Johnny Skeptic

I could not find any testimonies from Muslims in your previous post. Please repost the testimonies. In addition, please contact the Iraqi embassy in Washington, D.C. and ask them for their opinion on this matter. If you are really confident that Muslims would like to disprove Isaiah 13:19-20, you should be willing to contact the Iraqi embassy. I suspect that Muslims are perfectly content that 1) they already have sufficient evidence in abundance against the Bible, that 2) they are not in the least bit interested in refuting Isaiah 13:19-20, or for that matter any of the book of Isaiah, and that 3) even if they do not trust Isaiah 13:19-20, they are well aware that it would not be of any benefit to them at all to rebuild Babylon, except of course that you, Josh McDowell, and what would surely be a meager handful of other Christians, would give up Christianity, which most certainly would not be sufficient incentives for them to rebuild Babylon. The U.S. most certainly would not adopt a friendly foreign policy towards Muslims. You would never do anything without have adequate incentives, but yet you ask Muslims to do what you are not willing to do yourself.

You could just as easily visit Arabs pitching their tents.

Or visit the site of Arabs pitching their tents. You are obviously trying to "stack the deck" in your favor, but it won't work. Doing anything that God says you cannot do, no matter how simple the task, proves that God is a liar. Only a mentally incompetent person would build a city when all that he had to do was pitch a tent.

If President Bush and/or his other fundie friends agree with your position, all that they have to do is to challenge Muslims to have some Arabs pitch their tents in Babylon and send the world media, including Pat Robertson's CBN television crew, to witness the attempt. If the attempt is unsuccessful, millions of people would probably become Christians as a result. If President Bush and/or his fundie friends baited Muslims, Muslims would surely take the bait, and I can assure you that they would prevail.

Of course, everyone at this forum knows that President Bush and the vast majority of his other fundie friends would laugh at your absurd arguments. You have never even produced even one single noted FUNDAMENTIST Christian scholar who agrees with your absurd arguments. I have not found even one single Bible commentary that even comes close to saying what you are claiming about the Babylon prophecy.

Please be aware that I always have my "ace in the hole" argument, namely my nature of God argument. Due to God's questionable nature, I would never accept him even if I believed that he exists. I know from past experience that you are not willing to debate that issue because you do not want to embarrass yourself. God deliberately withholds information that would cause more people to become Christians, at the same time telling Christians not to withhold THE VERY SAME information. That is sufficient reason for people to reject him.

Jack the Bodiless

Good grief. Lee, why are you STILL dragging around this motley collection of rotting corpses?
This is a FAILED prophecy. Both Isaiah and Jeremiah falsely prophesied that Babylon would be conquered and destroyed by the Medes. But the Medes were conquered by the Persians, who then went on to take Babylon without a fight, and did not destroy it. It remained inhabited long, long after it was supposed to have been destroyed. Even in the modern era, Saddam Hussein had to evict thousands of inhabitants to build his replica of Nebuchadrezzar's palace... and you already KNOW this, becuse you've seen the PHOTOGRAPHS of some of those inhabitants.
Now demonstrate that these "prophecies" were written before Edom fell. Also, "forever" prophecies cannot be classed as "verifiably fulfilled", because this would require waiting until the end of time. This one could yet fail, anytime.
Another "forever prophecy", and an unremarkable one. Very few "peoples" have ever become totally extinct.
Assyria is no more. If you still want to argue that "Assyrian people" survive: the same can be said of just about every other nation that has ever existed throughout human history. And, of course, it's a "forever prophecy": it could fail at any time (e.g. a meteorite that wipes out humanity).
Another "forever prophecy", which has already failed (as I have pointed out to you before).
As it has already BEEN disproved: are you still claiming to be a Christian?

If so: why?

Johnny Skeptic

Message to Lee Merrill: Please disregard my previous post and reply to this post:

I could not find any testimonies from Muslims in your previous post. Please repost the testimonies. In addition, please contact the Iraqi embassy in Washington, D.C. and ask them for their opinion on this matter. If you are really confident that Muslims would like to disprove Isaiah 13:19-20, you should be willing to contact the Iraqi embassy. I suspect that Muslims are perfectly content that 1) they already have sufficient evidence in abundance against the Bible, that 2) they are not in the least bit interested in refuting Isaiah 13:19-20, or for that matter any of the book of Isaiah, and that 3) even if they do not trust Isaiah 13:19-20, they are well aware that it would not be of any benefit to them at all to rebuild Babylon, except of course that you, Josh McDowell, and what would surely be a meager handful of other Christians, would give up Christianity, which most certainly would not be sufficient incentives for them to rebuild Babylon. The U.S. most certainly would not adopt a friendly foreign policy towards Muslims. You would never do anything without have adequate incentives, but yet you ask Muslims to do what you are not willing to do yourself.

I do not believe that you would give up Christianity if Babylon were to be rebuilt, or if Arabs were to pitch their tents in Babylon. If the Babylon prophecy were refuted, that would mean to you that the Bible is not inerrant, but why must the Bible be inerrant for you to remain a Christian? If inerrancy means that much to you, then I challenge you to start a new thread about inerrancy. Readers can rest assured that you will not do so. Hundreds of millions of people have died without hearing the Gospel message. Of what use was a supposedly inerrant Bible to those people? It is in fact easy to change parts of the Bible, take it to some remote jungle regions, and deceive at least a few people. In other words, Biblical inerrancy just flew right out of the window. The last page of the book of Revelation warns against tampering with the texts. If tampering were not possible, there would have been no need for the warnings.

If God really wanted to challenge skeptics to accomplish certain tasks in order to prove his power, he could easily do so by clearly stating his challenges. The fact that he hasn't indicates that either he does not exist, or that he is afraid to state his challenges clearly lest they be accepted and he be proven a liar.

The presence of Arabs pitching their tents would be indisputable too.

Or you could visit the site of Arabs pitching their tents. You are obviously trying to "stack the deck" in your favor, but it won't work. Doing anything that God says you cannot do, no matter how simple the task, proves that God is a liar. Only a mentally incompetent person would build a city when all that he had to do was pitch a tent.

Please be advised that I always have my "ace in the hole" argument, namely my nature of God argument. Due to God's questionable nature, I would never accept him even if I believed that he exists. I know from past experience that you are not willing to debate that issue because you do not want to embarrass yourself. God deliberately withholds information that would cause more people to become Christians, at the same time telling Christians not to withhold THE VERY SAME information. That is sufficient reason for people to reject him.

EarlOfLade

But if you really want to see fullfilled "prophecies", look to the writings of Jules Verne and H. G. Wells...

lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

Well, for reference, here is the thread with that discussion, for those who may be interested. But we need not discuss this, all you need to do to make an unanswerable refutation is rebuild or reinhabit this city, or have someone else do this, where it is obvious to everyone that there are buildings and people living there now.

And very few peoples have had someone like Hitler after them, and him being within a hair’s breadth of winning his war (what if he had made the first atomic bomb?).

So, you can point me to some Hittites?

Yet this means Egyptians, who have indeed not ruled again, when Napoleon conquered parts of Europe, were those conquests of the druids, since they used to rule there?

But my argument was based on their beliefs, please do reread my post for my reply.

Would this do?

Isaiah 43:13 Yes, and from ancient days I am he. No one can deliver out of my hand. When I act, who can reverse it?

Yes, but then I have to take someone’s word that they are Arabs! But a building, or real inhabitants on the site, that cannot be argued with.

Yet I have addressed these points, as far as I recall, when you made them in a thread I was posting in.

Well, they kind of missed it on the inhabitants on other worlds, and the time machine, but it is interesting reading, and they did get some ideas that were ahead of their time…

Blessings,
Lee

Black Feather

I have a hard time with people saying that prophecies ARE going to happen--that they are definates. They are WARNINGS. These things 'could' happen if we do this...etc.

A prophecy is changeable unless we decide to self-fullfill it. Many fundies seem hell-bent on making prophecies from Revelations become real.

Johnny Skeptic

Message to Lee Merrill: Do you have any evidence what would happen if the Babylon prophecy were to be discredited? Would the Christian church become substantially smaller, or even 1% smaller? Would the U.S. adopt a friendly foreign policy towards Muslims? Without such incentives, why would Muslims want to discredit the prophecy?

I could not find your argument. Please save me some time and repost it, or don't you want to defend it? I suspect that you do not have any scholarly evidence at all that Muslims want to discredit the writings of Isaiah. You once contacted a Muslim at a Muslim web site regarding this issue. He demolished you and you quickly left that debate. How about if you contact him again and invite him to debate you at this forum? Or, I can pick another Muslim opponent for you. How about it? One wonders to what extent you will choose to embarrass yourself further.

Katastrophikus

I just find it amazing that every city that was to be "never inhabited" again always just shifts, moves or changes name. The vast majority of settlements, cities and towers not mentioned in the bible never seem to move, drastically change location or change names without reason. It must be a miracle.

Had God claimed that these cities were to "never be properly identified" instead of "never be inhabited." We might have had a prophesy.

Jack the Bodiless

Lee:
No, the reason we "need not discuss this" is that the prophecy has ALREADY failed. So there's no need to make it fail YET AGAIN.

It failed when the Persians conquered the Medes. It failed when the Persians decided not to destroy Babylon. And it has been defunct for well over two thousand years now, as people have continued to inhabit Babylon, right up to the modern era.

It's over, Lee. It's time for you to give up Christianity, as you promised that you would.
Hitler never came close to conquering the world, and his plan for the Jews involved removing them from the territories he controlled. Even if he HAD made an atomic bomb: the result would have been a nuclear standoff with America, a "Cold War". Also, nukes aren't easy to mass-produce, especially with an industrial infrastructure smashed up by Allied bombing: even America, largely untouched by war, only had TWO nukes ready for use against Japan.
If there are "Assyrians" still around, then obviously there are "Hittites" still around too. You still haven't given any examples of an ethnic population that has been obliterated.
You're struggling to find a counterexample that works, aren't you? If a Roman prophet, after Julius Caesar conquered Gaul, prophesied that "the Gauls will never again rule other nations": he'd be wrong. "Egypt" is a place, and "Egyptians" applies to whoever lives in that place: not a particular ethnicity or political institution. Does America cease to exist whenever a Republican administration takes over from a Democrat one or vice versa? Different people are in charge.

And, as I pointed out before, a "forever prophecy" can never be verifiably fulfilled anyhow. You cannot prove that such a prophecy will NEVER fail in the future, even if it HASN'T already failed.

So, we're still waiting for just ONE example of a verifiably-fulfilled prophecy.

Helpmabob

Hi Sven - Their testimony seems to be that they could not find something that is there, but this is because they have not looked properly or earnestly enough, with the wrong motives and in the wrong place. My testimony is that by the grace of God, I have found the thing that is there.

Hi Heretic – I hope you are curious about my God rather than myself.I don't necessarily, but there is a lot of propaganda in the world, in varying degrees. I prefer to trust people where possible – it is the better way, but, of course, only if they are trustworthy. A man must always remain alert: Test everything. Hold on to the good. [Thessalonians 5:21] God, however, is the epitome of trustworthiness.

I gain from the fact that I am convinced beyond major stubborn doubt that the Bible contains the truth, but I would be interested to know what you suppose I have to gain exactly from arguing that the Bible has the truth? Johnny, Jesus will return at the appointed time and not before. You will need to work with what you have now. But there is more available than you are admitting.Jesus’ miracles confirm that He was divine. Note Jesus’ words here: "I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the very work that the Father has given me to finish, and which I am doing, testifies that the Father has sent me. [John 6:36]

What about the other possibility: that God is good and that maybe you are unable or unprepared to ‘see’ this?

I do not understand – I hope I have nowhere claimed so. I know only partially, only in eternal life shall I fully know. That is sufficient for me. It is more important to me that God knows me fully.

One that can be recognised in the spiritual realm and appreciated by the heart, soul and yes, the mind. I’ve never been to seminary, so I don’t know what they say. If something is right, though, why would it surprise you if more than one person espoused the theory? Is there a monopoly on the truth? No, it comes free and abundantly!