Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Fulfillments of Bible Prophecy
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 166 of 327 (507670)
05-07-2009 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by Theodoric
05-05-2009 4:08 PM


First of all, I don't think that is what the saying means. If you use that expression you are implying that I have something to lose if I do not follow your argument. Second of all, Jewish people believing the prophecy or not is only a part of the argument against Isaiah being prophetic. Please do not misrepresent what I have said in previous posts.
And you wrote that "the last thing" you want anyone to do is to do something for you. So you're tell us up front, that though you're asking questions, you don't want answers provided.
As for my preaching, you can see that you're not restricted to sit passively in a pew and listen. You can challenge me at every point. Internet "preaching" gives that advantage to the one supposedly being preached to.
You can also "preach" your own message. And you do.
I think my point is made with you. I'm not terribly impressed with your insistence of "proof" of fulfilled prophecy. Like a good student of the Jesus Seminar or some other pop culture skeptical task force, you simply move the goal post ad infinitum that something has not yet been proved.
What would constituted "proof" for you anyway? Just what would be proof for you that Isaiah 53 spoke concerning Jesus Christ. Exactly what would you accept as proof?
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Theodoric, posted 05-05-2009 4:08 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by Theodoric, posted 05-07-2009 3:53 PM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 167 of 327 (507672)
05-07-2009 10:58 AM


I think we are absolutely on the right track to believe the testimony of the New Testament made abundantly, that Isaiah 53 was a prophecy of Jesus.
This prophecy contains these words:
"Therefore I will divide to Him a portion with the Great, And He will divide the spoil with the Strong; BECAUSE He poured out His soul unto death."
Now if this Suffering Servant poured out His soul unto death then how can He be around to enjoy the spoils of His death? He would have to be made alive again.
Who is the Person in history Who supposedly bore the iniquities of sinners and was raised from the dead? He has to be resurrected to enjoy any spoils of His labors if they called for His death.
Isaiah 53 also says:
"He will see [the fruit] of the travail of His soul, And He will be satisfied."
But if He is DEAD how can He? He must be resurrected, made to live again in order to see the fruit of His death and be satisfied.
I think this refers to Jesus.
"By the knowledge of Him, the rightoeus One, My servant, will make the many righteous."
Could that be Israel as a nation? Maybe so. However, the prophecy says that:
"We all like sheep have gone astray; Each of us has turned to his own way..."
If so then how can Israel be called in the prophecy "the righteous One, My Servant"? Which is it? Did the nation go astray from God or is the nation the righeous One?
"And Jehovah has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him."
If "us all" refers to Israel then there is no need for Jehovah God to cause the iniquity of Israel to fall on Israel.
The prophesy is that the iniquity of wayward one, or really wayward ones (plural) has been caused to fall on a righteous One.
"Jehovah was pleased to crush Him, to afflict Him with grief. WHen He makes Himself an offering for sin ..."
Of course we have to admit that the Jews have been crushed and afflicted. But they usually went to it kicking and screaming in regret of their sins. For example, the Assyrian or Babylonian invasions. Who was afflicted making Himself an offering for sin?
"He took a cup and gave thanks. and He gave it to them, saying, Drink of it, all of you,
For this is My blood of the covenant, which is being poured out for many for forgiveness of sins." (Matt. 26:27,28)
There Jesus Christ makes Himself an offering for sin. Is someone else expected to come along who will be more noted for doing this?
" ... He was cut off out of the land of the living for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke [was due] ..."
In other words the stroke should have fallen upon someone else who was deserving, It was due them. But instead the stroke fell on the Suffering Servant on thier behalf.
Who else in history is known for this kind of substitutionary suffering and death? You could suggest that some other person like Mahatna Ghandi or M L King or Abraham Lincoln died an underserving death on behalf of others. Okay, but none of them was known to subsequently be satisfied with the fruit of their death or see the positive results of their death. They were no longer around to divide any spoil. And they all would admit that they were sinners among other sinners.
The suffering servant should be a Jewish one. There have of course been a number of good Jews who suffered oppression and died. But this Jew has to be raised from the dead in order to see the fruit of the travail of his soul. He also has to be one who made intercession for the transgressors:
" ... Yet He alone bore the sin of many and interceded for the transgressors."
Is there another Jew, raised from the dead, who uttered words like this:
"there they crucified Him and the criminals, one on the right and one on the left. And Jesus said. Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." (Luke 23:33,34)
He made intecession for the trangressors. Is there a more notable instance of an innocent man under oppression, in His own words, for the sins of many, interceding for the forgiveness of sinners?
Are you expecting someone is to come to be more appropriate a referant of Isaiah 53?
So though some may say "Ya haven't proved it yet, that Isaiah 53 refers to Jesus." I think there is plenty there to suggest we are on the right track to assume Jesus Christ was the One being prophesied about.
There may be some aspects of the prophecy which are still in progress. The part about the dividing of the spoils may not fully be realized yet. However the Apostle Paul did say that Christ was already leading a train of captive foes.
You see Saul as a persecutor of the Christian church was one of those foes. But then he was led captive by Christ to be His apostle. He was a big spoil. Paul's thought is that every forgiven sinner is likewise a spoil being lead away in Christ's triumphant victory.
I think Isaiah 53 is talking about Jesus. The New Testament confirms it.
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.

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by Michamus, posted 05-07-2009 11:37 AM jaywill has replied
 Message 174 by purpledawn, posted 05-07-2009 12:05 PM jaywill has replied
 Message 182 by purpledawn, posted 05-07-2009 6:43 PM jaywill has replied

John 10:10
Member (Idle past 2995 days)
Posts: 766
From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA
Joined: 02-01-2006


Message 168 of 327 (507678)
05-07-2009 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by Theodoric
05-05-2009 4:08 PM


You are no longer even arguing the OP. You are preaching. If you want to preach you should go someplace else. Preaching is not something that is usually accepted here.
It seems preaching is OK when it's done by skeptics and unbelievers, but not OK when it's done by Believers in the Lord Jesus Christ explaining what the Scriptures mean to those who are able to hear Jesus speaking to them.
Maybe you need to "rethink" your reply (see post # 90).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Theodoric, posted 05-05-2009 4:08 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by Theodoric, posted 05-07-2009 3:54 PM John 10:10 has not replied

Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 169 of 327 (507679)
05-07-2009 11:35 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by jaywill
05-07-2009 9:57 AM


Re: The confidence trick of prophecy
How is this relevant to the discussion at hand? My point is that when Jesus was born in Bethlehem the priests had already for centries been in expectation that a Messiah would be born in that city.
That is how they knew to tell Herod when he asked where the "born king" of Israel would be.
I don't know how "confirmation bias" arranged that a man like Jesus was born there.
Confirmation bias doesn't arrange anything. Confirmation bias is, in its simplest form, where you ignore the misses and look for hits. Like the way you ignored the misses I pointed out and tried to point to some completely different supposed prophecy as a 'hit'.
I will address your latest claim at fulfilled prophecy when we have dealt with the one I started addressing, if you want me to. Until then, do you concede that you did not experience that the Lord Jesus is rich to all those that call upon him? That you only directly experienced doing so felt rich to you and that you have indirect reason to believe it was rich to some others? That you also have indirect reason to believe that it is not rich to all others since I stand as a counterexample. Since a single counterexample is all that is needed to refute a claim of 'all', your claimed prophecy has failed.
Will you also concede that the only way for you to hold a belief that the prophecy still works is to deny that I did what I said. Indeed - you have to deny every single person that has a differing experience. You have to come up with excuses and rationales that help convince you that the prophecy is still true, I didn't do it right, I didn't believe hard enough. And do you concede that this renders the prophecy entirely useless, since it can never be wrong - no matter what?
Even if the whole world tried the experiment and not a single person felt any richness - a philosopher could argue that it might be because nobody in the world tried hard enough, believed hard enough or that the presupposed it wouldn't work so it didn't. A prophecy than can claim fulfilment, no matter what happens, is no prophecy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by jaywill, posted 05-07-2009 9:57 AM jaywill has not replied

Michamus
Member (Idle past 5157 days)
Posts: 230
From: Ft Hood, TX
Joined: 03-16-2009


Message 170 of 327 (507680)
05-07-2009 11:37 AM
Reply to: Message 167 by jaywill
05-07-2009 10:58 AM


YAWN
You are still talking about a prophecy being fulfilled within a book you have yet to evidence the authenticity of. It seems a little weak that the only evidence you have for your claims is a compilation of books, that have no corroboration from any sources independent of the christian church.
To give you an example.
I could write several different gospels, all claiming George to be the messiah promised in Isaiah (Assuming for the moment Isaiah is even prophesying anything in the first place). I could then go ahead and sprinkle my gospels with catch phrases being stated by George, including actions and deeds as required per Isa. I could even have George become resurrected.
Then I could go around, and say that I found these gospels that written a few years ago, and had them revealed to be true to me, after a religious experience in which the resurrected George admonished me for persecuting the Georgians. I would then go on to right my own books, and create my own Church of George.
That's the problem with your example, everything I just did would make George the Messiah. I could even cite Isa just like you are to show how it became fulfilled! All this would have just as much corroborative evidence as the early christian stories would.
Do you really think the early Christians had no knowledge of Isa? Do you really think that it would be beyond the despot Roman funded Council of Nicaea to cherry pick the gospels that included references to Isa, to make their savior seem more legitimate?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by jaywill, posted 05-07-2009 10:58 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by jaywill, posted 05-07-2009 11:50 AM Michamus has replied

Michamus
Member (Idle past 5157 days)
Posts: 230
From: Ft Hood, TX
Joined: 03-16-2009


Message 171 of 327 (507684)
05-07-2009 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by jaywill
05-07-2009 9:57 AM


Re: The confidence trick of prophecy
jaywill writes:
How is this relevant to the discussion at hand? My point is that when Jesus was born in Bethlehem the priests had already for centries been in expectation that a Messiah would be born in that city.
That is how they knew to tell Herod when he asked where the "born king" of Israel would be.
I don't know how "confirmation bias" arranged that a man like Jesus was born there.
This is all ignoring the fact that Mary would have lost her child on the hypothetical journey, for the proposed reason she was in Bethlehem in the first place.
This is also ignoring the fact that Joseph would have never taken his wife with for a census, as women were deemed property at the time, and a husband's statement of his marriage was all that was needed for record keeping.
This is also ignoring that there are no records from the Roman Empire --which is the same Empire that kept records nearly down to the individual grain of wheat-- of any census like the one mentioned in the Gospels ever occurring.
This is also ignoring the sheer idiocy of such a proposed census, just from the amount of resources it would drain from the Empire's economy, as nearly every working class individual would have to make a journey to their places of birth.
This is also ignoring the fact that Herod wasn't even alive when Jesus was born.
Edited by Michamus, : typo
Edited by Michamus, : typos

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by jaywill, posted 05-07-2009 9:57 AM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 172 of 327 (507686)
05-07-2009 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by Michamus
05-07-2009 11:37 AM


YAWN
I don't bother reading replies that start this way.
So I'll leave off right here until you wake up a little.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Michamus, posted 05-07-2009 11:37 AM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by Michamus, posted 05-07-2009 11:52 AM jaywill has not replied
 Message 183 by Michamus, posted 05-08-2009 2:23 AM jaywill has not replied

Michamus
Member (Idle past 5157 days)
Posts: 230
From: Ft Hood, TX
Joined: 03-16-2009


Message 173 of 327 (507688)
05-07-2009 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 172 by jaywill
05-07-2009 11:50 AM


Excellent dodge... Did I really hurt your argument that much?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by jaywill, posted 05-07-2009 11:50 AM jaywill has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 174 of 327 (507689)
05-07-2009 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by jaywill
05-07-2009 10:58 AM


Isaiah 53 - Continues
quote:
But if He is DEAD how can He? He must be resurrected, made to live again in order to see the fruit of His death and be satisfied.
I addressed that in Message 138.
PurpleDawn writes:
Isaiah understand resurrection as a physical resurrection or rebirth. also read Ezekiel 37.
Isaiah 26:19
Your dead will come back to life; your corpses will rise up. Wake up and shout joyfully, you who live in the ground! For you will grow like plants drenched with the morning dew, and the earth will bring forth its dead spirits.
If you take the suffering servant as a prophecy, the servant dies and is physically resurrected. This means he is alive again and fully human and able to marry, have children, reflect on his work, and divide the spoils of his victory.
The poem does not lead one to believe that the "messiah" is to die, come back to life and then ascend.
quote:
If so then how can Israel be called in the prophecy "the righteous One, My Servant"? Which is it? Did the nation go astray from God or is the nation the righeous One?
Discerning the suffering servant would take some time to read all the suffering servants songs without predetermined ideas and taking into account poetic license. I doubt if you're up for that.
quote:
There Jesus Christ makes Himself an offering for sin. Is someone else expected to come along who will be more noted for doing this?
Matt. 26:27,28 is not a preparation for a sin offering and humans were not accepted by God as literal sin offerings. The verse speaks of a covenant not an offering.
quote:
The New Testament confirms it.
The NT writers apply the prophecy as creatively as Isaiah did. Anything can be speculated and nothing can be proven 100%.
Ultimately the prophets provided hope for a group of people that God would rescue them from their plight of the time. The NT writers used the same imagery to provide hope for the people of their time.
Bottom line: Times got worse after Jesus died. The Jews remained under the rule of other nations. No victory dance. Gentiles picked up the mantle of the Jewish Messiah and made him Christ and became Christians. The Jews continued to practice their religion even after the destruction of the temple and are still practicing their religion and still waiting for a messiah.
Whether our sins are forgiven after we die is another speculation. Nothing can be proven in reality. Verbally, as I've been told before, a sign of forgiveness from God is being in God's favor which means the good times are rolled out in the physical life and the bad times go away. If we use that to discern if sins were forgiven upon the death of Jesus, I would say no. The good times didn't roll.
What you and Peg haven't shown is that the results of the servants efforts according to Isaiah are spiritual or after death as opposed to being experienced in physical life.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by jaywill, posted 05-07-2009 10:58 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by jaywill, posted 05-07-2009 1:11 PM purpledawn has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 175 of 327 (507693)
05-07-2009 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 163 by Modulous
05-05-2009 1:48 PM


Re: The confidence trick of prophecy
And you think this makes sense. Classic.
My saying "Yes I did. Yes I do" refered to me saying that I experienced that Christ is rich to me because I called upon Him. I think you thought it refered to something else.
You didn't read my post before responding to this bit, perhaps? I have. Thousands of others have. And they didn't have the experience you did. You will later develop a whole new theory about why it didn't work.
Okay. I don't know. But my experience is not the same as yours.
I was too quick to offer solutions. You see I have helped and seen a few people who did not know Jesus come to know Jesus, before my eyes.
Maybe I was too eager.
I've seen it before countless times.
1. You didn't try.
2. You didn't do it right.
3. You didn't believe hard enough.
4. Your subconscious scepticism interefered with God's desire to help...
I would not say "You didn't believe hard enough."
I really don't think that in myself I have anymore faith than anyone else. So strength of effort I would not be concerned about.
and so on. It's a very similar mindset to conspiracy theorists.
There was a conspiracy against me. Every possible destraction came my way to turn me away from Christ, for years, years.
I will not again second guess your experience unless you request my opinion on it.
No. You had an experience that you felt was God being 'good', and tried to infer that this means God was in fact, universally 'good'.
The passage said that the Lord is rich to all who call upon Him. Calling on the name of the Lord started with the fourth generation of mankind, with Enosh in Genesis 4:26.
I think there would be over 500 references or examples of calling on the name of God. The vast majority of them are certainly positive.
I know personally of thousands of people who would confirm the positive results of calling on the Lord Jesus. If you like to get in touch with them personally to confirm, I would be will to provide 10 or 20 email addresses.
What rises up within me on many occasions when I call on the name of Jesus, I know is not of me alone. I enjoy sin and left to myself would do so as much as I could without being made to suffer.
When I see temptation coming, I do not struggle or strive or grit my teeth to try to resist. I do not resolve to turn over a new leaf or promise to do better. When I handle the situation rightly I begin to call on the name of the Lord Jesus. And grace empowers me to escape.
I have had over 35 years of this kind of experience. I began to have this kind of experience around 1974.
Excuse me if I don't jump on your alternative explanation so readily. I think that the Lord is rich to all who call upon Him as the NT says.
You know Paul identified the Christians by listening to them call on the name of Jesus according to the book of Acts. He bound all those who called upon this name. Why did they call? I think they also found it rich.
Independent testimony of Rome confirms that they "chanted" the name of Jesus. They regarded it as a chant. That doesn't prove that it was rich. But they were doing it and were known for it.
Some may argue that calling to another deity was also done. I don't doubt that. I have heard people sing Hari Krishna. You can talk to them about thier experience. Whatever it is it doesn't mean that the Lord Jesus is not rich to all who call upon Him.
A murderer's family will quite often say that their personal experience of the person is contradictory to their committing the act of murder. This does not mean that the person didn't commit murder.
I find that thinking and reasoning about calling to the Lord Jesus is vastly inferior to actually calling to the Lord Jesus.
While you reason about it, I rather spend the time to enjoy Him. If I find out at the end of my life that I was deceived, I have lost nothing.
In fact I would do it again. Calling on the name of Jesus is the best possible practice I could have included in my life. There will be no regrets.
As it stands, I do not think I have been deceived.
You have emphatically not experienced that calling upon Jesus is good for everybody even if you have experienced that it is good for you, and for some other people.
I have not experienced this for everyone. That is true. I believe that word of God when it says that He is rich to all who call upon Him.
Of course that is not the ONLY verse in the Bible. So I do have to make room for some other factors which might cause some interference. After all the Lord Himself did say some in "that day" would say "Lord Lord" and He will say that He did not allow them, or that He did not acknowledge them.
This does not mean for me that it must be a permanent dismissal as in eternal perdition. But Jesus did say something like "Why do you call me Lord, Lord when you will not do what I tell you to do."
So in that instance, there may be some discipline, some chastizement to the one calling Lord, Lord without regard to the will of God.
All this does not really nullify the teaching that He is rich to all who call upon Him. That richness may be preceeded with some necessary discipline.
I am going over this quickly and if you are not familiar with the passages you may have trouble following me. But I am a little pressed for time.
And you can't say that your personal experience means it was a universal truth. And that is all that I said. You are the one who is not taking the agnostic approach. You claim to have knowledge, not me.
I was talking about the passage which says that the Lord is rich to all who call upon Him. I believe firmly that I have experienced that. Of course that is not the only verse in the Bible. I am willing to consider other factors that may come into play mentioned elsewhere.
I have seen a few unbelievers argue and argue. But when it comes down to asking them to try calling on the name of the Lord Jesus in a prayerful way, they stop arguing. It seems that their hands get sweaty. They seem to approach an event horizon. Somehow, instinctively they realize that to call on the name of Jesus will result in something serious.
I have NEVER seen people reserve such caution towards any other name in history. When they come right up to it, they seem to sense deep within that to call Lord Jesus, Lord Jesus might just possibly result in a real change in their life.
Why is that? Have to go now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Modulous, posted 05-05-2009 1:48 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by Modulous, posted 05-07-2009 1:24 PM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 176 of 327 (507704)
05-07-2009 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by purpledawn
05-07-2009 12:05 PM


Re: Isaiah 53 - Continues
If you take the suffering servant as a prophecy, the servant dies and is physically resurrected. This means he is alive again and fully human and able to marry, have children, reflect on his work, and divide the spoils of his victory.
The poem does not lead one to believe that the "messiah" is to die, come back to life and then ascend.
This does say something in response to Peg's reference to Isa 26.
If you are refering to what I wrote, my reference was Isaiah 53:11 - 12.
Is that what you are claiming to have refuted? I don't see it in the quotation above.
If He poured out His soul unto death, He has to be made alive again in order to see and enjoy the fruit of His travail.
This is not that figurative. This is practical.
By the way - "Hind sight is 20/20" is okay a saying in regard to prophecy sometimes. I mean after His resurrection it says that Jesus " ... opened their minds to understand the Scripture"
So if someone complains that no contemporary of Isaiah reading chapter 53 would see resurrection there, that MAY be true. Looking back on the prophecy, with the help of the New Testament opening our minds to understand the Scripture,, possibly was the only way one could really grasp what the Spirit of God meant there.
At any rate, He died, He enjoyed the fruit of His travail and death. I think the death and resurrection of Jesus is being spoken of there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by purpledawn, posted 05-07-2009 12:05 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by purpledawn, posted 05-07-2009 1:39 PM jaywill has not replied

Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 177 of 327 (507708)
05-07-2009 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by jaywill
05-07-2009 12:41 PM


Re: The confidence trick of prophecy
My saying "Yes I did. Yes I do" refered to me saying that I experienced that Christ is rich to me because I called upon Him. I think you thought it refered to something else.
You were answering points I didn't raise, I hope you understand how that might have confused me.
jay: I experienced that the Lord Jesus was indeed rich to all who called upon Him. {my emphasis}
Mod: No you didn't.
jay: Yes I did.
You see how I might think that 'Yes I did' refers to your claim that you experienced Christ is rich to all, rather than 'to jaywill'.
But my experience is not the same as yours.
Exactly. So your claim that the experience is universal (applies to all) was premature, and it turns out, false. I sense you are coming around to this, now.
I would not say "You didn't believe hard enough."
I really don't think that in myself I have anymore faith than anyone else. So strength of effort I would not be concerned about.
So, despite the fact that we both called out to Christ with equal amount of faith, I didn't experience this richness. The prophecy is therefore unfulfilled, right?
I know personally of thousands of people who would confirm the positive results of calling on the Lord Jesus. If you like to get in touch with them personally to confirm, I would be will to provide 10 or 20 email addresses.
I do not doubt that some people experience what they would affirm as 'positive experiences' from this act. Some does not equal 'all'. So the prophecy stands unfulfilled.
Some may argue that calling to another deity was also done. I don't doubt that. I have heard people sing Hari Krishna. You can talk to them about thier experience. Whatever it is it doesn't mean that the Lord Jesus is not rich to all who call upon Him.
Indeed - but the fact that the Lord Jesus is not rich to me when I call upon him would does mean that the Lord Jesus is not rich to all who call upon him.
I find that thinking and reasoning about calling to the Lord Jesus is vastly inferior to actually calling to the Lord Jesus.
Indeed. But the point remains that knowing somebody personally doesn't mean you know them perfectly. The point being that just because you experienced something as rich, doesn't mean that it is rich.
While you reason about it, I rather spend the time to enjoy Him. If I find out at the end of my life that I was deceived, I have lost nothing.
Or maybe you have lost something. The only way to know is to live a whole life without calling out to Jesus but instead calling out to Lord Krishna and then comparing the two experiences.
I have not experienced this for everyone. That is true. I believe that word of God when it says that He is rich to all who call upon Him.
No, you believe the word of man that the word of god is that he is rich to all that call upon him.
Are you going to give up this prophecy as useless, now? It doesn't predict anything since you will believe that it is true, even if other evidence suggests strongly that it isn't. You'll have to consider me a liar, delusional or terribly mistaken or something in order to reach that conclusion.
Ignoring or explaining away all of the misses, accepting without scepticism all of the hits. The confidence trick of prophecy.
I was talking about the passage which says that the Lord is rich to all who call upon Him. I believe firmly that I have experienced that.
Yet you have admitted that you haven't. You have only experienced that the Lord is rich to jaywill and x number of other people (based on their testimony). You have also experienced that calling upon the Lord is not rich to other people (based on their testimony).
So - are you willing to concede this prophecy is either unfalsifiable and thus useless to confirm fulfilment, or has in fact been shown to be falsified?
I have seen a few unbelievers argue and argue. But when it comes down to asking them to try calling on the name of the Lord Jesus in a prayerful way, they stop arguing. It seems that their hands get sweaty. They seem to approach an event horizon. Somehow, instinctively they realize that to call on the name of Jesus will result in something serious.
I've done it. I've called upon Allah in the name of Mohammed. I don't get the effects postulated. Sorry to break it to you, but your prophecy has failed. You won't accept this, you can't accept this. You have to go on ignoring and explaining away the misses and only focussing on the hits (yourself and your belief that others have experienced 'hits').
Confirmation bias.
I have NEVER seen people reserve such caution towards any other name in history. When they come right up to it, they seem to sense deep within that to call Lord Jesus, Lord Jesus might just possibly result in a real change in their life.
Why is that? Have to go now.
It isn't so. You just believe it is, so you ignore all the times it was not true, and only remember or focus upon the times you think it was true - you probably also tried to 'read into' the motivations and intents of other people as you did with me earlier, and humans are notoriously good at seeing what they expect to see rather than what is.
I am happy to post video footage of me calling out to a variety of deities and prophets but I suspect it will not convince you anyway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by jaywill, posted 05-07-2009 12:41 PM jaywill has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by Perdition, posted 05-07-2009 1:32 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 178 of 327 (507709)
05-07-2009 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by Modulous
05-07-2009 1:24 PM


Re: The confidence trick of prophecy
I am happy to post video footage of me calling out to a variety of deities and prophets but I suspect it will not convince you anyway.
Can I put in a vote for you posting that?
I think it would be fascinating.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Modulous, posted 05-07-2009 1:24 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 179 of 327 (507711)
05-07-2009 1:39 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by jaywill
05-07-2009 1:11 PM


Re: Isaiah 53 - Continues
Read Message 138,not just the quote which you misunderstood.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by jaywill, posted 05-07-2009 1:11 PM jaywill has not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 180 of 327 (507733)
05-07-2009 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by jaywill
05-07-2009 10:10 AM


quote:
And you wrote that "the last thing" you want anyone to do is to do something for you. So you're tell us up front, that though you're asking questions, you don't want answers provided.
Oh now you are going to quote mine me. Yippeee!!!!
quote:
Theodoric believes it or Theodoric doesn't. When an explicit claim is made that some passages refer to Christ which are in the Old Testament, if he doesn't accept that, what can you do for him?
Believe me, the last thing I want is for something to be done for me.
As I have stated many times I am not going to accept your interpretations blindly you need to back them with something other than "I am right".
quote:
I think my point is made with you. I'm not terribly impressed with your insistence of "proof" of fulfilled prophecy.
If there is no proof why the hell should I believe you?
quote:
Like a good student of the Jesus Seminar or some other pop culture skeptical task force, you simply move the goal post ad infinitum that something has not yet been proved.
You really should know your audience. I think the Jesus Seminar is a joke. I am an atheist.
quote:
What would constituted "proof" for you anyway? Just what would be proof for you that Isaiah 53 spoke concerning Jesus Christ. Exactly what would you accept as proof?
Something that isn't vague or open too countless interpretaqtions. In other words Isaiah can never be considered a fulfilled prophecy. As has been shown in this thread it is too vague and there are to many parts of it that Jesus doesn't fit, or you have to do linguistic gymnastics for him to fit.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by jaywill, posted 05-07-2009 10:10 AM jaywill has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024