dongiovanni1976x

Additional Evidence to Support the Phoenician Wall "Theory"

TIME Magazine article entitled, "Up from Despair" dated January 15, 1996 mentions, over coming the desparate state of preservation and difficulty in continued excavations in Tyre and throghout Lebanon as a result of their civil war...the new hope created with its conclusion has resulted in many "Lebanese, some with tears in their eyes, are flocking to visit ancient mosques, churches and recently unearthed archaeological treasures." At Tyre it mentions a few of these "treasures, "A Phoenician wall, Roman baths, Byzantine mosaics, a Mamluk shrine and remnants of the Crusader castle"

I am so thoroughly convinced I do not understand why I need to keep researching my position. I have yet to hear any "positive" evidence from you Lee, that this wall does NOT exist. By positive I mean sources that say this wall does not exist or that this whole theory was disproven or that it was a hoax etc.

Your reliance on the silence of one historian and notoriously inaccurate tourist websites, which tend to be spawned copies of one another, makes your case extremely weak and you need to be intelectually honest in this debate and admit this if you want to continue this search in a serious manner.

Sven

You know, lee likes to play games like this. In two former discussions on the Babylon prophecy, he linked to an article supposedly making his point that Babylon can not be inhabited again (as the prophecy says), and then backpedalled for hundreds (literally!!!) of posts from the article saying: "Villagers told news media that a thousand people were evacuated to make way for [Saddam Hussein's Babylonian palace]" - this sentence somehow does not mean that Babylon was inhabited.
Even more ridiculous were his attempts to explain away a picture which was only some links away from the article he linked to and which was about local children in Babylon...

It's of no use answering Lee - only if you want to play his games with him and have too much time on your hands.

lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

Please, Johnny, the Scriptures we have been discussing: the prophecies in Ezekiel about Tyre. Surely you are familiar with these now.

I agree, only people here seem to insist this is virtually impossible!

Yes, I agree, I hold that the prophecy of sinking was about the island fortress.

His character, which I note you consider unjust, but I am of another opinion.

Because God also has purposes of healing?

Mark 10:51-52 "What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked him. The blind man said, "Rabbi, I want to see." "Go," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

And if we then ask why there is pain in the world, if there was nothing to overcome, what would there be to reward? And we may also ask if God bears pain, as in the cross…

So then the ruins are not from the causeway?

No, two, actually, it was quoted to me by a skeptic, and this quote mentioned the jetties, and no mention of the wall, and I’m too tired to go back and look it up again. Search for “jetties,” I remember that word was in the quote, if you absolutely want to see it again…

But my point is more than this; this indicates the opinion of the archaeologists may well have changed! That is my conclusion, they do not deny the wall, nor do I, they just do not consider it conclusively Phoenician.

Because I have a scenario which fits all the evidence, if the conclusion about this wall has changed, and your view does not fit all the evidence, without saying Jidejian was either uninformed, or careless, or deceptive, all of which I consider unlikely to be true.

No, I’m just saying they changed their opinion, archaeologists are not infallible.

I also note that ruins generally means more than just one remnant of a wall. Where are other walls, and doors, and floors, and so forth? I would expect them to find such, under the Greek and Roman layers, where they were in fact digging for them...

Well now, Time Magazine is about at the level of the Lebanon.com websites, it is not? But I would like to read this article, Google even finds it, and it’s been somehow moved, or is inaccessible.

I might even be able to make my case if I grant that this is a Phoenician wall! For then if all the rest of the ancient fortress is under the sea, or if the wall was built after the seige, why then I still think my case here holds.

Regards,
Lee

noah

You're right Sven. It is a waste of time answering Lee Merrill. It's a waste of time ansering him if all you're trying to do convivnce Lee Merril. Trying to engage in honest debate with Lee Merrill in which both sides respect the rules of evidence and debate is a waste of time.
However, going on like this with Lee Merrill has a number of benefits in the broader picture.

1) It exposes, makes public, the fatal flaws in the idea of " biblical inerrancy". Every day that threads like this go on, the more open minded and moderate people get to see how impossible it is to defend the Tyre prophecy.
Lee Merrill's games and the fact that Tyre is till there are enough to convince all but the fanatics out there that "biblical inerrancy" is impossible.

2) Lee Merrill thinks he is having fun and making us sweat here in this thread. What he doesn't realize or care about is the damage he is doing to Christian apologetics. As I said before, no honest or open minded person is going to look at these Lee Merrill threads and come away thinking "Wow, those Christians have an airtight case. With logic and scholarship like that, I guess I'd better take a closer look at being or becoming a Christian.

3) These threads further discredit Lee Merrill himself. Lee may be having a good time here with his games but every day that passes here is just more reason to dismiss Lee Merrill. Lee already done a very good job of making himself the internet laughing stock (along with Metacrock. I have been to a number of forums over the last year or so where Lee Merrill is the laughing stock.

4) I learn a lot in my exchanges with Lee. Proving the obvious is not as pointless as it may seem. You get to learn a lot about the history and geography/geology of the Tyre region when you refute Lee's nonsense.

5) I've established some good personal contacts with a number of smart educated people, for example Salim and a prof at my university here.

My only concern really about Lee Merrill himself is that he will repeat his nonsense to people, children for example, who don't know any better.

But by himself Lee Merrill is a gift to skeptics and freethinkers. He sure is a warning to anyone thinking of joining the Christian faith and a wonderful confirmation and reassurance to those leaving or thinking about leaving Christianity.

noah

You're right Sven. It is a waste of time answering Lee Merrill. It's a waste of time ansering him if all you're trying to do convivnce Lee Merril. Trying to engage in honest debate with Lee Merrill in which both sides respect the rules of evidence and debate is a waste of time.
However, going on like this with Lee Merrill has a number of benefits in the broader picture.

1) It exposes, makes public, the fatal flaws in the idea of " biblical inerrancy". Every day that threads like this go on, the more open minded and moderate people get to see how impossible it is to defend the Tyre prophecy.
Lee Merrill's games and the fact that Tyre is till there are enough to convince all but the fanatics out there that "biblical inerrancy" is impossible.

2) Lee Merrill thinks he is having fun and making us sweat here in this thread. What he doesn't realize or care about is the damage he is doing to Christian apologetics. As I said before, no honest or open minded person is going to look at these Lee Merrill threads and come away thinking "Wow, those Christians have an airtight case. With logic and scholarship like that, I guess I'd better take a closer look at being or becoming a Christian.

3) These threads further discredit Lee Merrill himself. Lee may be having a good time here with his games but every day that passes here is just more reason to dismiss Lee Merrill. Lee already done a very good job of making himself the internet laughing stock (along with Metacrock. I have been to a number of forums over the last year or so where Lee Merrill is the laughing stock.

4) I learn a lot in my exchanges with Lee. Proving the obvious is not as pointless as it may seem. You get to learn a lot about the history and geography/geology of the Tyre region when you refute Lee's nonsense.

5) I've established some good personal contacts with a number of smart educated people, for example Salim and a prof at my university here.

My only concern really about Lee Merrill himself is that he will repeat his nonsense to people, children for example, who don't know any better.

But by himself Lee Merrill is a gift to skeptics and freethinkers. He sure is a warning to anyone thinking of joining the Christian faith and a wonderful confirmation and reassurance to those leaving or thinking about leaving Christianity.

dongiovanni1976x

Lee, they may be from the causeway, they may be from the portion that is underwater. I don’t know. What are you getting at. I have already confirmed that I believe, like the archaeologists I have cited, that the southern harbor is underwater. What is it you are hoping to demonstrate here?
You have only used Nina Jidejian to the best of my understanding and each time I have been called on my sources I provide them readily so why am I supposed to do your work for you. As a common courtesy and as a means of bolstering your position you should be ready and willing to produce this 2nd archaeologist. (mind you that Nina Jidejian never says this wall does not exists or is not Phoenician and according to what you seem to remember about this mysterious “jetties” archaeologist s/he never contradicts all my sources either for the same reason- (using their silence as proof of your speculation)
Then make your case for this speculation. If Nina did updates to her book she and there was a major reversal in scholarly opinion about this wall she likely would have mentioned it. But your 2nd edition is from 1996 which still doesn’t account for the fact that I myself SAW the lead archaeologist at Tyre, Dr. Badawi touch the wall and describe its construction and Phoenician origins. This is in the year 2004 Lee. Your hypothetical speculation is irrelevant because even if Nina updated her 1969 book for the 1996 edition, which seems unlikely as you have only noted page differences and some words in a different place, then she still would not be contradicting Dr. Badawi and Peter Woodward in 2004.
How does your scenario fit all the evidence? Please explain yourself. The wall is there and you don’t contest that. I have numerous scholars all specialists in their field attesting to it and asserting that it is a 5th Phoenician wall, as well as our mutual tourist who attests to it, the tourist site that you are awaiting an email response from, the Time Magazine article etc…and your evidence is that one scholar does not mention the wall at all, another mysterious scholar who you are too tired to look up (which is not a source until you present it), and some rabid cloned tourist sites who also are silent about this wall. Therefore you have NO evidence Lee! You have pure speculation, but worse than that you are speculating a scenario that flies in the face of all the scholars and other sources I have cited.
But what is your evidence that my sources changed their opinion if you cannot even find one that dissents from the UNANIMOUS ACKNOWLEDGE CONCENSUS THAT THIS PHOENICIAN WALL IS THERE.
Lee, I give you the CURRENT lead archaeologist at Tyre walking along, touching the wall and describing its Phoenician origins, the lead team of excavators who unearthed a good deal of it, the archaeologist who discovered it, the Director of Antiquities who is praised by your source Nina Jidejian in the very book you use for everything, yada yada yada AND you have the audacity to attack the credibility of my sources because I “added” Time Magazine to my list. You have been spouting spawned tourist websites and I only offered one because of how much you seem to respect them even though I showed you that one said that Alexander’s causeway was created by King Hiram I!. It is upon you to demonstrate the inaccuracies of Time Magazine but bear in mind while you waste your time trying to do this that Time magazine is by no means my primary source as I have repeatedly demonstrated.

You are arguing for “possibility” that is not what a historian does. You need to be intellectually honest are argue for what is “most likely”!
But even your scenarios here fail Lee. Because the prophecy said Tyre would be LOST and you are acknowledging its location by your own admission…Plus you need to bear in mind that this is a 5th century wall- MEANING it is PRIOR to Alexander’s siege and AFTER Nebuchadnezzar’s! You have no argument or credibility. You are a nice guy but you are trying my patience by being “too tired” (i.e. lazy) to retrieve your sources when called upon or you don’t have any to begin with…I am not discussing possibilities I am discussing what is most likely the case. You have misled me into thinking your were searching for the same kind of historical truth…instead you are merely interested in concocting a scenario that allows for the mere POSSIBILITY that your view is correct. That is ridiculous.
Where is your evidence that this is not a 5th century Phoenician wall Lee. You have NO case whatsoever if you cannot account for this and you have failed and need to give up.

Avatar

I don't know about you, but the only cases of real healing I've heard about have come from doctors. Unless you're stupid enough to believe in faith healers.
I see. Basically, there is pain in the world so that when we get to heaven we can tell the difference.

bfniii

i do feel like that is reductio ad absurdum. my entire argument does not hinge on any one point.

i have addressed the specific point you cite with jack but i will do so again. ezekiel refers to the mainland of tyre in verse 8. i am asking why assume that verses 9, 10 and 11 are referring to something other than the mainland. what in the text suggests that ezekiel is making a switch from the mainland in verse 8 to all of tyre in verse 9?

bfniii

i have already addressed this multiple times in multiple threads. the nation of tyre stopped existing after alexander.

Johnny Skeptic

Message to Lee Merrill: I said:

You replied:

I replied:

You replied:

Now Lee, first you said “If it’s underwater now, that’s pretty impressive to predict!,” and now you are saying “I agree [that there is nothing at all unusual about islets or islands eventually becoming partially or completely submerged underwater], only people here seem to insist this is virtually impossible!” You have refuted your own argument. Will you please explain yourself?

Do you have any other bogus examples of things that are difficult to predict regarding the Tyre prophecy?