Is atheism predicated partially on the belief in evolution and the current prevailing views of science.

If so, then such a belief is subject to drastic changes as discoveries and theories

 have recently arose that shatter the paradigm that is the foundation of such a belief:

Discoveries keep pushing back the inception of civilization, indefinitely back in time

Evidence of coastal civilizations existing during the ice age are arising in now inundated coastal region due to rising seas.

The concept of a missing link is no longer postulated as a bush of hominids lineages walked  the earth. With what was once considered ancestors, actually being contemporary with postulated descendants. A bush of hominids actually existed as recently as 30,0000 B.C.E.

Though theories of evolution abound no working scientific model exists for the emergence of life.

Our very existence is interwoven with the anthropic principle. As such this has required scientist to postulate the multiverse to explain how the anthropic principle is mindlessly satisfied by nature. However this just substitutes one unfalsifiable believe for another.

In truth, Darwin's world has been shattered and the truth has become intractable. Even as we cope with dark matter and energy. Terms that falsely connote that we have defined them, when in fact they are no more apparent than God. As such new scientific theories continue to emerge based on the inadequacy of the standard model. This will continue into infinitum since, as God there is no means to detect these alleged entities with scientific instrumentation.

Views: 4113

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Well I must mention two points: 

Even if the city were 100 square miles as you say, that would only constitute a square 10 miles by 10 miles. where is the great 50 mile dimension that you first mention?.

Secondly, even at only 10 miles where is you proof that new construction is within the perimeter of the old city. I need documentation to believe not some rough guess-timate base on 50 miles.

Peter calls Rome, Babylon in the new testament. Please do not deliberately miscontrue what I am saying to mislead the audience. You are well read and know that.

Writer: The Apostle Peter, dictating to Silvanus (otherwise known as Silas) as his secretary

Date: c AD64, some time before Peter's execution

Where written: Rome, symbolically "Babylon" (1 Peter 5:13)

Michael, I believe my exact quote was "Babylon was over 50 square miles and on both sides of the river."

So we can pretty much be certain that it was 100.  Now look at the map and locate the central Ziggurat, which is Etemnanki, conveniently marked for you on google maps.  You have found the center of Babylon.  If you note, the road seems to follow the ancient path of the Euphrates in that era...  You can note the settlement on the western bank of the euphrates as it currently runs.  

Now lets look at the layout of the city.

As you can see the current settlement falls so well within the perimeter of the city, that you can tell that even if you decreased the size of the city, the settlement still falls well within it noting the curvature of the river.   Babylon is inhabited.  Furthermore, people lived at Camp Alpha which was located within the Istar gates and the most important parts of the city.  They were there for 18 months.

It is over.  You know the prophecy was about the city, you knew the context of the prophecy made it clear it was about repaying the city for the 587 destruction.  That is why you have been defending this point so fiercely, because a futurist interpretation is silly.  The prophecy failed to come to pass. 

Presently don't have access to google maps on this computer. But in regard to modern construction on the site, it is still under God's Curse. Cleary the invasion of Iraq was partially necessitated by God maintaining his word. God will also not allow anything to be rebuilt on the site in the future, World without End.

In 1983, Saddam Hussein started rebuilding the city on top of the old ruins (because of this, artifacts and other finds may well be under the city by now), investing in both restoration and new construction. He inscribed his name on many of the bricks in imitation of Nebuchadnezzar. One frequent inscription reads: "This was built by Saddam Hussein, son of Nebuchadnezzar, to glorify Iraq". This recalls the ziggurat at Ur, where each individual brick was stamped with "Ur-Nammu, king of Ur, who built the temple of Nanna". These bricks became sought after as collectors' items after the downfall of Hussein, and the ruins are no longer being restored to their original state. He also installed a huge portrait of himself and Nebuchadnezzar at the entrance to the ruins, and shored up Processional Way, a large boulevard of ancient stones, and the Lion of Babylon, a black rock sculpture about 2,600 years old.

When the Gulf War ended, Saddam wanted to build a modern palace, also over some old ruins; it was made in the pyramidal style of a Sumerian ziggurat. He named it Saddam Hill. In 2003, he was ready to begin the construction of a cable car line over Babylon when the invasion began and halted the project.

An article published in April 2006 states that UN officials and Iraqi leaders have plans for restoring Babylon, making it into a cultural center.[43][44]

Michael, we are talking about the settlement on the west bank of the euphrates.  Saddam was only working on the area around the Ishtar gate which is on the larger east bank of the Euphrates, and actually is dry riverbed now and the Euphrates has moved west. 

Saying it is under a curse is nonsense.  The passage doesn't say "He who defies this prophecy is accursed".  The passage says:

Nobody will live in it: False

The land will be infertile: False, farms exist all over the              western portion of the former city limits.

The stones from the ruins wont even be used to make new buildings  Jer 51:26:  False, the stones from the ancient city have been reused in Hillah and were used to build Selucia.  Babylonian stones from Nebuchadnezzar's time were stamped and sealed.  That was what Hussein was copying.

Babylon will experience a sudden tragedy that will shock the world  False, Bablylon slowly faded into obscurity, but was treated with respect by every conquering empire.

"The Lord has stirred up the spirit of the kings of the Medes, because his purpose concerning Babylon is to destroy it, for that is the vengeance of the Lord, the vengeance for his temple. Jeremiah 51:11"

This, did not happen.  Babylon was not destroyed.  The Medes kept it as a great city and it fell without a fight.  The king of the city at the time was so absent that people didn't feel particularly loyal to him.  He was busy being in Syria if I remember right.

Anyway, it lived on for hundreds of years and died a natural death, contrary to the prophecy about its destruction by the Medes. 

As can be seen, you don't need google earth, google maps is on the link, people have regular settlements within the location of the city walls, the place was not abandoned forever.  

The so-called curse is that anyone who tries to rebuild Babylon to make this prophecy invalid will be kept from allowing it to happen.  Except that people have been living in Babylon for quite some time now, already invalidating that curse.

You can also see that Tyre survived defying prophecy as well and still exists to this day.  Ezekiel says it will become so lost it shall not be found.   That never happened either.

If the fall of Nebuchadnezzar did not shock the ancient world then what did?. Come on Babyon fell in  one day as prophesied and by the invasion of the Persians. This was an earth shaken event in the Near East. the river cuts through Babylon, you are stating. Well, what is Babylon without its pride and glory and the Isthar Gate?. Even with settlement today on the out skirts, where is the Glory of Babylon that Hussein tried to reconstruct. It will never happen. Not even by UN mandate, though it is planned.

Also the vision in regard to the fall of Babylon in the future (Rome) is predicated on quick fall of ancient Babylon. "In one hour shall Babylon be destroyed"

The glory of Babylon is silly.  It has nothing to do with a prophecy that says specific things about its fall that never happened.

It was not destroyed, its glory lived on for hundreds of years.  And then it slowly died out.  It is thousands of years later.  Of course now it is an archaeological ruin.  Most ancient desert cities are.  Where is the glory of Persepolis?

The prophecy says nobody would live there.  The prophecy says nobody would use stones from the city to help build other buildings.   The prophecy said Babylon would be destroyed.  Babylon was not destroyed.  It surrendered without destruction which some could attribute to the hand of a god that protected the city.  Look at how Jerusalem fared...  Instead it was treated with great dignity and honor and almost everyone kept going with their normal lives.

The glory of Babylon continued to mystify even the Greeks hundreds of years later and they made sure to keep the city in good shape, even though the city was just waning in popularity according to the natural course of time for desert cities.  Where is the glory of Ur, or the glory of Mari, or the glory of Ebla, or the glory of Aleppo, or the glory of Petra?  Should I go on? 

John Kelly - I believe you're making him think, as opposed to relying solely on rote memory and pat answers, and that could result in severe headaches.

Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin,  Peres the handwritting on the wall was definitely satisfied: Your Kingdom had been weighed in  the balance and found wanting and shall be given as an inhertance to the Medes and the Persians. Where  in the prophecy is it implied that the destruction was eminent?

Michael, wrong part of town.  We aren't going over the passage in Daniel.  We are going over the passage in Jeremiah 51 right now.  There is no curse in Daniel.  It is in Jeremiah 51.  We will stick to the prophecy in Jeremiah and whether or not Jeremiah 51 came to pass.  

As you previously were shown, the passage directly mentions the temple of Jerusalem, and the Medes and the Persians destroying Babylon.

Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin,  Peres the handwritting on the wall was definitely satisfied: Your Kingdom had been weighed in  the balance and found wanting and shall be given as an inhertance to the Medes and the Persians. Where  in the prophecy is it implied that the destruction was eminent?

Michael, it seems to me your time would be better spent, not promoting harebrained oddball theories and instead taking some remedial English.


© 2015   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service