spin

The old shifto-changeo approach to your inherent lack of argument. "Don't look at Ezekiel, look at Isaiah." It tells a different story so we manipulate it through a liberal dose of BS to look a little like the other and oh, we're being metaphorical here and there.




spin

Sheshonq

If they really wanted to keep them safe, they'd put them in a fortified city on an island.

Sheshonq

That recycled bullshit again?

You've already been shot down in flames on that one. But go ahead - keep repeating your refuted claims; less work for me because I can just paste in my response -- you know, the one you keep running from because you can't answer it?

ROFLMAO

Sheshonq

No need to. You've already been shot down in flames on that one.

ROFLMAO! :rolling:

Isaiah contradicts Ezekiel. No big surprises there.
Not only that, but they weren't even writing at the same time in history.

Except you've never proven that.

Yep - just like the waves of the Allies as they attacked Nazi Germany in World War II - many nations all under a Supreme Allied Commander.

Jack the Bodiless

Remember that 10-second "nonsense check" we advised you to make before posting?

What you're saying is this:

A besieged, surrounded and cut-off city on the MAINLAND, with NO deep-water ports (the water between the mainland and the island was only 2 meters deep), in the midst of Nebby's army, can survive for 13 YEARS.

Whereas a besieged but NOT surrounded city on an ISLAND, not easily reachable by Nebby's army, and with TWO deep-water ports for supplies to be delivered (even if they might have to come from fairly distant ports) CANNOT survive for 13 years.

Why can't you see just how absolutely, ludicrously hypocritical this double-standard is?

The island COULD survive, and DID survive, for 13 years.

The mainland COULD NOT survive, and DID NOT survive.
Again: sheer insanity.

The ports were on the ISLAND. Therefore the place to store valuables was on the ISLAND. Especially stuff that arrives in one ship and leaves on another! Why transport anything to the mainland and then leave it there? Stuff headed inland would be transported to the mainland and then carted off the same day, no need to store it anywhere! They might have stored bulky and not-very-valuable goods on the mainland (more room), but not stuff that's worth plundering.

Let's be clear about this: the mighty island fortress of Tyre EXISTED. There's no getting away from that fact. Why build a second fortress, with no deep-water port? Especially as there is NO TRACE of any such fortress!

arnoldo

Interesting theory there (same day service). Have you ever seen pictures of modern day ports which are piled with crate after crate of goods waiting to be exported/imported? In any event the Island of Tyre fell, the princes of Tyre went into exile in babylon and joined the jews whom Nebby had exiled to babylon earlier. Did zekey( he was also in babylon) appear to be a false prophet by these exiles from tyre and Israel? Absolutely not. After Nebby Tyre was always under the control of foreign powers, hence MANY NATIONS continued to attack Tyre one after the other like waves of an ocean.

spin

Umm, scraped of its soil, bare rock, nothing there but simply a place for spreading nets, never again rebuilt. Tyre has been rebuilt many times. Alexander built a mole out to it and detroyed it and yet 20 years later, Antigonus Monophthalmus besieges it again. Then it's popping out coins that the Jerusalem temple uses as a standard. Tyre is continuously in history. Not bad for a city that Ezekiel tells us would never be rebuilt. F.




spin

JayW

Nebuchadnezzer did not enter tyre until a treaty was made. Kings were not in the habit of killing and deporting citizens that had submitted to them, hence Jeremiah's warning that if Jerusalem did not submit to the yoke of Babylon they would be destroyed. He was right. Not even the Assyrians slaughtered those who submitted. It would not have made any sense to kill citizens under treaty or submission, since it was economicall unrealistic. It made perfect sense to make an example out of those who didn't submit. Tyre submitted to nebuchadnezzer through a treaty. If He had destroyed the city, He would have lost revenue from the city.

arnoldo

Still obsessing about the walls and streets of Tyre, huh? Everybody here seems to parrot the arguments of a certain individual which this article proves is rubbish. Till and others suggest that the prophecies about Tyre’s utter destruction refer to the work of Nebuchadnezzar

spin

I merely talked about the evident utter failure of the prophecy -- you know, "never be rebuilt". You can keep your sophistry as to why you pervert the scriptures. You just don't like what they say.



spin