From: rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Question for fundamentalists
Date: 6 Oct 92 04:07:30 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology

In article <Oct.2.00.14.18.1992.1533@geneva.rutgers.edu> max@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com (Max Webb) writes:
|In article <Sep.27.22.42.01.1992.2219@athos.rutgers.edu> rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts) writes:
|>This is my submission that I mentioned would follow - it gives
|>a summary of three chapters of Dr. D. James Kennedy's book
|>_Why I Believe_.  
|>...
|>Summary of Dr. D. James Kennedy's book "Why I Believe"
|>
|>[1]Why I Believe the Bible:
|>The Bible gives many predictive prophecies.  It tells us of 
|>a coming Prophet into whom's mouth God will put his words.  
|>It tells not to fear anyone who gives a prophesy that is 
|>false...
|
|Keep that in mind...
|
|>Examples: The cities of Tyre and Sidon, two great cities on 
|>the Mediterranean Sea.  Exekiel prophesied that Tyre would 
|>be destroyed and never be rebuilt nor inhabited.  Sidon was 
|>to be brought down, but continue to be inhabited.  Sidon was 
|>attacked and many killed, but still exists to this day.
|>
|>Tyre on the other hand was at its height at the time of the 
|>prophecy.  It was to be destroyed, made like a rock, have 
|>its building stones thrown into the sea, and be built no 
|>more.  Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon fought against the city for 
|>thirteen years and took it.  Many former inhabitants fled 
|>for an island and made a new city of Tyre.  Two hundred and 
|>fifty years later the city walls still stood, but Alexander 
|>the Great came and took the old buildings and dumped them 
|>into the sea to build a bridge to the new Tyre, in order to 
|>take it.  He did - the old city was stripped.  Today the old 
|>Tyre is like a rock and a place to spread fishing nets to 
|>dry.
|>--
|>rpitts@cerl.gatech.edu
|>Atlanta, GA
|
|*sigh*. D. Kennedy is the guy that denied ever having believed
|in the Paluxy man-tracks (that supposedly coexist with dinosaur
|tracks) until confronted with video tape. He is no more honest
|here; this claim was trashed when it was quoted from McDowell.

I think this argument tactic is called an ad homien(?) - against the
man and not the point presented.  What do you think?

|Dave Butler writes:
|" Tyre is now Sur, a coastal Lebanese city of about 10,000 to 15,000 people.
|Comment:
|Josh is blatantly wrong, and it only took a couple minutes to verify.  His
|scholarship is not merely shoddy, but non-existent."
|Robert Low writes:
|"On the fulfillment of OT prophecy, specifically the fall of Tyre:
|(Ezekiel 26ff)
|the description given of the fullfilment of this prophecy
|could only be held to by somebody who already was committed to
|believing that. The prophecy clearly implies that Tyre
|would fall to the forces of Nebuchadrezzar, and that Tyre
|would be completely destroyed, never again to be inhabited.
|Of course, Tyre survived the siege and was not taken until
|Alexander built a mole out to the island.  It is hard to 
|justify this as a fullfilment of the prophecy, since the
|King of Tyre is being told that he will die in the sacking
|of Tyre, and he didn't live that long. However, even granting
|this, Tyre is still inhabited to this day: McDowell attempts
|to extract himself from this by maintaining that what is
|"really meant" is that Tyre will never again be prosperous.
|Unfortunately for him, Tyre currently has a thriving
|tourist industry, and a fishing industry."

You are supporting that the costal city was attacked and the inhabitants
fled to the island and rebuilt Tyre, correct? 

Is Tyre today on the island or on the mainland?

|James J. Lippard writes:
|"According to Ezekiel 26:3-14, 26:21, and 27:36, Nebuchadnezzar would capture
|Tyre and destroy it forever, never even to be found again.  Ezekiel 26:12
|predicted that he would seize its riches.  In fact, Nebuchadnezzar's siege
|lasted 13 years, but he never captured the city, only its outworks on the
|mainland.  Ezekiel 29:18 admits that he never captured its riches.  Tyre was

So you are saying that there were two cities - one one the mainland and
one on the island?

Less look at the passage in question.  Take note of the references to
the nations coming against Tyre (they) and Nebuchadnezzar attack (he).

   Ezek 26:1   In the eleventh year, on the first day of the month, the word
      of the LORD came to me:
   Ezek 26:2   "Son of man, because Tyre has said of Jerusalem, 'Aha! The gate
      to the nations is broken, and its doors have swung open to me; now that
      she lies in ruins I will prosper,'
   Ezek 26:3   therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against
      you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea
      casting up its waves.
   Ezek 26:4   They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers; I
      will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock.
   Ezek 26:5   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,
   Ezek 26:6   and her settlements on the mainland will be ravaged by the
      sword. Then they will know that I am the LORD.
   Ezek 26:7   "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.
   Ezek 26:8   He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword;
      he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls
      and raise his shields against you.
   Ezek 26:9   He will direct the blows of his battering rams against your
      walls and demolish your towers with his weapons.
   Ezek 26:10   His horses will be so many that they will cover you with dust.
      Your walls will tremble at the noise of the war horses, wagons and
      chariots when he enters your gates as men enter a city whose walls have
      been broken through.
   Ezek 26:11   The hoofs of his horses will trample all your streets; he will
      kill your people with the sword, and your strong pillars will fall to
      the ground.
   Ezek 26:12   They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they
      will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your
      stones, timber and rubble into the sea.
   Ezek 26:13   I will put an end to your noisy songs, and the music of your
      harps will be heard no more.
   Ezek 26:14   I will make you a bare rock, and you will become a place to
      spread fishnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I the LORD have spoken,
      declares the Sovereign LORD.

The prophecy did not say Nebuchadnezzar would take the city, but that
he would go against it.  They (the nations) would take the plunder.

|destroyed 240 years later by Alexander the Great, and it was subsequently
|rebuilt (and referenced in the New Testament in Matthew 11:21-22, Mark 3:8,
|Luke 10:13-14, Acts 12:20 and 21:3,7).  It was destroyed again in 1291 C.E.,
|again rebuilt, and continues to exist today.
|   Josh McDowell, amazingly enough, cites this as a prime example of a
|prophecy that has been fulfilled [McDowell 72, pp. 285-291].  He rationalizes
|away the rebuilding of Tyre by making a distinction between "Old Tyre" and
|"Tyre", an arbitrary distinction made only by Christian apologists.  He
|removes the problem of the prediction that Tyre would "never be found again"
|by claiming that Ezekiel 26:21 really means only that Tyre would never regain
|its former power."

Let me suggest the following.  Suppose I had a house and so was attacked.
I and my whole family fled down the road and over the hill and across the
river and built a new house.  My old house is left.  Someone comes in
later and clears this house down to the ground.  Even if someone else
later came and built on my old lot, it can be safely said that the house of 
Pitts was not rebuilt.  

|For lack of time, I will not address the other supposed prophecies.
|If you have a favorite, point it out, and I will address it.

Oh.

If some history presents one approach and other presents another, whose
is really to say that Dr. Kennedy is wrong.  Is the other one infallible.  I
think Dr. Kennedy says he or one of his friends has stood at the site
of the old Tyre and has seen the bald ground and I think, even 
seen the fisherman drying their nets there.

For Christ and His Kingdom,
Richard Pitts
-- 
rpitts@cerl.gatech.edu       |    
Atlanta, GA                --|-- 
                        -|-  |  -|-
                         |   |   |