fulfilled prophecy - specific examples.

This one's for you jar."Let's TWIST again! Like we did last summer.
Let's TWIST again! Like we did last year.
Let's TWIST again! TWISTING time is here!."Right from the Chubby Checker School of Biblical Studies.
From which you graduated SUMMA CUM LOUD ... Very LOUD !Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

One thing people should understand about Bible prophecy and about the ways of God in general:He does not force the will of man to believe.
He does not usurp the human will.Therefore there is always room left for you to doubt.
There is always left a space for the person to think"Well maybe it isn't so"
God always leaves you a way out in case you really don't want to believe in Him.If you really don't want to believe, God will leave you a way out so as to respect your free will.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

My point here is not that much related to the law. It is related to faith. It is related to faith and love and trust.Some skeptics of the Bible want to demonstrate their virtuosity at poking holes in prophecies concerning Christ. They want to prove that they can always find a plausible counter explanation to the Messianic prophecies.I say it is not hard to find some ground for possible doubt if you are dead set on not believing. This I believe, is sovereign of God. With faith there is always a escape hatch for the unbelieving.Maybe Isaac is not the child.
Maybe God will not be with Jacob everywhere.
Maybe Moses is not the one sent to bring Israel out of Egypt.
Maybe the Israelites should have remained in Egypt.
Maybe they won't be able to conquer the land of Canaan.The Bible is not only a record of God's acts and His promises. It is also a record of man's doubts and unbelief. The unbelieving always have their good reasons. It seems that God leaves you with a way out of trusting Him in faith and in love if you really don't want His way.You can lean on your own understanding if you wish to. Or you can trust the Lord. You can wait on the Lord.

Calm yourself.What do you mean "picayune little critter" ? Who here is limiting God ? And whose view is broader ?You want to chop off the New Testament and say only Genesis to Malachi is God's revelation? A Man comes on the scene who is 100,000 % absolute for the will of God Who He calls His Father. He dies in total obedience to this belief and is believed to have risen again from the dead.Are these picayune little insignificant events ?

I think that is kind of nonsense.I mean your - "it is the difficulty finding grounds for belief"Here is a prophecy of Jesus "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up" (John 2:19)They did their best to destroy Him and in three days He was raised up from the dead. But you say you have "difficulty finding grounds for belief."You have a problem then. YOU ... have a problem.

The major prophecies are there in the Bible. We didn't have to create them.At issue, as I said, is your not recognizing that the explanations of those prophecies given by the new covenant apostles and prophets are authentic and authoritative.For example, in His resurrection Jesus opened the minds of the wavering disciples to show to them that what was written concerning Him must be fulfilled: Perhaps you feel that Jesus needs to spend some time with you to get straightened out a bit on His error prone explanations of the Hebrew Bible. Perhaps you think He needs to consult with your superior insight into the Bible to get His faulty interpretations corrected.Some of us rather take His explanations a authoritative. We didn't have to create prophecies. We trusted in Christ and His apostles as to their explanations.Then the resurrected Christ explains to us: Some of us trust Jesus over you. We trust His explanations over yours. Luke says that "He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures." And we also think there is a serious problem with those who refuse to have their minds opened.So you challenge me, DARING me to try to open your minds to understand the Scriptures. There's a saying:"A person convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."Anyway, I believe the prophesies concerning Christ's life, death, and resurrection.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

You show that He didn't say it.

Who says you don't have to? That's rather arbitrary of you. You get to establish all criteria and set the bar of proof. Maybe I reject that.Maybe I first require you to show us that you are not clinically mentally deficient. I don't know that you're sane.Concerning, the saying that Jesus claimed that if they destroyed the temple He would raise it up in three days - His enemies accused Him of saying something like it in one gospel. That sounds something like what we have written that He actually said in a different gospel. After some troublesome activity at the temple (John 2:12-17)they came to question Him: I do not agree that you can set all criteria and raise the bar of evidence as infinitely high as you wish to rationalize your skeptical opinion. Eventually in this life we all have to trust someone.Do you really know that your mother and father are actually your mother and father or could they be mistaken or lying to you? Did you ever go have a DNA analysis done to prove that they are actually your mother and father? If not why not?You don't really KNOW who your real father is. You don't really KNOW who your real mother is. A birth certificate can be fudged can't it? How do you KNOW it was not ?You trusted them, perhaps? Well, I trust the evangelist John and I trust Jesus Christ.Even if you had the DNA analysis done, how do you know for certain that the nurses and doctors did not do something to deceive you? Is it not possible for them to have fudged the evidence? Is it not possible that they made a mistake in the evidence?Do you still believe that your mother and father are really your natural parents? Why? You haven't checked out all the possible things which could be erroneous with this proclamation.In this life, we all eventually have to trust someone or someones.I trust that Jesus said that if they destroyed the temple He would raise it up in three days. I do not have it on video for you. Even if I did video can be fudged, fabricated.I don't have it on tape recorder. Even so, tape recordings can be tampered with and made to sound authentic.I do believe that I have the Holy Spirit that Christ said the Apostle Paul said Christ became in resurrection:"the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)I testify and others could about me that my life changed from the time I accepted Christ as the resurrected Savior. But you'er likely to reject this. I mean people change by joining Amway Products also. Big deal.So I trust that Jesus said it to begin with. And though the disciples did not excactly know what He was talking about at the time, in hind sight after the resurrection, they gave their interpretation of what He must have meant. And I take this as significant evidence: I believe He said it, though they did not have an opinion about it at that time. It also shows that they recognized that the Scripture (Hebrew Bible of that time) confirmed the same thing. That is that the Christ should suffer and be raised on the third day.Anyway, we all have to trust someone eventually about some important decisions in our life. I find Jesus trustworthy. I find the Gospels worthy of my trust. And it doesn't surprise me that you could come up with endless rationals why you shouldn't believe the NT.At least the NT tells me that "belief" is the goal of the writing. Most people who are trying to lie to me do NOT tell me that they are telling me something so that I would believe it, not in that direct kind of way. If John were here I might say:"Thankyou Apostle John! I certainly will think about this and pray about it. I have no knee jerk reaction why I shouldn't anymore. In fact I'm kind of tired of my sinful life anyway and am opened to another way to live - through this Jesus - Son of God. " 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.

If the reference to the temple being the physical body of Jesus is ambiguous to you then you should speak for yourself. It is not ambiguous to many readers of John's Gospel.In the previous chapter (1:51) Jesus compared Himself to Bethel - the house of God (Gen. 28:16,17) in this saying: In this saying Jacob's dream in Genesis 28 of the house of God - Bethel, with the angels of God ascending and descending upon a ladder. is compared to "the Son of Man". The symbolism is that the house of God is now the Son of Man. God dwells on the earth in the "house" of the Person and body of Jesus Christ the Son of Man.So to go on in the next chapter and continue the theme that His body is the temple of His Father is perfectly harmonious with the previous teaching in John 1:51.You should speak for yourself if something is ambiguous to YOU in the Bible. If the comparing Himself to Bethel the house of God (Genesis 28:10-22) was mysterious before His resurrection, it certainly was not afterwards. Surely God cannot be destroyed and His rising again confirmed that the Son of Man was somehow the dwelling place of the indestructible God.Jesus taught that He was the dwelling place of His Father throughout that gospel.His resurrection, foretold by Himself, strengthened that testimony. So John in his prolog also says "And the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us." (1:14) Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Oh you think not? Why, is it because you don't think Jesus had any enemies?You have in Mark hostility and an accusation. When people want to find fault with someone they usually lay hold of something the person did and exploit any possible negatives with it. We see politicians talking about who said what or did what years ago.It is completely plausible that to do Jesus in they would exploit something that He said or close to it.Another question to you. If John is going out of his way to unfairly villify the Jews how come John records Jesus teaching that a true Israelite is without guile in chapter 2? Attributing this saying to Jesus does square with John supposedly trying to make the Jews undisbuted villians of the world for opposing Jesus. Futhermore John records that Jesus taught that salvation was of the Jews. As He told the Samaritan woman in chapter 4: I judge that John's record of accusations against Jesus were not of his prejudice. Rather it was his fair and balanced account of what happened. Jesus had enemies among the Jews. And Mark confirms that they seized upon some of His words to either twist them or present them in the worst possible light.This is what some of them said: This infuriated the chief priests and the elders as it was designed to do. Now this is what Jesus had said: It was a prophecy which was fulfilled. He, the Son of Man, the reality of Bethel, the HUMAN house of God (Compare John 1:51 and Genesis 28:16,17) was crucified and rose from the dead on the third day.What Mark records them saying I said was something LIKE what John recorded Him saying. I told you that didn't I?Mark says that their accusations were not consistent with each other.Now, should I believe that they made a false accusation and then latter the apostle John took that false accusation and modified it a little to pull the wool over everybody's eyes. He took a false accusation and gave it an air are authenticity in order to deceive you?I think whatever conspiracy theory you come up with requires more of a blind leap of "faith" then what is written there in the NT.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.

No they didn't jar. They remembered what Jesus had said and they believed. They understood the relevance of what He said after HE WAS DESTROYED (supposedly) and He miraculously rose from the dead on the third day. "You will see ..." That's a prediction jar. That is prophecy because it most likely refers to the second coming of Christ. It has not been fulfilled entirely yet. It has been fulfilled in that the Son of Man was the dwelling place of the Divine uncreated God.Some of the people were also impatient with Moses. When Pharoah did not give in on the first sign which Moses performed the people doubted Moses as a savior sent by God. Same with the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th plague.So it took time for the total Exodus to be realized. God outworked His salvation not all at once but in stages.So also with the Messiah Jesus. We shall see the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man. But He is Bethel the HUMAN house of God.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

We have here unbelief that Jesus refered to Himself as the destroyed and raised temple of God.In chapter one Jesus use Jacob's vision of the house of God to speak about Himself as the Son of Man.Think about it. The Son of Man is the House of God. This means that Jesus taught that God was incarnated as a man in Him.Now, is this teaching of Jesus out of the blue? Is there ANYTHING in the Old Testament Hebrew Bible that speaks of God dwelling in a man to make that man His house?Yes, there is in the prophet Isaiah 66: Here in the Hebrew Bible we have God asking where would His house be. Where will they build Him a house for His rest and for His dwelling.Then He says "But to this kind of man will I look ...". That means for His house, for His dwelling place on the earth He will look rather to a kind of man. He wants to dwell in a kind of man. He wants to dwell in man to be His house.This man is unique. It is the man Jesus who was born of the virgin Mary. He was God incarnated as a man. He is the Word become flesh Who tabernacled among us. He is the House of God - Bethel as He taught. And the Father delights to dwell in the Son of God Who is also the Son of Man.If they destroy this house He will raise it up in three days. Now if you will excuse me, I have to say Praise the Lord.

Any chance you'll admit that Jesus prophesied concerning Himself that if they destroyed Him He would be raised up again in three days?Maybe you don't like that one because it wasn't in your handy dandy skeptical book of refuted prophecies?I like to surprise people.

jar, You can reject it a hundred times and it changes nothing.Jesus prophesied that He would rise from the dead in three days. Repeating that this was not a prophecy means nothing.I use it because it is a very important one and is quite central to the Bible.

And you count yourself as unbiased about the Gospels?And Who are His enemies? Joseph of Aramethea stepped forward to bury the body of Jesus. His own disciples were scared to go to the scene of the crucifixion and to see to that honor. What an embaressment, that they were afraid to bury their revered Master. Another rich Jew, not of the twelve, had to do the honor.Why wouldn't the apostles hide this emabassessiing fact that they were too chicken to bury the body of Jesus? Why would they record that one of the supposed unfairly treated enemies had to do the job instead? So now you say that John modified the quotation.
According to you then Jesus REALLY said this:Mark 14:58 - "I will destroy this temple made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands"But John latter tampered with this accusation and it come out this way:John 2:19 - "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."Nothing about "another" temple.
Nothing about "made with hands".
Nothing about "made without hands".You want me to believe that John nicely dropped these details.I don't believe you. You have no sure proof that that is how the words were tampered with.I have evidence that the resurrection of Himself was a theme oft repeated though. And I have no confirming evidence that He spoke of building another physical temple. So the weight of the evidence is that He more likely WAS refering to His body. The overwhelming weight of the evidence is that Jesus was NOT refering to Him building another temple, as they charged, but with the miracle of Him rising from the dead.Could it be that you are simply carrying on the tradition of rejection of the chief priests, elders, and scribes who then reacted unbelievingly to the teaching of Jesus?Where is your evidence that Jesus must have refered to Him buildng another temple of stone?
Another attempt to deceive from you. I never said that John was hostile to Jews in general. And the hostile reference we were discussing comes from Mark - not John. I am building a case by using both testimonials, one from Mark and the other from John.I am not trying to deceive you. I believe that you said that the GOSPELS would be counted on to put the enemies of Jesus in a bad light. So I refered to one of the Gospels, John.Incedently, I take Mark's word for it that the accusations were false as he writes: We don't know what they were talking about until we come to John's gospel. The source of the accusation is discovered in chapter 2 of John. Oh no,no,no. Perish the thought that you would make such an accusation that the Gospels are deceptive.How long are you going to rely on subtle innuendo? Right. Spend at least some equal time considering what is UNLIKELY about some men being blown away by the miracle of the resurrection of a person like Jesus, and subsequently wanting to tell the world about it for future generations?What is unreasonable about some men being so impacted by the personality and deeds of man like Jesus of Nazareth and thinking that this was important enough to tell future generations of human beings what they had experienced, and in so doing were telling us the truth?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.