Creation predictions

[Major1]

Who here is trying to "destroy" the book? All we're trying to do is understand it better--who wrote it, when, why, etc.

OH, Well then. It was written by Daniel.

It was written around 550 BC.

It was written to YOU and ME. The Revelation is the "unveiling" of the book of Daniel.

God has a plan, and His plan is down to the intricate detail. God knows and is in control of the future. Everything that God has predicted has come true exactly as He predicted. Therefore, we should believe and trust that the things He has predicted for the future will one day occur exactly as God has declared.

 

[Speedwell]

Actually that is not true. The way you delivered your opinion did in fact bring into question what Jesus did
IMO. To me it seemed that you were trying to make fun of the Lord Jesus Christ and what He did.

I personally simply believe what happened happened just as it was said that it would happen. I honestly do not see how that would compel you to know what my understanding of Bible prophecy is.

Dr. John Gill says that .......
"All this was done,...." /The disciples were sent to the neighbouring village for the ass and colt, and they brought them, and Christ rode upon them; not because of the distance of the place from Jerusalem, for he was just at it; or because he was weary, or it would be very fatiguing to him to walk thither on foot; for he had been used to travelling, and had gone through most parts of Galilee and Judea; but that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet: the Ethiopic version adds, Isaiah; for the former part of the following citation stands in Isaiah 62:11 as the latter does in Zechariah 9:9. It was usual with the Jews to cite Scripture in this manner, by taking a part from one writer, and another from anther, and joining them together: saying, the following words. Matthew 21:4 Commentaries: This took place to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet:

And just how do you understand my understanding of prophecy?

It is clear from the passage that Jesus acted conciously to fulfill Zechariah's prophecy. It's not something that happened on its own. Does that square with what you think prophecy is about?

The reason I ask that question is that the impression I am getting from creationists is that the purpose of prophecies and their fulfillment is to prove the literal inerrancy of scripture (particularly the Genesis stories). But if people read the prophecies and then act them out (like Jesus did) does that count as a fulfillment?

 

[redleghunter]

Every prophecy in Daniel up until today has been meticulously, accurately and minutely fulfilled in every detail which is in my opinion why so many people reject Daniel. IF he was that correct....100% of the time, then why would we think that what comes next prophetically speaking will be inaccurate?

Thanks for the Josephus references. I guess now Josephus must be thrown under the bus because "prophecies just don't happen ."

I believe this is the longer quote from Josephus' Book of Antiquity XI chapter 8:

14 (30) that followed him thought they should have liberty to plunder the city, and torment the High Priest to death: which the King’s displeasure fairly promised them: the very reverse of it happened. For Alexander, when he saw the multitude at a distance, in white garments, while the priests stood clothed with fine linen, and the High Priest in purple and scarlet clothing; with his miter on his head; having the golden plate whereon the name of God was engraved, he approached by himself, and adored that name, and first saluted the High Priest. The Jews also did all together, with one voice, salute Alexander; and encompass him about. Whereupon the Kings of Syria, and the rest were surprized at what Alexander had done; and supposed him disordered in his mind. However, Parmenio alone went up to him, and asked him, “How it came to pass, that when all others adored him, he should adore the High Priest of the Jews?” To whom he replied, “I did not adore him, but that God who hath honoured him with his High Priesthood. For I saw this very person, in a dream, in this very habit, when I was at Dios in Macedonia. Who, when I was considering with my self how I might obtain the dominion of Asia, exhorted me to make no delay; but boldly to pass over the sea thither: for that he would conduct my army, and would give me the dominion over the Persians.

Whence it is that having seen no other in that habit, and now seeing this person in it, and remembring that vision, and the exhortation which I had in my dream, I believe that I bring this army under the divine conduct, and shall therewith conquer Darius, and destroy the power of the Persians; and that all things will succeed according to what is in my own mind.” And when he had said this to Parmenio, and had given the High Priest his right hand, the priests ran along by him; and he came into the (31) And when he went up into the temple, he offered sacrifice to God, according to the High Priest’s direction: and magnificently treated both the High Priest, and the priests. And when the book of Daniel was shewed him, (32) 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: but the next day he called them to him, and bid them ask what favours they pleased of him. Whereupon the High Priest desired, that they might enjoy the laws of their forefathers: and might pay no tribute on the seventh year. He granted all they desired. And when they intreated him that he would permit the Jews in Babylon and Media to enjoy their own laws also, he willingly promised to do hereafter what they desired. And when he said to the multitude, that if any of them would list themselves in his army, on this condition that they should continue under the laws of their forefathers, and live according to them, he was willing to take them with him; many were ready to accompany him in his wars.
Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews, Book XI

Footnote: (32) The placed shewed Alexander might be Dan. 7:6. 8:3–8, 20–22. 11:3. Some or all of them very plain predictions of Alexander’s conquests and successors

 

[Speedwell]

Thanks for the Josephus references. I guess now Josephus must be thrown under the bus because "prophecies just don't happen ."

Who says so? I thought we were talking particularly about the Book of Daniel.

 

[redleghunter]

Who says so? I thought we were talking particularly about the Book of Daniel.

Josephus (lived through the 1st ccentury AD) confirms Daniel authorship prior to prophesies later fulfilled.

Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews, Book XI

See chapter 8.

 

[redleghunter]

It is clear from the passage that Jesus acted conciously to fulfill Zechariah's prophecy. It's not something that happened on its own. Does that square with what you think prophecy is about?

Or Jesus needed a mode of transportation for the triumphal entry into Jerusalem. The account is interesting as the apostles found the Jenny and her colt as He explained it .

Now Jesus did predict His betrayal, arrest and execution. He accepted the Father's will. Are we to believe Jesus bartered with Judas to betray Him and negotiated His arrest and own torture?

I'm sure that is how the movie the Last Temptation depicted such but not how the Gospel accounts tell the accounts .

 

[redleghunter]

[Staff edit].

St Jerome (ca 401) said this in his introduction to the book of Daniel:

I wish to stress in my preface this fact, that none of the prophets has so clearly spoken concerning Christ as has this prophet Daniel. (619-620) For not only did he assert that He would come, a prediction common to the other prophets as well, but also he set forth the very time at which He would come. Moreover he went through the various kings in order, stated the actual number of years involved, and announced beforehand the clearest signs of events to come. And because Porphyry saw that all these things had been fulfilled and could not deny that they had taken place, he overcame this evidence of historical accuracy by taking refuge in this evasion, contending that whatever is foretold concerning Antichrist at the end of the world was actually fulfilled in the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, because of certain similarities to things which took place at his time. But this very attack testifies to Daniel's accuracy. For so striking was the reliability |16 of what the prophet foretold, that he could not appear to unbelievers as a predicter of the future, but rather a narrator of things already past. And so wherever occasion arises in the course of explaining this volume, I shall attempt briefly to answer his malicious charge, and to controvert by simple explanation (p. 492) the philosophical skill, or rather the worldly malice, by which he strives to subvert the truth and by specious legerdemain to remove that which is so apparent to our eyes.
St. Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (1958) pp. 15-157

 

[redleghunter]

[Staff edit].

Why Daniel specifically is addressed by skeptics is because of the detailed nature of the prophecies and how they match the actual historic unfolding.

The manuscript fragment defense is untenable for one major reason. None of the OT books have manuscript fragments in Hebrew dating earlier than the second century BC. None. There is only the Septuagint which is dated early 2nd century BC and guess what? Daniel is in there.

 

[Major1]

It is clear from the passage that Jesus acted conciously to fulfill Zechariah's prophecy. It's not something that happened on its own. Does that square with what you think prophecy is about?

The reason I ask that question is that the impression I am getting from creationists is that the purpose of prophecies and their fulfillment is to prove the literal inerrancy of scripture (particularly the Genesis stories). But if people read the prophecies and then act them out (like Jesus did) does that count as a fulfillment?

There is a teaching which I happen to subscribe to called "Dualism".

It means that when a prophet was giving his prophecy, he was giving it to the people around him at that time and also to others way down the time line.

Now as for Jesus fulfilling Zechariah's prophecy, what earthly reason does it matter.
IF we accept and believe that Jesus is the Creator of all things as the Bible tells us, then whether He manipulated the event or allowed it to happen on its own, the is the same.

If a prophet is told to give a prophecy by God 1000 years before it is to happen, and then it happens, since God is in control of ALL things and ALL things are done for His pleasure, then do we not have the same answer as to whether is was just a "happening" or it was manipulated????

If you subscribe to the idea that God is an old man sitting on the porch and watching time go by and has no input in the affairs of men, then your premise would make since to me. But I believe that kind of thinking to be an error, that the Lord has set the age of grace in motion, only to take His hand away, allowing us to drift without any moorings and is unthinkable of God.

My dear friend, I believe that God intervenes in the affairs of men every time a sinner trusts Christ as his Saviour. Every time the Gospel is preached God intervenes to “edify” His saints; to save men and women, boys and girls, from sin’s degradation–from a Christless eternity, and conform lives to the image of His Son. And, by faith alone, to delivers us from this present evil world system.

 

[Speedwell]

There is a teaching which I happen to subscribe to called "Dualism".

It means that when a prophet was giving his prophecy, he was giving it to the people around him at that time and also to others way down the time line.

.

Now that is interesting, and I will have to look into it in more detail later.
One of the reasons I frequent chatrooms like this is sheer curiosity. I was raised a Traditional Christian and it wasn't till I was an adult that I heard in any detail about literal inerrancy and the attendant doctrines of fundamenstalist Protestantism. My reaction at the time was, "They believe what??? about the Bible??? Why?" The "why" is hard for an outsider like me to get to. Every little tidbit helps. Thanks, Major.

 

[Major1]

Now that is interesting, and I will have to look into it in more detail later.
One of the reasons I frequent chatrooms like this is sheer curiosity. I was raised a Traditional Christian and it wasn't till I was an adult that I heard in any detail about literal inerrancy and the attendant doctrines of fundamenstalist Protestantism. My reaction at the time was, "They believe what??? about the Bible??? Why?" The "why" is hard for an outsider like me to get to. Every little tidbit helps. Thanks, Major.

I understand and thank you for the explanation.

May I say to you that one of the reason why fulfilled prophecy is important is the reason you just posted.

"They believe what"????

I have been in the Bible ministry for a long time now and I have spoken with many who have the same view that you have expressed. I am a fundamental, literalist and a proponent of Sola Scriptura.

Fundamental means that the basic foundational truths are the important ones.
Literalist means that what God said is what He meant to say and I do not need to explain it.
Sola Scriptura means that God has given us all we need to know in order to be saved in His Word the Bible.

I would say to you, if you are interested and if not ignore what I say and we will still be friends. IMO we can better understand the prophetic Scriptures if we will but study the wisdom and historical parts of the Bible as well as the "law".

There are 759 laws and judgments in the Scriptures that outline the "cause and effect"
of the many area of our lives. Each of these precepts describe an event or cause with a predictable effect. Those laws were true when God gave them and they are just as true today and they will be in the future.

You see, when God had a prophet tell something that was going to take place and then that event actually took place, that "cause and effect" then tended to VERIFY that what God said could be trusted and if what He said could be trusted then HE COULD BE TRUSTED.

Now to address the idea........"They believe what".

Horoscopes, physic readings, false religions, superstitions, false predictions are built upon lies, clever tales, or clever tricks but true Christianity is built upon God’s revelation of Himself to man through Scripture. Unlike the many tales and legends that have transpired throughout the ages, only the Holy Scriptures have withstood the test of time as being the accurate and inerrant Word of a divine and all-knowing God.

History attests to the fact that only the God of the Bible has known and foreseen the things that have transpired in the world. God tells us of his abilities in His Word and He has never been proven wrong!

Please do the work for yourself on this and decide for yourself.
There are over 8360 prophetic utterances in the Bible.
Now most of them have already been fulfilled so real history confirms their existence. But the fact is this.........not one time has the Bible been proven to be wrong. It is 100% accurate 100% of the time.!!!

Now since that is all true and verifiable, why would we not accept the prophetic words that Jesus Christ is coming again to this earth physically at Armageddon?

 

[Speedwell]

I understand and thank you for the explanation.

May I say to you that one of the reason why fulfilled prophecy is important is the reason you just posted.

"They believe what"????

I have been in the Bible ministry for a long time now and I have spoken with many who have the same view that you have expressed. I am a fundamental, literalist and a proponent of Sola Scriptura.

Fundamental means that the basic foundational truths are the important ones.
Literalist means that what God said is what He meant to say and I do not need to explain it.
Sola Scriptura means that God has given us all we need to know in order to be saved in His Word the Bible.

I would say to you, if you are interested and if not ignore what I say and we will still be friends. IMO we can better understand the prophetic Scriptures if we will but study the wisdom and historical parts of the Bible as well as the "law".

There are 759 laws and judgments in the Scriptures that outline the "cause and effect"
of the many area of our lives. Each of these precepts describe an event or cause with a predictable effect. Those laws were true when God gave them and they are just as true today and they will be in the future.

You see, when God had a prophet tell something that was going to take place and then that event actually took place, that "cause and effect" then tended to VERIFY that what God said could be trusted and if what He said could be trusted then HE COULD BE TRUSTED.

Now to address the idea........"They believe what".

Horoscopes, physic readings, false religions, superstitions, false predictions are built upon lies, clever tales, or clever tricks but true Christianity is built upon God’s revelation of Himself to man through Scripture. Unlike the many tales and legends that have transpired throughout the ages, only the Holy Scriptures have withstood the test of time as being the accurate and inerrant Word of a divine and all-knowing God.

History attests to the fact that only the God of the Bible has known and foreseen the things that have transpired in the world. God tells us of his abilities in His Word and He has never been proven wrong!

Please do the work for yourself on this and decide for yourself.
There are over 8360 prophetic utterances in the Bible.
Now most of them have already been fulfilled so real history confirms their existence. But the fact is this.........not one time has the Bible been proven to be wrong. It is 100% accurate 100% of the time.!!!

Now since that is all true and verifiable, why would we not accept the prophetic words that Jesus Christ is coming again to this earth physically at Armageddon?

Thanks. I was also interested in that quote from St. Jerome that Redleg posted--I was not familiar with it. I know that what the Fathers wrote is not scripture, but should be paid attention to all the same.

 

[Major1]

Why Daniel specifically is addressed by skeptics is because of the detailed nature of the prophecies and how they match the actual historic unfolding.

The manuscript fragment defense is untenable for one major reason. None of the OT books have manuscript fragments in Hebrew dating earlier than the second century BC. None. There is only the Septuagint which is dated early 2nd century BC and guess what? Daniel is in there.

Very true. Daniel was so correct in all that he said he has caused men to doubt that what he wrote was BEFORE it happened. It is so detailed that skeptics have tried to make it appear that he wrote his work AFTER those events took place.

Daniel was so precise that he predicted the 1st appearance of the Messiah to the exact number of days...... from the rebuilding of the Temple to Messsiah appearing on Palm Sunday as the King of the Jews was 173,880 days.

When we move 173,880 days forward in time from March 14, 445 BC we will come to Palm Sunday April 6, 32 AD and that is exactly what Daniel said in Daniel 9:24-27.

 

[Major1]

Thanks. I was also interested in that quote from St. Jerome that Redleg posted--I was not familiar with it. I know that what the Fathers wrote is not scripture, but should be paid attention to all the same.

I have know Redleg for some time now, and you can depend on what he says to be the truth and nothing but the truth.

 

[Major1]

Thanks. I was also interested in that quote from St. Jerome that Redleg posted--I was not familiar with it. I know that what the Fathers wrote is not scripture, but should be paid attention to all the same.

Wonderful. Here is the link that will take you to his verse by verse comments of Daniel and his opinions........St. Jerome, Commentary on Daniel (1958)  pp. 15-157

 

[redleghunter]

Now that is interesting, and I will have to look into it in more detail later.
One of the reasons I frequent chatrooms like this is sheer curiosity. I was raised a Traditional Christian and it wasn't till I was an adult that I heard in any detail about literal inerrancy and the attendant doctrines of fundamenstalist Protestantism. My reaction at the time was, "They believe what??? about the Bible??? Why?" The "why" is hard for an outsider like me to get to. Every little tidbit helps. Thanks, Major.

I grew up Roman Catholic which is the original Traditional church. I think you confuse the infallibility of Sacred Scriptures as well as what inerrancy means. The early church fathers knew how to exegete and considered what was written as truly inspired of the Holy Spirit.

Perhaps you have an errant understanding of Biblical inerrancy. Below is a link which may be informative.

Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy

 

[Speedwell]

I grew up Roman Catholic which is the original Traditional church. I think you confuse the infallibility of Sacred Scriptures as well as what inerrancy means. The early church fathers knew how to exegete and considered what was written as truly inspired of the Holy Spirit.

Perhaps you have an errant understanding of Biblical inerrancy. Below is a link which may be informative.

Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy

LOL! I have a copy of that on my flash drive. But we are not talking about the divine inspiration of scripture, but about the history of the Book of Daniel. Our discussion might apply the rest of the Old Testament as well. The texts of the Bible all have authorship and histories which, in principle at least, are determinable by the the standard tools of literary scholarship, augmented by archaeology and other sciences. What do you make of that work? Some quite learned and reputable persons have concluded on what seem to them to be reasonable grounds, that the Book of Daniel was composed in the 2nd century BC. According to St. Jerome, similar conjectures were being floated even in his day. What if they were right?

 

[redleghunter]

Thanks. I was also interested in that quote from St. Jerome that Redleg posted--I was not familiar with it. I know that what the Fathers wrote is not scripture, but should be paid attention to all the same.

If you keep reading his very long commentary at the link, Jerome probably had the very best knowledge of the then extant Hebrew Scriptures. It's an amazing read.

It's great to read the ancients like Jerome without all the trappings of the later schisms and camp following.

 

[redleghunter]

LOL! I have a copy of that on my flash drive. But we are not talking about the divine inspiration of scripture, but about the history of the Book of Daniel. Our discussion might apply the rest of the Old Testament as well. The texts of the Bible all have authorship and histories which, in principle at least, are determinable by the the standard tools of literary scholarship, augmented by archaeology and other sciences. What do you make of that work? Some quite learned and reputable persons have concluded on what seem to them to be reasonable grounds, that the Book of Daniel was composed in the 2nd century BC. According to St. Jerome, similar conjectures were being floated even in his day. What if they were right?

One of the reasons I posted Jerome is because he actually had full copies of OT manuscripts we today rate as fragments. That is why I always go see what the ancients say about works they considered not so ancient.

For the external evidence I agree with Josephus and Jerome that Daniel was the author and was a prophet. Meaning I don't believe someone composed the book of Daniel vaticinium ex eventu.

I read in Jerome's commentary that some extant Greek copies of Daniel were altered to actually fit the view of Porphyry. Probably why he had that view.

What blows the lid off of the presumption Daniel was composed as events happened is his account of receiving the messianic prophecies. Even if written in the 2nd century, that still makes a later fulfillment in 1st Century AD---future.

Yet what fuels the presumption that the Daniel autograph was mid 2nd century is the non-believer asserts miracles and prophecies fulfilled just don't happen. Even the Pharisees saw the miracles of Christ and still did not believe.

Add to the DSS data I posted and linked. 4 caves with 8 manuscripts of Daniel from the same timeframe as the skeptics claim it was in production. (1) not enough time for acceptance by all factions of Pharisee, Saducee, Essene and Maccabean. (2) the late 3rd century schism of the groups also poses a problem for the Maccabee source for Daniel. The DSS call into question the vaticinium ex eventu.

Then as mentioned above we have the testimony of the ancient scholarship in Josephus and also Jerome who cites sources even earlier than his day which has the earlier autograph of Daniel well before Alexander conquers the Levant.

 

[redleghunter]

Very true. Daniel was so correct in all that he said he has caused men to doubt that what he wrote was BEFORE it happened. It is so detailed that skeptics have tried to make it appear that he wrote his work AFTER those events took place.

Daniel was so precise that he predicted the 1st appearance of the Messiah to the exact number of days...... from the rebuilding of the Temple to Messsiah appearing on Palm Sunday as the King of the Jews was 173,880 days.

When we move 173,880 days forward in time from March 14, 445 BC we will come to Palm Sunday April 6, 32 AD and that is exactly what Daniel said in Daniel 9:24-27.

Indeed. And when they started unpacking and cataloging the Daniel fragments, early on they did not have fragments for Daniel 9. This raised some eyebrows until cave 4 was catalogued. Fragments of Daniel 9 were found in Scroll 4Q116.

Biblical Dead Sea Scrolls - Daniel 9


As
Posted much earlier this piece as well:

New Light on the Book of Daniel from the Dead Sea Scrolls