lee_merrill

Hi Noah,

Well, for the first point, Neb was to "ravage the settlements on the mainland," and "many nations" were said to destroy Tyre, so we need not insist that Neb must do all that is described here.

For the second and third points, if the island is underwater, then we have this part fulfilled.

Not for his defeat, but for his lack of reward, could it be that many (most?) people on the mainland fled to the island, and took their treasures with them? For example, this quote:

"Early in the sixth century B.C. Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, laid siege to the walled city for thirteen years. Tyre stood firm, but it is probable that at this time the residents of the mainland city abandoned it for the safety of the island."

If they left the mainland city it was quite possibly not so inhabitable any more, so this could indicate Neb did more than just a social visit. Or here: "From its fortified island bastion, Tyre repulsed several major assaults, including a 13-year siege by Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II in the 6th century bc." (MSN Encarta).

This allows that Neb took the mainland city, if the repulse was from the island, and the people fled to the island, leaving Neb holding the proverbial bag.

I can't find my satellite pictures of Tyre! And Google doesn't bring them up, either. But as I recall, the tip is not round, but more square, could you post a link to the image?

Yes, but that could be the causeway and the mainland city. Parts of Tyre are indeed underwater, we see … Phoenician ruins there! And no building projects in that location…

But the existence of such ruins underwater, and not (apparently) above ground, seems to make this conclusion that the island sank, more probable, I would say.

Well, the one tourism web site I could find mentions only a cemetery, which is not really ruins at all.

Not with reference to the island fortress, which seems to be what was implied in "a bare rock," for the island was basically a rock above water. Which allows the mainland part of Tyre to be rebuilt, without overturning the prophecy.

It's many nations, though, here:

Ezekiel 26:3-5 I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves. They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers; I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock. Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets.

Um, I'm Tyred, it's the pumpkin hour…

Regards,
Lee

noah

Thank you for your response.

1) The mainland part of Tyre was a suburb. The island was the city of Tyre proper. That's why they made it a fortress.
This guy maintains a page devoted to the siege of Tyre (and Gaza): http://joseph_berrigan.tripod.com/id34.html
Here's someone else's page devoted to Tyre:http://historic-cities.huji.ac.il/le...#brief_history
Here's an Encyclopedia Brittanica picture of the ruins of ancient Tyre:http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?tocId=9074016
This architect plans to build on Tyre:http://www.pierreelkhoury.com/newprojects.html
The Lebanese Ministry of Tourism thinks it's still there:http://www.middleeastuk.com/destinat...banon/tyre.htm
The Municpality of Tyre has ite own website:http://www.lebweb.com/dir/s.asp?l=36341
Pictures of modern day Tyre:http://photos.eisenbach.at/voyages/lebanon/3.htm
Here's an online encylopedia: http://www.answers.com/topic/tyre
Another picture of Tyre with Roman ruins foreground, modern Tyre background:
http://www.peterlanger.com/Countries...s/LBTYR001.htm
If this doesn't do it for ya Lee...: http://souwar.yaacoub.com/index.php?template=tyre
and:http://www.2la.org/lebanonphotos_fil...non_tyre_1.jpg
This one you can see the main part in the middle with suburbs in front and behind:http://www.2la.org/lebanonphotos_fil...non_tyre_2.jpg
The causeway Alexander built is much wider now than it was initially, so it looks less obvious than it first did.
I don't know Lee. The pasages are pretty specific. Ezekiel admits Nebachednezazar's siege failed. He did not take the fortress where the Tyranian grandeur was seated. That's why he got nothing from the siege. He only took the suburb. The city was in two parts.
If you read the article you linked to me it says in its description of the siege:
Early in the sixth century B.C. Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, laid siege to the walled city for thirteen years. Tyre stood firm, but it is probable that at this time the residents of the mainland city abandoned it for the safety of the island.
See? The residents fled the mainland city,not the main city, for the island, which as we know was the heart of the city.
If I ever figure out how to move my satellite picture of Tyre from my desktop to here, I will do so.

Regards,

lee_merrill

Hi Noah,

Thanks for the links! The missing links? Well, the links I was missing…

Well, do we need to insist on that, if it's possible that Neb's siege was what made the residents flee to the island? It seems probable that that was the cause of the move.

Yes, and that's consistent with the prophecy, since many nations were said to be involved.

I saw one on the web not too long ago, and can't find it now. Velly velly flustrating…

Regards,
Lee

Jack the Bodiless

From this thread:
Why are you still making this claim?

Also from that thread:
If you're promising to renounce your religion if Babylon or Petra are rebuilt, then does this apply to Tyre too? If not, why not?

Also, if these cities WERE rebuilt, what evidence of this would you accept? Apparently, photographs and tourist guides aren't acceptable if even ONE Christian apologist continues to deny the existence of these cities for religious reasons.

Incidentally, according to a map on one of the links provided by Noah above (http://joseph_berrigan.tripod.com/id34.html - I couldn't get the image link to work here) there WAS once another island just south of Tyre's island fortress (the Island of Hercules), which IS now under water. Perhaps that was the source of your apologist's confusion?

lee_merrill

Hi Jack,

Because of such statements I read as these:

"Looking down into the water one can see a mass of granite columns and stone blocks strewn over the sea bottom. Until recently the ruins of Tyre above water were few" (Nina Jidejian, "Tyre Through the Ages," Beirut: Dar El-Mashreq Publishers, 1969)

"The ruins of ancient Tyre are different from all the others--situated … in the heart of the sea" (Nina Nelson, "Your Guide to Lebanon", p. 220, London, 1965)

Yes, it does, any plain false statement in Scripture means Scripture's own testimony about itself is not true, implying either that God was mistaken or deceiving people, lying in either case, either about his ability, or about his knowledge of the future, and thus in either case, implying he is not holy, not the God depicted in Scripture.

But the above quotes do not seem to be from apologists…

Not if they were excavating Phoenician ruins in a silted-up harbor off the peninsula! Another non-apologetics reference to there being ruins of Tyre underwater.

Regards,
Lee

Jack the Bodiless

Lee, the plain and simple truth is that the island fortress of Tyre is NOT underwater.

We have photographs which PROVE that the island fortress of Tyre is NOT underwater.

No amount of underwater Phoenician ruins will change the plainly-visible FACT that the island fortress of Tyre is NOT underwater.

All you have is ONE Christian apologist making the bogus claim that the island fortress of Tyre IS underwater (and he probably came up with that while standing ON the island fortress of Tyre, believing himself to be on the mainland).

The relative scarcity of Phoenician ruins on the island is easily explained by the very fact that Tyre remained inhabited! People living there since have cleared them for new buildings, or built over their remains!

...Didn't some of the WTC rubble end up underwater? Could I cite this as proof that the entire island of Manhattan is now underwater? After all, according to the Merrill Criteria, actual photographs of Manhattan don't count as evidence that it is NOT underwater.

noah

Let's let scripture talk to Lee.
From Dennis Mckinsay:
Mark 7:24 says, "He arose and went into the borders of Tyre and Sidon." Acts 12:20 says, "Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon." One could also consult Mark 7:31, Acts 21:3 and 7, Matt. 15:21, and Mark 3:8 to see that Tyre never disappeared.

Jack the Bodiless

He'd probably claim that Tyre "sank" after Jesus went there.

Lee, I'd like you to answer a little quiz. Answering the quiz will require you to visit this link:

http://joseph_berrigan.tripod.com/id34.html

...and actually look at the maps. Do you think you can do that for me?

1. In the first of the two maps of Tyre itself (not counting the map of "the empire of Alexander"), what color is used to illustrate "Alexander's Mole"?

2. What is this same structure named on the second map of Tyre, immediately beneath?

3. Can you see a large lump of land on the end of this structure, on BOTH maps?

4. On the first map, what are the names of the northern and southern ports on the "Old city of Tyre"?

5. Can you find both of these on the second map too?

6. Now let's go to YOUR link: excavating Phoenecian ruins. Where does it say that Tyre is underwater?

7. From YOUR link, where do you think "the silted up harbour on the south side of the peninsula" might be referring to?

8. From YOUR link, what part of "most of the remains of the Phoenician period still lie beneath the present town" do you not understand?

Derec

Shouldn't it be easy to do a geological survey of the peninsula to see if the bedrock of the ancient island still exists at the end of the peninsula. Ground penetrating radar could also be used to make Alexander's mole visible. That should clear all uncertainties, or not?

Sauron

Yes, actually we must insist. Nebuchadnezzar was head of the neo-Babylonian empire, and his army was comprised of conscripts from the various conquered nations that formed the empire. Unlike Egypt, which might have been largely an Egyptian army, the Babylonian army was a polyglot force.

Not only that, but the passage indicates that this will be Nebuchadnezzar. Ezekiel, in typical prophetic discourse, lingers over the statement and fleshes it out. From a document that I am writing on OT prophecy:

In other words, the attempt to disconnect Nebuchadnezzar and "many nations" is contrary to the context of the passage.

Moving along....

However, the island is not underwater. The island is above water, joined to the mainland by Alexander's causeway. The presence of some rubble under the waterline does not equate to the island being underwater.

Nebuchadnezzar was trying to conquer Tyre by sieging it.He failed in that. If your goal is conquest, and the city prevents you from doing that, then you have indeed been defeated.

No one disputes that Nebuchadnezzar was bent on conquest. However, the island city was the central city - not the mainland. The island was the first inhabited place; afterwards, the inhabitants began to colonize the coastline. That is what Ezekiel's v6 means:

EZE 26:6 And her daughters which are in the field shall be slain by the sword; and they shall know that I am the LORD.

"Daughters in the field" is a reference to the mainland colonies. But history shows that all Nebuchadnezzar was able to do was destroy the mainland colonies. The mother city on the island remained intact.

Which invalidates Ezekiel's prophecy. Thank you.

No, it could not. The mainland city was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. The modern (island) city is inhabited and quite crowded:





There have even been environmental concerns raised about the extreme urbanization of Tyre:
http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/300....7/impact.html

The current manner in which the coast is exploited is clearly detrimental and destructive, both for the coast and for the future of Lebanon. The use of explosives destroys sea fauna, and causes other unforeseen problems. The direct outpour of sewage, industrial waste and household refuse without prior treatment and with no sanitary measures has transformed the Lebanese beaches into trash dumps and the Lebanese coast into underwater sewers. The removal of maritime accretions at low depths threatens the destruction of what is left of the beaches and even the destruction of neighboring gardens during winter storms. Lastly, the small coastal plain, generally very narrow at the foot of the mountain, is already lost to increasing urbanization in Tripoli, Jounieh, Antelias, Beirut, Sidon, and Tyre. The coast is being transformed into concrete, a linear city of catastrophic architecture along the coast.

I'm glad you are fond of Nina Jidejian - or at least, you don't mind quoting someone's website that quotes McDowell - and apparently neither you, your source, nor McDowell has ever read her book. Nina's book on Tyre contains a 1938 black and white photo plate showing that the island was densely populated even then (page 162).

And in fact, it was the continual rebuilding of Tyre - contrary to prophecy, I might add - that is responsible for the relative lack of Phoenician ruins above ground. You have to knock down the older buildings, in order to make room for th newer ones. Jidejian realizes then on p.6 when she says "Cities which have been continuously inhabited reveal less of their past history that those which have been destroyed and then deserted."

Actually, there are building projects in pretty much every location. And I'd wager that the underwater ruins are actually Roman, not Phoenician. So where are the Phoenician ruins? Under the modern-day city - like everyone has been telling you. Which might be expected in a situation of a city undergoing continual rebuilding. Encyclopedia Britannica:

The silted up harbour on the south side of the peninsula has been excavated by the French Institute for Archaeology in the Near East, but most of the remains of the Phoenician period still lie beneath the present town. Pop. (1982 est.) 23,000.



Rather absurd. If someone throws tires and 4 by 4 wooden posts into the water, does that prove that the island sank?

This site also notes that "impressive Phoenician ruins" are to be found on Tyre: http://www.hammourabi.net/lsite.html

The Roman levels are the most accessible. But the Phoenician and the Canaanite levels are underneath, and are being mapped:

http://tyros.leb.net/tyre/
The Roman levels of Tyre are of such importance that every effort has been made to preserve them. To determine the exact location of eariler Phoenician and Canaanite levels soundings are being made throughout the excavated areas.

That site also has another aerial view of Tyre showing the densely populated island.

Apparently you aren't looking very hard - as evidenced by the sites I found.

The problems are:
1. the island was not made bare - the mainland was;
2. the mainland was not rebuilt - the island was;
3. the prophecy was not fulfilled

More pictures of Tyre, showing the extent of the building:
http://www.lgic.org/en/photos3_tyre.php

How you square that particular circle is your own problem. But the archaeological and historical evidence says that this prophecy was not fulfilled.