• 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!

ONCE AGAIN! Facts in the Bible is supported by archaeology.

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
No, the Tyre prophesy had to do with the island of Tyre, hence the name.

Somehow Zeke got offended by the island's leader so he predicted its and his doom. The king of Tyre died of old age eventually, and Tyre itself is still there.

how did you get so confused?

Another example of the "failed prophecy" was that the Messiah
must come from Bethlehem (recall King Herod slaying the infants
at Bethlehem story?)
When the Jews pointed out that Jesus was a Nazarene he did
not answer this point. But the Gospels tell us Jesus was born
in Bethlehem and he was of the tribe of Judah. Those who
loved him called him who he was, the "Son of David."
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Again, haven't heard of this, and haven't looked into it.
I would make a suggestion - this stuff came from a web
site which looked at failed prophecies? To be honest with
yourself you would have to look at successful prophecies
and ask yourself "How come? What are the chances?"
and then... study in depth those prophecies that people
think have "failed."
And by this I mean the so-called failed prophecy of the
Messianic King, ruler and conqueror. If you honestly seek
to read ALL the Messiah prophecies you see that the Jews
are not being honest in judging Jesus - because, as you
know, "it's complicated."
I am unaware of any actual "successful prophecies". The few that supposedly came true tended to be the same sort of prophesy that Nostradamus made. And no, I did not get this from a website, though they tend to list this since it fails so blatantly. I heard about this one from several sources before I checked it out myself. It also led me to realize that many "apologists" are just liars for Jesus. Sounds a bit harsh but it is true. In this case one not only has to lie about Tyre and its history, but one must even lie about what the Bible says.

Here is an excellent article on how the prophecy fails:

Biblical Errancy: Ezekiel's Prophecy of Tyre: a failed prophecy
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Another example of the "failed prophecy" was that the Messiah
must come from Bethlehem (recall King Herod slaying the infants
at Bethlehem story?)
When the Jews pointed out that Jesus was a Nazarene he did
not answer this point. But the Gospels tell us Jesus was born
in Bethlehem and he was of the tribe of Judah. Those who
loved him called him who he was, the "Son of David."
And we know that those stories fail as well. Matthew especially shows that it was written to fulfill prophecy, not that Jesus fulfilled prophecy. Luke has a roughly ten year gestation period for Marry.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
And we know that those stories fail as well. Matthew especially shows that it was written to fulfill prophecy, not that Jesus fulfilled prophecy. Luke has a roughly ten year gestation period for Marry.

So how did "they" write the prophecy of the destruction]
of Israel and the exile of the Jews for millennia?
How did "they" factor in that Daniel said the Messiah
will come while the temple still stands?
How did they factor in Isaiah speaking of two exiles
and two returns of the Jews to their home lands?
Did the Jews just decide to be a blessing to the
world (arts, science, commerce etc..) to make the
bible prophecies of this come true?
It beggars my mind.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
I am unaware of any actual "successful prophecies". The few that supposedly came true tended to be the same sort of prophesy that Nostradamus made. And no, I did not get this from a website, though they tend to list this since it fails so blatantly. I heard about this one from several sources before I checked it out myself. It also led me to realize that many "apologists" are just liars for Jesus. Sounds a bit harsh but it is true. In this case one not only has to lie about Tyre and its history, but one must even lie about what the Bible says.

Here is an excellent article on how the prophecy fails:

Biblical Errancy: Ezekiel's Prophecy of Tyre: a failed prophecy

The prophecies concerning the Messiah as Redeemer,
rejected of his own people, but embraced by the Gentiles,
is a fulfilled prophecy.

Period - get that straight.

And this is the most important prophecy in the bible.

The prophecies that Israel would twice lose their land
but eventually return to it have been fulfilled.
No Nostradamus here - the only thing missing in these
bible prophecies were dates.
 
Last edited:

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
And we know that those stories fail as well. Matthew especially shows that it was written to fulfill prophecy, not that Jesus fulfilled prophecy. Luke has a roughly ten year gestation period for Marry.

And who revealed to you the rubbish that Luke has a roughly ten year gestation period for Marry. I suppose you meant Mary? One of your atheist scholars I suspect.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Rabbinic sources state that the First Temple stood for 410 years and, based on the 2nd-century work Seder Olam Rabbah, place construction in 832 BCE and destruction in 422 BCE, 165 years later than secular estimates.

The greater majority of biblical students today, accept the secular date of 587 B.C., as the correct date for the destruction of the temple and reject completely the Rabbinic dates as to the construction and destruction of the temple and yet, some like yourself, believe the erroneous Rabbinic period for the existence of the temple, to be 410 years, thereby erroneously believing that the temple was constructed in 997 B.C..

Whereas, the Jewish historian Josephus, says that "the temple was burnt four hundred and seventy years, six months and 10 days after its construction, revealing that it was constructed in 1057 B.C.

In the year that Moses died, [Forty years after the exodus] Deuteronomy 29: 5-8; Moses said to the people; “For forty years (since the exodus) the Lord led you through the desert, and your clothes and sandals never wore out, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . .King Sihon of Hesbon and King Og of Bashan came out to fight against us . But we defeated them, took their land, and divided it among the tribes of Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh. This all happened in the fortieth year after the Exodus.

Three hundred years later, Jephthah, the elected leader of the Israelites, went to war against, and defeated the King of Ammon, who attempted to reclaim the land that was lost 300 years previously. See Judges 11. This happened 340 years after the exodus. Jephthah led Israel for 6 years and died 346 years after the Exodus. (Judges 12: 7)

Ibzan succeeded Jephthah and he led Israel for 7 years and he died 353 years after the exodus. After Ibzan, Elon led Israel for 10 years and died 363 years after the exodus. After Elon Abdon led Israel for 8 years and died 371 years after the exodus, See Judges 12: 8-15.

The next leader was the prophet ELI, who led Israel for 40 years and died when the Philistines defeated the Israelites and captured the Covenant Box, 411 years after the exodus, (1 Samuel 4: 18.) The Spiritual and temporal reigns of Samuel and Samson are believed to have overlapped, and for the next 20 years the five Philistine kings ruled Israel until they were killed by Samson, who for 20 years was the thorn in the side of the Philistines, while Samuel was the Israelites spiritual guide and judge for that twenty years from the death of Eli.

Then came Saul, who, according to Young’s Analytical Concordance ruled Israel for 40 years. Saul was followed by David who reigned for 40 years, followed by Solomon, who, in the fourth year of his reign began construction of the temple, which was completed 7 years later in the 11th year of his reign, which Temple stood for 470 years 6 months and 10 days, before being destroyed in 587 B.C.,

587+470+11+40+40+20+40+8+10+7+6+300+40=1573 B.C. According to this, Moses, who was born 80 years before the exodus, was actually born in 1653 B.C.

Josephus dates the exodus as occurring in 1567 B.C. 6 years later than 1573 B.C., and some 40 years before the destruction of Jericho.
Do you have table of dates of reigns for the kingdom of Judah (from Rehoboam to the fall of Jerusalem)? Or your source(s)? .

I am asking because I don’t think your calculations will reach 587 BCE, if the completion of the temple occurred in 1057 BCE, as you have claimed.

There are few independent sources, which (1 & 2 Kings) will have to coincide know historical events, for certain kings to be contemporary.

So if you can provide the table of the kings of Judah, that will be helpful in your position.

PS

I have never used Seder Olam Rabbah. I preferred to do my own research and my own calculations. So your claim of using rabbinic dates is a false one, a strawman.

Also, I don’t include the years given in the Judges, because this book (Judges) over-complicated the calculation, and that make it (again, Judges) unreliable.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
The prophecies concerning the Messiah as Redeemer,
rejected of his own people, but embraced by the Gentiles,
is a fulfilled prophecy.

Period - get that straight.

And this is the most important prophecy in the bible.
But the messianic prophecy also stated that the messiah would bring back or reunite all 12 tribes, and rule this new Israel.

Jesus didn’t meet or fulfill this important prophecy.

Another is that he would be high priest and high king. Jesus was never king; no throne, no scepter, no crown. I would not count the crown of thorn that he die as actual crown.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
And who revealed to you the rubbish that Luke has a roughly ten year gestation period for Marry. I suppose you meant Mary? One of your atheist scholars I suspect.

I can see that you are not a scholar of the Bible at all. The author of Luke has Jesus being born both in roughly 4 BCE and 6 CE. Didn't you know that? He made up an inconsistent story.

Tell me, when do you think that the author of Luke has Jesus born?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
The prophecies concerning the Messiah as Redeemer,
rejected of his own people, but embraced by the Gentiles,
is a fulfilled prophecy.

Period - get that straight.

And this is the most important prophecy in the bible.

The prophecies that Israel would twice lose their land
but eventually return to it have been fulfilled.
No Nostradamus here - the only thing missing in these
bible prophecies were dates.
No, at best that is reinterpretation after the fact.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
So how did "they" write the prophecy of the destruction]
of Israel and the exile of the Jews for millennia?
How did "they" factor in that Daniel said the Messiah
will come while the temple still stands?
How did they factor in Isaiah speaking of two exiles
and two returns of the Jews to their home lands?
Did the Jews just decide to be a blessing to the
world (arts, science, commerce etc..) to make the
bible prophecies of this come true?
It beggars my mind.
A lot of that was not prophecy, it was history. Add in the reinterpretation and there are no fulfilled prophecy.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
No, at best that is reinterpretation after the fact.

This is the prophecy in a nutshell - compiled from all the books
of the Old Testament.
Messiah is presented as two figures - Redeemer and King.
To reign with the King one must be Redeemed.

The Redeemer will be born as a Jew, of the house of David
and the tribe of Judah - the son who offered himself to redeem
his brother. The Redeemer himself will be the lamb slain, his
blood to atone for his people. He will suffer, be judged and be
crucified (pierced hands and feet) by his own people.
He will come while the temple stands, and fulfill the symbolism
of the temple in himself. He will be believed upon by the Gentiles.
He will look back on his suffering and be pleased.
The Jewish nation will then lose their temple and their nation,
and be exiled throughout the whole world, until the Gentiles
time is finished. Then the Jews will come out of the nations that
were their graves,rebuild their ruined nation and live in peace,
despite the nations around seeking to destroy it.

Please explain how you interpret all this after the fact?
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
I can see that you are not a scholar of the Bible at all. The author of Luke has Jesus being born both in roughly 4 BCE and 6 CE. Didn't you know that? He made up an inconsistent story.

Tell me, when do you think that the author of Luke has Jesus born?

Most people who wish to attack and denigrate the Holy scriptures, will say that the Roman census which was taken in Israel at the time of the birth of Jesus, was the census of Quirinius, and of course it wasn’t.

In the KJV, which is riddled with translation errors….. In Luke 2:1; 2: 2; 2: 3; 2: 5. And Acts 5: 37; the Greek word “Apographe,” is erroneously translated as “TAX.” But according to Young’s Analytical Concordance, it means, “A writing off or Register.”

The Amplified version…. Luke 2: 1; In those days it occurred that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that the whole Roman Empire should be REGISTERED. Luke 2: 2; This was the first enrolment, and it was made when Quirinius was “hegemon” in Syria. Luke 2: 3; And all the people were going to be REGISTED, each to his own city or town.

The Living New Testament….. Luke 2: 1; About this time Caesar Augustus, the Roman Emperor, decreed that a census should be taken throughout the nation. Luke 2: 2; this census was taken when Quirinius was “hegemon” in Syria. Luke 2: 3; Everyone was required to return to his ancestral home for this ‘REGISTATION.”

RSV…… 2: 1; In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be ENROLLED. Luke 2: 2; This was the first ENROLLMENT, when Quirinius was “hegemon” in Syria.

Luke does not specifically state what the Roman office held by Quirinius actually was when the first registration or enrolment was made in Judaea in 6 B.C. But in reference to the position he held, Luke uses the Greek word “hegemoneuontos tes Surias Kureniou.’ “hegemon,” Which the authors of the English bible have translated “Governor.” Such as Luke 3: 1; Where it is written in most English Bibles, that Pontius Pilate was “Governor” of Judea, whereas Tacitus speaks of Pontius Pilate as the “Procurator.”

Likewise, Luke’s reference to Felix, has been translated as ‘Governor’ of Caesarea, in Acts 23:24; also verses 26 and 33, then again in Acts 24: 1, and verse 10 and also Acts 26: 30.

A procurator is an agent having power of attorney or a Roman official acting as a financial agent of the Emperor or the administrator of a minor province.

[Wikipedia]…….”Marcus Antonius Felix was the Roman procurator of Judaea, in succession to Ventidius Cumanus.” So the word “hegemon,” used by Luke, could apply to any Roman official holding a leading position of authority, such as procurator, Vicegerent or Governor in any of the Roman provinces, including Syria.

Around the year of 6 B. C., the Governors of Galatia and Syria were involved in the construction of a system of military roads and garrison cities. They had a major problem. The Homonadenses had taken control of a Roman client nation located in the Taurus mountains which traversed the centre of these operations. Syria and Galatia would normally be required to intervene but Galatia had no army and Varus had no military experience. Whereas Quirinius was a general and famous for having quelled the Marmaridea rebellion in Cilicia (Libya) in BC.14. Quirinius was the one who Caesar Augustus sent to conquer the Homonadenses nation. This campaign had to have been implemented from Syria. It necessarily follows that in 6-5 B.C., General Quirinius dealt with the Homonadenses situation as Augustus' vicegerent, whilst Varus attended to the internal administration of Syria.

As Herod the Great died in 4 B.C. believing that Jesus was over 12 months old and ordering the death of all the male children two years and below, or all who were born in and after 6 B.C., we can now safely assume that Jesus was born in 6 B.C., when the census of ENROLLMENT was taken in Judaea, while General Quirinius in 6-5 B.C., was dealing with the Homonadenses in the Taurus Mountains, which marked the northern limit of the Syrian plain from where Quirinius would have undoubtedly launched his campaign against the Homonadenses.

This reveals that the census of Israel in 6.B.C, when Quirinius was on a campaign in Syria as Augustus’ Vicegerent, was not an exercise in tax collecting, but an exercise in information gathering, which was a census of the entire Roman Empire, decreed by Caesar Augustus, It would have taken a few years to implement and complete this. It was decreed in 8 BC. and the completed set of documents, which registered the loyalty of Roman citizens and people of note in subject nations to Caesar Augustus, was presented to him in 3 BC.

The following is Augustus' own account: Page 1. "during my sixth term as consul (BC.28), I, along with my comrade Marcus Agrippa, commanded a census to be taken of the people. I directed a lustrum, the first in forty-one years, in which 4,063,000 Roman citizens were counted. And once again, with imperial authority, I single handedly authorized a lustrum when the consuls of Rome were Gaius Censorinus and Gaius Asinius (8 B.C.), during which time 4,233,000 Roman citizens were counted."

In Luke’s day there was no B.C. (Before Christ) or C.E. (Christian Era). So, in what year did Luke say that the census of Caesar Augustus was held in Israel? [ANSWER] In the year that General Quirinius, as Augustus’ Vicegerent, was on a campaign in Syria dealing with the Homonadenses situation, which we now know as the year 6 B.C. two years before the death of Herod the Great.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
Most people who wish to attack and denigrate the Holy scriptures, will say that the Roman census which was taken in Israel at the time of the birth of Jesus, was the census of Quirinius, and of course it wasn’t.
In the KJV, which is riddled with translation errors…..

There's lots of nuances and subtleties in this issue.
People who hate the bible act similar to Holocaust
Deniers in their methods and agendas.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
It does not even make that claim. The Bible as we know it was not completed and assembled until the third century at the earliest. People have to take verses out of context to even try to support that claim. When one looks at those verses in context at best they were referring only to some, and not even necessarily all, of the books of the Old Testament. There is nowhere in the Bible that in context refers to the New Testament as the "word of God". Ask a Christian to support their claim in regards to the whole Bible and they will fail.
Geeez. There ya go, gettin' all factual again.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
The Anointed……… Ahaziah was the only son of Ahab and Jezebel, and was not in the line of descent from King David. Ahaziah died childless. His sister, ‘Athaliah’ had married Joram/Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat, and Joram the son-in-law to Ahab, ruled Israel after the death of his brother-in-law for four years until the death of his father Jehoshaphat the King of Judah, in the beginning of his fifth year as King of Israel, he then ruled both Israel and Judah for eight years.
Sorry, but you have the wrong Ahaziah of the wrong kingdom (Israel).

You are right, Ahab and his son Ahaziah of Israel are not of David’s line.

No, I was referring to Ahaziah, son of Jehoram and Athaliah (Ahab’s daughter or sister).

In Matthew’s genealogy, it say Jehoram was father of Uzziah (or Azariah), not to Ahaziah.

Matthew 1:8 said:
...and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram (Jehoram) the father of Uzziah,

The problem is not so much as the missing name, but that it say that Jehoram being the father of Uzziah (Azariah)

But in 2 Kings 15:1, the father of Uzziah/Azariah was Amaziah, nor Jehoram (Joram).

2 Kings 15:1 said:
In the twenty-seventh year of King Jeroboam of Israel King Azariah (Uzziah) son of Amaziah of Judah began to reign.

Do you not see, the missing names are not the only problem in Matthew’s version of David’s genealogy, but who was father and son, differed.

The gospel is clearly wrong regarding to the father of Uzziah (Azariah); it is Amaziah who is the father, not Jehoram (Joram).

You are merely make excuses of the differences between 2 Kings and Matthew 1.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
No, at best that is reinterpretation after the fact.

"Believed upon of the Gentiles"
and
"Rejected of his own people"

were common themes of Messianic prophecy.

Which became true as the Jews crucified Jesus
and the Gospel went out into the Roman world.

Please explain how this is "after the fact" given
that some of the Messianic verses in the bible
were over two thousand years old.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
This is the prophecy in a nutshell - compiled from all the books
of the Old Testament.
Messiah is presented as two figures - Redeemer and King.
To reign with the King one must be Redeemed.

The Redeemer will be born as a Jew, of the house of David
and the tribe of Judah - the son who offered himself to redeem
his brother. The Redeemer himself will be the lamb slain, his
blood to atone for his people. He will suffer, be judged and be
crucified (pierced hands and feet) by his own people.
He will come while the temple stands, and fulfill the symbolism
of the temple in himself. He will be believed upon by the Gentiles.
He will look back on his suffering and be pleased.
The Jewish nation will then lose their temple and their nation,
and be exiled throughout the whole world, until the Gentiles
time is finished. Then the Jews will come out of the nations that
were their graves,rebuild their ruined nation and live in peace,
despite the nations around seeking to destroy it.

Please explain how you interpret all this after the fact?
We are talking prophecies here. For example the "prophecy" that led to the virgin birth myth was history if you read it in context. It tells how an existing king would have a child with a young woman and that Israel would be free before that child knew the difference between right and wrong. It does not predict the birth of Jesus. When looking at supposed prophecy one must look at the verses in context. Not cherry pick parts of the Bible that look like it could apply to Jesus.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
"Believed upon of the Gentiles"
and
"Rejected of his own people"

were common themes of Messianic prophecy.

Which became true as the Jews crucified Jesus
and the Gospel went out into the Roman world.

Please explain how this is "after the fact" given
that some of the Messianic verses in the bible
were over two thousand years old.
Then let's discuss specific "prophecy" and see if they are even prophecy at all.
 
Top