So I got in trouble

[Esquilax]

I was actually talking to mini about his failed arguement of tyre. That his city was the thrid or even fourth encarnation of that city (depending on where you start counting.)

His arguement states that the last version of Tyre was the same as Ezekiel's prophecied tyre. It wasn't plain and simple. the two citys share a name, they don't even share the same space.

Jerusalem although is not the same city it was back then, at least it has not moved, and therefore can be identified as the same city. This is not the case with tyre. it foundations were move 4 times making each encarnation a seperate city from the last.

Ezekiel's prophesy did not say there would never be another city name tyre, only that His city would be completely destroyed. it was. The damage was so extensive they could not build where the first city was.

Thus stomping mini's arguement.

We're all aware of the sophistry you're forced to employ, Drich.

And again, you're reduced to this pathetic "the bible doesn't not say this thing I'm making up isn't true, and therefore it is," crap. Given the kind of mental gymnastics you're having to employ, what's more likely: that a speciously supported magic prophecy is false, or that it's actually true, but that the author was so completely incapable of clearly communicating information- despite knowing the future- that he's forced to speak in vagaries and riddles that, coincidentally, can only be accurately translated by you, and they just so happen to agree with your every position?

[Minimalist]

I was actually talking to mini about his failed arguement of tyre. That his city was the thrid or even fourth encarnation of that city (depending on where you start counting.)

Drippy you fucking idiot...if your god existed he would be very ashamed of you.

When your fucking god says (supposedly) "19 “For thus says the Lord God: When I make you a city laid waste, like the cities that are not inhabited, when I bring up the deep over you, and the great waters cover you, 20 then I will make you go down with those who go down to the pit, to the people of old, and I will make you to dwell in the world below, among ruins from of old, with those who go down to the pit, so that you will not be inhabited; but I will set beauty in the land of the living. 21 I will bring you to a dreadful end, and you shall be no more. Though you be sought for, you will never be found again, declares the Lord God.”

why do you not believe him? I'll tell you why. Because the fucking city is still there...still in the same place....like every other town in the ANE one layer built on top of another.

I have no trouble with this because I know your "god" is a fucking figment of someone's imagination but YOU, shithead, are supposed to believe it.

Why is your faith so lacking?

How fucking stupid are you?

Probably time to remind you that it was your alleged god who said "14 I will make you a bare rock. You shall be a place for the spreading of nets. You shall never be rebuilt, for I am the Lord; I have spoken, declares the Lord God."

Nope. Not even close.

God fucked up and only shitheads like you refuse to see it. It might help if you pulled your head out of your ass!

BTW, before you trot out any more of your asinine apologetic shit.

In ancient times, the island city of Tyre was heavily fortified (with defensive walls 150 feet (46 m) high[10]) and the mainland settlement, originally called Ushu (later called Palaetyrus, meaning "Old Tyre," by the Greeks) was actually more like a line of suburbs than any one city and was used primarily as a source of water and timber for the main island city.[11] Josephus records that the two fought against each other on occasion,[12] although most of the time they supported one another because they both benefited from the island city's wealth from maritime trade and the mainland area's source of timber, water and burial grounds.

This is history, moron. And it doesn't give a flying fuck about your shitty bible. Time to grow up, Drippy.

[pocaracas]

Assume god exists -> ASK -> get a mental confirmation that god exists -> confirmation bias appears to be in action -> just another loony.

Assume nothing.> A/S/K as pointed out in Luke 11. > Get whatever confirmation you yourself specifcly needs to establish and maintain belief, apart from the religious ideas you have placed on God.

You do realize there are many people who have done this and got zilch, right?
You do realize that the method outlines in Luke only works for some people... I wonder why?...

Assume nothing -> get confirmation that a god exists -> write paper -> Be on the news -> collect million dollars.

Assume nothing -> get confirmation that a god exists -> write paper -> Get ridiculed for writting a paper, because the system of education we have will never accept God in any form, because it was designed not to.

If the method is reproducible, then why would anyone be ridiculed?
Oh, but reality shows that the method is anything but reproducible...
I wonder why?...

[Ryantology]

Assume nothing.> A/S/K as pointed out in Luke 11. > Get whatever confirmation you yourself specifcly needs to establish and maintain belief, apart from the religious ideas you have placed on God.

Operating on faith is the very definition of making an assumption and acting on it.

[Drich]

I was actually talking to mini about his failed arguement of tyre. That his city was the thrid or even fourth encarnation of that city (depending on where you start counting.)

Drippy you fucking idiot...if your god existed he would be very ashamed of you.

When your fucking god says (supposedly) "19 “For thus says the Lord God: When I make you a city laid waste, like the cities that are not inhabited, when I bring up the deep over you, and the great waters cover you, 20 then I will make you go down with those who go down to the pit, to the people of old, and I will make you to dwell in the world below, among ruins from of old, with those who go down to the pit, so that you will not be inhabited; but I will set beauty in the land of the living. 21 I will bring you to a dreadful end, and you shall be no more. Though you be sought for, you will never be found again, declares the Lord God.”

Ezekiel's tyre was pulled up stone by stone and cast into the sea to make a land bridge by Alexander the Great's army to get at the sea port of tyre. (Which has been fortified in the time of neb's invasion and seige) This satasifies this part of the prophesy: when I bring up the deep over you, and the great waters cover you,
Then over time sand was deposited over the stones and remains that made up Ezekiel's tyre. thus full filling this part of the prophesy: 21 I will bring you to a dreadful end, and you shall be no more. Though you be sought for, you will never be found again, declares the Lord God.”

there is 100,000,000+ tons of sand and water on top of the City Ezekiel spoke against. It has never been seen again. Not to mention a whole NEW city.

This shows "New tyre" built on the causeway created by the destruction of Old Tyre.
http://www.lgic.org/en/photos3_.php

Look at the photo of the causeway to the right is where Ezk's tyre existed to the left is where Rome built it's incarnation of the city and the new city is obviously in the middle.

Your arguement fails because none of the other encarnations of tyre were built where the old city was.

Probably time to remind you that it was your alleged god who said "14 I will make you a bare rock. You shall be a place for the spreading of nets.

Which was satasfied here:Negotiations having failed, Alexander began his operations in January 332 BC. After occupying old Tyre, he began to construct a causeway (or mole) across the channel toward the walls of Tyre, using rocks, timbers, and rubble taken from the buildings of the old city. Initially, work progressed well: the water near the mainland was shallow and the bottom muddy, but, as the causeway lengthened, the Macedonians and Greeks began to run into trouble. The seafloor shelved sharply near the city, to a depth of 18 ft (5.5m). Work slowed to snail-pace, and the work gangs found themselves increasingly harassed by missile fire from the city walls.

http://www.ancient.eu.com/article/107/

So what's on the site of Ezekiel's tyre? A fishing village, and guess what they do with their nets.
http://www.google.com/images?q=Tyre+nets...art=0&sa=N

You shall never be rebuilt, for I am the Lord; I have spoken, declares the Lord God."

...And it hasn't
Ezekiel's tyre is at the bottom of the ocean, and a fishing villiage sits on the foundations of where that city was orginally built.

In ancient times, the island city of Tyre was heavily fortified (with defensive walls 150 feet (46 m) high[10]) and the mainland settlement, originally called Ushu (later called Palaetyrus, meaning "Old Tyre," by the Greeks) was actually more like a line of suburbs than any one city and was used primarily as a source of water and timber for the main island city.[11] Josephus records that the two fought against each other on occasion,[12] although most of the time they supported one another because they both benefited from the island city's wealth from maritime trade and the mainland area's source of timber, water and burial grounds.

Ah, no. Any reference that Josephus would have been able to speak to was on the second incarnation of the city.. You know that pic you like to trot out when the subject comes up? The ruins in the foreground with the modern city in the back ground?? That was the city being spoken of in your foremention paragraph it was built by the romans. (A mile or so away from Ezekiel's tyre.) At that point Ezekiel's tyre had been on the ocean floor for several hundred years..

Nice try mini, but your bait and switch will not work here.

This is history, moron. And it doesn't give a flying fuck about your shitty bible. Time to grow up, Drippy.

This is history, moron. And it doesn't give a flying fuck about your shitty (desire to disprove the) bible. Time to grow up, (Mini.)

---

You do realize there are many people who have done this and got zilch, right?
You do realize that the method outlines in Luke only works for some people... I wonder why?...

Because they earnstly asked and sought and thought that was enough. NONE Of Them Knocked as outlined in Luke 11.

If the method is reproducible, then why would anyone be ridiculed?

because if the method is reproduciable then in a sense you have been able to bottle or put God in a box or formula. Which is counter the very defination of God. Meaning If an infinate God can not be contained then what you have contained in your formula is not God.

God is the only one who can give us a formula to approach Him and still remain true to His defining characteristics. He has in A/S/K.

Oh, but reality shows that the method is anything but reproducible...
I wonder why?...

Because that method would disprove an infinate being that answers to no one or nothing. In essence the 'forumla' would then be more powerful than God.
With a reproducable formula you reduce the Alpha and Omega down to a genie in a bottle. Genies are not Gods they are slaves of man.

---

Assume nothing.> A/S/K as pointed out in Luke 11. > Get whatever confirmation you yourself specifcly needs to establish and maintain belief, apart from the religious ideas you have placed on God.

Operating on faith is the very definition of making an assumption and acting on it.

Not my rules ryan. If you want to know God you must follow His rules. He told us we all have been given a measure of faith. I have demonstrated this to be true, that no matter what you believe (Science/Philosphy or God) it is all faith based. (To one degree or another.) Faith in God requiring the least amount of it.
All one needs is a mustard seeds worth.

[Angrboda]

First you claim that the prophecy was fulfilled by the destruction of some of the mainland suburbs which are pictured in a photograph showing modern Tyre behind them (in the thread you linked). Now you're claiming the destruction of Tyre was fulfilled by Alexander's attack of the island city. These are not compatible claims. This is what is known as kettle logic ("I didn't steal your kettle, and even if I did, you owed me."); claiming multiple incompatible things in the hopes that one of the explanations will gain traction. This shows you don't actually know anything about the subject, and are just throwing out ad hoc explanations like you always do. Any port in a storm, eh? Only problem is, this is another flawed way of thinking that leads to conclusions that can't be relied upon to be true. People shun you because you use flawed thinking, not because your conclusions are loathsome. (They are, but it is the faulty way you reach them which makes them unreliable bullshit.)

Logic fail. Prophecy not defended.

[Drich]

First you claim that the prophecy was fulfilled by the destruction of some of the mainland suburbs which are pictured in a photograph showing modern Tyre behind them (in the thread you linked). Now you're claiming the destruction of Tyre was fulfilled by Alexander's attack of the island city. These are not compatible claims. This is what is known as kettle logic ("I didn't steal your kettle, and even if I did, you owed me."); claiming multiple incompatible things in the hopes that one of the explanations will gain traction. This shows you don't actually know anything about the subject, and are just throwing out ad hoc explanations like you always do. Any port in a storm, eh? Only problem is, this is another flawed way of thinking that leads to conclusions that can't be relied upon to be true. People shun you because you use flawed thinking, not because your conclusions are loathsome. (They are, but it is the faulty way you reach them which makes them unreliable bullshit.)

Logic fail. Prophecy not defended.

Why? Because you can point out the evolution of this arguement?