Biblical prophesy

[74x12]

You don't need to believe the Bible to understand it. In fact believing it is often counterproductive. I have seen believers go to ridiculous lengths to explain away errors in the Bible, instead of owning up to the obvious.

Circular reasoning.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Circular reasoning.

You should not use phrases that you do not understand.

Do you have to believe the Grecian myths to understand them? Do you need to believe the Norse myths to understand them? I don't think many people would make that error. Why do Christians always think that others have to believe their myths to understand them? They seem to forget that many atheists use to be Christians and became atheists due to a better understanding of the Bible.

If anyone is guilty of circular reasoning here it is you.

 

[dianaiad]

I just saw this video by Aron Ra where he goes over why the prophecies of the Bible fail:

He points out quite correctly that to be valid a prophesy must be clear and have a set date. Given enough time any "prophecy" that is vague enough will be fulfilled. Quite often more than once. Lowering Bible prophecies to the level of "you will see a red car" would make all prophecy worthless.

You can watch the video if you like, but it is not a prerequisite to discuss prophecy here.

What is the question for debate, here?
If the question is about biblical prophecies and whether they comply with the assumption you have stated, then I would ask you...who said prophecies must be clear and have a set date?

I mean, really. That IS begging the question.

Or...is the question whether prophecies must be clear and have a set date?

If it's that, how the heck are we supposed to establish something like that?

 

[Subduction Zone]

What is the question for debate, here?
If the question is about biblical prophecies and whether they comply with the assumption you have stated, then I would ask you...who said prophecies must be clear and have a set date?

I mean, really. That IS begging the question.

Or...is the question whether prophecies must be clear and have a set date?

What do you mean 'who said'? Unclear prophecies can be "fulfilled" multiple times. That makes them failures. They are simply likely events and not prophecies. And given enough time almost anything will come true. That is why a time limit is needed to. It is not a matter of "who" it is a matter of "what" and the "what" is logic.

And please, learn what "begging the question" means.

If it's that, how the heck are we supposed to establish something like that?

What are you asking here? My point is that if people want to try to use prophecies as "proof" of Jesus then those prophecies have to follow logical rules. Otherwise you just have the saying of Nostradamus all over again.

 

[dianaiad]

What do you mean 'who said'?

I believe the question is clear and simple enough. "Who Said?"

Who is the authority that gets to dictate stuff like this?

Unclear prophecies can be "fulfilled" multiple times. That makes them failures.

.........or wild successes, depending upon ones POV.

They are simply likely events and not prophecies. And given enough time almost anything will come true. That is why a time limit is needed to. It is not a matter of "who" it is a matter of "what" and the "what" is logic.

And please, learn what "begging the question" means.

I used the term correctly. Perhaps you should look it up?

What are you asking here? My point is that if people want to try to use prophecies as "proof" of Jesus then those prophecies have to follow logical rules. Otherwise you just have the saying of Nostradamus all over again.

Uhmn....wait. Where in the OP did you mention 'proving Jesus?" I mean, the video concentrates on the bible, but in your OP you stated that we didn't have to watch the video, because it wasn't a prerequisite to discussing prophecy. Therefore one can reasonably conclude that you wish to discuss prophecy in general, not prophecy in regards to, specifically, 'proving Jesus."

It seems to me, then, that you are moving the goal posts a bit here.

(shrug) just as a disclaimer, and this might sound odd given that I'm a dyed in the wool theist and all, I was only able to watch the first couple of minutes or so of the video (time constraints) and I agreed with what he had to say. The bible is NOT a science text and was never meant to be one.

I'll probably watch the rest of it later, but since you didn't make doing so a prerequisite for discussing prophecy......

When did you decide that you only wanted to talk about prophecy that 'proved Jesus,' and again, who established the parameters you insist we use?

And why should we pay attention?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe the question is clear and simple enough. "Who Said?"

Who is the authority that gets to dictate stuff like this?



.........or wild successes, depending upon ones POV.



I used the term correctly. Perhaps you should look it up?



Uhmn....wait. Where in the OP did you mention 'proving Jesus?" I mean, the video concentrates on the bible, but in your OP you stated that we didn't have to watch the video, because it wasn't a prerequisite to discussing prophecy. Therefore one can reasonably conclude that you wish to discuss prophecy in general, not prophecy in regards to, specifically, 'proving Jesus."

It seems to me, then, that you are moving the goal posts a bit here.

(shrug) just as a disclaimer, and this might sound odd given that I'm a dyed in the wool theist and all, I was only able to watch the first couple of minutes or so of the video (time constraints) and I agreed with what he had to say. The bible is NOT a science text and was never meant to be one.

I'll probably watch the rest of it later, but since you didn't make doing so a prerequisite for discussing prophecy......

When did you decide that you only wanted to talk about prophecy that 'proved Jesus,' and again, who established the parameters you insist we use?

And why should we pay attention?

Excessively breaking up a post is rude. Try again. There were only two response to your longer screed. Three is the max.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I see that you do not understand your errors.

 

[Kenny]

I am not doing your homework for you.

if the supposed evidence is out there then why can't you find any?

If you were interested, you would have done a simple search.,. Why put effort on someone who doesn't really care?

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

actually it has
Bryant Wood has shown considerable evidence

Isn't he the guy who thought he found chariot wheels in the Red Sea?

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

If you were interested, you would have done a simple search.,. Why put effort on someone who doesn't really care?

That's not how this works. You make the claim, you provide the evidence.

Otherwise anyone could claim any ridiculous thing, and say "now you go prove it".

 

[Subduction Zone]

You can't learn by using the ostrich defense.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If you were interested, you would have done a simple search.,. Why put effort on someone who doesn't really care?

I have done the search. No credible sources could be found. Look at how terribly you have failed here in supporting your claims. I am open to valid reason evidence, all that you have to do is to find some.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Isn't he the guy who thought he found chariot wheels in the Red Sea?

Nah, you are conflating him with Ron Wyatt. Wyatt was a pretend archaeologist. Bryant Wood is a real archaeologist, but a failed one:
Bryant G. Wood - Wikipedia

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You can't learn by using the ostrich defense.

And just what position do you think I'm defending?

 

[Subduction Zone]

actually it has
Bryant Wood has shown considerable evidence

I already responded to this when I explained that it was off topic since it does not real with prophecy. But I did some digging for @Armoured and found that he was a failed archaeologist. His dating for the proposed city of Jericho was off by a significant amount:

Bryant G. Wood - Wikipedia

"Wood has attempted to redate the destruction of Jericho City IV from the end of the Middle Bronze Age (c. 1550 B.C.) to the end of the Late Bronze I (c. 1400 BC). He has put forward four lines of argument to support his conclusion. Not a single one of these arguments can stand up to scrutiny. On the contrary, there is strong evidence to confirm Kathleen Kenyon's dating of City IV to the Middle Bronze Age. Wood's attempt to equate the destruction of City IV with the Israelite conquest of Jericho must therefore be rejected.[6]"

 

[Subduction Zone]

And just what position do you think I'm defending?

The Exodus myth. Perhaps an honest approach to the problem would help. You should try it some time.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The Exodus myth.

Please quote my position on the Exodus myth.

The fact of the matter is this:

you simply engage in cheap, sophomoric posturing without a clue anent my position on the Exodus.​

 

[Subduction Zone]

Please quote my position on the Exodus myth.

The fact of the matter is this:

you simply engage in cheap, sophomoric posturing without a clue anent my position on the Exodus.​

You appear to be projecting. Where was I ever guilty of such an act? I can show where you acted that way multiple times.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You appear to be projecting. Where was I ever guilty of such an act? I can show where you acted that way multiple times.

Nice deflection. Now, once again.please quote my position on the Exodus myth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nice deflection. Now, once again.please quote my position on the Exodus myth.

So are you now claiming that you were just being a jerk when you posted this:

"Just out of curiosity, what are your three favorite texts on Syro-Palestinian archaeology?"

Not quite as bad as asking for favorite texts on why the Earth is not flat, but in the running.