Eastern Gate: An Atheist's Worst Nightmare [Archive]

campbell34

07-11-2004, 07:32 AM

peace_sells,

Where is the gate? what's on the other side of it? what's the gate for? and I don't mean for the next "coming" http://www.hipforums.com/forums/images/smilies/wink.gif I mean what is it actually for.

-Jerusalem, Israel
-It leads to the Temple Mount
-In ancient days, it allowed access to the temple.

strawpuppy,

BUT,....was'nt the temple destroyed by the romans about 70 years after Jesus was murdered.....So how can the gate be there..?

bluegill,

isn't the gate a recreation of the original gate built by the romans in the 250-300 AD period, a reconstruction of sorts after the romans officially converted to christianity

-Ezekiel 44:2 clearly states that the God of Israel has entered in by it, and since Jesus died before the gate was built, naturally you would think this would rule out the prophecy altogether. So I decided to look into this a little more. As I investigated further, I discovered the most amazing thing. In April of 1969 an excavation that dug directly beneath the present day East Gate, unearth the fully intact Shushan Gate. The Shushan Gate now acts as the foundation of the present and visible Eastern Gate. If the excavation
had continued, the old gate would be usable again. Yet as I began to read Ezekiel 44:3, pins and needles began to go up my spine. Because according to the prophecy, it states when the Prince comes to the gate, he will enter by the way of the porch of the gate. According to Google Web Definitions, a porch is a structure attached to the exterior of a building often forming a covered entrance. The visible Eastern Gate today is the attached porch. Christ must of passed through the old Eastern Gate or the Shushan gate many times because it was one of the main gates that leads
to the temple. When he returns again he will have to pass through the porch of that gate. Which would be the added on section. Now for this prophecy to be accurate and true, it requires two Eastern Gates to exist at the same time. It also requires both gates to be physically connected to each other. The porch of the gate would also have to be sealed, and any attempts to circumvent the prophecy by crashing through the gate would always meet with failure. The prince to come would of already had to of passed through the old Shushan Gate to fulfill the prophecy. In order
for him to complete the prophecy he will have to pass through the visible existing East Gate, or as Ezekiel puts it, the porch of the gate. The reason Ezekiel in verse 1 was so vague about the gate was because the gate that was to be sealed shut would not exist for another 1000 years. The East Gate is the porch of the old gate, and the gate that Ezekiel saw in his vision, is the same gate we see today, and the reason both attempts by the Arabs to smash through the ancient stone failed, is because the Gate is reserved for the prince to come.

strawpuppy

07-12-2004, 05:00 AM

Hi campbell,

I've been up in the mountains camping this week-end, but on my return I found this and thought it was worth posting....I have not checked it out yet as (once again....I'm really tired and have to get to bed...Also have to fly back to UK on Tuesday morning...my mum's ill..):

.................................................. ..........

The story you relate smells of urban legend. It is not entirely accurate. Here is some more information on the Golden Gate:

"The gate was probably open during the Byzantine period, and the Emperor eraclius entered through it after taking Jerusalem in 629. After the Muslim onquest, when the Dome of the Rock and the EI-Aksa Mosque were built, it was blocked to prevent unsupervised access to the mosque area.

In the time of the Crusaders it was opened twice a year on Christian festivals: once in the spring, on Palm Sunday, recalling Jesus' triumphal entry to the city through this gate (St. Matthew XXI, 1-8); and once in the autumn, to commemorate the entry of the Emperor Heraclius. The gate was finally closed under Turkish rule."

http://www.templemount.org/visittemp.html (http://www.templemount.org/visittemp.html)
.................................................. ......

Not sure if this is the gate....It was just posted with the text (FYI)...?
http://www.fire-of-god.com/EASTERNGATE.jpg

Hope to catch up on this later....

strawpuppy

campbell34

07-12-2004, 06:33 AM

Yes that is the Gate...

It does not matter how many times it was open or closed even if that were the case. The Bible predicted that it would be eventially sealed and remain sealed until the Messiah came. This is not a urban legend, it is well known among Christians, Jews, and Moslims. The graveyard in front of it was an attempt by arabs to prevent the coming Messiah from enter the gate, believing that the Messiah would not want to walk through a graveyard.

strawpuppy

07-12-2004, 06:45 AM

I was going to go to bed, but all the hatred, all the hurt, all the sorrow and sadness from where this info came from just got to me...

here it is:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/74849/1.ashx

Then I went and fell headlong into this:

http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15398

Hit the bottle of wine I had left over.....

And here I (blurry eyed, sad and fighting ALL the injustices and inequalities of this world... still up, and still knackered) am.

campbell34

07-12-2004, 07:26 AM

Are we still talkin about the Eastern gate? IS there any other athiest or anyone that can try explain away this amazing prophecy.

LuciferSam

07-12-2004, 07:57 AM

Are we still talkin about the Eastern gate? IS there any other athiest or anyone that can try explain away this amazing prophecy. Umm, what do you want explained? It sounds like a really well built gate. If they really want to test it why don't they just blow it up... that's what I'd do if I was determined to open it for some reason.

Chodpa

07-12-2004, 02:27 PM

Nowhere in the Bible does it declare that Jesus will return.

Kharakov

07-12-2004, 10:41 PM

POPthree13

07-12-2004, 10:45 PM

It does not matter how many times it was open or closed even if that were the case. The Bible predicted that it would be eventially sealed and remain sealed until the Messiah came.
So we can open it up today and seal it back up tomorrow and then open it again, etc. etc. As long as it's closed when Jesus comes the prophecy will be fulfilled? Ok, I predict the door to my house will be sealed and that it will remain selaed until I unseal it. Great prophecy...

PS: I agree with Chodpa.

campbell34

07-13-2004, 12:13 AM

popthree,

So we can open it up today and seal it back up tomorrow and then open it again, etc. etc. As long as it's closed when Jesus comes the prophecy will be fulfilled? Ok, I predict the door to my house will be sealed and that it will remain selaed until I unseal it. Great prophecy...

PS: I agree with Chodpa.

-Let me restate this:It does not matter how many times it was open or closed before it was sealed

The fact is Eziekiel predicted that when it is sealed it will not be open until the messiah comes.

No one has walked through it since it was sealed. Sorry popthree but you are still in this nightmare

Of course you agree with Chodpa because if you sided with me you would have to admit that the Bible does have validity.

Oh yeah popthree, I have posted these questions to you two other times and not yet have you replied to them.

Can you please explain these...
1. Messiah would be sold for 30 pieces of silver-Zech. 11:12

2. The Bible states that the Messiah would be the light to the gentiles. Who claimed to be the messiah and is now embraced by the gentiles but is rejected by the Jews?

LuciferSam,

Umm, what do you want explained? It sounds like a really well built gate. If they really want to test it why don't they just blow it up... that's what I'd do if I was determined to open it for some reason.

-Well why hasn't anyone been able to get through. There has been attempts, yet none succeeded. The arabs are so threaten by it they even put a graveyard in front of it with the thinking that the Messiah would not walk through a graveyard. Try to explain what you said: Why can't someone just blow it up. I give you this, if anyone walks through the gate-besides Jesus-they prove the Bible wrong. So if you are that determined, go ahead and try, but I don't think you'll get anywhere.

Chodpa,

"Nowhere in the Bible does it declare that Jesus will return."

-Then you do not know the Bible.

LuciferSam

07-13-2004, 03:11 AM

Campbell, I'm sorry but I really can't take this gate theory seriously. Do you honestly believe that simply quoting the Bible is a valid argument and expect people to soak in your wisdom based only on that? Hell, I could write my own scriptures, my own Gospel of LuciferSam, that refutes your Gate legend, and that would be just as valid. Why should the Bible be so much more special and valid than any other holy script, or anything else?

I'm not concerned enough about it nor do I have the means to actually go overseas with a rocket launcher and blow a hole in the Gate, but I don't doubt that with enough force, this Gate can be opened just like any other gate. But if someone does fire cruise missiles at the Gate or goes at it with a diamond saw and it comes out unscathed, then get back to me.

And on the return of Jesus legend, that originated from Paul's Gospel, I believe. Jesus' death understandably lowered the hopes of many believers, so quick-thinking Paul thought up the idea of Jesus' Second Coming. Though Paul had predicted that the Second Coming would be within a few decades or so of his prediction... and he also thought he and other believers would live forever... when those predictions failed, later Gospels and believers would extend those predictions and explain some of those that didn't come about to be allegorical rather than direct prophecies.

campbell34

07-13-2004, 05:17 AM

LuciferSam,

"Campbell, I'm sorry but I really can't take this gate theory seriously. Do you honestly believe that simply quoting the Bible is a valid argument and expect people to soak in your wisdom based only on that? Hell, I could write my own scriptures, my own Gospel of LuciferSam, that refutes your Gate legend, and that would be just as valid. Why should the Bible be so much more special and valid than any other holy script, or anything else?"

-Yeah you could write your own scriptures but could you predict anything in detail-nope-that's what makes your scriptures and any other book different from the Bible's. The fact is the gate still stands and so does my faith.

And on the return of Jesus legend, that originated from Paul's Gospel, I believe. Jesus' death understandably lowered the hopes of many believers, so quick-thinking Paul thought up the idea of Jesus' Second Coming. Though Paul had predicted that the Second Coming would be within a few decades or so of his prediction... and he also thought he and other believers would live forever... when those predictions failed, later Gospels and believers would extend those predictions and explain some of those that didn't come about to be allegorical rather than direct prophecies.

-First off Paul did not come up with Christ returning. Jesus himself said he would return.

"Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me. In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going."

Also, which prophecies did they explain away as allegory?

#include

07-13-2004, 05:46 AM

Just FYI to all...he is right. There is such a gate. Those there are afraid that it will come true, as well. They have built a graveyard right behind the wall, in hopes that Jesus would not desecrate (spelling?) a graveyard, and stop Him from walking through.

LuciferSam

07-13-2004, 06:32 AM

-Yeah you could write your own scriptures but could you predict anything in detail-nope-that's what makes your scriptures and any other book different from the Bible's. The fact is the gate still stands and so does my faith. Dude, if I cared enough to take the time, I could give you all the detail you want. I'd weave fantastic stories... I mean, predictions about giant magic wombats and angels riding in flying pumpkin chariots and Jesus returning in a flying saucer. The fact it's described in detail is only a testimony, if anything, to the author's imagination rather than his/her foresight.

First off Paul did not come up with Christ returning. Jesus himself said he would return.

"Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me. In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going." No one really knows what Jesus actually said. There are no actual scriptures of Jesus' teachings directly from him, all accounts of Jesus come from the Gospels or later writers, none of whom have ever encountered Jesus. This explains why the four official Gospels have such differing accounts of Christ, and the Gnostic Gospels are often even more cryptic or strange (read the Gospel of Thomas, that one's always entertaining).

Also, which prophecies did they explain away as allegory? In that specific case, the prophecies that Paul had about Jesus returning very soon, and that he and his followers would never die. These didn't come about, so later Christian leaders would say, essentially, "Oh... well, uh, that was just allegory. Jesus actually won't be back for quite a while. And what Paul meant was not that we won't physically die, but our spirits won't." Basically to that effect.

LuciferSam

07-13-2004, 06:49 AM

Brocktoon

07-13-2004, 10:58 AM

On a further note, if you pay any attention at all to Christian history, especially during its early years when it was infused with Hellenistic/Platonic ideas, you'd know that the Bible was and is often interpreted on a non-literal, allegorical level. The Greeks were fond of allegory, after all.
The insult implicit in the first sentence was not necessary. (Implying he does not pay attention to any Christian history)

It would be a fitting implication for yourself.
The early years of the Christian Church did not see some remarkable 'infusion' of Hellenistic/Platonic 'ideas'.
Not surprisingly, Apostles like Paul or even Jesus Himself were relating and teaching to a world infused with Hellenistic/Platonic ideas.
Even the language of the day (Greek) was chock-full of 'Hellenistic/Platonic' basis, reference and derivision.

So this you conclude is evidence Christianity was 'infused' with Plato??

Lets go with this baseless suggestion of yours....
You draw some 'conclusion' (which is someone supposed to 'inform' Campbell of God-knows-what)
..you'd know that the Bible was and is often interpreted on a non-literal, allegorical level. The Greeks were fond of allegory, after all.
Huh?

What is 'non-literal'?
You mean Paul's voyage to Malta 'was and is' to be seen as an 'allegory' about travelling to other islands?

You mean Jesus showing Thomas his healed wounds was really some 'allegory' about how 'man views scars'?

'After All' you remind us.. 'The Greeks were fond of allegory"
Huh?
or should I say 'Duh'?

Read the New Testament.. or even passages.. The Writers, Apostles, Jesus and everyone involved are entirely aware of Allegory, Literal vs. Non-literal and there is no confusion on anyones part.

The Gospels clearly and without 'grey' explain what they are, what they intend to explain and then go about doing so.
Clearly, literally and without mystery.

Please, since you are so familiar with early Church history and the Hellenistic/Platonic world-view of the Greco-Roman world, Please explain where and what is 'Allegorical' and what is 'Non-Literal'?

I'm certain that someone intelligent enough to stylise his countenance to that of a Hobbit will be able to carefully enlighten me as to where Dr. John's Gospel Account of Jesus Ministry was being 'Allegorical'.

I can't wait.

POPthree13

07-13-2004, 07:07 PM

-Let me restate this:It does not matter how many times it was open or closed before it was sealed

The fact is Eziekiel predicted that when it is sealed it will not be open until the messiah comes.
Again I restate that the status of 'sealed' has been difined by someone and you claim that since it was opened before it must not have been 'sealed' or it wouldn't have been opened. But now it is sealed because it hasn't been opened... but if someone opened it all the believers in this gate thing would just say... 'oh it must not have been sealed yet!' In essense the prophecy is circular, and unproovable. If you could say that the gate has been sealed since those scriptures were written it would be different. The gate has been opened and nothing happened. They could open it again and nothing would happen.

Of course you agree with Chodpa because if you sided with me you would have to admit that the Bible does have validity.I have not claimed that the bible has NO validity. I claim that the bible is NOT a 100% complete, accurate, literal, infallible document pulled 100% from the mouth of God without misinterpretations, mistranslations or the misdirections of man's influence on it. ... but I don't think Chodpa's statement had anything to do with invalidating the bible. He was pointing out that people read a bunch of stuff into the religion that's not in the bible (especially since 300 - 400 AD when the religion took quite a historical turn.)

Oh yeah popthree, I have posted these questions to you two other times and not yet have you replied to them.

Can you please explain these...
1. Messiah would be sold for 30 pieces of silver-Zech. 11:12

2. The Bible states that the Messiah would be the light to the gentiles. Who claimed to be the messiah and is now embraced by the gentiles but is rejected by the Jews?
1. Chapters 9 to 11 of Zechariah are not written by the prophet and are not considered prophetic in nature. They come from the hand of another author that is often called "Second Zechariah" (around 300 BC). These chapters consist of sayings against foreign nations together with promises of power for the returning exiles. They are easy to read stories about what God is going to do to Jerusalem's enemies and how those who return will be rewarded for there courage. How you find a 'Messiah' prediction in these documents is quite beyond me, unless you forgot the read the sentences that come before and after Zech 11:12.
2. Light unto the gentiles - very opinionated statement with can not be verified. Claimed to be the messiah - I don't remember Jesus claiming that. Hitler claimed to be a deliverer of the Gentiles and he is rejected by the Jews. Maybe you got the wrong man... ;)

POPthree13

07-13-2004, 07:12 PM

POPthree13

07-13-2004, 07:27 PM

PS: I don't really see the nightmare here. If Jesus came back I think we'd be pretty good pals.

LuciferSam

07-13-2004, 07:51 PM

The insult implicit in the first sentence was not necessary. (Implying he does not pay attention to any Christian history)
Alright then, I merely took the assumption from the fact that campbell seems to take everything in the Bible literally and at its word. A look at early Christian history would show you that theology would not often take things so literally. I am trying hard to maintain a level of civility in this conversation, but it gets very trying at times for me to hide my contempt for people who repeatedly yelp "The Bible says it and that's all the proof I need! And it's valid because my faith is very very strong!"

It would be a fitting implication for yourself.
The early years of the Christian Church did not see some remarkable 'infusion' of Hellenistic/Platonic 'ideas'. Wrong. Read further on for my counterargument.

Not surprisingly, Apostles like Paul or even Jesus Himself were relating and teaching to a world infused with Hellenistic/Platonic ideas. Jesus' main area of influence in his living days were strictly confined to the Hebrew world and he himself had little to do with Greek philosophy. It would be later Christian theologians that would bring in Hellenistic ideas. Had Jesus hypothetically returned only a few centuries after his death, he would very likely not have understood all the theological changes the religion he founded underwent.

So this you conclude is evidence Christianity was 'infused' with Plato?? No, that is not the extent of my evidence. You haven't covered the entire story. Not long after the passing of Jesus and the Gospels, the people who would assume leadership of the Christians were more and more gentiles rather than Jews. The new leadership was, like most other theologians of the day, heavily schooled in Greek philosophy, and so they would adapt Christianity to a Hellenistic/Platonic model simply because it was how they viewed things. And it was also the way to go if they ever wanted Christianity to earn any respect in the elite world of philosophy. The model that everyone looked to and respect was Plato's model of the cosmos, of a dualistic system with a physical world and an abstract world. In order to bring some status to their religion, which is generally viewed as a cult back then, they would explain Christianity to their theologian peers in terms of Plato's model of the universe and other Hellenistic ideas. Different varieties of Christianity would adapt Plato's model to Christianity in different ways, and Gnostic Christianity was especially influenced by Platonism. That is what I meant by the infusion of Hellenism and Platonism into early Christianity.

Lets go with this baseless suggestion of yours....
You draw some 'conclusion' (which is someone supposed to 'inform' Campbell of God-knows-what) I think I've made the case above that my "suggestion" is not baseless. What I was meaning to inform Campbell of is simply that the Bible isn't always taken literally.

What is 'non-literal'? Not taking everything word-for-word and as if it all really happened exactly as explained in the Bible.

You mean Paul's voyage to Malta 'was and is' to be seen as an 'allegory' about travelling to other islands?

You mean Jesus showing Thomas his healed wounds was really some 'allegory' about how 'man views scars'? Hm, sure, I don't really know about those excerpts specifically. Much of the stuff regarding Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection, and the motives behind them were interpreted at various levels, both literal and allegorical. Some Gnostics would even regard Jesus' resurrection as irrelevant in terms of salvation, which drove the mainstream Church nuts.

Read the New Testament.. or even passages.. The Writers, Apostles, Jesus and everyone involved are entirely aware of Allegory, Literal vs. Non-literal and there is no confusion on anyones part. You mean simply the "Writers." Jesus was never directly involved in the making of the New Testament of course. The Gospel writings that made it into the New Testament were handpicked by the authors. Whether they entirely aware of how it was meant to be interpreted can certainly be disputed, disputes over the correct interpretation of scripture has been the basis for many schisms and new denominations of Christianity.

The Gospels clearly and without 'grey' explain what they are, what they intend to explain and then go about doing so.
Clearly, literally and without mystery. Maybe to you. The 'grey' in the Gospels' explanations in my opinion have more to do with their different depictions of Jesus, from a peace-and-love hippy-ish messiah to a repent-or-feel-my-vengeance messiah.

And I encourage you to read some of the more obscure Gospels, those that didn't make it into the Testament for instance (mainly because a big reason why the Testament was written by the Church was to provide a basis on which to refute the rival Gnostics). The Gospel of Thomas that I mentioned before is particularly cryptic and incomprehensible, with many mystical, all-is-one quotes that seem like they were written by a drunken Buddha - example: "A man who is old in his days will not hesitate to ask a baby of seven days about the place of life and he will live. For many who are first shall be last, and they shall become a single one." If you can read that Gospel and tell me what it's trying to explain, and tell me convincingly that it's literal and clear, then I seriously would be very, very impressed.

Please, since you are so familiar with early Church history and the Hellenistic/Platonic world-view of the Greco-Roman world, Please explain where and what is 'Allegorical' and what is 'Non-Literal'? There is no real absolute explanation for what is allegorical and what is non-literal and what is literal in the Bible. I am not Christian myself (I only have an interest in religious studies in the sense of "hmm, that's interesting," as opposed to "this must be the truth.") so I do not have my own convictions on what's real and what's not in the Bible, I view all of it as one big story myself, based on various historical figures and events. Different groups had different ways of interpreting it. That's a fundamental part of all the debates between the many different groups of Christianity back then, the various factions would use different bits of scripture to validate the points they were trying to make.

I'm certain that someone intelligent enough to stylise his countenance to that of a Hobbit will be able to carefully enlighten me as to where Dr. John's Gospel Account of Jesus Ministry was being 'Allegorical'.

I can't wait. Hehe, calm down dude. I haven't thought of my sketch before as resembling a hobbit, but as a Tolkien fan I thank ye for the compliment. As I've said above, I have none of my own exacting convictions as to what should be taken literally in the Bible and what shouldn't, as I myself am not Christian. Being non-Christian though, naturally I don't believe that any of the supernatural and "miracle" elements are real. I am simply saying that the Bible has not always been taken word-for-word everything-in-this-book-actually-happened literally, as some other people on this forum seem to do, and in fact has very often not been taken so literally. Provide me with examples of the more fanciful stories in the Bible, and I will probably say that there is allegory involved. And as someone else said above, a good deal of the Bible was very likely, in my opinion, meant to be interpreted like a parable or fable with lessons and wisdoms rather than a literal, this is what happened story.

TheFly

07-13-2004, 08:03 PM

Prophesy is propaganda...

We could blow up the gate... then they would merely say that prophesy has not been fulfilled because nobody had actually walked through the gate...

And that is what makes prophesy so powerful...

And I'm not surprised that other religions are scared (for want of a better word) by this prophesy... after all, they are believers too... they may not be believers in the Christian faith, but they believe in their own prophesies... so it will come as no surprise if their actions indicate that they also believe in your prophesies too...

You demand an explaination... I can't give you one... but I expect there are many possible explainations as to why it cannot be opened... your knowledge of The Bible strikes me as being impressive, but your weild it like a moody teenager in a childish game of "taunt the atheist"...

Your prophesy is meaningless to me... just as your gate is meaningless to me... you give them power and value because of what you believe... for me, they have no power or value because they have no connection to my reality...

So I will never be able to dissuade you of your beliefs because I do not offer any beliefs to replace them... only the evidence of my life experience...

You believe... I do not believe...

Its as simple as that...

Fly...
.

LuciferSam

07-13-2004, 08:09 PM

Couldn't we just walk through the gate after we blew a hole in it?

Cosmic Butterfly

07-13-2004, 08:13 PM

Why would the Muslims be afraid of the Messiah??? They believe in Jesus (Isa) as a great prophet as well, who will come back.

Jaz Delorean

07-13-2004, 08:22 PM

Jesus might come back tonight...he could come back anytime...

campbell34

07-13-2004, 09:47 PM

LuciferSam,

Dude, if I cared enough to take the time, I could give you all the detail you want. I'd weave fantastic stories... I mean, predictions about giant magic wombats and angels riding in flying pumpkin chariots and Jesus returning in a flying saucer. The fact it's described in detail is only a testimony, if anything, to the author's imagination rather than his/her foresight.

No one really knows what Jesus actually said. There are no actual scriptures of Jesus' teachings directly from him, all accounts of Jesus come from the Gospels or later writers, none of whom have ever encountered Jesus. This explains why the four official Gospels have such differing accounts of Christ, and the Gnostic Gospels are often even more cryptic or strange (read the Gospel of Thomas, that one's always entertaining).

In that specific case, the prophecies that Paul had about Jesus returning very soon, and that he and his followers would never die. These didn't come about, so later Christian leaders would say, essentially, "Oh... well, uh, that was just allegory. Jesus actually won't be back for quite a while. And what Paul meant was not that we won't physically die, but our spirits won't." Basically to that effect.

-You can predict lots of things but unlike the writers then pen the Bible none of your predictions outside of what is predictable will come true. We all can predict the sun will rise tomorrow. However, the Bible has predicted hundreds of prophecies that have already come true thousands of years before they happen with impossible detail. Only God could have known the circumstances that have allowed these prophecies to come to pass.

-There are different views of Jesus life but that is because there are different writers talking about his life from their perspective. The most important thing is that none of their views conflict with each other. Now if you have any substance of what you told me, please show me where you see a conflict. I am sure I'll find this entertaining.

-Apparently when you read the Bible you don't believe in reading in context. The verse that you mention can be found in Luke 9:27 but you should have also read Luke 9:28-36 and this is the explanation: this is where Peter John and James saw Jesus in the glory of His coming it was a vision of the future. Christians refer to this as the Transfiguration. Usually nonbelievers love to take Luke 9:27 out of context dishonestly and do not read the rest of the verse. In an attempt to try and prove the Bible wrong. It's a cheap shot.

FreakyJoeMan

07-13-2004, 09:53 PM

http://itsb.ucsf.edu/~vcr/NaziMelt2.jpeg
This is me after the gate opens, right?

campbell34

07-13-2004, 10:38 PM

Again I restate that the status of 'sealed' has been difined by someone and you claim that since it was opened before it must not have been 'sealed' or it wouldn't have been opened. But now it is sealed because it hasn't been opened... but if someone opened it all the believers in this gate thing would just say... 'oh it must not have been sealed yet!' In essense the prophecy is circular, and unproovable. If you could say that the gate has been sealed since those scriptures were written it would be different. The gate has been opened and nothing happened. They could open it again and nothing would happen...

1. Chapters 9 to 11 of Zechariah are not written by the prophet and are not considered prophetic in nature. They come from the hand of another author that is often called "Second Zechariah" (around 300 BC). These chapters consist of sayings against foreign nations together with promises of power for the returning exiles. They are easy to read stories about what God is going to do to Jerusalem's enemies and how those who return will be rewarded for there courage. How you find a 'Messiah' prediction in these documents is quite beyond me, unless you forgot the read the sentences that come before and after Zech 11:12.
2. Light unto the gentiles - very opinionated statement with can not be verified. Claimed to be the messiah - I don't remember Jesus claiming that. Hitler claimed to be a deliverer of the Gentiles and he is rejected by the Jews. Maybe you got the wrong man... ;)
-East Gate

The scriptures never stated when, they only stated that it would be sealed. And the original gate would have to be buried because the prophecy requires that both gates exist at the same time. The gate that Ezeikiel saw in his vision did not exist yet. The gate to be sealed would have to be built on the original gate a thousand years later. Because the Bible states that when the Messiah comes he would enter through the porch of that gate. And it is the porch of the original gate that was to be sealed. The arabs have tried twice to open this gate once in 1917 and the second time in 1967. On the very day they tried to open it, Jerusalem passed out of Arab control. In 1917 the British took over and in 1967 the Jews took over. That is some coincidence considering it was on the very day they tried to open the gate.

-Zechariah

The prophecies of Zechariah were fully accepted by the Jewish community until about 1100 A.D. Many of the Beliefs today denying the messianic prophecies would have been rejected by Jews that lived before 1100 A.D. For you see all Rabbis before that time fully embraced the belief of the literal interpretation of the coming Messiah. About 900 years ago Rabbi ShlomoYitzchaki (Rashi) decided that all pervious Jewish religious leaders from the beginning were wrong in their understanding of many of these scriptures. So he took it upon himself and his followers to change that belief from Messiah, to Israel. In short, he did away with a 1000 years of Jewish belief and set the standard for a new belief. It was obvious to him that all previous religious theologians and Rabbis did not know what they were talking about. As a result, most Jews now reject what was clearly accepted in their faith and now embrace this new thinking. They had to forget the great medieval Jewish scholars like Moses Ben Nachman, Rabbi Moshe Konen Ibn Crispin, or Rabbi Moshe El-Sheikn. All of them with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophets were speaking of King Messiah. Could it be that all of the Jewish religious Rabbis and theologians were wrong from the beginning, and nobody got it right until Rashi came. The questions is, who was right? Was it the early religious leaders who were closer to the Bible's origin, or was it the maverick theologian Rashi? Apparently, you believe Rashi was right. Is it any wonder that 90% of today's Jews have no real religious faith.

-Light unto the Gentiles

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. -John 14:6

Light unto the Gentiles: two billion people today are considered Christians who else would be the light of the Gentiles that is also a Jew??

peace_sells

07-13-2004, 10:39 PM

lookin' pretty good there freakyjoeman

campbell34

07-13-2004, 10:46 PM

Why would the Muslims be afraid of the Messiah??? They believe in Jesus (Isa) as a great prophet as well, who will come back.
-The Muslims do not believe that Jesus is their savior. They do not accept his blood sacrifice. They also do not believe they have to be born again through Jesus.

John 3

1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

LuciferSam

07-14-2004, 12:47 AM

-You can predict lots of things but unlike the writers then pen the Bible none of your predictions outside of what is predictable will come true. We all can predict the sun will rise tomorrow. However, the Bible has predicted hundreds of prophecies that have already come true thousands of years before they happen with impossible detail. Only God could have known the circumstances that have allowed these prophecies to come to pass.
Uh, what in the name of all-that-might-be-holy are you talking about? The Bible has predicted hundreds of prophecies "that have already come true thousands of years before they happen"? How does something become true before it happens? The Bible hasn't even been in existance for that many thousands of years, the New Testament hasn't even been around for 2,000. Please elaborate on this because your above statement doesn't even make sense.

-There are different views of Jesus life but that is because there are different writers talking about his life from their perspective. The most important thing is that none of their views conflict with each other. Now if you have any substance of what you told me, please show me where you see a conflict. I am sure I'll find this entertaining.
So you first say that the Gospels do have different accounts of Jesus, different views and perspectives as you say, yet they don't conflict... how are they different yet not conflicting with each other? Anyway, it is well known that the four Gospels' accounts are not entirely consistent with each other. The more Hellenistic John has the most apparent differences, having been derived allegedly from a different manuscript, it's why he's categorized apart from the other three "synoptic" gospels.

-Apparently when you read the Bible you don't believe in reading in context. The verse that you mention can be found in Luke 9:27 but you should have also read Luke 9:28-36 and this is the explanation: this is where Peter John and James saw Jesus in the glory of His coming it was a vision of the future. Christians refer to this as the Transfiguration. Usually nonbelievers love to take Luke 9:27 out of context dishonestly and do not read the rest of the verse. In an attempt to try and prove the Bible wrong. It's a cheap shot.
I'll do more digging into that then, but I'm pretty certain that Paul's belief in the second coming of Jesus was at any rate a different sort than later Christian theology would have, that is, he expected Jesus to return very soon in his time as opposed to thousands of years.

campbell34

07-14-2004, 03:02 AM

Uh, what in the name of all-that-might-be-holy are you talking about? The Bible has predicted hundreds of prophecies "that have already come true thousands of years before they happen"? How does something become true before it happens? The Bible hasn't even been in existance for that many thousands of years, the New Testament hasn't even been around for 2,000. Please elaborate on this because your above statement doesn't even make sense.

So you first say that the Gospels do have different accounts of Jesus, different views and perspectives as you say, yet they don't conflict... how are they different yet not conflicting with each other? Anyway, it is well known that the four Gospels' accounts are not entirely consistent with each other. The more Hellenistic John has the most apparent differences, having been derived allegedly from a different manuscript, it's why he's categorized apart from the other three "synoptic" gospels.

I'll do more digging into that then, but I'm pretty certain that Paul's belief in the second coming of Jesus was at any rate a different sort than later Christian theology would have, that is, he expected Jesus to return very soon in his time as opposed to thousands of years.
-The reason I said that the prophecies were true before they happen is because when they did happen, it was evident at that time that the prophecies had been trues all along. Therefore, the Bible predicts history before it happens.

Example: according to the Bible in the last days....

*The Jews would return to Israel which occured in 1948

*The exact order the Jews would reclaim the land.
Judah would be occupied first, as the Bible predicted, which happened in 1948
Jerusalem was occupied second, as the Bible predicted, which occured in 1967

*That when the Jews return to Israel, they would be one nation with one ruler.
Note: Before the Jews were kicked out of Israel, it was divided into two nations with two rulers.

*Israel would be surrounded by enemies...They are

*Israel would have one of the strongest armies in the world...They do

-They don't conflict because one of the writers might have been focusing his attention on what the crowd was saying where as another writer was recording what a Roman soldier was saying. Yet, they are talking about the same event. They where just speaking from their perspective. If they where trying to get a story to agree they could have all gotten together and copied the story word from word.

-John predicted in the book of Revelation that at the time of the end, from out of the east would arise an army of 200 million men. It is questionable whether there where 200 million men in the whole world at this time. He also predicted that cities could be destroyed in hour's time in the future. Today, however, all of this is possible. But it was not back then.

Brocktoon

07-14-2004, 10:47 AM

Thank you PopThree for demonstrating exactly what I meant to point out.

ANYONE with the ability to read or be read to clearly understands when Jesus (and the writer) are about to start a Parable.
Then the Parable is recorded.
Often the writer then explains again that you have read a Parable.
Sometimes the meaning of the Parable (the NON LITERAL PART) is discussed or explained.

CHILDREN have NO problem grasping that this was the part where its an account and now this is the part where its a 'Parable' or 'Allegory'.

Another 'Clue' you are about to read an 'Allegorical' statement will be (example) when Jesus says something like:
"Now Im going to tell you a Parable.. The ___ is LIKE a ___

Do you actually mean to tell me that you and Lucifersam are actually at such a un-freaking-believable low level of concept grasping that you actually think your 'teaching us' how and where Allegories work inside accounts?!

Please, I really want you to tell us of your amazing intellectual discovery of 'Part of the Bible' that are 'Allegorical'.
What about the Prodigal Son?

You should really give us a 'lesson' about these things.. some of us thought it was just a Inheritance Law specifically for wealthy land-owners who had two Sons?

Oh wow.. You really have shown me the way!
Now I realise that something recorded in the Bible might be something called an 'Allegory' and be 'Non-Literal'!?

This means its not 'Real' physical descriptions of a specific event.. and therefore you just made me think "hey.. the entire Bible is proven to be partly 'not really real'... So its really just a soft nothing book that isnt real!

Wow!

- Dimwits!

Jaz Delorean

07-14-2004, 11:15 AM

I'll do more digging into that then, but I'm pretty certain that Paul's belief in the second coming of Jesus was at any rate a different sort than later Christian theology would have, that is, he expected Jesus to return very soon in his time as opposed to thousands of years.
Thats the feeling and sort of knowing that so many Christians have, I do, i expect Jesus to return very soon in my lifetime! Thousands of Christians all feel like this, it's what makes us go!! Jesus could come back any time, so we should expect him! and thats just what Paul was doing, it's not about theology or studying people, it's about listening to and living in the Spirit....
Jaz
xxx

LuciferSam

07-14-2004, 04:59 PM

Heh, well Campbell the thing about the Israel prophecy is that I don't believe it isn't a wild stretch of the imagination to not be surprised that the Bible has such content about Israel's future, since the Bible is derived from Jewish scripture. The content you posted can be attributed to Zionism or are just predictable (for instance, the Jews always had enemies around them). So would this all mean that Judaism is perhaps a more valid faith than Christianity even? Had various empires happened to actually succeed in their prophecies of ruling for thousands of years (Third Reich, just to give an example), would that have meant their leaders had astounding powers of seeing the future?

So the Israel prophecies just aren't impressive to me. Of course, my atheistic-agnostic viewpoints would explain that, as your Christian viewpoints would validate yours. I guess we can agree to disagree, or you may continue to present me with more of these fulfilled prophecies you speak of if you want.

Do you actually mean to tell me that you and Lucifersam are actually at such a un-freaking-believable low level of concept grasping that you actually think your 'teaching us' how and where Allegories work inside accounts?!
Sometimes there are Christians who give me the impression that they really can't grasp such concepts, and take everything in the Bible at its word. If I sounded condescending it's mostly because sometimes you guys give that impression of low-concept-understanding to us, such as apparently expecting non-Christians to shake in their boots because of this gate prophecy.

...

This means its not 'Real' physical descriptions of a specific event.. and therefore you just made me think "hey.. the entire Bible is proven to be partly 'not really real'... So its really just a soft nothing book that isnt real!

Wow!

- Dimwits!
Sheesh, who spat in your Bible today? And you reprimand me for only "implied" insults. From my perspective, yes, much of the Bible is a "soft nothing book" that isn't real, which is why I don't pay any regard to people presenting quotes from them to try and validate the existence of a magic gate in the real world.

Brocktoon

07-15-2004, 08:47 AM

Concerning the Prophecies.
Far from being 'Open ended' 'Allegories' - Prophecy is a way to make hard mathematical, logical conclusions about the authority of the Scriptures.

Of course, any one particular prophecy could be said to be 'Chance'.
The Gates could be said to be a 'Happenstance'. Fine.

Now so could a Prophecy predicting Tyre would never be anything more than a fishing village again for the rest of history.

What happens is that you the laws of probability quickly.. very quickly catch up to you.
Eventually.. even being extremely conservative.. you realise that the laws of statistical probability, fluke, chance (whatever you like) all can NOT explain away the hard cold numbers.

Ultimately, its anything but 'soft allegories' or some kind of subjective interpreting.
Its cold hard logical facts and an avalanche of mathematics.

Enjoy! :D

POPthree13

07-15-2004, 07:06 PM

Campbell - My point was that Zechariah didn't write that passage. Ans that your prophecy is completely useless. Sealed means closed. So anything that closes will remain sealed until it is opened. I would like to see where you get the sources that the Arabs were trying to open the gate when control was handed over..... I can find no such evidence.

Brocktoon - Sam has got a real good grasp on early christian history and I think his point about parable is MORE than valid here. I think most people take literally things that were never meant to be taken literally. Like Creation, the garden of eden, perhaps even the resurrection. Most of the jewish people I have talked to about 'stories' like creation say they are just stories meant to impart wisdom and not meant to be taken literally. But Christians adopt it and now it must be read word for word and beleived literally? Did you forget whose stories these are? What do they have to do with God, with Christ? Silly christians....

POPthree13

07-15-2004, 07:10 PM

Ultimately, its anything but 'soft allegories' or some kind of subjective interpreting.
Its cold hard logical facts and an avalanche of mathematics.

Enjoy! :D
I am not sure if I have ever read a bigger load of crap. There is no such thing as interpretation without subjectivity. Ever prophecy I have EVER heard was fullfilled was so full of generic language, fuzzy facts and obscure language that it could be twisted to mean dozens if not hundreds of thousands of things dependign on what you want to prove.

Read you bible and in tandem with any docuemtn claiming that hundreds of prophecies have been fulfilled and you will quickly realize that these people steal individual passages that 'supposedly' fulfill prophecy and never talk about the context of the scripture and how it has NOTHING to do with prophecy.

campbell34

07-16-2004, 03:22 AM

popthree,

"Sealed means closed. So anything that closes will remain sealed until it is opened."

-Right. Eziekel predicted that once the gate is closed that it will remain closed until the Messiah walks through it. Today, after about 1200 years, it still remains closed. However, we are only about 30 years away from the begining of God's third day. Things will begin to change.

"I would like to see where you get the sources that the Arabs were trying to open the gate when control was handed over..... I can find no such evidence."

-One source is from the book Messiah, by Grant Jeffery, copyright 1991

I have read other and sources and will try to locate. I have also heard that Jews during the '67 war were going to blast through the gate but they hesitated because they knew the prophecy.

"The next day I read a fascinating news account about one of the Jewish commando groups that had been involved in the assault on the city. The article stated that some members of the group had suggested catching the Jordanian defenders of the city off guard by blowing open the sealed Eastern Gate. But the leader of the group, an Orthodox Jew, had vehemently protested the idea, stating that "the Eastern Gate can be opened only when the Messiah comes."

That statement caught my eye. I wondered what the fellow was talking about. I knew nothing about the Eastern Gate except that it was the only gate of the city that led directly onto the Temple Mount. I was not aware that it was sealed, nor did I know that its opening was in any way biblically linked to the return of the Messiah."

read more... http://www.lamblion.com/prophecy/key/Key-13.php

campbell34

07-16-2004, 03:54 AM

"Twice in the last century an attempt to open the sealed Eastern Gate has failed. I found the following in Grant Jeffrey’s book "Heaven, The Last Frontier." The first attempt was on December 9th 1917, when the Grand Mufti, the Arab leader of Jerusalem, tried to open this gate. He had ordered the other gates to Jerusalem sealed to deter the approaching allied Expeditionary Army led by the British General Allenby. This was back in the early 1900s when the British were dismantling the Ottoman Empire, which had ruled over the land of Israel for 400 years.

But, the Grand Mufti did need to have one gate remain open, so he ordered his workmen to open the mysterious sealed gate. As the workmen picked up their sledgehammers, Allenby's airplane flew over the city, telling the Arabs to flee. Miraculously, without a shot being fired, the opposing soldiers fled the city. The city was delivered into the hands of the Britain, which one month earlier had promised the Jews the right to re-establish sovereignty over their ancient homeland, via the famous Balfour Declaration. The workmen fearfully put down their sledgehammers and the gate remained sealed as Ezekiel had prophesied.

Then, in 1967, the ancient prophecy was fulfilled again. But first, a little history: In 1948, the Jews declared sovereignty over a portion of their ancient homeland. In retaliation, King Hussein of Jordan, who had control over the ancient city of Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount, forbade the Jews from worshipping at their sacred Western Wall. This was the first time in centuries that the Jews did not have access to the Western Wall, which is a remnant of the wall around the second Temple, which was destroyed by the Romans some 1900 years ago.

King Hussein decided to build a hotel for Arab pilgrims on this section of the Western Wall, closing off this area to Jewish worship forever. The planned hotel was to be built over the Magreb Gate, which Moslems used to enter the Temple Mount. So, the King needed to open another gate so that Moslems could get to the El Aksa Mosque, which was built by Moslems on the site of the Jewish Temple Mount.

In violation of the prophecy, he ordered his workmen to open the sealed Eastern Gate. But, during this time, Arabs were also preparing to attack Israel, hoping to wipe out the Jewish state. And the Jews were about to preemptively respond to this planned attack. On June 5th of 1967, as the workmen prepared their air-hammers to shatter the huge stones sealing the Eastern Gate, an intimidating array of Israeli aircraft flew overhead. The Six Day War had begun, and the workmen put down their tools.

At the end of the Six Day War, the workmen were unable to resume their project because the Jews had managed to recapture their ancient capital of Jerusalem. True to Ezekiel’s prophecy, The Eastern Gate is still sealed. The gate will remain sealed until the day when the promised Messiah will enter into His Kingdom."

By George Konig
Christian Internet Forum
www.konig.org
January 18, 2003

Brocktoon

07-16-2004, 10:17 AM

I am not sure if I have ever read a bigger load of crap. You should read several of LuciferSams posts about Early Christianity then..

There is no such thing as interpretation without subjectivity. Lets take a look at this statement of yours.
Maybe I leave a note on your parked car that reads: "Sorry, but I backed into your car while backing up. The damage to your left bumper will be covered by my insurance company. Heres my number. My bad!

- Now, lets get something cleared up - You 'Can' interpret that note as being a Lesson about Cats and how they should not eat peanut butter'

After all .. that is just 'one interpretation' from 'your perspective'??
However, its not an intellectually valid interpretation.. and certainly not 'equal' to the common literal interpretation.
In addition - It does not 'mitigate' the literal interpretation does it?
No, of course not.
Would an observer be helpful and accurate if he declared: "Well... One person interprets it as being a literal event... and another interpreted it as a Cautionary warning about Cats and Peanut butter... 'Therefore' we will never truly be able to find any real meaning in the note!?

"Well that note was nothing but soft fuzzy 'anything' because there were at least two different interpretations right"

No.. There was just one person that is a moron and says silly things about notes.

Where does 'Subjectivity' come in. You seem convinced you have heard of this issue.
Well.. the Subjectivity DOES come into play on most Prophecies but it is almost always regarding A SPECIFIC WORD DEFINITION and rarely has anything to do with THE CLEAR MEANING AND LITERAL EXPLANATION of the events or objects themselves.

Perfect example in the Gates Prophecy.
There is NO RIGHT for 'Subjectivity' when it comes to the Objects themselves.
The Gates are cleary described, the events are explained and the timeline is established.
(Please note.. you 'can' interpret them to be Cats and Peanut Butter sandwiches 'if' you so choose. That is not 'Subjective'.. that is 'Stupid")

Now.. YES.. there is room for 'subjective' speculation and interpretation of a particular aspect of a definition.
In this case 'Sealed'.
YOU may speculate the, in this case, the author intended to use the word in the most extreme literal and scientifically stringent way possible.
The Gates will always be 'Hermetically Sealed' and scientifically can have NO air or water pass throught them at any points.

This is technically 'fair' and yes that word can be open to some degree of subjective opinion.. since we dont know exactly the precise meaning and emphasis the writer poured into that word.

This DOES NOT LOGICALLY 'mitigate away' the clear explanation of the prophecy.
It does not make it 'Fuzzy' now.
Regardless of which extreme 'subjective interpretation' we put on the word 'Sealed' - it does NOT make the Gates themselves 'less real'.

[QUOTE]Ever prophecy I have EVER heard was fullfilled was so full of generic language, fuzzy facts and obscure language that it could be twisted to mean dozens if not hundreds of thousands of things dependign on what you want to prove.
I am not sure if I have ever read a bigger load of crap. You should read several of LuciferSams posts about Early Christianity then..

There is no such thing as interpretation without subjectivity. Lets take a look at this statement of yours.
Maybe I leave a note on your parked car that reads: "Sorry, but I backed into your car while backing up. The damage to your left bumper will be covered by my insurance company. Heres my number. My bad!

- Now, lets get something cleared up - You 'Can' interpret that note as being a Lesson about Cats and how they should not eat peanut butter'

After all .. that is just 'one interpretation' from 'your perspective'??
However, its not an intellectually valid interpretation.. and certainly not 'equal' to the common literal interpretation.
In addition - It does not 'mitigate' the literal interpretation does it?
No, of course not.
Would an observer be helpful and accurate if he declared: "Well... One person interprets it as being a literal event... and another interpreted it as a Cautionary warning about Cats and Peanut butter... 'Therefore' we will never truly be able to find any real meaning in the note!?

"Well that note was nothing but soft fuzzy 'anything' because there were at least two different interpretations right"

No.. There was just one person that is a moron and says silly things about notes.

Where does 'Subjectivity' come in. You seem convinced you have heard of this issue.
Well.. the Subjectivity DOES come into play on most Prophecies but it is almost always regarding A SPECIFIC WORD DEFINITION and rarely has anything to do with THE CLEAR MEANING AND LITERAL EXPLANATION of the events or objects themselves.

Perfect example in the Gates Prophecy.
There is NO RIGHT for 'Subjectivity' when it comes to the Objects themselves.
The Gates are cleary described, the events are explained and the timeline is established.
(Please note.. you 'can' interpret them to be Cats and Peanut Butter sandwiches 'if' you so choose. That is not 'Subjective'.. that is 'Stupid")

Now.. YES.. there is room for 'subjective' speculation and interpretation of a particular aspect of a definition.
In this case 'Sealed'.
YOU may speculate the, in this case, the author intended to use the word in the most extreme literal and scientifically stringent way possible.
The Gates will always be 'Hermetically Sealed' and scientifically can have NO air or water pass throught them at any points.

This is technically 'fair' and yes that word can be open to some degree of subjective opinion.. since we dont know exactly the precise meaning and emphasis the writer poured into that word.

This DOES NOT LOGICALLY 'mitigate away' the clear explanation of the prophecy.
It does not make it 'Fuzzy' now.
Regardless of which extreme 'subjective interpretation' we put on the word 'Sealed' - it does NOT make the Gates themselves 'less real'.

[QUOTE]Ever prophecy I have EVER heard was fullfilled was so full of generic language, fuzzy facts and obscure language that it could be twisted to mean dozens if not hundreds of thousands of things dependign on what you want to prove.
I am not sure if I have ever read a bigger load of crap. You should read several of LuciferSams posts about Early Christianity then..

There is no such thing as interpretation without subjectivity. Lets take a look at this statement of yours.
Maybe I leave a note on your parked car that reads: "Sorry, but I backed into your car while backing up. The damage to your left bumper will be covered by my insurance company. Heres my number. My bad!

- Now, lets get something cleared up - You 'Can' interpret that note as being a Lesson about Cats and how they should not eat peanut butter'

After all .. that is just 'one interpretation' from 'your perspective'??
However, its not an intellectually valid interpretation.. and certainly not 'equal' to the common literal interpretation.
In addition - It does not 'mitigate' the literal interpretation does it?
No, of course not.
Would an observer be helpful and accurate if he declared: "Well... One person interprets it as being a literal event... and another interpreted it as a Cautionary warning about Cats and Peanut butter... 'Therefore' we will never truly be able to find any real meaning in the note!?

"Well that note was nothing but soft fuzzy 'anything' because there were at least two different interpretations right"

No.. There was just one person that is a moron and says silly things about notes.

Where does 'Subjectivity' come in. You seem convinced you have heard of this issue.
Well.. the Subjectivity DOES come into play on most Prophecies but it is almost always regarding A SPECIFIC WORD DEFINITION and rarely has anything to do with THE CLEAR MEANING AND LITERAL EXPLANATION of the events or objects themselves.

Perfect example in the Gates Prophecy.
There is NO RIGHT for 'Subjectivity' when it comes to the Objects themselves.
The Gates are cleary described, the events are explained and the timeline is established.
(Please note.. you 'can' interpret them to be Cats and Peanut Butter sandwiches 'if' you so choose. That is not 'Subjective'.. that is 'Stupid")

Now.. YES.. there is room for 'subjective' speculation and interpretation of a particular aspect of a definition.
In this case 'Sealed'.
YOU may speculate the, in this case, the author intended to use the word in the most extreme literal and scientifically stringent way possible.
The Gates will always be 'Hermetically Sealed' and scientifically can have NO air or water pass throught them at any points.

This is technically 'fair' and yes that word can be open to some degree of subjective opinion.. since we dont know exactly the precise meaning and emphasis the writer poured into that word.

This DOES NOT LOGICALLY 'mitigate away' the clear explanation of the prophecy.
It does not make it 'Fuzzy' now.
Regardless of which extreme 'subjective interpretation' we put on the word 'Sealed' - it does NOT make the Gates themselves 'less real'.

Brocktoon

07-16-2004, 10:18 AM

Ever prophecy I have EVER heard was fullfilled was so full of generic language, fuzzy facts and obscure language that it could be twisted to mean dozens if not hundreds of thousands of things dependign on what you want to prove.

This is because you were reading Nostradamus Prophecies.

Add to that you probably do not know the context of Biblical Prophecies you are reading - therefore it sounds all 'Dreamy and fuzzy and 'could be anything'.

Take Johns Revelations on the Isle of Patmos.

You might just read some prophecy about 'Armour Plated Locust' with 'Hair like women" and 'Stings in their Tails"...

Crazy.. that could be 'anything' and 'nothing' IF you think you are just reading some wild rant without any context.

In Johns case, the text CLEARLY EXPLAINS that John himself does not understand what he is seeing either- he is literally writing what he see's IN A VISION - and not transcribing a clear defined explanation of impending logical sequence.

Could it be John is descrining Apache Attack Helicopters?

Maybe.. we dont know and he would not have any 'reference' for such a thing..

What WE DO KNOW.. is that the text clearly and literally describes John as seeing something HE DESCRIBES as an armour-plated Locust with 'hair' and sounds of Rushing waterfalls.

The fact we dont know 'exactly WHAT' does not 'Cancel out' that he DID.

You seem to think 'Any Unknown' about 'any' part of a Prophecy 'therefore' nullifies the clearly explained 'Big Picture'?

But lets look at an example of a 'Literal Prophecy' which is in a clear "This will happen and how" context:

Mark 16:17-18 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."

Now you seem to believe that this is open to any kind of interpretation. Hundreds you say?

Ok sure.. you can 'interpret' that its really a morality lesson about Cats eating Peanut Butter.

Your a Dumbass and No.. No it does not 'nullify' or equal in validity to the clear, obvious and literal "It is what it is" interpretation.

(which is not even 'interpreting' but simply reading the sentences as they present themselves!)

In the book of Acts (a documentary about the Apostles after Christ) Paul picks up (and is bitten) by a poisonous snake.

So, forget for a minute whether or not you have subjectively decided the Book of Acts is a false document...

... Why would you refer to this prophecy as 'Soft and Fuzzy and open to all interpretations?!

What part of "They will pick up Snakes" is so confusing to you PopThree????
Please, please share with us what literary school of thought allows anyone to sensibly argue that its anything but a prophecy about picking up snakes?

Read you bible and in tandem with any docuemtn claiming that hundreds of prophecies have been fulfilled and you will quickly realize that these people steal individual passages that 'supposedly' fulfill prophecy and never talk about the context of the scripture and how it has NOTHING to do with prophecy.

I have no doubt there are library's of 'Quack' Prophecy books.

Many 'Crackpot' theorists have their own TV shows now.

This is not logical to presume that because some silly 'prophecy expert' is being irresponsible (and fitting news events to 'match' prophecy usually) will somehow nullify, mitigate or 'soften' what really are cold hard facts.

I look for the facts.

Fact: Prophecy is made that the Jews will be dispersed throughout the world.

Fact: Jews were dispersed throughout the world.

Of course, you can say its a lucky guess.

I think you can say that about any 'one' or even 'ten' prophecies.

Its when 100's are put together, given even a conservative estimate and even giving the most 'soft interpretation' as intellectually honestly possible... and STILL I see Odds of around 100 Million to 1.

Then I have to say.. Hmm yes, its logical to believe (beyond a reasonable doubt) that the Author of this book has some SuperNatural 'Omnipotence' that can make his Word trustworthy.

POPthree13

07-17-2004, 12:49 AM

All I would say to ALL of that is that I have trouble recounting a single biblical prophecy that was fulfilled to the satisfaction of all who interpret the bible.

I know you says hundreds have been fulfilled... by what source does this information come? I have heard that hundreds of prophecies were fulfilled when Jesus came, but when I start looking them up more than half are not prophecies at all, another 25% have NOTHING to do with the subject matter the prophecy collectors suggest it might, and the last 25% are so open ended and obscure that they could be read to mean any number of things depending ENTIRELY on what you want to find. The Jews do not beleive ANY of these prophecies were fulfilled in Jesus and I can't really find evidence to prove them wrong.

Example:
Zechariah 11:11-13
11 It was revoked on that day, and so the afflicted of the flock who were watching me knew it was the word of the LORD .
12 I told them, "If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it." So they paid me thirty pieces of silver.
13 And the LORD said to me, "Throw it to the potter"-the handsome price at which they priced me! So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the LORD to the potter.

Many christians claim that this is one of the most significant prophecies Jesus fullfilled. They say: "Here God indicates the Messiah will be (1) betrayed, (2) by a friend, (3) for thirty pieces, (4) of silver, that will be (5) cast onto the floor, (6) of the Temple, and (7) used to buy a potter's field."

I see nothing about betrayal, nothing about a friend. True thrity peices of silver were tossed into a house of the lord and THEN the cheif priest (who was obviously familiar with the prophecy as cheif preist) took the silver and bought a potters field. How convenient that the prophecy was fulfilled!

I prophecy here and now that $12 will be cast from my wallet into the liquor store to buy a 12-pack of Carona after work. Won't it be magical when I, who know the prophecy, find a way to fulfill it?

Besides that, the 30 peices of silver was owed to Zecharia... who says that's a prophecy at all? The fact that someone owed Zecharia 30 peices of silver and Judas received 30 peices of silver is THAT remarkably coincidental as to assume it must have been a prophecy?

campbell34

07-17-2004, 06:23 AM

POPthree13,

"The Jews do not beleive ANY of these prophecies were fulfilled in Jesus and I can't really find evidence to prove them wrong."

-Of course they don't believe these prophecies and the Bible predicted that His own people would reject him. The Jews believed all the Messianic Prophecies untill around 1200 A.D. But after nobody else showed up, they started to believe that they would not be fulfilled literally. There was a certain time in history where these prophecies could be fulfilled and that time was during the time of Christ.

"I see nothing about betrayal, nothing about a friend. True thrity peices of silver were tossed into a house of the lord and THEN the cheif priest (who was obviously familiar with the prophecy as cheif preist) took the silver and bought a potters field. How convenient that the prophecy was fulfilled!"

(1)betrayal by a friend (Psalm 41:9; Luke 22:3-4; John 13:18)

-Question. Why would the Chief priest aid in fulfilling a prophecy that He said Jesus had no part in? The Chief Priest was trying to deny that Jesus was the Messiah, why would he purposely try to fulfill a prophecy that supported Jesus?

Your argument makes no sense.

"Besides that, the 30 peices of silver was owed to Zecharia... who says that's a prophecy at all? The fact that someone owed Zecharia 30 peices of silver and Judas received 30 peices of silver is THAT remarkably coincidental as to assume it must have been a prophecy?"

-This has nothing to do with Zechariah. It is the Lord speaking. For it says in Zech. 11:13,

"And the LORD said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the LORD."

Therefore, the Lord is speaking of Himself.

LuciferSam

07-17-2004, 03:50 PM

You should read several of LuciferSams posts about Early Christianity then.. Heh, so you completely disregard anything I said about the early influences and variations of your faith? Please enlighten me, oh wise one, on the discrepencies then. You conveniently ignored responding to what I'd said earlier about it. I'll freely admit that you and campbell will probably always beat me when it comes to meticulously digging out bits of Bible scripture, but I do profess to have decent knowledge of early Christian history, and you've yet to give me a reasonable refutation. You may fling all the scripture excerpts you want at me, but their importance is negligible to me (regarding validating this gate theory in the real world) as the Bible, being faith-based, is just about as credible as any other religious book.

LuciferSam

07-17-2004, 04:13 PM

Of course, any one particular prophecy could be said to be 'Chance'. The Gates could be said to be a 'Happenstance'. Fine. Whatever. The Gates haven't been proven to be so divinely protected rather than just being very well built. I won't deem the Gate prophecy valid unless all human means of destroying it have failed.

What happens is that you the laws of probability quickly.. very quickly catch up to you.
Eventually.. even being extremely conservative.. you realise that the laws of statistical probability, fluke, chance (whatever you like) all can NOT explain away the hard cold numbers. I don't chalk it all up to fluke and chance. I give the authors of prophecy enough credit that they're smart enough to make their predictions reasonably safe. When something occurs that happens to be related to some prophecy, I see no reason why it must mean the validation of that prophecy and thus the amazing vision of its author. There is such a thing as taking real-life causes into consideration, you should try that sometime. Why did the Jews get back into Israel? Hmm, well it's because the western powers and the UN put them back there. Simple as that, and whether it was prophesied or not is irrelevent to the events of history.

Its cold hard logical facts and an avalanche of mathematics. It may well be taking advantage of what's a predictable prophecy, or one that's so open to interpretation that people can always find some way to insist it hasn't been fulfilled yet or whatever. So sure, there's logic in that, "avalanche of mathematics" is a bit much but logic, sure. Logic, and not divine inspiration.

I look for the facts.

Fact: Prophecy is made that the Jews will be dispersed throughout the world.

Fact: Jews were dispersed throughout the world.
Hey I've got another fact for ya...

Fact: The Bible was derived from... *gasp!* Jewish scripture!

It's not difficult either to think, beyond a reasonable doubt, that scriptures based on Jewish and Zionist thought would predict that sort of thing. Religions naturally are wont to say their constituency are a special people who'll have good things coming to them. Not too long ago, most Jews had a pretty shitty time suffering from rampant anti-Semitism, not a particularly blessed lot in life. Now they've had a better time of it, more or less, over the last half-century, in part because they've gone through enough horrible shit to make their original persecutors feel substantial guilt to plant them back in Palestine, a well-meant but poorly-planned gesture. Things have, on average, been better for the Jews. Ironically, the very Zionistic ideas that many of them credit their recent good fortune to of late may end up screwing them in the end if they don't snap out of it.

Mui

07-17-2004, 06:08 PM

-The Eastern or Golden Gate, which was sealed for almost a 1200 years is a key part to Bible prophecy. Ezekiel recorded the prophecy about the closing of this gate. He told how the Lord brought him to the Eastern Gate.

And the Lord said to me, "This gate shall be shut; it shall not open, and no man shall enter by it, because the Lord God of Israel has entered by it; therefore it shall be shut. As for the prince, because he is the prince, he may sit in it to eat bread before the Lord; he shall enter by way of the vestibule of gateway, and go out the same way" (Ezekiel 44:1-3). In other words, this gate is reserved for the entrance of the coming messiah.

After twelve centuries of being sealed, attempts have been made twice in this century to open the Eastern Gate. The first was in 1917 and the second fifty years later in 1967. Muslim leaders in control of Jerusalem tried and failed to break the prophecy and open the gate. Each time, on the exact day the workmen were preparing to demolish the ancient stone, the hand of God intervened and the city of Jerusalem passed of Muslim control into hands of British in 1917 and the israelis in 1967. Each time, the Eastern Gate remained sealed as the prophet declared it would. Habakkuk explaines that prophecy must be fulfilled: "Write the vision and make it plain in tablets, that he may run who reads it. For the vision is yet for an appointed time; but at the end it will speak, and it will not lie. Though it tarries wait for it; because it will surely come. It will not tarry" (Habakkuk 2:2-3) (Jefferey, Messiah-1991)LMFAO!!! nice one.

campbell34

07-17-2004, 06:59 PM

Mui,

"LMFAO!!! nice one."

-That's all you can come up with! You may be laughing but the fact is the gate is still sealed. Atleast make an attempt to prove this prophecy wrong.

brothersun

07-17-2004, 07:18 PM

'Non-Literal' - (example) When Jesus said that god's harvest was like grain that fell on fertile soil he didn't mean he was going to plant us.

A whole lot of the 'good' (IMO) teaching in the bible are in parable and even riddle. Those who built many of the scriptures must have been aware that language and word meanings change, but morals embedded inside of stories often held the test of time - because they are abstract in nature.

Taking these stories literally destroys ALL of the meaning and wisdom they were meant to impart.
This is a silly arguement. The parables are allegory and it is stated as such. There should me know confusion between these and the day to day events of Jesus and his apostles. For example revelations is 99% allegory. And act of the apostles is to me taked literally.

Brocktoon

07-19-2004, 11:27 AM

This is a silly arguement. The parables are allegory and it is stated as such. There should me know confusion between these and the day to day events of Jesus and his apostles. For example revelations is 99% allegory. And act of the apostles is to me taked literally.
Once again we have to remind ourselves of the obvious.
Simply pick up a New Testament and begin reading most any account.

You are immediately told what you are about to read. (an account)
What this is your reading (A letter, a Documentary, a Reminiscence)
The Author then clearly gives you place names, times, and often names authoritive figures who can be called on to verify what you are about to read.

Then the events are CLEARLY written as actual events the author is aware of.
Whenever one of the subjects in the account is about to give an allegory - The author will usually EXPLAIN THIS IS AN ACCOUNT OF AN ALLEGORY/ PARABLE...

Then the Parable that was spoken by the subject is recorded and attributed to the speaker.

WTF People?

Why is this so hard to understand for some of you?

The very fact you are quoting a 'Parable' and know its a Parable IS BECAUSE YOU TOOK THE ACCOUNT LITERALLY!
You LITERALLY understood this was a REAL DOCUMENT attributing a REAL event in which a REAL PERSON began to give a Parable.

Trust me.. I went through this when I was 18 years old.
I actually picked up a Bible and STARTED by reading The Book of Acts.
To my amazement - it is simply an account of the Apostles.

Its not 'Full of poetry' and 'Can be interpreted hundreds of mystical ways.. "
BULLSHIT...

Its a simple, easy to follow and document.
You clearly understand exactly what it is and what it intends to inform you of.

Oh.. and I think we have all had enough of the pissy passive-aggresive little comment from the critics who say:
"To not understand the Bible is meant to be an allegory, a morality myth and a parable of sorts - is to miss out on its true meaning"

Get lost with that. To take a clearly understood account of events and lazily imagine that its some wishy-washy poem is not only a great way to miss out on the true meaning but also a way to be really stupid and a git.

Brocktoon out.

LuciferSam

07-19-2004, 05:32 PM

Okay, let's take the Book of Genesis for instance. Do you regard that as an account of real events? Correct me if I'm wrong but I never saw a preface saying "This is just a parable, by the way," yet it's clearly allegorical, and has been used so, or at least interpreted in ways to support various ideologies. The powerful Bishop Ambrose, for instance, shrewdly used the creation myth as allegory to say that the State was inferior to the Church's power, beginning the centuries-long power struggle between the popes and the kings. That curmudgeon Augustine used it to derive his idea of original sin.

The Bible still isn't such an absolute source. Throughout history people have pointed to whatever scriptures support their theses in theological arguments, and schisms come about this way. Usually the arguments that bring them about concern the nature of Jesus, his relationship with God, and the whole convoluted Trinity debate. One of the big reasons why the New Testament was compiled was so the mainstream Church could have a reference handy by which they could define and point out heretics (esp. the Gnostics).

Brocktoon

07-19-2004, 07:50 PM

When you dont have a preface to explain whether the following will be Allegorical or Literal - you simply take it at face value.

Genesis simply describes a series of events from the beginning (of Earth) to the early Patriarchs.
It uses place names, references known people and more or less follows a sequential timeline.

There is no reason for you to presume its an 'Allegory'.
It is not 'clearly' allegorical.

Wether or not someone else, somewhere else has used an account for 'political hay' should not, logically does not change the intended meaning of the text.

If you read an article describing Bush Jr. as having addressed troops in Iraq - You dont start with the assumption that its 'Allegorical' (even though the writer didnt specifically say what he intended beforehand)

Further to that - Should Sen. Kerry make some insinuations, some political 'hay' out of it - it does not 'give validity' to your allegorical interpretation of the story, just because others twist the facts to suit themselves.

LuciferSam

07-19-2004, 09:00 PM

I personally would consider the creationism part of Genesis to not be something to be taken literally, as creation myths cannot in any way be a witness account, of course. Completely faith-based. I think it has enough mythical elements in it to not be a realistic account.

I agree that interpretations that are made for "political hay" should not necessarily change the intended meaning of the text, though such cases are not uncommon. I have a pretty low opinion of Ambrose and his legacy, as well as the other Latin Church Fathers. I just meant to provide you with an example of a prominent religious figure using Genesis as allegory. And believe you me, it was done many times back in those days. Was it incorrect to do so? Were they wrong to consider parts of the Bible as allegory that were not specifically labelled as such? It is hard to say. No matter how you may insist the rules for interpretations must follow a certain way, the fact is people will interpret things the way they want to and the way they see it, sometimes too allegorically and sometimes too literally, if we can set standards for that. Who's a credible authority to say who's wrong? For political ends I think the manipulation of religion is never a good thing. But back in ancient times, politics and religion were much more enterwined then they are today, so you can expect a lot more theology back then to have some political motivations behind them. Generally, it was a matter of theologians trying to gain a following and trying to convert people to their side, which means power. And sometimes, arguments over the Bible's interpretations were just simply over plain theological squabbles, such as the divisive nature-of-Christ issue I mentioned above.

What I'm saying is that although you insist that the intended interpretations of the Bible are very clear-cut and unmistakeable, it has not been treated as such over history, and should tell you something about religion's very human nature. Religions have been warped and twisted all the time to suit the political ends of leaders, which I think you know well enough, and to me that really points strongly to the idea that organized religions are something less than divinely inspired. It is not my only reason for discrediting the absolute truth of the Bible and other religious scriptures, but to me it's a strong case.

POPthree13

07-19-2004, 11:59 PM

Brothersun... I wasn't arguing. Brocktoon aksed what non-literally meant. I was telling him. I wasn't suggecting the whole bible is parable only what was meant when someone called some passages non-literal.
My only statement (not an argument) is that the most valuable teaching in the bible is in parable - including almost everything Jesus taught.

Campbell... I didn;t ask for quotes about Jesus' betrayal I asked where you see that in Zechariah. I have NO idea where you get that the lord must be talking about himself. Zech. tells us the lord told him to give his money away to a cause... so what?
Here's what Zech says about the shepard: "For, lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, which shall not visit those that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still: but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces"

Doesn't sound like the Jesus I have heard about. It is very convenient for christians to quote what works for them and leave the other 95% which makes no sense in the context of what they are trying to prove.

Brochtoon...
I think there is ample evidence that Genisis (most creation) is allegorical. Mainly if you look for lessons in the text there are many, but if you read it at face value it is nonsense... like Revelations.

campbell34

07-20-2004, 01:47 AM

POPthree13,

"Campbell... I didn;t ask for quotes about Jesus' betrayal I asked where you see that in Zechariah."

"And the LORD said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the LORD." -Zech. 11:13

-I didn't give you quotes from Jesus' betrayal. I gave you a Bible verse straight from Zechariah

"And the LORD said unto me," -God is speaking to Zechariah.

"Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them." -The "I" does not represent Zecharaiah. The "I" represents God speaking of himself.

What God is saying here is that someone decided that God's worth was 30 pieces of silver. Was there ever a time in history when God was worth 30 pieces of silver?? The only time a historical figure was believed by many to be God was betrayed for 30 pieces of silver-Jesus.

"I have NO idea where you get that the lord must be talking about himself. Zech. tells us the lord told him to give his money away to a cause... so what? Here's what Zech says about the shepard: "For, lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, which shall not visit those that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still: but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces"

-The verse zech. 11:13 God is not telling zech. to give to a cause; God is telling zech. to cast to the potter the value that God was prised at.

Prised means value of. Another words what was the value of God? And it appears it was 30 piecies of silver.

The prophecies in the Bible can only be understood if you put them all together. If you just take one verse you will never see the entire picture.

campbell34

07-20-2004, 02:18 AM

LuciferSam,

"Completely faith-based. I think it has enough mythical elements in it to not be a realistic account."

-There are many people who believe God parting the Red Sea is a mythical story. However, just a few years ago Ron Wyatt and his sons discovered on opposing shores of the Red Sea large pillars that are believed to be put there by Solomon. Government officials placed both pillars in an upright position and you will find them there today. It is believed it is the spot where the crossing took place. The markings on the pillars have chizzled into the stone the names of Solomon, Moses, Pharoh, Egypt, and Yaweh. Also all around the area are ancient stone writings referring to the crossing and the miracle.

Divers who have ventured beyond the shores are now finding charriots, charriot wheels, spears, and corral encrusted horse and human bones. The charriot wheels that have been located have been dated to the time period that Bible scholars believed this event occured.

Time is proving that the Bible is a literal book that has nothing to do with mythical stories. For more infomation check out his site...

http://www.arkdiscovery.com/red_sea_crossing.htm

LuciferSam

07-20-2004, 06:36 AM

Your site sez...

"The majority of archaeologists today do not have enough faith in the Bible as the accurate word of God. The majority of archaeologists do not even believe in the exodus of the children of Israel from Egypt, according to Hershel Shanks, editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review magazine. They are skeptical of the biblical account, perhaps because of a lack of archaeological evidence in the Sinai Peninsula and a lack of faith. We cannot look to these men to tell us where or if the exodus took place."

Yea... that site suuure seems objective and unbiased. Give me sources from sites that aren't blatantly fundamentalist if you want me to pay any attention to them.

And at any rate, this doesn't quite parallel the creation myth in Genesis anyway. That myth is not set anywhere in the human world. Completely faith-based, as I've said. About as good as any of the other myriad creation stories out there.

POPthree13

07-20-2004, 08:01 PM

"And the LORD said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the LORD." -Zech. 11:13

"And the LORD said unto me," -God is speaking to Zechariah.

"Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them." -The "I" does not represent Zecharaiah. The "I" represents God speaking of himself.

I still see NOTHING about betrayal in that quote (Zech 11:13). That's all I am asking for here...

So God IS talking to Zecharia there but then a couple lines later he is speaking to himself. 'Me' and 'I' change meanings that quickly huh? Seems God constructed to bible to confuse us all if this is the case.

I see what you are saying... you can't look at the prophecies individually, because they do not apply to what you are talking about. You must take away tiny tid-bits of text (COMPETELY out of context) and then twist them into a picture that makes your argument valid. Very convincing.

I can steal only what words I want from ANY book to build the message I want you to hear. If the bible were such an accurate prophecy from the hand of God I don't think you would have to stretch every single passage to build your case. Again... I don't think 30 peices of silver is a big enough coincidence to suggest Jesus must be God.

Here's a congresswoman who was payed thrity peices of silver to pass law... maybe she's the messiah?
http://www.zazona.com/ShameH1B/Library/Politicians/EshooSilver.htm

PS: Beyond all this is the fact that the bible was assembled so that is would proove itself valid. Inserting a little line like those that confirm this prophecy into a book where..
a) no origin copies exist
b) was written centuries after the events
c) had absolutely no oversight

...would be a very easy task indeed. I can write you a book FULL of prophecies that are then fulfilled. You could too.

I prophecy that in 1996 I will move to Colorado. An behold in 1996 I moved to colorado. Amazing isn't it?

campbell34

07-21-2004, 07:47 PM

popthree,

"So God IS talking to Zecharia there but then a couple lines later he is speaking to himself. ‘Me' and ‘I' change meanings that quickly huh? Seems God constructed to bible to confuse us all if this is the case."

-Me, and I, does not change the intended meaning at all. As far as confusing , it's only confusing to those who are not looking for the intended meaning. The Old Testament is laced with over 300 Messianic prophecies. When reading them, if you reject their intended meaning, you are often left with verses that makes no sense. Some might call theses verses anomalies. The Jews of the past were very familiar with them.

"You can't look at the prophecies individually, because they do not apply to what you are talking about."

-No, they do apply to what I am talking about, they do not apply to what you are talking about.You said, I don't see anything about betrayal in Zech 11:13. Which is true. You will not find the entire life of Jesus Christ in one verse, nor would one expect to. This is why there are three hundred anomalies, which were written hundreds of years before Christ was even born. Once they are assembled, you have the entire life of Christ. You said a congresswoman was payed thirty pieces of silver to pass a law. And then stated maybe she was the Messiah? Well she would have to fulfill three hundred more prophecies to qualify. First, she would have to of been born in Bethlehem.(Micah 5:2) Second, she would have to be born of a virgin. (Isaiah 7:14) Third, she would need a messenger going before her, saying. "Prepare ye the way of the Lord"(Isaiah 40:3) Fourth, she would have to be a Nazarene. (Judges 13:5 Amos 2:11; Lam. 4:7) Fifth, she would have to be rejected by her own people. (Isaiah 53:3) Sixth, she would have to enter Jerusalem as a king riding on an ass. Seventh, she would have to be betrayed by a friend. (Psalms 41:9) Eighth, she would have to heal the blind/deaf/lame/dumb. (Isaiah 35:5-6; Isaiah 29;18) Ninth, she would have to be Crucified with criminals.(Isaiah 53:12). There are hundreds of these verses, and when you finish reading them all, you know who the bible is talking about. Remember, these verses are found in the Old Testament, which was completed hundreds of years before the birth of Christ. I almost forgot, she would have to be Resurrected from the dead. (Psalm16:10-11; 49;15). Fulfilling one prophecy is amazing. Fulfilling three hundred prophecies, that is Divine.

POPthree13

07-22-2004, 12:22 AM

I still don't think you address the fact that you claim God is speaking to Zechariah ("...and the lord said unto me...") and then claim that in the same set of passages God is later referring to himself ("...goodly price I was prised at...") instead of Zechariah. Why would anyone (yourself included) assume that someone writing in the first person like this would change the me's and I's to mean different things. "Someone said something to me, and I told them price I was prised" Wouldn't it be confusing if I meant Jesus when I said 'I' in that statement but myself when I said 'me'? Who would assume form that statement that I was talkign about two different people? Unless of course I was just recanting what I had heard INSTEAD of actually READING the text.

Many christians claim Zechariah 11:12 prophecies that jesus will be betrayed for thrity peices of silver. Here is an example of such a site...(http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/prophmessiah.html)
If there is nothing about betrayal then the only coincidence is 30 peices of silver. This becomes no prophecy at all aside from the convenient (and not rare) amount of 30 peices of silver. 30 Peices of silver was the standard price for a slave at the time.

I do not beleive this is a prophecy at all. This biblical website agrees with me:
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/zechariah/zechariah11.htm

My point is only that I have been unable to find a single (one, uno , 1) prophecy in the bible that has not been stretched to these great lengths to support to ideas they want to spread (ie: Jesus is the one and only Lord of the bible).

We can argue about each and every one if you would like. I am not at all trying to focus on this single verse we just happen to be analyzing this one. Any prophetic verse you can come up with in support for Jesus' validity I feel I can adequately refute. You have already conceeded this one... this so-called prophecy does NOT in ANY way say that ANYONE will be betrayed for thrity peices of silver. Case closed. Regardless of the fact that it is not a prophecy and biblical scholars agree Zechariah the prophet didn't write it.

Brocktoon

07-22-2004, 08:55 AM

If I can generalise for a minute, there is a peculiar logic problem which seems shared by both PoPThree and LuciferSam and it needs to be dealt with before you start wrangling with anything further...

Both of you have a strange rationalisation when it comes to 'mitigating' or 'explaining away' the signifigance of fulfilled prophecy which seems to follow along these lines.

- A Prophecy has been made. (You/We all agree so far)

- The Prophecy was fulfilled somewhere along the lines of history (This you agree with too)

Then.. wierdly... You insist that because the prophecy was fulfilled by forces other than Jews/Christians - therefore - (You 'reason') it has 'Nothing to Do' with the The Original Prophecy (HuH?) and 'Therefore' it (somehow?) removes credibility and validity from the prophecies accuracy.

Further to this bizarre mislogic - You give as some 'example' the complete opposite of what you just claimed to have railed against.
Example: You draw a comparison to YOU fulfilling a Prophecy YOURSELF.

Just what are you trying to have both ways anyway??

Forces 'outside' the Biblical text (and centuries later) should (by your standards) validate and give credibility to the Prophecy.
In any case - The Prophecy fulfilled is still a Prophecy Fulfilled is it not?

So here is an example you are really looking for:

-YOU predict the liquor store will be burned to the ground and rebuilt.

-Thugs from another city, with no relation to you or your relation to the Liquor store, burn down the store...
..ten years later its rebuilt..

That is what your looking for as an example.
-The prophecy is 100% accurate.
-The prophecy is NOT less accurate because forces having nothing to do with you carried it out.
-IF ANYTHING - The Prophecy is more impressive because outside forces carried it out.

In anycase, the Prophecy IS 100% accurate.

Please get back to me if you continue have trouble thinking this fundamental premise through.
I hope that explained whats gone wrong.. but if not we can go over it again.
Then..
You can go onto happy discussion about the finer things of prophecy fulfillment

LuciferSam

07-22-2004, 06:40 PM

I Then.. wierdly... You insist that because the prophecy was fulfilled by forces other than Jews/Christians - therefore - (You 'reason') it has 'Nothing to Do' with the The Original Prophecy (HuH?) and 'Therefore' it (somehow?) removes credibility and validity from the prophecies accuracy. What I say is that the prophecies are not necessarily the cause of their fulfillment, and just like most things involved with religion, are a matter of faith and not of concrete logic. Prophecies tend to be vague enough that people who want to perpetuate faith in them will find some way to insist they are still valid. Many prophecies seem to go like this, in my view: If they're not fulfilled, the faithful will insist that they will be in time, mark their words, and woe upon the doubters. If they do happen to be fulfilled, then the faithful will hop and skip about it and claim it as a validation of their faith. The best-constructed prophecies are made in a way so that people can find a way to claim either of the two above scenarios. Even if it become very difficult to do so, people will then start to look beyond literal meanings and say the prophecy must have some true meaning that hadn't been interpreted yet.

If I'm reading you correctly, you find it perplexing that I say that prophecies are fulfilled by "forces other than Jews/Christians," taking the case of the Jews returning to Israel, the UN and the Western Powers, right? I say so because the concrete fact is that those powers were the reason why the Jews were able to come back to Israel. Fact. Ah, but the prophecy! The prophecy is just a prophecy, it played no concrete part in the Jews' return, and its only validity is founded upon peoples' will to believe in it. The faithful might cry "Ooh! Well that's what God meant to happen!" Go on saying that, but I don't consider that as legitimate proof of anything about your faith, except that it's opportunistic, something successful religions thrive upon.

Is the fulfillment of those prophecies supposed to mean that your faith is correct? Only if you will yourself to believe in it, and thus it cannot be used for objective reasoning. I look at history to see why events have happened in the past, not prophecies, and I consider them irrelevant. Prophecies come and go. Many more of them than anyone probably ever knows have been made in ancient times, and whether they were fulfilled or not they've been forgotten and whatever relevance anyone believed they had is gone. Christianity happened to be a fortunate religion that gained the ear of a massive power (the Roman Empire), and maneuvered itself into a position of power so that it could try to realize its goals, for better or worse. Had that not happened, no one would be caring about Christian prophecies today.

History > Prophecy = (In my view) Shrewd people making predictable or vague prophecies = (In the eyes of the faithful) The Bible must be divinely inspired! Praise da Lawd!

Once again, it all boils down to faith.

Further to this bizarre mislogic - You give as some 'example' the complete opposite of what you just claimed to have railed against.
Example: You draw a comparison to YOU fulfilling a Prophecy YOURSELF. I think Popthree's little mock prophecies are meant to portray the triviality of prophecies, and how easy it can be to claim a fulfilled prophecy. We're arguing that prophecies aren't such a remarkable feat as you claim. The only reason you guys think these fulfilled prophecies are so amazing are because they're in your faith's holy book

-The prophecy is NOT less accurate because forces having nothing to do with you carried it out.
-IF ANYTHING - The Prophecy is more impressive because outside forces carried it out.

In anycase, the Prophecy IS 100% accurate.
Ok, and then...? The fact is the prophecy still isn't remarkable by any sort of objective standard. The only thing that validates prophecy as a legit "prophecy" and not just making vague/predictable predictions is the faith in the people who made them.

campbell34

07-22-2004, 10:42 PM

Lucifersam,

"Give me sources from sites that aren't blatantly fundamentalist if you want me to pay any attention to them."

Many who were taught the theory of evolution, believed it was fact. After one hundred years, evolutionist could never prove their theory by the fossil record. Now, scientist in growing numbers are finding the courage to finally speak out against this failed theory. It is apparent to many, the only thing changing with evolution, is the theory itself. To add insult to injury, at the same time the theory is faltering, Christian archaeologist are discovering ancient artifacts that are confirming what Christians had believe all the time. Simply put, those old Bible stories really happen, and were not just simple allegory. Now we will get to see the die hard evolutionist, who have always postured themselves as the voice of reason, go nuts. When Christians present archaeological facts that support the bible, the evolutionist are now screaming. "It's not true. Those are Christians that found those chariot wheels in the Red Sea, I'm not listening to them. It was the Christians that found those ancient pillars on both sides of the Red Sea crossing site. It was Christians that pointed out the chiseled names of Egypt, Death, Pharaoh, Moses, Yahweh, in the ancient stone. It was Christians that discovered at the Red Sea crossing site, the coral incrusted chariot parts, and dead mens bones. Don't believe them, why they are fundamentalist Christians. Why this evidence is not worthy of out scientific review."
Evolution is dying, because there is no evidence to keep it alive, and the Bible is passing it by, because the evidence is there. Evolutionist have said that Christians only have blind faith. The real blind faith believers, are those who worship the dying religion of evolution, who's priest are now losing their faith.
Right now if I was an Evolutionist, I think I would go to the nearest Natural History Museum and say five Charles Darwins, and ask God Darwin to quickly send me fossils showing o