FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Reload this Page A simple invalidation of the Tyre prophecy
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM
Search

 
Page 31 of 70 « First 212930 31 323341 Last »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-17-2005, 05:11 PM   #301
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 5,815
Question
Quote:
Originally Posted by mata leao
the new polls show that 95% of people believe in God. If its all in the interpretation, then a fortiori, it would still seem that most folks interpret prophecies such as Tyre in favor of theism and in favor of a reliable Bible. Thus, you atheists aren't doing a very good job of convincing people otherwise.
What percentage of Christians have ever HEARD of a "Tyre prophecy"?

What percentage of Christians who ARE aware of it believe it was successful? (most Christians aren't inerrantists, and are perfectly capable of accepting that the prophecy failed).

What percentage of Christians CARE what the OLD Testament says about anything?
Jack the Bodiless is offline  
Old 12-19-2005, 07:22 PM   #302
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: baton rouge
Posts: 1,126
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apikorus
Another example where we know very accurately (to within a couple of years) the date of a text is the last four chapters of the Book of Daniel from the Hebrew Bible. These chapters can securely be dated to ca. 164 BCE because all the detailed "predictions" regarding the actions of Antiochus IV Epiphanes are correct regarding events prior to 164 BCE (i.e. the "prophecy" is a classic vaticinium ex eventu),
according to one view of that book



Quote:
Originally Posted by Apikorus
but are very wrong afterward (e.g. Antiochus did not die between Jerusalem and the (Mediterranean) Sea, but rather at Tabae, in Persia, while campaigning against the Parthians).
hmm. that might suggest that daniel wasn't always referring to AE.
bfniii is offline  
Old 12-19-2005, 07:37 PM   #303
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: baton rouge
Posts: 1,126
Default reponse to post #247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apikorus
To scholars, this evidence is pretty convincing. Of course there are still conservatives who insist that Daniel is a unified text from the Persian period, but most scholars -- save the evangelicals, who are clearly fettered by confessional stance
some christians take the critical stance so this is not true



Quote:
Originally Posted by Apikorus
see this as a slam-dunk for the late chapters being composed in 165/4 BCE.
it's far from a slam dunk at this point. the critical position has some problems.
bfniii is offline  
Old 12-19-2005, 07:42 PM   #304
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: baton rouge
Posts: 1,126
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless
We have had several extensive threads on the Tyre "prophecy" recently. Every aspect of it has been pulled apart and examined. It is quite clearly a false prophecy (for reasons already discussed elsewhere). But certain intransigent fundamentalists won't let go.
according to you



Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless
This is a spinoff thread, in which JS sought to address a general principle: that, if a fundamentalist wishes to claim "prophecy", it is incumbent upon THEM to demonstrate that the "prophecy" was written before the event "prophesied".
obviously, somebody in history got the idea that this was a prophecy. i would imagine it is because it was thought to have been stated by a prophet, someone who was prone to making statements about events before they happened. what reasons do you have for doubting this?
bfniii is offline  
Old 12-20-2005, 02:35 AM   #305
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 5,815
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfniii
it's far from a slam dunk at this point. the critical position has some problems.
This is not the first time you've tried to claim that there are "problems" with the critical position on Daniel. But, of course, you are conveniently unable to state them. IIRC, on a previous thread, you even tried to challenge Spin to list these "problems" for you!

Let me guess: the "problems" are only known to those who have "done enough research", and you want us to produce proof that there are NO problems: because, by default, the Bible itself contains no problems but all views which contradict it DO.
Quote:
This is a spinoff thread, in which JS sought to address a general principle: that, if a fundamentalist wishes to claim "prophecy", it is incumbent upon THEM to demonstrate that the "prophecy" was written before the event "prophesied".

obviously, somebody in history got the idea that this was a prophecy. i would imagine it is because it was thought to have been stated by a prophet, someone who was prone to making statements about events before they happened. what reasons do you have for doubting this?
1. Contrary to the modern usage of the word "prophet" (and modern fundamentalist interpretation), prediction of future events was not the purpose of a Hebrew "prophet".

2. The Book of Ezekiel was quite obviously NOT completed prior to the siege of Tyre, because it also refers to the aftermath of the siege (in the past tense).

3. The "prophecy" failed, and the subsequent prophecy (that Nebby would be granted success against Egypt as compensation for his failure at Tyre) ALSO failed.

4. People generally can't predict the future anyhow. If we are to believe otherwise, evidence must be provided: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

5. There is no reason to believe that the Bible in general is reliable in matters which exceed the mundane knowledge of the people who wrote it: it contains no indication of "supernatural knowledge" or "divine inspiration".

Is that enough? I could probably extend this list.
Jack the Bodiless is offline  
Old 12-20-2005, 02:54 AM   #306
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: baton rouge
Posts: 1,126
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
Various religious books are replete with lies and innocent but inaccurate revelations, so I am surprised that you asked why anyone would revise the Tyre prophecy when many revisions have occured in many religious books, and in a good deal of non-religious literature as well.
but the question is do you know of any such revisions in the bible or specifically ezekiel?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
One example of what I think is a reasonable possibility regarding a revision of the original prophecy is the claim that Nebuchadnezzar would go down ALL of the streets of the mainland settlement. There is no evidence that that happened. Ezekiel called Nebuchadnezzar "a king of kings," and yet this king of kings failed to conquer the mainland settement and eventually went home.

All of the verses refer to Nebuchadnezzar, and the destruction that they mention is extensive, and yet it took "many nations," reference Ezekiel 26:3, centuries to accomplish what this king of kings could not do. Ezekiel might have learned about Nebuchadnezzar's planned invasion in advance by oridnary means and expected him to defeat the mainland settlement by himself. The words "a king of kings" and that his forces would go down "all" of the street of the mainland settlement suggest this possibility. In addition, Nebuchadnezzar's prior conquests would have caused many people to believe that his invasion of the mainland settlement would succeed. Once it became apparent that Nebuchadnezzar was not going to defeat the mainland settlement, Ezekiel (or someone else) might have tried to save face by adding "many nations" to the prophecy.
just curious, why do you repeat questions instead of addressing my responses?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
Another important issue is that even if the prophecy was written before the events, what about it indicates divine inspiration?
already answered.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
Historically, kingdoms rising and falling has been the norm, not the exception. Due to Nebuchadnezzar's power, his proven penchant for conquest, the riches of Tyre, and Babylon's close proximity to Tyre, it would have been surprising if he had not attacked Tyre.
what reasons do you have for believing that ezekiel found out through means other than divine inspiration?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
It is interesting to note that the Old Testament deals mostly with the Middle East and areas adjacent to the Middle East, because that is where most Jews lived. Why was God not concerned with the rest of the world? Why didn't he protect anyone but Jews?
if you read the books prior to this one, you'll get your answer.
bfniii is offline  
Old 12-20-2005, 07:57 AM   #307
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: baton rouge
Posts: 1,126
Default response to post #259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
You DID NOT reasonably prove that Daniel 8-12 was not revised by the author or someone else.
that was not the intention of his point. nor have you even attempted to show that it was.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
Regarding my "triumphal 'cased closed' assertion," the case IS closed regarding the inability of Christians to accurately date the Tyre prophecy,
wrong. all you have demonstrated is that your position is non-committal.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
and their inability to reasonably rule out later revisions.
apiokorus has already addressed this.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
Christians have also been unable to reasonably prove that the prophecy is divinely inspired even if it was written before the events.
i have addressed this
bfniii is offline  
Old 12-20-2005, 08:06 AM   #308
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: baton rouge
Posts: 1,126
Default response to post #268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
Ezekiel, and the vast majority of fundamentalist Christians, have stated or believe that the predictions in Ezekiel predated the events.
and where would they have gotten this idea?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
Another problem for Christians is that they need to explain why God killed innocent babies in Tyre. Ezekiel said that the Tyrians were guilty of pride, but babies don't have pride.
what exactly were these babies innocent of? it seems that you are assuming that God allowing babies to be killed (or anyone else for that matter) makes Him bad.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
Nebuchadnezzar's invasion of Tyre would have taken months to plan, are surely hundreds if not thousands of people would have known about it. Such being the case, Ezekiel could easily have learned about the planned invasion by ordinary means, just like lots of other people learned about it.
this is an interesting theory. do you have any historical data that supports this theory?
bfniii is offline  
Old 12-20-2005, 08:22 AM   #309
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: baton rouge
Posts: 1,126
Default response to post #270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apikorus
To quote Greenberg, The earliest oracle in 26:1-21 says unequivocally that Tyre will be utterly destroyed by Nebuchadrezzar -- its walls breached, its houses demolished, never to be rebuilt, etc. But Tyre was not destroyed -- it was only partially subjugated, after a long siege. Indeed, it survived to be conquered by Alexander in 332 BCE, and the city was quite active during Greco-Roman times.
there is no part of chapter 26 that claims nebuchadnezzar will be the ultimate downfall of tyre. in fact, someone else is specifically named.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Apikorus
Thus, given the historical context -- and in the wake of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem -- a prediction of Tyre's fall at the hands of Nebuchadrezzar would hardly have been remarkable.
tyre was no pushover and nebuchadnezzar had to know this. it's not a given that he would have attacked tyre.
bfniii is offline  
Old 12-20-2005, 08:43 AM   #310
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,396
Default
No, it says that Nebuchadrezzar would destroy Tyre. See 26:7ff.

And of course Tyre survived until Alexander. Indeed, it survives to this very day. So much for "prophecy."
Apikorus is offline  
 
Page 31 of 70 « First 212930 31 323341 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:43 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.