Sauron

Or maybe you are projecting your own perception of a contradiction onto the muslims, and asking them to defend it. If they dont' find any contradictions, then that is your problem -- not theirs.

Funny how you can't seem to point out any areas of incompleteness, though.

You keep asking the same questions repeatedly, and keep receiving the same answers. Over and over and over again - ad infinitum. The answer is complete - but your willingness to read the answer is not.

Wrong. They disagree with *parts* of it. Not the entire thing. Can you understand that? Or should we just post it 50 or 100 times?

As usual, you expect wrongly.
And also as usual, the explanation has been given before as to *why* they would not take up your lame challenge. It is:

Oh, yeah. I'm sure they're really worried what an intellectually dishonest, backtracking fundamentalist christian thinks of them.

Of course, you could show them what your idea of "consistency" looks like, by putting as much time and research into your arguments as your opponents have put into their own positions. But let's not kid ourself: you are only going to do the very minimal amount of work you think you can get by with here, and not an ounce more.

1. You are backtracking, since you already took positions on (a) sheep and (b) grazing earlier in the debate;

2. Easier to verify? Yes, it is - verified as unfulfilled prophecy. It failed to come true as the text stated: Babylon did not fall to the Persians, it was standing as a glorious city for several centuries after 539 BCE, the temple of Esagila was rebuilt and held ceremonies as late as the 1st century CE, etc. And besides the state of the city itself, this thread has provided numerous other examples of how this prophecy failed to come to pass, refuting lee merrill and his "mentor", Josh McDowell.

1. The goal of this thread is to discuss your claim about Babylon - not to disprove the bible. Please stay on topic. That is, after all, what you claimed you *wanted* to do, back when you tried to backtrack on your claims about sheep and grazing, remember? :rolling:

2. It is not a "golden opportunity", since skeptics have already concluded the Babylon prophecy failed. No need to re-demonstrate that over and over again.

No, they think:

1. it has already been disproven; no need to keep showing that fact;
2. very expensive and hard to accomplish;
3. and no christians would give up their faith after it was rebuilt - so no benefit to the action, after spending all that money and time

This really is not that hard to understand, lee. Apparently you've got so much emotional investment in the Babylon prophecy that you simply can't function if it gets taken away from you.

Indeed.

1. You are making statements and then failing to support them;
2. You took the affirmative position and tried to shift the burden of proof onto the audience;
3. You failed to defend your opening statement (or failed to read what you wrote) and then tried to change the scope of the debate mid-way through it;
4. As the debate wore on, you discovered yourself losing on several topics:

• Babylon NEVER had an inland harbor;
• Alexander did NOT find a ruined city when he conquered it, and especially not the 'walls, gardens and palaces' as you so naively claimed;
• the defenses had NOT been destroyed;
• the city was NOT desolate;
• the city was NOT 'taken in a night' by the Persians, as you and McDowell romanticize the event;
• "desolate" refers to human habitations, NOT to the physical state of man-made buildings;
• Babylon NEVER reached a state like that of the (alleged) state of Sodom and Gomorrah;
• Loss of the temple at Esagila did NOT mean that Babylon was "approaching desolation", anymore than the loss of the Twin Towers proves that New York City is "approaching desolation";
• the speed at which cities are usually destroyed - you never actually supported that claim;
• Media is NOT north of Babylon;
• there is NO evidence that the army of Cyrus came from the north - another claim that you never supported;'
• Building on top of a city's earlier layers CAN be considered to be rebuilding the city;
• there ARE people living at Babylon NOW - a thousand or so that had to be removed to make way for Saddam's palace;
• the definition of "glamour" does NOT have anything to do with a wistful nostalgia for the past;
• the capital of Edom was Bozrah, NOT Petra;
• the stone city of Petra did NOT exist at the time of the Edomite habitation at Sela;
• Arrian is NOT a good historical source for Alexander's motives;
• the phrase "in the days of" is used to mark time, NOT to show control or authority;
• Muslims do NOT disagree with the entire bible;
• Muslims do NOT believe that the quran is the original version of the bible;
• sheep DO graze in swamps;

And that's just a partial list.

You're right; this isn't a true debate at all. It's more like a game of fundie whack-a-mole. :rolling: :rolling:

lee_merrill

Not whether the statement in the first post is right or wrong? The effects of a debate are not typically debated, within the debate.

Really, Johnny, you should not just post comments from emails without asking permission, though I don't mind reading what I wrote.

That is not, however, implied by my statement.

Well, it seems best that I withdraw any comment about the results of the debate, whether mine or the Muslims, or someone else's. Now let's discuss the point of the first post...

My approach is a little different, the request was for me to pick a prophecy to defend, and I picked the prediction that Babylon will never be rebuilt or reinhabited. You may fine me for not picking some less clear prophecy, or send me to Siberia, but I chose this prediction because it is the easiest to discuss and defend, and the clearest in its implications.

Well, as I said, you and they are perfectly free to refuse to rebuild or reinhabit Babylon, or bring shepherds there, however, I shall think your position is inconsistent, if you also point out contradictions in the Bible elsewhere.

The sun standing still need only be apparent motion, I presume you do say "sunrise"! And chewing cud need not mean what biologists mean today, the English phrase and the Hebrew phrase need not be identical.

Now about the debate topic! It would seem that Babylon is so manifestly not rebuilt, and Sadaam so manifestly failed in his attempt to rebuild it, that the focus has turned to all kinds of secondary issues. Well, regardless, I will reiterate that Babylon is not rebuilt or reinhabited, and that people have tried at various times, and failed, when the odds would have been for them to succeed.

And this is quite evidently supernatural...

Exodus 8:19 "This is the finger of God."

Regards,
Lee

Johnny Skeptic

Very good, Sauron. I will quote your comment in my reply to Lee's next post. Lee also quoted a source that said that Arabs were afraid to pitch tents in Babylon. I would like to see Lee try to find some scholars at leading universities who agree with his source. In Lee's opinion, one source often makes a good argument, as long as the source agrees with him.

Sauron

He can't.

Using my Babylon document, I already explained his mistakes about "Arabs afraid to pitch tents" nonsense here and here. You'll find that I also took a similar approach as your own arguments; i.e., that the question of timeframe is important and cannot simply be ignored.

For the very few times that lee bothers to provide a source, you mean.

Sauron

1. Except that you've already been told why this challenge is meaningless for skeptics or muslims. Continuing to ignore the rebuttal for this challenge does not make the rebuttal go away.

2. I thought you were claiming not to be debating the question about sheep? Apparently you *are* debating it, whenever you think you can score a point about it. But when that point is challenged and the score doesn't work out for you, suddenly you backpedal and pretend that the "sheep issue" is not part of the debate. You want to argue the point, as long as you think you're winning. When you start losing, suddenly you pretend like it never mattered in the first place.

Is it any wonder why you've been called "intellectually dishonest" by any number of people?

More handwaves and what-if scenarios. You realize that apparent motion of stopping the sun and the moon wouldn't work, right?

Except that was not the prophecy. The prophecy was specific about the time, manner, and imminence of Babylon's fall. It failed on all three counts. As I said earlier:
You're deliberately ignoring the prophetic text -- and the rebuttals -- in favor of your pre-recorded script. You're like an Amway salesman; no matter what the response offered, you never vary from the sales pitch.

No, the focus is still on the prophecy. You are the one creating all kinds of semantic quibbles in an attempt to derail the thread.

Oh, and PS - you still haven't dealt with the fact that there were 1000 people living in Babylon before Saddam moved them. Or any of the other 20 or so failures in my bulleted list, above.

Irrelevant, since it did not meet its demise according to the conditions set forth in the prophecy anyhow.

Incorrect. Alexander rebuilt sections of it, as did his successors. For that matter, so did Cyrus II.

The odds? Says who? You have presented no such "odds". Indeed, your comprehensive lack of education about the history of the ancient world suggests that you don't even have the minimum background to *propose* such odds.

There is nothing supernatural about it, and the only thing "quite evident" is that you are ducking the numerous rebuttals to your Amway script.

No, it's just lee_merrill, pretending to be God.

Johnny Skeptic

Where is Lee Merrill?

Johnny Skeptic

Quite evidently supernatural to whom? In another post Lee said “I have never said this prophecy is prominent among Christian apologetics. I do think it is a strong argument, and why it is not more prominent, well, I don't know, and I'm setting out to remedy that (in my opinion!) defect.�

To members of the Flat Earth Society, it is quite evident that the earth is flat. I wouldn't be surprised if the number of Christians who agree with Lee's opinion regarding the Babylon prophecy is smaller than the number of members in the Flat Earth Society.

John A. Broussard

Shh!!

Johnny Skeptic

I am pretty sure that Lee Merrill will formally withdraw from this thread soon. The question is, what topic will he want to debate next? Whatever it is, I look forward to the entertainment.

cajela

I eagerly await ringside seats at the continuing fundy whack-a-mole tournament. This is the best entertainment.

Well, actually I may not be back for a while. I'm off on holiday and probably won't be reading merssage boards. Have fun and remember, the lurkers want pretty pictures and reputable popular archaology sites.