|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: If some parts of the Bible can't be trusted how can any of it? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ROTB Member (Idle past 7166 days) Posts: 40 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
>Often folk don't understand me, I'm old and slow and sometimes have
>trouble explaining things. Welcome to the club!!! Thank you for your patience with me also. It's difficult communicating with message board. >If a prophecy is only understood after the fact, it is useless. I'm not saying Isaac Newton is the final and last and highest Bible interpreter of all time, but you are demanding a standard of proof that even Isaac Newton dared not demand of God. Newton's intelligence was considerable, his knowledge of the Bible formidable, and his knowledge of history extensive. And, it was enough for Isaac Newton for the Bible to say what would happen well before it would happen, and for flawed mortal men such as himself to look, study, and notice after the fact, and then see that God had said it all along, and marvel and praise God. There are many examples when you read the Old Testament where God shows he knows what would happen days before it happened. He told people when they would die if they did not repent, and He had Isaiah name Cyrus as the king that would rebuild His Temple decades before Cyrus was born. Jesus Christ said in Matthew 23 that the generation of men that stood before him would pay for all the righteous blood shed from Abel to Zechariah, and in Matthew 24 Jesus Christ said that the Temple would be destroyed with every stone overturned, and both happened in 70 AD, when around a million? Jews died when Titus' Roman legions sacked Jerusalem, and the soldiers of Rome overturned every last stone looking for the gold that had melted off the Temple. >So how about showing us a specific Biblical prophecy that will come>true in the second half of 2004 or during 2005. Anyone who thinks prophecy is made up by zealous Christians out to rule over people who don't know the Bible, should try making up prophecies from the Bible that came true in the historical verifiable past. The accuracy and specificity and verifiability demonstrated in Page not found must be duplicated, where the God of the Bible demonstrates to us that only He knows what happens thousands of years before it happens. At Page not found we learn that: 1) The prophecies of Moses, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel all written well before 250 BC point to 1948 AD as the year the Jewish people would be gathered from the world to rule themselves in Israel.2) The prophecies of Daniel and Moses and Haggai all point to the Messiah arriving at the 2nd Temple, in the time we call the 1st century. ROTB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Well, not quite.
as I said in another post, a prophecy has to have certain characteristics. First, it must be understandable. Vague statements that can be satisfied in several ways simply don't count. Second, there has to be a reasonable time line. Newton saying that Israel will become a nation again simply is less of a prophecy then my saying that in the next two decades man will go to Mars. Third, it has to be unexpected. Fourth, it has to be understood before the fact. As an example, Matthew was probably written long after the temple had been destroyed so saying it predicted something that had already happened just doesn't work. So keep trying, perhaps you'll be able to do what your sources have been unable to do. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ROTB Member (Idle past 7166 days) Posts: 40 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
>as I said in another post, a prophecy has to have certain
>characteristics. First, it must be understandable. I think you meant to say "understandable before the fact and but not only after the fact." Right? >Second, there has to be a reasonable time line. Newton saying that>Israel will become a nation again simply is less of a prophecy then >my saying that in the next two decades man will go to Mars. >Third, it has to be unexpected. >Fourth, it has to be understood before the fact. Checking the dictionary at Prophecy Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com it does not say anything about prophecy having a particular time line, or being unexpected, or when it is understood. >Vague statements that can be satisfied in several ways simply don't>count. How many ways does Page not found point to 1948 AD? I only count one. Please demonstrate what you are speaking of. Using the verses used by the author of the preceding link, make them point persuasively to another verifiable historical event, or make them plausibly point to the same historical event in a different way. ROTB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ROTB Member (Idle past 7166 days) Posts: 40 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
>How can they be the Word of God if they're translations?
Since the New Testament agrees with the LXX version 97% of the time, as opposed to siding withthe Masoretic text 68% of the timehttp://www.yourarmstoisrael.org/...rst_Response_Handbook.pdf If the translation of the Hebrew in 250BC to the Septuagint was good enough for Jesus and his apostles, it is good enough for me. Translations are fine so long as they are done well. The King James Bible, though the Old Testament is not from the Septuagint, borrows from the Septuagint at key points, and the translation of the New Testament Greek is very very good. I apologize for taking so long to reply. ROTB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ROTB Member (Idle past 7166 days) Posts: 40 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
>That's pretty bizarre - a string of unsupported assertions that
>"proves" something. >I still say it was Shiva raising up England to smite folks. Or>maybe it was the Invisible Pink Unicorn, though She's not real big >into Smiting. I apologize for going off on a tangent. The Septuagint was quoted by Jesus and the apostles 97% of the time when the Old Testament was quoted throughout the New Testament. So though the Septuagint is a translation, it met His standards for accuracy. http://www.yourarmstoisrael.org/...rst_Response_Handbook.pdf is the source I used for the 97% figure. He is a Rabbi that is now a follower of Jesus. ROTB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Your source doesn't say that Jesus or the Disciples used the Septuagint 97% of the tme at all. Just as well - because Jesus and the Disciples would not have been speaking Greek most of the time.
It does say:
quote: But since 97 + 68 is rather more than 100% it certainly DOESN'T follow that the Septuagint was used 97% of the time. And the usage of the NT authors - who were writing in Greek and may not have even understood Hebrew or Aramaic - doesn't necessarily reflect the usage of Jesus or the disciples. This message has been edited by PaulK, 08-24-2004 03:45 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ROTB Member (Idle past 7166 days) Posts: 40 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
>But since 97 + 68 is rather more than 100% it certainly DOESN'T follow
>that the Septuagint was used 97% of the time. Quotes from the New Testament agree with the Septuagint 97% of the time, but with the Hebrew text 68% of the time. The reason you don't add 97% and 68% together, is that the Hebrew and the Greek translated from the Hebrew agree with each other also. Put another way, sometimes the New Testament agrees with both at the same time. ROTB This message has been edited by ROTB, 08-24-2004 03:52 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ROTB Member (Idle past 7166 days) Posts: 40 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
I will attempt to summarize Page not found as best I can. Thank you for your patience!
I said:>>God promised to scatter the Jews into the world if they did not >>repent, and then he did it. He also brought them back (1948AD) >>exactly when he said He would. You replied: >How does it make sense for this prophecy to be based on a calendar >rooted in the false assumption that Jesus was born in 1 AD? I suspect you misunderstood. The prophecies that point to 1948 AD in Page not found have nothing to do with the time Jesus would arrive. The arrival time of Jesus is explained in Page not found. According to the Bible, years are 360 days, and not 365.24 days. Please see Page not found and Page not found which are part 1 and 2 of the same discourse respectively. A biblical year is a time span of 360 days, not 365.24 days. 606BC+ 70 biblical years (Jeremiah 25) + (((390+40) Ezekiel 4)- 70 Jeremiah 25) x (7 Leviticus 26) biblical years + no year zero 1948AD Or if we follow the algebra more closely line by line:606BC + 70 + ((390+40)-70)x7 + no year zero + 70 + (430)-70)x7 + no year zero + 70 + (360)x7 + no year zero + 70 + 2520 + no year zero + 2590 biblical years + no year zero 1948AD 2590 biblical years x (360 days per biblical year/365.2422199074 days per calendar year) = 2552.82645099 calendar years 606BC+2552.82645099 calendar years + no year zero (this adds 1) 1948AD On your calculator: 0-605.38 (negative since we need to represent BC on the calculator, and July 17 of that year, and keeping tabs of the fact that when counting BC, going forward in time requires making the number designating the year smaller) +1 (since there is no year zero, we need to skip it) +2552.82645099 (biblical years adjusted to calendar years) =1948.44 Which corresponds roughly to May 14, 1948. Page not found claims the calculation to be "off" by only 17 days, or 0.00182%. It's late. See you all tomorrow night. ROTB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Well at least you begin to understand why you were wrong.
Try thinking about it some more.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Oh well time to tackle another of the yfile lies. There's nothing in the Bible to say that a year is always 360 days nor that 360 days must be used whenever prophecy talks about a year.
The whole idea was made up to fiddle "prophecy" calculations.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Please demonstrate what you are speaking of. Using the verses used by the author of the preceding link, make them point persuasively to another verifiable historical event, or make them plausibly point to the same historical event in a different way. Sorry, but I have already shown that the examples given in your links are not prophecy. First, they were only understood after the fact. Second, many were not even written until after the fact, as in the case of Matthew. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Amlodhi Inactive Member |
Hello ROTB,
I've tried to avoid simply "ganging up" on you here, but the point others have been making is important. That is, "after the fact" prophecy identification simply allows too much leeway for manipulation of the data. When I first read Grant Jeffrey's "The Signature of God" several years ago, there were several "selective applications" of numbers and scriptural references which immediately made me suspicious that such manipulation was operative here. Since there are several complexities involved, (which is why you post so many links), I will for now only refer you to this brief statement made by a studied Christian and mathematician:
quote: http://www.accuros.com/thornbush/pollen/bibcode.htm The exampled quote above reflects only some of the "selective determinations" involved in indentifying "prophetic" dates and events ex post facto. Were these selections chosen before the fact and used to accurately identify a date in the future, this methodology might have some significance. Historically (and revealingly), however, such attempts at prior identification have a dismal track record. Again, I hesitate to "gang up" on you here, but the ex post facto interpretation of alleged prophecy is simply too susceptible to selective interpretation. Had the state of Israel been recommissioned in the year 1878, I have little doubt that the biblical data could be manipulated to incorporate that date as easily as 1948. Amlodhi
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 634 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
You know.. I would like to see where you get your supposed numbers.
Did you know that when people quote statistics, they are made up on the spot 90% of the time??
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 634 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Your formula is not taking into account the biblical leap years.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1488 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I suspect you misunderstood. No, you misunderstood my objection. All your dates are based on the Gregorian calendar, which erroneously dates Jesus's birth at 1 AD. How can we be expected to believe that God's prophecy would be based on a calendar rooted in falsehood? You're getting a date of 1948, but nobody who didn't know Israel was founded in 1948 would have gotten this date.
According to the Bible, years are 360 days Maybe, but that's not how long a year is. A Year is 365.24 days. Why would God base his prophecy on an erroneous year length?
On your calculator: That works out better, but why did you post an erroneous equation in the first place?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024