I wish I could believe

...in a religion sometimes. I've now come to the point in my knowledge that it is not possible for me to believe anymore, but sometimes I wish I could. To everyone who disagrees with the basic point of this post, I envy you, sometimes. /images/graemlins/ooo.gif
Shooby

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
...in a religion sometimes. I've now come to the point in my knowledge that it is not possible for me to believe anymore

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, so young and cute.

*koo-chee-koo!* /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[txag007]

"I've now come to the point in my knowledge that it is not possible for me to believe anymore, but sometimes I wish I could."

So you're too smart for religion? You know all the arguments, and God just can't fit into any of them?

Care to enlighten anyone else reading this who might truly be searching?

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
"I've now come to the point in my knowledge that it is not possible for me to believe anymore, but sometimes I wish I could."

So you're too smart for religion? You know all the arguments, and God just can't fit into any of them?

Care to enlighten anyone else reading this who might truly be searching?

[/ QUOTE ]

Every week I get two pleasant and polite fellows knock on my door and try to get me come to some church or other. Every week I tell them the same thing, I don't believe in god, I say 'Lets do a deal, don't try to convert me and I won't try to convert you'. Yet every week they come again, they are basically inoffensive so I don't mind, I think of them as mice who get the electric shock but keep coming back for the cheese anyway.

Its impossible to have a conversation with people who believe in god about his/its non existence, It would be like banging your head against a wall, and as mean and pointless as telling a 3 year old there is no Santa.

Mack

[ QUOTE ]
...in a religion sometimes. I've now come to the point in my knowledge that it is not possible for me to believe anymore, but sometimes I wish I could. To everyone who disagrees with the basic point of this post, I envy you, sometimes. /images/graemlins/ooo.gif
Shooby

[/ QUOTE ]

faith is only valid when there is every reason why you shouldnt believe in God.

[ QUOTE ]
...in a religion sometimes. I've now come to the point in my knowledge that it is not possible for me to believe anymore, but sometimes I wish I could. To everyone who disagrees with the basic point of this post, I envy you, sometimes. /images/graemlins/ooo.gif
Shooby

[/ QUOTE ]

And millions of children upon learning there is no Santa Claus wish it were still true. Get over it.

[ QUOTE ]
faith is only valid when there is every reason why you shouldnt believe in God.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is another way of saying that faith is the suspension of reason. (and thus, nothing to strive for)

[txag007]

"Its impossible to have a conversation with people who believe in god about his/its non existence, It would be like banging your head against a wall, and as mean and pointless as telling a 3 year old there is no Santa."

So am I to assume from your post that either a)you don't have any evidence for God's non-existence or b)you don't want to be bothered to post and/or defend it?

If it's "b", then why even bother to post that in the first place?

[txag007]

"faith is only valid when there is every reason why you shouldnt believe in God."

Not true. Christianity is not a "blind-faith" religion.

Every reason, huh? Can you name some?

[txag007]

"Which is another way of saying that faith is the suspension of reason."

Look up the definition of faith and see if you find anything that refers to an absence of reason. You won't.

[mackthefork]

This is why

[ QUOTE ]
So am I to assume from your post that either a)you don't have any evidence for God's non-existence

[/ QUOTE ]

Proving non existence is not possible, has your lack of evidence for gods existence made any difference to your faith? I think not. I don't believe in the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

[ QUOTE ]
b)you don't want to be bothered to post and/or defend it?


[/ QUOTE ]

I have many times, and a) is always brought up, which is kind of pathetic, I mean can you prove the Easter bunny doesn't exist?

I believe that religion is a tool for control of the masses, that was its purpose when created, it set up a social hierarchy for putting people in their places and punishing people, often with unimaginable barbarity. For all this I have good evidence, kept for posterity in church records.

Mack

[ QUOTE ]
"faith is only valid when there is every reason why you shouldnt believe in God."

Not true. Christianity is not a "blind-faith" religion.

Every reason, huh? Can you name some?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well just off the top of my head....have you ever seen God? Ever seen a photo of what God may look like? Has God ever spoken to you outloud and told you what to do? Is the idea of God supported by scientific fact?

My point is that christianity is a blind faith religion. I would be curious as to why a couple of you disagree with this statement. If there was actual scientific proof that God did indeed exist, then everyone could easily believe in God (and have faith in his existence) and this thread wouldnt exist. Thus in order to have faith in God, there must be overwhelming evidence of his non-existence. Thoughts?

[ QUOTE ]
"Which is another way of saying that faith is the suspension of reason."

Look up the definition of faith and see if you find anything that refers to an absence of reason. You won't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was replying to this quote: "faith is only valid when there is every reason why you shouldnt believe in God." I wasn't replying to a lookup definition of faith.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
"Which is another way of saying that faith is the suspension of reason."

Look up the definition of faith and see if you find anything that refers to an absence of reason. You won't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not exactly.

[ QUOTE ]
Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence

[/ QUOTE ]

Mack

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting how you picked one out of 6 (the one most applicable to your side) to illustrate your point yet omitted the others:

[ QUOTE ]

faith n.

1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.

2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief. See Synonyms at trust.

3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.

4. often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.

5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.

6. A set of principles or beliefs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also don't forget to reference - dictionary.com

Cheers,
SDM

[NotReady]

Belief in a religion isn't the goal. I don't know of any religions that ask for faith in that religion, though I could be wrong. But Christianity says believe in Jesus Christ. And if you really are seeking the truth, God and faith, He will lead you to Himself.

Luke 11

9"So I say to you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.
10"For everyone who asks, receives; and he who seeks, finds; and to him who knocks, it will be opened.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting how you picked one out of 6 (the one most applicable to your side) to illustrate your point yet omitted the others:

[ QUOTE ]

faith n.

1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.

2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief. See Synonyms at trust.

3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.

4. often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.

5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.

6. A set of principles or beliefs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also don't forget to reference - dictionary.com

Cheers,
SDM

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry I forgot that, of course I was trying to make a point but it is a fair one nonetheless.

Regards Mack

[txag007]

Here's the deal: You say that you can't prove non-existence, so the burden of proof lies on Christians.

Okay. I'll grant that 100% proof may not be possible, but reasonable evidence exists. It basically boils down to coincidences. Far too many would have had to occur for God not to exist, and they're not just scientific.

But that's not proof, you say? Well, not 100%, no.

But given enough time, even the most unlikely occurrence is bound to take place? Okay.

What about this? There are only three logical explanations for the creation of the universe:

1. The universe has always existed.
2. The universe created itself.
3. The universe was created by an outside being, presumably God.

Nuclear fusion tells us that #1 can't be true because the universe does not contain an infinite amount of hydrogen.

As for #2, can you name another time when something has ever come from nothing under our laws of physics?

That leaves #3.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
What about this? There are only three logical explanations for the creation of the universe:

1. The universe has always existed.
2. The universe created itself.
3. The universe was created by an outside being, presumably God.

Nuclear fusion tells us that #1 can't be true because the universe does not contain an infinite amount of hydrogen.

As for #2, can you name another time when something has ever come from nothing under our laws of physics?

That leaves #3.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is humankind is somehow incapable of seeing the insignificance of his existence. I suspect that several 'big bangs' have taken place giving births to new universes and that several universes have vanished from existence since this thread was started, I expect it happens everyday, I have as much evidence of this as you do for the existence of god.

Nothing I do will matter much, and if the universe ends in 15 billion years time it won't afect me in any way. Black holes could seed new universes for all we know, I'm excited by how little humans know, I really don't need to explain it away with 'god'.

Regards Mack

[ QUOTE ]
What about this? There are only three logical explanations for the creation of the universe:

1. The universe has always existed.
2. The universe created itself.
3. The universe was created by an outside being, presumably God.

Nuclear fusion tells us that #1 can't be true because the universe does not contain an infinite amount of hydrogen.

As for #2, can you name another time when something has ever come from nothing under our laws of physics?

That leaves #3.

[/ QUOTE ]


Tell me how God was created. Hint: He either (1) always existed, (2) created himself, or (3) another being created him. Welcome to the vicious circle of your logic.

[txag007]

"have you ever seen God? Ever seen a photo of what God may look like? Has God ever spoken to you outloud and told you what to do?"

The same questions could just about apply to my congressman as well. It's nowhere near the proof you implied you had when you said that there was "every reason" not to believe.


"Is the idea of God supported by scientific fact?"

The idea that God might exist? Yeah. Here's why (I posted this elsewhere in this thread as well):

There are only three logical explanations for the creation of the universe:

1. The universe has always existed.
2. The universe created itself.
3. The universe was created by an outside being, presumably God.

Nuclear fusion tells us that #1 can't be true because the universe does not contain an infinite amount of hydrogen.

As for #2, can you name another time when something has ever come from nothing under our laws of physics?

That leaves #3.


"My point is that christianity is a blind faith religion. I would be curious as to why a couple of you disagree with this statement. If there was actual scientific proof that God did indeed exist, then everyone could easily believe in God (and have faith in his existence) and this thread wouldnt exist."

Having faith in something is not the same thing as having "blind-faith". By "blind-faith" I mean belief in something in which all evidence points the other way. Look up the definition of faith.

Also, where else in your life do you need 100% certainty of something before you believe it. There's probably not many.

There are many, many occurrences that would have to be declared a coincidence for God not to exist. These range from the sustanence of life in our universe to parts of the Bible being written over hundreds of years all over the world without any contradictions to the Bible still being in existence today. This is not to mention the many prophesies that have been fulfilled and are still being fulfilled today.

So, to say that Christianity is a "blind-faith" religion would be a grossly inaccurate statement.


"Thus in order to have faith in God, there must be overwhelming evidence of his non-existence."

And yet you can't point to any except the fact that I've never physically seen or talked to him.

[ QUOTE ]
Here's the deal: You say that you can't prove non-existence, so the burden of proof lies on Christians.

Okay. I'll grant that 100% proof may not be possible, but reasonable evidence exists. It basically boils down to coincidences. Far too many would have had to occur for God not to exist, and they're not just scientific.

But that's not proof, you say? Well, not 100%, no.

But given enough time, even the most unlikely occurrence is bound to take place? Okay.

What about this? There are only three logical explanations for the creation of the universe:

1. The universe has always existed.
2. The universe created itself.
3. The universe was created by an outside being, presumably God.

Nuclear fusion tells us that #1 can't be true because the universe does not contain an infinite amount of hydrogen.

As for #2, can you name another time when something has ever come from nothing under our laws of physics?

That leaves #3.

[/ QUOTE ]

key word is "PRESUMABLY" God. Is that whole argument supposed to be scientific evidence for the existence of God? highly flawed if that is the case

[txag007]

"The problem is humankind is somehow incapable of seeing the insignificance of his existence. I suspect that several 'big bangs' have taken place giving births to new universes and that several universes have vanished from existence since this thread was started, I expect it happens everyday, I have as much evidence of this as you do for the existence of god."

Not really. I have the Bible, and I have the fulfillment of prophesy. You have theory.

"have you ever seen God? Ever seen a photo of what God may look like? Has God ever spoken to you outloud and told you what to do?"

The same questions could just about apply to my congressman as well."

Weakest argument ever. Yes buddy this could apply to your congressmen, however im sure you could easily find a picture of him or meet him in person if you tried hard enough. the same cant be said about God which is why there are many more reasons not to believe in god.

[txag007]

"Tell me how God was created. Hint: He either (1) always existed, (2) created himself, or (3) another being created him. Welcome to the vicious circle of your logic."

The answer is (1). It says so in the Bible. The reason my logic isn't circular is because God exists in another dimension outside our universe. Scientific evidence says that our universe is finite. You can't say the same thing about God.

[txag007]

"key word is "PRESUMABLY" God. Is that whole argument supposed to be scientific evidence for the existence of God? highly flawed if that is the case."

I'm going to take this to mean that you now admit that our universe was created by an outside being. Is that correct?

[ QUOTE ]

There are many, many occurrences that would have to be declared a coincidence for God not to exist. These range from the sustanence of life in our universe to parts of the Bible being written over hundreds of years all over the world without any contradictions to the Bible still being in existence today. This is not to mention the many prophesies that have been fulfilled and are still being fulfilled today.



[/ QUOTE ]

There are numerous contradictions to the bible, ever heard of other religions? or even the apocrypha within christianity? I am not going to try to argue with you about your own personal convictions, because i respect each person's own beliefs about God. can you just agree that there are more reasons not to believe in God than to believe in him? just like there are more reasons not to believe in ghosts or ufos? Having faith stares those reasons right in the face goes against the blatently obvious, which is what makes faith so powerful.

[txag007]

"Weakest argument ever. Yes buddy this could apply to your congressmen, however im sure you could easily find a picture of him or meet him in person if you tried hard enough. the same cant be said about God which is why there are many more reasons not to believe in god."

Did you even read the rest of my post? I was trying to make a point with the congressman example, but I know what I wrote. That's why I included the words "just about".

Should I take the fact that this was the only part of my post to which you replied to mean that you accept the rest of it?

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
Not really. I have the Bible, and I have the fulfillment of prophesy. You have theory.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes I have theory, but since when was the existence of god any more than a theory? This is why these conversations end quickly, there is nothing much to say, and neither side moves an inch.

Mack

[txag007]

"There are numerous contradictions to the bible, ever heard of other religions? or even the apocrypha within christianity? I am not going to try to argue with you about your own personal convictions, because i respect each person's own beliefs about God. can you just agree that there are more reasons not to believe in God than to believe in him? just like there are more reasons not to believe in ghosts or ufos? Having faith stares those reasons right in the face goes against the blatently obvious, which is what makes faith so powerful."

By contradictions I mean contradictions within the Bible itself. I don't mean other religions or outside beliefs.

I'm not going to further respond until you respond concerning the creation of the universe. I took your answer (from elsewhere in this thread) to mean that you now admit that the universe was created by an outside being. Is this the case?


"can you just agree that there are more reasons not to believe in God than to believe in him?"

I've shown you several reasons to believe. You've shown me one reason not to believe, that being that I can't physically see or talk to God. So, why would I admit that?

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
The answer is (1). It says so in the Bible. The reason my logic isn't circular is because God exists in another dimension outside our universe. Scientific evidence says that our universe is finite. You can't say the same thing about God.

[/ QUOTE ]

See there you go again, the bible is a book, it was written by men. Men with ugly agendas. Yes we know the universe is finite, if I told you I had read a book written by a monk in the 6th century, who says hes been to the edge of the universe and stuck his hand out, would you believe him? would you believe it if lots of other people did? Faith is nothing but the suspension of disbelief in my opinion.

Regards Mack

[txag007]

"Yes I have theory, but since when was the existence of god any more than a theory? This is why these conversations end quickly, there is nothing much to say, and neither side moves an inch."

Like I said, I have the Bible. I have the fulfillment of prophesy. I have the many occurrences that would have to be declared a coincidence for God not to exist.

The reason these conversations end quickly is because you haven't provided counter-evidence to these things.

[ QUOTE ]
"have you ever seen God? Ever seen a photo of what God may look like? Has God ever spoken to you outloud and told you what to do?"

The same questions could just about apply to my congressman as well. It's nowhere near the proof you implied you had when you said that there was "every reason" not to believe.


"Is the idea of God supported by scientific fact?"

The idea that God might exist? Yeah. Here's why (I posted this elsewhere in this thread as well):

There are only three logical explanations for the creation of the universe:

1. The universe has always existed.
2. The universe created itself.
3. The universe was created by an outside being, presumably God.

Nuclear fusion tells us that #1 can't be true because the universe does not contain an infinite amount of hydrogen.

As for #2, can you name another time when something has ever come from nothing under our laws of physics?

That leaves #3.


"My point is that christianity is a blind faith religion. I would be curious as to why a couple of you disagree with this statement. If there was actual scientific proof that God did indeed exist, then everyone could easily believe in God (and have faith in his existence) and this thread wouldnt exist."

Having faith in something is not the same thing as having "blind-faith". By "blind-faith" I mean belief in something in which all evidence points the other way. Look up the definition of faith.

Also, where else in your life do you need 100% certainty of something before you believe it. There's probably not many.

There are many, many occurrences that would have to be declared a coincidence for God not to exist. These range from the sustanence of life in our universe to parts of the Bible being written over hundreds of years all over the world without any contradictions to the Bible still being in existence today. This is not to mention the many prophesies that have been fulfilled and are still being fulfilled today.

So, to say that Christianity is a "blind-faith" religion would be a grossly inaccurate statement.


"Thus in order to have faith in God, there must be overwhelming evidence of his non-existence."

And yet you can't point to any except the fact that I've never physically seen or talked to him.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, your argument for the creation of the universe stems from St. Thomas Aquinas's cause and effect theory ( i think ). He basically states your obvious point. For every action in the universe there has to be a cause all stemming back to so-called "Big Bang", you are saying that the "Big Bang" is God. I am saying that is an anomoly of our universe that we will never understand along the same lines of the space having walls. This is just a disagreement about the definition of the the so called "big bang".

As for your reason about the "sustanence of life on earth" being attributed to god, why cant it be attributed to ration al science a.e. Darwinism and natural selection? I find it hard to believe that life would not evolved regardless of God. This argument will not end because our beliefs themselves are contradicory. HOWEVER, in general i believe that there is more evidene against the existence of god than for the existence of god.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes we know the universe is finite, if I told you I had read a book written by a monk in the 6th century, who says hes been to the edge of the universe and stuck his hand out, would you believe him?

[/ QUOTE ] excellent point

[Cooker]

[ QUOTE ]


What about this? There are only three explanations for the creation of the universe that sound reasonable to me personally for no real reason and that are certainly not all encompassing :

1. The universe has always existed.
2. The universe created itself.
3. The universe was created by an outside being, presumably God.


Nuclear fusion tells us that #1 can't be true because the universe does not contain an infinite amount of hydrogen. Let me state now that my expertise is not on current theories of the origin of the universe and some experts still think that it is possible the universe has an expand/collapse structure that will allow for an infinitely old universe without any problems.


As for #2, can you name another time when something has ever come from nothing under our laws of physics? Once again, I know nothing about the subject, but in the interest of intellectual honesty I feel compelled to mention that we have no theory for the mechanisms at work in the early universe, and it is entirely possible that there are laws of physics which will govern just such an emergence. As a matter of fact, this possiblity seems quite reasonable, but I must not like it because it didn't make my list of ways the universe could have come into creation.


That leaves #3. But then that begs the question: can you name another time when a magic being has ever come and created something from nothing under our laws of physics? But lets not bother with that either, because I want this to seem like a "logical" argument for believing in God.



[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

Also, you have a nasty habit of using "logical" and "a bunch of nonsense I just made up" as synonyms. You should probably try to correct that for future discussions.

[txag007]

"See there you go again, the bible is a book, it was written by men."

What about the fulfillment of prophesy? It suggests the Bible is more than just a book.

[txag007]

This is exactly the reply for which I was looking. I hope every skeptic in the world reads this thread.

[txag007]

Again, you stated that "there is more evidene against the existence of god than for the existence of god" but gave none.

Just pointing that out.

[Cooker]

By the way, I think I played poker with you on Full Tilt the other day. I am not really sure why you want skeptics to read my post and see through the that you tried to create with your "logical" argument for God.

[ QUOTE ]
Not really. I have the Bible, and I have the fulfillment of prophesy. You have theory.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, this argument has reduced to "because my book says so", huh? Yeah, that's *proof* alright.

Well, even though you can't reason with the unreasonable, I'll take a stab.

You say you have "fulfillment of prophesy" but science is just theory. But how do scientific theories evolve? Namely, hypothesis --> observation/experiment --> data supports the hypothesis. This is akin to "fulfillment of prophesy" if you choose those terms. But regardless, "fulfillment of prophesy" based on an incredibly vague text is no conclusive evidence. Every religion claims such a case, but you'll admit not every religion is the "truth" as the Bible clearly states there is but one God.

It is one thing to have faith in your religion. Fine, hope it makes your life more enjoyable. But don't confuse this faith with evidence of your God. Because your "evidence" only supports the existence of a God if you already assume that it must come from God. (e.g., I've heard Christians say there must be a God, just look at the beautiful mountains. This is no evidence of God, and of course the mountains have come and gone throughout the earth's lifecycle due to well-understood forces.)

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
"See there you go again, the bible is a book, it was written by men."

What about the fulfillment of prophesy? It suggests the Bible is more than just a book.

[/ QUOTE ]

I confess ignorance here, what is this fulfillment of prophecy? Why does it suggest the bible is more than a book?

Regards Mack

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
"Yes I have theory, but since when was the existence of god any more than a theory? This is why these conversations end quickly, there is nothing much to say, and neither side moves an inch."

Like I said, I have the Bible. I have the fulfillment of prophesy. I have the many occurrences that would have to be declared a coincidence for God not to exist.

The reason these conversations end quickly is because you haven't provided counter-evidence to these things.

[/ QUOTE ]

You haven't told me what they are thats why, if I refute them all will you stop believing? Heh there you go then, I wouldn't want you to anyway. Takes all sorts.

Regards Mack

[txag007]

"But regardless, "fulfillment of prophesy" based on an incredibly vague text is no conclusive evidence."

How much do you know about Biblical prophesy?

[txag007]

Because it shows to what extent non-believers will go to justify their beliefs.

[ QUOTE ]
"But regardless, "fulfillment of prophesy" based on an incredibly vague text is no conclusive evidence."

How much do you know about Biblical prophesy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Enough to have read the whole New Testament, studied it while in Christian school for 12 years, and rejected it when I learned to think for myself.

[txag007]

"I confess ignorance here, what is this fulfillment of prophecy? Why does it suggest the bible is more than a book?"

Biblical prophesy is a God given promise about the future. The prophesies within the Bible are very specific and involve certain people and certain places. The Bible contains approximately 2500 prophesies, 2000 of which have been fulfilled to the letter with no errors. The remaining 500 involve the future and will unfold as time goes by. (An example of this would be the reestablishment of the nation of Israel in 1948.)

The difference between Biblical prophesy and that of other religions is that prophesy found in the Bible is very specific and is always fulfilled to 100% accuracy. Other religions cannot claim this.

[txag007]

That didn't answer my question. And by the way, on what basis did you reject it? What were your reasons?

[ QUOTE ]
That didn't answer my question. And by the way, on what basis did you reject it? What were your reasons?

[/ QUOTE ]

The same reasons that led me to believe that there was no Santa Claus before I was actually told so.

[ QUOTE ]
(An example of this would be the reestablishment of the nation of Israel in 1948.)

The difference between Biblical prophesy and that of other religions is that prophesy found in the Bible is very specific and is always fulfilled to 100% accuracy. Other religions cannot claim this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny how you view this as 100% accuracy. Now let's see what leading *Christian and Jewish* theologians say (excerpt from http://www.entertainment.crosswalk.com/1137834.html):

The panel included two seminary presidents: R. Albert Mohler Jr. of Southern Seminary and Paige Patterson of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, N.C. The two other panelists were Craig Blaising, executive vice president and provost at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas, and Richard Gaffin, professor of systematic theology at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. Russell Moore, instructor of Christian theology at Southern Seminary, served as moderator. Moore is also the executive director of the Carl F.H. Henry Institute.

...

Blaising, saying that there is "quite a bit" of agreement between himself and Patterson, said that the re-establishment of Israel could possibly be the fulfillment of promises given to Abraham.

"Our present Israel might be related to covenant promises -- particularly the political and land promises of the patriarchal covenant," he said. "[But] the condition of being broken out from the olive tree of blessing in Romans 11 leaves present-day Israel in an ambiguous condition."

Gaffin said that biblical prophecy was not fulfilled with the establishment of Israel.

---

Notice the "could possibly" and "might be related" and "was not fulfilled". Thus is the nature of prophesy, it is just ambiguous enough for those who want to believe to take it as 100% accurate evidence, but those who are not drinking the koolaid, to view it more critically, maybe even as coincidence.

[David Sklansky]

What about this? There are only three logical explanations for the creation of the universe:

1. The universe has always existed.
2. The universe created itself.
3. The universe was created by an outside being, presumably God.

Nuclear fusion tells us that #1 can't be true because the universe does not contain an infinite amount of hydrogen.

As for #2, can you name another time when something has ever come from nothing under our laws of physics?

That leaves #3.


What's that have to do with Christianity? Even if the above argument was valid, you have to compete with the logically more likely scenarios of theism, all the rest of the religions combined, all the possible religions not yet thought of, or even, (to be politically incorrect) Judaism all by itself.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]

What's that have to do with Christianity? Even if the above argument was valid, you have to compete with the logically more likely scenarios of theism, all the rest of the religions combined, all the possible religions not yet thought of, or even, (to be politically incorrect) Judaism all by itself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Prophecy David.

[David Sklansky]

If it was so obvious, why do fewer than one percent of Jews, Muslims and Hindus with IQs over 140, convert to Christianity? Remember that group comprises people who accept God creating the universe and who could easily beat the average Christian on a logic test. Yet you say that the prophecies make Christianity more reaonable than all other religions combined?

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
If it was so obvious, why do fewer than one percent of Jews, Muslims and Hindus with IQs over 140, convert to Christianity? Remember that group comprises people who accept God creating the universe and who could easily beat the average Christian on a logic test. Yet you say that the prophecies make Christianity more reaonable than all other religions combined?

[/ QUOTE ]

How would you even know that? Quantum statistics 101?

Mack

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
If it was so obvious, why do fewer than one percent of Jews, Muslims and Hindus with IQs over 140, convert to Christianity? Remember that group comprises people who accept God creating the universe and who could easily beat the average Christian on a logic test. Yet you say that the prophecies make Christianity more reaonable than all other religions combined?

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, I am not sure if your < 1% is accurate or where it came from, but it doesn't matter anyway as I will answer your question.

Jews find it hard to convert because Judaism is not only a religion but it is the glue that has held the Jewish people together through numerous occupations and being scattered in various countries.

Thus Judaism is very much an identity, and it's very hard to give that up.

Muslims similarly in pre-Islamic times had many religions and if you study the origin of Islam you'll see that how Muhammad managed to unite the Arabs was that he placed importance on Ishmael (the father of all arabs) and thus wanted to give them pride and a holy 'purpose' like their semitic neighbours the Jewish people. (Isaac)

Thus "Islam is your birthright" and identity is very close to many Arabs, a mirrors what the Jews have in Judaism, and as we have seen, that 'cultural identity' is very hard to walk away from. (after all, humans are social creatures who need love and acceptance)

Not to mention Islam makes it a bit harder in some places to convert by certain penalties for leaving Islam (death under Shariah law if I recall correctly - see Ibn Warraq for more details) which is a deterrant.

As for Hindu's, eastern religions are totally different from those of the Judeo-Christian "strain".

Where Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all teach "one life - one soul", eastern religions have reincarnation and are polytheistic rather than monotheistic.

Hindu's convert to Christianity, and I don't know if the Hindu 'cultural identity' is as strong as that of Judaism and Islam.

So why don't these people convert? Is it only 'cultural identity' holding them back? I don't know.

Christianity says (in the book of revelations) at the judgement God will seperate the sheep (followers) from the goats. (unbelievers)

Whether some are predestined to be sheep/goats is not known. I personally believe in total free will, Calvinists however (if I understand it correctly) believe in predestination.

It says in the Book of Revelations 144,000 Jews will accept Jesus after witnessing the propecies come true, as will many other unbelievers.

But the crux of the matter (which is universal) is that most people are faced with various 'truths' (I'm not talking about religion here) everyday yet they choose not to accept them.

The truth hurts, it's "The Awful Truth" so to speak. People ask "Am I fat?" and they know the answer but it hurts, so they say 'so what, I'm happy'.

No they are not, they are just optimistic that if they can accept their current condition and learn to like it that it is easier than jogging and the cost of a gym membership. (not to mention cutting down on dietry favorites like chocolate)

Humans lie to themselves on a daily basis, and they don't even know it. From birth you are 'programmed' to accept certain things about the world, until eventually you program for yourself.

But your programming can be just as damaging as the one your parents bestowed upon you because if you don't question every belief you have, your programming will just be built upon pre-existing beliefs you didn't ask for, and were too young to reject. (or to take the 'negotiated view' as they teach in Sociology)

Furthermore, in today's post-modern society where humans have more choice and 'freedom' than ever before, religion has lost it's appeal, and in some circles believers are looked down upon.

Add all this up David and clearly the goats outweigh the sheep, there are just so many reasons to reject, and only a few to accept, and those "acceptance reasons" are either bitter to swallow or incomprehensible because you approach them with pre-existing programming which by default is set to reject.

Cheers,
SDM

[David Sklansky]

Your arguments don't stand up for smart people. Don't you understand that? For them, any psychological biases are usually not enough to overcome sound reasoning. If this prophecy stuff was in fact a great argument for Christianity's correctness (given God created the universe) a large number of logically trained people would have to convert. The discomfort in doing that isn't CLOSE to the discomfort of holding on to a logically untenable position for a decent number of these smart people. It is ridiculous that you can claim that Christianity is logically more reasonable than atheism and all religions combined when the great majority of those who are your logical superior, disagree.

Meanwhile, if somehow you were right, how could one claim that God should be angry at those who don't believe in Christianity if they were in the throws of delusion beyond their control?

[IronUnkind]

[ QUOTE ]
If it was so obvious, why do fewer than one percent of Jews, Muslims and Hindus with IQs over 140, convert to Christianity?

[/ QUOTE ]

This stat strikes me as likely, but I'm curious if you have in mind a study to this effect. If so, please cite it.

[David Sklansky]

Just a common sense guess.

[xniNja]

[ QUOTE ]
The discomfort in doing that isn't CLOSE to the discomfort of holding on to a logically untenable position for a decent number of these smart people.

[/ QUOTE ]

When it comes to logic, this statement best describes the position of an agnostic or atheist. If it could become or was logically clear to "convert" to a particular religion, logical people would have to, and would have no trouble doing so.

The difference between a logician and a theist is that the logician looks for questions, reasons and answers. The theist looks for questions that satisfy the answer he's already concluded upon.

Prophecy is a meaningless word. If it isn't, every other prophecy from every other religion or non-religion is equally significant or likely to be true. Do you think they are?

Edit: Btw, blind-faith simply means faith without seeing, or proof. All religions that concern particular deities are considered blind-faith religions as far as I know.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
Your arguments don't stand up for smart people. Don't you understand that? For them, any psychological biases are usually not enough to overcome sound reasoning.

[/ QUOTE ]

Define "smart people" David?

You have to remember that humans have great emotional needs.

A prophecy that is yet to be fulfilled isn't sufficient proof for a lot of people to adopt a new belief.

Smart ones with foresight will however.

Other people, even if the truth was laid out before them, would find a way to reject.

They would find some 'logical explanation' to reject. (ie- "the Book of Revelations is not prophetic, but wrriten at a times when Christians were presecuted etc" - Catholic Church & Historic stance)

[ QUOTE ]

If this prophecy stuff was in fact a great argument for Christianity's correctness (given God created the universe) a large number of logically trained people would have to convert.

[/ QUOTE ]

David, I believe prophecy is perhaps the only reason to follow a religion. (after all, it was the prophets who kept the Jews believing, otherwise over countless occupations and export for slavery, the Jewish people would have eventually either adopted the religion of their captors, or disbelieved religion altogether)

Me personally, I was not raised with a religion, and I think people that follow the religion their father practices (ie- tradition) without deciding for themselves are 'strange' to say the least. ('Programming' when one reaches a certain age should be questioned, especially something that claims such great importance like religion)

But you say a large number of these people HAVE to convert, but it's not that simple David.

On one hand you have a guy pointing to a book and saying 'see this, look around, it's happening, accept Jesus' on the other hand you have a person who for all their life, them and their friends and family followed a different book, and that book is closer to their culture, and now you are asking them to disbelieve it and take on this new belief.

That's not an easy thing David.

How many people would take the chance at being a Pariah for their new beliefs, and possibly face death (shariah law - muslims) when they could just reject and read some anti-christian propaganda to reassure themselves that the man telling them a 'prophecy was being fulfilled in our time' is illogical and has a stupid, just like the book he reads and the religion he follows?

After all, that's so much easier than the "awful truth", so to speak.

[ QUOTE ]

The discomfort in doing that isn't CLOSE to the discomfort of holding on to a logically untenable position for a decent number of these smart people. It is ridiculous that you can claim that Christianity is logically more reasonable than atheism and all religions combined when the great majority of those who are your logical superior, disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]

My logical superior? My God, I don't have the audacity to say "now I know how Jews in Nazi concentration camps felt" but I'm sure they heard something along those lines. (replace 'logical' with 'genetic')

David, your comment above using 'quantity' (the masses) over 'quality' and also implies that smart people can't be blind to certain things.

Let me remind you it was the masses who gave Hitler his power, and it will be the masses who will once again give 'the beast' his power according to Christianity.

But, is it ridiculous that I claim Christianity is more logical than atheism and other religions? On the surface yes, but you fail to consider why I claim this.

There is a logic to it David, as much as it might disappoint you and shatter a belief you may have that Christians are 'zombie-idiots' who are bound by tradition, and have no logic. (low IQ's too)

So if you want to know what that logic is, you need to read a few things, with an open mind, it shouldn't take you too long.

This:

An example (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=3104131&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1)

Then this:
This is shorter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_Digital_Solutions)

Then this:

From NASDAQ (http://www.nasdaq.com//aspxcontent/newsstory.aspx?selected=ADSX&symbol=ADSX%60&textpa th=20050822%5CACQBIZ200508220900BIZWIRE%5FUSPR%5F% 5F%5F%5F%5FBW5185%2Ehtm&cdtime=08%2F22%2F2005+9%3A 00AM)

Now David, I emplore you to read the Talmud, The Qur'an and any other religious text and see if it's version of the 'endtime events' (this means last age of man rather than immediate "it's happening tomorrow"/Chicken Little hysteria - although things are progressing) none are as detailed as the Book of Revelations.

Example: Megiddo (ie- Armageddon or "Har-megiddo in Hebrew") is a real place in Israel, the symbolism used in the book (7 hills = Rome) and others (far to numerous to go into, it takes alot of study) all corresponds to nations and places.

And ofcourse that 'mark' which is the main prophecy, is highly logical in today's post-modern world, as an implantable EFT and ID system is said to benefit mankind through the reduction in moneylaundering, identity theft, et al.

You know, all the things that those nasty "terrorists" do to fund their bombings, you want to help stop them right? (Remember post-9/11 when they said buying drugs was supporting terrorism?)

Maybe it's coincidence, but it's the biggest coincidence in history, and no other religious text I've viewed is as detailed as that book.

The Qur'an simply says in the last days "people will walk around like they are drunk" and the Book of Mormon didn't say anything about the Antichrist/beast like the Book of Revelations that I saw.

So yes David, there is a logic. Unfortunately not all Christians are mind-dead "I follow this because my family does" believers without a concept of logic.

At the very least, after one has this knowledge of what the last book of The Bible/Christianity says, they should keep an open mind and just watch how current events progress.

Perhaps it's coincidence, perhaps it's truth? Either way, a closed mind will never know.

[ QUOTE ]

Meanwhile, if somehow you were right, how could one claim that God should be angry at those who don't believe in Christianity if they were in the throws of delusion beyond their control?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's hard to gauge the character of God. From the Bible it appears God is very powerful, can be very loving but also very angry at times.

What is clear is, that *if* he exists, we have no say to judge him and only the most 'hard-headed' of us would choose not worship him.

Many people say "How can God do this if he is love?" or similarly "God is supposed to be Holy" ... this is all garbage IMHO.

The fact is, God has power, we don't. If he offers you a "get out of jail free card", that's mercy, depsite whether you think it's up to your standards of what mercy should be or not.

Example: If you were hanging off the edge of a cliff, miles from nowhere and the only person who could save you was Charles Manson with his hand out, you have two choices:

a) "I don't agree with your actions, leave me alone" (= you fall to your death)

b) Take the hand .(It still could mean death, but it's the only "out" you have here.)

I'm not saying God is a 'psychotic killer' per se, I'm just illustrating that in certain situations humans are completely powerless, and if a *God* exists and claims to be our only salvation - even from a situation he created - do we have any other 'play' here than to 'take the hand'?

Ofcourse, which hand? is the question you are asking me, (as there are so many out there!) and you have illustrated that with so many religions in the past, present, and future it is deifficult to know which (if any) is correct, and furthermore how a God can be angry if we choose the wrong one.

That's where independant research comes in, every man has to do his own research, as much or as little as he needs to be confident in his decision.

God seems loving in The Bible (especially the New Testament) and doesn't set out his arbitrary decision making guidelines in detail.

If he did, as I have said before, The Bible would be enormous and larger than all the world's tax legislations combined, and nobody would read it.

This is where 'faith' comes in. God tells you what you need to know, that's it, you have faith that where it is not written he will do the right thing. (example - Most Christians hold the belief that somebody who has never heard of the Christian gospel and who 'Jesus' is, can't be judged along the same lines as one who has heard and rejects)

Cheers,
a very tired SDM

[IronUnkind]

[ QUOTE ]
It is ridiculous that you can claim that Christianity is logically more reasonable than atheism and all religions combined when the great majority of those who are your logical superior, disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do they? I'm not sure this has been demonstrated, but it is of little consequence since we typically determine an argument's merits by examining its inherent logical qualities rather than citing the opinion of experts.

I should like to note that the claims of agnosticism are more logically sound than those of Christianity, but this fact is symptomatic of agnosticism's simplicity more than it is of its verity.

[thatpfunk]

[ QUOTE ]
"I confess ignorance here, what is this fulfillment of prophecy? Why does it suggest the bible is more than a book?"

Biblical prophesy is a God given promise about the future. The prophesies within the Bible are very specific and involve certain people and certain places. The Bible contains approximately 2500 prophesies, 2000 of which have been fulfilled to the letter with no errors. The remaining 500 involve the future and will unfold as time goes by. (An example of this would be the reestablishment of the nation of Israel in 1948.)

The difference between Biblical prophesy and that of other religions is that prophesy found in the Bible is very specific and is always fulfilled to 100% accuracy. Other religions cannot claim this.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is easily the funniest/saddest post I have ever read.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"I confess ignorance here, what is this fulfillment of prophecy? Why does it suggest the bible is more than a book?"

Biblical prophesy is a God given promise about the future. The prophesies within the Bible are very specific and involve certain people and certain places. The Bible contains approximately 2500 prophesies, 2000 of which have been fulfilled to the letter with no errors. The remaining 500 involve the future and will unfold as time goes by. (An example of this would be the reestablishment of the nation of Israel in 1948.)

The difference between Biblical prophesy and that of other religions is that prophesy found in the Bible is very specific and is always fulfilled to 100% accuracy. Other religions cannot claim this.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is easily the funniest/saddest post I have ever read.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I was saying this is why these conversations end very quickly, some of these guys who believe this are very intelligent, but they just leave logic and reason at the door with their coats.

Mack

[BigDukeSix]

There are only three logical explanations for the creation of the universe:

1. The universe has always existed.
2. The universe created itself.
3. The universe was created by an outside being, presumably God.

Nuclear fusion tells us that #1 can't be true because the universe does not contain an infinite amount of hydrogen.

As for #2, can you name another time when something has ever come from nothing under our laws of physics?

That leaves #3.

The universe has always existed. How do you know how much hydrogen is in the universe? If the universe is infinite then there is an infinite amount of hyfrogen in it.

[David Sklansky]

There are plenty of highly educated, high IQ, people who believe in a God who created the universe, were not born Christian, yet do not have strong social or psychological pressures on them to keep them from converting. Yet very few of THEM convert even though there is stong pressure on them to "get things right".

I am not willing to do the requiste studying myself to find the arguments to show why Christianity is not more reasonable than all other theories combined. Because I don't care a whit about religion. Any more than I do about baseball. My only goal is to make the point that in both subjects, a smart person who is well versed in logic and probability, is much more likely to come to the correct conclusion about either of the two (or almost anything else) than a mathematical illiterate who has studied the subject an equal amount of time.

[txag007]

"The universe has always existed. How do you know how much hydrogen is in the universe? If the universe is infinite then there is an infinite amount of hyfrogen in it."

The universe isn't infinite. It is generally accepted in the scientific community that the universe is expanding outward. This means that it had to have a beginning point. Look it up.

[xniNja]

You never really addressed another poster's argument about your circular logic paradox. I'm curious as to why you don't feel that God has to have always existed, created himself, or have been created by another entity- and if you do believe that God either always existed, or created himself- why couldn't the Universe?

[Cooker]

[ QUOTE ]

The universe isn't infinite. It is generally accepted in the scientific community that the universe is expanding outward. This means that it had to have a beginning point. Look it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is totally incorrect. The scientific community accepts almost universally that the universe is infinite. The view that the universe is most likely infinite is about as widely held in physics as the view that the Earth in most likely round. If this is done out of total ignorance, recognize now that you know almost nothing about science and stop bastardizing things you don't understand. However, I am starting to think that you are trying to intentionally mislead people, because this is so blatantly false that it would be very hard to find any information to support this wild and ludicrous claim.

And stop min raising preflop at NLHE for crying out loud. Minraising from EP with QQ and then getting all your chips in after the flop is giving huge implied odds to smaller pairs to hit their set and bust you. I must have seen you min raise 5 times preflop (with no raises bigger than a min raise) and show down really big starting hands like KK, QQ, AK and others. Why give your opponents such good implied odds?

[thatpfunk]

[ QUOTE ]
"I confess ignorance here, what is this fulfillment of prophecy? Why does it suggest the bible is more than a book?"

Biblical prophesy is a God given promise about the future. The prophesies within the Bible are very specific and involve certain people and certain places. The Bible contains approximately 2500 prophesies, 2000 of which have been fulfilled to the letter with no errors. The remaining 500 involve the future and will unfold as time goes by. (An example of this would be the reestablishment of the nation of Israel in 1948.)

The difference between Biblical prophesy and that of other religions is that prophesy found in the Bible is very specific and is always fulfilled to 100% accuracy. Other religions cannot claim this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Offer: I will transfer you $500 on any poker site/neteller and allow you to send me a bible if you can give 100 prophecies that have been fulfilled to 100% accuracy. The board will be a judge as to the validity of each claim. Prophecies must not be vague nor ambigious. The prophecies also must be verified through reliable sources, i.e. not the same book in which the claims were made.

Caveat: This is purely for my own sick amusement to watch you struggle with your "faith" and to expose the "prophecies" as complete bullshit.

This offer only extends to the quoted poster. Please pm me with any questions you may have regarding this offer.

[Cooker]

If he will give you 10 dollars when he fails giving him 50 to 1 odds, I would take a piece of you.

[thatpfunk]

Well it should be easy for him. With over 2k fulfilled prophecies to choose from, he will probably pick and choose his personal favorites /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[xniNja]

The thing is, as someone above best put it, just terribly sad and funny at the same time.

The funny part is that the original claimee will probably take the time to look up various prophecies and their "fulfillment," make a post with vague, unproven, and illogical conclusions - the sad part is that he will believe, with utmost sincerity, in the false logic and validity of his list.

Bottom line: You won't get paid, and he'll never learn, but we're here for entertainment right?

[txag007]

Not a problem. How long do I have?

[thatpfunk]

no rush, within a day or two reasonable?

[Timer]

[ QUOTE ]
The universe isn't infinite. It is generally accepted in the scientific community that the universe is expanding outward. This means that it had to have a beginning point. Look it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

This begs the question:

Then what is on the other side of the universe?

[Cooker]

I also think some statement should probably be included about accuracy. I think for a prophecy to 100% accurate it must be well grounded such that the prophecy must refer to a specific event and could only refer to that specific event, i.e. it must contain sufficient information that it is not simply a coincidence. "Joe will do evil things" would not meet this criteria as a prophecy about Stalin for instance. "A wicked ruler will kill Jews" is not even a good enough prophecy about Hitler. A prophecy is supposed to be a prediciton not an educated guess. A true prediction should have appropriate detail to leave it fairly unambiguous. I am not saying they must all be like "on September 12, 2004 Joe Swanson will eat a chicken sandwich while playing poker at 3:00pm," but at least enough details that similar events cannot easily be picked out and ascribed to the same prophecy. If I can find 2 events any prophecy may refer to, then that prophecy really refers to nothing.

LOL. I never though a post that I started would be over 75 replies, although 74 of the replies are to a hijacking of the post,but still. /images/graemlins/smile.gif
Shooby

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]

I am not willing to do the requiste studying myself to find the arguments to show why Christianity is not more reasonable than all other theories combined. Because I don't care a whit about religion. Any more than I do about baseball. My only goal is to make the point that in both subjects, a smart person who is well versed in logic and probability, is much more likely to come to the correct conclusion about either of the two (or almost anything else) than a mathematical illiterate who has studied the subject an equal amount of time.

[/ QUOTE ]

David,

You seem to have many beliefs about religion and logic, and they don't seem to be changing anytime soon, despite any arguments or evidence otherwise.

If you don't wish to look into religion deeply, that's your choice, though a smart man, given what I've put forth to you, would at the very least see how world events progress regarding this issue.

There is a consensus that you are a smart man, thus I hope you will at the very least do this.

That's all I wanted to say.

Sincerely,
SDM

To sexdrugsmoney,
If the notion of a god,etc doesn't hold water scientifically ie. no physical evidence supporting the pursuit of the idea, then it's not logical to pursue the line of thought.

I don't understand what you mean when you say that religion should be studied because of current world events. Do you mean that we might understand terrorists if we study their religious beliefs?

Shooby

[txag007]

Although prophecy can be found throughout the Bible, 17 of the 66 books are devoted to prophecy. (16 in the Old Testament and Revelation in the New Testament).

The Book of Daniel was written about 530 B.C. It should be noted that many critics claim Daniel to have been written about 164 B.C. because of the detailed accuracy of his predictions. Nevertheless, Flavius Josephus, court historian for three successive Roman Emperors, documents Alexander the Great receiving a copy of Daniel upon his annexation of Jerusalem in the autumn of 332 BC (Antiquities of the Jews XI, chapter viii, paragraphs 3-5). Furthermore, according to both the pseudo-aristeas account and Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews XII, chapter ii), Ptolemy Philadelphus (308-246 BC) commissioned the translation of the Septuagint (a.k.a. the LXX) from Hebrew into Greek in the 3rd century BC. Daniel is included in the LXX. Daniel is also included among the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) which date from about 200 BC (the oldest Daniel manuscript, 4Q114, dating from the late 2nd Century BC).
From Daniel 11 verse 1 to Daniel 11 verse 19, we have a concise history of the Near East, from Alexander the Great to Antiochus the Great, spelled out hundreds of years prior to the events described.

Prophecy: Three more kings will rise in Persia. Then a fourth will gain more riches than all of them.
Scripture: Daniel 11:1-2
"In the first year of Darius the Mede, I arose to be an encouragement and a protection for him. And now I will tell you the truth. Behold, three more kings are going to arise in Persia. Then a fourth will gain far more riches than all of them; as soon as he becomes strong through his riches, he will arouse the whole empire against the realm of Greece."
Fulfillment:
Darius the Mede was viceroy in Babylon during the reign of Cyrus II (a.k.a. Cyrus the Great, who ruled from c.550-530 BC; Note: the dates provided here and following represent a period of monarchial reign, not the ruler's actual life-span). The three kings which succeed Cyrus were Cambyses II (530-521 BC), Smerdis (521 BC) and Darius I (521-485 BC), son of Hystaspes. The fourth king, Xerxes (486-465 BC), excelling in wealth and power, launched an elaborate campaign against Greece.

Prophecy: And a mighty king will arise...
Scripture: Daniel 11:3-4
"And a mighty king will arise, and he will rule with great authority and do as he pleases. But as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom will be broken up and parceled out toward the four points of the compass, though not to his own descendants, nor according to his authority which he wielded, for his sovereignty will be uprooted and given to others besides them."
Fulfillment:
The "mighty king" was Alexander the Great (336-323 BC) who, shortly after conquering the Persian Empire, died abruptly at the age of 32. His empire was not bequeathed to his children (who were murdered) but instead was divided up amongst his generals (the Diadochi). Four lesser kingdoms emerged from the rubble of Alexander's empire: Greece, Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt.

Prophecy: The King of South will grow strong...
Scripture: Daniel 11:5
"Then the king of the South will grow strong, along with one of his princes who will gain ascendancy over him and obtain dominion; his domain will be a great dominion indeed."
Fulfillment:
The first "king of the South" was Ptolemy I (305-283 BC). He was the first to sit upon Egypt's throne after Alexander's demise. Seleucus I (305-281), who served under Ptolemy as "one of his princes" during the Diadochi Wars (which followed Alexander's death), acquired the throne of Syria for himself, becoming the first "king of the North." Syria was by far the largest portion of Alexander's divided empire and thus, Seleucus' dominion was great indeed.

Prophecy: The daughter of the King of South...
Scripture: Daniel 11:6
"After some years they will form an alliance, and the daughter of the king of the South will come to the king of the North to carry out a peaceful arrangement. But she will not retain her position of power, nor will he remain with his power, but she will be given up, along with those who brought her in and the one who sired her as well as he who supported her in those times."
Fulfillment:
Ptolemy II (283-246 BC), Ptolemy I's successor gave his daughter Berenice in a marriage-alliance to his rival Antiochus II (261-246 BC) who succeeded Seleucus I's son, Antiochus I (281-261 BC). Upon Ptolemy's death, Antiochus returned to his ex-wife Laodice (whom he had divorced in order to marry Berenice). Laodice took Antiochus' return to her bed as an opportunity to poison Antiochus and to have Bernice and her child murdered so that her own son Seleucus II (whom she had bore to Antiochus) could ascend the throne.

Prophecy: One of the descedents of her line will arise in his place...
Scripture: Daniel 11:7-9
"But one of the descendants of her line will arise in his place, and he will come against their army and enter the fortress of the king of the North, and he will deal with them and display great strength. Also their gods with their metal images and their precious vessels of silver and gold he will take into captivity to Egypt, and he on his part will refrain from attacking the king of the North for some years. Then the latter will enter the realm of the king of the South, but will return to his own land."
Fulfillment:
Ptolemy III (246-222 BC), Berenice's brother ("one of the descendants of her line"), upon hearing of Berenice's murder, launched a successful campaign against Seleucus II (246-225 BC) who fled to Asia Minor. Ptolemy took 40,000 talents worth of silver, 4000 talents of gold and 2500 idols from the Syrians before returning back to Egypt at which time Seleucus recovered Syria.

Prophecy: His sons will mobilize and assemble a multitude of great forces...
Scripture: Daniel 11:10-13
"His sons will mobilize and assemble a multitude of great forces; and one of them will keep on coming and overflow and pass through, that he may again wage war up to his very fortress. The king of the South will be enraged and go forth and fight with the king of the North. Then the latter will raise a great multitude, but that multitude will be given into the hand of the former. When the multitude is carried away, his heart will be lifted up, and he will cause tens of thousands to fall; yet he will not prevail. For the king of the North will again raise a greater multitude than the former, and after an interval of some years he will press on with a great army and much equipment."
Fulfillment:
Seleucus III (225-223 BC) succeeded Seleucus II, raised up an army and launched a campaign against Attalus I (241-197 BC) of the Attalid dynasty. He was assassinated after a brief two-year reign. His younger brother, Antiochus III (a.k.a. "Antiochus the Great," who ruled from 223-187 BC) succeeded him after his death, amassed an army and marched against Ptolemy IV (221-205 BC) of Egypt. He was successful up until his defeat at Raphia in 217 BC, a loss which nullified his previous gains.

Ptolemy IV, his heart being lifted up after his victory at Raphia in Palestine, sought to enter the Holy of Holies of the Jewish temple, an act forbidden by Jewish law. The Jews resisted him inciting his anger and he had "tens of thousands" put to death.

After his defeat, Antiochus turned towards the east, and, following in the footsteps of Alexander the Great, marched as far as the Kabul Valley in Afghanistan, enjoying great success and acquiring for himself the title "Antiochus the Great." He returned to wage war against the Ptolemies and by 198 BC, nearly 20 years after his defeat at Raphia, Antiochus had succeeded in taking possession of Palestine. The battle of Panium (198 BC) marked the end of Ptolemaic rule in Palestine. Thus, upon the king of the North's return following his initial defeat the king of the South did not prevail.

Prophecy: Many will rise up against the King of the South...
Scripture: Daniel 11:14-16
"Now in those times many will rise up against the king of the South; the violent ones among your people will also lift themselves up in order to fulfill the vision, but they will fall down. Then the king of the North will come, cast up a siege ramp and capture a well-fortified city; and the forces of the South will not stand their ground, not even their choicest troops, for there will be no strength to make a stand. But he who comes against him will do as he pleases, and no one will be able to withstand him; he will also stay for a time in the Beautiful Land, with destruction in his hand."
Fulfillment:
Egypt rose up in rebellion against Ptolemy IV, a rebellion which continued well into the reign of his successor, Ptolemy V (205-181 BC), and during the latter's reign Antiochus III and Philip V (221-179) of Macedon agreed to divide up Ptolemaic interests abroad. Thus "many" rose up against the king of the South, though the rebellion was eventually suppressed ("they fell down"). The king of the North, as mentioned a moment ago, returned and routed the king of South, in whom there was "no strength to make a stand." The Beautiful Land refers to Palestine which finally came under Seleucid rule after more than a century of Ptolemaic supremacy.

Prophecy: He will also give him the daughter of women to ruin it...
Scripture: Daniel 11:17-19
"He will set his face to come with the power of his whole kingdom, bringing with him a proposal of peace which he will put into effect; he will also give him the daughter of women to ruin it. But she will not take a stand for him or be on his side. Then he will turn his face to the coastlands and capture many. But a commander will put a stop to his scorn against him; moreover, he will repay him for his scorn. So he will turn his face toward the fortresses of his own land, but he will stumble and fall and be found no more."
Fulfillment:
Antiochus made peace with Ptolemy and gave his daughter Cleopatra in marriage to his young rival, hoping to use her to conquer Egypt through intrigue rather than through armed conflict. To his dismay Cleopatra stood against her father. Antiochus then turned against Asia Minor, marching as far as Greece ("the coastlands"), but was turned back by the Romans at Thermopylae (191 BC) and finally defeated at Magnesia in 190 BC. He was killed while trying to plunder a pagan temple near Susa (187 BC) just a year following the peace accords with Rome at Apamea (188 BC); thus he stumbled and fell and was found no more.

Prophecy: The anointed one will be rejected and the Temple destroyed…
During Daniel's lifetime, the Babylonians had destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple and had taken many Jews as captives to Babylon. Daniel, while in Babylon, delivered a prophecy of what would happen during the centuries that followed.
Scripture: Daniel 9:24-26
24
"Seventy `sevens' are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy.
25
"Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven `sevens,' and sixty-two `sevens.' It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble.
26
After the sixty-two `sevens,' the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.
Fulfillment:
1. After the Medo-Persians had conquered the neo-Babylonian empire about 2500 years ago, they ruled a vast empire that included the land of Israel. About 2400 years ago (about 445 BC), Persian king Artaxerxes gave permission to the Jews to rebuild Jerusalem, which was still in ruins after having been destroyed earlier by the Babylonians.
2. The Jews rebuilt the Temple and the city of Jerusalem.
3. Then, about 2000 years ago, Jesus entered Jerusalem as the Messiah who had been promised by Old Testament prophets. But, many people rejected Jesus as the Messiah and He was crucified by the Romans.
4. About 40 years after Jesus was crucified, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple. (The Temple has not been rebuilt since then).

Prophecy: Ninevah would be permanently destroyed, and the Ninevites would be drunk in their final hours.
Scripture: Nahum 1:8-14
8 but with an overwhelming flood
he will make an end of Nineveh ;
he will pursue his foes into darkness.
9 Whatever they plot against the LORD
he [a] will bring to an end;
trouble will not come a second time.
10 They will be entangled among thorns
and drunk from their wine;
they will be consumed like dry stubble.
11 From you, O Nineveh , has one come forth
who plots evil against the LORD
and counsels wickedness.
12 This is what the LORD says:
"Although they have allies and are numerous,
they will be cut off and pass away.
Although I have afflicted you, O Judah ,
I will afflict you no more.
13 Now I will break their yoke from your neck
and tear your shackles away."
14 The LORD has given a command concerning you, Nineveh :
"You will have no descendants to bear your name.
I will destroy the carved images and cast idols
that are in the temple of your gods.
I will prepare your grave,
for you are vile."
Fulfillment:
Nineveh's destruction in 612 BC brought an end to the city's status as the ancient world's most powerful city. It also brought an end to the Assyrian Empire, for which Nineveh was the capital. Many empires have lost and regained power, including Babylon, which played a key role in conquering Nineveh. But, like Nahum said 2,600 years ago, Nineveh never rose to power again. According to the ancient historian Diodorus Siculus: "The Assyrian king gave much wine to his soldiers. Deserters told this to the enemy, who attacked that night." Siculus compiled his historical works about 600 years after the fall of Nineveh. Today, Nineveh is an archaeological site in Iraq.

Prophecy: Ninevah would be hit with a flood.
Scripture: Nahum 2:6
“The river gates are thrown open and the palace collapses.”
Fulfillment:
This reportedly happened while the Babylonians and Medes were attacking the great city around 612 BC. According to the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus, who lived in the First Century BC, heavy rains had caused the Tigris River to overflow and flood part of Nineveh. The flooding destroyed some of Nineveh's protective walls. That might have helped the attacking forces conquer Nineveh.

Prophecy: Ninevah would be destroyed by fire.
Scripture: Nahum 3:15
“There the fire will devour you; the sword will cut you down and, like grasshoppers, consume you. Multiply like grasshoppers, multiply like locusts!”
Fulfillment:
Archaeologists unearthed the site during the 1800s and found a layer of ash covering the ruins. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica: "…Nineveh suffered a defeat from which it never recovered. Extensive traces of ash, representing the sack of the city by Babylonians, Scythians, and Medes in 612 BC, have been found in many parts of the Acropolis. After 612 BC the city ceased to be important…"

Prophecy: Ninevah’s army officers would desert.
Scripture: Nahum 3:17
“Your guards are like locusts, your officials like swarms of locusts that settle in the walls on a cold day-- but when the sun appears they fly away, and no one knows where.”
Fulfillment:
Babylonian records claim that Assyrian army members did flee from the battle.

Prophecy: The Decree of Cyrus
In about 700 BC, Isaiah names Cyrus as the king who will allow the Israelites to return to Jerusalem and rebuild its Temple. At the time of this prophecy, there was no king named Cyrus and the Temple in Jerusalem was totally built and in full operation.
Scripture: Isaiah 44:24-28
24 "This is what the LORD says—
your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb:
I am the LORD,
who has made all things,
who alone stretched out the heavens,
who spread out the earth by myself,
25 who foils the signs of false prophets
and makes fools of diviners,
who overthrows the learning of the wise
and turns it into nonsense,
26 who carries out the words of his servants
and fulfills the predictions of his messengers,
who says of Jerusalem, 'It shall be inhabited,'
of the towns of Judah, 'They shall be built,'
and of their ruins, 'I will restore them,'
27 who says to the watery deep, 'Be dry,
and I will dry up your streams,'
28 who says of Cyrus, 'He is my shepherd
and will accomplish all that I please;
he will say of Jerusalem, "Let it be rebuilt,"
and of the temple, "Let its foundations be laid."
Fulfillment:
In 586 BC, more than 100 years later, the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar sacked Jerusalem and destroyed the temple. The Jews living in Jerusalem were either killed or taken captive to Babylon. In about 539 BC, the Babylonian Empire was conquered by the Persians. Shortly thereafter, a Persian king named Cyrus issued a formal decree that the Jews could return to Jerusalem and rebuild their temple. (2 Chronicles 36:22-23) This decree is confirmed by secular archaeology in the form of a stone cylinder that details many events of Cyrus' reign, including the decree to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem.

Prophecy: The City of Tyre
In 586 BC (confirmed by secular sources as the 11th year of the reign of King Zedekiah of Judah), Ezekiel predicts the fall of mainland Tyre to the Babylonian armies of Nebuchadnezzar. The text further describes the siege against the island fortress of Tyre (a half mile off the coast of mainland Tyre) hundreds of years later. Ezekiel's prophecy describes how the future invaders would tear down the ruins of mainland Tyre and throw them into the sea. They would "scrape her dust from her and leave her as the top of a rock". "They will lay your stones, your timber, and your soil in the midst of the water." "I will make you like the top of a rock; you shall be a place for spreading nets."
Scripture: Ezekiel 26
1 In the eleventh year, on the first day of the month, the word of the LORD came to me: 2 "Son of man, because Tyre has said of Jerusalem, 'Aha! The gate to the nations is broken, and its doors have swung open to me; now that she lies in ruins I will prosper,' 3 therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves. 4 They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers; I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock. 5 Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets, for I have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD. She will become plunder for the nations, 6 and her settlements on the mainland will be ravaged by the sword. Then they will know that I am the LORD.
7 "For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar [a] king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great army. 8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you. 9 He will direct the blows of his battering rams against your walls and demolish your towers with his weapons. 10 His horses will be so many that they will cover you with dust. Your walls will tremble at the noise of the war horses, wagons and chariots when he enters your gates as men enter a city whose walls have been broken through. 11 The hoofs of his horses will trample all your streets; he will kill your people with the sword, and your strong pillars will fall to the ground. 12 They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea. 13 I will put an end to your noisy songs, and the music of your harps will be heard no more. 14 I will make you a bare rock, and you will become a place to spread fishnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I the LORD have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD.
15 "This is what the Sovereign LORD says to Tyre: Will not the coastlands tremble at the sound of your fall, when the wounded groan and the slaughter takes place in you? 16 Then all the princes of the coast will step down from their thrones and lay aside their robes and take off their embroidered garments. Clothed with terror, they will sit on the ground, trembling every moment, appalled at you. 17 Then they will take up a lament concerning you and say to you:
" 'How you are destroyed, O city of renown,
peopled by men of the sea!
You were a power on the seas,
you and your citizens;
you put your terror
on all who lived there.
18 Now the coastlands tremble
on the day of your fall;
the islands in the sea
are terrified at your collapse.'
19 "This is what the Sovereign LORD says: When I make you a desolate city, like cities no longer inhabited, and when I bring the ocean depths over you and its vast waters cover you, 20 then I will bring you down with those who go down to the pit, to the people of long ago. I will make you dwell in the earth below, as in ancient ruins, with those who go down to the pit, and you will not return or take your place in the land of the living. 21 I will bring you to a horrible end and you will be no more. You will be sought, but you will never again be found, declares the Sovereign LORD."
Fulfillment:
Secular history records that Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to the great mainland city of Tyre about a year after Ezekiel's prophecy. The Encyclopedia Britannica says: "After a 13-year siege (585-573 BC) by Nebuchadnezzar II, Tyre made terms and acknowledged Babylonian suzerainty." When Nebuchadnezzar broke through the city gates, he found it nearly empty. Most of the people had moved by ship to an island about a half mile off the coast and fortified a city there. The mainland city was destroyed in 573 BC (Ezekiel's first prediction), but the city of Tyre on the island remained a powerful city for several hundred years.

Secular history next records that Alexander the Great laid siege to the island fortress of Tyre in 332 BC. His army destroyed the remains of mainland Tyre and threw them into the Mediterranean Sea. As Alexander's army constructed a causeway to the island, they scraped even the dust from the mainland city, leaving only bare rock. Historian Phillip Myers in his history textbook, General History for Colleges and High Schools, writes, "Alexander the Great reduced Tyre to ruins in 332 BC. Tyre recovered in a measure from this blow, but never regained the place she had previously held in the world. The larger part of the site of the once great city is now as bare as the top of a rock -- a place where the fishermen that still frequent the spot spread their nets to dry."

Prophecy: Amos also predicted the destruction of Tyre
Scripture: Amos 1:9-10 (written about 750 B.C.)
Amos 1
9
This is what the LORD says: "For three sins of Tyre, even for four, I will not turn back [my wrath]. Because she sold whole communities of captives to Edom, disregarding a treaty of brotherhood,
10
I will send fire upon the walls of Tyre that will consume her fortresses."

Prophecy: The fall of Babylon
Isaiah says that Babylon will be attacked by the Medes and be overthrown permanently.
Scripture: Isaiah 13:17-19
17 See, I will stir up against them the Medes,
who do not care for silver
and have no delight in gold.
18 Their bows will strike down the young men;
they will have no mercy on infants
nor will they look with compassion on children.
19 Babylon, the jewel of kingdoms,
the glory of the Babylonians' pride,
will be overthrown by God
like Sodom and Gomorrah.
Fulfilled: 539 B.C.
This happened about 150 years after Isaiah is believed to have delivered this prophecy. The Medes joined the Persians and conquered Babylon in about 539 BC. History confirms that when Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BC, it never again rose to power as an empire. Before the time of Cyrus, however, Babylon had been defeated by the Assyrian Empire but was able to recover and later conquer the Assyrian Empire. However, like Isaiah said 2700 years ago, the Babylonian Empire never recovered from Cyrus' conquest.

Prophecy: Babylon will be reduced to swampland
Scripture: Isaiah 14:23
"I will turn her into a place for owls and into swampland; I will sweep her with the broom of destruction," declares the LORD Almighty
Fulfilled:
After Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BC, the kingdom never again rose to power. The buildings of Babylon fell into a gradual state of ruin during the next several centuries. Archaeologists excavated Babylon during the 1800s. Some parts of the city could not be dug up because they were under a water table that had risen over the years.

Prophecy: The City of Samaria
The prophets Hosea (748 - 690 BC) and Micah (738 - 690 BC) each predicted the destruction of Samaria, the capital city of the Northern Kingdom of Israel. Not only did these prophets predict violence and destruction, but they declared that this great city would become "as a heap in the field," with its stones poured down into the valley, and vineyards planted in place of its great walls, with even the foundations being removed.
Scripture: Hosea 13:16
16 The people of Samaria must bear their guilt,
because they have rebelled against their God.
They will fall by the sword;
their little ones will be dashed to the ground,
their pregnant women ripped open."
Micah 1:6
6 "Therefore I will make Samaria a heap of rubble,
a place for planting vineyards.
I will pour her stones into the valley
and lay bare her foundations."
Fulfillment:
History tells us that Sargon took Samaria by the sword in 722 BC. Later, Alexander took the city violently in 331 BC, as did Hyrcanus in 120 BC. What's remarkable is not the violent demise of Samaria and its people, but rather, some of the historic specifics of what then happened to that once great city.

Reactions upon visiting the ancient spot have been recorded for centuries. In 1697, Henry Maundrell declared: "This great city is now wholly converted into gardens, and all the tokens that remain to testify that there has ever been such a place, are only on the north side…" Floyd Hamilton continues: "To-day the top of the hill where Samaria stood is a cultivated field with the foundations of the columns marking the place where the palaces and mansions stood. At the foot of the hill, in the valley, lie the foundation stones of the city…" Finally, from Van de Velde:

Her foundations discovered, her streets ploughed up, and covered with corn fields and olive gardens… Samaria has been destroyed, but her rubbish has been thrown down into the valley; her foundation stones, those grayish ancient quadrangular stones of the time of Omri and Ahab, are discovered, and lie scattered about on the slope of the hill.

Prophecy: The Jews would be scattered to other countries
When Ezekiel delivered this prophecy, he was in Babylon with many other Jews who had been exiled from their homeland and taken as captives to Babylon.
Scripture: Ezekiel 22:14-15 (written between 593-571 BC)
14 Will your courage endure or your hands be strong in the day I deal with you? I the LORD have spoken, and I will do it. 15 I will disperse you among the nations and scatter you through the countries; and I will put an end to your uncleanness.
Fulfilled:
After the Babylonian Captivity, many Jews had returned to their homeland only to be exiled and scattered by the Romans. The Romans, in the hopes of preventing the Jews from ever organizing another attempt to secure sovereignty for their homeland, scattered the Jews to several different countries. The plan successfully contributed to the worldwide dispersion of Jews.

Prophecy: The people of Israel will be like wanderers in other nations
Hosea also predicted the scattering of the Jews
Scripture: Hosea 9:17
“My God will reject them because they have not obeyed him; they will be wanderers among the nations.”

Prophecy: The ruins of Israel would be rebuilt
In Amos 9:11, 13, the prophet said that God would restore the land of David. King David ruled Israel from about 1010 BC to about 970 BC. During that time, Israel was a united and sovereign nation. Afterwards, the land was divided into two kingdoms and later conquered by a succession of world powers. For much of the past 2000 years, the people of Israel have been living in exile in countries around the world, and the land of Israel has been in a state of ruin.
Scripture: Amos 9:11-15
11 "In that day I will restore
David's fallen tent.
I will repair its broken places,
restore its ruins,
and build it as it used to be,
12 so that they may possess the remnant of Edom
and all the nations that bear my name, [f] "
declares the LORD, who will do these things.
13 "The days are coming," declares the LORD,
"when the reaper will be overtaken by the plowman
and the planter by the one treading grapes.
New wine will drip from the mountains
and flow from all the hills.
14 I will bring back my exiled [g] people Israel;
they will rebuild the ruined cities and live in them.
They will plant vineyards and drink their wine;
they will make gardens and eat their fruit.
15 I will plant Israel in their own land,
never again to be uprooted
from the land I have given them,"
says the LORD your God.
Fulfillment:
During the past two centuries many Jews have returned from exile and have rebuilt and reconditioned much of the land of Israel. The soil is again productive, producing food exports for many countries. And the nation is again sovereign and united.

Prophecy: Ezekiel predicted when Israel would be reestablished
Scripture: Ezekiel 4:1-8 (written between 593-571 B.C.)
1 "Now, son of man, take a clay tablet, put it in front of you and draw the city of Jerusalem on it. 2 Then lay siege to it: Erect siege works against it, build a ramp up to it, set up camps against it and put battering rams around it. 3 Then take an iron pan, place it as an iron wall between you and the city and turn your face toward it. It will be under siege, and you shall besiege it. This will be a sign to the house of Israel.
4 "Then lie on your left side and put the sin of the house of Israel upon yourself. [a] You are to bear their sin for the number of days you lie on your side. 5 I have assigned you the same number of days as the years of their sin. So for 390 days you will bear the sin of the house of Israel.
6 "After you have finished this, lie down again, this time on your right side, and bear the sin of the house of Judah. I have assigned you 40 days, a day for each year. 7 Turn your face toward the siege of Jerusalem and with bared arm prophesy against her. 8 I will tie you up with ropes so that you cannot turn from one side to the other until you have finished the days of your siege.
Fulfilled: 1948
In Ezekiel 4, the prophet said the Jews, who had lost control of their homeland, would be punished for 430 years. This prophecy, according to Bible scholar Grant Jeffrey, pinpointed the 1948 rebirth of Israel. Here's a summary of Jeffrey's theory:

1. Ezekiel said the Jews were to be punished for 430 years because they had turned away from God. As part of the punishment, the Jews lost control of their homeland to Babylon. Many Jews were taken as captives to Babylon.

2. Babylon was later conquered by Cyrus in 539 BC. Cyrus allowed the Jews to leave Babylon and to return to their homeland. But, only a small number returned. The return had taken place sometime around 536 BC, about 70 years after Judah lost independence to Babylon.

3. Because most of the exiles chose to stay in pagan Babylon rather than return to the Holy Land, the remaining 360 years of their punishment was multiplied by 7. The reason is explained in Bible's book of Leviticus. (Leviticus 26:18, 26:21, 26:24 and 26:28). In Leviticus, it says that if the people did not repent while being punished, the punishment would be multiplied by 7. And, by staying in pagan Babylon, most exiles were refusing to repent.

4. So, if you take the remaining 360 years of punishment and multiply by 7, you get 2,520 years. But, Jeffrey says those years are based on an ancient 360-day lunar calendar. If those years are adjusted to the modern solar calendar, the result is 2,484 years.

5. And, there were exactly 2,484 years from 536 BC to 1948, which is the year that Israel regained independence.

Prophecy: The Jews will buy back land.
Scripture: Jeremiah 32:44
“Fields will be bought for silver, and deeds will be signed, sealed and witnessed in the territory of Benjamin, in the villages around Jerusalem, in the towns of Judah and in the towns of the hill country, of the western foothills and of the Negev, because I will restore their fortunes, declares the LORD."
Fulfillment:
During the last years of the Ottoman Empire, which ruled over the land of Israel four 400 years, ending in 1918, thousands of Jews returned to their ancient homeland and bought parcels of land from absentee landlords who lived in cities such as Beirut and Damascus.

324 Messianic Prophecies fulfilled by Jesus Christ.
For lack of time and space, I am just going to list these here along with the prophetic Old Testament scripture and the New Testament scripture in which it was fulfilled. It should be noted, in all fairness, that if a particular characteristic about Christ appears in more than one Old Testament scripture it appears in this list as a separate prophecy. Also, some are more specific than others, but they all pertain to Christ.
Old Testament Scripture…Prophecy…New Testament Scripture(s)
Gen. 3:15.....Seed of a woman (virgin birth).....Luke 1:35, Mt 1:18-20
Gen. 3:15.....He will bruise Satan's head.....Heb. 2:14, 1 Jn. 3:18
Gen. 5:24....The bodily ascension to heaven illustrated....Mk. 6:19
Gen. 9:26,27...The God of Shem will be the Son of Shem...Lu. 3:36
Gen. 12:3...As Abraham's seed, will bless all nations...Acts. 3:25,26
Gen. 12:7...The Promise made to Abraham's Seed...Gal. 3:16
Gen. 14:18...A priest after Melchizedek...Heb. 6:20
Gen. 14:18........A King also........Heb. 7:2
Gen. 14:18...The Last Supper foreshadowed...Mt. 26:26-29
Gen. 17:19.......The Seed of Isaac.......Rom. 9:7
Gen. 22:8...The Lamb of God promised...Jn. 1:29
Gen. 22:18...As Isaac's seed, will bless all nations...Gal. 3:16
Gen.26:2-5..The Seed of Isaac promised as the Redeemer..Heb.11:18
Gen. 49:10...The time of His coming...Lu. 2:1-7; Gal. 4:4
Gen. 49:10.......The Seed of Judah.......Lu. 3:33
Gen. 49:10......Called Shiloh or One Sent......Jn. 17:3
Gen. 49:10...To come before Judah lost identity...Jn. 11:47-52
Gen. 49:10...To Him shall the obedience of the people be...Jn. 10:16
Ex. 3:13,14........The Great "I Am".......Jn. 4:26
Ex. 12:5...A Lamb without blemish...1 Pet. 1:19
Ex. 12:13...The blood of the Lamb saves from wrath...Rom. 5:8
Ex. 12:21-27...Christ is our Passover...1 Cor. 5;7
Ex. 12:46...Not a bone of the Lamb to be broken...Jn. 19:31-36
Ex. 15:2...His exaltation predicted as Yeshua...Acts 7:55,56
Ex. 15:11...His Character-Holiness...Luke 1:35; Acts 4:27
Ex. 17:6...The Spiritual Rock of Israel...1 Cor. 10;4
Ex. 33:19...His Character-Merciful...Lu. 1:72
Lev.14:11..The leper cleansed-Sign to priesthood..Lu.5:12-14; Acts 6:7
Lev.16:15-17...Prefigures Christ's once-for-all death...Heb. 9:7-14
Lev.16:27...Suffering outside the Camp...Mt. 27:33; Heb. 13:11, 12
Lev.17:11...The Blood-the life of the flesh...Mt. 26;28; Mk. 10:45
Lev.17:11...It is the blood that makes atonement...1 Jn. 3:14-18
Lev.23:36-37...The Drink-offering: "If any man thirst." ..Jn. 19:31-36
Num. 9:12...Not a bone of Him broken...John 19:31-36
Num. 21:9...The serpent on a pole-Christ lifted up...Jn. 3:14-18
Num. 24:17...Time: "I shall see him, but not now."...Gal. 4:4
Deut. 18:15..."This is of a truth that prophet."...Jn. 6:14
Deut. 18:15-16..."Had ye believed Moses, ye would believe me."...Jn. 5:45-47
Deut. 18:18...Sent by the Father to speak His word...Jn. 8:28, 29
Deut. 18:19...Whoever will not hear must bear his sin...Jn. 12:15,
Deut. 21:23...Cursed is he that hangs on a tree...Gal. 3:10-13
Ruth 4:4-9...Christ, our kinsman, has redeemed us...Eph. 1:3-7
1 Sam. 2:10...Shall be an anointed King to the Lord...Mt. 28:18; Jn. 12:15
2 Sam. 7:12...David's Seed...Mt. 1:1
2 Sam. 7:14a...The Son of God... Lu. 1:32
2 Sam. 7:16...David's house established forever...Lu. 3:31; Rev. 22:16
2 Ki. 2:11...The bodily ascension to heaven illustrated...Lu. 24:51
1 Chr. 17:11...David's Seed...Mt. 1:1; 9:27
1 Chr. 17:12, 13a...To reign on David's throne forever...Lu. 1:32, 33
1 Chr. 17:13a..."I will be His Father, He...my Son."...Heb. 1:5
Job 19:23-27...The Resurrection predicted...Jn. 5:24-29
Psa. 2:1-3...The enmity of kings foreordained...Acts 4:25-28
Psa. 2:2...To own the title, Anointed (Christ)...Acts 2:36
Ps. 2:6...His Character-Holiness...Jn. 8:46; Rev. 3:7
Ps. 2:6...To own the title King...Mt. 2:2
Ps. 2:7...Declared the Beloved Son...Mt. 3;17
Psa. 2:7, 8...The Crucifixion and Resurrection intimated...Acts 13:29-33
Psa. 2:12...Life comes through faith in Him...Jn. 20:31
Psa. 8:2...The mouths of babes perfect His praise...Mt. 21:16
Psa. 8:5, 6...His humiliation and exaltation...Lu. 24:50-53; 1 Cor. 15:27
Psa. 16:10...Was not to see corruption...Acts 2:31
Psa. 16:9-11...Was to arise from the dead...Jn. 20:9
Psa. 17;15...The resurrection predicted...Lu. 24:6
Psa. 22:1...Forsaken because of sins of others...2 Cor. 5:21
Psa. 22:1...Words spoken from Calvary, "My God..." Mk. 15:34
Psa. 22:2...Darkness upon Calvary...Mt. 27:45
Psa. 22:7...They shoot out the lip and shake the head...Mt. 27:39
Psa. 22:8.." He trusted in God, let Him deliver Him "...Mt. 27:43
Psa. 22:9......Born the Saviour......Lu. 2:7
Psa. 22:14...Died of a broken (ruptured) heart...Jn. 19:34
Psa. 22:14,15...Suffered agony on Calvary...Mk. 15:34-37
Psa. 22:15........He thirsted........Jn. 19:28
Psa. 22:16...They pierced His hands and His feet....Jn. 19:34,37;20:27
Psa. 22:17,18...Stripped Him before the stares of men...Lu. 23:34,35
Psa. 22:18.....They parted His garments.....Jn. 19:23,24
Psa. 22:20,21...He committed Himself to God...Lu.23:46
Psa. 22:20,21..Satanic power bruising the Redeemer's heel..Heb. 2:14
Psa. 22:22.....His Resurrection declared.....Jn. 20:17
Psa. 22:27...He shall be the governor of the nations...Col 1:16
Psa. 22:31......"It is finished"......Jn. 19:30
Psa. 23:1...."I am the Good Shepherd"....Jn. 10:11
Psa. 24:3......His exaltation predicted......Acts 1:11; Phil. 2:9
Psa. 30:3......His resurrection predicted......Acts 2:32
Psa. 31:5..."Into thy hands I commit my spirit"...Lu. 23:46
Psa. 31:11...His acquaintances fled from Him...Mk. 14:50
Psa. 31:13...They took counsel to put Him to death...Jn. 11:53
Psa. 31:14,15..." He trusted in God, let Him deliver him"...Mt. 27:43
Psa. 34:20.....Not a bone of Him broken.....Jn 19:31-36
Psa. 35:11....False witnesses rose up against Him....Mt. 26:59
Psa. 35:19...He was hated without a cause...Jn. 15:25
Psa. 38:11.....His friends stood afar off.....Lu. 23:49
Psa. 40:2-5...The joy of His resurrection predicted...Jn. 20:20
Psa. 40:6-8....His delight-the will of the Father....Jn. 4:34
Psa. 40:9....He was to preach the Righteousness in Israel....Mt. 4:17
Psa. 40:14...Confronted by adversaries in the Garden...Jn.
Psa. 41:9.....Betrayed by a familiar friend.....Jn. 13:18
Psa. 45:2...Words of Grace come from His lips...Lu. 4:22
Psa. 45:6...To own the title, God or Elohim...Heb. 1:8
Psa. 45:7...A special anointing by the Holy Spirit...Mt.3:16; Heb.1:9
Psa. 45:7,8...Called the Christ (Messiah or Anointed)...Lu. 2:11
Psa. 55:12-14...Betrayed by a friend, not an enemy...Jn. 13:18
Psa. 55:15...Unrepentant death of the Betrayer...Mt. 27:3-5; Acts 1:16-19
Psa. 68:18...To give gifts to men...Eph. 4:7-16
Psa. 68:18...Ascended into Heaven...Lu. 24:51
Psa. 69:4...Hated without a cause...Jn. 15:25
Psa. 69:8...A stranger to own brethren...Lu. 8;20,21
Psa. 69:9...Zealous for the Lord's House...Jn. 2:17
Psa. 69:14-20...Messiah's anguish of soul before crucifixion...Mt. 26:36-45
Psa. 69:20..."My soul is exceeding sorrowful."...Mt. 26:38
Psa. 69:21...Given vinegar in thirst...Mt. 27:34
Psa. 69:26...The Saviour given and smitten by God...Jn. 17:4; 18:11
Psa. 72:10,11...Great persons were to visit Him...Mt. 2:1-11
Psa. 72:16...The corn of wheat to fall into the Ground...Jn. 12:24
Psa. 72:17...His name, Yinon, will produce offspring...Jn. 1:12,13
Psa. 72:17...All nations shall be blessed by Him...Acts 2:11,12,41
Psa. 78:1.2...He would teach in parables...Mt. 13:34-35
Psa. 78:2b...To speak the Wisdom of God with authority...Mt. 7:29
Psa. 88:8...They stood afar off and watched...Lu. 23:49
Psa. 89:27...Emmanuel to be higher than earthly kings...Lu. 1:32,33
Psa. 89:35-37...David's Seed, throne, kingdom endure forever...Lu. 1:32,33
Psa. 89:36-37...His character-Faithfulness...Rev. 1:5
Psa. 90:2...He is from everlasting (Micah 5:2)...Jn. 1:1
Psa. 91:11,12...Identified as Messianic; used to tempt Christ...Lu. 4;10,11
Psa. 97:9...His exaltation predicted...Acts 1:11;Eph. 1:20
Psa. 100:5...His character-Goodness...Mt. 19:16,17
Psa. 102:1-11...The Suffering and Reproach of Calvary...Jn. 21:16-30
Psa. 102:25-27...Messiah is the Preexistent Son...Heb. 1:10-12
Psa. 109:25...Ridiculed...Mt. 27:39
Psa. 110:1...Son of David...Mt. 22:43
Psa. 110:1...To ascend to the right-hand of the Father...Mk.16:19
Psa. 110:1...David's son called Lord...Mt. 22:44,45
Psa. 110:4...A priest after Melchizedek's order...Heb. 6:20
Psa. 112:4...His character-Compassionate, Gracious, et al... Mt. 9;36
Psa. 118:17,18...Messiah's Resurrection assured...Lu. 24:5-7;1 Cor. 15:20
Psa. 118:22,23...The rejected stone is Head of the corner...Mt. 21:42,43
Psa. 118:26a...The Blessed One presented to Israel...Mt. 21:9
Psa. 118:26b...To come while Temple standing...Mt. 21;12-15
Psa. 132:11...The Seed of David (the fruit of His Body)...Lu. 1:32
Psa. 138:1-6...The supremacy of David's Seed amazes kings... Mt. 2:2-6
Psa. 147:3,6...The earthly ministry of Christ described...Lu. 4:18
Psa. 1:23...He will send the Spirit of God... Jn. 16;7
Song. 5;16...The altogether lovely One...Jn. 1:17
Isa. 6:1...When Isaiah saw His glory... Jn. 12:40-41
Isa. 6:9-10...Parables fall on deaf ears...Mt. 13:13-15
Isa. 6:9-12...Blinded to Christ and deaf to His words...Acts. 28:23-29
Isa. 7:14...To be born of a virgin...Lu. 1:35
Isa. 7:14...To be Emmanuel-God with us... Mt. 1:18-23
Isa. 8:8...Called Emmanuel...Mt. 28:20
Isa. 8:14...A stone of stumbling, a Rock of offense... 1 Pet. 2:8
Isa. 9:1,2...His ministry to begin in Galilee...Mt. 4:12-17
Isa. 9:6...A child born-Humanity...Lu. 1:31
Isa. 9:6...A Son given-Deity...Lu. 1:32; Jn. 1;14; 1 Tim. 3:16
Isa. 9:6...Declared to be the Son of God with power... Rom. 1:3,4
Isa. 9:6...The Wonderful One, Peleh...Lu. 4:22
Isa. 9:6...The Counsellor, Yaatz...Mt. 13:54
Isa. 9:6...The Mighty God, El Gibor...Mt. 11:20
Isa. 9:6...The Everlasting Father, Avi Adth...Jn. 8:58
Isa. 9:6...The Prince of Peace, Sar Shalom...Jn . 16:33
Isa. 9:7...To establish an everlasting kingdom...Lu. 1:32-33
Isa. 9:7...His Character-Just...Jn. 5:30
Isa. 9:7...No end to his Government, Throne, and Peace...Lu. 1:32-33
Isa. 11:1...Called a Nazarene-the Branch, Netzer...Mt. 2:23
Isa. 11:1...A rod out of Jesse-Son of Jesse...Lu. 3:23,32
Isa. 11:2...The anointed One by the Spirit...Mt. 3;16,17
Isa. 11:2...His Character-Wisdom, Understanding, et al....Jn. 4:4-26
Isa. 11:4...His Character-Truth...Jn. 14:6
Isa. 11:10...The Gentiles seek Him...Jn. 12:18-21
Isa. 12:2...Called Jesus-Yeshua(salvation)...Mt. 1:21
Isa. 25:8...The Resurrection predicted...I Cor. 15:54
Isa. 26:19...His power of Resurrection predicted...Jn. 11:43,44
Isa. 28:16...The Messiah is the precious corner stone...Acts 4:11,12
Isa. 29:13...He indicated hypocritical obedience to His Word...Mt. 15:7-9
Isa. 29:14...The wise are confounded by the Word...I Cor. 1:18-31
Isa. 32:2...A Refuge-A man shall be a hiding place...Mt. 23:37
Isa. 35:4...He will come and save you...Mt. 1:21
Isa. 35:5...To have a ministry of miracles...Mt. 11:4-6
Isa. 40:3,4...Preceded by forerunner...Jn. 1:23
Isa. 40:9..."Behold your God."...Jn. 1:36;19:14
Isa. 40:11...A shepherd-compassionate life-giver...Jn. 10:10-18
Isa. 42:1-4...The Servant-as a faithful, patient redeemer... Mt.12:18-21
Isa. 42:2...Meek and lowly... Mt. 11:28-30
Isa. 42:3...He brings hope for the hopeless... Jn. 4
Isa. 42:4...The nations shall wait on His teachings... Jn. 12:20-26
Isa. 42:6...The Light (salvation) of the Gentiles...Lu. 2:32
Isa. 42:1,6...His is a Worldwide compassion... Mt. 28:19,20
Isa. 42:7...Blind eyes opened... Jn. 9:25-38
Isa. 43:11...He is the only Saviour... Acts. 4:12
Isa. 44:3...He will send the Spirit of God... Jn. 16:7,13
Isa. 45:23...He will be the Judge... Jn. 5:22;Rom. 14:11
Isa. 48:12...The First and the Last...Jn. 1:30;Rev. 1:8,17
Isa. 48:17...He came as a Teacher...Jn. 3:2
Isa. 49:1...Called from the womb-His humanity...Mt. 1:18
Isa. 49:5...A Servant from the womb...Lu. 1:31;Phil. 2:7
Isa. 49:6...He is Salvation for Israel...Lu. 2:29-32
Isa. 49:6...He is the Light of the Gentiles...Acts 13:47
Isa. 49:6...He is Salvation unto the ends of the earth... Acts 15:7-18
Isa. 49:7...He is despised of the Nation... Jn. 8:48-49
Isa. 50:3...Heaven is clothed in black at His humiliation... Lu. 23:44,45
Isa. 50:4...He is a learned counsellor for the weary... Mt. 11:28,29
Isa. 50:5...The Servant bound willingly to obedience... Mt. 26:39
Isa. 50:6a..."I gave my back to the smiters."... Mt. 27:26
Isa. 50:6b...He was smitten on the cheeks... Mt. 26:67
Isa. 50:6c...He was spat upon... Mt. 27:30
Isa. 52:7...To publish good tidings of peace... Lu. 4:14,15
Isa. 52:13...The Servant exalted...Acts 1:8-11; Eph. 1:19-22
Isa. 52:13...Behold, My Servant... Mt. 17:5; Phil. 2:5-8
Isa. 52:14...The Servant shockingly abused... Lu. 18:31-34; Mt. 26:67,68
Isa. 52:15...Nations startled by message of the Servant... Rom. 15:18-21
Isa. 52:15...His blood shed to make atonement for all... Rev. 1:5
Isa. 53:1...His people would not believe Him... Jn. 12:37-38
Isa. 53:2a...He would grow up in a poor family.... Lu. 2:7
Isa. 53:2b...Appearance of an ordinary man... Phil. 2:7-8
Isa. 53:3a...Despised.... Lu. 4:28-29
Isa. 53:3b...Rejected... Mt. 27:21-23
Isa. 53:3c...Great sorrow and grief... Lu. 19:41-42
Isa. 53:3d...Men hide from being associated with Him... Mk. 14:50-52
Isa. 53:4a...He would have a healing ministry... Lu. 6:17-19
Isa. 53:4b...He would bear the sins of the world... 1 Pet. 2:24
Isa. 53:4c...Thought to be cursed by God... Mt. 27:41-43
Isa. 53:5a...Bears penalty for mankind's transgressions... Lu. 23:33
Isa. 53:5b...His sacrifice would provide peace between man and God... Col. 1:20
Isa. 53:5c...His back would be whipped... Mt. 27:26
Isa. 53:6a...He would be the sin-bearer for all mankind...Gal. 1:4
Isa. 53:6b...God's will that He bear sin for all mankind... 1 Jn. 4:10
Isa. 53:7a...Oppressed and afflicted... Mt. 27:27-31
Isa. 53:7b...Silent before his accusers... Mt. 27:12-14
Isa. 53:7c...Sacrificial lamb... Jn. 1:29
Isa. 53:8a...Confined and persecuted... Mt. 26:47-27:31
Isa. 53:8b...He would be judged... Jn. 18:13-22
Isa. 53:8c...Killed.... Mt. 27:35
Isa. 53:8d...Dies for the sins of the world... 1 Jn. 2:2
Isa. 53:9a...Buried in a rich man's grave... Mt. 27:57
Isa. 53:9b...Innocent and had done no violence... Mk. 15:3
Isa. 53:9c...No deceit in his mouth... Jn. 18:38
Isa. 53:10a...God's will that He die for mankind... Jn. 18:11
Isa. 53:10b...An offering for sin... Mt. 20:28
Isa. 53:10c...Resurrected and live forever.... Mk. 16:16
Isa. 53:10d...He would prosper... Jn. 17:1-5
Isa. 53:11a...God fully satisfied with His suffering... Jn. 12:27
Isa. 53:11b...God's servant... Rom. 5:18-19
Isa. 53:11c...He would justify man before God... Rom. 5:8-9
Isa. 53:11d...The sin-bearer for all mankind... Heb. 9:28
Isa. 53:12a...Exalted by God because of his sacrifice... Mt. 28:18
Isa. 53:12b...He would give up his life to save mankind... Lu. 23:46
Isa. 53:12c...Grouped with criminals... Lu. 23:32
Isa. 53:12d...Sin-bearer for all mankind... 2 Cor. 5:21
Isa. 53:12e...Intercede to God in behalf of mankind... Lu. 23:34
Isa. 55:3...Resurrected by God... Acts 13:34
Isa. 55:4...A witness... Jn. 18:37
Isa. 59:15-16a...He would come to provide salvation... Jn. 6:40
Isa. 59:15-16b...Intercessor between man and God... Mt. 10:32
Isa. 59:20...He would come to Zion as their Redeemer... Lu. 2:38
Isa. 61:1-2a...The Spirit of God upon him... Mt. 3:16-17
Isa. 61:1-2b...The Messiah would preach the good news... Lu. 4:17-21
Isa. 61:1-2c...Provide freedom from the bondage of sin and death... Jn. 8:31-32
Isa. 61:1-2...Proclaim a period of grace... Jn. 5:24
Jer.23:5-6a...Descendant of David...Lu. 3:23-31
Jer. 23:5-6b...The Messiah would be God... Jn. 13:13
Jer. 23:5-6c...The Messiah would be both God and Man... 1 Tim. 3:16
Jer. 31:22...Born of a virgin... Mt. 1:18-20
Jer. 31:31...The Messiah would be the new covenant... Mt. 26:28
Jer. 33:14-15...Descendant of David... Lu. 3:23-31
Eze.17:22-24...Descendant of David... Lk. 3:23-31
Eze.34:23-24...Descendant of David... Mt. 1:1
Dan. 7:13-14a...He would ascend into heaven... Acts 1:9-11
Dan. 7:13-14b...Highly exalted... Eph. 1:20-22
Dan. 7:13-14c...His dominion would be everlasting... Lu. 1:31-33
Dan. 9:24a...To make an end to sins... Gal. 1:3-5
Dan. 9:24b...He would be holy... Lu. 1:35
Dan. 9:25...Announced to his people 483 years, to the exact day, after the decree to rebuild the city of Jerusalem... Jn. 12:12-13
Dan. 9:26a...Killed... Mt. 27:35
Dan. 9:26b...Die for the sins of the world... Heb. 2:9
Dan. 9:26c...Killed before the destruction of the temple... Mt. 27:50-51
Dan. 10:5-6...Messiah in a glorified state... Rev. 1:13-16
Hos. 13:14...He would defeat death... 1 Cor. 15:55-57
Joel 2:32...Offer salvation to all mankind... Rom. 10:12-13
Mic. 5:2a...Born in Bethlehem... Mt. 2:1-2
Mic. 5:2b...God's servant... Jn. 15:10
Mic. 5:2c...From everlasting... Jn. 8:58
Hag. 2:6-9...He would visit the second Temple... Lu. 2:27-32
Hag. 2:23...Descendant of Zerubbabel... Lu. 3:23-27
Zech. 3:8...God's servant... Jn. 17:4
Zech. 6:12-13...Priest and King... Heb. 8:1
Zech. 9:9a...Greeted with rejoicing in Jerusalem... Mt. 21:8-10
Zech. 9:9b...Beheld as King... Jn. 12:12-13
Zech. 9:9c...The Messiah would be just... Jn. 5:30
Zech. 9:9d...The Messiah would bring salvation... Luke 19:10
Zech. 9:9e...The Messiah would be humble... Mt. 11:29
Zech. 9:9f...Presented to Jerusalem riding on a donkey... Mt. 21:6-9
Zech. 10:4...The cornerstone... Eph. 2:20
Zech. 11:4-6a...At His coming, Israel to have unfit leaders... Mt. 23:1-4
Zech. 11:4-6b...Rejection causes God to remove His protection.. Lu. 19:41-44
Zech. 11:4-6c...Rejected in favor of another king... Jn. 19:13-15
Zech. 11:7...Ministry to "poor," the believing remnant... Mt. 9:35-36
Zech. 11:8a...Unbelief forces Messiah to reject them... Mt. 23:33
Zech. 11:8b...Despised... Mt. 27:20
Zech. 11:9...Stops ministering to the those who rejected Him... Mt. 13:10-11
Zech. 11:10-11a...Rejection causes God to remove protection... Lu. 19:41-44
Zech. 11:10-11b...The Messiah would be God... Jn. 14:7
Zech. 11:12-13a...Betrayed for thirty pieces of silver... Mt. 26:14-15
Zech. 11:12-13b...Rejected... Mt. 26:14-15
Zech. 11:12-13c...Thirty pieces of silver thrown into the house of the Lord... Mt. 27:3-5
Zech. 11:12-13d...The Messiah would be God... Jn. 12:45
Zech. 12:10a...The Messiah's body would be pierced... Jn. 19:34-37
Zech. 12:10b...The Messiah would be both God and man... Jn. 10:30
Zech. 12:10c...The Messiah would be rejected... Jn. 1:11
Zech. 13:7a...God's will He die for mankind... Jn. 18:11
Zech. 13:7b...A violent death... Mt. 27:35
Zech. 13:7c...Both God and man.. Jn. 14:9
Zech. 13:7d...Israel scattered as a result of rejecting Him... Mt. 26:31-56
Mal. 3:1a...Messenger to prepare the way for Messiah... Mt. 11:10
Mal. 3:1b...Sudden appearance at the temple... Mk. 11:15-16
Mal. 3:1c...Messenger of the new covenant... Lu. 4:43
Mal. 4:5...Forerunner in the spirit of Elijah... Mt. 3:1-2
Mal. 4:6...Forerunner would turn many to righteousness... Lu. 1:16-17

[txag007]

"This is totally incorrect. The scientific community accepts almost universally that the universe is infinite. The view that the universe is most likely infinite is about as widely held in physics as the view that the Earth in most likely round."

What are you talking about? Edwin Hubble discovered in 1927 that the universe is expanding outward. This was the theoretical basis for the Big Bang theory (whether you believe in it or not). The premise of the Big Bang is that the Earth had a beginning point. Einstein accepted Hubble's finding. Even Stephen Hawking says that the universe had a beginning point.

[Cooker]

I knew trying to correct your total lack of understanding on this point would be hopeless, but I will try one more time. The universe is expanding, but not in the sense that it is a balloon blowing up but in the sense that everything is moving apart on averge, but the whole thing is still probably infinite. When astrophysicist say expanding, they mean that things within the universe are farther apart now than they were before, but the boundary is still infinite. They do not mean that there is some magical boundary of the universe that you can reach in finite time and then just fly off the edge.

I have published papers in GR research, I know what I am talking about and you don't even know what you don't know. You have no idea what Hawking means when he says expanding universe. I know exactly what he means and it is not what you think he means. You have no idea what Hubble observered. I know exactly what he observed, how he observed it, and its implications and I promise you he never implied a finite universe and no researcher with any clue thinks his observations imply a finite universe.

Once again, I ask you to simply quit abusing what you clearly don't understand.

[BigDukeSix]

[quote
The universe isn't infinite. It is generally accepted in the scientific community that the universe is expanding outward. This means that it had to have a beginning point. Look it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok so even if it was 'generally accepted', then that's enough proof to base your entire religious belief on?

[thatpfunk]

Okay, the stipulations once again:

I will transfer you $500 on any poker site/neteller and allow you to send me a bible if you can give 100 prophecies that have been fulfilled to 100% accuracy. The board will be a judge as to the validity of each claim. Prophecies must not be vague nor ambigious. The prophecies also must be verified through reliable sources, i.e. not the same book in which the claims were made.

Not sure how you interpreted this but this means you can't use the freaking bible as answer to the prophecy. Do you understand how ridiculous this is? I kinda feel bad if you typed all this out, but I thought it would be blatantly obvious the you can't use your religious book to confirm the claims made it your religious book. So I actually don't feel bad, I'm just sort of in shock.

I thought this was clear.

/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[txag007]

What you said was that each prophecy could not be fulfilled within the same book. The Bible is a collection of books that were written hundreds of years apart. Thus, many of the prophecies were fulfilled hundreds of years from when they were made.

[thatpfunk]

The bible is not a reliable source. How is this not clear?

[xniNja]

In 10 years the Christian music scene will come out with a new rap video called:

"Thump it!"

(referring to the bible of course.)

[txag007]

So what you are telling me is that there is an infinite amount of hydrogen in the universe. Is that correct?

[txag007]

"The bible is not a reliable source. How is this not clear?"

Because you didn't say it. The specific wording of your post said "book".

[thatpfunk]

[ QUOTE ]
verified through reliable sources

[/ QUOTE ]

How would you like to interpret this?

[txag007]

The Bible is very reliable. There are more original copies of the New Testament (24000+) than any other major work of literature. Homer's "Iliad" is second with 643 copies. As for Pliny the Younger, Herodotus, and Thucydides, the number of original copies of each of their works is less than ten. Yet, we rely on them. Furthermore, no major archaelogical find has ever contradicted the Bible. So, it's very reliable.

[Cooker]

First off, let me back off my original stance somewhat. I am saying that most scientists believe the uiverse could be infinite and many physicist believe it most likely is infinite. The theory that underlies expansion in fact assumes the universe is infinite although it would probably change little to adjust it to a finite universe. I am saying that we don't know for sure, but many people think infinite is most reasonable since we see no hint of an edge affect and if there was an edge then what is beyond the edge if we travel there. If the universe is infinite then there is certainly infinite hydrogen. There was an old problem that if the universe was infinitely old then the energy density would infinite everywhere which is a big problem, but GR has several solutions to this problem that can be made compatable with current observations (although the evidence for them is weak and I personally believe the universe has finite age).

[thatpfunk]

Great work of fiction.

We can let the board vote on its validity, of course.

On a side note, how can you not understand how ridiculous your logic is? You believe the bible because the bible says so? Um, sure...

[txag007]

No, I believe the Bible because there has never been a documented case of historical contradiction. Additionally, there are other historical writings that verify many of the events in the Bible.

[thatpfunk]

People rising from the dead is enough to discount its validity.

Not to mention that some of your "prophecies" are physically impossible and your religion relies on their confirmation to exist.

But yeah, as a logical and rational individual I should clearly see that this is 100% truth.

I just don't understand, I mean it kills me, that someone that is able to use a computer is unable to understand how basic this is.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
To sexdrugsmoney,
If the notion of a god,etc doesn't hold water scientifically ie. no physical evidence supporting the pursuit of the idea, then it's not logical to pursue the line of thought.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shooby, Almost all religions started with someone claiming they had contact with God or one of his representatives then what usually happens is they tell people about it and usually begin to say what God allegedly told them.

The people normally ask "How do we know this is true?!" & "Why should we believe you?!" at which point the person who had contact will do something against the laws of nature to prove their authenticity.

If they perform correctly, they gain followers, if they fail, they were usually ignored, or killed instantly.

The whole Jewish faith was founded on Prophets, and not just to get the religion started, but to keep it afloat in times when the Jews were repeatedly invaded by their neighbours and captured and enslaved.

So you can see the Jewish people didn't one day decide to believe in a God with no proof whatsoever, and subsequently the further generations retained their faith in times of trouble almost solely by prophets and prophecy.

With that in mind, read my posts above.

[ QUOTE ]

I don't understand what you mean when you say that religion should be studied because of current world events. Do you mean that we might understand terrorists if we study their religious beliefs?

Shooby

[/ QUOTE ]

Not exactly.

While you may find it beneficial for yourself to read the Qur'an and perhaps a book like Ibn Warraq's "Why I am not a Muslim", my comment above related to one prophecy in the Book of Revelations, which is explained in full in my posts to David.

Cheers,
SDM

[baggins]

[ QUOTE ]

Its impossible to have a conversation with people who believe in god about his/its non existence, It would be like banging your head against a wall, and as mean and pointless as telling a 3 year old there is no Santa.

[/ QUOTE ]

sometimes we feel the same way on the other side of the conversation. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[baggins]

[ QUOTE ]
People rising from the dead is enough to discount its validity.

Not to mention that some of your "prophecies" are physically impossible and your religion relies on their confirmation to exist.

But yeah, as a logical and rational individual I should clearly see that this is 100% truth.

I just don't understand, I mean it kills me, that someone that is able to use a computer is unable to understand how basic this is.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you start with the assumption that supernatural events cannot occur, then your conclusion is correct. but, by their very nature, supernatural events such as dead people rising from their graves cannot be defined by natural laws.

it kills me that you cannot see outside of this paradigm. even if you don't hold to it, you must start with the basic principles of a theory or belief system if you want to understand it and pick it apart.

If there IS a creator-god, then he(she/it) has the power to alter/define the rules of the physical world he has created. at will. just because YOU can't define it doesn't mean it can't happen.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
People rising from the dead is enough to discount its validity.

Not to mention that some of your "prophecies" are physically impossible and your religion relies on their confirmation to exist.

But yeah, as a logical and rational individual I should clearly see that this is 100% truth.

I just don't understand, I mean it kills me, that someone that is able to use a computer is unable to understand how basic this is.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you start with the assumption that supernatural events cannot occur, then your conclusion is correct. but, by their very nature, supernatural events such as dead people rising from their graves cannot be defined by natural laws.

it kills me that you cannot see outside of this paradigm. even if you don't hold to it, you must start with the basic principles of a theory or belief system if you want to understand it and pick it apart.

If there IS a creator-god, then he(she/it) has the power to alter/define the rules of the physical world he has created. at will. just because YOU can't define it doesn't mean it can't happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

and doesnt mean it should or would ever happen, so this argument is never going to end

[thatpfunk]

Okay, how difficult is this to understand? I offered him $500 if he can give me 100 prophecies from the bible that have been fulfilled. I said that the fulfillments must be verified by a reliable source.

If we are looking at this objectively how is it not obvious that a text such as the bible is not a reliable source?

I am not making an argument for or against the paranormal. This is simply in the context of the offer.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Its impossible to have a conversation with people who believe in god about his/its non existence, It would be like banging your head against a wall, and as mean and pointless as telling a 3 year old there is no Santa.

[/ QUOTE ]

sometimes we feel the same way on the other side of the conversation. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I know, I guess it's funny. Also ironic that I am 100% confident of my position. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Mack

[txag007]

"Okay, how difficult is this to understand? I offered him $500 if he can give me 100 prophecies from the bible that have been fulfilled. I said that the fulfillments must be verified by a reliable source.

If we are looking at this objectively how is it not obvious that a text such as the bible is not a reliable source?

I am not making an argument for or against the paranormal. This is simply in the context of the offer."

First of all, this isn't about the money. I'd rather you give it to the Red Cross.

Secondly, let's look at the issue of the Bible as a reliable resource. The Bible is a collection of 66 Books written by more than 40 different authors on three different continents over a 1500 year span. Yet, if comes together in perfect harmony with no contradictions. That should tell you something about the subject matter. If it is all just a "great work of fiction" as you claimed in an earlier post, there should be conflicts all over the place. Heck, even the writers in Hollywood today can't write an entire TV series without including a few conflicts. That is, of course, if we are looking at this "objectively".

[thatpfunk]

[ QUOTE ]
The Bible is a collection of 66 Books written by more than 40 different authors on three different continents over a 1500 year span. Yet, if comes together in perfect harmony with no contradictions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah there is absolutely no way that anything could be :::gasp::: edited or :::gasp::: left out!!! I mean it was only 2000 years ago.

Let me know when you get the original copies of every book ever written for the bible.

[Cooker]

The funniest part to me is that it is well known that several books have been cut out of the bible at various times and the the bible is still chock full of contradictions and conflicting reports. Don't believe me, check here (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html).

To see more information on how the books of the bible were selected from a much broader collection of books look here (http://ohoh.essortment.com/biblechristiani_rfie.htm). I specifically selected a clearly pro-Christian site because it still illustrates my point that the bible has been cut down and edited over time. If I gave you one of the scathing historical sites that show just how cherry picked it was I am sure txag007 would suggest that the source was totally unrelyable, but you can find those sites yourself if you like.

[txag007]

"Yeah there is absolutely no way that anything could be :::gasp::: edited or :::gasp::: left out!!! I mean it was only 2000 years ago.

Let me know when you get the original copies of every book ever written for the bible."


The oldest Hebrew text of the Old Testament (Massoretic) dates back to 900 AD. In 1947, copies or partial copies of every Old Testament Book except Esther were discovered. These texts are dated approximately 100 B.C. The oldest Greek translation of the Old Testament (Septuagint, aka LXX) is dated 200 B.C.

All of these agree to within a few letters. The differences amount to spelling (i.e. "honor" vs "honour", etc). There are no conceptual or historical changes in these translations.

As for the New Testament, we have thousands of Greek manuscripts plus the writings of the early Church Fathers. If all of the New Testament manuscripts were to disappear overnight it would still be possible to reconstruct the entire New Testament using quotes from the Church Fathers with the exception of 15-20 verses.

So, the argument that the Bible was somehow altered or changed over the years doesn't hold much weight.

[thatpfunk]

ya i have some contradiction sites bookmarked.

i am just pointing out how absurd his statements and reasoning have been. it is a blatant disregard for the common sense that i am sure he would bring to a debate about any other subject.

[txag007]

"The funniest part to me is that it is well known that several books have been cut out of the bible at various times and the the bible is still chock full of contradictions and conflicting reports. Don't believe me, check here."

Most of those contradictions are easily explained by looking at the original Hebrew or Greek or by putting it in proper context. Don't believe me? Check here (http://www.rationalchristianity.net/apol_index.html#contradictions) or here (http://www.rationalchristianity.net/143contrad.html) or here (http://debate.org.uk/topics/apolog/contrads.htm).

[txag007]

"i am just pointing out how absurd his statements and reasoning have been. it is a blatant disregard for the common sense that i am sure he would bring to a debate about any other subject."

I disagree. Everything you have said on this subject has been easily explained or refuted.

[Cooker]

I looked at several of your sites, and of course, some "contradictions" are probably over reaching. Still many of the "explanations" are preposterous. So, take out the iffy contradictions and you still have a book with many contradicitons.

For instance, I doubt the contradiction about Judas's death can be explained away in a reasonable way. The argument that he did hang himself and did not die, but then died a short time later by falling from a high place is stupid. You must believe that neither author thought the whole story interesting (which I find it much more interesting) enough to relay and that they each just included the manner of his death that suited them. Actually, the first author is being out right misleading if it does happen that way. Even if the "resolution" is correct then the authors are so flawed in their story telling ability that I would never believe the bible to be divinely inspired!!

[txag007]

"For instance, I doubt the contradiction about Judas's death can be explained away in a reasonable way. The argument that he did hang himself and did not die, but then died a short time later by falling from a high place is stupid."

There are many possible explanations for Judas's death. The one to which you referred might be the least reasonable. For a more in depth investigation, look here. (http://www.tektonics.org/gk/judasdeath.html)

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
For instance, I doubt the contradiction about Judas's death can be explained away in a reasonable way. The argument that he did hang himself and did not die, but then died a short time later by falling from a high place is stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with the bold text completely, and I am suprised if anybody would actually make this argument.

Although I have no desire to get involved in this debate, I have heard that contradiction explained in saying that Judas hung himself from a tree, and then the body dropped from the branch breaking.

In regards to hanging (http://www.geocities.com/trctl11/hanging.html) :

[ QUOTE ]

In death, the body typically shows marks of suspension, e.g. bruising and rope marks on the neck and in some cases traces of urine, semen and feces. Male prisoners sometimes have penile erections and even ejaculate while hanging.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ofcourse "intestines" could mean "Bowels" but I have no lexicon to verify this and furthermore assume all translators would have checked that the appropriate word was used for 'intestines' meaning 'intestines' and not meaning the product of the intestines. (ie- feces)

Who knows?

Cheers,
SDM

[J. Stew]

What is this being made up of?