🚀 go-pugleaf

"Antares 531" <gordonlrDELETE@swbell.net> wrote in message 
news:72in74drr47ktr9l98raqph18ep0s1h4cp@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:25:09 -0400, Brian E. Clark
> <reply@newsgroup.only.please> wrote:
>
>>In article <4d2a74pf351she9f40vri1ku32c7s40a9j@
>>4ax.com>, Antares 531 said...
>>
>>> Fulfillment of prophecies is the most convincing "evidence" for the
>>> reliability of the Bible,
>>
>>Most convincing of all are those prophecies written
>>after the events they predict.
>>
> Bryan, I see your point, but I maintain that there are many Biblical
> prophecies that were written LONG before they were fulfilled, and the
> history/dating can not have been manipulated. Even if the dating of,
> say the prophecies of Daniel can be argued a bit, it can't be
> stretched to a date later than the time of Jesus's life. If you
> haven't already done so, please visit this site and check some of
> these items out.

There is no need to "stretch" anything when you are dealing with a work of 
multiple authors writing over a millennium or two.  You take it on trust, 
pure and simple.

Moreover, those prophesies are really quite vague (part of their intrinsic 
nature).  Any major religion has predictions about the appearance of a 
redeemer figure, about salvation and whatnot.  You merely latched onto 
Jesus -- it might just as well have been Mohammed, Bab, Baha'u'llah or a 
host of others.