Hislop's 'Babylonian
Mystery Religion' Teaching Exposed and
Overturned.
The Commendable Intellectual Honesty of Ralph Woodrow...
In 1858 a Scottish minister
called Alexander Hislop published a book called 'The Two
Babylons'. The book's basic teaching is that modern
Christianity, in its more ritualistic form (as evidenced within
Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy), is entirely pagan and
can be traced back to the worship of Nimrod and Semiramis and to
the very worst of ancient pagan practises. I myself read this
book when it was loaned to me by a friend around 1981. The book
was certainly fascinating but I recall being disturbed that
almost none of Hislop's claims could really be substantiated by
any reputable source, although it was certainly 'meat and drink'
to the gullible. I did not entirely reject Hislop's thesis but
put in on the back burner for a few years with the feeling that
Hislop's points were not backed up with conclusive evidence
(something which Hislop himself was apparently blind to).
Basically, I came to the conclusion that outrageous
accusation is not the same thing as carefully compiled and
decisive evidence.
Today, of course, the book is
soundly rejected because of the flawed and mostly unsubstantiated
mish-mash which it is. Note, for instance, what the Wikipedia
Encyclopedia says about this book,
The book has been
severely criticized for its lack of evidence, and in many cases
its contradiction of the existing evidence: for instance, the
Roman state religion before Christianity did not worship a
central Mother Goddess, and Jupiter was never called
"Jupiter-Puer." Likewise, Semiramis lived centuries after Nimrod,
and could neither have been his mother, nor married him. Hislop
also makes unacceptable linguistic connections and fanciful word
plays, e.g. the letters IHS on Catholic Holy Communion wafers are
alleged to stand for Egyptian deities Isis, Horus and Seth, but
in reality they are an abbreviation for Ihsous, the Latin
spelling of Jesus's name in Greek
(Ιησους), although
popularly, they stand for the Latin Iesus Hominum Salvator
meaning Jesus, Savior of Mankind (which also fits the teaching of
Transubstantiation, where the wafer and wine are said to become
the body and blood of Christ).” (Source: Wikipedia
article, Alexander Hislop.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Hislop)
I believed that - as late as
1998 - no self-respecting evangelical would wish to touch this
book; imagine my astonishment, then, when one day – circa
1998 - I found this book still for sale in a highly reputable
evangelical book shop! Actually, perhaps naively, even now many
still cling to every (usually erroneous) word of Hislop.
Originally influenced by this error-strewn
book, Ralph Woodrow wrote Babylon Mystery Religion. But
this honest man has since withdrawn this book (an action which
has caused him much financial loss) because of his later honest
acceptance of Hislop's flaws. See Woodrow's frank and honest
admission about his Hislop-inspired book and about the
errors of Hislop
HERE.
Here is just one brief quote
from Woodrow's article to help us to note the flawed reasoning
which Hislop so often used and which spread to the cults and
sects:
"Some claim that round objects, such as
round communion wafers, are symbols of the Sun-god. But they fail
to mention that the very manna given by God was round! (Exod.
16:14). Some are ready to condemn all pillars and historical
monuments as pagan. But they fail to take into account that the
Lord himself appeared as a pillar of fire; and, in front of his
temple, there were two large pillars (Exod. 13:21,22; 2 Chron.
3:17).”
I am not going to go further
into the errors of Hislop here but would commend Woodrow's
article to all, plus the book which he has now written, The
Babylon Connection?, to help put right freely-admitted
earlier errors (see the earlier link).
How worrying then, that even now in
November 2005, when I did a Google search for 'The Two
Babylons' and 'Alexander Hislop', the first 15 pages
which came up were overwhelmingly in support of Hislop's
position (most of these pages were from the websites of the cults
and sects but some extreme fundamentalists were also
represented). I finally only found about 3 references out of a
few hundred which Google produced which understood that
Hislop's arguments are now discredited!
Please be aware that in
rejecting Hislop's wild claims about Roman Catholicism I am in
no way defending error where it is present within Romanist
doctrine, indeed, my whole internet ministry is based on exposing
theological error (wherever it may be found), but I believe that
it is vital for Christian Apologetics and Countercult ministries
to ensure that they carefully substantiate all
claims.
Robin A. Brace, 2005.
(Apart from the earlier link,
here are other links on Hislop which I can recommend:
Babylon Boom Box
The Two Babylons/The Babylon
Connection?
Introductory Critique of Hislop's 'The Two Babylons'
(This comes from a Roman Catholic source yet its criticisms of Hislop are justified).
