the bible and its prophecies

by Crazyguy 132 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Vidqun

  The prophecy of Dan. 9:26 impresses me no end.

  Now after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one will be cut off and have nothing. As for the city and the sanctuary, the people of the coming prince will destroy them. But his end will come speedily like a flood. Until the end of the war that has been decreed there will be destruction. (Dan 9:26 NET)

  Modern scholars apply this prophecy to Antiochus IV Epiphanes. However, he and his hencemen might have desecrated the temple, but they never destroyed Jerusalem. Jesus correctly apply this to the Romans. Shortly after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, the Arch of Titus was erected in Rome to honor Titus. This monument is there for all to see.
• 

  Bugbear

  I think that you should look up in Wikipedia the site ”Ashurbanipals library” specific the Gilgamesh epos. Archeologists have found 4000 years old clay plates with readable texts on it. These clay plates were written in original 4000-4500 hundred years ago, and they (specially the Gilgamesh epos) were talking about an ancient flood, that took place during the reign of the evil king Gilgamesh. Now observe that these texts still are readable in ORIGINAL.

  All other texts we have are much younger and in fact only transcriptions of transcriptions of transcription, of older translations of transcriptions…..a.s.f. In fact as far I know the oldest peace of text taken from the Bible is the P54. (P stands for Papyrus) It is. a fragment of the size of your credit card, and it is dated to probably somewhere year 100 after Christ. What has happened with the original text during that time journey, we haven´t a clue. But those clay plates or cylinders are original documents, and they talk about ancient stories and scientists believe that even the Bible has got its story about the flood from these plates. Even the Plato story about Atlantis, fits the Gilgamesh epos rather good.

  The fact that we can link many of the mentioned regents and the mentioned stories in a time schedule (the evil king Gilgamesh for instance), makes the Bible texts absolutely insane. The Bible is not more reliable than the scriptures of Plato and Aristotele. And we know for Shure that their vision of the creation, or the world , the physic world or the eventual the world of Gods is nothing but just ferry tales..

  Bugbear
• 

  cofty

  Vidqun read the whole context and don't just cherry-pick phrases and tell us what it all means.
• 

  punkofnice

  What makes me laugh is how fundies et al relate 'bible prophecy' to our day in the case of apocalyptic stuff. Chatlie Tazers Asshole did the same and it all proved wrong. The 1975 fiasco being another prime example of looking for things that simply arent there.

  Let us get real. The bible and other fake holy books including the quran, are books of exagerated tales, idiotic scientific notions and skewed history that has no significance to our day at all.
• 

  Vidqun

  Cofty, my interpretation of Dan. 9 is Messianic, but you won't like that. So I concentrated on a part that is irrefutable, even if you want to ascribe a later date to the book. The fact that the prophecy occurs in multiple book form amongst the DSS, is indicative of an early date, as some have already mentioned. Also Daniel believed in the resurrection and the book of life, whereas Hellenistic Jews started believing in the immortality of the soul (see Maccabees, Philo). Last but not least is the Aramaic portions, written in Official Aramaic, indicating an early date for parts of Daniel. Jesus encouraged the study of the book, which Christians take to heart.
• 

  ablebodiedman

  The prophecy of Dan. 9:26 impresses me no end.

  Me too!

  What I question though is when the word went forth to rebuild Jerusalem.

  Daniel 9:25

  And you should know and have the insight [that] from the going forth of [the] word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem

  The Apostles seemed very convinced that the rebuilding of Jerusalem had just begun in their day:

  Acts 15:13-18

  　After they quit speaking, James answered, saying: "Men, brothers, hear me. 14 　Sym´e·on has related thoroughly how God for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name. 15 　And with this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written, 16 　‘After these things I shall return and rebuild the booth of David that is fallen down; and I shall rebuild its ruins and erect it again, 17 　in order that those who remain of the men may earnestly seek Jehovah, together with people of all the nations, people who are called by my name, says Jehovah, who is doing these things, 18 　known from of old.’

  Which must mean that the Messiah's "cutting off" is something entirely different from his crucifixion.

  This would make the Watchtowers and all other popular interpretations completely redundant.

  and

  That the temple being rebuilt was NOT brick and mortar.

  abe
• 

  KateWild

  This 70 weeks of years prophecy has hole in it. The calculation which JWs use in the Bible teach book propheses to be confirmed by historians. Hidtorian do not confirm anything. The bible taech book states

  "Historians confirm that the year 474 B.C.E. was Artaxerxes’ first full year as ruler. Therefore, the 20th year of his rule was 455 B.C.E. Now we have the starting point for Daniel’s Messianic prophecy, that is, 455 B.C.E." http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/how-daniels-prophecy-foretells-the-messiahs-arrival/

  Jewish encyclopedia states

  "King of Persia; ascended the throne in 465 B.C." http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1827-artaxerxes-i

  Many other sources confirm 465 BC as the date Artexerxes became king. Hence the start date for Daniels prophecy is wrong according to most historians. I checked this when we were having family study and got my son to check what historians confirmed. Needless to say we put this on the shelf, the WT give some nonsense about a vassal kingship to get around it.

  As soon as I experienced injustice within the cong this doctrine came promptly off the shelf and reinforced my beliefs that the bible cannot be from God. The more you read it the more you realise it's full of nonsense.

  Bart Ehrman, is an excellent Bible scolar, I have watched some of his promotional videos and lectures about "Misquoting Jesus" and "Did Jesus exist" I find him a very balanced historian indeed. But he is not a scholar of the OT his main discipline is from the gospels, although I am sure he has an opinion on Dan 9.26.

  Kate xx
• 

  Vidqun

  Here’s a few different takes on the calculation of the seventy weeks. All of these scholars apply it to the Christ. The phrase “to bring in everlasting righteousness” (Dan. 9:24 ESV) can only refer to the Christ. Applying this to Antiochus IV Epiphanes is ridiculous:

  Those who take the messianic view of this prophecy and who understand the time reckoning literally do not all hold to the same method of calculation. Gleason Archer and Stephen Miller believe that the sixty-nine sevens extended from the decree of Artaxerxes with Ezra about 457 BC to the commencement of Christ’s public ministry in 26/27 CE, based on solar year calculations (Gleason Archer, “Daniel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 7 [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985], pp. 114-116; Stephen Miller, Daniel, New American Commentary [Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994], pp. 263-265). But Harold Hoehner and Paul Feinberg believe that the sixty-nine sevens extend from the decree of Artaxerxes with Nehemiah in 444 BC to the passion week of Christ in 33 CE, based on prophetic or lunar years of 360 days. With either view the effect is the same: the calculations are literally true of Christ (Hoehner, “Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ; Part VI: Daniel’s Seventy Weeks and New Testament Chronology,” pp. 47-65; and Feinberg, “An Exegetical and Theological Study of Daniel 9:24-27,” pp. 189-220).
• 

  KateWild

  All Historians confirm that Artexerxes became King in 465 BC, Vidqun.

  I am afraid I don't believe your information to be credible, everything that I have looked up points to this date, but I am not a scholar I could be wrong.

  I am at present watching a youtube debate between Bart Ehrman and Michale Brown, a Jewish apologist, about Why does God permit suffering and how the OT explains this. It's 2 hrs I recomend it to anyone.

  Bart has just expressed how woeful it was of God to think that giving Job more kids could actually replace the ones he had lost. Bart expressed that the children who had died at the hands of Satan with God's permission were irreplaceable. I have lost my son, I would agree with this. Kate xx

  http://www.patheos.com/blogs/camelswithhammers/2014/01/bart-ehrman-debates-old-testament-scholar-on-bibles-treatment-of-suffering/
• 

  jam

  Processor: "trees again would grow in Isreal" no one

  could forsee that. LOL