The Incredible odds of fulfilled bible prophecy

[Akhenaten]

That one (like most) was done with Corel PaintShop Photo Pro X3. I made it for the late lamented NT Evidence thread but I received a prophecy that it would be needed again so I've kept it handy.

 

[dafydd]

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.

Presidents who said they believed. I can't believe that every American politician is or was a devout Christian.

 

[Craig B]

Presidents who said they believed. I can't believe that every American politician is or was a devout Christian.

Jefferson most certainly was no Christian. Neither, by any reasonable definition, was Washington, or Adams. Deists all.

 

[TimCallahan]

Okay, here's one last dip into DOCs link, prophecies 57 through 60:

57. Raised from the dead- Ps 16:8-11, Acts 2:24-31

All that this passage from Psalm 16 says that could relate to resurrection is verse 10:

For thou dost not give me up to Sheol
or let thy godly one see the pit.

Acts 2:24 - 31 quotes Ps. 16:8 - 11 as a prophecy of Jesus being raised from the dead. Of course, since there's no contemporary report outside the New Testament of Jesus being raised from the dead, there's really no way to test and either verify or falsify this claim.

58. Begotten as Son of God- Ps 2:7, Acts 13:32-35

Psalms 2:7 says:

I will tell you a decree of the LORD:
He said to me, "You are my son,
today I have begotten you."

This would seem to be a formula of kingly adoption, particularly in that God tells the psalmist, who already exists, that He has begotten him "today."

Again, the passage in Acts merely quotes the passage from Psalms and declares it a prophecy.

59. Ascended to God- Ps 68:18, Eph 2:8-10

This claim of prophecy frankly puzzles me. Here's Ps. 68:18 (emphasis added):

Thou didst ascend the high mount,
leading captives in thy train,
and receiving gifts among men,
even among, the rebellious,
that the LORD GOD may dwell there

This psalm is full of such warlike imagery. It has nothing to do with Jesus ascending into heaven after his resurrection. What's even more puzzling is what it has to do with Eph. 2:8 - 10:

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God - not because of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

This is a statement of the doctrine of salvation by grace. It would appear that the compiler of the 60 prophecies made an error in quotation here.

60. Seated beside God- Ps 110:1, Heb 1:3+13

The quote from Ps. 110:1 is:

The LORD says to my lord:
"Sit at my right hand,
till I make your enemies your footstool."

As with many of the psalms, this one is full of warlike imagery. Consider verses 5 and 6:

The Lord is at your right hand;
he will shatter kings on the day of his wrath.
he will execute judgment among the nations,
filling them them with corpses;
he will shatter chiefs
over the wide earth.

Both verses 3 and 13 in Hebrews 1 speak of Jesus sitting at the right of God, and Heb. 1:13 does quote Ps. 110:1. Again, quoting a passage from the Psalms and claiming it to be prophetic of an unsubstantiated claim one makes is hardly prophecy.

All in all, the supposedly impressive list of 60 "prophecies" from the Hebrew scriptures allegedly fulfilled by Jesus is utterly without substance.

 

[Rincewind]

Nice one Aberhaten, I salute you.


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

Likewise, naturally... Even after 4,000 years, the Pharoah's still got it!

My 15 minutes of fame!

Hey DOC - remind us... where did Simon the Zealot die?

Was there a prophecy about this?

 

[dafydd]

Here's a song for the Pharaoh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRtTkBdATS0

 

[Akhenaten]

Dankje.

 

[TimCallahan]

Here's one last thought about DOC's link, the 60 Old Testament prophecies supposedly fulfilled in the New Testament: One has to accept the historicity of the gospels to believe that the various prophecies and the quotations from the Psalms were fulfilled in the life of Jesus. Leaving aside the many miracles reported in the gospels, can we accept the other events reported in them as historically true? In a word, "No."

Consider the pageant of Palm Sunday. What do have to believe to accept it as true? We have to believe that the Romans, who had already put down a number of Jewish revolts, would stand idly by while some guy enters Jerusalem and is treated like a king, with crowds throwing down their garments so his donkey didn't have to walk on bare earth. These same crowds are crying out, "Hosannah!" which means, "Save us!" Yet the Romans seem utterly unconcerned by this.

Later, the mob turns against Jesus - though we aren't told why there's this sudden reversal - and Pontius Pilate is actually afraid of the mob. Thus he delivers Jesus up to be crucified and frees Barabbas, a man the Romans have already found guilty of insurrection. Yet, according to Josephus, Pilate was rather brutal when he was confronted by an angry mob, and there's no record of the Romans having a policy of remanding the death sentence (particularly in the case of insurrection) to honor local holidays.

I could go on; but the main point is this: Whether it's the fate of the city of Tyre or the life of Jesus, the only way one can make the prophecies of the Bible come out right is to ignore history and archaeology. I think it's time to end this thread.

 

[welshdean]

Here's one last thought about DOC's link, the 60 Old Testament prophecies supposedly fulfilled in the New Testament: One has to accept the historicity of the gospels to believe that the various prophecies and the quotations from the Psalms were fulfilled in the life of Jesus. Leaving aside the many miracles reported in the gospels, can we accept the other events reported in them as historically true? In a word, "No."

Consider the pageant of Palm Sunday. What do have to believe to accept it as true? We have to believe that the Romans, who had already put down a number of Jewish revolts, would stand idly by while some guy enters Jerusalem and is treated like a king, with crowds throwing down their garments so his donkey didn't have to walk on bare earth. These same crowds are crying out, "Hosannah!" which means, "Save us!" Yet the Romans seem utterly unconcerned by this.

Later, the mob turns against Jesus - though we aren't told why there's this sudden reversal - and Pontius Pilate is actually afraid of the mob. Thus he delivers Jesus up to be crucified and frees Barabbas, a man the Romans have already found guilty of insurrection. Yet, according to Josephus, Pilate was rather brutal when he was confronted by an angry mob, and there's no record of the Romans having a policy of remanding the death sentence (particularly in the case of insurrection) to honor local holidays.

I could go on; but the main point is this: Whether it's the fate of the city of Tyre or the life of Jesus, the only way one can make the prophecies of the Bible come out right is to ignore history and archaeology. I think it's time to end this thread.

For the win.
Succinctly put old bean and our absent friend DOC has nothing, nothing at all to counter this

 

[dafydd]

[/B]

For the win.
Succinctly put old bean and our absent friend DOC has nothing, nothing at all to counter this

He'll be back with the same old arguments that have been shot down many times before. Most of us learn from experience.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Here's one last thought about DOC's link, the 60 Old Testament prophecies supposedly fulfilled in the New Testament: One has to accept the historicity of the gospels to believe that the various prophecies and the quotations from the Psalms were fulfilled in the life of Jesus. Leaving aside the many miracles reported in the gospels, can we accept the other events reported in them as historically true? In a word, "No."

Consider the pageant of Palm Sunday. What do have to believe to accept it as true? We have to believe that the Romans, who had already put down a number of Jewish revolts, would stand idly by while some guy enters Jerusalem and is treated like a king, with crowds throwing down their garments so his donkey didn't have to walk on bare earth. These same crowds are crying out, "Hosannah!" which means, "Save us!" Yet the Romans seem utterly unconcerned by this.Later, the mob turns against Jesus - though we aren't told why there's this sudden reversal - and Pontius Pilate is actually afraid of the mob. Thus he delivers Jesus up to be crucified and frees Barabbas, a man the Romans have already found guilty of insurrection. Yet, according to Josephus, Pilate was rather brutal when he was confronted by an angry mob, and there's no record of the Romans having a policy of remanding the death sentence (particularly in the case of insurrection) to honor local holidays.

I could go on; but the main point is this: Whether it's the fate of the city of Tyre or the life of Jesus, the only way one can make the prophecies of the Bible come out right is to ignore history and archaeology. I think it's time to end this thread.

Re: the highlighted area - even when I was still a believer, and as a small child, this bothered me. I mean, the Romans never displayed much cultural sensitivity - or any other kind of sensitivity - at the best of times.

 

[Akhenaten]

He'll be back with the same old arguments that have been shot down many times before. Most of us learn from experience.

Exactly. He's been presenting the same previously-debunked arguments over and over again for years. One more debunking won't make the slightest difference.

 

[welshdean]

He'll be back with the same old arguments that have been shot down many times before. Most of us learn from experience.

Exactly. He's been presenting the same previously-debunked arguments over and over again for years. One more debunking won't make the slightest difference.

Don't get me wrong fellas, I'm fully aware of DOC's M.O., but his wriggling, grammatical twisting, obfuscation and paucity of truth cannot usurp the immense amount of historical and archaeological evidence. No matter how he serves it to us.

ETA: Sorry Pharoah, I forgot to thank you for the 'graphic design' tip earlier.

 

[pakeha]

...I could go on; but the main point is this: Whether it's the fate of the city of Tyre or the life of Jesus, the only way one can make the prophecies of the Bible come out right is to ignore history and archaeology. ....

Well done, TimCallahan.
I appreciate the time and effort you've put into this and I'm looking forward to seeing how DOC will answer your points.

 

[joobz]

[/B]

For the win.
Succinctly put old bean and our absent friend DOC has nothing, nothing at all to counter this

Predicted DOC response:
"I know I am doing something right when others attempt to silence me...."

 

[carlitos]

If God exists miracles are possible.

"If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle."
- carlito's dear papa

"If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry Christmas."
- "Dandy" Don Meredith, who is not an ordained minister in Canada, but did go to Southern Methodist University

 

[DOC]

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.

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.


No if there Doc. And beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I suppose that many inhabitants found their clothes beautiful. Failed prophecy Doc, why can't you admit it?

Odd the book of Isaiah never seemed to bother Jesus who quoted it several times. It also didn't seem to bother the Jews or their copyists for the 800 years before Christ came. You'd think if they thought the prophecy failed they wouldn't have held Isaiah in high regard or at least they would have had the copyists change the verse. It's a difficult verse from our view but if Jesus and the Jews for 800 years didn't seem to have a problem with Isaiah, then I really don't either (for that reason and for the multiple other reasons I gave in my post above).

 

[joobz]

Odd the book of Isaiah never seemed to bother Jesus who quoted it several times.

Yeah, but he condoned slavery. So his opinion is worth much.

It also didn't seem to bother the Jews or their copyists for the 800 years before Christ came.

because it was a prophecy that hadn't happened yet......?

You'd think if they thought the prophecy failed they wouldn't have held Isaiah in high regard or at least they would have had the copyists change the verse. It's a difficult verse from our view but if Jesus and the Jews for 800 years didn't seem to have a problem with Isaiah, then I really don't either (for that reason and the multiple reasons I gave in my post above).

I understand you come from the "Anything goes" version of biblical interpretation. Just don't expect anyone to be convinced by such weak arguments.

 

[X]

Odd the book of Isaiah never seemed to bother Jesus who quoted it several times. It also didn't seem to bother the Jews or their copyists for the 800 years before Christ came. You'd think if they thought the prophecy failed they wouldn't have held Isaiah in high regard or at least they would have had the copyists change the verse. It's a difficult verse from our view but if Jesus and the Jews for 800 years didn't seem to have a problem with Isaiah, then I really don't either (for that reason and for the multiple other reasons I gave in my post above).

1) You have no idea how Jesus felt about it. You have n^th-hand copies of generation-removed writings of unclear authorship claiming to be about Jesus, and letters from Paul politicizing and re-organizing the church, but nothing to actually detail what Jesus felt.

2) Perhaps it doesn't bother the Jews for the same reasons that the bible's innumerable contradictions, immoralities, falsehoods, fables and incorrect statements don't bother you; they're blinkered by their pre-existing belief.

 

[Akhenaten]

Odd the book of Isaiah never seemed to bother Jesus who quoted it several times.

It's not odd at all. The people who made up the words for the mythical Jesus to say were copying them from the older sources to make it look like the old prophecies were coming true.

It also didn't seem to bother the Jews or their copyists for the 800 years before Christ came.

And you know this how? Because that's what it says in the Bible?

You'd think if they thought the prophecy failed they wouldn't have held Isaiah in high regard or at least they would have had the copyists change the verse.

That's the way the inerrant word of teh LAWD works, is it? Change a phrase here and there to make things match up?

It's a difficult verse from our view . . .

Balderdash. It couldn't be any more straightforward.

Which bit of it are you having trouble understanding?

. . . but if Jesus and the Jews for 800 years didn't seem to have a problem with Isaiah, then I really don't either (for that reason and the multiple reasons I gave in my post above).

If it's good enough for some 2000-year-old mythical character to believe in then it's good enough for you, eh DOC?

This whole ridiculous post is just one long the-bible-is-true-because-it-says-it-is load of drivel.