Prophesies

Athée

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2015
1,443
256
41
✟39,486.00
Faith
Humanist
So I am a former believer trying to find my way back to faith. That's said I am at this point throughly convinced that there simply is simply no good reason to believe in God. Often in my conversations with believers they will quote the Bible as an authoritative text. This authority is based on its divine inspiration. One of the ways that some Christians claim to know that the Bible is divine is that it contains prophesies that have come true, prophesies that no mere moral could have written or orchestrated. When I was a believer I remwmber my pastor saying, full of confidence and authority, that the coming of Jesus fulfilled hundreds of specific prophesies proving without doubt that he is the son of god. However, when I eventually went back to look at some of these prophesies I was puzzled to say the least. Many of them don't seem to be prophesies at all or are about something else entirely. That said I rain fascinated by the subject and I believe that if I could be convinced that the Bible was a book of valid prophesies that this would go a long way towards helping me accept it ad the word of God.
In this thread I would like to discuss, debate and investigate the various prophesies in the Bible to see what force they have as an apologetic for the Bible specifically but Christianity in general.
Before we start it is always helpful to define terms and unfortunately prophecy is a slippery one :)
I am pulling my definition from a talk by Matt Dillahunty (prominent atheist speaker). Obviously this will slant the discussion a certain way but I can only popose a definition of prophecy that I am comfortable with here at the outset. That said if you would like to change some of the parts of the definition, take some out, add new ones or an nuances to existing elements please do so and include your rational for your perspective. I am always happy to be corrected or guided towards a more sophisticated understanding.

All that said here is my first stab at defining prophecy :

1)Prophecies must be written before the events they describe and that we must be able to verify this to a reasonable degree of certainty. This is nuanced by how much time is to elapse. If I look at a thunder cloud and predict rain today this wouldn't signify. If I look at a thunder cloud and predict a thunderstorm exactly one year from now at this exact time...well then we have something!
2)The statement must be intended as a prophecy. So if I say wow it sure is raining ....I have not made a prophecy that it will rain.
3)There must be some element of the extraordinary. Maybe the pediction is for an incredible event, or is incredibly detailed or is about a totally ordinary event but there are an extrordinary number of events predicted. Needless to say that events should not be easily fufilled. For example if I predict that somewhere in the world every day a minimum of 10 people will cry and that this will be true on 2 consecutive days, I haven't really predicted anything noteworthy.

4)unless specifically stated as a multiple occurrence prophecy, each prophecy should be fufilled by only one instance. So if I predict a woman will be the president of the United states and it happens next year and again 100 years from now, I can't claim that my one prediction was a specific prediction of both instances.

5) the prophecy should not be open to interpretation. If I were to say...in the day of the acendancy of the woman shall there be a great calamity...this is not a prediction. It could be satisfied in so many ways by so many variables that it is useless as prophecy.

6) Prophecy needs to be specific about time, location etc. Again if I predict a female leader shall rise and don't say what year, rise to what position, what country etc then the prophecy has no value because it will be fufilled eventually by chance.

7) The next part is from the video and not actually one I agree with ...he says the prophecy must be publicly known but not easy for people who know about it to bring about. I think the part about being publicly known is actually a part of #1. If we discover a prophecy and verify that it was written 1000 years ago, meets all the other criteria and came true last week I don't think that it is invalid just because nobody knew about it for all those years. However if it is publicly known it would need to be very difficult to manufacture. For example the alleged prophecy about coming into the city on a donkey. Well Jesus was Jewish and knew that prophecy and donkeys being readily available picked one up to ride in on....not really impressive as a fufillment of prophecy since anyone who knew about it could have achieved this.

Anyway these are my initial thoughts. At present I don't believe that the Bible is inspired and don't believe that there are examples of divine prophecy in the Bible but as I said before I would really like to be wrong about that :)

Looking forward to your thoughts!
 
  • Like
Reactions: crjmurray

jimmyjimmy

Pardoned Rebel
Supporter
Jan 2, 2015
11,556
5,728
USA
✟234,973.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Thanks for the post, and thank you for respecting this forum's SoP. Also, thanks for being so clear with your request.

However, I'm not sure where to begin. You say that you've examined these things as a believer already and are not convinced that there is even one which had been made and fulfilled in the life, death and resurrection of Christ.

You said this, "That's said I am at this point throughly convinced that there simply is simply no good reason to believe in God"

Would you allow for any off-topic stabs at that statement? In the mean time, I'll work on the prophesy thing.

Also, to get the ball rolling, do you want to throw any particular messianic prophesies at us that you think we get wrong?
 
Upvote 0

Athée

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2015
1,443
256
41
✟39,486.00
Faith
Humanist
Thanks for the post, and thank you for respecting this forum's SoP. Also, thanks for being so clear with your request.

However, I'm not sure where to begin. You say that you've examined these things as a believer already and are not convinced that there is even one which had been made and fulfilled in the life, death and resurrection of Christ.

You said this, "That's said I am at this point throughly convinced that there simply is simply no good reason to believe in God"

Would you allow for any off-topic stabs at that statement? In the mean time, I'll work on the prophesy thing.

Also, to get the ball rolling, do you want to throw any particular messianic prophesies at us that you think we get wrong?
Thanks for the reply :)

When I said I am unconvinced that there is any good reason to believe in God I am really talking about Christian apologetics in general. Of you wanted to pursue that with me, I am fine to do so but perhaps we could do so in a conversation rather than as part of this thread.
As for a prophecy... Hmmm..
Numbers 24:17 onwards has been cited to me as a messianic prophecy. I just don't see it. It is taking about a specific tribe and while it does contain the line of Judah and the sceptre it also contains a bunch of other things that in no way can be interpreted to be about Jesus. It Lao is not time, location or person specific. That may not be the best example but it might serve to get that ball rolling :)
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Here is one of my favorite examples:

1 Kings 13:2 And he cried against the altar in the word of the LORD, and said, O altar, altar, thus saith the LORD; Behold, a child shall be born unto the house of David, Josiah by name; and upon thee shall he offer the priests of the high places that burn incense upon thee, and men's bones shall be burnt upon thee.

Adam Clarke's Commentary said:
This is one of the most remarkable and most singular prophecies in the Old Testament. It here most circumstantially foretells a fact which took place three hundred and forty years after the prediction; a fact which was attested by the two nations. The Jews, in whose behalf this prophecy was delivered, would guard it most sacredly; and it was the interest of the Israelites, against whom it was levelled, to impugn its authenticity and expose its falsehood, had this been possible. This prediction not only showed the knowledge of God, but his power. He gave, as it were, this warning to idolatry, that it might be on its guard, and defend itself against this Josiah whenever a person of that name should be found sitting on the throne of David; and no doubt it was on the alert, and took all prudent measures for its own defence; but all in vain, for Josiah, in the eighteenth year of his reign, literally accomplished this prophecy, as we may read, 2Ki 23:15-20.

Anyone can make a prophecy -- and anyone can fulfill a given prophecy, as per your example of Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a donkey.

BUT ... the trick is not in fulfilling the prophecy.

The trick is KEEPING A PROPHECY FROM BEING FULFILLED.

The amount of time that transpires between when a prophecy is given and when it is fulfilled is what we call HOPE.

For instance, we are looking forward to the Rapture -- a prophecy mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4.

That prophecy hasn't been fulfilled yet, and until it is, it is referred to as our ...

Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

Even the period of time from the time we are saved (intitial salvation) to the time we enter Heaven (complete salvation) is referred to as ...

1 Thessalonians 5:8 But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation.

It's not a "hope" in the sense of crossing our fingers and wishing it will come true.

It is a "hope" in the sense that it is going to come to pass and nothing in Heaven or Earth is going to prevent it.

I ... um ... hope this helped. :)

Reference your opening sentence:
So I am a former believer trying to find my way back to faith.

Are you saying you once:
  1. were enlightened
  2. tasted of the heavenly gift
  3. were made a partaker of the Holy Ghost
  4. tasted the good word of God
  5. tasted the powers of the world to come
... and lost all that somehow?

Hebrews 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
Hebrews 6:5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
 
Upvote 0

jimmyjimmy

Pardoned Rebel
Supporter
Jan 2, 2015
11,556
5,728
USA
✟234,973.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
I see what you're saying. If I had to rely on Numbers 24 to believe in Christ, I would be an atheist. :)

I will be working on pulling some prophesies that meet you criteria, or at least close, but I also must say a few things first. Hopefully they are helpful.

First, I don't know of anyone who became a Christian because of seeing the fulfillment of prophesies. I do think that many believers have been strengthened in their faith by seeing the hand of God bring about His plans, however.

Second, Christianity is about Christ, and specifically His cross. I would direct you to start with Jesus and work your way outward. Start with the claims He made of Himself and His teaching. Reading as you would any other book. According to the Bible itself, things in the Old Testament are shadows, they are not as clear as looking to Christ himself for understand who God is and what He is up to.

Third, I would recommend that you try to come at this thing with a slightly more open mind. If you say that you can only believe if this that or the other. . . It's like saying that you will only accept medicine that comes in the form of a pill. Well, some are injectable, and some are transdural. . . If God is God, assuming I am correct, you can't make Him march to your tune, you have to march to His. Although, He is very gracious to us.

FYI, I was the biggest sceptic myself, and I had many many doubts even after I was a Christian, so I hopefully I can answer your objections as one who has been in your shoes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AV1611VET
Upvote 0

[serious]

'As we treat the least of our brothers...' RIP GA
Supporter
Aug 29, 2006
15,100
1,716
✟72,846.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
So I am a former believer trying to find my way back to faith. That's said I am at this point throughly convinced that there simply is simply no good reason to believe in God. Often in my conversations with believers they will quote the Bible as an authoritative text. This authority is based on its divine inspiration. One of the ways that some Christians claim to know that the Bible is divine is that it contains prophesies that have come true, prophesies that no mere moral could have written or orchestrated. When I was a believer I remwmber my pastor saying, full of confidence and authority, that the coming of Jesus fulfilled hundreds of specific prophesies proving without doubt that he is the son of god. However, when I eventually went back to look at some of these prophesies I was puzzled to say the least. Many of them don't seem to be prophesies at all or are about something else entirely. That said I rain fascinated by the subject and I believe that if I could be convinced that the Bible was a book of valid prophesies that this would go a long way towards helping me accept it ad the word of God.
In this thread I would like to discuss, debate and investigate the various prophesies in the Bible to see what force they have as an apologetic for the Bible specifically but Christianity in general.
Before we start it is always helpful to define terms and unfortunately prophecy is a slippery one :)
I am pulling my definition from a talk by Matt Dillahunty (prominent atheist speaker). Obviously this will slant the discussion a certain way but I can only popose a definition of prophecy that I am comfortable with here at the outset. That said if you would like to change some of the parts of the definition, take some out, add new ones or an nuances to existing elements please do so and include your rational for your perspective. I am always happy to be corrected or guided towards a more sophisticated understanding.

All that said here is my first stab at defining prophecy :

1)Prophecies must be written before the events they describe and that we must be able to verify this to a reasonable degree of certainty. This is nuanced by how much time is to elapse. If I look at a thunder cloud and predict rain today this wouldn't signify. If I look at a thunder cloud and predict a thunderstorm exactly one year from now at this exact time...well then we have something!
2)The statement must be intended as a prophecy. So if I say wow it sure is raining ....I have not made a prophecy that it will rain.
3)There must be some element of the extraordinary. Maybe the pediction is for an incredible event, or is incredibly detailed or is about a totally ordinary event but there are an extrordinary number of events predicted. Needless to say that events should not be easily fufilled. For example if I predict that somewhere in the world every day a minimum of 10 people will cry and that this will be true on 2 consecutive days, I haven't really predicted anything noteworthy.

4)unless specifically stated as a multiple occurrence prophecy, each prophecy should be fufilled by only one instance. So if I predict a woman will be the president of the United states and it happens next year and again 100 years from now, I can't claim that my one prediction was a specific prediction of both instances.

5) the prophecy should not be open to interpretation. If I were to say...in the day of the acendancy of the woman shall there be a great calamity...this is not a prediction. It could be satisfied in so many ways by so many variables that it is useless as prophecy.

6) Prophecy needs to be specific about time, location etc. Again if I predict a female leader shall rise and don't say what year, rise to what position, what country etc then the prophecy has no value because it will be fufilled eventually by chance.

7) The next part is from the video and not actually one I agree with ...he says the prophecy must be publicly known but not easy for people who know about it to bring about. I think the part about being publicly known is actually a part of #1. If we discover a prophecy and verify that it was written 1000 years ago, meets all the other criteria and came true last week I don't think that it is invalid just because nobody knew about it for all those years. However if it is publicly known it would need to be very difficult to manufacture. For example the alleged prophecy about coming into the city on a donkey. Well Jesus was Jewish and knew that prophecy and donkeys being readily available picked one up to ride in on....not really impressive as a fufillment of prophecy since anyone who knew about it could have achieved this.

Anyway these are my initial thoughts. At present I don't believe that the Bible is inspired and don't believe that there are examples of divine prophecy in the Bible but as I said before I would really like to be wrong about that :)

Looking forward to your thoughts!
1 and 7 are different. Let's say I write down a bunch of prophesies. Tomorrow it will rain, the Patriots will finish 19 and 0 supergirl will get canceled after the first season. You are going to burn dinner tonight.

Now, if these are all written, but not widely known, I can wait for one of them to come true, circulate that one widely as a demonstration of how accurate I am, and ignore the little known ones that failed.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
1 and 7 are different. Let's say I write down a bunch of prophesies. Tomorrow it will rain, the Patriots will finish 19 and 0 supergirl will get canceled after the first season. You are going to burn dinner tonight.

Now, if these are all written, but not widely known, I can wait for one of them to come true, circulate that one widely as a demonstration of how accurate I am, and ignore the little known ones that failed.
Would you also claim that if one prophecy failed, you spoke it presumptuously?

Deuteronomy 18:21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken?
Deuteronomy 18:22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
 
Upvote 0

Athée

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2015
1,443
256
41
✟39,486.00
Faith
Humanist
Here is one of my favorite examples:

1 Kings 13:2 And he cried against the altar in the word of the LORD, and said, O altar, altar, thus saith the LORD; Behold, a child shall be born unto the house of David, Josiah by name; and upon thee shall he offer the priests of the high places that burn incense upon thee, and men's bones shall be burnt upon thee.



Anyone can make a prophecy -- and anyone can fulfill a given prophecy, as per your example of Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a donkey.

BUT ... the trick is not in fulfilling the prophecy.

The trick is KEEPING A PROPHECY FROM BEING FULFILLED.

The amount of time that transpires between when a prophecy is given and when it is fulfilled is what we call HOPE.

For instance, we are looking forward to the Rapture -- a prophecy mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4.

That prophecy hasn't been fulfilled yet, and until it is, it is referred to as our ...

Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

Even the period of time from the time we are saved (intitial salvation) to the time we enter Heaven (complete salvation) is referred to as ...

1 Thessalonians 5:8 But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation.

It's not a "hope" in the sense of crossing our fingers and wishing it will come true.

It is a "hope" in the sense that it is going to come to pass and nothing in Heaven or Earth is going to prevent it.

I ... um ... hope this helped. :)

Reference your opening sentence:


Are you saying you once:
  1. were enlightened
  2. tasted of the heavenly gift
  3. were made a partaker of the Holy Ghost
  4. tasted the good word of God
  5. tasted the powers of the world to come
... and lost all that somehow?

Hebrews 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
Hebrews 6:5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
Back to repentance "... To finish your quote there. Three responses:
1)Super interesting topic, can one loose salvation, but not what I was hoping to discuss in this particular thread (still a good comment though)
2)Hebrew 6 vs John 6 interesting right :)?
3)I would have said instead I had convinced myself that I had experienced and later I came to believe that I had been fooling myself (for a variety of reasons)
Hope that helps.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
can one loose salvation,
No.

It is impossible.

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Hebrews 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
Hebrews 6:5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
Hebrews 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
 
Upvote 0

Athée

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2015
1,443
256
41
✟39,486.00
Faith
Humanist
No.

It is impossible.

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Hebrews 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
Hebrews 6:5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
Hebrews 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
Right that is more or less what I was pointing out. So based on those interpretations of scripture I both have salvation (because I did believe and accept Jesus as saviour) and will never be brought back to repentance. So basically, I am saved but will continue in to live forever as an apostate because there is no way for God to lead me back to repentance to pick up again the process of sanctification.
 
Upvote 0

jimmyjimmy

Pardoned Rebel
Supporter
Jan 2, 2015
11,556
5,728
USA
✟234,973.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
If we are concerned about accuracy, and I assume we are, please understand that there is never any instruction about "accepting Jesus as Savior" in the biblical texts. Sure, there is much of this kind of talk in many, many churches, but that doesn't change that fact that it's not a biblical idea. People being asked to make decisions for Christ, walk down isles, raise hands, sign cards, etc. The whole lot of it is rubbish because it puts you in the drivers seat. It actually perpetuates our sin! It puts man as the determining factor. Some people present Christ as if they are trying to sell you a timeshare. That's not what we see in scripture.

"Repent and believe" this is the instruction. We must even be clear on what these two things mean.

Repent: This does not mean confessing your drinking smoking and swearing (nothing wrong 2 out 3 of those, anyway :). It doesn't mean turning from your sins. It means turning from you Sin. Since the fall we all think that we are gods. We act is if we are autonomous, independent beings, but that simply is not true. Repentance is, at least in part, confessing this and turning from it. It means to turn from self-trust to trust in the gospel. It means that we stop setting the terms and accept the terms that we given. We all have faith. The trouble is that we place that faith in ourselves, in our goodness, intellect, money, etc. "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction." Knowledge can begin when I acknowledge God as God, and myself as creature. Coming in humility, reverence and respect is at the heart of this.

Believe: This does not mean intellectual ascent. It does not mean simply believing that God exists, and/or that Jesus is who he say he is. It means trust in Christ, but specifically, it means trust in the work of Christ. This is in contrast to works of the law. It's not that you have a belief in Christ. It's that you trust in His life death and resurrection as your righteousness (you right-ness).

*I did this rather quickly, so it's not perfect.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Athée

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2015
1,443
256
41
✟39,486.00
Faith
Humanist
If we are concerned about accuracy, and I assume we are, please understand that there is never any instruction about "accepting Jesus as Savior" in the biblical texts. Sure, there is much of this kind of talk in many, many churches, but that doesn't change that fact that it's not a biblical idea. People being asked to make decisions for Christ, walk down isles, raise hands, sign cards, etc. The whole lot of it is rubbish because it puts you in the drivers seat. It actually perpetuates our sin! It puts man as the determining factor. Some people present Christ as if they are trying to sell you a timeshare. That's not what we see in scripture.

"Repent and believe" this is the instruction. We must even be clear on what these two things mean.

Repent: This does not mean confessing your drinking smoking and swearing (nothing wrong 2 out 3 of those, anyway :). It doesn't mean turning from your sins. It means turning from you Sin. Since the fall we all think that we are gods. We act is if we are autonomous, independent beings, but that simply is not true. Repentance is, at least in part, confessing this and turning from it. It means to turn from self-trust to trust in the gospel. It means that we stop setting the terms and accept the terms that we given. We all have faith. The trouble is that we place that faith in ourselves, in our goodness, intellect, money, etc. "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction." Knowledge can begin when I acknowledge God as God, and myself as creature. Coming in humility, reverence and respect is at the heart of this.

Believe: This does not mean intellectual ascent. It does not mean simply believing that God exists, and/or that Jesus is who he say he is. It means trust in Christ, but specifically, it means trust in the work of Christ. This is in contrast to works of the law. It's not that you have a belief in Christ. It's that you trust in His life death and resurrection as your righteousness (you right-ness).

*I did this rather quickly, so it's perfect.
That was well said. In fact that is more or less what I would have said a few years ago :) I might have put a bit more emphasis on the fact that human heart hearts are sinful and broken and that it is only by the work of god that we can even begin to desire a relationship with God, that our confession of faith is not a pronouncement of intellectual brief but rather an outward sign of the internal change in our hearts that God has brought about through grace.

However the underpinnings of all those things are a belief that the God in question exists and once I actually looked at the evidence it became impossible to believe. This does not negate the experiences I had, but in my case at least, there were no experiences that could not be accounted for by natural means and the findings of psychology. That said I appreciate you taking the time to frame that response, it really was well done and as I said I would have agreed with you point for point a few years ago.
Peace.
 
Upvote 0

jimmyjimmy

Pardoned Rebel
Supporter
Jan 2, 2015
11,556
5,728
USA
✟234,973.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
I might have put a bit more emphasis on the fact that human heart hearts are sinful and broken and that it is only by the work of god that we can even begin to desire a relationship with God, that our confession of faith is not a pronouncement of intellectual brief but rather an outward sign of the internal change in our hearts that God has brought about through grace.

If I had a time machine, we would be fully agreement here. God must intervene (create new life) and He does so by His word.

I hope that you can see a way around or through whatever it is that has derailed you. If I have any other thoughts, I'll share as I watch this thread, but as far as prophesy goes, I would never in a million years take away you doubts with that as my only tool.

BTW, I was in a state of unbelief for about 7 years, shortly after becoming a Christian. He brought me back, and that was 20 years ago now, so I do somewhat understand your position, and I won't just tell you to suck it and believe.

Best,

Brian
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
So based on those interpretations of scripture I both have salvation (because I did believe and accept Jesus as saviour) and will never be brought back to repentance.
I'm not your judge, but it appears to me that, according to what you said here:
Kvothe said:
3)I would have said instead I had convinced myself that I had experienced and later I came to believe that I had been fooling myself (for a variety of reasons)
... you were never saved in the first place.

At least, that's how I took it.
Kvothe said:
So basically, I am saved but will continue in to live forever as an apostate because there is no way for God to lead me back to repentance to pick up again the process of sanctification.
God can lead you back to REPENTANCE, but He won't lead you back to SALVATION, because if you were saved in the first place, you didn't lose it.
 
Upvote 0

Athée

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2015
1,443
256
41
✟39,486.00
Faith
Humanist
If I had a time machine, we would be fully agreement here. God must intervene (create new life) and He does so by His word.

I hope that you can see a way around or through whatever it is that has derailed you. If I have any other thoughts, I'll share as I watch this thread, but as far as prophesy goes, I would never in a million years take away you doubts with that as my only tool.

BTW, I was in a state of unbelief for about 7 years, shortly after becoming a Christian. He brought me back, and that was 20 years ago now, so I do somewhat understand your position, and I won't just tell you to suck it and believe.

Best,

Brian
Hey Brian,
Thanks for your thoughts. It is good to know that that journey back was something you found a way to do :)
Hopefully we will hear from you more in the thread. Also I wanted to say that for me prophesies are not a make or break topic. Well actually to be fair if there are prophesies in the Bible that meet all those criteria and are verified and all that jazz, that would go a long way to proving that the God of the Bible exists. What I meant was that even if the prophesies turn out to be false, wishful thinking, unremarkable etc this would not disprove the existence of god.
Peace
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,341
26,785
Pacific Northwest
✟728,115.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
I would first want to establish that prophesy is not the same thing as prediction, at least not in the biblical sense. Both the Hebrew and Greek terms translated as "prophet" mean "one who speaks on behalf of", that is prophecy is not fore-telling, it's forth-telling.

Within that I'd say that, yes, there is predictive prophecy, it's just important to understand that prophecy is not the same thing as prediction.

The chief role of the Hebrew prophets wasn't to make predictions about the future, but to speak "the Word of YHVH" to the people, that involved both speaking promises and judgment. So the prophets railed against the abuses against the poor, the widow, and the orphan, they decried the people when they fell into idolatry. And so against these things the prophets declare God's judgment; the prophets spoke of the Assyrians as God's agents of judgment against the northern kingdom, and the Babylonians as the agents of God's judgment against the southern kingdom. But then in the midst of their captivity, in the midst of the suffering from dealing with this, the prophets would also speak of God's promises, that God was not going to abandon His people.

Then here's the thing, the ways Jews interpret certain prophecies and the way Christians interpret the same look very different. For example in mainstream Judaism the future world is associated with the Messiah's coming, and part of that future world involves people coming to Jerusalem to worship God and there will be offerings in the holy sanctuary, thus Judaism argues that since there is no Temple standing one of the marks of the Messiah is that he will rebuild the Temple. In Christianity this is very different, we see Jesus' words concerning His own body as a temple "destroy this temple and I will raise it up again in three days." and speaks of the destruction of the Temple that took place in 70 AD in the Olivet Discourse. The promises of the nations coming to Mt. Zion, in the historic Christian view, isn't literal, but speaks of the gathering of the nations to worship God in the Church, and speaks to the ultimate restoration and renewal of creation at the end of the age. From an historical Christian perspective the physical temple in Jerusalem is gone, it was destroyed, and it has no spiritual or theological significance, its purpose was fundamentally to point to Christ in Whom "the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form".

Another example of the way Christians have approached certain prophecy would be that found in the book of the Prophet Joel, Joel says that "in the last days" the sun would be darkened, the moon turn to blood, and also that the Spirit of God would be poured out on all people--this passage is specifically quoted by St. Peter in the Acts of the Apostles as having been fulfilled on Pentecost, also fulfilling St. John the Baptist's statement that, "I baptize you with water but the One who comes after me will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire". There is no indication in Acts 2--the passage that describes the account on Pentecost--of the sun turning dark or the moon to blood, or the stars from the heavens falling; yet for St. Peter that nonetheless was fulfilled. Jesus uses similar language in the Gospels in His speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple, that the sun would be darkened and the moon to blood, yet these things didn't happen in 70 AD either. The Apocalypse of St. John uses the same language.

To that end scholars have described such language as apocalyptic, apocalyptic is a literary genre that was most popular in the 2nd Temple Period, the Bible contains two examples, the book of Daniel written in the Maccabean era, and the Apocalypse of St. John written around the year 90-95 AD during the reign of Domitian. Apocalyptic literature isn't about predicting the future, but about using loud language to say important things. That's what apocalyptic language is, it's great big language to communicate that something is important, not necessarily that it will happen literally.

So if the chief interest is in predictive prophecy, a prediction coming to pass, then we would find something like that in Jesus' Olivet Discourse--Jesus announces that the Temple would be destroyed, He mentions Gentiles trampling Jerusalem underfoot, that armies would surround Jerusalem, and that in fact did happen in 70 AD in the First Jewish-Roman War. This of course also depends on whether one believes this was an authentic statement by Jesus. Some would argue that because it did happen there's no way Jesus could have said it would happen, and so was inserted into Jesus' mouth by the Evangelists themselves; this of course presumes Jesus couldn't have said it would happen.

And that gets us to an interesting point, to accept that such predictive statements are true we first must accept that they can be true. Or at the very least we would need a level of evidence not afforded to us, namely documented evidence that either the Evangelists themselves wrote the Gospels before the events, or that they were not introducing something into Jesus' mouth but were penning a tradition or source that predated the event itself. Such evidence simply doesn't exist, and so in a case like this it fundamentally boils down to a matter of faith.

And, really, such things really are almost always going to boil down to a matter of faith, as opposed to evidence and reason.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

Athée

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2015
1,443
256
41
✟39,486.00
Faith
Humanist
I would first want to establish that prophesy is not the same thing as prediction, at least not in the biblical sense. Both the Hebrew and Greek terms translated as "prophet" mean "one who speaks on behalf of", that is prophecy is not fore-telling, it's forth-telling.

Within that I'd say that, yes, there is predictive prophecy, it's just important to understand that prophecy is not the same thing as prediction.

The chief role of the Hebrew prophets wasn't to make predictions about the future, but to speak "the Word of YHVH" to the people, that involved both speaking promises and judgment. So the prophets railed against the abuses against the poor, the widow, and the orphan, they decried the people when they fell into idolatry. And so against these things the prophets declare God's judgment; the prophets spoke of the Assyrians as God's agents of judgment against the northern kingdom, and the Babylonians as the agents of God's judgment against the southern kingdom. But then in the midst of their captivity, in the midst of the suffering from dealing with this, the prophets would also speak of God's promises, that God was not going to abandon His people.

Then here's the thing, the ways Jews interpret certain prophecies and the way Christians interpret the same look very different. For example in mainstream Judaism the future world is associated with the Messiah's coming, and part of that future world involves people coming to Jerusalem to worship God and there will be offerings in the holy sanctuary, thus Judaism argues that since there is no Temple standing one of the marks of the Messiah is that he will rebuild the Temple. In Christianity this is very different, we see Jesus' words concerning His own body as a temple "destroy this temple and I will raise it up again in three days." and speaks of the destruction of the Temple that took place in 70 AD in the Olivet Discourse. The promises of the nations coming to Mt. Zion, in the historic Christian view, isn't literal, but speaks of the gathering of the nations to worship God in the Church, and speaks to the ultimate restoration and renewal of creation at the end of the age. From an historical Christian perspective the physical temple in Jerusalem is gone, it was destroyed, and it has no spiritual or theological significance, its purpose was fundamentally to point to Christ in Whom "the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form".

Another example of the way Christians have approached certain prophecy would be that found in the book of the Prophet Joel, Joel says that "in the last days" the sun would be darkened, the moon turn to blood, and also that the Spirit of God would be poured out on all people--this passage is specifically quoted by St. Peter in the Acts of the Apostles as having been fulfilled on Pentecost, also fulfilling St. John the Baptist's statement that, "I baptize you with water but the One who comes after me will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire". There is no indication in Acts 2--the passage that describes the account on Pentecost--of the sun turning dark or the moon to blood, or the stars from the heavens falling; yet for St. Peter that nonetheless was fulfilled. Jesus uses similar language in the Gospels in His speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple, that the sun would be darkened and the moon to blood, yet these things didn't happen in 70 AD either. The Apocalypse of St. John uses the same language.

To that end scholars have described such language as apocalyptic, apocalyptic is a literary genre that was most popular in the 2nd Temple Period, the Bible contains two examples, the book of Daniel written in the Maccabean era, and the Apocalypse of St. John written around the year 90-95 AD during the reign of Domitian. Apocalyptic literature isn't about predicting the future, but about using loud language to say important things. That's what apocalyptic language is, it's great big language to communicate that something is important, not necessarily that it will happen literally.

So if the chief interest is in predictive prophecy, a prediction coming to pass, then we would find something like that in Jesus' Olivet Discourse--Jesus announces that the Temple would be destroyed, He mentions Gentiles trampling Jerusalem underfoot, that armies would surround Jerusalem, and that in fact did happen in 70 AD in the First Jewish-Roman War. This of course also depends on whether one believes this was an authentic statement by Jesus. Some would argue that because it did happen there's no way Jesus could have said it would happen, and so was inserted into Jesus' mouth by the Evangelists themselves; this of course presumes Jesus couldn't have said it would happen.

And that gets us to an interesting point, to accept that such predictive statements are true we first must accept that they can be true. Or at the very least we would need a level of evidence not afforded to us, namely documented evidence that either the Evangelists themselves wrote the Gospels before the events, or that they were not introducing something into Jesus' mouth but were penning a tradition or source that predated the event itself. Such evidence simply doesn't exist, and so in a case like this it fundamentally boils down to a matter of faith.

And, really, such things really are almost always going to boil down to a matter of faith, as opposed to evidence and reason.

-CryptoLutheran
That was a great reply, thanks for that! In generally I agree with what you are saying both about the nature of prophecy in the Bible and with apocalyptic language ( I actually think that Jesus makes a lot of sense as a failed apocalyptic prophet). As you say however I am mostly interested in the specific definition of prophecy that is predictive. I also wouldn't say out of hand that Jesus could not have spoken the words about the temple, I would have to look into why people argue the question.
Anyway thanks for your thoughts.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Aelred of Rievaulx

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2015
1,398
606
✟12,231.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Here is one of my favorite examples:

1 Kings 13:2 And he cried against the altar in the word of the LORD, and said, O altar, altar, thus saith the LORD; Behold, a child shall be born unto the house of David, Josiah by name; and upon thee shall he offer the priests of the high places that burn incense upon thee, and men's bones shall be burnt upon thee.
The problem is that Kings was written at least after the Exile. We know this because the text finishes Jehoiachin being released from prison. So it doesn't really satisfy the whole "written before the events in question" notion...
 
Upvote 0