lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

Well, it seems you have some reason for trying to overturn other prophecies. Why do you not seek to clearly and unmistakably overturn the Babylon one? Why do I have to prove to you that your purpose in seeking to overturn various prophecies will be worth doing? It seems you have already made this conclusion.

Yes, it does, and this is set forth as an extraordinary incident, not typical of false prophets, and it is even called a test from God. So God could, in this case, be even giving that knowledge to the false prophet in some way.

It tells us that he is someone to be reckoned with! Also, people might be interested in hearing what he really knows about the future, if his perceptions are indeed accurate.

I'm not sure what your point is here, though, if they abandoned the city, wasn't it rather firmly conquered then?

Gen 2:17 for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

This is held to mean spiritual death immediately, notice all the blame-shifting that went on right away, and also physical death entered at that point.

Gen 46:4 I will go down with thee into Egypt; and I will also surely bring thee up again.

Well, Jacob may well have come back to Canaan in his lifetime, and his descendants did return, as well (which I think primarily is what was meant here). Not to mention a resurrection for Jacob! And a return, and inheritance after that, which is part of Christian belief:

Hebrews 11:9-10 By faith he made his home in the promised land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God.

Joshua 8:28 And Joshua burnt Ai, and made it an heap for ever, even a desolation unto this day.
Neremiah 7:32 The men of Bethel and Ai...

But Nehemiah is not at the same time as Joshua, nor is there a prophecy here that Ai would never be rebuilt.

2 Kings 22:20 Behold therefore, I will gather thee unto thy fathers, and thou shalt be gathered into thy grave in peace.
2 Chronicles 35:23-24 And the archers shot at king Josiah ... and they brought him to Jerusalem, and he died.

Presumably just this one battle was all that occurred, and he was not pursued, he died in his home, when there was peace.

2 Samuel 7:16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.

Certainly David's kingly line will never cease, and a descendant of David will rule again. And the part of having an unbroken line of rulers descended from David was conditional, not unconditional:

1 Kings 2:4 'If your descendants watch how they live, and if they walk faithfully before me with all their heart and soul, you will never fail to have a man on the throne of Israel.'

No, I would place this in the future, and associate any geographical aspects of the Babylon referred to then with the city of Rome.

Yes, I hold that this is in the future, too, and the sacrifices would then be before the descent of the new Jerusalem.

That's a good question, I would hold that a change in the ceremonies may indicate a change of meaning, which would have Jesus' sacrifice in view, if there are changes here from the Mosaic ceremonies, such as in this instance:

Ezekiel 46:13 Every day you are to provide a year-old lamb without defect for a burnt offering to the Lord; morning by morning you shall provide it.

In the Mosaic covenant, a morning and an evening sacrifice was prescribed, so this appears not to be simply a resumption of the old covenant, as is also indicated in the listing of tribes in Eze. 48, where Joseph is not listed as one tribe, but two. And then there is the river of living water coming from the temple (ch. 47), that's quite different, too!

Regards,
Lee

Johnny Skeptic

I dealt with that in my most recent post in the thread on the Babylon prophecy.

Regarding "not typical of false prophets," there is not any evidence at all that such was the case. Maybe extraordinary events WERE accurately predicted by false prophets and not recorded, or were recorded but destroyed by followers of the God of the Bible. There are precedents of such behavior by followers of the God of the Bible. Consider the following:

Elaine Pagels: For nearly 2,000 years, Christian tradition has preserved and revered orthodox writings that denounce the Gnostics, while suppressing and virtually destroying the Gnostic writings themselves. Now, for the first time, certain texts discovered at Nag Hammadi reveal the other side of the coin: how Gnostics denounced the orthodox. The 'Second Treatise of the Great Seth' polemicizes against orthodox Christianity, contrasting it with the 'true church' of the Gnostics. Speaking for those he calls the sons of light, the author says: "...we were hated and persecuted, not only by those who are ignorant (pagans), but also by those think they are advancing the name of Christ, since they were unknowingly empty, not knowing who they are, like dumb animals."

Larry Taylor: How does this apply to the story of Jesus? Simply that all of the early critics are dead. Skeptical opinions were banned. Christian opinions, other than those of the establishment, were banned. Books were destroyed, and later, heretics were burned.

We do not know what the most important perceptions of God are, for example why he allows natural disasters to attack even his choicest servants. Hurricane Katrina caused extensive damage (hundred of billions of dollars), injuries, and loss of life primarily in Southern Bible Belt states. There is no evidence that God has ever been good in tangible ways. There is no evidence that Jesus ever healed anyone. Regarding his supposed miracle healings, today, millions of Christians disagree as to what constitutes a miracle healing. There are not any good reasons at all for anyone to assume that it was any different back then. Regarding the feeding of the 5,000, the texts to not mention that anyone except the disciples were aware of the miracle. In addition, none of the disciples made such a claim. Further, the claim might have been made third hand or even fourth hand. None of the anonymous Gospel writers ever claimed to have seen a miracle, and even if their identities were known, and even if their claims were supposedly first hand, that would still not been sufficient evidence that miracles occured.

There is no evidence that God helps anyone in tangible ways today. I challenge you to reasonably prove otherwise. In the NIV, Matthew 14:14 says "When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them and healed their sick." We need compassion in tangible ways today just as much as people did back then. Where is tangible evidence of God's power and compassion in tangible ways today? An unusual healing can happen to anyone, not just to Christians. In the world today, there is every indication that tangible good things and bad things are not distributed equitably to those in greatest need, and that they are distributed according to the laws of physics, not by divine intervention. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that 1) God used to be compassionate in noticeably tangible ways but is not interested in being compassionate in noticeably tangible ways today, or that 2) he never was compassionate in noticeably tangible ways, or that 3) he does not exist.

There is no logical correlation that can be made between the ability to predict the future and goodness, and between the ability to rise from the dead and goodness. If Elvis Presley rose from the dead and claimed that he died for the sins of mankind, would you worship him based solely upon that evidence. Of course you wouldn't.

You said in the thread on the destruction of Tyre that you refuse to discuss the Tyre prophecy anymore, but now you have broken your word and shown that what you actually meant was that you only refuse to discuss the dating of the Tyre prophecy. How utterly convenient and deceptive.

The references were from two different sources. The first reference is from the Encyclopedia Britannica. The second reference is from a less authoritative Internet web site. The Britannica reference says that the mainland settlement "successfully withstood a prolonged siege by the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II." In order for the residents to withstand a prolonged seige, they had to be in the city, did they not?

Regarding the second reference, "at this time" means after Nebuchadnezzar went home. Ekekiel 26:10-11 say "By reason of the abundance of his (Nebuchadnezzar's) horses their dust shall cover thee: thy walls shall shake at the noise of the horsemen, and of the wheels, and of the chariots, when he shall enter into thy gates, as men enter into a city wherein is made a breach. With the hoofs of his horses shall he tread down all thy streets: he shall slay thy people by the sword, a nd thy strong garrisons shall go down to the ground." There is no evidence that Nebuchadnezzar tred down all of the streets of Tyre.

Ezekiel 26:6 says "And her daughters which are in the field shall be slain by the sword; and they shall know that I am the Lord." There is no evidence at all that that that happened the way that the verse indicates it happened. First of all, enough of the residents of the mainland settlement survived to withstand Nebuchadnezzar's seige for thirteen years. After that, he went home. Second of all, if the residents attributed whatever deaths occured to God, there is no evidence that they vacated the mainland settlement as a result until after Nebuchadnezzar gave up and went home. Third of all, if there is any lesson at all that can be learned from the Tyre prophecy, it is that after God made harsh judgments against the people of Tyre, it took him and some human armies centuries to defeat the puny human residents of Tyre.

Sauron

Because it's already been done a half-dozen times. The Babylon prophecy fails on at least six points of the prophecy; possibly more. No reason to overturn something that is ALREADY OVERTURNED.

Why is that so hard for you to get through your head? No, wait; I already know -- you are ignoring the evidence again.

You need to prove that it is worthwhile because you are asking skeptics to expend lots of time and money to disprove a prophecy which -- as far as we can see - has already been disproven multiple other ways. If rebuilding babylon isn't going to advance skepticism and critical thinking then why should any skeptic bother to expend the time and energy?

In order for skeptics to be interested, it must advance skepticism. Until you can prove that rebuilding babylon will have that effect among christians, then you haven't given skeptics any motivation for doing this. And since the babylon prophecy is already overturned on at least six different points, skeptics win the argument.

This is another one of those concepts that you pretend to ignore, because it is checkmate for your argument. From the top:

1. From a purely factual standpoint, the babylon prophecy has already been disproven at least six different ways.

2. Nobody continues to disproves things that are already refuted; I wouldn't spend any energy to disprove the idea that the moon is made of green cheese, either.

3. Thus, you have to provide a reason or motivation. So far you've failed to do so.

Bullshit.

It most certainly is NOT set forth as an extraordinary incident. That's just another example of lee_merrill adding extra text and "spin" to a passage.

Learn to read. The citation Johnny provided about Tyre says that the mainland was abandoned and the people fled to the island city. The island city of Tyre was never conquered.

You'll find that lee_merrill is full of dishonesty and games. He pops back in on the Tyre thread just long enough to make what he thinks is a point. But then when he's called on the claim, he then declares -- or should I say, "re-declares" -- that he is bowing out again. Intellectual as well as personal integrity is sorely lacking.

lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

Well, you asked me your question again, "Why would it make any difference if the Babylon prophecy was overturned?" To which I shall ask my question in reply again! "Why are you trying to overturn other prophecies?" Such as Tyre, such as a prophecy in Isaiah about Jesus, and on and on, and there is this unaccountable refusal to consider overturning a prophecy in an undeniable way.

The prophecy says Babylon will never be rebuilt, and the obvious (and quite conclusive) way to overturn this is to rebuild it.

Well, I have prayed in several instances for healing, and been (quickly) healed, three or four times.

Yes, however being healed helps me believe in God's goodness, and this, and predictions of the future help me believe in his power. Both are needed, I agree. Also, his holiness, these three all go together:

Psalm 62:11-12 One thing God has spoken, two things have I heard: that you, O God, are strong, and that you, O Lord, are loving. Surely you will reward each person according to what he has done.

Power, and love, and holiness...

Oh dear, let's not be legalistic, shall we? Bowing out of a thread doesn't mean I shall say no more about Tyre for six months anywhere. I'm certainly willing to discuss new points, though I would still rather discuss something else for a while.

Well, it just seems more probable to me that they left before they agreed to give up. That would mean they could take their treasures with them.

Apparently there is still a need for other prophecies to be discussed, though. Not to mention that I and others have answers for the claimed invalidations you and others have mentioned, here and in the other prophecy threads. Why not overturn the Babylon prophecy so clearly that an invalid prophecy is undeniable?

Regards,
Lee

Johnny Skeptic

Skeptics have already adequately refuted the Tyre prophecy because Christians cannot accurately date it, but no Christians who I know of have given up Christianity as a result.

Skeptics have already adequately refuted the most important supposedly messianic claim in Isaiah 53. Verse 4 says “Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.� There isn’t any evidence at all that Jesus’ death atoned for the sins of mankind, but no Christians who I know of have given up Christianity as a result. As far as the other supposed messianic prophecies in Isaiah 53 and elsewhere are concerned, maybe Jesus was an advanced alien being who was aware of the Old Testament and wanted people to worship him, and pretended to fulfill the prophecies. The universe is old, vast, complex, and full of possibilities. Who knows how many advanced alien races there are, and what their capabilities are?

You said that Arabs pitching their tents in Babylon would discredit the prophecy. If such an attempt were successful, do you have any evidence that the Christian Church would become substantially smaller than it is today, or that U.S. foreign policy towards Muslims would change? You haven’t produced even one single Christian who will give up Christianity if Arabs were to pitch their tents in Babylon, and people who read the posts in this thread and the thread on the Babylon prophecy know why. It is because your views on the Babylon prophecy are not even shared by one in one hundred FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIANS, let alone not shared by even one in a much greater number of liberal Christians.

What kinds of healings? Why do you attempt to correlate your healings with God’s involvement? Are these healings available to atheists and agnostics? Are you not aware that the odds are much greater that very unusual healings will someone happen than they are that very unusual healing will never happen? A much more beneficial miracle would have happened if you had prayed for Hurricane Katrina not to go ashore anywhere and your prayer had been answered. You said that you have been healed quickly three or four times. When flu and colds season comes around, I have an experiment to suggest to you. If you get a bad case of the flu or a bad cold, ask God to heal you quickly, preferably instantly, like Jesus and the disciples supposedly did. If you don’t get a bad case of the flu or a bad cold, try the experiment on a member of your church congregation.

So people who become quadriplegics and don’t get new arms and legs, will never walk again, lose their jobs, and never get to play with their children again, should have less reason to believe in God’s goodness, right?

Atheists agnostics have unusual healings too. So do wild animals.

Do you mean the prediction about heaven or predictions that have already come true? Based upon the prophets’ records, there are not any good reasons at all for any Christian to believe that God will provide them with a comfortable eternal. There is not one single prophecy in the entire Bible that indicates divine inspiration.

Your perception of God’s holiness is subjective. I could easily provide you with hundreds of testimonies from the followers of some other religions who claim that they perceive that God is holy.

But you DID NOT bow out. You came right back after you said that you were bowing out, but you conveniently refused my question that you provide reasonable proof when the prophecy was written. You wasted a lot of your time debating the Tyre prophecy. If the first skeptic who made a post had asked you to provide reasonable proof when the prophecy was written, how would you have replied? Would you possibly have made a hasty departure? I think that that is what would have happened due to your current evasiveness. Over the last few years, I have noticed that Christians become evasive much more frequently than skeptics do. That most assuredly does not impress the undecided crowd, so by all means, please go right ahead and continue to be evasive. Your evasiveness strengthens the skeptic cause.

Isn’t the dating of the Tyre prophecy a new point? If so, then you should attempt to reasonably date it. If not, then please tell me where I can read where you attempted to date it.

Well, there you go again discussing the Tyre prophecy, but quite selectively of course. You don’t want to embarrass yourself by trying to date it. The vacating of the mainland settlement, as well as all of the other aspects of the prophecy, are completely irrelevant without reasonable proof that the prophecy was written before Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion, but I will humor you anyway and reply to your argument.
Both the residents of the mainland settlement and the island settlement DID NOT give up. The Britannica 2002 Deluxe Edition says “For much of the 8th and 7th centuries BC the town was subject to Assyria, and in 585–573 it successfully withstood a prolonged siege by the Babylonian king Nebuchadrezzar II.� The reference refers to the mainland settlement.

At http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...e/1_bible.html, Alex Matulich says the following:

“Furthermore, we know that the city not only recovered quickly but was being besieged again (by Antigonus) less than 20 years later - proof that the walls still stood! In fact, Tyre remained a major city for another millennium and a half. Thus Dr. Kennedy's defense of the prophecy is not only illogical but depends on an outright falsehood.�

Consider the following Scriptures:

EZE 26:7 For thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will bring upon Tyrus Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, a king of kings, from the north, with horses, and with chariots, and with horsemen, and companies, and much people.

EZE 26:10 By reason of the abundance of his horses their dust shall cover thee: thy walls shall shake at the noise of the horsemen, and of the wheels, and of the chariots, when he shall enter into thy gates, as men enter into a city wherein is made a breach.

EZE 26:11 With the hoofs of his horses shall he tread down all thy streets: he shall slay thy people by the sword, and thy strong garrisons shall go down to the ground.

The Encyclopedia Britannica reference and other historical references refute those lies.

EZE 26:6 And her daughters which are in the field shall be slain by the sword; and they shall know that I am the Lord.

Even though some of the residents of the mainland settlement were killed, the survivors did not surrender to Nebuchadnezzar, and there most certainly is not any evidence at all that the residents of the mainland settlement attributed the attacks to God. If there is any lesson at all that can be learned from the Tyre prophecy, it is that after God’s prophet Ezekiel spoke harsh judgments again the mainland settlement and the island settlement, both God and the most powerful army in that part of the world (Ezekiel called Nebuchadnezzar a “king of kings�) could not defeat one single city that was successfully defended by a group of puny humans, and that it took God and his human proxies centuries to get even not with the majority of the Tyrians who were alive at the time that the prophecy was supposedly made, but with their descendants who were not even born until centuries later, and conveniently by an unknown conqueror.

Just bring 'em on, Lee. I and the other skeptics will demolish them one at a time.

Which prophecies did you and others have answers for? I look forward to refuting your and the other Christians' answers.

I have already told you that I am ready to make the attempt (Arabs pitching their tents in Babylon) if you will first provide proof that if the attempt is sucessuful it will achieve beneficial results for skeptics and Muslims. You can start by conducting a poll in your church congregation in order to find out how many of the members would give up Christianity if Arabs pitched their tents in Babylon, and by contacting the U.S. State Department and find out if U.S. foreign policy towards Muslims would change if the attempt is successful.

I notice that you quickly lost interest in any further discussions with the Muslim that you contacted. Why was that? Would you like to debate a member of the Flat Earth Society at this forum? Didn't you post something at the Theology Web about the Babylon prophecy? I have asked you on several occasions to contact James Holding, the pastor of your church, and some scholars at a leading Christian college regarding your arguments, but you continue to refuse to do so. Why is that? What do you have against conducting proper research? I frequently contact scholars in my debates with Christians, and my favorite scholars to use against Christians are Christian scholars. The undecided crowd is not at all impressed with you, Lee. They won't be undecided much longer. Evasiveness and refusing to conduct proper research do not win debates. If you wrote a formal paper on the Babylon prophecy, your bibliography would be conspicuous by its absence. I challenge to you write a formal paper on the Babylon prophecy with adequate bibliographical references. I will send it to several Christian colleges of your choice. You could also start a new thread at the Theology Web and post your formal paper there. How about it, Lee? You are good at making challenges, but I predict that you will refuse to accept my challenge.

lee_merrill

Hi Johnny,

Well, I don't know anyone who concludes that this prophecy was written at or after the time of Alexander! So I don't think I need to argue further than that, for I also hold that Alex was part of the fulfillment of this prophecy.

Well, "Tyre Through the Ages" says the king of Tyre is listed as one of the people on a Babylonian pension from the Babylonian household, in an official document at Babylon (p. 103). That would seem to imply he was a captive there.

As it turns out, I have mentioned and discussed such prophecies here more than a few times, here and in other forums. Surely you are aware of this, you were involved in several of these discussions.

And I have replied that your attempts to overturn other prophecies indicate that you have this agenda already! Why do you need no such proof of effectiveness for your other efforts?

I must say, you do have a tendency to give me lots and lots of projects! But my thread on Babylon was just to discuss this prophecy, and I'm not sure a formal paper would be much more by way of progress. Rebuilding the city, by the skeptics, however, would be...

Regards,
Lee

Johnny Skeptic

Alexander was not specifically mentioned in the prophecy, nor was his involvement implied in any way. Historically, kingdoms rising and falling has been the rule, not the exception to the rule. Ezekiel 26:4 says “And they shall destroy the walls of Tyrus, and break down her towers: I will also scrape her dust from her, and make her like the top of a rock.� If you attempt to use the verse as evidence of Alexander’s involvement, you will need corroboration from several modern historians. At the Theology Web, James Holding tried to use the verse as evidence. He said that “make her like the top of a rock� refers to the result of Alexander using the ruins of the mainland settlement to build his bridge to the island, but when I asked him to provide corroboration from several modern historical sources, he couldn’t. Since the mainland settlement was built on rocky ground, it is highly unlikely that it ever looked like the top of a rock. At any rate, modern historians are much more qualified to judge this issue than you or I am. I suggest that you begin by contacting a professor of ancient history at Wheaton College, which is a Christian college that you said that you like.

There are no surviving original documents from that time period on any subject. In addition, the Tyre prophecy is about much more than the king of Tyre. The prophecy also speaks against the “daughters in the field,� which refers to the mainland settlement. Neither the mainland settlement nor the island settlement surrendered to Nebuchadnezzar.

Consider the following Scriptures:

EZE 26:6 And her daughters which are in the field shall be slain by the sword; and they shall know that I am the Lord.

EZE 26:7 For thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will bring upon Tyrus Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, a king of kings, from the north, with horses, and with chariots, and with horsemen, and companies, and much people.

EZE 26:8 He shall slay with the sword thy daughters in the field: and he shall make a fort against thee, and cast a mount against thee, and lift up the buckler against thee.

EZE 26:9 And he shall set engines of war against thy walls, and with his axes he shall break down thy towers.

EZE 26:10 By reason of the abundance of his horses their dust shall cover thee: thy walls shall shake at the noise of the horsemen, and of the wheels, and of the chariots, when he shall enter into thy gates, as men enter into a city wherein is made a breach.

EZE 26:11 With the hoofs of his horses shall he tread down all thy streets: he shall slay thy people by the sword, and thy strong garrisons shall go down to the ground.

There is not any evidence at all that Nebuchadnezzar’s army tread down all of the streets of the mainland settlement. According to the Britannica 2002 Deluxe Edition and some other historical sources that I read, the daughters in the field did pretty well against this “king of kings,� and against God too I might add, since after 13 years of trying to defeat the mainland settlement, Nebuchadnezzar gave up and went home.

In my previous post, I said the following:

You did not comment on that. Why not?

You need to tell me specifically which prophecies that you mean. Regarding “there will always be a Jewish people,� as long as Jews have babies, there will always have to be a Jewish people. What do you find strange about Jewish people having babies?

And I already gave you your answer in my previous post as follows:

Johnny: Skeptics have already adequately refuted the Tyre prophecy because Christians cannot accurately date it, but no Christians who I know of have given up Christianity as a result.

Lee: such as a prophecy in Isaiah about Jesus

Johnny: Skeptics have already adequately refuted the most important supposedly messianic claim in Isaiah 53. Verse 4 says “Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.� There isn’t any evidence at all that Jesus’ death atoned for the sins of mankind, but no Christians who I know of have given up Christianity as a result. As far as the other supposed messianic prophecies in Isaiah 53 and elsewhere are concerned, maybe Jesus was an advanced alien being who was aware of the Old Testament and wanted people to worship him, and pretended to fulfill the prophecies. The universe is old, vast, complex, and full of possibilities. Who knows how many advanced alien races there are, and what their capabilities are?

Lee: The prophecy says Babylon will never be rebuilt, and the obvious (and quite conclusive) way to overturn this is to rebuild it.

Johnny: You said that Arabs pitching their tents in Babylon would discredit the prophecy. If such an attempt were successful, do you have any evidence that the Christian Church would become substantially smaller than it is today, or that U.S. foreign policy towards Muslims would change? You haven’t produced even one single Christian who will give up Christianity if Arabs were to pitch their tents in Babylon, and people who reads the posts in this thread and the thread on the Babylon prophecy know why. It is because your views on the Babylon prophecy are not even shared by one in one hundred FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIANS, let alone not shared by even one in a much greater number of liberal Christians.[/quote]

Lee, the issue of the results if Arabs were to pitch their tents in Babylon is quite easy to settle. You conduct a poll among several hundred fundamentalist Christians in several of your local churches, names please, and ask them two questions: Will they will give up Christianity if Arabs pitch their tents in Babylon, and will they give up Christianity if Babylon were to be rebuilt? I am quite certain that you will not be interested in conducting a poll among liberal Christians, since probably not any of them would give up Christianity if Arabs were to pitch their tents in Babylon, or even if the Babylon were to be rebuilt, for that matter.

If you will agree to conduct a poll among some fundamentalist Christians, I will contact the U.S. State Department and ask them if U.S. foreign policy towards Muslims would change if Arabs were to pitch their tents in Babylon, or if Babylon were to be rebuilt.

You see how easy it is, Lee? The results are easy to predict with only a brief amount of research.

You also conveniently avoided replying to the following from my previous post:

Hurricane Katrina is reason enough for rational minded people to reject Christianity. Only a barbaric monster would allow such a thing to happen. Fair and just oversight is one matter, but Hurricane Katrina is another matter entirely. God created hurricanes, not Adam and Eve. God determines where hurricanes go, not Adam and Eve. It would be inconsistent for a loving God to predict the future in order to help believers and then refuse to help them by preventing hurricanes from going ashore.

Love cares, love protects, love helps, and love heals. God is not provably like that in tangible ways. Good things and bad things are frequently not distributed to the people who are in greatest need, indicating that they are not distributed by intent.

As I have told you before, there is no logical correlation that can be made between the ability to rise from the dead and the ability to predict the future, and goodness. I also told you that Deuteronomy 13 says that bad people can predict the future too. You said not at dramatically as the Bible prophets did. I replied that accurate prophecies by bad prophets might have been destroyed by believers, and also that they might not have been written down. As far as I recall, you did not reply to those comments.

Prophecy is your favorite debate topic, but you have never made a convincing presentation regarding any prophecy. I challenge you to debate me in ten one on one moderated debates regarding ten prophecies of your choice. I predict that you will refuse to accept my challenge.

Sauron

1. The prophecy says many things about Babylon - none of which have come to pass. The prophecy has already been overturned; the skeptics have already won this argument.

2. Given that fact, there is no need to overturn it again, especially when you can't provide any evidence that this will convince christians that the bible is wrong.

3. Besides, Babylon was already rebuilt in history - twice, in fact.


Maybe you should have prayed for some honesty instead.

I suppose asking you for consistency would be "legalistic" as well, wouldn't it?

Seems to me that what you want to do is run around, make claims like someone setting brush fires, and then bow out when the hard work of proving them suddenly comes due.

1. What you think is "probable" carries no weight here. You've demonstrated time and time again that you do not have any education on this topic, and you're also willing to make up things on the spur of the moment.

2. The mainland settlements were destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. Whatever inhabitants were left afterwards fled to the island city. The mainland settlements were not rebuilt for several centuries.

Claiming that other prophecies need to be discussed does not address my point: the prophecy about Babylon has been disproven six different ways. Therefore there is no need to disprove it yet another way; the game is already over and the skeptics have won.

Except that those so-called answers were easily and handily refuted. You seem to think that having "answers" actually matters here; it does not. The answers have to be:

*solidly reasoned;
*stand up to historical investigation, and
*make sense with the text and the archaeology

None of your answers came even close.

Because the invalidation of the prophecy is already undeniable - and yet, you deny it anyhow. You were presented with photographic evidence that the prophecy was overturned, and yet you deny it.

Given the limitless ability of christians (like yourself) to deny anything that conflicts with their religion, there is no such thing as "undeniable proof" when it comes to bible literalists.

So what? You've already been informed -- three times in fact -- of why this happened. Shall I embarrass you again?

This is from Jidejian, the book you loved to quote from until you realized that (a) I also owned it and (b) unlike you, I had actually read it.



It was customary for a conqueror to take the royal class and elites back to his capital as "guest hostages", and also to preven them from becoming instigators of revolt.

Not really. The projects are a result of your mass production of claims; you put yourself in the bind, no one did it to you. Johnny is only suggesting ways that you could prove your case -- if you weren't so intellectually dishonest and lazy.

It would be substantial progress for you. It would force you to actually crack open a book instead of making up scenarios while brushing your teeth in the morning.

badger3k

Another Lee Merrill Prophecy Train Wreck!

I'm bettting on three months before he runs away, to repeat his arguments on another thread. Can we start a pool? :devil3:

lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

Certainly, I am only saying my interpretation fits with all the dates for this prophecy, and any author.

Well, Sauron quoted this surviving original document, too! It is real, it would seem, and it does imply that the king of Tyre was a captive in the Babylonian king-trophy-case, like the king of Israel (Jer. 52:31-34).

My eyes blear over when people say "Tyre." I'm not very enthusiastic about discussing this subject. But Nina again says the city was ruined, and quotes an archaeologist as saying that, and this matter has been discussed quite a bit in the Tyre thread.

So that would explain why there are still Babylonians? Elamites? Hittites?

But you must refute my interpretation, before I will be required to date it more accurately. But why are you still discussing other aspects, if only this aspect refutes it, and we need discuss it no longer?

But I see "Lee comments" all the way through your quote. To which you did not respond, by the way. Did you mean some other statement?

And then you raise another question, after not responding to my answers:

Well, I cannot conduct a discussion if the reply is to simply open another set of issues! I could say in reply, for example, that abiogenesis is reason enough for rational minded people to reject naturalism. But this gets us nowhere, if we're trying to go everywhere at once.

I do believe that God protects those who take refuge in him, though, which would be my response here.

God has done all of these in my life, remember I said I have been healed a good number of times, for instance, and I have been protected, as well, even when I have messed up. God really does care! And he does really help those who trust in him.

As I recall, I did reply, that God may well have given the information in some way to this false prophet. Please check the archives, I think I said more than this as well.

No one seems to be concluding that Babylon is now rebuilt, nor are they exactly jumping for joy at the prospect of overturning a clear prediction by rebuilding it. I think this is pretty convincing, that's also why it's a favorite topic!

Johnny, may I say that I really spend most of my time in discussing with you, in clearing underbrush, and even the same underbrush, time and time again. So yes, I do decline, though I wish you well, I think for both of us, our time can be spent more productively elsewhere.

Yes, I will certainly go on repeating these arguments! Prophecy seems to cause the most extraordinary leaps and bounds by the skeptics...

Regards,
Lee