Talk:Biblical prophecies

	This Bible related article has been awarded SILVER status for quality. We like it, and you should too! See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>

, (new)

Qur'an and other stuff.

It occurs to me that many religions maintain that miracles show that their religion/god is the only true one.

Typically, those supporting these stories maintain that "theirs" are proof of the correctness of their beliefs while maintaining that those of other religions are the inventions which they clearly are. It occurs to me that we should perhaps be combining "fulfilled" prophesies from various religions so that when supporters come round claiming the accuracy of their prophecies they will need to explain why those of their competitor religions are wrong.

Some obvious problems are that the article is already pretty big and I'm guessing that we don't really have much knowledge of non-Christian prophecies. Obviously we would need to rename as well.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 16:23, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Jeremiah's failed 70 year prophecy should be added.

Jeremiah predicted that Israel would return to their homelands from Babylonian captivity after 70 years from the time of their capture.

Should we add that failed predictions?

73.106.76.255 (talk) 21:50, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Unexplained content removal

What’s this about @Nebuchadnezzar7658? Christopher (talk) 21:53, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Agree, reverting the removal of the content until it is explained. Kauri0.o (talk) 00:06, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I originally added the content, and I kind of wanted all my edits to the mainspace to be reverted. If you insist against that action, then I'll leave it as is. Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 00:45, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Is there a template for content that has been copied from another article?

The criteria section was copy and pasted from the 'Biblical Foreknowledge' article; Of course, given how it fits this article, I don't think it should be removed, but there should be an indication of this somewhere. TheOneAndOnlyCirrusMan (talk) 19:29, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Response to several messages left by religious guys on previous talk pages

I read the archives of previous talk pages and notice a couple of opposing messages from religious guys and they were either not effectively dealt with or completely unanswered. Their words are misleading and erroneous and I feel I need to make refutations of them.

Response to first one: What you said is full of error. First, you claimed that Nebuchadnezzar II completely destroyed Tyre. This completely incorrect. Tyre itself was on the island, not mainland. The mainland part was called "Ushu" and just the suburb of the main city at that time. Many verses in related chapters indicate Tyre was an island city at that time, such as Ezekiel 26: 5, 27: 4 and 27: 32, which all say Tyre was in the sea. Ezekiel 26: 8 use "daughters" (KJV and NRSV versions. NIV doesn't do this) refer to the mainland part. All ancient cities which sent out colonies designated them as either “sons” or “daughters "depending on whether the inhabitants were kin-folk or simply allies. In this case the Tyranians on the mainland were allies and so were labelled “daughters”. The residents of Ushu soon abandoned the part and retreated into main city on the island. Nebuchadnezzar II only destroyed the mainland part but never able to break into Tyre on the island, so the prophecy failed from the beginning. A great number of Christians simply got it backwards. (intentionally or just mislead by others) Your claim "The verses before go into detail about the destruction of Tyre, and mentions how the rubble and debris will be 'in the midst of the water.'(Ez 26:12). Which came true when Alexander built a causeway towards the island using all the rubble etc." also failed since you thought Tyre was on the mainland. By the way, you said that you were not doing apologetic things since you thought apologetic was about defense of belief system and you were attacking certain claims. This is also clearly wrong. Apologetic is mean to defend certain faiths and will surely engage and attack all kinds of opposing claims and arguments. Your understanding of the word and your argument is really problematic.

Response to the second and third one: @Fpoof Pasting all the verses and making them bold and large won't make your arguments any more convincing. You are playing bad rhetoric game. First, you claimed that "many nations" in the verses mean a lot of forces which would attack Tyre afterwards. This is inadequate. If you read the context seriously, you should find that it refers to multi-national army under Nebuchadnezzar II, not some unrelated nations hundreds or thousands of years later. The verses clearly says that Nebuchadnezzar II's forces will take Tyre and completely sack it. This never happened, so the prophecy failed from the beginning.

You also claimed that the verse "You shall never be rebuilt" means the original Phoenician city would never exist. This is ridiculous. Nothing in the verses indicate or imply what you mean. It just says the city ITSELF will be destroyed and never be rebuilt. As long as it was rebuilt, the prophecy failed, and it did fail.

@198.232.223.248 Your words had about the same errors as previous two. For the response to most of your words, just read my response to previous two, but I need to add something since you had something new. You wrote "Tyre recovered in a measure from this blow, but never regained the place she had previously held in the world. The larger part of the site of the once great city is now as bare as the top of a rock -- a place where the fishermen that still frequent the spot spread their nets to dry" Where in the chapter says it's about these abstract and subjective things? Isn't this entirely made up? What's the reason and standard of saying "Tyre never regain former power and prosperity"? Today's Tyre is bigger and more populous than ancient time, why can't we say it's prosperous and powerful? (If it really had any real power in the past) This is completely double standard or simply ignorance. By the way, the city is still largely on the same site of previous one, just look at the Google Maps Satellite View of Tyre satellite image and you can clearly see its area.

Response to another one: @Skadooshbag You claimed that those verses are idioms or hyperbole. I don't see how they fit this. Those verses state and predict certain scenarios quite specifically and There is absolutely no hint of those predictions being interpreted symbolically or metaphorically. You also said "Nothing in the passage about Nebbuchanezzar attacking Tyre indicates that Tyre will be completely destroyed, nor does it indicate that it will stay that way forever." Are you serious? Did you really read that chapter? 26:14: "I will make you a bare rock; you shall be a place for spreading nets. You shall never again be rebuilt, for I the Lord have spoken, says the Lord God." 26:21: "I will bring you to a dreadful end, and you shall be no more; though sought for, you will never be found again, says the Lord God." How could this not mean "the city will be totally destroyed and never be rebuilt"? 七战功成 15:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)