You have the same problem as many other Christians posting on Religious Forums - you don't see the evidence that is shown to you. People often do not see what they have a stake in not seeing.
The Messianic prophecies have never been fulfilled. Biblical prophecy is what is called low quality prophecy, a topic I already covered for you.
High quality prophecy is specific, detailed and unambiguous. Optimally, the time and place are specified. It also needs to prophecy something unexpected, unlikely or unique - something that was not self-fulfilling and could not have been contrived or easily guessed. High quality prophecy must be accurate, it must be verified that it came before the event predicted, and that it was fulfilled completely.
Low quality prophecy, such as that from biblical scripture, horoscopes, psychics, and the like, is relatively vague and nonspecific, predicts trivial or predictable events, and may be self-fulling or written after the fact. That describes the messianic prophecy pretty well.
I gave you an example of what kind of prediction would be convincing from a movie some years back called Frequency, in which Dennis Quaid's character’s son contacts his father from his father's future by ham radio. To convince his father that he, the son, really is calling his father from his father's future - from 1998 back to 1969 - the son discusses the outcome of game five of what is for the father the as-yet unfinished 1969 World Series, which the father is watching live in 1969 on TV in a local pub
"
Well, game five was the big one. It turned in the bottom of the 6th. We were down 3-0. Cleon Jones gets hit on the foot - left a scuff mark on the ball. Clendenon comes up. The count goes to 2 and 2. High fastball. He nailed it. Weis slammed a solo shot in the 7th to tie. Jones and Swoboda scored in the 8th. We won, Pop."
Then the father watches it happen on TV.
That's what high quality "prophecy" of future events would look like, only it wouldn't be fiction. This would be a convincing demonstration of knowledge of future events, once fraud such as a tape-delayed broadcast of an already played game is ruled out. It's extremely specific and unexpected, preceded the event predicted, not self-fulfilling, and accompanied by no error. Biblical prophecy just can't compare to that, which is why it doesn't convince skeptics.Believers offer it as evidence of something profoundly unlikely, but what I see is something different.
Hearsay.
The evidence makes resurrection extremely unlikely, and it is not found in the Bible. Look around you. Are dead people revivifying? This just doesn't happen. Against that are words in an ancient manuscript, which imitate those in other manuscripts featuring similar stories of virgin births and resurrections attributed to many other legendary gods and heroes.
I told him all of that a few weeks ago when he wanted evidence of embellishment in the gospels, complete with comparisons of Luke and Matthew to Mark, and reference to the Q document. Not surprisingly, he said he didn't see any evidence.
Another faith-based thinker that can't see evidence.
Once somebody has accepted a notion on faith, a filter called a faith-based confirmation bias can form that allows in only that which seems to support the faith-based idea. Nothing else can be seen. No contradictory evidence gets through. I find this phenomenon endlessly fascinating. It also goes by the names antiprocessing, and Morton's demon.
As counterintuitive as this may seem, there is an excellent description of this phenomenon from geologist and former young earth creationist (YEC) Glenn Morton, now an old earth creationist (OEC), of his own experience encased in such a confirmation bias. He anthropomorphizes the experience by equating it to a demon like Maxwell's demon, one which sits at the portal to his mind and decides what will enter and what will not. This is from Morton:
"When I was a YEC, I had a demon that did similar things for me that Maxwell's demon did for thermodynamics. Morton's demon was a demon who sat at the gate of my sensory input apparatus and if and when he saw supportive evidence coming in, he opened the gate. But if he saw contradictory data coming in, he closed the gate. In this way, the demon allowed me to believe that I was right and to avoid any nasty contradictory data.
"The demon makes its victim feel very comfortable as there is no contradictory data in view ... one thing that those unaffected by this demon don't understand is that the victim is not lying about the data. The demon only lets his victim see what the demon wants him to see and thus the victim, whose sensory input is horribly askew, feels that he is totally honest about the data."
I find Morton sincere and credible. If he says that he was blind to this process, as counterintuitive as that claim may seem, I believe him. And this is how I now view most religious apologists telling me that they see no evidence for biological evolution, for example, even when it is handed to them. I count you and
@Spartan among them.
Neither of you sees evidence that the demon doesn't want you to see. From their distorted vantage point, such people find the rational skeptic's position unbelievable and insincere. They think were just intransigently resisting God, inventing contradictions that aren't there, refusing to see a god that is so obvious to them.
This is why I don't call you people liars. If Morton is right, that is an unfair description of what is going on in the apologist's head. He simply doesn't see evidence that is there, and also find evidence in support of his faith-based beliefs that isn't there.
Not needing evidence is not the same as not having any. You can't see evidence, but there is plenty that supports dismissing Christianity.
I dismiss any idea based in faith.
No. I told you that I reject faith-based thought and anything derived from it. Only scientists that do not believe by faith, or those that do who can learn to compartmentalize their religious beliefs and exclude them from their professional work are able to make lasting and useful contributions to science.
As soon as gods creep into the thinking, you get pseudoscience, as with the ID people. Their work is sterile. It has produced no evidence of an intelligent designer, but has been repeatedly embarrassed by making claims of irreducible complexity in biological systems such as the eye, the flagellum, the hemostatic cascade, and the immune system, each of which has been shown to be a false claim.
Newton only thought clearly when he left his faith-based assumptions out of his work. His work in areas like mathematics, optics, celestial mechanics, and gravitation, which employ's no faith-based assumptions, was as useful then as it is now.It's exactly the same science an unbeliever would do.
But living on the cusp of modernity, Newton also had a foot in medieval traditions like alchemy, a faith based system. His work there is only of historical interest, and never had any other value. Faith is the enemy of reason.