Seriously: don’t worry about it. Christ has fulfilled the “Law,” and fulfilled the Old Covenant in his own blood. Anything lacking or incomplete in either the Law or the Old Covenant has been completed. The age of prophesy has been completed and is at an end.
My suggestion…when you see articles and purported claims like these…think about this passage…Then from 1John 4…6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.
OK, let’s cut right to the chase:
It’s just written on erroneous and false premises The moment you see: “Jesus was wrong”, right there you can stop reading and say a little prayer for the author.So Ezekiel prophesies the destruction of Tyre and it happens. The author’s beef is that Tyre was not totally destroyed. If i said I was going to totally destroy my house, and the next day you come along and see five bricks still standing, if all you can say is “Look! You missed a spot!” Does that make what I said false or in complete or would you simply be a smart alic? Furthermore, Tyre, though not physically destroyed in its entirety, still paid tribute to Babylon. They were still conquered in some political sense. The author also says it was never rebuilt to its former glory. Just because the city is still called Tyre does not mean it is tge same Tyre prior to its destruction. So what part of Ezekiel’s prophecy wasn’t true? Its like if I prophesied that a thousand quarters would fall out of the sky tomorrow and it happened. You then counted and found only 999. Am I a false prophet? The author could have easily reconciled this if not for his bias in wanting to find a foothold against our faith.
Read the biblical quotes again. They’re not saying that Tyre would be severely damaged. It said it would be completely destroyed where it would be like a gleaming rock that fisherman cast nets from. It’s not being nitpicky, just highly inaccurate.
But the verses weren’t discussing the political sense. It was quite clearly discussing physical devestaion. To try and spin it as a political metaphor is to completely forego the plain meaning of words.
Not quite. Quarters falling out of the sky doesn’t happen, whereas cities being attacked and destroyed does happen. A more accurate analogy would be if you predicted I would find a quarter on the street in the next year and that it will be a rare one worth over $1,000 and then I find a regular old 2011 quarter. The probable part happened and the fanciful part didn’t.
Again, read the biblical passages. Mark 13:23-25 says that prior to Jesus’ return the sun will be darkened. the moon will not give light, and the stars will fall from the heavens. Did any of that occur before John died?
But he did. The Tyre prophecy was inaccurate. It would be like predicting a hurricane will hit Florida and that it will sink into the ocean, then claim success when a hurricane hits Florida (as they are wont to do).
To me that comes off as saying there is no thing that can’t be proven correct through proper massaging and redefining of words. I know that’s not what you’re implying at all, but that’s what it sounds like.
Saying the city will never again be inhabited is not a small detail. Saying stars will fall from the sky is not a small detail. It’s these big things that make a prophecy a prophecy. It’s the difference between predicting the winner of the Super Bowl and predicting the outcome of every single play in the game.
I think the author did his fair share of research and explained in a fair and concise manner why he has determined the prophecies failed. What’s the point of a prophecy if all substance from the statement is wrung out of them?
From that article, addressing a few of their points
When Jesus ,
all this is interwoven events to come.
Really?
Those with eyes saw and continue to see. But it’s always the old story,
biblearchaeology.org/post/2009/12/07/ezekiel-261-14-a-proof-text-for-inerrancy-or-fallibility-of-the-old-testament.aspx#Article I find this article a sufficient defense for Ezekiel’s prophecy. A few additional words, however. Exegesis is everything. The style line which people read and wrote in Biblical times re different than our own. This especially applies to ancient Israel. Poetry and prose are not seen as odd or uncommon in prophecy. It seems to me like you are under the impression that it should read like a newspaper, but that just isn’t how they thought. In any case, the article explains a lot and fills in some of the gaps the other article missed.
Concerning Mark 13, no John did not die before all that. The passage also says “They” will see-Third-person. verses 24 says “after that tribulation” which creates a break between those prophecies that applied to the Apostles and those that id not (at least, not necessarily).
The guy didn’t read the Ezekiel prophecy very carefully. Several times it says that the prophecy is against “the mainland” – Eze. 26:6, 8 – and didn’t include the island, which is his major bone of contention. In fact a few chapters later, in 29:17-20 it specifically says that Nebuchadnezzar was unable to conquer Tyre, though he did successfully destroy the mainland city, which is what chapter 26 is all about. He distorted the passage too – it doesn’t say it will never again be inhabited. It just says that he will destroy it, so that it won’t be inhabited, and then he will leave and go to war with Egypt. That absolutely came true. He destroyed it, it became uninhabited, and he left for Egypt. After they built new buildings, it was inhabited again, but the prophecy didn’t say anything against that so it’s no problem. The only difficulty is the comment about it never being rebuilt. Perhaps this means the inhabitants did not rebuild the buildings that had fallen and burned, because their material was now unusable, but instead had to build a new city. It doesn’t mean the land was never used to build buildings but that the remaining buildings (after the sack) were never built back up.