Johnny Skeptic

Try as he may, Lee Merrill cannot get around discussing the results if Babylon were to be rebuilt, which of course he was perfectly willing to discuss for weeks until he knew that he would have to concede defeat unless he abandoned that approach. Lee claims that Babylon has not been rebuilt because God has prevented it from being rebuilt. He cited past failed (in his opinion) attempts to do so. Those arguments depended COMPLETELY upon some people WANTING to rebuild Babylon. Lee is well aware that today, Muslims and skeptics DO NOT want to rebuild Babylon. Therefore, all that he has left to claim is that Muslims and skeptics are unable to rebuild a city that they DO NOT WANT TO REBUILD. Now if that don't beat all, folks.

Johnny Skeptic

I posted the following at the Prophecy Network at http://www.prophecynet.com/showthrea...page=11&pp=10:

A Christian administrator replied as follows:

Johnny Skeptic

Where is Lee Merrill? He once said that the Babylon prophecy has done pretty well so far. Why shouldn't it continue to do well? Although some people in the past "wanted" to rebuild Babylon, today, Muslims and skeptics "do not" want to rebuild Babylon. For a number of weeks Lee was perfectly willing to discuss the results regarding people who "wanted" to rebuild Babylon, but when he found out that his arguments regarding results
"don't work" regarding today, he refuted his previous position by basically saying "That [meaning discussing the results] is not done in debates." That is downright dishonest. I have lost all of my respect for Lee Merrill. Even the majority of fundamentalist Christians disagree with him, that is, the relative handful that know anything at all about the arguments that he has used. As I said in one my previous posts, a Christian administrator at the Prophecy Network disagrees with Lee.

lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

Yes, that is what I meant, and if more respond, the 60% of all who did respond.

Well, actually, they don't! If the Bible predicts an earthquake (see Rev. 8:5), does that mean that someone has to want an earthquake, for the prophecy to be real?

I think what is required is that Babylon not be rebuilt or reinhabited, for the prophecy to be fulfilled, whether people want it to be restored, or not, and attempts that fail, that could well have succeeded, make the prophecy much more convincing.

My point about people wanting to rebuild it is a different focus, here I am saying that trying to convince other people that the Bible is imperfect, that it is not God's word, and then passing up such a clear opportunity to demonstrate just that, is inconsistent.

More tomorrow, it's almost midnight. I guess that means it's almost tomorrow, though...

Regards,
Lee

Johnny Skeptic

Message to Lee Merrill: Assuming for the sake of argument that Babylon has not been rebuilt, what is unusual about that?

John A. Broussard

Nothing's unusual about that. Since lee believes Joshua made the sun stand still, how could lee possibly believe that anything is unusual.

Sauron

Which doesn't change what I said. Alll these conditions still hold:
We need to get:

*published archaeologists from Bib Arch Review;
* who respond to a poll;
* where at least ten of them respond, and 60% agree;
* to agree that it has been rebuilt, and it must include
* rebuilding similar walls to those the city had earlier

Then if we did all the above, he would consider it "similar". In other words:

* an extremely tight standard;
* far more detailed and aggressive than he himself has ever aspired to meet with his numerous assertions and posts;
* a standard that would be logistically difficult - to acquire such data;
* with all the work on the skeptic's back and none of it on lee_merrill's back;

In other words, typical disingenuous bullshit from the resident game player.

And of course, this would still leave him with wiggle room at the very end, because he can still argue about whether the walls are truly "like Babylon's" or not. Most people wouldn't attempt such chicanery, but this is lee_merrill. I mean after all - if he can claim with a straight face that Tyre was secretly submerged without anyone knowing it, then is there *anything* he wouldn't try to claim with a straight face? If he thought it would help him avoid admitting failure and drag the debate out a little more?


Not even remotely parallel. An earthquake is an act of nature; people cannot cause them. But it would require people to rebuild Babylon. People have to *want* to rebuild it.

Actually lee, what is required is for you to prove that Babylon fell according to the details of the prophecy. You have yet to do so. If the fall of Babylon was not according to prophecy, then all events after that point are meaningless. The prophecy is already dead on arrival.

And we're saying that your viewpoint is wrong because the people you are talking about (muslims, skeptics) have no interest in rebuilding it.
The conditions haven't been satisfied.

CONDITION 1. they disagree with the prophecy; and

CONDITION 2. they believe that disproving the prophecy would have an actual effect on christians; i.e., by making them reject their own bible.

Neither of these two conditions has been satisfied here.

So repeating your ridiculous view after it has already been shot down two dozen times is rather lame.

Johnny Skeptic

But Lee, you were perfectly willing to discuss intent, results and motives for a number of weeks. You abandoned that approach when you got into trouble.

I hereby issue you the following challenges:

1) Please restate your arguments without making any mention of intent, motives and results, or 2) please tell us what is at all unusual about the fact that Babylon has not been rebuilt, assuming for the sake of argument that it has not been rebuilt.

lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

Well, would you say Machu Picchu was rebuilt if some folks built such a city on top of it? We would instead say that someone built another city on top of that site, that would not be called rebuilding Machu Picchu. But I would be willing to consider the city rebuilt even without the wall, actually, though I think the claim to have rebuilt the city would be much stronger with it, that wall was a characteristic part of ancient Babylon.

Actually, we have an account in the Bible of the rebuilding of Jerusalem, so I would consider that the best explanation of what rebuilding a city would mean in the Bible, I even used that as part of my answer! I mentioned the rebuilding of Jerusalem.

I do know that people generally don't change their views in these forums! But I keep at it, anyway, having noticed that oftentimes the people who are influenced the most are the ones who are the Christians with doubts, or the skeptics with doubts, but they generally do keep rather silent. I'm also under orders!

2 Timothy 4:5 ... do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties ...

Because their being there nearby would have detracted from his royal residence? The claim that they had buildings on the site of ancient Babylon is simply that, a claim, and is less probable, given that the archaeologists make a protest only about Saddam, if there were other building projects there (surely people living on the site would think of building more, from time to time), they probably would have been mentioned as being similarly objectionable.

Um, wasn't the point that the archaeologists did object?

Well, that's actually not what I said, here is the quote: "... more than a block or two of houses ..." I think the goalposts are being moved, but not by me!

We discussed this already, though! Quite a lot. Back on the first page...

Nothing much, unless people have tried to rebuild it, several times! People who should have been able to rebuild it, then it becomes surprising.

Well, I did, to a previous, similar, challenge:

"The prophecy that Babylon will never be rebuilt or reinhabited (Isa. 13:19-20, Jer. 25:12, Jer. 51:26) has been and is being fulfilled, and this is a clear demonstration of God's supernatural power."

Regards,
Lee

Johnny Skeptic

Item 1 - That won’t work. Consider the following from another post:

Item 2 - You previously said “people have tried to rebuild it, several times! People who should have been able to rebuild it, then it becomes surprising.� That has to do with people wanting to rebuild Babylon, does it not? Regarding my comment “Those arguments depended COMPLETELY upon some people WANTING to rebuild Babylon,� I was correct. In other words, regarding the numerous arguments about intent and results over a number of weeks that you used, people wanting to rebuild Babylon was the basis of those arguments.

Item 3 - It is only a demonstration of God’s power if the issues of INTENT and RESULTS are part of your arguments. Today’s Muslims and skeptics DO NOT want to rebuild Babylon. You have a modest argument regarding ancient times where some people wanted to rebuild Babylon and failed to do so, at least according to you, but regarding modern times, you lose hands down. In order for your arguments to be consistent, they must apply to both the past AND the present. Since today, Muslims and skeptics do not want to rebuild Babylon, what is at all supernatural about the fact that they realize that it would not be of any benefit to them whatsoever to rebuild Babylon, and accordingly have chosen, for that and other reasons, not to attempt do so. If you contact the Iraqi embassy, I am quite certain that they will provide you with perfectly logical reasons why Babylon has not been rebuilt.

It seems to me that you must claim that today, God is demonstrating his supernatural power by causing Muslims and skeptics to not want to rebuild Babylon, which he most certainly did not do in ancient times since some people attempted to do so, or that today, God is demonstrating his supernatural power by preventing Muslims and skeptics from doing something that they DO NOT want to do. Which is it, or do you have other arguments?

Although your arguments have very little support even among fundamentalist Christians, I would actually be quite pleased if the majority of them agreed with you, since if they did agree with you, the numbers of new Christians would decrease substantially. The vast majority of the undecided crowd will most certainly reject your arguments, and I am quite certain that the vast majority of nominal Christians will reject your arguments as well. In short, your time would be much better spent using arguments which are more appealing to non-Christians and to nominal Christians. I am quite pleased that you are wasting your time in this thread. By all means, please don't leave anytime soon.