sugarhitman

Christians beware of getting into these debates concering science. Is the birth of Jesus backed by science? No. His walking on water? No. God's ability to predict events hundreds of years before they happen? No.

God can mainipulate natural laws.


You want evidence study bible prophecy...the greatest evidence of all. Stop trying to defend God with science or history.....because these have been and continue to be manipulated by men. If secular science and history disagree amongst themselves, and themselves are subject to contradictions, silences, and downright lies....these cannot be used to defend nor disprove God.



Creation, God's word backed by powerful prophecies, are the evidences.

Species8472

Good point. If you people really believe in the "poof godddidit" argument, why bother arguing science? You are not interested in what the real world shows, but what is in your old book. Stick to it and be happy.

I am not sure I would call the "manipulated by men" card on history and subject to contradictions when arguing in favour of the bible.

Creation were prohecised? Interesting...

Tom Sawyer

Well, if God was the one who created the universe, it would be pretty easy for him to predict that it was about to happen. In the same vein, I prophesize that I'm going to have a sandwich for lunch.

Martian Astronomer

Sigh....

sugarhitman, what if I claimed that the entire bible was written by a man named Philip Drivescrewer in 1708 - therefore the "fulfilled" prophecies in the bible aren't actually prophecies because the fulfillments were written the same year as the prophecies themselves by the same author.

Prove me wrong without using "history" - because you just said that Christians shouldn't try to defend the bible using history. I'll wait.

(Oh, and stuff that happened in the middle east in the last 50 years - that's "history." As you said, it "has been and continues to be manipulated by men.")

Nathan Poe

(Emphasis mine) So -- let me get this straight -- secular history and science are unreliable because they are manipulated by men, but the words written in a book which match up to words written elsewhere in the book could not possibly have been manipulated by men?

Interesting... and by "Interesting," I mean, "rediculously naive."

Johnny Skeptic

No, Bible prophecies is one of the very best reasons why people should reject the Bible. No loving, rational God would ever insprire prophecies that invite dissent when he could easily inspire prophecies that are difficult to dispute. Inspiring prophecies that needlessly invite dissent could not possibly benefit a God or anyone else. Obviously, you lack a reasonable motive for why God needlessly inspired prophecies that invite dissent.

Anyone who has just a modest amount of common sense knows that if a God was able to predict the future, and wanted to use prophecy in order to give confidence to his followers, and attract new followers, he would inspire prophecies that are difficult to dispute, thereby increasing the number of his followers, and decreasing the number of people who will go to hell.

Although you have tried to blame the Jews for rejecting Jesus during the first century, if a God inspired that Bible, he is partially to blame for that. If Micah had predicted that Jesus would heal people, that Pontius Pilate would become the Roman governor of Palestine, and the Titus would destroy the Jewish Temple in 70 A.D., surely more Jews would have accepted Jesus. Nostradamus and Edgar Cayce attracted a lot of followers based upon a lot less convincing evidence than that.

If prophecy is the greatest evidence of all, why have millions of people died without having any knowledge of Bible prophecy?

Of course, you lose even if God can predict the future since there is not a necessary correlation between power and good character. In addition, if a God favors Jews, unfair favoritism is another good reason for people to reject him.

Logically, if a God inspired the Bible, he is able to convince more people to love and accept him by providing additional evidence. No man can morally be sent to hell for refusing to accept evidence that he would accept if he was aware of it.

I challenge you to start a new thread at the General Religious Discussions Forum and discuss one of your favorite fulfilled prophecies. If you do, please limit your discussions to one prophecy.

sugarhitman

60 years is not that long ago, many people are around today to testify about mideast events....but who today was around in ancient times? Seeing that ancient secular history are filled with contradictions, silences, exaggerations, errors and lies, it too requires enormous faith to believe. You cannot disprove, or prove God with such suspect history. And neither with science because their theories and models conflict with one another, and cannot explain the supernatural.

Martian Astronomer

History 60 years ago is still history, which you just said people aren't supposed to use to try to prove the bible. Granted, the evidence of what happened 60 years ago is several orders of magnitude better, but it's still historical evidence "manipulated by men" - it's not a qualitatively different mode of argument.

At the risk of channeling Johnny Skeptic, I don't really see how the fact that Israel exists as a nation is some sort of slam-dunk proof of real prophetic abilities (since I'm assuming this is what you're referring to), and, moreover, even if I were to hypothetically grant that there are some confirmed prophecies in the Bible I don't see how this somehow makes everything in the Bible automatically true. Every assertion has to stand or fall on its own.

Toto

Please note the stickied thread at top section of this forum: Please Read. . .

The purposes of this forum are not served by endless repetition of the same old arguments, especially when they are bad and unpersuasive. If you really think you have something new to say on phrophecy, PM me. Otherwise, this thread is closed.