An Iranian missile landed within half a kilometre of the Temple Mount. Two of Islam's most important religious sites are on the Mount. I can't imagine how the Muslim world would react if the Dome of the Rock or Al Aqsa Mosque were destroyed.
Iran missile attack Jerusalem
- Thread starter Gideon300
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
A
arlev
Guest
A
arlev
Guest
Thanks for posting this - I'd not seen this reported anywhere else.
I checked it out on the web and the info seems to be that it wasn't a missile strike but debris from the shooting down of a missile by the IDF. I'm not clear as to what was the destination of the original missile.
I checked it out on the web and the info seems to be that it wasn't a missile strike but debris from the shooting down of a missile by the IDF. I'm not clear as to what was the destination of the original missile.
Or Israel would do a false flag and blame Iran. I saw a video of a rabbi in Israel calling for this very scenario
Yes. They are an abomination.Well, they gotta go.. Somehow.. Some way!
Trust you to think the worst. Israel is perfectly at liberty to demolish them anyway. They don't. There's a fault line in Jerusalem. God could give it a bit of a shake and the dome and mosque collapse.
By saying "think the worst" I know that you mean not "not be high on copium".
God can do whatever he wants, but there is no active fault line in Jerusalem; I've studied that matter in detail.
A
arlev
Guest
Not detailed enough.
"For centuries, believers read Zechariah 14:4, which says that when the Messiah returns, His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, and the mountain will "split in two from east to west." Skeptics called it poetry.
"But modern geology has revealed a stunning fact. A significant seismic fault line runs directly east-to-west through the Mount of Olives. It is geologically primed to split exactly how the Bible predicts. The Intercontinental Hotel built on the summit even had to be designed to withstand this specific slide. The earth beneath Jerusalem is physically waiting for the King’s feet to touch the ground."
I've seen this report from other sources. Check it out for yourself.
This is an urban legend. I have a geologic map of the area and there is no fault line as described. There are landslides at that location, but no fault line. There is an inactive fault south of that on the Mount of Corruption, but it doesn't pass through the old city.
Deciphering Zechariah 14:5
An indepth analysis of Zechariah 14:5
zechariahfourteenfive.wordpress.com
A
arlev
Guest
This is an urban legend. I have a geologic map of the area and there is no fault line as described. There are landslides at that location, but no fault line. There is an inactive fault south of that on the Mount of Corruption, but it doesn't pass through the old city.
Deciphering Zechariah 14:5
An indepth analysis of Zechariah 14:5
There will be once Christ steps back on to earth.
A
arlev
Guest
It's an example of incorrect interpretation. The Bible says that the Mount Of Olives will be split - it doesn't say that there's any fault line or that there has to be one. I don't know why professed believers keep announcing the fault line and, when it's obvious that there isn't one, continue proclaiming it.
Surely, the miracle is that the mountain will be split without a fault line?!
One thing I need to point out in your post, though, as you seem to think that the Mount Of Olives is in the Old City - that could just be me reading your text incorrectly. The Mount Of Olives lies east of the Old City on the other side of a valley in which the spring of Siloam rises and which extends into Gehenna (the Valley of the Sons of Hinnom) that Jesus used as a label for the destination of some of the dead.
There's still so much that is held on to dogmatically about the end times that pure speculation.
A
arlev
Guest
A couple of points about Zech 14:4 and the splitting of the Mount of Olives:
1. This is the first time that 'Mount of Olives' occurs in Scripture - and, as far as I can see, the first time it occurs in Jewish literature as a location. In II Samuel 15:30, many translations obscure the meaning of the text by rendering it 'Mount of Olives' but it actually means 'the ascent of olives' (not a mountain location but an ascending routeway amongst olive trees). It does appear to be referring to the rough location of what today we call the 'Mount of Olives' but the question always has to be asked as to what the recipients of the message understood by the turn of phrase. It may, in Zechariah's day, have meant some place else.
2. No one (I mean the commentators) seems to have drawn attention to the fact that the two renderings of the word 'east' in Zech 14:4 are completely different words - and yet they are rendered the same. The second usage means a geographic location and is more rightly given the meaning 'towards the sun' or 'where the sun rises'. But that refers to the splitting of the rocks.
The first word rendered 'east' isn't a word that is normally rendered as a geographic location - and that it's used in contrast to one that is should alert us to the possibility that something different is being conveyed. This is where my knowledge of Hebrew lets me down but the word studies I have tell me that it can be used to render the concept of time, amongst other things.
At present, I can't give you a proper understanding of what that word means (and, therefore, the text) - but that it's used in contrast to the regular Hebrew word for 'east' should make us sit up and take notice (the same as other places where contrasting words are used - for example, Genesis 1 and John 21).
1. This is the first time that 'Mount of Olives' occurs in Scripture - and, as far as I can see, the first time it occurs in Jewish literature as a location. In II Samuel 15:30, many translations obscure the meaning of the text by rendering it 'Mount of Olives' but it actually means 'the ascent of olives' (not a mountain location but an ascending routeway amongst olive trees). It does appear to be referring to the rough location of what today we call the 'Mount of Olives' but the question always has to be asked as to what the recipients of the message understood by the turn of phrase. It may, in Zechariah's day, have meant some place else.
2. No one (I mean the commentators) seems to have drawn attention to the fact that the two renderings of the word 'east' in Zech 14:4 are completely different words - and yet they are rendered the same. The second usage means a geographic location and is more rightly given the meaning 'towards the sun' or 'where the sun rises'. But that refers to the splitting of the rocks.
The first word rendered 'east' isn't a word that is normally rendered as a geographic location - and that it's used in contrast to one that is should alert us to the possibility that something different is being conveyed. This is where my knowledge of Hebrew lets me down but the word studies I have tell me that it can be used to render the concept of time, amongst other things.
At present, I can't give you a proper understanding of what that word means (and, therefore, the text) - but that it's used in contrast to the regular Hebrew word for 'east' should make us sit up and take notice (the same as other places where contrasting words are used - for example, Genesis 1 and John 21).
The Mt of Olives did split when it's western part split off and collapsed into the Kidron Valley during an earthquake as Zechariah predicted. There is documented evidence of this in the previous link I posted. And that is what the Septuagint version of Zechariah 14:5 states. The Masoretic Text version that talks about people fleeing is a corruption based on Jewish tradition.
There is no spring of Siloam. There is a pool of Siloam in the southern part of the old city that is fed by the Gihon Spring in the northern part of the old city directly across the Kidron Valley from Silwan on the slope of the Mt of Olives.
A
arlev
Guest
'Silwan' means 'Siloam' - the 'spring of Siloam' means 'the spring that produces Siloam' and is often referred to as the source named in the Bible as 'Gihon'. The Pool of Siloam isn't what it was - it's been cobbled together in a rather small place as the outflowing of the under-ground stream. A couple of us did go through the tunnel when we were there - but I declined to do so. We waved them off at one end and greet them at the other, though - the spring itself was full of kids throwing themselves into a pool accompanied with shots and screams that echoed off the walls.
Descending the shaft that Kathleen Kenyon excavated to the shaft over the spring was also intriguing - but some archaeologists have questioned whether that was the first such construction when the spring was blocked up.
Gihon spring is also outside the old city walls and not in the 'northern part of the old city' as you state.
Zech 14:5 is somewhat difficult to translate. You will have to explain why 'east to west' doesn't mean what it appears to mean in Zech 14:4, though, to support your understanding - and how the context of the verse was also fulfilled where all the nations gather against Jerusalem.
You will have to zoom in to see it. The Gihon spring is directly across from the neighborhood called Zahweilah at the northern extent of Silwan. It is most definitely is located at the northern part of old Jerusalem.
If you will read that study I linked to it will explain all of that.