Biblical Prophecies written BEFORE fulfillment

by brotherdan 64 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • brotherdan
    brotherdan
    It is thus not a novel prophecy that Jerusalem and its Temple would be restored but a repetition of Jeremiah's

    Because of similar word usage? This is a huge stretch for you, Leolaia...

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    You are still reading the Christian notion of "Messiah" into the text. The Hebrew term clearly has a sacerdotal meaning here and there isn't one "anointed one" but two that are singled out.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    How is it a stretch? The whole chapter is an exegesis of Jeremiah's prophecy, which contains exactly this promise.

  • brotherdan
    brotherdan

    I have never read anywhere how the term "Messiah" can mean dual persons.

  • brotherdan
    brotherdan

    It's speaks of some of the same issues that are contained in Jeremiah but stands on its own, Leolaia.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    It refers to anyone who is anointed. The usual reference in the OT is to priests and kings.

  • brotherdan
    brotherdan

    But there was clearly 1 person that was expected to be Messiah. You can't find the notion in either the OT or the NT that 2 messiahs were expected. Jesus was specifically asked, "Are you the Messiah?" I know that certain Jewish cults believe in 2 Messiahs, but it's not a clear teaching in the OT.

  • notverylikely
    notverylikely

    Lets say it WAS written in the 2nd century BC, NVL. I'll conceed if you'd like.

    Point conceded.

    It still prophesied about when Messiah would be killed.

    It did not. It did not name a person or a date. What you consider to be prophesy is a speculative chronology based on no rules given in the book for developing the chronology, IOW, you have no idea whether or not your chronology is right. Additionally, IF the timeline used in the traditional bible is the one you are following, then Jesus (I'll concede he existed as a person) would not have been killed in 32 BCE since the census that is commonly used to date his existence didn't happen as described in the Bible.

    Jesus was born either before 4 BC (when Herod the Great died) or in 6 AD (when the historical Census of Quirinius was undertaken)

    For one thing, I don't view wikipedia as a valid referrence work.

    Since you haven't provided a SINGLE referenceable work, and I have, and we aren't in college, to bad. Wiki references it's sources and you can check them. As soon as you provide me with a reference to check, I will. You have not.

    However, even in wiki, it says that the Macabees referr to Daniel. And it was written BEFORE Jesus death.

    It does. The issue is that reference that you used in no way proves that it was 5-600 years old at the time of the reference.

    I don't see what the issue is here. He described Jesus death and the attack on Jerusalem by the Romans in 70AD and even gave the specific dates.

    Many people were crucified by the Romans. Since 70AD is a later dating invention, please show me the scripture where the Book of Daniel, using the existing Roman or Jewish Calendar, gave a date for the destruction. Speculative prophetic chronology is NOT "giving a date".

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    Sure, of course it stands on its own, it is a novel interpretation of Jeremiah. That doesn't change the fact that the author is referring to the prophecy in Jeremiah.

  • sir82
    sir82

    If I may...

    I think what Leolaia is trying to say is that "messiah" meant something utterly and completely different than "god descending to earth to be crucified as a man".

    To the Jews, including the author of the book of Daniel, "messiah" was a generic term, it just meant "someone anointed [with oil]". It was understood to refer to a priest or a king generally.

    So when Daniel write of 2 messiahs, it was essentially no different than writing of 2 farmers or 2 merchants or 2 taxi drivers.

    It's comforting to Christians to think that somehow Daniel wrote a detailed prophecy hundreds of years in advance, but as has been stated, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". In this case it just ain't there.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit