Fulfilled Bible Prophecy
Pahu
Bible passage: Isaiah 13:17
Prophet: Isaiah
Written: perhaps between 701-681 BC
Fulfilled: 539 BC
In Isaiah 13:17, the prophet said the Medes would attack Babylon. This
happened about 150 years after Isaiah is believed to have delivered
this prophecy. The Medes joined the Persians and conquered Babylon in
about 539 BC.
Can man accurately reveal the future?
Can God?
snex
how can you prove it was written 701-681 BC? do you have the original
manuscripts carbon dated?
Scooter the Mighty
Sure. It happens all the time. I predict I'll blow raspberries in my
son's armpit tonight and he'll laugh uncontrollably. Stay tuned to
see if my eerie prediction comes to pass.
> Can God?
No. People who don't exist usually can't do things.
Ye Old One
group when s/he wrote:
No.
>Can God?
Who?
--
Bob.
Bloopen...@juno.com
If the book of Isaiah was actually written no earlier than 681 BC,
that is a bit hard to explain as a coincidence. But how do you know it
wasn't written after 539 BC? Or that the surrounding passages are
authentic 7th-cent. BC material but that particular verse isn't an
interpolation? If I'm not mistaken the Qumran scrolls (2nd century BC)
are the earliest surviving OT manuscripts.
And how do you extrapolate from this evidence that God did it? Could
it not have been aliens? Are there tests we can do that would falsify
one of these hypotheses?
edwar...@verizon.net
The beginning of Isiah was written in about 750 BC, but the original
Isiah was added to later and was not complete until perhaps as late as
350 BC; the background, style and language of the chapters after the
Senacherib episode (Is. 40) shift. The is also a third Isiah after Is
60, writing in about 450BC, much after the other two Isiahs. It's easy
to predict yesterday's lottery number.
Desertphile
> Babylon would be attacked by the Medes
>
> Bible passage: Isaiah 13:17
> Prophet: Isaiah
"Isaiah" was a walse prophet: King Ahaz lost the war and was
beheaded.
*POOF!* goes your falsehood.
--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Buffy has super strength; why don't we just load her up
like one of those little horses?" -- Anya
David Canzi -- non-mailable
Pahu <pah...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Babylon would be attacked by the Medes
>
>Bible passage: Isaiah 13:17
>Prophet: Isaiah
>Written: perhaps between 701-681 BC
>Fulfilled: 539 BC
An argument founded on "perhaps" proves nothing.
--
David Canzi | Eternal truths come and go. |
Mark VandeWettering
Man can accurately reveal the future, in retrospect.
> Can God?
Which one?
Mark
Vend
Moreover, even if this passage was written before the event, the
prediction seems generic enough that it could had been easly guesses.
I don't know very much about middle-east history, but perhaps there
was a longtime hostility between the Medes and the Babylonians, which
finally resulted in a war.
Greg G.
>
> Bible passage: Isaiah 13:17
> Prophet: Isaiah
> Written: perhaps between 701-681 BC
> Fulfilled: 539 BC
>
> In Isaiah 13:17, the prophet said the Medes would attack Babylon. This
> happened about 150 years after Isaiah is believed to have delivered
> this prophecy. The Medes joined the Persians and conquered Babylon in
> about 539 BC.
Verse 6 says:
Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a
destruction from the Almighty.
The prophecy says the day is at hand but it took 150 years? Some
prophecy.
>
> Can man accurately reveal the future?
> Can God?
Verses 19 and 20 say that Babylon will never be inhabited. Oops! God
guessed wrong.
Verses 21 and 22 prophecizes satyrs and dragons showing up. When will
that be fulfilled?
We are sometimes told of the beautiful poetry in the Bible. Check out
this chapter:
Isaiah 13
1 The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see.
2 Lift ye up a banner upon the high mountain, exalt the voice unto
them, shake the hand, that they may go into the gates of the nobles.
3 I have commanded my sanctified ones, I have also called my mighty
ones for mine anger, even them that rejoice in my highness.
4 The noise of a multitude in the mountains, like as of a great
people; a tumultuous noise of the kingdoms of nations gathered
together: the LORD of hosts mustereth the host of the battle.
5 They come from a far country, from the end of heaven, even the
LORD, and the weapons of his indignation, to destroy the whole land.
6 Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a
destruction from the Almighty.
7 Therefore shall all hands be faint, and every man's heart shall
melt:
8 And they shall be afraid: pangs and sorrows shall take hold of
them; they shall be in pain as a woman that travaileth: they shall be
amazed one at another; their faces shall be as flames.
9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and
fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the
sinners thereof out of it.
10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not
give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and
the moon shall not cause her light to shine.
11 And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for
their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease,
and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.
12 I will make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than
the golden wedge of Ophir.
13 Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out
of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his
fierce anger.
14 And it shall be as the chased roe, and as a sheep that no man
taketh up: they shall every man turn to his own people, and flee every
one into his own land.
15 Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one
that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword.
16 Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes;
their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.
17 Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, which shall not
regard silver; and as for gold, they shall not delight in it.
18 Their bows also shall dash the young men to pieces; and they shall
have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare
children.
19 And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees'
excellency, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.
20 It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from
generation to generation: neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there;
neither shall the shepherds make their fold there.
21 But wild beasts of the desert shall lie there; and their houses
shall be full of doleful creatures; and owls shall dwell there, and
satyrs shall dance there.
22 And the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate
houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces: and her time is near to
come, and her days shall not be prolonged.
--
Greg G.
I am Daffy Duck of Borg.
Yooourrrr'e assssssimilated!!
Pfusand
Since 'God' blew it with (at least) Isaiah 13:10 and 13:20, I'd have
to say "no."
Pfusand
That which does not destroy us
has made its last mistake.
-- Unspoken motto of the pantope crew
Scooter the Mighty
And it came to pass, yea and verily. Rejoice oh citizens of earth.
Robert Carnegie
Yup. Maybe the Medes were always saying "One of these days,
Babylonians."
A respectable prophecy would be something falsifiable, like "The Amish
will never invade Quebec." As far as I know this is not yet
disproved, but it could be if things go on. You know what I mean.
And, of course, if the Amish do invade Quebec then you know I was just
blowing smoke.
Bloopen...@juno.com
Eh? But that would mean that the prophecy could be considered
"fulfilled" at any time between the time it was spoken and many
thousands of years in the future. And anyone who knows the Amish,
knows that they aren't going to invade anyone anytime soon. It would
be easy to predict that they aren't going to invade Quebec. So no,
actually, I don't think that would be a respectable prophecy.
John Wilkins
It's even easier if "Amish" and "Quebec" take on symbolic meanings that
can be post hoc interpreted to apply to, say, the Nigerians of 1000
years later invading the region now called Chad.
--
John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Biohumanities Project
University of Queensland - Blog: scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts
"He used... sarcasm. He knew all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor,
bathos, puns, parody, litotes and... satire. He was vicious."
Robert Carnegie
Heretic! You pollute the teachings of Carnegie!
Anyway... yeah, a prophecy that something that appears likely, won't
happen, is more heavyweight. And with a time limit, so you can
actually tell that I was right. Like, "President Bush will not start
a war against Iran just the right time before the 2008 election."
Note this is only a hypothetical example, I am not making the
prophecy. In fact I would have to use up a lot of credibility that I
don't have, to get people to believe the prophecy. I only wish I
could do it. Obviously I'd want to start with President Bush. And I
probably should mention Dick Cheney.
Bloopen...@juno.com
eerok
[...]
> A respectable prophecy would be something falsifiable, like
> "The Amish will never invade Quebec." As far as I know this
> is not yet disproved, but it could be if things go on. You
> know what I mean. And, of course, if the Amish do invade
> Quebec then you know I was just blowing smoke.
Quebec's defence against the Amish is already in place: an
elite cadre of rude French waiters will drive them off by
refusing to understand any language they choose to speak, and
spitting in their soup.
--
"The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality."
- George Bernard Shaw
Vend
No, the prophecy doesn't have a litteral meaning, because it's written
in a language that must be understood by 21st century keyboard-typers.
Robert Carnegie
Vend wrote:
Oh? Well, woe unto thee, buddy. A prophet is not without honour, I
guess, except in the talk.* newsgroups.
John Wilkins
> Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > A respectable prophecy would be something falsifiable, like
> > "The Amish will never invade Quebec." As far as I know this
> > is not yet disproved, but it could be if things go on. You
> > know what I mean. And, of course, if the Amish do invade
> > Quebec then you know I was just blowing smoke.
>
> Quebec's defence against the Amish is already in place: an
> elite cadre of rude French waiters will drive them off by
> refusing to understand any language they choose to speak, and
> spitting in their soup.
Oh, come on. You know that they are all working in Paris!
eerok
> eerok <ee...@addr.invalid> wrote:
>> Robert Carnegie wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> > A respectable prophecy would be something falsifiable, like
>> > "The Amish will never invade Quebec." As far as I know this
>> > is not yet disproved, but it could be if things go on. You
>> > know what I mean. And, of course, if the Amish do invade
>> > Quebec then you know I was just blowing smoke.
>> Quebec's defence against the Amish is already in place: an
>> elite cadre of rude French waiters will drive them off by
>> refusing to understand any language they choose to speak, and
>> spitting in their soup.
> Oh, come on. You know that they are all working in Paris!
Okay, you called my bluff. But we can still clog their
arteries with Montréal smoked meat.
Desertphile
The second author of Isaiah came along later and tried to correct
some of the falsehoods, only making things worse. Some Bible
scholars claim there is evidence for a third author who tried to
do the same with the first two writer's texts. This is why Isaiah
7:14 to 8:etc was a miserable failure as a prophesy--- not only
did the first writer of Isaiah get the outcome of the battle
wrong, but the king he made the prophesy for, claiming complete
victory, was captured and beheaded by the enemies Isaiah claimed
would be vanquished.
Which is pretty damn funny, I think.
Desertphile
Thank you.
Funny thing, but the second author even made excuses about the
failed prophesies of the first author.
Desertphile
> On Apr 18, 6:03 pm, Pahu <pah...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Babylon would be attacked by the Medes
> >
> > Bible passage: Isaiah 13:17
> > Prophet: Isaiah
> > Written: perhaps between 701-681 BC
> > Fulfilled: 539 BC
> >
> > In Isaiah 13:17, the prophet said the Medes would attack Babylon. This
> > happened about 150 years after Isaiah is believed to have delivered
> > this prophecy. The Medes joined the Persians and conquered Babylon in
> > about 539 BC.
> >
> > Can man accurately reveal the future?
> > Can God?
>
> Since 'God' blew it with (at least) Isaiah 13:10 and 13:20, I'd have
> to say "no."
The same "god" also got the "prophesy" about Tyre wrong.
> Pfusand
>
> That which does not destroy us
> has made its last mistake.
> -- Unspoken motto of the pantope crew
edwar...@verizon.net
> The same "god" also got the "prophesy" about Tyre wrong.
>
Ez. 28:8 (Ithobaal II was not killed)
Ez 29:10, 29:14 (Nebuchadnezzar din't conquor Egypt)
And the Conquest of Canaan (Jericho, Ai) is not supported by
archaeological evidence.
Desertphile
Good, thank you. It is both funny and sad that Bible worshippers
still believe there are such things as "fulfulled Bible prophesy."
Even though Tyre currently exists and is a tourist trap (the
"prophesy" in the Bible said it would soon be destroyed and never
inhabited again), Fundamentalist Christians *STILL* believe the
"prophesy" was "fulfilled."
On second thought that ain't both funny and sad: it's just sad.
snex
> On 20 Apr 2007 20:33:42 -0700, edward_...@verizon.net wrote:
>
> > On Apr 20, 9:42 am, Desertphile <desertph...@nospam.org> wrote:
> > > The same "god" also got the "prophesy" about Tyre wrong.
> > See also Ezekiel 26:7-9 (Nebuchadnezzar never conquored Tyre)
> > Ez. 28:8 (Ithobaal II was not killed)
> > Ez 29:10, 29:14 (Nebuchadnezzar din't conquor Egypt)
>
> > And the Conquest of Canaan (Jericho, Ai) is not supported by
> > archaeological evidence.
>
> Good, thank you. It is both funny and sad that Bible worshippers
> still believe there are such things as "fulfulled Bible prophesy."
> Even though Tyre currently exists and is a tourist trap (the
> "prophesy" in the Bible said it would soon be destroyed and never
> inhabited again), Fundamentalist Christians *STILL* believe the
> "prophesy" was "fulfilled."
>
> On second thought that ain't both funny and sad: it's just sad.
well, dont you see. tyre HAD to be destroyed because it says it right
there in the bible, and since we know biblical prophecies are true,
tyre was destroyed.
therefore, since we know tyre was destroyed, it is amazing that
ezekiel could have predicted this, and it confirms the accuracy of the
bible.