After two essays about characters from the Old Testament and two essays on characters from the New Testament (linked below), I return to the Old Testament to discover more about a man named Harbonah.
Harbonah (or Harbona) was the third of the seven eunuchs or chamberlains who served Ahasuerus, king of Persia (AKA Xerxes). The list of the 7 eunuchs is in Esther 1:10;
On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine, he said for Mehuman, Biztha, Harbona, Bigtha, Abagtha, Zethar, and Carkas, the seven eunuchs who attended to the presence of King Ahasuerus,
It was a big deal to have access to the King. Not many did. Not even his wife. Esther knew that if she went into the presence of the King without being summoned by name, she could be killed.
The eunuchs did not have first place with the king, that was reserved for “the seven officials of Persia and Media who had access to the king’s presence and sat in the first place in the kingdom” (Esther 1:14b). Those 7 men advised the king. The eunuch group to which Harbonah belonged carried out the kings orders.
Some eunuchs were doorkeepers, two of these, “Bigthan and Teresh, two of the king’s eunuchs from those who were doorkeepers, became furious and sought to send forth their hand against King Ahasuerus”. (Esther 2:21).
Doorkeeper: Person guarding access to an important or restricted place. Temple doorkeeper was an important office in biblical times. The doorkeepers collected money from the people (2 Kings 22:4). Some Levites were designated doorkeepers (or “gatekeepers”) for the ark (1 Chron. 15:23–24). The Persian kings used eunuchs for doorkeepers (Esther 2:21). Women also served this function (John 18:16–17; Acts 12:13). Source- Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (p. 438).
So access to the king didn’t mean complete contentment. Discontent, intrigue, and assassination plots were fomented by those close to the king and eunuchs were in a perfect place to do so.
What is a eunuch? “A male servant or supervisory official in the court of a ruler; often castrated.” It was safer for the king to have men who could not procreate in charge of his women. An illegitimate heir was bad for purity of royal lineage.
The eunuchs had the task of managing the two harems. One was for women waiting to go into the king’s bed, (virgins) and the other was for ones who had already been summoned to his bed (concubines).
Rembrandt: Haman disgraced before Xerxes and Esther
Eunuchs in the Ancient World
Ancient Near Eastern cultures made frequent use of eunuchs, particularly in service to royalty. Royal leaders such as Cyrus the Great sought out eunuchs as servants because he perceived them as loyal, compliant, and trustworthy around women (e.g., Xenophon, Cyropaedia 7:59–65). Eunuchs could possess noteworthy roles such as statesmen, military generals, and palace officials; however, often they supervised the female quarters of a royal home or oversaw a royal harem. (Source the Lexham Bible Dictionary).
Hegai was Xerxes’ chief eunuch it seems. He managed all the women, and in fact saw Esther as kind and beautiful so he apparently had authority to transfer her to the best place in the harem and supply her with the best cosmetics and food. (Esther 2:9-10).
So after the mention of Harbonah the eunuch in Esther 1:10, he is only mentioned one other time, toward the end of Esther, in Esther 7:9. The Lord used Harbonah to propel the conclusion of Esther’s story.
When it became obvious that Haman’s plot to kill Mordecai and all the rest of the Jews was failing, Harbonah who “just so happened” to be near Xerxes at the right moment, made a powerful suggestion. He delivered this nugget to the King, which the King probably hadn’t known:
Then Harbonah, one of the eunuchs who were before the king, said, “Behold indeed, the gallows—which Haman made for Mordecai who spoke good on behalf of the king—are standing at Haman’s house fifty cubits high!” And the king said, “Hang him on it.” (Esther 7:9).
Rembrandt: Haman at the feast
Just in case the King had forgotten that Mordecai had done the King a good deed in revealing the assassination plot to the King and had been written in the Book of Deeds, Harbonah inserted that reminder in his statement, perhaps to bolster its worthiness. What’s going on with Harbonah? Hmmm-
Jewish tradition has it that Harbona had originally been a confederate of Haman, but, upon noting the failure of the latter’s plans, abandoned him. Harbona, Harbonah. (1915). In The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia.
Jan Victors: Haman begging Queen Esther for mercy, 1642
Was Harbonah’s suggestion a helpful one to aid the king? Or one to rid himself of a co-conspirator? Only God knows. We do know that eunuchs had previously been involved in dastardly intrigue. The two doorkeepers Bigthan and Teresh had been unmasked as traitors early on in Esther, they had plotted to kill the king. It’s not unreasonable to wonder if Harbonah may have involved himself in the same kind of activity.
Esther Denouncing Haman (1888) by Ernest Normand. Notice all the people attending the king. Some of these are Eunuchs, and according to the Bible, Harbonah would have been in the scene at that moment.
On the other hand, eunuchs were usually loyal. Pragmatically, they had a good place in the court, comfortable surroundings, and influence or at least proximity to the king. So again, only God knows the true intentions of Harbonah in this moment.
The Jewish Encyclopedia entry for Harbonah ends with this: A liturgical piece for Purim beginning “Shoshannat Ya’aḳob” ends with the words, “and let Harbona, too, be remembered for good.”
Jan Lievens (1607–1674) Esther accuses Haman during her meal with Assuerus (Esther 7:1-17)
“One of the most dramatic moments from the Book of Esther comes when the queen accuses the king’s advisor Haman of treachery against her people (Esther 7:1–7). Through her efforts, Haman’s plot for the slaughter of all the Jews in Persia was unmasked before King Ahasuerus (Xerxes). Seated before his chamberlain, Harbonah, the king reacts in anger with arms outstretched and hands clenched. Across from him sits the isolated, shadowy figure of Haman, who cowers at the king’s wrath. Shortly thereafter, Haman’s life would end on the gallows“. (Source)
I never forgot Voddie Baucham’s introduction to a certain sermon. It was back when he was preaching here in the US and on rotation with other pastors in his church. He said his turn came up in the expository preaching passage, and it was the list of names Paul wrote. The passage (I think it was Paul’s sign-off of Romans 16). He said preachers usually read the passage something like: ‘The verse says ‘And give my love to…all these names I can’t pronounce…’ “
Of course, Voddie always says there is a lot to learn from “just a list of names.” Voddie’s preached on the concept before, that ALL scripture has something to offer, even if it was just an introduction or sign-off of a bunch of names in one of Paul’s epistles. Names are important!
Today we see the name “Eutychus.” This young man is mentioned just once, in Acts 20:7-12, but was the central character in a miracle.
The scene is a home where Paul is preaching. The house is packed. Because the third story is mentioned, the dwelling was probably an insulae, a lower-class apartment building in an area where other apartment buildings were, AKA tenements. The poorer someone was the higher up in the building they lived. The insulae were configured as you might imagine apartments are today, but square with a central courtyard with a fountain. Many of the lowest class ones were not made of bricks but of wood. No such dwellings exist today in Troas, the city (now called Alexandria Troas) is mostly ruins. But in the city of Ostia Italy, we can still see many preserved apartment tenements (insulae). In fact, most urban dwellers lived in such apartments, the density of which would not be seen again until the Industrial Revolution. (Source)
Ostia Antica, regione I, via dei Balconi (public domain). Source
Apartments were cramped and many were not well made or maintained by their owners. Cicero admitted he was a poor landlord when he wrote:
“Two of my shops have collapsed and the others are showing cracks, so that even the mice have moved out, to say nothing of the tenants. ‘Immortal gods, what do such trivialities matter to me?”
So perhaps Eutychus’ fall was not totally due to sleepiness but perhaps a poor condition of the window or the dwelling itself? … hmmm.
Anyway, Paul was leaving the next day, and he wanted to impart as much as he possibly could to his beloved friends. Paul liked to wring out every minute for Jesus.
And he did. He began preaching probably after dinner when they had completed the Lord’s supper, and Paul continued on past midnight.
The three-story house was filled with people, all the lamps were lit, and it was a Mediterranean evening. Lamps in the first century usually emitted a great deal of smoke and it would have become hard to breathe, so, since the crowd was staying in one spot for a long time, shutters were opened to allow fresh air in. All this to say, hot and stuffy. With not a lot of movement, with dinner in their bellies, and the length of time they were sitting still, young man Eutychus nodded off.
This happens. Who can blame him? I get sleepy at all-day meetings when they resume after lunch. The difference is, Eutychus was perched on the open windowsill. When he fell asleep, he fell out the window. He fell to the ground and was pronounced dead.
Imagine the scene. Hazy, warm lamplight, wafting breeze, cicadas, a murmuring voices, all was hushed, then- SUDDEN DEATH!
On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight. There were many lamps in the upstairs room where we were gathered together. And there was a young man named Eutychus sitting on the window sill, sinking into a deep sleep; and as Paul kept on talking, Eutychus was overcome by sleep and fell down from the third floor, and was picked up dead. But Paul went down and fell upon him, and after embracing him, he said, “Do not be troubled, for he is still alive. When Paul had gone back up and had broken the bread and eaten, he talked with them a long while until daybreak, and then left. They took away the boy alive, and were greatly comforted.(Acts 20:7-12).
They didn’t have to plan a funeral but could continue to learn from Paul immediately and deepen their love for the Lord through His word!
See similar event in 1 Kings 17:21 where Elijah also fell on the widow’s son and asked the Lord to resurrect the lad. And the same in2 Kings 4:34 with Elisha.
Eutychus was dead. Not mostly dead, but all dead. The first century people saw death often. They knew dead. Luke the physician wrote Acts, he records that Eutychus was dead, and Luke would know. Yet Eutychus came alive!
Imagine having your name inscripturated forever. You’re mentioned in God’s holy word! Anna’s faithfulness, Mary’s submission, Lydia’s hospitality…wow. And on the flip side, also Jezebel forever linked with deep evil. Cain always known as the rebel. And more innocently, Eutychus, the sleeper, lol. Forever known as the guy who fell asleep.
But the positives are these. He was young, but desired to attend a meeting where Paul would be preaching. He didn’t say instead, ‘I’ve got sheep to herd or nets to fix or a girl to date.’ He chose to go and be present where the word of God was taught. Sleepiness at midnight is normal, but then he became the central figure in a display of the power of God! God can resurrect the dead, using ordinary men like Paul and young men like Eutychus!
So now, Eutychus is forever known as the man whom God resurrected from the dead! The man God obviously had plans for. I wonder how Eutychus lived his life for Christ in his remaining days on earth.
The scene in the home where Eutychus fell, crowded with earnest and eager listeners, desiring to have a firehose of theology aimed at them, clinging to as much as they can from the learned lecturer, reminds me of another scene in these present days.
It happened shortly after the Iron Curtain fell and the Soviet Union disintegrated. The loosely united regions and nations under Russian control splintered into their own little countries, and Kazakhstan was one of them. Pastors who had been persecuted or exiled collected in a first-ever conference, and who did they ask to come and teach them? John MacArthur.
They gave MacArthur 6 days to teach them all the doctrines of the Bible. 1600 men came from all over the region, traveling and staying where they could. They crowded into hot, stuffy room to listen to Dr MacArthur and be taught all day and all night, previously not having had the benefit of seminaries or even openly learning because of the atheistic Communist regime which oppressed them. MacArthur said the sessions were about 12 hours long.
Such things as the Eutychus house still happen. Anywhere or at any period of time on earth, if there are people of the Lord there will be people eager to gather and learn more about Him. Eutychus’ time wasn’t up, the Lord had more of a number of days for him. And we will meet him in heaven! Remember, the people we read about in the Bible are real, and those who are said to be believers we will see and commune with in heaven, praising our Savior!
Sources:
EUTYCHUS IN TROAS: THE ARCHITECTURE AND ARCHAEOLOGY OF HIS FALL by Mark Wilson in Biblica.
Paul made three major missionary journeys. Acts 20 records the 3rd. He had spent 3 months in Greece, then planned to get on a boat in Corinth and set sail for Jerusalem via Syria, but he learned that some Jews were plotting to grab him for nefarious purposes on the voyage, so he decided to return to Macedonia by land. So Paul went from Corinth to Berea, Thessalonica, and Philippi, caught up with Luke again and observed Passover.
From Philippi, Paul and Luke set sail for Troas, arriving there five days later and meeting Paul’s traveling companions who had gone ahead of them: Timothy, Sopater, Aristarchus, Secundus, Gaius, Tychicus, and Trophimus. This is where we meet Trophimus.
And he was accompanied by Sopater of Berea, the son of Pyrrhus, and by Aristarchus and Secundus of the Thessalonians, and Gaius of Derbe, and Timothy, and Tychicus and Trophimus of Asia. (Acts 20:4).
Miletus was about 36 miles from Ephesus. Map source
Trophimus was mentioned three times in the Bible, in verse above in Acts 20:4, and also Acts 21:29, and 2 Timothy 4:20.
For they had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian in the city with him, and they supposed that Paul had brought him into the temple. (Acts 21:29).
Erastus remained at Corinth, but Trophimus I left sick at Miletus. (2 Timothy 4:20).
Trophimus was from the Roman province of Asia and was living in or was from Ephesus. He was a Greek Christian. As we saw from the first mention of him in the verse, Trophimus was one of seven disciples mentioned by name who accompanied Paul on his return to Macedonia (Acts 20:3–4), meaning, the others to whom Paul was writing probably knew Trophimus personally, or knew OF him. These seven men formed an envoy from the various churches at Asia. They protected Paul, as it was better to travel in numbers. They also helped deliver the contributions from the churches of Asia to the saints in Jerusalem at the end of Paul’s third missionary journey (2 Corinthians 8:2–3). The delegation left Paul in Macedonia and traveled to Troas to wait for Paul and Luke to join them (Acts 20:4–6).
When they met up again, the men, including Trophimus, stayed together for a week. Imagine the theological conversations they must have held! The joy of being together!
Next time we read of Trophimus, it isn’t so joyous. We read of poor Trophimus being accused of having gone into the Temple with Paul, which uncircumcised Gentiles were not allowed to do. The Jews at that time were insisting that one had to become a Jew first in order to become a Christian. They leaped on the opportunity to accuse Paul of bringing Trophimus into the temple in order to get to Paul. And they did as much, dragging Paul out to be murdered. Of course, the accusation was false, but Trophimus’ name was used for evil purposes and he was innocently at the center of this controversy.
The modicum of fact lying at the root of this false accusation was that they had seen Paul and T. in each other’s company in the city. On this slender basis “they supposed” that Paul had brought T. past the barrier or middle wall of partition (Eph 2:14; see PARTITION), beyond which no Gentile was allowed to penetrate on pain of death. They supposed that T., who was neither a Jew nor a proselyte, but a gentile Christian, had been introduced into the temple itself by Paul—which would have been profanation. Hence their fury against the apostle. Source: The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia (ISBE),. 1915.
Sometimes being Paul’s friend was dangerous!
The third time we read of Trophimus is when he had become too sick to travel. Paul had to leave him in Miletus.
As a side note: IF the miracle gifts had still been ongoing, why didn’t Paul just lay hands on his friend so he could continue the mission? Why doesn’t the verse say “Trophimus was sick in Miletus but I laid hands on him and by grace of God he used me to heal my friend.” Or something to that effect. 2 Timothy was written in 64/65 AD, and the sign gifts were well and truly dying out by then. The were for a sign to authenticate the Apostles and since it was nigh on 30 years since Jesus had departed and at least 20 years since the first NT book was written, the need to authenticate the ministers of God was lessening by the day.
In the previous book, 1 Timothy 5:23 written a few years before, Paul had advised Timothy to take wine for his stomach ailments.
Anyway, Trophimus was sick a few years after we last read of him, we know not with what, but was serious enough to cause Paul to have to leave T. behind. But not alone. We read in Acts 20:17 Paul had previously sent for some elders to come from Ephesus, which they did. It was an easy travel jaunt. Therefore, Paul was not abandoning his trusted friend and traveling companion to the wilds,
“Trophimus, therefore, in his sickness, could easily reach Ephesus, or his friends from that city could quickly come to him at Miletus, and give him whatever attention and nursing he might require.” ISBE
Keep in mind that these people we read about in the Bible are real people. They are alive now. We will meet them in heaven and commune with them. We can sit with Trophimus and talk with him about his sickness, his association with Paul at the temple, his missionary journeys. That’s why I write about the ‘little known’ Bible characters. Someday we will fully know them, and they will fully know us. What a day that will be.
I started an occasional series covering little known Bible characters. These are men or women who are named in the Bible, but we do not know much about apart from their names. Though, the Word of God is always worth plumbing its depths, and we can elicit from the text more than we think.
I had thought of several people named in the New Testament to focus on, but as our teaching elder concluded his series on Ezra, the last chapter listed by name, many offenders. That is what the section of text is called in my NASB Bible, “The List of Offenders”.
And among the sons of the priests there were found that had taken strange wives: namely,… (Ezra 1018a).
GIll’s Exposition:
And among the sons of the priests there were found that had taken strange wives,…. So that it need not be wondered at that this evil should spread among the people, when those who understood the law, and should have instructed the people in it, set such an example: namely: of the sons of Jeshua the son of Jozadak; who was the high priest; and perhaps for this fault of his, in not restraining his sons from such unlawful marriages, is he represented in filthy garments, Zechariah 3:3, and his brethren, Maaseiah, and Eliezer, and Jarib, and Gedaliah; these were the brethren of Jeshua.
The Holy Spirit chose to name the men who had grievously sinned by marrying foreign women who brought foreign idols into the sheepfold. The offense was not marrying women of different race or ethnicity, but that they worshiped other gods.
We saw the problem when Solomon married foreign wives who worshiped other gods.
Again, it wasn’t their ethnicity. Canaanite Rahab converted and married Joshua, Moses married Zipporah a Cushite, Ruth was a Moabite.
Do not be mismatched with unbelievers; for what do righteousness and lawlessness share together, or what does light have in common with darkness? (2 Corinthians 6:14).
and you might take some of his daughters for your sons, and his daughters might prostitute themselves with their gods and cause your sons also to prostitute themselves with their gods. (Exodus 34:16)
There were only about 100 or so who intermarried, among tens of thousands of returnees from Babylon, but remember a little leaven… spreads like gangrene. Ezra was so appalled he tore his clothes, his hair, and his beard, and sat in a puddle of prayers appealing to God for mercy.
Every man who had married an unbeliever and thus brought idolatry into Israel was named. This is the “List of Offenders” at the end of Ezra 10.
Imagine…being named in the Bible. So many people were named as a congratulations for their faith. There’s Hebrews Hall of Faith in chapter 11, where men and women are expressly named and commended.
The positively named in Hebrews are, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Moses’ parents, Moses, Rahab, Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David, Samuel, and the prophets.
Others from the New Testament were named for their faith and/or service also: Anna, Mary, Dorcas, Lydia, Tychicus, and many others of course. We can be sure when they arrived in God’s holy abode in heaven, Jesus was pleased to say to them, “His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter the joy of your master.'” (Matthew 25:21)
But to be named in the Bible because of your sin, enscripturated forever as an example of disobedience, what a woe and embarrassment to them! And what a warning to us.
–Sin is a corrupting influence –Leaders should be an example to the positive, not the negative –Sin hurts the reputation of the church and brings reproach to the name of Jesus.
Sin must be dealt with. If we don’t address it with genuine repentance, God will.
In this New Testament era, our names are written in heaven in the Book of Life. What a grace, mercy, and gift! Let us be thankful and do our best to follow the Lord’s statues in obedience as a thank you in return.
Instruct me, O Yahweh, in the way of Your statutes, That I may observe it to the end. (Psalm 119:33).
(Cropped)Art is The neo-gothic fresco of big prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel by Leopold Bruckner from end of 19. cent. in Saint Nicholas church.
When I read the Bible and someone is named that I am not too familiar with, it makes me curious. I’ll never get tired of studying Paul or Peter or John or Stephen or Lydia…but then someone is mentioned and I go “Another person to get to know! Who was h/she?” Like, Tychicus, Eutychus (the guy who fell out the window during Paul’s long sermon), Chloe, Rufus, and so many others.
These were real people. They were fellow believers and part of the body. We will meet them in heaven. So let’s take a look in this new series, at some names of folks we don’t know much about.
While there may not be a huge amount the Bible says about these folks, studying what we do know we will learn there is more than we think.
PROPHETS
The Old Testament is divided into Law, Wisdom, History, and Prophets. Of the Prophets, there are whole books dedicated to these men and the words God used their mouths to utter. The Major Prophets, so called because their books were longer, not because they were more important than any other book, were Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel. There were the Minor Prophets, so called because their books were shorter, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi.
But those were not ALL the prophets operating in the Old Testament (or the New). There were others named and many others in the School of Prophets who were not named.
Of the named Prophets who do not have a book about them or written by them, there is one called Iddo.
He is listed in a verse along with Nathan the Prophet, and Iddo is named as a seer. There are many definitions and suppositions about the seers and their differences in operation to the Prophets, which I won’t get into. Except to paste what The Lexham Bible Dictionary has to say,
Generally synonymous with the role of the prophet (e.g., 2 Sam 24:11; 1 Chr 21:9; Amos 7:12). However, at times, it is used as a distinct term from that of prophet (2 Kgs 17:13). Seer, by connotation of the Hebrew word affiliated with it being connected to the idea of receiving a vision (חֹזֶה, chozeh), may be more connected to the idea of visions than the prophetic word, although this is not necessarily the case in all usages.
An additional term used for “seer” does not necessarily evoke the connotation of one who receives a vision but does evoke the idea of seeing (רֹאֶה, ro’eh; e.g., Isa 30:10). Nonetheless, even this term is used synonymously with “prophet”; this point is explicitly made in an aside in 1 Sam 9:9: “Formerly in Israel, when a man went to inquire of God, he would say: ‘Come, let us go up to the seer.’ For the prophet of today was formerly called a seer” (compare 1 Sam 9:19). A “Chronicle of the Seers” is also mentioned in 2 Chr 33:19.
Source Barry, J. D. (2016). Seer. In The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Lexham Press.
Cleared that right up, didn’t it? Not so much.
Iddo the name means lovely, his beloved, or His love. Iddo was was contemporary to Solomon and Rehoboam. We read this specific Iddo (for there are others named Iddo in the Old Testament), three times in the OT:
Now the rest of the acts of Abijah, and his ways and his words are written in the treatise of the prophet Iddo. (2 Chronicles 13:22)
The Death of Solomon Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, from first to last, are they not written in the chronicles of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer concerning Jeroboam the son of Nebat? (2 Chronicles 9:29)
Now the acts of Rehoboam, from first to last, are they not written in the records of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the seer, according to genealogical record? Now there were wars between Rehoboam and Jeroboam all their days. (2 Chronicles 12:15).
Iddo prophesied against Jeroboam. He also seems to have written stories about the lives of the Kings and events in Israel and Judah, but those stories have not been included in the canon.
Some claim these writings of Iddo were “lost,” but Yahweh never loses anything and has perfectly preserved His word through centuries. His Spirit has inspired men to include exactly what God wanted included in the canon. If it’s not in the canon, it isn’t meant for us, as God considered it unnecessary for our edification. The Bible is all-sufficient.
Iddo may also be the grandfather of the minor prophet Zechariah (see Zechariah 1:1,7) but there is much discussion as to whether this is the same Iddo.
Hard tellin’ not knowin’, as the saying goes.
And that is all I could find out about Iddo! Blessings, and thank you for reading.
When I published that discernment article exposing some major doctrinal and behavioral issues with The Transformed Wife (Lori and Ken Alexander)’s output, there was quite a bit of reaction. One of the reactions was Lori’s husband Ken messaged me on Facebook. I did not solicit nor expect a personal private message, and not from a married man, no less. As you read the correspondence, please keep in mind that I have no relationship with Mr Alexander, personal or spiritual, I did not invite the messaging, and I tried to cut it off, but he breached that boundary of non-consent.
I have the screenshots.
People who message have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Normally I keep messages private and do not publish messages. (Sometimes I ask permission to publish if a reader has offered a really good thought or blog idea, and I publish if yes or no if they say no). However when Ken contacted me again after I’d asked him not to, all bets were off.
As you read this, keep in mind also that he claims identity in Christ as a Godly man.
So here it all is. Explanation at bottom. I refrained from editorializing as much as I could and tried to give you just the facts. You decide. I might have erred in replying. My goal and intent was to try and get him to see the issues and hopefully repent. I tried. Maybe that was my mistake. Again, you decide.
MESSAGE #1 from Ken Alexander. His wife had already blocked me after 1 engagement which she initiated.I believe she blocked me because I’d asked her if she had repented of her false teaching of Pelagianism. Lori never answered that. Neither did Ken when I asked him. I did not solicit this contact.Ken wrote right off the bat that I’m influenced by satan. So much for pleasant contact:
Hi Elizabeth,
After reading your article on Lori I could not recognize my own wife by the time you were done.
I found it interesting that you claim she is unteachable, yet when she makes her position clear on Original Sin in a post you gloss it over as “too little too late.”
We raised four wonderful Children together with strong and reasonable discipline… and they are all secure Believers in Christ with highly successful lives and families of their own. You’re just dead wrong on this idea of “hitting.” It’s spanking and there is very little cold in So Cal. How did you do with your family and kids?
Lori says that some time back you praised her ministry and agreed with her, yet somehow you caught Satan’s whisper and have been quite undiscerning here. You sound like a post from the trolls you are listening to.
She is full of love and grace, but hard hitting because she is goes up against the strong influence of feminism. You are correct that she purposely avoids the teaching the man’s role to keep women focused on what God calls them to do without pointing a finger at their disobedient husband they are called to win.
Lori’s ministry is not perfect, just as you have now proven that yours is not either. But many women write her regularly with wonderful stories of changed lives and marriages, proof that God is using her and blessing her God given wisdom from the Word. We don’t expect everyone to agree with her… even I don’t 100% 🙂. But when you attack one of the few godly women teaching the vital principles of Biblical Womanhood you do a disservice to the advancement of the Kingdom of God. She is teaching things that you and many other women cannot teach because she walks the talk with her life and love of our Jesus.
I just read this by you and wonder if the Lord wasn’t telling you something, yet you projected it upon others without careful reflection for the words you just wrote against another sister in Christ?
It’s something to ponder in the Spirit as you asked others to do the same. 🙂
“It is humbling to publicly repent of something done in sin or taught incorrectly in His name. It is humbling to eat crow. But pride should not be so strong that it prevents us from kneeling down and saying “I was wrong. Forgive me.”
My reply to the above Ken-messages #1 & 2:I wrote-
Lori’s ministry is exactly as I described. The measure of a ministry is not how many people are writing in, but how doctrinally correct it is. She is an obviously troubled woman dwelling in error, and leading many astray. You have your part in that. Your influences such as the Pearls are atrocious, and this error has flowed down into your own ministry to your wife and her errant ministry to women. Her insistence that the Pearls, Partridge, and Gothard are worthy models, and her excuses for lack of sexual boundaries with wives and lack of boundaries in child punishment is appalling. Repent of those things and I’ll listen.
The Pharisees were ‘hard hitting’ too, and they were mostly right on their doctrine but went beyond by adding and adding, and by the guilt (‘millstone’) laid upon the neck of the sheep. You need to repent too for your part in the devastating millstones, and graceless absolutes you teach your wife to lay on women.
As far as the Original Sin controversy, I asked Lori if she has repented of her previous stance that we are not born as sinners but only BECOME sinners when we sin. It was not answered. HAVE you repented of that?
Your statement that Lori is one of “few godly women teaching the vital principles of Biblical Womanhood” is evidence of how skewed your vision has become. Lori is NOT one of the few women teaching this. You are NOT a bulwark. (And she doesn’t even teach it correctly or evenly).
She should look at gracious and doctrinally correct models such as The Women’s Hope Show from The Master’s Seminary, A Word Fitly Spoken podcast (Spreeman & Lesley), Open Hearts in a Closed World online conference and all women associated with that, DebbieLynne Kespert, Susan Heck, and MANY others who believe as you and Lori do, but who have a balanced view of scripture, and a FULL Titus 2:5 wisdom that includes being “sensible, … kind” but are missing from Lori’s online presence.
I have prayed for her and I do hope the Lord will graciously lift the scales from your and her eyes. Something to ponder and I am not being snarky, I am totally grieved over this. Consider, repent, and then we can talk some more. I’m always willing to listen.
Ken’s message #3, replying to my above: [Editor’s Note- Yes their lives ARE an open book. Lori and Ken have kept a blog for 12 years with hundreds of thousands of words written, 6 years’ worth of hours of video, and thousands of tweets. Yes their lives ‘are an open book,’ therefore there’s much material available to evaluate in order to make a solid assessment of their lives.] Ken wrote:
Elisabeth, I have no idea who you are really, but our lives are open book. Your comment “She is an obviously troubled woman dwelling in error, and leading many astray,” is so very far from the truth.
Lori is a woman whose heart is set completely upon the Lord. She has proven herself to her husband and to her family, friends and online friends as a woman of grace, peace, joy and full of the fruits of the Spirit. How can you make such an awful and incorrect assessment of her and expect me to take you seriously?
Ken then messaged again before I could reply. By now I’m getting the idea he lacks patience and self-control. Ken’s message #4-
If you want to dialogue, pick one or two issues you believe she is “so wrong about” that her errors are worthy of you trying to destroy her ministry over… and let’s talk about them. There are no grave errors in her teaching, just a difference of opinion on things we cannot have a definitive answer about.
You cannot prove from the scriptures that woman should be teaching doctrine and theology. WE know for certain it must not be from the pulpit, but where do you get the authority for women to teach other women outside of Titus 2?
So you and Lori disagree on something… that is not grounds to disqualify her God given ministry.
Child discipline… you know nothing about our child discipline but for a few stories from the trolls you disagree with. You are welcome to disagree, but you are not welcome to mischaracterize the facts that you do not possess. There were no freezing children that Christmas morning, and the discipline was appropriate and well received. A story we all laugh about including the kids. Yet you want to portray it as wring and grounds for disqualification of a ministry?
My question to you is why did you lie about what I wrote to you? You attacked Lori on at least 10-12 things and I challenged you on 3 of them. Yet you write on your page that I challenged you on “everything.” That is not true… why tell falsehoods?
The pattern seems clear to me that you are one who God keeps telling you to repent of your attacks on others, show kindness and grace, yet you have done nothing of the kind yourself. Speaking of Pharisees… you might consider talking the log out of your eye before trying to remove the specks from others.
I have not read any of the rest of your stuff, but I understand that you can be ruthless in your writing, betraying your own stated purpose: “Writing ministry of The End Time, by Elizabeth Prata, Exalting name of Jesus through Christian essays.”
Please prayerfully consider the words my Spirit has given for yours. We are all about trying to build up the kingdom of God, and Lori’s ministry will not be perfect… neither yours. But as far as I know we are on the same team Jesus.
‘You’re a ruthless liar’… ‘We build up the kingdom of God’. Bit of a disconnect .Photo by nega on Unsplash
My reply to Ken’s message #4. I kept it short thinking he’d said all that needed to be said and I was done too.
Thanks. I ask you to do the same. Have a pleasant day.
(He gave it a thumbs up in reply)
Ken’s message #5: out of the blue hours later. I had not replied.
Some of the things you write must be a joke: “I wrote about how Lori’s insistence on not teaching anything except home economics from Titus 2 (a stance which, even then, lacks several aspects of the verse, such as kindness, sensibility, reverence, etc).”
Lori has not only taught on all these subjects extensively but she has a book out with a chapter on each one.
You really need to find the Spirit here. I have never heard her equate Titus 2 with Home Economics. Now your just making up lies.
Mark Jay Goebel/Getty Images
Obviously I’d get nowhere with a man who has that little self-respect and that much anger, to think himself a Christian and called me a troll, a liar, a joke, making up lies listening to satan, not walking the walk, so much ad hominem… but not an ounce of self-reflection. I’d had enough: My reply to Ken Message #5.
Please do not contact me again. And repent of your rough mouth. “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, acts of adultery, other immoral sexual acts, thefts, false testimonies, and slanderous statements.” Mt 15:19
Ken disrespected my boundary and in a shocking lack of self-control, contacted me again: Ken message #6:
It’s interesting how often the Spirit gives you thoughts that you should be applying to yourself, yet you ignore them. May He open up your hardened heart to see what you are doing is not glorifying to Him.
I think we are on the same Team Jesus…. I sure hope so.
My reply to unasked for Ken Message #6. I knew he’d be looking to see what I’d say so I waited until the little circle showed he had read my reply below, then I blocked him.
“BLOCKED and REPORTED for HARASSMENT”
PS: I tried to find the Facebook information on harassment but had a hard time finding it, and when I finally did and read it, decided his correspondence didn’t rise to the level of harassing. He was just more of an annoyance.
—–end correspondence—–
The reference to the children and the hitting and the cold was a story Lori had published about a Christmas morning when she came downstairs to see her 1, 3, 5, 7 year olds had opened up every single present. She was “so upset” and began hitting her kids with her slipper hard enough to “let them know she was clearly angry”. Running upstairs to Ken he came down and put all of them outside on the porch to them the shutting out of the Garden of Eden, so the 1 year old and the others “could ponder their sin.” Later Ken relished the memory by saying they were ‘so cute all lined up out there.’ Ken and Lori are careful nowadays to say ‘swat’ or ‘spank’ instead of hit or beat. He dislikes when I say “hit”.
Anyway I wanted the messages to be public so it would be transparent, not only his behavior, but mine too. So you can decide. A journalist puts the information out there in the most credible and factual way possible, and so that the reader can make her own assessment.
As a journalist, I am familiar with how people act when their worldview is challenged. I know what happens with some, who, when presented with facts contrary to their long-held opinion, act up. I’m used to people like Ken Alexander.
But the issue is: he is half of the Transformed Wife’s ministry He is an overseer of it, contributing author to it, and ultimate teacher within it. A student will go no higher than his teacher, so, my goal is to present information that clearly shows that the Transformed Wife’s ministry is not healthy. Ken and Lori Alexander should not be followed.
My goal, sole goal, is to present information about this self-stated ‘ministry’ of Lori Alexander, The Transformed Wife, which is partnered by Ken Alexander, that demonstrate that the two of them are to be marked and avoided as false teachers. Their issues, both behavioral and doctrinal, give a clear picture that their material should not be consumed. Stay away.
Though the internet affords opportunity for anyone to come forth with a blog, a Youtube or TikTok channel, to tweet or comment on Facebook boldly, not all content should be absorbed. Lori Alexander The Transformed Wife’s should not.
But first, a defense of discernment
Jesus praised the folks at church at Ephesus doing discernment properly. It’s in Revelation 2:2 and 2:6-
‘I know your deeds and your toil and perseverance, and that you cannot bear with those who are evil, and you put to the test those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false;
Yet this you do have, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.
Critiquing a ministry is appropriate. “Going to them” personally is not required. Public teachings can and should be publicly assessed. Evaluation is noble. (Acts 17:11)
Discerning Lori Alexander
If you take Lori Alexander’s tweets individually, if you read them occasionally or one-by-one, they seem good. Like this one:
I agree with this one as well:
Nothing bad there. It’s good advice. Firstly, the tricky part comes when she also mixes in things that are not biblical. Secondly, the damaging part is consuming a steady diet of her material. Over time you see an accumulation of tone and thought: that almost every tweet disparages women, wives, and marriage in some way. Worst of all, the advice you see over time, is extra-biblical because it’s legalistic.
Ligonier definition of Legalism: “Legalism is, by definition, an attempt to add anything to the finished work of Christ. It is to trust in anything other than Christ and His finished work for one’s standing before God.“
To that end, The Transformed Wife’s cumulative posts reveal a constant pointing to a wife’s works as the measure of a marriage, her standing with God, and her soul. It’s trust in Debi and Michael Pearl, not Christ of the cross. It’s trust in the idol of submission Lori has made it for herself. Husband’s responsibility is not mentioned. Grace is not found. Charity, fruit, prayer, or scripture is not evidenced. Only legalistic, negative-Nellie warnings in confident absolutes. Dire and dour. For example, “women destroy everything”, see screenshot below.
Her focus is as she states here- is usually on Eve alone. She’ll accuse Eve like here- “The devil deceived Eve, “and Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression”(II Tim2:14)” but not include Romans 5:12-13, stating that Adam also sinned.
Biblical concern # 1, Lori Disbelieves in Original Sin
In a post now scrubbed, Lori wrote in 2016: “Your children are born in the flesh. It’s not sinful yet since they haven’t sinned, just as Adam’s flesh wasn’t sinful before he sinned“. (Source). And in 2022 or 23 The Transformed Wife replied to a woman asking Lori directly about original sin. Her reply was completely unbiblical. (Source: Lindsey Davis-Knotts)-
I asked Lori about her stance on original sin in May 2023 but she refused to answer and blocked me. Later, Lori came out with a weak affirmation of original sin but I suspect its sincerity, because it was issued under cloud of the growing scandal that her stance had generated when it resurfaced.
Disbelieving in our sin nature from the womb and at birth going forward in life is a big doctrine to get wrong. This heresy is actually called Pelagianism after Pelagius who promoted it. This doctrine was condemned as heresy in 418 by the Council of Carthage.
Biblical concern # 2: Lori teaches that women should not teach doctrine to other women, thus her view of scripture is skewed
My conviction that women shouldn’t be teaching women doctrines other than the doctrine of biblical womanhood, as commanded in Titus 2:3-5, has given me a lot of criticism from many places. I am even being called dangerous, legalistic, ungodly, and a false teacher. Women’s Bible studies are the pathway that has led to many female preachers/pastors, women speaking in the churches, and lukewarm churches. If women can preach/teach Scripture in a church, how is this any different than the men who do this on Sunday mornings?
The first issue with this stance, is that it is wrong. We are not saying Titus 2 urges women to preach in church. The verse is urging older women to teach the younger. That’s all. Lori tends to make straw man fallacies and argue them when they in fact don’t exist.
Teaching what is good means teaching about God – who is the only Good. (Mark 10:18). She got this ‘no teaching doctrine or theology’ from Dale Partridge, who is a man who fell below reproach due to serial plagiarism, and should not be teaching or pastoring. This shows that Lori displays a lack of discernment. More on Partridge on another day. She elevates Michael and Debi Pearl and Dale Partridge’s teachings as if they are Gospel words from Jesus Himself. But when challenged, won’t take anyone else’s words, research, or experience into account.
The apostle Paul tells Titus, in verse 3, that older women must first of all teach what is good. What could possibly be better than the Lord Jesus Christ? Doesn’t being a godly wife, mother and housekeeper flow out of knowing Him? Surely women without the Lord are fully capable of teaching those basic skills!
Only a Christian woman, however, can teach her sisters Who Jesus is. And obviously she can’t do so unless she teaches sound doctrine. Theology lays the groundwork for having godly marriages, raising children by godly principles and maintaining a home that reflects godly order. Theology deepens our understanding of who God is and what He values. So when a woman teaches right theology to other women as a supplement to the pastor’s preaching, she assists their abilities to be wives and mothers that bring glory to God.
DebbieLynne is wise.
Lori Alexander’s self-imposed strict legalism about not teaching women other doctrines than the one doctrine Lori deems acceptable to teach, that is, biblical womanhood, has resulted in her skewed view of scripture. 2 Peter 3:14-18 can be applied to her, particularly where the unstable distort God’s teachings. For example, several times she has said the following:
Legalism will take one verse and camp on it to the exclusion of other verses and to the exclusion of the authorial intent and context. This is what is meant by the unstable twisting God’s word.
Her version of submission is one way only and she doesn’t to my knowledge teach young women what to expect from a husband according to Ephesians 5 or any other pertinent verses.
Ephesians 5:25 urges believers “Just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her”. Ephesians 5:28–29 says “So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself”. This is sacrificial love. Not submissive love per se, but a gentle leadership love that sacrifices for the wife. There is none of that kind of teaching in Lori’s world.
Husbands lead. Yes they are the ultimate decision-maker, but leading means leading in kindness and grace, remembering what Christ has done for His church and mimicking the same in sacrificial love.
Submission is Lori’s ‘tithing of mint’. “But woe to you Pharisees! For you pay tithe of mint and rue and every kind of garden herb, and yet disregard justice and the love of God; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others.” Luke 11:42
3. Lori is a King James Onlyist
Lori said in a blog post she agrees with Michael Pearl who teaches KJV-Only. Pearl had said in that video, “I believe that the King James Bible is the Word of God and not the other books” (Michael Pearl). Pearl has also said,
“The others are not really translations, they’re not preservations of the Word of God. They’re modern renderings which involve somewhat the imagination of the authors, and they’re all done for the sake of selling something.” (MPearl)
This shows a lack of discernment on Lori’s part. It again demonstrates her total acceptance of what Michael and Debi Pearl teach, a stance she has repeated many times in affirming the Pearls’ ministry and defending their teachings.
Rebuttal: Dr. James White spends a few minutes with Todd Friel of Wretched (Wretched is a ministry Lori quotes and speaks well of), on the fact that while the KJV is good, as the centuries have passed and as more archaeological finds have occurred giving us original documents of the original Bible, there are better versions nowadays.
That video with Friel and White was 9 years ago and lately the Legacy Standard Bible has been issued. This new version is a spare updating of the original NASB 1995. The translators went back to the original languages of the Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic. Alan Hunter spends 3 minutes explaining it, here.
It is of biblical concern she promotes KJV-onlyism which again I say, displays a lack of discernment. She wrote that she likes it, besides the fact that Michael Pearl taught that it’s the best and only version that is acceptable, but because homosexual is a recently made up word but the KJV uses sodomite and that is a way better word, Lori says. Oy.
One of the saddest signs of legalistic Christianity is the tenacious defense of the KJV as the only legitimate English-language translation. Almost as sad is that countless hours of scholars’ and pastors’ time must be diverted from the larger priorities of God’s kingdom to point out the numerous historical, logical, and factual errors of KJV Onlyism — even though these errors have been repeatedly exposed in the past.
4. Lori is unteachable. She resorts to victim status when challenged or corrected
Every teacher and every person with a ministry, has both a responsibility to be as correct as possible, and has a duty to be accountable to their own overseers and to those whom they teach. In ministry, we’re talking souls, we’re talking of eternal truths from the Bible, and we’re talking of our Sovereign King. Heavy stuff. Though we do not kowtow to trolls, and though we should have a fair amount of confidence in our own settled convictions that we teach, no one is above error. As Lori says constantly when defending the indefensible (more on that below) she overlooks and ignores error by constantly replying to challenges of Gothard or the Pearls or Hannah Pearl Davis, “no one is 100%”.
Well, that seems not to apply to her, because when she was asked about original sin by me, I was blocked right away. Others report the same, blocking rather than engaging. She never seems to give her teachings a fair evaluation when many, MANY who have pleaded with her to do just that. Nor does she give an evaluation of the terrible teachings of the Bill Gothard of IBLP or the Pearls (Debi & Michael) though constantly asked by many to do just that. Her reactions are knee-jerk defenses. Often they don’t make sense or she contradicts herself within the same posting.
A minister of the Gospel should be teachable, fair, and humbly allow correction when wrong. Lori does not. Rather than seek truth, she retreats behind a blocked wall, scrubs content, deletes tweets, hides comments, and carries on with error. Proverbs 12:1 applies here, which I’ll share in the KJV since Lori likes that version so much-
Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth reproof is brutish.
And then out comes the victim status. After asking about her stance on original sin, she messaged me, saying: “I can’t believe you’re scouring through my writings to find things against me that was stolen from my private chat room by trolls!”
There is no need to ‘scour’ writings since she has been on blogs and other social media since 2011, and all of them public. I asked about nothing that wasn’t public. ‘To find things against me’ is typical victimhood. In her mind, a person asking about the basis for her theology and lifestyle choices is actively trying to bring her down. She wants 100% agreement all the time, when in fact, questions about what a teacher has written is called reasoning together to find mutual understanding, or to enact repentance and correction.
And you say, “How I have hated discipline! And my heart spurned reproof! I have not listened to the voice of my instructors, And I have not inclined my ear to my teachers! I was almost in utter ruin In the midst of the assembly and congregation.”
What one expects of a teacher is right belief within orthodoxy, and the fruit of the spirit- two of which are teachability and humility. When a person lacks those, their doctrine becomes skewed, as well as their ability to discern.
5. Lori Alexander defends alleged instances of marital rape & engages in child beating, under the names ‘submission and ‘discipline’
This is a serious charge. I will back it up.
Lori gave advice on a video to a woman who said that her husband had asked her for sex and the wife had said no thanks, but the wife awoke to her husband in the middle of the night having sex with her anyway. The question the wife asked Lori was, ‘is this rape?’
In the video, Lori replied,
“I said well do you feel like you need to call the police and have them locked in jail because if true rape is when you’re assaulted and against your will by some stranger and you you feel like he’s worthy of being put in prison.”Here, time stamps 2:33, 2:51.
She received a lot of flak for that (rightly so) and in unteachable fashion, didn’t take fair look at her reply but doubled down instead. She said in a defensive-rebuttal blog post-
I told her that no, this wasn’t considered marital rape. Marital rape is when a husband forces himself upon his wife on a frequent basis while drunk or high on drugs or is simply an abusive, mean man. If there is true marital rape, there is physical abuse that comes with it. … It’s not that big of a deal!” source.
Wait, a woman has to be raped a bunch of times for it to be rape? Or he has to be high for it to be rape? It’s not rape if it only happened once, or if he was sober when he did it? If no physical evidence of your refusal can be seen, it’s not rape? (That’s an outdated 1980s rape culture philosophy that harmed and silenced many women). Lori said nothing about Jesus’ charge to the husband to exhibit self-control, or as Ephesians 5:29b says ‘he should nourish and cherish her just as Christ also does the church’.
She has extremely troubling views on consent and boundaries (which include positive mentions of husband swatting his wife on the behind? Corporal punishment of the wife?!)
Legally, most states consider it rape when the victim is unconscious. Further, regarding consent laws, “Researchers who have spoken to husband-rapists conclude that they rape to express anger, and to reinforce power, dominance, and control over their wives and families. • Stereotypes about women and sex such as women enjoy forced sex, women say “no” when they really mean “yes,” and it’s a wife’s duty to have sex continue to be reinforced in our culture. Such stereotypes mislead into believing they should ignore a woman’s protests. These stereotypes also mislead women into believing they must have sent the wrong signals. Women blame themselves for unwanted sexual encounters, believing they are bad wives for not enjoying sexual encounters, or believing they are bad wives for not enjoying sex against their will.”
With Lori Alexander, you begin to notice that everything is always the wife’s fault. She has a dim view of marriage, a joyless outlook, and dispenses advice filled with lots of legalism and blame. Like this screenshot.
Worse, when I read this account of her approach to ‘discipline’ I had to walk away and calm myself down. I grew up in a not-safe household where things like this happened or were threatened to happen. Lori Alexander, following the Pearls’ advice, beat her children in the name of godly submission and obedience.
Christmas is a time to celebrate the wondrous incarnation of Christ, to gather with family and prayerfully and joyfully speak and sing of His love, share gifts in that spirit. It isn’t to focus on the opportunity to abuse your children by hitting them in anger (severe lack of self-control to hit babies in anger!) for a totally appropriate child-like reaction to Christmas. Please note that there are many mentions of her hitting her children for being children, even crawling babies, urging women to hit them hard enough to make them feel pain so they won’t crawl off the blanket or display unwanted negative emotions.
It isn’t just about locking them outside on a cold morning. The act of closing your home’s door against your babies and toddlers should enrage even the most strict disciplinarian. All that “teaches” them is that you can be tossed out at a moment’s notice and that your home is NOT SAFE and it’s NOT PERMANENT. It just shows the kids that ‘home’ could be lost for the most trivial of reasons.
Here is a link to a Christianity Today Article from 2011 “When Child Discipline Becomes Abuse which notes several children have died under this cruel and abusive method that Lori encourages moms to use to this day. Yet she defends her actions of hitting babies with belts or a switch to this day.
Here is a page of 34 screen shots showing her stance on physical punishment of under-three-year-olds. The one where she says make sure you’re in a state that allows you to use an instrument like a belt or a rod rather than just a hand…smh. And advising women to ‘break the child’s will’? Where is the nurturing and loving admonishment?
She kicked her cat, too, hard enough to break its ribs if she’d actually connected. She smacks her babies in anger, why not the cat? (Source)
“Blanket Training” is a technique in the Pearl’s book that involves putting a 6 month old baby on the floor on a blanket, putting a few toys just off the blanket, encouraging the baby to crawl off the blanket to get the toy, then and then hitting the child with an implement like a wooden spoon or a stick if they do so. Repeat until the child remains on the blanket despite temptations.
This is a practice Lori Alexander enacted and approves of. I’d show you recent screen shots from Twitter but she has deleted them. Nevertheless, here is one reply to one of Lori’s now-deleted tweets approving of blanket training,
@jannabstil: Blanket training is holding power over the powerless. Putting out toys that they can’t have, and then hitting them when they reach for it..you are tempting them to sin. Something Jesus never did and says not to do. Obedience should never be taught using fear. This is abuse.
Tim Challies is a book reviewer, author, blogger, and pastor. He reviewed Debi Pearl’s book and Michael Pearl’s books books negatively. This is the method Lori says completely transformed her and which she follows to the letter. Tim is Canadian and known to be an even more polite Canadian than most Canadians. Even if a book review is negative, it’s usually softly presented. Not this time. He reviewed both the Pearls’ books severely.
Throughout the book, Pearl shows that she is a poor and unwise mentor. In place of the wisdom and the fruit of the Spirit that ought to mark a mentor, she displays a harsh and critical spirit, she offers foolish counsel, she teaches poor theology, she misuses Scripture, and she utterly misses the centrality of the gospel.
A student will go no higher than her teacher, and thus, Lori is exactly the same as Challies described Debi Pearl above.
Michael Pearl’s book How to Train up a Child, a review titled by Challies “How (Not to) Train up a Child” had so much to say he made his review into two parts. (Part 1, Part 2). About Michael Pearl’s book, Challies said
But the fact remains that the weight of the book is driven by an unbiblical view of human nature which in turn leads to the wrong emphases. In place of the gracious, loving mercy of gospel is the harsh justice of law.
And that is the same spirit that touched Lori Alexander so much that it ‘transformed’ her, and sadly, which she displays in her online persona via Tweets, Youtubes, TikToks, blogs, Facebook, and Instagram posts. Remember, it was Debi Pearl’s book that she says transformed her, NOT the Holy Spirit’s illuminating truth to her mind. THAT is why her advice is twisted and legalistic, because it’s not based on God’s book, but on her idol’s book.
Lori Alexander’s dependence on the KJV only, the Pearls, and to a lesser degree Bill Gothard’s teachings, along with a limited view of scripture has drawn her into a sphere where she dispenses seemingly surface good advice but comes from a very cultish place.
“It’s a culture of fear, is what it is,” says Veinot, who wrote a book about Gothard and IBLP. “If you [follow] these rules, you make God happy and thereby will be protected. If you violate the rules, then you will be punished: Your car will break down and your washing machine won’t work and your kids will rebel.” The charismatic leader, the authoritarian control, the isolation of members, the severe punishments, the demand for absolute and blind loyalty—all those elements outlined in the lawsuit add up to IBLP being “cult-like,” he says.
He was speaking of the Gothardites but I find his assessment can and should be applied to Lori Alexander, who is a kind of Gothardite herself.
Ladies, don’t be so relieved you found someone online who refreshingly teaches biblical womanhood that you overlook the serious flaws from the Transformed Wife’s ministry. She’s wrong on not teaching doctrine to other women, she’s wrong on the Pearls, she’s wrong on the Duggars, she’s wrong on Bill Gothard, she’s wrong on KJV-only, she’s wrong on her version of wifely submission and the husband’s role.
Yes, she pushes back against culture but does it so far and so hard far that she enters legalistic, pharisaical territory. Many of her teachings are in absolutes, as in these paraphrased attitudes-
‘No wife should EVER work outside the home’, ‘higher education for a woman means she is a feminist’, ‘anyone who critiques me is a hater Jezebel,’ and this a direct quote- “Our culture sure isn’t turning out many great children now; that’s for sure.”
I’d encourage women to watch these two videos, and compare against the tone and content of Lori’s teachings. The first is a short video of a mom listening to her boy after he’d been thru the consequence of his disobedience and had a tantrum. He had calmed down and was talking it through. Can you envision Lori gently speaking with her son this way? Or does the picture of Christmas morning and in fury smacking her son with a slipper come to mind? It’s just 1:18 long.
This next one is a marvelous Titus 2 woman from ‘across the pond’. She is Sharon Dickens, who has been in Women’s Ministry for 25 plus years, written books on biblical womanhood, and has a loving approach to being a Titus 2 woman. Think of the end goal here. Lori’s end goal is always telling women to submit and that everything that goes wrong in a marriage is her fault. That is her only mantra. And because she has restricted herself from speaking of Jesus, her mantras are devoid of love.
Here Sharon is interviewed by Exposit the Word’s UK leader, David Knight. David asked her about her church’s ministry program, “20 schemes” (a scheme in Scotland is akin to a lower middle-class neighborhood or ‘the projects’).
She said, “Growing up the next generation and [unintelligible] leaders that’s what I get excited about. I mean God saving people and then investing in them and seeing them moving to become all that God has meant them to be. So, women’s ministries, yeah I love I love the ministry. My role in that as Director of Women’s Ministries is I love seeing God save and transform and then I love seeing our new believers fulfill their full potential.“
Wow. What a breath of fresh air, taking joy in salvations, attributing womens’ sanctification to God, and reveling in ladies growing in His likeness. And Sharon puts her money where her mouth is, teaching the whole Bible to whole women, enjoying Christ and being transformative via His word shared in real lives.
Friends, rather than simply taking Lori’s words at face value, look at what she says AND does. I’d heard somewhere that “When someone shows you who they are, believe them.”
Conclusion
Lori Alexander has a lot of influence. Here is an article from 2018 describing her influence:
She has a massive following of over 232,000. This is concerning to me. She is on Facebook, Administers a private chat room, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, Gab Social, Youtube, and has a blog probably with subscribers and for sure, readers.
I urge women, especially younger women who may be relieved to discover a conservative and traditional older women, to avoid Lori Alexander. And I haven’t even gone into the hypocrisy and contradictions, of which there are many. (The Wiki link below has them, so take a look).
In delving into her videos, posts, tweets, books, and influences, I have come to the conclusion she is completely unedifying. In my opinion she is a rigid, joyless, emotional miser, mindlessly defending the cult of Gothard and Pearl, and promoting unthinking, soul-shrinking capitulation, not joyful soul-expanding submission.
Her entire ministry is one of berating, warnings, and loveless unconcern for the many women to look to her for advice. Rather than exhibiting joyful submission in honor of the grace bestowed by a compassionate savior nurturing his sheep, she advises dour duty and plodding legalism heavier than a weight around one’s neck. Lori Alexander IS a millstone, and she will weigh you down and bring you down if you follow her.
My conclusion is based on the unbiblical view she has of doctrine, of her narrow interpretation of Titus 2, of her own words regarding marital sex (not lovemaking, and btw a subject she discusses way too frequently for a discreet godly woman she alleges to be), and her own words regarding her spiritual gurus Gothard and Pearl.
What did Jesus excoriate the most? The rigid legalism of the Pharisees. Remember, He pronounced WOES upon them for doing what they did to the helpless sheep. Woes represent his deepest anger. I weep for young ladies who get drawn into Lori’s sphere. There are more wholesome and balanced women’s ministries out there.
The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses. Therefore, whatever they tell you, do and comply with it all, but do not do as they do; for they say things and do not do them. And they tie up heavy burdens and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as their finger. And they do all their deeds to be noticed by other people…(Matthew 23:2-5a).
My discernment radar is off the charts with this ministry. Her influence is vast, the danger is real. I found this entry below to be fair and is saturated with links to original words or screen shots.
The following is a critique of Bill Gothard and the Institute in Basic Life Principles (IBLP) by well-respected journalist Don Veinot. Lori vehemently defends alleged child abuser Bill Gothard, summarily rejects accusations of his alleged cult, and vigorously defends the Duggars, rejecting allegations of child abuse & molestation in the family. She has come out with several blogs affirming the Duggars in the face of the documentary exposing the abuse and cult-like atmosphere, and published another one today, claiming it is the evil ‘globalists’ agenda’ behind the doc.
As I said, Lori lacks discernment and is so invested in her own system she won’t entertain even an iota of mention that it is false. To her, wifely submission is more important that rightly regarding Christ.
Sharon Dickens is a good role model:
I am certainly not the first person to critique Lori Alexander. Many have been saying these things for years and still do to this day. I am a Johnny Come Lately. But here are a couple of other critiques I found that I think are accurate:
I listened to two videos from Gina at Where the Wild Bee Wings critiquing Lori Alexander/The Transformed Wife. I just found Gina today. I am not familiar with Gina’s videos except the two I watched on Lori and one on morning coffee.
I find her gentle and honest and spot-on. I was impressed, for two reasons. First because the first video I watched began with an explanation of why Gina had deleted her original video critiquing Lori Alexander. A commenter had made a gentle rebuke and asked Gina to think about it. Gina did think about it, agreed with the rebuke, and then deleted her entire video and remade it in better fashion. I was impressed with this and it made me want to listen to her more. That is being teachable and humble!
Secondly, because Gina makes insightful comments. Here is another video from Gina rebutting the blog essay Lori wrote about not expecting the husband to fulfill emotional needs (here). And a video about Lori’s reaction to Shiny Happy People docuseries and Lori’s defense of the Duggars. (here).
Disclaimers
Yes, I have ‘gone to Lori’ personally. It didn’t last long. I asked the one question about original sin, and she complained I was out to get her like the rest of her trolls, blocked me and misstated on her blog what had happened. Secondly, going to a person privately when critiquing her public ministry is not necessary. It’s nice, but not mandated.
No, I’m not “jealous” of Lori’s marriage, her following, or her life. Why would I be jealous of someone Jesus is probably going to pronounce woes upon? The question is, are you concerned for thousands of young women who cling to her awful advice, which includes mishandling scripture, bad psychiatry, untrained medical pronouncements, hypocrisy, and child abuse?
I am a member in good standing of a local, elder led, expository church and I believe in the God-ordained role for women: The older to minister as Titus 2 says to the younger, and for the younger, to become wives and moms IF the Lord grants a husband and/or children. I believe the Bible is patriarchal, and that husbands lead families and men lead churches.
I believe that women especially if married should make home their primary orientation and that is what I teach and encourage, BUT that each husband and wife come to their own decisions regarding women’s work outside the home and anyone who makes generalized absolute pronouncements upon others with no knowledge (like Lori Alexander does) is a legalist and an ignorant busybody.
Recommended women’s ministries- they teach online and in real life with grace and humility, and with these ladies, Christ is central, not just “submission”.
Women’s Hope: A podcast: Join Dr. Shelbi Cullen and Kimberly Cummings as they bring hope and encouragement through 25 years of combined experience in biblical discipleship.
Actually let’s back up a bit. It all begins and ends with God.
Sunset at Jerusalem. Source Faithlife media
Before the foundation of the world, God determined in His mind and His heart to select a people for Himself to have fellowship with. (Ephesians 1:4). He began with Adam and Eve, then made covenants through Noah, Abraham, David, and the entire People Israel. He revealed His extended operations and dealings with man by grafting in the Gentiles (all the world) to His promises of Redemption and grace through faith with any person who repents to Jesus, God’s Son.
Through all this Jerusalem has remained for almost the entire period the central city of God. Earlier named Salem, when we meet King Melchizedek of Salem, this city of Jerusalem is the true eternal city, not Rome as man has dubbed that ancient urban center.
Jerusalem! It is the eternal city, (Psalm 46:4, Revelation 3:12) God’s city where He has set His name, (1 Kings 11:36, 2 Chronicles 12:13) and is the city in which Immanuel (Matthew 1:23) will dwell in all His glory, (Zechariah 8:3) calling it Jehovah Shammah, The Lord is There. (Ezekiel 48:35). It is the nickname He uses when he calls His people. (Zechariah 3:2). When Jesus returns, “Then Jerusalem will be called the City of Truth, and the mountain of Yahweh of hosts will be called the Holy Mountain.'” Says Zechariah 8:3.
It is a place that figures solely as the most important land, city, and people in the history of the earth. All of history is dwindling down to one focal point: Jerusalem. So let’s take a look at this incredible place.
In all of history, there’s never been a distinct people group who dwelled outside of a national homeland for thousands of years yet retained their identity like the Jewish people have. There has never been a people on earth restored to their homeland after dozens of generations. There has never been a case where generations upon generations who forgot their own language and let it die, had it restored to the entire nation. No people, that is, except for God’s people in God’s land and in God’s city- Jerusalem. This is God’s hand.
This tiny nation is mighty in many ways, because her very existence has generated hate and war since her birth. Just existing provokes the entire world into hating her. Allowing her to make her own sovereign decisions as a nation inflames the world (satan).
Ancient maps placed Jerusalem in the center of the page. They knew that Jerusalem is God’s city and is the fulcrum of history, the axle of the wheel, and the center of the world stage. In the Jewish tradition, the Ark in the Temple in Jerusalem, through which God dealt with his people through the High Priest, it is the Foundation marking the “navel of world”. Ezekiel 5:5, “This is Jerusalem; I have set her at the center of the nations.”
We read a similar reference in Ezekiel 38:2, “to seize spoil and carry off plunder, to turn your hand against the waste places that are now inhabited, and the people who were gathered from the nations, who have acquired livestock and goods, who dwell at the center of the earth.”
And what of this land? What is it like? It is wonderful! From deserts of the southern Negev to the snow-capped mountains to the north, to the 270 miles of coastline along the Mediterranean and to the frontier at the east, it is a diverse land.
Mountains of Judea, source Wikipedia commons
Northern coast. Source Wikipedia commons
Jordan’s Rift Valley, Source Wikipedia commons
Acacia tree in Negev Desert, Makhtesh Gadol, Wiki photo
Jerusalem itself is about 2500 feet in elevation. It sits on a plateau within the mountains, which includes the Mount of Olives, and Mount Scopus. Valleys surround the city. We read in the Psalms some “Psalms of Ascent” because when Jews made the annual trek to the City for Passover, they climbed to the old City. They were ascending.
As the mountains surround Jerusalem, So Yahweh surrounds His people From now until forever. (Psalm 125:2).
And many mountains do surround the city, almost like a rampart. Some count the peaks numbering 7, and refer to the Revelation 17:9 verse describing a city of seven mountains upon which the harlot sits as Jerusalem, not Rome.
1. Mount Scopus, 2. Mount of Olives 3. Mount of Corruption 4. Mount Ophel 5. Mount Zion/Moriah (AKA the Temple Mount) 6. New Mount Zion 7. the Roman Antonia Fortress peak
The Kidron Valley runs to the east of Old Jerusalem and the Mount of Olives is actually separated from it. Along the southern side of old Jerusalem is the Valley of Hinnom, a steep ravine where hell or Gehenna is mentioned and the trash heaps blazed night and day. In biblical times, lush forests surrounded the city, forests of almond, pine, and olive. These forests are gone now. Due to the steep incline, farmers used a terracing system to keep the soil in place and those can still be seen today.
I’d mentioned that Jerusalem was the primary city for the Israelites for “most” of their life, but in the early years of the Israelite kingdom, the Ark of the Covenant was sometimes moved around to several sanctuaries, especially those of Shechem and Shiloh. Shiloh was the capital for almost 400 years, before the first temple was built. Jeremiah 7:12a says
“But go now to My place which was in Shiloh, where I made My name dwell at the beginning,
After King David’s capture of Jerusalem, the Ark was moved to Jerusalem. Its presence there signified the presence of the LORD within the Holy of Holies. Sadly, the people’s idolatry, bloodshed, and disobedience meant that eventually the glory would depart from the Temple (Ezekiel 9-10). This happened in advance of the Babylonian sacking of the temple. In fact, God’s glory would never again occupy a temple or a building on earth.
Today the glorious temple is mostly gone. Only the grounds and the Western Wall (a retaining wall) are left of the original building. Atop the grounds lies the Dome of the Rock, the 3rd most holy site in Islam. Will there be a third temple? Some believe so, that the events of Ezekiel 37 indicate a future restoration of the temple with Jesus bodily present and with His people:
And the nations will know that I am Yahweh who sanctifies Israel, when My sanctuary is in their midst forever.
Jerusalem today is a bustling city, the intersection of three religions- Islam, Christianity, and Judaism. One day the ‘City of Truth’ will know only 1 true religion, and its inhabitants will worship Yahweh properly. What a day that will be!
This is the third of a 4-part series on the Great Cities of the Bible. I’ve written about Damascus and Babylon in the first two parts. Damascus first because it is among the first cities mentioned in the Bible and is the oldest continuously inhabited city in the world. And I chose Babylon second because its presence from Genesis to Revelation dominates the Bible’s spiritual and historical landscape.
Now we turn to Rome. GotQuestions notes that – “Rome is not mentioned in the Old Testament but figures prominently in the New Testament. Although the city of Rome is not often directly mentioned, every place and event in the New Testament has Roman rule as its background.“
Part of the reason I’m doing this series is because we tend to be myopic in our day and age, thinking we are the most advanced or the most sophisticated or our culture is the best. It’s hard to physically go see that in Babylon because it is mostly a ruin now. Damascus is considered to be one of the most beautiful cities in the Arab world, but sadly, the ongoing war has destroyed much of it by now. However ROME! Ahh, Rome, one can wander the streets and see many buildings from the Bible days intact. One can envision Paul standing up in court…writing his ‘Jail Epistles’ (Ephesians, Colossians, Philippians and Philemon). We can visit the Colosseum where so many Christians were martyred.
Underfloor of the Roman Colosseum, where many Christians were martyred. EPrata photo
Rome is both the city and was an Empire. It is urban setting and also a character itself in the Bible history. It is a city past from Bible days, a thriving city today, and it is an Roman empire future in prophecy. Rome was the oppressor of the Jews in Judea but its engineered roads allowed for the dispersed believers to bring the Gospel out to the world.
It was first called The Eternal City (Latin: Urbs Aeterna; Italian: La Città Eterna) by the Roman poet Tibullus in the 1st century BC, and the expression was also taken up by Ovid, Virgil, and Livy. Rome is also called “Caput Mundi” (Capital of the World).
Rome is also known as the City of Seven Hills, due to the hills that it is founded on and provide a backdrop. This may become important later when in prophecy, discussed more in the postscript.
For almost a thousand years the continent’s people were either one of the unfortunate tribes conquered and absorbed into the vastly growing Roman empire, or were one of the privileged Romans citizens enjoying the engineering marvels the Romans invented and especially Pax Romana (widespread peace) during the 200 years of the Empire’s height. Paul the Apostle was a Roman Citizen, and this fact allowed him to escape one of the intended beatings, to stand in a Roman Court and plead his case, and at the end, legend says, given the less painful execution of beheading.
Rome was said to be founded around 625 BC in the areas of ancient Italy’s center known as Etruria and Latium. Etruria was home to the mysterious people of the Etruscans (from which we get the name Tuscany). Not much is known of the Etruscans, except they were a sophisticated culture, master bronzesmiths, their tombs were expertly painted, they formed city-states all over Tuscany as far south as Rome, and began sewer and other construction projects in Rome. It is said that the Etruscans had a heavy influence on the conquering Romans.
For about a hundred years or so, this merging and overlap of the Etruscans and the Romans led to the period known as the Age of Kings, which came to an end when the Etruscans disappeared, and the Roman Republic was born. (510 BC). It was during this time that Romans codified their laws and were led by the citizens (upper class senators and knights).
They continued to expand their empire with masterful military strategies and successive victories. By 338 BC they had conquered the entire Italian peninsula and a few years later gained control of the Mediterranean as a dominant maritime power.
The time of Jesus’ birth through his death & resurrection, the rise of the Church, and the last of the first generation witnesses (31BC to 90 AD and beyond) was known as the Imperial Rome era. During this period, Rome saw decades of peace, prosperity, and expansion. Its maximum land expansion occurred in about AD 117, near when Apostle John died. Its empire spanned three continents including Asia Minor, northern Africa, and most of Europe as far north as Scotland.
Unlike many other conquering empires, Rome allowed worship of personal gods. They were a pantheistic society. We remember in Daniel 1 when Nebuchadnezzar besieged and conquered Jerusalem and carried off its captives, “among them from the sons of Judah were Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah.7 Then the commander of the officials set names for them; and for Daniel he set the name Belteshazzar, for Hananiah Shadrach, for Mishael Meshach, and for Azariah Abed-nego.” (Daniel 1:6-7). The practice of forced assimilation was common. The boys were given new names, forced to eat what was eaten by the natives, and forced to worship what the natives worshiped, namely, the king. But unusually for an Empire, that was not Rome’s practice.
Definition: Assimilation is one outcome of acculturation. It involves the complete adoption of the ways of life of the new cultural group, resulting in the assimilated group losing nearly all of its original or native culture.
Rome practiced assimilation. Captured peoples from the many wars were brought to Rome as slaves but allowed to practice their religion and maintain their culture. The building in Rome called The Pantheon was originally a temple built for all Roman gods, then later any gods. Pan means “all” and “theos” means “gods”.
The Pantheon in Rome, one of Rome’s best preserved buildings to this day. EPrata photo
The Roman Empire was a primarily polytheistic civilization, which meant that people recognized and worshiped multiple gods and goddesses. Despite the presence of monotheistic religions within the empire, such as Judaism and early Christianity, Romans honored multiple deities. They believed that these deities served a role in founding the Roman civilization and that they helped shape the events of people’s lives on a daily basis. Romans paid allegiance to the gods both in public spaces and in private homes. While the Roman state recognized main gods and goddesses by decorating public buildings and fountains with their images, families worshipping at home also put special emphasis on the deities of their choosing. Source
The Jews in Judea were overseen (oppressed) by Rome, which sent it governors and soldiers to keep the peace, but largely (except for taxes to keep up the empire) they were allowed to continue as they were and that included worship.
Romans built things. Bridges, temples, mansions, aqueducts, and roads. They had sewers, hot and cold running water, and spas. They had colosseums for their beloved games. It was the roads that allowed the dispersing Christians to take the Gospel to the outermost parts of the empire and beyond. It was the spread of the Latin language in the huge Empire that allowed folks to understand one another when sharing the Gospel with natives. The Roman influence on art and architecture was massive and stands to this day. They loved games and competitions, and they built amphitheaters to play them in. The round and oval stadiums we see today are derived from the Romans. They even held “naumachia” in them, or sea battles. They engineered a system where the amphitheaters could be flooded to host maritime competitions with ships!
Because of their sophisticated government, art, engineering, culture, and lifestyle, the Romans often referred to all other tribes as “barbarians.” They deeply believed they were a superior race to the Germanic tribes or the Celts, both of which they had conquered. However, the Romans for all their marvels and sophistication in the arts, were still pagans, which means, barbaric themselves. Any culture that enjoys live bloody competitions to the death, which invents crucifixion as a method of execution, or dips Christians in tar and sets them alight for garden illumination, is barbaric themselves. No veneer of art or poetry or law can hide the fact that without Christ, any society will die. And the Romans did. After its Pax Romana era came to a close, the city declined until 410 when the Visigoth King Alaric successfully sacked the city of Rome. The “Eternal City” was no more.
POSTSCRIPT
After Alaric and the beginning of the Middle Ages, Rome slowly fell under the political control of the Popes, and in the 700s, Rome became the capital of the Papal States, which lasted until 1870. Even today, Vatican City is a sovereign state inside Rome. The Pope is one of the very the last absolute monarchs on earth. An Absolute Monarchy, which Vatican City is governed by, is defined as “a form of government in which a single person—usually a king or queen—holds absolute, autocratic power. In absolute monarchies, the succession of power is typically hereditary, with the throne passing among members of a ruling family.”
“Absolute monarchies, where the monarch is the final authority, are few and far between these days. There are currently five, excluding subnational monarchies: Brunei, Eswatini, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Vatican City.”
In Revelation 17:7, we read that Babylon the harlot is riding on a beast having seven heads and ten horns. The seven heads are called seven hills or seven mountains in verse 9. Everyone at the time that passage was written was so familiar with Rome being called the city of seven hills it is likely that they understood this to be Rome. As Daniel 2 describes the flow of the world empires from beginning to end in a vision of a statue, will the last empire be a revived Roman Empire? One that includes an absolute monarchy, that already exists today, led by a false prophet (of the Catholic Church?) Many think so.
Further Reading
Book- SPQR: A History of Ancient Rome by Mary Beard. (I’m reading this book. It’s good).
Babylon. City of mystery, history, prophecy. The very name Bab-iliu means “the gate of the gods” in Akkadian, which is the oldest recorded Semitic language and the most common language of the ancient Near East until the eighth century BC.
It was founded on the great river, Euphrates, about 200 miles north of where the Euphrates joins the Tigris and drains into the Persian Gulf, two of the 4 great rivers flowing out of Eden to “water the garden”. (Genesis 2:14).
Babylon was a sacred site dedicated to the (false) god Marduk, the city’s patron god. Often Marduk’s name is included with the title ‘Bel’ to Marduk’s name to indicate supremacy of all the gods. The city’s inhabitants celebrated Marduk at the start of their new year with a festival noting his ascension as king of all gods and his seating in his temple in the city.
Marduk was mentioned in the Bible in Jeremiah 50:1–2 where Yahweh ordered Jeremiah to declare:
‘Babylon has been captured; Bel has been put to shame; Marduk has been shattered; Her images have been put to shame; her idols have been shattered.’
For two thousand years Babylon dominated Mesopotamia.
The Lexham Bible Dictionary indicates that Babylon was a “cultural and political center of Mesopotamia during much of the second and first millennia BC. Located in modern-day Iraq along one branch of the Euphrates River, about 59 miles southwest of Baghdad.“
Babylon Past
Throughout the entire Bible, Babylon stands as a dominating presence as an actual historical empire but also as a symbol of spiritual apostasy and evil opposition to God and His people. Its name Babel is first found in Genesis 11:9,
Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth’
Babylon is the Greek form of the name Babel. Babylon began its ascent in 2300 BC to greatness but really exploded in cultural and architectural wonders during the reign of Hammurabi in 1792 BC, the sixth king of his line. During his reign and later his son’s reign, numerous temples were built and irrigation channels were excavated. King Hammurabi also conquered all of the surrounding cities, including the famous city of “Ur” where Abraham had lived centuries before.
But like many cities, Babylon then began to decline, and this up and down swing continued until Assyria was finally defeated. It then reached another pinnacle during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II and entrenched itself as one of the most important cities in the Near East.
“The empire had been founded by Nebuchadnezzar’s father Nabopolassar (r. 625-605 BCE) after his victories over the Assyrian Empire. Nebuchadnezzar II would go on to even greater things, including the capture of Jerusalem in 597 BCE. The Babylonian king then set about making his capital one of the most splendid cities in the world”. Source World History Encyclopedia
The most famous of these improvements to the city were the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, “ancient gardens considered one of the Seven Wonders of the World and thought to have been located near the royal palace in Babylon” says Encyclopedia Britannica. Though no one is quite sure where they were within the city, there were enough descriptions of them in classical literature to know that they likely existed, though no one is exactly sure of what they looked like.
The Gardens were said to be ‘hanging’ because perhaps they were perhaps on a tall ziggurat with terraces, “were set upon vaulted terraces. They were also described as having been watered by an exceptional system of irrigation and roofed with stone balconies on which were layered various materials, such as reeds, bitumen, and lead, so that the irrigation water would not seep through the terraces.”
In Daniel 4:30 we read the perhaps most famous story about Babylon, where King Nebuchadnezzar admires his city from his palace rooftop, saying “‘Is this not Babylon the great, which I myself have built as a royal house by the strength of my power and for the glory of my majesty?’”
Barnes’ Notes says: “He greatly enlarged the city; built a new city on the west side of the river; reared a magnificent palace; and constructed the celebrated hanging gardens; and, in fact, made the city so different from what it was, and so greatly increased its splendor, that he could say without impropriety that he had “built” it.“
Yet…the very next verse says that King Nebuchadnezzar’s pride and self-glorification was a mistake.
While the word was in the king’s mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, saying, O king Nebuchadnezzar, to thee it is spoken; The kingdom is departed from thee.
The city “under Nebuchadnezzar, who died B.C. 561 after a reign of forty-three years, attained great splendour. In the reign of Belshazzar the capital was taken by Darius the Median (Dan. 5:25–31), who entered it unexpectedly at the head of an army of Medes and Persians, as Isaiah (21:1–9) and Jeremiah (51:31) had predicted some 170 years before. Then began the decay and ruin of this proud city, and the kingdom of Babylon became a part of the Persian empire. In course of time the “great city” became “heaps,” and “an astonishment, and a hissing, without an inhabitant” (Jer. 51:37–58).
“Many of the Jews who had been carried captive to Babylon remained there, notwithstanding the decree of Cyrus. After the destruction of Jerusalem there was established at Babylon a school of Jewish learning of great repute.” Source– Easton’s(1893) In Illustrated Bible Dictionary and Treasury of Biblical History.
Babylon future
Babylon is mentioned in Revelation numerous times. We read in Revelation 14:8, “and another angel, a second one, followed, saying, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great, she who has made all the nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her sexual immorality.”
Babylon was not only a city in history, not only an empire that rose & fell, but the name Babylon is also figurative of an evil commercial-governmental system and an evil spiritual system.
Roy Gingrich interprets both the actual and the symbolic nature of Babylon:
“The fall of Babylon (Rev 14:8)-
“(1) The announcement—Another angel (other than the one in verse 6) announces the soon coming fall of Babylon. The “Babylon” mentioned here is not the religious system of chapter 17 -that “Babylon” was destroyed at the mid-point of “The Seventieth Week”. The “Babylon” mentioned here is the capital city of the political-religious-commercial system of chapter 18, which city and system will be destroyed when the Seventh bowl is poured out. God destroys her because she made the nations drink “the wine of the wrath of her fornication,” that is, because she caused them to commit spiritual fornication, which is punished by God’s wrath.” Gingrich, R. E. (2001). The Book of Revelation (p. 69). Riverside Printing.
Gingrich continues-
“The destruction of religious “Babylon” as an ecclesiastical system, chapter 17. In the days of Nimrod, Gen. 10:8–12, and his wife, Semiramis, around 200 years after the Flood, two great systems came into existence, a God-defiant political system and a God-defiant religious system, the one founded by Nimrod and the other founded by Nimrod through his wife, Semiramis. These two systems are often called Political Babylon and Religious Babylon because they had their beginnings in Babylon, the one in the building of the city of Babylon and the other in the building of the tower of Babylon. The city of Babylon is the symbol of organized political rebellion against God and the tower of Babylon is the symbol of organized religious rebellion against God.” Gingrich, R. E. (2001). The Book of Revelation (pp. 76–77). Riverside Printing
“These two systems in varying forms, have continued on side by side down through the centuries, hating one another but for the sake of self-advancement, exchanging favors with one another. During the Middle Ages, these two systems were seen in the Holy Roman Empire and in the Roman Catholic Church. Today, they are seen in the United Nations Organization and in the Ecumenical Church Movement. During the first half of Daniel’s Seventieth Week, they will be seen in the Revived Roman Empire [“the Scarlet-colored beast,” Rev. 17:3] and in the rejected Lacodicean church] [“the great whore,” Rev. 17:1]. It is very helpful in understanding Rev., chap. 17, to know that “the scarlet-colored beast” and “the great whore” of chapter 17 are the final forms of two great God-defiant systems which have been in existence for over 3,000 years.” Gingrich, R. E. (2001). The Book of Revelation (pp. 76–77). Riverside Printing.
–end Gingrich quote
Babylon both actual and spiritual offer many lessons for us. Whenever I think of Dickens’ “A Tale of Two Cities” I often think of ‘Babylon & Jerusalem’. In the NT Babylon is always mentioned negatively, as a seat of evil, ungodly power. It signifies the world and its forces in opposition to God. It is often contrasted with “New Jerusalem”, in which God will finally reign supreme with no opposition ever again.
We will live in the city GOD built, not a city made by man like Assyria’s Damascus, Caesar’s Rome or Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylon. It will be a pure city, devoid of anything detracting from the glory of Jesus and his Light.
Babylon present
Whatever became of the actual, historical city of Babylon? It no longer really exists. It is a ruin, though it was opened to tourists again in 2009. There is not much to see. It is estimated that only about 5% of the old city has been excavated.
Babylon would stay under the Persian Empire’s rule for two centuries before Alexander the Great then conquered Babylon in 331 BC. He had plans to make Babylon the capital of his empire but died there in 323 BC before his dream came into reality. Alexander’s generals divided his empire among themselves immediately after his death. This is how general Seleucus obtained the historical city of Babylon. Not long after, he moved most of the population to his new capital Seleucia, which left the city decaying and deserted.Source
Will Babylon the city rise again? Only the Lord knows. Babylon the metaphor for an economy and an ecclesiastical system will indeed rise again to uncontested dominance, and be part of the major events prophesied to occur in the future, if the Babylonian system even can be said to have disappeared in the first place. Yet “Babylon” actual and Babylon figurative will finally be squashed in the future when Revelation events occur and Jesus’ wrath wipes out the evil system. The Lord as always, reigns supreme.
There will be no king looking out from his own rooftop and congratulating himself on his achievements. There will be no pagan priests celebrating a false god on a mythical throne. There will be no garden except the one the LORD himself planted, meaning, the world. It will be pure, verdant, and full of peoples who acknowledge Jesus as the supreme Lord of Lords and King of Kings. What a day that will be!
the-end-time.org 