The Incredible odds of fulfilled bible prophecy

Joobz how come you are allowed to continuously (possibly 15 to 20 times) give the opinions of people,
There are a few reasons why:
1.) it is on topic. It directly addresses the observed strengths of your arguments in support of biblical prophecies
2.) I have been continually updating it as people have voiced their opinions. As such, it contains new information relevant to the discussion.

but I'm no longer allowed to give the opposite opinion (concerning prophecy) of attorney Jay Sekulow.
Because his opinion isn't related to the OP. Of course, Jay Sekulow is more than welcome to join in and state if he agrees or disagrees with your premise.

That's not fair.
It would seem your real complaint is that No one has said you have made a convincing argument.

Plus the fact it is a bandwagon fallacy with no new relevant information given (other then some anonymous person's opinion).
1.) each post contains new information.
2.) It is relevant information.
3.) It suggests you have failed to make a convincing argument.

Just let the posts speak for themselves.
Why don't you let my post speak for itself?


Also this is a skeptic website. You parading your poll is like me parading a poll taken at a Tea party convention (where there was a debate about Obama's performance) that states 98% of those that heard the debate think Obama is not doing a good job.
It is a skeptic website. A website dedicated to critical thinking. As such, this poll is likely to be a very fair analysis regarding the logical and rational strength of your arguments.

The fact that you can't even logically support a single solitary prophecy is no one else's problem but your's.
 
Joobz how come you are allowed to continuously (possibly 15 to 20 times) give the opinions of people, but I'm no longer allowed to give the opposite opinion (concerning prophecy) of attorney Jay Sekulow. That's not fair.

Plus the fact it is a bandwagon fallacy with no new relevant information given (other then some anonymous person's opinion).

Just let the posts speak for themselves.

Also this is a skeptic website. You parading your poll is like me parading a poll taken at a Tea party convention (where there was a debate about Obama's performance) that states 98% of those that heard the debate think Obama is not doing a good job.

You are allowed to bring up the opinion of Sekoluw. Others are allowed to point out how wrong that opinion is.
It is not a bandwagon fallacy. The poll demonstrates that you have failed to convince the named people of your argument about fulfilled biblical prophecy.
Your Tea Party poll would be very appropriate in answering the question:
'are the delegates convinced Obama is not doing a good job?'
 
Joobz how come you are allowed to continuously (possibly 15 to 20 times) give the opinions of people, but I'm no longer allowed to give the opposite opinion (concerning prophecy) of attorney Jay Sekulow. That's not fair.

Plus the fact it is a bandwagon fallacy with no new relevant information given (other then some anonymous person's opinion).

Just let the posts speak for themselves.

Also this is a skeptic website. You parading your poll is like me parading a poll taken at a Tea party convention (where there was a debate about Obama's performance) that states 98% of those that heard the debate think Obama is not doing a good job.

Minor quibble of no real relevance--it's just something that bugs me: while it's true that most of us do not post under our real, complete names (with the notable exception of TimCallahan), we do post under names; therefore, we are not some anonymous people. We are some pseudonymous people. This does not negate your argument. What everyone else has said negates your argument.
No DOC, it's not.
Your attorney quote was about his conversion, an ill-disguised 'appeal to authority', if you will.
By the way, what is the Tea party and what does it have to do with bibical prophecy?

Joobz' poll is about how the forum members here view your efforts to show there have actually been fulfilled bibical prophecis.
Do you get the difference, DOC?

Here's the OT quote:
"Isaiah 52:1 Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean."

Here's your answer
"I've already answered this question. The verse could be interpreted as conditional since God gave two commands in the verse; what if the Jews don't obey those commands. Also he could have easily been referring to invading heathen armies (since he was talking about invasions in the previous chapter) and the prophecy could have been intended for their lifetimes. If I say a Yankee fan will never enter this house. I obviously mean during my lifetime, but I don't actually say that, it's implied.

Also it's not practical to believe that he also meant such people as traders and caravans who might pass through the large city for economic reasons. "

Do you see any problem with your interpretation, DOC?

Yup, it's clearly not conditional. Indeed, the grammar of the clauses indicates a cause and effect relationship: Make yourself pretty, Jerusalem, because you won't be sullied by the uncircumcised and unclean any more.
 
I'm on said list, I have no qualms in stating quite clearly that you have done a horrible job in proving even a single one of these supposed prophecies has come true.
 
Continuing with the 60 prophecies in DOC's link, here are more of those dealing with the Crucifixion:

39. Hands and feet pierced- Ps 22:16,
Jn 20:24-28

Does Ps. 22:16 actually say, " . . . they have pierced my hands and feet,"? Well, it does in English translations. However, the Hebrew word thus translated, q'aru, actually means to "dig into." There is another Hebrew word, daqar that actually means to stab or pierce. It' the word used in Zech. 12:10 (They will look upon him whom they have pierced). Let's put the phrase from Ps. 22:16 quoted above into context by quoting it in its entirety:

Yea, dogs are round about me;
a company of evildoers encircle me;
they have dug into my hands and feet.

The psalmist likens his enemies to a pack of dogs. Typically, when a pack of dogs takes down its prey, the dogs (wolves, etc.) immobilize the animal by seizing it legs or feet to either drag it down or immobilize it. Then one of the pack clamps its jaws on the victim's windpipe, or they tear its guts out. this doesn't sound much like the Crucifixion.

40. Crucified with thieves- Isa 53:12, Mt 27:38

Did Is. 53:12 actually predict the messiah would be crucified with thieves? Let's take a look at the verse:

Therefore I ill divide him a portion with the great,
and he shall divide spoil with the strong;
because he poured out his soul to death,
and was numbered with the transgressors;
yet he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors

It's quite a stretch to make numbered with the transgressors to fit crucified with thieves.

41. Prayed for enemies- Isa 53:12, Lk 23:34

The last line of Isa. 53:12 is used again to cover Lk. 23:34, "Father forgive them for they know not what they do." the "Song of the Suffering Servant" (Isa. 53) was mined by the gospel writers as a source of material for the Passion. In other words, the Passion narrative was made to fit the scriptures.

42. Rejected by His own people- Isa 53:3, Jn 19:14-15

Isaiah 53:3 says: "He was dispised and rejected by men . . ." not by his own people. Thus, it is, once again, stretching things to make it cover the Jews rejecting Jesus in Jn. 19:14, 15.

43. Hated without cause- Ps 69:4, Jn 15:25

In Jn 15:25 Jesus says, "It is to fulfill the word that is written in their law, 'They hated me without cause.' . . ." What he is referring to is Ps. 694a:

More in number than the hairs on my head
are those who hate me without cause . . . .

This psalm, like many, is a lament. It's also traditionally considered a psalm of David. So Jesus is, in this narrative, claiming to be a descendant of David. Once more, this is not a prophecy.

44. Friends stood aloof- Ps 38:11, Lk 22:54,23:49
45. People wag their heads- Ps 22:7;109:25, Mt 27:39
46. People stared at Him- Ps 22:17, Lk 23:35

These three verses from the Psalms, which are, again, laments, were used by various gospel writers to flesh out and add pathos to the Passion. The lament that his enemies "stare and gloat over me," from Ps. 22:17 is used here to be a "prophecy" of Lk. 23:35a, 'And the people stood by watching . . . ." Again, it's really stretching things to make this verse from the Psalms a prophecy.

I'll do more on the not-so-fabulous 60 in later posts.
 
Plus the fact it is a bandwagon fallacy with no new relevant information given (other then some anonymous person's opinion).

I would say that there's only one anonymous person in this thread who is peddling solely opinions, DOC.
 
Okay, finishing up the prophecies on the Crucifixion here are numbers 47 through 56 in DOC's link.

47. Cloths (sic) divided and gambled for- Ps 22:18, Jn 19:23-24

Again, we return to Psalm 22, a lament. Verse 18 says:

they divide my garments among them,
and for my raiment they cast lots.

John 19:23, 24 do indeed say the soldiers divide Jesus' clothes among themselves and cast lots for a seamless tunic he was wearing. This was, in fact, a priestly garment. Only John says Jesus was wearing such an article of clothing. It's pretty obviously his invention, since Jesus, a carpenter from Galilee, would not have owned this very special sort of tunic. At the end of verse 24, John tells the reason for the soldiers casting lots for Jesus' clothes (a rather unlikely event, since said clothing would have been drenched in sweat and stained with blood):

This was to fulfill the scripture,
"They parted my garments among them,
and for my clothing they cast lots."

So, once again, the author of John scoured the scripture to find a "prophecy" (actually a psalm) he could fulfill.

48. Became very thirsty- Ps 22:15, Jn 19:28

Again, John says this was done to fulfill scripture. It's the same-old same-old.

49. Gall and vinegar offered Him- Ps 69:21, Mt 27:34

Actually, the Gospel of John says that vinegar and hyssop, rather than gall, were offered to Jesus Mark just says vinegar was offered. Luke doesn't mention the incident. Hyssop would have helped deaden the pain. In Ps. 69:21 the psalmist (supposedly David) complains that his enemies gave him poison for food and vinegar to drink. It's really rather doubtful that the Romans would have cared about those being tortured to death being thirsty.

50. His forsaken cry- Ps 22:1, Mt 27:46

Yes. both Mark and Matthew say that Jesus cried, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me." This would be inexplicable except for the fact that this is the opening of Psalm 22, supposedly written by King David. Hence, this is a literary device to to link Jesus and David.

51. Committed Himself to God- Ps 31:5, Lk 23:46

Again, having Jesus quote a Psalm verse is a literary device, not a prophecy.

52. Bones not broken- Ps 34:20, Jn 19:32-36

This one is rather amusing. putting it in context Ps. 34:19, 20 say (emphasis added):

Many are the afflictions of the righteous;
but the LORD delivers him out of them all.
He keeps all his bones;
not one of them is broken.

The LORD obviously did not deliver Jesus out of his affliction. Thus, John is misusing the psalm in his effort to make it into a prophecy.

53. Heart broken- Ps 69:20; 22:14, Jn 19:34

The incident where a Roman soldier spears Jesus in the side, and blood and water come out, is only found in John. Psalm 69:20 only says that insults have broken the psalmist's heart. Psalm 22:14 says, "I am poured out like water." In both cases it's really stretching things to try to make these verses prophetic of the Crucifixion. Once again, the resume has been padded.

54. His side pierced- Zech 12:10, Jn 19:34+37

John again claims Jesus was speared to fulfill scripture. Yet, none of the Synoptic Gospels mentions this incident, so significant in John. Again, the spearing of Jesus would seem to be John's invention.

55. Darkness over the land- Amos 8:9, Lk 23:44-45

Amos 8 is an apocalyptic prophecy of the end of Israel, not of the Crucifixion.

56. Buried in rich man's tomb- Isa 53:9, Mt 27:57-60

Yes, our present translation of Isa. 53:9 reads:

And they made his grave with the wicked
and with a rich man in his death,
although he had done no violence,
and there was no deceit in his mouth.

However, there are problems with this verse. The rich man doesn't fit unless Isaiah was saying the rich are wicked. Some variant translations substitute the words "evildoers" or "satyrs' in place of "rich man."

As to whether the body of Jesus was actually given to Joseph of Arimathea, we only have the words of the gospel writers. In fact, as a condemned criminal, found guilty of sedition and put to the most degrading form of death the Romans used, Jesus may not have even been accorded a decent burial. The Romans may well have cast his body into a common open grave, covered it in lime and eventually buried it as the pit began to fill up.

In my next post on this subject I'll finish the 60 prophecies.
 
My name is Ed Benson. Fast Eddie B is just a convenient "handle".

So...

1) I'm not anonymous, and...

2) I ain't skeered!
My name is Mike, Mudcat is my real life nickname I picked up as a kid. And I think the bible is full of horse ****.
 
Thanks for your analysis of DOC's 60 prophecies, TimCallahan.
What a dishonest and misleading list that is, to be sure!
 
47. Cloths (sic) divided and gambled for- Ps 22:18, Jn 19:23-24

Again, we return to Psalm 22, a lament. Verse 18 says:

they divide my garments among them,
and for my raiment they cast lots.

John 19:23, 24 do indeed say the soldiers divide Jesus' clothes among themselves and cast lots for a seamless tunic he was wearing. This was, in fact, a priestly garment. Only John says Jesus was wearing such an article of clothing. It's pretty obviously his invention, since Jesus, a carpenter from Galilee, would not have owned this very special sort of tunic. At the end of verse 24, John tells the reason for the soldiers casting lots for Jesus' clothes (a rather unlikely event, since said clothing would have been drenched in sweat and stained with blood):

This was to fulfill the scripture,
"They parted my garments among them,
and for my clothing they cast lots."

So, once again, the author of John scoured the scripture to find a "prophecy" (actually a psalm) he could fulfill.
Do we need to concern ourselves with seamless priestly garments here? Surely this is simply another example (like Matthew's donkey multiplication exercise) of a gospel misinterpretation of a poetic parallelism. The parting and casting lots are two statements of the same event, but John thinks two processes are involved, so he invents an indivisible garment in an attempt to make sense of his own misreading of the psalm.
 
Please add me to "has failed to demonstrate that biblical prophecies have been fullfilled" please.

DOC, this list is only falicious if it is used to demonstrate anything other than what it is. A list of presidents who believed(for example) is evidence for presidents that believed, not whether that belief is true. Most everyone, including me, has explained this to you many times and either there is a serious disconnect going on or some fairly aggrevious intellectual dishonesty.
 
How on Discworld could anybody think I wasn't posting under my real name?

:)
R. Incewind?

Rincewin D.?

Rin Cewind?

Rince Wind?

I could go on, but I'm approaching my bit cap for the morning already.


Just as it appears above his avatar, according to the famous author, W. Elshdean.


Rincewind1a.jpg

Rincewind2a.jpg
 
:D:D:D

Nice one Aberhaten, I salute you.


Incidentally, what do you use for making these extraordinary pics?
 

Back
Top Bottom