Biblical Prohecies That Came True?

by Viviane 250 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  sir82

  Without these two things there is no reason for people to not behave has ISIS does, there's no reason for people not to just rape and pillage all over because this is the only life they get, so why live by any standards? Why not TAKE what you want?

  So your entire sense of morality is dependent on what the Bible says?

  I dunno, the Bible seems to paint rapists and pillagers in a pretty favorable light, so long as they have the "God told me to do it" excuse....

  Answering the question a little less snarkily, "why not take what you want?", the answer is that experience has shown that by living in a socially responsible and ethical manner, the living standards of all in the community are raised. Billions of people all over the earth, past and present, have figured that out without even having heard of the Bible, much less read it.
• 

  sir82

  Double post, and a pre-apology to the topic police for straying off topic
• 

  Viviane

  Sir82, while accurate, off topic :)

  The reason for being the OT police is that I've seen these conversations completely devolve into arguments and the original topic get buried under endless arguments. Just like my "What is spirit" thread (and as I learned from Cofty's giant thread), staying on topic prevents a lot of noise and distraction from the discussion.

  So, does anyone know of a specific Bilblical prophecy that required special knowledge that came true exactly as foretold?
• 

  Vidqun

  Yes , you're right. Rome wasn't mentioned. History, Josephus amongst others, tells us it was Rome. The Maccabees (also most modern scholars) believed it to be Antiochus IV Epiphanes. These are all mistaken. Antiochus never destroyed the city or the temple. That's why Jesus encouraged the reader of the prophecy to use discernment (Matt. 24:15 NW). Rotherham's translation says, "let him think." You need to think to understand. Jesus went on to say, not a stone upon a stone will be left (Matt. 24:2). That also came true.

  But, sad to say, all these arguments are in vain. Gleason L. Archer, a conservative scholar, summed it up quite well when he said: “The committed antisupernaturalist, who can only explain the successful predictions of Daniel as prophecies after the fulfillment…. is not likely to be swayed by any amount of objective evidence whatever.”
• 

  Moses Joe

  Absolutely nothing I posted is preaching, I'm posting a logical argument and being flamed and insulted in return. Nor was I being arrogant.

  You initiated a thread asking a question you know full well is controversial, has far too many educated people on either side both claiming they have the answeres and you think the common people who come here are going to be able to just eliminate all the doubt and give aboslute proof of prophetic specificity and authenticity when in fact if that were possible everyone in the world would be christian, so i say again there is no point to your topic. You've asked a question whcih you already know the answer to either for your own self gratification or some other purpose - but not an soley for a discussion. unless of course your an idiot and did expect someone to be able to do what you ask - but i doubt it very much.
• 

  Moses Joe

  somehow double posted; my bad.
• 

  Viviane

  You need to think to understand. Jesus went on to say, not a stone upon a stone will be left (Matt. 24:2). That also came true.

  Are you suggesting I am not thinking? Jesus said nothing specific and simply described what HAD happened already under similiar circumstances to his own time. He never said who, when or why it would happen. Nothing he said required foreknowledge. He, among many others, were saying destruction was coming.

  But, sad to say, all these arguments are in vain. Gleason L. Archer, a conservative scholar, summed it up quite well when he said: “The committed antisupernaturalist, who can only explain the successful predictions of Daniel as prophecies after the fulfillment…. is not likely to be swayed by any amount of objective evidence whatever.”

  Provide some objective evidence. Gleason couldn't.
• 

  Viviane

  Absolutely nothing I posted is preaching, I'm posting a logical argument and being flamed and insulted in return. Nor was I being arrogant.

  You're not being flamed for being logical as you've yet to do that. You've been arrogant and preaching.

  You initiated a thread asking a question you know full well is controversial, has far too many educated people on either side both claiming they have the answeres and you think the common people who come here are going to be able to just eliminate all the doubt and give aboslute proof of prophetic specificity and authenticity when in fact if that were possible everyone in the world would be christian, so i say again there is no point to your topic.

  If you can't stay on topic and back up your claims regarding prophecy, you are free to leave.

  You've asked a question whcih you already know the answer to either for your own self gratification or some other purpose - but not an soley for a discussion. unless of course your an idiot and did expect someone to be able to do what you ask - but i doubt it very much.

  Such arrogance! I do find it quite amusing that you, attempting to insult me, claim that only an idiot would expect someone to be able to show a valid prophecy in the Bible. You did get one thing in doubting that I am idiot, however.
• 

  Moses Joe

  Arrogant: making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud.

  I never claimed or behaved in a superior fashion, such as taking a persons post and breaking down line by line and on the basis of nothing but my superior opinion as to why it's off topic, wrong or in of itself arrogant.

  I also never made any claims. You want a prophecy that came true? All of them did. They all came true whether or not they where written before hand or not - and since you dont want to use that as a measuring point that doesn't really matter does it? You stated you left that out of your OP because it would immediately make them all disqualified - so when I say that you already know none of them really are I wasn't being assumptive I was using your own words already stated.

  I posted a response with scriptures that held prophecies that, if you do not get involved with the debate about whether or not they were written before or after, history shows have happened. Your question has been answered clearly, you got what you wanted. Now you've apparently decided to allow the criteria of, "Is proven not to have been written before hand" and that ends the discussion because that proof doesn't exist. You're continuing a debate you've already stated yourself is pointless - thus you are not doing it for a discussion. That's not being arrogant, that's what YOU have said and demonstrated.
• 

  Vidqun

  Back to what we are discussing, Gleason L. Archer could and did. He demonstrated that Daniel's Aramaic is much older than the Aramaic of the Genesis Apocryphon, discovered amongst the DSS (dated 200 BCE). He forced the following concession from John J. Collins, a staunch defender of a late date Daniel: While acknowledging that a “precise dating on linguistic grounds is not possible,” Collins concludes that the Aramaic of Daniel is later than that of the Samaria papyri (Wadi Daliyeh, fourth century BCE) but earlier than that of the Genesis Apocryphon (1Q20). Collins does not believe in predictive prophecy, thus his late date for the book of Daniel (ca. 165 BCE). But the further back the compilation date of Daniel is pushed, the more relevant his prophecies become. That's why Archer said what he said.