> It's interesting to contemplate the very clear prophecies in
>Eze.26:1 - 28:19 that Nebuchadrezar will completely destroy Tyre. They
>contain powerful poetic language & profound theology, but there is
>also no doubt what is predicted (e.g., 26:7-14). & it didn't happen.
>We know this not only from secular history but from Ezekiel himself! In
>30:17-20, God says, "Nebuchadrezar didn't get anything for all his
>work against Tyre. I'll give him a consolation prize." & in fact Tyre
>didn't fall to seige until Alex the Great, some 250 years later.
The prophesy may be more accurate than that. Remember, there were no
vowels or punctuation in the original text. In Eze. 26:7, the King James
translators placed a comma after the phrase, "I will bring upon Tyrus
(Tyre) Nebuchadrezar king of Babylon ...." Yet what follow is this,
"a king of kings from the north with horses, and with chariots ..."
It is doubtful that the king of Babylon could be called a "king of
kings," whereas Alexander the Great was indeed. Also, Babylon is east
and a little south of Tyre. A conqueror from the north better describes
Alexander. See what a difference it makes if a period replaces the
comma. That would separate the king of Babylon who waged war against
Tyre from the conqueror (unnamed) who would waste Tyre eventually.
Dick Fischer
THE ORIGINS SOLUTION
http://www.orisol.com