Biblical Prohecies That Came True?
Not my definition of prophecy, Viv. That's from Webster Dictionary.
But you claimed it as your understanding. Which is it?
Perhaps you should write them and inform them of the new definition.
Why would I do that? So far it's 100% accurate, no prophecy has come true. As that's also your understanding, we seem to all be in agreement.
No, even if I could come up with pinpoint chronology, names, places, and events in fine detail, you and most modern scholars will reject the evidence. Why? Because you do not believe in predictive prophesy.
But you can't, so it's 100% irrelevant what you wrongly presume I and others would think. It's pointless speculation. At least you admit you can't come up with a prophecy.
Nothing, and nobody is going to change that. End of story. If a dog bit you in the bum, you will not believe it.
What does a dog biting me in the bum have to do with your failure to come up with a prophecy?
You would reason: It could have been a hyena or a shark in disguise. So, straw man and changing the goal posts indeed...
Yes, you literally just made up a giant strawman, claiming that if you COULD do what you so have haven't, then I would change the goalposts. How incredibly dishonest of you.
Let's just stick with what we have today. I've not moved any goalposts, you simply can't come up with a prophecy that has been specifically fulfilled, so now you've moved your argument to "Well, if I could, you would just deny it". The simple fact is, that's not what's under discussion. The very definition you claimed as your own of prophecy admits it would never be fulfilled and, thus far, you've only confirmed the lack of prophecy.
Rather than complain about what you think I might do, I would suggest you look inward to your own arguments and discern why they are so easily dismantled.
Viv, let's do some revision. Do you accept or reject Josephus' testimony? Do you not think he would have been attacked by his peers for lying? What about the report by the liberal scholar John J. Collins? As to the status of the book of Daniel and the date of the documents and their compilation, you have been presented with the evidence. Now you have to accept or reject it. If you believe it to be false, you have to present evidence to the contrary.
Josephus viewed Daniel as “one of the greatest prophets,” because not only did he prophesy future things, but he also fixed the time during which these would come to pass. He was also of the opinion that the book of Daniel was in existence prior to the arrival of Alexander the Great in the fourth century BCE. He viewed the third kingdom of Dan. 2 as Greece , “from the west,” intimating that the fourth would be Rome . Elsewhere Josephus interprets the actions of Antiochus IV Epiphanes as being the fulfillment of prophecies made by Daniel in the 6th century BCE. He also tells of a tower that Daniel had built at the height of his fame, at Ecbatana or Susa (according to Jerome’s copy) that became the burial place of kings. This structure was still in existence in his day, so his detractors could go and see it. 
According to J. J. Collins, Jewish tradition related the end of the Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks to the destruction of the temple, an interpretation that may already be implied in Josephus: “Daniel also wrote about the empire of the Romans and that Jerusalem would be taken by them and the temple laid waste.” 
Daniel as Scripture: At the Council of Jamnia, held after the A.D. 70 fall of Jerusalem to discuss whether certain books should be maintained as Scripture, the place of Daniel was clearly secure. From what we know of the deliberations of the Jewish religious leadership, Daniel’s place in the canon was never even a matter of discussion. It had already been fully accepted. This is established even more firmly by the Dead Sea Scrolls, discovered at Qumran in 1947. Not only were several copies of the book of Daniel discovered, but other scrolls were found which were based upon Daniel-related material. These include the Prayer of Nabonidus, Pseudo-Daniel and the Book of Giants. Roger T. Beckwith discusses different computations of the Seventy Weeks prophecy. In his book he states that the Essenes’ “interpretation of the 70 Weeks is first found in the Testament of Levi and the Pseudo-Moses Documents . . . , which probably means that it was worked out before 146 B.C.” Having also examined dates based on Daniel 9 as calculated by Jewish sects other than the Essenes, Beckwith concludes: “These considerations do not make easier but more difficult the problem of the origin of the Book of Daniel. Nevertheless, they are among the data which, especially since the Qumran discoveries, have been accumulating to necessitate a reconsideration of the common Maccabean dating of that book.”  The latest studies indicate that much of the messianic Qumran literature that depends on Daniel can be dated to before 150 B.C. In other words, by the time of the Maccabees, Daniel had clearly already been accepted as Scripture. On that basis the writer of Daniel could not have been contemporaneous with the Maccabees and the writers of the Qumran material. This adds credence to the Jewish Talmudic teaching that the book was written (or edited) and included in the canon of Scripture by the Great Synagogue before it ceased to operate during the time of Simon the Just (circa 300 B.C.). Jews believed that the canon of Scripture was closed at that point—nothing more could be added. This would also suggest that, contrary to critics, Josephus’s claim about Alexander the Great and the high priest cannot simply be dismissed as patriotic propaganda (see also Ivor C. Fletcher’s Internet article, “Daniel in the Critics’ Den,” Vision-Insights and New Horizons).
 Josephus, Antiquities, Book X, Chapter XI, § 7; Book X, Chapter X, § 4; Book XI, Chapter VIII, § 5; Book XII, Chapter VII § 6 (W. Whiston translation).
 John J. Collins, A Commentary on the Book of Daniel , Hermeneia-series, p. 356, footnote 82.
 Roger T. Beckwith, Calendar and Chronology, Jewish and Christian: biblical, intertestamental and patristic studies (1996), E. J. Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp. 260-262, 275.
" The Council of Jamnia, presumably held in Yavneh, was a hypothetical late 1st-century council at which the canon of the Hebrew Bible was alleged to have been finalized. First proposed by Heinrich Graetz in 1871, this theory was popular for much of the twentieth century. However, it was increasingly questioned from the 1960s onward and the theory has been largely discredited"
Phizzy, during the time of the copying of the DSS (200 BCE - 68 CE), a standard consonantal text had not yet been established. The Biblical texts of Qumran can be divided into three groups:
1) Those related to the Masoretic Text (MT),
2) Those related to the Samaritan Pentateuch, and
3) Those related to the LXX.
Above is the first window. A consonantal text from Wadi Murabba`at, originating from the time of the Bar Kochba Revolt (132 - 135 CE), would create a second window for scholars to peer into. Now they were afforded an opportunity to glance at the text situation during the Bar Kochba Rebellion. These MSS belong to the Proto-Masoretic text type, which proves that this text was by then viewed as being authoritative. By then it had supplanted all other text types.
Professor Paul Kahle puts it this way: “Thus there came in existence an authoritative text of the Torah, substantially the consonantal text of our present Masoretic text. This text was established with the aid of early manuscripts that were then available, and in contrast to the widely used popular texts of the period, which the Samaritan Pentateuch survives as an example, it gives the impression of greater age and value. The remaining books of the Bible followed. We cannot trace all the stages of the work in detail, but the result is quite evident.” 
 P. Kahle, Die hebräischen Handschriften aus der Höhle (1951), p. 28f.
Viv, let's do some revision.
Or we can can stick with the facts.
Can you show me a single, specific prophecy detailing names, dates and events that came true EXACTLY as foretold? Regardless of what Josephus interpreted (citation required, BTW), he was still trying to say what it meant rather than let the text speak for itself.
Daniel as Scripture: At the Council of Jamnia, held after the A.D. 70 fall of Jerusalem to discuss whether certain books should be maintained as Scripture, the place of Daniel was clearly secure. From what we know of the deliberations of the Jewish religious leadership, Daniel’s place in the canon was never even a matter of discussion.
It cannot be pointed out enough, as Phizzy did, that the events you referred to are an outright fabrication and never happened.
Right, let's stick to the facts. Outright fabrication you say? Why am I waiting for the facts?
Right, let's stick to the facts. Outright fabrication you say? Why am I waiting for the facts?
You aren't waiting for facts. I never said anything about waiting for facts.
Can you show me a single, specific prophecy detailing names, dates and events that came true EXACTLY as foretold?
You made a statement. You prove it.
To which statement do you refer?
Failed Bible prophecy
Joshua said that God would, without fail, drive out the Jebusites and Canaanites, among others (Josh. 3:9-10). But those tribes were not driven out (Josh. 15:63, 17:12-13).
Ezekiel said Egypt would be made an uninhabited wasteland for forty years (29:10-14), and Nebuchadnezzar would plunder it (29:19-20). Neither happened.