• In total there are 34 users online :: 2 registered, 0 hidden and 32 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am

Flann talks Satan with youkrst and y'all are welcome, bring the love :)

Engage in conversations about worldwide religions, cults, philosophy, atheism, freethought, critical thinking, and skepticism in this forum.
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.

All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
youkrst

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
One with Books
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:30 am
13
Has thanked: 2280 times
Been thanked: 727 times

Re: Flann talks Satan with youkrst and y'all are welcome, bring the love :)

Unread post

bob wrote:The correct question is "Is the Bible true?"
ok, i'm thinking you are going to answer that question thusly

YES! the bible is 100% true and i can prove it... am i close bob?

if so then how do you prove it..... on second thoughts, don't answer that, you might spoil the fun of finding out for myself :lol:

besides if the bible is 100% true i'm going to kill myself to register a protest vote :lol: (c'mon ant get your proof on brother) :-D

luckily anyone with a questioning mind and freedom can see through it and i am blessed with both, and some good friends.

after today consider me gone! (sting reference)
User avatar
Interbane

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 7203
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
19
Location: Da U.P.
Has thanked: 1105 times
Been thanked: 2166 times
United States of America

Re: Flann talks Satan with youkrst and y'all are welcome, bring the love :)

Unread post

youkrst wrote:so i ask

could you please give me one or two of your best bible prophecies because i am obviously not getting the best ones.
This works against you yourkrst. Think of it in terms of probability. Nostradamus spit out so many "prophecies" that he inevitably has one or two that fit remarkably close to notable events. Depending on the fit and how the connection is made, it's a fallacy of some sort. Shoehorning; texas sharpshooter fallacy, postdiction. But fallacy is ignored when belief is strong.

If you ask for the best one from the bible, the fallacy won't be so obvious. The fit will be stronger. Shoot a shotgun at a barn wall enough times, and you'll inevitably run across a cluster that is extremely tight, that you can draw a smaller and more accurate-seeming circle around.

But with that said, I'd like to see the most convincing prophecy also. The very best, so ironclad in its irrefutability that it persuades people that magic is real.
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
youkrst

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
One with Books
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:30 am
13
Has thanked: 2280 times
Been thanked: 727 times

Re: Flann talks Satan with youkrst and y'all are welcome, bring the love :)

Unread post

ahhh of course, damn what an elementary mistake, thanks for the pickup Interbane.

shotgun analogy works very well.

i have a feeling though that the best example is still like shooting ducks in a barrel.

hence my fatal overconfidence :lol:
User avatar
Flann 5
Nutty for Books
Posts: 1580
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
10
Location: Dublin
Has thanked: 831 times
Been thanked: 705 times

Re: Flann talks Satan with youkrst and y'all are welcome, bring the love :)

Unread post

Interbane wrote:I looked out of curiosity. I picked one from the list at random, a prophecy about Cyrus.

Cyrus will conquer Babylon
100prophecies.org claims that before 681 BCE the prophet Isaiah predicted Persia would defeat Babylon and furthermore that this prophecy was fulfilled in 539 BCE. Bible inerrantists would have us believe that Isaiah prophesied specifically that Cyrus would be Babylon's conqueror and would enter through gates, and that he made this prediction over 140 years before the event. They cite Isaiah 45:1 (NIV) as predicting that "Babylon's gates would open for Cyrus":[10]

This is what the Lord says to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I take hold of to subdue nations before him and to strip kings of their armor, to open doors before him so that gates will not be shut[.]
Interbane wrote:This claim is ridiculous, on two grounds.

First, Isaiah's reference to gates, although the actual means Cyrus used to gain entry to the city of Babylon, was nonetheless meant figuratively. This is evidenced by noting the continued use of obviously figurative language in the next verse (NIV):

I will go before you and will level the mountains; I will break down gates of bronze and cut through bars of iron.
Furthermore, Babylon is not actually mentioned anywhere in the chapter.
First here's Isaiah chapter 45; http://www.biblehub.com/niv/isaiah/45.htm

The first criticism is that the language is figurative. This is partly true though it's alluding to standard material problems of conquest such as gaining entrance to fortified citadels and cities. It's a prophecy of conquest by Cyrus of not just one nation but several, which is additional information.
So I wouldn't read it as meaning specifically or entirely literally the gate of Babylon not being shut though it could include that.
His second criticism is that Babylon is not actually mentioned anywhere in the chapter. It is though in many places in Isaiah,and the prophet Jeremiah who came later but still well before the fall of Babylon, provides more specific prophecies relating to the conquest and destruction of Babylon.

Isaiah has many themes and the fall of Babylon is just one. The critic ignores other references in Isaiah to Babylon and also the fact that in verse 13 of the chapter God says that Cyrus will rebuild his city Jerusalem and let his exiles go free.

This looks ahead to the prophesied Babylonian captivity,the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, and Cyrus having conquered Babylon,issuing the decree to release the Jews and rebuild Jerusalem.

A lot of information in these few lines.
http://www.biblehub.com/isaiah/45-13.htm

In Isaiah 48:14-15 there is a further reference to Cyrus as the one chosen and called by God to defeat Babylon.
http://www.biblehub.com/isaiah/48-14.htm
Interbane wrote:Second, in reality, this section of Isaiah was likely written approximately 537 BCE. Even if the "prediction" was not made after the event, its occurrence was hardly impossible to foresee and the name of Cyrus would have been well known. Imagine someone in the future who digs up a document from late 2002 which "prophesies" the Iraq War and the defeat and death of Saddam Hussein - how impressed should our future reader be of the author's oracular powers?
Interbane wrote:Here Oakes ignores the well established scholarship that Isaiah is not a single document composed "more than two hundred years before the events" (incl. by Christians who don't subscribe to biblical inerrancy), but a composite of at least three different authors writing at different times.
It's hard to astoundingly predict the future when the events you predict are actually in the past.
Here the critic asserts that this section of Isaiah ch. 48:14 was likely written approximately 537BCE. He says this is the "well established scholarship" that says Isaiah is not a single document but a composite of three different authors writing at different times.
In reality it's the outdated 19th century "documentary source hypothesis" and it methodology applied to the book.
But this is bad scholarship. http://www.ukapologetics.net/2criticalisaiah.html

This article has another linked on the remarkable prophecy of Daniel. These critics constantly try to say biblical prophecies are postdated but the evidence keeps building up against them.

https://www.probe.org/the-dead-sea-scrolls

The rest of his argument is only valid if his premise is right which it is not. The conquest of the superpower Babylon was not a likely event for many reasons.


Here's a two part article on the biblical prophecies on the conquest of Babylon.
https://christiancourier.com/articles/3 ... ecy-part-1

Nostradamus is not comparable to biblical prophecy for many reasons, but there's enough to be going on with here.
Last edited by Flann 5 on Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Interbane

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 7203
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
19
Location: Da U.P.
Has thanked: 1105 times
Been thanked: 2166 times
United States of America

Re: Flann talks Satan with youkrst and y'all are welcome, bring the love :)

Unread post

Flann wrote:This article has another linked on the remarkable prophecy of Daniel. These critics constantly try to say biblical prophecies are postdated but the evidence keeps building up against them.
According to whose standards of evidence? Your own, with your motivated belief? Prove that the "prophecies" aren't postdated. If you can't prove they aren't, then why do you believe they aren't? It's obvious that your standards for what justifies belief are far too low - belief is justified when is supports something you already believe, right? :?
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
youkrst

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
One with Books
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:30 am
13
Has thanked: 2280 times
Been thanked: 727 times

Re: Flann talks Satan with youkrst and y'all are welcome, bring the love :)

Unread post

this line from the prophecy article Flann linked just cracked me up
God is not the only one, however, who uses forecasts of future events to get people's attention. Satan does, too.
Satan does, too.
:lol:

but wait there's more
though rarely with more than about 60 percent accuracy, never with total accuracy. Messages from Satan, furthermore, fail to match the detail of Bible prophecies, nor do they include a call to repentance.
Satan is only batting 60% :lol: He has no detail :lol:

and worst of all Satan includes no call to repentance :lol:

i came back to the thread to debunk a prophecy but i got sidetracked on this...

:ydrbatcdy:

brb, gotta recover my composure :-D
youkrst

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
One with Books
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:30 am
13
Has thanked: 2280 times
Been thanked: 727 times

Re: Flann talks Satan with youkrst and y'all are welcome, bring the love :)

Unread post

ok, i picked this one
(1) Some time before 500 BC, the prophet Daniel proclaimed that Israel's long-awaited Messiah would begin his public ministry 483 years after the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25-26). He further predicted that the Messiah would be "cut off," killed, and that this event would take place prior to a second destruction of Jerusalem. Abundant documentation shows that these prophecies were perfectly fulfilled in the life (and crucifixion) of Jesus Christ. The decree regarding the restoration of Jerusalem was issued by Persia's King Artaxerxes to the Hebrew priest Ezra in 458 BC, 483 years later the ministry of Jesus Christ began in Galilee. (Remember that due to calendar changes, the date for the start of Christ's ministry is set by most historians at about AD 26. Also note that from 1 BC to AD 1 is just one year.) Jesus' crucifixion occurred only a few years later, and about four decades later, in AD 70 came the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.
:slap:

my first response is

OMFG!

how easy is it to take a pre-existent writing and work your mojo after the fact to fit the template.

voila, i am the fulfillment.

this crap is so weak that my brain just says to me "youkrst, if you think i am going to focus on that drivel you can go away"

ok first

Some time before 500 BC, the prophet Daniel proclaimed that Israel's long-awaited Messiah would begin his public ministry 483 years after the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25-26).

right

Daniel 9:25-26

k, verse 25
So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress.
next a jewish response
With four different proclamations there is no historical justification to choose the one mentioned in Nehemiah 2 and there is no reliable source stating that it occurred exactly in 444 BCE. It seems that Christians picked this passage out of convenience and assigned it this specific date, because, if you start at 444 BCE and count 69 weeks of years (483 years) you reach 39 CE. Whatever their reason for choosing Nehemiah’s reference and attributing it as having occurred in 444 BCE it is still 7 years off from the year 32 CE when Jesus supposedly died.

This 7 year discrepancy is resolved by Christian theologians who redefined the definition of a “year.” They claim that prophesies like Daniel’s are to be understood in “Prophetic years” that have 360 days rather then 365 ¼ days. The argument that Daniel might be speaking to Babylonians who may have had a 360 year is unsubstantiated and refuted by the fact that this particular passage is spoken in Hebrew to Jews who had a different calendar than and Babylonians who spoke Aramaic.
it's just a retrofit

it's pathetic, my brain hates me for making it wade in this rubbish. :lol:

the argument presented here, if it be lawful to call it an argument, could just as easily be used by any of the many other would be messiahs around at the time.

Flann this is no justification for believing Satan is "A fallen angel. A conscious intelligent malevolent spiritual being."
Last edited by youkrst on Mon Jan 18, 2016 1:04 am, edited 2 times in total.
youkrst

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
One with Books
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:30 am
13
Has thanked: 2280 times
Been thanked: 727 times

Re: Flann talks Satan with youkrst and y'all are welcome, bring the love :)

Unread post

Satan is a fallen angel, A conscious intelligent malevolent spiritual being.

this is just mentally unhealthy superstition based on a reading made with no knowledge of well.... how these things are done.

there is no justification possible for this assertion that Satan is a fallen angel, A conscious intelligent malevolent spiritual being.
because it is a position of faith.

faith
strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.
proof
evidence or argument establishing a fact or the truth of a statement.
and it is mentally unhealthy in it's implication.

instead of working things out are we going to say

oh it's Satan who is a fallen angel, a conscious intelligent malevolent spiritual being.

what am i supposed to say to that?!?!?!

i know

evidence please or else just admit it's a position of faith not a position of reason.

it's superstition of the worst kind in my book and it's high time it was run out of town.

but i want to emphasize i do not confuse you Flann with what you believe.

you are not what you believe, you are much better than that.
User avatar
Flann 5
Nutty for Books
Posts: 1580
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 8:53 pm
10
Location: Dublin
Has thanked: 831 times
Been thanked: 705 times

Re: Flann talks Satan with youkrst and y'all are welcome, bring the love :)

Unread post

youkrst wrote:it's just a retrofit

it's pathetic, my brain hates me for making it wade in this rubbish. :lol:

the argument presented here, if it be lawful to call it an argument, could just as easily be used by any of the many other would be messiahs around at the time.
I agree that there are conflicting views on dating the seventy weeks and I would agree that changing the calendar is not a good way of doing this.
I picked that site mainly because they had gathered a lot of these prophecies not that I agree with their methodology on Daniel. A lot comes down to how the commencement point is interpreted.

But Daniel had a lot of prophecies about coming empires and one prophecy was fulfilled by Antiochus for example. The critics try to put Daniel in the Maccabean era to get around this.

But the evidence from the dead sea scrolls strongly suggests it must have been earlier than this.

I'm not dogmatic about how the seventy weeks can be worked out but the messiah being cut off and the temple being destroyed are clearly in there.
http://www.christiancourier.com/article ... enty-weeks

I don't think that Satan can know the future supernaturally,so I think they are wrong on that also.

The thing about motivated reasoning is that it's actually the critics of biblical prophecy who manifest this by not looking objectively at the evidence for dating books. They proceed on the assumption that they must be postdated because they have remarkably fulfilled historic events in them.

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/20 ... px#Article
Last edited by Flann 5 on Sun Jan 17, 2016 9:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.
youkrst

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
One with Books
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:30 am
13
Has thanked: 2280 times
Been thanked: 727 times

Re: Flann talks Satan with youkrst and y'all are welcome, bring the love :)

Unread post

wow Flann! you never cease to impress me with your expression :clap2:

you are an inspiration :-D

it's 10:48 am here and we are listening to "boogie wonderland".

you sir are welcome anytime at all :yes:

i'll be back when i get off cloud 9 :lol:

Image
Post Reply

Return to “Religion & Philosophy”