Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

Notice – The ministries featured in this section of TheologyWeb are guests of this site and in some cases not bargaining for the rough and tumble world of debate forums, though sometimes they are. Additionally, this area is frequented and highlighted for guests who also very often are not acclimated to debate fora. As such, the rules of conduct here will be more strict than in the general forum. This will be something within the discretion of the Moderators and the Ministry Representative, but we simply ask that you conduct yourselves in a manner considerate of the fact that these ministries are our invited guests. You can always feel free to start a related thread in general forum without such extra restrictions. Thank you.

Deeper Waters is founded on the belief that the Christian community has long been in the shallow end of Christianity while there are treasures of the deep waiting to be discovered. Too many in the shallow end are not prepared when they go out beyond those waters and are quickly devoured by sharks. We wish to aid Christians to equip them to navigate the deeper waters of the ocean of truth and come up with treasure in the end.

We also wish to give special aid to those often neglected, that is, the disabled community. This is especially so since our founders are both on the autism spectrum and have a special desire to reach those on that spectrum. While they are a special emphasis, we seek to help others with any disability realize that God can use them and that they are as the Psalmist says, fearfully and wonderfully made.

General TheologyWeb forum rules: here.
See more
See less

Book Plunge: The Babylon Connection?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Book Plunge: The Babylon Connection?

    Is the RCC tied to Babylon?

    The link can be found here.

    ----

    What do I think of Ralph Woodrow's self-published work? Let's plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

    At the outset, I'll tell you I don't know a lot about Ralph Woodrow. A month or two ago I hadn't even heard his name. Now that I have heard of him, this book gives me a tremendous respect for him. Why is that?

    Ralph Woodrow used to be one of the greatest advocates of the work of Alexander Hislop. He was well-known in that position by his opponents. At one speaking engagement, he was even introduced as Reverend Hislop. His book on the Babylonian Connections between the Roman Catholic Church and Babylon was the best seller of his ministry. If you wanted to know what was his greatest success and money-maker was, look at that book.

    Most of the response was positive, but there was a high school history teacher who really liked Woodrow's ministry, but knew there were problems. Hislop was not the reliable source that Woodrow thought he was. This teacher wrote Woodrow challenging him to go and investigate the claims of Hislop by looking up the primary sources.

    Woodrow found that he had been fooled by Hislop. On paper, Hislop looked impressive after all. He had an impressive bibliography and several notes to back his case. The problem was those sources were rarely checked. Woodrow's response? Was it to keep selling the book he had written and get the money? No. It was to sacrifice it by removing the book from sale and by writing this book in response. Woodrow owned up to his mistake.

    At this point, I don't care if you agree with Woodrow or disagree, but if someone is willing to do that, I think that deserves respect.

    A work like this is needed today because there are too many Christians who buy into conspiracy theory type thinking and ideas like that of Hislop fuel into it. Let's not forget that also atheists are buying into this. If you want any evidence of this, just look at Jesus mythicism. Just yesterday I had someone share with me all the similarities between Horus and Jesus. Had they done any verification of the claims? No. Could they name any respected living Egyptologist who would back the claims? No. Still, it was shared. Sure, you can count the number of Jesus mythicists on one hand out of thousands of NT scholars and classical and ancient historians (By scholar, I mean someone with a Ph.D. in the relevant field and passes peer-review and not just some person on the internet with a blog, web site, self-published book, etc. and yes, I know that means I am not a scholar so don't treat me like one) but hey, the modern internet atheists knows better than all of them!

    If most of us had the guts to go and look at the claims closely like Woodrow did and be open to being wrong, we would have much better debates.

    So on to the book. An aspect of it is that Woodrow is seeking to show how ridiculous Hislop's system is, and I think he succeeds wonderfully. For Hislop, everything traced back to Nimrod in the Bible and his being married to Seimramis. Never mind that even if Semiramis existed, it would have been centuries apart from Nimrod. A theory should never be dislodged by some inconvenient facts after all.

    Hislop then tries to show that if you name any pagan god, that goes back to Nimrod. (Goddesses go to Semiramis.) Do you see a ritual here in Hawaii honoring deity X? That traces to Babylon. Do you see something in Scandanavia? That goes back to Nimrod. Is a belief being honored in Tahiti? Nimrod is responsible. Why? Well who else would it be? If everything went forth from Babylon and the rule of Nimrod, then if it shows up anywhere, that's because of Nimrod.

    You're not convinced?

    Yeah. Neither am I.
    Hislop also argued from similarities based on words. Of course, this would often be their English spelling but hey, we know the rest of the world always thought in English. It's just like the people who think Jesus is a way of saying "Hey Zeus!" It's the people who think Israel is a way of saying "Isis, Ra, and Elohim." Do you think this sounds ridiculous? There are plenty of people who actually believe this.

    Now a downside would be that if you're a believer in Scripture, you'll agree with a lot that Woodrow says. If you're not, then chances are you could wind up walking away and thinking "Yeah. The Bible borrowed everything from the pagans too." Of course, that's not the fault of Woodrow because I don't think this book is written to atheists, but I do know the way that too many online think. Everything in Christianity was borrowed from the pagans!

    Whatever your stripe, take this book as a warning. Just because that source you are using points to multiple sources and looks compelling (*cough cough* Wikipedia *cough cough*) that does not mean it is reliable. Try and go back and check the sources as much as you can. If some atheists had done this with the Zeitgeist movie, they might not have embarrassed themselves so much by hyping it everywhere they went.

    Also, Woodrow is certainly no Catholic and neither am I, but I do agree with him that there's a great deal we agree with them. I am happy to call many Catholics my brothers and sisters in Christ. At the same time, when it comes to our discussions about our differences, let's make sure those differences are grounded in fact. Hislop's work is not and the most ardent Protestant arguing against Catholicism should not use a work like Hislop's. We have better areas to debate rather than accusing one another of pagan practice.

    I recommend Woodrow's work then for anyone who has bought into Hislop's false information. Unfortunately today, there are a thousand Hislops from numerous other perspectives. (Again, think Jesus mythicists.) Maybe someday our culture will learn the practice of going and reading academic works and checking claims, but I am skeptical.

    In Christ,
    Nick Peters

  • #2
    I personally have never heard of Hislop, but if one takes Genesis 11 as literal history, then wouldn't it be self-evident that all religions could trace to a central theme in ancient times? In other words, if the populations of the world were ruled by one man, and they all spoke the same language as the bible illustrates, then couldn't we suppose that at one time there was one universal religion? That religion may not have been totally untrue -- it may have had elements of truth with elements of twisted truth. Then when the populous broke up into separate groups with separate languages, that religion became obfuscated but still retained many common elements that can be found in most religions today. Then God comes on the scene and chooses one of those groups (Abraham) and leads them back on the path of true belief. But because the central religion that was under Nimrod had elements of truth, Abraham and his descendants' belief will have some similarities. Then skeptics come along, who obviously don't believe Genesis 11 ever happened, and erroneously interpret the similarities as each culture copying the religious belief of the other. That's how I look at it

    Comment


    • #3
      The problem is Hislop goes into all sorts of flights and fancies and assumes all these things were as is back in Babylon.

      Comment


      • #4
        I was going by just the information in your OP, so I guess I'll have to read his work before I comment further.

        Comment

        Related Threads

        Collapse

        Topics Statistics Last Post
        Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-15-2024, 10:19 PM
        14 responses
        74 views
        1 like
        Last Post rogue06
        by rogue06
         
        Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-13-2024, 10:13 PM
        6 responses
        61 views
        0 likes
        Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
        Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-12-2024, 09:36 PM
        1 response
        23 views
        0 likes
        Last Post rogue06
        by rogue06
         
        Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-11-2024, 10:19 PM
        0 responses
        22 views
        2 likes
        Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
        Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-08-2024, 11:59 AM
        5 responses
        49 views
        0 likes
        Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
        Working...
        X