arnoldo

There is definite archaelogical proof that Israel has existed for thousands of years. Note the following archealogical source: British Museum. In addition the Beni Hassan tomb paintings depict Canaanites entering Egypt around 1870 BC. In the year 1670 BC The Hyksos govern Egypt along with a ruler called Ya'qub-'al which is similar to the Hebrew name Jacob. In the year 1525 BC Thutmose I of Egypt begins to use horses for military purposes which fits neatly with the Exodus account for the Egptian horses being thrown into the sea. The Stela of Merneptah indicates an Egyptian King destroyed "Israel" providing absolute archaelogical proof that Israel was know to exist by an extrabiblical source. Yes, Israel exists at this very moment as a great sign to all skeptic of bible history who practice 'higher criticism"

Johnny Skeptic

But you have said that prophecy is for believers, not for unbelievers. First Corinthians 14:22 says "Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe." You have also said that God used prophecy after the fact to strengthen the faith of believers. That cannot possibly be true. If it was true, Ezekiel would have mentioned Alexander, and Micah would have made many unmistakable prophecies that would have left little doubt who Jesus was.

Micah 5:2 says “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.” If Micah had predicted that the messiah would rule a heavenly kingdom instead of an earthly kingdom like Micah misled the Jews to believe, and had predicted that the messiah would heal people, and that the messiah would be crucified, buried, and rise from the dead in three days, and that Pontius Pilate would become the Roman governor of Palestine, and that Herod would become the King of Judea, there are not any doubts whatsoever that more Jews would have accepted Jesus.

Why does the Bible contain 100% disputable prophecies? I wish to distinguish between 100% disputable prophecies and 100% false prophecies. A false prophecy is obviously a prophecy that did not come true. A disputable prophecy is not necessarily a false prophecy. It can be a prophecy that came true that failed to convince a sizeable majority of people to believe that it is true. All Bible prophecies are disputable. If Pat Robertson accurately predicted when a where a natural disaster would occur, month, day, and year, that prediction would convince a sizeable majority of people that he is able to predict the future. In addition, it would convince some people to become Christians who were not previously convinced. That is a reasonable assumption since historically, many people have accepted all kinds of outlandish religions based upon much less convincing evidence than that. In addition, Nostradamus and Edgar Cayce attracted a lot of followers based upon a lot less convincincing evidence than that.

It is an utterly absurd notion that a God would have difficulty convincing most people to believe that he can predict the future.

arnoldo

There is no need for "predicting the future" to prove God's existence since the State of Israel exist as a testimony that the Abrahamic promise is still in effect and furthermore there is a plethora of archaelogical evidence that confirms bible history. Note the following verse from Matthew 22:

. . . and here is a coin with the image of Caesar and the inscription.
Source: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: This specific image has been released into the public domain

Johnny Skeptic

It is a question of to what extent a loving God would go in order to encourage people to make choices that would cause them to end up in heaven instead of hell. It is my position that it is improbable that a loving God would be willing to sacrifice his only begotten Son in order to save mankind but refuse to, for instance, inspire Pat Robertson to use the world media to accurately predict when and where a natural disaster would occur, which would surely cause some skeptics to become Christians. That is a reasonable assumption since historically, many people have accepted all kinds of outlandish religions based upon much less convincing evidence than that. In addition, Nostradamus and Edgar Cayce attracted a lot of followers based upon a lot less convincing evidence than that. You can argue that God has done enough to convince people to believe that he exists, but you would not be able to get away with arguing that God is not able to convince more people to love him, and to accept him. It is no accident that no religious book contains a prophecy of the quality of the hypothetical prophecy that I mentioned.

You have never reasonably proven that the Partition of Palestine was not a self-fulfilled prophecy. If the Koran said that a temple would be rebuilt in Mecca by Muslims, and Muslims rebuilt a temple in Mecca, would you call that a legitimate fulfillment of prophecy?

If God did not make a land promise to Abraham and his descendants, and Abraham falsely believed that God made a land promise to him and his descendants, since all that it takes in order to self-fulfill a prophecy is the belief that it is true, and enough military power to make it come true, that explains why Palestine was partitioned in 1948.

Johnny Skeptic

Message to arnoldo: Micah 5:2 says “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.” If Micah had predicted that the messiah would rule a heavenly kingdom instead of an earthly kingdom like Micah misled the Jews to believe, and had predicted that the messiah would heal people, and that the messiah would be crucified, buried, and rise from the dead in three days, and that Pontius Pilate would become the Roman governor of Palestine, and that Herod would become the King of Judea, would more Jews would have accepted Jesus?

angelo

Not forgetting that the promise to Abraham was that they would be as numerous as the sands on a beach. What is the population of Israel today? World wide the Jews number less than 10 million.

arnoldo

You neglect the fact that according to Christian Theology, or mythology if you prefer, believers in Yeshua are children of Abraham. Note the following scriptures.

Johnny Skeptic

Message to arnoldo: Micah 5:2 says “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.” If Micah had predicted that the messiah would rule a heavenly kingdom instead of an earthly kingdom like Micah misled the Jews to believe, and had predicted that the messiah would heal people, and that the messiah would be crucified, buried, and rise from the dead in three days, and that Pontius Pilate would become the Roman governor of Palestine, and that Herod would become the King of Judea, would more Jews would have accepted Jesus?

It is a question of to what extent a loving God would go in order to encourage people to make choices that would cause them to end up in heaven instead of hell. It is my position that it is improbable that a loving God would be willing to sacrifice his only begotten Son in order to save mankind but refuse to, for instance, inspire Pat Robertson to use the world media to accurately predict when and where a natural disaster would occur, which would surely cause some skeptics to become Christians. That is a reasonable assumption since historically, many people have accepted all kinds of outlandish religions based upon much less convincing evidence than that. In addition, Nostradamus and Edgar Cayce attracted a lot of followers based upon a lot less convincing evidence than that. You can argue that God has done enough to convince people to believe that he exists, but you would not be able to get away with arguing that God is not able to convince more people to love him, and to accept him. It is no accident that no religious book contains a prophecy of the quality of the hypothetical prophecy that I mentioned.

You have never reasonably proven that the Partition of Palestine was not a self-fulfilled prophecy. If the Koran said that a temple would be rebuilt in Mecca by Muslims, and Muslims rebuilt a temple in Mecca, would you call that a legitimate fulfillment of prophecy?

If God did not make a land promise to Abraham and his descendants, and Abraham falsely believed that God made a land promise to him and his descendants, since all that it takes in order to self-fulfill a prophecy is the belief that it is true, and enough military power to make it come true, that explains why Palestine was partitioned in 1948.

Sheshonq

That depends on what you mean.

The Merneptah stele is old news. Since it dates from only the 1200s BCE - and since it refers to Israel only as a people, not a country - it doesn't help your case much.

The Hyksos are not Hebrews. Finding a cognate name demonstrates nothing.

Not really, since the existence of the stele is news only to YOU -- everyone else already knew it existed, and how limited in value it is.

Sheshonq

So?

The Illiad and Odyssey mention actual historical places. Does that mean that they're historically accurate as well?

That's what you get for not taking 10 seconds to work the bugs out of your own posts, arnoldo.

:rolling: :rolling: :rolling: