Javaman

I brought the following two passages up in an EoG thread but they either weren't worth the effort to tackle or they got lost in the multi-page fiasco that is Don't Trifle With God. The prophecies are:

Isaiah 52
1 Awake, awake, O Zion,
clothe yourself with strength.
Put on your garments of splendor,
O Jerusalem, the holy city.
The uncircumcised and defiled
will not enter you again.

-and-

Isaiah 17
An Oracle Against Damascus

1 An oracle concerning Damascus:

"See, Damascus will no longer be a city
but will become a heap of ruins.

I posted them as I'd always been told they were not only not fulfilled but obviously unfulfilled. Are there common refutations to them? Is there a context issue that I'm missing?

WinAce

Do you really need someone else to point out for you why those aren't fulfilled? Lots of uncircumsized people live in Jerusalem (and took it over several times after Isaiah made that prediction, for that matter; like the Romans in 70 AD). And Damascus is still a pretty non-heapy city, the capital of Syria.

But don't worry, I used to wonder "WTF, maybe I'm just dumb or something" too; it goes away when you realize how an apologist can contort the truth to make Orwell proud. If you haven't already, wait until you encounter a Tyre prophecy defender for some real cognitive dissonance.

Javaman

That's what's happening in the Willow-thread now. Giggle-worthy.

Magus55

Why do atheists always assume every Biblical prophecy was written to be fullfilled before the 21st Century? The destruction of Damascus isn't exactly hard to imagine being fullfilled. Syria has been a hot topic in regard to the Middle East Conflict. I don't think its a coincidence that Damascus is a very possible bombing target in the near future.

dado

prophets aren't infallible. the entire book of ezekiel was nearly dumped from the Jewish canon thanks to the rather large number of serious issues with it.

WinAce

Not all of us do, Magus. It's just that this particular prediction of Damascus' ruin simply can't apply any longer. You'll note it's nested within comments that can be used to effectively date the prophecy.

Isaiah 17
1 "See, Damascus will no longer be a city
but will become a heap of ruins.
2 The cities of Aroer will be deserted
and left to flocks, which will lie down,
with no one to make them afraid.
3 The fortified city will disappear from Ephraim,
and royal power from Damascus;
the remnant of Aram will be
like the glory of the Israelites,"
declares the LORD Almighty.

Modern Syria is a republic under military regime, not a kingdom, as noted in the CIA World Factbook. But this is hardly the only way to date the last possible fulfillment of this prophecy in centuries long past.

Verse 8, for example, speaks of people "in that day" abandoning the Asherah poles they made (with their own hands) to worship in favor of Judaism. Those were idols of a cult goddess that was commonly worshipped in ancient Israel. The problem, you may ask? No one's made or worshipped an Asherah pole in centuries. It's effectively a dead religion. That part dates the prophecy's last possible fulfillment to no later than millenia ago, and guess what...

Magdlyn

Wrong. Heard of the resurgence of Goddess religion much?

Javaman

I didn't know that, dado. But doesn't your statement "prophets aren't infallible" go against Deuteronomy 18:20-22? If a prophet sees/predicts the future and parts of it come to pass and others don't (and others are interpretable), is that person still a prophet?

Javaman

I did some research and you appear to be right inasmuch as the modern re-invention of Goddess worship goes. I don't want to put words in WinAce's mouth but I think there are a couple of points about his post. One, I don't think Goddess worship is practiced much in Syria (unless you have information to pass along). Two, since I don't spend a bunch of time looking into the intricacies of newly-invented belief systems and tend to focus on Christianity and Judeism, perhaps WinAce is the same.

P.S. Your sentence is worded such that I originally typed out some fairly unpleasant comments about Wicca/God-Goddess Worship. Were you trying to be so snide? Sometimes it's hard to tell with the written word.

Magdlyn

OT: Not snide. Maybe a little snarky. I was out of line. But I do sense here on II an assumption (by many of the atheists, not all) that all religions are stupid, all practitioners are dishonest, there is no truth to be found in them for anyone. An insistence all gods are "dead," esp Egyptian and Hellenistic ones.

I see god/desses as anthropomorphized psychological concepts, as Campbell and Jung.

I am certainly not a nitpicking literalist, not do I belong to any organized religious group. I just don't believe in throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Back on topic: that said, I do think prophets can be wrong. I do think many sincerely felt inspired by their god/dess, but that is no reason for us to believe in their oracles. Unless god is telling us to!

BTW, prophecy does not equal fortune teller. That is only one of the four definitons I find on dictionary.com.

A person who speaks by divine inspiration or as the interpreter through whom the will of a god is expressed.
A person gifted with profound moral insight and exceptional powers of expression.
A predictor; a soothsayer.
The chief spokesperson of a movement or cause.