Saturday, December 18, 2021

Notes on Ezekiel’s Prophecy of the Destruction of Tyre from Joshua Bowen, Atheist Handbook to the Old Testament (2021)

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)