Arvel Joffi

I'm one that simply finds the Bible, as a whole, to be a little absurd; so I'm not very good with the details. Can any knowledgeable people take a look at these prohecies that a friend sent me that are "100% correct!" This is his primary proof of the existence of the Christian God.

I did fine on my own yesterday when we were discussing evolution, early science, and the just nature of God (he just wouldn't listen ) , but prophecy just strikes me as silly so I've never spent any time on them. Anyone here want to tear these things apart?

His article is here.

And the prohecies that he refers to are here.

Tod

There are several criteria for claiming prophecy fulfillment. Farrell Till has outlined them numerous times before. Here are five of them:

1. It must be shown that the event predicted actually occurred.

2. It must be shown that the prophecy was made prior to the event predicted.

3. The event must be far enough in advance to eliminate guesswork. I could predict we will send a manned mission to Mars, but such an educated guess would hardly be prophetic.

4. The prophecy must be specific. If claiming prophecy fulfillment requires "correct interpretation" of vague statements, it isn't prophecy fulfillment.

5. The prophecy cannot be easily self-fullfilled.

To take the first example regarding Tyre:

To be destroyed and never rebuilt, and to become a place for fishermen's nets (Ezekial 26:14)
*Destroyed 1291 A.D.. not yet rebuilt at original site.

The prophecy specifies that Nebuchadnezzar will be the one to destroy Tyre (26:14) The cited verses will demonstrate how explicitly this destruction is laided out in this alleged "prophecy." The above claims prophecy fulfillment in 1291 AD, 1700 years after Nebuchadnezzar attacked, but failed to destroy, Tyre! Sorry, but this claim of prophecy fulfillment left out some important information about WHO was predicted to destroy Tyre!

Nebuchadnezzar FAILED in his attempts. As the source above acknowledges Tyre existed for almost two thousand more years! It specifically says that Tyre's "wealth will be seized [its] merchandise looted." (26:12) Ezekiel himself acknowledges this is true later in chapter 29: "Son of man, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon has taken his army in a great expedition against Tyre. their heads have all gone bald, their shoulders are all chafed, but even so he derived no profit, either for himself or for his army, from the expedition mounted against Tyre."

So this prophecy fails the first criteria.

We have only the author of Ezekiel's claim of when the book Ezekiel was written. There exist no copies from the time it was allegedly written, so there is no good evidence that this prophecy was written prior to the event it predicts.

It fails criteria two for that reason. It further fails three, if we assume it was written when it is claimed to have been written. I'll let Asimov field this one. From "Isaac Asimov's Guide to the Bible":

'"[Tyre] shared in the Egyptian-encouraged intrigues against Babylonia that led to Judah's destruction and it was quite obvious that Nebuchadnezzar intended to punish Tyre when he was done with Jerusalem. Ezekiel's prophecy "in the eleventh year" took place in 587 B.C., when Jerusalem's fate was sealed and when the forthcoming siege of Tyre was a sure thing." (p. 587)

That is an example of how you debunk these prophecies. Look at what the prophecy actually says. Don't rely on quotes, as I demonstrated here they can be misleading, since this person left out completely the crucial role of Nebuchadnezzar in this prophecy. Look for yourself. Look at the evidence the event predicted came to pass. Can it be verified extrabiblically? If not, they have no prophecy fulfillment. Look at the evidence for when the prophecy was written. Can they show it was made before the event predicted occurred? If all they can do is cite the source of the prophecy as their evidence for when it was written, they have no claim to prophecy fulfillment. Check all criteria and see if the alleged prophecy passes.

Also, give your friend some examples of failed prophecies:

Ez. 29:9-12 and 30:4-16 tell us that Nebuchadrezzar will "destroy" the land of Egypt, cause its inhabitants "to cease", the land will be made "desolate and waste" and "neither shall it be inhabited for forty years," and finally that afterwards, "there shall be no more a prince in the land of Egypt." The prophecy fails miserably on all counts.

Nebuchadrezzar never destroyed Egypt, neither did he exile or exterminate the inhabitants of Egypt. A prince ruled in Egypt for centuries after Nebuchadrezzar's death, and never has Egypt been uninhabited for a single day in recorded history, much less forty years. An utter failure of a prophecy.

Another example would be Jer. 36:30, where Jeremiah predicts to Jehoiakim that Jehoiakim would have no sons to rule over Judah. His son Jeconiah (also Coniah and Jehoiachin) (I Chron. 3:16 and II Kings 24:6) however was the very next king (Est. 2:6 and II Kings 24:6-8)! This prophecy not only fails, but one doesn't even have to look outside the Bible to see as much. The Bible refutes one of its own prophecy.

Arvel Joffi

I try to address these issues myself, but I don't know how anyone can get through enough the Bible to do so. So thanks, Tod. I appreciate the detailed post. Fascinating.

Tod

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tod
There are several criteria for claiming prophecy fulfillment. Farrell Till has outlined them numerous times before. Here are five of them:

1. It must be shown that the event predicted actually occurred.

2. It must be shown that the prophecy was made prior to the event predicted.

3. The event must be far enough in advance to eliminate guesswork. I could predict we will send a manned mission to Mars, but such an educated guess would hardly be prophetic.

4. The prophecy must be specific. If claiming prophecy fulfillment requires "correct interpretation" of vague statements, it isn't prophecy fulfillment.

5. The prophecy cannot be easily self-fulfilled.

I thought of the 6th criteria: The prophecy can't be overly general or about things that occur all of the time. E.g., general predictions about earthquakes, famine, and pestilence fall into this category of nonprophecies. Of course, if somebody predicted that on June 16th 2054 a quake would hit San Francisco, that would be a valid prophecy because of its precision. If somebody simply said that some time in the future a quake will hit San Francisco, the occurence of a quake some time in the future wouldn't be an example of prophecy fulfillment.

Tod

I don't know why it is that I find it so easy to "get through" the Bible. I don't know if it is my past Christianity or my love for antiquities that causes me to find the Bible not only tolerable but terribly interesting. It is indeed one of my favorite books for some reason. I have well over a dozen translations and a whole section of my library dedicated to Bibles and books about the Bible. It could simply be an acquired taste that results from past years of studying the Bible as a believer. I can certainly see how most people would find it a boring read though.

Tod

Correction needed. In my first post I'd said:

Nebuchadnezzar FAILED in his attempts. As the source above acknowledges Tyre existed for almost two thousand more years! It specifically says that Tyre's "wealth will be seized [its] merchandise looted." (26:12) Ezekiel himself acknowledges this is true later in chapter 29: "Son of man, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon has taken his army in a great expedition against Tyre. their heads have all gone bald, their shoulders are all chafed, but even so he derived no profit, either for himself or for his army, from the expedition mounted against Tyre."

The italacized portion should read "Ezekiel himself acknowledges this didn't occur."

Gooch's dad

Hey, Tod,

Some of those supposed prophecies on that guy's page are just laughable. Most fall quite easily to Farrel Till's excellent criteria, and I like your addition to that list too. It can't be too obvious of a 'prophecy' to really count.

But this one:

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

"mostly controlled by Russia"? A prophecy is considered fulfilled if some little backwater of Russia happens to be the same territory as some ancient biblical land, but only in part?

And since when is Russia counted as Israel's "most powerful enemy"? That's utter nonsense.

Much of the rest of the list is either obvious or self-fulfilling.

I've seen similar lists which refer to Jesus supposedly fulfilling 3000 or so OT prophecies, and most of them are patently ridiculous. A fair number of those also appear to be ones where the NT writers specifically wrote their stories to 'fit' to the OT prophecy.

Good luck, though. Experience around here with such fundies as Magus55 show that they can't even comprehend that bit about the NT writers. It simply doesn't register with them.

CJD

From a non-fundamentalized view of prophetic literature, I see Till's and other's criterion on this thread as largely a response to fundamentalist hermeneutics. That's great; maybe the fundy will learn that reading prophecies solely as single, specific prognostications doesn't do justice to the text.

The problem with Till and others is my fear that they think they are undermining the actual text when all they have really done is undermined a faulty way to read it.

This thread on the Isaiah 7 prediction and this thread on reading OT prophetic literature in general might help the reader see what they already know—that a fundamentalized hermeneutic is wrong-headed. In the process, maybe the reader will also learn how the text itself suggests we read the prophetic literature of the Tanak.

Regards,

CJD

gregor

Also - you can visit Tyre today. The island-portion of the cirty was never taken by Nebby, and remained through antiquity. While the land-base portion of the city was seiged, it has since been built.

Lovely town that doesn't exist:

http://www.tracyanddale.50megs.com/Byblos/tyrsid.html

Arvel Joffi

I find some sections of the Bible to be fascinating, and the stories themselves are enjoyable. But the prose is just so heavy handed and cumbersome and redundant that I can't stand it after 20 or so pages. And why couldn't they simply edit Matthew, Mark, Luke and John together? They're 90% the same, so it just gets really boring!

Oh well. Back to television