Prophecies fulfilled?

intojoy

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2013
1,612
54
✟2,069.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Pinko, :)

The bible says that in order to understand scripture, one must undergo spiritual regeneration. At the point of rebirth the believer is pictured as a baby in need of milk. Milk in this context has to do with things like forgiveness, justification and eternal security. Once those spiritual truths are internalized and settled in the mind of the believer he/she can move onto the deep things, the hidden things in the word characterized by "meat". There are a lot of people making comments here and not many agree obviously. But going on the basis of what the bible says, for you to make a decision one way or the other about prophecy and other deeper subjects inside the word would be difficult until you've come to know The Lord personally. I can only encourage you to take every verse at its obvious meaning first. Don't look for the hidden, spiritual meaning behind what is written. For a better understanding of what I mean check out my thread - biblical rules of interpretation.
What is holding you back from believing Pink?
Maybe I can help answer your objections.
Your friend
Intojoy
 
Upvote 0

intojoy

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2013
1,612
54
✟2,069.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Shoulda put this but had to look it up

Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, and he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he should instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. (1 Corinthians 2:14-16 ASV)
 
Upvote 0

Pink Spider

EUROPEAN ANGLICAN
Supporter
May 26, 2013
10,929
493
Sweden
✟38,072.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
:wave: Hello again, friend!

There are a lot of people making comments here and not many agree obviously.
If I were a man of faith - I would say: 'This wide
variety of interpretations and sub-belief systems
inside Christianity is pure Machiavelli - Divide
and Conquer. By whom? Satan or the Antichrist.'

Since I am not a man of faith - I am just confused
and turn to the things I know and can rely on:
Hard Science and Mathematics.

But going on the basis of what the bible says, for you to make a decision one way or the other about prophecy and other deeper subjects inside the word would be difficult until you've come to know The Lord personally.
How is that possible? How can I ask 'guidance' from
an entity that I do not believe exists?


I can only encourage you to take every verse at its obvious meaning first. Don't look for the hidden, spiritual meaning behind what is written.
Yes - and that's exactly what I'm doing right now.
Reading the KJV.
Now and then I have to check out an expression -
but all in all I like to read the book. (If one is used
to the rigor of math and science textbooks - then
the KJV is IMHO just right...:)).

For a better understanding of what I mean check out my thread - biblical rules of interpretation.
Thanks will do.

What is holding you back from believing Pink?
Good question. Tough answer.

I'd say (and I am honest to you):

- Philosophical materialism

- Determinism and the question whether
free will exists

- Scientific education

- Sheer confusion about the many different
interpretations here at CF.

- Personal aesthetic preferences

Maybe I can help answer your objections.
I might take you up on that... Thanks! :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

Pink Spider

EUROPEAN ANGLICAN
Supporter
May 26, 2013
10,929
493
Sweden
✟38,072.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Shoulda put this but had to look it up

Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, and he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he should instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. (1 Corinthians 2:14-16 ASV)

That's actually a good quote - and it 'draws a line
in the sand', so to speak. A line that divides Scientific
knowledge from 'Spiritual knowledge' - No?
 
Upvote 0

Hawkins

Member
Supporter
Apr 27, 2005
2,559
394
Canada
✟235,114.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Sometimes I speculate that people (the atheists) don't know how a truth (in general) can be conveyed. And they don't understand about how a scientific truth is specially detected, that is, how humans consider a scientific truth is actually a truth.

Regarding to how a truth can be conveyed,

======
It's a matter of how truth can be conveyed, and hw efficient humans can approach a truth.

Basically, history as a whole has no evidence. It's all tied up to a human witness called the *historian*. Similarly, any piece of news (think about any news before the creation of photos and video, or go to a museum to grap a newspaper of 150 years ago then ask will you believe what is said in the newspaper) can be that it's never evidenced. It's all tired up to yet another human witness called the *reporter*.

Truth sometimes (most of the times) can only be conveyed this way (such as history), or at least it can only be efficiently approached this way (such as today's news).

Even science is conveyed this way, that is, rely on faith to a human witness rather than getting the evidence. Do you have any evidence that the earth is actually revolving around the sun, or you just conveniently choose to believe what it is said and delivered from yet another human witness called the *scientist*.


Now what is the effect of the creation of videos and photos meaning to the process of news reporting (a human witnessing process). It enhance the effect of this witnessing process. But in nature, it's still a human witnessing process. That is, you can still doubt the source of the video or photo and to question if it is faked. You cannot completely untie from your trust/faith on the human witness (called the *reporter*).

Then before the creation of videos and photos, how can one *enhance* a human witnessing process ? That is, how can one make what he writes to be more believeable ? Sacrifice himself for what is written, that could be the only efficient way.

You can randomly name a historical figure in your history, then show us the evidence that he ever existed. Without referencing what was written down by another human, most likely you get none!
======


As for how humans consider a scientific truth to be a truth. Science is a very specific means to detect a very specific kind of truth. First the kind of truth must be repeatable, not for them to be called a science but for them to be surely detected beyond doubt. That is, you might have called a lot of subject a science, but only a specific one you can get to an undeniable precision.

Is the Big Bang Theory a science ? It is a science if it is assumed that the Big Bang is a repeatable natural phenomenon. However, as long as the Big Bang won't repeat itself before humans, it remains you faith to believe whether it is so or not.
 
Last edited:
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

Hospes

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 2, 2005
1,245
117
Arizona
Visit site
✟48,887.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
On a personal note:

I am reading a gospel (Mark) the first time in my life -
and I am amazed. It's great stuff.

Pink,
C. S. Lewis wrote "A young man who wishes to remain a sound Atheist cannot be too careful of his reading. There are traps everywhere--'Bibles laid open, millions of surprises,' as Herbert says, 'fine nets and stratagems.' God is, if I may say it, very unscrupulous."

I hope my my Lord deals unscrupulously with you. :)
 
Upvote 0

Joshua260

Well-Known Member
Oct 30, 2012
1,448
42
North Carolina
✟9,504.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Originally Posted by ebia
[...]If you look at the OT texts that the NT says
Jesus fulfilled in their original context they often aren't predictive at all,
or are clearly talking about something else entirely.
Yes - that struck me too when I was checking
out some of those 'prophecies'...


Originally Posted by ebia
[...]
But then what is the point of prophesy in the bible - usually its about warning or promise. Generally its not about giving someone later a handy magical proof.
No - but the alleged 'fulfillments' are widely used as
proof that Jesus was the Christ and savior (e.g. Lee
Strobel).


Originally Posted by ebia
[...]
What the NT texts are doing by referring back in this way is NOT trying to prove Jesus, its trying to understand Jesus by thinking about him in
terms of those texts.
Yes - that makes sense. quote]

I've heard a popular internet atheist trash Strobel (I think unfairly) and his close followers have done so also, but sometimes I wonder if they have actually read his stuff. I admit that his books are written for the laiety but all his info comes from sholars and historians. He just gathers the info into a concvenient package, and that's why I still recommend his books.

As far as the prophecies, some quote 44, some over 100, and some over 300...the actual number is debateable. However, it would be a mistake to dismiss them all. Many are very specifically written concerning the messiah and Jesus fulfills many of them. Throughout the many years that the old testament books were written, it had been prohesied that the messiah would come from Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Jesse, David, born in Bethlehem, and also come before the destruction of the temple. I'm sure that one could find many more that are very SPECIFICALLY written concerning the coming messiah. So it is perfectly okay to use the argument that Jesus fulfilled many of the old testament messianic prophecies.
 
Upvote 0

Joshua260

Well-Known Member
Oct 30, 2012
1,448
42
North Carolina
✟9,504.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Since I am not a man of faith - I am just confused
and turn to the things I know and can rely on:
Hard Science and Mathematics.

Hi Pink. I have no problem with science and math. I did pretty well myself in those subjects also. More specifically, I was a huge physics fan. But the only thing those subjects will do for you is describe the NATURAL universe. Part of the Christian message is that there's a supernatural part of life, and there's just no way you will ever be able to use science to measure anything supernatural. I think a great book that discusses the interaction between the supernatural and the natural is Miracles by C.S. Lewis.

I think one of the most interesting things in life is that strange interaction between the two. One day, you see a lame guy and the next day he's walking. One day, a blind guy sits by the road and the next day he sees just fine. One day, you have a lump of lifeless chemicals and the next day life appears. Oops! How did that one get in there? ;) But seriouosly, this is exactly the kind of thing one will find when they search for where the supernatural and the natural has intermingled...it will be like a crime scene. People will say "what happened here?" Some might say that something supernatural might have occured, others will immediately rule out all possibity of supernatural affects and restrict their search only to natural causes. But what if there really IS a supernatural side? Are we going to ignore it, since we can't measure it directly?

Anyway, I totally appreciate your time in researching our faith. You seem to me to be a pretty smart person and I think you strive for truth, but I think some of it will be difficult for you because the supernatural is at the heart of Christianity.

Have a good nite.
 
Upvote 0

Pink Spider

EUROPEAN ANGLICAN
Supporter
May 26, 2013
10,929
493
Sweden
✟38,072.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Sometimes I speculate that people (the atheists) don't know how a truth (in general) can be conveyed. And they don't understand about how a scientific truth is specially detected, that is, how humans consider a scientific truth is actually a truth.
If you haven't already done so - then read:
'The Logic of Scientific Discovery' by Karl R. Popper.
(and PLEASE - after you done so - spare me the most
commonly cited critiques of that masterwork, if you
can)

Regarding to how a truth can be conveyed,
Science does not provide absolute truths.

Absolute truth can be found within the
framework of formal systems like
mathematics.

Basically, history as a whole has no evidence. It's all tied up to a human witness called the *historian*. Similarly, any piece of news (think about any news before the creation of photos and video, or go to a museum to grap a newspaper of 150 years ago then ask will you believe what is said in the newspaper) can be that it's never evidenced. It's all tired up to yet another human witness called the *reporter*.

Truth sometimes (most of the times) can only be conveyed this way (such as history), or at least it can only be efficiently approached this way (such as today's news).
History has no evidence? Seriously?
Even Jesus existence is confirmed by a few
non-biblical sources.


Even science is conveyed this way, that is, rely on faith to a human witness rather than getting the evidence. Do you have any evidence that the earth is actually revolving around the sun, or you just conveniently choose to believe what it is said and delivered from yet another human witness called the *scientist*.
Yes I do. Buy a telescope and check the movement
of other celestial bodies and you will soon arrive
at the conclusion that the planets revolve around
the sun.

So: Both History and Science have no evidence?
Wow!

You cannot completely untie from your trust/faith on the human witness (called the *reporter*).
I see your point. However - many scientific theories
one can experience by oneself.

Not to speak of mathematics. I simply read the
mathematical proof and see whether it holds.

Sacrifice himself for what is written, that could be the only efficient way.
That's no way to prove or ascertain anything.

You can randomly name a historical figure in your history, then show us the evidence that he ever existed. Without referencing what was written down by another human, most likely you get none!
Yes, yes - I have heard that argument a few times.

So what you are saying is that perhaps Napoleon
Bonaparte did not exist? No?
Well - the sheer volume of literally hundreds of
thousands of direct or indirect references from
literally thousands and thousands of people
makes it extremely probable that he existed.
And for him it was not necessary to sacrifice
himself...

The same goes for Jesus, only that the sources are
very few. Still it was not necessary to sacrifice
himself - just to prove that he existed.

As for how humans consider a scientific truth to be a truth. Science is a very specific means to detect a very specific kind of truth. First the kind of truth must be repeatable, not for them to be called a science but for them to be surely detected beyond doubt. That is, you might have called a lot of subject a science, but only a specific one you can get to an undeniable precision.
I told you before - science does NOT provide absolute
truths. That realm is reserved for mathematics.

Is the Big Bang Theory a science ?
It is a very promising hypothesis that explains a lot
of things.

It is a science if it is assumed that the Big Bang is a repeatable natural phenomenon. However, as long as the Big Bang won't repeat itself before humans, it remains you faith to believe whether it is so or not.
We do not know yet, whether Big Bangs have
occurred before in the multiverse and/or whether
they will happen again.


On a side note: You only talk about deduction
when it comes to science - what about
induction?
 
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

Pink Spider

EUROPEAN ANGLICAN
Supporter
May 26, 2013
10,929
493
Sweden
✟38,072.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Hello again Hospes! :wave: Thank you for your post!

Pink,
C. S. Lewis wrote "A young man who wishes to remain a sound Atheist cannot be too careful of his reading. There are traps everywhere--'Bibles laid open, millions of surprises,' as Herbert says, 'fine nets and stratagems.' God is, if I may say it, very unscrupulous."

I hope my my Lord deals unscrupulously with you. :)[/size]
I think 'something' (I call it 'the spirit' - not to be
confused with the holy spirit) is dealing
unscrupulously with me:

I went out of my way and bought:

- A KJV study Bible
- A Concordance (Strong's)
- A Bible dictionary (Holman's)
- A Bible commentary
- A KJV/AMP side by side Bible

I acquired the Libronix Bible software.
(Which I highly recommend)

I registered at CF.

Plus I am reading the bible every
night.

I still am an Atheist - but 'the spirit' makes
me be more open minded... :)
 
Upvote 0

Pink Spider

EUROPEAN ANGLICAN
Supporter
May 26, 2013
10,929
493
Sweden
✟38,072.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
I've heard a popular internet atheist trash Strobel (I think unfairly) and his close followers have done so also, but sometimes I wonder if they have actually read his stuff.
I just watched his videos. IMO he is too heavily
relying on the prophecies.

I admit that his books are written for the laiety but all his info comes from sholars and historians. He just gathers the info into a concvenient package, and that's why I still recommend his books.
It was not my intention to trash him. His stuff is
not all bad - and I learned one or two things... :)

As far as the prophecies, some quote 44, some over 100, and some over 300...the actual number is debateable. However, it would be a mistake to dismiss them all.
I do not yet know - nor do I have the knowledge
to accept or dismiss.


So it is perfectly okay to use the argument that Jesus fulfilled many of the old testament messianic prophecies.
As long as we can be sure that it's not retro-
engineered prophecy fulfillment.
 
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

Pink Spider

EUROPEAN ANGLICAN
Supporter
May 26, 2013
10,929
493
Sweden
✟38,072.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Hi Pink. I have no problem with science and math. I did pretty well myself in those subjects also. More specifically, I was a huge physics fan.
Cool! :thumbsup:

But the only thing those subjects will do for you is describe the NATURAL universe.
Yes that is true!

Part of the Christian message is that there's a supernatural part of life, and there's just no way you will ever be able to use science to measure anything supernatural.
Do we know that for sure?

I think a great book that discusses the interaction between the supernatural and the natural is Miracles by C.S. Lewis.
I don't like C.S. Lewis much - but perhaps I will
give it a go.

I think one of the most interesting things in life is that strange interaction between the two.
Or that there can be an interaction a all.

One day, you have a lump of lifeless chemicals and the next day life appears. Oops! How did that one get in there? ;)
Well I understand you - no problem. We can not
yet emulate the emergence of life in vitro.

But we haven't tried long enough to say
that we never will. There are in all likelihood
billions and billions of suitable planets.

So even if the chances are very slim that life
suddenly emerges - the universe is so vast
that IMO it had to happen.
And very likely has happened a lot of times
on a lot of planets.

(I am aware that this is a common atheist
argument).

But seriouosly, this is exactly the kind of thing one will find when they search for where the supernatural and the natural has intermingled...it will be like a crime scene. People will say "what happened here?" Some might say that something supernatural might have occured, others will immediately rule out all possibity of supernatural affects and restrict their search only to natural causes. But what if there really IS a supernatural side? Are we going to ignore it, since we can't measure it directly?
Good point and very persuasive... ;)

Anyway, I totally appreciate your time in researching our faith. You seem to me to be a pretty smart person and I think you strive for truth, but I think some of it will be difficult for you because the supernatural is at the heart of Christianity.
Thanks for the compliment - but I'm not that smart.
As to my current task to find out about faith and
the Bible - I find it to be both hard and
worthwhile. :wave:
 
Upvote 0