The End Time Prophecy in Revelation 16:12 has been Fulfilled

[Cooky]

@blü 2 is attempting to introduce the scientific method into scriptural debates, and seems to expect others to demonstrate things for him like they do in the "sciences"...

...But this isn't the science section, so nobody honors his request.

 

[Tazarah]

You're a very careless, or a very selective reader, no?

I point out again that it's very easy to prove a great many negatives: eg that I wasn't in Tokyo on Christmas Day 1635. That at no time in the last 20,000 years has Mount Everest been wholly submerged. That England since 1066 has never had a monarch called Igor. On and on.

And I also told you before how to show that the Euphrates has or has not run dry before ─ check history thoroughly yourself, or refer to the work of a reputable historian who's done that.

Why haven't you done that?
Has or has not, one or the other ─ I'm not championing any particular answer. I'm simply pointing out that if it's dried up on one or more earlier occasions then your argument fails. If it hasn't then you don't have that problem but you still have the problems raised by @Kangaroo Feathers.

The points raised by Kangaroo Feathers have been debunked. They claim that Revelation 16:12 was fulfilled in 1918, but the Euphrates river did not dry up in 1918 and on top of that no eastern forces were preparing to use the dried up river as a pathway/location for military purposes -- because the river did not dry up.

 

[Tazarah]

Provide a link to reputable authority that confirms your claim.

That's exactly what you should have done in your first post without asking, and haven't done even now after your problem has been pointed out to you again and again.

You've merely asserted. You've entirely failed to demonstrate.

If the river has dried up before in the past (which it hasn't, because no such evidence of it ever drying up exists) then feel free to share the information. Otherwise you're just rambling, grasping for straws and trying to find loopholes to jump through in order to avoid dealing with the fact that Revelation 16:12 is currently being fulfilled as I have proven in the OP.

 

[Tazarah]

@blü 2 is attempting to introduce the scientific method into scriptural debates, and seems to expect others to demonstrate things for him like they do in the "sciences"...

...But this isn't the science section, so nobody honors his request.

Exactly. Let's ask him to provide evidence that humans came from monkeys or fish and see what he says.

 

[blü 2]

If the river has dried up before in the past (which it hasn't, because no such evidence of it ever drying up exists) then feel free to share the information. Otherwise you're just rambling, grasping for straws and trying to find loopholes to jump through in order to avoid dealing with the fact that Revelation 16:12 is currently being fulfilled as I have proven in the OP.

Well, goodness knows I tried to get you to make an argument that made sense.

But now I'll leave you to your world of let's-pretend.

And this is for you and our friend @Landon Caeli: if you exclude reasoned argument (and scientific method is a branch of reasoned argument) from discussions of the bible, then that reduces the bible to a Harry Potter game where the players move around inside a fictional world, saying Accio broom! and Expecto Patronum!

But you're both volunteers and it's completely a matter for you in the end.

Have a lovely Revelation, guys!

Ciao.

 

[Tazarah]

Well, goodness knows I tried to get you to make an argument that made sense.

But now I'll leave you to your world of let's-pretend.

And this is for you and our friend @Landon Caeli: if you exclude reasoned argument (and scientific method is a branch of reasoned argument) from discussions of the bible, then that reduces the bible to a Harry Potter game where the players move around inside a fictional world, saying Accio broom! and Expecto Patronum!

But you're both volunteers and it's completely a matter for you in the end.

Have a lovely Revelation, guys!

Ciao.

And we gave you several opportunities to prove that the Euphrates river has dried up before, which you could not do. Feel free at anytime to prove that the river has dried up sometime before now.

In the meantime, I suggest that you find some solid evidence to substantiate the idea that fish grew legs and turned into monkeys which then turned into humans (or whatever you happen to believe) instead of trying to make fun of a prophecy that you cannot explain by comparing the bible to harry potter.

 

[blü 2]

And we gave you several opportunities to prove that the Euphrates river has dried up before, which you could not do. Feel free at anytime to prove that the river has dried up sometime before now.

In the meantime, I suggest that you find some solid evidence to substantiate the idea that fish grew legs and turned into monkeys which then turned into humans (or whatever you happen to believe) instead of trying to make fun of a prophecy that you cannot explain by comparing the bible to harry potter.

You're saying it wrong.

It's a-lo-ha-MOR-rah, not a-lo-HA-mo-ra.

 

[Tazarah]

You're saying it wrong.

It's a-lo-ha-MOR-rah, not a-lo-HA-mo-ra.

It's actually ah-LOH-ho-MOR-ah.

 

[Etritonakin]

Not true. You don't know what you're talking about. Let's take a look at the prophecy in Joel 3.

JOEL 3:1-2

"1 For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem,
2 I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land."

According to the prophecy in Joel 3:1-2, the Israelites are already in captivity and will be in captivity until the day when God comes to gather all nations and judge them.

Ummmmm.... where are they now in captivity -actually -literally???? They are in many places now -and are often mistreated -but captivity?????

behold, in those days, and in that time..... I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem,

 

[Tazarah]

Ummmmm.... where are they now in captivity -actually -literally???? They are in many places now -and are often mistreated -but captivity?????

behold, in those days, and in that time..... I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem,

That's what the scriptures say. Are you disagreeing with the bible? Being chained up physically is not the only form of captivity (see Nehemiah 9:36-37).

Joel 3:1-2 makes it clear that the Israelites are still currently in some form of captivity in the lands where they were taken as captives, and that they will remain there until the day that God gathers all nations to judge them.

There are other prophecies like Jeremiah 30:7-11 which also say that the Israelites will still be in the lands of their captivities (the places where they were captives at one point in time) when God comes to gather and save them on that day. Not in Israel.

All of these prophecies prove that the modern jewish people are not the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. They are not the Israelites of the bible.

JEREMIAH 30:7-11

"7 Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble, but he shall be saved out of it.
8 For it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will break his yoke from off thy neck, and will burst thy bonds, and strangers shall no more serve themselves of him:
9 But they shall serve the LORD their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them.
10 Therefore fear thou not, O my servant Jacob, saith the LORD; neither be dismayed, O Israel: for, lo, I will save thee from afar, and thy seed from the land of their captivity; and Jacob shall return, and shall be in rest, and be quiet, and none shall make him afraid."

 

[Etritonakin]

That's what the scriptures say. Are you disagreeing with the bible? Being chained up physically is not the only form of captivity (see Nehemiah 9:36-37).

Joel 3:1-2 makes it clear that the Israelites are still currently in some form of captivity in the lands where they were taken as captives, and that they will remain there until the day that God gathers all nations to judge them.

There are other prophecies like Jeremiah 30:7-11 which also say that the Israelites will still be in the lands of their captivities (the places where they were captives at one point in time) when God comes to gather and save them on that day. Not in Israel.

All of these prophecies prove that the modern jewish people are not the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. They are not the Israelites of the bible.

JEREMIAH 30:7-11

"7 Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble, but he shall be saved out of it.
8 For it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will break his yoke from off thy neck, and will burst thy bonds, and strangers shall no more serve themselves of him:
9 But they shall serve the LORD their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them.
10 Therefore fear thou not, O my servant Jacob, saith the LORD; neither be dismayed, O Israel: for, lo, I will save thee from afar, and thy seed from the land of their captivity; and Jacob shall return, and shall be in rest, and be quiet, and none shall make him afraid."

You are saying it says that -I am disagreeing with you.

 

[Tazarah]

You are saying it says that -I am disagreeing with you.

Ah, the oldest trick in the book. Claim that the bible doesn't say what it says, even though it clearly says what it says.

JOEL 3:1-2

"1 For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem,
2 I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land."

 

[Etritonakin]

Ah, the oldest trick in the book. Claim that the bible doesn't say what it says, even though it clearly says what it says.

JOEL 3:1-2

"1 For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem,
2 I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land."

That's what I am saying. FUTURE -not past. I'm going to have to assume you are just messing with me or going all INTJ or something.
No point in continuing if you are not serious.

 

[Tazarah]

That's what I am saying. FUTURE -not past. I'm going to have to assume you are just messing with me or going all INTJ or something.
No point in continuing if you are not serious.

So you agree that the bible (Joel 3:1-2) says Judah and Jerusalem will be saved from captivity on the day God gathers all nations to judge them?

 

[Muffled]

Nope, I’m saying men spoke a prophecy and said it came from God when it did not.

I believe that is based on what you think God should say rather than what He actually said.

 

[Muffled]

I don't get why this is so hard for them to understand. They will literally grasp for straws and try to create loopholes all day when it's obvious what the text is saying.

I even showed them the greek word used for "king" in Revelation 16:12 and how it's biblical usage includes "commander", as well as "leader of the people".

I suppose if God used the word Imam or president no-one in that day would know what it meant because it didn't exist in their language. However we in our day know that King can mean the presiding authority whether it be Imam, president or premier.

 

[danieldemol]

I believe that is based on what you think God should say rather than what He actually said.

God could have used the word for ‘ruler’ such as in Job 3:14.
‘with kings and rulers of the earth’

But the men who wrote the Bible used the word for ‘king’.

Check out the link in post #167 and you will find the word does not have a single Biblical usage other than king or kings.

 

[Tazarah]

God could have used the word for ‘ruler’ such as in Job 3:14.
‘with kings and rulers of the earth’

But the men who wrote the Bible used the word for ‘king’.

The reason for this has already been explained to you multiple times in multiple different ways by multiple different people.

Check out the link in post #167 and you will find the word does not have a single Biblical usage other than king or kings.

This is not true, I've already explained this in post # 96.

The greek word used for "king" in Revelation 16:12 is:

Strong's G935 - basileus (βασιλεύς)

Here is the outline of biblical usage:

1. leader of the people, prince, commander, lord of the land, king
   
   https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?t=kjv&strongs=g935

 

[danieldemol]

This is not true, I've already explained this in post # 96.

The greek word used for "king" in Revelation 16:12 is:

Strong's G935 - basileus (βασιλεύς)

Here is the outline of biblical usage:

1. leader of the people, prince, commander, lord of the land, king
   
   https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?t=kjv&strongs=g935

Ok I can see the nature of the problem, Strongs has placed his definition of the word basileus (βασιλεύς) under the title, "outline of biblical usage". What I am saying is that in order for it to be a "biblical usage", it would have to actually be used that way in an actual Bible, not just as a definition of the word. Hence i went through every instance of the word as it was translated in your link (I think they used the NASB, but for details you can see Post#167 The End Time Prophecy in Revelation 16:12 has been Fulfilled) and in every instance it was either "king" or "kings".

Can you find it in the actual Bibles in any of the historical translations where it is not king or kings?

 

[Tazarah]

Ok I can see the nature of the problem, Strongs has placed his definition of the word basileus (βασιλεύς) under the title, "outline of biblical usage". What I am saying is that in order for it to be a "biblical usage", it would have to actually be used that way in an actual Bible, not just as a definition of the word. Hence i went through every instance of the word as it was translated in your link (I think they used the NASB, but for details you can see Post#167 The End Time Prophecy in Revelation 16:12 has been Fulfilled) and in every instance it was either "king" or "kings".

Can you find it in the actual Bibles in any of the historical translations where it is not king or kings?

It is used that way in the actual bible. That's why it says "outline of biblical usage".