From: daveb@pogo.wv.tek.com (Dave Butler)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Tyre still exists today (was: I'm God.)
Date: 8 Oct 92 00:59:24 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Wilsonville,  OR.

I find Richard Pitts rationale and defense of Mr Kennedy's abuse of
historical fact to be very contrived and in no way compelling.  Richard
suggests that the new Tyre (now Sur) was not built by the original inhabitants
and therefore is not really Tyre.

> 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.  

He then defends Mr Kennedy's claims because there are indeed areas of old
Tyre where fishermen dry their nets:

> 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.
 
Richard, it is not surprising that there are areas of Tyre on which they
spread fishing nets; its on the coast and is a fishing town.  The fishermen
who live there are going to spread their nets to dry somewhere close to where
they live.  Thus if Mr Kennedy uses this as proof that Tyre exists no more, he
is either uselessly ignorant, or worthlessly deceitful. 

As to your house analogy, it is not applicable to Mr Kennedy's claims. Don't
you remember how he stated it:

> 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. ...
> 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.
> ^^^^

But today Tyre is not "like a rock;" it has been rebuilt.  According to
Encyclopedia Britannica, most of the remains of the Phonician period lie
beneath the present town of Sur.  In other words Richard, Mr Kennedy lied. 
Further that was not his only mistake.  Kennedy claimed:

> 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.  

That too is wrong.  EB states:

	For much of the 8th and 7th centuries the city was subject to 
	Assyria, and in 585-573 it successfully withstood a prolonged 
	siege by the Babylonian king Nebuchadrezzer II. 

So Mr Kennedy can not even be trusted to get historical facts correct.

By the way Richard, the Island Tyre and the mainland Tyre are now connected
and have been since Alexander built a causeway out to the island to conquer
it; the Island is now technically an peninsula.  The modern city of Sur,
which can in no way to be considered a barren rock, includes both old parts
of Tyre.

As to Mr Kennedy, I find it disgusting when an evangelist who claims to
represent a god of truth, falsely presents himself as a historical authority
and then presents lies to gain followers for that god.  I find it repulsive
when I see some charlatan and fraud ostensibly lying for a "God of Truth." 
If there is really a Jesus who is "The God of Truth", and a Devil who is 
"The Father of all lies", then it becomes obvious who Mr Kennedy serves with
his disinformation.
 
				Later,

				Dave Butler

    He who begins by loving Christianity better than truth, will proceed
    by loving his own sect of the Church better than Christianity, and end by
    loving himself better than all.
				Samuel Taylor Coleridge
 
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.sex,soc.singles