Check it out and get back to me
Nice that you leave out the vast majority of the article, which is about how those dates are incorrect... you sent me to an article that backs my position...
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Bible Prophecys coming true
- Thread starter Ryan2065
- Start date
JerryL
Well-Known Member
And you repeat the shotgun approach retort. You just plop down a bunch of references.
I agree that the Jews scattered. I agree that everyone has scattered. I don't accept this as a useful prophecy because it's too ordinary (I predict that, in the future, Floridians will scatter all over the globe).
Oh I am making my case...
It does indeed...
According to Religioustolerance.com (http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb3.htm) Paul died in around 65 A.D. this is echoed by wikipedia(64-67) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_of_Tarsus) and most other places I have seen...
Acts, it can be logicall deduced, was written before the death of Paul, as Paul has not yet died in the end, this line of thought lead to the idea that Acts was written, given the latest date of death, 66 A.D. Acts is the second part of the series, meaning Luke was written before that... at least 65 A.D. putting it well ahead of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
JerryL
Well-Known Member
1. You need to establish that Luke, as it exists in our oldest record, was written prior to Acts.
2. You need to establish that acts was written before Paul died.
3. Establish that Paul's death predates the temple's destruction (both are in 66)
4. Estbalish that Luke predicts the temple's destruction specifically.
Let me elaborate on 4 (having bothered now to look at the passage):
As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it [the city] and said, "If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peacebut now it is hidden from your eyes. The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God's coming to you."
This is a prediction of the destruction of Jeruselam, killing all the children and leaving "not one stone on another" in Jeruselam. Do I really need to refer you to structures older than 70AD to establish that this prophecy did not come to pass either?
Those would be stones, laid before Jesus's arrival, which are one on top of the other in Jerusealam
BTW (and this is my favorit part) The wall pictured is part of the temple
Oops. I was reading the wrong false-prophecy. Here's Matthew 24:
1Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2"Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."
OK. Matthew is not Luke. So your Paul dating conversation is irrellevent (and how I got confused as to your claim). So let's discuss Matthew 24.
Firstly Not all of the Temple was destroyed by the Romans. Again, for reference, I send you to my pic of the wailing wall (the outer wall of the temple).
Secondly, Matthew talks about a great deal more than the temple's destruction. Let's look:
At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. 31And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.
There's our end of the world with Jesus in the sky and all the nations of the world mourning (this is part of the same prophecy).
But maybe they are seperated by time. Maybe there's 3000 years between. Let's see if Matthew comments on that:
I tell you the truth, this generation[e] will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.
OK. well there goes that prophecy. It seems that he predicted an awful lot, including the complete destruction of the temple; and there was indeed a partial destruction of the temple... though it occured after that generation passed (as you were so kind to point out, Paul was dead). But hey, that's no reason to take a small part of a large prophecy and point out that it almost happend sort-of.
joeboonda
Well-Known Member
The Temple was destroyed and the Jews scattered just as Jesus said. That cannot be denied. The Wailing Wall was part of the retaining wall supporting the temple, it was not the temple itself. The temple itself WAS destroyed, not one stone left upon another as there was a fire and gold had melted between the stones, the Roman soldiers taking them apart one by one in order to get to the gold.
JerryL
Well-Known Member
I disagree. There are two stones, one upon the other, left of the temple (for example the wailing wall). How come you ignored the rest of the prophecy (and my post), that before that generation passed from the Earth, "the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other."
It's part of the same prophecy. Are you asserting that this also happened?
It's part of the same prophecy. Are you asserting that this also happened?
Bennettresearch
Politically Incorrect
You have done nothing other than prove my point JerryL.
It doesn't matter when a book was written, only if it is accurate. Just because the Base that the Temple was built on is still there, the Temple and other buildings are gone. To pick hairs about this is entirely ludicrous. If the Temple were still there, then you would have a point. Ruins are just that, ruins. The Temple was destroyed even if the prophecy was slightly overstated, which can happen when predicting the future.
Just as one cannot take a minor point and prove the whole, one cannot take a minor point and disprove the whole. I too am done here because the arguments are arbitrary and the contentions are based upon a misguided premise JerryL.
See Ya.
It doesn't matter when a book was written, only if it is accurate. Just because the Base that the Temple was built on is still there, the Temple and other buildings are gone. To pick hairs about this is entirely ludicrous. If the Temple were still there, then you would have a point. Ruins are just that, ruins. The Temple was destroyed even if the prophecy was slightly overstated, which can happen when predicting the future.
Just as one cannot take a minor point and prove the whole, one cannot take a minor point and disprove the whole. I too am done here because the arguments are arbitrary and the contentions are based upon a misguided premise JerryL.
See Ya.
JerryL
Well-Known Member
That depends on what conclusions you wish to draw. If you wish to conclude that something makes accurate predictions, you must establish that it's accurate and written before the event. Otherwise it's simply a history book.
The prophecy is either rigt or wrong. Had it simply said "the temple will be destroied", then I would agree that poining out an outer-wall might be nit-picking; but it clearly says "not one stone upon another". It goes outof its way to say every bit will be completely destroied, and that's not true.
Nor does the rest of the prophecy (any of the useful parts anyway) describe events that actually happened.
It was wrong.. plain and simple. The Bible is full of hundreds of prohpecies. Trhoughout the following 2000 years, it's not surprising that events similar to parts of some occured. That's not useful.
You have prophecies which are entierly inaccurate, and others (like this one) which are mostly inaccurate.
- The temple will be destroied completely
- All the nations will go to war
- Jesus will appear in the sky
- All the nations will mourn
- The elect will be drawn into heaven
- all before that generation passed.
The first one *almost* happened, but not quite. To the second: there were some wars (there were wars when the statement was made). The rest is completely false.
Of course you can. The claim that an inerrant God made inerrant claims can be disproven by showing a claim errant.
Your claim of nitpicking is simply false. The reality is you are cherry-picking. Out of the 6 points of the prophecy, only 1/3rd even sort-of occured, and half of those (wars) wasn't even a prophecy as it was ongoing.
Worse, Luke offers a variant of this prophecy, where all of Jeruselam would be destroied. It was not, and is stlil there today. So again, an entirely false prophecy.
You are taking thousands of claims, ignoring the majority that are completely wrong and trying to conform histry to the few remaining (actually, most of the prophecies are just entirely unevidenced outside the BIble).
Pick an integer between 1 and 10. I'm gonna make 10 predictions, that you are thinking of each number ("1" in the first prediction, "2" in the second, etc). One will be right. Of course, to be consistant, you can't nit-pick that the other 9 were wrong. So now I've proven I'm God and can see the future (by your standard).
Mujahid Mohammed
Well-Known Member
I am curious and please forgive me for my ignorance but is it not true that inorder for a prophecy to be true must all statements in the prophecy come true inoder for it to be fulfilled. Is half of the prophecy came true but the other part did not does that mean it came true. Now it is to my understanding from what I have been told by certain Christian scholars and evangelists that this prophecy is referring to Jesus. But I have to ask when was Jesus(pbuh) ever called Emmanuel in his life time. And why did they name him Jesus if his name according to prophecy is to Emmanuel.MusicProducer said:
JerryL
Well-Known Member
Actually, his name is YSH (Yeshua, pronounced closest to Joshua). "Jesus" is the English of the Latin of the Greek of the Aramaic.
This prophecy suffers as well from the fact that you can't even verify the parts claimed true. There's no independant verificaion of Jesus's birt, much less the nature of his mother's good name at the time.
This prophecy suffers as well from the fact that you can't even verify the parts claimed true. There's no independant verificaion of Jesus's birt, much less the nature of his mother's good name at the time.
joeboonda
Well-Known Member
In Luke, note the mrking at verse 25, this is a different prophecy altogether, the generation that would not pass is the generation that would see these things, NOT the generation of the destruction of the temple. The signs in the sun, moon, and stars...distress of nations, the sea and waves roaring, Men's hearts failing them in fear, the powers of heaven being shaken, etc. THEN shall Jesus appear in a cloud with power and great glory. This is a future prophecy, has not happenned yet. Look at the next verses, saying behold the fig tree, and all the trees, when they short forth you know summer is near, so when these signs happen you know the kindom of God is at hand. THEN it says this generation shall not pass til all be fulfilled, then it says Heaven and earth shall pass away but my word shall not pass away. This is the end time, a different prophecy thatn in verse 24 entirely, you cannot lump them together. And you will see, this prophecy will be fulfilled too, possibly even in our lifetime.
JerryL
Well-Known Member
"this generation shall not pass" is in Matthew, not Luke; and it's in direct response to the question of when "these things" will happen.
I see zero support for that claim. Matthew 24 says:
- The temple will be thrown down.
- God will appear in the sky
- It will happen in this generation
You assert it's future? That would not be in that generation, and it would be nigh-impossible to throw-down, in the future, an already demolished temple.
You assert it's from the time of the deciples? Then it fails due basically to a failure of the rapture to appear.
Either way, it's wrong.
So matthew 24 is a different prophect than Matthew 24?
You don't seem aware of where you are quoting. You seem to think that the temple throwdown is in Mattehew and the "this generation" is in Luke (or the other way around). It's one, continuious narrative in Matthew.
It's also wrong... which is the more important part.
Deut 13:1
Well-Known Member
Let's look at what the Hebrew has to say...MusicProducer said:
Isaiah 7:14 לָכֵן יִתֵּן אֲדֹנָי הוּא, לָכֶם--אוֹת: הִנֵּה הָעַלְמָה, הָרָה וְיֹלֶדֶת בֵּן, וְקָרָאת שְׁמוֹ, עִמָּנוּ אֵל
I hate to burst your buble, but Alma doesn't mean virgin, it means young woman. So let's read a better translation...
Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Now, I'm sure all your Christian bibles will tell you it means virgin, but I can tell you this, all Rabbinical scholars will tell you it translates as a young woman or maiden.
Oy vey! :banghead3 Not Isaiah 7:14 again ...Binyamin said:
i would say that the feet of iron and clay is where we are now, so we are waiting for Gods heavenly kingdom goverment to crush and put an end to all of the manmade goverments Daniel 2;44the iron and clay picture the politically devided world in the time of the endjoeboonda said:
the bible prophecy is well along in its final stages , the image in daniel has gone through all of the stages of the metals we are in the last days of man ruling himself independant of God , Jesus was made king of the heavenly kingdom goverment in the heavens in 1914 ,and he is ready to swing into action at the command from Jehovah God .this image is all about Jehovahs universal sovreignty and it will do away with manmade govermentsJerryL said:
(Revelation 19:15) And out of his mouth there protrudes a sharp long sword, that he may strike the nations with it, and he will shepherd them with a rod of iron. He treads too the winepress of the anger of the wrath of God the Almighty
(Isaiah 60:12) For any nation and any kingdom that will not serve you will perish; and the nations themselves will without fail come to devastation.
(Psalm 110:5) Jehovah himself at your right hand Will certainly break kings to pieces on the day of his anger........ but hey for those who are willing to recognize Jesus as king of Gods heavenly kingdom , they will think it is great to be ruled by the heavenly kingdom and its king Jesus christ
MdmSzdWhtGuy
Well-Known Member
Wow. Looks like Jerry has been fighting a one man battle here. I have just read the entire thread, but will refrain from commenting on everything that jumped out at me, as I don't feel like writing War and Peace at the moment.may said:
Re: the quote above. First thing that comes to mind is, that for most nations of this world, there are no kings. What would have been a much more impressive prediction would have been if instead of kings, they had mentioned Presidents, Parlaiments, or some other political entity which is common in our modern world, but which would have been completely unknown to human writers in the first or second century A.D.
People have been claiming to be prophets for millenia, and they will continue to do so. There is a long history to the fine art of prophesy. There is also a long history to fortune telling, and astrology. I mention these other arts because they rely on a similar devise for their perpetuation. That lyric and logical devise is quite simply - vague-ness.
As has been done previously by detractors on this thread, it is quite simple to make prophesies about the future. As a matter of fact, it is quite fun. "Wait a minute, I am getting a vision . . . I see the future. . . it is a black comedian . . . and he . . . is . . . making fun of the way white people dance." Hmm, lets sit back and see if I am a prophet. I bet I am. It would be equally easy to predict war in the future. Pretty safe prophesy there.
Even the great Nostradamus, who admittadly seems quite accurate in some of his quattrains, is guilty of the vague-ness that I mention. Equally guilty are the after the fact apologists, tho, who come along and want to change the meaning of words and phrases to fit with events occuring after the original prophesy. Someone earlier is saying that the word "world" in a given prophesy only meant the known world. Well that is awfully convenient, isn't it?
I guess the next time I place a bet, I can come along after the fact and say, "No Mr. Bookie, when I said the Cowboys were going to cover the spread, by the Cowboys, I meant the Lions." . . . "Can I have my money please?"
Then again, there is the alternative devise to vaguary. Just make a whole heap of predictions, and there is a good chance some of them will come true. Some of them may even come true with striking similarity to the original prediction/prophesy.
Given enough time to do so, I will guarantee to predict the winner of the next World Series. I can even predict the number of games it will take them to win it, and against whom they will play. Pretty specific stuff, huh? But I can easily guarantee that result by individually predicting all possible outcomes (game numbers, teams, etc. . . ) long in advance, then later coming out and claiming I prophesied it.
It is when you combine the devices of vague-ness and volume of predictions, along with some faithful after the fact apologists that you can make some marginal claims to prophesy. However, when you break it down, look at it logically, it is much easier to explain away prophesy, fortune telling, soothsaying, astrology and the like by simple logic and probability.
Wait, I am getting another vision. . . I predict someone will read this . . . and . . . disagree with it. Lets sit back and see if I am a prophet after all.
B.