WVIncagold

Regardless of your assertion it was NEVER laid bare. And it has been occupied since that time land bridge, Alexander, blah blah blah.
So using your analogy let me put it in modern terms you might understand. Los Angeles started out as a very small Spanish settlement, an Island one may say on the frontier. It has been built on and built on for 300 years or better (for arguments sake i am not going to look it up) therefore Los Angles does not exist never to be inhabited. this is what your arguing? It matters little if their was mainland Tyre or Island Tyre or whether Ushu was little Tyre or whether it was laid waste or that it has a mole by Alexander or anything else. It still exist. Period you loose! Babylon doesn't, funny enough Zeke didn't predict that one. You would have an argument if the city of Tyre no longer existed as many of the cities during that time have vanished yet despite claims to the contrary and i am sure people who pay taxes to the city of Tyre is still is there sitting sweet as you please. Everything is nonsense. Its like your telling me I have no nose because someone 2500 years ago said i would be born without one. I point to my face and say here it is. You say not thats not a nose its a sniffing protuberance. But i reply no it is my nose. You say no its a scent pheromone detecting system. No its my nose its right here, touch it it is on my face your looking right at it. No you reply its not there because Moe the righteous said you would not have a nose so you don't.
So regardless of what you assert this prophecy means or what you read into it the giant nose point at you is Tyre is still alive, a modern city and has been occupied continually since the time of Nebby.
Prophesy Fails. How many time has this been pointed out?

Sheshonq

No skeptic ever said that.
What we said was that the city was on the island, not the mainland.
The mainland had suburbs, called "daughters in the field."

This is the 10th or 20th time you've been corrected on this, arnoldo.

arnoldo

I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree then. In order for "prophecy fails (sic) :rolling:" at least we agree that zekey wrote the entire book of ezekiel in the 5th BC. Otherwise the book of ezekiel would be like the book of daniel which also describes events that occured in the 5th BC. However the difference is that skeppies argue that Daniel was written in the 2nd BC.

I invite anyone to read the entire book of Ezekiel for themselves in order to reach their own conclusion on this subject.

All the Best,
"Arnoldo"

Minimalist

Oh, must we really read such drivel again?

Johnny Skeptic

Message to arnoldo: What evidence do you have that the Tyre prophecy was written before the events, and was not revised?

Johnny Skeptic

But if the Tyre prophecy was revised, we do not know what it originally said.

Anyone who has just a modest amount of common sense knows that if a God exists, he could easily telephathically communicate the same messages to everyone in the world, whether about prophecy, or about anything else, thereby discouraging dissent instead of needlessly inviting dissent. Since the Bible says that God is not the author of confusion, and the Bible has needlessly caused a lot of confusion, obviously, the God of the Bible does not exist.

arnoldo

Uhhh.. . if it was revised doncha' think the writers would have <edited> it to take out the alleged errors?

WVIncagold

Hey until anything comes up that is verifiable and states otherwise sure we can agree Ezekiel existed.
I am still chuckling over the global warming dude thats priceless. glad you can keep a sense of humor.

Skeppie at large. peace out.

Sheshonq

No, we'll have to agree that you've been obliterated on every claim you made here.

Dating Ezekiel has never been part of my argument.

Well, they are "like" each other in the respect that they both get 5th century events horribly wrong. But Ezekiel and Daniel get it wrong for different reasons.

That's the point you keep avoiding - just because both of them were wrong, does not mean that they both fumbled for the same reason. And it's been pointed out to you before and refuted.


Which it was.

If they read it with an open mind, they'll see the failure of prophecy as well as Ezekiel's subsequent "do-over" attempt by predicting Nebuchadnezzar would invade Egypt. Which, of course, ALSO did not happen.

PROPHECY FAILS! TIMES TWO!
:rolling: :rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling:

arnoldo

Good. I guess the second alleged failed prophecy proves that zekey was written in the 5th BC and that zekey didn't revise his alleged mistake about Tyre and instead tried to fix it by writing the "do-over" prophecy about Egypt (which he also failed to revise after it was an alleged <non-event>).