Prophecy for Buzsaw

Buzsaw,I think this is worth a topic by itself.Perhaps you could present your best biblical prophecy that has allegedly been fulfilled so it can be examined in detail.It would probably be best if we agreed the standards any prophecy must meet in order to be considered verified before kicking off. Percy wrote down a list of six requirements yonks ago that is worth repeating here. OK by you, Buz?Mark

---

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

Bump, Interesting question lets get some answers

Very interesting.

*cough* *cough*

Bumpity bump.

Firstly, let me show you your bias and/or listen to yourself: What does the NT say about a certain person who was the Messiah and suffered. It is not Buz's claim - it is documentation, - fact.
The evidence Jesus was the Messiah,is the NT. Christ says himself it's a matter of belief though, according to the scriptures your unbelief is and has been explained.
Then you want us to buy some ridiculous rules for "self satisfaction". Sorry Mark but "bias" is written all over this self righteouss topic. The first rule is laughable, basically if you don't have complete justification via your will then it's not a prophecy? - Lol, sorry that's not the way it works. 1947 for example is a FACT. Buz has also offered you many examples including the Isaiah one, and you ignored him. Again - irrational. Now if you still seek proof of bias, just read the above bullony. Who is Percy to say, "You can't include Christ's prophecy". This is definitely the icing on the cake for me now. Your ulterior motives of your "evolution" position are written all over you. You might aswell call the sight evolution versus Jesus.The 6 rules are laughable, I can just hear Percy's thoughts as I write: " Hang on a minute, Christ was accurate, oh dear....I'll have to get rid of that one. That's it - bingo, I'll write a rule saying you can't include it"Indeed a desperate notion, but I'm hoping these bizarre attempts to ridicule the Bible will end. At the moment, as one of your fellow unbelievers wrote - to the effect at least " we deserve answers". Well, no you don't, Buz has shown you many examples and I feel you do not deserve anything concerning truth. All you do is hound Buz with your self righteouss position.

Mark, I just LOVE the way some decide to structure the lives of others without much consideration to whether one has enough time for that particular structuring at any given period to respond adequately, for to respond to all the spin, nonsense and other flak one encounters in such discussion here requires considerable effort and time, as has been demonstrated in the past.Then, not only that, but you want the discussion to be according to the rules of one of your own persuasion. Biblical prophecy doesn't quite work the way Percy has it in the rules, in that all prophecies must be isolated to one reference (rule 3), for example, and in rule 2 where he says 'the complete prophecy must be fulfilled.'Having said the above, I'd be happy to regurgitate and rehash one of my favorite specific prophecies Jesus made in his famous Olivet Discourse, as addressed in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21. The problem is here that the desciples of Jesus asked him concerning what events to look for as to his 2nd advent return and as to what to look for in order to determine when these 'latter days' will come. As in your science and toe, it's not always simple enough to address in the context of one paragraph statement of the prophet.One of my favorite prophecies has already been discussed at length, which is the fulfillment of the segment of Jesus's Olivet Discourse regarding the reocupation of Jerusalem, but you people insisted upon isolating phrases/statements within the whole prophecy and spinning these in the desperate attempt at refuting the prophecy's credibility. If you wish to continue with this prophecy in this new thread, I'd be willing to restate my position and go from there at a pace I'm able to handle at this busy time in my life and business.

quote:

---

The evidence Jesus was the Messiah,is the NT.

---

The evidence that I am the Messiah is that I say so.Fact.

quote:

---

The 6 rules are laughable, I can just hear Percy's thoughts as I write: " Hang on a minute, Christ was accurate, oh dear....I'll have to get rid of that one. That's it - bingo, I'll write a rule saying you can't include it"

---

I agree. Those six rules would certainly take some credibility away from my prophecies, and I wouldn't want that. Ut... hold on... I feel a prediction coming on...Lo, I say unto you, there will be this guy. He's gonna do all sorts of stuff, and the stuff will be good. But others will react to this stuff. Or else they might ignore it. It's a little hazy.

​

But lo I say unto you that three nights shall not pass before this stuff is done.By the standards you're looking for, it should be clear that I have astounding prognasticating powers. Don't let your anti-Dan bias cause you to pick and choose "rules" and "standards" for the purpose of weeding out my accurate prophecies.

---

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

Hmmmm.Good to see you back anyway Dan. My main point though, is that we do base our beliefs on happenings in history. Remember the prophecies we discussed concerning Israel?
Percy is making it so that no Prophecy will pass the test.I would adhere to your jargon, only the NT does not mention Dan Carrol

quote:

---

My main point though, is that we do base our beliefs on happenings in history. Remember the prophecies we discussed concerning Israel?

---

Yup. Remember the arguments against them? (As evidence for prophecy.)

quote:

---

Percy is making it so that no Prophecy will pass the test.

---

Is that Percy's fault, or the fault of the prophecies?

quote:

---

I would adhere to your jargon, only the NT does not mention Dan Carrol

---

It does in bible code.

Your point seems to be that since the Bible prophecies aren't good enough the rules should be relaxed. You can't claim that the rules are unfair just because they don't give the result you want - THAT is bias.Buzsaw claimed that there WERE genuinely good prophecies in the Bible. It has been shown that he was wrong - or at least that none of the ones he knew of were good - and your accusation of bias is just further evidence that he was wrong.

NO, you are under the illusion that what the evo refutes then becomes reality. And/or if you refute Biblical prophecy that means Buz is wrong - rubbish, many many agree Biblical prophecy has come to pass. My point is the Bible prophecies ARE good enough, but they are not good enough for the evo - which, guess what: does not surprise me. Besides 'rules relaxed' - LOl, who are you to make the rules. Who is an unbeliever to make the rules? - A biased rule maker!

quote:

---

many many agree Biblical prophecy has come to pass.

---

Many, many people agreed that bellbottoms were a good idea.Twice.

quote:

---

who are you to make the rules. Who is an unbeliever to make the rules? - A biased rule maker!

---

What would you say the rules are for a valid prophecy, Mike?

---

"It isn't faith that makes good science, it's curiosity."
-Professor Barnhard, The Day the Earth Stood Still< !--UE-->[This message has been edited by Dan Carroll, 01-09-2004]

YOU seem to be under the illusion that it is your opinion that dictates the truth.If you think that Percy's rules are biased and unfair then you need to support that with reasoning. So far all you can offer is the fact that you say so. Do you have any rational basis for that ? Or is it because the Bible prophecies DON'T meet the rules ?

Mikey, Mikey, Mikey, Buz' claim was that the Dead Sea Scrolls were independend evidence of Jesus/Matthew, Mark & Luke. They is not. The messiah having existed is not even mentioned in the scrolls that POST DATE Jesus. So please tell me how I'm biased?The independent evidence of Jesus is not the NT, that would lead to a circular argument. The evidence that the bible is true is that Jesus existed cos the bible says so. That was the point of that particular sub-thread.Perhaps you should have read further back through Buzsaws many nefarious evasions before going off half cocked. Really? So if I prophecised that a particular car will come down my street in the next five minutes & "a" car did come down my street, you would happily accept that I meant that particular car despite there being tens, if not hundreds of millions of cars in the world? Gullibility must be a christian prerequisite.Unless I am specific, the prophecy is meaningless. I know, it came between 1946 & 1948. You are spooky, any more like that & we'll have to start calling you Nostradamus. Why don't you read Buz again, Mike. Where did Buz offer independent evidence of the prophecies of Jesus (the prophecies Jesus made, as witnessed by the apostles)? Isaiah lived before Jesus so that's wrong isn't it? Buz then tried to switch meanings to prophecies of Jesus' coming, rather than prophecies Jesus' made. Regardless, he then offered the Dead Sea Scrolls up as independent evidence of Jesus' existence. The scrolls mention Isaiah's prophecy that a messiah is in the works, not that Jesusis imminent. It is both yours & his assertion that Jesus was the one being prophecised, but the scrolls themselves offer no evidence that any messiah, Jesus or otherwise actually appeared.Who is biased? Remind me?Where do the Dead Sea Scrolls provide independent evidence of Matthew, Mark, & Luke? Buz reckoned that it did, he cited the scrolls when I mentioned there is no independent evidence whatsoever of these blokes having ever lived.Who is biased? Remind me?Get off the cross, Mike, somebody else needs the wood. Percy never said that, you did. For a prophecy to be deemed fulfilled it must meet certain standards.Rule 1: See "a specific car will come down my street, above".Rule 2: A warrior will ride into the city on a sunday, his name will be gerald, he will have the pox & his horse will be called Dobbin. This is not fulfilled if a warrior rides into town called Eric, even if his horse is called Dobbin & he has Syph.Rule 3: Self evident. Claiming a chariot will ride into town when you mean a car.Rule 4: There is no point claiming the bible is reliable & valid on the strength of biblical prophecies are fulfilled if there is no other evidence outside of the bible. It's a circular argument. It's like claiming a prophecy in Lord of the Rings has been fulfilled because Tolkien said so.Rule 5: The prophecy must mean what it says. If you allow prophecies to be interpreted in ways not written then you can "validate" any prophecy. For example, I prophesise that a red car will be the next vehicle under a bridge. A blue lorry is the next vehicle under the bridge, but it has the same number of wheels, & was resprayed from red to blue six months ago so the prophecy is valid. Um, no, in actual fact the prophecy was that it would be a car, & it would be red.Rule 6: Myself or the bible prophecising the sun will come up in the east tomorrow is meaningless, trivial, & in no way validates the bible, or me as a prophet.What is your problem with that? It's not just Christians that have prophecies, you know, you don't want theirs coming true do you? If anyone can come up with any vague old crap & that be considered a good prophecy, then meet the new prophet, mark24.I will be happy to discuss any of the six points Mike, using non-christian examples to show you the logic behind them, but claims of bias without support will get you called a little whiney christian ponce. As long as we both understand that name calling is a two way affair. I think you'll find that prophecies are only allowed to be loosely interpreted when it applies to what you want to be true, Mike. I think you'll be much tougher when it comes to validating other religions via their prophecies, no? You had better hope so, or you are going to have to coexist with a pantheon!Mark[This message has been edited by mark24, 01-09-2004]