Here is one benefit in doing your own research. (bible false)

[samian]

"against tyre that it would destroyed, and the details about how it would be destroyed are prophesised such as a causeway to be built , you can read about it s fulfillment in the greek historians of Alexander or in Josephus-and its ruins and the causeway are there today,"

I find this claim very interesting so did a little investigation.

The prophecy was easy to find after a google search "prophecy tyre", this is found in Ezekiel 26 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...=33&chapter=26):
(quoted the whole and underline the most important so you know the context is correct)

"In the eleventh year, on the first day of the month, the word of the LORD came to me: 2 "Son of man, because Tyre has said of Jerusalem, 'Aha! The gate to the nations is broken, and its doors have swung open to me; now that she lies in ruins I will prosper,' 3 therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves. 4 They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers; I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock. 5 Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets, for I have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD. She will become plunder for the nations, 6 and her settlements on the mainland will be ravaged by the sword. Then they will know that I am the LORD.

"For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar [a] king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great army. 8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you. 9 He will direct the blows of his battering rams against your walls and demolish your towers with his weapons. 10 His horses will be so many that they will cover you with dust. Your walls will tremble at the noise of the war horses, wagons and chariots when he enters your gates as men enter a city whose walls have been broken through. 11 The hoofs of his horses will trample all your streets; he will kill your people with the sword, and your strong pillars will fall to the ground. 12 They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea. 13 I will put an end to your noisy songs, and the music of your harps will be heard no more. 14 I will make you a bare rock, and you will become a place to spread fishnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I the LORD have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD."

...

"This is what the Sovereign LORD says: When I make you a desolate city, like cities no longer inhabited, and when I bring the ocean depths over you and its vast waters cover you, 20 then I will bring you down with those who go down to the pit, to the people of long ago. I will make you dwell in the earth below, as in ancient ruins, with those who go down to the pit, and you will not return or take your place [b] in the land of the living. 21 I will bring you to a horrible end and you will be no more. You will be sought, but you will never again be found, declares the Sovereign LORD."

After getting over my shock at the brutality of this God that is worshipped (and bias aside, my apologies...), I had a look to see if this actually happened.

Tyre was an interesting city at that time, and different to today. At the time it was a costal city with a stronghold on an offshore island not far out. This picture shows what the coast was like in Alexander's day (330 BC ish):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...iege_tryre.gif
As the picture says Alexander constructed the mole to get to the city because it was incredibly well defended. This picture shows it now if you're interested (no longer an island):
http://www.earthspots.com/ExploreEar...?NID=1211&MT=1

From the Ezekiel quote I give above it is reasonably clear that the description is of the offshore island, for example it is said the lord will "make her a bare rock", which can only make sense to a small island.

Nebuchadnezzar was a Babylonian king around some 250 years earlier than Alexander's siege. He did attack Tyre like the prophecy said, but was unsuccessful in this attack. Wikipedia it if you don't believe me. He besieged it for 13 years without success and eventually retreated, settling up a diplomatic solution where he would recieve tribute from the city.


Indeed Alexander conquered it, like he conquered every city in his total dominance over the previously ruling Persian Empire, but did not destroy it. He did lose patience and there was a severe sacking of the city, but after this it recovered and continued to trade and certainly exist.

"You will never be rebuilt"

As you can see from the satellite image I gave above, Tyre still exists today.


Conclusion? The bible is wrong on this count.

[timbo81]

http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=20472&rendTypeId=4
http://portal.unesco.org/es/file_dow...+(Lebanon).jpg
looks pretty defunct to me.

case dismissed

[samian]

Originally Posted by timbo81

http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=20472&rendTypeId=4
http://portal.unesco.org/es/file_dow...+(Lebanon).jpg
looks pretty defunct to me.

case dismissed

"and when I bring the ocean depths over you and its vast waters cover you,"

yes, looks underwater to me as well.

Pretty much every single building from 2000 years in the past is being protected by conservation (against the will of the lord). This is like me taking a photo of the area around Trajan's column in Rome and concluding the Rome is not there anymore.

[timbo81]

well actually when Alexander build his causeway he destroyed and tossed in the ocean the remains of mainland tyre, so yes the oceans did in fact cover it as predicted.

Also the tyre we see today is the tyre of lebanon not the phoenician tyre that was prophecised against.

http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/tyre.htm

" The principal ruins of the city today are those of buildings erected by the Crusaders. There are some Greco-Roman remains, but any left by the Phoenicians lie underneath the present town. "
- Columbia Encyclopedia, Fifth Edition.

http://www.eternalministries.org/art...erningTyre.htm

http://www.bibletoday.com/archive/prophecytest_text.htm

Tyre
The metropolis of Tyre occupied the coast while some of its people lived on an island a half mile out into the sea. Seven main points stand out in this prophecy of Ezekiel. Many nations would attack Tyre (26:3). Nebuchadnezzar would destroy the mainland metropolis (26:8). The debris of the city would be cast into the water (26:12). The dirt or dust of Tyre would be scraped down to the bare rock then thrown into the sea (26:4,12). Fishermen would spread their nets over the site (26:5). Tyre would never be built again (26:14).

The incredible happened! As predicted, Nebuchadnezzar captured the mainline city in fulfillment of verses 7-11. But many of the people escaped to the island city.1 Without a navy, Nebuchadnezzar left. Over 200 hundred years passed and Alexander the Great called on the Phoenician cities to surrender. Tyre refused and found itself in siege by Alexander. He demolished the old mainland city and with the debris, built a causeway 200 feet wide out to the island city of Tyre. To complete the causeway, Alexander’s army literally scraped the dirt off the old city down to bare rock to smooth out the causeway surface. Finally, he erected towers and war engines and conquered the island fortress of Tyre. What a remarkable fulfillment of verses 4 and 12.2

After eighteen years, Tyre recovered rapidly. From 314 BC to AD 1291, Tyre in fulfillment of verse 3 was sacked and restored numerous times by many nations until its final destruction in 1291. In fulfillment of verse 14, never again was there an attempt to rebuild the Tyre of old. Since then, even today, Tyre is the "place for the spreading of nets in the midst of the sea."3 The six predictions from God’s word concerning Tyre in Ezekiel 26 have been remarkably fulfilled.

[rockit]

^^Good post

edit: An article I found:

VISITORS TO TYRE

In the years that followed Alexander’s conquest of Tyre, the island city managed to rebuild itself a number of times, only to be conquered by many nations. The last trace of Tyre’s independent existence was taken from it by the Roman emperor Augustus. A.D. 638 Tyre was captured by the Moslems, and in 1124 Tyre was taken by the crusaders. The crusaders lost it in 1291, when the city was razed almost to a heap of stones. After its capture by the Turks in 1516, Tyre soon became a desolation. When Sandys visited Tyre about 1619 he said: “This once famous Tyre is now no other than a heap of ruins.”

In 1697 Maundrell said of Tyre: “Its present inhabitants are only a few poor wretches harbouring themselves in the vaults, and subsisting chiefly upon fishing, who seem to be preserved in this place by Divine Providence as a visible argument how God has fulfilled his word concerning Tyre, viz., That it should be as the top of a rock, a place for fishers to dry their nets on.”

In 1751 the Swedish naturalist Hasselquist visited Tyre and said: “Here are about ten inhabitants, Turks and Christians, who live by fishing.”

In 1838 Dr. Robinson visited Tyre and later wrote in his Biblical Researches: “I continued my walk along the whole western and northern shore of the peninsula, musing upon the pomp and glory, the pride and fall, of ancient Tyre. Here was the little isle once covered by her palaces and surrounded by her fleet. . . . But alas! . . . Tyre has indeed become ‘like the top of a rock, a place to spread nets upon!’ The sole remaining tokens of her more ancient splendour—columns of red and gray granite, sometimes forty or fifty heaped together, or marble pillars—lie broken and strewed beneath the waves in the midst of the sea; and the hovels that now nestle upon a portion of her site present no contradiction of the dread decree, ‘Thou shalt be built no more.’”

Today the inhabitants of Tyre are not many more than when Dr. Robinson made his visit. Called Es Sur (the old name in Arabic), Tyre is a mere village of about 5,000 people and is built around the north end of the former island. Alexander’s causeway is still there; and the ancient island, now a peninsula, is connected right with the mainland by a tongue of land almost half a mile broad. Once a center of world commerce, Tyre now carries on an insignificant trade in cotton and tobacco; and its fishermen have acres of desolate space to spread out their nets to dry.

[samian]

Interesting. So why does Ezekiel 29 later say:

17And it came to pass in the seven and twentieth year, in the first month, in the first day of the month, the word of the LORD came unto me, "saying, 18 Son of man, Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon caused his army to serve a great service against Tyrus: every head was made bald, and every shoulder was peeled: yet had he no wages, nor his army, for Tyrus, for the service that he had served against it: 19 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will give the land of Egypt unto Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon; and he shall take her multitude, and take her spoil, and take her prey; and it shall be the wages for his army.

also,

"For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar [a] king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great army. 8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you. 9 He will direct the blows of his battering rams against your walls and demolish your towers with his weapons. 10 His horses will be so many that they will cover you with dust. Your walls will tremble at the noise of the war horses, wagons and chariots when he enters your gates as men enter a city whose walls have been broken through. 11 The hoofs of his horses will trample all your streets; he will kill your people with the sword, and your strong pillars will fall to the ground. 12 They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea. 13 I will put an end to your noisy songs, and the music of your harps will be heard no more. 14 I will make you a bare rock, and you will become a place to spread fishnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I the LORD have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD."

I gave the whole quote so context could be given. You argument is that:

The incredible happened! As predicted, Nebuchadnezzar captured the mainline city in fulfillment of verses 7-11"

But from the quote above you can clearly see that the prophecy is prose and does not simply STOP at 11. It carries on without stopping to 14, "I will make you a bare rock". By consodering CONTEXT, it is clear that Tyre as a whole, including the island, was being described, and the mainland was just a specified feature of the prophecy. This conclusion agrees much more with the context of the whole verse, and the first quotation of Ezekiel 29 where it is effectively admitted that the army tried, but failed.

Also the tyre we see today is the tyre of lebanon not the phoenician tyre that was prophecised against.

Are you implying they are two different geographical areas? Because that would be inconsistent with your first reply which used pictures of (modern) Tyre to compare to the prophecy of (old) Tyre.

[timbo81]

it's in the same geographical area yes but it isn't the same tyre that was prophecised against.

The principal ruins of the city today are those of buildings erected by the Crusaders. There are some Greco-Roman remains, but any left by the Phoenicians lie underneath the present town. "
- Columbia Encyclopedia, Fifth Edition



http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/tyre.htm

^That link explains that answer to your other question. Verse 12 is a continuation of the prophecy of verse 3.

[samian]

As for the claim that Ezekiel 29:17 is an admission from Ezekiel that his prophecy about Tyre failed, because Nebuchadnezzar did not get any loot from Tyre, take a look again at verses 7-11. Those are indeed the only verses that specifically mention Nebuchadnezzar, and these verses do not refer to loot or plunder. Like the destruction of the island itself, the prophecy of plunder was to be carried out by the "many nations" of verse 3.

(http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/tyre.htm)

This can only solve one part of the prophecy by sacrificing another part of it.

"yet had he no wages, nor his army, for Tyrus, for the service that he had served against it"

Is therefore false, as he did extract tribute from the city. The prophecy remains unfulfilled.

The principal ruins of the city today are those of buildings erected by the Crusaders. There are some Greco-Roman remains, but any left by the Phoenicians lie underneath the present town. "

This refers only to "ruins", ie. old buildings of the city. Any distinction between an old and new Tyre is as much a fabrication. It is like calling Roman Bath and Bath, UK different cities, or ancient Damascus and Damascus, Lebanon different cities. The prophecy says "You will never be rebuilt"; "I will bring you to a horrible end and you will be no more.", but the city has been continuously inhabited since the siege.

The island of Tyre was never destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, and never reduced to bare rock as the prophecy explains. This I currently find indisputable.

[timbo81]

no the point was that the heavy toll(verse 18 ezekiel 29- every head was rubbed bare and every shoulder made raw) and long siege (13 years) of tyre by Nebuchadnezzar did not pay off what it cost him and he was adequately rewarded by God with having victory over Egypt.

I've said already this prophecy is not just about Nebuchadnezzar, but many other kingdoms who will also attack. Also when alexander conquered Tyre he either killed or sold into slavery everyone on the island. The other half of the city of tyre on the mainland had been demolished and thrown in the ocean. It was definately never the same after that, and today there is nothing on that island is there, just ruins. And on the mainland the entire old city is in the ocean.

[DigitalMuscle]

Originally Posted by samian

"against tyre that it would destroyed, and the details about how it would be destroyed are prophesised such as a causeway to be built , you can read about it s fulfillment in the greek historians of Alexander or in Josephus-and its ruins and the causeway are there today,"

I find this claim very interesting so did a little investigation.

The prophecy was easy to find after a google search "prophecy tyre", this is found in Ezekiel 26 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...=33&chapter=26):
(quoted the whole and underline the most important so you know the context is correct)



After getting over my shock at the brutality of this God that is worshipped (and bias aside, my apologies...), I had a look to see if this actually happened.

Tyre was an interesting city at that time, and different to today. At the time it was a costal city with a stronghold on an offshore island not far out. This picture shows what the coast was like in Alexander's day (330 BC ish):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...iege_tryre.gif
As the picture says Alexander constructed the mole to get to the city because it was incredibly well defended. This picture shows it now if you're interested (no longer an island):
http://www.earthspots.com/ExploreEar...?NID=1211&MT=1

From the Ezekiel quote I give above it is reasonably clear that the description is of the offshore island, for example it is said the lord will "make her a bare rock", which can only make sense to a small island.

Nebuchadnezzar was a Babylonian king around some 250 years earlier than Alexander's siege. He did attack Tyre like the prophecy said, but was unsuccessful in this attack. Wikipedia it if you don't believe me. He besieged it for 13 years without success and eventually retreated, settling up a diplomatic solution where he would recieve tribute from the city.


Indeed Alexander conquered it, like he conquered every city in his total dominance over the previously ruling Persian Empire, but did not destroy it. He did lose patience and there was a severe sacking of the city, but after this it recovered and continued to trade and certainly exist.

"You will never be rebuilt"

As you can see from the satellite image I gave above, Tyre still exists today.


Conclusion? The bible is wrong on this count.

A further search:
http://www.seagrant.wisc.edu/madison...ex_4500BC.html
http://www.padfield.com/1994/tyre.html
http://www.apocalipsis.org/rev-tyre.htm

When Ezekiel prophesied against this city it was the most prosperous port city in the area. If Ezekiel had looked at Tyre in his day and made these predictions in human wisdom, there would had been only the slightest of chances of them all coming true (some estimates are around one in 75,000,000).

The city of Tyre consisted of a mainland metropolis and a small Island that stood about half a mile offshore.

The prophecy mentioned in Ez. 26:14 found its fulfilment regarding mainland Tyre under Nebuchadnezzar. Three years after Ezekiel's Prophecy Nebuchadnezzar moved in and besieged the ancient city of Tyre. He attacked the mainland city and held it besieged for about thirteen years. He then marched into the city to find it nearly deserted. The Tyrians had abandoned the mainland and fortified themselves on the Island of Tyre. The mainland was over-run and defeated, and it was thrown down and left in ruins. The Island continued to be a mighty power in the Mediterranean until many years later.

When the prophet says NEVER REBUILT, he is meaning to its former glory. Meaning Tyre would never again be the same. Another example of this is Babylon. G-d destroyed babylon and stated that it would never be rebuilt, yet Iraq still stands, but not as the empire it once was.

The fact alone that Nebuchadnezzar attacked Tyre years after it was mentioned in the Bible should be proof enough. The chances of this being predicted is slim. 1 king out of all the vast empires of their times.

Ending: I do however applaud your research on the matter and bringing in facts. This is very seldom done in this community.

[MonsterG8r]

Originally Posted by samian

Conclusion? The bible is wrong on this count.

You meant to say..."I desperately want and need the Bible to be wrong."

[grup910]

Originally Posted by samian

After getting over my shock at the brutality of this God that is worshipped (and bias aside, my apologies...), I had a look to see if this actually happened.

Life is brutal, why wouldn't "god" be?

The walt disneyfied idea of "god" as this kindly old man with a beard who sends his "kind and loving" son to "save" everyone (unless you don't believe, then the "kind and loving" son sends you to eternal hell :-o) is a creation of unreligious and unspiritual people who appropriated the OT for their own use and corrupted the meaning of it, and the meaning of religion along with it.

Now instead of the lion ripping apart the gazelle with bloody jaws and screams from the prey that is more like the reality of the real world which we have to get in tune with, we have this goofy idea of a "big brother" jeezus who is your "friend" and who will "save" you from everything (except getting sick, getting old, getting hurt, watching your family die, dying yourself, natural disasters, or anything else, on and on). Nature bad, jeebus good.

That's one big reason why there has been so much environmental destruction from the christians over the centuries. They see the natural order as "evil," and their made-up walt disney jeezus as the "good" that is going to save them from all the bad stuff they are afraid of. The OT is just a little more realistic about things, that's all. When you look it from the fake and erroneous christian perspective, it looks "brutal." But that's just life, so you'd better get used to it.

[k4y]

^^ Because according to you Christians, God is all-loving, merciful, and just. Or are you telling me he's not?

[samian]

Originally Posted by timbo81

I've said already this prophecy is not just about Nebuchadnezzar, but many other kingdoms who will also attack. Also when alexander conquered Tyre he either killed or sold into slavery everyone on the island. The other half of the city of tyre on the mainland had been demolished and thrown in the ocean. It was definately never the same after that, and today there is nothing on that island is there, just ruins. And on the mainland the entire old city is in the ocean.

I think your facts are wrong, "Those citizens that took shelter in the temple of Hercules were pardoned by Alexander, including the king of Tyre." Not everyone was sold into slavery.

Son of man, because Tyre has said of Jerusalem, 'Aha! The gate to the nations is broken, and its doors have swung open to me; now that she lies in ruins I will prosper,' 3 therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves. 4 They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers; I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock.

There is no mention here of the mainland only. This clearly refers to the island. Which was NEVER bare rock.

"For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar [a] king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great army. 8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you. 9 He will direct the blows of his battering rams against your walls and demolish your towers with his weapons. 10 His horses will be so many that they will cover you with dust. Your walls will tremble at the noise of the war horses, wagons and chariots when he enters your gates as men enter a city whose walls have been broken through. 11 The hoofs of his horses will trample all your streets; he will kill your people with the sword, and your strong pillars will fall to the ground. 12 They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea. 13 I will put an end to your noisy songs, and the music of your harps will be heard no more. 14 I will make you a bare rock, and you will become a place to spread fishnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I the LORD have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD."

If you read the whole thing without stopping, it is clear that the context is:

1. Acre; Nebuchadnezzar will attack you from the north
2. he will attack your settlements on mainland
3. his horses will cover you with dust, he will kill your people with the sword
4. your will be left a bare rock
5. you will never be rebuilt

This is a summary of the quotation with the contex intact. You are claiming "they" applies to other conquerors, but this is like me saying:

The romans attacked sicily in their war against carthage. They conquered spain, and then they landed in N.Africa. They landed in North America, found the local tribes and took their gold.

Since the final "they" refers to a different group than the first. It makes no sense in context, but perfect sense when you only quote parts of it.

[samian]

Originally Posted by DigitalMuscle

When the prophet says NEVER REBUILT, he is meaning to its former glory.

This is not what is said.
If he had said "to its former glory", then I would certainly retract parts of the claim the prophecy was never fulfilled. However, even if this is the case, the prophecy still says it would be a bare rock. Tyre has not since been a bare rock.

Originally Posted by DigitalMuscle

The fact alone that Nebuchadnezzar attacked Tyre years after it was mentioned in the Bible should be proof enough. The chances of this being predicted is slim. 1 king out of all the vast empires of their times.

Wikipedia:

Nebuchadrezzar engaged in several military campaigns designed to increase Babylonian influence in Syria and Judah. An attempted invasion of Egypt in 601 BC was met with setbacks, however, leading to numerous rebellions among the states of the Levant, including Judah. Nebuchadrezzar soon dealt with these rebellions, capturing Jerusalem in 597 BC and bringing King Jehoiachin to Babylon. When Pharaoh Apries attempted another invasion of the Levant in 589 BC, Judah and other states of the region once again rebelled. Another siege of Jerusalem began in 588 BC, ending in 587 BC with the destruction of both the city and the Temple and the deportation of many prominent citizens and a sizable portion of the Jewish population of Judah to Babylon. These events are described in Ketuvim, a section of Tanakh, the Hebrew Bible and known to non-Jews as the Old Testament. After the destruction of Jerusalem, Nebuchadrezzar engaged in a thirteen year long siege of Tyre (585-572 BC), which ended in a compromise, with the Tyrians accepting Babylonian authority.

I believe that after all his conquests, Tyre would be fairly obvious as the next in line.

[grup910]

Originally Posted by samian

This is not what is said.
If he had said "to its former glory", then I would certainly retract parts of the claim the prophecy was never fulfilled. However, even if this is the case, the prophecy still says it would be a bare rock. Tyre has not since been a bare rock.

Unless you've studied it with qualified teachers, preferably in the original Hebrew, you can't really say what "bare rock" is supposed to mean. It could indicate many things, perhaps a literally bare rock not being one of them. You can't take passages out of the context of the culture in which they exist and then try to force them to mean something else which they perhaps don't mean and aren't intended to mean. :-o

[Ruhanv]

Originally Posted by timbo81

http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=20472&rendTypeId=4
http://portal.unesco.org/es/file_dow...+(Lebanon).jpg
looks pretty defunct to me.

case dismissed

LOL. The first two photos show modern apartment blocks next to the ruins.

Talk about self-ownage.

[grup910]

Originally Posted by k4y

^^ Because according to you Christians, God is all-loving, merciful, and just. Or are you telling me he's not?

Of course he's not, by human standards, at least. Those are just ideas people make up. What is "all-loving, merciful, and just" about a tsunami that kills thousands of good and innocent people? Nothing, by human standards.

What's required then is to change the definition of "all-loving, merciful, and just" to include wiping out thousands of people in a disaster, giving kids cancer, and so on. To do that, you have to see things as part of a larger process, evolution, the universe expanding, the natural order, and so on. And when you do that, the usual definitions of "all-loving, merciful, and just" don't really apply anymore. You've twisted them beyond all recognition.

So why even say it? It doesn't mean what it means when we say a human is those things. It means something different. But what the christians and the other reggies do at that point is very interesting: they latch onto those words and then twist them BACK to meaning the human meanings! That's where they get confused, because "god" is obviously not "all-loving, merciful and just" by human standards. That's obvious anytime you see an orphan whose parents were killed in a tsunami, earthquake, etc., and who will die a lingering painful death from being crushed in the quake, from a water borne disease from the flooding, or whatever.

Again, they've just warped and twisted the language to mean something it doesn't, and then confused themselves with that until they think "all-loving," etc. means what it means for humans. They're just massively confused, and the funny thing is, they've done it to themselves.

[samian]

Originally Posted by grup910

Unless you've studied it with qualified teachers, preferably in the original Hebrew, you can't really say what "bare rock" is supposed to mean. It could indicate many things, perhaps a literally bare rock not being one of them. You can't take passages out of the context of the culture in which they exist and then try to force them to mean something else which they perhaps don't mean and aren't intended to mean. :-o

Now this is a different argument and I will do some research into this area.
Bear with me.

[grup910]

Originally Posted by samian

Now this is a different argument and I will do some research into this area.
Bear with me.

Just go ask a rabbi somewhere. Maybe there's even one online somewhere who could answer it. It's their book after all, and they know what it means and what it's supposed to mean. Although I don't know what the answer is to your interesting question, I can guarantee you there's a logical meaning for it within the context of Judaism.

The point is that it has to be taken within the context in which it's intended. If you take it out of context, the entire thing collapses. So you can't rely on christian or non-jewish sources to know what it "means" because in those situations it's taken out of context. It's not their culture, just like a white person wouldn't be the best source of understanding what a native american or aboriginal myth might mean. So to do that is actually to do violence to the original.