Talk:New Jerusalem
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Something to add to article if Anon user cleans up and explains
oktober 31 MMV The New Jerusalem described poetically.
In the book of Revelations the future holy city is mentioned as lying on the banks of a broad river with many pleasant fruit trees around. That is not what old Jerusalem is like since this is a fortified place on a mountaintop. The New Jerusalem ressembles far more......Babylon! Already psalm 46 describes a river pleasing God's city. This in contrast with the cruel sea further on, which often symbolizes death. Research has to be done on the oldest name for Jerusalem Uru Salim to see whether word parts are shared with indo-european like garden (walled place) and waters (s-vowel-l, still recognizable in many river and gulley names up to New Zea(l)land, while different vowels in very ancient times may have been chosen to express characteristics like form of the waterbedding).
Remarkable in religous literature is that God prefers to be present in Jerusalem. When Moses stayed away on the mountain and the Israelites made a golden calf in the desert as a footbank to God (attribute comparable with the crown of a king) that was not appreciated. By the way kind of same tresspassing might be the slogan "Gott mit uns" once on German helmets. Explanation can be sought in the statement that "law will spread from Jerusalem".
The moslim claim on Jerusalem is difficult to justify, for prophet Mohammed on his stopover there during the trip to heaven talked with Moses and Jeso; which means paying respect to the older religions; not driving its adherants into the sea.
Another misunderstanding regards the sacrifice by Abraham. At the time it was custom that what belonged to the gods should be in the fire on the altar. So Abraham had to learn that not he was master of his son. Neither can religous leaders order young people to become suicide terrorists. This story ends with the sacrifice of a goat where now is the mosque with the golden dome. Which place then is more holy: where man offers or where God gives? Presumably the goat did not get stuck on the flat surface of what was later called the Temple Mount, but in the bushes on the steep slope, where now is the Wailing Wall.
So an important item connected with old and present Jerusalem is how things should be arranged in accordance with the will of God or harmony in the world. Many obstacles appear, but these vanish in the New Jerusalem, which fits in a landscape where "the mountains have become flat". Also a much appreciated description of the future holy city is worded in the famous psalm that reports on Babylonians, Palestinians, etc. registered as born in Jerusalem, having become children of Israel.
jitso keizer kantoor ARLEX geographic research
Yeah... this work has got so manyprobelms that I don't know where to begin. It rambles on into different subjects, it is incoherent in some places and has got a SERIOUS NPOV problem. I doubt it will ever be able to get in in a form that in any way resembles it's current one. I vote No as far as this coming in.Gator(talk) 14:45, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Hats Off to Ecto for a Fine Job Cleaning This Page Up
You took away the math calculations that I so painstakingly made, but you kept and validated my conclusions. :-) Dbabbitt 18:19, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Communicating Ambiguity
Hi Guys!
I created a table of the foundation stone adornments, but I don't think it expresses the ambiguity of each definition well enough. Certainly better than before though.
Dbabbitt 19:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- A further problem with regards to ambiguity is the use of "layers" in describing the arrangement of things. I think the text is very ambiguous in describing the way the precious stones adorn the foundation stones. All of the twelve precious stones may be on each foundation stone in layers, as the table suggest, but they could also be mixed together on each stone in another way. Another possibility is that each one of the foundation stones might have just one type of precious stone adorning it. From my reading, the text is ambiguous enough to allow for any of these possibilities and perhaps others. Ecto 10:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Jerusalem above
I have suggested that we merge the stub article Jerusalem above into the article New Jerusalem. Any objections? Ecto 22:27, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
