Greywolf wrote:
<pbamvv@worldonline.nl> wrote in message
news:1168096127.966258.212570@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com...
Gilbertus schreef:
An inspired message; a revelation of divine will and purpose or the
proclamation thereof. Prophecy may be an inspired moral teaching, an
expression of a divine command or judgment, or a declaration of
something to come. Foretelling, is not the basic thought conveyed by the
root verbs in the original languages (Heb., na=B7va''; Gr.,
pro=B7phe=B7teu'o); yet it forms an outstanding feature of Bible prophe=
cy.
As far as I know, the Biblical prophesies are indeed more directed at
moral teaching then they are at fortelling. The most obvious example is
Jonah, where the fortelling fails, because the moral teachings have
succeeded:)
Strangely enough theists will believe they are true fortellings,
even after they have been shown not to come true.
A classic example of this is the 'prophecy' regarding the destruction of =
the
island-city of ancient 'Tyre' ('Tyrus'). The biblical text clearly
identifies the 'island-city' that was Tyre back then. It was 'prophecied'=
by
'Ezekiel' to be destroyed by the Babylonian king, 'Nebuchadnezer'. But af=
ter
some thirteen years of siege, 'Nebuchadnezer' failed to capture the city.=
It
wasn't until Alexander the Great built a 'causeway' out to the city was if
finally captured.
How do the bible humpers 'explain away' this 'failed prophecy'? Easy. They
maintain that 'Ezekiel's prophecy was a 'two-part' prophecy with
Nebuchadnezer initiating the '1st-phase' and Alexander the Great
'completing' the prophecy in the 2nd. Neat, huh? The fact that Alexander =
the
Great is nowhere mentioned in the texts and that the destruction of the c=
ity
was 'prohecied' to come about as punishment for the deeds and actions of =
the
'Tyrians' living in the time of Ezekiel and not in the time of Alexander =
the
Great is 'no problemo' for bible humpers. First, they don't really contest
any 'wrongs' they find in the bible with anything even *close* to true
'skepticism'. Second, like you say, they just shrug off any 'real' mistak=
es
like a duck sheds water. So much for being 'sincere' and revealing 'bibli=
cal
truth'.
(Just how these people can be in *such* denial boggles the mind.)
Greywolf
Never underestimate the power of Myth, some folk cleave to beliefs that
are frankly unsupportable, in an empirical manner, but then again have
you noticed how the belief is irrefutable despite the evidence.
It must be so because the Bible tells me so, context is also helpful.
But beware Superstition it holds on better than truth.
LB
.
