Prophecy for Buzsaw

Mike, Of course you think "there will be wars and rumors of wars" is a good prophecy, of course you do. But you forget you accepted rule 1, which in it's revised form reads; Wars & rumours of wars is not specific. The rule clearly states that the prophecy must allude to a single event. You agreed this, Mike. By the standard YOU agreed "there will be wars and rumors of wars" is not valid. I'm not putting words in your mouth , or misquoting you. I am following a logical process by applying the agreed rule to the prophecy. It is a logical requirement for you to reject the prophecy as being an example of a prophecy fulfilled, regardless of what you believe.Regarding your second sentence, what is the point of agreeing to rules & then not accepting the outcome when you don't like the result? And you have accused others of bias! The point of agreeing to rules is that at the end of the day we can objectively apply those agreed rules to any given prophecy & be able to say that this prophecy is valid, or not. We should all be able to walk away in agreement. What should not happen is that we all agree rules, & a prophecy is shown to be in violation of the rules, & one person still shouts "I believe this is a valid example of a prophecy fulfilled". The "H" word will be coming out again if that happens.What mental convolutions must you go through to agree a standard that clearly invalidates the prophecy as an example of a prophecy fulfilled, & then just ignore it because you don't like the result? Be clear, no one is saying it is false, just that it isn't validating anything, & that you have no logical reason to believe it is true.When I say; I speak the truth, it IS unacceptable, you agreed to the standard that made it unacceptable. That you don't implicitly accept it is your inconsistency, no one elses.There really is no point in you participating, Mike, if every prophecy that is tested is found wanting based on standards you agreed in advance, yet you still walk around thinking they are logically acceptable validation of the bible.Your hand is accepted, please accept mine.Mark[This message has been edited by mark24, 01-12-2004]

Mark I think that one of the big problems all through this thread is that Mike has persistently ignored the purpose of the rules. (The other one is his insistence that the rule was biased because he took personal exception ot the example).The point of the rules is not to say that a prophecy has been proven to be a fake or anything like that, is it ? The point is to say that this prophecy is not good evidence for the supernatural. That is what Rule 4 is for isn't it ? If the event happened then the prophecy would be "valid" in one sense - but it would be no good as evidence of the supernatural because we can't really be sure that the event happened or that if it did it really was a good match for the prophecy. And that is what Mike is ignoring.

PaulK,Yep, agree 100%The purpose of the rules is not to determine the wrongness of the prophecy, but whether it is supported well enough to be an acceptable example of the supernatural.Mark

OK guys.I think Mike has been very apologetic and it is time to get on with the topic in hand.Can you try and bury the hatchett and get on with some constructive debate, or do we need to close the thread for a day or two to cool off?Let's get prophecy-testin!AdminBrian

Well as I pointed out in my reply to your earlier non-Admin post I'm already dealing with one example and the other trivially fails to meet the requirements in that the event referred to hasn't happened yet.It seems that we have a shortage of prophecies....

AdminBrian, Let's get the creationists that are going to participate agree to points 1-6 first!Even when we do it looks like it might be futile given Mikes comments that I respond to here.Mark

---

"Physical Reality of Matchette’s EVOLUTIONARY zero-atom-unit in a transcendental c/e illusion" - Brad McFall

Percys Rules for validation of prophecycomments)
1. The prophecy must be specific. For example, "There will be wars and rumors of wars" does not qualify as a specific prophecy. The determining factor in deciding specificity is that there must be only one event, one person, one whatever, etc, in history to which the prophecy could reasonably apply. (This should apply to rules for specific prophecy. In the case of cumulative prophecy,where several general prophetic events converge on a central theme, why not allow that?)
2. The complete prophecy must be fulfilled. If parts are fulfilled and parts not fulfilled then the prophecy is not considered fulfilled. In other words, you can't pick and choose predictions out of a longer prophecy. (Unless we are in the process of fullfillment.)
3. The prophecy must be interpreted in the context in which it appears. A prophecy about one time period or geographic region or political entity can't be reinterpreted into other venues.(Fair enough.)
4. The event or person or whatever that fulfills the prophecy must have extra-Biblical corroboration. (However, remember the differing mindset. What is their source of verification? In other words, it is one thing to declare the bible as fallible. To declare that Jesus never existed requires counterproof.)
5. The original prophecy itself must be interpreted in a straightforward way, not in some convoluted way. (Then let us define straightforward and convoluted!)
6. If the prophecy is mundane and easy to satisfy, then it must not have been previously known to the person, group, whatever, that fulfills it. (suggesting that Jesus merely did certain things to fullfill prior Messianic qualifications? How likely or unlikely is that scenario, using logic?)

Perhaps the fact is that prophecy does not stand the test of any reasonable critical analysis, should we close the thread and put prophecy into room 101?AdminBrian

quote:

---

This should apply to rules for specific prophecy. In the case of cumulative prophecy,where several general prophetic events converge on a central theme, why not allow that?

---

As long as the prophecy specifically names the several events, no problem. But otherwise, the following counts as prophecy:And in some year, a bunch of stuff shall happen. Many people, be they men or women, shall watch the stuff, after which a fight will start. And woe to the unbelievers, for surely they will not be invited to the party that happens after the stuff.Several converging events. And utterly useless as prophecy.

quote:

---

Unless we are in the process of fullfillment.

---

Why don't you give us a ring when the fulfillment is completed? Otherwise it amounts to "no, honest! It'll happen any day now!"If I prophecize that green maggots will burrow their way out of my skull, it doesn't do the prohecy any good for me to say, "well... I have a skull. There are maggots and green paint in the world. It's clearly in the process of fulfillment. All that remains is for things to fall into place."

quote:

---

However, remember the differing mindset. What is their source of verification? In other words, it is one thing to declare the bible as fallible. To declare that Jesus never existed requires counterproof.

---

Right after you provide counterproof that Rhett Butler never existed.After all, I have a book that says he did.

quote:

---

Then let us define straightforward and convoluted!

---

Webster's is always worth a good read. In the meantime, I think we can reasonably apply the Supreme Court porn position: "you know it when you see it."

quote:

---

suggesting that Jesus merely did certain things to fullfill prior Messianic qualifications? How likely or unlikely is that scenario, using logic?

---

More like suggesting that the American government supports Zionism specifically for the purpose of causing biblical prophecy to happen. There's a whole other thread on the forum somewhere about self-fulfilling prophecy.

---

"It isn't faith that makes good science, it's curiosity."
-Professor Barnhard, The Day the Earth Stood Still

quote:

---

Perhaps the fact is that prophecy does not stand the test of any reasonable critical analysis, should we close the thread and put prophecy into room 101?

---

We're... gonna put a cage of rats on Jesus' face?Hunh.

---

"It isn't faith that makes good science, it's curiosity."
-Professor Barnhard, The Day the Earth Stood Still

Any witnesses?

---

Has he lost his mind?
Can he see or is he blind?
Can he walk at all,
Or if he moves will he fall?
Is he alive or dead?
Has he thoughts within his head?
We’ll just pass him there
Why should we even care?

I know plenty of Christians who take it literally. Besides, what does "MOST CHRISTIANS" mean to me anyway. I presented a 'could be' prophecy and you shoot me down by telling me that most of the Christian community don't take references to Babylon literally? Guess what, most Christians don't take the Old Testament literally...

---

Has he lost his mind?
Can he see or is he blind?
Can he walk at all,
Or if he moves will he fall?
Is he alive or dead?
Has he thoughts within his head?
We’ll just pass him there
Why should we even care?

doesn't take references***

---

Has he lost his mind?
Can he see or is he blind?
Can he walk at all,
Or if he moves will he fall?
Is he alive or dead?
Has he thoughts within his head?
We’ll just pass him there
Why should we even care?

quote:

---

Hi,
Can I just let you know that I saw Dan curing a man who was blind, Dan put some of his saliva on his thumbs and pressed them against the blind man's eyes and suddenly the man could see!

​

It truly was a miracle.

​

Brian.

---

Considering you claim to be from Scotland and Dan claims to be from Chicago, that's hard to believe... hehe

---

Has he lost his mind?
Can he see or is he blind?
Can he walk at all,
Or if he moves will he fall?
Is he alive or dead?
Has he thoughts within his head?
We’ll just pass him there
Why should we even care?

That's part of what makes it so miraculous!!!!!

---

Asgara
"An unexamined life is not worth living" Socrates via Plato