----- Original Message -----

From: <lawyerkill@aol.com>

Newsgroups: alt.bible.errancy

Cc: <errancyn@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2003 5:54 PM

Subject: Re: David Lim Strikes Again!

> >> DAVID LIM

> >> Do not remember drawing tickets.

> >

> >Tim Taylor

> >Which is a response to LK's comments how?

Wonder how Lawyerkill got it.

----- Original Message -----

From: Viv <viv@viv.id.au>

Newsgroups: alt.bible.errancy

Cc: <errancyn@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 7:31 AM

Subject: Re: David Lim Strikes Again!

> On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 03:36:24 GMT, Tim Taylor <bdtayl@yahoo.com> uttered:

> >>DAVID LIM

> >>Skeptics claim that Tyre is not a bare rock at the present time. Therefore the

> >>prophesy failed.

> >>The city of Tyre was made a bare rock in history. Skeptics are reluctant to

> >>show us a city of Tyre on the mainland.

>

D.Lim: Quotation that does not state location(where about in the vast sites). Does not appear to be good scholarship from the off-set.

> >Tim Taylor

> >I'm not reluctant because the idea that this prophecy referred to a mainland

> >city, which WOULD HAVE BEEN ON SAND, NOT A ROCK is ridiculous.

D.Lim: Bare rock and sand. Who sees the distinction?

Also, part of the modern island city/village is built on reclaimed land on the widened causeway of Alexander. On Rock? On stones and rubble? Or on sand? Ridiculous?

So, is the modern city and Roman buildings on the mainland built on sand? Not even by implication.

Ridiculous to think the mainland is all sand, and the island is just a piece of rock because it is called "La SUR" � "Rock"

D.Lim: Romans and Arabs have a long history of false witness. Eg: the invention of Palestine. This name was never there on the map of Judea (the first century AD). To date, the state of Palestine has not yet existed. Sympathizers also bear false witness by keeping on mentioning Palestine.

The lesson we learn here is that frequent mentioning does not validate anything. Certain personal conviction and words, and historical record do not validate anything.

> >The island city was built on two rocks, so the prophecy was referring to the

> >island city, not the mainland city (where a settlement- El Bass exists anyway)

>

D.Lim: 2 rocks now, after so many posting/e-mail.

A word to word quotation from the prophecy would do if it is so clearly stated in the Bible. Why interpretation and extra-Biblical evidence if it is so clearcut? Where is that quotation from the Bible?

How come non-believers do not withdraw from this question begging assertation?

Any settlement is a city? And a city rebuilt?

How is the glory of the city rebuilt? Too much asking for that? Is that what is demanded in the rebuilding of London after the Fire in London? Is that what is expected in the rebuilding of the twin-buildings of World Trade Centre? Not just something on the precinct/address/site.

F. Till called El Bass something other than a city. Mix up of language/words by this English teacher?

Even in this post the oppositions have not called El Bass the city of Tyre.

Here in Toronto, we call Scarborough and North York Toronto because this is the official designation.

One can find the border drawn on the map. Very convenient.

> >Perhaps Dr. Lim will tell us why Ezekiel would think a city built on sand would

> >become a bare rock.

D.Lim: How stupid! How ignorant! Prophecies do not necessary come with explanation.

Ie. The prophecies concerning the coming of Christ and His return, God�s salvation plan hardly include explanation.

Stupid enough to ask "why".

Stupid to think and express that Ezekiel would thnk "why".

With such stupidity people laugh at me. Very amusing, if not just unreasonable.

Is El Bass built on sand? Roman settlement built on sand?

All the mainland is sand?

> >The relevant map, obtained from the UN is here:

> >

> >http://www.geocities.com/bdtayl/t1.JPG

D.Lim: The UN is hardly any Bible, Divine authority. The political representation is hardly an Archaeological authority.

Map link did not work. Why not link up to the UN site instead of geocities?

What makes the UN more truthful than the Romans and Arabs?

What makes one think it is?

> >>David Lim

> >>Skeptics hardly talk about a modern city of Tyre on the Island of Tyre.

> >

> >Tim Taylor

> >As was the custom when you regularly posted to this list, one can only guess

> >what it is you are trying to communicate here.

D.Lim: Guess work?

Guess work of non-believers. Not a matter of sound reasoning. Not a matter of scholarship.

What a waste of time for Christians trying to communicate with truth seekers.

> >>David Lim

> >>Skeptics are reluctant to show us the ruined city of ancient Tyre as a proof

> >>that the city of Tyre is not a bare rock ( ie: rocky ground without a city,

> >>not even its ruined walls ).

>

D.Lim: So far, the bare rock part is not shown. No map to indicate settlement and rocky territories.

> VIV

> That would be because the modern city of Sur is built *upon the Phoenician

D.Lim: Is this a guess work? Did she live there at the time? Got aproved documentary tapes for us?

Who could be so sure with guess work? Who could be so trusting to some scholars whose lives you hardly know, and not stated. Who could be so sure of the thoughts of some others?

Kadado claimed to be scholars?

Kadado: Probably the best-known episode in the history of Tyre was its resistance to the army of the Macedonian conqueror Alexander the Great, who took it after a seven-month siege in 332. He completely destroyed the mainland portion of the town and used its rubble to build an immense causeway (some 2,600 feet [800 meters] long and 600-900 feet [180-270 meters] wide) to gain access to the island section.

. . . and until the 13th century it was a principal town of the kingdom of Jerusalem.

D.Lim: Interesting to find on this site of Kadado that Tyre is described as the town. Something got mixed up here. Big difference between a major city and a town. Also He mentioned that Alexander completely destroyed the mainland portion of the town and used its rubble to build, and the opposition think that Phoenician remains could be found under the built Roman structures.

Also, El Bass and some Phoenician cemetory existed to date. How would he reconcile with his idea of complete destruction with remaining town and cemetery?

> The section Archeological Sites mentions that "most of the remains of the

> Phoenician period lie beneath the present town". In another section

> regarding the UNESCO designation of ancient Tyre as a World Heritage site,

> it mentions that "the site is threatened by ****urban growth****, looting,

> ^^^^^^^^^^^^

> and the decay of stone because of airborne pollution"(emphasis mine).

>

The coastal region of Tyre is well mentioned at the time of Christ.

Having a name, a designated region populated is no proof that the prophecies failed.

No one at the time of Christ and no Gospel writer thought so when the name of Tyre was freely penned into their records.

Christ had no doubt or fear of failing prophesies when walking there.

> The UNESCO World Heritage report on Tyre says "The Committee decided to

> inscribe this site such as it was defined in the plan submitted by the

> Lebanese authorities. The Committee furthermore requested the Lebanese

> authorities to give details on the type of protection given within and

> around the zones of protection indicated on the plan as uncontrolled urban

> development should not destroy the old city."

>

D.Lim: The Lebanese authorities are non-believing Arabs; not Christians.

This said Committee rely soly on the input of some other people(not well examined).

"the zones" and the "old city"? Yet F. Till and non-believers so often talked of one island zone.

How come non-believers put so much faith on UNESCO and people whose lives and reasoning are hardly examined? What makes these carnal flesh trustworthy? Because they are of the same kind with the opposition?

> Then of course, the Roman ruins also lie above the Phoenician ruins. But go

> ahead, David Lim, tell the archaeologists that they should tear down what's

> left of the largest Roman hippodrome ever discovered just so they can show

> you some Phoenician walls underneath it.(hint: the hippodrome was on the

> mainland, as it's too big to fit on the island, and is on sand, not rock)

> <http://www.kadado.com/media/pics/lebanon/tyre/tyre_romanarena_collage.jpg>

>

D.Lim: Isn�t this what is demanded by sceptics? To see to the truth themselves?

Now why a leap over a leap of faith?

The wordings avoid ascertaining that the Roman structure is on top of Tyre, or a rebuilding program of Tyre. Rebuilding what Tyrian structure? Rebuilding what Tyrian system and precinct?

The Roman Structure on sand? What proof is there? Showing us geological data? Or have you got that yourselves?

On Phoenician walls? On Phoenician walls which are on sand? Or on sand?

Not seeing the walls and yet believing they are there? Why suddenly so much faith?

> The same website has a fabulous shot of Tyre from the air (link below),

D.Lim: Where are the maps, archaeological, and geological data?

A lack of research and data while jumping into answers with leaps of faith?

> showing some sections on both the island and the mainland covered in

> apartment buildings, and some areas left uninhabited to preserve the ancient

> ruins: Roman ruins, all of them. (Y'know, built on top of the old

> Phoenician town - TYRE WAS REBUILT. What ruins remain today are the columns

> and tiers of monumental public architecture, the Romans' private dwellings

>would have been where today's modern dwellings now stand.)

D.Lim: "some sections", with geographical location not shown on scaled map. Poor scholarship.

No Phoenician ruins, building lines? All built over by Romans? What is wrong with the Romans or rather the interpretators? Did Romans hate ancient artifacts and Tyre so much to effect a complete cover-up?

Did Alexander mix them when the causeway was constructed?

In Kowloon, apartments are built on top of the old Kowloon City. Yet no one is saying that the old Kowloon City is rebuilt. You do not call a city rebuilt just because some buildings are on its original location. This is common sense. The modern Kowloon City is an area. The old demolished one was a walled city.

Also, the cultural, economy, religion, ethnic and glory parts. Where are they?

Tyrian dye? Cider? Trade? Phoenician language? Phoenician Kingdom? Timber citywall on the island?

>These Roman

> buildings were built on top of Alexander's causeway, the original rocky

> islands being residential as was the mainland immediately across from the

> islands. The ROman hippodrome was built on the landward side of the

> mainland settlements, as people were living where their ancestors always had

> within a year of Alexander moving on. Today's cemeteries are in the spaces

> between the Roman ruins, a thrifty use of space that the inhabitants cannot

> build upon because they wish to preserve the ruins. So the "bare space"

> (notice how green it is) we see today is on top of the Alexandran causeway,

> not on top of either the island fortress city or its mainland agricultural

> satellites known to Ezekiel.

>

D.Lim: Original rocky islands? How many and where about?

Ancestry of Roman and Phoenician?

> You can see from this shot that while there are still beaches and rocky

> places for fishermen to spread their nets, anywhere within several miles of

> Tyre they are going to see tall modern buildings while they do it, and be

> able to walk a few hundred metres to the nearest cafe. Hardly the place of

> ruin and desolation described by the Bible.

> TYRE FROM THE AIR:

> <http://www.kadado.com/media/pics/lebanon/tyre/tyre_from_the_air.jpg>

> MORE PICTURES (including the "downtown Roman ruins" - they've got so many

> Roman ruins them within the city boundaries they have to distinguish between

> downtown and others!):

> <http://www.kadado.com/album/tyre_pictures.htm>

>

D.Lim: It takes people who are against conservation to build on ancient ruins, and ancient building lines.

> Viv

> --

> alt.bible.errancy FAQ

> <http:www.viv.id.au/abefaq.htm>

> Vivienne Smythe

> --

> "Some believe all manner of hearsay evidence; others twist truth

> into fiction; and both sorts of error are magnified by time."

> [Cornelius Tacitus, _The Annals of Imperial Rome_ c.100CE]

D.Lim: We select believable evidence for our pictures and story of life. Some twist fiction into truth, and call truth fiction.

Error reflects human weakness; the same weakness inherent in the thoughts of non-believers. Sin also produces error. Only God can forgive sin and rectify error completely.

Who can help your weakness and error if you believe God to be in error?