Johnny Skeptic

Your must produce evidence that a sizeable percentage of Christians would give up Christianity if Babylon were to be rebuilt, and more importantly to produce evidence that U.S. foreign policy towards Muslims would change if Babylon were to be rebuilt.

I doubt that one historian in a hundred will agree with your attempt to correlate Alexander’s and Saddam’s attempts to rebuild Babylon with divine intervention, but that won’t bother you at all since you are fond of adopting positions that even the vast majority of fundamentalist Christians do not support. We skeptics find that to be quite amusing.

All right, let’s start all over again. What is your current position on the Babylon prophecy? Do you or do you not maintain, as you did on numerous occasions, that Muslims and skeptics have a golden opportunity to discredit the Bible anytime that they want to by rebuilding Babylon? Even though you have conveniently tried to avoid discussing Arabs pitching their tents in Babylon, you once said that you added Isaiah 13:20 to your list of pertinent Scriptures regarding the Babylon prophecy, so you as the claimant must reasonably prove that Arabs have never pitched their tents there. I have never asserted that Arabs did pitch their tents there, but you have asserted that the Babylon prophecy has done pretty well so far, and Isaiah 13:20 is by your own admission part of the prophecy.

Clearer to whom? To you, Josh McDowell and a relative handful of people whose number is probably less than the membership of the Flat Earth Society? By the way, the members of the Flat Earth Society DO want to know whether or not the earth is round, and they STILL consider that you have missed golden opportunities to prove that the earth is round, and that you have been inconsistent.

And quite conveniently I might add. If you are not concerned with what Muslims and skeptics think, then will you please tell us how Muslims and skeptics can have opinions without thinking? Do you or do you not wish to discuss the agenda of Muslims and skeptics, and the best means that are available for them to carry out their agenda?

Although some skeptics have claimed that the Babylon prophecy has been invalidated, I have never made such a claim. It is my position is that 1) there is no evidence that Arabs have never pitched their tents in Babylon, that 2) I do not believe that there is one historian in a hundred, or even ten historians in a hundred fundamentalist Christian historians, who agrees with your attempts to correlate Alexander’s and Saddam’s failed attempts to rebuild Babylon (in your opinion) with divine intervention, that 3) Muslims and skeptics are well aware that it would be non-productive for them to rebuild Babylon, and that 4) since I am wealthy, I am willing to pay a few Arabs to pitch their tents in Babylon if you can convince President Bush to change U.S. foreign policy towards Muslims if Arabs pitch their tents in Babylon, and if you will give up Christianity if the attempt is successful.

I did no such thing. My position IS NOT that no once agrees with your position, but that there is no evidence that the percentage of people in the world who agree with your position is even 0.000000009%.

You previously said that you didn’t want to talk about results and what Muslims and skeptics think, and here you are right back again discussing results. Since you are right back to discussing results, why would anyone want to rebuild Babylon?

Other prophecies do not have anything whatsoever to do with the Babylon prophecy. Please stay on topic. It is not incumbent upon skeptics to disprove ANY prophecy. Typical of fundamentalist Christians who do not enjoy playing the role of claimant, you seek to change the widely accepted burden of proof into the burden of disproof. No, I can’t disprove a man’s claim that he saw a pig sprout wings and fly. Can you?

I have never said that the Babylon prophecy and the Tyre prophecy have not been fulfilled. If you wish, I will start a new thread on the Tyre prophecy, assume for the sake of argument that it DID come true, and still invalidate it. How about it Lee? Would you participate in a new thread on the Tyre prophecy?

And that definitely includes you on your mission to one day enjoy immortality, but not just any old immortality, but immortality in comfort.

You are quite mistaken. The following is from the home page of the Flat Earth Society:

Mission Statement-

Background information on the Flat Earth Society

The Flat Earth Society's purpose - why we do what we do

Why a Flat Earth?

Why we don't believe the world is round

Scientific data and measurements backing up our claims

Fighting the "Evidence"-

Dispelling common myths about "proof" regarding round earth theory

Uncovering the conspiracy to withhold the truth from the public

Current Events-

What the Flat Earth Society is doing

What you can do to help out in your own community

Now then, Lee, do you still maintain that the Flat Earth Society is not sincere?

I doubt YOUR sincerity, since you have promised to produce a list of the names of people who agree with your position, but still refuse to do so.

He did say that. Sauron quoted him verbatim. Don’t you remember the part of Sauron’s quote where the Muslim told you that he was “attempting to circumvent your recurring incomprehension. Siemplimente! Kapiche?�

Please do not speak for the Muslim. Let him speak for himself. I suggest that you contact him again and post your discussions with him, but I am quite certain that you will not do it. Why didn’t you continue your dialogue with the Muslim. You quit, not him. Do you consider it to be unusual that the Iraqis are well aware that they do not have a vested interested in rebuilding Babyon, and that skeptics are well aware that they (skeptics) do not have a vested interest in rebuilding Babylon?

It is not my turn to provide references. You are the claimant, and your own assessment is of no importance at all regarding what the general public finds to be convincing. No one will listen to you unless you can back up your assertions about Alexander and Saddam with corroboration from at least several historians who have impressive credentials, or do you consider the testimonies of experts to be unimportant?

There is no logical correlation that can be made between the ability to predict the future and goodness, nor is there any logical correlation that can be made between the ability to rise from the dead and goodness. If Elvis Presley rose from the dead, claimed that he died for the sins of mankind, and predicted what the stock market would close at a week in advance, would you worship him based solely upon that evidence? Of course you wouldn’t.

Sauron

{deleted}

1. You *continue* to make claims about what people will think.
2. Every time you ask muslims and skeptics to rebuild Babylon, you are making a challenge based upon what these other people think.
3. Your entire silly challenge presupposes a knowledge of what these other groups think.

The fatal problem for your lame challenge is that you are wrong about what muslims and skeptics think, concerning rebuilding Babylon. But as I said earlier:

Of course, lee, if you disagree, then you should take your own advice here: go rebuild Babylon. If you and other christians want to prove to the world that the prophecy is true, then you should take up a collection from among your fellow believers. Start a rebuilding project at Babylon. And when that rebuilding project is divinely and miraculously stopped, you can come back and tell us "I told you so". Put your money where your mouth is, lee.



Ah, lee. You must have thought that The Great Eye wasn't watching you any longer. Well, I am.

1. Alexander did not need or try to "build a capital". Babylon was declared the capital. Alexander merely wanted to make some improvements that would help Babylon to perform the role of capital city.

2. Your quotation above does not even say "capital"; it says "make it his residence." Quite a difference there.

3. Folks, lee_merrill tried to claim that there was no building activity at Babylon. Yet from the very same page he quotes from above -- in the VERY NEXT SENTENCE -- we find the following:

Building activity related to the Esagila is mentioned in several cuneiform sources and continued as late as the early 280's, when the Seleucid crown prince Antiochus used his elephants to remove the debris (text).

Interesting how lee_merrill "accidentally" left that damning sentence out of his quotation, even though it was right next door to the text he quoted.

My, my. The quotation I provided above only reinforces what I told lee fifteen times already: Alexander did rebuild parts of Babylon, and that rebuilding was continued by the Diadochi. Indeed, religious services were still being held at Esagila, the central sanctuary of Babylon, right up into the 1st century AD. All of which is contrary to the prophecy that lee is trying to defend. Not that it matters anyhow, since:

1. Babylon was not destroyed either by Nebuchadnezzar, Darius, Alexander, or even Xerxes. It remained a magnificent city, long after the prophecies said it would;

2. Babylon's demise did not match the details of the prophecy, and since that is the case, then nothing that happens to Babylon afterwards matters. So trying to defend the prophecy is already hopeless. But facts seldom bother lee merrill, which is why we continue......

Oh, lee -- by the way: have you found the Shinar Gate that you claimed existed at Babylon? No, I haven't forgotten about that howler of a mistake, either. :rolling:

And Saddam did finish what he set out to do. He wanted to build himself a luxurious palace there. Which he did, as well as other buildings for the servants, the military, etc. All of which are visible in this photo:


And all of which contradict the prophecy.
Why should he? You haven't supported your own arguments yet. You've tossed claim after claim here, without any supporting documentation. The two citations you provided here were already known, and do not support the specific claims you have made. Not only that, both both of your citations here contain evidence that contradicts your position:

(a)the quote from livius.org about Babylon shows building activity that you claimed did not happen; and
(b)the architecture website quotation shows a palace Saddam built, with other buildings alongside it - contrary to prophecy.

Nope, sorry. You're the one that has failed to support your claims with references. And since you're the claimant, as well as the person who claimed *first*, the burden of proof is *still* on your shoulders.

Johnny Skeptic

Yes indeed. That is exactly what William MacDonald says in his 'Believer's Bible Commentary.' I posted this in the past, and I can do so again if necessary. I have four Bible commentaries, including one whose general editor is noted scholar and author F.F. Bruce, and none of them make any mention whatsoever of Lee Merrill's arguments.

Typical of many Christians, Lee cites personal experience as evidence of God's power, but he never provides any evidence that can be checked out. Does he naively suppose that none of the followers of other religions make the very same kinds of claims?

lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

I said I would try to find them, this, of course, I expected to be difficult, so long after the time of the event.

Yes.

Yes, I meant this part, since that was pertinent to the topic under discussion:

Isaiah 13:20 It will never be inhabited or lived in for all generations...

Why do you not insist that I defend this part, too?

Isaiah 13:21 But desert creatures will lie there...

The point is that these other predictions are incidental to the prophecy I was defending, that Babylon will never be rebuilt or reinhabited. I did not set out to defend every prophecy made about Babylon here, that would be a whole lot of ground to cover.

But clearer was meant in reference to anyone considering whether prophecies can be disproved.

But you skipped my main question! Why are you trying to disprove another prophecy, and refusing to rebuild Babylon? What is the difference here?

I actually think their agenda is rather clear, and that they are trying to find the best means to show that Christians are incorrect in claiming that they have true and perfect revelation from God.

Well, again, that is not my question here, I am asking why your other arguments are better than rebuilding Babylon, in order to invalidate prophecy.

Well, again, that is not my point! I am asking here why you and all the other people here tried (and that's an understatement) to disprove the prophecy about Tyre, and then refuse to even consider disproving the prophecy about Babylon never being rebuilt?

In this case, I have said all I have to say on it, and remain convinced this prophecy is correct. I think we have covered the ground here rather well, pro and con, point and counterpoint, for weeks and months in two different forums, and I think it is therefore appropriate to now discuss other topics instead.

Do you know that I have never said "I now change my view," though? That would be required for this conclusion.

All this does not, however, address my point that a phone call from a trusted source would solve the knot here, though. Four phone calls at four spots would be even better! How can it be sunrise and sunset at the same time, and midnight and noon, too? They have a simple remedy for their question, and do not take it.

I don't seem to recall promising this, though. You did say that no skeptic would want to rebuild Babylon, however, and I wonder on what evidence you base this conclusion.

And that was not the topic for the debate! Perhaps Babylon's demise did not follow this passage of prophecy, perhaps it did, that is another topic, and if I said I would defend every prophecy about Babylon, that would be a pertinent question.

But Babylon was said to never be rebuilt, and you may invalidate this prophecy by rebuilding it.

... and you may invalidate this prophecy by rebuilding it.

Regards,
Lee

Johnny Skeptic

Arabs pitching their tents IS NOT incidental to what you are defending. You once said that you had added Isaiah 13:20 to your list of pertinent Scriptures. The verse reads “It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation: neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there; neither shall the shepherds make their fold there.� You clearly said Isaiah 13:20, and the verse mentions Arabs. You once quoted a reference that said that Arabs were afraid to pitch their tents in Babylon, but now you are saying “The point is that these other predictions are incidental to the prophecy I was defending, that Babylon will never be rebuilt or reinhabited.� You DID contest my mention of Arabs pitching their tents in Babylon, but you are well aware that if I checked out the reference, you would be in trouble. Please repost that reference so that I can check it out.

You said that the Babylon prophecy is falsifiable. That means any part of the prophecy. In my previous post, I told you that I am wealthy, and that I can afford to pay a few Arabs to pitch their tents in Babylon [I meant for a few weeks] if you can convince President Bush to change U.S. foreign policy towards Muslims, and if you will give up Christianity if the attempt is successful. I might even be willing to pay some Arabs to pitch their tents in Babylon for a few weeks even if you are unable to convince President Bush to change U.S. foreign policy towards Muslims if you promise to give up Christianity if the attempt is successful. How about it, Lee?

But Muslims do not want to rebuild Babylon, and even if they did want to rebuild it, they are well aware that for all practical purposes, the Christian Church would still be as large as it is today, and more importantly, that U.S. foreign policy towards Muslims would still be exactly the same as it is today.

I prefer to invalidate the prophecy by having Arabs pitch their tents in Babylon, but again, Muslims and skeptics DO NOT have a perceived vested interest in rebuilding Babylon.

That most assuredly IS your point. You have said on numerous occasions that Muslims and skeptics have a golden opportunity to discredit the Bible by rebuilding Babylon anytime that they want to.

A few hours ago I reopened the thread titled ‘The destruction of Tyre,’ and I agreed with you for the sake of argument that the prophecy DID come true, and I still showed that the prophecy DOES NOT indicate divine inspiration. Regarding “and then refuse to even consider disproving the prophecy about Babylon never being rebuilt,� as I said previously, you once said that you added Isaiah 13:20, meaning ALL of the verse, to your list of pertinent Scriptures, and you challenged Muslims and Skeptics to falsify the prophecy, meaning ANY PART of the prophecy, and I promise you that I WILL falsify the part of the prophecy that mentions Arabs pitching their tents in Babylon.

My current arguments regarding the Tyre prophecy are not similar to the arguments that other skeptics used. Take a look at the thread titled ‘The destruction of Tyre’ and see for yourself.

So are you saying that in debates, it is not necessary and customary to provide corroboration from experts and laymen in order to win debates? I can easily produce a good number of skeptics, liberal Christians, and even a good number of fundamentalist Christians and fundamentalist Christian scholars who agree with my position that rebuilding Babylon WOULD NOT produce results that would substantially benefit Muslins and skeptics if you will do the same. I am quite certain that you will refuse my offer. What do you have against providing corroborative sources?

Regarding skeptics, I revise my statement to read “There is no evidence that even 0.0001% of skeptics maintain that if Babylon were to be rebuilt, the Christian Church would become substantially smaller than it is now.�

In typical fashion, you conveniently avoided replying to the following from my previous post:

To that I will now add that your reference WAS NOT a reference that agreed with your attempt to correlate Alexander’s failure (in your opinion) to rebuild Babylon with divine intervention from God.

Please reply to all of my arguments.

John A. Broussard

Don't you think it rather amazing that something as profound as god's growing back of a missing finger would be remembered--long after the time of the event?

Jesus' minor miracle of multiplying fishes was suddenly recalled centuries after it occurred, yet this astonishing phenomenon--never before wintessed in the modern world--disappeared from memory.

How strange.

Johnny Skeptic

Yes indeed. Such a miracle, if true, would have made newspaper headlines around the world. Is Lee Merrill not aware that God has always gone out of his way to make certain that his supernatural powers NOT be obvious to everyone? That would eliminate the need for faith.

Johnny Skeptic

Your deceptiveness is not becoming of someone who claims to be a Christian, or of anyone else for that matter. You most certainly DO recall saying that there are people who haven't been convinced so far that the Bible has been discredited (a number of people probably fewer than the membership in the Flat Earth Society), but would be convinced if Babylon were to be rebuilt, but you haven't produced even one single Christian who agrees with your position. This is simply not done in debates (except for people who are dishonest), to make numerous unsupported assertions with no corroboration whatsoever. Didn't you try to find someone at the Theology Web who agreed with your postions?

"No skeptic" is not what I meant. You are well aware that I meant that the vast majority of skeptics agree with my position that it would be non-productive for skeptics if Babylon were to be rebuilt, not that there isn't one single skeptic in the entire world who would like for Babylon to be rebuilt. Most skeptics agree with my position, but even most fundamentalist Christians disagree with your position that Muslims and skeptics are missing a golden opportunity to discredit the Bible by rebuilding Babylon. If you dispute this, then let's conduct a poll in various forums at the IIDB and find out who is right. In addition, you can ask the Muslim who you contacted to conduct a poll at his web site as well. How about it, Lee?

What can't God be amoral, providing the ability to predict the future to both "good" and "bad" people?

lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

Well, now you are not only telling me what topics I must address (never mind the topic of the debate in the first post), but also the points I must make in support of these topics I have (been) chosen to defend. And you did also write my first reply in this thread for me...

I did check the thread, and it does seem to be about points raised previously there or in the Tweb Tyre thread, as far as I can see.

Well, fine, and again I wonder on what you base your conclusion here. Challenging me to do a parallel survey is not a defense of your point here! I do indeed decline to do a survey, I came here to talk about the topic of the first post, not about what people think of any discussion on it.

Yes, I try and answer the main points, if I answer every single point, the posts become enormous and unreadable. And unwriteable! Some restraint is needed. If you feel I missed an important point, please bring it to my attention, but I don't feel it's profitable to debate every point being made.

I try and keep steering the discussion back to the topic in the first post, apparently in vain.

Yes, it's possible, but again, this is not the topic of the thread.

No, my point was simply that he tried, and failed. If we agree on that, then we can look for implications.

I have said it was remembered, actually, and you said you did not believe this person.

And again I wonder why you would be trying (with extended effort) to show that the Tyre prophecy was invalidated, and yet do not take a clear opportunity to invalidate the Babylon prophecy.

Regards,
Lee

Johnny Skeptic

I did not say that the Tyre prophecy was invalidated. My position is that even if the prophecy did come true, divine inspiration is not indicated. What parts of the prophecy indicate divine inspiration to you?

I told you in another post that I am ready to invalidate the part of the Babylon prophecy in Isaiah 13:20 that says that Arabs will never pitch their tents in Babyon if you will promise to give up Christianity if the attempt is successful, but you did not mention that in your post. Why not? You once said that you had added Isaiah 13:20 to your list of pertinent Scriptures regarding the prophecy.

Is it your position that if Muslims were to rebuild Babylon that the Christian Church would become substantially smaller, and much more importantly that U.S. foreign policy towards Muslims would change? If so, where is your evidence? If not, then why should Muslims rebuild Babylon? It would be a simple matter for me to contact the U.S. State department regarding this issue. How about it, Lee? Would you like to embarrass yourself?

Regarding your attempts to correlate Alexander's and Saddam's attempts to rebuild Babylon with divine intervention, you don't by any chance have any corroboration from historians, pastors, or laymen, do you? It is simply not done in debates to make uncorroborated assertions. Why do you frequently do this? Do you think that the undecided crowd will be impressed with your uncorroborated assertions? I am always willing to conduct polls and research that back up my assertions, but you are never willing to conduct polls and research that back up your assertions. I enjoy conducting research. In some of my debates with Christians at the Theology Web I embarrassed them by using exclusively fundamentalist Christian scholarly sources. I am ready to contact two professors at Wheaton College, and two professors at Dallas Theological Seminary. I will send them copies of this post and your reply. If all four professors agree with my position, will you concede defeat?