Orthodox_Freethinker

...unless God becomes incarnate and clearly shows that prophecy has been fulfilled.

Read Isaiah 9:6. That should be clear enough.

Even Jews who vehemently deny that Jesus Christ fulfilled Biblical prophecy agree that the texts were written long before the coming of Christ.

This critique is unoriginal and tired. I could have provided better objections to Biblical prophecy but then I'd also be able to defend against such objections.

Peace.

CJD

Well of course it does, and I in no way suggested otherwise. The problem is, one has to have at least a semblance of know-how in these matters to even judge whether or not the argument does stand on its own merits. Do you honestly consider yourself capable of this?

The author's scholarly qualifications are relevant when an otherwise unknown Internet poetaster begins to critique him.

No one is talking about blind faith here. I am speaking of the fact that we live in a world that requires us to seek out what the experts say. If you ask me, disagreeing with an expert without offering a plausible alternate scenario sounds more like blind faith than humbly acquiescing until such a time that disagreeing becomes an option precisely because of the work the one disagreeing has done. And, incidentally, "scholarly qualifications" are a decent way to show this. Another way would be to post and prove it.

We are very poor and shallow thinkers, not so "free" at all.

CJD

CJD

Really, this is the only faulty point from your opening post. It simply is not how prophetic utterances were understood in their original contexts. There is no valid distinction between a "prophecy" and a "prediction," if for no other reason than the ancient peoples did not understand "prophecy" to mean what you think it means. A "prophecy," by its very nature, only claimed fulfillment according to the multitudinous historical contingencies that could and did occur between the time of the utterance and its fulfillment (or not). The ancients understood this. Many modern apologists, and many skeptics who are all-too-willing to hand-wave "failed" prophecies (using the apologist's own hermeneutic), do not.

CJD

John A. Broussard

If someone advances an argument, the value of the argument rests entirely on the argument itself. The credentials of the arguer are totally irrelevant.

John A. Broussard

Is there anyone posting here who understands this? I'd appreciate an exegesis.

Thank you.

John A. Broussard

You missed the point.

I was not singling out any particular prophesy. I was merely setting up some guidelines for judging the value of prophesies.

Why get upset by a mere suggestion of guidelines?


If there's something wrong with any of them, tell me what it is that you object to instead of implying I'm attacking one particular prophetic utterance.

Jack the Bodiless

Well, it obviously doesn't apply to Jesus, he never sat on the throne of David and governed Israel. And it hasn't been established that Jesus was the promised Messiah either.

If you think that the Bible DOES contain specific evidence of divine inspiration, the thread Inerrantists: please demonstrate that ANY part of the Bible is "divinely inspired" would be a better place for it (maybe I shouldn't have included "inerrantists" in the title, it would be helpful if anyone could demonstrate this).

CJD

Read the damned article!!!

John A. Broussard

Thank you for your sensitive response to my question.

However, it remains of interest that you are unable to make your own analysis of the OP.

CJD

John, all in jest. I know you haven't been around here that long. I'll point you in the right direction by doing a simple search:

Look here and here for starters.

Best,

CJD