he cut down the trees and captured 591 cities of the 16 districts of Damascus; however, he was unable to capture the Aramean capital. The strategy of cutting down the trees was well known in the ancient Near East and intended to cut off the rebels’food supply(30).

He did attack the epicenter of Damascus and won. Case closed.

David M
06-22-2013, 03:22 AM
And let me add this.

EDIT This is on page 10

First, Tiglath-pileser III did not attack the epicenters of the rebellion (Damascus and Samaria) in a direct confrontation at the very beginning of his intervention but aimed his first campaign (14th palû) at conquering Tyre and coastal Philistia. Such an unexpected strategy caught Tyre and coastal Philistia off guard and Tiglath-pileser III quickly gained a strong foothold on the Mediterranean coast(29). Since the Assyrian army leaned heavily on its chariotry and cavalry, the decision to attack the coastal region first took into consideration the fact that the flat coastal terrain would allow the fast advance of Assyrian troops. This would not have been the case, if Tiglath-pileser III had decided to move his army through Israelite hills.

Only after this Blitzkrieg did Tiglath-pileser III venture on his first attack against the epicenter of the coalition — Damascus. After winning the field battle, he cut down the trees and captured 591 cities of the 16 districts of Damascus; however,
he was unable to capture the Aramean capital. The strategy of cutting down the trees was well known in the ancient Near East and intended to cut off the rebels’food supply(30).

He did attack the epicenter of Damascus and won. Case closed.

Hello L67
The part you highlighted is confirming the fact that Tiglath-pileser III destroyed the environs of Damascus, but not the city itself, which had its own fortress wall surrounding it. The Aramaean capital was outside Damascus, and was not captured so this has to be understood. Now accepting T-p attacked the walled city of Damascus and eventually captured it, this does not mean he destroyed the fabric of the city. We read elsewhere that he set up his headquarters in Damascus and I will accept that. It is by no means clear that the capital at the heart of Damascus (similar to the City of London as opposed to London) was destroyed; the evidence suggests it was not. The fact remains the that the heart of city of Damascus was not destroyed. And so, if finally conquered and the headquarters of Tiglath-pileser III set up there, the main city survived. Even if the people had been overthrown and put to death and taken captive, the main City of Damascus survived and this is what this argument is about.


David

PS I have found another article on Wikipedia which states:
As a result, Tiglath-Pileser sacked Damascus and annexed Aram.[3] According to 2 Kings 16:9, the population was deported and Rezin executed. Tiglath-Pileser also records this act in one of his inscriptions Ok, so if Damascus was eventually taken as this would suggest, the word "sacked" does not mean the fabric of the city was destroyed rather it means that the contents of the city were taken. This is not surprising. So then at the conclusion of all this, allowing for the fact that the city was taken, the people killed or taken captive and led off, does not say the fabric of the city was destroyed. This is in keeping with the fact that T-p set up his HQ there. Unlike Sodom & Gomorrah which the remains can be seen today, the City of Damascus was not destroyed even if its people who are the heart of the city were finally taken away. Those people were replaced and the city continues to this day.

L67
06-22-2013, 06:24 AM
Hello L67
This is ridiculous when you post yet another quote in which you claim to win your argument and the very words you quote do not say what you want them to say. You put massive words in red and miss out the following words;

No, you're just too stubborn to admit your wrong. And you are.




The part you highlighted is confirming the fact that Tiglath-pileser III destroyed the environs of Damascus, but not the city itself, which had its own fortress wall surrounding it. The Aramaean capital was outside Damascus, and was not captured so this has to be understood. Now accepting T-p attacked the walled city of Damascus and eventually captured it, this does not mean he destroyed the fabric of the city. We read elsewhere that he set up his headquarters in Damascus and I will accept that. It is by no means clear that the capital at the heart of Damascus (similar to the City of London as opposed to London) was destroyed; the evidence suggests it was not. The fact remains the that the heart of city of Damascus was not destroyed. And so, if finally conquered and the headquarters of Tiglath-pileser III set up there, the main city survived. Even if the people had been overthrown and put to death and taken captive, the main City of Damascus survived and this is what this argument is about.

You don't even know what you're talking about. You have changed your argument from its original form.

This is your original argument. http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?3665-Top-20-Topics-taught-in-the-Bible&p=53987#post53987 I can only say this is an extremely short-sighted understanding of scripture which does not take into account all of scripture including the Old Testament prophets which said many things that have not happened. Have you answered the question; When did Damascus become a "ruinous heap"? Please tell me when that happened.

I thoroughly proved that. The Annals of the Assyrians confirms that as does the 18 page document from Dubovsky. Now you are trying to say just the main city of Damascus. You're full of crap. It's dishonest of you to operate this way.

I also have never said once that the main city of Damascus was destroyed. That is what YOU have tried to make this argument so you can confirm your dogmas.

I'm glad you admit that the Aramaean capital was outside of Damascus. So your point is invalid. The Arameans never had a unified nation; they were divided into small independent kingdoms across parts of the Near East, particularly in what is now modern Syria. After the Bronze Age collapse, their political influence was confined to a number of Syro-Hittite states, which were entirely absorbed into the Neo-Assyrian Empire by the 8th century BC. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arameans


My point from the get go is that Damascus was left a ruinous heap and the city lost its independence. History confirms both and Isaiah is fulfilled. I mentioned this way back on 5-13-13 . Damascus was destroyed. The Annals of the Assyrians confirms this. You also didn't read the link very well. Page 12:

Tiglath-pileser III destroyed 591 cities of 16 districts of Damascus (Ann 23:16’-7’). Ann 18 and 24 mention a total of 13,520 deportees (36); however, their fragmentary status does not allow specifying where the deportees came from. These numbers do not include the captured soldiers mentioned in Ann 23:6’-7’. Biblical sources mention the deportation from Ijon, Abel-beth-maacah, Janoah, Kedesh, Hazor, Gilead, Galilee, and the land of Naphtali (2 Kgs 15,29). The Chroni- cler’s account mentions the deportation of the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh (1 Chr 5,26) and the deportation of Beerah, the chieftain of the Reubenites (1 Chr 5,6).

Sorry you misread. Damascus was totally destroyed.

Also Damascus was NOT left in tact. Israel was left intact.


In 732 BC, the kingdom of Damascus lost its independence and existence, its holdings carved up into Assyrian provinces. Israel, on the other hand, was allowed to survive, albeit reduced to a fraction of its former size and cut off from the sea. Tiglatpileser put it under the rule of a new king, Hoshea, chosen to serve as a loyal executor of Assyrian interests.

Israel's northern territories came under direct Assyrian rule. The newly established province of Megiddo centred around the city of the same name and included also the coastal regions with the harbour of Dor.

http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/aebp/essentials/countries/israel/






PS I have found another article on Wikipedia which states: Ok, so if Damascus was eventually taken as this would suggest, the word "sacked" does not mean the fabric of the city was destroyed rather it means that the contents of the city were taken. This is not surprising. So then at the conclusion of all this, allowing for the fact that the city was taken, the people killed or taken captive and led off, does not say the fabric of the city was destroyed. This is in keeping with the fact that T-p set up his HQ there. Unlike Sodom & Gomorrah which the remains can be seen today, the City of Damascus was not destroyed even if its people who are the heart of the city were finally taken away. Those people were replaced and the city continues to this day.




See if you weren't so stubborn in confirming your dogmas you would have seen I said this back on 5-13-13.

After Tiglath-pileser III destroyed 591 cities of 16 districts of Damascus this happened.

In 732 BC, the kingdom of Damascus lost its independence and existence, its holdings carved up into Assyrian provinces. Israel, on the other hand, was allowed to survive, albeit reduced to a fraction of its former size and cut off from the sea. Tiglatpileser put it under the rule of a new king, Hoshea, chosen to serve as a loyal executor of Assyrian interests.

Israel's northern territories came under direct Assyrian rule. The newly established province of Megiddo centred around the city of the same name and included also the coastal regions with the harbour of Dor.

Isaiah is fulfilled. Period. You have been wrong since 5-13. You have changed your argument and have still failed to prove your point. It has all been documented.

David M
06-24-2013, 07:42 AM
No, you're just too stubborn to admit your wrong. And you are.





You don't even know what you're talking about. You have changed your argument from its original form.

This is your original argument. http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?3665-Top-20-Topics-taught-in-the-Bible&p=53987#post53987 I can only say this is an extremely short-sighted understanding of scripture which does not take into account all of scripture including the Old Testament prophets which said many things that have not happened. Have you answered the question; When did Damascus become a "ruinous heap"? Please tell me when that happened.

I thoroughly proved that. The Annals of the Assyrians confirms that as does the 18 page document from Dubovsky. Now you are trying to say just the main city of Damascus. You're full of crap. It's dishonest of you to operate this way.

I also have never said once that the main city of Damascus was destroyed. That is what YOU have tried to make this argument so you can confirm your dogmas.

I'm glad you admit that the Aramaean capital was outside of Damascus. So your point is invalid. The Arameans never had a unified nation; they were divided into small independent kingdoms across parts of the Near East, particularly in what is now modern Syria. After the Bronze Age collapse, their political influence was confined to a number of Syro-Hittite states, which were entirely absorbed into the Neo-Assyrian Empire by the 8th century BC. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arameans


My point from the get go is that Damascus was left a ruinous heap and the city lost its independence. History confirms both and Isaiah is fulfilled. I mentioned this way back on 5-13-13 . Damascus was destroyed. The Annals of the Assyrians confirms this. You also didn't read the link very well. Page 12:

Tiglath-pileser III destroyed 591 cities of 16 districts of Damascus (Ann 23:16’-7’). Ann 18 and 24 mention a total of 13,520 deportees (36); however, their fragmentary status does not allow specifying where the deportees came from. These numbers do not include the captured soldiers mentioned in Ann 23:6’-7’. Biblical sources mention the deportation from Ijon, Abel-beth-maacah, Janoah, Kedesh, Hazor, Gilead, Galilee, and the land of Naphtali (2 Kgs 15,29). The Chroni- cler’s account mentions the deportation of the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh (1 Chr 5,26) and the deportation of Beerah, the chieftain of the Reubenites (1 Chr 5,6).

Sorry you misread. Damascus was totally destroyed.

Also Damascus was NOT left in tact. Israel was left intact.


In 732 BC, the kingdom of Damascus lost its independence and existence, its holdings carved up into Assyrian provinces. Israel, on the other hand, was allowed to survive, albeit reduced to a fraction of its former size and cut off from the sea. Tiglatpileser put it under the rule of a new king, Hoshea, chosen to serve as a loyal executor of Assyrian interests.

Israel's northern territories came under direct Assyrian rule. The newly established province of Megiddo centred around the city of the same name and included also the coastal regions with the harbour of Dor.

http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/aebp/essentials/countries/israel/










See if you weren't so stubborn in confirming your dogmas you would have seen I said this back on 5-13-13.

After Tiglath-pileser III destroyed 591 cities of 16 districts of Damascus this happened.

In 732 BC, the kingdom of Damascus lost its independence and existence, its holdings carved up into Assyrian provinces. Israel, on the other hand, was allowed to survive, albeit reduced to a fraction of its former size and cut off from the sea. Tiglatpileser put it under the rule of a new king, Hoshea, chosen to serve as a loyal executor of Assyrian interests.

Israel's northern territories came under direct Assyrian rule. The newly established province of Megiddo centred around the city of the same name and included also the coastal regions with the harbour of Dor.

Isaiah is fulfilled. Period. You have been wrong since 5-13. You have changed your argument and have still failed to prove your point. It has all been documented.

Hello L67
It does not take much for you to express abusive language which is uncalled for. OK perhaps in addition to the quote about Damascus becoming a ruinous heap, I should have quoted what preceded those words which said; Damascus is taken away from being a city, If all that is left is a runinous heap, then that certainly qualifies the words preceding and that all resemblance of a city had been taken away. That has simply not happened to Damascus the capital of the region of Damascus.

I am not being stubborn, I am being factual. I will admit to jumping the gun in my previous post and not reading to the very end of the 18-page document. I stopped short of the third campaign in which Tiglath-pileser III defeated the resistance in the city of Damascus.

The conclusion at the end of the article confirms that the city remained and T-p set up temporary headquarters there. At the end of the article, the spoils of war are listed and the colateral damage is listed. All is says about the city of Damascus is that the outer walls were torn down;
Captured cities
[URUx]-ha-a-da-ra – Rezin home city; city of Kurus≥s≥a,
Sama and Metuna; 591 cities of 16 districts of
Damascus (Ann 23:16’-7’; 18:3’; 24:3’);
Damascus was captured and its walls were torn down
(2 Kgs 16,9).
15 citi[es …] (Ann 18:12’)
GALILEE (demolished)
16 districts of Bit-[Humri] (Ann 18:3’; 24:3’); URUKu-
[…] (Ann 18:5’); Hinatuna = biblical Hannathon (Ann
18:5’); [Ya]tbite = biblical Jotbah (Ann 18:6’); URUSa-
¢xÜ-[…] (Ann 18:6’) = either Khirbet Saruna or Khirbet
Semuniye (Tell Shimron); Aruma = Rumah (Ann
18:7’); Marum = either bibl. Merom or Madon/Maron
(Ann 18:7’).
Ashtaroth was captured (Tadmor, Inscriptions, fig. 11);
That is not surprising for T-p to gain access to the city and overthrow its inhabitants. As for the city and its buildings, there is nothing said about them and it is acceptable to presume that since if was not a ruinous heap that T-p could set up his headquarters (temporary seat) there.
In this phase Tiglath-pileser III turned finally against Damascus,
captured it, and executed Rezin (2 Kgs 16,9). Then he established his
temporarily seat there and received the homage of the vassal rulers
(Ahaz’s visit to Damascus 2 Kgs 16,10).


That really is it. The region of Damascus we can agree was destroyed. You disagree and go against all the evidence that the city of Damascus was not destroyed and did not become a ruinous heap. You are not accepting that fulfilment could according to the prophecy still take place. Damascus as I have said quoting another source says it is the one of oldest cities in history and has continuously traded. The city changed hands but the infrastructure was there for life to continue in the city and for the city to be recognized as a city. Its status of being called a city had not been taken away. Until it becomes a total ruinous heap, then that situation has not changed.

All the best
David

L67
06-24-2013, 10:43 AM
Hello L67
It does not take much for you to express abusive language which is uncalled for. OK perhaps in addition to the quote about Damascus becoming a ruinous heap, I should have quoted what preceded those words which said; Damascus is taken away from being a city, If all that is left is a runinous heap, then that certainly qualifies the words preceding and that all resemblance of a city had been taken away. That has simply not happened to Damascus the capital of the region of Damascus.

Fair enough. I'll try to choose my words more carefully.


I am not being stubborn, I am being factual. I will admit to jumping the gun in my previous post and not reading to the very end of the 18-page document. I stopped short of the third campaign in which Tiglath-pileser III defeated the resistance in the city of Damascus.

You are NOT being factual at all. You haven't just jumped the gun and not read the entire document but you only pick the bits that suit you. I will show that below.


The conclusion at the end of the article confirms that the city remained and T-p set up temporary headquarters there. At the end of the article, the spoils of war are listed and the colateral damage is listed. All is says about the city of Damascus is that the outer walls were torn down; That is not surprising for T-p to gain access to the city and overthrow its inhabitants. As for the city and its buildings, there is nothing said about them and it is acceptable to presume that since if was not a ruinous heap that T-p could set up his headquarters (temporary seat) there.

That is NOT the conclusion. Your interpretation of Isaiah ins WRONG. It was NOT just about one city in Damascus. There is a much bigger picture than just Isaiah 17. Let's go over this carefully.

Isaiah is prophesying during the time when Syria and Israel (northern 10 tribes) have made a confederacy against Judah (southern kingdom).

You can read about how Judah was fearful because of this confederacy. These two countries were going to gang up on Judah.

Isaiah 7:1-9 7 Now it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin king of Syria and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up to Jerusalem to make war against it, but could not prevail against it. 2 And it was told to the house of David, saying, “Syria’s forces are deployed in Ephraim.” So his heart and the heart of his people were moved as the trees of the woods are moved with the wind.

3 Then the Lord said to Isaiah, “Go out now to meet Ahaz, you and Shear-Jashub[a] your son, at the end of the aqueduct from the upper pool, on the highway to the Fuller’s Field, 4 and say to him: ‘Take heed, and be quiet; do not fear or be fainthearted for these two stubs of smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin and Syria, and the son of Remaliah. 5 Because Syria, Ephraim, and the son of Remaliah have plotted evil against you, saying, 6 “Let us go up against Judah and trouble it, and let us make a gap in its wall for ourselves, and set a king over them, the son of Tabel”— 7 thus says the Lord God:

“It shall not stand,
Nor shall it come to pass.
8 For the head of Syria is Damascus,
And the head of Damascus is Rezin.
Within sixty-five years Ephraim will be broken,
So that it will not be a people.
9 The head of Ephraim is Samaria,
And the head of Samaria is Remaliah’s son.
If you will not believe,
Surely you shall not be established.”’”


Isaiah 8:5-13 The Lord spake also unto me again, saying,

6 Forasmuch as this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah that go softly, and rejoice in Rezin and Remaliah's son;

7 Now therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the river, strong and many, even the king of Assyria, and all his glory: and he shall come up over all his channels, and go over all his banks:

8 And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.

9 Associate yourselves, O ye people, and ye shall be broken in pieces; and give ear, all ye of far countries: gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces; gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces.

10 Take counsel together, and it shall come to nought; speak the word, and it shall not stand: for God is with us.

11 For the Lord spake thus to me with a strong hand, and instructed me that I should not walk in the way of this people, saying,

12 Say ye not, A confederacy, to all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid.

13 Sanctify the Lord of hosts himself; and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.


King = Rezin
Country = Syria
Capitol = Damascus

confederate with

King = Pekah (Remaliah's son)
Country = Israel
Capitol = Samaria

Isaiah 8:7-8 tells us of the mighty flowing river who will decimate them all, which is the Assyrian Empire to the east of Syria. Isaiah prophesies in Isaiah 17 about the destruction of Damascus, the idea of Rezin's defeat and the defeat of the entire nation of Syria is in view.

We can see this fulfilled in 2 Kings 16 2 Kings 16


16 In the seventeenth year of Pekah the son of Remaliah Ahaz the son of Jotham king of Judah began to reign.

2 Twenty years old was Ahaz when he began to reign, and reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem, and did not that which was right in the sight of the Lord his God, like David his father.

3 But he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, yea, and made his son to pass through the fire, according to the abominations of the heathen, whom the Lord cast out from before the children of Israel.

4 And he sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places, and on the hills, and under every green tree.

5 Then Rezin king of Syria and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel came up to Jerusalem to war: and they besieged Ahaz, but could not overcome him.

6 At that time Rezin king of Syria recovered Elath to Syria, and drave the Jews from Elath: and the Syrians came to Elath, and dwelt there unto this day.

7 So Ahaz sent messengers to Tiglathpileser king of Assyria, saying, I am thy servant and thy son: come up, and save me out of the hand of the king of Syria, and out of the hand of the king of Israel, which rise up against me.

8 And Ahaz took the silver and gold that was found in the house of the Lord, and in the treasures of the king's house, and sent it for a present to the king of Assyria.

9 And the king of Assyria hearkened unto him: for the king of Assyria went up against Damascus, and took it, and carried the people of it captive to Kir, and slew Rezin.

10 And king Ahaz went to Damascus to meet Tiglathpileser king of Assyria, and saw an altar that was at Damascus: and king Ahaz sent to Urijah the priest the fashion of the altar, and the pattern of it, according to all the workmanship thereof.

Isaiah 7-8 shows Isaiah prophesying during the reign of Ahaz. Here in II Kings 16 we see Ahaz on the throne in Judah, and the destruction of Damascus in just the sense that Isaiah prophesies in Isaiah 17.

The city ceased to be a city when the people were taken captive and the king was slain.

The 18 page document all ties in with the Bible perfectly. It is absolutely WRONG to think that this could possibly be a future fulfillment, when we have concrete evidence it already occurred.

Here is two quotes from the 18 page document that sums up the Biblical prophecy.

Aram lost its independence and was annexed to Assyria. and

The Assyrians left behind them not only ruined cities but also the monuments recalling their sovereignty.





That really is it. The region of Damascus we can agree was destroyed. You disagree and go against all the evidence that the city of Damascus was not destroyed and did not become a ruinous heap. You are not accepting that fulfilment could according to the prophecy still take place. Damascus as I have said quoting another source says it is the one of oldest cities in history and has continuously traded. The city changed hands but the infrastructure was there for life to continue in the city and for the city to be recognized as a city. Its status of being called a city had not been taken away. Until it becomes a total ruinous heap, then that situation has not changed.


All the evidence is on my side David. It confirms Damascus was left a ruinous heap. It confirms Damascus was taken away from being a city. It ties in with Biblical prophecy perfectly.

You are focusing only on one city, while you ignore the entire picture.

David M
06-26-2013, 12:41 AM
All the evidence is on my side David. It confirms Damascus was left a ruinous heap. It confirms Damascus was taken away from being a city. It ties in with Biblical prophecy perfectly.

You are focusing only on one city, while you ignore the entire picture.
Hello L67
It would be good to hear another opinion on this matter from someone who has read both our evidence and can make an unbiased opinion.

I appreciate the point you make about a city ceasing when the people are taken out of it and there is no population dwelling there. This was not entirely the case. As far a the records show and no commentary makes this point that Damascus at no time remained unoccupied. Yes, the city changed hands and T-p set up his headquarters there and that would have included his troops staying there.

Once T-p vacated Damascus, people would occupy the city once again (not those who were taken away). The actual city which is made of its buildings continued and those buildings were then occupied by a different people.

I am talking of only this one city. Maybe I should have changed the title to include the word "city" as distinct from the region. I agree the region was destroyed, but I argue from the evidence you supplied that the evidence does not say the city was destroyed; only; "its (outer) walls were torn down".

Unless, someone else can shed some more light on the history of Damascus that we have not presented, then I say we are done and we have nothing new to add.

All the best
David

L67
06-26-2013, 05:53 AM
Hello L67
It would be good to hear another opinion on this matter from someone who has read both our evidence and can make an unbiased opinion.

I am NOT stating my opinion on this. I am posting FACTS. You have done nothing like that. All you have done is change your argument. Isaiah totally confirms everything I have said. Why don't you try refuting Isaiah?



I appreciate the point you make about a city ceasing when the people are taken out of it and there is no population dwelling there. This was not entirely the case. As far a the records show and no commentary makes this point that Damascus at no time remained unoccupied. Yes, the city changed hands and T-p set up his headquarters there and that would have included his troops staying there.

You are making this up. Isaiah never mentions anything you are saying. Read this: Aram lost its independence and was annexed to Assyria

Let's see what Independence means: Independence is a condition of a nation, country, or state in which its residents and population, or some portion thereof, exercise self-government, and usually sovereignty, over the territory. The opposite of independence is a dependent territory.

Here is what annexed means: to incorporate (territory) into the domain of a city, country, or state:

Damascus losing its independence and being annexed to Assyria is exactly what Isaiah was talking about. Damascus ceased to be a city as Isaiah saw it. There is no disputing that.


Once T-p vacated Damascus, people would occupy the city once again (not those who were taken away). The actual city which is made of its buildings continued and those buildings were then occupied by a different people.

What's your point? Isaiah never said it would be permanent. That is your false interpretation.


I am talking of only this one city. Maybe I should have changed the title to include the word "city" as distinct from the region. I agree the region was destroyed, but I argue from the evidence you supplied that the evidence does not say the city was destroyed; only; "its (outer) walls were torn down".

I know what you are talking about. But you changed your argument after I proved you wrong. And your assertions still aren't correct because you never dealt with Isaiahs own words leading up to Isaiah 17.


Unless, someone else can shed some more light on the history of Damascus that we have not presented, then I say we are done and we have nothing new to add.

No offense David, but I don't recall you presenting anything. All I have gotten from you is your interpretation.

You need to deal with Isaiah chapters 7 and 8 that lead to chapter 17. You think the Bible is the inerrant word that trumps anything. Well I have the inerrant word on my side. Even if you think the evidence isn't totally complete you still have to explain how Isaiah speaking of those times could apply to today. And there is no doubt he was speaking of those times because he mentions the king of Assyria by name. And then we have confirmation that Damascus did cease to be a city as Isaiah saw it and Damascus was destroyed. You have to explain all this David.

Unregistered
08-19-2013, 12:17 AM
I am not a professor and do not hold any degrees of higher learning, but I am a big fan of common sense. Typically if one was to assert that something was "destroyed" then that may preclude that it has been wiped from existence, only to be remembered in ancient histories and texts like the Annals of the Assryians. If it was destroyed then that text would be some proof that it ever existed at all, being relegated to a site for archaleogists to apply their craft of discovering the world as it once was but is no longer. I would purpose that the very existence of Damascus to this day would be fairly strong proof that it was not destroyed in Isaiah's time. I have not verified this personally with my own two eyes but take it on faith in the authority of other sources that Damascus still exists, even if it happens to be embroiled in a civil war that threatens its very existence and possible future destruction.


just my point of view,
Jared K. Matthews.

Unregistered
08-23-2013, 08:57 PM
'And shall no more be called a city'

No matter how many times it has been ransacked, it has been rebuilt.
Clearly Isaiah is shown a time when the destruction is final.
Never to be a city again.