Evidence for the Divine Inspiration of the Bible?

[SonofAdam]

But Jesus raising Himself from the dead is a different matter entirely, I think. It’s a bit difficult for a man to fake His own resurrection, don’t you think?

Even though the supposed resurrection of Jesus is entirely a different issue, I didn’t mention anything about that. I was talking about him raising raising the dead with God’s permission.

Yes, you might be right. I suppose you’d agree that the Bible has something in common with the Koran, then. For Job is quoted as saying this:

The God spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing.

(Job 26:7)

And how could he have known that the earth is suspended over nothing? The prophet Isaiah wrote this:

The God sits enthroned above the sphere of the earth,
and its people are like grasshoppers.
He stretches out the heavens like a canopy,
and spreads them out like a tent to live in.

(Isaiah 40:22)

And he could not possibly know that the earth is a sphere and not flat.

How do you think the Bible compares to the Koran in as far as it stands up to scientific analysis, thus far?

If there are a couple of statements here and there that are accurate doesn’t necessarily mean it is from Allaah; we have to look at consistency as well because if you have 10 statements that are correct and one that is wrong, it would still be considered not from Allaah; this is a very sensitive issue.

 

[patg]

Pat:

LOL! Yes, I agree! Some people are too gullible and read the Bible looking for predictions of the latest headlines!



But what if I were to show you one prophecy of the Bible that came true and that was specific and verifiable? What if the prophecy predicted an event hundreds of years before it occurred, and such an event is one that historians and archeologists, who are not religious, have confirm happened only once in all of recorded history. Would you think this is possibly not a run of the mill vague prediction or wishful thinking?

So spit it out, already! I’m sure if it were so sperfect an example that everyone would immediately believe.

 

[spockrates]

Even though the supposed resurrection of Jesus is entirely a different issue, I didn’t mention anything about that. I was talking about him raising raising the dead with God’s permission.

If there are a couple of statements here and there that are accurate doesn’t necessarily mean it is from Allaah; we have to look at consistency as well because if you have 10 statements that are correct and one that is wrong, it would still be considered not from Allaah; this is a very sensitive issue.

SonOfA:

Please forgive my boldness in asking questions. I suppose it comes from being somewhat of a disciple of both Jesus and Socrates, who both asked frank questions about sensitive issues. In as far as Mohammad appears to agree with Jesus, I’d call myself one of his disciples, too (but I hope you don’t mind my saying so).

Regarding my blatant regard for the truth, I’d very much like to hear what you think about the accuracy of the books of the Bible. It will not offend me if you believe there to be fatal flaws within it’s texts. In fact, I’d appreciate your pointing out one or three to me.

 

[spockrates]

Sonofa…

If you prefer not to speak of errors unknown to the People of the Book, that’s OK. I have other questions. Please let me ask you this:

Do you consider Moses (PBUH) one of Allah’s prophets?

 

[spockrates]

So spit it out, already! I’m sure if it were so sperfect an example that everyone would immediately believe.

Why, yes there is an example, Pat! It’s one studied by many students of military history regarding Alexander the Great’s conquering of the Phonetician city of Tyre. Have you heard of it, or should I give a brief historical account?

 

[PJM]

=SonofAdam;6344881]Even though the supposed resurrection of Jesus is entirely a different issue, I didn’t mention anything about that. I was talking about him raising raising the dead with God’s permission.

Was not necessary. Jesus IS GOD “One God” [three Divine inseperatble persons] with One Nature, One Intellect, One Will. What One Wills all Will. What One desires All desire.

 

[patg]

Why, yes there is an example, Pat! It’s one studied by many students of military history regarding Alexander the Great’s conquering of the Phonetician city of Tyre. Have you heard of it, or should I give a brief historical account?

I am aware of the siege of Tyre. I am not aware that there is some prophecy that can be twisted into a prediction of it or why God would bother with something so irrelevant to the Jewish people.

 

[spockrates]

I am aware of the siege of Tyre. I am not aware that there is some prophecy that can be twisted into a prediction of it or why God would bother with something so irrelevant to the Jewish people.

Well, you cannot be faulted for being unaware of what is true, Pat! But if such a prophecy does exist, and it mentions Tyre by name, and it predicts not just the exact way Alexander the Great brought the city to it’s end, but also the full history of the city over hundreds of years. Would you say that such a prediction would be impossible for one man to make? Such a man would have to know the future. And if such a man said that God Himself told him the future of Tyre, then you and I might be tempted to believe him, or at least come up with a plausible explanation as to how he could know what only an all-knowing (or time-traveling) being could know. Don’t you think?

 

[spockrates]

PatG:

Let me know if you are interested in examining the comparison between the biblical prophecy regarding Tyre and the actual historical events. For me, personally, it was compelling evidence that the Bible is, at least in part, Divine rather than human in origin.

 

[patg]

PatG:

Let me know if you are interested in examining the comparison between the biblical prophecy regarding Tyre and the actual historical events. For me, personally, it was compelling evidence that the Bible is, at least in part, Divine rather than human in origin.

No, such “prophecies” are regularly debunked and I am aware of the arguments on both sides of this one. I have found no reason to absolutely see the result of divine inspiration in this example which is full of questionable logic.

 

[spockrates]

No, such “prophecies” are regularly debunked and I am aware of the arguments on both sides of this one. I have found no reason to absolutely see the result of divine inspiration in this example which is full of questionable logic.

PatG:

By saying you are aware of the arguments on both sides, do you mean you are aware of the general reasons for and against the idea that the Bible writes history hundreds (sometimes thousands) of years before it occurs? Or do you mean you have read the specific prophecy of Ezekiel regarding the ancient and powerful Phoenician city state of Tyre and compared his predictions to the actual historical events and found that Ezekiel got it wrong?

 

[patg]

PatG:

By saying you are aware of the arguments on both sides, do you mean you are aware of the general reasons for and against the idea that the Bible writes history hundreds (sometimes thousands) of years before it occurs? Or do you mean you have read the specific prophecy of Ezekiel regarding the ancient and powerful Phoenician city state of Tyre and compared his predictions to the actual historical events and found that Ezekiel got it wrong?

Yes to both. But the second also includes the possibility the “prophecy” was written/added in later, after the event.

If you really want to discuss this, you should start a new specific thread.

 

[hellopeople]

The Church says so and so does scripture itself at 2 Timothy 3:16 - twinc

Scripture here is the old testament. People didn’t start calling the NT scripture until well into the second century.

 

[When_it_comes]

f God is omniscient then he knows how to bring it about that there is neither evil nor suffering.
If God is omnipotent then he is able to bring it about that there is neither evil nor suffering.
If God is benevolent then he wants to bring it about that there is neither evil nor suffering.
But if God knows how to, is able to and wants to bring it about that there is neither evil nor suffering, then why does he not do so?

“God is incomprehensible” you respond.

Theists have often been content to say that we are unable to comprehend God, that his being transcends our mundane experiences and that our concepts, which are derived from such experiences, cannot be used to describe him. If true, then this might be thought to count in favor of agnosticism; if we cannot comprehend God, then how can we reason with any confidence concerning his existence?

Of course, I can’t expect this to make sense to any one here. The only way you could maintain such a blind faith as I see here is if you rejected anything that offended you or challenged your knowledge. At least when I am censored, you must acknowledge the truth of this last paragraph.

 

[spockrates]

… If you really want to discuss this, you should start a new specific thread.

Why start a new thread, Pat? The discussion thread is about evidence that demonstrates the Bible is Divine, rather than human, in origin. Predictive prophecy, if it exists within the pages of the Bible, is perhaps the greatest evidence for the divine inspiration of its text. Or can you think of any other evidence that, if found to be true, would be greater?

 

[spockrates]

Yes to both. But the second also includes the possibility the “prophecy” was written/added in later, after the event. …

We may discuss both, if you like. Regarding the latter (that is, your assertion that specific prophecies of Ezekiel are proven false), I’d very much like to know your thoughts. Please tell me exactly which of the predictions of the future Ezekiel got wrong. I’ll quote the passage with chapter and verse. You may site the verse number and explain how the prediction is false.

1 In the eleventh year, on the first day of the month, the word of the LORD came to me: 2 "Son of man, because Tyre has said of Jerusalem, ‘Aha! The gate to the nations is broken, and its doors have swung open to me; now that she lies in ruins I will prosper,’ 3 therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves. 4 They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers; I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock. 5 Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets, for I have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD. She will become plunder for the nations, 6 and her settlements on the mainland will be ravaged by the sword. Then they will know that I am the LORD. …

12 They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea. 13 I will put an end to your noisy songs, and the music of your harps will be heard no more. 14 I will make you a bare rock, and you will become a place to spread fishnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I the LORD have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD.

(Ezekiel 26)

You may examine the context of the passage here:

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+26&version=NIV

 

[patg]

We may discuss both, if you like. Regarding the latter (that is, your assertion that specific prophecies of Ezekiel are proven false), I’d very much like to know your thoughts. Please tell me exactly which of the predictions of the future Ezekiel got wrong. I’ll quote the passage with chapter and verse. You may site the verse number and explain how the prediction is false.
1 In the eleventh year, on the first day of the month, the word of the LORD came to me: 2 "Son of man, because Tyre has said of Jerusalem, ‘Aha! The gate to the nations is broken, and its doors have swung open to me; now that she lies in ruins I will prosper,’ 3 therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves. 4 They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers; I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock. 5 Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets, for I have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD. She will become plunder for the nations, 6 and her settlements on the mainland will be ravaged by the sword. Then they will know that I am the LORD. …

12 They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea. 13 I will put an end to your noisy songs, and the music of your harps will be heard no more. 14 I will make you a bare rock, and you will become a place to spread fishnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I the LORD have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD.

(Ezekiel 26)
You may examine the context of the passage here:

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+26&version=NIV

Well, at the time of the prediction, it seemed like to be a sure thing, but 13 years of seige later Nebuchadrezzar gives up. The Island of Tyre is not destroyed or even conquered. It is not made “a bare rock” that will “never be rebuilt”. Nebuchadnezzar did capture the mainland suburb of Tyre, but he never succeeded in taking the island part, which was the seat of Tyrian grandeur. Ezekiel admits his error in Ezek 29:17.

So he then predicts that God decides to give Egypt to him instead, another Ezekiel prophecy that completely failed.

 

[spockrates]

Well, at the time of the prediction, it seemed like to be a sure thing, but 13 years of seige later Nebuchadrezzar gives up. The Island of Tyre is not destroyed or even conquered. It is not made “a bare rock” that will “never be rebuilt”. Nebuchadnezzar did capture the mainland suburb of Tyre, but he never succeeded in taking the island part, which was the seat of Tyrian grandeur. Ezekiel admits his error in Ezek 29:17. …

Then they will take up a lament concerning you and say to you:
" ‘How you are destroyed, O city of renown,
peopled by men of the sea!
You were a power on the seas,
you and your citizens;
you put your terror
on all who lived there.’ "

(verse 17)

True. The Babylonian king did not conquer the city on the island, but he did destroy the city on the coast. Tyre was really two cities. The prediction would be a false one IF it was regarding only one king and one nation. But what does Ezekiel quote his God as saying?

“… 3 therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves. 4 They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers … .”

(verses 3-4)

Do you see that it is not just the Babylonian nation that Ezekiel predicts will come against Tyre, but many nations. It’s not just he who will destroy the towers of Tyre, but they (meaning other kings besides Nebuchadnezzar) who would destroy her. Like most biblical prophecies, there are both a near future and a far future fulfillments. The fact is that verse 17 was finally fulfilled by Alexander the Great. Do you think that sounds reasonable?

 

[patg]

the Babylonian nation that Ezekiel predicts will come against Tyre, but many nations. It’s not just he who will destroy the towers of Tyre, but they (meaning other kings besides Nebuchadnezzar) who would destroy her. Like most biblical prophecies, there are both a near future and a far future fulfillments. The fact is that verse 17 was finally fulfilled by Alexander the Great. Do you think that sounds reasonable?

Ezekiel clearly identified Nebuchadnezzar as the instrument of destruction who would bring about a total, everlasting destruction of Tyre. It seems strange that Alexander wouldn’t be named also by such a great prophet.

Even if one somehow proved that Ezekiel included Alexander the Great in the prophecy against Tyre, they would still have to explain why the complete and everlasting destruction of the city did not happen. Although Alexander the Great did succeed in capturing the island part of the city, Tyre by no means ceased to exist after this conquest. In The History of Tyre, Wallace B. Fleming said this of the city’s defeat by Alexander:
Alexander then left the city which was half burnt, ruined, and almost depopulated. The blackened forms of two thousand crucified soldiers bore ghastly witness to the completeness of the conquest. The siege had lasted from the middle of January till the middle of July, 332 B.C. The city did not lie in ruins long. Colonists were imported and citizens who had escaped returned. The energy of these with the advantage of the site, in a few years raised the city to wealth and leadership again (Columbia University Press: New York, 1915, p. 64).
Tyre existed in the days of Jesus, who “withdrew into the parts of Tyre and Sidon” at one time during his personal ministry (Matt. 15:21), and it existed in the time of the Apostle Paul, who, returning from one of his missionary journeys, stopped there, found disciples, and tarried with them seven days (Acts 21:3).

And we still have Ezekiel admiting his error in Ezek 29:17.

 

[spockrates]

Ezekiel clearly identified Nebuchadnezzar as the instrument of destruction who would bring about a total, everlasting destruction of Tyre.

7 "For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great army. 8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you. 9 He will direct the blows of his battering rams against your walls and demolish your towers with his weapons. 10 His horses will be so many that they will cover you with dust. Your walls will tremble at the noise of the war horses, wagons and chariots when he enters your gates as men enter a city whose walls have been broken through. 11 The hoofs of his horses will trample all your streets; he will kill your people with the sword, and your strong pillars will fall to the ground.

(Ezekiel 26)

These verses are the only ones that mention the Babylonian king, Pat. Please tell me in which of these five verses Ezekiel clearly quoted God as saying that Nebuchadnezzar, and no other, would be “the instrument of destruction who would bring about a total, everlasting destruction of Tyre.”

It seems strange that Alexander wouldn’t be named also by such a great prophet.

It sounds like you saying that before you will believe that a prophecy is accurate it must give the name of every important person who will bring about the historical events predicted. But I wonder if that is a reasonable burden of proof. Please let me ask you this, Pat: If some well-known person, such as Benjamin Franklin, predicted more than 200 years ago that two towering buildings would come down on the same day in New York City and thousands would die, would you say his prediction was false because he did not mention Osama Bin Laden by name?