Thanks again for these reviews, Dr. Josh. Much appreciated in these very weird times. And I used to think my grandparents, born in the 1880's witnessed everything there was to see.

Apologetics + Mental Gymnastics = Apologymnasts? Not to be construed with Apollogymnasts, the dancing brigade of Apollo followers.

Thank you for mentioning Mike Winger's "interpretation" ...you are likely tabling the only counterpoint, with citations included. Good work.

God himself explains in Ezekiel 29:18 “Son of man, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon drove his army in a hard campaign against Tyre; every head was rubbed bare and every shoulder made raw. Yet he and his army got no reward from the campaign he led against Tyre." Which shows that "he" and "they" did not both refer to the Nebuchadnezzar campaign since God confirms this here in Ezekiel 29:18. The Bible gives the best interpretation of the Bible! The prophecy was fulfilled as God through Ezekiel prophesied! God is not a man that he should lie!

Interested if you’d tackle Dr Titus Kennedy at some point, he’s apparently a popular archaeologist in the apologetics world

I want to say thank you for these videos and your source about the Assyrian inscription was insanely interesting. Its so great to be able to find such things on the internet. I'm sorry to copy paste this question from the other Tyre video, Im not sure if you see the comments automatically, but I also added a question. Would you be willing to expand on the "many nations" part? Looking at masoretic based bibles, it seems to be very consistently saying "many nations" (1471. word, gentile in Strong's concordance) in 26:3 but a form of "peoples" (5971. word, "am" in Strong's concordance) in 26:7. Cross referencing these, it seems that the only "gentile" based words that Ezekiel uses for an army, is "the most ruthless of nations" in 30:11 for Nebuchadnezzar's army. He uses the same expression in 28:7 against Tyre, 31:12 Nabopolossar's army against Assyria, 32:12 Nebuchadnezzar's army against Egypt. However when Im looking at the translations, whenever the "gentile" is grouped with "many" or rab (7227), it seems to be "many nations" across times or different kings (as in different countries). However when its alone (as in just "nations" or "as the nations") it seems to mean "non hebrew". Jeremiah calls his army "families of the north" (mishpachah: a clan, 4940). So it seems to be a consistent theme in masoretic based bibles that there is a difference in the expression "many nations" and the expressions used for Nebuchadezznar's army when they try to express that its not a homogenous army. Im courious if you could shed some light on whether its possible to prove that "families of north" can be used interchangibly with "nations" or the "many nations" in 26:3 is just "many non hebrews"? As I'm not knowledgeable in hebrew, I can only extrapolate from how they were translated in the different versions of the bible. I would really appreciate if you could expand on it from a linguistic point of view. Also in Jeremiah 51 it specifically mentions 3 nations and kings of the medes as "nations" and says that they will be given a commander and come upon babylon (51:27-28). It contains an expression „the sea will rise (kehaalowt) over Babylon, its roarin waves will cover her "(Jeremiah 51:42) which seems like a similar image as the one in Ezekiel 26:3. They both use the word "alah" to describe the sea coming up (according to Strong concordance 5927). And its also consistent with the expression used in Isaiah 48:18 "If only you had paid attention to my commands, your peace would have been like a river,your well-being like the waves of the sea. " where it seems "waves of the sea" is implying "a lot of" instead of a form of periodicity. Is it reasonable to say that the entire passage of Jeremiah 51 is talking about persia and Cyrus alone, hence a similar multi-nation empire under a single "commander" being characterized by "waves of the sea" yet being only a single army? Or that passage is about multiple nations that are gonna subjugate Babylon, one of which is Persia?

Hoping you and you sweet wife and family are well. Thanks for being back !

Good Evening , Dr. Josh , Thanks again

It's funny: apologists argue that Ezekiel referred to Tyre's fall to Alexander or Evagoras, but yet Daniel explicitly names the Greeks as a separate power from Babylon. So for Daniel to be true, Ezekiel would have to be false. Or maybe they're just putting specific words in God's mouth for revenge fantasies

Please respond , I would like to know what it means when chapter 26 says the nations will come "as waves", how could this be understood in this context because I wouldn't think that Nebuchadnezzar would go back and forth like a wave, right? Attacking and then taking a break.

In your opinion, Ezekiel records the failing of his own prophecy which he says in chapter 26 and then says in fails in chapter 29:18 for what reason? Doing what he did would just record him as being a false prophet.

Wasn’t there apose to be a livestream this weekend?

It must be hard work being an apologist.... surely it would be easier to face up to reality! Thus is the life of a man or woman of faith: working hard to uphold fantasy.

The prophecy in Ezekiel is chapters 26 and 27. It speaks of the coming destruction of Tyre and the offshore city. This was all in fact historically fulfilled by the conquests of Nebuchadnezzar and Alexander the Great. Tyre also serves as an apocalyptic symbol of world overthrow in the Tribulation in the end times. Ezekiel's prediction about Egypt was also fulfilled (29:15). The king of Tyre is a symbol or personification of the Tyrian dynasty, or government collectively.

You're ignoring the obvious fact that there has already been a "they" mentioned in the opening verses of chapter 26, that being "the nations." The set up to the passage clearly indicates that multiple nations will rise against Tyre "like the sea casting up its waves," (verse 3). Verse 7-11 become specific about what Nebuchadnezzar would do, and then the passage returns to using "they" because it is again referring to what the nations more broadly would do. It's honestly embarrassing that you have to ignore the context of the passage like that in order to construe it as a failed prophecy. If you read the passage in full it clearly reads as a literary chiasm (or chiasmus).

God who created the visible and the invisible doesn't need you finite being judge Him..The Absolute fulfilment exposes Satan's agents....It is definitely future and will be decoded in His time

There is also an error in saying of Nebuchadnezzar that “he” would attack Tyre, clearly it would have been more than just him attacking it would have been many of ‘them’ !! Some of this is the daftest misuse of language interpretation I’ve come across. If you applied this type of ‘analysis’ to a report I doubt you would conclude that any report is accurate. You may feel more comfortable thinking that the bible is false, you are just an improbable accident in a meaningless universe but you will still have to face the God who made you and actually he is longing for you to turn humbly to Him, so he can forgive you and welcome you.

It's amusing watching someone try to interpret pronouns in the Bible with confirmation bias, whilst ignoring the prophecies which actually came to pass as they were written.

Whats ur position on ezekiel 29? U know abouth egypt.

Sorry I meant the gog of magog question to go here...x

I said it before and I will say it again. The Tyre prophecy is neither failed or fulfilled. Of course there is no sense covering it here because spiritually discerned would not get the truth or a lie either way. Someday soon I will reveal the secret in my own video. Yea, like the God that put the stars in place can't write the Bible right. Good luck with that one.

The verses about the chariots are kind of interesting. If you Google 'Richard Carrier Tyre,' he says that the Greeks stopped using chariots in the 6th century BC, and that Alexander didn't use chariots. If he's right, Ezekiel almost certainly does not describe Alexander's conquest. Carrier's claim seems to make sense. The causeway that Alexander built from the mainland to the island almost certainly wouldn't have been very level, like a road would be. I guess you could argue that horses traveled across very uneven road, and that the army carried the chariots separately, or even more amazingly that the Tyrians had chariots that Alexander's army subsequently commandeered... but I can't imagine why an island city would have chariots. I guess that the Tyre hippodrome, which did in fact have chariot races, was built in the second century CE. (Does this contradict Carrier? Or is he saying that they stopped using chariots for battles, after the 6th century BC? Questions like this make Bible prophecy almost impossible to verify, or to disprove.) The hippodrome was on the mainland city Ushu. Regardless, I think you're right that 'many nations' refers to the Babylonian empire, which did in fact consist of many nations.

Winger is a nice guy but he's in a world of hurt if he thinks he's going to outsmart NELC PhD holders on the OT.

Chapter 29 Ezekiel admits it didn’t come true.

God said "Nebuchadrezzar" would add dirt, stones and timber into the waters but unfortunately alexander the great did it. Failed prophecy