Damn, I didn't realize the Septuagint translations are that different. They even call Nebuchadnezzar's army an army of "many nations" „For thus saith the Lord; Behold, I will bring up against thee, O Sor, Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon from the north: he is a king of kings, with horses, and chariots, and horsemen, and a concourse of very many nations. (Septuagint, Ezekiel 26:7)” Awesome channel, just subscribed.

How can you besiege a city for 13 years and not notice that the inhabitants had skedaddled?

The virgin Nebuchadnezzar II: nooo, it is impossible to take the island, it took me 13 years and just got some concessions.... =( The Chad Alexander: I don't have to invade an island if I make it a peninsula >=)

Your best video so far, Joshua. I was delighted to see that you've changed your style of presentation. It is more to the point, easier to follow your argument and I love that you include ample direct quotes. I am looking forward to *many* more! Thank you!!!

Keep it up Dr.Josh and future Dr. Megan. You may have found a niche that is desired by not only us ancient history and biblical enthusiasts, but to mainstream religious organizations.

Brill Dr Josh. Thank you. Wishing you and Megan a fab Winter solstice!

Excellent presentation, Dr. Josh.

Ezekiel 26:21 " I will bring you to a horrible end and you will be no more. You will be sought, but you will never again be found, declares the Sovereign Lord.” Actual history: Tyre is a city in Lebanon, one of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the world, Sa-wing and a miss.. 😉

This reminds me, must get a new set of tyres.

Write the prophecy down for it will surely come to pass Zechariah 9

Excellent video with the exact points I made to someone on this topic before

He says Tyre always means the island, and yet the very source he uses at 18:20 describes "the mainland of Tyre?" Can someone explain this?

My golly goodness this was Fantastic. Quoting from Assyrian and Babylonian sources Referring to commentaries Clear and logical layout Keep these kind of videos coming!!

Another wonderfully detailed (and cited) presentation. I cannot thank you enough for giving ordinary people such easy access to scholarly work, for making it approachable but not dumbing it down. ❤

Once someone points out the I/ they construction of verses 3-6 in Ezekiel 26 (which everyone agrees refer to "the nations") are followed by a series of "he" pronouns in verses 7-11 referring to Nebuchadnezzar, it seems obvious that the return to the I/they construction in verses 12 and beyond must refer again to "the nations". To work so hard to prove otherwise doesn't sound like scholarship so much as it sounds like bias.

I'm not a scholar. This is my uneducated opinion here. But it just seems obviously wrong from the context and, as you say, internal logic of the story. It cannot be Alexander. If you read the beginning of Ezekiel 26, verse 4, Yahweh gives the reader an introductory summary of the upcoming judgment on Tyre. Yahweh says that the end goal is that Tyre will become a bare rock in the midst of the sea. This is obviously the island. How does the island become a bare rock? All of the debris will be thrown into the ocean. Kill everyone, steal the valuables, destroy the buildings, then remove Tyre from history by throwing its infrastructure into the sea. It even says to throw the soil into the sea. If there's no soil, then you have a bare rock. The action of debris removal is the ultimate "fuck you" to Tyre. It is the CONCLUSIVE act to the siege according to the introductory summary. Therefore, it is no coincidence that when "They" removes the debris in Ezekiel 26:12, it is actually the VERY LAST action of the army that happens during the siege. It is the last action of the assault. The pillaging and looting and destruction of the walls come BEFORE the debris removal. Additionally, in the very next verse, it is REITERATED that Tyre has now become a bare rock. That's because Ezekiel is saying it is finished. Debris removal = the end. It has nothing to do with Alexander building a causeway with the debris from the mainland. It would also make no sense, because why would debris removal be listed LAST? That's when the destruction really started for Alexander.

i think it's very clear, even if the text is talking about Nebuchadnezzar and Alexander, the city was not submerged and was rebuild, and Nebuchadnezzar didn't destroyed Egypt, anyway im not interested in god's age of empires gameplay

Ancient history is messy and not for wimps

Thank you both for sharing your knowledge and your drive to make your channel happen.. I like the honest and factual way you convey information.. You make it calm and collected.. easier for me to understand these concepts.. Keep up the good work and... Awesome job! (thanks for not giving any time to "willfully ignorant, belligerent, close minded, and willfully deviant individual") on the Non Sequitur channel

How can you lay siege against the greatest naval power of the time?

is mister Winger saying that they had a secret tunnel like in Minas Tirith ?

Didn’t Alexander raze the city to the ground after a 6 month siege circa 330 BC?

Digital Hammurabi we should definitely do a history/archaeology hangout one of these days. Be good to do a methodology overview of how archaeology works :)

Whats ur opinion on ezrquiel 29? U kniw the desolation of egypt

You still remind me of the actor who played Modok in the latest Ant Man film!

Excellent presentation. Subbed.

This channel is a gift

You can clearly see here who not only will put the mark of the beast either on their forehead or their right hand but who are also looking forward to it.

Fantastic channel I love it

This channel is gold during this pandemic.

Wonderful material: subscribed. Currently digging into Ezekiel for the moment and finding the material in 38-39 and it's relation to the Table of Nations in Genesis diverting. And heh, if you needed an idea for another video romp through Biblical Prophesy- and it's misuses- that might not be a bad one. Anyway, carry on. Great channel.

This is quite convincing... Let's see whether it stands against criticism... Also @Digitalhamurabi.... I would like see you do formal debates with people who hold different views.. Loving the content

First, I would recommend you begin by explaining exactly what this prophecy is in Ezekiel 26 and how you believe that it has not been fulfilled. Second, I don't think I would focus just on Mr. Winger's statements in order to argue for the so-called failed prophecy. It is not sufficient to successfully counter only his arguments in order to show a failed prophecy. The biggest problem with your first argument is that Ezekiel 26 begins by God saying he will bring many nations against Tyre: "They will destroy the walls of Tyre and bring down her towers...She will become plunder for the nations". It is after this that God refers specifically to Nebuchadnezzar coming from the north against Tyre and explains what Nebuchadnezzar will do to the settlements on the mainland. Then it returns to using the plural when it says "they" will plunder your (Tyre's) wealth and loot your merchandise". The section ends by God declaring, "I will put an end to your noisy songs...I will make you a bare rock". There is nothing in this section that has not come to pass, as described. Does it say that Nebuchadnezzar would make Tyre a bare rock or that God would? Doesn't God say that he would be the one to make Tyre a desolate city? The comparison to Jeremiah 20 doesn't work very well because it was written by another author, and your lack of citation of any scholar who has presented this argument is conspicuous. I think you also claimed that it wouldn't make sense for Ushu to supply the island fortress, which doesn't make much sense because Nebuchadnezzar had no navy while Tyre possessed the Phoenician navy. It also makes no sense that Ezekiel would refer to the noise of warhorses, wagons and chariots when describing the attack on an island fortress since these are all devices used for land battle (the mainland). You also made the claim that the mainland was always referred to as Ushu, and somehow because the text refers to the mainland without using the name Ushu that it's somehow not referring to the mainland settlements but must be referring to the island fortress.

Please do you have some scholarship I can point someone to to read? He’s a Christian and now is going wayyyy deep into this but I fear his confirmation bias is not helping.

t's a shame that people like Josh can't make a living doing what they are are are trained to do and are so enthusiastic about.

It depends on which Tyre it’s talking about. 1. The antediluvian type for Tyre 2. Tyre itself 3. The end of age type for Tyre which is also called Mystery Babylon.

My research on Eze 26:12 originals show that neither Hebrew nor Greek original texts contain a word directly corresponding to "he" or "they". The subjects in both texts both mean "Power, might, strength, force, duress; ability, capability; miracle, wonder; resources; source of power; armed military force, army" and the corresponding verb in Hebrew is singular and in Greek plural. Hence there's no discrepancy between the Mesoretic and Septuagint texts in Eze 26:12 meaning wise. Not sure why the English translators had to substitute with a "he" or "they". Regarding "all the pillars". The greek word ὑπόστασίν means "sustenance, support, subsistence; foundation of a building; substantial nature, essence, actual being". It makes sense to me when it is used to refer to any religious temple pillars. However, it makes more sense here to say the fundamental support for Tyre would be brought to ground, which includes the gods Tyrians believed in. The way you read into it is likely you believed the greek word should be translated as "a wood column supporting a temple" only. In addition, it is the "ἰσχύος (an expert, one with abiity; strength, might, power, abiity, forcefulness)" who would brought down to the ground the powerful strengthening "pillars". Again, no "he" here, so it doesn't need to be interpreted as referring to Nebuchadnezzar at all. I didn't do real research on "all the streets" (already too much time spent on this today) but it is quite possible it refers to all main market or residential streets, which might not exist on the island, if it was merely a "fortress" at that time. As for why the bible uses one word for Nebbuchadnezzar's army and another for the nations I'm not sure and don't see how it is critical in this matter yet. The only reason I am here because I was trying to understand Eze 26 when reading it this morning. If you're interested below is what I found in greek for verses 11 and 12. The Hebrew originals are on my cell so I'll save myself some energy from pasting them here. 11 ἐν ταῖς ὁπλαῖς τῶν ἵππων αὐτοῦ καταπατήσουσίν σου πάσας τὰς πλατείας· τὸν λαόν σου μαχαίρᾳ ἀνελεῖ (to destroy, to take away) καὶ τὴν ὑπόστασίν (sustenance, support, subsistence; foundation of a building; substantial nature, essence, actual being) σου (you) τῆς (the )ἰσχύος (an expert, one with abiity; strength, might, power, abiity, forcefulness) ἐπὶ (where) τὴν (the this that) γῆν (earth, dirt; ground) κατάξει (bring down). “ 12 καὶ (Conjunction, and; together with) προνομεύσει (Verb: Fut Act Ind 3rd Sing, to plunder, spoil) τὴν (Definite article: Acc Sing Fem, at that time, then) δύναμίν (Noun: Acc Sing Fem, Power, might, strength, force, duress; ability, capability; miracle, wonder; resources; source of power; armed military force, army; ) σου (Possessive Pronoun: 2nd Gen Sing) καὶ (and ) σκυλεύσει (Verb: Fut Act Ind 3rd Sing, to plunder; to take possession of by force) τὰ (Definite Article: Nom/Acc Plur Neut, tavern, wooden huts or buildings, shop, store) ὑπάρχοντά (Pres Act Nom/Acc Plur Neut, to exist, be present; to belong, possess; Substantival: one’s possessions and livelihood that contribute to one’s existence; Substantival: one in charge of possessions) σου (Possessive pronoun: 2nd Gen Sing) καὶ (and) καταβαλεῖ (Verb: Fut Act Ind 3rd Sing, to throw down, cast down, overthrow) σου (your) τὰ τείχη (Noun: Nom/Acc Plur Neut, wall, city wall, protective wall) καὶ τοὺς οἴκους σου τοὺς ἐπιθυμητοὺς καθελεῖ καὶ τοὺς λίθους σου καὶ τὰ ξύλα σου καὶ τὸν χοῦν σου εἰς μέσον τῆς θαλάσσης ἐμβαλεῖ.

This video was pretty good actually, but there was couple things which are debateable. Example the claim that Ushu and Tyre was not the same things, but infact there are sources which disagree with this. Verse 11 is important here. Phoenicia: History of Civilization 2nd ed.: “It is among the most remarkable peculiarities of Tyre, that it was a double-city - a city made up of two wholly distinct parts - one, a littoral island about three-quarters of a mile in length, separated from the mainland by a strait about half a mile wide, and the other a town upon the opposite shore. The town upon the shore was known to the Greeks and Romans as Palaetyrus, or “Old Tyre” - its twin sister was “the island Tyre”, or “New Tyre”, or “Tyre” emphatically.” [George Rawlinson (I. B. Tauris, 2005), 41.] Also Ezekiel might have used different definition (even though it is questionable) about the parts of Tyre. Also some scholars do claim that Nebukadnessar did conquer Tyre (E.G in book The Phoenicians and the West: Politics Colonies and Trade p. 33)

Support for the 'many nations' referring to Babylon can be found in Jeremiah, especially 29:14-18. Referring to the Babylonian Captivity, he talks about the 'many nations' among whom the Jews had been scattered.

Wait, so you think Nebuchadnezzar besieged an island with no fresh water supply for 12 years! See you said they got there fresh water from Ushu but then it was conquered easily. Then where did they get water to survive 12 years of besiegement

So Ezekiel the prophet records the failing of his own prophesy to tell people he is a false prophet? That doesn’t make any logical sense.

You mention it in a offhand remark, but one of the strongest arguments against the apologist view, is that Ezekiel ALSO distinguishes quite clearly between Tyre and Ushu. So, the idea that Ezekiel refers to Ushu is preposterous. This also makes irrelevant the distinguishing between "he" and "they" elsewhere in the text. Since Ezekiel is quite specific about what the King is going to do to Tyre ("his horses", "he will"), combined with the clear distinguishing between Tyre and Ushu in Ezekiel him self, makes the "he" and "they" change irrelevant. Even if it was true that the "they" refers to the later Alexandrian conquest, Ezekiel says "he" and "his" about a lot of the specific destruction to befall Tyre, and he clearly says that Tyre refers exclusively to the island city, not the mainland Ushu. Since the King never enters the city of Tyre, as Ezekiel him self defines it, "he" can not have "his" horses trample its streets. For example.

Very interesting. You answered some questions for me. Thanks.

The phonecians had many ships , the greatest naval power, is he saying Nebuchadnezzar built a navy to conquer the island, can he present some evidence, ?history shows it took alexander built the land bridge that finally conquered the island, his premises don’t seem to hold true.

I have a question regarding this prophecy. I know you were arguing that the “many nations” only referred to Nebuchadrezzar but according to Ezekiel 26:12, it says the the city would be destroyed and scraped into the water. According to Wikipedia, this event occurred. Can you explain how it was prophesied by Ezekiel and then later fulfilled by Alexander the Great? en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Tyre_(332_BC)

Interesting thoughts, you might be right and wrong at the same time. The only thing you did is explain that a certain interpretation or explanation of the fulfillment of the Prophecy can be regarded differently, nothing is mentioned by you on verbs following the many nations in verbs 4 and 5. This by all means one can not come to the conclusion that the Prophecy was not fulfilled. Look at elements giving in this Prophecy: She (Tyres) will become plunder for THE nations. Exactly as you mentioned that many more nations would plunder this land after Nebuchadnezar. In verbs 6 it is even mentioned that the countryside (aka mainland) would be slaughtered by the sword. IN verbs 8 it is mentioned he (Nebuchadnezzar) would raise a great shield, can but not only be translated by shielded or shielded off. In verbs 15 it is even mentioned: will the islands not shudder? In verbs 16 more is mentioned that also “Princes of the sea... they will be seized with trembling”. One can argue whom is involved and into what extend. In verbs 21 it ends with: “I will bring sudden terror upon you, and you will no longer be. They will search for you, but you will never again be found...” If you look at Tyre’s history, even with or without Alexander The Great’s involvement, and today’s Tyre’s you can concluded that the old (palae) Tyre is never been built upon as of Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion, it is even declared as protected areas for its nature wetlands therefore it can not be build upon. So, if you take you own advice before proclaiming the Prophecy being failed you need to base it on more then only explaining verbs 3 “many nations”. At least take the whole of Ezekiel 26, and even take the references in to account from the time of David and Salomon in which the Tyre did not exist yet in its full extend. Not to mentioned, that the old historians: Josephus and Diodorus Siculus explained how old Tyre came to its end. The reference, although it only a smal portion of the Prophecy, to Alexander The Great might only refer to 1 aspect of the Prophecy, namely verbs 4: “... scrape away soil and make her a shining, bare rock” and verbs 12: “... throw your stones and your woodwork and your soil into the water.” Nebuchadnezzar did no such things, even if you look at the historians. So in my view, you might be right on the reference to “many nations”, but looking at the historical events until today and the Biblical historical events until Ezekiel 26 one can conclude that the possibility of the Prophecy is being fulfilled remains, that possibility alone arguments that your statement is judgmental. There is many more to this Prophecy then you currently tried to disclaim.

As a fallen evangelical conservative I have thoroughly enjoyed learning about the “other side” of biblical interpretation; back during my training this was known as the evil liberal view. In this particular vid I appreciated the careful explanation of both sides of the debate and the use of the actual text to support the failed prophecy argument. I would love to see more of these vids discussing problem texts.

V-Rhino said you were good, he's right. I'm looking forward to going through your back catalogue after X-mas. Hope you have a good one.

So Josh you're telling me there's a chance? Lol

The problem with you comparing the Ezekiel verse to the Jerimiah verse lies within the context of both verses. Sure in the Jerimiah verse the pronoun shifts from he to they but the jerimiah verse never stated "MANY NATIONS" so therefore in THAT scripture the he to they pronoun shift may be used for one man. But Ezekiel literally states "MANY NATIONS" so that he to they shift would be referring to the other nations.

Ezekiel 26 New International Version (NIV) A Prophecy Against Tyre 26 In the eleventh month of the twelfth[a] year, on the first day of the month, the word of the Lord came to me: 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,’ 3 therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against you, Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves. 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. 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, 6 and her settlements on the mainland will be ravaged by the sword. Then they will know that I am the Lord. Prophecy fail, the bible is not 100% true. It really is that simple.

Tyre, also known as Kittim, Tyrus and now Cyprus. Not many people know that when Tyre is mentioned in the bible it talks about Cyprus. Monika

Romans 1:22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools,

@digital Hammurabi You put a lot of emphasis that this prophecy states Nebuchadnezzar would attack the island of Tyre but the portion of chapter 26 that introduces him specifies that he will attack those on the mainland. "For thus says the Lord God : Behold, I will bring against Tyre from the north Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, and with horsemen and a host of many soldiers. He will kill with the sword your daughters on the mainland. He will set up a siege wall against you and throw up a mound against you, and raise a roof of shields against you. Ezekiel 26 verses 7 & 8 If we ignore this specific reference to "He will kill with the sword your daughters on the mainland" then I agree it is easy to assume Nebuchadnezzar would be the agent to completely destroy Tyre, despite the fact we are told in Chapter 29 and verse 18 that he was not. I find it suspicious that the text would go so far as to specify the killing of those on the mainland and leave out a reference to Nebuchadnezzar killing those at sea or on the island of Tyre, if in fact that is what the writer was trying to express.

Winger’s interpretation is lifted directly from J.Vernon McGhee’s “Thru the Bible” commentary, apparently. Read that commentary cover to cover years ago.

Antonio Ciasca of Rome Calls the City Destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar “The Mainland Sector of the City of Tyre” Ciasca makes the following statement: The mainland sector of the city of Tyre (called Ushu in Egyptian and Assyrian texts and Palai-Tyros in classical sources) was situated 6 km [3.7 mi] further south...The causeway built by Alexander the Great to reach the besieged city, and the gradual silting up around this line, contributed towards extending the artificial area which emerged...that of a peninsula jutting into the sea (Ciasca 1988: 147, 148, emphasis added). Notice that Ciasca calls the “Old Tyre” destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar “the mainland sector of the city of Tyre.

The fact that it’s up for debate tells me God didn’t explain it clearly enough or we just misunderstood it, which kind of defeats the point of it being foretold, imo. But if God intended to reward Nebuchadnezzar with Egypt, why not include that in 26 when he is mentioned instead of later in 29, only after Nebuchadnezzar comes up empty handed in Tyre? I guess it can be harmonized, but if Neb fulfilled what God intended at Tyre, why mention the lack of spoils at Tyre in 26 as the reason Neb gets Egypts spoils? 29 could just say God is going to use Neb against Egypt as well, and no need to mention Tyre at all.

Why are prophecies always complicated and without specific times? Why can’t they be clear snd simple?

Oh, this is going to be good..

I definitely appreciate your strict adherence to the details of the text in the original language, and the examples from other prophecy. However, biblical prophesy commonly has a Now AND Later view where in the same passage we see events fufilled on the immediate future coupled with event fulfilled in the distant future. The time between then could be years, centuries or millennia, but in the end the prophecy get fulfilled. That same seems to be happening here, with main exception of the rebuilt city, however, we know in the ancient world, a city was more than people living in a place. It was the place their God was represented. So all aspcts of a city from the land, to the govt, people, rulers, and etc made up the city. If all that was destroyed and a new Govt, New God resettled the city, that city would not be the same city, just because it was inhabitated again. Even in modern days we see something akin to that with the fall of the USSR, but without their cities being destroyed. No one would argue the nation of the USSR still exists, even though many of it people and building still remain. So when you consider the details, other prophecy texts in this Now and Later context, and how everything predicted has happened, i see the prophecy as fulfilled. It may have not happened the way Ezekiel could understand based on the world around him and his limited knowledge, but the words he used, inspired by God, do not exclude this prophecy from being correctly fulfilled as we look back from the future.

OK. Before we call others false, may be one of us should prophecy what would happen to a nation next year. It is easier to point the wrongs of others than our own inadequacies especially on subjects we don't have full knowledge. We can ask questions but not outright condemn. Ezekiel claimed God told him, it would be right to ask God at least if not God we should ask Ezekiel. Nobody has full knowledge of history best still spiritual matters.

I remember when you guys were a newbies 😂. Great job. Growing fast. Love the route you are taking. Thanks for the insights.

Thanks...this video made me subscribe

Tyre was a shipping industry and that required hemp and hemp was the king of tyre and hemp was forgotten about 70 years and only known as marijuana and smoked until recently and hemp seeds are sold at many food stores now including Walmart...

Alexander worshiped the Greek gods. The hebrews God ran away from iron chariots and was chased out of his temple by the roman gods

What is he arguing about? Tyre doesn't exist

If I was god and I wanted to prove that I really was speaking to Ezekiel, I would 1. Talk to people other than Ezekiel. Like, I'd just talk to everyone instead of choosing random people from thousands of years ago 2. Give clear, definite, precise prophecies that could not be questioned or exegized.

Jesus called John the Babtist Eliah. Maybe then by Nebukandesar this prophecy allowes and mean somebody else in a simmilar way ?

In your zeal you’ve overlooked the name tyre may not be the present island out in the med that may have only used that na,e, probably named by someone like yourself

Your evidence that “many people” in verse 7 is the same as “many nations” in verse 3 by saying the word for “many” is the same seems to do nothing to make your point. I could say “many apples” and “many oranges” in the same sentence, and that would not indicate that apples and oranges are the same thing.

I am 15 and a Christian and I found this video to be interesting, but at the same time, I would still hold that this part of Ezekial is too accurate to just dismiss completely especially with the land bridge and how if you can get past the idea that it was referring to Nebuchadnezzar it seems to fit perfectly with what would be expected. It would be nice if I too one day could be a scholar like you Digital Hammurabi, but I plan on going to college for education in entrepreneurship. If I do get enough time to study Near Eastern language or Greek, it might not be until I am 73 and by then I will probably be a father of many nations!

Must be a secret who did resist a Babylonian slaver for 13 years

I have one question. - You claim, that "they" simply refers to Nebuchadnezzar's army, but why does the text then use "he" in verse 11, 10, 9, when "they" would be a more accurate word to use, if your interpetation of the pronoun "they" is correct? Wouldnt the fact, that "he" is used in verse 11 to talk about Nebuchadnezzar's armies and their actions, indicate that "he" refers to Nebuchadnezzar and his armies, while "they" refers to the many nations talked about in verse 3, that arent nessecarily Nebuchadnezzar's armies?

Here's how I'm spending my evening after a tiring day with horses. I dink moonshine I bought from the stores (so not authentic) and watch War Thunder and Men of War game play videos silent while listening to Digital Hammurabi. Nice.

I genuinely wonder how literalists read Eze 26:14 in light of their ability to pull up Tyre/Ushu up on a satellite map and pick out dozens of coffee shops, grocery stores, etc. Maybe like flat earthers they think NASA is in on the anti-Bible conspiracy.

my friend, ancient Tyre was (according to Josephus) about thirty kms south of "new tyre" the ancient city was destroyed by Babylon king Nebuchadnezzar... and Alexander the great threw the old city into the sea creating a causeway Winger is correct, nations came like waves of the sea

Claim 1) Ezekiel spoke very truly when he said MANY nations. You think Ezekiel admitted his prophecy was wrong in Ezekiel 29:18? Ezekiel 29:18 KJV Son of man, Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon caused his army to serve a great service against Tyrus: every head was made bald, and every shoulder was peeled: yet had he no wages, nor his army, for Tyrus, for the service that he had served against it: Nebuchadrezzar succeeded. You assume because he received no wages that he failed. It was prophesied that spoil and merchandise would be taken... but by whom? THEY! Ezekiel 26:12 And they shall make a spoil of thy riches, and make a prey of thy merchandise: and they shall break down thy walls, and destroy thy pleasant houses: and they shall lay thy stones and thy timber and thy dust in the midst of the water. HE refers to Babylon. THEY refers to the nations after Babylon. Ezekiel said that riches would be spoiled. Since Nebuchadrezzar clearly did not receive Tyrus' goods, Babylon IS NOT "THEY." Alexander created a causeway to take the island city of Tyre. Just like it was prophesied: "THEY shall lay thy stones and thy timber and thy dust in the midst of the water." Ezekiel knew very clearly what would happen: God told him. Claim 2) Babylon had no navy. Ezekiel 26 makes mention of horses, chariots, forts, mounts, bucklers, engines of war, and axes. Babylon had no means to siege the island city. They didn't. Babylon succeeded in destroying the mainland city. Alexander succeeded in destroying the island. Do you really think Ezekiel could predict the engineering marvel of Alexander's causeway? No, God told him. The prophesy came to pass exactly as it was prophesied. Turn to Jesus Christ. Repent and trust in Christ for remission of sins. Judgment day is coming. If God gives you justice, you will end up in the lake of fire. Jesus Christ came so that wouldn't have to happen.

You should cover Ezekiel chapter 29-33 where Nebuchadnezzar was supposed to destroy all Egypt and it would be a waste land for 40 years . This prophecy also didn’t come true.

This kind of thing is why I don't really trust apologetics anymore....

Even the smallest amount of research shows that you are misleading. Pierre Bikai (Tyre scholar): “The majority of the population must have lived on the mainland, while the island area was an administrative and religious center.” Ushu is commonly referred to as "Old Tyre" and the island city was "New Tyre" (wonder why) You present Tyre as if it were a wretched old place that always got conquered when it was actually the hub of naval power and wealth at the time.

Recon and message that bible text to make it say whatever you want, CLASSIC. Bible clearly failed Ezekiel 26:14 . I can book an AirBnb there right now, it is still around.

I'd like to know, do you have a written version of this?

Amd it is still a failed prophecy because Ezekiel states that Tyre will NEVER be rebuilt, which it had been by Jesus day

If you researched the book of Ezekiel youll know that he himself was not likely to have written the book himself but that it was written by others who recorded it to preserve the prophecies... from wikipedia "According to the book itself, it records six visions of the prophet Ezekiel, exiled in Babylon, during the 22 years from 593 to 571 BCE, although it is the product of a long and complex history and does not necessarily preserve the VERY WORDS of the prophet." 'does not necessarily preserve the VERY WORDS of the prophet' That puts a large whole in your attempt to examine word for word the context of the prophecy in relation the the King vs other Nations fulfilling the prophecy. You're studying words that may not even be the exact words he originally used, just like someone telling someone else what you said a year ago, chances are they're account of what you said will not be word for word or exact, it may be correct in the general but their exact account could be very different in how they relay it.

What irks me about this prophesy is that Tyre was supposed to be sunk by God.

Atheist claims about the prophecy of Tye are so clearly refuted by the facts that it is quite bizarre that they repeat their claims. It is done in desperation because the evidence of it's fulfillment is so clear. This motivates atheists to come against it. They are driven to and need to protect their conciense. Tyre was a city made of two parts: the mainland portion, and an island fortification approximately 3/4 of a mile off it's coast, which was not actually a city, but a place of refuge for the city's citizens and Tyre's army when attacked. Ezekiel predicted that many nations would come up against Tyre (Ezek. 26:3); that Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar would be the first to attack it (v. 7); that Tyre’s walls and towers would be broken down (vv. 4,9); that the stones, timbers, and debris of that great city would be thrown into the sea (v. 12); that its location would become a bare rock and a place for the drying of fishermens’ nets (vv. 4-5,14); and finally, that the city of Tyre would never be rebuilt (v.14). History bears eloquent testimony to the fact that all this is precisely what happened. Many nations did come up against Tyre - the Babylonians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Muslims, and the Crusaders, to name a few. And Nebuchadnezzar was indeed the first of these invaders, who - after a thirteen year siege - broke down the walls and towers of mainland Tyre, thus fulfilling the first of Ezekiel’s prophecies. Nebuchadnezzar massacred all of Tyre’s inhabitants except for those who escaped to an island fortress a half mile out in the Mediterranean Sea. Centuries after Ezekiel’s body had decomposed in his grave, Alexander the Great fulfilled a major portion of the prophecy. In order to conquer the island fortress of Tyre (without the luxury of a navy), he and his celebrated architect Diades devised one of the most brilliant engineering feats of ancient warfare. They built a causeway from Tyre’s mainland to the island fortress, using the millions of cubic feet of rubble left over on mainland Tyre. Thus Tyre was scraped bare as a rock, just as Ezekiel predicted. 1. Ezekiel says many nations would come against tire to destroy it. Extrabiblical history verifies that this is exactly what happened. Tyre was repeatedly demolished. Babylon, Syria, Egypt, Rome, Greece, Armenia, and Persia are but a sampling of the “many nations” that had a part in the ultimate destruction of Tyre. 2. It is in verse 12 and following that Ezekiel predicts that “they” will lay the stones and building material of Tyre in the “midst of the waters.” Ezekiel said Tyre would be scraped clean like a base rock. Alexander the Great had his army remove all of the materials of the city and throw them into the sea to build a causeway for his army to invade the island portion of the city. As Alexander could not attack the city from the sea, he built a kilometre-long causeway stretching out to the island on a natural land bridge no more than two meters deep. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Tyre_(332_BC) 4. Ezekiel said Tyre would be covered by the waters of the sea. Geology verifies the present area of Tye has been covered by the sea and was buried by sand. The sandbar upon which modern Tyre has been built did not exist in ancient times and verifies geologically that Tyre has indeed been swallowed by the sea. In ancient times, there was no sandbar at tyre: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Tyre_(332_BC) Tyre before it was covered by the sea with no landbridge or sandbar: upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Siege_tryre.gif Tyre after it was buried in the sea, with a landbridge created by Alexander and sandbar created by the sea: upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/Tyre-aerial-photo-by-France-Military-1934.jpg Tyre today: sophismata.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/tyre_today_satellite.jpg This prophecy of Tyre is but one among many examples of meticulously detailed and fulfilled prophecies, any one of which is sufficient to demonstrate the truth and accuracy of Scripture. “I have spoken,” says the Lord of Hosts. The Scripture can­not be broken (John 10:35).

The anticipation is killing me

This whole thing lies not on history but exegesis...what does the text say and what does it allow in interpretation...

You are incorrect sir. He doesn’t mention Nebuchadrezzar in verse three he says many nations. In verse seven he is mentioning Him as the next and most prolific one he’ll, Tyrus, who also represents Satan seen later in Ezekiel. He is addressing Tyrus that is the whole point of this chapter and he is advising Tyrus that his glory will be destroyed. Your Hebrew translation is incorrect

When Xerxes tried to conquer hellenic greece his army contained contingents from almost 40 vassal nations marching with the Persians... Babylon ruled a similar extensive empire, so even if they just had 12 vassals, many nations would still be nothing but justified. And that is just basic history, not in depth study of the times and circumstances. I loathe that sleight of hand attitude exposed by "arguments" like these.

The reason the prophecy is unfulfilled is it is an end time prophecy against Babylon the Great. If you study Isaiah's prophecy against Tyre found in Isaiah 23 you will see that his prophecy against Tyre is really prophecy against a migrating city that has existed in at least one other geographic location. You will also see that the description of Tyre matches the description of Babylon the Great. Babylon the Great is really a city that has existed in seven geographic locations during the reigns of seven kings and kingdoms. Tyre was one of the locations for the city. Study Isaiah's prophecy against Tyre in Isaiah 23 to see it for yourself.

Oh, it's just a reclaimed land and not an island of Tyre.

you should debate mike winger about this topic if you really want to convince christians

And of course, the promised destruction was to be so thorough that the city would be reduced to bare rock and *never rebuilt* (verse 14), drowned beneath the ocean (verse 19), and sought but never again found (verse 21). Current population c200,000.

'He, John, is coming over to you later. Don't make a coffee, they will bring you a coffee' Shifted from one pronoun to another, with no change in meaning or identification of who will be bring the coffee. Is this how desperate they've gotten?

People who want to believe in bronze age magical stories will grasp at any straw. This is what the bible says. Ezekiel 26 A Prophecy Against Tyre 13: I will put an end to your noisy songs, and the music of your harps will be heard no more. 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. Oops,, there it is, right there where it's always been.

Perhaps prophets can be both legitimately in touch with the divine and wrong some times. The word of God can flow through us and the Holy Spirit fill can fill our hearts. But it's still mediated through our human souls. Like pure light refracting through a prism.

Another failed prophecy from the inerrant "word of god"? I am learning once you open up to the fact that the scriptures we have are not inspired that you can see failure for what it is. Then you see the blind faith in others you once exhibited and you understand it often goes against logic and reason.

Not convinced... Alexander was also the King of Babylon... king of many nations in fact.

Just curious if mike has attempted to respond to your paper on Tyre? Or, said he intends to respond? He recommended the Tyre prophecy to Doug and I as one way to verify the divinity of scripture. I thought this was an important part of Mike's apologetic aproach since he took the time to defend it when Aronra made his first response to Mike.