Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Johnny Skeptic · 01-20-2008, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Ok, just so I'm understanding you claim that the Book of Daniel acurately portrays events that happened in the 2nd century? How do you explain that it also explains events that occured during the Roman Empire after the 2nd century?

This thread is about the Tyre prophecy. Please stay on topic. If you wish to debate the book of Daniel, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, please start new threads.

Johnny Skeptic · 01-20-2008, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Since the Bible is the claimant, not skeptics, all that I need to do is provide reasonable plausibilities.

What evidence do you have that the Tyre prophecy was not recorded after the events, or revised after the events?

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The Dead Sea Scrolls have absolutely proved that Daniel wrote about Greece/Alexander the Great two hundred years before these events happened.

But this thread is about the Tyre prophecy. What do the Dead Sea Scrolls have to do with the Tyre prophecy.

The book of Daniel has been widely discredited. If you wish to debate the book of Daniel, please start a new thread.

It is not likely that Ezekiel would say that "a king of kings" (Nebuchadnezzar) would down the streets of Tyre, and tear down its towers, and fail to defeat Tyre, but it is likely that after Nebuchadnezzar failed to defeat Tyre that the "many nations" part of the Tyre prophecy was added. It is reasonably possible that Ezekiel wrote the Tyre prophecy after Nebuchadnezzar invaded Tyre.

By the way, do you have any proof that deism is false?

Sheshonq · 01-20-2008, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Actually, one of the clues that Daniel dates from 2nd cnetury instead of 5th century is that he makes many mistakes about 5th century events, but his description of 2nd century events is far more accurate.

Ok, just so I'm understanding you claim that the Book of Daniel acurately portrays events that happened in the 2nd century? How do you explain that it also explains events that occured during the Roman Empire after the 2nd century?

Still having difficulty reading?

Would red text help? Big, red text?

As soon as you support your other claims about Tyre, Israel and fulfilled prophecy, the Dead Sea Scrolls allegedly supporting Daniel, etc. etc. etc.

As soon as you do all that, THEN - and only then - will you be in a position to ask other people for evidence.

You have such a weak ability to stay focused on the topic at hand that I'm not about to let you open a new can of worms here, when you haven't even addressed all the topics you brought up so far.

Johnny Skeptic · 01-20-2008, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

What evidence do you have that Zek rewrote his prophecy?

What evidence do you have that deism is false?

Since the Bible is the claimant, it is not up to me to disprove it, or to disprove deism for that matter. All that I need to do is provide reasonable possibilities that Christians cannot successfully refute.

It will not do you any good to refer to other prophecies. If the Tyre prophecy cannot stand upon its own merits, then it cannot stand at all. Even if a witness in a court trial is assumed to be trustworthy, if the witness testifies in another court trial, he is not automatically assumed to be trustworthy, especially if some of his testimonies of other trials were questionable. Some of the the Bible's testimonies are questionable. Therefore, as I said, "If the Tyre prophecy cannot stand upon its own merits, then it cannot stand at all. Since it is obvious that the Tyre prophecy cannot stand upon its own merits, I request that you start a new thread about a prophecy that you believe can stand upon its own merits.

Please be advised that there is much more at issue than just the historical record. Even if a God inspired the Bible, that does not necessarily mean that he had good character. Even if you were able to provide reasonable evidence that God can predict the future, and that he helped the Jews establish a new Jewish nation in Palestine in 1948, in order to reasonably defend Chrsitianity, you would also need to defend God's character. A good place for you to do that would be in a thread at the GRD Forum that is titled 'Justifying BibleGod's Atrocities.' At this time, every fundamentalist Christian has withdrawn from the thread. The link is http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=230295. Do you intend to participate in that thread?

spin · 01-20-2008, 09:14 PM

Incidentally, this stuff about prophecy makes a mockery of faith. Contrived fulfillments of prophecies are an ignorant person's substitute for scientific evidence. This is not faith at all. Look, see, prophecy fulfilled. Evidence that god is working. Faith has no place in this prophecy fulfillment rubbish.

spin

Johnny Skeptic · 01-20-2008, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Ok, just so I'm understanding you claim that the Book of Daniel acurately portrays events that happened in the 2nd century? How do you explain that it also explains events that occured during the Roman Empire after the 2nd century?

But this thread is about the Tyre prophecy. If you wish to embarrass yourself by debating the book of Daniel, please start a new thread.

sugarhitman · 01-20-2008, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

I did not plan on writing on this again, but the critics are still bringing this up, so let us go back to this accurate prediction of Ezekiel. Now the critics says that Ezekiel has Nebby attacking Island Tyre. But there is something funny about this because all the weapons used by Nebby are land based, and there were no causeway connecting the island with the mainland.

1. This was already addressed in the previous thread. You failed to respond to it.

2. Please present evidence that all of Bablyon's weapons were land-based.

No it isn't. Historians quite plainly tell us that Babylon sieged Tyre - yet failed.

Personally witnessing it is unnecessary.

No, because he was sieging the city and continued the siege for 13 years. They were at a stalemate, and both sides wanted a face-saving way to call it a draw.

Why did *who* resist Greece? When?

It won't do much good; you don't know enough about the history to even being discussing this intelligently.

No, they come one right after another. In fact, military planners refer to waves of bombers or waves of cavalry, all happening during the same battle.

No, it isn't.

Except that is not what the Babylonian army was. Each of the tribute nations was required to send a certain number of soldiers, horsemen and chariots as part of their tribute payment. It may have been one army, but it was still an army of "many nations".

Wrong. When are you going to learn not to argue scripture with people who know it better than you do?

The text says both - in typical Hebrew poetic fashion, it repeats the theme twice:

EZE 26:3 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Tyrus, and will cause many nations to come up against thee, as the sea causeth his waves to come up.
EZE 26:4 And they shall destroy the walls of Tyrus, and break down her towers: I will also scrape her dust from her, and make her like the top of a rock.
[...]
EZE 26:9 And he shall set engines of war against thy walls, and with his axes he shall break down thy towers.

Verses 1-6 lay out the destruction in general terms. Then at v7, Ezekiel repeats the destruction mentioned earlier, but now he names the agent of destruction: Nebuchadnezzar and the armies of Babylon.

So unless you are stupid enough to think that Nebuchadnezzar himself was wielding an axe in this battle, it's obviously a figurative usage that encompasses the entire army.

Not that it helps much, since the target of the prophecy was the island city, not the suburbs on the mainland. And "he" (Nebuchadnezzar) failed to conquer that.

Quote:

island because how can engines of war be set against walls that has no land outside of them? How can a physical siege be employed against a island fortress without ships...especially ships that did not have battering rams?

How laughable. What proof have you given that they did not possess battering rams? What evidence have you given that they did not have ships (or that some of the tribute allies had ships)?

I asked you this before - you lacked the courage to answer it - here's another chance to see if you have any spine:

You have yet to prove that Nebuchadnezzar didn't understand the need for boats when conquering an island. You really think that he marched tens of thousands of soldiers six months from Babylon, and didn't realize that boats would be needed to conquer an island city?

You also seem to forget that a causeway existed. REmember? You misidentified the author of my source as being a co-author of the Da Vinci code? :rolling:

So not only have you brought zero evidence to support your claim of no ships and no battering rams, but you have never dealt with the fact that a causeway existed.

The rest of your drivel is like the above: repetition of already-refuted points.

Zek names not one weapon used in sea battles for Nebby. History says that Nebby siege the island but does not give any detail what-so-ever why? Because he didnt. And no there was no causeway you found one source who says this where did he get this information that general history does not mention? hmmmm. History has it that there was indeed a city on the mainland, and not just a "suburb." Isaiah has Tyre restablishing itself after the seventy year rule of Babylon. Jeremiah has Tyre listed as one of the nations who would SERVE Babylon for seventy years. Tyre was not to be completely destroyed by any army, but only when God bury it deep beneath the sea. Oh by the way can you cite any historical source that gives details about Nebby sieging Island Tyre. And not your imaginary assumptions?

And Israel and Tyre proves that God Exist, more proof is sure to come stick around. :wave:

sugarhitman · 01-20-2008, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

sugarhitman,

As you tended to avoid much of what I wrote on this subject in the earlier thread, please answer each of these questions.

Why were all the other Phoenician cities built on island, but you think Tyre, which was founded by Sidon, was not?
Why would the central city of Tyre be on the land if there was an island off the coast that they could inhabit and thus be safer from siege?
Why does Hiram king of Tyre say to Solomon, "do thou take care to procure us corn for this timber, which we stand in need of, because we inhabit in an island"? (Josephus, AJ 8.2.7. See also 8.6.3)
Why does Josephus tell us that Hiram "raised banks at the eastern parts of the city, and enlarged it; he also joined the temple of Jupiter Olympius, which stood before in an island by itself, to the city, by raising a causeway between them", Contra Apion 1.17, if Tyre was on the mainland?
Where were "Old Tyre"'s harbors?
Why did Shalmaneser V, Sennacherib and Ashurbanipal each besiege Tyre a few decades after the other, if they had each conquered the city and dominated it? Was it not because Tyre was an island and it came to an accord with each king from the safety of that island?
What did Nebuchadnezzar do against the inhabitants of the island for the 13 years?
Why does Ezekiel say, "King Nebuchadnezzar made his army labor hard against Tyre... yet neither he nor his army got anything from Tyre to pay for the labor he expended against it", 29:18?
Why does Ezekiel refer to the mainland possessions connected to Tyre as the "daughters on the land", if "Old Tyre" was on land?
Why does Ezekiel refer to Tyre as being in the midst of the sea, 27:32, if it was not an island?

Thank you.

spin

I will answer your question if you ask mine (since you all want to play that game with Arnoldo) Josephus says that Jesus was the Christ, do you trust him as a source to believe this? Josephus says that the priests in Jerusalem read the book of Daniel to Alexander, thus showing that the book of Daniel was written before the events and not after, do you believe these accounts of Josephus also? I remember asking you this and if I recall correctly you said you did not believe it. So do you trust this book or not?:wave:

Johnny Skeptic · 01-20-2008, 11:44 PM

Message to sugarhitman: What evidence do you have that the Tyre prophecy was written before the events? If you ask me what evidence I have that the Tyre prophecy was written after the events, I will ask you what evidence you have that deism is false. As I said before, if the Tyre prophecy cannot stand upon its own merits without being associated with other prophecies, it cannot stand at all.

Johnny Skeptic · 01-20-2008, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

I will answer your question if you ask mine (since you all want to play that game with Arnoldo) Josephus says that Jesus was the Christ, do you trust him as a source to believe this? Josephus says that the priests in Jerusalem read the book of Daniel to Alexander, thus showing that the book of Daniel was written before the events and not after, do you believe these accounts of Josephus also? I remember asking you this and if I recall correctly you said you did not believe it. So do you trust this book or not?

Please quote your sources regarding what Josephus said.

Are you aware that it is well-known that some of Josephus' writings contain interpolations, and that those are only the obvious interpolations?

In my new thread at http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=234947, I provided reasonable proof that the book of Daniel contains errors, and was not all written by Daniel.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-20-2008, 09:14 PM	#35
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	Incidentally, this stuff about prophecy makes a mockery of faith. Contrived fulfillments of prophecies are an ignorant person's substitute for scientific evidence. This is not faith at all. Look, see, prophecy fulfilled. Evidence that god is working. Faith has no place in this prophecy fulfillment rubbish. spin

01-20-2008, 11:44 PM	#39
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	Message to sugarhitman: What evidence do you have that the Tyre prophecy was written before the events? If you ask me what evidence I have that the Tyre prophecy was written after the events, I will ask you what evidence you have that deism is false. As I said before, if the Tyre prophecy cannot stand upon its own merits without being associated with other prophecies, it cannot stand at all.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.