The Bible - Why Trust It

[Subduction Zone]

Virtually all cities in the Middle East were burned, destroyed and sieged. Nothing unusual in the Middle East or anywhere else in the world for that matter. The old walled city where the old temple was on the island was ever under water. only part of the city in part of the harbour just Southwest of the island is submerged. Like manyancient building the ruins of the Temple of Tyre still exist.

That whole prophecy is filled with fail. Tyre especially was constantly attacked or at least threatened. It was attacked before Nebuchadnezzar and afterwards. The prophecy was against him. Trying to move it a hundred years down the line is declaring God to be evil since he would be attacking innocent people.

And it is a BOGO of bad prophecies. After he failed to defeat Tyre Ezekiel predicted that Nebby would defeat Egypt. He did not do that either.

 

[nPeace]

Bible Gateway passage: Ezekiel 26:7 - English Standard Version

King of kings. And a king of kings would be the head of more than one nation.

I appreciate your attempt to at least use the Bible, to make a defense for your argument. However, it appears you are trying very hard to interpret the text to support your belief on the matter.
It's very easy for anyone to take the Bible, and try to do this, but that only leads to a never ending argument, so I won't go there.
I'll let you have the last say, since you think that's how you win.

I noticed you also think that linking to a site somehow proves your argument true, but it doesn't.
I could link to sites too.
What Happened To Tyre?
Although the historical record of both the Babylonian siege of Tyre and the subsequent invasion of Egypt is limited, archeological evidence does support the Bible record. A broken cuneiform tablet first published in 1926 by German archeologist Eckhard Unger refers to provisions of food for “the king and his soldiers for their march against Tyre“. Other cuneiform tablets show that at some point Tyre was in the hands of the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar. Finally, a cuneiform tablet at the British Museum shows that Nebuchadnezzar did indeed successfully engage the Egyptian forces.

Nebuchadnezzar did not take the island city by force. It seems likely that the city negotiated a surrender after 13 years of siege. Either King Ithobal of Tyre died during the siege or he was surrendered to the Babylonians to be replaced by his son Baal who would become a Babylonian puppet-ruler. The later theory is supported by an ancient list of foreign kings residing in Babylon who like Judean King Jehoiachin were prisoners dependent on the Babylonian monarch for their lives. At the top of this list is an unnamed king of Tyre.

Yet the prophecy concerning Tyre at this point could only be said to be partly fulfilled. Nebuchadnezzar had taken the mainland city, but the island city had not been destroyed let alone “thrown in the water”. The fulfilment of this part of the prophecy would wait over 250 years for the ascent of Alexander the Great. Remember, Ezekiel had said that Tyre would be plundered by “many nations”. (Ezekiel 26: 3)

... but what does that prove, that one link is better than another? It doesn't prove anything.
The point is, what does the prophecy say. If we don't understand what it said, we will believe our argument is right, when it is not.
So, that's all I can say on that.

I notice you didn't address the fact that the author himself made an erroneous claim, which I pointed out.
I don't read anywhere in scripture where it says "Tyre's land would never be built upon again:" Where is that written?
This fact alone says he doesn't even know much about what he is trying to refute.
From some of the others, I looked at, it appears he only has one intention - create strawman. He wants only to create distractions... imo.
Or perhaps he is just careless, because he doesn't seem interested in facts. Or his research is not very extensive... from what I have seen.

Concerning his next claim, with a little digging into somewhat sketchy history, we can have a great deal of confidence that the prophecy concerning Egypt (Ezekiel 29:1-15,) was fulfilled accurately.

I know you don't like to read a lot, but if you are interested, the information is below. I tried to simplify it as much as I could.

What it shows, is that there was a period when Egypt was conquered. The period was long - about 50 years, before it was taken back by Egypt, and the land taken, from which the Egyptians scattered was as prophesied in Ezekiel - from Migdol to Syene to the boundary of Ethiopia.

Basically from the North of the Red Sea to the border of land of Kush, on this map.

(Ezekiel 29:10-12)
10 So I am against you and against your Nile, and I will make the land of Egypt devastated and dry, a desolate wasteland, from Migdol to Syene to the boundary of Ethiopia. 11 Neither man nor livestock will pass through it on foot, and it will not be inhabited for 40 years. 12 I will make the land of Egypt the most desolate of lands, and its cities will be the most desolate of cities for 40 years; and I will scatter the Egyptians among the nations and disperse them among the lands.”

The prophecy was also fulfilled with Egypt's loss of power.
The secular historical record is sketchy, and not necessary accurate, but the Bible too, is a historical record. So it comes down to which do we trust? Especially when for the most part, the secular sources agree with the Biblical source.

There are many reasons for trusting the Biblical record, some of those reasons were already covered in this thread.

 

[nPeace]

Nebuchadnezzar II | Biography, Accomplishments, & Facts
Nebuchadnezzar II
KING OF BABYLONIA
Nebuchadnezzar’s further military activities are known not from extant chronicles but from other sources, particularly the Bible, which records another attack on Jerusalem and a siege of Tyre (lasting 13 years, according to the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus) and hints at an invasion of Egypt.

Nebuchadnezzar consciously pursued a policy of expansion, claiming the grant of universal kingship by Marduk and praying to have “no opponent from horizon to sky.” From cuneiform fragments he is known to have attempted the invasion of Egypt, the culmination of his expansionist policy, in 568/567.

Nebuchadnezzar II - Wikipedia
Nebuchadnezzar's assault on Egypt four months before the fall of Jerusalem in 587 is represented in Ezekiel as a divine initiative undertaken "by the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon"

Thebes, Egypt - Wikipedia
Thebes, Egypt
Thebes (Ancient Greek: Θῆβαι, Thēbai), known to the ancient Egyptians as Waset, was an ancient Egyptian city located along the Nile about 800 kilometers (500 mi) south of the Mediterranean. Its ruins lie within the modern Egyptian city of Luxor. Thebes was the main city of the fourth Upper Egyptian nome (Sceptre nome) and was the capital of Egypt for long periods during the Middle Kingdom and New Kingdom eras. It was close to Nubia and the Eastern Desert, with its valuable mineral resources and trade routes. It was a cult center and the most venerated city of ancient Egypt during its heyday. The site of Thebes includes areas on both the eastern bank of the Nile, where the temples of Karnak and Luxor stand and where the city proper was situated; and the western bank, where a necropolis of large private and royal cemeteries and funerary complexes can be found.

Late Period
In 667 BC, attacked by the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal's army, Taharqa abandoned Lower Egypt and fled to Thebes. After his death three years later his nephew (or cousin) Tantamani seized Thebes, invaded Lower Egypt and laid siege to Memphis, but abandoned his attempts to conquer the country in 663 BC and retreated southwards. The Assyrians pursued him and took Thebes, whose name was added to a long list of cities plundered and destroyed by the Assyrians, as Ashurbanipal wrote:

"This city, the whole of it, I conquered it with the help of Ashur and Ishtar. Silver, gold, precious stones, all the wealth of the palace, rich cloth, precious linen, great horses, supervising men and women, two obelisks of splendid electrum, weighing 2,500 talents, the doors of temples I tore from their bases and carried them off to Assyria. With this weighty booty I left Thebes. Against Egypt and Kush I have lifted my spear and shown my power. With full hands I have returned to Nineveh, in good health."

Thebes never regained its former political significance, but it remained an important religious centre. Assyrians installed Psamtik I (664-610 BC), who ascended to Thebes in 656 BC and brought about the adoption of his own daughter, Nitocris I, as heiress to God's Wife of Amun there. In 525 BC, Persian Cambyses II invaded Egypt and became pharaoh, subordinating the kingdom as a satrapy to the greater Achaemenid Empire.

Tantamani - Wikipedia
Tantamani (Assyrian UR-daname), Tanutamun or Tanwetamani (Egyptian) or Tementhes (Greek) (d. 653 BC) was a Pharaoh of Egypt and the Kingdom of Kush located in Northern Sudan and a member of the Nubian or Twenty-fifth dynasty of Egypt. His prenomen or royal name was Bakare which means "Glorious is the Soul of Re."

He was the son of King Shabaka and the nephew of his predecessor Taharqa. In some sources he is said to be the son of Shebitku. Assyrian records call Tantamani a son of Shabaka and refer to Qalhata as a sister of Taharqa. Some Egyptologists interpreted the Assyrian text as stating that Tantamani was a son of Shebitku, but as he was most likely a son of Shabaka himself, it is now more common to consider Tantamani a son of Shabaka.

Once the Assyrians had appointed Necho I as king and left Egypt, Tantamani marched down the Nile from Nubia and reoccupied all of Egypt including Memphis. Necho I, the Assyrians' representative, was killed in Tantamani's campaign. In reaction, the Assyrians returned to Egypt in force, defeated Tantamani's army in the Delta and advanced as far south as Thebes, which they sacked. The Assyrian reconquest effectively ended Nubian control over Egypt although Tantamani's authority was still recognised in Upper Egypt until his 8th Year in 656 BC when Psamtik I's navy peacefully took control of Thebes and effectively unified all of Egypt.

Thereafter, Tantamani ruled only Nubia (Kush). Tantamani died in 653 BC and was succeeded by Atlanersa, a son of Taharqa. He was buried in the family cemetery at El-Kurru. The archaeologist Charles Bonnet discovered the statue of Tantamani at Kerma (now called Doukki Gel) in 2003.

 

[nPeace]

Necho I - Wikipedia
Menkheperre Necho I (Egyptian: Nekau,[1] Greek: Νεχώς Α' or Νεχώ Α', Akkadian: Nikuu[6] or Nikû) (? – 664 BCE near Memphis) was a ruler of the Ancient Egyptian city of Sais. He was the first securely attested local Saite king of the 26th Dynasty of Egypt who reigned for 8 years (672–664 BCE) according to Manetho's Aegyptiaca. Egypt was reunified by his son Psamtik I.

History
This dynasty traced its origins to the Twenty-fourth Dynasty. Psamtik I was probably a descendant of Bakenranef, and following the Neo-Assyrian Empire's invasions during the reigns of Taharqa and Tantamani, he was recognized as sole king over all of Egypt. While the Neo-Assyrian Empire was preoccupied with revolts and civil war over control of the throne, Psamtik threw off his ties to the Assyrians circa 655 BC, formed alliances with King Gyges of Lydia, and recruited mercenaries from Caria and ancient Greece to resist Assyrian attacks.

With the sack of Nineveh in 612 BC and the fall of the Assyrian Empire, both Psamtik and his successors attempted to reassert Egyptian power in the Near East, but were driven back by the Neo-Babylonian Empire under Nebuchadnezzar II. With the help of Greek mercenaries, Apries was able to hold back Babylonian attempts to conquer Egypt, only for the Persians to eventually do so. Their king, Cambyses II, captured and later executed Psamtik III.
Which documents can we trust?

Tefnakht II - Wikipedia
Tefnakht II 695 – 688 BC (Proto-Saite Dynasty)
Biography
Tefnakht II is mainly known by Manetho's Egyptiaca, under the name Stephinates. Based on Manetho's work, Sextus Julius Africanus called Stephinates the founder of the 26th Dynasty while another historian, Eusebius, placed a certain Ammeris "the Nubian" just before him. In both cases, the two historians credited Stephinates with a 7-year-long reign.

Since the initial claim by Petrie, there were scholars whom questioned the distinction between Tefnakht I and Tefnakht II. In 1956, Wolfgang Helck equated the two figures,[6][4] a position later rejected by Karl-Heinz Priese, who stated that there was no compelling reason to identify Tefnakht II with Tefnakht I aside from the similarity of their names.

In more recent times, Oliver Perdu noticed close similarities in style, form and content, between a newly discovered donation stela dating to Year 2 of Necho I, and a Year 8 donation stela of Shepsesre Tefnakht (I). Perdu argued that these two Saite rulers were more close contemporaries than usually believed, and suggested that Shepsesre Tefnakht is in fact Tefnakht II and not Tefnakht I, the former having lived just few years before Necho I while the latter, several decades before.

Perdu's arguments were put in discussion by Dan'el Kahn who note that his epigraphic criteria here – such as the use of the tripartite wig, the slender figure of the king and the method through which the falcon-headed god keeps his head upright in stelas and temple wall reliefs contemporary with Tefnakht I's time – appear in use already in the early 25th Dynasty during Piye's or Shabaka's reign and even in Shoshenq V's Year 38 donation stela of the Chief of the Ma Tefnakht (I), who was Piye's rival.

Spoiler: Problems with Egyptian history

*** it-1 pp. 450-451 Chronology ***
Modern historians rely principally on certain documents in the form of Egyptian king lists or annals. Among these are: the fragmentary Palermo Stone, presenting what are considered to be the first five “dynasties” of Egyptian history; the Turin Papyrus, very fragmentary and giving a list of kings and their reigns from the “Old Kingdom” into the “New Kingdom”; and additional inscriptions in stone, likewise fragmentary. These separate lists and other independent inscriptions have been coordinated in chronological order by means of the writings of Manetho, an Egyptian priest of the third century B.C.E. His works, dealing with Egyptian history and religion, arrange the reigns of the Egyptian monarchs into 30 dynasties, an arrangement still used by modern Egyptologists. These sources, together with astronomical calculations, based on Egyptian texts dealing with lunar phases and the rising of the Dog Star (Sothis), have been used to produce a chronological table.

Problems of Egyptian chronology. Uncertainties are multiple. The works of Manetho, used to give order to the fragmentary lists and other inscriptions, are preserved only in the writings of later historians, such as Josephus (first century C.E.), Sextus Julius Africanus (third century C.E., hence over 500 years from Manetho’s time), Eusebius (fourth century C.E.), and Syncellus (late eighth or early ninth century C.E.). As stated by W. G. Waddell, their quotations of Manetho’s writings are fragmentary and often distorted and hence “it is extremely difficult to reach certainty in regard to what is authentic Manetho and what is spurious or corrupt.” After showing that Manetho’s source material included some unhistorical traditions and legends that “introduced kings as their heroes, without regard to chronological order,” he says: “There were many errors in Manetho’s work from the very beginning: all are not due to the perversions of scribes and revisers. Many of the lengths of reigns have been found impossible: in some cases the names and the sequence of kings as given by Manetho have proved untenable in the light of monumental evidence.”—Manetho, introduction, pp. vii, xvii, xx, xxi, xxv.



Manetho - Wikipedia
The author's division of dynasties, however, is still used as a basis for all Egyptian discussions.

Shabaka - Wikipedia
Neferkare Shabaka (or Shabako) was the third Ku****e pharaoh of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty of Egypt, who reigned from 705–690 BC.

Taharqa - Wikipedia
Assyrian invasion of Egypt
It was during his reign that Egypt's enemy Assyria at last invaded Egypt. Esarhaddon led several campaigns against Taharqa, which he recorded on several monuments. His first attack in 677 BC, aimed at pacifying Arab tribes around the Dead Sea, led him as far as the Brook of Egypt. Esarhaddon then proceeded to invade Egypt proper in Taharqa's 17th regnal year, after Esarhaddon had settled a revolt at Ashkelon. Taharqa defeated the Assyrians on that occasion. Three years later in 671 BC the Assyrian king captured and sacked

Memphis, where he captured numerous members of the royal family. Taharqa fled to the south, and Esarhaddon reorganized the political structure in the north, establishing Necho I as king at Sais. Upon Esarhaddon's return to Assyria he erected a stele alongside the previous Egyptian and Assyrian Commemorative stela of Nahr el-Kalb, as well as a victory stele at Zincirli Höyük, showing Taharqa's young son Ushankhuru in bondage.

Upon the Assyrian king's departure, however, Taharqa intrigued in the affairs of Lower Egypt, and fanned numerous revolts. Esarhaddon died en route to Egypt, and it was left to his son and heir Ashurbanipal to once again invade Egypt. Ashurbanipal defeated Taharqa, who afterwards fled to Thebes.

Kingdoms of North Africa - Ancient Egypt
Twenty-Fifth (Ethiopian/Nubian) Dynasty
712 - 663 BC

While the Twenty-Fourth Dynasty pharaohs attempted to rule from Sais, Nubians from the kingdom of Kush (with perhaps Ethiopian overlordship) invaded from the south and swiftly took over Egypt. The second of their pharaohs cleared the way for their complete rule of Egypt. Control was probably indirect, with local Egyptians in charge of administration.

They originated in Kush (now in northern Sudan) at the city state of Napata, from where they invaded and took control of Egypt under Piye (spelt Piankhi in older works). From Taharqa's reign onwards, the kings of this dynasty were driven back into Nubia, at first by the Assyrians, then by the pharaohs of the Twenty-Sixth dynasty. Their successors settled back in Nubia, where they re-established their Ku****e kingdom at Napata (c.750-590 BC) and then moved it to Meroë (590 BC to the fourth century AD)

 

[Subduction Zone]

I appreciate your attempt to at least use the Bible, to make a defense for your argument. However, it appears you are trying very hard to interpret the text to support your belief on the matter.
It's very easy for anyone to take the Bible, and try to do this, but that only leads to a never ending argument, so I won't go there.
I'll let you have the last say, since you think that's how you win.

I noticed you also think that linking to a site somehow proves your argument true, but it doesn't.
I could link to sites too.
What Happened To Tyre?
Although the historical record of both the Babylonian siege of Tyre and the subsequent invasion of Egypt is limited, archeological evidence does support the Bible record. A broken cuneiform tablet first published in 1926 by German archeologist Eckhard Unger refers to provisions of food for “the king and his soldiers for their march against Tyre“. Other cuneiform tablets show that at some point Tyre was in the hands of the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar. Finally, a cuneiform tablet at the British Museum shows that Nebuchadnezzar did indeed successfully engage the Egyptian forces.

Nebuchadnezzar did not take the island city by force. It seems likely that the city negotiated a surrender after 13 years of siege. Either King Ithobal of Tyre died during the siege or he was surrendered to the Babylonians to be replaced by his son Baal who would become a Babylonian puppet-ruler. The later theory is supported by an ancient list of foreign kings residing in Babylon who like Judean King Jehoiachin were prisoners dependent on the Babylonian monarch for their lives. At the top of this list is an unnamed king of Tyre.

Yet the prophecy concerning Tyre at this point could only be said to be partly fulfilled. Nebuchadnezzar had taken the mainland city, but the island city had not been destroyed let alone “thrown in the water”. The fulfilment of this part of the prophecy would wait over 250 years for the ascent of Alexander the Great. Remember, Ezekiel had said that Tyre would be plundered by “many nations”. (Ezekiel 26: 3)

... but what does that prove, that one link is better than another? It doesn't prove anything.
The point is, what does the prophecy say. If we don't understand what it said, we will believe our argument is right, when it is not.
So, that's all I can say on that.

I notice you didn't address the fact that the author himself made an erroneous claim, which I pointed out.
I don't read anywhere in scripture where it says "Tyre's land would never be built upon again:" Where is that written?
This fact alone says he doesn't even know much about what he is trying to refute.
From some of the others, I looked at, it appears he only has one intention - create strawman. He wants only to create distractions... imo.
Or perhaps he is just careless, because he doesn't seem interested in facts. Or his research is not very extensive... from what I have seen.

Concerning his next claim, with a little digging into somewhat sketchy history, we can have a great deal of confidence that the prophecy concerning Egypt (Ezekiel 29:1-15,) was fulfilled accurately.

I know you don't like to read a lot, but if you are interested, the information is below. I tried to simplify it as much as I could.

What it shows, is that there was a period when Egypt was conquered. The period was long - about 50 years, before it was taken back by Egypt, and the land taken, from which the Egyptians scattered was as prophesied in Ezekiel - from Migdol to Syene to the boundary of Ethiopia.

Basically from the North of the Red Sea to the border of land of Kush, on this map.

(Ezekiel 29:10-12)
10 So I am against you and against your Nile, and I will make the land of Egypt devastated and dry, a desolate wasteland, from Migdol to Syene to the boundary of Ethiopia. 11 Neither man nor livestock will pass through it on foot, and it will not be inhabited for 40 years. 12 I will make the land of Egypt the most desolate of lands, and its cities will be the most desolate of cities for 40 years; and I will scatter the Egyptians among the nations and disperse them among the lands.”

The prophecy was also fulfilled with Egypt's loss of power.
The secular historical record is sketchy, and not necessary accurate, but the Bible too, is a historical record. So it comes down to which do we trust? Especially when for the most part, the secular sources agree with the Biblical source.

There are many reasons for trusting the Biblical record, some of those reasons were already covered in this thread.

Your own source tells you that it was a failed prophecy. And I am rather amazed that you have not read it yet. I am on a tablet again which limits my ability to respond fully. But if we cover one point at a time we should be able to stick a fork in this turkey.

And you have the wrong invasion of Egypt. Young Nebby attacked Egypt and had some success. He never defeated it. King Nebby, not so much.

 

[nPeace]

Your own source tells you that it was a failed prophecy. And I am rather amazed that you have not read it yet. I am on a tablet again which limits my ability to respond fully. But if we cover one point at a time we should be able to stick a fork in this turkey.

And you have the wrong invasion of Egypt. Young Nebby attacked Egypt and had some success. He never defeated it. King Nebby, not so much.

May I ask... What are you talking about?

 

[shunyadragon]

Your own source tells you that it was a failed prophecy. And I am rather amazed that you have not read it yet. I am on a tablet again which limits my ability to respond fully. But if we cover one point at a time we should be able to stick a fork in this turkey.

And you have the wrong invasion of Egypt. Young Nebby attacked Egypt and had some success. He never defeated it. King Nebby, not so much.

The main island city of Tyre was never thrown into the water,

 

[Subduction Zone]

May I ask... What are you talking about?

You quoted an attack on Egypt. If you study the history of the area Nebuchadnezzar attacked Egypt's military before he became king. You posted about attacks on Egypt.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The main island city of Tyre was never thrown into the water,

I know. I wish I was using a laptop or was at home. It is hard to work on a tiny tablet.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The prophecy that it would be swept bare Ezekiel 26 14

Swept bare, are to spread fishing nets, never rebuilt.

 

[nPeace]

That is a good question and one that I would tend to think is an unguided process. In fact I think most thinks are unguided, but have the illusion of being guided.

If it's an unguided process, then please help me understand the connection between "it was not meant to be" and "it's an unguided process". Are you saying that nature does not allow for any relationship to work, because of random processes, so it does not deleted on one's efforts to make a relationship work?

The question is not whether God can decide the rules or not. Its whether the are morally right or not, based on our judgement.

Just because he don't like something and claim to right about it, doesn't mean that he is. Especially when you have lots of people (Especially atheists) disagreeing with it being so.
Since that is the case, clearly it is possible to adresse these claims in a constructive way by putting them up for debate. Even if one look at the laws found in most countries, we have made rules that support the idea, that one is not allowed to kill homosexsuals due to what God think is morally right.

How is that?
Why are there not millions and millions of Christians on the street protesting and demanding that this should be changed, if its clearly the moral right thing to do?

You can't question God's morals, or anyone else's for that matter. You believe right and wrong is decided by individuals, remember.

No, why should I? Its the same on both sides.


I mean that free will have to work in accordance to physical laws. When the US dropped the atom bomb on Nagasaki for instant a person standing right where the bomb felt would have no chance of surviving. If such person however did survive a direct hit from such bomb, I would consider it an unexplained reason.

The mere fact, that the forces released from such blast would instantly kill them, as their body wouldn't be able to withstand it, would make it a miracle or intervention by something.


But that is not the case, because it is perfectly explainable why this person is going down rather than up. That is why one have to work within the limits of physical laws.


If God stops someone from doing something, then one can not argue that there is any such thing as free will. Or at least it would be completely meaningless as you would have no clue when and when not God would choose to interfere.


No, im clearly not. If that were the case, I would have used examples with people shooting beams out of their eyes etc.


Im far from certain that we do have free will. But that is besides the point, because im not the one claiming we have free will. The bible claims that we have, because God told us so. (Hope you see the irony in that)

For instant, we do not choose what we like or what we don't like when it comes to flavours. No one have ever chosen that they like strawberries more than bananas. In fact most things we choose to do in life, is based on passed experiences rather than freely choosing what to do.


First of all I would be extremely surprised. Next I would question it, maybe they are wearing some new high protective suit that im not aware of. And to me that is the big difference, I would not just jump to the conclusion that it must be supernatural, but rather I would look for explanations.

Secondly, I would make sure that people I trust could also witness it and get their opinion as well. If it turned out that these people could in fact jump in and out of hot lava, then I would have no issue changing m mind.


It depends on the situation. So obviously in some cases he would interfere with someone's free will.


Well that is basically the idea of a prophecy isn't it?

If it weren't, what is the difference between a guess and prophecy?

So basically, you have closed your mind to any notion of the supernatural. Is that what we know to be close-mindedness? That's not a good thing, is it.
I pointed that out earlier, where the detective, admitted that was what prevented him from investigating. Psalms 10:4

Where does the Bible say we have free will, according to your understanding of free will? Nowhere that I ever came across.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You can't question God's morals, or anyone else's for that matter. You believe right and wrong is decided by individuals, remember.

That does not mean that a rational thinker cannot question God's morals. This is a non sequitur on your part.

 

[nPeace]

You quoted an attack on Egypt. If you study the history of the area Nebuchadnezzar attacked Egypt's military before he became king. You posted about attacks on Egypt.

I assume you are referring to my last post.
You may not have read it carefully.
I think I will wait until you get back on your pc. That might help alleviate some confusion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I assume you are referring to my last post.
You may not have read it carefully.
I think I will wait until you get back on your pc. That might help alleviate some confusion.

Why did you post it?

 

[nPeace]

The prophecy that it would be swept bare Ezekiel 26 14

Swept bare, are to spread fishing nets, never rebuilt.

(Ezekiel 26:14) And I will make you a shining, bare rock, and you will become a drying yard for dragnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I myself, Jehovah, have spoken,’ declares the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. . .

That's different to... "Tyre's land would never be built upon again:"

The ruined city, is indeed still in the waters - a drying yard for dragnets.

 

[nPeace]

Why did you post it?

What do you mean?
I'm saying, I don't think you read it properly, so I will wait until you can do so, because I have no idea why you are talking about Nebuchadnezzar.

 

[nPeace]

Why did you post it?

I'm sorry. It's my fault for including the Babylonian conquest. Just ignore that part. I will edit it. Sorry for causing that confusion.
Actually, @Subduction Zone no. That was part of the same period. So I made no mistake there. However, why did you focus of Babylon's conquer? What the problem there.

 

[Subduction Zone]

(Ezekiel 26:14) And I will make you a shining, bare rock, and you will become a drying yard for dragnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I myself, Jehovah, have spoken,’ declares the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. . .

That's different to... "Tyre's land would never be built upon again:"

The ruined city, is indeed still in the waters - a drying yard for dragnets.

No, those are "its settlements" . Read where Alexander the Great got his materials. It was not swept bare. Parts of Tyre that were destroyed, and by the wrong man, remember Nebby failed, were rebuilt. That prophecy fails and fails and fails.

 

[nPeace]

No, those are "its settlements" . Read where Alexander the Great got his materials. It was not swept bare. Parts of Tyre that were destroyed, and by the wrong man, remember Nebby failed, were rebuilt. That prophecy fails and fails and fails.

Whatever, sub.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Whatever, sub.

Don't be rude. You claimed that verse was not there. You were wrong. Then you claimed it was Tyre that was used to build the causeway. You really should have thought that one out. You were wrong again. That was the on land settlements. Not Tyre.