Freethought & Rationalism Archive

dongiovanni1976x · 06-02-2006, 06:11 AM

Quote:

Don: Please tell me what it is you want to argue and what sources you actaully believe...
Lee: Is my position here unclear? I am arguing the island fortress sank

And by Island fortress you mean Ancient Tyre, the Phoenician city founded upon a chain of rock-like islands connected by King Hiram, which includes the Island of Hercules and the main island where the religious and administrative centers were located for the Tyrian kingdom.
In addition to this you are arguing that it did not sink and resurface, but rather sank and is still under water in a unknown location as prophesied.
If I am incorrect here please let me know.

bfniii · 06-02-2006, 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dongiovanni1976x

If you are asking for evidence that this prophecy was made DURING the 13 year siege I have just as much as you do that it was PRIOR to its beginning. Regardless, my point was to establish the highly probable fact that this prophecy was made BEFORE the events which are forecasted- score one for the Bible.

understood. thank you for the clarification

Quote:

Originally Posted by dongiovanni1976x

You can skirt this issue anyway you like but the fact remains that the prophecy WAS directed against the CITY of TYRE.

skirt? i go to the trouble of specficially addressing the issue head on, in detail, even citing the original language and this is your response?

Quote:

Originally Posted by dongiovanni1976x

The prophecy is directed against the city of Tyre and its people. Its walls, towers and houses would be scrapped away and cast into the sea, its people would be slaughtered- even those daughter towns (i.e. suburb areas under the protection of the Tyrian throne such as Ushu), its riches would be plundered, the city would be laid waste and lost forever.

my response was part of an effort to show how your response does not represent the prophecy in it's entirety. you are correct that there are parts that refer to the physical destruction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dongiovanni1976x

For the prophecy to be fulfilled, the city of Tyre, which means the portion that contains the religious and administrative centers and palace of the king of the “greedy” Tyrians who gloated at Jerusalem’s fall (see Ez 26:2), must be submerged except for a bare rock jutting out in the midst of the sea…a place that fisherman will unbeknowingly lay fishnets upon to dry, be uninhabited, never rebuilt and lost forever.

this is incorrect. i addressed it specifically in post #307.

dongiovanni1976x · 06-02-2006, 07:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bfniii post #307

bfniii: in verse 2, God refers to tyre as a common, not a place, just as in the reference to jerusalem. "tyre has said". places don't "say" anything. groups of people do. in verse 6, "they shall know that". if He were referring to the place, He would say "it". verse 7 claims "against tyre". the language implies that an attack would come against a people, not a place. an enemy isn't against a city. in verse 15, which picks up the word against the nation, God says "sound of your fall". the word used means "overthrow". a place isn't overthrown, a seat of power is. the lamentation in verse 17 uses the word "perished". the original word means perish, die, be exterminated, kill, put to death. those words don't refer to a place. in verse 20 God says He will "bring you down with those". the word "those" refers to a nation or people, not a place.

the prophecy wasn't totally about the physical damage to the city

Quote:

Don: For the prophecy to be fulfilled, the city of Tyre, which means the portion that contains the religious and administrative centers and palace of the king of the “greedy” Tyrians who gloated at Jerusalem’s fall (see Ez 26:2), must be submerged except for a bare rock jutting out in the midst of the sea…a place that fisherman will unbeknowingly lay fishnets upon to dry, be uninhabited, never rebuilt and lost forever.

Bfniii: this is incorrect. i addressed it specifically in post #307.

Bfniii, when God says,

Quote:

Originally Posted by God

When I make you (Tyre) a city laid waste, like cities that are not inhabited, when I bring up the deep over you, and the great waters cover you…Ez 26:19 NRSV

Why do you assume God is not talking about the city of Tyre. He even compares Tyre’s destruction to other cities laid waste to give a clear picture of what is going to happen to them.

Quote:

Don: You can skirt this issue anyway you like but the fact remains that the prophecy WAS directed against the CITY of TYRE.

Bfniii: skirt? i go to the trouble of specficially addressing the issue head on, in detail, even citing the original language and this is your response?

Yes, that is my response. The great troubles you went through have no bearing on the clear fact that the prophesy was directed against a city with walls, streets, houses, plunder etc…that would be made like uninhabited cities laid waste etc etc.

Quote:

Don: The prophecy is directed against the city of Tyre and its people. Its walls, towers and houses would be scrapped away and cast into the sea, its people would be slaughtered- even those daughter towns (i.e. suburb areas under the protection of the Tyrian throne such as Ushu), its riches would be plundered, the city would be laid waste and lost forever.

Bfniii: my response was part of an effort to show how your response does not represent the prophecy in it's entirety. you are correct that there are parts that refer to the physical destruction.

So what was supposed to happen to Tyre in your opinion?

Were the Tyrians to be slaughtered? (v. 8, 19-21)?
Were the walls of Tyre to be destroyed (v.4)?
Was Tyre to be made into a Bare rock (v. 14)?
Was Tyre to never be rebuilt (v. 14)?
Was Tyre to be submerged under the sea (v. 19, 20)?
Was Tyre to be brought to a dreadful end lost for all posterity (v. 21)?
Was Tyre to vanish from the sea (v. 17) never to be found again (v. 21)?

Jack the Bodiless · 06-02-2006, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bfniii

skirt? i go to the trouble of specficially addressing the issue head on, in detail, even citing the original language and this is your response?

You believe that the original language of the Book of Ezekiel is... English?

I see no Hebrew in your post.

Jack the Bodiless · 06-02-2006, 08:10 AM

BTW: bfniii, repeating an already-refuted spiel won't make it any better the second time around.

...Or, in this case, the third time around.

From the first time:

Quote:

in verse 2, God refers to tyre as a common not a place just as in the reference to jerusalem. "tyre has said". places don't "say" anything. groups of people do. in verse 6, "they shall know that". if He were referring to the place, He would say "it". verse 7 claims "against tyre". the language implies that an attack would come against a people, not a place. an enemy isn't against a city. in verse 15, which picks up the word against the nation, God says sound of your fall. the word used is Mappeleth which means overthrow. a place isn't overthrown, a seat of power is. the lamentation in verse 17 uses the word "perished". the original word is 'abad which means perish, die, be exterminated, kill, put to death. those words don't refer to a place. in verse 20 God says He will "bring you down with those". the word "those" is `am which means nation or people. that obviously doesn't refer to a place.

the word figurative doesn't really apply to this prophecy. ezekiel was literally talking about the nation of tyre. i realize you disagree, but obviously i have provided reasons to support that view.

No, you haven't. At the time, Nebuchadnezzar was about to attempt the "overthrow" of Tyre by conquering it. He failed.

From the second time:

Quote:

in verse 2, God refers to tyre as a common not a place just as in the reference to jerusalem... (etc etc etc).

Yes, "Tyre" could refer to either the physical city or the population. We have exactly the same usage in English: when historians say that "Japan surrendered" at the end of WW2, they're not saying that the physical island chain surrendered: geological formations don't surrender.

But I will again note your failure to meet my challenge. Perhaps I should make it clearer: PROVIDE a rewrite of Ezekiel 26:7-11, with "you" replaced, and see if it makes sense.

"You" has daughter villages, walls, towers, gates, streets.

Of course, you never did.

dongiovanni1976x · 06-02-2006, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Merrill’s favorite source of info, Tourist sites

Sour or as the Greeks called it ‘Tyre’ offers two impressive sites dating back to the Phoenician, Greek, Roman, Byzantine and crusader periods. The ‘bass’ site contains one of the largest hippodromes existing from the Roman period and a very big necropolis amongst other vestiges. The other site ‘the imperial city’, by the sea-side, has a very beautiful mosaic and marble Roman alley, an arena for two thousand people, baths, and remains of the Phoenician wall of the city.

Looks like I don’t need to send them my information. But if you are still interested in what they think about this wall feel free to give thm a buzz yourself.

Quote:

For more information call us at 961 (0) 1 749 082 or 33 (0) 6 30 69 28 47 .

Tourist website

dongiovanni1976x · 06-02-2006, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

PROVIDE a rewrite of Ezekiel 26:7-11, with "you" replaced, and see if it makes sense.

"You" has daughter villages, walls, towers, gates, streets.

This should be a requirement everytime we have this disscussion. Invariably it is the lack of such clarity that allows this discussion to lethargically stroll along as long as it does. And for some people the fact that they can keep it limping along provides enough comfort to them to maintain a belief that the Bible's integrity, insofar as from an inerrantists position, remains unblemished.

dongiovanni1976x · 06-02-2006, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Quote:
Don: Shalmaneser V “placed guards at the river (Litani) and the aqueducts to prevent the Tyrians from drawing water, and this they endured for five years, and drank from wells which they had dug.” (ibid, 287)

Lee: Where, may I ask, are you going to find fresh water in a well on an island fort out in the ocean? This besieging the island still has no prima facie case, in my opinion.

Lee, the difficulty in getting drinking water in this fashion contributed to the pressure upon the Tyrian's to negotiate with Nebuchadnezzar II just like they did with Shalmaneser V, Esarshaddon, Sennacherib and Ashurbanipal before him. What is your opinion based upon? We have at least four sieges PRIOR to Nebuchadnezzar where the Tyrians decided it was in their best interests to negotiate rather rather than try to maintain their over-crowded thirsty city.

You can simply disagree with history (ANET, Josephus, Meander etal) but your unsupported opinion will not garner any credibility as a result.

bfniii · 06-02-2006, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dongiovanni1976x

Why do you assume God is not talking about the city of Tyre. He even compares Tyre’s destruction to other cities laid waste to give a clear picture of what is going to happen to them.

after alexander was done, tyre was apparently rubble, both on the mainland and on the island. then God goes on to use the word "like" which seems to indicate that the passage may be metaphorical. notice verse 20, lots of metaphor there. the "you" is not referring to the physical city, just as "with those" does not either. the text says "desolate city" which certainly doesn't have to refer only to the city physically, especially in the metaphorical context of the surrounding verses.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dongiovanni1976x

Yes, that is my response. The great troubles you went through have no bearing on the clear fact that the prophesy was directed against a city with walls, streets, houses, plunder etc…that would be made like uninhabited cities laid waste etc etc.

ok. still no substantive response from you. since you don't have a reply to my post, we can just drop it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dongiovanni1976x

So what was supposed to happen to Tyre in your opinion?

Were the Tyrians to be slaughtered? (v. 8, 19-21)? Were the walls of Tyre to be destroyed (v.4)? Was Tyre to be made into a Bare rock (v. 14)? Was Tyre to never be rebuilt (v. 14)? Was Tyre to be submerged under the sea (v. 19, 20)? Was Tyre to be brought to a dreadful end lost for all posterity (v. 21)? Was Tyre to vanish from the sea (v. 17) never to be found again (v. 21)?

yes to all

bfniii · 06-02-2006, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

You believe that the original language of the Book of Ezekiel is... English?

I see no Hebrew in your post.

post #307. perhaps you missed it

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.