Prophecy for Buzsaw

Lysimachus Riiiight! The same Daniel who stunned Nebuchadnezzar, a king of such sceptic bent that he employed the longest running line of charlatan [AKA astrologers] in his kingdom. I can see how hard it would be to convince that man of prophecy.

There's much debate on when Daniel was written.
Especially about the fact that his prophcies after 167 BC are suddenly flawed and didn't happen.
Any thoughts?Lucy

Hi Lysimachus. Uriah's book is an old one and some things have come to light since. I'm afraid even way back in the 50s when I read it I had some problems with it, but it's been so long ago, I'll need to read up again before commenting as to what those problems were. I do appreciate your input, regardless.

.......And his astrologers faired very badly didn't they, and would've all lost their heads, had it not been for Daniel, Jehovah's prophet saving the day by declaring both the dream and the interpretation.

Hey bud, hold on there! I showed where it's not both ways and Amlodhi has yet to refute my response to his bogus charge. Why don't you show where I've gone wrong if you think you can before spouting off your unsubstantiated implications?

Well, here is another approach to dealing with the vagueness of the prophecy. In science a prediction is given in unequivocal terms. Something happens or it doesn't within some specified margin of error. Prophecies are stated in terms vague enough that multiple interpretations are permitted. If enough guesses are made the odds improve that sooner or later they guess right, particularly if you look back and work the claim for something that has happened. If Christians who believe the prophecies can't agree on them that tells me that I am right about prophecies. They are not predictions.lfen

What possible difference would it make if NONE of the phrophecies were fulfilled?How does the issue of prophecy relate to the message of Christianity?Love GOD, love others as you love yourself.It really is that simple.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The vast majority of biblical scholars (aside from some Religious right, who are mainly wrong) think it was between 170 to 130 b.c.e.

1. It was in 1967 that they took possession of the city, not 1968, for what it's worth. This included the west temple barrier wall, the Wailing Wall which they pray at. That they don't have the whole temple side area is significant in that according to the propecies, antichrist is suppose to sit at the most holy place declaring himself to be a god. Imo, the antichrist will be Muslim and the holy place he sits at will likely be the Dome Of The Rock and the next Jewish temple will not be built until after Armageddon and the return of Jesus to rule. 1. Only a minority of Christians ever thought that the Jews would actually literally come back to Israel and literally become a nation again before the fact. Nobody, but nobody outside of Christianity ever dreamed it would happen. Then after they began to come back few figured they'd overcome the extreme odds during the wars with the enemies, ten times their number, backed by Russia. So these prophecies are not vague stuff like Nostradamus and others come up with.2. Given it took 1900 years for the end time prophecies concerning Israel to come in focus, a few decades is not out of a reasonable time frame for their complete fulfillment. Stay tuned.

1. The prophecies are very important. The Bible is the only religious book claiming supernatural origin and inspiration that has significant fulfilled prophecies. This is how it is shown to be reliable and the others are not.2. Jesus warned not to be deceived and not to let the end time days come upon us unawares, coming upon us as a thief. The were not given just to fill the book up, but to be read and studied. A blessing is promised in Revelation 1:3 for those who read, hear and keep the words of the prophecies. You and so many others are missing out on the blessing by a negative attitude towards them, my friend.3. Nothing strengthens my faith and trust in God and the Bible like the fulfilled and fulfilling prophecies. We live in an exciting time in history when these end time events are coming to pass. 4. The apostle Paul said one must be spiritually minded in order to comprehend spiritual things. Being born again (from above) by the Holy Spirit of God makes this possible. One does not appreciate what one does not comprehend.

Nothing you said answered the question. What does that have to do with the message?"What possible difference would it make if NONE of the phrophecies were fulfilled?" Actually, several times in the Bible it says that Jesus will return like a thief in the night and when least expected. But again, what does that have to do with the question? That might be your person feelings, but again, it has nothing to do with the question. Again, that has nothing to do with the issue.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

In other words rather than back up your claim you want me to do your work for you. And I have no doubt that you would complain loudly about unfairness if anyone attempted to impose such a requirement on you.And referring to "historical fulfilment" to validate interpretation is purely circular. Any such argument rests on the assumption that the prophecy must come true.Now to the meat.1) I have already dealt with the variation in Matthew. You are trying to "pick and choose" scripture again. As I have pointed out more than once if Matthew's version significantly affects the interpretation than Mark and Luke made a significant error in leaving out the additional questions. Are you prepared to accept that ?
Moreover the questions which appear in all three Synoptic Gospels DO require that earlier events appear. We should expect that the question of when the Temple will be destroyed to include some preceding events as context, and by definition the signs asked for must come before the destruction.
We note yet again that you offer no reason to place the destruction at the start of the list of events other than appealing to unnamed experts whose work you cannot be bothered to research.2) Many fundamentalists see adding to the Bible as a sin. You clearly do not. None of the Gospels mention Jesus making any such remark - odd indeed if he did. I see no problem with reading the "these things" as referring to the destruction alone.

Go figure. Think before complaining. Either address the specifics of my answer or acknowledge them as an answer and move on. I haven't time for this nonsense. You may have all the time in the world on your hands, but I don't. "This is how it is shown to be reliable and the others are not." Duh. If they aren't being fulfilled, neither the prophecies nor the book are shown to be reliable. Again, read and think before wasting my time. If there is no fulfillment, I have reason to doubt the book and the prophecies in it and will doubt there will even be a return of Jesus to watch for and be ready for. It has a whole lot to do with the issue. It explains why you people haven't a clue and why you do your level best to reject, distort and debunk the message of the book.

Interesting answer Buz and it gave me an insight that might well explain the difference between my approach to Christianity and that of the Christians like you and WILLOWTREE. So you see the message of Christianity being that you will get some reward in the future that others will be denied. It's about the time after Jesus returns.I see the message slightly differently. I see the message of Christianity as dealing with today. Love GOD and love others as you love yourself because that will lead to a better life for everyone around you.

quote:

---

Matthew 6:34
Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.

---

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

1. My approach to Christianity is quite different than that of Willowtree, who has said the most awful and slanderous things possible about me and my fellow Biblical fundamentalist brothers and sisters.2. I don't see where you have made any approach to Christ and Christianity atol. You seem to reject about everything he and his apostles taught and take the counterpart side of about every debate that comes up the pike against the acuracy and credibility of Jesus, and the authors of both the OT and NT. I see you more as a troll claiming you're a Christian but denying about everything Biblical and Christian. All religions and even secular organizations claim to preach love and all that, but the Biblical agape love comes by the Holy Spirit of Jehovah. True Christians assume the responsibilities of Christianity so as to hope to enjoy the blessings and rewards. One can be concerned about the future and still love and do good in the here and now. Biblical Christians are generally the most caring and sharing people on the planet. I am very concerned about the future and God's kingdom, but that does not mean I don't care and share in the here and now, both at home and abroad. Man, why do you think I take all this punishment here in town and stay here? Because I'm justa poor bum who found bread and want to tell you people where I found it so you can get some too. I want to take some through those pearly gates with me. You don't have to be Christian to do good and live for the here and now. Many athiests do that. Christianity as taught by Jesus and the apostles is "love not the world or the things that are in it." and "lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven where moth nor rust nor theives will be able to take away." And this: "seek those things that are from above." The ultimate citizenship of Christians is in Heaven. In context, this is in reference to our daily needs and the verse before it admonishes to seek first God's kingdom (future) and the material needs in this world will be met.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz