Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Johnny Skeptic · 02-05-2008, 09:41 AM

Arnoldo knows that he has been beaten since he has refused to reply to the following post on several occasions:

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The historical fact remains that Nebby destroyed Jerusalem and after 70 years Cyrus allowed the Jews to begin to return to their land.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

But at the GRD Forum, you said "It doesn't matter if God can predict the future," and now you are saying that it does matter. Which you please make up your mind which is the case?

Sheshonq · 02-05-2008, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

So? That proves nothing about which one ruled the other 2500 years ago.

Again, big deal. Empires are often short-lived. the USSR lasted less than 75 years. The Neo-Babylonian Empire - the empire of Nebuchadnezzar - only lasted 87 years.

Again: if you knew jack shit about the historical material, you wouldn't need to be spoonfed all the basic elements. But study is hard work and it would interfere with your preaching, wouldn't it?

No, your source says that the Medes were in control of a confederation. But your source is talking about a period in time several decades before Cyrus. By the time Cyrus came on the scene, the Medes were long past their prime and they were subservient to the Persians.

Moreover, your "source" is a cultural attache website. It's hardly a historical source. Someone without any historical training or ability to review the actual primary sources threw up a website. Then you -- being equally ignorant of history and archaeology -- found the website and decided that it was a "source". It is not.

From my paper on the topic - pay attention to the red text:

You seem to be arguing both sides of the argument.

No, you're not paying attention again.

Quote:

First you claim that the writer of Daniel was HIGHLY aware that Medes was a seperate empire from the Persians, Ie, the kingdoms that Daniel writes about is 1. Babylon 2. Medes 3. Persia 4. Greece (not rome)

I made no such argument. I have stayed out of the discussion of the interpretation of Daniel's vision/dream, except to point out that you are ignoring spin's rebuttal and your arguments are unconvincing.

But since you asked - in fact, the writer of Daniel obviously did *not* realize that Persians and Medes were different - which is the writermade so many obvious mistakes in referring to the Persians as "Medes".

Quote:

Then your argument is that the writer of Daniel committed a "historical mistake" by identifying that a "Mede" conquered babylon when in fact it was Cyrus (a persian).

More than that. Daniel identifies the ruling power of the time as the Medes, when in fact they were crushed decades earlier and the Persians were in power. Not just Cyrus was Persian; the entire empire - adminstration, rulers, satrapies, military - was run by Persians. The Medes overplayed their hand and got smacked down for their efforts.

Quote:

All jews know that it was Cyrus who allowed the Jews to leave Babylon to return to Jerusalem.

So? Cyrus was still a Persian. The empire was still Persian. What "all Jews know" agrees with that, and doesn't contradict anything about Cyrus allowing the Jews to leave.

Your rebuttal is disconnected in a really schizophrenic way, arnoldo.

Quote:

Sorry, the only "historical mistake" in the book of daniel is in your imagination.

Nope. Wrong again. Prophecy fails! :rolling:

Sheshonq · 02-05-2008, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

At the same time no evidence has been provided that the ENTIRE BOOK OF DANIEL was written between 167-164 BC and yet this is accepted as a given.

Another stupid strawman claim from you? This question has been answered already.

You're listed in Latin America - is English your native language? I've been wondering if maybe the stupid questions, deliberate failure to read, and pointless attempts to derail the conversation could be blamed on your language skills, not merely being intellectually dishonest.

That was a lifeline; take it.

In case anyone wants proof that arnoldo's claim is a strawman position, here's a previous post of mine. Note the quote from Oxford Companion.

Sheshonq · 02-05-2008, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The historical fact remains that Nebby destroyed Jerusalem and after 70 years Cyrus allowed the Jews to begin to return to their land.

Except it's not a historical fact.

The destruction of the temple was in 587/586 BCE.
The decree from Cyrus was in 539 BCE.

That's 47/48 years, not 70.

Result? Prophecy fails! :rolling:

arnoldo · 02-05-2008, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

You seem to be arguing both sides of the argument.

No, you're not paying attention again.

I made no such argument. I have stayed out of the discussion of the interpretation of Daniel's vision/dream, except to point out that you are ignoring spin's rebuttal and your arguments are unconvincing.

But since you asked - in fact, the writer of Daniel obviously did *not* realize that Persians and Medes were different - which is the writermade so many obvious mistakes in referring to the Persians as "Medes".

More than that. Daniel identifies the ruling power of the time as the Medes, when in fact they were crushed decades earlier and the Persians were in power. Not just Cyrus was Persian; the entire empire - adminstration, rulers, satrapies, military - was run by Persians. The Medes overplayed their hand and got smacked down for their efforts.

Wrong, Daniel indentifed the ruling power as the Medes and Persians. Note Daniel 5:28 "Peres: Your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians." Notice that the Medes and Persians is ONE kingdom. Daniel also identified the Medes and Persians as Ram with two horns, one is longer (Persia) than the other (medes). This Ram is attacked by a Goat with a prominent horn (Alexander the Great).

arnoldo · 02-05-2008, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The historical fact remains that Nebby destroyed Jerusalem and after 70 years Cyrus allowed the Jews to begin to return to their land.

Except it's not a historical fact.

The destruction of the temple was in 587/586 BCE.
The decree from Cyrus was in 539 BCE.

That's 47/48 years, not 70.

Result? Prophecy fails! :rolling:

Really, read the Jeremiah 29:10 again

Quote:

Jeremiah 29:10
This is what the LORD says: "When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my gracious promise to bring you back to this place.

The scripture simply states that seventy years are appointed for Babylon. Sorry, Nebby started taking Jews into captivity before the fall of Jerusalem. Try again.

Sheshonq · 02-05-2008, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

[
Really, read the Jeremiah 29:10 again

No need to.

Quote:

Jeremiah 29:10
This is what the LORD says: "When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my gracious promise to bring you back to this place.

The scripture simply states that seventy years are appointed for Babylon.

Which failed - on more than one level, by the way.

Quote:

Sorry, Nebby started taking Jews into captivity before the fall of Jerusalem.

He did? Wow; what an amazing claim you have cooked up here! Show your proof. You can't. :rolling:

Quote:

Try again.

No need to - you haven't done anything except toss out a new homemade claim.

Sheshonq · 02-05-2008, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

No, you're not paying attention again.

I made no such argument. I have stayed out of the discussion of the interpretation of Daniel's vision/dream, except to point out that you are ignoring spin's rebuttal and your arguments are unconvincing.

But since you asked - in fact, the writer of Daniel obviously did *not* realize that Persians and Medes were different - which is the writermade so many obvious mistakes in referring to the Persians as "Medes".

More than that. Daniel identifies the ruling power of the time as the Medes, when in fact they were crushed decades earlier and the Persians were in power. Not just Cyrus was Persian; the entire empire - adminstration, rulers, satrapies, military - was run by Persians. The Medes overplayed their hand and got smacked down for their efforts.

Wrong, Daniel indentifed the ruling power as the Medes and Persians.

Yes. I said that.
I also said that was why Daniel is wrong.
Not only is there no support for any "Darius the Mede", but the Persians were always the senior partners, even during the brief period of co-rulership that they allowed the Medes to have.

Quote:

Note Daniel 5:28 "Peres: Your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians." Notice that the Medes and Persians is ONE kingdom.

Except history says that it by the time the invasion of Babylon happened, it was the Persian kingdom *only* - the Medes were kicked out of their joint rulership.

Another reason why Daniel contains bad history.

Quote:

Daniel also identified the Medes and Persians as Ram with two horns,

Not interested in your personal interpretation of visions and dreams. You can't even read a post on this BBS and understand it fully. What in the world makes you think you can interpret visions and dreams from a text over 2000 years old? :rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

Amaleq13 · 02-05-2008, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

At the same time no evidence has been provided that the ENTIRE BOOK OF DANIEL was written between 167-164 BC...

That is simply false. Your refusal to seriously consider the evidence that has been put forth changes nothing.

Johnny Skeptic · 02-05-2008, 11:37 AM

Arnoldo knows that he has been beaten since he has refused to reply to the following post on several occasions:

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The historical fact remains that Nebby destroyed Jerusalem and after 70 years Cyrus allowed the Jews to begin to return to their land.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

But at the GRD Forum, you said "It doesn't matter if God can predict the future," and now you are saying that it does matter. Which you please make up your mind which is the case?

The undecided crowd knows that evasiveness shows which side's arguments are better.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.