Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

7673Re: PE Naturalism refuted by supernatural Biblical prophecies (e.g. Mic 5:2 & Dn 9:24-26, etc ...)

Expand Messages
  • Stephen E. Jones
    Jan 14, 2004

      On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 19:48:37 -0800, elf wrote:

      >>>>supernatural fulfillment of prophecies like Dan 9:24-27 and Mic 5:2,

      >>>EC>Which, as I've pointed out before, begs the question, albeit in a
      >>>different direction - one which assumes as a premise that premise which
      >>>*you* wish to prove.

      >SJ>For the *umpteenth* time No. *I* am not ruling out in advance naturalistic
      >>explanations (in fact I am *inviting* them!). All I am asking my opponents
      >>to do is agree to not rule out in advance supernaturalist explanations.

      >EC>I didn't say you were ruling out anything -- I pointed out that
      >you were begging the very question you were asking, so since your
      >conclusion is one of your premises, of course you're going to arrive at
      >that conclusion.

      My conclusion is *not* one of my premises. First here is my PE
      "Naturalism ... Refuted by supernatural ... Biblical prophecies" page:

      2. Naturalism
      1. "Nature is all there is"
      2. Refuted by supernatural
      1. Biblical prophecies
      1. Micah 5:2: Birthplace of Messiah (Bethlehem)
      The prophet Micah in the 8th century BC, predicted that the Messiah would
      be born in Bethlehem (Mic 5:2; Mt 2:5-6; Jn 7:42). And Jesus was born in
      Bethlehem (Mt 2:1; Lk 2:4-7)!

      2. Daniel 9:24-27: The time of Messiah
      The objectively best combination of terminus a quo (starting point), and
      method of calculation of the 70 `weeks', yields a terminus ad quem (ending
      point) at the time of Jesus' public ministry and crucifixion! (Newman,
      1988; Newman, 1997, pp.223-224; Archer, 1964, pp.386-387; Strobel,
      2000, pp.248-249; Unger, 1966, pp.391-392). [...]

      Expressed in logical premises and conclusions syllogistic format (I this
      together in 5 minutes, so it could no doubt be tightened up but it would
      not change its basic structure) my claim simply is:

      1. Naturalism is the claim that "nature is all there is" (i.e. the
      supernatural does not exist);

      2. Naturalism would therefore be refuted if the supernatural exists;

      3. The supernatural does in fact exist in the form of Fulfilled
      Biblical prophecy, that cannot plausibly be explained naturalistically
      (e.g. Mic. 5:2 and Dan. 9:24-27)

      4. Therefore naturalism is false.

      So the premise (1) does *not* contain the conclusion (4). And (2) follows
      from (1) by definition. Only (3) needs to be established, which is what I
      am prepared to debate.

      It is up to my opponents at (3) to provide a naturalistic explanation
      that: a) fits all the facts; and b) is more plausible than my supernatural
      explanation; without c) begging the question by ruling out supernatural
      explanations; and my claim that Naturalism is false, fails. But otherwise
      it stands.

      PS: Here is another tagline quote about Daniel's prophecy of the 70
      `weeks' in Dan 9:24.

      "The Prophecy of Daniel Nine. Because our Lord quotes from the prophecy
      of Daniel, it may be profitable to study that passage ... Daniel 9:24-27 ...
      The seven weeks are, in prophetic language, weeks of years. The period in
      which the above was to find fulfillment consisted of 490 years. During this
      period four things were to be accomplished: (1) reconciliation for iniquity,
      (2) righteousness established, (3) sealing up vision and prophecy, and (4)
      the anointing of the Most Holy. All these things were to be accomplished
      by the Messiah. The whole design of Christ's coming upon earth and dying
      upon Calvary's Cross was "to finish transgression, and to make an end of
      sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity." Daniel, in his prayer previous
      to this particular prophecy, was deeply concerned with the forgiveness of
      both his and the people's transgressions, sins, and iniquities. God assures
      him that within the prophetic seventy weeks one would come who would
      remove these things. The whole of the New Testament proclaims that
      Christ did exactly what Daniel prophesied. ... (Acts 3:18,19,26).
      Everlasting righteousness has been brought into this world by the
      incarnation, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. ... Also Christ
      sealed up both vision and prophecy by fulfilling the same. ... This period,
      referred to in Daniel, saw also the fulfillment of the anointing of the Most
      Holy. This anointing took place at the baptism of Jesus. ... (Acts 10:38). ...
      (Dan. 9:25). The seventy weeks are divided into three divisions: 7-62-1.
      They form in years: 49-434-7. At the time Daniel made this prophecy the
      children of Israel were in captivity and Jerusalem and its Temple were in
      ruins. The first period Of 49 years was to accomplish the rebuilding of the
      city. This actually took place when Zerubbabel was governor over Judah. A
      number of Israelites were released from captivity, and they rebuilt the city.
      The books of Nehemiah and Ezra relate the troublous times that were
      experienced in the rebuilding. However, in spite of all these handicaps, the
      city was rebuilt. ... (Dan. 9:26). Notice that the above verse states after the
      threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off. The Anointed
      One is, of course, Christ Jesus. The 483 years (7 plus 62 weeks) takes us up
      to the ministry of Christ. During the last week of years the Messiah was to
      be cut off. We know that after three and a half years of his ministry the
      Anointed One suffered a violent death. Isaiah used the same expression in
      his fifty third chapter: "He was cut off out of the land of the living." The
      prophecy records that this cutting off of Christ was *after* the sixty ninth
      week. There are those who maintain that the last week of this prophecy has
      as yet not been fulfilled in history. This amounts to a denial of the plain
      import of the prophecy that the death of the Anointed One was to be after
      the sixty ninth week and during the seventieth week. ... The expression,
      "And shall have nothing," seems to refer to the city and its Temple. ... The
      Temple and the city were nothing to Christ after their rejection of him. And
      it was because of this cutting off of the Messiah that the destruction of the
      city and its sanctuary was determined. ... Dr. Edward J. Young ... writes:
      "They seem to indicate that all which should properly belong to the
      Messiah, he does not have when he dies. This is a very forceful way of
      setting forth his utter rejection, both by God and man. ... The prophecy
      indicates that the destruction was to be accomplished by the people of the
      Prince, namely, the Romans under the command of the general Titus. As a
      matter of fact, the Roman soldiers destroyed the city and its sanctuary
      directly against his wishes. And that destruction was certainly as a flood,
      for the city and its Temple were completely destroyed. ... (Dan. 9:27). That
      firm covenant is none other than that which Christ made with many. ...
      (Matt. 26:28). We know that Christ by his death caused the sacrifice and
      oblation to cease by fulfilling the shadow and becoming the substance. ...
      (Heb. 7:27). When Christ died upon the Cross the veil of the Temple was
      rent in twain. Gone was the old system with its shadows. ... Jesus caused
      the sacrifice and oblation to cease by the destruction of the Temple and the
      city and by the dispersion of the Jews. This is true even unto this day. Thus
      the prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 finds its fufillment in the atoning sacrifice
      of Christ and the destruction of Jerusalem. ... The only valid objection
      against this general interpretation is that the destruction of Jerusalem did
      not occur within he seventieth week-within the period of seven years. The
      seventy weeks extended to about 33 A.D. The destruction of Jerusalem, of
      course, came in 70 A.D. A close examination of the passage in Daniel does
      not disclose ant statement that the people of the prince were to cause this
      destruction within the seven years. Within the seven years the destruction
      of the city *was determined* by its rejection of Christ and his apostles.
      Because of this rejection "the people of the prince that shall come shall
      destroy the city and the sanctuary." Christ himself stated that for a short
      period after his death he would send his prophets: "Wherefore, behold, I
      send unto you prophets and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye
      shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your
      synagogues, and persecute them from city to city." [Mt 23:34] This actually
      happened before the seven year period was up. After the stoning of
      Stephen, the Church was scattered abroad and the message went to the
      Samaritans and Gentiles. Jerusalem, by the crucifixion of Christ and the
      persecution of his followers, overflowed the cup of iniquity. Jerusalem was
      nothing but a stinking carcass. As Jesus stated: "For wheresoever the
      carcass is, there will the eagles be gathered together." [Mt 24:28] Jerusalem
      became a "carcass" during the seventieth week. It was only a matter of time
      when the "eagles" would come with the outward destruction. Daniel
      prophesied that the events he enumerated were to occur in the continuous
      period of 490 years. Would not God have revealed to him that the last
      seven years were not to be joined to the 483? Did not God know that the
      Jews would reject his Son? The Scriptures and history have revealed that
      the prophecy of Daniel has been wonderfully fulfilled. The Scriptures do
      not tell us that the seventieth week has been postponed. If it were
      postponed, I repeat, we would still be in our sins and without hope. If one
      can believe Luke, that the abomination of desolation is the Roman army
      [Lk 21:20] ..." (Kik J.M., "Matthew Twenty-Four: An Exposition,"
      Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Co: Philadelphia PA, 1948, pp.46-53.
      Emphasis in original)
      Stephen E. Jones http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones
      Moderator: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CreationEvolutionDesign
    • Show all 7 messages in this topic