Font Size
Few oracles have proved to be so difficult as this for the interpreter. If it is against Babylon as v.9 suggests, why didn't the prophecy make it clear from the beginning? Also, after chs. 13 and 14, is another oracle against Babylon really necessary? Third, what is the provenance of the oracle? Is it the eighth century, referring to defeats of Babylon in 710, 702, or 689 B.C., and thus a word to Israel not to rely on Babylon for help against Assyria (cf. Oswalt, 389.)? Or does it refer to the defeat of Babylon in 539 b.c. and thus the end of Israel’s exile? If so, then why isn't there more of a celebrative tone, similar to that of chs. 13 and 14?
It seems better to recognize that we do not have enough data to make a definitive determination. But clearly the prophet has received a vision of awesome destruction, like a fierce sirocco destroying everything in its path.
Elam and Media (v.2b) are the two nations that defeated Babylon in 539 b.c. This is evidence in support of a later date for the oracle.
The vision is so potent that the prophet feels the pain of it himself. A watchman is posted. He comes with the message that Babylon has fallen.