Johnny Skeptic

Message to Lee Merrill: Let me state this as simply as I can: What do skeptics and Muslims believe that the results will be if they have Arabs pitch their tents in Babylon, and/or if Babylon were to be rebuilt? In addition, what do you believe would be the results? Expected results regarding any given endeavor is the chief factor that determines whether or not the endeavor will be attempted. That is the way that you live your life, and you should not require anything different from anyone else.

John A. Broussard

Why do you keep asking the same question over and over again?

Lee has made it quite clear. The bible says that Babylon will not be rebuilt. So it can't be rebuilty. That's all there is to it, period. Double period.

It won't matter if the entire Arab population of Iraq pitches their tents there, if Disney Inc. moves in and reproduces the old Babylon brick for brick and wall for wall. Lee will just say, sorry, it's not the same.

Even if god, herself, came down and put it all back up the way it was in B.C., lee would deny that it was there.

mata leao

puleez! the ancient city-state of Babylon was one of the SEVEN wonders of the world! Babylon had Kings and an entire royal family and courtiers/courtesans, Babylon the city state was the capital of an entire empire, it had a huge army and a huge navy and it sent out foreign ambassadors and received foreign ambassadors from distant countires and empires. Babylon has NOT been rebuilt, not now,not ever.

Sauron

No, it was not.

So far that's the definition of "empire".

No, it did not. Apparently you're making this up as you go.

That's because it wasn't destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, thus invalidating the prophecy. No need to rebuild something, that wasn't destroyed in the first place.

There were at least two separate rebuildings of Babylon in later years.

You apparently have recycled this series of assertions from your other posting, over in the thread on Tyre.
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...47#post2846947

Which is fine, because the refutation is the same, as well as the advice: all your assertions have already been refuted in the original "mother of all threads" on Babylon. Go read it, and come back when you're ready.

mata leao

sauron you are just plain wrong. you go and study history from a qualified professor and come back when you are ready.

Sauron

On the contrary; I'm very correct. And I've studied this for years.

If you have an argument, make it.

mata leao

Even William Lane Craig tires of some arguments, and I tire of this one. Tell you what, sauron, you let "your stones cry out"(archaeologically and prophetically speaking) and I will let "God's stones cry out". I hope you are ready friend, as we used to say in the 101st.its gonna be an e-ticket ride boys!

Sauron

1. You are not william lane craig - and nothing about your posts so far indicates that you are in his league, so comparisons to craig might feed your ego but I doubt craig would appreciate them;

2. It's hard to believe you tire of this argument, when all you have done is assert and wave your hands around in 2 or 3 posts. Hardly enough time to get tired, I should think.

3. If anyone should be tired of this argument it should be me -- I have debated it here for several months. Yet I am not tired; if I can take the time to continue the debate, it seems that you ought to be able as well.

As I said: your assertions about Babylon are incorrect. If you have an argument, a source, or some new point, then make it. Otherwise, I'll take your post above as a (barely) creative way to exit the debate without admitting defeat.

mata leao

you are not William Lane Craig either. And my assertions are not incorrect. I perceive your formal historical training may have been inadequate. And you are free to take my "tiredness" any way you please. As I said, let's let the stones settle it. I am sure you know what "the stones will cry out" means prophetically and theologically.

Sauron

However, it was not I who tried to make comparisons to Craig.

That was *you*.

Yes, I'm afraid they are. Not merely your comments about the city of Babylon itself, but also about the prophecy.

You "perceive". Give me a break.

You come into this thread with assertions piled high like country flapjacks, but on the first formal challenge, you wither and make excuses to exit the thread.

And you have the nerve to accuse me of not having 'adequate' training. :rolling:

Your "perception" is just wishful thinking. My education on this subject exceeds yours - but given the available evidence, that isn't exactly hard.