In answer to this, I have to observe, that the literal acceptation, has already, in some instances, been shewn to be impossible; and will, hereafter, be so in many more; while the figurative exposition offered, is in perfect accordance with the style and language of prophecy in general, and is uniform and consistent throughout. As I fully acquiesce in the Rabbi’s corrections, and in the only instance where we differ, have adopted his view in preference to my own, it is wholly unnecessary to offer his translation at length; but an objection which he makes to my exposition of verses 3rd and 4th of the last chapter, I feel called upon to notice. In those verses, I adopted the view of Dr. Blayney, that the destruction _by fire_, there denounced, applies to Sidon rather than to Tyre. The common version, “_For Tyre has built herself a fortress_,” being rendered by him, “_For she_ (Sidon) _has built herself a fortress, Tyre_;” the Sidonians being thus made the immediate object of denunciation, who are allowed to have been the builders of Tyre, which was thence called the daughter of Sidon. Now the Jew’s objection is founded upon collateral prophecies, in which the burden cannot, as here, be shifted from Tyre to Sidon, the former being distinctly named in these; and in some, the precise mode of destruction specified, namely, by fire: Thus, in Amos i. 10, “_I will send a fire upon the wall of Tyrus, which shall devour the palaces thereof:_” see also Isa. xxiii., in which the whole burden is expressly on Tyre; and again, Ezek. xxvii. 32, “_and in their wailing, they shall take up a lamentation for thee, and lament over thee, saying, What city is like Tyrus, like the destroyed in the midst of the sea?_” These, and similar passages, would, no doubt, be fatal to the exposition of Dr. Blayney, could they be shewn to foretel one and the same event; but against this, there are, what appear to me, conclusive objections. Two of these prophets not only wrote long before the time of Zechariah, but before the destruction of Old Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar, which was therefore most likely to be the object of their predictions, and not New Tyre, which, at that time was not in existence, being built after Old Tyre was demolished; this then appears conclusive against the objection drawn from what occurs in Amos and Isaiah. With regard to Ezekiel, the case is somewhat different, and the answer must rest on other grounds.