|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Fulfillments of Bible Prophecy | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
quote: 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.
The Ram (Iraq/Iran) is attacked and defeated by the GOAT (Western Allience - US / GB coalition) power, which comes from the WEST, across the earth without touching the ground. (War Planes) This war is staged near the 'stream Ulai' - Traditional Bible commentaries refers the GOAT to be Greece, and the large horn to be Alexander the Great as the first king.. However, Alexander the Great defeated the Medes and Persians on the Plains of Arbella, approx 1000 miles distance from Ulai, and Phillip the third was the king before Alexander. Which makes it difficult to reconcile traditional applications to this prophecy. What's more; the event takes place vs 17. "AT THE TIME OF THE END' which cannot possibly be 321 BC when Alexander the great ruled the area, also he only ruled one part of the world, NOT the entire world. 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 points1) The prophecy must be proven to have been spoken before it was fulfilled. This is a major problem with Old Testament Prophecy. To prove that the prophecy wasn't written after the fact, one must find the earliest copy we have of a prophecy and carbon date it. That date must be sometime before the prophesied event occured. The Book of Daniel runs into this problem, as all evidence suggests it was written long after its alleged "predictions". 2) The prophecy must be specific. No vague, Nostradamus Style prophecy. The Book of Revelation runs into exactly this problem. The prophecies are so vague that they can have easily have many different "fulfillments". For instance, who is the beast of Revelation 13 (whose number is 666)? Some Fundamentalist Christians insist that it is the pope; Catholics believe it was Caesar Nero; and yet a few conpiracy theorists argue that it is Ronald Reagan! These symbloic prophecies are meaningless because they can be interpreted to fulfill anything that happens. 3) The prophecy must be of something that was not forseeable. For instance, a lot of people predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union, because they saw that it was a very unstable government. Yet we do not think of them as prophets. A prophecy must be something that few/none would have predicted when it was made. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
We will start with 2.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
kbertsche,
Your request. Message 26quote: My response. Message 34quote: 2) The prophecy must be specific. No vague, Nostradamus Style prophecy. The Book of Revelation runs into exactly this problem. The prophecies are so vague that they can have easily have many different "fulfillments". For instance, who is the beast of Revelation 13 (whose number is 666)? Some Fundamentalist Christians insist that it is the pope; Catholics believe it was Caesar Nero; and yet a few conpiracy theorists argue that it is Ronald Reagan! These symbloic prophecies are meaningless because they can be interpreted to fulfill anything that happens. Are you conceding the point? Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
Vague :not clearly or explicitly stated or expressed:
quote: 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: 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
quote: 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
quote: 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
quote: 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
quote: 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
quote: 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
will recompose
Edited by Theodoric, : need to rethink reply
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
quote: 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: By New Testament writers. The provenance of which is very disputable. No one else.
quote:quote: 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
quote: 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9207 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
There are a couple of problems with your reasoning.
quote: 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.
There are few sources that deal with the Targum in full. Those that do, while they claim that this Targum is a support for the idea that Isaiah 53’s suffering servant is the Messiah, they will at the same time attack the author of the Targum for ‘completely twisting’ the text, or making a ’virtual rewrite’. If the issue were not so serious, it would be laughable. 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
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024