Fulfilled Prophecy

Hi Buz.I infact was referring to skeptics in general, not just skeptics in this thread, as Phat usually is simply inquisitive.Sorry if I caused trouble. I think the problem is, that to die-hard believers, it's one tiny miracle, but to a skeptic, it's one hell of a claim that goes contrary to what natural law dictates.I think for that reason, they seek an extraordinarily air-tight and specific, clear-cut case. Even then, from a neutral perspective, one could only argue that this was inexplicable, unless it was proved that it was God.It's simply a clash between a dedicated Christian fundamental believer, such as you, and those who have no belief in miracles. Or those with belief in miracles, but with the opinion that they're not proven.I've seen a fair bit of evidence that shows that basically we all have different interpretations, yet we apparently have the same belief. For that reason, it's best to not claim too much, as hindsight shows that the end of the world didn't happen.

no, mike, it's a clash between buz and those who understand how to read. some of buz's opponents here -- such as myself -- happen to believe in god and miracles.

---

At this point it's not that Buz doesn't have an airtight case, it's that he doesn't have a case at all. The skeptics here aren't objecting to miracles - they're objecting to Buzsaw's twisting and misrerpesentation of the Bible.

exactly. the irony being that he's denying the fulfilled prophecy -- the fall of assyria -- for the distortions.

---

Now your getting downright insolent, Ringo. I suggest you stick to addressing the debate at hand and lay off rudly maligning the member you're debating.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

It all depends on what the purpose of the interpreter really is. Do they want to actually understand what was written, even if it means the prophecy was fulfilled over 2500 years ago or so, or do they want to just use quotemining to support their personal agenda?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You were the one who rudely maligned "skeptics" by claiming that they "want" to disbelieve.
All I did was expose your malignant rudeness.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

You people are flat out denying the imperical evidence I've produced. When are one of you going leave off badmouthing to admit that the names of the nations and people of the world as well as the whole world itself are being addressed with specific events/aspects applying to each and those names are not Nineveh in chapter one after the introductory mention of Ninevah in verse one?Unless I've missed it, not one of you prophecy skeptics has addressed the peoples to which the events of chapter one apply by name or the nature of the events not applicable to the city of Ninevah. All you seem to accomplish is to badmouth your counterparts in this thread.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Buz -Do you read Hebrew and Greek? Aramaic? No?Do you think there's maybe just a possibility that translation after the fact introduces ambiguities that you're retrodacting into prophecy?

Nahum is short so let's look at it and see if there really is any End Times prophecy in there.It begins by telling us what it will discuss.Nahum 1 Well Gosh Darn, Buz. Guess what? It tells us that it is an Oracle concerning Nineveh.It then starts with a general part that talks about how powerful GOD is. It then says that even though GOD protects those He favors, She can show anger to others. And what others are mentioned? Right, Nineveh.It says that if they plot against Him they will lose. And who specifically is Nahum pointing to? Yup, Nineveh.So ALL of Chapter one is just what it said, and Oracle concerning Nineveh.Shall we go on to Chapter 2?Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Sigmund, you're slip is showing!

i'll assume that question is rhetorical here.

---

jar, what translation of nahum are you using?

well, i can read a little hebrew... ...and i don't think so. i think the english text is just as clear as the hebrew text (at least in this instance) and buz is simply imagining ambiguities that do not exist. and anyone who can read the text, even in english, can see that.

---

quote:

---

You people are flat out denying the imperical evidence I've produced.

---

That is untrue. You have offered no empirical evidence. All you have done is to twist the Bible to try to make it say what you want. I've explained the evidence for that - and instead of answering it you just ptry to pretend that that my responses don't exist.So your defence of your twisting of the Bible is to falsely allege that the critics are acting like you. Charming.

quote:

---

When are one of you going leave off badmouthing to admit that the names of the nations and people of the world as well as the whole world itself are being addressed with specific events/aspects applying to each and those names are not Nineveh in chapter one after the introductory mention of Ninevah in verse one?

---

I've already cited reasons to think that these points are NOT predictions - they are declaratiosn of God's power. Firstly such a reading is consistent with Nahum 1:1's declaration that the book is a prophecy against Nineveh. Secondly they are written in the present tense, if they refer to any specific time then it is logically the time of writing not the future.Worse the whole point of your reading is to deny the context of the verses - and others in Nahum 2. So it appears to not only be an obviously false interpretation but an inthentional distortion of Nahum. However such a tactic cannot work since if an interpretation conflicts with the context, then the interpretation is wrong. It's that simple. Your tactic can't work because it is going up against a basic rule of interpretation.

quote:

---

nless I've missed it, not one of you prophecy skeptics has addressed the peoples to which the events of chapter one apply by name or the nature of the events not applicable to the city of Ninevah.

---

You've missed it - or deliberately ignored it. The points I raise here were raised in Message 176 There are other responses although with less detail. Arachnophilia raises some points in Message 154 and Message 109 I raise issues in Message 118, Message 79 and Message 65 - which you replied to. Although you never addressed the points, preferring to threaten to run away on the laughable basis that I refused to address your points - when in fact you were the one refusing to acknowledge my points.So the fact is that your points have been answered. You have not addressed those answers. Your only attempt to deal with them is an outright denial that those answers exist in the first place ! It's even worse than your accusation that critics of "cancel" verses in Nahum because they refuse to "cancel" Nahum 1:1 and 2:8 !