testament and testimony (2017/10/01)
If you struggle with reading prophecy as much as I do, then come listen to my friend Nathan Kitchen talking about Ezekiel 27. There so much to miss that makes so much more sense out of these oracles to Tyre than the cherry-picker, tunnel-vision approach. We even spend a few minutes talking about the Ark of the Covenant in 1 Chronicles 15, and the resurrection narrative in Luke 24.
Prophecy is one of the most widely, publicly, and badly abused types of writing in the Bible. Think of this episode as a kind of antidote, or at least a vaccination. When we actually try to read the text as it really is - rather than as it might be if we uprooted it and planted it right down here in 2017 - we get an insight into the way in which God touches the world. It's profound and surprising.
Visit www.fourcubitsandaspan.com to read our about... pages, and join the discussion on Facebook. Now that we're on iTunes you can find us iOS, and thanks to TuneIn you can also find us on your usual podcatcher for Android or PC.
References
Sandy, D. Brent (2002). Plowshares & Pruning Hooks: Rethinking the Language of Biblical Prophecy and Apocalyptic. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.
Amazon
Amazon
Links
Bible Snippets: Ploughshares and pruning hooks, Nathan Kitchen
I am surprised and disappointed by what you and Nathan say about the Ezekiel 26 prophecy against Tyre. Are you right to regret having given a talk about Tyre's destruction by Nebuchadnezzar and Alexander?
ReplyDeleteThe mainland city of Tyre, which God through Ezekiel is addressing in Ezekiel's day, was never rebuilt after Alexander totally razed its ruins to build his causeway to the island in 332 BC. That original site remains a desolate place even today. After Nebuchadnezzar's long siege which ruined that first and ancient "strong city" (Jos 19:29), the name Tyre continued to be used, being transferred initially to the island settlement where Tyre's treasures were heaped up - but in vain - before Alexander came (Zech 9:3-4). Later it was used of the larger peninsula and the adjacent Roman town, whose ruins are still visible today. But that does not change the meaning of the words of Ezekiel 26. They are (for reasons that are apparent in verse 2) explictly about the physical structure of the original city of Tyre. It can be shown (and Nathan was present at a talk where I showed) that the original city was located in a different mainland location not on the site that bears the name Tyre now.
So I know of no reason to doubt that Ezekiel's words against Tyre in this chapter were fulfilled completely in 332 BC, when Alexander finished off the work of destruction that Nebuchadnezzar had started. Do you? If so, please would you explain it.
Hi Mark. Thanks for listening, and thanks for your comments!
DeleteI think we explained quite fully in the episode how we read this passage, and the problems inherent in trying to read this (and other prophetic texts) from an absolute "future history" viewpoint. As you've illustrated, it's necessary to read it within an extremely narrowly defined interpretative framework in order to judge it "fulfilled completely".
The prophecy as it stands specifically indicates Nebuchadnezzar as the agent of destruction; and, as we pointed out, Ezekiel states in chapter 29 that Neb did not in fact fulfil this prophecy. But more than that, the imprecation that Tyre was never to be rebuilt is clearly not reflected in history. It was a major trading hub well into medieval times, and its continuity with the 'golden age' of Tyre under the Phoenicians is historically beyond question.
Cities are destroyed and rebuilt all throughout history, and to apply the interpretation, "this original city at these specific map co-ordinates," is to impose a meaning on the text that does not reflect its full range. As we discussed in the episode, these oracles are practically hyperbolic in their description of the utter, total, and eternal destruction of Tyre and its trading power. This is why it's such a valuable image to the writer of Revelation, who recycles it to apply to the apocalyptic and ultimate end of 'Babylon', a kingdom that represents the present world order.
When a person can simply open a history book (or read a well-sourced digest in a Bible dictionary or online article) to debunk a particular reading of the Bible, it reflects very poorly upon the Scriptures and upon the one advocating that interpretation. It also diminishes the Bible itself, and its profound connection with its origins and the people of God.
The value of the text is in appreciating it for what it is, what it says, and how it was intended. This is a challenge only to one specific interpretation of biblical prophecy. I think that a fuller appreciation of the text can only bring us closer to its true message.
I am utterly baffled by your comment about Ezekiel 29:
ReplyDelete"The prophecy as it stands specifically indicates Nebuchadnezzar as the agent of destruction; and, as we pointed out, Ezekiel states in chapter 29 that Neb did not in fact fulfil this prophecy"
On the contrary... in 29:17-20, God makes clear that Nebuchadnezzar DID fulfil what was said about him in the prophecy of chapter 26. He says Neb waged a long hard seige against Tyre. That is exactly what, 16 years previously (29:16 cp 26:1) he had been predicted to do (26:7-11). So Eze 29 is not saying he did not fulfill what Ezekiel 26 had prophesied about him, it is directly confirming that he did!
If you are saying that Nebuchadnezzar did not fulfill the prophecy of ch 26 all by himself, then of course that is true, but chapter 26 does not claim he would. Rather, it says "many nations" would destroy Tyre, and she would become a spoil to those nations (26:3-5). Manifestly, Nebuchadnezzar was not "many nations"; rather he was a king, the king of the nation of Babylon. And as ch 29 says, his army spent huge effort to break into Tyre, battering its walls and ruining its defences. Thus he prepared the material - the stones, timbers and dust - that 250 years later would be placed into the sea by the multinational forces under Alexander's direction, completing the physical destruction of the original city of Tyre, exactly in accordance with the prophecy of chapter 26
Hi again, Mark. You seem pretty well locked into your interpretation of this passage, so I think the most constructive response might be via your earlier question: do I really regret that talk in which I reiterated this same interpretation? Yes, I certainly do.
DeleteI had to cherry-pick 26:7-14 to do it, you see. I think it does a disservice to the text to ignore its form, purpose, and genre. This oracle addressed to Nebuchadnezzar describes a city breached, plundered, and rendered eternally desolate by overwhelming force. The Ezekiel 29 passage reflects the historical reality that the siege practically failed and was ended by treaty. The sovereign city-state of Tyre may have been dissolved, but it was neither wiped out nor plundered (as Ezekiel 29 indicates); and of course Tyre shortly rose again as the foundation of mighty Carthage.
The Bible is far richer and deeper than I gave it credit for all those years ago, and I know that treating prophetic texts in the way that I did contributes to disillusionment when a person finds out that those applications are so disconnected from reality. I disrespected the text by squeezing it into a narrow and stylised version of history, and I confess: I was more concerned with proving a point about the Bible than in truly representing its unique message.
These days, I'm trying to focus more on that richness and diversity in the biblical texts, and on applying them to our Christian lives with a bit more respect. I hope you've been enjoying the show, and I'm glad you've found it thought-provoking. There's more to come on prophecy this year, of course. We're not finished with Ezekiel yet, and I just recorded an episode on Daniel 7 for the end of October, which is also a lot of fun - not to mention foundational for the New Testament writers.
I’ve also regretted using the prophecy of Tyre as a preaching tool. I appreciate why you may be initially surprised by this, and by way of explanation I’d add that the root of my regret is the sense that I misrepresented scripture by failing to adequately convey the full meaning of the passage. I used the passage purely for apologetics purposes, to the detriment of the original message. While history goes a long way toward explaining the fulfilment of the prophecy, it’s only half of the picture.
ReplyDeleteTyre is often perceived to be a failed prophecy, and Dan was good enough to outline a few of the reasons in the show. A purely historical approach leaves enough unanswered questions for Tyre to be cited as a reason for deconversion (see also https://robjhyndman.com/unbelievable/). Genuine questions arise, and as we discussed in the podcast, an understanding of prophetic language — and the Oracle genre in particular — go a long way to answering those objections.
The ability to access a detailed history of the ancient near east is a relatively modern phenomenon. For many faithful Jews and Christians, geographically distant from the land, the text largely stood by itself. The poetic power of the message, reassurance of final justification, and dominance of God in men’s affairs, are what the narrative speaks of. This is true whether or not we have an exhaustive history of the city.
As a bonus, the availability of accessible scholarship providing insights into the literature of the ANE lends independent credibility to the way we approach the text. Like opposable thumbs, I see history and literary context as complimentary, as it is only through using both together that we can grasp the whole truth.