Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 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 242 of 327 (508071)
05-10-2009 10:53 AM


"Don't preach." I here that often from Internet Skeptics.
Sorry some of you have nothing of which you're enthusiastic to proclaim to others.
Are you "tolerant" or is it that you just don't have anything worth talking about enthusiastically?
This preacher is not accustomed to ignoring thougthful challenges or objections to my alledged "sermons".
You guys preach too.

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 11:03 AM jaywill has not replied

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


Message 243 of 327 (508072)
05-10-2009 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 241 by Theodoric
05-10-2009 10:52 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Evidence that Jesus is the best referent to the whole chapter of Isaiah 53 has been given.
Extra-faith community testimnials may have a problem recognizing that there is any NEED for someone to be their sin offering.
'
At least they should recognize the JESUS thought so and conducted Himself and His teaching in such a manner as to fulfilled what Isaiah prophesied.
Outside the Bible there is a whole civilization that recognizes at least that Jesus Came, Lived, Died, and taught of Himself in terms of what Isaiah predicted.
They may have a vested interest to come short in admitting that Christ actually is the Servant of God.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 10:52 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 245 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 11:06 AM jaywill has replied

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


Message 246 of 327 (508075)
05-10-2009 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 241 by Theodoric
05-10-2009 10:52 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
This Forum room is about What the Bible Really Means.
There are other rooms where historical reliability of Scripture is hashed out.
Pliney, Phlegon, Josephus our extra-biblcal confirmers of the life of Jesus to a degree.
I frequent this particular forum because my greater interest is What the Bible really means.
In so discussing the prophecy matter I have made the case that Isaiah 53 means Jesus of Nazareth.
My suspicion has long been that when things get quiet on this Forum, discusions really belonging on other Forums find there way over here to Bible Study to warm things up a little.
I could be wrong. I think moderation is lenient when it comes to placing postings here which more appropriately seem suited to other rooms. Case in point - you harping of extra biblical evidence on fulfilled prophecy.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 10:52 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 12:44 PM jaywill has replied
 Message 252 by bluescat48, posted 05-10-2009 1:11 PM jaywill has not replied
 Message 254 by Kapyong, posted 05-10-2009 6:49 PM jaywill has not replied
 Message 255 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 6:56 PM jaywill has not replied

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


Message 247 of 327 (508076)
05-10-2009 11:18 AM
Reply to: Message 245 by Theodoric
05-10-2009 11:06 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
really don't understand what your last post even said. Just random sentences spouting christianist dogma.
Dogma can be right sometimes.
Dogma is not untrue, simply because it is dogma.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 11:06 AM Theodoric has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by mark24, posted 05-10-2009 11:39 AM jaywill has not replied

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


Message 263 of 327 (508180)
05-11-2009 7:30 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Peg
05-11-2009 1:53 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Not even the opponents of Jesus ever denied his existence.
It has always been interesting to me that we can learn about what the opponents of the Christian faith were arguing by studying the early Christian apologetics.
In this case the earliest debates I see were not over whether Jesus existed or not. It was assumed that He did. Rather they argued over whether He was a real flesh and blood human being or some kind of fantasm.
In essence early opponents of the Gospel were arguing that Jesus was too good to be material.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Peg, posted 05-11-2009 1:53 AM Peg has not replied

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


Message 265 of 327 (508182)
05-11-2009 8:30 AM
Reply to: Message 250 by Theodoric
05-10-2009 12:44 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
I have seen no effective rebuttal that the prophecy of Isaiah 53 does not refer to Jesus of Nazareth and His establishing of His vision of the "new covenant".
Attempts to point the prophecy off to something or someone else haven't impressed me. Attempts to make the subject matter all material, devoid of spiritual values are more feeble.
I am light on the side of extra-biblical confirmation perhaps. I am purposely not going to give some of you credence to the implication that biblical confirmation is not valid. Luke was writing history. He was not writing a "Once Upon a Time in a Far Off Land" kind of document.
By "extra-biblical" confirmation I do not concede in any way the biblcal confirmation does not count. So you can stop dangling that bait before me.
And concerning preaching - Gospel means to announce good news. So I can hardly avoid doing some, in light of this fact that that is what it is really about.
Some of you seem to think that the Bible only exists to tickle your intelletual curiosity.
Now Jesus came and did what He did whether or not you agree with Him or believe His message. So I count Josephus reference to Him as extra-biblical confirmation of His ministry. He does come short of admitting that He rose from the dead.
Because the resurrection of Jesus is an article of faith, does not in and of itself, that it is not a historical fact.
German scholar Wolfgang Trilling writes, "We are convinced and hold it for historically certain that Jesus did in fact perform miracles ... The miracles reports occupy so much space in the Gospels that it is impossible that all could have been subsequently invented or transferred to Jesus."
Predicting His own resurrection then as Jesus did, can be credibly assumed as fulfillment of His prophecy. It may not be believed by some that He rose. But it is really arguable on historical grounds, not only theological ones.
That Jesus performed miracles, says William Lane Craig, belongs to the historical Jesus. The disputes over this fact are mostly philosophical rather than on historical grounds.
There is too many miracles reported in the New Testament to conclude that all of the eyewitnesses got it wrong every time. And the resurrection of Jesus is the most important of these submitted. If true it would be fulfillment of His prophesy.
The evidence for Christ's resurrection is very strong. Simon Greenleaf the Harvard law professor who wrote the standard study on what constitutes legal evidence, came critically to the New Testament to study the Gospel witnesses. With his knowledge of the characteristics of genuine eyewitness testimony, he concluded the the four Gospels "would have been received in evidence in any court of justice, without the slightest hesitation."
Geenleaf credited his own conversion to the Christian faith based on his professional examination of the nature of the witnesses of the Gospel.
Gary Habermas collected more than 1,400 of the most scholarly works on the Resurrection written from 1975 to 2003. Habermas reports on the facts upon which these writings agree. And this would be over a spectrum of ultra-liberal to fundamentalist conservative writers. These are the matters upon which all of these varied scholars agree are historical facts.
1.) Jesus died by Roman crucifixion.
2.) He was buried, most likely in a private tomb.
3.) Soon afterwards the discipoles were discouraged, bereaved, and despondent, having lost hope.
4.) Jesus' tomb was found empty very soon after his interment.
5.) The disciples had experiences that they believed were actual appearances of the risin Jesus.
6.) Due to these experiences, the disciples' lives were thoroughly transformed. They were willing to die for their belief.
7.) Proclamation of the Resurrection took place very early, from the beginning of church history.
8.) The disciples' public testimony and preaching of the Resurrection took place in the city of Jerusalem, where Jesus had been crucified and buried shortly before.
9.) The good message centered on the preaching of the death and resurrection of Jesus.
10.) Sunday was the primary day for gathering and worshipping.
11.) James, the brother of Jesus and a skeptic before this time, was converted when he believed he also saw the risen Jesus.
12.) Just a few years later, Saul of Tarsus (Paul) became a Christian believer, due to an experience that he also believed was an appearance of the risen Jesus.
Giesler and Turek comment on this agreement of 1,400 varied scholarly works on the Resurrection and conclude:
"The acceptance of these facts makes sense in light of what we've seen so far, The evidence shows:
The New Testament Story Is Not a Legend - The New Testament documents were written well within two generations of the events by eyewitnesses or their contemporaries, and the New Testament storyline is corroboratted by non-Christian writers. In addition, the New Testament mentions at least 30 historical figures who have been confirmed by sources outside the New Testament. Therefore the New Testament story cannot be a legend.
The New Testament Is Not a Lie - The New Testament writers included divergent and embarrassing details, difficult and demanding sayings, and they carefully distinguished Jesus' words from their own. They also referenced facts and eyewitnesses that their readers either already knew or could verify. In fact, the New Testament writers provoked their readers and prominent first-century enemies to check out what they said. If that's not enough to confirm their truthfulness, then their martyrdom should remove any doubt. These eyewitnesses endured persecution and death for the empirtical claim that they had seen, heard, and touched the risen Jesus, yet they could have saved themselves by simply denying their testimony.
The New Testament Story Is Not an Embellishment - The New Testament writers were meticulously accurate, as evidenced by well over 140 historically confirmed details. They recorded miracles in those same historically confirmed narratives, and they did so without apparent embellishment or significant theological comment."
[I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist, Giesler and Turek, Crossway Books, pg.299,300]
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 12:44 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 1:04 PM jaywill has replied
 Message 293 by purpledawn, posted 05-12-2009 6:31 AM jaywill has replied

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


Message 272 of 327 (508206)
05-11-2009 11:15 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by purpledawn
05-11-2009 8:13 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
The author has Jesus guarantee that that generation would certainly not pass away until all those things had happened. That would include the finale.
Purpledawn must be refering to Mark 13:30:
"Truly I say to you that this generation shall by no means pass away until all these things happen. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall by no means pass away."
Does "this generation" insist on the meaning of those physically composing His audience listening to that particular conversation?
Generation in Mark 13:30 there does not refer to a generation defined according to the age of a person, like the generations mentioned in Matthew 1:17. It refers to the moral condition of the people, like the generations in these passages:
"But to what shall I liken this generation? It is like little children sitting in the market place, who call to others and say, We have played the flute to you and you did not dance; we have sung a dirge, and you did not mourn." (Matt. 10:16,17)
"But He anwered and said to them, An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and a sign shall not be given to it except the sign of Jonah the prophet." (Matt. 12:39)
"Ninevite men will stand up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold something more than Jonah is here. (v.41, See also verse 42)
"The last state of that man becomes worse than the first. Thus shall it be also with this evil generation." (v.45)
"There is a generation that curse their father, and do not bless their mother.
There is a generation that are pure in thier own eyes, and yet they are not washed fom their filthiness.
There is a generation - oh how lofty are their eyes, and thier eyelids are raised [arrogantly].
There is a generation whose teeth are like swords, and their jaw teeth like knives, to devour the afficted from off the earth" (See Prov. 30:11-14)
These instances of "generation" refer not to age of people but to moral condition. Such a generation would not pass away in Mark 13:30 until all that Jesus predicted should come to pass.
This is consistent with the fact that He told His disciples that it was not up to them to know the times and seasons when God would restore the kingdom to Israel when they asked for the specific "when" of such (Acts 1:7).
Had He meant that all this culmination was to occur before those immediate disciples had died, He could have easily reminded them that He told them already, that all these things were to occur in their "generation" in the sense that Purpledawn means.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by purpledawn, posted 05-11-2009 8:13 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by purpledawn, posted 05-11-2009 1:21 PM jaywill has replied

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


Message 273 of 327 (508210)
05-11-2009 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 271 by Percy
05-11-2009 10:37 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Time passes by, but some things never change. There will always be believers of myth.
I view the modern "Jesus the Myth" critics to be like modern Holocaust deniers.
Deniers of an actual historical event with which they are not happy usually accumlate as time from that event extends. They are emboldened as the eyewitness generation gradually expires.
It is mostly after the generation of the Holocaust survivors die out that more vocal voices start to say that it never happened. It is harder to deny while the event is fresh in the minds of eyewitnesses. It is easier to deny as the witnesses die off.
Hence we see the bold claim from Neo Nazi groups or Iranian anti-Zionists that the Jewish Holocaust was fictional. They grow bolder as time from that event extends.
In the same way New Testamet textural higher critic's suggestion that there was no Jesus, is recent phenomenon. I think such suggestions of the mythic invention of Jesus began around the 1800s or so. This is long after the denial of the historical Jesus would not have been taken seriously. By all accounts more contemporary with the First Century this extraordinary Person lived and was noted for extraordinary words and deeds.
Where are the protests of the mythic invention of a Jesus of Nazareth in the first and second century or third century?
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Percy, posted 05-11-2009 10:37 AM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 12:35 PM jaywill has replied
 Message 275 by mark24, posted 05-11-2009 12:51 PM jaywill has replied
 Message 288 by Kapyong, posted 05-11-2009 6:14 PM jaywill has not replied

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


Message 277 of 327 (508217)
05-11-2009 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 274 by Theodoric
05-11-2009 12:35 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Everywhere. Christianity wasn't an accepted religion in the Roman Empire until the 4th century.
Emperor's Constantine made political move to make Christianity the state religion is not evidence that Rome denied that Jesus lived. Previous emporer's hated the Christian faith because of fear of sedition. They were not able to wipe it out. So it really became a case of "If you Can't Beat em, Join em."
This fact does not argue for a denial of Jesus' existence, but only of His being important as a Lord. Rome had its own gods.
It did not became the dominant religion because it had some innate appeal to the masses.
The version of Christianity that Constantine made the official religion of the Roman Empire was a degraded matter. Any time you have to threaten people to become Christians or lead them to the baptismal at the point of a sword, or promise material rewards for becoming Christians, that is a terrible perversion of what Jesus taught. It would have been unrecognizable to the 12 apostles.
I think this also was a fulfillment of a few prophecies of Jesus in parabolic form in the 13th chapter of Matthew.
Namely the mustard seed which changed in form and became a huge tree in which the evil birds lodged and the leaven mixed with three measures of meal until the whole thing became leavened.
Both parables I take as essentially negative prophecies of how the "kingdom of the heavens" would mutate in coming times after the initial preaching of the Gospel. (See Mattew 13:31,32; 13:33-35)
Leaven is clearly a corrupting symbol as Jesus said beware of the leaven of the scribes and Pharisees. It bloats up and ferments the bread so as to make it larger than normal. This was a prophecy of the development of Christiandom as a great worldly political / religous power. And the birds which lodged in the branches of the mustard seed transmuted into a tree, are also a negative symbol as they are in the same chapter in verses 4 and 19.
The emmergence of the Roman Public Church as the official empire religion should be regarded as the fulfillment of the negative prophetic parables in Matthew 13.
It became the dominant religion because it became the state religion in 380 C.E.
And the church has suffered ever since. The attack from within by being improperly joined to the world was worst than the attack from without by the world's persecution.
However, none of this argues for Rome previously believing that Jesus of Nazareth was a fiction. They just lightly regarded His importance. And they feared the "anti-social" lifestyles of the Christian faith's adherants.
Records outside the Bible prove that they knew Christians could not easily be made to renounce Jesus as their Lord. They tortured and killed Christians in order to exact such denials.
At that time the people followed the religion of their ruler. Heck, people followed the religion of their ruler in some countries until the last century. Doesn't make any of those religions any more correct than any other. Do you need sources for the above or can you research it yourself?
I read Foxe's Book of Martyrs and Miller's Church History[/b] years ago. You have not added anything previously unkown by me in your post. But I do not agree with you suggestion that any of this means that Rome did not think Jesus was a real historical Person of some unusual qualities.
Being promised gold or expensive garments for promising to become a Christian, as Constantine's government did, is not at all a statement as to the nature of the Gospel. And that thousands took up the offer is not either. Thousands probably had no experience with encountering Christ on a personal level as the typical Christian claims.
This too is kind of prophetic. For Jesus said that the way to divine life was narrow and constricted while the way to destruction was broad. Many will enter the latter and fewer would enter the former.
There is little to know mention of Jesus Christ outside of the bible in the first couple centuries.
There is more mention of Jesus than there is of Tiberius Ceasar. Do you doubt the existence of Tiberius Ceasar for that fact? Probably not.
He did not enter into the minds of most of the chroniclers of the period. Why would they discount something that hardly intruded into their lives?
Many did not regard a Jewish itenerant preacher as important. But eventually they noticed that the people who did believe in Him seemed to rather suffer and die than renounce Him.
Can you find documents attesting to the mythic character of King Arthur from the period he was set? No. Because he was a mythic character that was invented later? The absence you mention does not equate to affirmation. There is little to nothing about Jesus Christ at all in that time perios. Little attesting to his existence or non-existence.
It may not prove His existence. But it does show the hypocrisy of those who more readily accept the existence of say, Socrates or Tiberius Ceasar with less historical confirmation than there is for Jesus Christ.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 12:35 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 1:33 PM jaywill has not replied

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


Message 278 of 327 (508218)
05-11-2009 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by Theodoric
05-11-2009 1:04 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
I am surprised you would use such a biased source to try to back your claim.
You were expecting me to seek the assistance of atheist Jeffrey Loewder or skeptic James Still?
You were expecting me to rely on the Jesus Seminar perhaps?
You find more objectivity in Internet Infidels perhaps ?
Your own objectivity is more than just slightly underwhealming.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 1:04 PM Theodoric has not replied

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


Message 280 of 327 (508220)
05-11-2009 1:25 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by Theodoric
05-11-2009 1:04 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Literally tears the book apart. This is popular christianist book, it is not a serious work of scholarship. Its publisher is a christian publishing house that could hardly be called subjective.
If you don't think Norm Giesler is a serious scholar on the subject, I don't think I have a polite way of telling you what I think of you. So I'll refrain.
And argument by "fun" has never impressed me from athiests.
I will re-read your post to see if there is any substantive reply now that these gestures have been reviewed, like patting yourself on the back and such.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 1:04 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 1:43 PM jaywill has replied

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


Message 283 of 327 (508224)
05-11-2009 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 279 by purpledawn
05-11-2009 1:21 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
Since Jesus is only talking to four people, they aren't themselves a generation. Unfortunately Jesus doesn't provide descriptive words to make it more specific than the current age or that the generation in question is in the time of the disciples. We can't infer any more than that.
How many people would constitute Purpledawn's definition of generation then? What's the number if not four?
His usage of the word in the examples I submitted indicates that He had a concept of a moral generation. And since He was also a teacher of the Old Testament in a sense, the contribution of the Proverb's passage shows that there was concept of a moral generation as an age of culture.
Me:
Generation in Mark 13:30 there does not refer to a generation defined according to the age of a person, like the generations mentioned in Matthew 1:17. It refers to the moral condition of the people, like the generations in these passages:
You:
Actually it is the same word. Genea
1. fathered, birth, nativity
2. that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family
a) the several ranks of natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy
b) metaph. a group of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character
Since [b] is a valid definition of the word, my case is established that this is what He meant. Especially since in Acts chapter one He told them that they WOULDN'T know when all these things were to happen. Otherwise He would have been self contradictory about it.
1) esp. in a bad sense, a perverse nation
3) the whole multitude of men living at the same time
4) an age (i.e. the time ordinarily occupied be each successive generation), a space of 30 - 33 years
Numbers 1 and 2 confirm my explanation. Such an association might last 50 or 79 or 100 or more years. It might last even 1,000.
When Jesus said that heaven and earth would pass away before His words would, that seems to indicate that the generation could be INDEFINITELY long.
Generation is a noun and means nothing more than the definitions above.
Definitions you provided which allow for my interpretation.
You have not yet explained how all such definitions make my interpretation impossible. But let me read on.
Another word is needed to either describe the moral condition of the generation or which generation is being referred to, as you examples did. In this verse the word "houtos" is used, which means this. As written it is speaking of a current generation.
Yes, even the part about the men of Nineveh and the Queen of the South. Jesus is saying that the current generation (the one at the time he is speaking) will be condemned by those people when they are resurrected at the judgment.
Both in Matthew 12 and Mark 13 I see the Greek GENEA. What are you talking about? (Metzger's Greek New Testament and NIV Greek / English Interlinear).
What verse are you saying reads HOUTOS ?
Metzger's dictionary has for the word in Matthew 12 and Mark 13:
"generation, contemporaries, period, age (of time); family, posterity (posterity or perhaps origin)."
Period or age (of time) - morally characterized is the sense that I think He means and is admissible by definition.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by purpledawn, posted 05-11-2009 1:21 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by purpledawn, posted 05-11-2009 3:52 PM jaywill has not replied

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


Message 285 of 327 (508227)
05-11-2009 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by Theodoric
05-11-2009 1:43 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
I didn't say he wasn't a serious scholar. I said the book was not a work of serious scholarship. Please do not attribute things to me that I do not say.
I don't have to. The things you actually say are bad enough.
I have not quoted a book that is not of serious scholarship. You might read it. But I won't hold my breath waiting.
And I have read enough Giesler to realize that he repeats a lot of things in succesive books. "Christian Apologetics" probably includes that same arguments and it is very dense scholarship on Philosophy and the interpretation of History in general. I think it is completely serious. Giesler repeats some things from book to book.
I am reading his book of Answering Islam which is very well documented from many Moslem scholars themselves. So I can't take seriously that he wrote a none serious book on Christian apologetics.
The only thing about I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be An Atheist is at times it seems geared to the American political Right. I tend to vote on the Democrat side. But I don't know why you say the book is not serious.
Deleted via moderator's request.
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 1:43 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 286 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 3:24 PM jaywill has replied

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


Message 289 of 327 (508240)
05-11-2009 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 269 by Theodoric
05-11-2009 9:19 AM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
I think the key point is we can not give a firm, solid, clear date to Mark, or any of the other NT writings. Therefore, they can not be used a validation of any prophecy. Without a complete provenance, these books can never be used to verify the prophecies. There needs to an external verification if the people that claim the prophecies are fulfilled want to be taken seriously.
Is there a scenario by which someone after the Invasion of Pearl Harbor would write a fradulant history pretending that the event was in the future to the time of writing ?
Could you see someone writing a fake history of New York after the falling of the Twin Towers pretending that such an event was a prophecy to be fulfilled in the future?
What I am hearing is that the Gospel of Mark had to have been written after the temple was destroyed by the Roman army. Such a momentous event is sneakily "ignored" by the writer except for a pretended reference to its future destruction to the events being recorded.
I think this is unrealistically conspiratorial. What I hear is the theory that AFTER the destruction the writer of Mark wrote a pretended history of Jesus totally ignoring this momentous event. Furthermore the writer of Mark pretended to make it a prophesied event to occur in the future.
Now while the writer of Mark is perpetrating this devious hoax he is also portraying high standard of morality, honesty, truthfulness and ethics as taught by the central figure, Jesus.
This doesn't make too much sense to me.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by Theodoric, posted 05-11-2009 9:19 AM Theodoric has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 290 by Richard Townsend, posted 05-11-2009 6:56 PM jaywill has replied
 Message 297 by Percy, posted 05-12-2009 8:43 AM jaywill has not replied
 Message 307 by Peg, posted 05-13-2009 5:51 AM jaywill has not replied

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


Message 292 of 327 (508293)
05-12-2009 6:15 AM
Reply to: Message 290 by Richard Townsend
05-11-2009 6:56 PM


Re: Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE prophecy
This is weak reasoning. All the prophecies in this thread have needed specific interpretations of the text, and the eye of faith. All these have an element of doubt to them.
What is wrong with one needing to have faith in what the Bible prophesied ? Your basic objection that "It requires an eye of faith" may be a criteria which you reject but God has in mind.
You may be wanting God to play strictly by your rules that no "eye of faith" be required. In response to this objection I think it would be a good idea for one to make an examination of fulfilled promises told about in the Bible and see if no "eye of faith" was required upon those for whom the prophecy came about.
When Jesus showed doubting Thomas empirical and scientific evidence that His wounds and holes in His living body proved that He had risen from the dead, He added to His proof the words [b]"And be believing.
"Then He said to Thomas, Bring your finger here and see My hands, and bring your hand and put it into My side; AND DO NOT BE UNBELIEVING, BUT BELIEVING." (John 20:27 my emphasis)
What I hear you saying is that you want a case of fulfilled prophecy in which it is not required of you to be believing.
Give me some time to study this. It seems on the first consideration is that the prophecy of God exists only for the sake of man's intellectual curiosity. I'm not sure that that is valid.
I'm still looking for a prophecy that
- was made explicitly, ie does not need 'interpretation' for us to know what it means
There is always disagreement among people as to the meaning of history. What does the American Civil War MEAN. To some it is the war between the states. To others it was the war of Northern Aggression.
I think I would lean towards accepting what meaning was given to the fulfillment given by the same God Who caused it to come to pass.
- is specific enough to be an 'unlikely' prediction and one whose fulfillment would be clearly detectable.
A man name Stoner wrote a book on this. I only saw some examples of his statistical calculations of the unlikelyhood of certain fulfilled prophecies was a chance event. The book was called "Science Speaks". The quotations of which I read decades ago in "Evidence That Demands a Verdict" by J. McDowell. I do not know of further editions of that book since the 80s still contain Stoner's statistical examples.
No doubt someone will yawn at the mention of Josh McDowell.
- is guaranteed to have been written before the prophesied event took place
I think it should be obvious that Isaiah 53 for example was written way before Jesus came teaching that the New Covenant was in the blood of His sacrificing Himself for the sins of people.
Of course you said that you don't want to have to interpret the meaning. But if you don't, for instance, believe that there is a God or that sin exists, then you won't agree with the "meaning" of Jesus going to the cross for the sins of man. Would you?
No "eye of faith" and "no need for interpretation" could be so restrictive as to allow you to dismiss all proposals of Bible prophecy.
- is proven to have been fulfilled by material outside the bible
Then you may run into the problem of the interpretation given to that event by the "outsider" to the community of faith. Plenty of ancient authorities agree that Jerusalem's walls were torn down to the ground as Jesus predicted. They may find it coincidental or not necessarily the doing of the Christian God.
Outsiders to the Bible confirm that Jesus virtually offered Himself up to Roman execution. The meaning of that history for them may be entirely removed from what Isaiah said was the significance of the event.
Jesus predicted "wars and rumors of wars" and "earthquakes" in various places, with famines and false Christs arising saying "I am the Christ". Paul spoke of a general apostasy of the Christian church. He said the Spirit of God expressly said that some would depart from the faith and give heed to deceiving spirits. One of the doctrines that Paul prophesied would come about was the forbidding of marriage to Christian workers. The celebacy of the Roman Catholic Church is a good candidate for the fulfillment of that prophesy.
But saying "I want a prophesy in which I do not have to have an eye of faith" may be purposely restrictive. I will spend some time to think about it.
- is not potentially self-fulfilling
Those are sometimes the best kind. The prophesy pronounced upon Joseph caused his brothers to hate him. And all that they did only caused the prophesy to come about anyway !
I wouldn't exclude instances in which the very reaction TO the prophesy of God was a contributing cause for its fulfillment. They are fascinating examples of God's sovereignty over time.
Then again I am looking for reasons to believe the Bible. Perhaps you are hunting for reasons why NOT to believe the Bible.
If I had knowledge of the future I could write any number of prophecies that would (eventually) meet my criteria. If God has shared knowledge of the future with the prophets, then so should they.
He said somewhere in the prophets that He does nothing without letting His prophets know.
But then prophecy is not usually with the sole purpose of entertaining man's curiosity. The Bible is not the same as the predictions of Nostradamus or Jean Dixon. The aim is to instill faith and impart the Spirit of God into people.
There are number of passages in Ezekiel or Zechariah in which God says "And they shall know that I am Jehovah" when thus and such comes to past.
I'd have to think about prophesy in which the witnesses of fulfillment may not want to know Jehovah. This is not meant to be offensive. But the "NO EYE OF FAITH" criteria concerns me. God has restricted Himself to the process of faith to reveal Himself to man.
That leave man with nothing to boast about. And it instills trust in God which man needs. Are you saying "I want a none faith instilling fulfillment of Bible prophecy" ? I need time to think about that.
I have never seen a prophecy like that and I don't believe there are any in the bible. Can you show me to be wrong?
Maybe you should give up looking then. If no example meets your criteria, maybe you just should remain in unbelief.
I find a number of prophesies impressive. And I look forward to seeing some unfold in the future.
If there were a number of prophecies of that strength, then the claims of the bible would become more credible. It would be strong evidence that something interesting was going on.
When I am really interested in the Bible, some matters I put on the back burner for a season. I go to study other things. Then again I want to love God, want to find God, want God to be real, and want to submit myself by His mercy to God.
I'm biased. God has been faithful to me and encouraged me that I am on the right track of my life to believe the Bible, discerningly of course, with wisdom as to what is what. I don't take the Bible as Nostradamus type predictions for the sake of wowing human curiosity solely.
Stoner's book on probablity and prophesy fulfillment is called "Science Speaks". Maybe that could help you.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by Richard Townsend, posted 05-11-2009 6:56 PM Richard Townsend has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by Peepul, posted 05-12-2009 8:41 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