Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Jayrok · 02-01-2008, 10:22 PM

I have a question for sugarhitman and arnoldo (or maybe it's the same person) regarding prophecy fulfillment.

In a couple of different threads you've talked about and defended the idea that prophecy fulfillment in OT books such as Daniel and Ezekiel prove God exists and Jesus is who he said he was, etc. Here's a comment from sugarhitman:

Quote:

It's amazing that people will reject the obvious even when it is staring them in the face. Israel is restored just as predicted. The nations are trying to take this land from them as predicted. The Global Community is uniting against Israel as foretold. And yet the naysayers say it is not so!

Preachers like Hal Lindsey and John Hagee and people like yourselves often parallel world events to scripture in Ezekiel and claim prophecy is being fulfilled around us as predicted in the OT. Prime example is the Israeli state established in 1948.

My question is this... From Ezekiel 40 to the end of the book where Ezekiel describes the Temple in great detail... When is this prophecy going to take place? I mean the prophecy where God lives in the Temple and requires daily sin sacrifices of burnt offerings at his alter for atonement for the people.

When is this going to come true? Or is it a false prophecy? Was Ezekiel mistaken or was he lied to?

spamandham · 02-01-2008, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayrok

Preachers like Hal Lindsey and John Hagee and people like yourselves often parallel world events to scripture in Ezekiel and claim prophecy is being fulfilled around us as predicted in the OT. Prime example is the Israeli state established in 1948.

This would be an impressive prophecy indeed IF:

- it was not re-established by Christians and Zionists trying to force the fulfillment of prophecy

- the modern nation of Israel (gee, what are the odds it would even have the same naem as the ancient state!? oh yeah, 100% since it was created for the express purpose of trying to fulfill prophecy) were a theocracy rather than a secular republic

- ...and if it had happened several thousand years ago as predicted (Daniel set a specific timetable which, when it failed to happen, spawned Christianity to explain away why the prophecy wasn't fulfilled as expected)

sugarhitman · 02-01-2008, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayrok

Preachers like Hal Lindsey and John Hagee and people like yourselves often parallel world events to scripture in Ezekiel and claim prophecy is being fulfilled around us as predicted in the OT. Prime example is the Israeli state established in 1948.

This would be an impressive prophecy indeed IF:

- it was not re-established by Christians and Zionists trying to force the fulfillment of prophecy

- the modern nation of Israel (gee, what are the odds it would even have the same naem as the ancient state!? oh yeah, 100% since it was created for the express purpose of trying to fulfill prophecy) were a theocracy rather than a secular republic

- ...and if it had happened several thousand years ago as predicted (Daniel set a specific timetable which, when it failed to happen, spawned Christianity to explain away why the prophecy wasn't fulfilled as expected)

I'm not Hagee or Lindsey. And If 'christian' Britian was so for Israel then why did they brake thier promise and gave the land promised to the Jews to Transjordan? Why did they try to stop Jewish immigration to Palestine? Indeed why does Britian have a terrible record for Anti-Semitism? This arguement that Israel was restored to fulfill prophecy by christians, is the most weak and absurd arguement yet by skeptics. I guess the Arabs and the U.N. the bloody dispute over this land is all scripted to support bible prophecy. Such an arguement is not only implausable but also.....stupid. :wave:

Johnny Skeptic · 02-02-2008, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

I'm not Hagee or Lindsey. And If 'christian' Britian was so for Israel then why did they brake thier promise and gave the land promised to the Jews to Transjordan? Why did they try to stop Jewish immigration to Palestine? Indeed why does Britian have a terrible record for Anti-Semitism? This arguement that Israel was restored to fulfill prophecy by christians, is the most weak and absurd arguement yet by skeptics. I guess the Arabs and the U.N. the bloody dispute over this land is all scripted to support Bible prophecy. Such an argument is not only implausable but also.....stupid.

Ok, if God is able to predict the future, what does that mean? Does it mean that he has good character?

Consider the following from another thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Question: How many governments supplied troops for the State of Israel to defend itself in 1948. Answer: 0.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

During the first several years of the Second World War, did the U.S. have any troops in Europe? No.

Without American aid, would the British have been defeated? Yes.

Without a majority vote by the U.N., would the Jews have tried to occupy parts of Palestine at that time? No.

If the Bible did not exist, would the vote by the U.N. have been the same? No. The proof is that out of the 33 governments that voted in favor of the partition, 32 are Christian, and 1, the Russian government, was joyfully receiving lots of aid from the U.S. Out of the 13 governments that voted against the partition, 12 are not-Chrisitian, and 1, the Greek government, is nominally Christian. Now are you going to embarrass yourself and tell us that Christianity, Judaism, and military power did not have anything to do with the Partition of Palestine, and that if the Axis Powers had won the Second World War, the Palestine would have been partitioned.

Is it true that even if a prophecy is false, if people believe that it is true, and have enough military power, they can make it come true? Yes.

Could God have made indisputable prophecies that would have left no doubt about the history of the Jewish people? Yes.

Could God easily prove to everyone's satisfaction that he can predict the future if he wanted to?

2 Samuel 7:10 says that the Jews will have a homeland where no one will bother them. That is not going to happen.

If the Partition of Palestine was not a self-fulfilled prophecy, if Jewish and Palestinian history had been reversed, and Hitler and other parties had persecuted Palestinians instead of Jews, the U.N. would have awarded control of Jerusalem and a grossly disproporationate amount of land per capita to the Palestinians instead of to the Jews. As you know, that would not have happened. Why not? What is the difference between the actual scenario and the hypothetical scenario? Why wouldn't the U.N. have been consistent in both cases? The correct answer is because 32 Christian governments, and one non-Christian government, the Russian government, outvoted 12 non-Christian governments, and the Greek government, who is nominally Christian. In other words, the deck was stacked in favor of the Jews before the hand was dealt.

Anyone who has just a modest amount of common sense knows that even if a prophecy is false, if people believe that it is true, and have enough military power, they can make it come true. If the Koran said that Muslims would kill Jews, and Muslims killed Jews, would that be a fulfillment of a true prophecy, or a fulfillment of a self-fulfilled prophecy?

If the God of the Bible does not exist, would the Partition of Palestine have happened anyway. Yes.

If God can predict the future, does that mean that he has good character? No.

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 the Jews believed that the messiah would become ruler of Israel in this life, which I believe that they did, God deceived them.

Although Christians blame the Jews for not knowing who Jesus was, it was God's fault. If Micah had said that the messiah would become ruler of a heavenly kingdom, and that he would heal people, and that he would be crucified and rise from the dead in three days, and that Pontius Pilate would become governor of Palestine, there are not any doubts whatsoever that a lot more Jews would have accepted Jesus.

No Christian can intelligently claim that God wants people to believe that he can predict the future. Since a God would not have any trouble at all convincing everyone that he is able to predict the future, you obviously do not have any idea whatsoever what he is talking about. One advantage of being a God is that you are able to accomplish whatever you want to accomplish.

sugarhitman · 02-02-2008, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

I'm not Hagee or Lindsey. And If 'christian' Britian was so for Israel then why did they brake thier promise and gave the land promised to the Jews to Transjordan? Why did they try to stop Jewish immigration to Palestine? Indeed why does Britian have a terrible record for Anti-Semitism? This arguement that Israel was restored to fulfill prophecy by christians, is the most weak and absurd arguement yet by skeptics. I guess the Arabs and the U.N. the bloody dispute over this land is all scripted to support Bible prophecy. Such an argument is not only implausable but also.....stupid.

Ok, if God is able to predict the future, what does that mean? Does it mean that he has good character?

Consider the following from another thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

During the first several years of the Second World War, did the U.S. have any troops in Europe? No.

Without American aid, would the British have been defeated? Yes.

Without a majority vote by the U.N., would the Jews have tried to occupy parts of Palestine at that time? No.

If the Bible did not exist, would the vote by the U.N. have been the same? No. The proof is that out of the 33 governments that voted in favor of the partition, 32 are Christian, and 1, the Russian government, was joyfully receiving lots of aid from the U.S. Out of the 13 governments that voted against the partition, 12 are not-Chrisitian, and 1, the Greek government, is nominally Christian. Now are you going to embarrass yourself and tell us that Christianity, Judaism, and military power did not have anything to do with the Partition of Palestine, and that if the Axis Powers had won the Second World War, the Palestine would have been partitioned.

Is it true that even if a prophecy is false, if people believe that it is true, and have enough military power, they can make it come true? Yes.

Could God have made indisputable prophecies that would have left no doubt about the history of the Jewish people? Yes.

Could God easily prove to everyone's satisfaction that he can predict the future if he wanted to?

2 Samuel 7:10 says that the Jews will have a homeland where no one will bother them. That is not going to happen.

If the Partition of Palestine was not a self-fulfilled prophecy, if Jewish and Palestinian history had been reversed, and Hitler and other parties had persecuted Palestinians instead of Jews, the U.N. would have awarded control of Jerusalem and a grossly disproporationate amount of land per capita to the Palestinians instead of to the Jews. As you know, that would not have happened. Why not? What is the difference between the actual scenario and the hypothetical scenario? Why wouldn't the U.N. have been consistent in both cases? The correct answer is because 32 Christian governments, and one non-Christian government, the Russian government, outvoted 12 non-Christian governments, and the Greek government, who is nominally Christian. In other words, the deck was stacked in favor of the Jews before the hand was dealt.

Anyone who has just a modest amount of common sense knows that even if a prophecy is false, if people believe that it is true, and have enough military power, they can make it come true. If the Koran said that Muslims would kill Jews, and Muslims killed Jews, would that be a fulfillment of a true prophecy, or a fulfillment of a self-fulfilled prophecy?

If the God of the Bible does not exist, would the Partition of Palestine have happened anyway. Yes.

If God can predict the future, does that mean that he has good character? No.

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 the Jews believed that the messiah would become ruler of Israel in this life, which I believe that they did, God deceived them.

Although Christians blame the Jews for not knowing who Jesus was, it was God's fault. If Micah had said that the messiah would become ruler of a heavenly kingdom, and that he would heal people, and that he would be crucified and rise from the dead in three days, and that Pontius Pilate would become governor of Palestine, there are not any doubts whatsoever that a lot more Jews would have accepted Jesus.

No Christian can intelligently claim that God wants people to believe that he can predict the future. Since a God would not have any trouble at all convincing everyone that he is able to predict the future, you obviously do not have any idea whatsoever what he is talking about. One advantage of being a God is that you are able to accomplish whatever you want to accomplish.

If the U.N. is so christian why are they so hostile towards God and Israel (The U.N. Charter does not recognize God)? And if God does not work through Kings or governments to help Israel, then what was the point of him working through Cyrus of Medo-Persia (that He predicted He would use in Isaiah by the way)? If the so-called christian nations helped Israel, why didn't they fight with Israel in the war of independence. Heck why did Israel have to fight anyway. Johnny you are starting to sound like a raving maniac (which is why I pretty much ignore you...you're rantings are crazy) who seems to be mad at God about something. Is it because after 30 years you lost your faith? What were you anyway a Roman Catholic Priest? (which may explain why you lost your faith) :wave:

Sheshbazzar · 02-02-2008, 03:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayrok

I have a question for sugarhitman and arnoldo (or maybe it's the same person) regarding prophecy fulfillment.

In a couple of different threads you've talked about and defended the idea that prophecy fulfillment in OT books such as Daniel and Ezekiel prove God exists and Jesus is who he said he was, etc. Here's a comment from sugarhitman:

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

It's amazing that people will reject the obvious even when it is staring them in the face. Israel is restored just as predicted. The nations are trying to take this land from them as predicted. The Global Community is uniting against Israel as foretold. And yet the naysayers say it is not so!

Quote:

Preachers like Hal Lindsey and John Hagee and people like yourselves often parallel world events to scripture in Ezekiel and claim prophecy is being fulfilled around us as predicted in the OT. Prime example is the Israeli state established in 1948.

Quote:

MY QUESTION IS THIS... From Ezekiel 40 to the end of the book where Ezekiel describes the Temple in great detail... When is this prophecy going to take place? I mean the prophecy where God lives in the Temple and requires DAILY SIN SACRIFICES OF BURNT OFFERINGS AT HIS ALTER FOR ATONEMENT for the people.

How do you reconcile this "prophecy" with the doctrine of the New Testament?

1. Wasn't the shed blood of his only begotten son a sufficient enough sin sacrifice?

2. Was not the death of of his only begotten son a sufficient "atonement"?

3. Is your gawd's appetite for the blood of dead animals, and for burnt animal carcasses still unappeased?

4. In the "Third Temple" that you desire, envision, and preach, will livestock still need be slaughtered and burned to make an atonement for sin?

5. Will your gawd, hungry for blood and smoke, just discount that "sacrifice" on the cross that so big a deal is made out of in the New Testament?

6. Is Ezekiel being a true prophet here?

7. When is this going to come true?

8. Or is it a false prophecy?

9. Was Ezekiel mistaken?

10. Or did your gawd give to him a false prophecy ?

I have split out and numbered each individual question so that you may answer them one by one.

I have set before you this day these TEN QUESTIONS, you ought not to turn from them either unto the right hand, neither unto the left hand, but for once in your miserable life, face forward and acquit yourself as honest, straightforward and upright men.

Give straightforward answers, Or continue to be evasive, and dodge the questions, after all, it is only the question of your "christian" integrity and morality that is here at stake.

Jayrok · 02-02-2008, 01:03 PM

Sheshbazzar - This is basically what I'm getting at.

People who claim the middle east is in the end of days like to point at today's events and claim prophecy has been fulfilled. Yet you don't hear these preachers talk about Ezekiel any further than chapter 36 or 38.

These are difficult passages for christians. Not so much for those who practice Judaism, who are still waiting for their messiah to come. When Christianity hijacked Judaism and changed the story to have the NT trump the OT, they didn't clean up things very well.

I'm sure sugarhitman will claim the battle of gog/magog is still future as it hasn't happened yet. In fact, gog and magog are mentioned in Revelation as well which most likely means the author of Revelation used Ezekiel (among others) as his source material.

But Ezekiel's temple comes into play after armageddon. This is the new Jerusalem, but the one sugarman, John Hagee and Hal Lindsey refuse to talk about. Because in this temple God requires sacrifice for continued sin atonement.

I thought Jesus paid that price 2000 years ago? If this temple is still in the future, why is sin still not paid for?

Since the bible is the word of God, all this must come to pass or else it's a false prophecy or God flat out lied. Either way there is a problem here that Christians don't want to talk about.

1. If the OT is correct and the prophecies will be fulfilled (as sugarhitman claims with the current nation of Israel), then the NT is worthless and Jesus' acts on a cross didn't mean very much. Since God's plan is still yet to be fulfilled in Ezekiel's temple, and he demands sacrifice for sin atonement, then Jesus died for nothing and didn't conquer sin after all.

2. If the NT is correct and Jesus literally paid for the sin of mankind on the cross, then the OT prophecy of Ezekiel's temple is rubbish and will not come to pass.

Either way, there is a problem there. Both the NT and OT are claimed to be God's inerrent word. But which one is correct and which one will not take place?

Jayrok · 02-02-2008, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

I'm not Hagee or Lindsey. And If 'christian' Britian was so for Israel then why did they brake thier promise and gave the land promised to the Jews to Transjordan? Why did they try to stop Jewish immigration to Palestine? Indeed why does Britian have a terrible record for Anti-Semitism? This arguement that Israel was restored to fulfill prophecy by christians, is the most weak and absurd arguement yet by skeptics. I guess the Arabs and the U.N. the bloody dispute over this land is all scripted to support bible prophecy. Such an arguement is not only implausable but also.....stupid. :wave:

Why didn't you address the original question?

This new jerusalem will be built after armageddon. The sacrificial system is clearly instated. Is this a false prophecy because Ezekiel had no idea of Christianity?

If God had Jesus being the sole sacrifice for mankind in mind all along (from before time began), why in the world would he dictate this Temple nonsense to Ezekiel in the first place??

No wonder the jews rejected Jesus. They had their future plans laid out from God's lips to Ezekiel's pen all along. And that plan has no mention of Jesus.

Paul claims that circumcision is worthless and superseded by Jesus' acts on the cross. Yet Ezekiel 44:9 says This is what the Sovereign LORD says: No foreigner uncircumcised in heart and flesh is to enter my sanctuary, not even the foreigners who live among the Israelites.

Does that mean Ezekiel 44 is garbage and should be ignored? Or does it mean Paul manipulated his audience and introduced them to a new religion? Both sides are claimed to be God's word. But all of it cannot be correct.

spamandham · 02-02-2008, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

And If 'christian' Britian was so for Israel ...

Britain had little to do with it. The creation of the modern state of Israel was forced by Zionists and Jewish sympathizers in the US.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

This arguement that Israel was restored to fulfill prophecy by christians, is the most weak and absurd arguement yet by skeptics.

I suppose that would seem so to someone unversed in the history of the events. Tell me, why was the name "Israel" chosen?

sugarhitman · 02-03-2008, 04:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayrok

I have a question for sugarhitman and arnoldo (or maybe it's the same person) regarding prophecy fulfillment.

In a couple of different threads you've talked about and defended the idea that prophecy fulfillment in OT books such as Daniel and Ezekiel prove God exists and Jesus is who he said he was, etc. Here's a comment from sugarhitman:

Quote:

MY QUESTION IS THIS... From Ezekiel 40 to the end of the book where Ezekiel describes the Temple in great detail... When is this prophecy going to take place? I mean the prophecy where God lives in the Temple and requires DAILY SIN SACRIFICES OF BURNT OFFERINGS AT HIS ALTER FOR ATONEMENT for the people.

How do you reconcile this "prophecy" with the doctrine of the New Testament?

1. Wasn't the shed blood of his only begotten son a sufficient enough sin sacrifice?

2. Was not the death of of his only begotten son a sufficient "atonement"?

3. Is your gawd's appetite for the blood of dead animals, and for burnt animal carcasses still unappeased?

4. In the "Third Temple" that you desire, envision, and preach, will livestock still need be slaughtered and burned to make an atonement for sin?

5. Will your gawd, hungry for blood and smoke, just discount that "sacrifice" on the cross that so big a deal is made out of in the New Testament?

6. Is Ezekiel being a true prophet here?

7. When is this going to come true?

8. Or is it a false prophecy?

9. Was Ezekiel mistaken?

10. Or did your gawd give to him a false prophecy ?

I have split out and numbered each individual question so that you may answer them one by one.

I have set before you this day these TEN QUESTIONS, you ought not to turn from them either unto the right hand, neither unto the left hand, but for once in your miserable life, face forward and acquit yourself as honest, straightforward and upright men.

Give straightforward answers, Or continue to be evasive, and dodge the questions, after all, it is only the question of your "christian" integrity and morality that is here at stake.

This temple was the temple to be built after the Babylonian Captivity. In the New Jerusalem there will be no Temple and thus no animal sacrifices. Read Revelation. Ezezkiel's Temple is no way connected to New Jerusalem, because in this city there will be no temple....Ezekiel's temple is the temple to built after the Babbylonian captivity...a little encouragement showing that Israel would be restored. Is that being straight forward enough for you? :wave:

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

02-02-2008, 01:03 PM	#7
Jayrok Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: USA Posts: 471	Sheshbazzar - This is basically what I'm getting at. People who claim the middle east is in the end of days like to point at today's events and claim prophecy has been fulfilled. Yet you don't hear these preachers talk about Ezekiel any further than chapter 36 or 38. These are difficult passages for christians. Not so much for those who practice Judaism, who are still waiting for their messiah to come. When Christianity hijacked Judaism and changed the story to have the NT trump the OT, they didn't clean up things very well. I'm sure sugarhitman will claim the battle of gog/magog is still future as it hasn't happened yet. In fact, gog and magog are mentioned in Revelation as well which most likely means the author of Revelation used Ezekiel (among others) as his source material. But Ezekiel's temple comes into play after armageddon. This is the new Jerusalem, but the one sugarman, John Hagee and Hal Lindsey refuse to talk about. Because in this temple God requires sacrifice for continued sin atonement. I thought Jesus paid that price 2000 years ago? If this temple is still in the future, why is sin still not paid for? Since the bible is the word of God, all this must come to pass or else it's a false prophecy or God flat out lied. Either way there is a problem here that Christians don't want to talk about. 1. If the OT is correct and the prophecies will be fulfilled (as sugarhitman claims with the current nation of Israel), then the NT is worthless and Jesus' acts on a cross didn't mean very much. Since God's plan is still yet to be fulfilled in Ezekiel's temple, and he demands sacrifice for sin atonement, then Jesus died for nothing and didn't conquer sin after all. 2. If the NT is correct and Jesus literally paid for the sin of mankind on the cross, then the OT prophecy of Ezekiel's temple is rubbish and will not come to pass. Either way, there is a problem there. Both the NT and OT are claimed to be God's inerrent word. But which one is correct and which one will not take place?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.