• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Bible - Why Trust It

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
The author of this article, makes this claim...
Nebuchadnezzar would destroy Tyre
In Ezekiel 26:1-21, God states that Nebuchadnezzar would conquer, sack, and completely destroy the city of Tyrus (Tyre) and that Tyre's land would never be built upon again:


I don't read anywhere in scripture where it says "Tyre's land would never be built upon again:"
Where is that written?

The city was destroyed, as was prophesied, by Nebuchadnezzar. :heavycheck:
It was hurled into the sea, as prophesied. :heavycheck:
It thus was uninhabited - made desolated... as prophesied. :heavycheck:

The claim is a strawman.
Let's go over your worst mistake first. Tyre was not destroyed. The prophecy failed there.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I see your claim. I don't see any supportive evidence. Should I ask, if you have any?

Tyre was destroyed.
Tyre, Lebanon - Wikipedia
Tyre
Siege of Tyre (332 BC) - Wikipedia
Yes, but not by Nebuchadnezzar. Failed prophecy.

Edit: Your second source uses the "Old Tyre" claim. That arose from Christian historians that realized how Tyre was a problem. But if you study the are, or even read the Bible, you will see that Tyre always was the (at that time) island. It was the source of wealth. It was a natural port. The land was where the "settlements" were. Those were destroyed by Nebby.
 
Last edited:

nPeace

Veteran Member
Yes, but not by Nebuchadnezzar. Failed prophecy.
So you were wrong the first time. Thanks.
Now read the prophecy again, and see that it was not to be completely destroyed by one king or nation. That's where readers make the mistake.
Please read it again.
Thus, the prophecy was fulfilled.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
So you were wrong the first time. Thanks.
Now read the prophecy again, and see that it was not to be completely destroyed by one king or nation. That's where readers make the mistake.
Please read it again.
Thus, the prophecy was fulfilled.
No, I was right the first time.

Zeke prophecized about Nebby, not Alex.

You did not understand the Bible verses. I can help you with that.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Using my tablet, but later I will link some articles using my desktop. Tyre was attacked many times before and after Nebby. That would make Alex's attack an expected event. Do you remember the standards for a prophecy?
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
No, I was right the first time.

Zeke prophecized about Nebby, not Alex.

You did not understand the Bible verses. I can help you with that.
No, please... and I am not going to engage in any childish argument with you - No yes No Yes.
You said Tyre was not destroyed. It was. you were wrong. Don't lie.
If anything, just say you made a mistake, and really meant to say, "Tyre was not destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar."
I will accept you made a mistake. Pride and ego, are not trophies.

The prophecy says...
(Ezekiel 26:3-5) 3 therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says: ‘Here I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring up many nations against you, just as the sea brings up its waves. 4They will destroy the walls of Tyre and tear down her towers, and I will scrape away soil and make her a shining, bare rock. 5 She will become a drying yard for dragnets in the midst of the sea.’. . .

Understand that you did not write the prophecy, so it's not the writer's fault that you got it wrong.
Based on the scriptures, the prophecy came true accurately.

After the prophecy was uttered...
Tyre, Lebanon - Wikipedia
Babylonian period (612-539 BCE)
Persian period (539-332 BCE)

Prophecy fulfilled. Done
Have your last word on this, as usual.
I'll move on to the next strawman.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
No, please... and I am not going to engage in any childish argument with you - No yes No Yes.
You said Tyre was not destroyed. It was. you were wrong. Don't lie.
If anything, just say you made a mistake, and really meant to say, "Tyre was not destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar."
I will accept you made a mistake. Pride and ego, are not trophies.

The prophecy says...
(Ezekiel 26:3-5) 3 therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says: ‘Here I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring up many nations against you, just as the sea brings up its waves. 4They will destroy the walls of Tyre and tear down her towers, and I will scrape away soil and make her a shining, bare rock. 5 She will become a drying yard for dragnets in the midst of the sea.’. . .

Understand that you did not write the prophecy, so it's not the writer's fault that you got it wrong.
Based on the scriptures, the prophecy came true accurately.

After the prophecy was uttered...
Tyre, Lebanon - Wikipedia
Babylonian period (612-539 BCE)
Persian period (539-332 BCE)

Prophecy fulfilled. Done
Have your last word on this, as usual.
I'll move on to the next strawman.
You need to drop the rudeness. You are simply wrong.

Nebby was a "king of kings". He was the "many nations".

You lost.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You should study the history of Tyre. It was attacked quite often before and after Nebby. It was a prized possession. Predicting that it would be attacked was not hard to do at all. That it would fall sooner or later was a given.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
I see your claim. I don't see any supportive evidence. Should I ask, if you have any?

Tyre was destroyed.
Tyre, Lebanon - Wikipedia
Tyre
Siege of Tyre (332 BC) - Wikipedia


Biblical Errancy: Ezekiel's Prophecy of Tyre: a failed ...
Biblical Errancy: April 2012ezekiels-prophecy-of-tyre-failed.html
Finally, the prophecy refers to Tyre as a whole—not to some edge of it! Tyreʼs negotiated settlement certainly did not give away the store; Baal, the son of Tyreʼs king, Ithobaal, succeeded him …
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
No, please... and I am not going to engage in any childish argument with you - No yes No Yes.
You said Tyre was not destroyed. It was. you were wrong. Don't lie.
If anything, just say you made a mistake, and really meant to say, "Tyre was not destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar."
I will accept you made a mistake. Pride and ego, are not trophies.

The prophecy says...
(Ezekiel 26:3-5) 3 therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says: ‘Here I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring up many nations against you, just as the sea brings up its waves. 4They will destroy the walls of Tyre and tear down her towers, and I will scrape away soil and make her a shining, bare rock. 5 She will become a drying yard for dragnets in the midst of the sea.’. . .

Understand that you did not write the prophecy, so it's not the writer's fault that you got it wrong.
Based on the scriptures, the prophecy came true accurately.

After the prophecy was uttered...
Tyre, Lebanon - Wikipedia
Babylonian period (612-539 BCE)
Persian period (539-332 BCE)

Prophecy fulfilled. Done
Have your last word on this, as usual.
I'll move on to the next strawman.

Let's go.back to this. Even the part that you quoted failed. By your own sources it was not scraped bare. Parts of the old city still exist as ruins. Alex did not flatten the city. He defeated it.

And if you want a thorough debunking of the failed prophecy, including the parts that you missed you could read this. Or we could go over how badly it fails here:

Biblical Errancy: Ezekiel's Prophecy of Tyre: a failed prophecy
 

Nimos

Well-Known Member
So basically, you seem to be saying, to outgrow someone, is to disagree with, or choose a way of life different to the other person.
Do you consider that a natural unguided process, or a guided process - choice?
That is a good question and one that I would tend to think is an unguided process. In fact I think most thinks are unguided, but have the illusion of being guided.

This is exactly the case... without the guessing.

Therefore, from that perspective, it is not reasonable to call this hate... unless of course, you mean hatred of what is bad, because that is how it is with this king (according to scripture). He does hate what is bad, and removes it from his domain. So anyone who wants to promote, and practice what is unclean, must go... no question.
The question is not whether God can decide the rules or not. Its whether the are morally right or not, based on our judgement.

Just because he don't like something and claim to right about it, doesn't mean that he is. Especially when you have lots of people (Especially atheists) disagreeing with it being so.
Since that is the case, clearly it is possible to adresse these claims in a constructive way by putting them up for debate. Even if one look at the laws found in most countries, we have made rules that support the idea, that one is not allowed to kill homosexsuals due to what God think is morally right.

How is that?
Why are there not millions and millions of Christians on the street protesting and demanding that this should be changed, if its clearly the moral right thing to do?

Do you want to restate it, by removing random people?
No, why should I? Its the same on both sides.

What do you mean by "somehow by some unexplained reason"? Can you give an example?
Do you mean a sudden earthquake occurs; a swarm of FBI agents suddenly swoop into the neighborhood, and order residents to stay put; a sudden downpour of rain... etc... etc.. ?
Please tell me. Do you think free will means unlimited?
I mean that free will have to work in accordance to physical laws. When the US dropped the atom bomb on Nagasaki for instant a person standing right where the bomb felt would have no chance of surviving. If such person however did survive a direct hit from such bomb, I would consider it an unexplained reason.

The mere fact, that the forces released from such blast would instantly kill them, as their body wouldn't be able to withstand it, would make it a miracle or intervention by something.

A man that thinks he should go up, rather than down, when he jumps off a cliff without a jet pack, is just being ridiculously arrogant, isn't he? ...and asking for gravity to cease to exist... because he wants to be unlimited.
But that is not the case, because it is perfectly explainable why this person is going down rather than up. That is why one have to work within the limits of physical laws.

If God stops a person from carrying out an act he doesn't want taking place, he has demonstrated that he alone is all powerful, while the person has limits, and is really not as big as he thinks.
That person should learn something - free will does not mean ultimate, or unlimited. He should humble himself, just as gravity makes him humble.
If God stops someone from doing something, then one can not argue that there is any such thing as free will. Or at least it would be completely meaningless as you would have no clue when and when not God would choose to interfere.

The point is, you apparently are conflating free will with unlimited freedom. They are not the same.
No, im clearly not. If that were the case, I would have used examples with people shooting beams out of their eyes etc.

Does the fact that you have to (a necessity) eat, drink, dedicate, urinate, and sleep, mean that you do not have free will?

If your answer is yes, then we do not have free will, according to your understand of it.
Im far from certain that we do have free will. But that is besides the point, because im not the one claiming we have free will. The bible claims that we have, because God told us so. (Hope you see the irony in that) :)

For instant, we do not choose what we like or what we don't like when it comes to flavours. No one have ever chosen that they like strawberries more than bananas. In fact most things we choose to do in life, is based on passed experiences rather than freely choosing what to do.

Let's suppose you did see someone fall into hot lava, and they emerged without a mark, would you rub your eyes, and turn to the person next to you, and ask, "Did you see that?"
What if they all did, what natural explanation would you suggest? I have a hunch that would not change your mind about the supernatural.
First of all I would be extremely surprised. Next I would question it, maybe they are wearing some new high protective suit that im not aware of. And to me that is the big difference, I would not just jump to the conclusion that it must be supernatural, but rather I would look for explanations.

Secondly, I would make sure that people I trust could also witness it and get their opinion as well. If it turned out that these people could in fact jump in and out of hot lava, then I would have no issue changing m mind.

No. It does not interfere with free will. You agreed that the outcome does not determine free will.
I don't understand why you agree and yet don't agree.
Also, I'm not sure you grasped the explanation about prophecy.
Nonetheless, if God intervened to protect the life of someone, as he did, it does not have anything to do with free will. See the explanation above.
It depends on the situation. So obviously in some cases he would interfere with someone's free will.

You evidently don't understand. It was not already decided. Where did you read that?
Well that is basically the idea of a prophecy isn't it?

If it weren't, what is the difference between a guess and prophecy?
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I see your claim. I don't see any supportive evidence. Should I ask, if you have any?

Tyre was destroyed.
Tyre, Lebanon - Wikipedia
Tyre
Siege of Tyre (332 BC) - Wikipedia

Virtually all cities in the Middle East were burned, destroyed and sieged at one time or the another. Nothing unusual in the Middle East or anywhere else in the world for that matter. The old walled city where the old temple was on the island was never under water. only part of the city in part of the harbour just Southwest of the island is submerged. Like many ancient building the ruins of the Temple of Tyre still exist.
 
Last edited:
Top