Freethought & Rationalism Archive

deadman_932 · 01-28-2008, 10:26 AM

Quote:

That's what Alexander did when he tossed the mainland city into the sea to create the land bridge to the island.

Straining words to support a failed prophecy is always amusing to me. Tyre IS the island, and is specifically referred to as the region of interest.

Amasis continued to rule after "Nebby" died...visiting the North Mediterranean to make a treaty with Croesus of Lydia (and returned) during the period that Egypt to be a wasteland. No break in the archaeology, no evidence of a 50-year period of uninhabitation for the Nile valley. None. Zero. Just a literalist wasteland of failed prophecies.

arnoldo · 01-28-2008, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by makerowner

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

FYI, Tyre is in the sea and on the mainland. Hawaii is part of the United States even though it's noted connected to the American Continent.

Even if the prophecy referred to the Tyrian kingdom as a whole, including the mainland, it would still apply to the island as well. The text of Ez. 26 clearly distinguishes between the mainland settlements and the island city, and claims that Nebuchadrezzar would destroy both:

"[7] "For thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I will bring upon Tyre from the north Nebuchadrez'zar king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, and with horsemen and a host of many soldiers.
[8] He will slay with the sword your daughters on the mainland; he will set up a siege wall against you, and throw up a mound against you, and raise a roof of shields against you." (emphasis added)

Notice the distinction between "your daughters on the mainland" (Ushu and any other mainland settlements) and "you" (Tyre).

"[9] He will direct the shock of his battering rams against your walls, and with his axes he will break down your towers.
[10] His horses will be so many that their dust will cover you; your walls will shake at the noise of the horsemen and wagons and chariots, when he enters your gates as one enters a city which has been breached.
[11] With the hoofs of his horses he will trample all your streets; he will slay your people with the sword; and your mighty pillars will fall to the ground.
[12] They will make a spoil of your riches and a prey of your merchandise; they will break down your walls and destroy your pleasant houses; your stones and timber and soil they will cast into the midst of the waters." (emphasis added)

Now remember that throughout this section 'you' refers to the island city as opposed to the mainland ("your daughters"). Did Nebuchadrezzar trample down all the streets of the island city? Did he break down its walls or cast its stones into the waters?

Obviously Alexander the Great destroyed the island city after he threw the old city into the sea to create the landbridge.

Darklighter · 01-28-2008, 11:10 AM

Wow sugar. I see you've gone from splitting hairs to splitting hair molecules. What you've been arguing for the last couple of pages makes NO DIFFERENCE! Ezekiels prophecy was against TYRE and HER DAUGHTERS ON THE MAINLAND. Meaning in Ezekiels mind they were two seperate entities. If Tyre's daughters are on the mainland, then where does that leave Tyre? Don't think too hard, but the answer is: ON THE ISLAND. Even if you're arguement is granted, the prophecy is still a failure, because TYRE is still there! No part of it (island or mainland) even remotely resembles a "BARE ROCK". 'Tyre' itself has always been the ISLAND. There is no evidence that states otherwise.

If part of the prophecy is reserved for the future, then what is God going to do about the significant Christian popualtion there? (The city itself has a "Christian Quarter" while Lebanon itself is 39% Christian.) Will he destroy them along with everyone else?

And then there's the Egypt prophecy... please stop avoiding that issue.

sugarhitman · 01-28-2008, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darklighter

Wow sugar. I see you've gone from splitting hairs to splitting hair molecules. What you've been arguing for the last couple of pages makes NO DIFFERENCE! Ezekiels prophecy was against TYRE and HER DAUGHTERS ON THE MAINLAND. Meaning in Ezekiels mind they were two seperate entities. If Tyre's daughters are on the mainland, then where does that leave Tyre? Don't think too hard, but the answer is: ON THE ISLAND. Even if you're arguement is granted, the prophecy is still a failure, because TYRE is still there! No part of it (island or mainland) even remotely resembles a "BARE ROCK". 'Tyre' itself has always been the ISLAND. There is no evidence that states otherwise.

If part of the prophecy is reserved for the future, then what is God going to do about the significant Christian popualtion there? (The city itself has a "Christian Quarter" while Lebanon itself is 39% Christian.) Will he destroy them along with everyone else?

And then there's the Egypt prophecy... please stop avoiding that issue.

Ilike how you guys use maniland instead of field. By using mainland you are trying to seperate the island from the mainland. Ezekiel said field that was out side the mainland city gates. Tyre and Old TyRE ARE THE SAME KINGDOM same city. And Nebby and the nations were only to diminish Tyre which they did by destroying the mainland. God makes it more than clear He will will bury the island under the sea. In ch 27 it says the inhabitants on the island will fall into the sea with it. This shows that the bringing the deep over Tyre has nothing to do with Alex laying the mainland city in the water. Two judgements two locations same city..Zek does not seperate the two. And by the way look at how many so called christians are in America, but yet this country rivals Sodom in immorality....being a christain means nothing....obeying God does. :wave:

deadman_932 · 01-28-2008, 11:55 AM

1. Tyre was not a bare rock, nor is it today. It has been continuously inhabited ( as shown by archaeology) since 1600 BCE.
2. Nebuchadrezzar did not conquer Egypt. The heart of Egypt is and always has been the fertile regions along the banks of the Nile that are subject to annual flooding and replenishment. Nebuchadrezzar never took that, nor was it laid waste for 40 years, nor were the Egyptians scattered among all nations.

Here's some modern images of Tyre, giving a full view of the situation:

That's the Island, now connected to the mainland by (1) Alexander's Mole, a "bridge" of rubble (but no one has shown it was the whole mainland city rubble...ever) and (2) Sand and silt.

Then we have these images:

Clearly, the island Tyre is not beneath the sea and not "uninhabited forver" nor has it ever BEEN uninhabited since 1600 BCE:

Joukowsky, Martha Sharp, ed. (1992). The Heritage of Tyre: Essays on the History, Archaeology, and Preservation of Tyre. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co.

Aubet, Maria Eugenia.(1997). The Phoenicians and the West : politics, colonies, and trade. New York : Cambridge University Press.

Lipinski, E., ed. Phoenicia and the Bible (1991) : Proceedings of the Conference Held at the University of Leuven on the 15th and 16th of March 1990. Leuven : Departement Orientalistiek : Peeters.

arnoldo · 01-28-2008, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darklighter

Wow sugar. I see you've gone from splitting hairs to splitting hair molecules. What you've been arguing for the last couple of pages makes NO DIFFERENCE! Ezekiels prophecy was against TYRE and HER DAUGHTERS ON THE MAINLAND. Meaning in Ezekiels mind they were two seperate entities. If Tyre's daughters are on the mainland, then where does that leave Tyre? Don't think too hard, but the answer is: ON THE ISLAND. Even if you're arguement is granted, the prophecy is still a failure, because TYRE is still there!.

Tyre is not there.

Quote:

The Columbia Encyclopedia, under its entry for Tyre, noted: “The principal ruins of the city today are those of buildings erected by the Crusaders. There are some Greco-Roman remains, but any left by the Phoenicians lie underneath the present town” (“Tyre,” 2006, emp. added).

Tyre failed to rebuild itself after it's destruction. Do you have historical proof that after Alexander the Great destroyed Tyre the phoenicians rebuilt it?

spin · 01-28-2008, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Ilike how you guys use maniland instead of field. By using mainland you are trying to seperate the island from the mainland.

Actually all our sources separate Tyre from Ushu. You can sing and dance and jump through hoops, but you can't fudge your way past that fact. Ushu is the name of the the city on the mainland. Tyre is the island. It's that simple. Ezekiel tells you that Tyre is the island, as it's in the midst of the sea.

So, you shut your eyes and pretend that fact hasn't been said, so now you're trying to cling to one meaning of $DH, ie "field", but there are three basic meanings of $DH,

"open field, country",
"field, portion of land", and
"land (as opposed to sea)"

and after talking about Tyre in the midst of the sea, we must assume that $DH takes the third meaning. *Poof* goes another shred of credibility.

spin

spin · 01-28-2008, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darklighter

Wow sugar. I see you've gone from splitting hairs to splitting hair molecules. What you've been arguing for the last couple of pages makes NO DIFFERENCE! Ezekiels prophecy was against TYRE and HER DAUGHTERS ON THE MAINLAND. Meaning in Ezekiels mind they were two seperate entities. If Tyre's daughters are on the mainland, then where does that leave Tyre? Don't think too hard, but the answer is: ON THE ISLAND. Even if you're arguement is granted, the prophecy is still a failure, because TYRE is still there!.

Tyre is not there.

Uh-huh. Is that a reasoned supported argument? Naaa.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

The Columbia Encyclopedia, under its entry for Tyre, noted: “The principal ruins of the city today are those of buildings erected by the Crusaders. There are some Greco-Roman remains, but any left by the Phoenicians lie underneath the present town” (“Tyre,” 2006, emp. added).

Tyre failed to rebuild itself after it's destruction. Do you have historical proof that after Alexander the Great destroyed Tyre the phoenicians rebuilt it?

Oh, so Tyre hasn't been rebuilt several times since Alexander? What are you really quibbling about here?

spin

xaxxat · 01-28-2008, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

And by the way look at how many so called christians are in America, but yet this country rivals Sodom in immorality....being a christain means nothing....obeying God does.

Funny how they always resort to preaching when their arguments are totally refuted...

:banghead:

sugarhitman · 01-28-2008, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Ilike how you guys use maniland instead of field. By using mainland you are trying to seperate the island from the mainland.

Actually all our sources separate Tyre from Ushu. You can sing and dance and jump through hoops, but you can't fudge your way past that fact. Ushu is the name of the the city on the mainland. Tyre is the island. It's that simple. Ezekiel tells you that Tyre is the island, as it's in the midst of the sea.

So, you shut your eyes and pretend that fact hasn't been said, so now you're trying to cling to one meaning of $DH, ie "field", but there are three basic meanings of $DH,

"open field, country",
"field, portion of land", and
"land (as opposed to sea)"

and after talking about Tyre in the midst of the sea, we must assume that $DH takes the third meaning. *Poof* goes another shred of credibility.

spin

"We must assume" In other words you are not sure. :wave:

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

01-28-2008, 11:10 AM	#373
Darklighter Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Pale Blue Dot Posts: 463	Wow sugar. I see you've gone from splitting hairs to splitting hair molecules. What you've been arguing for the last couple of pages makes NO DIFFERENCE! Ezekiels prophecy was against TYRE *and* HER DAUGHTERS ON THE MAINLAND. Meaning in Ezekiels mind they were two seperate entities. If Tyre's daughters are on the mainland, then where does that leave Tyre? Don't think too hard, but the answer is: ON THE ISLAND. Even if you're arguement is granted, the prophecy is still a failure, because TYRE is still there! No part of it (island or mainland) even remotely resembles a "BARE ROCK". 'Tyre' itself has always been the ISLAND. There is no evidence that states otherwise. If part of the prophecy is reserved for the future, then what is God going to do about the significant Christian popualtion there? (The city itself has a "Christian Quarter" while Lebanon itself is 39% Christian.) Will he destroy them along with everyone else? And then there's the Egypt prophecy... please stop avoiding that issue.

01-28-2008, 11:55 AM	#375
deadman_932 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Altadena, California Posts: 3,271	1. Tyre was not a bare rock, nor is it today. It has been continuously inhabited ( as shown by archaeology) since 1600 BCE. 2. Nebuchadrezzar did not conquer Egypt. The heart of Egypt is and always has been the fertile regions along the banks of the Nile that are subject to annual flooding and replenishment. Nebuchadrezzar never took that, nor was it laid waste for 40 years, nor were the Egyptians scattered among all nations. Here's some modern images of Tyre, giving a full view of the situation: That's the Island, now connected to the mainland by (1) Alexander's Mole, a "bridge" of rubble (but no one has shown it was the whole mainland city rubble...ever) and (2) Sand and silt. Then we have these images: Clearly, the island Tyre is not beneath the sea and not "uninhabited forver" nor has it ever BEEN uninhabited since 1600 BCE: Joukowsky, Martha Sharp, ed. (1992). The Heritage of Tyre: Essays on the History, Archaeology, and Preservation of Tyre. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co. Aubet, Maria Eugenia.(1997). The Phoenicians and the West : politics, colonies, and trade. New York : Cambridge University Press. Lipinski, E., ed. Phoenicia and the Bible (1991) : Proceedings of the Conference Held at the University of Leuven on the 15th and 16th of March 1990. Leuven : Departement Orientalistiek : Peeters.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.