Some Christians, especially those of the right, like to cite biblical prophecy as a demonstration of Yahweh's power and as confirmation of [his] existence.
This is thus a claim that the demonstrations of prophecy in the bible are so astonishing that they demand consideration of a supernatural explanation.
(ID runs a rather similar argument, but unfortunately all the examples of 'irreducible complexity' ─ the only real purported evidence for ID ─ were explained in evolutionary terms at the Dover trial, so that cupboard is bare.)
If something demands that we consider explanations of a supernatural nature, it must be a very very powerful argument indeed.
In the case of biblical prophecy, the onus of demonstrating the correctness of the claim would be on the one who claims it's so, and that claimant would have to show ─
1. That the prophecy was unarguably made at a particular time and place, and that its exact original terms are known.
2. That it's not possible the terms were varied afterwards, nor that the prophecy was invented wholesale afterwards.
3. That the subject matter of the prophecy is so complex, remote and unforeseeable that it couldn't happen by chance.
4. That the subject matter isn't of a kind that will incite others to bring about its fulfillment.
5. That no person contrived its happening, and
6. That the happening of the prophesied events is so well and exactly attested that it's not possible that reports are false in any way.
I can't think of any biblical prophecy that comes within a day's drive of satisfying those terms.
Can you? Do you know a biblical prophecy that ticks all those boxes to the satisfaction of any impartial onlooker?
Because without at least one irrefutable example, prophecy demonstrates nothing. Or rather, it demonstrates how in the politics of biblical times, prophecy was a tool for one-upping your opponent, or driving your followers in particular directions, not for being tipped off about the future.
.
This is thus a claim that the demonstrations of prophecy in the bible are so astonishing that they demand consideration of a supernatural explanation.
(ID runs a rather similar argument, but unfortunately all the examples of 'irreducible complexity' ─ the only real purported evidence for ID ─ were explained in evolutionary terms at the Dover trial, so that cupboard is bare.)
If something demands that we consider explanations of a supernatural nature, it must be a very very powerful argument indeed.
In the case of biblical prophecy, the onus of demonstrating the correctness of the claim would be on the one who claims it's so, and that claimant would have to show ─
1. That the prophecy was unarguably made at a particular time and place, and that its exact original terms are known.
2. That it's not possible the terms were varied afterwards, nor that the prophecy was invented wholesale afterwards.
3. That the subject matter of the prophecy is so complex, remote and unforeseeable that it couldn't happen by chance.
4. That the subject matter isn't of a kind that will incite others to bring about its fulfillment.
5. That no person contrived its happening, and
6. That the happening of the prophesied events is so well and exactly attested that it's not possible that reports are false in any way.
I can't think of any biblical prophecy that comes within a day's drive of satisfying those terms.
Can you? Do you know a biblical prophecy that ticks all those boxes to the satisfaction of any impartial onlooker?
Because without at least one irrefutable example, prophecy demonstrates nothing. Or rather, it demonstrates how in the politics of biblical times, prophecy was a tool for one-upping your opponent, or driving your followers in particular directions, not for being tipped off about the future.
.