FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-12-2005, 02:57 AM   #431
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 5,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mata leao
...."Daniel was a contemporary of Ezekiel and Ezekiel mentions Daniel as a 'pattern of righteousness and wisdom' 14:14-20,28:3,...D.J. Wiseman.
The not-very-wise Wiseman is getting his "Daniels" in a muddle. It's a rather well-established fact (except, apparently, among fundamentalists) that Ezekiel's Daniel was an ancient hero, not a contemporary: whereas the "Daniel of Babylon" was a fictional character who would not be invented until long afterwards, when the Book of Daniel was written, 168-164 BC or thereabouts.
Quote:
The prophecy was fulfilled brilliantly and in detail, that is why it has been one of the finest apologetical arguments for centuries and remains so today.
On the contrary, Tyre is frequently cited as an example of the Bible's many FAILED prophecies (it appears on the SAB's False Prophecies page, for instance). I doubt if ANY apologist has ever successfully used it in any discussion with a well-informed unbeliever.
Jack the Bodiless is offline  
Old 11-12-2005, 06:32 AM   #432
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 19,796
Default The destruction of Tyre

Quote:
Originally Posted by mata leao
Then you are a fraud my friend and the debate is over. The prophecy was fulfilled brilliantly and in detail, that is why it has been one of the finest apologetical arguments for centuries and remains so today.
Why do you use the word "prophecy"? Where is your evidence that the events that are mentioned in Ezekiel 26 were predicted before the events, and that the version of the prophecy that we have today is the same as the original version?
Johnny Skeptic is offline  
Old 11-12-2005, 04:47 PM   #433
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 631
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless
The not-very-wise Wiseman is getting his "Daniels" in a muddle. It's a rather well-established fact (except, apparently, among fundamentalists) that Ezekiel's Daniel was an ancient hero, not a contemporary: whereas the "Daniel of Babylon" was a fictional character who would not be invented until long afterwards, when the Book of Daniel was written, 168-164 BC or thereabouts.
.
Well established fact? There was a Danl other than the Daniel of the Bible, but to think that the ancient hero came even close to the wisdom and renown of the Biblical Daniel is way off. Daniel was written in the 6th century B.C. Those who try to establish a late date have had their arguements refuted.
aChristian is offline  
Old 11-12-2005, 04:48 PM   #434
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
Default

Quote:
In 609 B.C. the Babylonians crushed combined assyrian and egyptian forces at carchemish on the euphrates river. Unchallenged, babylonian armies under Nebuchadnezzar made Judah a vassal state and took a number of young nobels to Babylon, including the future prophet,daniel.
Wiseman's book on Neb and Babylon. Wiseman is an ANE expert. Let's accept that the Babylonian court used captured literate types as clerks (skipping over the fact that they were literate in other languages). I'll join the chorus that asks: what argument can you make that Ezekiel was so treated?
Vorkosigan is offline  
Old 11-12-2005, 05:01 PM   #435
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: tampa,florida
Posts: 342
Default

vork, did you read all the prior posts I made on the details of Ezekiel's treatment in Babylon?
mata leao is offline  
Old 11-12-2005, 05:32 PM   #436
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
Default

Yes, I looked at them. But there doesn't seem to be a chain of evidence, or a mound of citations backed by evidence, to support your claim.

If Sauron or spin or Pearse were in your shoes, we'd have sentences that looked like this:

"...and an inscription found at Babylon in 1961 reads "EZEKIEL prophet of the lord, employed here in the archives." Further, a personal diary found at Tel Banana in 1965 records that its writer had frequent clashes with one Ezekiel of the archives, whom he had to fire for wasting time writing prophecies. Another take on this story was uncovered in 1972, when construction in downtown Baghdad unearthed diplomatic archives previously unknown. These archives had been run by a jew named ezekiel. Hidden in them was a request from the King of Tyre that a certain archivist, Ezekiel, a Jew, be fired for writing nasty prophecies about the allied state of Tyre. Indeed, in Ezekiel Book 19 we find a reference to his firing...."

See? I don't see anything like that in your posts. I am happy to believe that literate foreigners were made use of. But the general is not support for the specific. In individual cases you need evidence.

Vorkosigan
Vorkosigan is offline  
Old 11-12-2005, 06:38 PM   #437
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: tampa,florida
Posts: 342
Default

Vork: Was Ezekiel Treated Reasonably Well In Babylon, ? Yes Or No?
mata leao is offline  
Old 11-13-2005, 04:06 AM   #438
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: outraged about the stiffling of free speech here
Posts: 10,987
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liviu
Based on the knowledge I have about this prophecy, I'd say it's highly unlikely the prophecy was fulfilled. I've read every explanation I could find by Christian apologists, and none come even close to showing how this prophecy was fulfilled.

BUT, there may be something that I don't understand or know which prevents me from understanding it. So I'm still allowing for the possiblity that this is indeed a fulfilled prophecy.
Thanks for your honest answer! As you may have noticed, I also allow for a (tiny) little probability that it's a fulfilled prophecy.
But, on the other hand, there's also a tiny little probability that the Earth is actually flat. :Cheeky:
Sven is offline  
Old 11-13-2005, 11:54 AM   #439
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 19,796
Default The destruction of Tyre

Given Nebuchadnezzar's great power, his penchant for conquest, the riches of Tyre, and Babylon's close proximity to Tyre, it would have been unusual if he had not attacked the mainland settlement.
Johnny Skeptic is offline  
Old 11-14-2005, 02:54 AM   #440
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 5,815
Default

mata leao:

I'll try a more direct approach. Why are you babbling like this?

You haven't yet established that Ezekiel was known to the Babylonian court. But even if he WAS, and he was "well-treated" for some time: how is this relevant to the topic? Are you implying that he would have been treated badly if he became known as a failed prophet?

History records that Nebuchadrezzar DID fail to conquer Tyre, after 13 years of siege. We don't know if he knew or cared about Ezekiel's "prophecy". IF he did (and that's a big IF): it's possible that Ezekiel's second failed prophecy (promising victory over Egypt) was part of Ezekiel's attempt to redeem himself: "please don't punish me, my God will grant you another victory instead". IIRC, history doesn't record what happened to Ezekiel after THAT prophecy failed too, and the Book of Ezekiel doesn't address this either.
Jack the Bodiless is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:03 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.