Philosophy Discussion Forums

Sy Borg wrote: ↑June 9th, 2024, 8:56 pm Alter2Ego, please do not spread misinformation on the forum. You have made a blatantly wrong statement - and even highlighted the wrongful claim in red.

Let's see ... Ezekiel, Chapter 26


The claim was that Tyre would be destroyed and never be rebuilt. Yet, Tyre not only still exists, but it is Lebanon's fourth biggest city.

Thus, your claim "Every single prophecy in the Bible has been accurately fulfilled" is demonstrably false. Philosophy is not about making grand false claims in the hope of fooling the gullible into following your ideas. It is ideally aiming for maximal accuracy an truthfulness.

Sy Borg:

I will not be returning to this website in the near future. I tend to disappear from websites where moderators have a habit of micromanaging. I've done it for years. Sometimes I return; sometimes I do not.

Alter2Ego

Alter2Ego wrote: ↑June 9th, 2024, 10:24 pm

Sy Borg wrote: ↑June 9th, 2024, 8:56 pm Alter2Ego, please do not spread misinformation on the forum. You have made a blatantly wrong statement - and even highlighted the wrongful claim in red.

Let's see ... Ezekiel, Chapter 26

“Son of man, because Tyre has said of Jerusalem, ‘Aha! The gate to the nations is broken, and its doors have swung open to me; now that she lies in ruins I will prosper,’ 3 therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against you, Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves. 4 They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers; I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock. 5 Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets, for I have spoken, declares the Sovereign Lord. She will become plunder for the nations, 6 and her settlements on the mainland will be ravaged by the sword. Then they will know that I am the Lord.

7 “For this is what the Sovereign Lord says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great army. 8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you. 9 He will direct the blows of his battering rams against your walls and demolish your towers with his weapons. 10 His horses will be so many that they will cover you with dust. Your walls will tremble at the noise of the warhorses, wagons and chariots when he enters your gates as men enter a city whose walls have been broken through. 11 The hooves of his horses will trample all your streets; he will kill your people with the sword, and your strong pillars will fall to the ground. 12 They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea. 13 I will put an end to your noisy songs, and the music of your harps will be heard no more. 14 I will make you a bare rock, and you will become a place to spread fishnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I the Lord have spoken, declares the Sovereign Lord.

The claim was that Tyre would be destroyed and never be rebuilt. Yet, Tyre not only still exists, but it is Lebanon's fourth biggest city.

Thus, your claim "Every single prophecy in the Bible has been accurately fulfilled" is demonstrably false. Philosophy is not about making grand false claims in the hope of fooling the gullible into following your ideas. It is ideally aiming for maximal accuracy an truthfulness.

Sy Borg:

By your own admission Tyre was destroyed (in fulfillment of Bible prophecy). And by your own admission it is now a city in Lebanon, not a city called Tyre. In other words, Tyre was never rebuilt, just as the Bible stated.

I find it interesting that you have made no attempt to micromanage the false statements being made by LuckyR and Lagayscienza who claim, without evidence, that humans have existed 250,000 years. Why are you singling me out? If you want me gone from your website, I can do that.

Feel free to ban me.

Alter2Ego

Ban you? Who talked about banning? I simply pointed out that you made a blatantly wrong claim and asked if you'd be more rigorous in the future. This is a philosophy forum, and one would hope it would be at least a bit more rigorous than most.

Yours was massive claim - and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. When a claim can be disproved in a moment (Tyre is still thriving) then it's a very weak claim.

Humans have been around for at least 250,000 years - much more if you start with Homo erectus. Laygaya's and Lucky's comments were fine.

Alter2Ego wrote: ↑June 9th, 2024, 10:24 pm Sy Borg:

By your own admission Tyre was destroyed (in fulfillment of Bible prophecy). And by your own admission it is now a city in Lebanon, not a city called Tyre. In other words, Tyre was never rebuilt, just as the Bible stated.

I find it interesting that you have made no attempt to micromanage the false statements being made by LuckyR and Lagayscienza who claim, without evidence, that humans have existed 250,000 years. Why are you singling me out? If you want me gone from your website, I can do that.

Feel free to ban me.

Alter2Ego

What you said in bold doesn't make sense because there is presently, a city called Tyre, in the country called Lebanon. In other words, Tyre was only partially destroyed and with time, the city was slowly rebuilt that exists to this day. That's totally the opposite of the prophecy that is in the Bible.

So, no, not every prophecy was fulfilled.

Alter2Ego wrote: ↑June 9th, 2024, 10:32 pm Sy Borg:

I will not be returning to this website in the near future. I tend to disappear from websites where moderators have a habit of micromanaging. I've done it for years. Sometimes I return; sometimes I do not.

Alter2Ego

So......since a moderator who was participating in the discussion only pointed it out that what you claimed was false and weren't actually micromanaging, you are returning, correct?

In Judaism, prophecies are not to be understood literally. For instance when the birth of Jesus was prophesied by the prophet Micah the 'Son of God' was not the literal son but was a biological descendant of the line of kings from David . 'Son of God 'meant a person devoted to God. Because the king of the Jews was such an important personage the NT story was told that Jesus son of Joseph,who was in line of kingly descent ,was born in the City of David i.e. Bethlehem. Jesus' mother was also of important descent from the priestly line. Rachel was reputed to have been buried at Bethlehem. Thus the birth of Jesus was told so to fit the prophecy; this was no chance or magical event. It's well known that prophecies were popularly important to Jews and so it is natural that important events would be engineered to fit the prophecy.

It is a shame on Christianity that Biblical interpretation is not taught historically and anthropologically. Instead of which the faithful are misled by into superstition , including believing that prophecies are supernatural foreknowledge.

[Archaeological confirmation of Bethlehem as a city in the Kingdom of Judah was uncovered in 2012 at the archaeological dig at the City of David in the form of a bulla (seal impression in dried clay) in ancient Hebrew script that reads "From the town of Bethlehem to the King." According to the excavators, it was used to seal the string closing a shipment of grain, wine, or other goods sent as a tax payment in the 8th or 7th century BCE.[23] []Wikipedia

Alter2Ego wrote: ↑June 9th, 2024, 10:24 pm I find it interesting that you have made no attempt to micromanage the false statements being made by LuckyR and Lagayscienza who claim, without evidence, that humans have existed 250,000 years. Why are you singling me out?

We cannot address every issue that exists, simultaneously. If someone comments on one aspect of what one person has posted, it doesn't necessarily mean that other issues are being ignored, does it? It just means that we are temporarily focussing on one comment, of all those that have been made. That's a practical necessity. Otherwise, no issue can ever be addressed without addressing *all* issues, which is impossible, in practice, in real life.

What evidence did you offer evidence, Alter2Ego. All I could see were religious assertions. As for evolution, evidence for it is all around us and we can watch evolution happening in real time. That evidence is so well documented, and so well known, an so constantly being strengthened, that it hardly needs to be detailed here. Just Google "evidence for evolution" if you're interested (which I doubt) and you will have enough reading to last a lifetime.

Religious texts, on the other hand, may have value as Bronze Age history, but they offer no real evidence as to human origins. In that respect they are just myth and legend.

Anyway, Alter2Ego addressed the question - why he believes. Trouble is, the reasoning was so poor that five minutes of quality time with Google could reveal that the Bible's prophesies were not always right. No doubt some will claim that it's predicted today, but predicting that a system will decay and decline is like predicting that people will eventually die. Predicting apocalypses is simple, predicting the timing is not.

Besides, one cannot claim that the Bible and its writers were always right, when their treatment for those with bacterial, viral or prionic diseases that impacted on the brain was demonic exorcism.

We know that the Bible is wrong in many ways, especially if misinterpreted as entirely literal. I would think the most valid reasons for believing would be subjective/internal. Pitting religious texts against science and history in an attempt to discredit the other two is a backwards step in the search for truth. Certainly IMO, anyone who disputes evolution is not going to provide enlightening answers to this question.

Sy Borg wrote: ↑June 10th, 2024, 6:04 pm Certainly IMO, anyone who disputes evolution is not going to provide enlightening answers to this question.

Evolution can't be proven, like many things. Science has never, and will never, prove anything, after all. But evolution has *explanatory power* that, in itself, is very persuasive, even if not actually conclusive. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to *refute* evolution, IMO. So, like you, I'll stick with it until something better comes along.

Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑June 11th, 2024, 7:09 am

Sy Borg wrote: ↑June 10th, 2024, 6:04 pm Certainly IMO, anyone who disputes evolution is not going to provide enlightening answers to this question.

Evolution can't be proven, like many things. Science has never, and will never, prove anything, after all. But evolution has *explanatory power* that, in itself, is very persuasive, even if not actually conclusive. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to *refute* evolution, IMO. So, like you, I'll stick with it until something better comes along.

I agree too. I have only a minor quibble. It's evolution by natural selection we are talking about. It may be a long phrase but it's worth while to be explicit. 'Evolution' means 'change'.

Belinda wrote: ↑June 13th, 2024, 4:39 am

Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑June 11th, 2024, 7:09 am

Sy Borg wrote: ↑June 10th, 2024, 6:04 pm Certainly IMO, anyone who disputes evolution is not going to provide enlightening answers to this question.

Evolution can't be proven, like many things. Science has never, and will never, prove anything, after all. But evolution has *explanatory power* that, in itself, is very persuasive, even if not actually conclusive. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to *refute* evolution, IMO. So, like you, I'll stick with it until something better comes along. 👍

I agree too. I have only a minor quibble. It's evolution by natural selection we are talking about. It may be a long phrase but it's worth while to be explicit. 'Evolution' means 'change'.

It's a good quibble. Since "evolution" is a technical term for "biological evolution", there is a tendency to not see anything else evolving. The universe has been evolving for roughly 14 billion years (unless James Webb finds otherwise). Natural selection is, as you suggest, only one way that things may evolve. There was a complex evolution of the Earth's geology that made abiogenesis possible. Everything evolves, including technology.

Yup. Everything is, and has always been, evolving. We can't say if there will be an end to it. Maybe when the universe reaches thermodynamic equilibrium or "heat death", evolution will cease but, until then, we can be certain that evolution will continue.

Lagayscienza wrote: ↑June 14th, 2024, 11:22 am Yup. Everything is, and has always been, evolving. We can't say if there will be an end to it. Maybe when the universe reaches thermodynamic equilibrium or "heat death", evolution will cease but, until then, we can be certain that evolution will continue.

If there were no change nothing would exist.

The 'God' that i believe exists is a mixture, or even a compound ,of truth, goodness, and beauty with offspring such as mercy, justice, and knowledge.

I believe this 'God' exists because I have seen evidences of the above in a relative world.

Belinda, why do you attribute the most refined and mature human qualities as "God" but everything else - all the negatives - are ours alone? Why does this "God" have a free pass?