24 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf the stories were obviously incredible, they would hardly have survived for two millennia. I could provide an enormous list of novels which come across as extremely believable for the same reasons you state. Really, not enough to lend credibility to tales of the miraculous in my view, although I respect your choice to differ with me here.
see the text above. If you like you can pick a scriptural account of the Christ and i can try to demonstrate how the human elements lend themselves to the actuality of a real event, take the healing of the blind man at the pool of Bethsaida, for example, its full of them.
24 Nov 10
Originally posted by avalanchethecatLol, after a day on the hills, a seat beside a roaring fire and an arm about your deary with the wind and snow howling outside and some fiddler piping up an ancient melody, it matters really not a jot if that them there stagnant water enhances the taste or otherwise, if it does it does! Abelour i dont know if i have had the pleasure, Dalwhinnie i was fond of.
Agreed, all good tipples - particularly the Lagavulin (although I'm not a fan of Glenmorangie's 10yr old - tastes a bit buttery to me). I usually fall back on Laphroaig or Highland Park. I also have a weakness for Abelour for some reason. There's a faint overtone of what tastes a bit like stagnant water which I know shouldn't enhance it, but somehow it does!
24 Nov 10
Originally posted by avalanchethecatI think this reply eloquently and succinctly sums it up.
I think I must have phrased my last response poorly, or perhaps you may have misread. I do not doubt that the archaeological evidence supports the existence and fall of Tyre, Babylon and Jerusalem, I thought I'd made that clear - if not, I apologise. I do dispute that there is archaeological evidence supporting the existence of Christ or of Pilate. ...[text shortened]... eology "provides ample evidence that [the bible as a whole] is trustworthy" ) is specious.
24 Nov 10
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper Knobi dispute the terms eloquently and succinctly, and i also dispute that the argument is
I think this reply eloquently and succinctly sums it up.
specious, for example let us take the instance of Babylon, what does the scriptures
state in this regard,
Distinguishing features. Bible prophecies are often specific and have been
fulfilled down to the smallest of details. They usually involve matters of great
importance and predict the opposite of what those living at the time of the writing
might have been expecting.
An outstanding example. Strategically built astride the Euphrates River,
ancient Babylon has been called “the political, religious, and cultural centre of the
ancient Orient.” About 732 B.C.E., the prophet Isaiah penned an ominous prophecy
—Babylon would fall.
Isaiah provided specifics: A leader named “Cyrus” would be the conqueror,
the protective waters of the Euphrates would “dry up,” and the city’s gates would
“not be shut.” (Isaiah 44:27–45:3) Some 200 years later, on October 5, 539 B.C.E.,
the prophecy was fulfilled in all its details.
Greek historian Herodotus (fifth century B.C.E.) confirmed the manner of Babylon’s
fall.
A bold detail. Isaiah made a further startling prediction regarding Babylon:
“She will never be inhabited.” (Isaiah 13:19, 20) To predict permanent
desolation for a sprawling city occupying a strategic location was bold indeed. You
would normally expect that such a city would be rebuilt if ruined. Although Babylon
lingered on for a while after its conquest, Isaiah’s words eventually came true.
Today the site of ancient Babylon “is flat, hot, deserted and dusty,” reports
Smithsonian magazine.
It is awesome to contemplate the magnitude of Isaiah’s prophecy. What he foretold
would be the equivalent of predicting the exact manner in which a modern city,
such as New York or London, would be destroyed 200 years from now and then
emphatically stating that it would never again be inhabited. Of course, most
remarkable is the fact that Isaiah’s prophecy came true!
we have seen how the dead sea scroll of Isaiah has been preserved intact for
almost a thousand years, its has been subject to rigorous analysis, its contents
verified and dated. Isaiah not only gives details of who would take the city, but the
manner in which it would be taken, and that it would remain uninhabited eternally.
Events confirmed by historians , Herodotus whose book i have read and by
archaeology down the the very details. I think it sums up my point entirely!
Bible events are corroborated by both history, science and archaeology! The text is
sound and trustworthy and you Noobsters should read it.
24 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIrrelevant. There is no way of demonstrating that this 'prophecy' was written prior to the fall of Babylon.
i dispute the terms eloquently and succinctly, and i also dispute that the argument is
specious, for example let us take the instance of Babylon, what does the scriptures
state in this regard,
[b]Distinguishing features. Bible prophecies are often specific and have been
fulfilled down to the smallest of details. They usually involve mat ...[text shortened]... science and archaeology! The text is
sound and trustworthy and you Noobsters should read it.[/b]
24 Nov 10
Originally posted by avalanchethecatnice try but no gold star, all we need to do is ascertain whose regency Isaiah prophesied through, and your rather well, unfortunate little old wagon is lying wheeless on the forum floor. Oh the lengths you people will go to in order to avoid the obvious that scripture is inspired!
Irrelevant. There is no way of demonstrating that this 'prophecy' was written prior to the fall of Babylon.
24 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYour triumphal crowing is unwarranted. Even if one accepts that the book of Isaiah itself pre-dates the fall of Babylon, you still cannot demonstrate that the prophecy as it is now read does. The details you find so convincing may all be later interpolation. For all you know, the original text may have predicted the fall of Babylon under the feet of giant angels armed with flaming heavenly swords. These are old arguments well worn in the telling, and as you must know the faithful and the rational sceptic can only agree to differ.
nice try but no gold star, all we need to do is ascertain whose regency Isaiah prophesied through, and your rather well, unfortunate little old wagon is lying wheeless on the forum floor. Oh the lengths you people will go to in order to avoid the obvious that scripture is inspired!
24 Nov 10
Originally posted by avalanchethecatNot so fast there oh great and illustrious putty cat, the very details of the prophecy itself lend to their credentials. Babylon remains uninhabited to this very day does it not? despite the efforts of world rulers like Saddam Hussain to try and rebuild it. It is nothing short of astonishing to be honest. Indeed what is the basis of the statement that these are an interpolation? none at all except a sceptical approach. I will crow like a rooster if I must, you people must learn that scripture is not a mundane thing to be treated as if it were ordinary, no no, godbreathed my rational friend regardless of your most ardent protestations. 😉
Your triumphal crowing is unwarranted. Even if one accepts that the book of Isaiah itself pre-dates the fall of Babylon, you still cannot demonstrate that the prophecy as it is now read does. The details you find so convincing may all be later interpolation. For all you know, the original text may have predicted the fall of Babylon under the feet ...[text shortened]... he telling, and as you must know the faithful and the rational sceptic can only agree to differ.
25 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe biblical prochesies are much alike the prophecies of Nostradamus.
i suppose its the best you can do. if you have any comment on the details of the text, you might like to start there. Otherwise such a statement is unworthy to be considered.
If biblical miracles work, then Nostradamus miracles work as well.
I deny both. You don't seem to.
25 Nov 10
R.C. and I may disagree on theology but I think we agree the book of Isaiah is one of the most eloquent books of prophecy in the bible. Isaiah 9 and 53 are great examples about the coming messiah. Talks about the Christ with detail speaks of the virgin birth and the suffering He would endure. Nostradamus prophecy's are vague at best.
Manny
25 Nov 10
2 edits
Originally posted by menace71And I am willing to bet that to anyone but a believer, Isiah is vague at best too.
Isaiah 9 and 53 are great examples about the coming messiah. Talks about the Christ with detail speaks of the virgin birth and the suffering He would endure. Nostradamus prophecy's are vague at best.
Manny
I must also point out that the claim that Jesus fulfilled those prophesies was largely made by writers who had read Isiah. eg the story of Jesus' birth was made up in order to try and fit him to the prophesy.
There is of course no archeological evidence of Jesus' virgin birth. There isn't even much written evidence. The claim that Mary was a virgin came long after Jesus, and was not made by people who would have had any firsthand knowledge of the matter. In fact, probably only Mary would have had direct knowledge of the matter.
At best it is a claim that the knowledge was gained via inspiration from God (by people who knew of the prophesy). At worst, I don't think there is even agreement that such a claim is contained in the Bible but was made later by others.
Whatever the case, it is no more prophetic than me announcing that I knew about 9/11 before it happened but didn't tell anyone till now.
25 Nov 10
Originally posted by menace71yes this is the point, Isaiah's prophecies are specific and fulfilled with chilling accuracy!
R.C. and I may disagree on theology but I think we agree the book of Isaiah is one of the most eloquent books of prophecy in the bible. Isaiah 9 and 53 are great examples about the coming messiah. Talks about the Christ with detail speaks of the virgin birth and the suffering He would endure. Nostradamus prophecy's are vague at best.
Manny
25 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAnd there are many prophecies in the bible which are not fulfilled. Leaving the nature of chance very alive.
yes this is the point, Isaiah's prophecies are specific and fulfilled with chilling accuracy!
Nostradamus is a good prophet in comparison.
Are we all agreeing of what a prophecy really is? I think not. Some think only biblical prophecies are treu prophecies. I would like a more general definition.
I myself make a prophecy every morning. I say that the sun will set when the day is ending. I've never been wrong so far.
The prophecies of the meteorological institute sometimes fail.