Egypt was never desolated for 40 years. This is an overwhelming proof that he who inspired Ezekiel's prophecies was deceiving him.
Misleading explanation for the fulfillment of the Prophecy against Tyre
by opusdei1972 18 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
opusdei1972
As Bart Belteshassur pointed out, Ezekiel proclaimed that Egypt would be desolated for 40 years:
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.” 13 “‘For this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says: “After 40 years I will gather back the Egyptians from the peoples where they were scattered; (Ezekiel 29:11-13)
However, it never happened. But the Watchtower Society, the champion of fraud and deception, gives the following misleading defense:
At Ezekiel 29:1-16 a desolation of Egypt is foretold, due to last 40 years. This may have come after Nebuchadnezzar’s conquest of Egypt . While some commentaries refer to the reign of Amasis (Ahmose) II, the successor of Hophra, as exceedingly prosperous during more than 40 years, they do so primarily on the testimony of Herodotus, who visited Egypt over a hundred years later. But as the Encyclopædia Britannica (1959, Vol. 8, p. 62) comments on Herodotus’ history of this period (the “Saitic Period”): “His statements prove not entirely reliable when they can be checked by the scanty native evidence.” The Bible Commentary by F. C. Cook, after noting that Herodotus even fails to mention Nebuchadnezzar’s attack on Egypt , says: “It is notorious that Herodotus, while he faithfully recorded all that he heard and saw in Egypt , was indebted for his information on past history to the Egyptian priests, whose tales he adopted with blind credulity. . . . The whole story [by Herodotus] of Apries [Hophra] and Amasis is mixed with so much that is inconsistent and legendary that we may very well hesitate to adopt it as authentic history. It is by no means strange that the priests should endeavour to disguise the national dishonour of having been subjected to a foreign yoke.” (Note B., p. 132) Hence, while secular history provides no clear evidence of the prophecy’s fulfillment, we may be confident of the accuracy of the Bible record. (Insight, Egypt, pp. 686-699)
So, though the Society tries to undermine Herodotus' reliability, Leolaia provided us all the records found of Amasis' reign, which is an overwhelming proof that Nebuchadnezzar could not desolate Egypt:
-
Perry
Wikipedia says that Nebuchadnezzer did invade Egypt:
"Nebuchadnezzar then goes on to attack Egypt. After releasing Jeremiah from prison, the remaining Israelites apologized to Jeremiah but still do not listen to him when he tells them to stay in Jerusalem. They instead flee to Egypt, where the king takes them in even after Nebuchadnezzar has asked that they be returned. Nebuchadnezzar then conquers Egypt and moves further north in Africa before returning home with treasures and hoards of slaves."
-
opusdei1972
Perry: The Babylonians led by Nebuchadnezzar defeated the Egyptians but did not conquer Egypt. The refererence quoted by Wikipedia is from the book "Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon" (Wiseman, 1983). I did not get that book, but I would like to read in it what is the proof for that assertion. As far as I know there is no such a proof. Nebuchadnezzar, as a king, fought against two egyptian kings, namely, Hophra (589 - 570 BCE) and Amasis II (570-526 BCE). Before Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem in 587 BCE, Hophra went against him to help the king of Judah, Zedekiah. Hophra and his army were defeated by Nebuchadnezzar but not conquered by him, because Hophra could went back to Egypt as Jeremiah said:
5 Pharaoh’s army had marched out of Egypt, and when the Babylonians who were besieging Jerusalem heard the report about them, they withdrew from Jerusalem. 6 Then the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet: 7 “This is what the Lord , the God of Israel, says: Tell the king of Judah, who sent you to inquire of me, ‘Pharaoh’s army, which has marched out to support you, will go back to its own land, to Egypt. 8 Then the Babylonians will return and attack this city; they will capture it and burn it down.’ (Jeremiah 37:5-8)
Then, Amasis II overthrew Hophra and became king of Egypt, so Hophra had to flee to other country. Then Hophra got the help of Babylon to recover his reign but he was killed by Amasis' army in 567 BCE. Also, there is a babylonian tablet (BM33041) of the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar, which seems to be 568 BCE, where it is narrated the battle between Amasis and Nebuchadnezzar. Nevertheless, due to the damage of some portions of the tablet we can't know for sure the result. At worse, Amasis lost the battle and went back to Egypt, but Nebuchadnezzar could not conquer the land of Egypt, because Amasis continued reigning until 526 BCE, whereas Nebuchadnezzar died in 562 BCE, six years after that battle. So, the land of Egypt was not desolated by Nebuchadnezzar, nor the 40 years could be fulfilled during Nebuchadnezzar reign.
-
Perry
A clay tablet, now in the British Museum , bears the following inscription: "In the thirty-seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar, king of the country of Babylon, he went to Egypt [Misr] to make war. Amasis, king of Egypt, collected [his army], and marched and spread abroad."
Another Source:
forty years —answering to the forty years in which the Israelites, their former bondsmen, wandered in "the wilderness" (compare Note, see on Eze 29:5 ). Jerome remarks the number forty is one often connected with affliction and judgment. The rains of the flood in forty days brought destruction on the world. Moses, Elias, and the Saviour fasted forty days. The interval between Egypt's overthrow by Nebuchadnezzar and the deliverance by Cyrus, was about forty years. The ideal forty years' wilderness state of social and political degradation, rather than a literal non-passing of man or beast for that term, is mainly intended (so Eze 4:6 ; Isa 19:2 , 11 ).
-
opusdei1972
As I see, the tablet (BM33041) does not say where the battle was, and as I said, at worse, Amasis lost the battle and went back to Egypt. But as the many records of the activity of the Amasis' reign reveal, "the land of Egypt" (read Ezekiel 29:20) was not given to Nebuchadnezzar nor to his sucessor. Furthermore, the 40 years of desolation of the land and of the egyptian exodus, were intended to be taken literally:
13 Further, thus says the Lord God : At the end of forty years I will gather the Egyptians from the peoples among whom they were scattered; 14 and I will restore the fortunes of Egypt, and bring them back to the land of Pathros, the land of their origin; and there they shall be a lowly kingdom. (Ezekiel 29:13-14)
otherwise, the above words would not make sense.
-
Crazyguy
Didn't the prophecy against Babylon also say it would be destroyed? Because it was not it survived for centuries and finally after a few rebellions the inhabitants were relocated and the city abandoned but never destroyed.
-
Vidiot
opusdei1972 - "Who deceived him? Aliens? No one knows."
-
