Prophecy 1: (1290 days & 42 Months)

[BrianC]

Prophecy 1: Daniel's 1290 days & Revelation's 42 months (Dan 12:11 & Rev 11:2)
Here's the quick and dirty, then I'll explain it out:

1290 days (a day = a year in prophecy)
1290 Hebrew yrs X .9857 = 1271.553 solar years
583BC (sacrifices taken away in Daniel's time)
-583BC + 1271.533 yrs = 688.533

688AD - The year the muslims started building the Dome of the Rock on the Temple mount in Jerusalem.

42 months
365.24 days in a year (.24 = 1 days ever four years: leap year)
365.24 divided by 12 = 30.44 days in a month
42 months X 30.44 days = 1278.48 years

688.553AD + 1278.48 years = 1967AD

1967AD was the year that the Jews got Jerusalem and their temple mount back. Below, I'll explain the details of these prophecy and how both of these prophecies explained EXACTLY those events that happened, their beginning and the number of years that would pass.

In the Old Testament, twice it says that a day is given as a year regarding prophecy. Hebrew years were 360 day years. History is recorded in solar years, so we have to convert Hebrew years to solar years. The conversion factor is .9857.

1290 days
Daniel 12:11
11 "From the time that the regular (daily) sacrifice is abolished and the abomination of desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days.

NOTE: The way the Hebrews spoke was a bit different than the way we speak today. This prophecy means "from" this event "to" this event will be 1290 days. We'll prove that true...

The Abomination of Desolation is spoken of in many places in the Bible. We know from the verse above that it will be 'set up.' We know from Matthew 24:15 that it will "stand in the holy place" or Mark 13 "standing where it should not be." (the holy place is the temple mount in Jerusalem). We see it described as a man speaking things against God in 2 Thess 2:1-4, but as we will see later, it's just the statements of a man in a building that this is speaking of.

We have two markers:
Start: Daily sacrifice taken away
End: Abomination of Desolation

So, these are very specific events that start and end this 1290 day/year period.

Historians have dated the Jews being taken away into captivity by the Babylonians as being 583BC. Once the Jews have no temple mount to sacrifice on, their priests can no longer give sacrifices. This is when the daily sacrifice was ended.

Best estimates place the decree to build the Dome of the Rock as 687-688AD.

So, convert 1290 Hebrew years to solar years, then add them to 583BC:

1290 x .9857 = 1271.553 solar years

-583BC + 1271.553 yrs = 688.553AD (the year the Dome of the Rock was built)

42 Months

Revelation 11:2
2"Leave out the court which is outside the temple and do not measure it, for it has been given to the nations (or Gentiles); and they will tread under foot the holy city for forty-two months.

In 688.553 AD (according to the prophecy and history) the Dome of the Rock began construction and was built in the OUTER court, just as this prophecy says the Gentiles will rule the outer courts for 42 months (or 42 months of years).

42 x 30.44 days per month = 1278.48 yrs

(Daniel was under a Hebrew/Babylonian 360 calendar, so a conversion is needed. John, the write of Revelation, was under a 365.24 day solar calendar, and so no conversion is needed.)

688.553 + 1278.48 yrs = 1967AD

1967AD is the year the Jews took back the temple mount in the Six Day War.

One of these prophecies was given in the 500BC era and the other in 95-105 AD. The Bible stops at that point. How could they have predicted these two events to the year exactly? They are not vague at all, but VERY specific, so don't claim they are "vague" and can be interpreted in any way you want.

There are 13 of these numerical prophecies. I will not list 6 of them, because 6 happen from around 444BC to 33BC (within the time period the Old and New Testiments were written). People will say that those could've been fabricated for those times, and while it's a ridiculous argument, I'm just not going to bring it up. I'll list the rest, though in other threads.

[Mateo5.0]

you have entirely too much time on your hands. work on the SHO, and read books other than the bible- you'll find that there's more truth in fiction. :rolleyes:

[Shorty]

why is a day a year in prophecy?

[That_Is_My_El_Camino]

why is a day a year in prophecy?Because it makes things work.

[BrianC]

why is a day a year in prophecy?

Don't ask me, ask God:

Numbers 14:34 & Eze 4:5,6 say that a day = a year in prophecy, and we see evidence of that in at least two different prophecies in the Bible: Daniel's 70 weeks and when God prophesies the Hebrews going into captivity in Egypt for 390 years, then 40 years in the desert. He prophesies these things in days, then says, "I give you a day for a year." Again, don't ask me...ask God. I'm just repeating what the Bible says.

[BrianC]

Because it makes things work.

Besides the fact that God said it in two or three places in the Bible, yes, it just happens to work out perfectly. And in doing so, it defies all statistical possibilities, proving that there is a God that foretold this stuff thousands of years in advance. Atheists really don't like this kind of stuff, because it shows there is a God. :) I think it's entertaining, personally...

[That_Is_My_El_Camino]

Don't ask me, ask God:

Numbers 14:34 & Eze 4:5,6 say that a day = a year in prophecy, and we see evidence of that in at least two different prophecies in the Bible: Daniel's 70 weeks and when God prophesies the Hebrews going into captivity in Egypt for 390 years, then 40 years in the desert. He prophesies these things in days, then says, "I give you a day for a year." Again, don't ask me...ask God. I'm just repeating what the Bible says.Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:5-6 say that they'll be punished a year for every day they sinned. It doesn't say, "From here on out, every time I say 'day,' I really mean 'year.'"

[talisman]

I asked god for the winning lotto numbers once. You see he obviously isn't interested in giving serious answers with his whole "god postiton." :mad:

[DarkWolf]

Don't ask me, ask God:

Numbers 14:34 & Eze 4:5,6 say that a day = a year in prophecy, and we see evidence of that in at least two different prophecies in the Bible: Daniel's 70 weeks and when God prophesies the Hebrews going into captivity in Egypt for 390 years, then 40 years in the desert. He prophesies these things in days, then says, "I give you a day for a year." Again, don't ask me...ask God. I'm just repeating what the Bible says.

You seem incapable of keeping this in the original thread. Making more threads doesn't add validity.

And because you seem incapable of doing so, I'll just quote what I posted in the other thread.

The prophecies are all over the place. In Daniel 4:32 it states: "And they shall drive thee from men, and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field: they shall make thee to eat grass as oxen, and seven times shall pass over thee, until thou know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will."

So, if we accept your interpretation of "a time" being 1000 years, then that must mean Nebuchadnezzar dwelled in the fields for 7000 years.

Oops.

Clearly "a time" is any arbitrary amount of time applied to a prophecy, in order to make it "work".

He also specifically calls for days and weeks, and even years at some parts. So, if you're suggesting a day is a year, a week is seven years, and a year is 365 years. When Daniel figures out that the desolation of Jerusalem would last 70 years, that really means 25,550 years? That's quite a bit longer than the entire span of history covered in the bible, much less starting from the time of Daniel. Even if you use 360 years (based on the 360 days in a year of the Jewish calendar), that's still 25,200 years.

Or was that literally 70 years? And if that was literally 70 years, why should we trust that other specifically referred time periods are to be interpreted and not taken literally?

Of course, Michael informs Daniel that he's got 70 weeks to rebuild Jerusalem. 490 days... er years?

And all this time Nebuchadnezzar is out chewing cud with his cattle homies.

Your "prophecies" are bunk. Give it up.

And I'll add to this, that Daniel was already aging when Micheal told him he had 70 weeks to rebuild Jerusalem. Methinks Daniel didn't have the luxury of living ~900 years like Adam & Eve.

[Brain_Mach1]

You say solar years. The Jews work on a lunar calender. :confused:

[Mateo5.0]

See? This is what happens when you stop thinking for yourself. :)

BTW: I'm no atheist, however every atheist that I have ever met has been more spiritually inclined and thoughtful than ANY mainstream religious counterpart on the other side.

It's easy to spout-off scripture, even when it is taken out of context, and claim *whatever* in the name of God. What it really is, is Blasphemy.

It's simple really:
Accept that we aren't alone in the universe (if you do, you suffer from arrogance),
and we all are the same on a genetic level (you aren't better b/c of your skin).
Don't believe everything you hear or read. Especially when your life is involved.
Think for yourself.
If it works for you, it might not work for everyone else.
And above all else:
Don't assert authority over your peers and you won't seem like an asshole and subsequently alienated from them.

[BrianC]

You say solar years. The Jews work on a lunar calender. :confused:

Jews had a 360 day year, just as the Babylonians did. You can prove this in Genesis around the time of the flood, if I'm not mistaken. It talks about a certain number of months and days and half a year, and it comes right out to 30 day months and 180 days for half a year. You should really go look at what historians say about this. All agree on the old Jewish Calendar being a 360 day calendar.

Besides, doesn't the moon have a perfect 12 month (30 day months, 360 day year) pattern it travels around the earth?

[BrianC]

Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:5-6 say that they'll be punished a year for every day they sinned. It doesn't say, "From here on out, every time I say 'day,' I really mean 'year.'"

It doesn't matter. The point is that God is prophesying the future, and in this future, He is prophesying that a day equals a year. In Numbers He says that each day they sinned will be a year you must bear your guilt. A day = a year. Then, in Eze 4:5,6 it says, "For I have assigned you a number of days corresponding to the years of their iniquity, three hundred and ninety days; thus (A)you shall bear the iniquity of the house of Israel.

Once again, a day = a year when God is prophesying.

[BrianC]

The prophecies are all over the place. In Daniel 4:32 it states: "And they shall drive thee from men, and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field: they shall make thee to eat grass as oxen, and seven times shall pass over thee, until thou know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will."

So, if we accept your interpretation of "a time" being 1000 years, then that must mean Nebuchadnezzar dwelled in the fields for 7000 years.

Oops.

No where in prophecy do you see God saying "Seven times." This is not a "times" prophecy, obviously. Besides, if you were a Hebrew scholar or had done any research on this type of thing at all, you'd know that "seven times" is a saying the Jews had. Nebuchadennar commanded the furnace to be made 7 times hotter, but obviously they couldn't make the furnace 7 times hotter. It's just an expression.

A disciples comes up to Christ and says, "We are told to forgive our brother seven times in a day." It's just a saying. Seven is the number of completion in the Bible (6 days of creation and 1 of rest, and the week and creation are complete). If someone says something like seven times hotter, they mean a fire that is as hot as they can get it, or completely hot. When you are commanded to forgive someone seven times in a day, it means to COMPLETELY forgive them all they do.

You should really look into this stuff if you're going to try and debate it. It's like a Buddhist trying to debate a Christian, but the Buddhist barely knows anything about the Bible or Christianity. He has no business even attempting to debate a Christian topic unless he first learns it.

The Nebuchadnezzar prophecy is simply saying that when he, Nebuchadnezzar, is completely humbled, then he will know that The Most High rules. That's it.

Also, you forgot a key thing, here. Daniel is prophesying to a non-Jew. Jews understood day=year prophecies and even "time" prophecies back in those days, most likely. But Daniel is speaking to Nebuchadnezzar, a Babylonian, who has no clue about the way God prophesies to the Jews. Why would God use unknown terms when He would want to be completely clear with Nebuchadnezzar on this prophecy? We KNOW Nebuchadnezzar understood the "seven times" saying/lingo of that day, because he himself uses it when he says to make the furnace seven times hotter.

Your explanations are 'bunk,' as you say...



Your "prophecies" are bunk. Give it up.

And I'll add to this, that Daniel was already aging when Micheal told him he had 70 weeks to rebuild Jerusalem. Methinks Daniel didn't have the luxury of living ~900 years like Adam & Eve.

First of all, it was Gabriel that spoke with Daniel. Secondly, Daniel was not told to rebuild Jerusalem. The start of the prophecy was said to be at the command to rebuild Jerusalem. Daniel was dead when the command to rebuild Jerusalem was given in 444BC. The prophecy was given to Daniel in 536BC.

The prophecies aren't "bunk" just because you don't understand them properly and haven't ever studied Hebrew literary styles. Ignorance doesn't make the prophecies "bunk" as you say.

[BrianC]

See? This is what happens when you stop thinking for yourself. :)

Since the ignorance of DarkWolf's post as been exposed, I guess this statement of yours is null and void now.

See what happens when you try to debate something you are completely ignorant about? :)

And besides, I am one that tears every teacher apart to see if they are lining up with the Bible. I don't just take people's word and believe it. I am the world's worst about taking preachers apart if they are teaching something unbiblical. I listen to no one and blindly believe. I read the book The False Prophet where I learned this stuff 3 times, and I did what I could to make sure these historical dates were accurate, and they were. I can't refute these prophecies. They're dead on accurate. ANY statistician will tell you that these prophecies MUST be accurate, no one changed any time periods to make anything fit because the time periods are all logically deduced with no one modifying anything, and these are statistical impossibilities so there must be a God behind them. Period.

You all are just so incredibly determined to make these not true because you don't want to be accountable to the God of the Bible for some reason. That's your issue, not mine. Don't make me debate your personal baggage and issues.


BTW: I'm no atheist, however every atheist that I have ever met has been more spiritually inclined and thoughtful than ANY mainstream religious counterpart on the other side.

It's easy to spout-off scripture, even when it is taken out of context, and claim *whatever* in the name of God. What it really is, is Blasphemy.

And that's exactly what you all are trying to do to me. I'm taking scripture COMPLETELY in context and modifying NOTHING and making NOTHING fit anything I want it to fit. It simply says what it says and it fits history perfectly to the year 13 times. I can't help that. That's what God says, and it happened, and you won't accept it. That's your problem, not mine. LEARN this stuff before you go debating it.

And you're probably right about Christians, or you have only known average Christians. The average Christian nowadays is not much of an example for what a real Christian should be. Most are not deep thinkers when it comes to the Bible and spirituality. Most have no time for the Bible or God, just a church service once a week. A lot of people like to condemn others and look down on them. None of this is what a Christian should be.



It's simple really:
Accept that we aren't alone in the universe (if you do, you suffer from arrogance),

This is a ridiculous statement (basically propoganda from scientists wanting funding, or 'intellectuals' wanting to make others look bad or arrogant and therefore 'less than themselves.'). The reason I believe no life is out in the universe is simply because I have never seen it and we have zero proof that there is any life anywhere. PERIOD. Until there's proof, it's JUST A THEORY, kind of like evolution and the big bang and the creation theory.


and we all are the same on a genetic level (you aren't better b/c of your skin).

I believe we are all the same on a genetic and on a spiritual level. No one's better than anyone else, even from Christians to non-Christians, saved to unsaved. Everyone's the same to me. Couldn't care less about what they look like or believe in.

Don't believe everything you hear or read. Especially when your life is involved.
Think for yourself.

I completely agree and practice this very heavily. I would add this though, "When you see something that is obviously true and that is irrefutible and 100% proveable, you believe it." You all haven't gotten this one down yet, though, because you don't like the idiot religious (and I agree with you, I don't like the religious as a whole either...most try to enslave people to legalism and into taking a preacher's word for it) and you don't want to be accountable to the Christian God. ANYONE with half a brain can see that 13 prophecies over thousands of years are completely impossible to predict unless you're God and can see the future. Period. It's your BELIEFS that are getting in the way of both halves of your brain and the logic you would normally have in a situation like this.

If it works for you, it might not work for everyone else.

I agree. But look for truth in all situations and learn what truth is, and learn what is just a farce. If you don't, you'll enslave yourself to a bunch of lies all your life.

And above all else:
Don't assert authority over your peers and you won't seem like an asshole and subsequently alienated from them.
I assert absolutely no authority over anyone. I discuss things in a rational manner and talks about the facts and share information with others. If they want to debate it, that's fine. If they want to believe it or not believe it, that's fine. I couldn't care less what people do with the information I give them. But when they come back at me and say, "You're wrong! You're an idiot!" I'm going to make them prove it and debate the points they claim I'm wrong on. So far, no one has disproven ANY of these prophecies. Not one. Nor have they given any credible reasons for why these prophecies are statistically impossible unless God gave them. There's no authority being asserted here. It's all about sharing information. That's it.

If you're going to debate something, though, learn something about it first and stop just throwing out random things or looking on websites for little pieces of information you think solves the problem. Learn to do some ACTUAL research for yourself and spend time doing it instead of being impatient and only researching things for a few minutes. I study things for months and years sometimes. I spend a few hours every morning studying things. I didn't just read a quick book and I magically know all of this stuff. I studied for years and years.

[ClockwrkOrangeS4]

so how many days did it rain when Noah had his ark? I remember it being 40 days and 40 nights, so obviously it was actually 40 years?

[DarkWolf]

No where in prophecy do you see God saying "Seven times." This is not a "times" prophecy, obviously. Besides, if you were a Hebrew scholar or had done any research on this type of thing at all, you'd know that "seven times" is a saying the Jews had. Nebuchadennar commanded the furnace to be made 7 times hotter, but obviously they couldn't make the furnace 7 times hotter. It's just an expression.

It's pretty goddamn clear... "and SEVEN TIMES SHALL PASS OVER THEE"

That is clearly an indication of a passage of time, not a saying Jews had.

You should really look into this stuff if you're going to try and debate it. It's like a Buddhist trying to debate a Christian, but the Buddhist barely knows anything about the Bible or Christianity. He has no business even attempting to debate a Christian topic unless he first learns it.

There's only one person here needing a lesson in christianity, and it certainly isn't me.

The Nebuchadnezzar prophecy is simply saying that when he, Nebuchadnezzar, is completely humbled, then he will know that The Most High rules. That's it.

And it will take the passage of seven times to do this.

Also, you forgot a key thing, here. Daniel is prophesying to a non-Jew. Jews understood day=year prophecies and even "time" prophecies back in those days, most likely.

That would be mighty convenient. But you have nothing to back up this claim, so it remains just your pet theory. And, to be specific it was God (or at least a messenger of God) speaking to Neb. As shown in Daniel 4:31

"31 The words were still on his lips when a voice came from heaven, "This is what is decreed for you, King Nebuchadnezzar: Your royal authority has been taken from you. 32 You will be driven away from people and will live with the wild animals; you will eat grass like cattle. Seven times will pass by for you until you acknowledge that the Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes.""

First of all, it was Gabriel that spoke with Daniel. Secondly, Daniel was not told to rebuild Jerusalem. The start of the prophecy was said to be at the command to rebuild Jerusalem. Daniel was dead when the command to rebuild Jerusalem was given in 444BC. The prophecy was given to Daniel in 536BC.

Ah, yeah you're right it was Gabriel, my bad. However:

"23At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.
24Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy."

The moment his prayer started, is when the commandment was given to end the transgression/rebuild Jerusalem. At least according to the bible.

Since the ignorance of DarkWolf's post as been exposed,

HA, you made a funny!

Wait, you were serious?

Hell, that makes it even funnier!

I'm taking scripture COMPLETELY in context and modifying NOTHING and making NOTHING fit anything I want it to fit.

Well, nothing except changing the definition of days to years, and applying 1000 years to "a time".

I have never seen it and we have zero proof that there is any life anywhere. PERIOD.

Zero is showing that you have no idea what you're spewing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterrestrial_life

There's not 100% concrete evidence, but there are signs and suggestions.

[BrianC]

so how many days did it rain when Noah had his ark? I remember it being 40 days and 40 nights, so obviously it was actually 40 years?

It wasn't a prophecy. It was a story. This is a ridiculous argument...

[BrianC]

It's pretty goddamn clear... "and SEVEN TIMES SHALL PASS OVER THEE"

That is clearly an indication of a passage of time, not a saying Jews had.

I'm done arguing with you. I don't deal with pride. You just don't want to be wrong here. That's all this is. Yes, the Jews do have a saying and the Babylonians have it too. "Seven times" is the saying. It's used in the Bible plenty of times. I'm done with this conversation. If this were a debate in person, I'd walk away if someone spoke to me the way you just did. That's completely uncalled for. No offense, but I'm ignoring you at this point.

[ClockwrkOrangeS4]

It wasn't a prophecy. It was a story. This is a ridiculous argument...

So 'days' only means 'years' in prophecies? You're right, it is rediculous.

[DarkWolf]

I'm done arguing with you. I don't deal with pride. You just don't want to be wrong here. That's all this is. Yes, the Jews do have a saying and the Babylonians have it too. "Seven times" is the saying. It's used in the Bible plenty of times. I'm done with this conversation. If this were a debate in person, I'd walk away if someone spoke to me the way you just did. That's completely uncalled for. No offense, but I'm ignoring you at this point.

HA! I'm quoting the bible word for word. You're the one making shit up. "Oh it was a saying they had back then!" Please. You're just upset that your "undeniable proof" has been so easily discounted, by even the very source of your "proof".

Zorro had a similar tact, and he similarly failed when his "indisputable proof" was easily disputed.

The thing that you, and he fail to realize, is that WE CANNOT KNOW FOR CERTAIN. That's why it's called "faith", because YOU DON'T KNOW. You believe. Belief does not equate to proof.

[1994SilverGT]

well first off, if you are gonna post prophecies from the bible, make sure you post the entire thing, not pieces of it from the bible or little 2 word quotes that can easily be taken out of context. On top of that, how do we know what a day was back then? or a year? Id love to see some references showing exactly what each one consisted of back then and how we know it. How we think now is certainly not how people thought back in the day.

[1994SilverGT]

It doesn't matter. The point is that God is prophesying the future, and in this future, He is prophesying that a day equals a year. In Numbers He says that each day they sinned will be a year you must bear your guilt. A day = a year. Then, in Eze 4:5,6 it says, "For I have assigned you a number of days corresponding to the years of their iniquity, three hundred and ninety days; thus (A)you shall bear the iniquity of the house of Israel.

Once again, a day = a year when God is prophesying.


side note when did god physically write the bible? last checked he hasnt written anything for us to read, instead the bible was written by people.... and i wanna say the bible has even been changed by changing languages and by a few kings who needed it to say other things....

[Hollywood]

We've had some disillusioned cats on this board before, but you take the cake.

5 years before BrianC is committed to an insane asylum. Who wants the over?

[Mateo5.0]

BrianC....

you aren't stupid. But you might as well believe in Nostradamus.

I think it's amazing that all this history has been written down for over two thousand years, albeit changed countless times over....

Yes, I know that it's hard to believe it, but your fellow man of the faith has betrayed you on this one. From generation to generation, two thousand years worth of knowledge and theology- Changed and re-translated many, many times over not only to cement the peoples faith, but to re-assert power that might be lost if not published and worshiped. Not to mention, the main reason behind religious expansion was to control the minds of the people.

But besides the fact that the church has a sketchy past, what with burning people, drowning them, massacring millions, and charging them gold to get into heaven. Why on earth would you believe that they haven't been altered? But no let's all believe that in no way, fashion or form, that the "prophecies" have not been altered. Let's all sit back and-
"I listen to no one and blindly believe."
^I guess that explains it all...

And it's entertaining to read them and make associations with worldly historic events, and especially easy when they give you a road map to do so. All these are meant to do is cement your faith with the rest of the ideology and hopefully "secure your place in heaven". Guess what? Heaven is on earth (it is written), and how you live determines your heaven, not your afterlife (not written). The Bible is a great book with many lessons that apply to our modern lives, but beyond that it is mostly fiction and/or metaphor. A lot of it is based on true, historic events that really happened. But most of it is not.

It is humbling to realize how many priests, kings, popes, translators that the writings have passed down through- NOT EVEN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THAT MOST OF THE LANGUAGES SPOKEN BACK THEN ARE NOW DEAD.

You can't polish a turd BrianC. Do all the research you want, it will just cement you further into the doctrine that has been written by man, for man.

Personally, I'd rather read Nostradamus. It makes for much lighter reading! ;)

[BrianC]

So 'days' only means 'years' in prophecies? You're right, it is rediculous.

Yes, only in prophecies, just like the Bible said. I'm not making this up. I showed where it says this in two verses: Num 14:34 and Eze 4:5,6

It can't get much more clear than that. I don't make up the rules.

And, as it happens, the day = year just happens to work with every prophecy and ends on significant dates everytime. That's a statistical impossibility.

I also showed how it was a saying back then for people to say "seven times" using the Bible itself as proof, yet some refuse to believe that.

31 verses total, here are some of them. I made up nothing...

Pro 24:16
Psm 12:6
2 Kings 5:10
Isa 30:26
Dan 3:19 (Babylonians use "seven times" phrase)
Mat 18:21,22 (Jesus uses it)
Luke 17:4

[Mateo5.0]

Yes, only in prophecies, just like the Bible said. I'm not making this up. I showed where it says this in two verses: Num 14:34 and Eze 4:5,6

It can't get much more clear than that. I don't make up the rules.

And, as it happens, the day = year just happens to work with every prophecy and ends on significant dates everytime. That's a statistical impossibility.

I also showed how it was a saying back then for people to say "seven times" using the Bible itself as proof, yet some refuse to believe that.

31 verses total, here are some of them. I made up nothing...

Pro 24:16
Psm 12:6
2 Kings 5:10
Isa 30:26
Dan 3:19 (Babylonians use "seven times" phrase)
Mat 18:21,22 (Jesus uses it)
Luke 17:4



Brian, you aren't making anything up. It has already been made up for you.

[AdamLX]

I'll list the rest, though in other threads.

Waiting on these other Prophecies in other threads you mentioned....

[DarkWolf]

Yes, only in prophecies, just like the Bible said. I'm not making this up. I showed where it says this in two verses: Num 14:34 and Eze 4:5,6

Umm... Numbers 14:34 is just God saying he will punish them a year for each day they sinned.

32But as for you, your carcases, they shall fall in this wilderness. 33And your children shall wander in the wilderness forty years, and bear your whoredoms, until your carcases be wasted in the wilderness.

34After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise.

35I the LORD have said, I will surely do it unto all this evil congregation, that are gathered together against me: in this wilderness they shall be consumed, and there they shall die.

No where does that suggest that a day = a year in prophecy.

Let's look a Ezekiel, shall we?

4Lie thou also upon thy left side, and lay the iniquity of the house of Israel upon it: according to the number of the days that thou shalt lie upon it thou shalt bear their iniquity. 5For I have laid upon thee the years of their iniquity, according to the number of the days, three hundred and ninety days: so shalt thou bear the iniquity of the house of Israel.

6And when thou hast accomplished them, lie again on thy right side, and thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: I have appointed thee each day for a year.

Here, he's saying "you will bear their iniquity for a number of days equalling the number of years of their iniquity" On the left side you'll lay there for 390 days, because of the 390 years of iniquity of the house of Isreal. 40 days on the right side for the 40 years of iniquity of the house of Judah.

This is bearing the sins of the house of Isreal and Judah. Again, no where does it suggest that a day = a year in prophecy.

I don't make up the rules.

Apparently, you do.

[ClockwrkOrangeS4]

We've had some disillusioned cats on this board before, but you take the cake.

5 years before BrianC is committed to an insane asylum. Who wants the over?

don't you mean 5 days?

[Mateo5.0]

It's okay, he just believes too much. Like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny!

[jones4stangs]

Where is the support, from other students of the bible, in this forum for this post?

Does anyone agree that this prophecy has been completed as BrianC has outlined? If it is as he says, I would expect it to be common knowledge to those who study the Book of Daniel? Is that the case?

[DarkWolf]

Where is the support, from other students of the bible, in this forum for this post?

Does anyone agree that this prophecy has been completed as BrianC has outlined? If it is as he says, I would expect it to be common knowledge to those who study the Book of Daniel? Is that the case?

If it is as he says, it would be common knowledge. But he, like many people professing to have some previously unseen revelatory knowledge, has the problem of complete lack of any biblical or scholarly support for his claims.

[Strychnine]

I didn't just read a quick book and I magically know all of this stuff.

I read the book The False Prophet where I learned this stuff 3 times.

That one's just funny.


-------------------------------------------------


I don't deal with pride.


I am one that tears every teacher apart to see if they are lining up with the Bible.
I am the world's worst about taking preachers apart if they are teaching something unbiblical.
I study things for months and years sometimes. I spend a few hours every morning studying things.


Humility in action, right?

-------------------------------------------------


A lot of people like to condemn others and look down on them. None of this is what a Christian should be.


This is a ridiculous statement (basically propoganda from scientists wanting funding, or 'intellectuals' wanting to make others look bad or arrogant and therefore 'less than themselves.').
ANYONE with half a brain can see....


How's the view from your pedestal?

------------------------------------------------


I agree. But look for truth in all situations and learn what truth is, and learn what is just a farce. If you don't, you'll enslave yourself to a bunch of lies all your life.I study things for months and years sometimes. I spend a few hours every morning studying things. I didn't just read a quick book and I magically know all of this stuff. I studied for years and years.



"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely
rearranging their prejudices."

- William James


----------------------------




"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two
opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to
function."

- F. Scott Fitzgerald




.

[BrianC]

Never said I was perfect. I also admitted that for a while I was acting untasteful toward some of you so I stopped it. Either way, it doesn't negate that what I'm telling you is the truth, and unchanged for thousands of years and a statistical impossibility that you cannot disprove. :)

[BrianC]

If it is as he says, it would be common knowledge. But he, like many people professing to have some previously unseen revelatory knowledge, has the problem of complete lack of any biblical or scholarly support for his claims.

I have given plenty of biblical support for my claims. And you do not need scholarly support. lol That's too funny. What do scholars have to do with this? The writer of the book The False Prophet that shows all of these prophecies is a biblical scholar who has written many books on Christianity and the Bible. But The False Prophet was only written in 2004, so there has been little to no time to get any real major support for it by anyone. And the book hasn't been advertised hardly at all to get support, because there's not budget for widespread advertising.

Also, you must take into account the power of pride in the religious world. Most preachers believe in a future seven year tribulation that's not true. And when they are told they're incorrect, they're unwilling to believe it, or they're unwilling to admit they could be wrong or have been teaching a lie to their people. So you get a lot of people not wanting to support the idea that they're wrong and have taught incorrectly for years. You'd besurprized how many preachers are this prideful and unwilling to admit wrong doing.

I love to be proven wrong and shown the truth, because it allows me to find more truth. So far, not one of you has given any reasonable explanation for how these prophecies could come true apart from an all-powerful God. So, I will not change my view on this. A lot of preachers, though, are not at all like this. It's just pride in their teachings, traditions and handed down beliefs. I seek truth, regardless of whether it's what I believe or not.

[BrianC]

Umm... Numbers 14:34 is just God saying he will punish them a year for each day they sinned.

No where does that suggest that a day = a year in prophecy.

Oh, now we've reached a paramount time on this board where an atheist is trying to tell me how to interpret the Bible. This is classic...

He is PROPHESYING to the Hebrews about what's going to happen to them. He says:

Num 14:34 After the number of the days in which ye
searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year.

So, yes, He says "each DAY FOR A YEAR" in His prophecy.


Let's look a Ezekiel, shall we?

Yes, let's!


Here, he's saying "you will bear their iniquity for a number of days equalling the number of years of their iniquity" On the left side you'll lay there for 390 days, because of the 390 years of iniquity of the house of Isreal. 40 days on the right side for the 40 years of iniquity of the house of Judah.

This is bearing the sins of the house of Isreal and Judah. Again, no where does it suggest that a day = a year in prophecy.

Are you blind, man? I mean, really... It says, plain as day, in this PROPHECY to the Hebrews:

"I have assigned it to you for forty days, a day for each year." (NASB)

Therefore, when God gives prophecies to people, he gives it in A DAY = A YEAR FORMAT. Why? I haven't the foggiest idea. Think of it this way. Why the heck would God not just give the prophecy in a year = a year format in the first place? Why did He bother giving it in a day = a year format? Because He knew full well at the end of Daniel that people were not supposed to figure out the prophecies until all of the prophecies in Daniel had been fulfilled. He tells Daniel, "He said, "Go your way, Daniel, for these words are concealed and sealed up until the end time."

So, God has this way of concealing things from people so that they will not figure them out in advance for some reason. The "time of the end" is after the "time of the Gentiles." The "time of the Gentiles" is when Gentiles rule the temple mount, as they did for the past 2500 some odd years. That ended when the Jews got it back in 1967, so the time of the Gentiles is over, and the time of the end is afterwords. We're told prophecies about the time of the Gentiles being complete and stuff like that... we know how to define when these begin and end, but I won't go into it now.

Sure enough, no one figured out the numerical prophecies until about the late 70's to early 80's. And it took years and years of research to figure out all 13 of them completely. And in 2004, the research was completed and put down in a book finally, many years after the time of the end began. God has reasons for the way He does things, but I'm not claiming I know why. I'm giving my best explanation, and this makes sense, I suppose.

The point is that regardless of what the Bible says about a day = a year, Daniel's prophecies about the 70 weeks came true within Bible times. God gave Daniel a prophecy about 7 weeks + 62 weeks + 1 week (70 weeks). God told what would happen in the first 69 weeks and how it would end, and sure enough, every prophecy came to pass in those 69 weeks, ending with the crucifiction of Jesus. One came to pass on the year the last book of the Old Testament was written, which was prophesied in the first 7 weeks of the 69 weeks, and the rest were fulfilled with Jesus. Therefore, we see that Daniel's prophecy came to pass in a day = a year format, yet God did not say to Daniel, "each day equals a year." Daniel either new this on his own, or we were just supposed to figure it out. Daniel's prophecy says it starts at the time the command goes out to rebuild Jerusalem, and that there will be trouble building the wall. Sure enough, the command goes out in 445-444BC and there is a LOT of trouble while building the wall. Then, we're told that Messiah is cut off, sins are forgiven, eternal righteousness is brought in, etc., ect.. This all happens in the next part of the 69 weeks. If you do the math from Hebrew to Solar years, then you add the years, you get 32-33AD, the year Jesus was crusified.

So, again, regardless of what you believe the Bible says or doesn't say about a day equaling a year doesn't negate the fact that Daniel's first 7 prophecies about 70 weeks came to pass exactly as stated in a day = a year format. You have absolutely NO leg to stand on here. Would you like me to lay out the 70 weeks prophecies for you? I can do that too, because one of them actually comes out with a 1948 date, so they aren't completely held within the time of the Bible.


Apparently, you do.[/QUOTE]

[BrianC]

BrianC....

you aren't stupid. But you might as well believe in Nostradamus.

Nostradamus was most likely a fraud. His prophecies were incredibly vague and could be attributed to any event in the future. Also, people have forged his prophesies and then said, "look, it came true on this date," yet Nostradamus never made that prophecy at all. I couldn't care less about Nostradamus.


I think it's amazing that all this history has been written down for over two thousand years, albeit changed countless times over....

Oh really? Please explain how history has been changed countless times over. And I'd especially like an explanation as to how people changed history to meet these prophecies when no one has understood these prophecies until the late 70's - early 2000's.


Yes, I know that it's hard to believe it, but your fellow man of the faith has betrayed you on this one. From generation to generation, two thousand years worth of knowledge and theology- Changed and re-translated many, many times over not only to cement the peoples faith, but to re-assert power that might be lost if not published and worshiped. Not to mention, the main reason behind religious expansion was to control the minds of the people.

You actually believe this crap, don't you? LOL That's too funny. Please allow me to make your belief look like ridiculousness. :)

First of all, I must say, which is it? Did history change or did the Bible change? Because you first assert that history has been altered many times, then you say the Bible has been altered many times. Which is it? Both?

Next, let's get into how the Bible HAS NOT changed and how we can prove it.

1. There are over 27,000 original copies of the original manuscript scrolls. They are basically identical.

2. These scrolls come from TONS of different countries or origin, which means EVERY person that EVER copied the original scrolls would've had to have met up with everyone ELSE that copied a scroll, and changed that scroll to meet the changes in the other scrolls.

3. These scrolls are so meticulously copied that if one letter is incorrect, they will burn the entire scroll so that nothing is tainted. They count every letter of every word, and the number of words in each scroll. It's extremely maticulous. I'll give a link to an explanation for this at the bottom of this post.

4. Over the years, EVERY scroll EVERY found would have to be collected into the same place and modified in its original form on the original parchment paper in order to change the Bible without anyone knowing, yet not one of the scrolls has evidence that they were altered in any way.

5. The original Hebrew & Greek NEVER change on these scrolls, and therefore, can be accurately translated, as they have for a couple thousand years now.

6. In 1948, we found the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Middle East, hidden in caves off the shores of the Dead Sea. These scrolls were untouched for over 2000 years, and they contain only the Old Testament books of the Bible. When compared to the scrolls we have had for over two thousand years, they are exactly a like, proving that not one Old Testament scroll has been changed in over two thousand years. These Dead Sea scrolls have been dated to 300BC, approximately.

7. The New Testament scrolls are compared with scrolls we found around 900 AD, which again, were not modified one bit. We have tons of scrolls to compare with, all of which agree with each other. From time to time, you find missing scripture which most likely happened due to someone copying from a torn scroll or something to that extent, but that is rare. The other thousands of scrolls are identical, regardless of the few incomplete scrolls.

Here is a link to an explanation for this. It's not long, and it shows how it is utterly impossible to pull of a modification of the original scrolls that make up the Old and New Testament and gives 100% proof that we have the accurate, unchanged scrolls today.

http://www.ellisskolfield.com/manuscript-errors-may-2006.shtml

On top of that, we can go back to the old Strong's references to get the single meaning of each word in the Hebrew and Greek, and you can compare this to the original ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek dictionaries to see that it is correct. Then, you can go back to the 1611 King James Version (the original) and see that the words are translated almost exactly like they're supposed to be, with the exception for VERY VERY few little translated words that were simply a misunderstanding of the translators due to the passage not making sense. For instance, the fourth horseman in prophecy is riding a green horse, but they translated it to be a pale horse from the "pale green" possibility of this word. They see horses day in and day out and didn't understand how a horse could be green. So they translated it "pale" instead. They didn't realize it was symbolism, and the color was symbolic, not literal, so they made a mistake on that one. But those are few and far between. VERY very few. 99.999999999% of the words are completely translated correct and can be checked out with any ancient Hebrew or ancient Greek dictionary.

In other words, our Bible scrolls and the King James Version is pretty much 100% accurate and unchanged, without a doubt. The NASB is the next best modern translation. The rest of the Bibles lack a bit, because the translators took liberties with the translated words, and that was really stupid. However, regardless of what they changed through translation errors, it didn't change the overall message and it definitely never changed the prophecies I've stated in these posts. Therefore, you have absolutely no leg to stand on with your accusation. Every Bible scholar in the world would laugh you out of a debate if you said this. They all know they're accurate, and that's why your view on a modified Bible is not a view held by any of the major Bible scholars.


But besides the fact that the church has a sketchy past, what with burning people, drowning them, massacring millions, and charging them gold to get into heaven. Why on earth would you believe that they haven't been altered? But no let's all believe that in no way, fashion or form, that the "prophecies" have not been altered. Let's all sit back and-

^I guess that explains it all...

Wow, the delusion continues further.

Alright, let's assume for a moment that the church DID change the original Bible manuscripts (which, as we've seen, is impossible). How, pre-tell, did people in the 1500's change the Bible to FIT these prophecies that would not come to pass till 1776, 1948 and 1967? I ask, because we know the Bible hasn't changed since the 1611 with the introduction of the King James Version. We have other Bibles earlier than that to confirm this, and the scrolls as well. How on earth would these people change prophecies 200-400+ years before they came to pass? How would they know? They couldn't! Your theory is completely and utterly ridiculous. Seriously...you should think these things through and do some studying before you make ridiculous off-the-top-of-your-head comments like this. It just shows how you really haven't researched this stuff and that you haven't a clue what you're talking about. You're just thinking up possible explanations that make sense to you and would appear to make these prophecies look fraudulent. Sorry, but your arguments are ridiculous...


And it's entertaining to read them and make associations with worldly historic events, and especially easy when they give you a road map to do so. All these are meant to do is cement your faith with the rest of the ideology and hopefully "secure your place in heaven". Guess what? Heaven is on earth (it is written), and how you live determines your heaven, not your afterlife (not written). The Bible is a great book with many lessons that apply to our modern lives, but beyond that it is mostly fiction and/or metaphor. A lot of it is based on true, historic events that really happened. But most of it is not.

That's funny, because historians say that the Bible is one of the most accurate and best history books we have, and it has yet to be disproven. We have found countless evidences of events and time periods in the Bible with completely accuracy to the texts. In fact, we know the Bible was written in exactly the time periods and the places it says it was written because the terminology changes by the culture. Daniel was written while the Jews were in Babylon. Low and behold, there is Babylonian sayings in Daniel. So we know he was actually there when he wrote it at that time period. You really have ABSOLUTELY NOT ARGUMENT here. You've been completely disproven on your points. Get over it.


It is humbling to realize how many priests, kings, popes, translators that the writings have passed down through- NOT EVEN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THAT MOST OF THE LANGUAGES SPOKEN BACK THEN ARE NOW DEAD.

Hebrew is not dead by any means. Ask any Jew to speak it for you. The only thing that's changed is that it's old Hebrew. Most any Hebrew speaker can give you a pretty darn good translation of the Hebrew scrolls from the Old Testament.

Also, ancient Greek is WELL documented and easily translatible. What's laughable is that you actually think you know something about this stuff when it's blatantly obvious that you don't.

[scootro]

Since the ignorance of DarkWolf's post as been exposed, I guess this statement of yours is null and void now.

See what happens when you try to debate something you are completely ignorant about? :)

And besides, I am one that tears every teacher apart to see if they are lining up with the Bible. I don't just take people's word and believe it. I am the world's worst about taking preachers apart if they are teaching something unbiblical. I listen to no one and blindly believe. I read the book The False Prophet where I learned this stuff 3 times, and I did what I could to make sure these historical dates were accurate, and they were. I can't refute these prophecies. They're dead on accurate. ANY statistician will tell you that these prophecies MUST be accurate, no one changed any time periods to make anything fit because the time periods are all logically deduced with no one modifying anything, and these are statistical impossibilities so there must be a God behind them. Period.

You all are just so incredibly determined to make these not true because you don't want to be accountable to the God of the Bible for some reason. That's your issue, not mine. Don't make me debate your personal baggage and issues.


And that's exactly what you all are trying to do to me. I'm taking scripture COMPLETELY in context and modifying NOTHING and making NOTHING fit anything I want it to fit. It simply says what it says and it fits history perfectly to the year 13 times. I can't help that. That's what God says, and it happened, and you won't accept it. That's your problem, not mine. LEARN this stuff before you go debating it.

And you're probably right about Christians, or you have only known average Christians. The average Christian nowadays is not much of an example for what a real Christian should be. Most are not deep thinkers when it comes to the Bible and spirituality. Most have no time for the Bible or God, just a church service once a week. A lot of people like to condemn others and look down on them. None of this is what a Christian should be.


This is a ridiculous statement (basically propoganda from scientists wanting funding, or 'intellectuals' wanting to make others look bad or arrogant and therefore 'less than themselves.'). The reason I believe no life is out in the universe is simply because I have never seen it and we have zero proof that there is any life anywhere. PERIOD. Until there's proof, it's JUST A THEORY, kind of like evolution and the big bang and the creation theory.


I believe we are all the same on a genetic and on a spiritual level. No one's better than anyone else, even from Christians to non-Christians, saved to unsaved. Everyone's the same to me. Couldn't care less about what they look like or believe in.

I completely agree and practice this very heavily. I would add this though, "When you see something that is obviously true and that is irrefutible and 100% proveable, you believe it." You all haven't gotten this one down yet, though, because you don't like the idiot religious (and I agree with you, I don't like the religious as a whole either...most try to enslave people to legalism and into taking a preacher's word for it) and you don't want to be accountable to the Christian God. ANYONE with half a brain can see that 13 prophecies over thousands of years are completely impossible to predict unless you're God and can see the future. Period. It's your BELIEFS that are getting in the way of both halves of your brain and the logic you would normally have in a situation like this.

I agree. But look for truth in all situations and learn what truth is, and learn what is just a farce. If you don't, you'll enslave yourself to a bunch of lies all your life.

I assert absolutely no authority over anyone. I discuss things in a rational manner and talks about the facts and share information with others. If they want to debate it, that's fine. If they want to believe it or not believe it, that's fine. I couldn't care less what people do with the information I give them. But when they come back at me and say, "You're wrong! You're an idiot!" I'm going to make them prove it and debate the points they claim I'm wrong on. So far, no one has disproven ANY of these prophecies. Not one. Nor have they given any credible reasons for why these prophecies are statistically impossible unless God gave them. There's no authority being asserted here. It's all about sharing information. That's it.

If you're going to debate something, though, learn something about it first and stop just throwing out random things or looking on websites for little pieces of information you think solves the problem. Learn to do some ACTUAL research for yourself and spend time doing it instead of being impatient and only researching things for a few minutes. I study things for months and years sometimes. I spend a few hours every morning studying things. I didn't just read a quick book and I magically know all of this stuff. I studied for years and years.


Nostradamus was most likely a fraud. His prophecies were incredibly vague and could be attributed to any event in the future. Also, people have forged his prophesies and then said, "look, it came true on this date," yet Nostradamus never made that prophecy at all. I couldn't care less about Nostradamus.


Oh really? Please explain how history has been changed countless times over. And I'd especially like an explanation as to how people changed history to meet these prophecies when no one has understood these prophecies until the late 70's - early 2000's.


You actually believe this crap, don't you? LOL That's too funny. Please allow me to make your belief look like ridiculousness. :)

First of all, I must say, which is it? Did history change or did the Bible change? Because you first assert that history has been altered many times, then you say the Bible has been altered many times. Which is it? Both?

Next, let's get into how the Bible HAS NOT changed and how we can prove it.

1. There are over 27,000 original copies of the original manuscript scrolls. They are basically identical.

2. These scrolls come from TONS of different countries or origin, which means EVERY person that EVER copied the original scrolls would've had to have met up with everyone ELSE that copied a scroll, and changed that scroll to meet the changes in the other scrolls.

3. These scrolls are so meticulously copied that if one letter is incorrect, they will burn the entire scroll so that nothing is tainted. They count every letter of every word, and the number of words in each scroll. It's extremely maticulous. I'll give a link to an explanation for this at the bottom of this post.

4. Over the years, EVERY scroll EVERY found would have to be collected into the same place and modified in its original form on the original parchment paper in order to change the Bible without anyone knowing, yet not one of the scrolls has evidence that they were altered in any way.

5. The original Hebrew & Greek NEVER change on these scrolls, and therefore, can be accurately translated, as they have for a couple thousand years now.

6. In 1948, we found the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Middle East, hidden in caves off the shores of the Dead Sea. These scrolls were untouched for over 2000 years, and they contain only the Old Testament books of the Bible. When compared to the scrolls we have had for over two thousand years, they are exactly a like, proving that not one Old Testament scroll has been changed in over two thousand years. These Dead Sea scrolls have been dated to 300BC, approximately.

7. The New Testament scrolls are compared with scrolls we found around 900 AD, which again, were not modified one bit. We have tons of scrolls to compare with, all of which agree with each other. From time to time, you find missing scripture which most likely happened due to someone copying from a torn scroll or something to that extent, but that is rare. The other thousands of scrolls are identical, regardless of the few incomplete scrolls.

Here is a link to an explanation for this. It's not long, and it shows how it is utterly impossible to pull of a modification of the original scrolls that make up the Old and New Testament and gives 100% proof that we have the accurate, unchanged scrolls today.

http://www.ellisskolfield.com/manuscript-errors-may-2006.shtml

On top of that, we can go back to the old Strong's references to get the single meaning of each word in the Hebrew and Greek, and you can compare this to the original ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek dictionaries to see that it is correct. Then, you can go back to the 1611 King James Version (the original) and see that the words are translated almost exactly like they're supposed to be, with the exception for VERY VERY few little translated words that were simply a misunderstanding of the translators due to the passage not making sense. For instance, the fourth horseman in prophecy is riding a green horse, but they translated it to be a pale horse from the "pale green" possibility of this word. They see horses day in and day out and didn't understand how a horse could be green. So they translated it "pale" instead. They didn't realize it was symbolism, and the color was symbolic, not literal, so they made a mistake on that one. But those are few and far between. VERY very few. 99.999999999% of the words are completely translated correct and can be checked out with any ancient Hebrew or ancient Greek dictionary.

In other words, our Bible scrolls and the King James Version is pretty much 100% accurate and unchanged, without a doubt. The NASB is the next best modern translation. The rest of the Bibles lack a bit, because the translators took liberties with the translated words, and that was really stupid. However, regardless of what they changed through translation errors, it didn't change the overall message and it definitely never changed the prophecies I've stated in these posts. Therefore, you have absolutely no leg to stand on with your accusation. Every Bible scholar in the world would laugh you out of a debate if you said this. They all know they're accurate, and that's why your view on a modified Bible is not a view held by any of the major Bible scholars.


Wow, the delusion continues further.

Alright, let's assume for a moment that the church DID change the original Bible manuscripts (which, as we've seen, is impossible). How, pre-tell, did people in the 1500's change the Bible to FIT these prophecies that would not come to pass till 1776, 1948 and 1967? I ask, because we know the Bible hasn't changed since the 1611 with the introduction of the King James Version. We have other Bibles earlier than that to confirm this, and the scrolls as well. How on earth would these people change prophecies 200-400+ years before they came to pass? How would they know? They couldn't! Your theory is completely and utterly ridiculous. Seriously...you should think these things through and do some studying before you make ridiculous off-the-top-of-your-head comments like this. It just shows how you really haven't researched this stuff and that you haven't a clue what you're talking about. You're just thinking up possible explanations that make sense to you and would appear to make these prophecies look fraudulent. Sorry, but your arguments are ridiculous...


That's funny, because historians say that the Bible is one of the most accurate and best history books we have, and it has yet to be disproven. We have found countless evidences of events and time periods in the Bible with completely accuracy to the texts. In fact, we know the Bible was written in exactly the time periods and the places it says it was written because the terminology changes by the culture. Daniel was written while the Jews were in Babylon. Low and behold, there is Babylonian sayings in Daniel. So we know he was actually there when he wrote it at that time period. You really have ABSOLUTELY NOT ARGUMENT here. You've been completely disproven on your points. Get over it.


Hebrew is not dead by any means. Ask any Jew to speak it for you. The only thing that's changed is that it's old Hebrew. Most any Hebrew speaker can give you a pretty darn good translation of the Hebrew scrolls from the Old Testament.

Also, ancient Greek is WELL documented and easily translatible. What's laughable is that you actually think you know something about this stuff when it's blatantly obvious that you don't.

I bet you knock on peoples doors at 7 in the morning handing out pamphlets in a suit and tie while riding a bike with your black helmet, too.............

[scootro]

Explain this one, Atheists
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=345170


Is heaven a nudy party? (not a joke)
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=345456


Biblical & Historical Prophecy Fulfillments (How do Atheists explain this?)
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=342311


Existence of the Spiritual World
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=345254


Weird Question about Sheep & Evolution
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=344926


Challenge for Atheists
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=340861


Can You Lose Your Salvation? (Debate)
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=341637



Free Will & Predestination: Answer this Question
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=342050


The Flood
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=285423















:rolleyes:

[BrianC]

I bet you knock on peoples doors at 7 in the morning handing out pamphlets in a suit and tie while riding a bike with your black helmet, too.............

I haven't once gone to anyone's house to talk about God with them, nor have I ever handed out a pamphlet. Those are Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons. I do enjoy talking to them when they come to my door, though, because they don't have answers to my questions, and it's easy to show the flaws in their doctrines.

Don't know what you thought you were accomplishing with your posts...

[Quick '91 GT]

Come on man...who are you to take a stab at someone else's religion? Debating with you (or any other zealot) is pointless. No matter what someone says OR proves to you, you will have a rebuttal. People like you give me a bad taste for religion as a whole. You get on here and start NUMEROUS threads trying to convince people that the only right way is your way (or God's way you will say). I have met many Christians who would listen to my points and truly respect what I have to say and then politley disagree...not you pal...you have to make sure that you have the last word and that everyone sees the point your way. All I am saying is relax a bit and truly listen to what other people have to say....

[flashstang04]

Explain this one, Atheists
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=345170


Is heaven a nudy party? (not a joke)
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=345456


Biblical & Historical Prophecy Fulfillments (How do Atheists explain this?)
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=342311


Existence of the Spiritual World
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=345254


Weird Question about Sheep & Evolution
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=344926


Challenge for Atheists
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=340861


Can You Lose Your Salvation? (Debate)
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=341637



Free Will & Predestination: Answer this Question
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=342050


The Flood
http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=285423















:rolleyes:



Yeah, isnt it funny that he would discuss all this stuff in a THEOLOGY FORUM


Maybe you were looking for the back porch....

[DarkWolf]

Oh, now we've reached a paramount time on this board where an atheist is trying to tell me how to interpret the Bible. This is classic...

Ignorance is bliss, I hear.

He is PROPHESYING to the Hebrews about what's going to happen to them. He says:

Num 14:34 After the number of the days in which ye
searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year.

So, yes, He says "each DAY FOR A YEAR" in His prophecy.


Yes, let's!


Are you blind, man? I mean, really... It says, plain as day, in this PROPHECY to the Hebrews:

"I have assigned it to you for forty days, a day for each year." (NASB)

One problem... in Numbers, the punishment is a year for each day of sin. In Ezekiel, the punishment is a day for each year of sin.

So even given that God might SOMETIMES prophecise cryptically like this, he is inconsistent in his format.

You also have the obvious problem that in these two situations God explicitly states his intent (day for each year, or year for each day)... yet in Daniel there is no indication of his intent.

And you conveniently discount the interpretation of the length of a "time". It's 1000 years when it's complimentary to your theory, but "just a saying they had back then" when it's contrary.

Nostradamus was most likely a fraud. His prophecies were incredibly vague and could be attributed to any event in the future.

All prophecy can be attributed such. All prophecy is speaking in metaphors and cryptic generalizations. All prophecy is vague enough that it can be applied to any number of future events. Nostradamus certainly doesn't hold the monopoly on this matter.

[BrianC]

Come on man...who are you to take a stab at someone else's religion? Debating with you (or any other zealot) is pointless. No matter what someone says OR proves to you, you will have a rebuttal. People like you give me a bad taste for religion as a whole. You get on here and start NUMEROUS threads trying to convince people that the only right way is your way (or God's way you will say). I have met many Christians who would listen to my points and truly respect what I have to say and then politley disagree...not you pal...you have to make sure that you have the last word and that everyone sees the point your way. All I am saying is relax a bit and truly listen to what other people have to say....

I listen to people on here and I point out the flaws in what they say. I said it before, and I'll say it again. I love being proven wrong so I can fix what I know and learn the truth. I hate teaching something that's incorrect. So, I always listen to what other people have to say. If someone cannot completely disprove what I believe, or if I can 100% prove what I'm saying, then there's no reason to go further than that. Like the prophecies. No one can disprove them. It's impossible.

I respect people's beliefs. That's their business and their right to believe whatever they want. My job is to lay out the truth and they are welcome to take it or leave it. Doesn't matter to me. However, people on here like to persistently tell me I'm an idiot, but cannot substatiate that claim nor disprove what I'm saying. They just sling mud. So, I join in a bit and debate and discuss. Nothing wrong with that. You're just upset that I actually have some things that are legitimate and proveable that go against what you believe. You don't like the fact that these prophecies prove that there must be a God. Not my problem...that's your problem. Don't get mad at me for that.

[BrianC]

One problem... in Numbers, the punishment is a year for each day of sin. In Ezekiel, the punishment is a day for each year of sin.

So even given that God might SOMETIMES prophecise cryptically like this, he is inconsistent in his format.

What?? No, in each prophecy it says "a day for a year." It's not backwards like you say. If it is, post it up and let's see.


You also have the obvious problem that in these two situations God explicitly states his intent (day for each year, or year for each day)... yet in Daniel there is no indication of his intent.

In Daniel, we can do the math on the day = a year and it comes out perfectly to the year Jesus died and the year the Old Testament was finished. So, we can prove that a day equals a year in Daniel's 70 weeks. Then, we can also prove it again, multiple times, with the other prophecies I've given you. We know for a fact that all of the prophecies are day = a year prophecies. They came out perfectly. It's pretty obvious. God is always consistent.


And you conveniently discount the interpretation of the length of a "time". It's 1000 years when it's complimentary to your theory, but "just a saying they had back then" when it's contrary.

That's ridiculous. It is obvious when "time" is being used in a saying and when "time" is being used in a prophecy. Blatantly obvious if you know Hebrew writing styles. I twisted nothing and did nothing out of context with these prophecies. You just WANT the verse in Daniel to mean seven "times" so you can disprove me, but everyone full well knows that "seven times" is a common statement in the Bible. I showed you TONS of verses where it is used. It means complete or full, basically, because seven is the number of completion. That's why the say, "Make the fire seven times as hot" in Daniel. They want it as hot as possible, completely hot, fully "turned up," if you will. You can prove this everytime this "seven times" is used in the Bible. But it's very different when used in the prophecies. It never ever says "seven times." It defines time as something completely separate from "seven times." Ask any credible Bible scholar or a Jew that speaks Hebrew and they'll tell you the same thing. It cannot mean what you want it to just so you can have an argument. There are rules, and you're trying to go against them because you're grasping at anything that will help you look as if you actually have a credible argument against this.

Regardless, though, ALL of the prophecies I listed have come true exactly as stated and cannot be refuted. Period. There is no explanation for it except that there is a God. You simply choose not to believe in a God, so you cannot give into the obvious fact that these prophecies DID come to pass and God prophesied they would over a couple thousand years ago.


All prophecy can be attributed such. All prophecy is speaking in metaphors and cryptic generalizations. All prophecy is vague enough that it can be applied to any number of future events. Nostradamus certainly doesn't hold the monopoly on this matter.
Ok, let's put an end to this ridiculous argument once and for all. You are never allowed to use this argument ever again. Why? Because as I showed you, there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING VAGUE about ANY of these prophecies.

We have a starting event with historical date that is not left up to interpretation. We have a length of time that is also stated exactly and not left up to interpretation. We also have ending events or descriptions of what exactly will happen in these times periods or what will happen at the beginning or end of them. There is absolutely nothing vague about these prophecies. They couldn't get much more specific.

God said in Daniel 12 that FROM the time the daily sacrifice is taken away (583BC) to the time the Abomination of Desolation is set up (688AD), there will be 1290 days (1271.553 solar years). The Abomination of Desolation is said to be set up on the temple mount 1271.553 years after the daily sacrifice is stopped. It happened EXACTLY like that: -583BC + 1271.553 = 688.553 (688AD).

There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING vague about that. It's EXTREMELY specific. All of these prophecies are very specific like this without one ounce of vaguity to them. Therefore, you are never allowed to use th is argument again in regard to these prophecies, because it's a flat out lie and you know it full well.

[flashstang04]

One verse to kind of show you about the Hebrew sayings and their meanings is


<< Matthew 18:22 >>
Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.

In this statement Jesus was taking that well known saying to the limit, by inferring that forgiveness should be infinite, like Brian is saying. "seven times seven" is "the maximum". Jesus went one step further saying "seventy times seven", meaning we should never get to the point where we don't forgive one another. Anyone knowing this particular saying would know exactly what He meant when he said this.

[DarkWolf]

What?? No, in each prophecy it says "a day for a year." It's not backwards like you say. If it is, post it up and let's see.

My GOD man! I already did, you even quoted the post in a response.

32But as for you, your carcases, they shall fall in this wilderness. 33And your children shall wander in the wilderness forty years, and bear your whoredoms, until your carcases be wasted in the wilderness.

34After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise.

35I the LORD have said, I will surely do it unto all this evil congregation, that are gathered together against me: in this wilderness they shall be consumed, and there they shall die.

Here, the punishment is a year for each day of sin. Forty years for 40 days of sinning.

4Lie thou also upon thy left side, and lay the iniquity of the house of Israel upon it: according to the number of the days that thou shalt lie upon it thou shalt bear their iniquity. 5For I have laid upon thee the years of their iniquity, according to the number of the days, three hundred and ninety days: so shalt thou bear the iniquity of the house of Israel.

6And when thou hast accomplished them, lie again on thy right side, and thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: I have appointed thee each day for a year.

Here, the punishment is a day for each year of sin. 390 days, plus 40 days, for 390 years, plus 40 years.

In Daniel, we can do the math on the day = a year and it comes out perfectly to the year Jesus died and the year the Old Testament was finished. So, we can prove that a day equals a year in Daniel's 70 weeks. Then, we can also prove it again, multiple times, with the other prophecies I've given you. We know for a fact that all of the prophecies are day = a year prophecies. They came out perfectly. It's pretty obvious. God is always consistent.

Or it's also pretty obvious they're vague enough to be applicable to anything.

That's ridiculous. It is obvious when "time" is being used in a saying and when "time" is being used in a prophecy.

"And seven times shall pass over thee"

You're quite right. It is obvious it's intended to be a passage of time.

Regardless, though, ALL of the prophecies I listed have come true exactly as stated and cannot be refuted. Period. There is no explanation for it except that there is a God. You simply choose not to believe in a God, so you cannot give into the obvious fact that these prophecies DID come to pass and God prophesied they would over a couple thousand years ago.

Will the ignorance never cease?

Ok, let's put an end to this ridiculous argument once and for all. You are never allowed to use this argument ever again. Why? Because as I showed you, there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING VAGUE about ANY of these prophecies.

No, you showed YOUR INTERPRETATION. There's nothing concrete about it. There are other interpretations, some even within the bible. Let's focus on the abomination of desolation, shall we?

God said in Daniel 12 that FROM the time the daily sacrifice is taken away (583BC) to the time the Abomination of Desolation is set up (688AD), there will be 1290 days (1271.553 solar years). The Abomination of Desolation is said to be set up on the temple mount 1271.553 years after the daily sacrifice is stopped. It happened EXACTLY like that: -583BC + 1271.553 = 688.553 (688AD).

One interpretation has it at 167BC when Antiochus Epiphanies set up an altar to Zeus over the altar of burnt offerings in the Jewish temple in Jerusalem.

Another has it at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD by the Roman army.

You have it at 688AD when the dome on the rock was set up by the Muslims.

Should I make a pie chart?

There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING vague about that. It's EXTREMELY specific. All of these prophecies are very specific like this without one ounce of vaguity to them. Therefore, you are never allowed to use th is argument again in regard to these prophecies, because it's a flat out lie and you know it full well.

Oh please. You're just miffed because you're undeniable proof ... isn't. That's the problem with prophecy... there's any number of ways to interpret it so that it "works" for whatever you want it to work for.

Though I must say, your arrogance is astounding. What a good little christian you are!

[AL P]

BrianC has it all figured out, he read a book so he is right and everyone else is wrong.

[AL P]

Interesting reading on the subject of translating the Bible:

http://www.mb-soft.com/believe/txh/version7.htm

[Phillystang]

Interesting reading on the subject of translating the Bible:

http://www.mb-soft.com/believe/txh/version7.htm

from the article

"It truly is a remarkable achievement by the many hundreds of Scribes who had to copy the entire Bible that they made astoundingly few copying errors! (We know that there were a few, and we now know where they were, because thousands of existing copies of those Scribe written Manuscripts have been carefully compared to see if and when they had any tiny differences."

[AL P]

from the article

"It truly is a remarkable achievement by the many hundreds of Scribes who had to copy the entire Bible that they made astoundingly few copying errors! (We know that there were a few, and we now know where they were, because thousands of existing copies of those Scribe written Manuscripts have been carefully compared to see if and when they had any tiny differences."

Little bit different than:

"99.999999999% of the words are completely translated correct and can be checked out with any ancient Hebrew or ancient Greek dictionary."

[Quick '91 GT]

I listen to people on here and I point out the flaws in what they say. I said it before, and I'll say it again. I love being proven wrong so I can fix what I know and learn the truth. I hate teaching something that's incorrect. So, I always listen to what other people have to say. If someone cannot completely disprove what I believe, or if I can 100% prove what I'm saying, then there's no reason to go further than that. Like the prophecies. No one can disprove them. It's impossible.

I respect people's beliefs. That's their business and their right to believe whatever they want. My job is to lay out the truth and they are welcome to take it or leave it. Doesn't matter to me. However, people on here like to persistently tell me I'm an idiot, but cannot substatiate that claim nor disprove what I'm saying. They just sling mud. So, I join in a bit and debate and discuss. Nothing wrong with that. You're just upset that I actually have some things that are legitimate and proveable that go against what you believe. You don't like the fact that these prophecies prove that there must be a God. Not my problem...that's your problem. Don't get mad at me for that.

You are no different than any other religious quack who refuses to hear what anyone else has to say....and if u really want me to spend the time quoting all 500 threads you started then I will show you specific examples where someone has a legitimate point and you totally dismiss what they have to say because of what you read in a book WRITTEN BY MAN!!!! For every overly zealous religious fanatic like yourself I can find 10 more just like you who will disagree with what YOU say. So keep on believeing you are right and keep trying to force your propaganda down everyones throat. And btw...you can do all the little number games you want but those little number "prophecies" are retarded. Do you really think that if God wanted to reveal the furture he would do it by hiding numbers in the Bible? Your omnipotent God is really gonna play sudoku with prophecy? Dude...wisen up, drop the "demon" crap and numerology crap and grasp hold of something tangible. No need to comment...this is the last time i am wasting seconds of my life subscribing to the information you learn at cult meetings. :D

[BrianC]

You are no different than any other religious quack who refuses to hear what anyone else has to say....and if u really want me to spend the time quoting all 500 threads you started then I will show you specific examples where someone has a legitimate point and you totally dismiss what they have to say because of what you read in a book WRITTEN BY MAN!!!! For every overly zealous religious fanatic like yourself I can find 10 more just like you who will disagree with what YOU say. So keep on believeing you are right and keep trying to force your propaganda down everyones throat. And btw...you can do all the little number games you want but those little number "prophecies" are retarded. Do you really think that if God wanted to reveal the furture he would do it by hiding numbers in the Bible? Your omnipotent God is really gonna play sudoku with prophecy? Dude...wisen up, drop the "demon" crap and numerology crap and grasp hold of something tangible. No need to comment...this is the last time i am wasting seconds of my life subscribing to the information you learn at cult meetings. :D

Wow, the delusion is strong with this one. Have fun with that. :) And I have seen no legitimate points so far, or if I did, I acknowledged them. I'm glad this is the last time you're going to post here. You obviously have nothing to backup your accusations and you just like to go off on people that don't agree with you. I don't mind people disagreeing with me and I'm shoving nothing down anyone's throats. What I am doing, though, is responding to ridiculous arguments.

[BrianC]

My GOD man! I already did, you even quoted the post in a response.



Here, the punishment is a year for each day of sin. Forty years for 40 days of sinning.



Here, the punishment is a day for each year of sin. 390 days, plus 40 days, for 390 years, plus 40 years.



Or it's also pretty obvious they're vague enough to be applicable to anything.



"And seven times shall pass over thee"

You're quite right. It is obvious it's intended to be a passage of time.



Will the ignorance never cease?



No, you showed YOUR INTERPRETATION. There's nothing concrete about it. There are other interpretations, some even within the bible. Let's focus on the abomination of desolation, shall we?



One interpretation has it at 167BC when Antiochus Epiphanies set up an altar to Zeus over the altar of burnt offerings in the Jewish temple in Jerusalem.

Another has it at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD by the Roman army.

You have it at 688AD when the dome on the rock was set up by the Muslims.

Should I make a pie chart?



Oh please. You're just miffed because you're undeniable proof ... isn't. That's the problem with prophecy... there's any number of ways to interpret it so that it "works" for whatever you want it to work for.

Though I must say, your arrogance is astounding. What a good little christian you are!

I can't debate the stupidity and complete irrationality. It's not possible. You don't look at this stuff like a rational human being and you keep spouting off ridiculous arguments that make no sense. Like the whole day for a year thing. You say it's backwards, but it's saying the exact same thing. It's saying that a day equals a year! Even when it states it in such a way as to say a year for each day of sin. It is just saying it backwards, but the meaning is the same, that when a day is given in prophecy, it means a year. But you're too dense to comprehend that, because you cannot accept or admit that you have no argument against this. You cannot do it, because you cannot accept that there's a God. Sorry, but I'm not going to debate pride and irgnorance and irrationality. It's pointless. I've proven what I've said. You've giving irrational arguments. No reason for me to waste my time on you...

[DarkWolf]

I can't debate the stupidity and complete irrationality. It's not possible. You don't look at this stuff like a rational human being and you keep spouting off ridiculous arguments that make no sense. Like the whole day for a year thing. You say it's backwards, but it's saying the exact same thing. It's saying that a day equals a year! Even when it states it in such a way as to say a year for each day of sin. It is just saying it backwards, but the meaning is the same, that when a day is given in prophecy, it means a year. But you're too dense to comprehend that, because you cannot accept or admit that you have no argument against this.

Though they are technically saying the same thing, they are not functionally equivalent. Both of them have to do with dealing out punishment for sin (ie: NO WHERE DOES IT SAY A DAY = A YEAR IN PROPHECY. Get it through your head.), but one is dealing out an extremely long period of punishment, for a relatively short period of sin. While the other is dealing out a comparatively short period of punishment, for an extremely long period of sin.

They are not consistent with each other, and in no way imply a cypher for any and all prophecies from here on out. It was implicit to those two instances, and other than you wanting it to be so, is no indication of how to decode other cryptic prophecies.

If it were, certainly there would be a single mind on the 688AD date for the fulfillment of the abomination of desolation. But as it currently stands, there are numerous interpretations as to when... or more acurately WHICH abomination of desolation was the one prophecied. There's even one that doesn't agree it's actually happened yet.

You cannot do it, because you cannot accept that there's a God.

Seriously, this cracks me up every time you say it.

I've proven what I've said.

No you haven't. You've postulated. Nothing more.

[BrianC]

Though they are technically saying the same thing, they are not functionally equivalent. Both of them have to do with dealing out punishment for sin (ie: NO WHERE DOES IT SAY A DAY = A YEAR IN PROPHECY. Get it through your head.), but one is dealing out an extremely long period of punishment, for a relatively short period of sin. While the other is dealing out a comparatively short period of punishment, for an extremely long period of sin.

They are not consistent with each other, and in no way imply a cypher for any and all prophecies from here on out. It was implicit to those two instances, and other than you wanting it to be so, is no indication of how to decode other cryptic prophecies.

If it were, certainly there would be a single mind on the 688AD date for the fulfillment of the abomination of desolation. But as it currently stands, there are numerous interpretations as to when... or more acurately WHICH abomination of desolation was the one prophecied. There's even one that doesn't agree it's actually happened yet.


I don't think I can take it anymore. It's just complete lack of reading comprehension. NEVER were the hebrews punished for 40 days for 40 YEARS of punishment. So a year never equalled a day, like you're basically trying to say. (quote - While the other is dealing out a comparatively short period of punishment, for an extremely long period of sin.) That's COMPLETELY backwards from what it says. It gives a year for each day of sin. Therefore, fourty days would equal fourty years. That EXACTLY what the prophecy says, and that's EXACTLY what happened. They got 390 DAYS prophesied to them, and they were in Egypt for 390 YEARS. They got 40 DAYS prophesied to them, and they spent 40 YEARS in the desert. A DAY FOR A YEAR! GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULL! Any English teacher or professor will tell you your reading comprehension is staggeringly horrible if you can't see this. I can't believe you actually came to this backwards conclusion.

As for every day = year prophecy coming 100% true, exactly as they should have, that's 100% proof that the prophecies did come to pass. And yes, you are simply unwilling to admit this because you don't want to acknowledge a God. It gets no more clear than that with people like you. Every Christian would say the same thing I'm saying right now if they read your arguments.

The Abomination of Desolation is said to be built on the outer court (court of the Gentiles). It's said to be "set up." It's called an "it" and never called a "he." Jesus says that when you see it built, get out of Judea for great tribulation starts at that time, but only the Christians knew about this. In 688 AD, the Christians saw the Dome of the Rock being built and they fled Judea/Jerusalem and not one was killed, because of this warning from Jesus. The Jews didn't have this warning in the Old Testament, so one million were slaughtered and the rest were run out of the country. This started the worst period of "tribulation" for the Jews, ever.

Throught the next 1275 years, the Jews would be hunted down and killed all over the world. In medieval times, the Catholic churches would tell the Jews to give all of their belongings to them for safe keeping when the people came to get the Jews. The Jews would flee to safety, and the Catholics would tell the persuers where the Jews hid so they could find and kill them. Then the Catholic churches got all of the Jews' money and belongings. So incredibly twisted. During Hitler's onslaught, over 6 million Jews were killed. Jews have historically, over that time period, been the most hunted of all races, and the most killed proportionately. They are the most hated race on the entire planet. So, the time of the "Great Tribulation" Jesus spoke of was 1278.48 years exactly, and happened just as He described, and this started with the Dome of the Rock called the Abomination of Desolation.

The False Prophet, Muhommad, has writings in the Dome of the Rock that deny Jesus as the son of God, and says that God would not have a son, and boasts Allah over all gods, including the one true God. This is exactly what the False Prophet is said to do on the temple mount, but most people think it's the antichrist doing it on the temple mount. This is just a bad theory on their part. The book of John has tons of arguments against the antichrist being a single person, and James or Peter says it is a spirit of antichrist, as well as John, not a person. Everyone that implies the Abomination of Desolation is a future event has incorrect, and completely unproveable interpretation of the events. This is now known by the numerical prophecies which destroy their interpretations.

The pre-trib futurist interpretation of prophecy and the preterist view both started as a fraud back in the 1500's. People were beginning to understand that the Catholic church was the w-h-o-r-e riding the scarlet beast in Revelation, because it said she was drunken with the blood of the saints, wore red and purple (cardinals and bishops), and she's a city on seven hills (Rome is the city on seven hills and Vatican City is in Rome). So, the pope at the time had two Jesuit Priests come up with fraudulent interpretations of prophecy to throw the people off. It took around 200-300 years for this theory to finally reach the shores of the United States, and Darby got ahold of it and claimed it as his own theory. So he's called the Father of Modern Dispensationalism. They mixed in this "secret rapture" when a young girl had a "vision" of a "secret rapture" that would occur before this seven year tribulation. This girl also was known for being into the occult and witchcraft and played with ouji boards. Clearly a fraud, from beginning to end.

And I cannot count the number of preachers, teachers and scholars I've heard say, "I started studying pre-trib prophecy in the Bible and found that it had no foundation and the Bible did not say this at all." These theories came out prior to 1948 and 1967. Daniel was told to seal up the prophecies until the time of the end. We are told that the time right before the time of the end will be the time of the gentiles (gentile rule of the temple mount) and ends with the Jews getting the temple mount back. So, Daniel says that all of his prophecies will be finished after the last one is done in 1967, and that means the time of the end has come, and we could not have fully understood the prophecies, according to that passage, until the time of the end, because they were sealed and we had no dates of special events like 1948 or 1967 yet.

It's completely irrational to say that the prophecies do not work in a day = a year fashion when all 13 numerical prophecies come out perfectly correct using this principle. And on top of that, God says it twice in the Bible, and God also says "I never change." God stays consistent throughout the Bible with everything. People say He doesn't, but they don't understand the big picture if they think that. You have absolutely no argument here, but you will argue till the day you die with these insanely ridiculous, unfounded arguments just because of pride, ignorance, and an inability to accept a God. So I won't be a part of it. I'm done responding to your posts.

[jones4stangs]

Where is the support, from other students of the bible, in this forum for this post?

Does anyone agree that this prophecy has been completed as BrianC has outlined? If it is as he says, I would expect it to be common knowledge to those who study the Book of Daniel? Is that the case?
Anyone care to cosign BrainC on this one?

[flashstang04]

Anyone care to cosign BrainC on this one?



We are supposed to study it. Is it possible that Brian is correct? Very much so. The thing about God is that He is less concerned with us knowing when something will happen as He is with us studying it and getting into the Word. Scripture does tell us that the very elect will be deceived, so the people you see on TV that "have it all figured out" could be very wrong. The point is we are to study, because it is when we look for answers that we are opened up to so many other messages. God is MUCH more concerned with us treating our neighbor as ourselves than He is with us finding out who plays the harlot in prophecy.

[jones4stangs]

We are supposed to study it. Is it possible that Brian is correct? Very much so. The thing about God is that He is less concerned with us knowing when something will happen as He is with us studying it and getting into the Word. Scripture does tell us that the very elect will be deceived, so the people you see on TV that "have it all figured out" could be very wrong. The point is we are to study, because it is when we look for answers that we are opened up to so many other messages. God is MUCH more concerned with us treating our neighbor as ourselves than He is with us finding out who plays the harlot in prophecy.
I don't really know anything about this whole discussion. Anyway, it looks like this is the other side of the coin. I'm guessing you'll come across this in your study.

http://christianforums.com/t5871676
Renton405
The first desolation sacriledge was when Antiochus Ephihanes defiled the temple when he erected an altar of Zeus and Sacrificed a pig..

1 Maccabees 1:54.
"Now on the fifteenth day of Chislev, in the one hundred and forty-fifth year, they erected a desolating sacrilege on the altar of burnt-offering."

The abomination of desolation Jesus talked about was the destruction of the Temple in AD70 by Titus. many Jews fleed to the mountains and not one stone was left standing. As Jesus predicted.

The 1 Maccabees usage of the term points to the actions of Antiochus Epiphanes in the mid-second century BC. Specifically, he set up an altar to Zeus in the Second Temple in Jerusalem, and sacrificed swine on it around the year 167 BC. Accordingly, most modern scholars believe that Daniel 11:31 and 12:11 are a direct prophecy (or vaticinium ex eventu) relating to Antiochus.

The interpretation of Daniel 9:27 is more controversial. Many modern scholars believe that it likewise refers to Antiochus Epiphanes; however, others consider in light of the gospel usage (see below) that it must have a future application.

Most Christian scholars and commentators agree that Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 are prophecies about the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70 by the Roman general Titus, and believe that Jesus has reapplied the familiar prophecy of Daniel to an event in his immediate future. A minority scholarly view relates the prophecy to the actions of Caligula around AD 40. Some other interpreters with a futurist perspective think that Jesus' prophecy deals with an end time literal Antichrist.

The rabbis as a whole consider that the expression refers to the desecration of the Temple by the erection of a Zeus statue in its sacred precincts by Antiochus Epiphanes. Some rabbis, however, see in it an allusion to Manasseh, who, as related in II Chron. xxxiii. 7, set up "a carved image ... in the house of God"[6]. The Haggadah narrates that two statues were erected, one of which fell over upon the other and broke off its hand. Upon the severed hand the following inscription was found engraved: "I sought to destroy God's house, but Thou didst lend Thy hand to its protection".


The hard thing in Daniel, is that the list of events shows that the Desolating sacrilege will happen before the messiah comes, so its something that happened before Christ came. Which only can point to Antiochus.

More of BrainC's point of view can be found here:
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/index.htm

[DarkWolf]

I don't think I can take it anymore. It's just complete lack of reading comprehension. NEVER were the hebrews punished for 40 days for 40 YEARS of punishment. So a year never equalled a day, like you're basically trying to say. (quote - While the other is dealing out a comparatively short period of punishment, for an extremely long period of sin.) That's COMPLETELY backwards from what it says. It gives a year for each day of sin. Therefore, fourty days would equal fourty years. That EXACTLY what the prophecy says, and that's EXACTLY what happened. They got 390 DAYS prophesied to them, and they were in Egypt for 390 YEARS. They got 40 DAYS prophesied to them, and they spent 40 YEARS in the desert. A DAY FOR A YEAR! GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULL! Any English teacher or professor will tell you your reading comprehension is staggeringly horrible if you can't see this. I can't believe you actually came to this backwards conclusion.

Again you're wrong. In Numbers, they were punished for 40 years to wander the desert, for 40 days of sin.

In Ezekiel, it was 390 days, for the 390 years.

It's all right there in the bible, there's no question that one is years for days, and the other is days for years.

As for every day = year prophecy coming 100% true, exactly as they should have, that's 100% proof that the prophecies did come to pass. And yes, you are simply unwilling to admit this because you don't want to acknowledge a God. It gets no more clear than that with people like you. Every Christian would say the same thing I'm saying right now if they read your arguments.

And yet there still remains the various other interpretations. Fancy that. Your christians don't even universally agree with your interpretation.

The Abomination of Desolation is said to be built on the outer court (court of the Gentiles). It's said to be "set up." It's called an "it" and never called a "he."

An idol of Zeus over the sacrificial alter is an "it" not a "he". Idols to roman gods in the temples are "its", and not "hes".

and God also says "I never change." God stays consistent throughout the Bible with everything.

Yet he goes from being a vindictive, spiteful, coniving god in the OT, to being a kind and loving god in the NT.

Yeah... he never changes.

So I won't be a part of it. I'm done responding to your posts.

Haven't you already said this before?

[Mr Majestyk]

Yet he goes from being a vindictive, spiteful, coniving god in the OT, to being a kind and loving god in the NT.

Yeah... he never changes.


Bullshit. Not surprising though from one who shows little familiarity with and even less understanding of either the Old or New Testaments.

To use you own words.....
Again you're wrong.

[BrianC]

Yet he goes from being a vindictive, spiteful, coniving god in the OT, to being a kind and loving god in the NT.

Yeah... he never changes.


And this is how you know that someone has no clue how the Bible works.

In the Old Testament, sin had not yet been dealt with yet. And God's people who carry His name were extremely sinful and basically making Him look bad. God was very angry with sin at this point and had to punish, not get revenge. He was chastising His people to get them back in line with His ways.

After Jesus, sin was said to have been defeated. So, sin is not the problem anymore. God's people have a new spirit that is perfect and sinless. That spirit man is in heaven with God, we're told, in the present and has eternal life in him now. He is holy, and therefore cannot sin. That is the REAL us now. Our flesh will go away before we get to heaven and be changed to a perfect body. God sees us as perfect now and is not angry anymore. However, He does say that His wrath is on those who have not accepted Jesus, though, and He is saving His wrath for the last days.

This is why there was a major change in God's attitude toward us. It wasn't that He changed. The reason for His anger with His people changed, and so His anger went away and He commanded His love on His people.

[BrianC]

We are supposed to study it. Is it possible that Brian is correct? Very much so. The thing about God is that He is less concerned with us knowing when something will happen as He is with us studying it and getting into the Word. Scripture does tell us that the very elect will be deceived, so the people you see on TV that "have it all figured out" could be very wrong. The point is we are to study, because it is when we look for answers that we are opened up to so many other messages. God is MUCH more concerned with us treating our neighbor as ourselves than He is with us finding out who plays the harlot in prophecy.

Actually it says, even the very elect would be deceived IF it were possible. So no, they won't be deceived. But that was in reference to the false Jesuses in the earth.

[BrianC]

I don't really know anything about this whole discussion. Anyway, it looks like this is the other side of the coin. I'm guessing you'll come across this in your study.

http://christianforums.com/t5871676
Renton405
The first desolation sacriledge was when Antiochus Ephihanes defiled the temple when he erected an altar of Zeus and Sacrificed a pig..

1 Maccabees 1:54.
"Now on the fifteenth day of Chislev, in the one hundred and forty-fifth year, they erected a desolating sacrilege on the altar of burnt-offering."

The abomination of desolation Jesus talked about was the destruction of the Temple in AD70 by Titus. many Jews fleed to the mountains and not one stone was left standing. As Jesus predicted.

The 1 Maccabees usage of the term points to the actions of Antiochus Epiphanes in the mid-second century BC. Specifically, he set up an altar to Zeus in the Second Temple in Jerusalem, and sacrificed swine on it around the year 167 BC. Accordingly, most modern scholars believe that Daniel 11:31 and 12:11 are a direct prophecy (or vaticinium ex eventu) relating to Antiochus.

The interpretation of Daniel 9:27 is more controversial. Many modern scholars believe that it likewise refers to Antiochus Epiphanes; however, others consider in light of the gospel usage (see below) that it must have a future application.

Most Christian scholars and commentators agree that Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 are prophecies about the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70 by the Roman general Titus, and believe that Jesus has reapplied the familiar prophecy of Daniel to an event in his immediate future. A minority scholarly view relates the prophecy to the actions of Caligula around AD 40. Some other interpreters with a futurist perspective think that Jesus' prophecy deals with an end time literal Antichrist.

The rabbis as a whole consider that the expression refers to the desecration of the Temple by the erection of a Zeus statue in its sacred precincts by Antiochus Epiphanes. Some rabbis, however, see in it an allusion to Manasseh, who, as related in II Chron. xxxiii. 7, set up "a carved image ... in the house of God"[6]. The Haggadah narrates that two statues were erected, one of which fell over upon the other and broke off its hand. Upon the severed hand the following inscription was found engraved: "I sought to destroy God's house, but Thou didst lend Thy hand to its protection".


The hard thing in Daniel, is that the list of events shows that the Desolating sacrilege will happen before the messiah comes, so its something that happened before Christ came. Which only can point to Antiochus.

More of BrainC's point of view can be found here:
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/index.htm

I don't know anything about the Macabees, really, so I can't comment on that. It's Catholic and I'm not a Catholic.

[BrianC]

Anyone care to cosign BrainC on this one?

No, this would not be common knowledge. The pre-trib view started in the 1500s and took a few hundred years to reach the U.S., and then it took over 100 years for that view to catch on and be a big deal with the people. Once you have a doctrine like futurism and pre-trib, it's hard to get people to change their views. So, this stuff with the numerics was found only backin the 80's and fully understood in the 90's. It hasn't had time to catch on.

[DarkWolf]

Bullshit. Not surprising though from one who shows little familiarity with and even less understanding of either the Old or New Testaments.


And this is how you know that someone has no clue how the Bible works.

In the Old Testament, sin had not yet been dealt with yet. And God's people who carry His name were extremely sinful and basically making Him look bad. God was very angry with sin at this point and had to punish, not get revenge. He was chastising His people to get them back in line with His ways.

Hmmm

8Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
9Thus saith the LORD, After this manner will I mar the pride of Judah, and the great pride of Jerusalem.

10This evil people, which refuse to hear my words, which walk in the imagination of their heart, and walk after other gods, to serve them, and to worship them, shall even be as this girdle, which is good for nothing.

11For as the girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave unto me the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah, saith the LORD; that they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory: but they would not hear.

12Therefore thou shalt speak unto them this word; Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Every bottle shall be filled with wine: and they shall say unto thee, Do we not certainly know that every bottle shall be filled with wine?

13Then shalt thou say unto them, Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will fill all the inhabitants of this land, even the kings that sit upon David's throne, and the priests, and the prophets, and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, with drunkenness.

14And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.

This is not "chastising His people to get them back in line with His ways." This is vengeful. This is evil. Slaughtering infants simply because they're there with all these dirty sinners. They've made no decision to go against God's word, but he's going to kill them all the same.

In Genesis 38 God kills Judah's first born "7And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him." Why was Er wicked? No reason given. But God killed him, basically just because he could.

Then later kills his brother Onan, because Onan would not have sex with his brother's wife. This is the infamous "spilling the seed" that's quoted to explain why masturbation and birth control are wrong.

In Exodus, while giving the 10 commandments, God proclaims that he is a jealous god.

4Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

6And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.


There's plenty of examples, if you guys need them. This stuff is way beyond punishing/chastising his people to get them to shape up.

[Phillystang]

Hmmm



This is not "chastising His people to get them back in line with His ways." This is vengeful. This is evil. Slaughtering infants simply because they're there with all these dirty sinners. They've made no decision to go against God's word, but he's going to kill them all the same.

In Genesis 38 God kills Judah's first born "7And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him." Why was Er wicked? No reason given. But God killed him, basically just because he could.

Then later kills his brother Onan, because Onan would not have sex with his brother's wife. This is the infamous "spilling the seed" that's quoted to explain why masturbation and birth control are wrong.

In Exodus, while giving the 10 commandments, God proclaims that he is a jealous god.




There's plenty of examples, if you guys need them. This stuff is way beyond punishing/chastising his people to get them to shape up.

God is Holy, Holy, Holy and people are wicked. Everyone deserves death and God's wrath. Thank God He is also merciful.

You would call an earthly judge corrupt if he didn't bring down justice on lawbreakers, and yet you cry and call God's actions evil when He brings justice on those that deserve it.

Even in the New Testament, check out Acts 5 What happened to Ananias and Sapphira after they lied about the money they gave to the Apostles. They both dropped dead.

[Brain_Mach1]

DarkWolf, you miss the point of a covenant. The people of Israel have sworn a covenant with God. Covenants are sealed with blood because that is the fait of anyone who breaks the covenant.

When Israel makes a covenant then breaks it, they have called death upon themselves, punishment for breaking a covenant. This is seen in Exodus when Israel makes the covenant sealed in blood then builds the calf. They have brought death to themselves. The interesting thing is that God did not destroy all the people even though it was justified for God to destroy all of Israel.

Now we can see a prefigurement of Jesus with the intersetion of Moses, but that is a different point.

Every time Israel strays, they are breaking a covenant, not just the law. Anything short of death is mercy.

This is hard for modern man to comprehend a covenant because, in our enlightenment, we do not recognize anything so binding.

[flashstang04]

DarkWolf, you miss the point of a covenant. The people of Israel have sworn a covenant with God. Covenants are sealed with blood because that is the fait of anyone who breaks the covenant.

When Israel makes a covenant then breaks it, they have called death upon themselves, punishment for breaking a covenant. This is seen in Exodus when Israel makes the covenant sealed in blood then builds the calf. They have brought death to themselves. The interesting thing is that God did not destroy all the people even though it was justified for God to destroy all of Israel.

Now we can see a prefigurement of Jesus with the intersetion of Moses, but that is a different point.

Every time Israel strays, they are breaking a covenant, not just the law. Anything short of death is mercy.

This is hard for modern man to comprehend a covenant because, in our enlightenment, we do not recognize anything so binding.



Thats true Brian, in fact I would go so far as to say that anything short of total destruction is merciful, as it would be for any of us.

Just to address the "dashing the babies heads" comments. In God's wisdom ( I know this will go right by you non believers) He knew that the babies that were there would be brought up in pagan ways, causing them to lose their eternal souls. What He did, although to us seems monstrous, ....on an eternal scale, was completely merciful because it was the ONLY chance they would have had to make Heaven....and that is where they were and are still today.

[DarkWolf]

You guys give me the willies, that's for sure. That your ok with a god that will knowingly create imperfect beings, and then get pissed off at his imperfect creation and wipe it out willy nilly, is quite disturbing.

But hey, to each his own, I suppose.

[Brain_Mach1]

You guys give me the willies, that's for sure. That your ok with a god that will knowingly create imperfect beings, and then get pissed off at his imperfect creation and wipe it out willy nilly, is quite disturbing.

But hey, to each his own, I suppose.

God does not wipeout his creation willy nilly, unless willy nilly means with justification.

God threatens to destroy his people when the people break their covenants. A covenant is a blood oath. God keeps his promises to Israel, it is Israel who defaults on their end of the deal. They knowingly entered a covenant.

Scott Hahn has a book called A Father Who Keeps His Promise. It is a quick easy read which follows the covenants, how man broke the covenants, how God could have destroyed His people but showed mercy, then continues to make new covenants with His people.

This is far from willy nilly (could not find the etymology of willy nilly).

In fact, God gives his people many chances to change before punishment falls. Adam was questioned, Cain was questioned, Sodom and Gomorrah were tested, after teh Golden Calf Moses asked who would stand with God (the Levites did), etc.

All his creatures are imperfect, but are given the chance to repent.

[Mr Majestyk]

You have to understand that DarkHorse has shown virtually no understanding of the Bible as yet and qualify his statements accordingly.

[DarkWolf]

I think you're missing the point, Brian.

That point being, if God is omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, yada yada, then he would know that we would sin. He would know that we would break his covenant. And he would know, in so doing, that we would piss him off to the point that he would destroy us.

And he goes and creates us anyway. He knew he would destroy us, even before creating us.

I get the "justification" as laid out in the bible. I'm saying I don't agree with it, and quite honestly it shocks me that so many people do.

[Brain_Mach1]

Okay, I understand your point now. I don't have a good answer that will satisfy that question.

A Christian believes in God and heaven and that they will eventually be in heaven with God, so the Christian sees the happy ending and Hopes for that.

As for the creation of those who will not be saved, I would say they are an effect of true free will. Predestiantionists would have more/different to say on the subject. I have not studied much on the various predestination points since my interest has not lead me there.

But I follow your point (assuming there is a God):
1. God knows who will break the covenants.
2. If God is loving why even create those who will break the covenants? This is creating people whom He will have to damn.

[flashstang04]

Okay, I understand your point now. I don't have a good answer that will satisfy that question.

A Christian believes in God and heaven and that they will eventually be in heaven with God, so the Christian sees the happy ending and Hopes for that.

As for the creation of those who will not be saved, I would say they are an effect of true free will. Predestiantionists would have more/different to say on the subject. I have not studied much on the various predestination points since my interest has not lead me there.

But I follow your point (assuming there is a God):
1. God knows who will break the covenants.
2. If God is loving why even create those who will break the covenants? This is creating people whom He will have to damn.


If we are truly to carry out the great commission, then it stands to reason that believer and non believer alike are put here together to give Christians opportunities to be "Christlike". What would be the use of anything if we had no challenges...and no strife. God does not damn people so to speak, we damn ourselves. The rules are laid out. God cannot coexist with wickedness. So it is our choice completely.

[Mr Majestyk]

Man was given free will to folow God or not. Whether or not God knows who will follow Him is of no consequence to the individual who must make that choice.

[DarkWolf]

The question of free will seems to be a popular topic here. Gets brought up quite regularly.

If there is pre-destination, then that by essence demands there is no free will.

If there is no pre-destination, and we truly have free will, then God must not be omniscient, as is demanded by free will.

[Mr Majestyk]

Man does not know his destiny however, and thus makes his own choices without that knowledge. God knows what is written in a man's heart, which drives the choices he makes, but still allows man to make his own decision on whether to accept Him or not. There are two events recorded in Scripture where God intervened directly in mankind's affairs; the Exodus from Egypt as recorded in the Old Testament and the resurrection of Jesus Christ as recorded in the Gospels. Man still made his own choices leading up to those interventions however.

[flashstang04]

The question of free will seems to be a popular topic here. Gets brought up quite regularly.

If there is pre-destination, then that by essence demands there is no free will.

If there is no pre-destination, and we truly have free will, then God must not be omniscient, as is demanded by free will.



Once again you are ascribing characteristics of man to God. He sees all time lines at once, and you cannot possibly fathom that. We DO have ultimate free will, but He is outside the circle of interfering by His own design. He can insert Himself if He chooses, but let's us make our own choice as to salvation. The fact that He knows does not take away from the fact that we still have free will. From a philosophy standpoint you are saying that if He knows, it implies no TRUE free will. The thing that you are missing is that you are trying to use limited human understanding to assign God a characteristic, and that is just impossible. There are some dimensions that man just cannot understand. Like th old example of two stick figures on a paper separated by a wall.. you can see it..and both of them, as you are seeing in 3D, but they cannot see each other because they are limited to 2D. You are outside the loop, and can see the whole page at once.

[DarkWolf]

Man does not know his destiny however, and thus makes his own choices without that knowledge. God knows what is written in a man's heart, which drives the choices he makes, but still allows man to make his own decision on whether to accept Him or not. There are two events recorded in Scripture where God intervened directly in mankind's affairs; the Exodus from Egypt as recorded in the Old Testament and the resurrection of Jesus Christ as recorded in the Gospels. Man still made his own choices leading up to those interventions however.

Man cannot have a destiny, if he has free will. The two concepts negate each other.

Once again you are ascribing characteristics of man to God. He sees all time lines at once, and you cannot possibly fathom that.

Just because I cannot do it, doesn't mean I cannot fathom it. And this argument has been brought up before, the problem with it is it requires that God does not intervene. For us to have free will, God can see all things, but he cannot change our minds. We cannot be destined for anything.

[edit]Which... after reading further, is what you appear to be saying :) My apologies for just stopping at your first sentence.

[flashstang04]

Man cannot have a destiny, if he has free will. The two concepts negate each other.



Just because I cannot do it, doesn't mean I cannot fathom it. And this argument has been brought up before, the problem with it is it requires that God does not intervene. For us to have free will, God can see all things, but he cannot change our minds. We cannot be destined for anything.

[edit]Which... after reading further, is what you appear to be saying :) My apologies for just stopping at your first sentence.


The only time we are destined in scripture is Christians "not being destined for wrath", but this is already after making a conscious choice for Him, so it is really after the fact.

[Mr Majestyk]

Man cannot have a destiny, if he has free will. The two concepts negate each other.

I never stated man does or does not have a destiny. I said "man does not know his destiny". Man does have free will. No negation there.

[DarkWolf]

Saying "man does not know his destiny" is equivalent of saying "man has a destiny, he just doesn't know it."

To which I say man cannot have a destiny, if he has free will. The two concepts negate each other.

[Mr Majestyk]

Man has free will. If he chooses the path of righteousness, he is destined for eternal life with his Creator. If he chooses the path of evil, he may not be so destined. Man does not know his destiny, which is the product of his choices, until his earthly life ends.

No negation there.

[jones4stangs]

Man has free will. If he chooses the path of righteousness, he is destined for eternal life with his Creator. If he chooses the path of evil, he may not be so destined. Man does not know his destiny, which is the product of his choices, until his earthly life ends.

No negation there.
is destined/not be so destined/his destiny/product of his choices

Sounds like your contradicting yourself.
“One cannot say of something that it is and that it is not in the same respect and at the same time.”

Destiny
A predetermined course of events often held to be an irresistible power or agency.

[Mr Majestyk]

It is predetermined in so far as God promises eternal life to those who will follow Him, and God keeps all of His promises. Man still has the free will to follow Him or not, and thus influences his own destiny.

[jones4stangs]

It is predetermined in so far as God promises eternal life to those who will follow Him, and God keeps all of His promises. Man still has the free will to follow Him or not, and thus influences his own destiny.

Freewill
Freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention.

Destiny
A predetermined course of events often held to be an irresistible power or agency.

Mr Majestyk, Can you be destined for two separate outcomes? That sounds off to me.

In line with your position is that man is destined to be judged by God. As such, nothing man chooses can change this outcome.

It seems like the word play revolves around attaching mans choices to the outcome of heaven or hell. Then you get into the mix of is man choosing or is God choosing. However, if you stop man's destiny at getting before God, then the finally outcome is entire left up to God's choosing.

Darkhorse, What do you think of that? That seems to encompass both freewill and destiny without the contradiction.

[Mr Majestyk]

I use the words free will to say that man chooses how he lives his life on earth. If he chooses the righteous path he is destined, or predetermined to have eternal life through God's promise, or covenant. Though the final outcome is indeed completely up to God's choosing, God has already made His promise and will always fulfill it if man does his part. A man will either have eternal life or will not have eternal life, not both.

[DarkWolf]

Freewill
Freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention.

Destiny
A predetermined course of events often held to be an irresistible power or agency.

Mr Majestyk, Can you be destined for two separate outcomes? That sounds off to me.

In line with your position is that man is destined to be judged by God. As such, nothing man chooses can change this outcome.

It seems like the word play revolves around attaching mans choices to the outcome of heaven or hell. Then you get into the mix of is man choosing or is God choosing. However, if you stop man's destiny at getting before God, then the finally outcome is entire left up to God's choosing.

Darkhorse, What do you think of that? That seems to encompass both freewill and destiny without the contradiction.

I'm not sure I understand the question... are you saying if man's destiny is simply to stand before God, and then God chooses from there whether man goes to heaven or hell?

If that is the case, I'm not sure that would actually encompass destiny and free will, much like dying in the first place shouldn't be considered destiny. Naturally, we know we're going to die someday, somehow. Taken to the context of standing before God to be judged, religiously we're told this will happen when we die, so that's not really a destiny so much as an inevitability.

[Preston]

I do not have a clue what that means to me.
You must be a theology major or love to copy and paste off the wall topics.

[BrianC]

This is not "chastising His people to get them back in line with His ways." This is vengeful. This is evil. Slaughtering infants simply because they're there with all these dirty sinners. They've made no decision to go against God's word, but he's going to kill them all the same.

God had a law about the age of accountability being 20 years. If a child died before then, they would go to heaven automatically, because God is merciful. All of those babies killed were taken to heaven. That's mercy. They didn't have to live a crappy life and chance going to hell.


In Genesis 38 God kills Judah's first born "7And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him." Why was Er wicked? No reason given. But God killed him, basically just because he could.

Then later kills his brother Onan, because Onan would not have sex with his brother's wife. This is the infamous "spilling the seed" that's quoted to explain why masturbation and birth control are wrong.

In Exodus, while giving the 10 commandments, God proclaims that he is a jealous god.

Refer to my last answer. God does everything for a reason. Maybe God looked ahead and saw that if He didn't kill off certain people ahead of time, they were going to cause major problems and they would end up going to hell on top of that. Who knows? He doesn't explain everything He does to us in the Bible.



There's plenty of examples, if you guys need them. This stuff is way beyond punishing/chastising his people to get them to shape up.

Doesn't matter what the reasoning was, because these kids that were under 20 were going to heaven and got to skip having to deal with life. I'd say they got one hell of a good deal!! That's mercy if you ask me...

[BrianC]

I'm not sure I understand the question... are you saying if man's destiny is simply to stand before God, and then God chooses from there whether man goes to heaven or hell?

If that is the case, I'm not sure that would actually encompass destiny and free will, much like dying in the first place shouldn't be considered destiny. Naturally, we know we're going to die someday, somehow. Taken to the context of standing before God to be judged, religiously we're told this will happen when we die, so that's not really a destiny so much as an inevitability.

Oh no, not the predestination and free will debate again.... This went on forever................

I think I'm done with this board. It's taken up too much of my time. Hope you all have fun and have good discussions on here. I'll post one last thread before I go. It's been fun.

[Casper]

Strange coincidence, i have been studying the book of daniel. It is one of the most easily datable books in the bible. It was written about 166 BCE, give or take a few years (169-164 BCE). It accurately and completely describes the seleucid wars, written pseudoepigraphically (in other words, write an accurate known history and then claim the work is much older, which means it must be prophecy fulfilled).

This is one book that is often used as evidence that judaism is not nearly as old as claimed, and is in fact a hellenist creation based on sumerian, babylonian and arabian mythology. Daniel is definitely less than 2200 years old.

[flashstang04]

Here is a good study on it..

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qwhendan3x.html

[Casper]

Here is a good study on it..

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qwhendan3x.html

They dismiss the parallels to the Seleucid campaigns. In fact I don't see that it is even mentioned.

[paul_376]

the borrower is servent to the lender...

[Casper]

God had a law about the age of accountability being 20 years. If a child died before then, they would go to heaven automatically, because God is merciful. All of those babies killed were taken to heaven. That's mercy. They didn't have to live a crappy life and chance going to hell.


You can supply text to back this up?

[svtaaron]

Strange coincidence, i have been studying the book of daniel. It is one of the most easily datable books in the bible. It was written about 166 BCE, give or take a few years (169-164 BCE). It accurately and completely describes the seleucid wars, written pseudoepigraphically (in other words, write an accurate known history and then claim the work is much older, which means it must be prophecy fulfilled).

This is one book that is often used as evidence that judaism is not nearly as old as claimed, and is in fact a hellenist creation based on sumerian, babylonian and arabian mythology. Daniel is definitely less than 2200 years old.

Contrary to the above, the Expositor's Bible Commentary (Zondervan, 1990) claims that the language of Daniel, in comparison with the Hebrew and Aramaic texts of the Hellenistic period, "prove quite conclusively to any scholar that the second-century date and Palestinian provenance of the Book of Daniel cannot be upheld any longer without violence being done to the science of linguistics". It adds that the serious mistakes of the Septuagint to render many Persian and Accadian terms, as the offices mentioned in Daniel 3:3, proves ignorance of words of the old past, already forgotten in the Hellenistic period, indicating that the Book of Daniel was written in the late 6th century B.C.E.[15]

E.C.Lucas, Daniel, Apollos OT Commentary (Apollos, 2002) pp 307f is more cautious in his assessment of linguistic arguments as well. Evaluating Collin’s approach he considers "the wide geographical spread from which the material comes and the implicit assumption that linguistic developments would have occurred uniformly throughout this area" a weakness and concludes, "The character of the Hebrew and Aramaic could support a date in the fifth or fourth century for the extant written form of the book, but does not demand a second-century date." He agrees with Collins that there are "clear differences" between Qumran Hebrew and the Hebrew of Daniel (p. 307).
Three Greek words used within the text have long been considered evidence for a late dating of Daniel. All three are terms for musical instruments. The existence of the Greek word symphonia was cited by Rowlings as having its earliest use in second century BC, but it has subsequently been shown that Pythagoras used the term to denote an instrument, while its use to refer to a group performing together is found in the 'Hymni Homerica, ad Mercurium 51'; both instances date from the sixth century BC, the supposed setting of Daniel.

It is known that "Greek mercenaries and slaves served in the Babylonian and Assyrian periods, some of whom were undoubtedly versed in Greek music and musical instruments." It has been speculated that this would explain the existence of the three Greek musical terms in Daniel's book. On the other hand, it has been claimed that the non-existence of other Greek words is a strong witness against the theory of the writing of the book in the Hellenistic period, since "it is inconceivable that Greek terms for government and administration would not have been adopted into Aramaic by the second century B.C."[16]

There are also nineteen Persian loan-words in the book, most of them having to do with governmental positions
The book of Daniel uses the term "Chaldean" to refer both to an ethnic group, and to astrologers in general. According to Montgomery and Hammer, Daniel's use of the word 'Chaldean' to refer to astrologers in general is an anachronism, as during the Neo-Babylonian and early Persian periods (when Daniel is said to have lived), it referred only to an ethnicity.

you cant dismiss daniel being a prophetic book, due to the fact that his prophecies were so accurate.
accuracy is the key to prophecy.. deuteronomy 13...

[Casper]

Contrary to the above, the Expositor's Bible Commentary (Zondervan, 1990) claims that the language of Daniel, in comparison with the Hebrew and Aramaic texts of the Hellenistic period, "prove quite conclusively to any scholar that the second-century date and Palestinian provenance of the Book of Daniel cannot be upheld any longer without violence being done to the science of linguistics". It adds that the serious mistakes of the Septuagint to render many Persian and Accadian terms, as the offices mentioned in Daniel 3:3, proves ignorance of words of the old past, already forgotten in the Hellenistic period, indicating that the Book of Daniel was written in the late 6th century B.C.E.[15]

E.C.Lucas, Daniel, Apollos OT Commentary (Apollos, 2002) pp 307f is more cautious in his assessment of linguistic arguments as well. Evaluating Collin’s approach he considers "the wide geographical spread from which the material comes and the implicit assumption that linguistic developments would have occurred uniformly throughout this area" a weakness and concludes, "The character of the Hebrew and Aramaic could support a date in the fifth or fourth century for the extant written form of the book, but does not demand a second-century date." He agrees with Collins that there are "clear differences" between Qumran Hebrew and the Hebrew of Daniel (p. 307).
Three Greek words used within the text have long been considered evidence for a late dating of Daniel. All three are terms for musical instruments. The existence of the Greek word symphonia was cited by Rowlings as having its earliest use in second century BC, but it has subsequently been shown that Pythagoras used the term to denote an instrument, while its use to refer to a group performing together is found in the 'Hymni Homerica, ad Mercurium 51'; both instances date from the sixth century BC, the supposed setting of Daniel.

It is known that "Greek mercenaries and slaves served in the Babylonian and Assyrian periods, some of whom were undoubtedly versed in Greek music and musical instruments." It has been speculated that this would explain the existence of the three Greek musical terms in Daniel's book. On the other hand, it has been claimed that the non-existence of other Greek words is a strong witness against the theory of the writing of the book in the Hellenistic period, since "it is inconceivable that Greek terms for government and administration would not have been adopted into Aramaic by the second century B.C."[16]

There are also nineteen Persian loan-words in the book, most of them having to do with governmental positions
The book of Daniel uses the term "Chaldean" to refer both to an ethnic group, and to astrologers in general. According to Montgomery and Hammer, Daniel's use of the word 'Chaldean' to refer to astrologers in general is an anachronism, as during the Neo-Babylonian and early Persian periods (when Daniel is said to have lived), it referred only to an ethnicity.

you cant dismiss daniel being a prophetic book, due to the fact that his prophecies were so accurate.
accuracy is the key to prophecy.. deuteronomy 13...

Same old arguments from 1907.

On the one hand, it doesn't matter if it was truly fulfilled prophecy regarding antiochus I-IV or not, because either way it has nothing to do with christianity.

On the other hand, It fails miserably even as precise and accurate prophecy or history:

Geneological errors:

Nebuchadnezzar did not have a son named Belshazzar. Nor a grandson. Nor a great grandson, etc.

This mythical Belshazzar was not the last king of babylon during the Jewish captivity. There were four kings after Nebuchadnezzar, and none of them were named Belshazzar.

Babylon, under this mythical belshazzar or not, did not fall to Darius but to Cyrus. The king's name was Nabonidus, and he was not a descendant of Nebuchadnezzar.

Darius was not a Mede, he was Persian. Darius the Mede did not exist. There is a distinct and important difference.

Interestingly, Qumran documents contain the prayer of Nabonidus, which seems to have been copied into Daniel in the second century (this is the source material for part of Nebuchadnezzar). Nabonidus did have a son named Belshazzar, but he was never king. One hedge from the early daters is that the first portion of Daniel is indeed older than the rest. That would be the first six chapters.

Cyrus had a grandson named Darius, and a son named Xerxes. Daniel claimed that cyrus was the son of Xerxes.

Anachronisms:
Chaldean was a nationality during the exilic period. It only became a term to describe astrologers in the 2nd century BCE. Daniel's interchangability indicates a much later date than the exile.

Daniel notes the "sacred book of Jeremiah", but jeremiah would have written after Daniel, if Daniel were truly prophecy. Not to mention that Jeremiah itself was not part of Tanakhuntil much later, at least 180BCE.

All in all Daniel gets most things fairly close up until Antiochus defiles the temple around 167BCE, but after that he goes haywire; Antiochus dies in Persia, not palestine, not killed by a king from the south but from illness. And of course the world did not end.

[Preston]

Man people really get into this.

[svtaaron]

Same old arguments from 1907.

On the one hand, it doesn't matter if it was truly fulfilled prophecy regarding antiochus I-IV or not, because either way it has nothing to do with christianity.

On the other hand, It fails miserably even as precise and accurate prophecy or history:

Geneological errors:

Nebuchadnezzar did not have a son named Belshazzar. Nor a grandson. Nor a great grandson, etc.

This mythical Belshazzar was not the last king of babylon during the Jewish captivity. There were four kings after Nebuchadnezzar, and none of them were named Belshazzar.

Babylon, under this mythical belshazzar or not, did not fall to Darius but to Cyrus. The king's name was Nabonidus, and he was not a descendant of Nebuchadnezzar.

Darius was not a Mede, he was Persian. Darius the Mede did not exist. There is a distinct and important difference.

Interestingly, Qumran documents contain the prayer of Nabonidus, which seems to have been copied into Daniel in the second century (this is the source material for part of Nebuchadnezzar). Nabonidus did have a son named Belshazzar, but he was never king. One hedge from the early daters is that the first portion of Daniel is indeed older than the rest. That would be the first six chapters.

Cyrus had a grandson named Darius, and a son named Xerxes. Daniel claimed that cyrus was the son of Xerxes.

Anachronisms:
Chaldean was a nationality during the exilic period. It only became a term to describe astrologers in the 2nd century BCE. Daniel's interchangability indicates a much later date than the exile.

Daniel notes the "sacred book of Jeremiah", but jeremiah would have written after Daniel, if Daniel were truly prophecy. Not to mention that Jeremiah itself was not part of Tanakhuntil much later, at least 180BCE.

All in all Daniel gets most things fairly close up until Antiochus defiles the temple around 167BCE, but after that he goes haywire; Antiochus dies in Persia, not palestine, not killed by a king from the south but from illness. And of course the world did not end.

jeremiah wrote before the exile to babylon and daniel wrote during, i dont believe it is a stretch to say that daniel wasnt ignorant of jeremiah, as he had a very public ministry... jeremiah was completed sometime after 586bc. if even the earliest proposed date for daniel is 530 bc, that is still 55yrs, plus or minus a few that daniel had to write after jeremiah, i would imagine prophecies of such magnitude like that of jeremiah could have made it into the hands of daniel..

[Casper]

Possibly, but not as a sacred book.

And if Daniel truly was a minister in the King's court, he would not have made the glaring errors he did about the monarchy.

Another problem is that Daniel is mentioned as a hero in 1 Maccabees, which is definitely dated to about 100BCE, but Ben Sira does not mention him at all, writing less than a hundred years earlier.

Even in the older portions, like chapter 1, Daniel tells us that Nebuchadnezzar captured Jehoiakim and took jerusalem in the third year of Jehoiakim's reign. But 2 Chronicles tells us that Jehoiakim reigned for 11 years. And Jeremiah tells us that Nebuchadnezzar ascended the throne in Babylon in the 4th year of Jehoiakim's reign. Which of these three does not stand with the others? Daniel.

We know that Nebuchadnezzar ascended the throne in 604-603 BCE, and that he sacked Jerusalem in 598-597 BCE. There is extra-biblical evidence for this delay of 5-7 years along with excellent dating. And both Jeremiah and Chronicles are consistent with this. Only Daniel has it all mixed up.

Using archeological evidence along with Chronicles and Jeremiah, we can derive a plausible timeline:

608 Jehoiakim ascends the throne in Jerusalem
604 Nebuchadnezzar ascends the throne in Babylon
597 Nebuchadnezzar conquers Jerusalem and dethrones Jehoiakim.

Using Daniel, we get this wierdness:

608 Jehoiakim ascends the throne in Jerusalem
605 Nebuchadnezzar, king of babylon, conquers jerusalem.
604 Nebuchadnezzar becomes king of babylon

It doesn't work out at all.