The following notes are taken from Joshua Bowen, The Atheist Handbook to the Old Testament, vol. 1 (Mechanicsville, Md.: Digital Hammurabi Press, 2021)
On Ezek 26:8-9:
Many commentators have noted that
Ezekiel’s description of the coming siege does not seem to fit with the idea of
besieging an island city. We see, however, that Ezekiel has a certain set of
words and phrases that he uses to describe attacks on cities. Hummel notes, “It
appears, at least, as if Ezekiel had a sort of stock, stereotyped repertory of
idioms to describe the fall of cities” (Horace Hummel, Ezekiel 21-48 [Concordia
Commentary; St. Louis, Miss.: Concordia Publishing, 2007], 812-813). Allen
suggests that there may not have been specific vocabulary to describe a naval
attack (Leslie Allen, Ezekiel 20-48 [Word Biblical Commentary; Dallas,
Tex.: Word Books, 1990], 75-76). There are several descriptions of siege tactics
found in the book of Ezekiel, including 4:2; 17:17b; and 21:22 (Hebrew text 21:27).
These three passages speak of the siege of Jerusalem, and each uses language that
is—at least in part—quite similar to what we see in 26:8-9. In other words,
Ezekiel had a particular way of describing a siege, and he used that stock
language in chapter 26; it was not custom-tailored to the coming siege of Tyre.
Nebuchadnezzar is to lay siege to
the island fortress and ultimately breach its walls. “Because of the multitude
of his horses, he will cover you with their dust; because of the sound of the cavalry
and wagons and chariots your walls will shake, when he comes into your gates
as one enters a breached city” (v. 10, emphasis mine). Block ties these
verses together nicely: “The last line of v. 10 is the key: the enemy will take
the sea fortress by storm as if it were an ordinary walled city on the mainland”
(Daniel Block, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 25-48 [NICOT; Grand Rapids,
Mich.: Eerdmans, 1998], 41). This is another possible explanation for the use
of stock siege imagery here in the passage. (Joshua Bowen, The Atheist
Handbook to the Old Testament, vol. 1 [Mechanicsville, Md.: Digital
Hammurabi Press, 2021], 355)
Scholarly Commentaries
. . . this prophecy did not come
to pass. . . . the vast majority of biblical scholars come to the exact same conclusion.
A small selection of quotes will illustrate the point:
“All of Ezekiel’s anti-Tyre prophecies
declare the disastrous defeat and destruction of the fortress city. Yet this
did not happen; instead, Tyre held out in the siege, no doubt greatly assisted
by the possibility of receiving supplies by sea. Although humiliated, the city
was not defeated and ransacked.” (Ronald Clements, Ezekiel [Westminster
Bible Companion; Louisville, By.: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996], 122)
“In the oracles against Tyre, the
fall and devastation of Tyre and, quite explicitly in 26:7, her surrender to
the great king from the north were expressed. The end of the siege of Tyre
appeared quite differently. Whatever the details of the end may have been, Tyre
was in any case not destroyed and plundered. (Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2: A
Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel Chapters 25-48 [Hermeneia;
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983], 119)
“The prediction of the siege of
Tyre ending in its complete destruction provides an interesting case of the disconfirmation
of prophecy, for by the time of the last anti-Egyptian saying, dated sixteen
years later (29:17-20), it was well known that the attempt of Nebuchadnezzar to
reduce the city had failed. (Joseph Blenkinsopp, Ezekiel [Interpretation;
Louisville, Ky.: John Knox Press, 1990], 115-116) (Ibid., 358-59)
Ezek 29 as an apologetic for explaining the failure of Ezek 26
The
Later Prophecy of Ezekiel 29
Shortly after the fall of
Jerusalem in 587/586, Ezekiel prophesied that Nebuchadnezzar would completely
destroy the city of Tyre. Modern biblical scholars aren’t the only ones who
note the failure of the prophecy…the prophet had noticed himself. Some 15 years
later, lo, and behold, a clarifying message from God came to Ezekiel:
“And in the twenty-seventh year,
in the first month, on the first day of the month, the word of Yahweh came to
me, saying; ‘Human! Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon worked his army in hard
labor against Tyre—every head was made bald and every shoulder was rubbed bare—but
he received no wages for his army from Tyre on account of the work that he
performed against it. Therefore, thus says the Lord Yahweh: I am about to give
to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon the land of Egypt, and he will take up its
riches and plunder booty and pillage her spoils, then he will have wages for
his army. For the work he performed against it I have given him the land of
Egypt, as they did it for me, says the Lord Yahweh’” (Ezekiel 29:17-20).
As discussed above, it is likely
that the king of Tyre ultimately submitted to Nebuchadnezzar, paying him tribute;
however, it seems clear that the prophesied result of the siege did not come to
pass. Block concurs:
“But the present prophecy
[29:17-21] seems to look on these developments as a failure. To be sure, Nebuchadnezzar
would have made off with tribute payments of Tyre jingling in his pockets, but
this is a far cry from having conquered the city and confiscated all the
precious loot that the merchant state had gathered into its treasure-houses”
(emphasis mine). (Daniel Block, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 25-48
[NICOT; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1998], 149)
In short, Ezekiel prophesied Tyre’s
complete destruction but some 15 years later, it appeared that the prophet’s
words had gone unfulfilled. This follow-up prophecy in Ezekiel 29 helped to
make sense of the historical developments. God was apparently in control, and
was still working through Ezekiel, declaring that Nebuchadnezzar and his
soldiers would not receive their compensation from Tyre, but instead from Egypt
(another prediction that failed to come to pass). (Ibid., 359-60)
Examination of the “many nations” apologetic
Perhaps the most common argument
is that Nebuchadnezzar was only the first agent of Yahweh; he
would do his part against Tyre but would be followed by Alexander the Great,
who would finish the job against the island city. (Ibid., 364)
One purported evidence in support of this is the claim that
. . .the prophecy in Ezekiel 26
speaks of “many nations”, not simply Nebuchadnezzar; this is confirmed in the
passage by the change from the pronoun “he” to “they” in Ezekiel 26:12. The “he”
represented Nebuchadnezzar and his armies, while the “they” referred to
Alexander the Great, who ultimately fulfilled the prophecy when he destroyed
the island city centuries later. (Ibid.)
“Many Nations” and the “He/They”
Distinction
As stated above, it is argued that
Nebuchadnezzar was never prophesied to be the only agent to bring about Tyre’s
total destruction; many nations (Ezekiel 26:3) would come against Tyre, ultimately
destroying the city and leaving it a bare rock. In Ezekiel 26:3 we read, “Therefore,
thus says the Lord Yahweh: I am now against you, Tyre! And I will bring up
against you many nations like the sea brings up its waves!”.
The reference to “many nations”,
at first glance, would seem to strongly indicate that the Neo-Babylonian Empire
and its armies, headed by Nebuchadnezzar, would only be the first “wave” to
come against the city of Tyre. If we only had this phrase to go by, this
interpretation would likely be the natural reading of the text. However,
several aspects of this passage, along with similar descriptions of
Nebuchadnezzar’s army in different contexts, argue against this conclusion.
Let’s begin with Nebuchadnezzar
and his army. The Babylonian king is the only agent of God spoken of in the
text. The description of Nebuchadnezzar and his forces in verse 7 is meant to
link with and develop the “many nations” of verse 3 . . . We see in Ezekiel
26:7, “For thus says the Lord Yahweh: I am about to bring to Tyre
Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon from the north – the king of kings – with horses
and with chariots and with horseman and an assembly and many people”.
There are several things to note
in this verse. First, the Hebrew particle ki “for, because” appears at
the beginning of verse 7, and directly connects the previous section to this
concrete identification of Nebuchadnezzar and his army. Second, the use of the
phrase “king of kings”, along with the description of the various parts of the
army (i.e., horses, chariots, horsemen), as well as an “assembly” and “many
people”, are almost certainly the “many nations” from v. 3. In fact, the
adjective “many” in verse 3 is the same adjective used in verse 7 (Hebrew rav0
to refer to the “many people”. This has led consensus scholarship to
identify Nebuchadnezzar and his armies as the “many nations” in verse 3.
Block writes concerning this connection: “The gôyim rabbîm portrayed as
waves beating on the rock in v. 3 are identified as Nebuchadnezzar (with his
title of melek melākîm) and his hosts, referred to as qāhāl we’am rāb”.
(Block [1998], 39)
Furthermore, Ezekiel’s description
of Nebuchadnezzar’s forces is not unique. For example, in Jeremiah 34:1 we
read:
“The word that came to Jeremiah from
Yahweh, when Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and all his army and all the
kingdoms of the earth – the dominion under his power – and all the peoples,
were fighting against Jerusalem and against all its cities, saying”
(Jeremiah 34:1, emphasis mine).
Similarly, in the book of Ezekiel
itself, we read another description of Nebuchadnezzar’s army in 23:23 “the
Babylonians and all the Chaldeans, Pekod and Shoa and Koa, all the Assyrians
with them all of the desirable ones, governors, and officials, and all of
the adjutants and famous men, and riders of horses” (emphasis mine). Block
writes concerning Ezekiel 23:23:
“At their head are the ‘magnates
of Babylon,’ the Chaldeans, followed by a triad of forces . . . The list
concludes with a reference to ‘all the magnates of Assyria,’ presumably the
officials of western vassal states, formerly under Assyrian control but now in
the hands of the Babylonians” (emphasis mine). (Daniel Block, The Book
of Ezekiel: Chapters 1-24 [NICOT; Grand Rapids, Mich.: 1997], 749-50)
In other words, The Babylonian
army was made up of soldiers from a variety of vassal nations; the
descriptions seen in the above passages make it clear that the “many nations”
of Ezekiel 26:3 refer to the multi-national makeup of Nebuchadnezzar’s army. (A
similar reference to a multiplicity of people groups can be seen in Ezekiel 32:3,
where the Babylonian army is referred to as “many peoples” [Hebrew ammim
rabbim] compared to “many nations” [Hebrew goyim rabbim] in 26:3) (Ibid.,
365-67)
