Sheshonq

But every generation thought it was the end.
Obviously, since we are stilll here every generation has been wrong.
So how do you know which parts are sealed? No evasions; be specific.

1. He was not alive then. Daniel dates from the 200s BC and hence did not see the invasion of Babylon by Cyrus II.

2. There was no "Medo-Persian" empire.

Sure he was. spin has already addressed your failures on Daniel's vision; did you think I didn't read that? Since you ducked responding to him, did you really think it would work bringing the same busted arguments to me?

Sheshonq

The rock isn't buried in the water; the city is.

But as I said: it doesn't bother me that Ezekiel contains contradictory language; that's kinda your problem to sort out. I make no assumption that Ezekiel's text is perfect and needs to be followed like some kind of reference guild.

It doesn't say that. Those are your words, that you are trying to force onto the chapter.

Poetic imagery to represent death, destruction and oblivion. Not intended to be literal.

Nope.

Sheshonq

Hysterics as a defense? Is that all you have?

Sheshonq

What's really sad - and true - is that you still cannot prove your position, even after many pages and dozens of posts.

Talk about the unwise not understanding. :rolling:

sugarhitman

1.Sidon was a city on the coast, as was its daughter Tyre.
2. Why did the Tyrians wait until Hiram to build this city on the island (if indeed it was then) if they were so obsessed with islands?
3. Because island Tyre became a city during Hiram
4. Because it was too small for what he planned on making it into....a CITY
5. On the mainland where else, it is known fact that Hiram built the ports on the island (if their were no ports on the island where else could they be?)
6. If im not mistaken did Tyre serve Assyria?
7. You mean what did Neby do against the inhabitants of the mainland for 13 years?
8. Because maybe the Tyrians after being conquered agreed to the covenant. Look what happen to Jerusalem when they refused they were kicked out of their land.(When they broke the covenant between them and Babylon).
9. Thats daughters in the field not land (nice try trying to seperate the island from the mainland by using land instead of field) Daughters in the field were towns etc. outside the city walls. Not outside the island.
10. Ch 27 is is against island Tyre because 'All your men of war who are in you, and the entire company which is in your midst, will FALL INTO THE MIDST OF THE SEA ON THE DAY OF YOUR RUIN....WHAT CITY IS LIKE TYRE DESTROYED IN THE MIDST OF THE SEA....IN THE TIME WHEN YOU SHALL BE BROKEN BY THE SEAS (NOTE: BY THE SEAS, NOT NATIONS) IN THE DEPTHS OF THE WATERS YOUR MERCHANDISE AND ALL YOUR COMPANY IN THE MIDST OF YOU SHALL FALL" This happens when God brings the sea over Tyre. Ch 27 is against iSLAND Tyre because during this time that is all that exist of her. :wave:


Oh before I go, I see that you consider Josephus a reliable source. You know he said that Jesus was the Christ. And that the book of Daniel was written before the events not after..Thanks

arnoldo

Your right, you have proven that the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob is all a lie. Ezekiel was a false prophet and Tyre gives evidence of this. The book of Daniel is a fraud. :notworthy:

Darklighter

Happy to oblige...

Close... but not quite.

The typical fundie understanding of these vs is that the stone cut from the mountain represents the coming of Jesus (one like a son of man), with athority "cut" from the original Kingdom of God (mountain). Notice then the stone, after destroying the image, becomes a new mountain. A new kingdom of God, by Jesus, which destroys all the other man-made kingdoms. It represents the re-establishment of God's sovreignty over the earth.... that is... if you believe such things.

Sugar, on your "spreading nets" theory, I'll try to remember the source and post it for you later, but I'm fairly certain now that the original language used in Ez 26 indicated a place to spread nets, NOT TO FISH, but to DRY, and REPAIR them, like a nice, flat, bare, ROCK. Do your own resarch and save me the time though... please. As to tyre being covered over by the sea, well lets just wait and see... But this just highlightes the problem with these prophecies: DO YOU DEFEND NOSTRADAMUS WITH THE SAME ZEAL? If not, why? I'm itching to know this.

makerowner

I'm not especially interested in what the fundies think it says, because they're terrible at exegesis. I'm interested in what the author meant. I think the 'one like a son of man' is pretty widely considered to be Michael, but I'd like to hear what spin has to say on it and on the identity of the stone in Nebuchadrezzar's vision.

Sheshonq

Still stuck on that burden of proof, aren't you?

I don't have to prove they are a lie. You need to prove that they are true.

You're the one with the claims, poptart. You're the only one with a burden of proof. <edit>

It's really comical watching you try to avoid this. It's like watching a five-year old kid at the dinner table:

"I want dessert!"
You can't have dessert if you haven't finished your meal.

"But I want dessert."
You can have dessert after you finish your plate.

"But I want dessert now!"
You aren't getting dessert until you eat everything on your plate.

"WAAA!"
Throwing a temper tantrum isn't going to change things. You aren't getting dessert until you finish your meal.

You act just the same way with regards to burden of proof behind your claims. You seem to think that tantrums and whining change the fact that YOU have the CLAIM here, and YOU are the only one with a burden of proof. The audience doesn't have to prove you *wrong*; you have to prove yourself right.

Better get busy if you want that dessert. :rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

Darklighter

Ohhhh... OK. Couldn't tell ya then. But again, that highlightes the problem with these prophecies, we have no clue what some of them originally meant, and it's too easy to just hand pick a few historical events (especially if you say that a particular prophecy spans hundreds or even thousands of years), and say "Lookie! Lookie! It's fulfilled!"

Sugar, what do you think of NOSTRADAMUS?