Sheshonq

And I'm still waiting for you to prove your claim that he had no naval forces.
That, and about a hundred other claims you have manufactured out of thin air......

I have backed up my claims far better than you've done in your life. In fact, I've done a better job of backing up my claims just this morning, than you have done in this entire thread.

sugarhitman

In Jeremiah there is no mention of a Babylonian multi-national force that sieged Jerusalem. Only Babylon and the Chaldeans are mentioned. You guys have no proof to back this agrument just like you dont have proof to back Neby's supposed siege of the island. :wave:

arnoldo

The only possible way you can consider the prophecy failed is you practice doublethink conerning the following verse:

Now in the eleventh year, on the first of the month, the word of the LORD came to me saying, 2 “Son of man, because Tyre has said concerning Jerusalem, ‘Aha, the gateway of the peoples is broken; it has opened to me. I shall be filled, now that she is laid waste,’ 3 therefore thus says the Lord GOD, ‘Behold, I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring up < double think: this does not mean future tense, it means I have brought up nations (past tense) to fight tyre> many nations <double think: this does not mean many nations, it only means Nebby willl attack Tyre> against you, as the sea brings up its waves.

Of course there is also the lame assumption that Zekey wrote this when he saw Nebby and the many nations attacking Tyre and thought they would have an easy time destroying it so he gambled, wrote the "prophecy" and lost. Nevermind that Zekey saw that Nebby took at many months to destroy Jerusalem which wasn't even close to the defenses Tyre had.

arnoldo

A minimalist/revisionist doesn't need proof, they simply revise history to win any argument :huh:

Jack the Bodiless

Somewhat off-topic, but... in fact, "King James" was wrong to ignore the LXX, as the later discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls proved (for instance, the original Hebrew Jeremiah in the DSS was closer to the LXX than the Masoretic).

sugarhitman

Their arguments makes great stories....but thats it.

Sheshonq

So? Nobody said that Jeremiah was especially good at history. Moreover, it's not obvious that Jeremiah would have noticed a multinational force; after all, Jeremiah's goal wasn't to document the Babylonian army - it was to preach to Israel. So your objection is not only silly, but unfounded.

Someone else (Amaleq?) has already mentioned the Babylonian Empire's alliances with Scythians and Medes, which was in fact how they disassembled Nineveh. What actual historians will tell you, however, is that ancient near east empires routinely received tribute in the form of military units - for vassal states, it was better than being re-invaded by the senior military power.

Wrong.

You've already received the citations for that. Your deliberate ignorance is not an argument against those citations. :rolling:

Jack the Bodiless

As usual: utterly false.

The prophecy still fails WITHOUT this "doublethink".

...And I no longer believe that you "just don't get it". This has been pointed out so MANY times that there is NO EXCUSE for this deliberate head-in-the-sand denial.

Therefore it is obvious to me that you are doing this deliberately, and you have therefore surrendered. :wave:

Sheshonq

Our arguments are facts which you can't refute...which is why you still haven't provided evidence to your claim that Nebuchadnezzar had no naval force and/or no way to reach Tyre on the island

You also have run like a scared rabbit from explaining why a siege of the mainland colonies would have lasted for 13 years.

Running like a rabbit......too bad that I'm hunting rabbits.....:rolling:

Sheshonq

It's been obvious for weeks; I don't know what is taking the moderators so long to respond to the problem. Repeating dishonest claims and opening new threads to resurrect defeated arguments can only be explained by deliberate insincerity. arnoldo needs to be given a choice: either debate the issue, or have his account suspended.