Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sugarhitman · 02-11-2008, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by makerowner

ENOUGH WITH THE TYRE THREADS ALREADY!!! :banghead:

Come on Makerowner share this information with us.

arnoldo · 02-11-2008, 11:10 AM

Protected Areas in Lebanon This is the source of water for the Phoenician city of Tyre.

Sheshonq · 02-11-2008, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

1. Jeremiah's prophecy about Tyre was before Ezekiel's.

So?

Quote:

Ezekiel's came 5 years after the Exile.

Yet still before the siege.

Quote:

Remember Tyre is here condemned by Zek because She rejoiced at Jerusalem's fall Jeremiah was warning Judah and Tyre that Nebby would come against them Jerusalem was not yet destroyed. (oops you got that one wrong)

I did? Where?

No, I didn't.

Quote:

2. The horses, chariots are listed under "His" not they (oops!)

Wrong as usual:

EZE 26:11 With the hoofs of his horses shall he tread down all thy streets: he shall slay thy people by the sword, and thy strong garrisons shall go down to the ground.

EZE 26:12 And they shall make a spoil of thy riches, and make a prey of thy merchandise: and they shall break down thy walls, and destroy thy pleasant houses: and they shall lay thy stones and thy timber and thy dust in the midst of the water.

Quote:

3. The suburbs emerged after Alexander's siege.

No, they existed even before Nebuchadnezzar's siege. After Alexander, the mainland was abandoned.

Quote:

4. Ezekiel say that God would destroy Tyre by bringing the sea over her, the nations dimineshed her.

Wrong. Ezekiel says that Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon would destroy Tyre.

Sheshonq · 02-11-2008, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Tyre's ancient Aqueduct according to the sources I have read, were bronze pipes going from the mainland spring to to the island. The spring was south of the island city on the mainland. If anyone has any extensive information on this please share it with us. This may give us some idea as to where the ancient mainland city was located...Thank you.

There was no mainland city. A water source on the mainland (Ras al-'Ain) fed the island city. Just like the presence of timber on the mainland provided natural resources for the island city.

You seem to think that there was some requirement that a city had to be located wherever the resources were being obtained from. How absurd.

Toto · 02-11-2008, 11:29 AM

No more than one Tyre thread at a time.

Thanks.

arnoldo · 02-11-2008, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Please note there is no Island of Tyre which the Phoenicains built. The only thing the present day Tyre has in common with the mighty Island city/state built by the phoenicians is the name. Richmond, Virginia exists today, does that mean that the capital of the Confederacy continues to exist?

That particular busted analogy has already been shot down by Jack:

nobody prophesied the permanent destruction and depopulation of Richmond, as Ezekiel did with Tyre. If they DID: then THAT person would ALSO be a false prophet, just as Ezekiel was.

You can continue to use it, and we'll just keep shooting it down and showing the audience how stupid it is.

Quote:

Regardless the only failed prophecy exists in the imagination of the minimalists.

No, the failed prophecy exists in Ezekiel. You've had weeks to show otherwise, and have not done so.

Matthew Hogan's comments have been shredded by Farrell Till and others already.

No comments have been shredded. The only thing mentioned by Till is a half-truth that is spinned that since in hebrew there is no future tense; the many nations referred to as coming against tyre was only Nebby. How absurd.

Sheshonq · 02-11-2008, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

That particular busted analogy has already been shot down by Jack:

nobody prophesied the permanent destruction and depopulation of Richmond, as Ezekiel did with Tyre. If they DID: then THAT person would ALSO be a false prophet, just as Ezekiel was.

You can continue to use it, and we'll just keep shooting it down and showing the audience how stupid it is.

No, the failed prophecy exists in Ezekiel. You've had weeks to show otherwise, and have not done so.

Matthew Hogan's comments have been shredded by Farrell Till and others already.

No comments have been shredded.

Actually, all of Hogan's comments were shredded. In fact, as Jack pointed out:

Note that this article was written by a guy who later ADMITTED THAT THE PROPHECY FAILED?

...So would you mind telling us WHO cherry-picked that article and ignored the others in that debate, Arnoldo?

You lacked the nerve to answer Jack's comment, so I'll post it again here to show the world how weak your position is. Do you understand that Matthew Hogan -- the person you are trying to use as your source -- Matthew Hogan has ADMITTED that the prophecy FAILED?

Quote:

The only thing mentioned by Till is a half-truth that is spinned that since in hebrew there is no future tense; the many nations referred to as coming against tyre was only Nebby. How absurd.

1. That is not the only thing mentioned by Till; don't be dishonest with people who know the material better than you do. It's a sure-fire way to get caught red handed;

2. Till's response to Hogan doesn't even *use* the hebrew/future tense argument; are you kidding? You have either never read Till's response, or you are simply lying about it.

Jack the Bodiless · 02-11-2008, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

Nope, I am not the one "misreading the prophecy". YOU are. As your source, Matthew Hogan, agreed.

Of course, you're still ignoring Nebby's failure to do what HE was specifically prophesied to do (including his failure to rampage down all of the streets of Tyre).

As usual the "failed prophecy" is based upon spinning a half truth that hebrew was no future tense, hence the many nations was not refering to Alexander the Great and all the other nations which rose like waves to attack Tyre.

Hebrew Tenses

As usual, completely untrue, and a desperate attempt to change the subject!

Remember, we were discussing "he" and "they" in Ezekiel? WTF has this got to do with "tenses"?

Answer: absolutely nothing!

...Nevertheless, I see you haven't abandoned your bizarre habit of shooting yourself in the foot with your own sources. So Farrell Till was wrong about tenses? Who says so? Not this guy, apparently:

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo's source

There is no such thing as "tense" in biblical Hebrew. (Modern Hebrew, on the other hand, does have tenses.) Biblical Hebrew is not a "tense" language. Modern grammarians recognize that it is an "aspectual" language. This means that the same form of a verb can be translated as either past, present, or future depending on the context and various grammatical cues.

This was even bolded in the original!

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

No comments have been shredded. The only thing mentioned by Till is a half-truth that is spinned that since in hebrew there is no future tense; the many nations referred to as coming against tyre was only Nebby. How absurd.

As usual: WRONG. That is NOT Till's argument.

Jack the Bodiless · 02-11-2008, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Critics love to post the Google map of Tyre. Ive discovered something quite revealing. The tour guides (or the written histories of various sites of Tyre posted at this map) says that Tyre was a double or two part city, one on the island the other on the mainland. You hear that a "Double city" or a city located on both the mainland and island (Type in the search engine mainland city and see what you get). Now watch how they will now rise up against the Google map Tour guides....watch.

This looks like the same sort of BS you attempted here (again, citing sources that failed to support your position). Everyone accepts that the MODERN city of Tyre was originally two urban centers (Tyre and Ushu): nowadays they're even joined together! But that's not saying that ANCIENT Tyre was actually regarded as a "double city".

Of course, the exact wording of your "tour guides" is conveniently unverifiable! But as you have consistently misunderstood or misrepresented every previous source you have attempted to use: why should we assume that this one is any different?

sugarhitman · 02-11-2008, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Critics love to post the Google map of Tyre. Ive discovered something quite revealing. The tour guides (or the written histories of various sites of Tyre posted at this map) says that Tyre was a double or two part city, one on the island the other on the mainland. You hear that a "Double city" or a city located on both the mainland and island (Type in the search engine mainland city and see what you get). Now watch how they will now rise up against the Google map Tour guides....watch.

This looks like the same sort of BS you attempted here (again, citing sources that failed to support your position). Everyone accepts that the MODERN city of Tyre was originally two urban centers (Tyre and Ushu): nowadays they're even joined together! But that's not saying that ANCIENT Tyre was actually regarded as a "double city".

Of course, the exact wording of your "tour guides" is conveniently unverifiable! But as you have consistently misunderstood or misrepresented every previous source you have attempted to use: why should we assume that this one is any different?

Well all you have to do is go to Google maps to get this information.

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

02-11-2008, 11:10 AM	#62
arnoldo Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Latin America Posts: 4,066	Protected Areas in Lebanon This is the source of water for the Phoenician city of Tyre.

02-11-2008, 11:29 AM	#65
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	No more than one Tyre thread at a time. Thanks.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.