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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I don't think Bible prophecy is reliable. But I'm 50 years old and have read in the history of religion -- I've seen the same things prophesied over and over without coming true.
Examples please
Oh I understand where you are coming from -but have you really examined "Bible Prophecy" -its really fascinating t0 see just how accurate the Prophecies are.If you gave me a dollar for every time I've heard, in my 50 years, from one Christian or another that the world was going to end tomorrow, I'd be the proverbial rich man, and you would be broke. But it's not just during my lifetime that this sort of nonsense has been going on. Even the early Church was filled with end of the world thinking. Christianity has a nearly unbroken 2000 year history of being wrong about the end of the world.
What God says about the change of the Seventh Day [Saturday] Sabbath in "Bible Prophecy"
Explanation of the Year/Day Principle .................Post #76
1260 Day Prophecy - Identified ............... .............Post #77
1260 Day Prophecy -Historical Accuracy Investigated......Post #78
1260 Day Prophecy - Reliability Confirmed..................... Post #79
Why do people reference me in their post vs what the Bible says? I have not mentioned my personal opinions or interpretations of Scripture other than what the Bible says.Mr. Irvin,
To those who are not Christian this is not an earthshaking topic. The Torah established a sabbath. Christianity honored the sabbath but switched the day to bew a constant commemoration of Easter. Islam switched it back.
To Baha`i's this is one of those laws that stays in effect spiritually because there are days for the special commemoration of God, and the Baha`i Faith establishes that day on a different calendar.Is that what the Bible says? I was not aware of a Biblical change of the Sabbath- a man made change certainlyHere in OKC, the Buddhist Temple honors Sundays with public services and receptions because it is a good day to attract people to the temple on an outting. The baha`i communities in the area often host children's classes on that day which are open to the public.Do you remember one of the first dialogs we had, when I mentioned that I didn't know how much we would able to discuss since you don't believe in the Bible? You believe in the Baha`i and there teachings and writings. I'm not familiar with the Baha `i teachings -So how could I ever comment on them with confidence.The sabbath is more tradition than LAW, and it's a tradition honored by the Great Prophets though subject to modification according to the needs of humanity at the time in question.And early Roman Catholics honored Sunday the first day of the week over the Seventh Day of the week -because it was a good day to introduce Pagans to Christianity -hence most Pagans worshiped on Sunday. But is that Biblical I ask you?Regards,See this is what I mean, not to single you out,but to make this kind of statement -is NOT based on Biblical fact - notice the use of the word " Biblical." Your statement -comes from your mind- and your personal understanding of the Bible. Which is different from what the Bible says. God gives Man the right to believe and do whatever he chooses- whether it is Biblical or Not.
Scott
I haven't delved too deeply into the Baha´i faith yet, but am so far positively neutral. I was for example awed by the "Lotus Temple" in Delhi, inside and outside. It would be interesting to dissect your claims in the original language (I have some knowledge of languages like Arabic, Hindi, and Persian to name a few.)Here's a prophecy from the Baha`i writings (Kitab'i Aqdas, 1868CE). Short term forty-six years before the fact and not one prediction but two (second prediction 77 years 1945CE).
"O banks of the Rhine! We have seen you covered with gore, inasmuch as the swords of retribution were drawn against you; and you shall have another turn. And We hear the lamentations of Berlin, though she be today in conspicuous glory."
(Baha'u'llah, Synopsis and Codification of the Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 21)
Pretty simple and direct . . . . .
Regards,
Scott
I haven't delved too deeply into the Baha´i faith yet, but am so far positively neutral. I was for example awed by the "Lotus Temple" in Delhi, inside and outside. It would be interesting to dissect your claims in the original language (I have some knowledge of languages like Arabic, Hindi, and Persian to name a few.)
Any outcome of such examinations won't of course have any bearing on what some self-labelled Christians believe regarding Bible "prophesies".
Care to share some Bible prophecies for the next few months? We can figure out what they predict now, watch for the prophecied events to unfold (or not), then get back together afterward to evaluate how accurate they were.Oh I understand where you are coming from -but have you really examined "Bible Prophecy" -its really fascinating t0 see just how accurate the Prophecies are.
Care to share some Bible prophecies for the next few months? We can figure out what they predict now, watch for the prophecied events to unfold (or not), then get back together afterward to evaluate how accurate they were.
If you're right, there'll be no question; you'll have quite a bit of hard evidence to back up your claims.
If a few months is the wrong length of time (are we in a "prophecy lull" right now? Is something supposed to happen next Tuesday?), then we can figure out a different time period that works for you.
Sound good? I'm ready when you are.
See... that's the thing about prophecy: you can play the random chance game by looking in hindsight. Any prophecies that coincidentally match past events can be trumpeted as evidence, and you can claim that any that don't match past events just haven't happened yet. It's trickier (and the real test of prophecy) to look at them before they happen.Well actually, what about prophecy that ahs already come to pass (arguably)?
See... that's the thing about prophecy: you can play the random chance game by looking in hindsight. Any prophecies that coincidentally match past events can be trumpeted as evidence, and you can claim that any that don't match past events just haven't happened yet. It's trickier (and the real test of prophecy) to look at them before they happen.
But that's what I proposed: present a few prophecies now that are supposed to be fulfilled in the near future, then once they've supposed to have been fulfilled, look back and see what happened.Can't be done. You cannot examine them for truth until they are fulfilled or not fulfilled.
It seems like this prophecy could have been considered fulfilled no matter what happened. If the Second French Empire had flourished, this could have been seized as evidence that Napoleon III had indeed "held fast by this firm Cord."I showed you the prophecy concerning Germany. Here's one that was transmitted to Napoleon III in the Suriyi-Hykal. I would posit that it was fulfilled by circumstances through which Baha`u'llah had no obvious control:
[...]
["]For what thou hast done, thy kingdom shall be thrown into confusion, and thine empire shall pass from thine hands, as a punishment for that which thou hast wrought. Then wilt thou know how thou hast plainly erred. Commotions shall seize all the people in that land, unless thou arisest to help this Cause, and followest Him Who is the Spirit of God [Jesus] in this, the straight Path. Hath thy pomp made thee proud? By My Life! It shall not endure; nay, it shall soon pass away, unless thou holdest fast by this firm Cord. We see abasement hastening after thee, while thou art of the heedless.... Abandon thy palaces to the people of the graves, and thine empire to whosoever desireth it, and turn, then, unto the Kingdom.["]
[...]
At the supposed height of his power Napoleon III crashed and burned and was deposed within fifteen years of the prophecy in question.
But that's what I proposed: present a few prophecies now that are supposed to be fulfilled in the near future, then once they've supposed to have been fulfilled, look back and see what happened.
It seems like this prophecy could have been considered fulfilled no matter what happened. If the Second French Empire had flourished, this could have been seized as evidence that Napoleon III had indeed "held fast by this firm Cord."
So... how does one go about proving the accuracy, or even usefulness, of prophesy, then?1) Prophecy is not written to a timetable, or if it is that timetable is occulted (like the Book of Daniel). So the parameter you propose is not valid.
So, let me get this straight... the Second French Empire collapsed, thereby fulfilling the prophecy. However, had the Second French Empire flourished, it would have also fulfilled the prophecy. Looking through the lens of history, this example does nothing to show the accuracy of prophecy. It seems like you've got all bases covered regardless of divine inspiration of the prediction, therefore there's no need to invoke any sort of supernatural influence in our explanation.2) In this particular instance that was the point of the prophecy. A change of heart on the part of Napoleon III would have brought about the alternative and thus WOULD have fulfilled the prophecy.
So... how does one go about proving the accuracy, or even usefulness, of prophesy, then?
Say you're in the midst of WWII and you find a prophecy that says something like "all Europe will kneel before the German leader. His enemies will be swept from the Earth" and declare that by this prophecy, you know that Hitler will win the war.
As we know, Hitler didn't win the war; the Germans lost. You can still continue to believe that the prophecy is true... you just declare that you interpreted it incorrectly, and it's talking about some future German leader, not Hitler.
Since most prophecies are (IMO) rather vague, how does one determine that a prophecy actually applies to a given situation?
So, let me get this straight... the Second French Empire collapsed, thereby fulfilling the prophecy. However, had the Second French Empire flourished, it would have also fulfilled the prophecy. Looking through the lens of history, this example does nothing to show the accuracy of prophecy. It seems like you've got all bases covered regardless of divine inspiration of the prediction, therefore there's no need to invoke any sort of supernatural influence in our explanation.
It seems like it's almost the equivalent of going to a football game and declaring, "the team with the truest spirit will win here tonight"; it doesn't prove a thing.
According to Josephus, when Alexander returned from India to sack Jerusalem he was met at the city gates by the high priest, Jaddus, who outlined for Alexander the prophecy of his career in the book of Daniel. Upon seeing this Alexander spared Jerusalem.How do you feel about Daniel & Revelation?
Given the history of Europe, predicting that Germany will lose two wars seems to me to be a rather safe bet.If one sees the original prophecy to not be borne out (in other words, the "Banks of the Rhine" would see blood and failure TWICE) then it was "true prophecy". The original prophecy was addressed to the Kaiser at the pinnacle of the German victory in the Franco-Prussian War, no one would forsee that as coming to pass according to the reality of the times. Yet, it did come to pass over a period of almost eighty years.
And I see prophecy as no indication of anything at all, unless it provides enough detail that its truth or falsehood can actually be measured against history.personally, I see prophecy as an indication of the truth of the Prophet, not of any importance in any other way. It is a token of legitimacy, and if prophecy sways your decision to the point that it is the ONLY thing that sways your decision it is a fragile straw indeed.
Fair enough, though I thought we were talking about the accuracy of prophecy specifically.In other words, I am a Baha`i because I believe that Baha`u'llah bore a Revelation from God, not because He picked out a few historical events on the 'winning side'. He was a Prophet not a "Bookie". The Spiritual truths of that Revelation are the important thing, not the prophecies.
And since we do not have insight into the inner workings of Napoleon's mind, the boolean relationship becomes:Do you understand the Boolean concepts of IF, THEN, OR?
IF Napoleon did not do something in particular THEN the outcome would be "X", OR IF he did do that thing in particular the outcome would THEN be "Y"
quod erat demonstrandum