Fulfillments of Bible Prophecy

quote:

---

I would also like to be clear that this thread is not for debate on whether a prophecy was written after the event but whether the prophecy was fulfilled in the manner that the scripture said it would be fulfilled.

---

There can be no debate about whether there are fulfilled prophecy if there is no debate on whether the supposed prophecy were written before the event.As has been shown by PaulK there are serious problems with your dating of Daniel. There is no way you can say these are fulfilled prophecies if you cannot firmly establish the dating the book.Also, these passages could be interpretted anyway you want. There are end of times loonies that believe these passages reflect the here and now. Last year I found a post on another board that clearly laid out 3 points that must be met in order for something to truly be a prophecy. I agree with these and no bible policies fulfill these 3 points. 3 points

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

My first response would be that there is no evidence that Jesus lived and died in the first place.Second of all, how is Isaiah 53 a prophecy? It seems to me that christians are trying to insert something into writings that isn't there. It says nothing about Jesus. It talks of a servant. Could be anyone. Could be a reference to Israel itself. This prophecy is beyond vague. Do you believe Nostradamus' prophecies? How is this any different?

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

No.
Start with PaulK's response in response #20. If you feel a need for more I will gladly refute anything you have to say.Edited by Theodoric, : Post # correction

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

We will start with 2.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

kbertsche,Your request. Message 26

quote:

---

You haven't answered my second question. Which of your three requirements does Is 53 not meet?

---

My response. Message 34

quote:

---

We will start with 2.

---

Are you conceding the point?

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Vague :not clearly or explicitly stated or expressed:

quote:

---

I have given a number of examples where NT writers referred to Is 53 as predictive of Jesus in Re: Isaiah (Message 25).

---

So your argument is the following. NT writers said that this jesus guy was the fulfillment of a prophecy, so therefore he is the fulfillment.How is this any different than Nostradamus. Lots of people are saying things happening now are fulfillment of his prophecies. The writings of Isaiah are vague. There is nothing in them that states who, when or where. Just vague statements that later writers used to deify a legendary and probably mythological character.

quote:

---

(Jewish rabbis saw this passage as speaking of Christ).

---

Which Rabbis? When?
Any references to Jesus in the Talmud have him existing anywhere between 300 BCE and 100 CE.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

quote:

---

The NT writers were native Hebrew speakers (actually Aramaic-- a Hebrew dialect)

---

Wrong on a couple of points. First Aramaic is not a dialect of Hebrew. It is its own distinct language. Yes it is a Semitic language like Hebrew but it is a distinct language. Saying it is a dialect would be similar to saying Spanish is a dialect of French because they are both romance languages.Hebrew was primarily a liturgical language in the first century CE. In Jerusalem and the south Hebrew was more widely spoken, but in the north it was heavily Aramaic.Your contention that they were native Hebrew speakers, because they spoke Aramaic, is wrong. They were native Aramaic speakers.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

quote:

---

The fact that many people interpret the symbols incorrectly does NOT mean that they don't have an objective, clear meaning.

---

So your interpretation of symbols is the correct interpretation?By virtue of the fact that symbols need to be interpreted shows that they do not and cannot have an "objective, clear meaning". Interpret
:
1. to give or provide the meaning of; explain; explicate; elucidate: to interpret the hidden meaning of a parable.
2. to construe or understand in a particular way: to interpret a reply as favorable.Hermeneutics cannot be used as an argument for the "objective and clear meaning" of symbols. Because that is what it purports to do. It is like trying to use the bible to prove the bible. I am amazed of the audacity of people that claim they know exactly what the writer meant thousands of years ago. How can you understand what the symbolic meaning is of something from a vastly different time and vastly different culture?

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

quote:

---

John 10:27-28 "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand."

---

This passage says nothing about giving his descendants long life. That is the whole gist of the argument.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

quote:

---

With study of language, history, and culture, it is possible to know what many of these apocalyptic symbols meant to the original author. This knowledge can be gained independent of the person doing the study. Thus these meanings are objective according to the above definition.

---

How? How can you know what some one from 2000 or 4000 years ago meant? You do not have the linguistic and cultural background to know what they meant by their symbolism. No one does. All you, or anyone, can do is interpret and try to divine what they may have meant. To declare that you can know what they meant is a huge statement of hubris.It is extremely arrogant to declare that your interpretation is correct and all others are wrong.You can state, without any reservations, that your interpretation of Isaiah is correct and the interpretation of all Jewish scholars is wrong?

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

quote:

---

Nonsense!
Do Maxwell's equations have an "objective, clear meaning?" Yes!
Do they need to be "interpreted," especially for a non-scientist? Yes!

---

Maxwell's equations are laws of electromagnetism that can be proven and mathematically explained. They are a fundamental truth. You are equivocating by saying that they would need to be interpreted for a layman.The symbols in the bible are not a universal truth. Different people and different groups will come up with different meanings(read interpretations)Just because thay are the same word(interpret) does not mean they mean the same thing.Interpret as you used for maxwell's equations, is to explain or elucidate. I do not think this is an actual correct use of this word here. Because in actuality the equations do not require an interpretation. All they require is for the person to learn physics and mathematics and they can learn why they are truth.Interpret as used for the prophecies has a different meaning. Here it means :To conceive the significance of; construe. A person can not learn the ultimate intent of the writer. All they can do is make educated guesses and suppositions of what the original writer meant.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

will recomposeEdited by Theodoric, : need to rethink reply

quote:

---

Why are you even posting here? (The subtitle of this forum is "what the Bible really means".)

---

I didn't know that this forum was closed to anyone that disagreed with you.I am not arguing that people interpret the bible. My argument is that you cannot know the original intent of the write. You can infer a lot, but you can never KNOW for sure what the original intent is.As for your postings in Message 25, I have already said that just because New Testament writers tried to shoehorn Jesus into these prophecies does not make it a fulfilled prophecy. Looking at the vagueness of the prophecy, we can see it is not specific and lots of things could fit. Like maybe the whole nation of Israel.You sir, have given nothing to back up that this is a prophecy except for New Testament writings. You have not explained how Jesus fits and when discrepancies have been shown you have completely ignored them. Remember this thread is "Fulfillment of Bible Prophecy". The only people convinced so far are you and the original poster Peg, who has seemed to have backed out of the conversation. Maybe you could try another "prophecy" other than Isaiah. Maybe that would be more convincing. A little advice though, if you continue with the argument, that by some special divination you can KNOW what the original meaning of the symbolism, you will get nowhere.

quote:

---

Really?? The prophecies in Is 53 are not a modern argument for Christianity. They were seen to speak of Christ since even before the founding of Christianity

---

By New Testament writers. The provenance of which is very disputable. No one else.

quote:

---

quote:

---

(Jewish rabbis saw this passage as speaking of Christ).

---

​

Which Rabbis? When?
Any references to Jesus in the Talmud have him existing anywhere between 300 BCE and 100 CE.

---

Any reply to this? Just because you say it doesn't make it so.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

quote:

---

One who has not studied physics or advanced mathematics could insist that the symbols in Maxwell's equations are subjective and unknowable.

​

One who has not studied theology or biblical interpretation (you?) could insist that the symbols in Scripture are subjective and unknowable.

---

So you are saying Theology is as objective as Physics and Mathematics? Interesting. I guess I never knew that math could have multiple interpretations. Like 4+4 doesnt always = 8?Laws of physics are just guidelines?Because if Theology is as objective as Physics and Math then there must be lots of interpretations. Because there certainly are a lot of Theological interpretations. For example, look at evolution. The Catholic Church teaches that evolution fits perfectly fine within its theology, now the fundamentalist churches(some baptists, Missouri Synod, Lutheran Church) teach that evolution is not true and only the creation story of the bible is true. Now these religions are based on the same book. If that isn't subjective, what is?Is your argument that the one is wrong? That they do not know true theology or know how to correctly do biblical interpretation.There is one way to correctly explain and interpret the symbols in Maxwell's equations. Any other explanation is objectively wrong.There are multiple ways to explain and interpret symbols in your bible. There is no way to prove conclusively what is the "correct" way to interpret them. All explanations are subjective. If they weren't then there would be only one explanation. To declare all others wrong and yourself correct is extremely arrogant. But typical christian.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

There are a couple of problems with your reasoning.

quote:

---

But there is evidence that Jews of the 1st century did believe Isaiah 53 was a messianic prophecy. In one rendering of Isaiah 52:13, the Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel (1CE), as translated by J. F. Stenning, states: "Behold, my servant, the Anointed One (the Messiah), shall prosper."
Another one, the Babylonian Talmud (c.3 CE) says: "The Messiahwhat is his name?..." (Sanhedrin 98b)

---

Even if Rabbi's thought this was a a messianic prophecy, the dating is before Jesus. SO how could this be evidence that jesus fulfilled the prophecy? Also, if Rabbis of later times thought Jesus was the fulfillment wouldn't they proclaim him Messiah.The whole Targum and Jonathan ben Uzziel issue is not as clearly accepted as you imply. I think christians get so caught up in finding evidence in Jewish writings for that divinity of Jesus that they refuse to look at it objectively. Here is a good counterpoint to your argument. You have to use multiple contortions and manipulations to use the writings of the Rabbis to support your contention that Jesus is the fulfillment of this prophecy.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts