|
Post by gillianren on Feb 1, 2009 23:47:58 GMT -4
This thread is for the discussion of faith v. works. It's natural that other topics will be touched upon in that discussion, but gillian, you are going into an area that isn't dealing with the faith/works topic. Why don't you start a new thread? Because there's no point. It doesn't matter what my sources are; you've made up your mind. It doesn't matter to you what prophecies may or may not have been fulfilled by/in the Bible. It doesn't matter what prophecies have been fulfilled by other religions. I've tried giving you information before, and you don't want to hear it unless it agrees with your own worldview.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 2, 2009 0:21:34 GMT -4
It isn't just one thing. THE condition is that the writing be inspired by God. One of the proofs that an author is speaking for God is fulfilled prophecy. Good. I think I can agree with that general definition. Now, how can you tell when a writing was inspired by God, apart from prophecy? The Song of Solomon. That is the only book in the Bible that Joseph Smith declared was not inspired. The case for its inclusion has been that its an allegorical account of God's love for Israel and/or the church. It was almost certainly not written by Solomon, and possibly not even written anywhere near the time Solomon lived. There are no prophecies in it, no real religious themes, and it is not quoted from in the New Testament. It has passages like this: "How beautiful are thy feet with shoes, O prince’s daughter! the joints of thy thighs are like jewels, the work of the hands of a cunning workman. Thy navel is like a round goblet, which wanteth not liquor: thy belly is like an heap of wheat set about with lilies. Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins. Thy neck is as a tower of ivory; thine eyes like the fishpools in Heshbon, by the gate of Bath-rabbim: thy nose is as the tower of Lebanon which looketh toward Damascus. Thine head upon thee is like Carmel, and the hair of thine head like purple; the king is held in the galleries. How fair and how pleasant art thou, O love, for delights! This thy stature is like to a palm tree, and thy breasts to clusters of grapes. I said, I will go up to the palm tree, I will take hold of the boughs thereof: now also thy breasts shall be as clusters of the vine, and the smell of thy nose like apples; And the roof of thy mouth like the best wine for my beloved, that goeth down sweetly, causing the lips of those that are asleep to speak." If it is an allegory for God's love for Isreal it's not exactly a very spiritual allegory, is it? Why is it in the Bible? We'll come back to that. I did earlier in the thread. But I don't see how you could declare them "inspired" or "not inspired", since they aren't available for examination. The Biblical writers clearly thought they had value, since they refer to them, but they were not preserved and added to the Bible. Should we trust the judgement of the Biblical writers who thought they were inspired, or should we decide they're not inspired because they weren't preserved?
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Feb 3, 2009 1:28:57 GMT -4
This thread is for the discussion of faith v. works. It's natural that other topics will be touched upon in that discussion, but gillian, you are going into an area that isn't dealing with the faith/works topic. Why don't you start a new thread? Because there's no point. It doesn't matter what my sources are; you've made up your mind. It doesn't matter to you what prophecies may or may not have been fulfilled by/in the Bible. It doesn't matter what prophecies have been fulfilled by other religions. I've tried giving you information before, and you don't want to hear it unless it agrees with your own worldview. If that's what you think, why do you bother to respond to my posts? You claim to have secret knowledge that Christians don't have--and which would surprise us if we learned what it was, but you never say what it is. Generally, the posts you direct at me are just to attribute evil thoughts and motives to anything I say.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Feb 3, 2009 2:08:31 GMT -4
It isn't just one thing. THE condition is that the writing be inspired by God. One of the proofs that an author is speaking for God is fulfilled prophecy. Good. I think I can agree with that general definition. Now, how can you tell when a writing was inspired by God, apart from prophecy? How can I tell? You'd get a better answer if you asked how I can tell something is not inspired. The best answer I can give you is Jesus Himself validated the entire OT and promised His disciples that He would bring all things to their remembrance, in anticipation of their writing the books of the NT. Not having my own answer, here's an excerpt from an article by Chuck Missler at khouse.org: Rabbi Akiba, the leading rabbi of the Bar Kochba revolt (132-135 A.D.) is quoted in the Mishnah:
In the entire world there is nothing to equal the day on which the Song of Songs was given to Israel. All the writings are holy, but the Song of Songs is most Holy.6
(Due to his support, all questions about the place of the Song of Songs in the canon of the Scriptures were silenced.)
This book is inspired; it was part of the Scriptures when Jesus Christ was here on the earth. He put His imprimatur on the entire volume when He said, "The Scripture cannot be broken." (John 10:35). Some say that it is not quoted in the New Testament, yet there are fragments everywhere. Just because there are references in the bible to other books it doesn't mean that that book is inspired. The obvious answer is that those books were never considered inspired and were therefore not included.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Feb 3, 2009 3:02:25 GMT -4
If that's what you think, why do you bother to respond to my posts? You claim to have secret knowledge that Christians don't have--and which would surprise us if we learned what it was, but you never say what it is. Generally, the posts you direct at me are just to attribute evil thoughts and motives to anything I say. Nonsense. Many of my reference books are written by Christians. I've suggested several of them to you before, you know, and you pretty much brushed them off. Having done that, I leave things for you to research yourself, because I'm not doing your homework for you. Frankly, you should have learned quite a lot of it before you became so diehard in your faith, because it's integral to your church's history. As to why I bother, it's just the same as in the Moon Hoax threads. I do not consider it at all likely that you will ever bother researching your own faith; as I've said, and as you've not bothered to deny, you've made up your mind. However, someone might read your screeds and think, "Wow. She really knows what she's talking about." However, I think it's important to show how little research you've done.
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Feb 3, 2009 11:20:28 GMT -4
Prophesy. The books of the bible contain detailed information about the future--a future only the true God could foretell. No other religion's holy books do this. The prophecies in the bible are detailed and of the ones which have already been fulfilled, they were fulfilled with amazing accuracy. That's a very strong indication that the books of the bible were inspired by God. What about other prophesies? Science makes predictions that are far more specific that those in scriptures, but doesn't claim any divine inspiration. The fans of Nostradamus claim that his prophesies have been fulfilled. Astrologers claim the occasional success. Where do you draw the line?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 3, 2009 12:26:22 GMT -4
How can I tell? You'd get a better answer if you asked how I can tell something is not inspired. The best answer I can give you is Jesus Himself validated the entire OT and promised His disciples that He would bring all things to their remembrance, in anticipation of their writing the books of the NT. So how do we know: A) that we have the same Old Testament that Jesus was talking about? B) that the New Testament books we have were all really written by his disciples under his inspiration? In fact, several of the writers of the New Testament were not named as apostles in the text - Matthew, Mark, Luke, James and Jude. C) that there aren't additional works out there that are also inspired but not collected in the Bible? Why trust a Rabbi, who wasn't a Christian, to determine what is and isn't inspired writings? Wouldn't he have said that the New Testament as a whole is not inspired? An obvious answer, but is it the correct one? Here's the list again, along with where they are mentioned in the Bible: Book of the Wars of the Lord (Num. 21:14) Book of Jasher (Josh. 10:13, 2 Sam. 1:18) Book of the Acts of Solomon (1 Kgs. 11:41) Book of Samuel the Seer (1 Chr. 29:29) Book of Gad the Seer (1 Chr. 29:29) Book of Nathan the Prophet (1 Chr. 29:29; 2 Chr. 9:29) Prophecy of Ahijah (2 Chr. 9:29) Visions of Iddo the Seer (2 Chr. 9:29; 2 Chr. 12:15; 2 Chr. 13:22) Book of Shemaiah (2 Chr. 12:15) Book of Jehu (2 Chr. 20:34) Sayings of the Seers (2 Chr. 33:19) An earlier epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 5:9) Possibly an earlier epistle to the Ephesians (Eph. 3:3) An epistle to the Church at Laodicea (Col. 4:16) Prophecies of Enoch known to Jude (Jude 1:14) Perhaps you should look up a few of these refrences and see if it sounds like they were considered uninspired by those who took the time to refrence them in their own works.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 3, 2009 12:35:11 GMT -4
This book is inspired; it was part of the Scriptures when Jesus Christ was here on the earth. He put His imprimatur on the entire volume when He said, "The Scripture cannot be broken." (John 10:35). Some say that it is not quoted in the New Testament, yet there are fragments everywhere. I disagree that John 10:35 indicates that the entire Old Testament as it was constituted in Jesus' time is inspired. The context of the passage is that the Jews were about to stone Jesus for the blasphemy of calling himself the Son of God. Jesus defends himself by saying basically "in the Scriptures you are called gods", probably refrencing Psalms 82:6. He then says "if that scripture called everyone gods and the children of god, and it's right (cannot be broken), then why are you upset that I am calling myself the Son of God?" Jesus seems to be refrencing a particular scripture when he asks if it can be broken, not the Old Testament as a whole. Also I would like to see some specific refrences as to where fragments of the Song of Solomon can be found in other scriptrues.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Feb 4, 2009 0:20:57 GMT -4
Prophesy. The books of the bible contain detailed information about the future--a future only the true God could foretell. No other religion's holy books do this. The prophecies in the bible are detailed and of the ones which have already been fulfilled, they were fulfilled with amazing accuracy. That's a very strong indication that the books of the bible were inspired by God. What about other prophesies? Science makes predictions that are far more specific that those in scriptures, but doesn't claim any divine inspiration. The fans of Nostradamus claim that his prophesies have been fulfilled. Astrologers claim the occasional success. Where do you draw the line? Scientists can predict things according to known laws. They're not really prophecies about the future in the way I mean, where the prophets aren't speaking according to the laws of science. Yeah, I know Nostradamus has a lot of fans. I find his prophecies to be so vague that they can be interpreted almost any way you like. He also has a high failure rate. Likewise for astrologers on the failure rate. When God gave the law to Moses He told him that if the words a prophet speaks don't come to pass, then that prophet is not speaking for God. God also told the Hebrews that if a prophet's words were untrue, they were to take him out and stone him. God drew the line at 100% accuracy. There are some amazing fulfilled prophecies in the bible.
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Feb 4, 2009 12:46:29 GMT -4
Scientists can predict things according to known laws. They're not really prophecies about the future in the way I mean, where the prophets aren't speaking according to the laws of science. Yeah, I know Nostradamus has a lot of fans. I find his prophecies to be so vague that they can be interpreted almost any way you like. He also has a high failure rate. Likewise for astrologers on the failure rate. When God gave the law to Moses He told him that if the words a prophet speaks don't come to pass, then that prophet is not speaking for God. God also told the Hebrews that if a prophet's words were untrue, they were to take him out and stone him. God drew the line at 100% accuracy. There are some amazing fulfilled prophecies in the bible. Are you seriously claiming that every prophesy in the Bible has come true? Apart from cases where there is no proof that the prophesy preceded the event it prophesised, or cases where someone (eg Jesus) who was aware of a prophesy could take action to fulfil it, I don't see that the Bible has any better record that the other examples I mentioned.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Feb 5, 2009 3:28:22 GMT -4
No, I'm not claiming that. Some prophecies were short ranged, some medium ranged (which would establish the person as a prophet because the prophecies came to pass during his lifetime), and some were long range and have yet to be fulfilled. There is proof that the prophecies preceded the events. They're called history books, and we also know approximately when the prophetic books were written as well. There were many prophecies concerning Jesus and He certainly couldn't arrange events to fulfill all of them. You can't see how accurate the biblical prophecies are from my posts. You have to study the bible as well as history. If you're in a hurry, you can also search the web for articles dealing with the subject. An in-depth discussion of this topic ought to go on a new thread.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Feb 5, 2009 3:30:05 GMT -4
Jason, I'm still reading.
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Feb 5, 2009 7:44:40 GMT -4
No, I'm not claiming that. Some prophecies were short ranged, some medium ranged (which would establish the person as a prophet because the prophecies came to pass during his lifetime), and some were long range and have yet to be fulfilled. There is proof that the prophecies preceded the events. They're called history books, and we also know approximately when the prophetic books were written as well. There were many prophecies concerning Jesus and He certainly couldn't arrange events to fulfill all of them. You can't see how accurate the biblical prophecies are from my posts. You have to study the bible as well as history. If you're in a hurry, you can also search the web for articles dealing with the subject. An in-depth discussion of this topic ought to go on a new thread. I think you're tying yourself up in knots here. You claim you know the Bible is inspired because of the 100% accurate prophesies, but if some of the prophesies haven't yet been fulfilled, how do you know if they are accurate? Plus, there is still the question of how you know if parts that don't contain prophesies are inspired.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Feb 5, 2009 16:47:55 GMT -4
No, I'm not claiming that. Some prophecies were short ranged, some medium ranged (which would establish the person as a prophet because the prophecies came to pass during his lifetime), and some were long range and have yet to be fulfilled. There is proof that the prophecies preceded the events. They're called history books, and we also know approximately when the prophetic books were written as well. There were many prophecies concerning Jesus and He certainly couldn't arrange events to fulfill all of them. You can't see how accurate the biblical prophecies are from my posts. You have to study the bible as well as history. If you're in a hurry, you can also search the web for articles dealing with the subject. An in-depth discussion of this topic ought to go on a new thread. I think you're tying yourself up in knots here. You claim you know the Bible is inspired because of the 100% accurate prophesies, but if some of the prophesies haven't yet been fulfilled, how do you know if they are accurate? Plus, there is still the question of how you know if parts that don't contain prophesies are inspired. If a prohpet's fulfilled prophecies are accurate there's every reason to believe that his future prophecies will be accurate as well. As to your other question, that's what Jason and I are currently discussing. Stay tuned to see if I can come up with an answer--but it's not going to be quick. modified to add this: I neglected to mention that some of the prophets' long-range prophecies have been fulfilled. Previously all I said was long range prohecies were yet to be fulfilled. Just wanted to clarify that.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 5, 2009 18:13:07 GMT -4
Jason, I'm still reading. K. I'll keep waiting then.
|
|