The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
I was going to say something but... yeah, this encapsulated it all better than I ever could.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How Can Anyone Not Accept This Biblical Prophecy as Real?
- Thread starter wizanda
- Start date
I was going to say something but... yeah, this encapsulated it all better than I ever could.
Unfortunately you've completely missed the point; the prophecy isn't about anyone future coming claiming to be him...
It is the usage of the language, as when we examine the whole of the Greek 'Ego I-mee' (I Am) statements by Yeshua in the Synoptic Gospels, he applies it to God, not himself; so the authors of John are blatantly in error.
I'd not take it seriously, if it wasn't for the OP prophecy being so blatant; Christians follow jesus as the 'I Am', he didn't speak that way of himself in the Synoptic Gospels.
Christianity exist, their whole premise is jesus is the 'I Am', he warned that was how the world will be deceive.
Yes, there is all sorts of silly things in the book; yet the idea that people will be deceived by it is self contained, and it is meant to be this way...
That the book shall be left as a curse to the people.
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
Proof isn't the text, it is that it literally happens in the real world; what is the point in it being a prophecy, if it is just some fictional belief.
I knew what you meant - all I mentioned was "modern day proof" ascribed to the text. Meaning you take what is happening in modern day and say that the text you're pointing at describes what is happening.
However, this sort of thing happens all the time, and under many and varied interpretations. Why do you think we've had so many failed "End of the World" prophecies and predictions? The only difference between your "prophecy" and those is that yours has no proposed expiration date - so it is only less obviously a tenuous link, and can't be "disproven" by us reaching an expiration mark.
Altfish
Veteran Member
I see you ignored most of my response
I literally CAN see what is being said and it is total baloney, I believe the whole church(es) is (are) built on falsified texts. Isn't it convenient that just that was prophesied.
Pondered changing the title as so many people are not reading the OP; which is funny, and shows why this deception exists in the world, people don't pay attention to what is being said, they apply their own meaning behind something.
I'm asking what the thread is about, the title is a reference to the material contained in the OP; people who only answer the title, are as bad as Christians only reading "Holy Bible", and thinking everything contained within it is the same as the title.
That was already shown flawed, because the OP is actually about proving one very solid prophecy we can all see.
They're not the same, an end of the world prophecy is something not visible, not assesable; this exists right in front of all of us, we can all examine the Biblical text with a Bible software, and see the Greek usage of Ego I-mee, thus showing that the Gospel of John is a totally different vocabulary and phraseology, there are also no parables within it, and numerous contradictions.
We can then see that Christians have numerous sites, teachers, etc, all saying that jesus repeatedly used Ego I-mee because he was implying himself as God; when Yeshua didn't speak that way in the Synoptic Gospels.
There was no reason Yeshua should have known the Gospel of John would be included within the cannon, for the world to then be deceived by it, as he said would occur.
It wasn't just that which was prophesied; that is only the easy to pick cherry on the cake...
There are so many specifications, and prophecies that show a lot of details; each of the Ego I-mee warnings, are presented before the main judgement days to take place.
Yet personally found that if people won't even accept the basics, their not going to go into the complexities any better.
So the actual prophecy is that someone who uses the phrase "I am" will lead people astray?
This prophecy fails criteria #3 and #4:
- it's vague and ambiguous. Virtually every person on the planet has used the phrase "I am" (or its equivalent in their language) many, many times. And what "astray" means depends on the opinions and baggage of the person interpreting the prophecy.
- it's not improbable. Virtually every belief system has had schisms and breakaway groups.
... which they put in the Gospel of Johm with those passages in Matthew, Mark & Luke in mind? If so, it fails criteria #5: the prophecy wasn't unknown.
Your prophecy fails the test.
This greatly misstates the problem, which is attempting to judge by today's mindset that of the 1st and 2nd cent. On the one hand there is the already formed believing communities of Christians who worship the risen Jesus as God in there practice. The Evangelist' purpose was to address the needs of their respective communities, and they took literary freedom to do so by placing much in the mouth of Jesus. In the earlier layers of the NT one does not find explicitly a belief that Jesus is God. And one has to look at the non canonical writings that follow or are contemporaneous with the NT. in answer to that question today, Jesus is never identified with God, only as the Son. Whenever one refers to God it is always the Father alone.
Perhaps a better phrasing--or maybe it's a better question--is 'How can anyone accept biblical prophecy as real?'
or, as we common in the social sciences, we construct our studies around testing the null hypothesis.
In this case, the null hypothesis would be: 'There is no evidence that [insert particular prophecy here] is true.' We would also advance the alternative hypothesis, that 'There is no evidence that [insert particular prophecy here] is true.'
Before our analysis of the facts, we would set our criteria for rejecting the null hypothesis, and failing to reject (a fancy way of saying that we accept) the alternative. If the evidence is insufficient to reach our pre-set criteria, we will fail to reject (accept) that the evidence does not support believing in the prophecy.
We would then look at the evidence: The OP asserts that the synoptic gospels are independent sources that are reliable as to what Jesus said and did, while John is, apparently, a pack of lies.
9/10ths Penguin already introduced and I expanded on the requirements to accept prophecies.
The asserted prophecy does not meet these requirements--at the very least:
1) it's possible to interpret the text in different ways (thus accuracy is questionable);
2) yes, the text is in the currently accepted versions (plural) of the Bible;
3) it is not precise/unambiguous (see #1);
4) it is not improbable to make this general claim about the future, as other point out; indeed, it was likely even at the time that people would make claims that would divert people from whatever beliefs the authors held;
5) It was already known that others even at the time of the writing of the gospels had made this claim, but the prophecy itself is not specific enough to reveal that the people of the time could not know this was going to happen.
Next point: the synoptic gospels are not independent sources: it is probable that Mark was written first, and Matthew and Luke were written using it as a guide/source. The fact that all three say essentially the same prophecy is not independent evidence--but it is evidence of plagiarism, and self-fulfilling prophecy due to the later choices of the early church, which mostly set the text of the New Testament during the 300s CE.
So, why would someone not accept the OP's 'prophecy?'
It's because the evidence is not sufficient to reasonably accept it.
or, as we common in the social sciences, we construct our studies around testing the null hypothesis.
In this case, the null hypothesis would be: 'There is no evidence that [insert particular prophecy here] is true.' We would also advance the alternative hypothesis, that 'There is no evidence that [insert particular prophecy here] is true.'
Before our analysis of the facts, we would set our criteria for rejecting the null hypothesis, and failing to reject (a fancy way of saying that we accept) the alternative. If the evidence is insufficient to reach our pre-set criteria, we will fail to reject (accept) that the evidence does not support believing in the prophecy.
We would then look at the evidence: The OP asserts that the synoptic gospels are independent sources that are reliable as to what Jesus said and did, while John is, apparently, a pack of lies.
9/10ths Penguin already introduced and I expanded on the requirements to accept prophecies.
The asserted prophecy does not meet these requirements--at the very least:
1) it's possible to interpret the text in different ways (thus accuracy is questionable);
2) yes, the text is in the currently accepted versions (plural) of the Bible;
3) it is not precise/unambiguous (see #1);
4) it is not improbable to make this general claim about the future, as other point out; indeed, it was likely even at the time that people would make claims that would divert people from whatever beliefs the authors held;
5) It was already known that others even at the time of the writing of the gospels had made this claim, but the prophecy itself is not specific enough to reveal that the people of the time could not know this was going to happen.
Next point: the synoptic gospels are not independent sources: it is probable that Mark was written first, and Matthew and Luke were written using it as a guide/source. The fact that all three say essentially the same prophecy is not independent evidence--but it is evidence of plagiarism, and self-fulfilling prophecy due to the later choices of the early church, which mostly set the text of the New Testament during the 300s CE.
So, why would someone not accept the OP's 'prophecy?'
It's because the evidence is not sufficient to reasonably accept it.
Lorgar-Aurelian
Active Member
Well I would just toss out the gospel of john because of how much it deviates from the other gospels. How much later it came about. There are numerous reasons to reject john but.. If you read the chapters before and the verses before it seems to me all this is saying is that anyone who comes after him and says "I am." Is false. He doesn't reject the statement I am altogether.Not studied either of those, so can't relate...
So you don't think that the world being deceived by false "I Am" statements, and then the Gospel of John repeatedly using falsified "I Am" statements isn't blatant?
How much more simple should we get for it to be specific and accurate?
Underhill
Well-Known Member
Yes, there is all sorts of silly things in the book; yet the idea that people will be deceived by it is self contained, and it is meant to be this way...
That the book shall be left as a curse to the people.
Right...
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
That was already shown flawed, because the OP is actually about proving one very solid prophecy we can all see.
Your OP doesn't actually offer any counters to any of the kinds of prophecies listed in Kelly's post. It just flat-out ignores them. So no, they haven't been shown to be flawed.
Funny how one prophecy being 'right' means Biblical prophecy is accurate but the fact that so many other prophecies fail to meet the definition of what a valid prophecy is doesn't seem to prove Biblical prophecy is useless... very convenient.
Last edited:
We've got to understand its usage in Ancient Greek grammar, there isn't a reason to phrase sentences like that, as you can apply the pronoun to the word in question.
Then we've got to examine Yeshua's speech in Greek within the Synoptic Gospels to understand his phraseology, then we see the difference clearly.
That can all be done with Esword Bible software, and KJV+ as we can search by Strong reference numbers.
What 'astray' means depends on Bible dictionaries, Ancient Greek grammar in the sentence context, and Yeshua's overall usage of the word.
It says many shall be deceived; plus him saying the whole world is in context of that whole speech; not just a small break away group.
Considering most people are oblivious to any of this, it isn't possible to say the prophecy hasn't come true.
They've got no clue about any of it; the Gospel of John was most likely written by the Sanhedrin to discredit Yeshua, by presenting hearsay evidence, and what they correlated.
Why would anyone deliberately make up something prophesied to deceive everyone, other than to make a group of hypocrites?
Satans_Serrated_Edge
Deicidal
It could mean that, sure.
It could also mean you are grasping at shadows as you are ready to believe pretty much anything.
It doesn't have to, only the title is misleading, as it should state, 'how can anyone not accept this biblical prophecy as real'; yet once we accept the first premise, it is easier to start questioning all the rest.
It is good tho, as what it has shown is people don't read much other than the title, and then make an opinion about a massive subject matter.
If we examine the whole of Yeshua's usages of Ego I-mee within the Synoptic Gospels he doesn't speak that way, and it is clear the Pharisees were accusing him of it...
Yeshua uses Ego I-mee almost like Self Existing one, in other words only for the God Most High; we're translating it into a different concept of self identity.
Are you kidding, having spent years studying everyone's religious texts globally, having first hand experience of an NDE, miracles, etc, i really am not attached to religious books.
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
However, most "End of Days" prophecies also have their own accounts of things that have happened according to their interpretations - and we can all SEE and WITNESS all of those things they lined up with their prophecies. That's more what I was getting at. That they have their prophesied moments to call on, and all of those things supposedly lead up to the moment when everything ends. Except they are proven false when the world doesn't end on the day prescribed. Yours just doesn't have that culminating moment where it is "all or nothing."
There is something more fundamental, that people trying to parse deep meaning from by parsing the exact wording of Yeshua quotes.
Yeshua didn't write any of it. He never wrote anything at all that was recorded. It is always something that somebody is attributing to Him, which is not the same at all.
Tom
Satans_Serrated_Edge
Deicidal
Are you kidding, having spent years studying everyone's religious texts globally, having first hand experience of an NDE, miracles, etc, i really am not attached to religious books.
No you don't. You may have had some experience that your preexisting belief in those things caused you to interpret that way, but nothing more.
There isn't a reason to say "I am"?
We may be at an impasse, since I don't know ancient Greek grammar and I don't trust you enough to rely on your word.
Well, I don't care enough about this issue enough to download software or do a lot of research.
I understand what the word means. My point was that any judgement about what qualifies as going "astray" from the correct position will be interpreted through the reader's subjective opinion of what the "correct" position is.
That could still describe countless schisms throughout history. It's still very vague.
If all that it takes to "satisfy" the prophecy is to say "I am", why would we assume it was deliberate at all?Considering most people are oblivious to any of this, it isn't possible to say the prophecy hasn't come true.
They've got no clue about any of it; the Gospel of John was most likely written by the Sanhedrin to discredit Yeshua, by presenting hearsay evidence, and what they correlated.
Why would anyone deliberately make up something prophesied to deceive everyone, other than to make a group of hypocrites?
Donald Trump is the world's most depressing cosplay of Senator Steven Armstrong.
sigh.
Goddamn it. Where is that white-haired samurai pretty-boy when you need him?