Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Jack the Bodiless · 12-12-2007, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Now I am being accused of word playing when I bring up a good arguement such as that some historians has Nebuchadnezzar attacking Island Tyre. Again I ask, how did he do it? How could he have reached the island with a land based army? History it seems is silent about this, why? is it because Nebby layed seige to a mainland city? Which would no doubt prove Ezekiel's prophecy. I repeat can any of you cite or direct me to your source which details the attack of island Tyre by Babylon. And dont just brush me off with accusations such as me engageing in word play. This is a good question that deserves an answer. If alex coudnt attack the island without the causeway, how did Nebby do it without a causeway....and without ships? Please explain.

Your argument doesn't seem very coherent here. You're coming up with reasons why Nebby would not succeed: but history records that he DIDN'T succeed!

Ezekiel explains what he expected Nebby to do: "...build up a mound against thee" (i.e. move dirt) - which is basically what Alex later did. But the walls of the island fortress of Tyre were 150 feet high! Hence, Nebby didn't bother to try, and attempted a siege instead. Later, Alex didn't repeat Nebby's error, and actually built a causeway (and presumably hacked a hole in the wall, or used siege towers).

BTW, Alexander didn't destroy Tyre either. He did a lot of damage and killed a lot of people, but the city recovered. It even regained its independence.

Also, Ezekiel confirms that Nebby was a king of "many nations" in Ezekiel 26:7, describing him as "king of kings" (i.e. an overking, a ruler over many kingdoms).

Johnny Skeptic · 12-12-2007, 05:39 AM

Message to sugarhitman: Why didn't Ezekiel mention Alexander? Wouldn't that have been helpful?

If God wanted to convince people that he can predict the future, couldn't he easily prove that to everyone's satisfaction?

renassault · 12-12-2007, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Message to sugarhitman: Why didn't Ezekiel mention Alexander? Wouldn't that have been helpful?

If God wanted to convince people that he can predict the future, couldn't he easily prove that to everyone's satisfaction?

It would have only been pointed out that it was written after 323 BC and it wouldn't have proved squat, much like the prophecy of the destruction of the Temple.

Quote:

Originally Posted by makerowner

You can call it what you want, but the plain reading (ie. the one supported by the text) is that Nebuchadnezzar was supposed to destroy Tyre, both on the island and the mainland, and that the sea was supposed to cover the island. Alexander is not mentioned, nor is a two-hundred year delay.

Again, that's not necessary.

Quote:

Ezekiel was most likely written during the Babylonian Exile, so I would say that the return to Palestine was a pretty significant shift. These centuries also saw the adoption of Aramaic as the everyday language throughout the Near/Middle East, including Judea, and saw several hundred years of Hellenisation in that same area. All these factors would be likely to have an effect on the language. Beside all that, the Gospels were written in Greek, which is completely unrelated to Hebrew. And your parallel isn't even very good: Jesus says that a piece of bread is his body vs. you read into a text that Alexander was a successor to Nebuchadnezzar (something the text never says).
I believe it's called "clutching at straws".

The same literary device is found in Ezekiel 5.16, and especially Ezekiel 7 with its prediction that this is the End. (Note one example, 7.13, "not one of them will preserve his life," yet earlier despite all that survivors are pictured).

renassault · 12-12-2007, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

BTW, Alexander didn't destroy Tyre either. He did a lot of damage and killed a lot of people, but the city recovered. It even regained its independence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Story of the Greatest Nations and the World's Famous Events, Vol. 1

Then came the days of Mahometan conquest and of the European crusade against these "infidel" possessors of the Holy Land. Tyre, the port of all this region, was besieged by Saracens and Crusaders in turn. More than once it was captured; for it was no longer an island inaccessible to foes. The Turks finally became masters of all this land of "Asiatic Turkey" in the sixteenth century. To their barbaric robbery and neglect has been due the final downfall of the Phoenician cities. Says the historian Kendrick, "Neither sieges nor earthquakes have done so much as Turkish oppression and misrule to make Tyre what the traveler now sees," in the words of the Bible, "a rock for fishermen to spread their nets on."

Quote:

Also, Ezekiel confirms that Nebby was a king of "many nations" in Ezekiel 26:7, describing him as "king of kings" (i.e. an overking, a ruler over many kingdoms).

The many nations does not denote a multinational army, but as it is described: a consecutive attack of armies like the consecutive waves of the sea.

makerowner · 12-12-2007, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renassault

Quote:

Ezekiel was most likely written during the Babylonian Exile, so I would say that the return to Palestine was a pretty significant shift. These centuries also saw the adoption of Aramaic as the everyday language throughout the Near/Middle East, including Judea, and saw several hundred years of Hellenisation in that same area. All these factors would be likely to have an effect on the language. Beside all that, the Gospels were written in Greek, which is completely unrelated to Hebrew. And your parallel isn't even very good: Jesus says that a piece of bread is his body vs. you read into a text that Alexander was a successor to Nebuchadnezzar (something the text never says).
I believe it's called "clutching at straws".

The same literary device is found in Ezekiel 5.16, and especially Ezekiel 7 with its prediction that this is the End. (Note one example, 7.13, "not one of them will preserve his life," yet earlier despite all that survivors are pictured).

I don't see the connection, and the phrase you cite doesn't occur in Ezekiel, or anywhere else that I could find:

Quote:

[Ez. 5:16] When I shall send upon them the evil arrows of famine, which shall be for their destruction, and which I will send to destroy you: and I will increase the famine upon you, and will break your staff of bread:

Quote:

[Ez. 7:13]For the seller shall not return to that which is sold, although they were yet alive: for the vision is touching the whole multitude thereof, which shall not return; neither shall any strengthen himself in the iniquity of his life.

Sheshonq · 12-12-2007, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renassault

The many nations does not denote a multinational army, but as it is described: a consecutive attack of armies like the consecutive waves of the sea.

Incorrect.

Consecutive attacks by other armies cannot be supported by the text, because the destruction is attributed to Nebuchadnezzar and his armies.

The composition of the Babylonian army was a multinational one, composed of tribute armies from vassal states as well as powers allied with Babylon.

Your source sounds very old, and misses the target on Tyre's actual history. Try a competent history book instead.

sugarhitman · 12-12-2007, 12:14 PM

This question is causing a little problem for the skeptics. Recently after I posted this question a critic referred me to some previous threads concerning Tyre. I came upon Lee's thread and one of the critcs he was debating with said that Nebuchadnezzar used a narrow causeway that the Tyrians had builded to link Old Tyre (The mother city of the two Tyres) to New Tyre. I looked this up but nowhere does any historian or history has Nebuchadnezzar using a causeway to reach island Tyre. The source this critc used was a Michael Haag. Sounds familier? Yes he is one of the authors of that bizaar and crazy psuedo historical book The Di Vinci Code. For someone who believes in this myth like Jesus having children and marrying Mary Magdelene? It would be no small thing to go against true historical accounts and make things up. This idea (or lie) that Nebu used a causeway to reach the island is a desperate attempt to explain how Nebu seiged island Tyre with a land based army. Ive noticed that those historians who says Nebu seiged the island are silent about how it was done. It wasnt done. There is no way Nebu could have traveled across 20 foot deep water with chariots and horses and seige engines without ships or a bridge two things he did not have. Nebu is predicted by Ezekiel to seige Old Tyre not the island. Michael Haag says there was a causeway what is his source? Micheal Haag said Jesus got married and had children yeah? what is his source?....oh yeah from pseudo historical writings. I repeat can any of you qoute a RESPECTED HISTORIAN who says that there was a causeway built by the Tyrians linking the island with the mainland? Can any of you give any DETAIL how Nebby laid seige to island Tyre? I'm waiting.

sugarhitman · 12-12-2007, 12:52 PM

To Johnny Skeptic: "The ram which you saw having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the GREAT HORN that is between his eyes is THE FIRST KING. now that (the horn) being broken whereas FOUR STOOD UP FOR IT, FOUR KINGDOMS SHALL STAND UP (OR RISE) OUT OF THE NATION, BUT NOT IN HIS (THE FIRST KING OF THE GRECIAN EMPIRE) POWER. Daniel ch.8 "Behold there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth....shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia. And a mighty king shall stand up (out of Greece) that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will. And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken (divided) toward the four winds of heaven (east west north south) and not to his posterity (seed). ch.11 "Therefore the goat (Greece) became very great, and when he was strong the GREAT HORN (King of Greece) was broken (death) and in its place came up four notable ones towards the four winds of heaven." ch. 8. There is no need to say his name for you already know who this is....dont you Johnny? We can know who a person is simply by what he does or details of his life.

makerowner · 12-12-2007, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

To Johnny Skeptic: "The ram which you saw having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the GREAT HORN that is between his eyes is THE FIRST KING. now that (the horn) being broken whereas FOUR STOOD UP FOR IT, FOUR KINGDOMS SHALL STAND UP (OR RISE) OUT OF THE NATION, BUT NOT IN HIS (THE FIRST KING OF THE GRECIAN EMPIRE) POWER. Daniel ch.8 "Behold there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth....shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia. And a mighty king shall stand up (out of Greece) that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will. And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken (divided) toward the four winds of heaven (east west north south) and not to his posterity (seed). ch.11 "Therefore the goat (Greece) became very great, and when he was strong the GREAT HORN (King of Greece) was broken (death) and in its place came up four notable ones towards the four winds of heaven." ch. 8. There is no need to say his name for you already know who this is....dont you Johnny? We can know who a person is simply by what he does or details of his life.

The Book of Daniel is dated to 167-164 BC. This 'prophecy' was written more than a hundred years after the fact.

makerowner · 12-12-2007, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

This question is causing a little problem for the skeptics. Recently after I posted this question a critic referred me to some previous threads concerning Tyre. I came upon Lee's thread and one of the critcs he was debating with said that Nebuchadnezzar used a narrow causeway that the Tyrians had builded to link Old Tyre (The mother city of the two Tyres) to New Tyre. I looked this up but nowhere does any historian or history has Nebuchadnezzar using a causeway to reach island Tyre. The source this critc used was a Michael Haag. Sounds familier? Yes he is one of the authors of that bizaar and crazy psuedo historical book The Di Vinci Code. For someone who believes in this myth like Jesus having children and marrying Mary Magdelene? It would be no small thing to go against true historical accounts and make things up. This idea (or lie) that Nebu used a causeway to reach the island is a desperate attempt to explain how Nebu seiged island Tyre with a land based army. Ive noticed that those historians who says Nebu seiged the island are silent about how it was done. It wasnt done. There is no way Nebu could have traveled across 20 foot deep water with chariots and horses and seige engines without ships or a bridge two things he did not have. Nebu is predicted by Ezekiel to seige Old Tyre not the island. Michael Haag says there was a causeway what is his source? Micheal Haag said Jesus got married and had children yeah? what is his source?....oh yeah from pseudo historical writings. I repeat can any of you qoute a RESPECTED HISTORIAN who says that there was a causeway built by the Tyrians linking the island with the mainland? Can any of you give any DETAIL how Nebby laid seige to island Tyre? I'm waiting.

You're just digging yourself in deeper. If Nebuchadnezzar didn't destroy the island city, he didn't fulfill the prophecy:

Quote:

[8] He shall slay with the sword thy daughters in the field: and he shall make a fort against thee, and cast a mount against thee, and lift up the buckler against thee.
[9] And he shall set engines of war against thy walls, and with his axes he shall break down thy towers.

(emphasis added)

Note that "thy daughters in the field" (the mainland city) is distinguished from "thee" (the island city). The prophecy says that BOTH WOULD BE DESTROYED, by Nebuchadnezzar. You've just admitted that Nebuchadnezzar didn't destroy the island city, therefore the prophecy fails.
I think that's called "shooting yourself in the foot".

12-12-2007, 12:14 PM	#117
sugarhitman Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: georgia Posts: 2,726	So how did Nebuchadnezzar seige island Tyre? This question is causing a little problem for the skeptics. Recently after I posted this question a critic referred me to some previous threads concerning Tyre. I came upon Lee's thread and one of the critcs he was debating with said that Nebuchadnezzar used a narrow causeway that the Tyrians had builded to link Old Tyre (The mother city of the two Tyres) to New Tyre. I looked this up but nowhere does any historian or history has Nebuchadnezzar using a causeway to reach island Tyre. The source this critc used was a Michael Haag. Sounds familier? Yes he is one of the authors of that bizaar and crazy psuedo historical book The Di Vinci Code. For someone who believes in this myth like Jesus having children and marrying Mary Magdelene? It would be no small thing to go against true historical accounts and make things up. This idea (or lie) that Nebu used a causeway to reach the island is a desperate attempt to explain how Nebu seiged island Tyre with a land based army. Ive noticed that those historians who says Nebu seiged the island are silent about how it was done. It wasnt done. There is no way Nebu could have traveled across 20 foot deep water with chariots and horses and seige engines without ships or a bridge two things he did not have. Nebu is predicted by Ezekiel to seige Old Tyre not the island. Michael Haag says there was a causeway what is his source? Micheal Haag said Jesus got married and had children yeah? what is his source?....oh yeah from pseudo historical writings. I repeat can any of you qoute a RESPECTED HISTORIAN who says that there was a causeway built by the Tyrians linking the island with the mainland? Can any of you give any DETAIL how Nebby laid seige to island Tyre? I'm waiting.

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

12-12-2007, 05:39 AM	#112
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	Message to sugarhitman: Why didn't Ezekiel mention Alexander? Wouldn't that have been helpful? If God wanted to convince people that he can predict the future, couldn't he easily prove that to everyone's satisfaction?

12-12-2007, 12:52 PM	#118
sugarhitman Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: georgia Posts: 2,726	To Johnny Skeptic: "The ram which you saw having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the GREAT HORN that is between his eyes is THE FIRST KING. now that (the horn) being broken whereas FOUR STOOD UP FOR IT, FOUR KINGDOMS SHALL STAND UP (OR RISE) OUT OF THE NATION, BUT NOT IN HIS (THE FIRST KING OF THE GRECIAN EMPIRE) POWER. Daniel ch.8 "Behold there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth....shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia. And a mighty king shall stand up (out of Greece) that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will. And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken (divided) toward the four winds of heaven (east west north south) and not to his posterity (seed). ch.11 "Therefore the goat (Greece) became very great, and when he was strong the GREAT HORN (King of Greece) was broken (death) and in its place came up four notable ones towards the four winds of heaven." ch. 8. There is no need to say his name for you already know who this is....dont you Johnny? We can know who a person is simply by what he does or details of his life.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.