Freethought & Rationalism Archive

digitalbeachbum · 11-09-2007, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ktsai

A person I met is trying to inculcate me with his beliefs. He emailed me this as proof of the "absolute authority of God's word." Supposedly, these are prophecies in the bible that came true. I don't know much about the historicity of these. Can someone please verify if these prophecies have been fulfilled and are true/false:

ktsai,

If you want to believe in Christianity, then believe in it with out any miracles or prophecies. Discard all the dogma and mystisim which has been injected in to it over the thousands of years. Believe in it because you have faith that all of it will be proven true to you at a later time or date.

If you don't believe in any of the miracles and dogma, then reject it based on your own observations of life around you.

Don't let any one sway you by their own beliefs. Experience it for your self.

Good luck.

Johnny Skeptic · 11-09-2007, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Merrill

Here are some other prophecies you might want to consider.

There are a number of prophecies that are to continually be fulfilled, forever.

Now some might say that "forever prophecies" are actually not so difficult to make, such as in saying "This car will never run again." Yet this prophecy has a point beyond which it cannot reasonably be falsified, but other prophecies may not. Certainly, making a probable "forever prophecy" is not so difficult, nor is making a probable prophecy about anything! "The sun, I predict, will rise tomorrow." Yet these easy prophecies do not explain improbable ones, and more importantly, such easy predictions do not overturn prophecies that can be falsified, forever.

We may also note here that there are some prophecies like this in Scripture in both directions (so to speak): that some specific nations would disappear, and yet others specifically would continue, so this is not only making guesses based on a general tendency, as far as nations lasting or not.

May I suggest that we discuss one prophecy at a time. Please pick a prophecy and we can discuss it. Based upon your past failures debating the Tyre prophecy and the Babylon prophecy, I doubt that you would pick either one of those.

It is a virtual given that God never inspired anyone to write a prophecy. Two reasons are 1) if God wanted to predict the future in order to help people, he would have for example predicted natural disasters, and 2) if God wanted people to believe that he could predict the future, he would easily have been able to convince everyone in the world that he could predict the future simply by showing up in person and proving that he could predict the future.

One of the biggest flaws in fundamentalist Christianity is that fundamentalist Christians are never able to come up with rational motives regarding why God does what he does. It is not possibly to realiably evaluate someone's character unless you know what their motives are.

I have a prediction to make based upon your past debates about prophecy at this forum. I predict that just like in some other threads, you will spend weeks or months debating in this thread, and finally give up without having convinced one single skeptic to agree with your arguments. The same will be true regarding your current debates about evolution at the Evolution/Creation.

lee_merrill · 11-12-2007, 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shirley knott

What makes something a prophecy rather than any of the other possibilities?

Prophecy is a prediction of a future event by divine perception, or by stating a divine plan, I would say, now the more unlikely that future event is, the more likely the prophecy is not a mere guess or thought of what will probably happen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheInerrantWord

Babylon [is] currently being occupied by U.S. Marines. Don't they count?

Not unless they plan to settle there...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

May I suggest that we discuss one prophecy at a time.

It seems we are discussing Babylon now...

TheInerrantWord · 11-12-2007, 09:49 AM

I guess I just don't get how Babylon counts as a prediction. According to tradition, Jeremiah lived in Jerusalem and started his ministry in 628 B.C.E. He was around when Nebachudnezzar II sacked the city in 588 B.C.E. and then took over for good in 586 B.C.E. but lived for quite a while after that. The prediction about Babylon falling and never being rebuilt happens, I guess, at right around the time that the Hebrews were so angry with Nebuchednezzar (after 588 B.C.E. but before Jeremiah dies during the reign of Nebachudnezzar's son).

So then Cyrus the Great takes over Babylon in 539 B.C.E. and you would think that this would end Babylon the city, but no, the city turns into a center of learning and power under the Persians for another 200 years. So then Alexander takes over the city in 331 B.C.E. but that's not really the end of the city either. Again, the city is a cultural powerhouse under the Macedonians but after Alexander dies, everyone starts fighting and sometime before 275 B.C.E. the city is abandoned by the Serecids. This may arguably be the end of Babylon as a cultural center, although the people of the surrounding area have forever called their land Babylon and they have certainly used it to raise their sheep (as the prophesy denies they would).

Anyway, if the Serecid's leaving was the fulfillment of the prophesy (certainly it wasn't before then), what took god so long? Doesn't seem like much of a punishment for what Nebachudnezzar did to the Hebrews, does it? That was ancient history by then.

Ray Moscow · 11-12-2007, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Matthew 24
Signs of the End of the Age
1Jesus left the temple and was walking away when His disciples came up to Him to call His attention to its buildings. 2"Do you see all these things?" He asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

In A.D.70 the Jew rebelled against the Roman Empire. General Titus was sent to attack Jerusalem and burn the temple where some gold equipment were inside. The melted gold got into the seams of the stone bricks of the walls and stayed there. In order to get the gold the Roman soldiers broke the walls into pieces except the west wall, really no one stone left upon another as the Bible says.

Well, the poster negates his own thesis with his very first example. That's pretty neat!

Szkeptik · 11-12-2007, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Babylon [is] currently being occupied by U.S. Marines. Don't they count?

U.S. Marines are in Rome?

TheInerrantWord · 11-12-2007, 10:14 AM

The ancient city of Babylon is in modern-day Iraq, not Italy.

Oh, and for what it's worth, Saddam Hussein re-built the ancient temple back in the 1980's, in direct contradiction to Jeremiah's prediction that no Arab would ever pitch his tent there. On second thought, Saddam Hussein probably wouldn't have self-identified as "Arab" rather than "Persian" and he never actually lived there in any event. Maybe the prediction is right after all.

Johnny Skeptic · 11-12-2007, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

May I suggest that we discuss one prophecy at a time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Merrill

It seems we are discussing Babylon now...

Ok, let's discuss the Babylon prophecy.

Your views regarding the Babylon prophecy represent a very small minority even among fundmentalist Christians. That means that you have very little credibility even among your own group. Not one single Bible commentary interprets Isaiah 13:19-20 like you do. In past debates regarding the Babylon prophecy, you refused to post corroborative arguments from one single prominent fundamentalist Christian scholar.

Even if your interpretation of Isaiah 13:19-20 is correct, the verse offers THREE ways to discredit the prophecy, not just ONE way. The three ways are 1) rebuilding Babylon, 2) shepherds grazing their flocks in Babylon, and 3) Arabs pitching their tents in Babylon. Items 2 and 3 have happened many times. Logically, how difficult it is to prove that a lie has been told does not have anything to do with whether or not a lie was told. Items 1, 2, and 3 are independent claims, not one collective claim. If the prophecy only consisted of claiming that no Arab would ever pitch his tent in Babylon, would you claim that overturning the prophecy would not be valid because it would be easy to overturn?

If your challenge was worth two cents, certainly at least one prominent fundamentalist Christian would be making it, but there aren't ANY. you have about as much support as the Flat Earth Society, and the group of people who claim that men have not landed on the moon. Your arguments regarding the Babylon prophecy are possibly the worst arguments that you have ever made. You have lost hands down, EVEN AMONG MOST OF YOUR OWN CROWD.

shirley knott · 11-12-2007, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lee_merrill

Quote:

Originally Posted by shirley knott

What makes something a prophecy rather than any of the other possibilities?

Prophecy is a prediction of a future event by divine perception, or by stating a divine plan, I would say, now the more unlikely that future event is, the more likely the prophecy is not a mere guess or thought of what will probably happen.
...

Ah, so in other words, a prophecy is a special case of special pleading.
"divine perception" is undefined and appears undefinable if not inherently self-contradictory.
And the probability of future events appears to be incalculable. Were it calculable, no recourse to "divine perception" [is that like 'divine wind'?] would be necessary. And if they are not caculable, we have yet another special case of special pleading.

I would claim, with 100% confidence, that there are no prophecies. Not a single one. Not that there are failed prophecies, but that there is not a single case of an item that could properly and accurately be identified as a prophecy.
Refute me.
kthx.

no hugs for thugs,
Shirley Knott

Johnny Skeptic · 11-12-2007, 11:10 AM

Message to Lee Merrill: Consider the following:

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...bylon+prophecy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sauron

Babylon's demise did not match the details of the prophecy, and since that is the case, then nothing that happens to Babylon afterwards matters. So trying to defend the prophecy is already hopeless.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnySkeptic

Yes indeed. That is exactly what William MacDonald says...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Merrill

And that was not the topic for the debate! Perhaps Babylon's demise did not follow this passage of prophecy, perhaps it did, that is another topic, and if I said I would defend every prophecy about Babylon, that would be a pertinent question.

But Babylon was said to never be rebuilt, and you may invalidate this prophecy by rebuilding it.

However, consider the following from the same thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnySkeptic

In his 'Believer's Bible Commentary,' William MacDonald says the following:

"There are certain difficulties connected with the prophecies of the destruction of Babylon, both the city and the country (Isa. 13:6-22)
14:4-23; 21:2-9; 47:1-11; Jer. 23:12-14; 50; 51). For examples, the capture of the city by the Medes (Isa. 13:17 in 539 B.C. did not result in a destruction similar to that of Sodom and Gomorrah (Isa. 13:19); DID NOT LEAVE THE CITY UNHABITED FOREVER [emphasis mine], Isa. 13:20-22); was not accomplished by a nation from the north - Medo-Persia was to the east - (Jer. 50:3); did not result in Israel or more than a remnant of Judah seeking the Lord or returning to Zion (Jer. 50:4, 5); and did not involve the breaking fo the walls and burning of the gates (Jer. 51:58).

"When we come to a difficulty like this, how do we handle it? First of all, we reaffirm our utter confidence in the Word of God. If there is any difficulty, it is because of our lack of knowledge. [Of course, that doesn't apply to Lee Merrill, at least according to Lee Merrill], But we remember that the prophets often had a way of merging the immediate future and the distant future without always indicating any time signals. in other words,a prophecy could have a local, partial fulfillment and a remote, complete fulfillment. That is the case with Babylon. Not all the prophecies have been fulfilled. Some are still future."

As MacDonald's Bible commentary and EVERY OTHER Bible commentary show, your interpretation of the Babylon prophecy is incorrect.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-12-2007, 09:49 AM	#44
TheInerrantWord Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA Posts: 165	I guess I just don't get how Babylon counts as a prediction. According to tradition, Jeremiah lived in Jerusalem and started his ministry in 628 B.C.E. He was around when Nebachudnezzar II sacked the city in 588 B.C.E. and then took over for good in 586 B.C.E. but lived for quite a while after that. The prediction about Babylon falling and never being rebuilt happens, I guess, at right around the time that the Hebrews were so angry with Nebuchednezzar (after 588 B.C.E. but before Jeremiah dies during the reign of Nebachudnezzar's son). So then Cyrus the Great takes over Babylon in 539 B.C.E. and you would think that this would end Babylon the city, but no, the city turns into a center of learning and power under the Persians for another 200 years. So then Alexander takes over the city in 331 B.C.E. but that's not really the end of the city either. Again, the city is a cultural powerhouse under the Macedonians but after Alexander dies, everyone starts fighting and sometime before 275 B.C.E. the city is abandoned by the Serecids. This may arguably be the end of Babylon as a cultural center, although the people of the surrounding area have forever called their land Babylon and they have certainly used it to raise their sheep (as the prophesy denies they would). Anyway, if the Serecid's leaving was the fulfillment of the prophesy (certainly it wasn't before then), what took god so long? Doesn't seem like much of a punishment for what Nebachudnezzar did to the Hebrews, does it? That was ancient history by then.

11-12-2007, 10:14 AM	#47
TheInerrantWord Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA Posts: 165	The ancient city of Babylon is in modern-day Iraq, not Italy. Oh, and for what it's worth, Saddam Hussein re-built the ancient temple back in the 1980's, in direct contradiction to Jeremiah's prediction that no Arab would ever pitch his tent there. On second thought, Saddam Hussein probably wouldn't have self-identified as "Arab" rather than "Persian" and he never actually lived there in any event. Maybe the prediction is right after all.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.