Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Jack the Bodiless · 04-07-2008, 09:06 AM

Sugarhitman:

Why are you still asking questions which have already been answered?

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

If the Medes are the second kingdom alone (the silver arms and the lop sided bear) that would mean that they had to conquer Babylon alone which did not happen. And that they would have ruled Israel alone. (The four beasts of Daniel all ruled over Israel, which is why Daniel focuses on them alone). The Medes alone never ruled over Israel. And if the Persions are the third kingdom or the four headed leopard tell us why is this so what would make them the four headed leopard? The Medes never conquered Babylon so how can they be the suscessor or the second kingdom?

What part of Jeremiah was a false prophet do you not understand?

Jeremiah promised that the Medes WOULD conquer Babylon alone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

History has it that Cyrus was both a Persian and Median and that he united the Medes and Persians and then conquered Babylon. The Person who was made ruler over Babylon was a Median. (Gubaru? Cyaxeres II? Darius the Mede? all three (more likely the same person) were Median. Gaburu is said to be a Median General of Cyrus. Cyaxeres is said to be the son of Astyages whom Cyrus made ruler over Babylon. Darius the Mede...well the name speaks for itself...but all are Medes.)

Why are you citing this mishmash of apologetic claptrap as "history"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

And also if Daniel was wriiten during the days of Antiochus why do Gabriel say this "and the people of the PRINCE THAT SHALL COME SHALL DESTROY THE CITY AND THE TEMPLE." The Prince who is to come. How can Antiochus come later if he is already there? And no he did not destroy the Temple or the city.

...Except that, of course, he did. We've discussed this "destruction" before. But as for describing Antiochus as "the prince that shall come": this is a no-brainer. Daniel was written AS IF it was prophecy: AS IF it was written centuries earlier.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

About the 70 weeks. You and others are trying to rewrite what that means because the Messiah did arrive during the 62 weeks.....which would prove that Yeshua is the Messiah. The Jews have already said curse is the man who tries to figure out the 70 weeks. It would be no suprise to me that they have altered those weeks to deny the Truth that Yeshua is the promised Messiah.

How conveniently you forget about the "three and a half weeks" (the duration of the Maccabean crisis), which doesn't fit Jesus at all.

WVIncagold · 04-07-2008, 10:24 AM

Jack you have to understand. sugarhitman is really on earth S in the DC multiverse, you know the one with captain marvel and Adam savage. So the history he recites is all based on a different universe that is similar yet different. Somehow he has gotten hold of a rift generator and is able to bridge the gaps between universes. either that or his just pure crazy because nothing he says has been backed up with a bit or evidence found in a history book anywhere that i have been able to find so i have to assume that my theory of earth S is correct.

Sheshonq · 04-07-2008, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

No, I said that the Europeans are the forces behind the economic powers of China and Japan

And you're wrong about that as well.

Sheshonq · 04-07-2008, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

History has it that Cyrus was both a Persian and Median

Uh, no. History says no such thing.

Quote:

and that he united the Medes and Persians

Also wrong.

Quote:

The Person who was made ruler over Babylon was a Median.

No evidence for this.

Quote:

(Gubaru? Cyaxeres II? Darius the Mede? all three (more likely the same person

There is no evidence that "Darius the Mede" ever existed. Too bad for you!
:rolling: :rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

ROFLMAO

sugarhitman · 04-07-2008, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

Sugarhitman:

Why are you still asking questions which have already been answered?

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

If the Medes are the second kingdom alone (the silver arms and the lop sided bear) that would mean that they had to conquer Babylon alone which did not happen. And that they would have ruled Israel alone. (The four beasts of Daniel all ruled over Israel, which is why Daniel focuses on them alone). The Medes alone never ruled over Israel. And if the Persions are the third kingdom or the four headed leopard tell us why is this so what would make them the four headed leopard? The Medes never conquered Babylon so how can they be the suscessor or the second kingdom?

What part of Jeremiah was a false prophet do you not understand?

Jeremiah promised that the Medes WOULD conquer Babylon alone.

Why are you citing this mishmash of apologetic claptrap as "history"?

...Except that, of course, he did. We've discussed this "destruction" before. But as for describing Antiochus as "the prince that shall come": this is a no-brainer. Daniel was written AS IF it was prophecy: AS IF it was written centuries earlier.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

About the 70 weeks. You and others are trying to rewrite what that means because the Messiah did arrive during the 62 weeks.....which would prove that Yeshua is the Messiah. The Jews have already said curse is the man who tries to figure out the 70 weeks. It would be no suprise to me that they have altered those weeks to deny the Truth that Yeshua is the promised Messiah.

How conveniently you forget about the "three and a half weeks" (the duration of the Maccabean crisis), which doesn't fit Jesus at all.

Um Cyrus was also a Mede...and his general in charge of the expedition against Babylon was also a Mede....so Jeremiah is not a false prophet.

Also this does not address my questions, so I shall ask them again. (They were directed at Spin but since you stepped up...).

1. Greece is seen splitting into four powers. The four headed leopard has four heads, so how can this be the Medes instead of Greece?

2. The ram is seen with two horns one rising up later and higher than the other. The bear beast is seen raising itself up on one side...one side higher than the other. So how can this not be Medo-Persia?
3. The goat (Greece) has four horns on one animal. The four horns are said to be of the same kingdom. The ten horns of the 4th beast is said to be of the same kingdom. So why are the two horns (as interpreted by critics) of the ram (Medo-Persia) seperate kingdoms? Why are they two kingdoms instead of one? The goat and 4th beast has multiple kings but yet they are part of the same kingdom, why does this not apply to Medo-Persia as well?

4. The ten horns coexist together. The only horn that arises later is the little horn. Greek Syria had a total of 21 or 23 kings. Spin's list of ten kings arosed in chronological order...so his interpretation does not fit the 4th beast kingdom.

5. The 4th beast kingdom is divided between 10 kings. Syria was never divided between 10 kings because they did not coexist together...there was always only a single king in power.

6. The book of Daniel focuses on the Kingdom of God, and the Messiah and opposition of the 4th beast and the horn power to this Messianic figure. Why would Daniel then switch to the horn power opposing "Onias the III." Is Onias the one who slays the 4th beast at his coming...who is to rule the whole world for eternity? Or is this Messianic person the Davidic Messiah in whom all Jews look forward to?

Please by all means....teach us.

Sheshonq · 04-07-2008, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Um Cyrus was also a Mede...

Um no evidence of this.

Quote:

and his general in charge of the expedition against Babylon was also a Mede..

Which hardly matters, since it was a Persian army that conquered Babylon on behalf of the Persian emperor and Persian empire.
:rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

sugarhitman · 04-07-2008, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Um Cyrus was also a Mede...

Um no evidence of this.

Quote:

and his general in charge of the expedition against Babylon was also a Mede..

Which hardly matters, since it was a Persian army that conquered Babylon on behalf of the Persian emperor and Persian empire.
:rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

Question was Cyrus the grandson of Astyages? Wasnt Astyages a Mede?

Can you addres the rest of those questions or are you willing to steer clear of them?

Sheshonq · 04-07-2008, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Question was Cyrus the grandson of Astyages? Wasnt Astyages a Mede?

Was he? Where is the historical evidence for your claim?

Quote:

Can you addres the rest of those questions or are you willing to steer clear of them?

You need to prove your claims. That is accomplished by citing your supporting evidence - if you actually have any, that is.

It is *not* accomplished by asking other people questions while ducking those that are posed to you.

sugarhitman · 04-07-2008, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Question was Cyrus the grandson of Astyages? Wasnt Astyages a Mede?

Was he? Where is the historical evidence for your claim?

Quote:

Can you addres the rest of those questions or are you willing to steer clear of them?

You need to prove your claims. That is accomplished by citing your supporting evidence - if you actually have any, that is.

It is *not* accomplished by asking other people questions while ducking those that are posed to you.

So you will not address the rest of my questions? Maybe I should wait for Jack or Spin.....Who are not afraid to respond whether if im right or wrong.

Also it appears that you are only interested in ridicule and insults...a fine critic you are indeed.

GenesisNemesis · 04-07-2008, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Also it appears that you are only interested in ridicule and insults...a fine critic you are indeed.

If you want to accuse someone of ridiculing and insulting you, do it in a reported post.

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

04-07-2008, 10:24 AM	#102
WVIncagold Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: West Virginina Posts: 4,349	Jack you have to understand. sugarhitman is really on earth S in the DC multiverse, you know the one with captain marvel and Adam savage. So the history he recites is all based on a different universe that is similar yet different. Somehow he has gotten hold of a rift generator and is able to bridge the gaps between universes. either that or his just pure crazy because nothing he says has been backed up with a bit or evidence found in a history book anywhere that i have been able to find so i have to assume that my theory of earth S is correct.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.