Bible Prophecy as Evidence of a bible writers trustworthiness

[CG Didymus]

Bahai's are greatly mislead. the messiah of God must come...

Yes and why don't Jews believe the Christians? Isn't it because they think Christians are "misled"? That was all I was trying to say. And prophecies are a part of this. One religion says they didn't fulfill the prophecies. And the other one says they did... and usually say they "clearly" fulfilled them.

I must say some muslims also say similar things about bible prophecies fit Muhammed.

Christianity and Islam are well established. Baha'is haven't proved themselves yet. But my point was the Jews don't accept the Christian interpretations of the prophecies. Then Christians don't accept the Islamic and Baha'i interpretations. And Islam doesn't accept the Baha'i interpretations. And I think, from whose ever perspective we take, they have a point. Any one of them can say, "Well because it says this here, that makes them wrong. And because this verse says this, it makes us right."

But then if we start at the other end, we have Baha'is saying that Islam, Christianity and Judaism are all true and from God, but... then, not the prophet, but the followers misinterpreted this and this. and that is why we needed a new message to correct the errors that crept in. Then Islam can say something similar about Christianity. And Christianity will say it about Judaism.

I don't know. Like I've told you before, I respect your knowledge about these things, so any comments and critique would be appreciated. Thanks.

 

[Redemptionsong]

We don't need to have a MAN-MADE sacrifice to be able to get to Paradise

In Islam, Allah says that he can forgive and WILL forgive his servants that repent unto Him. But He did say, that there is one sin he will never forgive and that is associating partners unto Him.

Mohammad pbuh was just a messenger of Allah and started the revelation at the age of 40 yrs. In the Quran it says,

“And We have sent you (O Muhammad SAW) not but as a mercy for the Aalameen (mankind, jinn and all that exists)” al-Anbiya’ 21:107
“Say (O Muhammad): I am only a man like you. It has been revealed to me that your Ilaah (God) is One Ilaah (God _ i.e. Allah)”al-Kahf 18:110

The Prophet pbuh forbade when he said: “Do not exaggerate about me as was exaggerated about ‘Eesa (Jesus) ibn Maryam. Say: the slave of Allah and His Messenger.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6830.

We are not to worship the prophets and messengers of Allah. peace and blessings be upon them all. We are to only worship our Creator who sent them. So you see it isn't a competition.

Mohammad died and will be resurrected. Jesus never died according to Allah in the Quran. We await for his return.

Jesus is not a man-made sacrifice, but a God-given sacrifice. If Jesus never died, and if he was not resurrected three days and nights later, then there is no redemption for mankind, and we remain in sin. Unless there is a payment for the sin of Adam, then all in Adam will die. Muhammad was 'in Adam' too, and this means he died and will not be resurrected to everlasting life. It's the same for all the prophets, including Moses. All the prophets rely on God for resurrection and eternal life.

Only God can save, and God has made it clear how his salvation works.

 

[nPeace]

That's the problem. Christians say the "Comforter" was the prediction of the Holy Spirit coming at Pentecost. Baha'is, and maybe Muslims also, use it as a prediction of their prophets.

But also, if the NT was written after the events happened, how can we be sure that the writers didn't make the story fit a prophesy. Like Matthew and the virgin birth, Herod having the little boys killed, out of Egypt he will be called his son and he will be called a Nazarene.

But then... were some of those even prophecies? The cherry-picking problem of finding one verse that says something that can be made to fit cannot be claimed to be a prophecy.

Then, going back to the virgin birth, there's the dual-fulfillment problem. What do Christians do with the context of Isaiah chapter 7 after verse 14? Was there a boy born that became the sign for King Ahaz? If so, was he born of a virgin? If there was no boy in Isaiah's time and the sign was a prophesy about Jesus, then how did Jesus fulfill the rest of the things predicted about this boy?

And because Islam and the Baha'i Faith use the Bible to "prove", give "objective" evidence of "fulfilled" prophecy, then anybody can make the prophecies in the Bible show that their prophet is the promised one. So, unless Christians believe Islam and the Baha'i Faith are true, then this shows that prophecies can be interpreted in a way to make whatever happens fit.

How can we be sure that the writers didn't make the story fit a prophesy?
Flavious Josephus for one.
Josephus offers another important but highly controversial detail about Alexander’s brief visit to Jerusalem. While in the city, a scroll is brought to Alexander:

“And when the Book of Daniel was showed him wherein Daniel declared that one of the Greeks should destroy the empire of the Persians, he supposed that himself was the person intended. And as he was then glad, he dismissed the multitude for the present.”

For another... When compared with other works of antiquity, the New Testament has far greater (numerical) and earlier documentation than any other book. Most of the available works of antiquity have only a few manuscripts that attest to their existence, and these are typically much later than their original date of composition...

Another... the abundance of evidence that turns up... confirming that the writers did state the truth.
City of David Top Finds #1: King Hezekiah's Royal Seal
City of David Top Finds #8: House of David Inscription

Hezekiah's Tunnel

It's like having a reputation that is time and again tested, and proven.
Imagine being taken to the same court time and again by accusers, and evidence turning up to prove your innocence.
After a while, the judge will not want to see you in the courtroom.
He will know that you are truthful, and opposers are out to get you.
It's obvious.

Just as people trust the records made by the Assyrians, and others, there is no reason to doubt the record of the Jewish people - Israelites - especially when time after time, evidence confirms its reliability.

So my question is, how do we know anything about history, if we reject historians, because we don't like what they wrote?
The Bible contains accurate history.
It's a reliable source.

Which historians do you accept?
Is history buried, and we only accept what modern people want to believe?

 

[Redemptionsong]

Muhammed is irrelevant. I am not a jew or a christian, but in order to understand the language of the Tanakh, one has to consult a Jewish scholar or at least a scholar in the Jewish languages.

Just making some random statement that Jews are just stuck in some covenant while misrepresenting their text is preposterous. Thats in my opinion.

And prior to quoting 1st Timothy as "authoritative" maybe you should establish why it should be authoritative. YoU just quote a random verse as if its Gods word.

As I have stated clearly, my evidence for God is the Bible and the Holy Spirit. Scholars have had 2000 years to determine the canon and text of scripture, and I believe the Holy Spirit has been their guide.

If you wish to discuss the integrity of scripture, then I'll do so based on the internal integrity of the text. Let's not forget that all the apostles chosen by Jesus were Jews, and as Jews they had no difficulty accepting Jesus as the Jewish Messiah.

Paul, who was a Pharisee before becoming an apostle of Christ, made it very clear in his epistles that the Law and the Prophets were holy and of God.

Romans 7:12. 'Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.'

Paul could not be clearer about the Law. And this applies to the whole of the Tanakh, which he knew back to front. Paul believed them to be scripture, and inspired by God.

If a Muslim thinks that there are parts of the Bible that have been corrupted then they should try to rewrite the Bible with the errors taken out. That I would love to see.

 

[CG Didymus]

not everyone will see, and some will be blind.

And then Baha'is say the same thing to Christians. They say, "All the prophecies pointed to the year 1844. But you weren't looking for the right person and weren't looking in the right place."

You lost me on this one CG.

It's about some being blind. Christians see the Bible prophecies clearly fulfilled, but others are blind to it. Now the Baha'is come along and say their prophet fulfilled all the prophecies. That he is the return of Christ. And those that don't "clearly" see that are blind to the "truth" that they see.

So, of course, it's clear for those that are looking at Scriptures and prophecies from a certain perspective. But Jews, Christians, Muslims, Baha'is, Atheists and people in the other religions all see it from a different perspective. Unless we let ourselves see it from those other points of view, we too will be blind in some ways.

Then, just thinking about it, let's say your Christian perspective is correct, those other people are more than blind, they are seeing things that aren't there. But then, if any one of those others is right, then it is the Christians that are seeing things that are blinding them to the truth. But then do you believe that all Christians "see" the truth correctly?

 

[nPeace]

The more the color changes and the
more the bold font is underlined, the weaker
the presentation gets. Keep it up.

Oh, i almost missed this, the colours so dazzled me-

"A one time event that happens annually"

Thats too precious!

And prophecy of the flood? You couldnt have picked a better
example ofvfailed prophecy to auto- discredit your claims.

I'm sorry. i did not realize the colors were difficult to read for you. I find it helpful. However, we ar different.

"A one time event that happens annually"
Ha ha. You're right. It is precious. I'll keep it around so that others can get a laugh as well.
Despite the error, you know exactly what I mean.

 

[kaninchen]

When our thoughts, words, and actions are laid bare, and we are compared with Jesus, where do we stand?

I stand by the NT being neither scripture nor reportage so the question is merely 'literary', like asking me to compare myself with Elizabeth Bennet or Lara Antipova.

 

[nPeace]

It's about some being blind. Christians see the Bible prophecies clearly fulfilled, but others are blind to it. Now the Baha'is come along and say their prophet fulfilled all the prophecies. That he is the return of Christ. And those that don't "clearly" see that are blind to the "truth" that they see.

So, of course, it's clear for those that are looking at Scriptures and prophecies from a certain perspective. But Jews, Christians, Muslims, Baha'is, Atheists and people in the other religions all see it from a different perspective. Unless we let ourselves see it from those other points of view, we too will be blind in some ways.

Then, just thinking about it, let's say your Christian perspective is correct, those other people are more than blind, they are seeing things that aren't there. But then, if any one of those others is right, then it is the Christians that are seeing things that are blinding them to the truth. But then do you believe that all Christians "see" the truth correctly?

That still is not relevant to the point being made.
The fact is, people will believe lies, untruths, what they want to... etc.
that does not change the fact that truth was spoken.
So I am still lost.

If you say after that fact, that we need to identify who has the truth, I can understand that, but saying that nobody has it, is not truth.
There is truth, and if it is given to be known, then it can be known.
Because everyone does not attain it, doesn't mean it does not exist.

If you are interested in how we know what truth is, that's a different subject, which I don't mind discussing at all.

 

[nPeace]

Occasionally precise, never accurate

You mean to you... and skeptics alike. That's true.

 

[Sheldon]

Are you going to believe my answer no matter what it is, or is this a totally false question? Are you capable of believing that someone can read your sacred text, understand it, and honestly not believe it?

Not to mention the fact it smacks of a special pleading fallacy. Claiming the texts require subjective immersion, in order to reveal some esoteric truth, is just a bare claim, and once again I cannot help but observe different religions make these identical unevidenced claims, for different texts, that to them prove different deities exist, and dispute each others claims.

 

[Redemptionsong]

That's the problem. Christians say the "Comforter" was the prediction of the Holy Spirit coming at Pentecost. Baha'is, and maybe Muslims also, use it as a prediction of their prophets.

But also, if the NT was written after the events happened, how can we be sure that the writers didn't make the story fit a prophesy. Like Matthew and the virgin birth, Herod having the little boys killed, out of Egypt he will be called his son and he will be called a Nazarene.

But then... were some of those even prophecies? The cherry-picking problem of finding one verse that says something that can be made to fit cannot be claimed to be a prophecy.

Then, going back to the virgin birth, there's the dual-fulfillment problem. What do Christians do with the context of Isaiah chapter 7 after verse 14? Was there a boy born that became the sign for King Ahaz? If so, was he born of a virgin? If there was no boy in Isaiah's time and the sign was a prophesy about Jesus, then how did Jesus fulfill the rest of the things predicted about this boy?

And because Islam and the Baha'i Faith use the Bible to "prove", give "objective" evidence of "fulfilled" prophecy, then anybody can make the prophecies in the Bible show that their prophet is the promised one. So, unless Christians believe Islam and the Baha'i Faith are true, then this shows that prophecies can be interpreted in a way to make whatever happens fit.

I give greater credit to those who seek after the truth, knowing that truth is not easily established, or broken. The claims made by Muslims and Bahais need to be investigated carefully, but I believe God has already established his safeguards against those who aim to break in like thieves. See Revelation 22:18,19.

There are certain facts that can be established by historical research, and in many ways this is the easy bit. The framework into which prophecy fits is necessary for prophecy to be believable. Unfortunately, there are some sceptics who see it as their duty to deny prophecy first, and then base their revised history on the understanding that prophecy is not possibe!

The history of Israel is crucial to securing a foundation for prophecy. Jews exist today as a people, and the history of that people plays a huge part in determining the truth of scripture. Who is prepared to say that the history of Israel recorded in the Bible is inaccurate? It so, what is the truth?

 

[Redemptionsong]

I am supposed to trust things i
know are untrue?

What do you know to be untrue, and how can you be so sure?

 

[nPeace]

That's the problem. Christians say the "Comforter" was the prediction of the Holy Spirit coming at Pentecost. Baha'is, and maybe Muslims also, use it as a prediction of their prophets.

But also, if the NT was written after the events happened, how can we be sure that the writers didn't make the story fit a prophesy. Like Matthew and the virgin birth, Herod having the little boys killed, out of Egypt he will be called his son and he will be called a Nazarene.

But then... were some of those even prophecies? The cherry-picking problem of finding one verse that says something that can be made to fit cannot be claimed to be a prophecy.

Then, going back to the virgin birth, there's the dual-fulfillment problem. What do Christians do with the context of Isaiah chapter 7 after verse 14? Was there a boy born that became the sign for King Ahaz? If so, was he born of a virgin? If there was no boy in Isaiah's time and the sign was a prophesy about Jesus, then how did Jesus fulfill the rest of the things predicted about this boy?

And because Islam and the Baha'i Faith use the Bible to "prove", give "objective" evidence of "fulfilled" prophecy, then anybody can make the prophecies in the Bible show that their prophet is the promised one. So, unless Christians believe Islam and the Baha'i Faith are true, then this shows that prophecies can be interpreted in a way to make whatever happens fit.

Isn't what you describe there, like the diverse theories that the various scientist all claim is true, and one group can claim that theirs is true?
"Look at these bones. They look like... and look at this... this says that this is the case... and..."

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
That's a circular reasoning fallacy, you have assumed your conclusion in your premise. I'll give you a clue, Predicting an outcome is not evidence one knows the future, as the daily lottery wins across the globe amply demonstrate.

cherry picking when it suits is common

Among religious apologists, yes I have seen this to be the case. Selection bias is very common in theistic claims and beliefs.

fulfilled prophecy IS objective evidence.

You're just repeating your circular reasoning fallacy, while ignoring the logical objections. You would need to demonstrate objective evidence that an accurate prediction has been made and fulfilled, then you would need to demonstrate objective evidence, or at the very least offer a rational reason why this needs divine intercedence? As I said people "predict the future every day of the week across the glob, with extreme accuracy and against massive odds, nothing supernatural is needed to explain this.

 

[CG Didymus]

How can we be sure that the writers didn't make the story fit a prophesy?
Flavious Josephus for one.
Josephus offers another important but highly controversial detail about Alexander’s brief visit to Jerusalem. While in the city, a scroll is brought to Alexander:

“And when the Book of Daniel was showed him wherein Daniel declared that one of the Greeks should destroy the empire of the Persians, he supposed that himself was the person intended. And as he was then glad, he dismissed the multitude for the present.”

For another... When compared with other works of antiquity, the New Testament has far greater (numerical) and earlier documentation than any other book. Most of the available works of antiquity have only a few manuscripts that attest to their existence, and these are typically much later than their original date of composition...

Another... the abundance of evidence that turns up... confirming that the writers did state the truth.
City of David Top Finds #1: King Hezekiah's Royal Seal
City of David Top Finds #8: House of David Inscription

Hezekiah's Tunnel

It's like having a reputation that is time and again tested, and proven.
Imagine being taken to the same court time and again by accusers, and evidence turning up to prove your innocence.
After a while, the judge will not want to see you in the courtroom.
He will know that you are truthful, and opposers are out to get you.
It's obvious.

Just as people trust the records made by the Assyrians, and others, there is no reason to doubt the record of the Jewish people - Israelites - especially when time after time, evidence confirms its reliability.

So my question is, how do we know anything about history, if we reject historians, because we don't like what they wrote?
The Bible contains accurate history.
It's a reliable source.

Which historians do you accept?
Is history buried, and we only accept what modern people want to believe?

The parting of the seas, Moses' cane turning into a snake, Elijah going off in a fiery chariot, then the NT with Jesus walking on water, dead people coming out of their graves and Jesus himself coming out of the tomb, but he could appear and disappear and float off into the clouds? It's hard to believe these things actually happened. Therefore, it is easier to write the Bible off as myth and legends, then to accept it as being the inerrant, infallible and historically accurate word of God. It might be, but I have my doubts.

Then, as you might know, I argue a lot with Baha'is about their claims. Baha'is make whatever contradicts their beliefs "metaphorical." I don't agree with that either. To me, the worst claim is that they say Jesus didn't rise from the dead. That those stories were metaphorical. That Jesus died and stayed dead, that only his spirit rose.

But, for Christians, I do believe that if a person calls themselves a Christian then they should take the Bible as literal as they can. But there has to be a limit to where even a Christians stops short. Like in Mark where it says that his followers will handle snakes and be able to drink deadly poison? So, some verses, I'd hope, even the most literal-believing Christian would see as being metaphorical. So, how can there ever be proof of those miraculous things? Of course, if Jesus returns. That would settle it.

 

[Sheldon]

Try for a post without the word " fallacy"?

The sheer number of irrational claims is relevant. It may seem tedious, it certainly is to keep pointing them out, but you're shooting the messenger.

 

[CG Didymus]

Isn't what you describe there, like the diverse theories that the various scientist all claim is true, and one group can claim that theirs is true?
"Look at these bones. They look like... and look at this... this says that this is the case... and..."

The point is prophecies can be so vague that anybody can come up with a supposed fulfillment.

 

[Sheldon]

History books show prophecy to be fulfilled as it was foretold.

I am dubious but by all means offer something beyond the bare assertion. Then offer some rational explanation as to why an accurate prediction of the future is evidence of any deity?

As I have explained, people predict the future extremely accurately every day of the week across the globe, and against massive odds, when they win lotteries.

 

[ElishaElijah]

The Jews don't agree with you.

Some do some don’t, same as in Acts 2.
Romans 11 also describes this, but still not sure why you brought that up. Is Truth majority rules in your view?

 

[Bree]

The point is prophecies can be so vague that anybody can come up with a supposed fulfillment.

Bible prophecies are not vague.

the propecy from Isaiah gives the name of the person who will overthrow the city Babylon.
Daniel gave a prophecy with an exact number of years to the messiahs appearance (the 70 years prophecy)
Jesus prophecy about jerusalems destruction by rome specifically states that they will build a wall of 'pointed stakes' around Jerusalem which they did in 70CE ....40 years after jesus death.
.