Sheshonq

Yes, and that was because he was attacking an 'easily defended island'.

The depth of your denial is staggering.

Jack the Bodiless

There is a comment I'd like to make here (and it's not about the Tyre prophecy as such...)

Nobody here has EVER disputed that Nebby didn't gain any riches from Tyre (though the actual reason is that he failed to conquer it), and nobody here has EVER disputed that (according to Ezekiel) Nebby went to Egypt because of his failure to gain riches from Tyre.

...So WHY are you continually repeating stuff that WE ALREADY KNOW, and that NONE OF US HAS DISPUTED?

Yet more diversionary waffle?

It's like those repelling magnets again! You CANNOT stay on topic.

You need to examine why this is so.

makerowner

arnoldo, do you remember when you promised to stay on topic? Twice? Well you haven't. Do you know what happens to liars? "But as for [...] all liars, their lot shall be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death." (Rev. 21:8 RSV)

Darklighter

Yes, they're building up quite the plethora of ignored questions.

To arnoldo and sugar: In order to make a reasonable case for a future destruction of Egypt, you must first address the issues I raised in post #107.

Jack the Bodiless

Yes, that's a good point... and sugarhitman's bizarre fantasy completely ignores it.

Also: Arnoldo, you have admitted that you believe Nebby went to Egypt to gain his "wages" after not getting them from Tyre.

So WHY does your post #98 consist almost entirely of a repetition of sugarhitman's bizarre fantasy that YOU do not believe?

Your own "truth-repulsion effect" was taking you in a different direction entirely. So why did you suddenly go for sugarhitman's denial that Nebby was involved? HE is trying to claim that it WASN'T Nebby that would sack Egypt! (in defiance of all the verses that specifically name Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon).

Yet the whole reason for going to Egypt was (supposedly) to pay off Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon!

Again, the analogy of the repelling magnets: a magnet can suddenly zig to the left, then zag to the right... any direction is preferable to forwards towards the unwanted truth.

Cege

Ezekiel 29:17-20 (NIV):

17 In the twenty-seventh year, in the first month on the first day, the word of the LORD came to me: 18 "Son of man, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon drove his army in a hard campaign against Tyre; every head was rubbed bare and every shoulder made raw. Yet he and his army got no reward from the campaign he led against Tyre. 19 Therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am going to give Egypt to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and he will carry off its wealth. He will loot and plunder the land as pay for his army. 20 I have given him Egypt as a reward for his efforts because he and his army did it for me, declares the Sovereign LORD.

Nebuchadnezzar didn't defeat Egypt, didn't carry off its wealth, didn't loot and plunder the land. God did not give Egypt to Nebuchadnezzar as a reward and there was no desolation of Egypt then, or since.

sugarhitman

Egypt did plunder and subjugated Egypt. In the chapter 30 a hint is given: "Wail Woe is the day! Even the day of the Lord is near; It will be a day of clouds THE TIME OF THE GENTILES. The sword shall come upon Egypt and great anguish shall be in Ethiopia, when the slain fall in Egypt, and THEY TAKE AWAY HER WEALTH, and her foundations are broken." Now compare this with Daniel: "He (the King of the North) shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the LAND OF EGYPT SHALL NOT ESCAPE. He shall have power over the TREASURES OF GOLD AND SILVER AND OVER ALL THE PRECIOUS THINGS OF EGYPT; also the Libyans and ETHIOPIANS SHALL FOLLOW AT HIS HEELS." This king of the north does the same thing to Egypt as Nebby was predicted to do. Nebbie conquered Egypt, just like he conquered Jerusalem. But Nebby is not the true king of the north who will rise against Jerusalem and Egypt. Also in Daniel's time Babylon and Nebby was gone. There is a king of the north coming as predicted, and he is decribed through Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon.

Why would God do to Egypt today for what their ancestors did? If anyone continues in the sin of their forfathers God will bring judgement on them. Jesus told this to the Pharasees who said they would not have stood with them when they killed the prophets. Jesus told them not only were they actually doing this very thing, but that judgement would fall onto them...and it did. :wave:

Sheshonq

Egypt conquered and subjugated itself? :rolling:

That's not a hint; it's another unproven scripture. To support a previous unproven scripture. Neither one happened.

Uh, no. He did not. In fact, there is zero evidence that Nebuchadnezzar ever launched so much as a campaign against Egypt -- much less conquered it.

Not according to Daniel - Daniel claims to have interpreted Nebuchadnezzar's dream. Of course, Daniel wasn't written until the 160s BCE anyhow.

sugarhitman

Thank you for pointing out my error. I shall return the favor. This vison was given in the third year of Cyrus. Babylon and Nebby was gone. This vision is future. Therefore this King of the North is not Nebuchadnezzar. :wave:

Darklighter

So your logic amounts to: "This scripture mentions Egypt, and this scripture mentions Egypt, therefore the must be talking about the same thing!", am I right?

If you knew what the "Times of the Gentiles" were you'd know why that arguement doesn't work. But I'll let you figure that one out since there's a thousand different opinions for what that means, and it would get us off-topic anyway. But that's beside the point because your "interpretation" raises questions such as: Why is the Neb in chapter 26 literal, while the Neb in 29 is merely representative of the 'King of the North' from Daniel, as you say? If a part of the prophecy doesn't fit you just say it's figurative and then you can apply it to whatever the hell you want... how convenient.