Freethought & Rationalism Archive

bfniii · 05-27-2006, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farrell Till

"Tyre 's economy recovered somewhat under the Selucids."

"under the Selucids" being the key part of that phrase.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farrell Till

If you want to take the position that the prophecy was that "many nations" would destroy Tyre, I will be glad to debate that specific issue with you. Since Nebuchadnezzar had absored the Assyrians and its multi-national population by this time and had conscripted soldiers from the defeated armies into his, then when he came against Tyre, it was "many nations" laying the siege. This is a very defensible position, which I can easily copy from other articles I have written, if you would care to "disagree" again.

this may be true, but it doesn't mean that nebuchadnezzar would be the only attacking force in involved in the prophecy, nor does ezekiel state such.

bfniii · 05-27-2006, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farrell Till

So if Ezekiel was declaring that Nebuchadnezzar would be the instrument that Yahweh would use to destroy Tyre, why did he say that "many nations" would be sent against it?

nebuchadnezzar's army is just one part of the prophecy. if you believe otherwise, then you would need to show that there is no way to interpret the chapter than only nebuchadnezzar would attack tyre.

bfniii · 05-27-2006, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farrell Till

This is a well known messianic prophecy. Verse 17 is often quoted in reference to the presumed kingship of Jesus, who prophecy-fulfillment buffs now claim is sitting on the throne of the house of Israel and will sit there forever, but they say nothing about the very next verse, which says that there would always be levitical priests standing in the presence of Yahweh to offer burnt offerings, grain offerings, and sacrifices for all times, but the levitical system of sacrifices ended with the destruction of the temple in AD 70. "For all times," then, seemed to have ended about 2,000 years ago.

the person who fulfills this prophecy is Jesus. He stands before God offering these sacrifices daily.

bfniii · 05-27-2006, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farrell Till

When Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Tyre, it was an army of many nations trying to defeat it. The attempt failed, so Ezekiel's prophecy failed, as he himself bluntly admitted a few chapters later.

as i have pointed out repeatedly, ezekiel makes no such statement

bfniii · 05-27-2006, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Remarkable things happen every day.

some people believe that the string of remarkable events chronicled in the bible are a little too remarkable for mere coincidence. however, any person is free to think whatever they like about these events.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Without any divine intervention at all, it far more likely that very unusual things will sometimes occur than that they will never occur.

not necessarily. that depends on your definition of "unusual". not everyone will agree on that definition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Even if God can predict the future, so what? If he is evil and plans to send everyone to hell, you would not brag that he could predict the future. Paul says that Satan has transformed himself into an angel of light. Following that same line of reasoning, if God is evil, it would be quite natural for him to transform himself into an angel of light too. If God is evil, then by definition he would be able to duplicate anything that is attibuted to the God of the Bible. Paul's problem is that he does not provide believers with a reliable method of finding out what God's true nature really is.

as i have stated to you in the other thread, there are multiple ways to know God's true nature; some in the bible, some from reason.

bfniii · 05-27-2006, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

what was the point of God finally getting even with the inhabitants of the mainland settement centuries AFTER the Tyrians whom the prophecy was spoken against had died?

the fulfillment of the prophecy started during their lifetime and continued on for some time after that.

bfniii · 05-27-2006, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farrell Till

Those who read this section will see that Carrier makes many of the same points that we have used here in our replies to Richbee. An additional point that he makes is that even if everything that Ezekiel had predicted had undeniably happened to Tyre, this could still not be considered an amazing prophecy fulfillment, because Ezekiel was a captive in Babylon and could therefore have easily had inside information about preparations by the largest superpower of the time to attack Tyre.

as i stated in the other thread to these points:
1. even if ezekiel knew that an attack on tyre was imminent, there is absolutely no guarantee that it could have or would have happened. any number of things could have prevented such an outcome.
2. there is absolutely no reason to think that ezekiel did know of such an attack in advance
3. there is no guarantee that even though ezekiel was in babylon, that he would have been privy to such information

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farrell Till

The status of Babylon would have naturally made Ezekiel assume that Tyre was doomed to fall.

not at all. this is completely unsubstantiated conjecture

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farrell Till

Carrier didn't use this analogy, but I think that it is an appropriate one. If some self-proclaimed prophet living in the United States in early 2003 had predicted that the United States would invade Iraq and completely destroy the country, this "prediction" would have been somewhat like Ezekiel's prophecy.

this is a poor analogy because it omits the events of 9/11. we know of no such precipitating event prior to the tyre campaign

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farrell Till

The fact that this modern prophet was living in the United States would have given him inside information about U. S. plans to invade Iraq,

what in the world makes you think that the average joe in the US knows one iota about what the military is going to do? rule #1 about military campaigns is that no information is leaked prior. this is a good reason to think that ezekiel would not have known.

bfniii · 05-27-2006, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayrok

I don't understand why christians are so gung-ho in trying to prove the Tyre prochecy is fulfilled when these other prophecies are absolutely doomed to fail, if christianity is correct.

probably because christians don't think these other prophecies failed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayrok

If the NT is true and the Jesus story is true, then the latter part of Ezekiel is a false prophecy, period. Then we can refer to Dueteronomy 18. If Ezekiel's prophecy of God living in Jerusalem and accepts offerings for all time (as also described in Jeremiah 33 as you posted) is true, then the new testament is false, period. There is simply no room for both of these to be correct.

i see where your confusion is coming from. the jeremiah phophecy does not state that God would live in jerusalem, although that is indirectly true because in one sense, God is everywhere. what it states is that the levites would have someone in God's presence. there's no reason why that person can't be Jesus.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayrok

I've spoken with several pastors about this issue, and usually don't get a response. I guess it's not something they want to teach from the pulpit. The only reply I could find on this issue is one that claims Ezekiel's temple is the Millenial kingdom of Christ. It is silly to believe that Jesus would sit on a throne and require animal sacrifices, when Paul clearly claims that Jesus abolished the system with his actions on the cross.

abolished is not the right word. supplanted would be a better word. one of the most important aspects of Jesus' ministry is that the spiritual equivalent of these rituals and sacrifices does continue, although the physical act of carrying them out does not because it is now no longer necessary. they had begun to be corrupted by multiple groups of jews and they had lost the meaning of the original intent.

bfniii · 05-27-2006, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrWhy

At some point in the defence of a prophecy it becomes clear that too much time, text, and detail is necessary. If it takes this much to substantiate, or defend a prophecy, it is very weak.

the defense of something is necessary as long as people are willing to misconstrue that thing.

bfniii · 05-27-2006, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yummyfur

That a city should be sacked and its people slaughtered in antiquity is already a highly likely event, and that a prophet should declare such a doom upon a city is likewise commonplace

what is "highly likely"? furthermore, even if it were, there is no guarantee that said city would be attacked or that such an attack would be successful. it's disturbing that carrier fails to mention these aspects in a "scholarly" article.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yummyfur

so that the one is certain to follow the other by chance alone.

if that were the case, every city in antiquity would have been constantly destroyed. obviously, that is not the case. how someone could make such a statement is confounding.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yummyfur

On the other hand, Ezekiel 26:3-14 predicts that Tyre will be attacked by many nations, its walls torn down and its rubble cleared away, and it will be a bare rock. Then "out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets" and will never be rebuilt. The passage specifically predicts that Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (26:7) will do this, and his army will throw the stones, timber and rubble into the sea--and there can be no mistake here, since Ezekiel says he will break into the city, not someone else: every verb from 26:7 to 11 is in the 3rd person singular, and the use of the 3rd person plural in 26:12 clearly refers to the troops--the "horsemen" (parash) and "charioteers" (rekeb), i.e. the "men entering the city"--in verses 10 and 11 which Nebuchadnezzar leads into the city. They are the first available plural antecedent of the verb in 26:12, and the whole passage is clearly about this invasion.[4] Note as well that 26:10 includes chariots in the invading force--but Alexander (whom Newman claims fulfilled the prophecy) did not use chariots. They ceased to be used by Greeks and Macedonians after the 6th century B.C.

for those who are keeping score at home i will repeat, the prophecy does not state that only nebuchadnezzar will attack tyre. he is just one part of the prophecy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yummyfur

Ezekiel was a captive of Nebuchadnezzar since the sack of Jerusalem in 597 B.C. and this explains the prediction: he is issuing propaganda favoring his captor, no doubt to get on his good side, and Ezekiel could easily have intelligence about the king's plans since he would see the preparations.

this statement alone should undermine the entire credibility of the article.
1. there is no such indication from history that ezekiel was privy to said information
2. there is no reason to believe that ezekiel would have been privy to such information nor does the author ever bother to make such a case other than to merely state it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yummyfur

I've read some of Carriers articles, but not this one, and he nicely sums up many of the problems.

i wholeheartedly disagree. the article espouses unscholarly and unsubstantiated ideas.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yummyfur

Also I agree with Carrier that Ezekial is basically a propagandist for his captors, and a Jewish apologist at the same time, in some ways similar to Josephus. He wants to show that the Jews and their god are right behind their captors. My guess is he(they) actually wrote the Tyre "prophecy" before the attack, and I also think he(they) wrote the "prophecy" about Jerusalem before the attack,

that's a colorful representation, but hardly indicative of the entirety of ezekiel's corpus

Quote:

Originally Posted by yummyfur

not that any idiot could have written similar "prophecies" at the time.

that's funny, i haven't heard of any other prophecies against tyre regarding nebuchadnezzar. you seem to know of some.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.