The Bible, the word of God or the word of men?

[Eloi]

Jehovah's Witnesses regard the Bible as the Word of God that he inspired to be written to instruct his people. That is the direct cause that our people are so different from other religious communities around the world. For example: all Witnesses preach, no Witnesses participate in military matters, we are totally neutral in political matters, etc. I am not talking about a few individuals or small groups of fellow believers with the same principles or beliefs, I am talking about a worldwide community where the more than 8.5 million counted as Jehovah's Witnesses are dedicated, baptized and active public preachers. Furthermore, we all study the same teachings week after week all over the planet. They are direct effects of seriously considering all biblical matters.

Aside from the direct results of being fully guided by the Scriptures, what other evidence do we Witnesses have to consider the Bible as the Word of God? I would like to talk about them little by little on this topic, and although some do not agree, at least you will know what reasons we have for having this point of view on the Bible. First thing, to start on one specific point: prophecies.

To understand the matter of the prophecies that Jehovah's prophets gave in their books, we must first understand one thing: since the Bible was written part by part over a period of about 1600 years, there was already part of the Bible written at the time in which others wrote new inspired books. For example, at the time that Daniel was living in Babylon, he was holding in his hands part of the book that Jeremiah had written some years earlier. This process of writing to join with what has already been written continued throughout the time that the Bible was being completed until it was what we know today. In reality, when Jesus lived as a human, the Scriptures that we call the Old Testament were already complete and he read and studied them.

Although I will talk about other prophecies later, I would like to mention three of them that are especially striking:

1) Did you know that Daniel predicted the time when Jesus would appear as Messiah? How did Daniel know that the Messiah would appear in 29 C.E.?

2) Did you know that the Christians were not destroyed when the Romans attacked Jerusalem in 70 C.E. because Jesus told them more than thirty years before that they had to flee out of there at the right moment?

3) Did you know that the prophet Isaiah predicted more than a century and a half earlier how Babylon would be conquered by the Medo-Persians and even predicted the name of the man who would be directly responsible for that attack?

When we Witnesses see prophecies like these fulfilled, our confidence that the Bible is more than just a book written by men increases. What do critics of the Bible say about biblical prophecies and their fulfillment?

[JoeyKnothead]

...
For example, at the time that Daniel was living in Babylon, he was holding in his hands part of the book that Jeremiah had written some years earlier.
...

Please present this partial book for analysis.

Second request.

This claim of a book is presented as some form of evidence related to following claims within the OP.

Any chance we'll get to see this thing?

Or is this just another making a claim and ignoring challenges tactic we find all to common among theists?

[Athetotheist]

The city was razed. Was any stone left on another stone? Perhaps... and yet that doesn't change the fact that the prophecy was fulfilled. If you were to ask anyone who lived at the time Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans, what would they tell you about Jesus' prophecy and its fulfillment? Well, you have the opportunity to read historians of the time like Josephus. Perhaps they can tell you more about the reality that was lived... which is much more than your desire to contradict and deny the prophecy.

About the temple? Well, nothing remains of that temple. The so-called Wailing Wall did not belong to the temple, it was an outer wall. Only a section of that wall still stands... as a memorial to what it means to disobey Jehovah. The same remained a corner of the city of Jericho when it was demolished; Rahab lived there, and even so, the destruction of Jericho left a memory for all who read the story.

Don't you like Bible prophecies? It doesn't matter... there they are for you to see and learn that the prophecies that are yet to be fulfilled will be fulfilled without fail.

------

by no means will a stone be left here upon a stone

"Jesus’ prophecy came true right down to fine detail."

And when he got nearby, he viewed the city and wept over it.......

".......and they will not leave a stone upon a stone in you"

https://www.nbcnews.com/sciencemain/dis ... 2d11687560

Like I said earlier, it's like someone writing after the fall of Jerusalem was careless about what he had Jesus say.

And there's still the matter of Jesus straddling the fence on the law of Moses.

[TRANSPONDER]

The city was razed. Was any stone left on another stone? Perhaps... and yet that doesn't change the fact that the prophecy was fulfilled. If you were to ask anyone who lived at the time Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans, what would they tell you about Jesus' prophecy and its fulfillment? Well, you have the opportunity to read historians of the time like Josephus. Perhaps they can tell you more about the reality that was lived... which is much more than your desire to contradict and deny the prophecy.

About the temple? Well, nothing remains of that temple. The so-called Wailing Wall did not belong to the temple, it was an outer wall. Only a section of that wall still stands... as a memorial to what it means to disobey Jehovah. The same remained a corner of the city of Jericho when it was demolished; Rahab lived there, and even so, the destruction of Jericho left a memory for all who read the story.

Don't you like Bible prophecies? It doesn't matter... there they are for you to see and learn that the prophecies that are yet to be fulfilled will be fulfilled without fail.

Clearly, you are rewriting the bible to suit yourself. Luke has a reference to the wonderful stones and buildings. So that is talking about not just one building, but all the Temple buildings. Of course not one stone on another (which wasn't the case) is hyperbole. The point really is not whether the prophecy was meticulously accurate or not but whether it was before the event or not.

I'd like to know how you explain that Luke changed what the prophecy said. - from the abomination in the Temple to surrounded by armies.

[Eloi]

(...) Like I said earlier, it's like someone writing after the fall of Jerusalem was careless about what he had Jesus say.

Yeah, because all of you, the enemies of the Bible, think that Christians are like you, trying to change the history to follow an agenda. We are not like you.

[Athetotheist]

(...) Like I said earlier, it's like someone writing after the fall of Jerusalem was careless about what he had Jesus say.

Yeah, because all of you, the enemies of the Bible, think that Christians are like you, trying to change the history to follow an agenda. We are not like you.

You throw that "enemies of the Bible" line around pretty freely. Are you an "enemy of the Book of Mormon"? Are you an "enemy of the Upanishads"?

Think about it. First you make a big deal of a prophecy being amazingly accurate, then when it's brought home that it wasn't amazingly accurate, all of a sudden amazing accuracy isn't important. Is it my fault if the narrative has a weakness which I happened to find? Just because I'm pointing out what may be an unpleasant realization doesn't make me an enemy. Isn't that what you would say to a follower of some belief in which you found a weakness?

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
---Galileo

[Eloi]

The prophecy was fulfilled to the level of details, even if you are that "exquisite" to accept it. The entire city was razed to the ground and the writings of historians attest to that. Not a stone was left of the temple upon a stone, just as Jesus indicated. There were hardly any remains of the city, but nothing habitable was left. The prophecy was fulfilled just as Jesus said it would be. About the reason for the event there is a very interesting note in our Study Bible in Luke 19:44

Luke 19:44 They will dash you and your children within you to the ground, and they will not leave a stone upon a stone in you, because you did not discern the time of your being inspected.”

the time of your being inspected: Or “the appointed time of your inspection.” The Greek word e·pi·sko·peʹ (inspection; visitation) is related to the words e·piʹsko·pos (overseer) and e·pi·sko·peʹo (watch over; watch carefully) and can have a positive or a negative connotation. For unfaithful Jews, who did not discern this time of inspection in connection with Jesus’ earthly ministry, it would result in adverse judgment by God. However, those who did discern this time of inspection and took advantage of it to repent and show faith in God would have God’s approval. The same Greek word is used in the Septuagint at Isa 10:3 and Jer 10:15 to render a Hebrew expression for “day of reckoning (punishment).” https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1001070663

The main issue is not in itself that some stone was left in Jerusalem on top of another, which may well be considered in that case a hyperbole (although not in the case of the temple, mentioned in Matt. 24:1; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5)... the main issue is that Jesus prophesied the destruction of the city and the temple more than 35 years in advance, and that the facts show that the prophecy was already written, because the Christians fled to Pella before the massacre and saved their lives. Diverting attention to whether or not some stones were left on top of others in the city is totally irrelevant. Not a stone was left of the temple, so the Jews have things to think about about Jesus and his prophecies. The enemies of the Bible don't think about anything...they already have an agenda and if they don't follow it, they don't get paid ... a "good" motivation for those who believe that this life is all there is.

Luke 19:41 And when he got nearby, he viewed the city and wept over it, 42 saying: “If you, even you, had discerned on this day the things having to do with peace—but now they have been hidden from your eyes. 43 Because the days will come upon you when your enemies will build around you a fortification of pointed stakes and will encircle you and besiege you from every side. 44 They will dash you and your children within you to the ground, and they will not leave a stone upon a stone in you, because you did not discern the time of your being inspected.”

... 21:20 However, when you see Jerusalem surrounded by encamped armies, then know that the desolating of her has drawn near. 21 Then let those in Ju·deʹa begin fleeing to the mountains, let those in the midst of her leave, and let those in the countryside not enter into her, 22 because these are days for meting out justice in order that all the things written may be fulfilled. 23 Woe to the pregnant women and those nursing a baby in those days! For there will be great distress on the land and wrath against this people. 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled.

[Clownboat]

Funny how the enemies of the Bible fool themselves

This Us vs Them mentality that you have in your mind is cult behavior. It allows the cult to unite against a common made up enemy, in this case you invent enemies of the Bible.

I'm going to prophesy that you are a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses.
Now how could I know this when I'm responding to post 30? Do you think that maybe I learned about this afterwords and then referenced an earlier writing to thereby make it seem like I had info that I shouldn't have had?

How could that be possible?

Apparently I am a prophet for knowing your religion in post 30 before you had made mention of it! Blessed be!

I'm going to guess that I have been written off as an enemy of the Bible. That way, Eloi doesn't have to consider how I was able to prophecy what type of religious beliefs they subscribe to. How could I have had that info in post 30 afterall!?!
I'm going to guess that this is not lost on the readers and they realize how it comes in to play when considering religious prophecies.

When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. - Socrates

Enemy of the Bible!

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to Eloi in post #86

Not a stone was left of the temple upon a stone, just as Jesus indicated.

According to Luke, he indicated the same for the entire city. If it was fulfilled in one respect, it should have been fulfilled in both.

Why do the authors of Matthew and Mark have Jesus refer to Daniel?

"In the holy of holies Antiochus set up a statue of a Greek god.…In keeping with the prophecy the daily sacrifices were stopped, the sanctuary was polluted, desolated and made an abomination."
---Dr. John Walvoord

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/ic ... Part13.cfm

Logically, that would be the abomination standing in the holy place. The Greeks didn't destroy the temple, so the destruction of the temple doesn't line up with the reference to Daniel.

".....for those days will be days of a tribulation such as has not occurred from the beginning of the creation that God created until that time, and will not occur again." (Mark 13:19, NWT)

"....for then there will be great tribulation such as has not occurred since the world’s beginning until now, no, nor will occur again." Matthew 24:21, NWT)

If the abomination was supposed to be the Roman army around Jerusalem, then Jesus must have believed that the fall of Jerusalem would herald the end of the world. That would explain why he goes on:

"Immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven, and all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in grief, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." (Matthew 24:29-30, NWT)

None of that happened after the sack of Jerusalem by the Romans.

[TRANSPONDER]

That's true. Ever since the Maccabean revolt there had been this idea of a perfect Messianic rule and the Pharisee/zealot side were always looking for it while the rather richer and more pro - Hellenic Sadducees saw the benefits of co - operating with pagans.

I can say that in my religious instruction class when I was in inky -fingered brat in short pants (when it was only the Bible propagandised in a shameless manner until deleted when I was in my last school years) The Romans were presented as a sorta benevolent police force in Judea. The seething revolutionary feeling is better conveyed in Life of Brian than it ever was by my religious teachers. Time and again after the disappointment of the Hasmoneans, the dislike of Herod, and the repeated revolts against the Romans shows how the Jews were expecting the liberating messiah, which hope was co -opted into Christianity who were expecting the messiah to come...well, come a second time...as much as the Jews were. And both are still waiting.

[JoeyKnothead]

...
For example, at the time that Daniel was living in Babylon, he was holding in his hands part of the book that Jeremiah had written some years earlier.
...

Please present this partial book for analysis.

Second request.

This claim of a book is presented as some form of evidence related to following claims within the OP.

Any chance we'll get to see this thing?

Or is this just another making a claim and ignoring challenges tactic we find all to common among theists?

Will the third time be a charm?

Our claimant has referred to this book in support of some notion that we can trust the biblical claims regarding various events or ideas. I seek to examine this book, so that we have the data necessary to analyze the timeline / claims involved here.

I propose if a claimant makes a claim but refuses to even address challenges to that claim, one should invest in Kleenex futures.

The liar lies and the preacher preaches.