palladium

Thanks Ivastic.
 
Also, it's worth mentioning that the prophecy regarding Tyre (Ezek 26) was quite possibly written while the siege was in progress (see http://en.wikipedia....)#Early_history), and after Nebuchadnezzar had already been successful in his siege against Jerusalem...so it's unsurprising that Ezekiel would prophesy the same outcome for Tyre. What is surprising is that Nebuchadnezzar failed to deliver.
 
It would seem from Ezekiel 29:18-21 that Ezekiel acknowledges the (partial?) failure of the Tyre prophecy:
 

Son of man, King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon made his army labor hard against Tyre. Every head was rubbed bald and every shoulder rubbed bare; yet he and his army received no wages from Tyre for the work he carried out against it. Therefore this is what the sovereign Lord says: Look, I am about to give the land of Egypt to King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon. He will carry off her wealth, capture her loot, and seize her plunder; it will be his army’s wages. I have given him the land of Egypt as his compensation for attacking Tyre, because they did it for me, declares the sovereign Lord.

 
As for the Tyre prophecy, yes Tyre was later defeated by Alexander the Great, but it was never made "a bare rock" (Ezek 26:14) and was later rebuilt, despite what the prophecy claims. Even if you want to assert that the "old" city wasn't rebuilt, you still have to concede that it was partially rebuilt, and the only reason it has never been fully restored is because it is an ancient landmark and the old ruins are preserved. By the same logic, Jerusalem was never rebuilt because the old city ruins are still there today. Looking at Tyre today (quite a successful city), Ezek 26:17-18 make little sense.

Exposure is impressive, must be time lapse; this photo pretty much proves it.

There is writing on top of the bricks in this photo. Left there by other keen climbers perhaps?

You can get any old rubbish published. Especially as a conference abstract.

Science is simply an understanding and knowledge of our physical world. Science and religion are perfectly compatible, the prophets understood science. Dan 1:4 Gods creative process was set in motion in 6 literal 24 hour days. "The evening and the morning were the (#) day. Each day continued for 6000 years where what was created multiplied and evolved until the next day of creation. Adam and Eve were created at the end of the sixth day, in the year 4004 bce so on March 12 it will be the year 6018 (Nissan 1) God is Energy (the El of Elohim-a plural) Energy, the forces in nature, are ubiquitous, omnipotent and eternal. Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only change form. God is electromagnetism, gravitation and the nuclear force. Our son (pun intended) is the source of Energy for the universe and is a ball of fire (symbol of holiness The Lord is Gods wife and they are one flesh. Gen. 2:24

I'm sorry, what?

Were these two posts related?

I am not so sure about this. In the relevant passage 1 Corinthians 15:8, Paul does distinguish his experience from that of the other disciples - it was "as though to one born at the wrong time"

I understood that quote to be about the timing of Paul's conversion.

I found this interesting. It claims that mass hallucinations (or at least reports of them) are possible, even likely (in the specific circumstances of the gospels). And it gives real, verifiable examples of such.
http://ntwrong.wordp...-hallucination/

How well documented are these historical cases of mass hallucination? Specifically:

(1) How long after the supposed mass hallucination was it recorded?
(2) Is the record of them influenced by political imperatives? Since we know that political imperatives normally trump truth.

Do these problems also apply to the NT narrative of the resurrection?

As I understood it, the point wasn't so much that mass hallucinations occur or not (I suspect there are genuine recorded cases however). The point was that writers in those times would use mass hallucination (well, "visions"), to bolster their claims.
The NT accounts even follow the same formula, of increasing numbers of "witnesses" over time.

The article claims that people of those times considered visions to be as good as reality, and divine truths were often manifest through visions (we have several other visions recorded in the NT). Compare the record of Peter and Cornelius.
Also compare the fact that Paul does not distinguish between his vision and the other post-resurrection appearances. Therefore either they were all visions, or Paul did not consider there to be any distinction between a vision and a real life appearance. Either way, the truth is not as clear as we might think.

As for your questions, we don't know the answers to the first question with respect to the NT accounts, so I'm not sure how it would help. As for the second, I'm not sure about political motivation, but the gospel accounts were highly motivated. They even admit as such "That ye might believe" (John) or "so that you might know for certain the things you heard about" (Luke).

While we're on the subject, the rebuttal used against those who suggest the mass hallucination theory is that "mass hallucinations are extremely rare", but the irony is that resurrections are even rarer. Accounts of resurrections however, are far more common than actual ones.

My view is that the actual truth is unknowable. No one knows for certain. All that remains is what level of credibility/plausibility you can muster up, and I would suggest that what is required for any particular person to believe is actually quite subjective, and varies from person to person.