arnoldo

I guess I have to agree with you that Tyre is a failed prophecy IF the "many nations" is only referring to Nebby and his armies. If the "many nations" includes all the latter nations which attacked Tyre,like waves of a sea one after the other throughout various points in time, then it's a successful prophecy(unless your obsessive about the walls and streets of Tyre).

makerowner

NO IT'S NOT! Even if we discount the verses with 'they' (as moronic as that argument is); even if we ignore the 'many nations', the prophecy still fails!

Didn't happen.

Sheshonq

There is no twisting going on.

I have plenty - not that it matters, since you ignore historical evidence when it is shown to you. It takes a minimum of 30 posts to drive a point through your thick skull.

You're deliberately ignorant and intent only on continuing an argument, in the hopes of getting the thread shut down. For some reason you think that will soothe your bruised, undeserving ego.

Fat chance. :rolling:

Sheshonq

<edit>

This has already been explained:

The skeptic emphasis on walls and streets is to respond to fundies like yourself who think that there is some difference between walls, streets, island and mainland.

Skeptics didn't choose to focus on the streets and physical buildings; that was the choice of fundies like yourself. YOUR choice; not ours.

We're just responding on the same playing field where you guys decided to play (and fumble) the ball. :rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

Sheshonq

It fails even then, since:

a. Tyre was never fully destroyed at any time in history;
b. it has always been inhabited; and
c. it is currently being rebuilt with a population of over 100,000 people

All in contradiction to Ezekiel's prophecy. Result?
PROPHECY FAILS! :rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

Sheshonq

You've been asked many times to prove that this is a valid manner to interpret prophecy. You've never had the guts or intellectual horsepower to do that.

Until you do so, then you can't claim that this is how the Ezekiel prophecy of Tyre should be interpreted. In fact, it makes far more sense to consider how a person in Ezekiel's audience would have understood Ezekiel's message back in that time. If we do that, then it's clear that all this destruction was intended to happen by the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, at that time.

In fact, the ONLY reason that fundies try to interpret this as many nations over time is because the obvious interpretation (Babylon) failed. So you're thrashing about, looking for some way to rescue this prophecy from the junk heap of failure. You try substituting Alexander, but that doesn't work; you try redefining "lost"; that doesn't work; you try pretending that "never" doesn't mean "never"; that doesn't work.

You go through all these gymnastics because of the dishonest, agenda driven approach you take to interpretation. Instead of looking at the facts first, you flip it around and start with your interpretation and work backwards to force-fit the facts.

Johnny Skeptic

Message to arnoldo: If the God of the Bible exists, he could easily have inspired many indisputable prophecies thousands of years ago. As it is, the Bible does not contain one single indisputable prophecy. Why is that? An example of an indisputable prophecy would be a prophecy that predicts when and where a natural disaster will occur, month, day, and year.

If Micah had predicted that the messiah would rule a heavenly kindgom instead of an earthly kingdom like Micah misled the Jews to believe, and had predicted that the messiah would heal people, and that the messiah would be crucified, buried, and rise from the dead in three days, and that Pontius Pilate would become the Roman governor of Palestine, and that Herod would become the King of Judea, surely more Jews would have accepted Jesus. Historically, many people have accepted all kinds of outlandish religions based upon much less convincing evidence than that.

Why are you so evasive? If you want to discuss these issues in another thread, just let me know which one. If you do not want to embarrass yourself, just say so and I will not ask to you discuss these issues any more.

If a God exists, if anything is obvious, it is obvious that he has never predicted the future with the intention of convincing people to believe that he can predict the future. You are living in a fantasy world. No sensible motives regarding why God predicts the future = no God of the Bible. No rational man would ever accept a God who supposedly wants people to believe that he can predict the future, but has never made one single indisputable prophecy.

arnoldo

Stop, Hammer Time. Anyway, these people obviously suffer from Minimalist Eye Syndrom (MES) and wouldn't know a fulfilled prophecy if it came up behind them and slapped them upside the head. Zekey both prophesied to the people of Jerusalem and Tyre that the cities would be attacked by Nebby. The Jews and the people of Tyre both scoffed at zeke. I guess when the princes of Tyre and the princes of Israel were both in captivity in Babylon they continued to think that Zekey was a false prophet :huh:

Jack the Bodiless

There is no evidence whatsoever that Ezekiel prophesied (i.e. predicted in advance) that Tyre would be attacked by Nebby (because we don't actually know when Ezekiel started writing about Tyre). In fact, Tyre was attacked by Nebby, but pretty much everything went off the rails after that point.

I notice that you can't even make up your own mind about who finally "fulfilled the prophecy". Now you're abandoning Alex and going back to Nebby again?

arnoldo

Rubbish. Y'all have a lame argument on the Daniel thread that it was written between 167-164 to give encouragment to the Jews at the time who were in a war. By using this twisted logic Zekey prophesied that both Tyre and Jerusalem would fall and they both did. These populations went into exile in Babylon. Prophecy fulfilled. :wave: ( that is if your not obsessive compulsive about walls and streets of Tyre)