Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sugarhitman · 04-04-2008, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Critics are going so far as to try and seperate the European nations from the Roman empire.

No, we just know far more about ancient Rome and modern Europe than you do.

1. "The Empire" was never dominated by France; Gaul (France) was a conquered territory.
2. The only part of modern day Europe that dominated the Roman Empire was Italy.
3. Germany? The Roman Empire never included Germany.

Quote:

And "Within the E.U., supporters of European intergration often appeal to a SHARED EUROPEAN HISTORICAL/CULTURAL HERITAGE, TYPICALLY INCLUDING ANCIENT GREECE AND ANCIENT ROME...."

Which is far more cultural more than it is historical, since Rome didn't rule half (or more) of modern Europe, and Greece failed to conquer 95% of it. You were already informed of these glaring, inconvenient facts here:

By the way, Rome did not "conquer the Europeans". Rome conquered the Mediterranean Basin plus modern-day France and England. They had no territory north of the Rhine and (after Aurelian abandoned Dacia) the Danube. They never ruled Scotland, Germany, Poland, the Baltic states, any of the former USSR, Scandinavia, Hungary, former Yugoslavia (except the coast), Slovakia, Bohemia, Moravia, or Ireland.

Pull the shit out of your ears.

Hey muslims dont curse!

Um you do realize ofcourse that the Roman Empire also existed as the Holy Roman Empire right? Do you also realize that France was in alliance with the Roman empire right? Germany WAS this empire and there were quite a few European states under its rule.

Dominant powers within the Roman empire-Italy-France-Germany
Dominant powers within the E.U.-Italy-France-Germany

Roman Empire-a European empire-Europeans-divided powers of the Roman empire-Daniel-100% accurate-which proves the God of Israel....lives.

Sheshonq · 04-04-2008, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

No, we just know far more about ancient Rome and modern Europe than you do.

1. "The Empire" was never dominated by France; Gaul (France) was a conquered territory.
2. The only part of modern day Europe that dominated the Roman Empire was Italy.
3. Germany? The Roman Empire never included Germany.

Which is far more cultural more than it is historical, since Rome didn't rule half (or more) of modern Europe, and Greece failed to conquer 95% of it. You were already informed of these glaring, inconvenient facts here:

By the way, Rome did not "conquer the Europeans". Rome conquered the Mediterranean Basin plus modern-day France and England. They had no territory north of the Rhine and (after Aurelian abandoned Dacia) the Danube. They never ruled Scotland, Germany, Poland, the Baltic states, any of the former USSR, Scandinavia, Hungary, former Yugoslavia (except the coast), Slovakia, Bohemia, Moravia, or Ireland.

Pull the shit out of your ears.

Hey muslims dont curse!

Who cursed?

Quote:

Um you do realize ofcourse that the Roman Empire also existed as the Holy Roman Empire right?

No, it did not. The Roman Empire - or what was left of it - moved east to Constantinople.

The rest of your post is irrelevant, since you missed that pivotal fact.

sugarhitman · 04-04-2008, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by funinspace

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Critics are going so far as to try and seperate the European nations from the Roman empire. And yet those nations who once dominated the Empire (Italy, France, Germany) are now leading the E.U. in unifying Europe (which was what the Roman Empire tried to do). And "Within the E.U., supporters of European intergration often appeal to a SHARED EUROPEAN HISTORICAL/CULTURAL HERITAGE, TYPICALLY INCLUDING ANCIENT GREECE AND ANCIENT ROME...." WIKIPEDIA THE EUROPEAN UNION. You are seperating the Romans from the Europeans.....they do not distinguish themselves from these empires including Rome. Daniel was 100% accurate concerinig the 4th kingdom and its division. :wave:

And you keep evading direct and clear arguments that demonstrate that position is untenable.

You still ignore my point (4) If you claim these other empires are just a subset of the Roman empire, then logically the Roman empire is just a subset of the Greek empire. Therefore you do not have your proclaimed 4 kingdoms.

So your claims are still empty and crash on their own twisted arguments. And by your own methodologies, there is no fourth kingdom. Therefore Daniel still does not work as valid prophecy.

You do realize that the book of Daniel is completely about ISRAEL and the nations or kingdoms that rules over them. Did the USSR rule over them? Nope, Did the British rule over them? Nope. ALL of the four kingdoms of Daniel ruled over Israel, from Babylon to Rome. An empire is not an empire without the control of Israel (so why would Daniel write about a kingdom that has no relation with Israel. He is clearly concerned about Israel and it's Gentile rulers). So tell me which kingdom after Rome had control of Israel? You will not find any other....Revelations shows that in the world government to come Israel will be subjected to those people who made up the Roman empire....the Europeans (who also established the USSR and British empires as well...including America). :wave:

Biblical prophecy is dead on the money.

Sheshonq · 04-04-2008, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Quote:

Originally Posted by funinspace

And you keep evading direct and clear arguments that demonstrate that position is untenable.

You still ignore my point (4) If you claim these other empires are just a subset of the Roman empire, then logically the Roman empire is just a subset of the Greek empire. Therefore you do not have your proclaimed 4 kingdoms.

So your claims are still empty and crash on their own twisted arguments. And by your own methodologies, there is no fourth kingdom. Therefore Daniel still does not work as valid prophecy.

You do realize that the book of Daniel is completely about ISRAEL

None of which matters to the objection that he raised.

First you try to say that Rome and Greece are separate.
Then you try to say they are the same.
It can't be both.

Checkmate - you lose.

PROPHECY FAILS!
:rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling:

Quote:

So tell me which kingdom after Rome had control of Israel?

The Byzantine Empire. Which lost the region to the Islamic caliphates after holding it for only 10 years.

Not only do you suck at reading comprehension, but your knowledge of history is crippled as well.

Quote:

Biblical prophecy is right on the money.

Monopoly money, perhaps.

sugarhitman · 04-04-2008, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Hey muslims dont curse!

Who cursed?

Quote:

Um you do realize ofcourse that the Roman Empire also existed as the Holy Roman Empire right?

No, it did not. The Roman Empire - or what was left of it - moved east to Constantinople.

The rest of your post is irrelevant, since you missed that pivotal fact.

That is the eastern portion of the Roman empire. It also continued in the west as the Western Roman empire, and the Holy Roman Empire.

The Europeans do not seperate themselves from the Roman empire which is apart of their heritage...why should you or anyone else? Oh thats right you have too in order to disprove Daniel...the Romans are the Europeans and vice versa...So are you telling us (the readers) that the Roman empire was not composed of Europeans?

sugarhitman · 04-04-2008, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

You do realize that the book of Daniel is completely about ISRAEL

None of which matters to the objection that he raised.

First you try to say that Rome and Greece are separate.
Then you try to say they are the same.
It can't be both.

Checkmate - you lose.

PROPHECY FAILS!
:rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling:

The eastern part of the Roman empire was Greek and Greek was a powerful influence on Roman culture...but in the NT the Romans and Greeks are clearly distinguished from one another just as brass is to iron, the 3rd and 4th kingdoms of Daniel. Rome was composed of different European tribes...which is why unity was always weak.

sugarhitman · 04-04-2008, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

You do realize that the book of Daniel is completely about ISRAEL

None of which matters to the objection that he raised.

First you try to say that Rome and Greece are separate.
Then you try to say they are the same.
It can't be both.

Checkmate - you lose.

PROPHECY FAILS!
:rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling:

The Byzantine Empire. Which lost the region to the Islamic caliphates after holding it for only 10 years.

Not only do you suck at reading comprehension, but your knowledge of history is crippled as well.

Quote:

Biblical prophecy is right on the money.

Monopoly money, perhaps.

you have no idea of what you are talking about. Israel was not even a nation when Rome split. Israel was destroyed in A.D. 70. Rome was the last empire to rule over Israel (Im not talking about the region but the nation). The Europeans will be the last.

makerowner · 04-04-2008, 09:36 PM

<edit> You're doing an even worse job with this than you did with Tyre and Daniel. If anyone lurking on here were a Christian doubting his faith, you would definitely push them over. Nicely done.

Oh and this is just gold. Nice Sheshonq :notworthy::

Quote:

Biblical prophecy is right on the money.

Monopoly money, perhaps.

Sheshonq · 04-04-2008, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

None of which matters to the objection that he raised.

First you try to say that Rome and Greece are separate.
Then you try to say they are the same.
It can't be both.

Checkmate - you lose.

PROPHECY FAILS!
:rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling:

The Byzantine Empire. Which lost the region to the Islamic caliphates after holding it for only 10 years.

Not only do you suck at reading comprehension, but your knowledge of history is crippled as well.

Monopoly money, perhaps.

you have no idea of what you are talking about.

I know far more than you do.

Quote:

Israel was not even a nation when Rome split.

So? Israel wasn't a nation during the rule of Rome either. It was divided into several administrative districts.

Quote:

Israel was destroyed in A.D. 70.

No, only the temple was. The country Israel hadn't existed for several centuries; Rome didn't do that.

Quote:

Rome was the last empire to rule over Israel (Im not talking about the region but the nation).

But the Rome of 100 AD didn't include Europe as we know it. It was only Italy, France, Spain and Portugal. Not the same as your fantasy EU configuration.

Quote:

The Europeans will be the last.

Except that the modern state of Israel (a) doesn't even have the same land borders and (b) the majority of Jews don't even live there.

BWAHAHAHAAA!

Sheshonq · 04-04-2008, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

None of which matters to the objection that he raised.

First you try to say that Rome and Greece are separate.
Then you try to say they are the same.
It can't be both.

Checkmate - you lose.

PROPHECY FAILS!
:rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling:

The eastern part of the Roman empire was Greek and Greek was a powerful influence on Roman culture

So were they separate? Or part of each other?

Make up your mind where you want to move the goalposts to.

Quote:

...but in the NT the Romans and Greeks are clearly distinguished from one another

No, that's just your interpretation. Daniel says nothign about Romans and Greeks.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.