Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good point. Neb is refereed to in the singular as"he"and "his". Then it changes to "They" showing others than Neb will be involved in the final work of destruction.
Horse hockey. "They" is referring to Nebbie's army. That's why several chapters later Ezekiel speaks of paying them--the army--with the spoils of Egypt.
Ezekiel was among the first deportees and probably wrote much of the book from the perspective of exile in Babylon between the first deportation in 598 and the destruction of Jerusalem in 586. The oracles we are looking at came from the period immediately preceding the destruction of Jerusalem as Nebuchadnezzar marched south from Assyria along the Mediterranean coast via Tyre and Sidon before he turned toward Jerusalem on his way to Egypt. Where in any of this is Alexander?
If Ezekiel had meant to predict Alexander, then it would have said "Alexander's army." Or is your God not prone to speaking plainly?
Mike, read this post VERY CAREFULLY and try to comprehend what Warden is saying:
If even ONE prophecy fails then the Bible is not the inerrant Word of God. This prophecy failed, as Warden points out.
The Bible therefore passes from the category of "From the lips of God directly to mankind" to "A book filled with some good advice, but certainly not perfect and most certainly NOT the inspired Word of God."
Sorry but that's the reality of things.
The prophecy of Tyre didn't fail. Nebuchadnezzar was but the first wave of assault against Tyre. He destroyed the mainland part of Tyre and the surrounding settlements. Much later, Alexander the Great used the ruins of the mainland part of Tyre to build a causeway out to the island and attack it. This is described in Ezekiel 26:12. Over the years silt deposits accumulated on that causeway and turned the island into a peninsula.
The prophecy shifts from the singular 'he' with reference to Nebuchadnezzar to the plural 'they' in Ezekiel 26. The prophecy clearly states that many nations would come up against Tyre as the sea brings up its waves. [26:3] 'They' refers to the many nations that over time would come up against Tyre. It is a matter of historical fact that over the centuries many nations did come up against Tyre. The prophecy concerned Phoenician Tyre. Over time Phoenician Tyre lost its sovereignty to other nations who ruled over it. Although Tyre did recover from Nebuchadnezzar's and Alexander's attacks it did not recover its former power.The part of the prophecy which states that Tyre would be built no more [v. 13] may refer to the mainland part of Tyre which had been destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar.
It is a matter of historical fact that it was Alexander the Great and his armies that built the causeway from the ruins of the mainland city which Nebuchadnezzar had earlier attacked. And it is quite obvious that Nebuchadnezzar did not and could not ride his horses over the half mile of water in order to attack the island fortress. That had to wait for Alexander.
Now the prophecy contains picturesque language which is easy to misunderstand. But the point of the prophecy is that Phoenician Tyre lost its former glory and came under the influence of foreign nations. Tyre did continue to exist into New Testament times, and there is a Tyre today. But Phoenician Tyre was attacked by various nations as the prophecy said it would be and which history confirms, and it's former power and glory was never restored to what it had been.
But I don't intend to argue whether the Biblical prophecies were fulfilled or if they failed, or the issue of inerrancy. I primarily posted on this thread in order to refute your claims that the Old Testament didn't point to Jesus. And I did refute that claim.
Mike, read this post VERY CAREFULLY and try to comprehend what Warden is saying:
If even ONE prophecy fails then the Bible is not the inerrant Word of God. This prophecy failed, as Warden points out.
The Bible therefore passes from the category of "From the lips of God directly to mankind" to "A book filled with some good advice, but certainly not perfect and most certainly NOT the inspired Word of God."
Sorry but that's the reality of things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
The prophecy of Tyre didn't fail. Nebuchadnezzar was but the first wave of assault against Tyre. He destroyed the mainland part of Tyre and the surrounding settlements. Much later, Alexander the Great used the ruins of the mainland part of Tyre to build a causeway out to the island and attack it. This is described in Ezekiel 26:12. Over the years silt deposits accumulated on that causeway and turned the island into a peninsula.
The prophecy shifts from the singular 'he' with reference to Nebuchadnezzar to the plural 'they' in Ezekiel 26. The prophecy clearly states that many nations would come up against Tyre as the sea brings up its waves. [26:3] 'They' refers to the many nations that over time would come up against Tyre. It is a matter of historical fact that over the centuries many nations did come up against Tyre. The prophecy concerned Phoenician Tyre. Over time Phoenician Tyre lost its sovereignty to other nations who ruled over it. Although Tyre did recover from Nebuchadnezzar's and Alexander's attacks it did not recover its former power.The part of the prophecy which states that Tyre would be built no more [v. 13] may refer to the mainland part of Tyre which had been destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar.
It is a matter of historical fact that it was Alexander the Great and his armies that built the causeway from the ruins of the mainland city which Nebuchadnezzar had earlier attacked. And it is quite obvious that Nebuchadnezzar did not and could not ride his horses over the half mile of water in order to attack the island fortress. That had to wait for Alexander.
Now the prophecy contains picturesque language which is easy to misunderstand. But the point of the prophecy is that Phoenician Tyre lost its former glory and came under the influence of foreign nations. Tyre did continue to exist into New Testament times, and there is a Tyre today. But Phoenician Tyre was attacked by various nations as the prophecy said it would be and which history confirms, and it's former power and glory was never restored to what it had been.
But I don't intend to argue whether the Biblical prophecies were fulfilled or if they failed, or the issue of inerrancy. I primarily posted on this thread in order to refute your claims that the Old Testament didn't point to Jesus. And I did refute that claim.
remember, that in fundie thought each prophecy has 2-3 maybe as many as 6 minor occurrences. Just because it did not come to pass exactly as written, does not mean it happened 2-3 times in a slightly different variant.
The prophecy of Tyre didn't fail. Nebuchadnezzar was but the first wave of assault against Tyre. He destroyed the mainland part of Tyre and the surrounding settlements. Much later, Alexander the Great used the ruins of the mainland part of Tyre to build a causeway out to the island and attack it. This is described in Ezekiel 26:12. Over the years silt deposits accumulated on that causeway and turned the island into a peninsula.
The prophecy shifts from the singular 'he' with reference to Nebuchadnezzar to the plural 'they' in Ezekiel 26. The prophecy clearly states that many nations would come up against Tyre as the sea brings up its waves. [26:3] 'They' refers to the many nations that over time would come up against Tyre. It is a matter of historical fact that over the centuries many nations did come up against Tyre. The prophecy concerned Phoenician Tyre. Over time Phoenician Tyre lost its sovereignty to other nations who ruled over it. Although Tyre did recover from Nebuchadnezzar's and Alexander's attacks it did not recover its former power.The part of the prophecy which states that Tyre would be built no more [v. 13] may refer to the mainland part of Tyre which had been destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar.
It is a matter of historical fact that it was Alexander the Great and his armies that built the causeway from the ruins of the mainland city which Nebuchadnezzar had earlier attacked. And it is quite obvious that Nebuchadnezzar did not and could not ride his horses over the half mile of water in order to attack the island fortress. That had to wait for Alexander.
Now the prophecy contains picturesque language which is easy to misunderstand. But the point of the prophecy is that Phoenician Tyre lost its former glory and came under the influence of foreign nations. Tyre did continue to exist into New Testament times, and there is a Tyre today. But Phoenician Tyre was attacked by various nations as the prophecy said it would be and which history confirms, and it's former power and glory was never restored to what it had been.
But I don't intend to argue whether the Biblical prophecies were fulfilled or if they failed, or the issue of inerrancy. I primarily posted on this thread in order to refute your claims that the Old Testament didn't point to Jesus. And I did refute that claim.
The mere fact that Ezekiel's prophecies were dated makes it quite different from all the "forward" looking prophecies by other prophets. This date specific oracle is against the Phoenician city of Tyre in Ezekiel 26, and is dated 586. It is an unambiguous prediction and deals only with the massive army the Babylonians had.
Nebuchadnnzar's army was composed of massive numbers of nationalities--mercenaries--as were most large armies of that period of time. But it had no naval ability and couldn't transport men across the water. Thirteen years after the siege began, Nebbie pulled out.
Though Alexander did, indeed, destroy parts of the city of Tyre, it was immediately rebuilt and became an important Greek, and later Roman, seaport. It still exists today as a resort city of Lebanon. This clearly violates Ezekiel’s judgment that it would never be rebuilt and become a bare rock upon which to dry fishnets. In fact you can get a hotel room in Tyre right now.
There is no internal rationale for changing the specific reference to Babylonians and assume that it really means Greeks, or to change Nebuchadnezzar to Alexander. If the text were inerrant in the way that many claim it to be, then we should be able to read "Greeks" and "Alexander" here. Again, this sounds like an attempt to preserve a certain view of prophecy that the evidence does not support. The only way this position can be maintained is to affirm both that history is predetermined, and that Scripture is verbally given to the prophet without any awareness on his part of the actual meaning of what he was being told (100% God!). In fact, it even deceives him into thinking he was actually talking about his own situation when in fact he was talking about a situation centuries in the future. This, as it usually does, assumes a certain theory of inspiration of Scripture in order to maintain its inerrancy, which is then used in a circular fashion, to confirm the same theories of inspiration
And the theory assumes that Ezekiel was completely in the dark regarding his own prophecy. He thought he was talking about Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians when he was unwittingly talking about Alexander and the Greek. Just how stupid did biblical writers have to be with if that theory holds water?
More than that, what good is a prophetic word that isn't to be filled for two or three hundred years. What is the point of a prophecy like that? It sounds like Ezekiel is converted into a kind of Nostradamus.
Finally, Ezekiel himself changed his prophecy two years after Nebbie failed to do what Ezekiel prophesied:
Quote:
--Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon made his army labor hard against Tyre; every head was made bald and every shoulder was rubbed bare; yet neither he nor his army got anything from Tyre to pay for the labor that he had performed against it. Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I will give the land of Egypt to Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon; and he shall carry off its wealth and despoil it and plunder it; and it shall be the wages for his army. I have given him the land of Egypt as his recompense for which he labored, because they worked for me, says the Lord GOD.
Ezekiel 29:18b-20
Ezekiel saw that Neb's men hadn't been paid, so the sacking of Egypt became compensation for their earlier failure at Tyre.
The INTERNAL biblical evidence and the context of the time frame are unambiguous and straight forward. Ezekiel was a prophet for his own people in captivity. He was a prophet for them. He wasn't staring down the tunnel of 2 1/2 centuries to Alexander.
The prophet's role was to help the people respond faithfully to God in their own time. So, Ezekiel could change his prediction, and even admit that he got it wrong, because, finally, the historical prediction was not his message!
Leave it to those insecure in their faith to need fulfilled prophecies in order to believe God. Those of us who have received the indwelling of the Holy Spirit need no prophecies whatsoever. We just need to know who we can help as a good neighbor to any of those around us.
All I see in your highlighted texts is Neb will siege the city and "they" again meaning more than one nation will plunder the spoils. The only thing you demonstrate is your willingness to attack the Word of God at any turn while claiming to be a Christian.
Warden is a teacher and disciple of Christ, jeff. You would do well to listen to him if you want to get to know how to be a Christian follower of Jesus.
The mere fact that Ezekiel's prophecies were dated makes it quite different from all the "forward" looking prophecies by other prophets. This date specific oracle is against the Phoenician city of Tyre in Ezekiel 26, and is dated 586. It is an unambiguous prediction and deals only with the massive army the Babylonians had.
Nebuchadnnzar's army was composed of massive numbers of nationalities--mercenaries--as were most large armies of that period of time. But it had no naval ability and couldn't transport men across the water. Thirteen years after the siege began, Nebbie pulled out.
Though Alexander did, indeed, destroy parts of the city of Tyre, it was immediately rebuilt and became an important Greek, and later Roman, seaport. It still exists today as a resort city of Lebanon. This clearly violates Ezekiel’s judgment that it would never be rebuilt and become a bare rock upon which to dry fishnets. In fact you can get a hotel room in Tyre right now.
There is no internal rationale for changing the specific reference to Babylonians and assume that it really means Greeks, or to change Nebuchadnezzar to Alexander. If the text were inerrant in the way that many claim it to be, then we should be able to read "Greeks" and "Alexander" here. Again, this sounds like an attempt to preserve a certain view of prophecy that the evidence does not support. The only way this position can be maintained is to affirm both that history is predetermined, and that Scripture is verbally given to the prophet without any awareness on his part of the actual meaning of what he was being told (100% God!). In fact, it even deceives him into thinking he was actually talking about his own situation when in fact he was talking about a situation centuries in the future. This, as it usually does, assumes a certain theory of inspiration of Scripture in order to maintain its inerrancy, which is then used in a circular fashion, to confirm the same theories of inspiration
And the theory assumes that Ezekiel was completely in the dark regarding his own prophecy. He thought he was talking about Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians when he was unwittingly talking about Alexander and the Greek. Just how stupid did biblical writers have to be with if that theory holds water?
More than that, what good is a prophetic word that isn't to be filled for two or three hundred years. What is the point of a prophecy like that? It sounds like Ezekiel is converted into a kind of Nostradamus.
Finally, Ezekiel himself changed his prophecy two years after Nebbie failed to do what Ezekiel prophesied:
Ezekiel 29:18b-20
Ezekiel saw that Neb's men hadn't been paid, so the sacking of Egypt became compensation for their earlier failure at Tyre.
The INTERNAL biblical evidence and the context of the time frame are unambiguous and straight forward. Ezekiel was a prophet for his own people in captivity. He was a prophet for them. He wasn't staring down the tunnel of 2 1/2 centuries to Alexander.
The prophet's role was to help the people respond faithfully to God in their own time. So, Ezekiel could change his prediction, and even admit that he got it wrong, because, finally, the historical prediction was not his message!
Leave it to those insecure in their faith to need fulfilled prophecies in order to believe God. Those of us who have received the indwelling of the Holy Spirit need no prophecies whatsoever. We just need to know who we can help as a good neighbor to any of those around us.
Prophecies are not required to conform to your standards. I have already shown that the prophecy was to be fulfilled by different nations in successive waves over time. Historically this is what happened. I stand by what I said and have no intention of arguing about it.
I also have no desire to waste my time on people who like yourself have to resort to accusing people of being insecure in their faith because they believe in fulfilled prophecy. If you want to consider yourself some kind of spiritual giant by accusing others of having a weak faith, go right ahead. I have a different opinion of you. We're done.
There are many compelling 'proofs' that Scripture/the Bible is God's Inspired Word of Truth. It is historically indisputable that the Bible is filled with accurately fulfilled Prophecies (historical, Messianic and End Time). To summarize:
1. Accurately fulfilled Bible Prophecy exceeds any human frame of reference
• 3,000 accurately fulfilled historical, Messianic and End Time prophecies affirm God’s inspiration
• There is no other rational explanation or human frame-of-reference for accurately fulfilled prophecy
• Bible prophecy affirms God’s direct, beginning-to-end involvement in human life
Is it possible to intelligently discuss this without resorting to 'name calling' and personal attacks?
How do you know that the prophecies were fulfilled? What if the prophecy and the result were written at the same time? Predicting it's going to rain as it's raining, while still technically correct, is really unimpressive.
How do you know that's not what happened?
Also, can I get a complete list of those 3,000. I'm curious what they are.
Also, you're second bullet point makes you're whole point worthless. If humans can explain prophecies, how they hell did we count 3,000 fulfilled ones and no that's what happened at all?
Warden is a teacher and disciple of Christ, jeff. You would do well to listen to him if you want to get to know how to be a Christian follower of Jesus.
He is also someone who trashes the Word of God, regularly lends supports to atheists and holds the sin of homosexuality in the highest regard. He has no problem being rude and insulting to those who don't share his viewpoints. He is a teacher of a false Christ. It would do great harm to listen to his new age beliefs like yours. The Word of God is the measuring stick of true Christianity.
The Christ you and Warden claim to serve is obviously not the Christ of the Bible so why hould I listen to someone with a baseless Christianity who can just whip up their own version of truth? The Christ of the Bible believed in a literal Bible. He believed that the actual words had power. This is clearly see in Matthew 4:1-11 when Jesus fights Satan with the words from the Bible.
He is also someone who trashes the Word of God, regularly lends supports to atheists and holds the sin of homosexuality in the highest regard. He has no problem being rude and insulting to those who don't share his viewpoints. He is a teacher of a false Christ. It would do great harm to listen to his new age beliefs like yours. The Word of God is the measuring stick of true Christianity.
The Christ you and Warden claim to serve is obviously not the Christ of the Bible so why hould I listen to someone with a baseless Christianity who can just whip up their own version of truth? The Christ of the Bible believed in a literal Bible. He believed that the actual words had power. This is clearly see in Matthew 4:1-11 when Jesus fights Satan with the words from the Bible.
He'd probably say that you are teaching a false Christ.
He'd probably say that you are teaching a false Christ.
"Will the real Jesus Christ please stand up?"
He can say whatever he wants. My faith is basically on the foundation of the Bible which has changed countless lives. He has no foundation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
