Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So God is able to communicate messages to you through the Bible, but he is unwilling or unable to make those messages inform you of truth and error? That seems like an incredibly arbitrary restriction to place on what God can tell you through the Spirit. Where and were you informed that God will not help you discern truth from error in the Bible? Obviously something so important is based on revelation and not just on fallible human inference.
I do not have low regard for the book at all. I have low regard for ignorant and dogmatic perspectives on what the book is, but not for the book itself. As I've already told you, I love the Bible, for all that it is.
My asking you to fix a repeated spelling error in your assertions that I'm being ignorant betrays my claims of Christianity? Wow, your particular brand of Christianity has the weirdest criteria for membership.
Yes, my brand of Christianity promotes kindness. Not mockery, acting condescending to others, and taking cheap shots. So I made a single spelling error. Big whup. This isn't an English essay class. It's an off the cuff discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel O. McClellan
True, but in vv. 7-11 it uses the third masculine singular verbal forms in referring repeatedly to the individual who will attack the city and enter the gates. Observe:
There can be only one subject for all of these verbs, and that is their immediate antecedent, Nebuchadnezzar. It cannot mean anyone else, no matter how many times you say "Yu-huh!" You cannot force this text to say anything else. It absolutely and unequivocally states that Nebuchadnezzar, through his army, would break down towers, enter the gates, trample people in the streets, slay the people with the sword, etc. The text states this. You can make it say nothing else. These things simply did not happen.
No, Alexander absolutely did not fulfill the prophecy. I explained what happened to you. He didn't even come close to completely destroying the city. Where on earth do you get the idea that he completely destroyed the city? Do you have some kind of ludicrously liberal definition of "destroy" that means everything but "destroy"? Where do you get the idea that he completely destroyed the city? What is your source? Additionally, the city was demonstrably not scraped clean. None of the walls were knocked down. The sea did not overcome it. It was not lost forever. It did not remain uninhabited. These are all things the prophecy unequivocally stated would happen. None of them happened. Are you honestly so cognitively dissonant that you can look at the complete account and just insist that a ton of things happened that the account unequivocally precludes from having happened? Now who's being explicitly and flagrantly intellectually dishonest? You're basically looking at 2+2 and telling me the answer is 5.
Ok, will you at least admit that ANY part of the prophecy came true? If you can't even acknowledge that then it would be pointless to show you the misrepresentations of your statements.
EDIT: post deleted. Upon further reflection, that wasn't an accurate reflection of my feelings, and was largely intended to be rather marginalizing. I apologize.
I will leave my point about a few minor parts of the prophecy "coming true" in the same sense that my "prophecy" that the Seahawks would beat the Redskins "came true." It has nothing to do with the supernatural.
Last edited by Daniel O. McClellan; 01-08-2013 at 03:48 PM..
Yes, my brand of Christianity promotes kindness. Not mockery, acting condescending to others, and taking cheap shots.
So when you told me I obviously don't know much at all about the ancient world and about the Bible, you were just trying to be kind to me? Telling me I'm arrogant must be the same, as is accusing me of "blatantly lying."
Quote:
Originally Posted by TWD39
So I made a single spelling error. Big whup. This isn't an English essay class. It's an off the cuff discussion.
Which is why my comment was off the cuff and I forgot about it after I posted it. I'm just making a point about the irony of talking down to me about intelligence only to repeatedly misspell a rather simple word. It's a minor point, and I don't really care about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TWD39
Ok, will you at least admit that ANY part of the prophecy came true? If you can't even acknowledge that then it would be pointless to show you the misrepresentations of your statements.
Very few minor parts of the prophecy "came true" in the same way my prophecy that the Seahawks would beat the Redskins "came true." In other words, both "prophecies" just happened to align with the outcome. There's nothing supernatural in the author of Ezekiel getting 90% of it wrong, but getting the bottom 10% right. The prophecy in its main assertions, and overall, demonstrably failed.
Last edited by Daniel O. McClellan; 01-08-2013 at 03:43 PM..
EDIT: post deleted. Upon further reflection, that wasn't an accurate reflection of my feelings, and was largely intended to be rather marginalizing. I apologize.
I will leave my point about a few minor parts of the prophecy "coming true" in the same sense that my "prophecy" that the Seahawks would beat the Redskins "came true." It has nothing to do with the supernatural.
In other words, no, you can't admit that any part of the prophecy has come true. No point wasting my time and energy with a person who won't accept reality.
In other words, no, you can't admit that any part of the prophecy has come true. No point wasting my time and energy with a person who won't accept reality.
Why would you retreat to the notion that even though the main points of the prophecy failed, the things that happen to coincide with reality must be viewed as supernaturally prophesied? That makes no sense. We must go where the evidence leads, not where your dogmas insist the evidence must be lead. The fact is, you can point to nothing spectacular about those few minor claims that happen to align with reality. They are basic concepts that could be true of any one of a number of ancient cities at the same time. There is nothing at all that suggests they are supernatural in origin. To suggest that my refusal to view those items as supernaturally inspired indicates I "won't accept reality" is the most asinine perversion of the word "reality" I've ever seen.
Why would you retreat to the notion that even though the main points of the prophecy failed, the things that happen to coincide with reality must be viewed as supernaturally prophesied? That makes no sense. We must go where the evidence leads, not where your dogmas insist the evidence must be lead. The fact is, you can point to nothing spectacular about those few minor claims that happen to align with reality. They are basic concepts that could be true of any one of a number of ancient cities at the same time. There is nothing at all that suggests they are supernatural in origin. To suggest that my refusal to view those items as supernaturally inspired indicates I "won't accept reality" is the most asinine perversion of the word "reality" I've ever seen.
The main points didn't fail, dude. The prophecy named specifically one of the attackers and the method of destruction. That's not vauge prophecy.
The main points didn't fail, dude. The prophecy named specifically one of the attackers and the method of destruction. That's not vauge prophecy.
Except for the fact that destruction didn't come at all, and the very explicit details of Nebuchadnezzar's attack never happened.. Military defeat is all that came, but nowhere in the prophecy was anything as tame as simple military defeat prophesied. The prophecy was that the walls would be leveled, Nebuchadnezzar would enter the gates and slaughter people in the streets, and the town would be razed to the ground and basically sunk in the sea. None of that happened. Alexander didn't do any of that either. You can't point to a single detail that the prophecy says would happen that actually happened. All you can say is that broadly speaking, the city was defeated, as the prophecy said it would be.
Except for the fact that destruction didn't come at all, and the very explicit details of Nebuchadnezzar's attack never happened.. Military defeat is all that came, but nowhere in the prophecy was anything as tame as simple military defeat prophesied. The prophecy was that the walls would be leveled, Nebuchadnezzar would enter the gates and slaughter people in the streets, and the town would be razed to the ground and basically sunk in the sea. None of that happened. Alexander didn't do any of that either. You can't point to a single detail that the prophecy says would happen that actually happened. All you can say is that broadly speaking, the city was defeated, as the prophecy said it would be.
Things that came true:
1. The specific name of one of the attackers
2. A coalition of attackers
3. Nebuchadnezzar would siege the city
4. The ruins of MAINLAND Tyre would be cast into the sea. Alexander did this to build his causeway. The mainland was scraped bare as a rock as a result.
You are blind if you consider all that to be minor or no details fullfilled.
And despite your smoke and mirrors dance, you can't get away from the fact that the prophecy does indeed use the plural pronoun, "They". If the prophecy meant that only Nebuchadnezzar would conquer the city, then it should only be "He" in the passage.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
