..........................
Let me have one last plead with Mr Till.
TILL
>I'm afraid that we are all going to go to a "Christless eternity," but the
>thought of that doesn't bother me. Before I was born, I was nothing and had
>no awareness of anything, because I didn't exist. When I die, I will return
>to what I was... nothing. What is so dreadful about that?
This is an assumption that nothing comes after life.
Should you not be skeptical about the thought of nothingness?
It is also an assumption that eternity is Christless.
My maps show Tyre having different location.
In terms of splendour, Tyre was the centre for cedar and dye trade. Now,
new Tyre is a small fishing village. The mainland Tyre is so desolated
that nobody bother to photograph a bear rock, save knowing its location.
Big difference between rebuilt city and new fishing village.
The prophesy in Eze. shows there is an intelligent superbeing telling the
future from the past. You did not detect a change of location with your
scholarship. You argue for things you did not and could not see. (Show me
an aerial photo of populated old Tyre perhaps with trading industry, if you
like.)
This superbeing told us that there is life after death. Should you not
fear of the suffering for Christless eternity?
>TILL
>Yes, Walid's god is the god of Israel who either approved or commanded the
>slaughter of women, children and babies (Num. 33:17-18; Joshua 10-11; 1 Sam.
>15:1-3, etc., etc., etc.). Walid can have him; I don't want him.
All nations murder and behaved selfishly. Where (in which nation) are you?
How can you hide from your own self?
(eg: Buddhists kill for the survival of their faith; advocates of peace
and tranquility behaved just the opposite when cornered.
Anti-aborptionists bomb organisations, increase social burden, destroy
family lives, cause fear and anxiety. Humanists advocate lying and
stealing.)
>TILL
>All anyone has to do is study the best information that history provides us,
>and he will see that Ezekie's prediction of Nebuchadnezzar's role in the
>prophecy failed. I have repeatedly pointed out that even Ezekiel himself
>admitted the failure (29:18-19), but Walid consistently skirts this issue.
How biased and stupid you are to appeal to history. A historian's naration
is his story. History is journalism. Is there anybody trusting stories
from contradicting newspapers? Reconciliation of contradiction is decided
by believing in one-sided narative even picking a newspaper.
Show us a rock in Archaeology and it is a rock. Show us an essay from a
historian and dwell in fiction. It is only an essay (an attempt) - nice
trial. I personally do like stories.
>TILL
> The daughters
>in the field were the mainland villages, and even the translation that Walid
>first quoted to us rendered the Hebrew expression as "mainland settlements,"
Is this a deduction of some historians again?
>so when Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed "YOUR daughters in the field," he had
>not yet destroyed "YOU." Now if Ezekiel was saying only that Nebuchadnezzar
>would destroy a fortified city on the mainland, why did he say that
>"daughters in the field" or "mainland settlements" would be killed or
>destroyed? Is everyone noticing that when a part of this prophecy doesn't
>conveniently fit into Walid's claim, he simply ignores it?
An appeal to pretext.
>Now if Walid will simply read Ezekiel 27, even he should recognize by all of
>the sea and ship imagery that the prophecy was about the island city. In
>the following quotation of the entire chapter, I have emphasized in bold
>letters words and expressions that show that Ezekiel's prophecy was clearly
>directed at a city that was in the sea.
Sea ports are not necessarily part of a mainland city.
Can a little island command the greatest cedar trade at the time?
>TILL
>That Ezekiel was metaphorically describing Tyre as a ship is evident to
>anyone who wants to see the obvious meaning of the passage. The metaphor is
>very appropriate for a city that occupied an entire island in the sea but
>hardly appropriate for mainland villages. The quotation of chapter 27
>continues.
There is no archaeological finding to prove an island city in that period.
There is no map dating back to Nebuchadnezzar showing 2 Tyre. You just
have a firm belief in your reasoning.
>TILL
>Again, we can clearly see the metaphorical representation of Tyre as a ship
>that is wrecked and sinks into the sea. Does this imagery fit a mainland
>city? Well, notice that the last two verses of this chapter refers to the
>reactions of "the inhabitants of the coastlands" who witness Tyre's
>destruction in the sea.
How far can you see a ship sinking? It makes little difference which
shore (on the mainland or on an island) you are located.
>>35 All the INHABITANTS OF THE COASTLANDS are appalled at you; and their
>kings are horribly afraid, their faces are convulsed.
How far apart are cities situated? What was the distance between the
inhabitants to view the event? You can hardly see things 4 miles away at
sea. Were all the inhabitants living in a radius of 2 miles from Tyre?
What is the size of population in the ancient world - just a few thousand
locallers at nearby kingdoms?
>>36 The merchants among the peoples hiss at you; you have come to a
>dreadful end and shall be no more FOREVER.
Where is the cedar trade today? Where is the dye trade today? Where is
the infra-structure of Tyre city today?
>TILL
>The "prophecy" makes a clear distinction between the city "in the heart of
>the seas" and the inhabitants of the mainland. Furthermore, this chapter
>ends with the repetition of the prediction that Tyre would "be no more
>FOREVER."
Please show us aerial photos to reveal what is on the mainland Tyre and
what is on the island Tyre.
Can you locate mainland Tyre?
++^^^+++
David Lim
57 Northolt Cres.
Markham,ON
Canada, L3R 6P2
http://www.interlog.com/~dlim/
KNOW JESUS . KNOW PEACE
+++***+++