Prophecy (head to head debate, RedEye vs Tart)

[Tart]

This topic is for a head to head debate about prophecy and whether that prophecy is true or not, between RedEye and Tart. This topic was started in debate about whether or not the Christian Bible is authored by men or God, and how to determine such things... The scripture tells us that we may know the truth by prophecy, that we can be revealed the truth from an All Knowing God by the witnessing of prophecy... For example, Jesus said on many occasions "I have told you now before it happens, so that when it does happen you will believe.", or "23 So be on your guard; I have told you everything ahead of time.", etc...

That is the claim in the scripture, that prophecy is revealing to us the mysteries of God, and I certainly think that is true. It isnt only true for Jesus, or for the Israelite, I see it true from me, and my life, and the world around me. The Bible is riddled with prophecy, its said to be made up of 1/3 prophecy... It is actually quite amazing, the power of God revealed from his word.

Below I am just going to post our conversation, and continue from there.

Good that you recognize being bias... You are right, we all have biases and I think if we come from a perspective that is not bias in concluding judgement about the scripture, that it is sufficient in demonstrating its Word.

Ya, so lets look at the prophecy... What is your criteria for prophecy?

Since you have left it up to me I suggest these:

viewtopic.php?t=2142&lofi=1

Lets start with Jeremiahs prophecy about Jerusalem (Jeremiah 31)... You believe this is false prophecy?

38 “The days are coming,� declares the Lord, “when this city will be rebuilt for me from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate. 39 The measuring line will stretch from there straight to the hill of Gareb and then turn to Goah. 40 The whole valley where dead bodies and ashes are thrown, and all the terraces out to the Kidron Valley on the east as far as the corner of the Horse Gate, will be holy to the Lord. The city will never again be uprooted or demolished.�

Of course it is false prophecy. It fails multiple criteria. There are no specifics given on when this prophecy will come to pass --- it is completely open-ended because we can never know if Jerusalem will be destroyed again (as it was about 70CE). There is also no agreement among modern scholars on the location of most of the landmarks referred to in this passage — the Tower of Hananel, the Hill of Gareb, Goah, and so on. That makes it impossible to verify against present day Jerusalem (which has expanded to the north of the ancient city). Jerusalem has been captured and desolated several times from 2600 years ago and its current state still cannot be described as fully restored. Arab Muslims still control some areas of Jerusalem.

Was this really your best shot?

My best shot? There are more prophecies we can look at, but first...

I suggest you go back and read what I asked of you. First, I wanted you to start a new thread so we don't derail this one. You chose not to. Second, I wanted your single best candidate for a prophecy. That was to avoid this game of you dropping each failed attempt and immediately moving on to another, making an endless amount of work for me. Again, you want to ignore my request.

1) When did specific dates become requirements for prophecies? They arent... Look up "prophecy", get a definition, there is nothing that states it needs to name a specific date. Id suggest that your "criteria" (that you probably imagined up in your head) is a means of discrediting prophecy on standards that doesnt define prophecy... Its almost like a No True Scotsman fallacy, (but no true prophecy fallacy), on "criteria" you come up with to do so.

If you remember I asked you to do this job. Instead you left it up to me. Now you complain because you don't like for there to be any rules. (The criteria were not imagined up by me. I even provided you a link to them and as you can see I am not the author). It is not unreasonable that a specific date be given otherwise an alleged prophecy becomes vague and open-ended as I have explained. Here is another link if you don't like the first set of criteria:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_ ... e_prophecy

Are you really telling me a prophecy cant have a "never again" element? Why would anyone need to accept this "criteria" from you?

I have already explained why. How do we know that Jerusalem won't be destroyed again in 10 years time via a terrorist attack (sneaking in an atomic bomb for example). We can't know. Therefore a prophecy which states that Jerusalem will never again be destroyed is useless. To validate it would require us to know the future right out to eternity. Since that is impossible, the "prophecy"can never be validated.

Actually this prophecy of "never again" is an extremely improbable prophecy that seems to be fulfilling...

2) when did prophecy become dependent on where scholars can agree upon exact locations? Maybe the prophecy should have read:

this city will be rebuilt for me from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate. 39 The measuring line will stretch from there straight to the hill of Gareb and then turn to Goah. 40 The whole valley where dead bodies and ashes are thrown, and all the terraces out to the Kidron Valley on the east as far as the corner of the Horse Gate, will be holy to the Lord. The city will never again be uprooted or demolished.�, but only if scholars can agree on the location"
~Jeremiah

Very droll. If we have no way of determining these locations within the city, how do you suggest we determine the truth of the specifics of the "prophecy"? Do we guess?

We can certainly locate the location, even if scholars dont agree on the exact location of the landmarks. This is Jerusalem they are talking about, and we know where Jerusalem is, all the way back to that time.

The landmarks (place locations) are the issue not the location of Jerusalem itself.

What is a valid reason this prophecy is false?

I've given you a number of reasons. Until you argue against them (other than dismissing out of hand reasonable criteria for what constitutes a valid prophecy) I don't need any more.

So first of all, i think this subject is relevant to this topic... We can tell that it is authored by an "All Knowing" God by true prophecy... But if you continue to insist to move to another topic, fine. Id like to do a head on head, but it seems to be closed for some reason

Second, why shouldn't we conciser all prophecy? The Bible has been said to be composed of 1/3 prophecy... That is a lot of prophecy! Any true prophecy would be a good example...

And finally, why should we accept your criteria for prophecy? How is this not a classic "No True Scotsman Fallacy"? The criteria you are giving isnt only irrelevant to prophecy being prophecy, its not even independent...

Every list of criteria you are giving is coming from bias, and one sided sources, whom would have an interest in disqualifying prophecy... The sources you give for criteria are building a list, becuase they want to discredit prophecy.


For example, here are some quotes from your criteria...

"Different persons with different interpretations, and even vastly different expectations originating from diverse world views, should all reach virtually the same conclusion."

Yet this list isnt accepted by different persons with different interpretations. This list is proposed and accepted by non-believers... Why should we accept it? It seems like the only people who "reach virtually the same conclusion" about this criteria is nonbeliever...

"The event must be independently confirmed to have happened."

Shouldnt your list of criteria be held to the same standards that you set for prophecy? It should be independently confirmed...


"Definite empirical evidence must be publicly available to document that the prophecy predates its fulfillment." "Otherwise, knowledge of the outcomes could have influenced the selection process..."

How do we know your criteria hasnt been influenced in the same way you criticize the prophecy being influenced?

I could go on more, but i think you get the point...

Why should anyone accept your criteria from these biases, non independent sources, while you yourself would only accept prophecy that is independently verified?

It seems to me that these lists you give are created to disqualify prophecy from being considered as prophecy. It is a classic No True Scotsman fallacy.. How is it not?

"The prophecy must be clear and unambiguous." ~No it doesnt. Prophecy can be prophetic even if this criteria isnt met.

"The event must be a complete fulfillment of the prediction."~No it doesnt, prophecy could still be fulfilled in furture dates, and it would still be prophecy.

"The event must be shown to have actually happened."~Yes the event must have actually happened, objectively... But "showing" or convincing someone that an event happened, does not actually make a prophecy true or not.

"The prophecy must have happened before the event."~Yes this is true, however it goes on to say

"The prophetic statement must be proved to precede the fulfillment event in time. Definite empirical evidence must be publicly available to document that the prophecy predates its fulfillment"~No, proving a prophecy doesnt create that prophecy or fulfill that event.. This is criteria on "you have to convince me about it", which is completely irrelevant to whether or not a prophecy is actually true..

"The event must not have been artificially created by a person who knew of the prophecy, with the intent of fulfilling it."~Yes and no... It should not be self fulfilled, but fulfilled in destiny, whether the person knows about it or not could be considered irrelevant

"The prophecy must not have been a logical guess."~The claim is that the Prophecy in the Bible is a revelation from God, we have no evidence of people making their best guess...



I could go on, if you'd like, should we discuss the criteria, and you and I come to accept reasonable criteria, and agree upon it? Id be happy to discuss each point listed, and discuss why it should or shouldnt be accept as criteria.


But this list is a list created as a fallacy, and much of it is irrelevant to whether prophecy is true...

[RedEye]

Tart, I await your criteria for what constitutes a valid, properly fulfilled prophecy since you have made it clear that you won't accept mine.

Or do you want me to defend the criteria I posted (linked to) against your objections instead?

[rikuoamero]

Why isn't this in the Head to Head section?

[Tart]

I think they shut down the head for head forum... You can't create topics (or at least I couldn't).


I don't think I have a criteria for prophecy... But if I would create some criteria for prophecy, of specifically Biblical prophecy, I would say that the prophecy would need to be revealed by God of some future event or some kind of truth or knowledge....

I say "some kind of truth or knowledge" because not every prophecy is an event...

For example: Prophesying about an event could be like prophesying the destruction of the temple, or a specific war, or some event.. Where prophesying about a truth might be like prophesying how people will react to the message of Christ, which isn't a specific event but is a certain knowledge/truth.

Both these kinds of prophecies are in scripture.... So I suppose that is my "criteria", which is by no means complete or even incomplete... perhaps a work in progress.

[rikuoamero]

You have to send a request to Otseng, to be come a member of the H2H usergroup, then you can create a topic.

[Tart]

So basically I simply think prophecy, specific to the Bible, needs to be revealed from an All Knowing God and to be true... That is what would make up a legitimate prophecy in scripture...


Do you think that is sufficient or insufficient criteria, why or why not?

[RedEye]

So basically I simply think prophecy, specific to the Bible, needs to be revealed from an All Knowing God and to be true... That is what would make up a legitimate prophecy in scripture...

Do you think that is sufficient or insufficient criteria, why or why not?

Not sufficient. We need some rigorous criteria or almost anything could be passed off as fulfilled prophecy. It's too vague to say that the prophecy has to be "true". We need some impartial way of determining whether the prophecy has been fulfilled or not and can therefore qualify as valid prophecy.

My suggestion (again) is these criteria:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_ ... e_prophecy

• For a statement to be Biblical foreknowledge, it must fit all of the five following criteria:
  
  1. It must be accurate. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it is not accurate, because knowledge (and thus foreknowledge) excludes inaccurate statements. TLDR: It's true.
  
  2. It must be in the Bible. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it is not in the Bible, because Biblical by definition foreknowledge can only come from the Bible itself, rather than modern reinterpretations of the text. TLDR: It's in plain words in the Bible.
  
  3. It must be precise and unambiguous. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if meaningless philosophical musings or multiple possible ideas could fulfill the foreknowledge, because ambiguity prevents one from knowing whether the foreknowledge was intentional rather than accidental. TLDR: Vague "predictions" don't count.
  
  4. It must be improbable. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it reasonably could be the result of a pure guess, because foreknowledge requires a person to actually know something true, while a correct guess doesn't mean that the guesser knows anything. This also excludes contemporary beliefs that happened be true but were believed to be true without solid evidence. TLDR: Lucky guesses don't count.
  
  5. It must have been unknown. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it reasonably could be the result of an educated guess based off contemporary knowledge, because foreknowledge requires a person to know a statement when it would have been impossible, outside of supernatural power, for that person to know it. TLDR: Ideas of the time don't count.

I would also add:

• 6. The event must be a complete fulfillment of the prediction. That is, the prophecy must accurately predict the event. And the event must fulfill each component of the prophecy in a passage. If I say that the god Sodales revealed to me that next week Tom Cruise will purchase a red Ferrari and next week Mr. Cruise actually buys a red Porsche, my prophecy has failed the test.
  
  7. The event must be shown to have actually happened. The event must be independently confirmed to have happened. Ideally, there should be historical or archeological evidence that the event really occurred. The outcome of the prophecy must be evident by the present time, with that outcome well documented by publicly available facts. For instance, reliable and independent historical records, stones and relics found at archaeological sites and museums and evident facts of world history all count as publicly available facts. But unverifiable reports do not count, especially reports of miraculous events that are exceedingly improbable from an objective perspective. (Lack of evidence that the event has happened does not necessarily disprove the fulfilled prophecy. The event may still have happened. But without reliable evidence of the event happening, the fulfilled prophecy has lost any apologetic value).
  
  8. The prophecy must have happened before the event. The prophetic statement must be proved to precede the fulfillment event in time. Definite empirical evidence must be publicly available to document that the prophecy predates its fulfillment. For the Jewish prophetical books, this criterion is satisfied by all outcomes dated after 150 BC, the average date of copies of Bible books among the Dead Sea Scrolls. This is also about the time the independently-circulated Greek translation, the Septuagint, was completed in Alexandria, Egypt. Otherwise, knowledge of the outcomes could have influenced the selection process, canonizing those books with fulfilled prophecies while discarding other books with embarrassing ones, thereby producing a spurious prophetic accuracy using the unfair advantage of hindsight..

Are these criteria (which I consider eminently reasonable) acceptable to you or do you have objections?
Or do you want me to go back and address the objections in your first post?

[Tart]

So basically I simply think prophecy, specific to the Bible, needs to be revealed from an All Knowing God and to be true... That is what would make up a legitimate prophecy in scripture...

Do you think that is sufficient or insufficient criteria, why or why not?

Not sufficient. We need some rigorous criteria or almost anything could be passed off as fulfilled prophecy. It's too vague to say that the prophecy has to be "true". We need some impartial way of determining whether the prophecy has been fulfilled or not and can therefore qualify as valid prophecy.

Saying something is too value isnt some kind of scientific measurement... the statement "its too vague" is too vague...

The criteria you listed, could be used to discredit real, true, prophecy... That doesnt make your criteria good criteria.

My suggestion (again) is these criteria:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_ ... e_prophecy

• For a statement to be Biblical foreknowledge, it must fit all of the five following criteria:
  
  1. It must be accurate. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it is not accurate, because knowledge (and thus foreknowledge) excludes inaccurate statements. TLDR: It's true.

Yes the prophecy needs to be true.

2. It must be in the Bible. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it is not in the Bible, because Biblical by definition foreknowledge can only come from the Bible itself, rather than modern reinterpretations of the text. TLDR: It's in plain words in the Bible.

I plan to only comment on Biblical Prophecy.

3. It must be precise and unambiguous. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if meaningless philosophical musings or multiple possible ideas could fulfill the foreknowledge, because ambiguity prevents one from knowing whether the foreknowledge was intentional rather than accidental. TLDR: Vague "predictions" don't count.

I think this criteria is too ambiguous itself... Id like an example... Prophecy, can be true, even if interpretation is difficult.

"you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."~2 Peter

This is saying, that perhaps the prophets themselves didnt even fully understand the prophecies they gave. If this is true, the prophecy in scripture could still be true and God inspired...

4. It must be improbable. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it reasonably could be the result of a pure guess, because foreknowledge requires a person to actually know something true, while a correct guess doesn't mean that the guesser knows anything. This also excludes contemporary beliefs that happened be true but were believed to be true without solid evidence. TLDR: Lucky guesses don't count.

There is no evdience whatsoever of prophets "guessing"

5. It must have been unknown. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it reasonably could be the result of an educated guess based off contemporary knowledge, because foreknowledge requires a person to know a statement when it would have been impossible, outside of supernatural power, for that person to know it. TLDR: Ideas of the time don't count.[/list]

there is no evidence of guessing...

I would also add:

• 6. The event must be a complete fulfillment of the prediction. That is, the prophecy must accurately predict the event. And the event must fulfill each component of the prophecy in a passage. If I say that the god Sodales revealed to me that next week Tom Cruise will purchase a red Ferrari and next week Mr. Cruise actually buys a red Porsche, my prophecy has failed the test.

Unfortunately you are giving criteria that can reject prophecy that could be true... That is not good criteria...

7. The event must be shown to have actually happened. The event must be independently confirmed to have happened. Ideally, there should be historical or archeological evidence that the event really occurred. The outcome of the prophecy must be evident by the present time, with that outcome well documented by publicly available facts. For instance, reliable and independent historical records, stones and relics found at archaeological sites and museums and evident facts of world history all count as publicly available facts. But unverifiable reports do not count, especially reports of miraculous events that are exceedingly improbable from an objective perspective. (Lack of evidence that the event has happened does not necessarily disprove the fulfilled prophecy. The event may still have happened. But without reliable evidence of the event happening, the fulfilled prophecy has lost any apologetic value).

Convincing people of event does not create prophecy, or fulfill that prophecy.. This criteria is only about convincing people, which i dont plan to convince you REdEye... You are not the jury, you are the prosecution, and we should see whos position is more reasonable..

This criteria is another criteria that can be in place to reject actual, true, God inspired prophecy.... Any criteria that can be used to reject true prophecy, is not good criteria... Its like a scotsman

8. The prophecy must have happened before the event. The prophetic statement must be proved to precede the fulfillment event in time. Definite empirical evidence must be publicly available to document that the prophecy predates its fulfillment. For the Jewish prophetical books, this criterion is satisfied by all outcomes dated after 150 BC, the average date of copies of Bible books among the Dead Sea Scrolls. This is also about the time the independently-circulated Greek translation, the Septuagint, was completed in Alexandria, Egypt. Otherwise, knowledge of the outcomes could have influenced the selection process, canonizing those books with fulfilled prophecies while discarding other books with embarrassing ones, thereby producing a spurious prophetic accuracy using the unfair advantage of hindsight..[/list]

Are these criteria (which I consider eminently reasonable) acceptable to you or do you have objections?
Or do you want me to go back and address the objections in your first post?

This is another criteria about convincing you... and not about the prophecy itself... If you want to say the prophecy needs to happen before the event, id agree with you... but basically saying "you need to convince me it did", is criteria that has nothing to do with the prophecy itself...

Can you create a list of criteria that would sufficiently establish criteria that wouldnt be able to to used to reject prophecy that could actually be true prophecy?

Some kind of criteria that couldnt be used to reject real and true prophecy? Becuase this list isnt living up to that... Why should anyone accept a list that could be used to reject real prophecy?

(also go here, read my post, and post that you are interested in head to head (also read original post on page 1)) If you are interested in head to head.
viewtopic.php?t=19875&postdays=0&postor ... &start=120

[RedEye]

Tart, I take it that you won't accept the criteria I provided?

If that is the case, then there will be no debate by me about whatever Biblical prophecy you have in mind as your best candidate. I am unwilling to participate in a debate where what constitutes a valid, fulfilled prophecy is ill-defined.

Thank you, but no thanks. I see no point in arguing without rules.

[Tart]

Tart, I take it that you won't accept the criteria I provided?

If that is the case, then there will be no debate by me about whatever Biblical prophecy you have in mind as your best candidate. I am unwilling to participate in a debate where what constitutes a valid, fulfilled prophecy is ill-defined.

Thank you, but no thanks. I see no point in arguing without rules.

Well that is what we are discussing. Im fine with creating rules, which we should agree on. You suggested criteria, that I reviewed and gave my reasoning why it is good or why it isnt. Think of it like a peer reviewed article for your "prophecy criteria". Our job is to come up with valid criteria, and you offered 2 sources of criteria that come from places of bias, like rationalpidia

Im simply asking for criteria that can not be used to reject real God Inspired Prophecy.. Which I think is a reasonable thing to ask...

So you cant create criteria we can agree on? You wont even comment on my reviews of your criteria?