mata leao

WAS EZEKIEL TREATED REASONABLY WELL IN BABYLON? you are becoming an embarassment to your atheist friends here sauron, notice that they arent jumping in to defend you.....none of them are......and if they begrudgingly do so, I am just going to ask the question to them that you are running from like a rat from a cat from!!!!! WAS EZEKIEL TREATED REASONABLY WELL IN BABYLON?........

spin

Was there ever an Ezekiel and if so when was he and was he ever in Babylon?

These questions are not trivial.

All we have is a text referred to by the name of Ezekiel, a text with an unknown time of writing, in in fact there was a single date for the writing, although it does seem like it is a work of accretions. We would still have to work out some method of dating the accretions. I pointed out many moons ago that the Gog/Magog passage was anachronous as it was a "prophecy" which referred to events well before the reputed time of the central character of the text. But then all references to Meshech and Tubal will prove to be just as anachronous in the text because they were entities which no longer existed at the reputed time of Ezekiel.

So, when was Ezekiel written? We know that from the time of the arrival of the Assyrians back before 700 BCE trading from Tyre had been cut off, yet we have these nasty passsages about Tyre as though it had done something naughty against Jerusalem recently. Certainly under the Persians Tyre had the peace in the region to spread its trading practices throughout the Levant, but before that we have to go back before the arrival of the Assyrians well before 700 BCE. So, why all the negativity against Tyre?

Why does god say in Ezekiel that he was "about to take the stick away from Joseph (which is in the hand of Ephraim)", 37:19a, when the Assyrians had already removed the tribes of Israel??

When did the sons of Zadoq keep god's "charge, when the people of Israel went astray", 48:11, when no other biblical work shows any interest in the sons of Zadoq? The only other places we find out about the sons of Zadoq are in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Hebrew original of Ben Sira.

It's not strange for a biblical book to be set in one era yet to deal with a much later era. This is the case of the book of Daniel as well as the book of 1 Enoch.


spin

Sauron

I already answered that, above. All we know is the general treatment of the exiles. We have no evidence either way on Ezekiel, specifically. And there lies the problem: the general treatment is not sufficient to prove a specific case. By the way: the difference between the general case and the specific case have been explained to you before. Pay attention next time.

Pointing out that he had a house and a wife does not prove your original first claim, which was that Ezekiel was singled out for special access to the Babylonian court.

1. I can guarantee you that my "atheist friends" are more embarrassed FOR you, than they are embarrassed ABOUT me.

2. No one jumping in to defend me? Not that it matters much, since I don't rely on a popularity vote. But you do seem to have missed the posts above, which basically took my side and told you that you were full of it. And in point of fact, one "atheist friend" (Vork) went into detail about the quality difference between your posts and what could be expected from me. Let's review that:



3. You must have also missed the post from Dr Jim. I dont' blame you for trying to ignore it. But I'll reproduce it here anyhow, for the audience:
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...77#post2881377


I notice that the mods have mercifully shut down your other thread; perhaps you'll eventually get the clue. Your behavior is strange; for someone who claims so much education, you act like a child on a rampaging tantrum. Let's review:

*You misidentified your first claim.
* The evidence is only sufficient to prove the general case, not the specific;
* You now have this list of claims to support:

(1) forced 'concubinry' involving Tyre -- per your specific claims earlier, and not a general comment on the ubiquitous slave trade in the ANE;
(2) unusual Greek involvement in such sex trade, at this stage in history - also per your claim;
(3) proof of Greek 'conquests' at this period in history, which was a full century and a half before the golden age of Athens, and even longer from the rise of Sparta;
(4) how eradicating the Babylonian 'hegemony' in the Mediterranean would somehow force the liberation of exile Jews in the capital city of Babylon, hundreds of miles away;
(5) that the Babylonian court paid any attention to the prophecies of a Jewish priest held captive with the exiles, as opposed to just ignoring the rambling words of another one of their "pet exiles";
(6) that the Babylonians were somehow 'emboldened' by Ezekiel's prophecy to attack Tyre -- according to your claim -- when otherwise they were not intending to do so already;
(6) the people of Tyre somehow got wind of Ezekiel's prophecy - how did that happen?
(7) and then afterwards, the Tyrians and were thus given a 'false sense of security' - in spite of the fact that they were correct about their security;
(8) that any Jewish children held in Tyre would have been held only on the mainland, instead of the island city - again, according to your claim;

Once you finish these items, we can discuss your claims about Alexander, and the rest of the Tyre prophecy. But given the workload above, I doubt you'll be hanging around that long.

Johnny Skeptic

WHAT QUALIFIES THE TYRE PROPHECY AS BEING A PROPHECY? NO PROPHECY IS A PROPHECY UNLESS IT CAN BE REASONABLY PROVEN THAT IT WAS MADE BEFORE THE FACTS, AND NO PROPHECY IS VALID UNLESS IT CAN BE REASONABLY PROVEN THAT IT IS NOT PLAUSIBLE THAT LATER REVISIONS WERE MADE IN SUBSEQUENT DECADES OR CENTURIES. You are becoming an embarrassment to your Christian friends, mata leao, notice that they aren't jumping in to defend you except for bfniii, who I don't think will try to help you much longer, and I say to your Christian friends that you are running from like a rat from a cat because you have continued to refuse to attempt to accurately date the Tyre prophecy, and therefore have made a laughing stock out of yourself.!!!!!

John A. Broussard

It disturbs me to think that all these doctorate level experts are accepted at face value, but my own personal revelation regarding Ezekiel's career are ignored.

I detect some strong bias, here.

gregor

BTW

Sauron is not an embarassment to me. He earns my applause for dealing with folks like Mato and Lee who make up "just so" stories without support (I couldn't take the aggravation).

Sauron seems very reasonable in asking for some evidence to support these stories.