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 
Kathy, good question, i’ll see if i can find a source that specifically says that tyre’s island was bigger or more built up than it’s mainland.
Can you provide sources saying specifically that the mainland was bigger more fortified thna the isalnd.
We do know that the Island had a large fortified city. We know the kings dwelling was there. at least at the time of Alexander, their temple was also on the island.
But does it matter? To me, the prophecy was still about tyre and not parts of tyre.
you said:
“And yes, I acknowledge that they had other resources/ ways to function on the island.. but I don’t see a valid argument that their lives weren’t miserable for those 13 years. As a comparison.. just realize how miserable MANY lives are today because of this horrible economy.. if your home town is under siege.. I imagine the economy alone would be significantly affected.”
But was ezekiel prophecy that tyre would be in bad shape, or utterly and permanently destroyed?
LikeLike
““she will be a place in the midst of the sea for spreading nets.” What does “she” refer to? Looking at verse 4, it’s clear that “she” refers to Tyre. The subject does not change. The subject of verse 5 does not suddenly switch to the debris and claim that all of it will be where nets are spread.”
Sorry Nate. She is the city and she is scraped into the sea the city consist of building material. case closed. The verse is unambiguous. So all the points about she really makes no point at all.
I realize you are up against it when in the midst of the water and in the midst of the sea pretty much proves your reading wrong but that doesn’t work.
“It’s that the source manuscripts used for the KJV were not as old or as good as the ones we have available today. You can read more about that here, if you’re interested:”
complaining about KJV makes no point nate. that also won’t work. there are MULTIPLE translations that translate field. Its after all how the word is translated most of the time and its extremely misleading on your part to claim that the KJV is at fault for translating the word the way it does when it is actually translated at most other places that way. to claim that is really desperate.
” But Mike’s comment could lead someone to think that the Hebrew word here shouldn’t be translated as mainland and can only mean field, but that’s not the case.”
Fudging. Anyone reading me would read me saying that it is translated field the majority of the time NOT that it can never be translated that way. Why would I be denying anyone could translate it that way when some do? lets face it you are getting desperate to try to imply anything I said would be misleading people. What I said was straight and obvious – just the facts. Its not the normal translation of the word. Furthermore you have NEVER been able to answer why nowhere else has mainlands being slained by the sword. The expression is used of human beings being killed. PERIOD.
“This article from Strong’s goes into a lot of detail concerning the word:
http://biblehub.com/hebrew/7704.htm”
Great anyone that actually looks at your links will see it confirms exactly what I said and it even shows that mainland is a MINORITY meaning being only used twice with several hundred other times its translated as field or something else.
“Mike, maybe you weren’t aware of this, but the image you linked to was taken from the southern tip of the island. If you notice, it’s standing in for a “Google Street View” of the island’s coast, so I’m afraid it doesn’t help your case at all.”
Fair enough Nate. Wrong picture but outside of a beach strip that exists now, the coastland is very rocky all over even away from the island
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.274251,35.207404,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m5!1e2!3m3!1s31009208!2e1!3e10
You can see the rockiness right into the sea
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Tyre/@33.274251,35.207404,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m5!1e2!3m3!1s31009208!2e1!3e10!4m2!3m1!1s0x151e7d902f915d95:0xcf0e3fc6fb997408
“. At most, both locations were rocky, which tells us nothing.”
nate- you forgot – the point about Tyre and rock was your point not ours. We are merely answering it. We don’t care if it tells us nothing. It was your point.
You’ve rebutted none of our points only begged that its all KJV’s fault and have failed again to prove your unfulfilled prophecy. You also of course have nothing to say about in “the midst of the water” in verse 12 being synonymous with verse 5 and in the “midst of the sea” because it proves you are wrong and that was one of your key passages to claim it must be the island.
LikeLike
1) is it really your position that the Ezekiel wasnt talking about a complete and a permanent destruction?
Kathy: “Ezekiel was clearly talking about serious destruction to Tyre.. and serious destruction DID happen to Tyre, mainland and island. What is being claimed by deniers of the proph. is that Ezekiel said ALL of Tyre would never be rebuilt.. you claim “complete” destruction was predicted but there isn’t anything in the prophecy to support that claim except the word “Tyre”.. which isn’t enough to make that claim especially since there were essentially 2 Tyres.”
WILLIAM: “Tyre” is as specific as someone’s name. So if Ezekiel predicted that bob would be killed, did he mean that bob would be killed or did he mean that bob’s leg would be severed and that flesh would die?
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?
Kathy: “I don’t believe the mainland was only suburbs.. I believe it was a city possibly larger than the island city. And again, even though the island wasn’t taken, their lives were miserable for those 13 years.. I don’t see how life could have gone on as usually.. an island relies on outside sources and they must have relied on the mainland for much of their trading needs. So, the king suffered.. from loss of half his kingdom and also his freedom to some extent for those 13 years and loved ones on the mainland? It’s just not reasonable to think he didn’t suffer.”
WILLIAM: why do you think the mainland was bigger and better when Neb had the mainlnd but still failed to take tyre?
3) is it your understanding that ezekiel was speaking only about the building materials of mainland tyre?
Kathy: “The city was not the land.. if you read all 3 chapters of the prophecy, that is what makes up the city.. and all those things were affected.. all of it came true. And also, there is nothing in the prophecy that states that it would all happen on a certain day or all at once.. it just doesn’t specify.. so maybe it does mean all of Tyre.. and it just hasn’t happened yet.. that is a possibility. But since the mainland city was scraped and was witnessed to be under water, there is no argument to be made that THAT Tyre, ancient/ old Tyre will never be rebuilt.”
WILLIAM: when was the mainland ever underwater and when have they ever spread nets on the mainland?
And Kathy, again, even if were only looking at a modern picture, tyre is there today, on what was the island, on what was the mainland, and on what was Alexander’s causeway. this point is what really makes me depart from understanding your position.
LikeLike
sorry this should have been the 2nd one
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Tyre/@33.274861,35.208778,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m5!1e2!3m3!1s5432898!2e1!3e10!4m2!3m1!1s0x151e7d902f915d95:0xcf0e3fc6fb997408
LikeLike
“Sorry Nate. She is the city and she is scraped into the sea the city consist of building material. case closed. The verse is unambiguous. So all the points about she really makes no point at all.” – mike
fascinating.
Islands are also in the midst of the sea, but yeah, once old building materials are thrown away, a city can never be rebuilt again. I mean, it can be rebuilt with new building materials, but ezekiel is using wisdom from above and up above, only original building materials define a city…
I do agree that it was unambiguous, though. Tyre would be destroyed forever and leftdelsolate forever… yet she’s there today…
LikeLike
and mike, you’re suggesting that the building materials were transformed into bare rocks and now are where they spread their nets… under modern day tyre?
I’m really not understanding this “the city is the building materials” thing…
LikeLike
“Tyre was scraped and dumped into the sea.. I don’t know how that gets rebuilt. ”
Its on Cartoon Network. Its where Sponge Bob Square pants lives 🙂
LikeLike
so if ezekiel was talking about the actual building materials, why would say that they couldnt be rebuilt again?
and again, he said this about tyre – you’re saying tyre was the building materials. so what’s there now?
according to you, sponge bob doesnt exist anymore, never more to be redrawn. the first pencil used to sketch him is gone now, used up. the original papers, old and framed. No, what you watch on cartoon network now is something else, but sponge bob is long gone – per your ridiculous argument.
LikeLike
do you rebuild building materials or cities?
I cant believe this is your whole argument.
LikeLike
you’ve proven it all. Finally. Ezekiel was condemning building material from the mainland. Building materials will never be rebuilt and will turn into rocks.
well, that’s not as impressive as I originally took it, but god sure showed those building materials. Tyre better take notice, they wouldnt want to meet the same fate.
LikeLike
Kathy, my most recent post is dedicated to you. Just an FYI, in case you didn’t notice it.
LikeLike
“I cant believe this is your whole argument.”
LOl….William you are such a liar. after all these posts you are trying to claim one point is our whole argument. This is why I barely read you anymore.
and Kathy you are about to see how Nate misreads and twists Bible verses up front and personal. His Creation Gen 1 vs gen 2 contradiction is classic Nate and its a doozy.
LikeLike
Mike, the gymnast, approaches the mat…
LikeLike
and Nate the would be researcher is about to go splat
hey you were waxing poetic. I just continued with an appropriate rhyme 🙂
LikeLike
“LOl….William you are such a liar. after all these posts you are trying to claim one point is our whole argument. This is why I barely read you anymore.” – Mike
Pot calling the kettle black again?
Without that point, you don’t have one – and it’s a lame and absurd point based off of frantic hope that someone swallows it, at that
I think all that’s required to refute ezekiel’s prophecy is a picture of modern tyre.
I dont resort to having to redefine words, or have to explain what Ezekiel really meant or point to grassy fields and ruins, surrounded by city, and pretend that every inch of every other city in the world is covered by occupied buildings that sit on original foundations.
your whole argument is hope. you hope all he meant was the mainland building materials. You hope that the empty field on tyre’s mainland is actually all of tyre (in addition to the building nmaterials underwater?)…
I know what “forever” means and what “desolate” means, and dont have to pretend they mean something else.
I dont know if you’re a liar or not, but you’re either that, delusional, or less than intelligent. This isnt a point I have to argue. It’s clear that you firmly believe ezekiel was exactly right, and that I just dont see it that way at all. the causal, honest reader will see who the bigger idiot is without either of us having to point it out…
LikeLike
Hi Nate,
Just wondering, if you had time to read it, what were your thoughts on Thomistic Bents overview?
http://humblesmith.wordpress.com/2014/04/30/did-ezekiel-prophesy-correctly-about-tyre-part-1/
LikeLike
Hey Ryan,
I have read it, and I do have some thoughts on it. I really have started my response, but I’ve gotten distracted lately by some of the other activity on here. I’ll try to finish it up soon and get it posted — I’ll be interested to hear any thoughts about it you might have.
While my post will lay out evidence for the points I want to focus on, I’ll go ahead and let you know that I still don’t view it as an actual fulfilled prophecy. It seems to me that most apologetic attempts to resolve it are stretching a number things beyond the point of credulity. After all, it’s still true that Tyre still stands today as a major city, and has been important in its region throughout virtually all of its long history. And I just have trouble squaring that with the way Ezekiel’s prophecy reads. But again, I plan to lay all of this out in detail soon.
Thanks for reminding me to get back on it!
LikeLike
Hi Nate
I just read through this series on the Tyre prophecy in Ezekiel. Thanks for all the effort you put into this and your clear considered presentation. The Book of Ezekiel poses many challenges and tends not to get much focus in Churches, except perhaps for the Valley of Dry Bones part. I will make a couple of observations in passing:
– The prophecy against Egypt seems suspect also. Firstly I understand it was not Nebuchadnezzar who conquered Egypt but his successor. Further Egypt was not decimated in the way predicted;
– The temple foreseen by Ezekiel and the restored Israel and Jerusalem does not match the return from exile (though sometimes this is spiritualized or treated as an end times prediction by interpreters) – but is hard to see it as end time as it talks about re-establishing the Old Testament cultic practices;
– Some of Ezekiel’s personal behaviour, which he attributes to God’s instructions, is quite bizarre.
LikeLike
Thanks Peter!
Yeah, this prophecy was a very big deal to me early on. I actually did a fuller treatment of it several months ago. That series starts here, if you’re interested.
And thanks for sharing those other points. I was aware of the failure of the Egypt prophecy, but I didn’t know about the other details. The temple thing sounds particularly interesting — I’ll check that out.
Thanks!
LikeLike
The first of my series on Tyre starts at the link below. I’ll post the conclusions on your final post. Suffice to say, you are incorrect, and I think you know it. Do the right thing, Nate, and pull this one.
https://humblesmith.wordpress.com/2014/04/30/did-ezekiel-prophesy-correctly-about-tyre-part-1/
LikeLike
I’ll post my comments on the other thread, but it might be a little while before I get to it. This is a topic I’ve studied pretty exhaustively (I’ve read your posts on it before too), so I don’t anticipate that I’ll come away with a different view of it, but who knows? It will take me some time to go back through it all, though. I’ll post a response as soon as I can.
LikeLike
If you really want to know the history of Tyre and what a delapitated shell of a city it is today not to mention it is known as modern day Sour today and not Tyre watch this video and see it and hear it first hand. God bless..
LikeLike
Vincent, the name Tyre, in Hebrew, is Tzor, or Sur. So, the name is really the same.
There are ruins in Tyre, for sure, but people also live there, contrary to what Ezekiel said. One of the ancient ports still works, contrary to what Ezekiel said. The city was found again, rebuilt and re-inhabited, contrary to what Ezekiel said.
Use google earth, and search for Tyre, Lebanon – it’ll top right up. Not only was the city rebuilt on the island, but also on the causeway that Alexander built to sack it. You can click on picture icons there to see modern day dwellings. You can see the operational northern port.
How exactly did Ezekiel get his prophecy correct?
LikeLike