Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 159 (8167 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-27-2014 8:16 PM
63 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: MarkG
Upcoming Birthdays: Raphael
Post Volume:
Total: 742,189 Year: 28,030/28,606 Month: 3,087/2,244 Week: 491/710 Day: 67/134 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1617
18
19202122Next
Author Topic:   Fulfillments of Bible Prophecy
Peg
Member (Idle past 1430 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 256 of 327 (508162)
05-11-2009 1:53 AM
Reply to: Message 245 by Theodoric
05-10-2009 11:06 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Theodoric writes:

Remember extra-biblical evidence for the life and death of this Jesus guy.

the very calendar used in most parts of the world is based on the year he is thought to have been born!
Dates before that year are listed as BC, or before Christ. Dates after that year are listed as AD, or anno Domini (in the year of our Lord)

Not even the opponents of Jesus ever denied his existence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 11:06 AM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by Huntard, posted 05-11-2009 4:21 AM Peg has responded
 Message 260 by DrJones*, posted 05-11-2009 5:09 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 263 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 7:30 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 266 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 8:56 AM Peg has not yet responded

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 1430 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 257 of 327 (508163)
05-11-2009 2:17 AM
Reply to: Message 255 by Theodoric
05-10-2009 6:56 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Theodoric writes:

If not then what else are we supposed to accept as evidence of prophecy fulfillment?

If you are unfamiliar about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70CE you can view info here

http://www.livius.org/ja-jn/jewish_wars/jwar04.html

or here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Jewish-Roman_War

Fall of Jerusalem
"the Roman armies established a permanent camp just outside the city, digging a trench around the circumference of its walls and building a wall as high as the city walls themselves around Jerusalem."

Jesus prophecy said that they 'will surround you and build a fortification of pointed stakes'

This is exactly what Titus did. He trapped the inhabitants inside the city so none could escape.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 6:56 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 258 by Huntard, posted 05-11-2009 4:17 AM Peg has responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 198 days)
Posts: 2854
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 258 of 327 (508169)
05-11-2009 4:17 AM
Reply to: Message 257 by Peg
05-11-2009 2:17 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
There's only one tiny little problem with this prophecy.

It was written AFTER the fall of Jerusalem....


I hunt for the truth
This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by Peg, posted 05-11-2009 2:17 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by Peg, posted 05-11-2009 5:38 AM Huntard has not yet responded
 Message 264 by purpledawn, posted 05-11-2009 8:13 AM Huntard has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 198 days)
Posts: 2854
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 259 of 327 (508170)
05-11-2009 4:21 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Peg
05-11-2009 1:53 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Peg writes:

the very calendar used in most parts of the world is based on the year he is thought to have been born!


What the hell kind of evidence is that? Just because we use a calendar based om somebody's supposed date of birth (which, even IF he existed, is a few years of), is NOT evidence he actually did exist!


I hunt for the truth
This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Peg, posted 05-11-2009 1:53 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by Peg, posted 05-11-2009 5:39 AM Huntard has responded

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 1557
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004


Message 260 of 327 (508172)
05-11-2009 5:09 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Peg
05-11-2009 1:53 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
the very calendar used in most parts of the world is based on the year he is thought to have been born!

So you believe Sól, Máni, Tyr, Woden, Thor, Frejya, Saturn, Janus, Mars, Maia, and Juno were all real?


soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry

Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor
This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Peg, posted 05-11-2009 1:53 AM Peg has not yet responded

Peg
Member (Idle past 1430 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 261 of 327 (508173)
05-11-2009 5:38 AM
Reply to: Message 258 by Huntard
05-11-2009 4:17 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Huntard writes:

There's only one tiny little problem with this prophecy.

It was written AFTER the fall of Jerusalem....

this has been discussed and it can easily be shown that the claim that the gospels were written after 70Ce is baseless.

What line of reasoning are you using?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Huntard, posted 05-11-2009 4:17 AM Huntard has not yet responded

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 1430 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 262 of 327 (508174)
05-11-2009 5:39 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by Huntard
05-11-2009 4:21 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Huntard writes:


What the hell kind of evidence is that? Just because we use a calendar based om somebody's supposed date of birth (which, even IF he existed, is a few years of), is NOT evidence he actually did exist!

then its the greatest hoax of all time


This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by Huntard, posted 05-11-2009 4:21 AM Huntard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 8:59 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 270 by Huntard, posted 05-11-2009 10:03 AM Peg has responded
 Message 271 by Percy, posted 05-11-2009 10:37 AM Peg has responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 45 days)
Posts: 4120
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 263 of 327 (508180)
05-11-2009 7:30 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Peg
05-11-2009 1:53 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Not even the opponents of Jesus ever denied his existence.

It has always been interesting to me that we can learn about what the opponents of the Christian faith were arguing by studying the early Christian apologetics.

In this case the earliest debates I see were not over whether Jesus existed or not. It was assumed that He did. Rather they argued over whether He was a real flesh and blood human being or some kind of fantasm.

In essence early opponents of the Gospel were arguing that Jesus was too good to be material.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Peg, posted 05-11-2009 1:53 AM Peg has not yet responded

purpledawn
Member
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 264 of 327 (508181)
05-11-2009 8:13 AM
Reply to: Message 258 by Huntard
05-11-2009 4:17 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
quote:
There's only one tiny little problem with this prophecy.

It was written AFTER the fall of Jerusalem....


But what shows that it was written after the fall of Jerusalem?

We keep saying that we want prophecy to be specific and not vague and yet when we are provided a prophecy that is more specific such as the one concerning the temple in Mark, we say it is written after the fact.

I agree that Matthew and Luke are later writings. They copied from Mark.

What is the proof that clearly shows the author of Mark wrote after the fact?

Tradition says the author of Mark is supposed to be John Mark, who is described as companion of Paul and Peter. Some of the author's geographical and cultural mistakes show us that the author probably wasn't a companion of Paul or Peter and probably gained his information from various anecdotes.

To me the most compelling information is that, like Daniel, part of the prophecy matches, but the rest doesn't come to pass. This gives one the impression that part was written after the fact and the second was an attempt at predicting the future and failed.

Following the distress (destruction of the temple) the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken (Mark 13:24-25).

Then we have the grand finale which didn't happen that we know of:

Mark 13:26
At that time men will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.

The author has Jesus guarantee that that generation would certainly not pass away until all those things had happened. That would include the finale.

I also find the statement that "those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now--never to be equaled again." to show a limited view.

Was this destruction really worse than the flood that is supposed to have wiped out all of mankind aside from one family?
Was this destruction really worse than the times when Israel was conquered before?
Was this destruction really worse than the later Holocaust?

Do we have anything more specific for the dating of the Book of Mark?


"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Huntard, posted 05-11-2009 4:17 AM Huntard has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 9:19 AM purpledawn has not yet responded
 Message 272 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 11:15 AM purpledawn has responded
 Message 318 by jaywill, posted 05-13-2009 10:08 AM purpledawn has responded

jaywill
Member (Idle past 45 days)
Posts: 4120
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 265 of 327 (508182)
05-11-2009 8:30 AM
Reply to: Message 250 by Theodoric
05-10-2009 12:44 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
I have seen no effective rebuttal that the prophecy of Isaiah 53 does not refer to Jesus of Nazareth and His establishing of His vision of the "new covenant".

Attempts to point the prophecy off to something or someone else haven't impressed me. Attempts to make the subject matter all material, devoid of spiritual values are more feeble.

I am light on the side of extra-biblical confirmation perhaps. I am purposely not going to give some of you credence to the implication that biblical confirmation is not valid. Luke was writing history. He was not writing a "Once Upon a Time in a Far Off Land" kind of document.

By "extra-biblical" confirmation I do not concede in any way the biblcal confirmation does not count. So you can stop dangling that bait before me.

And concerning preaching - Gospel means to announce good news. So I can hardly avoid doing some, in light of this fact that that is what it is really about.

Some of you seem to think that the Bible only exists to tickle your intelletual curiosity.

Now Jesus came and did what He did whether or not you agree with Him or believe His message. So I count Josephus reference to Him as extra-biblical confirmation of His ministry. He does come short of admitting that He rose from the dead.

Because the resurrection of Jesus is an article of faith, does not in and of itself, that it is not a historical fact.

German scholar Wolfgang Trilling writes, "We are convinced and hold it for historically certain that Jesus did in fact perform miracles ... The miracles reports occupy so much space in the Gospels that it is impossible that all could have been subsequently invented or transferred to Jesus."

Predicting His own resurrection then as Jesus did, can be credibly assumed as fulfillment of His prophecy. It may not be believed by some that He rose. But it is really arguable on historical grounds, not only theological ones.

That Jesus performed miracles, says William Lane Craig, belongs to the historical Jesus. The disputes over this fact are mostly philosophical rather than on historical grounds.

There is too many miracles reported in the New Testament to conclude that all of the eyewitnesses got it wrong every time. And the resurrection of Jesus is the most important of these submitted. If true it would be fulfillment of His prophesy.

The evidence for Christ's resurrection is very strong. Simon Greenleaf the Harvard law professor who wrote the standard study on what constitutes legal evidence, came critically to the New Testament to study the Gospel witnesses. With his knowledge of the characteristics of genuine eyewitness testimony, he concluded the the four Gospels "would have been received in evidence in any court of justice, without the slightest hesitation."

Geenleaf credited his own conversion to the Christian faith based on his professional examination of the nature of the witnesses of the Gospel.

Gary Habermas collected more than 1,400 of the most scholarly works on the Resurrection written from 1975 to 2003. Habermas reports on the facts upon which these writings agree. And this would be over a spectrum of ultra-liberal to fundamentalist conservative writers. These are the matters upon which all of these varied scholars agree are historical facts.

1.) Jesus died by Roman crucifixion.
2.) He was buried, most likely in a private tomb.
3.) Soon afterwards the discipoles were discouraged, bereaved, and despondent, having lost hope.
4.) Jesus' tomb was found empty very soon after his interment.
5.) The disciples had experiences that they believed were actual appearances of the risin Jesus.
6.) Due to these experiences, the disciples' lives were thoroughly transformed. They were willing to die for their belief.
7.) Proclamation of the Resurrection took place very early, from the beginning of church history.
8.) The disciples' public testimony and preaching of the Resurrection took place in the city of Jerusalem, where Jesus had been crucified and buried shortly before.
9.) The good message centered on the preaching of the death and resurrection of Jesus.
10.) Sunday was the primary day for gathering and worshipping.
11.) James, the brother of Jesus and a skeptic before this time, was converted when he believed he also saw the risen Jesus.
12.) Just a few years later, Saul of Tarsus (Paul) became a Christian believer, due to an experience that he also believed was an appearance of the risen Jesus.

Giesler and Turek comment on this agreement of 1,400 varied scholarly works on the Resurrection and conclude:

"The acceptance of these facts makes sense in light of what we've seen so far, The evidence shows:

The New Testament Story Is Not a Legend - The New Testament documents were written well within two generations of the events by eyewitnesses or their contemporaries, and the New Testament storyline is corroboratted by non-Christian writers. In addition, the New Testament mentions at least 30 historical figures who have been confirmed by sources outside the New Testament. Therefore the New Testament story cannot be a legend.

The New Testament Is Not a Lie - The New Testament writers included divergent and embarrassing details, difficult and demanding sayings, and they carefully distinguished Jesus' words from their own. They also referenced facts and eyewitnesses that their readers either already knew or could verify. In fact, the New Testament writers provoked their readers and prominent first-century enemies to check out what they said. If that's not enough to confirm their truthfulness, then their martyrdom should remove any doubt. These eyewitnesses endured persecution and death for the empirtical claim that they had seen, heard, and touched the risen Jesus, yet they could have saved themselves by simply denying their testimony.

The New Testament Story Is Not an Embellishment - The New Testament writers were meticulously accurate, as evidenced by well over 140 historically confirmed details. They recorded miracles in those same historically confirmed narratives, and they did so without apparent embellishment or significant theological comment."

[I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist, Giesler and Turek, Crossway Books, pg.299,300]

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 12:44 PM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 1:04 PM jaywill has responded
 Message 293 by purpledawn, posted 05-12-2009 6:31 AM jaywill has responded

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 4673
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 266 of 327 (508189)
05-11-2009 8:56 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Peg
05-11-2009 1:53 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
quote:
the very calendar used in most parts of the world is based on the year he is thought to have been born!
Dates before that year are listed as BC, or before Christ. Dates after that year are listed as AD, or anno Domini (in the year of our Lord)

Did you even think of your explanation before you typed it? Do I really need to explain history to you and when and how this dating system started?
They did not call the year 70 AD, 70 AD in 70 AD. And amazingly enough this is wrong too.

quote:
Not even the opponents of Jesus ever denied his existence.

The Jews didn't use BC and AD, neither did the moslems or hindus or even the chinese.

Edited by Admin, : Fix quote. Theodoric, suggest you click on "Preview" before posting.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Peg, posted 05-11-2009 1:53 AM Peg has not yet responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 4673
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 267 of 327 (508192)
05-11-2009 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 262 by Peg
05-11-2009 5:39 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Its a freaking calendar. It isn't historical fact.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by Peg, posted 05-11-2009 5:39 AM Peg has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 11456
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 268 of 327 (508194)
05-11-2009 9:14 AM


Moderator Still on Board
Let me remind participants that I am still here. Please do not just dismiss evidence, assertions or arguments. Rebuttals should take the form of characterizing the problems (bare assertion? erroneous information? poor logic? something else?). Purpledawn's Message 264 should serve as a positive example for everyone.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 4673
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 269 of 327 (508195)
05-11-2009 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by purpledawn
05-11-2009 8:13 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
There is a lot of scholarship dating Mark to after the fall of Jerusalem. Here is a sampling from Wikipedia

Dating of Mark near 70 AD is based on apparent references to the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, combined with the assumption that the first readers would not have understood these references if the gospel had been written prior to the events described.

Mark 13:14-23, known as the "Little Apocalypse", is a key passage for dating the text. Using the method of Higher Criticism to analyze the Biblical text and to discover the historical framework in which it was written, correspondences have been seen by scholars between this passage and the calamities of the First Jewish Revolt of 66–70.[31] The passage predicts that Herod's Temple would be torn down completely, and this was done by the forces of the Roman general Titus in the year 70.[32] Scholars have also pointed out that the last verse of the Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen Mark 12:9 alludes to the slaughter and exile of the Jews from Jerusalem by the Romans after 70[33] (according to historians, the Jews were excluded from Jerusalem only after the Bar Kokhba revolt[34]). Others see the reference in Mark 14:58-59 to the false accusation that Jesus threatened to destroy the Temple and rebuild it in three days as another reference to the destruction of the Temple in 70.[35]

A small group of scholars, including the German radical critical scholar Hermann Detering,[36] see a 2nd century date for Mark. These scholars make the case that the "Little Apocalypse" Mark 13:14-23 refers to the events of the Bar Kokhba Revolt of 132-135, and which they see as a much better fit to events described in this text than the First Jewish Revolt of 70.[37] See also Ten Martyrs[38].

Earl Doherty in the Jesus Puzzle puts the dating to 85-90. His argument is that Marks strong apocalyptic flavor is inconsistent with a period just prior to or just post destruction of Jerusalem. He also does a good analysis with the Q document to show a later date.

I highly suggest checking out the book.

I think the key point is we can not give a firm, solid, clear date to Mark, or any of the other NT writings. Therefore, they can not be used a validation of any prophecy. Without a complete provenance, these books can never be used to verify the prophecies. There needs to an external verification if the people that claim the prophecies are fulfilled want to be taken seriously.

Edited by Theodoric, : More thoughts


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by purpledawn, posted 05-11-2009 8:13 AM purpledawn has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by jaywill, posted 05-11-2009 6:34 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 198 days)
Posts: 2854
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 270 of 327 (508200)
05-11-2009 10:03 AM
Reply to: Message 262 by Peg
05-11-2009 5:39 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Peg writes:

then its the greatest hoax of all time


Hoax? Using a calendar becasue you believe someone to be born at a specific date (which is wrong, by the way) is "the greatest hoax of all time"? I can think of much bigger hoaxes then planning a calenadar around a fictional chracters birth.

Peg, could you please explain to me that how on earth using a calendar using someone's supposed date of birth is in any conceivable way ANY proof that that person actually existed?


I hunt for the truth
This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by Peg, posted 05-11-2009 5:39 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 303 by Peg, posted 05-13-2009 5:00 AM Huntard has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1617
18
19202122Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014