Lebanon In End Time Bible Prophecy

What date is given to the earliest extant Book of Ezekiel?Brian.

No, it is not Ray, but the argument is still simply absurd. I provided the link to the thread where we discussed Tyre in depth at least three times, but his only response was that the thread was irrelevant. If he wishes to go on believing that Tyre was scraped down to bare rock suitable only to dry nets, then that is fine. The fact that not one of his "sources" even hinted that was the case says volumes.One last link to the thread. Message 1

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

There's also a big coincidence that Bob cites from Ray's fav book, the Cambridge history.But it's no big deal, it was a tongue in cheek comment It has been a while since we had any fun around here anyway, I mean we have never heard any of Bob's arguments before have we?Bria,

It is not any point of logic at all. Rather, it is a point about human behavior.There are (at least) two reasons for not responding to an argument. One of those reasons is that the argument is so silly as to not warrant a response. If the argument fell flat on its face when first given, then that argument does not stand and never did stand.

It may not support the argument from a logical point of view but in a debate/discussion it sure looks to an observer like the last point made has some special strength.

Jar you claimed Alexander failed in his assault from my previous posts:"Alexander did far more against Tyre than Shalmaneser or Nebuchadnezzar had done. Not content with crushing her, he took care that she never should revive; for he founded Alexandria as her substitute, and changed forever the track of the commerce of the world." (Edward Creasy, Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World, ch. 4).
And
"After its capture, 10,000 of the inhabitants were put to death, and 30,000 were sold into slavery. Alexander's causeway, which was never removed, converted the island into a peninsula"
http://phoenicia.org/cities.htmlThere is an obvious point you guys keep missing that demonstrates the prophecy to be fulfilled. The fortress on the island and the original city are two different things. The people left the orignal city to go out to the fortress on the island. In order to build the causeway (mole sp?) Alexander took everything from the original city to build the causeway out to the fortress. The original city was never rebuilt and the ruins and city there that you guys keep harping about are from the fortress on the island that Alexander finally sacked and not the original city. As demonstrated from the
Edward Creasy quote above Tyre was no longer the huge city state it once was even though later, the fortress on the island and not the original city used to build the causeway 1/2 mile out to the island, was a place of commerce.So the prophecy of multinational forces attacking Tyre and it being torn down was fulfilled. The only thing left to prove now is the dating of Ezekiel...if it is before Alexander the Great's conquest then the issue is moot. I'll next attack the Higher Criticism School claiming it wasnt written when it claims it was. That's all you guys can claim is that it was written after the fact so once that contention is removed there can be no credible argument about this prophecy even if you still choose to disbelieve it.And

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

It is obvious to me that you are quibbling to try to insist that a failed prophecy was fullfilled. The section of the city on the island
was not 'taken to the ground'. THe prophecy specifically had to do with King Neb to begin with, and what alexander did was irrelavent ot the prophecy, and Ezekiel himself admits he wasn't able to.I mean why don't you read what Ezekiel really says, rather than distort things beyond all reality?

quote:

---

"I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves. They will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock. Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets, for I have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD. She will become plunder for the nations, and her settlements on the mainland will be ravaged by the sword. For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great army.

---

See, it doesn't say alexander, it says 'Nebuchadnezzar'.And eziekel admits he was wrong too

quote:

---

"The word of YAHWEH came to me: "Son of man, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon drove his army in a hard campaign against Tyre; every head was rubbed bare and every shoulder made raw. Yet he and his army got no reward from the campaign he led against Tyre. Therefore thus says YAHWEH GOD: Behold, I will give the land of Egypt to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon; and he shall carry off its wealth and despoil it and plunder it; and it shall be the wages for his army. I have given him the land of Egypt as his recompense for which he labored, because they worked for me, says YAHWEH GOD."

---

Of course, Nebuchadnezzar didn't succeed against Egypt either.. but that is another story.

No, the Biblical prophecy was that Tyre would be destroyed and scraped down to bare rock suitable only for drying nets.That simply never happened. If you want to go on believing that it did, fine.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Not only that, but the prophecy specifically mentions that King Neb would be the one to do it.

I know that but I give them some wiggle room cause it's fun watching them dance. I particularly enjoy them talking about how "Waves" will come like Nebbi and Alex were two fronts of one battle.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I would just point out that predicting the eventual decline of a great city is a pretty safe prediction, and it is not remarkable that Tyre, like most other ancient cities, ain't what it used to be. Or that it was besieged and conquered a few times in its long history.So, if you want to set yourself up as a prophet, a good place to start is to look around for some thriving metropolis and tell everybody that you predict it will eventually fall on hard times. Just be careful not to be too specific, you know? Like, don't say it's going to fall to a specific aggressor like, say, King Nebuchadnezzar.Oops.On the other hand, you might get lucky and say something poetically specific about fishermen drying their nets on the ruins of the city and 2500 years later some National Geographics photographer snaps a shot of fishermen drying their nets on the ruins.It's a tricky business, prophecy.But the biggest mistake you can make is the "these things will come very soon" prediction or, even worse because it's more specific, "this will happen before the current generation passes" prediction. The Bible seers never seemed to learn that lesson, and that's probably the main reason rational people don't look to the Bible for information on the future.

Yeah why bother paying attention to important words...that's just quibbling. like the prophecy saying "Behold I am against you, O Tyre and will cause many nations to come up against you" which flies in the face of your statment No, it says MANY NATIONS AND Nebuchadnezzar. Which makes your statement below untenable. And equally untenable And the fortress on the island was not the city of Tyre!And Nebudchanezzar easiy and quickly took the city, as prophesied, but tried for 13 years to take the island fortress which is a separate and different matter.Ramoss,you attempt to redefine the prophecy to say ONLY Nebudchanezzar but it doesnt. And you and others try to make the island fortress the city but it isnt.The facts are the city of Tyre was attacked by 3 separate nations, scraped to the ground by Alexander to build the causeway out the the island fortress after which the city of Tyre never regained its former glory fulfilling the prophecy. But those important details are just quibbling.

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

Yeah I see, it's pretty safe to say a great city/state will be attacked by 'many nations' and 'scraped into the sea' after which it will no longer be a city/state. That is easily forseeable and applies to any great city. Yeah I see again, and the fact that the temple was destroyed with not one stone left standing, the city of Jerusalam was surrounded by armies, false christs led thousands into the desert to be slaughtered, times were so bad in Jerusalem that they had never been seen before and never since, all within one generation was forseeable also. Yeah I see your obvious point Max! The misunderstanding here is the common notion that these prophecies refer to the second coming of christ and the end of times when these prophecies actually refer to the end of the age when the covenant would be removed from the Jews exclusively and opened to anyone and the event was signaled by the destruction of the temple. Edited by ReformedRob, : smiley face typo!Edited by ReformedRob, : spelling

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

The fact of that matter is that the passages in Eziekel says King Neb.No matter how you try to wiggle out of that one, you can not change the words that were written.You can, (and are) , ignoring what is written, attempt to explain away what is written, but you are not dealing with that is written.For you to say the 'prophecy' happened, you have to look at the prophecy,and say 'that isn't what Ezekiel really meant'.You may now start your rationalizatoin process to try to explain what Eziekal write isn't what he meant.

I've engaged in the prophecy concerning Tyre before and its disheartening to see the same old tired arguments geared towards refuting the Bible. The prophecy is clearly fulfilled, furthermore, no one takes into consideration that the Phoenician empire ended during this time period. Phoenicians were some of the most affluent peoples of that time period and the port of Tyre was easily considered the most important maritime trading depot of that time period. After the destruction of Tyre the Phoenicians basically undergone their own version of a diaspora. It was so thorough that the only way to tell who comes from Phoenician lineage anymore is to run a DNA test. Furthermore, the current residents of Lebanon mostly come from Arabic lineage, not Phoenecian, just like modern-day Palestinians have little to do with Biblical Phillistines. Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : No reason given.

---

“"All science, even the divine science, is a sublime detective story. Only it is not set to detect why a man is dead; but the darker secret of why he is alive." ”G. K. Chesterton