Failed Biblical Prophecies

[Godscreated]

@ Darkstar, what makes you think that anyone respects your translation of scripture? You could not even get the Joshua scriptures correct, I gave you an explanation of the verses and you ignored them, try learning for a change, you need to know what your talking about before you can critically analyze it. Trying to tear down something just for the sake of tearing it down does not make the thing incorrect. To analyze something you first need to find the truth of the complete work. Cherry picking only shows a persons ignorance of the material he is analyzing.

Uh, they aren't my translations; I don't know Hebrew and I'd be willing to bet you don't either. I am looking at direct translations from Hebrew to English, and at lexicons showing Hebrew to English comparisons with the literal and contextual meanings of the Hebrew shown. At least Drich made some points, but I honestly have no idea how your earlier post has anything to do with what we are discussing. I am not cherry picking, and I don't know how you can draw that conclusion. The 'truth' of the complete work has never been found, I am using direct translations from the original Hebrew to get as close to the original as I can.

Ok, your conclusion of what the text says, is that better. You have used what you want to see rather than what's there, this would be like Drich X-Y idea. You can't defend your conclusion against the truth of the passages.

[Drich]

I did not think you were making it up, I just wanted to see the source. I do not know what it means by Pharaoh="great house", but the below description suggests that it does not simply mean 'leader'.

Pharaoh, a common title of the ancient kings of Egypt, until Persian invasion. It is commonly put nakedly, like pr.n (Gen.12:15;37:36;40:2,seqq.;41:1,seqq.,and so throughout the Pentayeuch); more rarely with the addition of the words [Hebrew text] --- the chariots of Pharaoh, or made like Pharaoh's. This word properly signifies king in the Egyptian language, as was long ago observed by Josephus (Antiqu. viii. 6, 2), and in Coptic it is written pouro, from ouro ruling, king, with the sign prefixed of the m. gen., whence touro, queen, metouro, dominion (see...); it was, however, so inflected by the Hebrews that it might seem to be a Phoenicio-Shemitic word, i.q. [Hebrew text] prince (from the root [Hebrew text]), with the addition of the termination [Hebrew text].

So do you mean to say you believe that a pharaoh was a litteral House that was greater than a common house/home dewelling? Or does the word 'House" denote a linage of strong Men/leaders?

[Ryantology]

now who is selling snake oil?

As I have never made a grilled cheese sandwich with no golden, crispy pattern of any kind, I have to concede the advantage to theists.

[Minimalist]

Drippy. The city is still there. Your prophet fucked up. Are you willing to admit that your prophet was wrong? Maybe you want to say that your prophet misunderstood "god?" That would at least het your god off the hook for being an asshole.

Sadly....nothing is going to save you from that fate.

---

@ Darkstar, what makes you think that anyone respects your translation of scripture?

@ G-C... what makes you think anyone respects "scripture?"

Maybe if you could produce evidence that your bullshit was written by - or even inspired by - some actual deity but you have never been able to meet that burden.

[Darkstar]

---

You are a dishonest cherry picker who does not understand anything about scripture, you need to quit being a pretender, it makes you look foolish.

The verses you quoted are only a few of a series of verses about an event that has nothing to do with conquering those nations named, and in those verses you used you sealed your fate as to looking foolish.

1) The event was about crossing a raging river, each year the Jordan River floods and runs as a torrent. Go look up your geography, I'm not doing this simple task for you, it is you who's responsible for your facts.

2) Joshua tells the people that God is going to stop the flow of this raging river so that they can crossover to the land of promise.

3) God explained what He was going to do with the river to Joshua, and this event is the one that will establish God is still with His people and their leader.

4) God did as He said, He blocked the flow of the river when the priest carrying the ark stepped into the river. All the people crossed over, it was only when the priest came out of the river bed that the river returned to it's flood stage.

5) God did not tell Joshua in these verses that He would dispossess these other peoples, it was Joshua that said this is what God will do.

6) Joshua was getting ahead of God, as many do, and embellished what God was going to do, why Joshua did this is not explained, it is though written down that he did so. Did Joshua know that God was going to aid His people in dispossessing these people, yes, that is another matter altogether, it has no bearing on this part of the journey. The only thing that's important here, is that God did exactly what He said he would, to show His people that He was with their leadership and them.

7) You should try at least to be more accurate in your reporting of events, especially since it was already written for you, you make one lousy reporter of the facts even when they stare you in the face.

8) Now we have taken a look at what the verses really say!!

---

Why do you keep accusing me of being dishonset when it was a simple mistake. I needed to include this:

---

Joshua 1:1-6 After the death of Moses the servant of the Lord, the Lord said to Joshua son of Nun, Moses’ aide: 2 “Moses my servant is dead. Now then, you and all these people, get ready to cross the Jordan River into the land I am about to give to them—to the Israelites. 3 I will give you every place where you set your foot, as I promised Moses. 4 Your territory will extend from the desert to Lebanon, and from the great river, the Euphrates—all the Hittite country—to the Mediterranean Sea in the west. 5 No one will be able to stand against you all the days of your life. As I was with Moses, so I will be with you; I will never leave you nor forsake you. 6 Be strong and courageous, because you will lead these people to inherit the land I swore to their ancestors to give them.

---

Here, god promises that the isrealites will conquer everwhere they set foot. This is the origin of Joshua's quote, in which he says:

---

“Come here and listen to the words of the Lord your God. 10 This is how you will know that the living God is among you and that he will certainly drive out before you the Canaanites, Hittites, Hivites, Perizzites, Girgashites, Amorites and Jebusites."

---

Here he is relaying what god told him in the earlier passage. It may have caused some confusion as to the origin of his quote when the previous verse was talking about a river. I am not talking about the river.

---

---

So do you mean to say you believe that a pharaoh was a litteral House that was greater than a common house/home dewelling? Or does the word 'House" denote a linage of strong Men/leaders?

It could. A king could be one in a lineage of leaders, as could a pharaoh, but was there a word to distinguish between a pharoah/king and a regular leader? The explanation on the lower part of that page suggests that there may have been.

[Drich]

Drippy. The city is still there. Your prophet fucked up. Are you willing to admit that your prophet was wrong? Maybe you want to say that your prophet misunderstood "god?" That would at least het your god off the hook for being an asshole.

Sadly....nothing is going to save you from that fate.

---

@ Darkstar, what makes you think that anyone respects your translation of scripture?

@ G-C... what makes you think anyone respects "scripture?"

Maybe if you could produce evidence that your bullshit was written by - or even inspired by - some actual deity but you have never been able to meet that burden.

"Old tyre" is not there any more, it makes up the causeway connecting the Main land to the Island. The City Ezk condemned is at the bottom of the ocean. What you are desperatly trying to say the city was left untouched when infact it was destroyed by alexander the great. What Ezk condemned was used to build a causway to attack the island city/sea port. (which was eventually destroyed as well.) What is now know as tyre was built after the destruction of Old Tyre next to the ruins of the old city Again the city that Ezk condemned.

Your arguement fails Minnie. The fact that you will not speak to what your own wiki artical says about old tyre says you know your whole arguement is in trouble. That is why you simply keep repeating yourself appealing to my vanity rather than address the facts.

[Ryantology]

There are plenty of ancient cities which were destroyed and never rebuilt, so forgotten that people believed them to be mere legends. See: Troy.

Tyre fared quite well, all things considered. Maybe God was feeling a little less like a genocidal maniac that day.

[Godscreated]

---

You are a dishonest cherry picker who does not understand anything about scripture, you need to quit being a pretender, it makes you look foolish.

The verses you quoted are only a few of a series of verses about an event that has nothing to do with conquering those nations named, and in those verses you used you sealed your fate as to looking foolish.

1) The event was about crossing a raging river, each year the Jordan River floods and runs as a torrent. Go look up your geography, I'm not doing this simple task for you, it is you who's responsible for your facts.

2) Joshua tells the people that God is going to stop the flow of this raging river so that they can crossover to the land of promise.

3) God explained what He was going to do with the river to Joshua, and this event is the one that will establish God is still with His people and their leader.

4) God did as He said, He blocked the flow of the river when the priest carrying the ark stepped into the river. All the people crossed over, it was only when the priest came out of the river bed that the river returned to it's flood stage.

5) God did not tell Joshua in these verses that He would dispossess these other peoples, it was Joshua that said this is what God will do.

6) Joshua was getting ahead of God, as many do, and embellished what God was going to do, why Joshua did this is not explained, it is though written down that he did so. Did Joshua know that God was going to aid His people in dispossessing these people, yes, that is another matter altogether, it has no bearing on this part of the journey. The only thing that's important here, is that God did exactly what He said he would, to show His people that He was with their leadership and them.

7) You should try at least to be more accurate in your reporting of events, especially since it was already written for you, you make one lousy reporter of the facts even when they stare you in the face.

8) Now we have taken a look at what the verses really say!!

---

Why do you keep accusing me of being dishonset when it was a simple mistake. I needed to include this:

---

Joshua 1:1-6 After the death of Moses the servant of the Lord, the Lord said to Joshua son of Nun, Moses’ aide: 2 “Moses my servant is dead. Now then, you and all these people, get ready to cross the Jordan River into the land I am about to give to them—to the Israelites. 3 I will give you every place where you set your foot, as I promised Moses. 4 Your territory will extend from the desert to Lebanon, and from the great river, the Euphrates—all the Hittite country—to the Mediterranean Sea in the west. 5 No one will be able to stand against you all the days of your life. As I was with Moses, so I will be with you; I will never leave you nor forsake you. 6 Be strong and courageous, because you will lead these people to inherit the land I swore to their ancestors to give them.

---

Here, god promises that the isrealites will conquer everwhere they set foot. This is the origin of Joshua's quote, in which he says:

---

“Come here and listen to the words of the Lord your God. 10 This is how you will know that the living God is among you and that he will certainly drive out before you the Canaanites, Hittites, Hivites, Perizzites, Girgashites, Amorites and Jebusites."

---

Here he is relaying what god told him in the earlier passage. It may have caused some confusion as to the origin of his quote when the previous verse was talking about a river. I am not talking about the river.

The whole thing is about the river, not the conquering of the land, God did not tell Joshua of the peoples that would be dispossessed, do you see those names in the verses you gave, no, so why are you using it, those verses are repeating what Joshua already knew. God proved to the people He was with Joshua and the people by stopping the flow of the river, a much greater feat. Joshua got the info about the people to be dispossessed from Moses. The verses in the OP have nothing to do with dispossessing these people, why is it so hard for you to see. Joshua was the one who made the statement about dispossessing these people, He was embellishing what God actually said.

Drich was correct in saying that the people did not take all God was giving them. They started off all wrong, they did not take all the lands God was going to give them, they stopped and settled down in the lands west of the Jordan except for a couple of small areas. If they had accepted what God was going to give them they would have conquered all the lands to the Euphrates, virtually eliminating all there enemies to this day. They payed a big price for not doing what God had planned for them.

[Darkstar]

The whole thing is about the river, not the conquering of the land, God did not tell Joshua of the peoples that would be dispossessed, do you see those names in the verses you gave, no, so why are you using it, those verses are repeating what Joshua already knew. God proved to the people He was with Joshua and the people by stopping the flow of the river, a much greater feat. Joshua got the info about the people to be dispossessed from Moses. The verses in the OP have nothing to do with dispossessing these people, why is it so hard for you to see. Joshua was the one who made the statement about dispossessing these people, He was embellishing what God actually said.

Drich was correct in saying that the people did not take all God was giving them. They started off all wrong, they did not take all the lands God was going to give them, they stopped and settled down in the lands west of the Jordan except for a couple of small areas. If they had accepted what God was going to give them they would have conquered all the lands to the Euphrates, virtually eliminating all there enemies to this day. They payed a big price for not doing what God had planned for them.

God actually said "I will give you every place where you set your foot", so how is Joshua bending the facts? God spends one sentence talking about the river, and then three talking about how the Israelites are going to conquer all of the places they go to. God may not have mentioned specific places, but he said "every place where you set your foot", so that is pretty all-encompassing. God also says "No one will be able to stand against you all the days of your life. As I was with Moses, so I will be with you; I will never leave you nor forsake you." and yet the iron chariots stood against them. Again, I am only referring to the part where god promised that they would conquer any place they went and no one could stand against them. The point of contradiction is that the iron chariots were indeed able to stand against them.

[Minimalist]

"Old tyre" is not there any more,

Yes it is, you pointed it out yourself in an earlier phase of trying to twist your balls into a pretzel to save your fucking bible from ridicule. And it has been built and rebuilt over the centuries in spite of what your fucking silly bible says in verse 14.

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.

Why is your 'god' such a loser that he needs a shmuck like you to explain his fuck-ups? Why does he have any fuck-ups at all? Shouldn't god have known what would happen and that Tyre would still be there for fucking jesus to visit?

How come you are such a jackass when confronted by obvious facts?