The Incredible odds of fulfilled bible prophecy

[Brainache]

How could I ever do that when (besides my other posts) there is Isaiah chapter 53, and also the verse in Ezekiel 26 that accurately prophecizes Tyre will become a place over which fisherman will place their nets.

I also see in another alleged false prophecy, the person who alleged the false prophecy again left out a very important verse in their claim. Also there is evidence that their historical claim is false. I wish I had more time but I should get to this by next Wednesday at the latest.

Those prophecies failed. Every single one of them. Why not just accept that the Bible was written by fallible human beings trying to explain the mysterious world around them?

Even if the bible is totally wrong and Jesus never existed, it doesn't mean that people shouldn't be kind, compassionate and forgiving. It doesn't mean that murder is suddenly OK just because Moses didn't actually receive the Ten Commandments from the hand of God.

The Bible is a collection of books which reflects different cultures at different times, none of which is our time or our culture. The Bible has had an enormous influence on our time and culture, but it also contains a lot of things that our culture has rejected.

Don't enslave yourself to some old book DOC, set yourself free and trust your conscience, not an old freak of a Priest in a dress.

 

[DOC]

Tyre has been rebuilt as often as it has been destroyed, if indeed it has ever been entirely destroyed, and its present existence - and population of well over 100,000 - are living proof that Ezekiel was prophecizing through his fundament.

How could they rebuild a city that has been placed in the the Mediterranean. The Old Tyre is gone and mostly under water.

Ezekiel 26:5 It shall be [a place for] the spreading of nets in the midst of the sea: for I have spoken [it], saith the Lord GOD: and it shall become a spoil to the nations.

Ezekiel 26:12 ...and they shall lay thy stones and thy timber and thy dust in the midst of the water.

That's what Alexander the Great did to make a causeway to reach the island part of Tyre. And it is certainly possible that Nebu. tried to do the same thing after he destroyed the mainland part. Also if Nebu did that it would be less likely that his enemy would rebuild. But the bottom line is history says the Old Tyre was destroyed and is sitting in the Mediteranean.

 

[DOC]

The article entitled Ezekiel's Tyre Prophecy Defended states

"Alexander's attack was successful, and Tyrian sea power was destroyed. No longer did her fleets dominate the seas, no longer were her praises sung in the marts of the ancient world. As a nation she disappeared, never to rise again.

The causeway built by Alexander still connects Tyre's one-time island-fortress with the mainland, but so completely has every vestige of the original city disappeared, that its' position can only be ascertained by the distance measured from the ruins of the fortress. The mighty city of ancient Tyre was completely erased.

http://www.tektonics.org/uz/zeketyre.html

 

[ddt]

The article entitled Ezekiel's Tyre Prophecy Defended states

"Alexander's attack was successful, and Tyrian sea power was destroyed. No longer did her fleets dominate the seas, no longer were her praises sung in the marts of the ancient world. As a nation she disappeared, never to rise again.

The causeway built by Alexander still connects Tyre's one-time island-fortress with the mainland, but so completely has every vestige of the original city disappeared, that its' position can only be ascertained by the distance measured from the ruins of the fortress. The mighty city of ancient Tyre was completely erased.

http://www.tektonics.org/uz/zeketyre.html

Summary of your position: Ezekiel prophecised that Nebuchadnezzar would destroy Tyre. Alexander destroyed Tyre, so the prophecy did come true.

Everyone can see that that is an argument with a hole you can drive a truck through. And let's not rehash those failed mental gymnastics that "they" somehow does not refer to Nebuchadnezzar's troops.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Glanced at the link.

If a human student used the word "they" in a paper in such a way that it's meaning was ambiguous, any conscientious teacher would circle it in red, write something like "clarify" in the margin and knock down the overall grade a bit.

What does it tell us that God in his prophecies is incapable of clarity?

Sounds like a flaw to me.

 

[ddt]

I also see in another alleged false prophecy, the person who alleged the false prophecy again left out a very important verse in their claim. Also there is evidence that their historical claim is false. I wish I had more time but I should get to this by next Wednesday at the latest.

Why speak in riddles and not name which prophecy, which person and which verse you're speaking of here? Or haven't you identified them yet?

Your lack of time you continuously refer to is, unlike Fermat's margin, utterly unconvincing: you ostensibly have time to make various other posts here, so spill the beans already. Your previous posts indicate, though, that not even in 300 years, convincing evidence for your claims would arise.

 

[DOC]

Glanced at the link.

If a human student used the word "they" in a paper in such a way that it's meaning was ambiguous, any conscientious teacher would circle it in red, write something like "clarify" in the margin and knock down the overall grade a bit.

What does it tell us that God in his prophecies is incapable of clarity?

Sounds like a flaw to me.

Not having commas, other punctuation, or verse numbers probably didn't help. and I doubt many of the prophets took a writing or grammar class. And if they didn't have paragraphs, they might write, put the scroll wherever, tend sheep, and then start where they left off. I don't even know if they had periods back then.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Sorry if I misunderstood.

I assumed you were in the camp that if it was in the bible it had something to do with God's word, and that the "incredible odds" part was seeking to establish something meaningful.

If your point is that a bunch of prophets wrote so poorly as to leave their meaning open to debate, well duh.

And I assume that someone back then had periods!

 

[ddt]

Sorry if I misunderstood.

I assumed you were in the camp that if it was in the bible it had something to do with God's word, and that the "incredible odds" part was seeking to establish something meaningful.

If your point is that a bunch of prophets wrote so poorly as to leave their meaning open to debate, well duh.

Can't you see that DOC is uniquely qualified to put back in the commas, periods and to explain the proper antecedents of the pronouns in the way his infallible God meant them to be but consistently failed to explain to the whole world for some 2,500 years? To use an argument DOC is wont to trot out: his 6,653 posts here are testament to that.

And I assume that someone back then had periods!

Wasn't that part of the punishment for Eve's eating the apple?

 

[DOC]

Sorry if I misunderstood.

I assumed you were in the camp that if it was in the bible it had something to do with God's word, and that the "incredible odds" part was seeking to establish something meaningful.

If your point is that a bunch of prophets wrote so poorly as to leave their meaning open to debate, well duh.

So you think God should have programmed each of the prophet's writing style to better suit the needs of 21st century?

 

[ddt]

So you think God should have programmed each of the prophet's writing style to better suit the 21st century?

Back then people could write unambiguously too if they wanted to. And wasn't it part of God's plan that these prophecies would be preserved until into the 21st century? He is supposed to be omnipotent and omniscient, isn't he? Why then wouldn't he have taken care those prophecies were still clear to 21st century people? Another argument in favour of the claim that your God does not exist.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

What the Mafia Penguin said.

 

[joobz]

Not having commas, other punctuation, or verse numbers probably didn't help.

proper use of pronouns isn't a grammatical failing. it is a failing in clarity of thought.
Besides, I have no reason to believe the failure is the author here.

and I doubt many of the prophets took a writing or grammar class. And if they didn't have paragraphs, they might write, put the scroll wherever, tend sheep, and then start where they left off. I don't even know if they had periods back then.

DOC, do you have other evidence of poor grammar/writing that would support your claim here?

Afterall, it seems to me that Ezekiel was well written, which implies that the pronouns would NOT be ambiguous. In other words, this entire line of apologetic is your (and your source's) figment of imagination.

 

[Helen]

Not having commas, other punctuation, or verse numbers probably didn't help. and I doubt many of the prophets took a writing or grammar class. And if they didn't have paragraphs, they might write, put the scroll wherever, tend sheep, and then start where they left off. I don't even know if they had periods back then.

What you are saying is that none of us can be sure what they meant. Which makes it quite meaningless to search for fulfilled prophecies.

But I am quite sure they had periods "back then". It might even explain why they seem a bit cranky at times...

 

[Mudcat]

What about Archimedes' Claw that allegedly could grab Roman ships and capsize them? Sounds far fetched to me.

I take it the Romans finally assaulted Syracuse on a cloudy day, to escape the attentions of the solar-powered death rays.

Did God prophesy any of this, by the way, or was he interested only in the Eastern, rather than the Western, Mediterranean?

Difference between that claw weapon and biblical claims is that the claw is a scientific claim not a paranormal one. It might also interest you to know they built the claw weapon and tested it and came to the conclusion that it was a feasible weapon design.

The death ray, by comparison, is complete BS.

 

[Craig B]

The article entitled Ezekiel's Tyre Prophecy Defended states

"Alexander's attack was successful, and Tyrian sea power was destroyed. No longer did her fleets dominate the seas, no longer were her praises sung in the marts of the ancient world. As a nation she disappeared, never to rise again.

The causeway built by Alexander still connects Tyre's one-time island-fortress with the mainland, but so completely has every vestige of the original city disappeared, that its' position can only be ascertained by the distance measured from the ruins of the fortress. The mighty city of ancient Tyre was completely erased.

http://www.tektonics.org/uz/zeketyre.html

Ezekiel didn't say simply her sea power would be destroyed. He said the city would be destroyed and never rebuilt. It has been rebuilt. He said a bare rock on which nets would be spread. Tyre is not a bare rock. Of course the ancient buildings have been replaced. That happens in most places. Tyre was not finally obliterated. Sparta was, Sybaris was, Palmyra was. Tyre was not. The prophecy was not fulfilled.

 

[Craig B]

DOC, you refer to "the causeway built by Alexander". Not long ago you were telling us there was no evidence for him. Your apologetic literature invokes physical evidence for Alexander when discussing Tyre, but denies the existence of such evidence when discussing the historicity of Jesus. And you happily deny, and then invoke Alexander, depending on what point you're making at any given moment.

Do you regard this as a valid intellectual procedure?

 

[DOC]

DOC, you refer to "the causeway built by Alexander". Not long ago you were telling us there was no evidence for him...

Actually that is not true.

 

[Craig B]

Actually that is not true.

See your post #594

I tried for a few minutes but I couldn't find what these alleged fragments say? So the evidence at this point in this thread says there is no contemporary writings about Alexander the Great, the man whom history says conquered much of the world and even the Holy Land. Why no contemporary sources for such a great world conqueror??

I took "contemporary sources" to refer to other physical, as well as written, sources of information. I cited written inscriptions dating from Alexander's lifetime.

But in the above you seem to deride the idea that Alexander conquered the Holy Land, while more recently you have been discussing the detail of his siege of a city on the very borders of that land.

Since you accept the physical evidence for his existence (and even his military activities in the Holy Land) why did you raise the consequently superfluous question of the contemporary written record? In which, in any case, he appears.

 

[DOC]

proper use of pronouns isn't a grammatical failing. it is a failing in clarity of thought.
Besides, I have no reason to believe the failure is the author here.


DOC, do you have other evidence of poor grammar/writing that would support your claim here?

Afterall, it seems to me that Ezekiel was well written, which implies that the pronouns would NOT be ambiguous. In other words, this entire line of apologetic is your (and your source's) figment of imagination.

Introduction to the Hebrew Bible
By Jeff A. Benner Ancient Hebrew Research Center

There are many factors that go into a translation which are invisible and unknown to the reader of the translation. Most Bible readers assume the English translation of the Bible is an equivalent and exact representation of the original text. Because of the vast difference between the Ancient Hebrews' language and our own, as well as the differences in the two cultures, an exact translation is impossible.

http://urimthummim.com/hebrew_language.htm

ETA This is also probably the reason many passages are somewhat difficult.