Some Specific Biblical Prophecies

No, it *is* more impressive if it refers to a specific generation that can be identified in advance. The greater the risk of failure, the more impressive the prophecy, if it succeeds.And I am certainly keeping to the debate. "Generation" is a perfectly acceptable translation of "genea". And this translation is reinforced by the fact that the whole passage implies that the disciples will be alive to see the signs (as I pointed out - are you saying that relevant context ISN'T part of the debate ?).And while I may laugh at the idea that your religion could be true it's no reason for wanting you out of the thread. Buzsaw is likely to be less tolerant.

What you believe or don't believe is of no consequence to the issue of the veracity of your arguements,but only the evidence itself which is clearly against you.

I don't see any more risk if the prophecy is 50 years, 100 years, 500 years, 1,000 years, 2,000 years, the prophecy has no less or more of a risk that is why you see him talking about things near in the future and also things far away in the future. The fact that he nails them both in luke 21 is awsome, as for the generation topic I have found that I am right you would have to open a thread about such in order for me to continue this I am respecting buzsaw he wants to debate L 21:24 and as I have already stated I Agree with him, so anyone got anything good to say which would prove that L 21:24 is false or has not been fulfilled?-Quiz[This message has been edited by Quiz, 10-22-2003][This message has been edited by Quiz, 10-22-2003]

You are misreading my point. I am claiming that "all this will happen within the next 70 years" is more impressive than "all this will happen at some time in the future". Distance in time is not an issue - the issue is limits in when the events may occur so that we may know that those limits have been passed.No your interpretation clearly places no limits at all - not even the limit that all the events must happen withing a single unspecifed generation. So you are actually impressed with a prophecy BECAUSE you think that it places no temporal restrictions at all !If you really think that you cna show that generation is NOT the better translation - givne the context that has been pointed out and without relying on the assumption that the prophecy could not have failed then please do start a new thread.And have you got any answers to the point that Luke 21:24 likely represents an addition to the story postdating the exile ? Because, as I have pointed out already that makes it completely unimpressive as a prophecy.

quote:

---

You are misreading my point. I am claiming that "all this will happen within the next 70 years" is more impressive than "all this will happen at some time in the future". Distance in time is not an issue - the issue is limits in when the events may occur so that we may know that those limits have been passed.

---

There are restrictions the restriction is (the nation of israel will not pass till all of the things he said are fulfilled) believe it or not that is a large restriction considering the hate for them in the past as buzsaw pointed out! "A timeframe does not matter to me, unless the the savior gives it one and in this case the savior only said that it would happen before he came and that the nation shalt not pass so that is all that matters.

quote:

---

No your interpretation clearly places no limits at all - not even the limit that all the events must happen withing a single unspecifed generation. So you are actually impressed with a prophecy BECAUSE you think that it places no temporal restrictions at all !

---

WRONG, I am not impressed with anything I could care if the savior predicted any events, it does not make me believe in him because he makes predictions or does not make predictions.

quote:

---

And have you got any answers to the point that Luke 21:24 likely represents an addition to the story postdating the exile ? Because, as I have pointed out already that makes it completely unimpressive as a prophecy.

---

Yes, you have the saviors words and then you have the exile happening.-Quiz[This message has been edited by Quiz, 10-22-2003][This message has been edited by Quiz, 10-22-2003]

Presumably you mean the Jewish people rather than the nation state. But that is still a very vague limit (and one that may as well be indefinite).And I see that you are already denying your own words. YOu cliamed to be impressed because Jesus - supposedly - predicted both near and distant events in the same prophecy while ignoring the fact that there is nothing to say which was which !Presumably your objection to my point is a simple insistence that Jesus must be accurately reported in Luke. However such an assertion is hardly an adequate resposne given that strong grounds for questionign such a claim have already been presented.

quote:

---

Presumably you mean the Jewish people rather than the nation state. But that is still a very vague limit (and one that may as well be indefinite).

---

I believe that jesus was simply trying to tell them signs for when his 2nd coming was going to happen, a warning persay, something to say get into gear because it is going to happen and then warning them of things and to not lose faith just because bad things are going to happen thats all.

quote:

---

And I see that you are already denying your own words. YOu cliamed to be impressed because Jesus - supposedly - predicted both near and distant events in the same prophecy while ignoring the fact that there is nothing to say which was which !

---

If you think that then you need to read my post again all I said was that it was awsome, for me to be impressed it requires more then for me to think it is awsome......(lol)
"The fact that he nails them both in luke 21 is awsome"

quote:

---

Presumably your objection to my point is a simple insistence that Jesus must be accurately reported in Luke. However such an assertion is hardly an adequate resposne given that strong grounds for questioning such a claim have already been presented.

---

WRONG!!-Quiz[This message has been edited by Quiz, 10-22-2003]

Come on sideline, chill out a bit and refrain from the personal comments.AdminBrian

SOoif I sum up your arguments you assert that Jesus was talking about events immeidatley preceding his return (which means that Jesus did NOT "nail" short term events, since the exile and return are separated by 1900 years).Secondly you are asserting that "awsome" doesn't mean "impressive". I think that this is so obivously a silly wordgame as to deserve no further comment.Finally you assert without explanation that "you have the saviors words and then you have the exile happen" is not based on the simple assumption that Luke's Gospel must be correct on this point.
Well then, what IS your argument ? because all you have offered is an assertion which you are apparently unwilling to explain or support

Hello Quiz & buzsaw,

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quiz

​

I would say No 1967 is not the cut off date.

​

Does that clear things up at all????

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by buzsaw

​

My position is that every item in verse 24 of this chapter has been fulfilled. True or false?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quiz

​

Luke 21:24: "And they (Jews) shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led captive into all the nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled."

​

I agree with that verse.

---

Luke 21:24 doesn't say that the Jerusalem will be trodden down of the Gentiles until Israel once again becomes a nation. It says that Jerusalem will be trodden down "until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled".If, then, you say that the 1967, six-day war was the fulfillment of this prophecy; you are, by necessity, saying that the "times of the Gentiles" came to an end in 1967.How would you define or characterize this dispensation known as "the times of the Gentiles"?Namaste'Amlodhi

It might be more accurate to say that Israel initiated hostilities. Another article at the same BBCi site titled Israel launches attack on neighbours includes these paragraphs: --Percy

Rei, your attempt to correlate nations who've risen and fallen in no way resembles the prophecy at hand. If the Chinese cited had been scattered world wide to all nations for nearly two milleniums and then have assembled themselves back to the land of China, still identifiable as distinct Chinamen and to again become a nation of Chinese you might make some sense. Bear in mind that all those centuries the Chinese were absent, other nationalities would have to move in to occupy the land to complete a fair analogy.So buz's response in a word.....GONG!

Hi Percy. And to add a comment to your informative post, Israel's survival depended on a pre-emptive strike. This was the only possible solution to the planned massive invasion from three directions. It's like if you have a tiger cornered and you have the high powered rifle, the tiger's only chance for survival is to spring and hit before the gun is fired.

Hi Amlodhi. Some good points you raise:1. First of all, please note my item #4 in my opening post of this thread. You will notice that I addressed this, carefully noting that there were two options open to the fulfillment of this prophecy. The option which has come to pass is the option which correlates with the prophecies of other Biblical prophets that Israel will be existing as a nation in what is known in escatology as the "latter days" or "end times."
2. The "times of the Gentiles" for all practical purposes have indeed ended in the city after scores of centuries of occupation. The gentile nations have tried to bully Israel into moving their capitol out of Jerusalem and a host of other demands, but Israel remains firmly in control of the city.Buz's opening post, item #4:

quote:

---

4. Gentile nations were to occupy the city after Jews gone, but there would come a time when Gentiles would no longer occupy the city, implying that either there would be nobody occupying the city after Gentile occupation or that the Jews would again return to the city.

---

------------------
Surely the Lord Jehovah will do nothing except he reveal the secret to his servants the prophets. Amos 3:7

Hi Buz It has also been considered as 25 years. Yes a lifetime, however, a lifetime and a generation is two entirely different things. A generation is ‘the average interval of time between the birth of parents and the birth of their offspring’. You can see for yourself that this theory of yours is invalid. Also, given that people lived for a much shorter time in Jesus’ day, a generation is likely to be much shorter than 40 years, probably closer to 20 years. Yes, so where is Jesus? More than 40 years has passed, are we moving the goalposts yet again? Ambiguity, in the Bible, surely not? Enough ambiguity to allow the believer a few get out clauses, it seems that this prophecy really isn’t that impressive, given the ambiguity of course.You do see what you are doing here Buz? Once the prophecy fails you change the criteria so as to give it another chance. Why not simply accept that Jesus was wrong? And come 2037 when this doesn’t happen you will move the goalposts again.However, a generation is not 70 years, if you want to make it 70 years then you got another whole load of problems with Bible chronology to fix. No one except the Father of course, whole is greater than Jesus, now that we have rejected this Trinity nonsense.It is likely that Jesus knows by now? IF Jesus was God he would have known all along, how can a God not know something?Brian.