This is the sixth part in a series of blog posts I’ve been doing about prophecies in the Bible (part 1 is here). The one I’d like to talk about today was one of the first ones that really hit me like a hammer when I first started examining the Bible’s claims critically. In my opinion, it’s extremely strong evidence that the Bible was not really inspired by God.
Ezekiel’s prophecy of Tyre is very interesting to look at. In fact, it’s one that is often used as evidence by both sides of the inerrancy debate. Ezekiel 26-28 details a prophecy against the island city of Tyre. It was a great trade center and features fairly prominently throughout the Bible.
Once Judah was led into captivity by Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, Ezekiel prophesied destruction for Tyre, since they were glad at the destruction that had been wrought on Jerusalem. And the benefit of this prophecy is that it is very specific. Chapter 26 says that many nations would come against Tyre, and in verse 4, Ezekiel says that their walls and towers would be torn down, and it would be made a bare rock.
Then, in verses 7-14, Ezekiel is even more specific by saying that Nebuchadnezzar would come against the city. He will kill Tyre’s “daughters on the mainland” (vs 8 ) and direct a siege wall against them to destroy their walls. He would enter the city with his army and kill, plunder, and cast the debris into the sea. They would be a bare rock and never be rebuilt.
In fact, Nebuchadnezzar did bring his army against Tyre. And he did destroy the mainland suburbs of Tyre, just as was predicted in verse 8. He also besieged the city, as was predicted. But the similarities end there. He besieged Tyre for 13 years without success. Tyre finally signed a treaty with Nebuchadnezzar, but their city remained unharmed. Ezekiel even admits as much in 29:17-18 when he says that Nebuchadnezzar got nothing in his efforts against Tyre.
About 250 years later, Tyre did finally fall to Alexander the Great. And many Christians view this as the fulfillment of Ezekiel’s prophecy. But then why didn’t Ezekiel prophesy that Alexander would do it? God could have easily revealed that to him. Also, verses 7-14 show no apparent break in speaking about Nebuchadnezzar’s attack. Where is the indication that the actual destruction wouldn’t come for another 250 years?
And furthermore, Tyre was rebuilt shortly after Alexander defeated it. It was still a prominent trade center during the times of Jesus and Paul. In fact, Tyre is the 4th largest city in Lebanon today. That is a problem since Ezekiel says it would be utterly destroyed (26:14) to the point that no one would be able to find it again (26:21), and it would be “no more forever” (27:36).
Prophesying that Tyre would be gone forever is an immensely bold claim, and it’s also extremely important. It is one of the few biblical prophecies that we would actually be able to verify today, if it were true. So how do people answer it?
Taking the prophecy at face value isn’t going to work. That’s a shame, because if Tyre was still a “bare rock” as Ezekiel says, then it would be great proof of prophecy fulfillment. So instead, we have to think of other ways to explain it. One is to say that Ezekiel was only talking about the mainland portion of Tyre. This one is used quite often – some apologists even claim that Tyre was only on the mainland at this time and moved out to the island once Nebuchadnezzar besieged them. But this seems unlikely because Ezekiel often refers to Tyre as being “in the midst of the sea,” or “on the sea,” or “borders are in the heart of the seas,” etc (26:5, 17, 18; 27:4, 25, 26, 32; 28:2, 8). In fact, chapter 27 compares Tyre to a ship that will sink because of the destruction that God is bringing upon it. So trying to say this is the mainland is somewhat ridiculous. It also goes against the historical and archaeological evidence [src].
Sometimes, people try to explain the prophecy by noting that the city that exists today in that spot is actually called Sur. Therefore, it’s not the same city, and Ezekiel was right. However, “Sur” is the way Tyre is spelled in Arabic, and in Hebrew it’s “Tzur.” In fact, the Old Testament essentially spells it as “Tzur” – just check an interlinear Bible for the Hebrew translation of this passage. So the city still has the same name that it had back then.
Another explanation is that this is a prophecy against the people of the city, so when it says Tyre would never be rebuilt it’s just saying that it will never be those same people. But when you really start to think about it, this is also silly. Ezekiel himself says that Nebuchadnezzar was unable to take the city (Ezek 29:18-20), so God would give him Egypt instead (this is also something that doesn’t appear to have happened, by the way). But anyway, Nebuchadnezzar was unable to take Tyre. So those inhabitants were not defeated, and we have to wait for Alexander the Great to take the city. But this happened two or three hundred years later. So how could Ezekiel have been talking about the people of the city in his prophecy? All those people were dead and gone by the time the city fell to Alexander. Besides that, why bother even making the prophecy that the city would never be rebuilt if you’re only talking about the inhabitants? Who would possibly think those people would re-inhabit a city once they were dead?
Instead, about the only possibility we’re left with is that Ezekiel was merely being figurative. He didn’t really mean that the city would never be rebuilt. He simply meant that they would be punished in some way (this is where Alexander the Great fits in) and never come back to their former glory. I guess we can see why Ezekiel didn’t phrase it this way because it does seem to lose some of its grandeur. Of course, even then it’s hard to put your finger on exactly when this was fulfilled, because Tyre still enjoyed some prominence for a long time after Alexander took it.
But the benefit of saying that the prophecy is just figurative is that you can’t disprove it. Ezekiel could have said almost anything and it wouldn’t matter – whatever reality actually occurred would be the prophecy fulfillment. Everything is vague and non-specific so that we have no problem reading the fulfillment into whatever happens. It’s much like the fortune from a fortune cookie. They give a vague pronouncement that’s supposed to happen over an unspecified time so that if you really try, you can find the fulfillment to your fortune. The problem with this view is that there was no point in Ezekiel’s prophecy at all. The specific things he mentioned don’t really happen in the way he described. And even though he seems emphatic in at least 3 different places that Tyre would never be rebuilt, people just say that he didn’t mean that. What else could he have said if his true intention was that the city would never be rebuilt in any fashion at all? People who use this excuse in order to maintain the inerrancy of the Bible aren’t viewing this prophecy as any kind of proof (which is at least part of the reason it would have been given). Instead, they’ve made up their mind that it must be true, regardless of the facts. So there was really no point in even recording it.
This is one of the most blatant and obvious examples of a failed prophecy in the Bible. It is clear and specific, yet it did not come to pass. The conclusion is obvious: at the very least, Ezekiel was not a true prophet. At most, the entire Bible is uninspired. If you’re a firm Bible-believer (as I was), are you honest and brave enough to accept it for what it is? I hope you’ll think about it.
We’ll continue our study of Bible prophecies in the next post.
Finding Truth 
I meant to add … yet Tyre does exist today.
LikeLike
@William.. “From the way God is presented in the OT, it’s easy to imagine what one would have expected to happen to Tyre had they lived in Ezekiel’s time. Images of Sodom and Gomorrah would have readily come to mind.
But it’s nothing like what really happened.
That’s how I see it. Even if you disagree, do you see why I might expect that kind of fulfillment, considering the god we’re talking about? Considering his past accomplishments?”
I can certainly see your argument here.. on the surface. But, first, those other incidences weren’t actual prophecies as such.. not like Ezekiel’s. With Sodom & Gomorrah, it was angels who revealed what would happen.. not a man giving a prophecy.
In those other events, we don’t have historical documentation of what God or His angels told Abraham etc.. so there is no easy way to verify these events.. but Ezekiel’s prophecy is documented along with the time of prophecy.. so it can be verified using actual historical records to compare to the actual prophecy.
But, further, it doesn’t matter how other cities were destroyed.. again, it only matters what the actual prophecy says.. and everything it says, as worded.. happened.
This is another example of injecting your own beliefs into the prophecy.. stating what is “should” or “would” be if it were true. This is the problem I believe.
“Personally, I don’t read Ezekiel’s prophecy as just promising punishment for Tyre — it’s promising destruction. Destruction to a point that the city would never be rebuilt. That’s why this one seems so significant to me, because that simply didn’t happen.”
I agree.. the idea was punishment.. via destruction. And that most definitely happened. But again, where the crux of this debate lies is in if the specific points within the prophecy were in regards to ALL of Tyre on every single “mini” prophecy. And again, based on the style of the prophecy, it allows for some of the mini prophecies to be for parts of Tyre. An example would be.. looting of the merchandise.. well, since the island was the trade center.. THIS portion of the prophecy would apply to only the island.. wouldn’t it?
cont..
LikeLike
Nate, here is another example of injecting your belief into the prophecy..
“No, that’s not at all what I’ve been saying. Several times now I’ve referred to all the passages, as well as the historical reasons, that make me think this prophecy was talking about all of Tyre, especially the island portion since it was far more important than the mainland.”
“.. especially the island portion since it was far more important.. ”
Again, this isn’t how to determine if a prophecy is fulfilled.. by injecting what you “feel” it should be.. the island most definitely suffered and was destroyed, just as the prophecy states. If nothing had ever happened to the island, then I could agree with you.. because I believe that the prophecy most definitely includes the island. Again, at the crux of this debate is that you feel that the portion of the prophecy that states it would never be rebuilt is in regards to ALL of Tyre.. and again, I know of nothing inside the prophecy that forces that belief.. on the contrary, due to the style, other parts of the prophecy, it argues that not all of Tyre had to be under water etc.
cont..
LikeLike
Nate, cont..
“As you went through Ezekiel’s prophecy point by point, I noticed that you left out part of this:
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.”
This happened to “Old Tyre”..
LikeLike
Nate, cont..
Me:
You don’t get to ADD to these words, your own meaning and then declare the prophecy unfulfilled. It doesn’t work that way. The answer to ALL these questions is YES.
you: You say this, but you added the word “mainland” where Ezekiel did not.
It doesn’t matter that Ezekiel didn’t specify every time which part he was prophesying about .. there are other portions of the prophecy where he didn’t specify but which we can tell only meant the island.. like looting of the merchandise.
LikeLike
“Again, this isn’t how to determine if a prophecy is fulfilled.. by injecting what you “feel” it should be.. the island most definitely suffered and was destroyed, just as the prophecy states.” – kathy
yet it was rebuilt, contrary to what the prophecy states.
LikeLike
“It doesn’t matter that Ezekiel didn’t specify every time which part he was prophesying about .. there are other portions of the prophecy where he didn’t specify but which we can tell only meant the island.. like looting of the merchandise.”
it does matter. See, here is where you’re inserting what you want it to say.
LikeLike
Now wait a second, Kathy. This isn’t exactly right. If we’re truly going back to just what the prophecy says, then this is what we’re looking at:
Just going off what he said, the being scraped bare applies to the island. Notice where he says “in the midst of the sea,” and he refers to the mainland only at the very end. Everything else was directed at Tyre itself, not Ushu.
LikeLike
Nate, cont.. “Finally, if God had really wanted all of Tyre to be destroyed and never rebuilt, could he have made sure that would happen? And if that’s what he wanted, what else should Ezekiel’s prophecy have said to get that point across?”
Tyre WAS destroyed.. just as the prophecy says.. and old Tyre was never rebuilt. Of course God could decimate ALL of Tyre if that’s what He wanted to do.. clearly He didn’t want to… which I suspect, again, is so ppl who are looking for “excuses” to argue non fulfillment will have what they want. I truly believe this.. this is described in the Bible that God would do this..even to the point of causing ppl to not believe.. which I know seems “unfair”.. but, as the verse goes.. “..
“Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.” I don’t believe this verse is about literal possessions, but spiritual faith/ belief. If you want to not believe, God has chosen to accommodate you… which again, is His sovereign right to do.
LikeLike
Is it really? Let’s think about this for a moment. God sets up a system where all the world will be judged by whether or not they believe the claim that he is the only true God, and Jesus is his Son — our only avenue for salvation. But he also gives people reasons not to believe, insuring their eternal damnation? Does that really sound like the kind of God you serve and love?
Let’s not malign God’s character — a god who behaved in such a way could not be described as all-loving and merciful.
Kathy, which scenario makes more sense: God gave a prophecy that doesn’t entirely seem to have come true, or a man gave a false prophecy?
LikeLike
And let me ask this:
If it turned out that you were following after the wrong god, wouldn’t you want to know? Perhaps this is some of the evidence…?
LikeLike
@William.. me:It doesn’t matter that Ezekiel didn’t specify every time which part he was prophesying about .. there are other portions of the prophecy where he didn’t specify but which we can tell only meant the island.. like looting of the merchandise.”
you: it does matter. See, here is where you’re inserting what you want it to say.
It doesn’t matter because as I pointed out.. OTHER parts of the prophecy didn’t specify which part of the island yet, “looting the merchandise” clearly only refers to the island since that’s where the trading happened. Or, the “pleasant houses”.. and that it switches at that point and says “they”.. only supports my assertion since Alexander did those things to the island.
LikeLike
kathy, i still think you’re reading what you want into it, and you think the same of me.
yet we both agree that we should text as it is written.
If you answer these questions, it may help me understand your position better.
1) is it really your position that the Ezekiel wasnt talking about a complete and a permanent destruction?
2) Do you really think that when ezekiel was saying so much about punishing their king, that he really didnt mean that he’d punish the king beyond taking the suburbs of the mainland?
3) is it your understanding that ezekiel was speaking only about the building materials of mainland tyre?
LikeLike
“I don’t agree with your view of those verses, just as you don’t agree with my points about all the verses that show the prophecy’s focus on the island.”
There are none. they were all debunked
“Other readers of this thread can simply make up their own minds.”
Thats obvious. Unless it some claim that the majority on an atheist blog makes a point I don’t get the point of informing me of what we all know
“Oh, and about the king of Tyre: he wasn’t killed. We know that from history.”
You know how he died as you are now suggesting Nate? I’d like to see some sources for that and by sources I don’t mean some historian that surmises that but actual documents from the time that show us this “history” because there are is as I understand mention of him as a vassal of Babylon which would suggest (against what you have been claiming) he was very affected. It would be wonderful to know how he died because That would be an unusual detail given the historical documents of the time and yes that would be required.
LikeLike
Nate,
you quoted & said:
4″ They shall destroy the walls of Tyre and break down her towers, and I will scrape her soil from her and make her a bare rock. 5 She shall be in the midst of the sea a place for the spreading of nets, for I have spoken, declares the Lord God. And she shall become plunder for the nations, 6 and her daughters on the mainland shall be killed by the sword. Then they will know that I am the Lord.”
“Just going off what he said, the being scraped bare applies to the island. Notice where he says “in the midst of the sea,” and he refers to the mainland only at the very end. Everything else was directed at Tyre itself, not Ushu.”
Why does it apply to the island only in the beginning? Walls & towers existed on the mainland.
“5 She shall be in the midst of the sea ..”
The def. of “midst” can mean in the middle OR among..
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/midst
“.. and he refers to the mainland only at the very end. Everything else was directed at Tyre itself, not Ushu.”
Yes, he did give specifics for the daughters of the mainland.. but to that I say “so?” 1st, point.. did any of those things not happen as worded? No. Including the daughters on the mainland being killed by the sword. God elected to give this specific about the daughters.. but that doesn’t mean that He gave specifics to ALL of the prophecy.. which He didn’t. Again, I give you the ex. of looting the merchandise. When you look at how the warningless changing of “he” and “they”.. that pretty much sets up the style for all of the prophecy.. sometimes there is specification, sometimes there isn’t.. within individual sentences even..
“4” They shall destroy the walls of Tyre and break down her towers, and I will scrape her soil from her and make her a bare rock.”
God goes from “they” to “I” in one sentence. There is no set template for prophecies. Yes, I realize that that is inconvenient but again, I believe it is how God wants it. Again, bottom line, NOTHING as worded in the prophecy did not happen. It only becomes “unfulfilled” when you add your own context.
LikeLike
What evidence do you have for that Kathy? Tyre’s walls and towers were on the island — no history of Tyre I’ve ever seen runs counter to that. Have you considered the possibility that you may just be wrong about this prophecy? That perhaps it didn’t actually come true?
LikeLike
From BibleArcheology.org:
Ethbaal was the father of Jezebel and king of Sidon (1 Kgs 16:31). Many scholars follow Josephus (Against Apion 1.121-24; Antiquities 8), who was quoting Menander, and identify Ethbaal with Ithbaal (Hebrew “Man of Baal”), priest of Astarte who killed the king of Tyre and seized the throne (Jidejian 1996:73, 306).
LikeLike
I think that’s a much earlier king, Nan. But thanks for the info. I’m researching it as well.
LikeLike
Nate.. you said: “What evidence do you have for that Kathy? Tyre’s walls and towers were on the island — no history of Tyre I’ve ever seen runs counter to that. Have you considered the possibility that you may just be wrong about this prophecy? That perhaps it didn’t actually come true?”
I haven’t claimed that the island didn’t have walls and towers.. the question is what do we have to indicate that the mainland DIDN’T have these things??
And have you ever thought that the prophecy actually is fulfilled just as it is worded? These questions are irrelevant.. it comes down to the actual prophecy in determining it’s fulfillment.. not what we consider as possible answers or what we want those answers to be.
I still don’t know exactly what you are using to argue that ALL of Tyre MUST be the meaning behind “never to be rebuilt”.. I’ve adequately shown that it CAN mean the mainland only. This is the crux of the debate.
LikeLike
Kathy, if someone claimed that they were going to destroy the Statue of Liberty, what would you think? Would you assume they were talking about the one in NYC?
Yet, there’s a small replica in Birmingham, AL. If that’s the one they were talking about, are you the one at fault for not knowing it? And if they destroyed that one, would it be true that they really destroyed the Statue of Liberty? Of course not.
Ezekiel prophesied that Tyre’s walls and towers would be destroyed, but they were not. Even if the mainland had some, those are not the ones people would have been thinking of. Tyre’s main defenses were unquestionably on the island. That is what Ezekiel was talking about. If it’s not, then he was a very poor communicator, which also causes problems for the notion of divine inspiration.
This is a much simpler issue than we’re making it. I completely understand why you’re trying so hard to make everything fit together — I went through something similar the first time I was exposed to actual problems in the Bible. It’s not easy to accept. You definitely have my sympathy. I’m happy to talk through any of the bigger repercussions of this stuff, if you ever want to. I can even send you my email address, if you’d rather discuss offline.
Thanks
LikeLike
From Wikipedia
Echoing Ezekiel’s words, historian Philip Myers writes in 1889:
The city never recovered from this blow. The site of the once brilliant maritime capital is now “bare as the top of a rock,” a place where the few fishermen that still frequent the spot spread their nets to dry.[52]
Older sources often refer to the locations as a “fishing village”. However, the nearby area grew rapidly in the 20th century. The ruins of a part of ancient Tyre (a protected site) can still be seen on the southern half of the island[53] whereas modern Tyre occupies the northern half and also sprawls across Alexander’s causeway and onto the mainland.[54] It is now the fourth largest city in Lebanon[55] with a population of 14,000 people[56]
LikeLike
Nate,
Me: “If you want to not believe, God has chosen to accommodate you… which again, is His sovereign right to do.
You: Is it really? Let’s think about this for a moment. God sets up a system where all the world will be judged by whether or not they believe the claim that he is the only true God, and Jesus is his Son — our only avenue for salvation. But he also gives people reasons not to believe, insuring their eternal damnation? Does that really sound like the kind of God you serve and love?
First, there is no question that the Creator of all has the sovereign right to do as He pleases.. whether we like it or not.
God laid out a plan. It starts with our creation. And our possession of free will. His plan/ desire is for His creation to love Him.. as He loves us. (Who doesn’t want to be loved and give love? Even God wants this..) And it’s critical to understand that love cannot exist w/o free will. This is a major component of the plan. God says to “seek and ye shall find”.. when we seek, we are using our free will. And when we don’t seek we are using our free will. If we don’t seek Him, what do you expect Him to do? Well, He DOES give us nudges.. he gives us all kinds of reasons to seek Him.. mostly when we are in distress.. due to events in ordinary life living in a world of humans with free will.. but ALSO due to our pride in not obeying Him and paying the consequences. While we get these nudges.. we ALSO see His love.. in everything around us.. from our family/ loved ones, to the beauty of nature that gives us so much pleasure… not to mention our very lives and senses to enjoy these things.
So, while we reject Him, He still gives us chance after chance.. but even with God, there is a point where He feels He’s given enough. Some ppl, no matter how much evidence & signs He gives, are going to reject Him. I fear sometimes that He might give up on me.. and it’s a healthy fear because it keeps me focused on Him. God has shown us so much love that by the time He accommodates you with what you WANT.. He is blameless.. He gave His Son to die for us.. what more do you want??
Just as there is no factual reason to point to that proves that the prophecy HASN’T been fulfilled, there is no factual reason to point to that God doesn’t exist. Overwhelmingly, the evidence points to a Creator.. as opposed to not. Atheists have to argue away so much to believe that we are nothing but an accident.
“Kathy, which scenario makes more sense: God gave a prophecy that doesn’t entirely seem to have come true, or a man gave a false prophecy?”
“God gave a prophecy that doesn’t entirely seem to have come true,..”
It only seems that way to those who inject their own interpretation.. without looking further.. not seeking so they can find..
I’ll bring up an example that I brought up before.. the story of Jephthah .. if you don’t seek further, you will assume that he sacrificed his daughter.. and that is NOT the God described in the rest of the Bible who would condone this sacrifice.
It requires effort.. “seek and ye shall find”.. don’t seek, and you won’t find.. and even worse, God might give up on you all together.
LikeLike
Nate.. you: “And let me ask this:
If it turned out that you were following after the wrong god, wouldn’t you want to know? Perhaps this is some of the evidence…?”
Of course I would want to know.. I don’t know of any evidence that God isn’t the God of the Bible.. the Bible is full of evidence.. all we need.
LikeLike
Really, Kathy? You’ve commented enough on here by now to get a feel for the knowledge level of most of us here… do we really seem like people who aren’t seeking? People who aren’t seeking, don’t bother with this kind of research — it’s as simple as that. Besides that, I have old archives on here of posts I did while a firm believer. Again — people who aren’t seeking don’t bother with this much study.
If he doesn’t condone human sacrifice, why would we condone hiding information from people that would save them? I was happy as a Christian — I only stopped believing because I was convinced by evidence that Christianity is false. If I’d had better evidence, I would still be a Christian today. I wanted it to be true… why would God allow me to be led away?
Besides, I don’t think you’re correct about the Jephthah story anyway. I know a number of people like to think it only meant that she remained a virgin forever, but that’s not what the passage says (Judges 11):
That’s fairly straightforward, and so is this prophecy. Several of us have stated over and over all the verses that point to the destruction and the being scraped as prophecies about the island. I’m sorry that this is so difficult to accept…
In fact, maybe it would be easier if we just tabled this one for a bit and talked about another one. Maybe after seeing this kind of trend, it will be easier for you to see that this prophecy simply didn’t work out the way Ezekiel claimed it would. Interested?
LikeLike
I’m afraid this just isn’t true, Kathy. Take me up on my offer — let me walk you through some of the other problems so you can stop wasting your time and your life on a false god. It’s a difficult journey, but well worth it in the long run. And I don’t mean any of this condescendingly — I’m sincerely offering as someone who’s walked that same road.
LikeLike