Eastern Gate: An Atheist's Worst Nightmare

Once again we have to remind ourselves of the obvious.
Simply pick up a New Testament and begin reading most any account.

You are immediately told what you are about to read. (an account)
What this is your reading (A letter, a Documentary, a Reminiscence)
The Author then clearly gives you place names, times, and often names authoritive figures who can be called on to verify what you are about to read.

Then the events are CLEARLY written as actual events the author is aware of.
Whenever one of the subjects in the account is about to give an allegory - The author will usually EXPLAIN THIS IS AN ACCOUNT OF AN ALLEGORY/ PARABLE...

Then the Parable that was spoken by the subject is recorded and attributed to the speaker.

WTF People?

Why is this so hard to understand for some of you?

The very fact you are quoting a 'Parable' and know its a Parable IS BECAUSE YOU TOOK THE ACCOUNT LITERALLY!
You LITERALLY understood this was a REAL DOCUMENT attributing a REAL event in which a REAL PERSON began to give a Parable.

Trust me.. I went through this when I was 18 years old.
I actually picked up a Bible and STARTED by reading The Book of Acts.
To my amazement - it is simply an account of the Apostles.

Its not 'Full of poetry' and 'Can be interpreted hundreds of mystical ways.. "
BULLSHIT...

Its a simple, easy to follow and document.
You clearly understand exactly what it is and what it intends to inform you of.

Oh.. and I think we have all had enough of the pissy passive-aggresive little comment from the critics who say:
"To not understand the Bible is meant to be an allegory, a morality myth and a parable of sorts - is to miss out on its true meaning"

Get lost with that. To take a clearly understood account of events and lazily imagine that its some wishy-washy poem is not only a great way to miss out on the true meaning but also a way to be really stupid and a git.

Brocktoon out.

 

Okay, let's take the Book of Genesis for instance. Do you regard that as an account of real events? Correct me if I'm wrong but I never saw a preface saying "This is just a parable, by the way," yet it's clearly allegorical, and has been used so, or at least interpreted in ways to support various ideologies. The powerful Bishop Ambrose, for instance, shrewdly used the creation myth as allegory to say that the State was inferior to the Church's power, beginning the centuries-long power struggle between the popes and the kings. That curmudgeon Augustine used it to derive his idea of original sin.

The Bible still isn't such an absolute source. Throughout history people have pointed to whatever scriptures support their theses in theological arguments, and schisms come about this way. Usually the arguments that bring them about concern the nature of Jesus, his relationship with God, and the whole convoluted Trinity debate. One of the big reasons why the New Testament was compiled was so the mainstream Church could have a reference handy by which they could define and point out heretics (esp. the Gnostics).

 

When you dont have a preface to explain whether the following will be Allegorical or Literal - you simply take it at face value.

Genesis simply describes a series of events from the beginning (of Earth) to the early Patriarchs.
It uses place names, references known people and more or less follows a sequential timeline.

There is no reason for you to presume its an 'Allegory'.
It is not 'clearly' allegorical.

Wether or not someone else, somewhere else has used an account for 'political hay' should not, logically does not change the intended meaning of the text.

If you read an article describing Bush Jr. as having addressed troops in Iraq - You dont start with the assumption that its 'Allegorical' (even though the writer didnt specifically say what he intended beforehand)

Further to that - Should Sen. Kerry make some insinuations, some political 'hay' out of it - it does not 'give validity' to your allegorical interpretation of the story, just because others twist the facts to suit themselves.

 

I personally would consider the creationism part of Genesis to not be something to be taken literally, as creation myths cannot in any way be a witness account, of course. Completely faith-based. I think it has enough mythical elements in it to not be a realistic account.

I agree that interpretations that are made for "political hay" should not necessarily change the intended meaning of the text, though such cases are not uncommon. I have a pretty low opinion of Ambrose and his legacy, as well as the other Latin Church Fathers. I just meant to provide you with an example of a prominent religious figure using Genesis as allegory. And believe you me, it was done many times back in those days. Was it incorrect to do so? Were they wrong to consider parts of the Bible as allegory that were not specifically labelled as such? It is hard to say. No matter how you may insist the rules for interpretations must follow a certain way, the fact is people will interpret things the way they want to and the way they see it, sometimes too allegorically and sometimes too literally, if we can set standards for that. Who's a credible authority to say who's wrong? For political ends I think the manipulation of religion is never a good thing. But back in ancient times, politics and religion were much more enterwined then they are today, so you can expect a lot more theology back then to have some political motivations behind them. Generally, it was a matter of theologians trying to gain a following and trying to convert people to their side, which means power. And sometimes, arguments over the Bible's interpretations were just simply over plain theological squabbles, such as the divisive nature-of-Christ issue I mentioned above.

What I'm saying is that although you insist that the intended interpretations of the Bible are very clear-cut and unmistakeable, it has not been treated as such over history, and should tell you something about religion's very human nature. Religions have been warped and twisted all the time to suit the political ends of leaders, which I think you know well enough, and to me that really points strongly to the idea that organized religions are something less than divinely inspired. It is not my only reason for discrediting the absolute truth of the Bible and other religious scriptures, but to me it's a strong case.

 

Brothersun... I wasn't arguing. Brocktoon aksed what non-literally meant. I was telling him. I wasn't suggecting the whole bible is parable only what was meant when someone called some passages non-literal.
My only statement (not an argument) is that the most valuable teaching in the bible is in parable - including almost everything Jesus taught.

Campbell... I didn;t ask for quotes about Jesus' betrayal I asked where you see that in Zechariah. I have NO idea where you get that the lord must be talking about himself. Zech. tells us the lord told him to give his money away to a cause... so what?
Here's what Zech says about the shepard: "For, lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, which shall not visit those that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still: but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces"

Doesn't sound like the Jesus I have heard about. It is very convenient for christians to quote what works for them and leave the other 95% which makes no sense in the context of what they are trying to prove.

Brochtoon...
I think there is ample evidence that Genisis (most creation) is allegorical. Mainly if you look for lessons in the text there are many, but if you read it at face value it is nonsense... like Revelations.

 

POPthree13,


"Campbell... I didn;t ask for quotes about Jesus' betrayal I asked where you see that in Zechariah."

"And the LORD said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the LORD." -Zech. 11:13

-I didn't give you quotes from Jesus' betrayal. I gave you a Bible verse straight from Zechariah

"And the LORD said unto me," -God is speaking to Zechariah.


"Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them." -The "I" does not represent Zecharaiah. The "I" represents God speaking of himself.

What God is saying here is that someone decided that God's worth was 30 pieces of silver. Was there ever a time in history when God was worth 30 pieces of silver?? The only time a historical figure was believed by many to be God was betrayed for 30 pieces of silver-Jesus.

"I have NO idea where you get that the lord must be talking about himself. Zech. tells us the lord told him to give his money away to a cause... so what? Here's what Zech says about the shepard: "For, lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, which shall not visit those that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still: but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces"

-The verse zech. 11:13 God is not telling zech. to give to a cause; God is telling zech. to cast to the potter the value that God was prised at.

Prised means value of. Another words what was the value of God? And it appears it was 30 piecies of silver.





The prophecies in the Bible can only be understood if you put them all together. If you just take one verse you will never see the entire picture.

 

LuciferSam,

"Completely faith-based. I think it has enough mythical elements in it to not be a realistic account."

-There are many people who believe God parting the Red Sea is a mythical story. However, just a few years ago Ron Wyatt and his sons discovered on opposing shores of the Red Sea large pillars that are believed to be put there by Solomon. Government officials placed both pillars in an upright position and you will find them there today. It is believed it is the spot where the crossing took place. The markings on the pillars have chizzled into the stone the names of Solomon, Moses, Pharoh, Egypt, and Yaweh. Also all around the area are ancient stone writings referring to the crossing and the miracle.

Divers who have ventured beyond the shores are now finding charriots, charriot wheels, spears, and corral encrusted horse and human bones. The charriot wheels that have been located have been dated to the time period that Bible scholars believed this event occured.

Time is proving that the Bible is a literal book that has nothing to do with mythical stories. For more infomation check out his site...

http://www.arkdiscovery.com/red_sea_crossing.htm

 

Your site sez...

"The majority of archaeologists today do not have enough faith in the Bible as the accurate word of God. The majority of archaeologists do not even believe in the exodus of the children of Israel from Egypt, according to Hershel Shanks, editor of the Biblical Archaeology Review magazine. They are skeptical of the biblical account, perhaps because of a lack of archaeological evidence in the Sinai Peninsula and a lack of faith. We cannot look to these men to tell us where or if the exodus took place."

Yea... that site suuure seems objective and unbiased. Give me sources from sites that aren't blatantly fundamentalist if you want me to pay any attention to them.

And at any rate, this doesn't quite parallel the creation myth in Genesis anyway. That myth is not set anywhere in the human world. Completely faith-based, as I've said. About as good as any of the other myriad creation stories out there.

 

I still see NOTHING about betrayal in that quote (Zech 11:13). That's all I am asking for here...

So God IS talking to Zecharia there but then a couple lines later he is speaking to himself. 'Me' and 'I' change meanings that quickly huh? Seems God constructed to bible to confuse us all if this is the case.

I see what you are saying... you can't look at the prophecies individually, because they do not apply to what you are talking about. You must take away tiny tid-bits of text (COMPETELY out of context) and then twist them into a picture that makes your argument valid. Very convincing.

I can steal only what words I want from ANY book to build the message I want you to hear. If the bible were such an accurate prophecy from the hand of God I don't think you would have to stretch every single passage to build your case. Again... I don't think 30 peices of silver is a big enough coincidence to suggest Jesus must be God.

Here's a congresswoman who was payed thrity peices of silver to pass law... maybe she's the messiah?
http://www.zazona.com/ShameH1B/Library/Politicians/EshooSilver.htm

PS: Beyond all this is the fact that the bible was assembled so that is would proove itself valid. Inserting a little line like those that confirm this prophecy into a book where..
a) no origin copies exist
b) was written centuries after the events
c) had absolutely no oversight

...would be a very easy task indeed. I can write you a book FULL of prophecies that are then fulfilled. You could too.

I prophecy that in 1996 I will move to Colorado. An behold in 1996 I moved to colorado. Amazing isn't it?

 

popthree,

"So God IS talking to Zecharia there but then a couple lines later he is speaking to himself. ‘Me' and ‘I' change meanings that quickly huh? Seems God constructed to bible to confuse us all if this is the case."

-Me, and I, does not change the intended meaning at all. As far as confusing , it's only confusing to those who are not looking for the intended meaning. The Old Testament is laced with over 300 Messianic prophecies. When reading them, if you reject their intended meaning, you are often left with verses that makes no sense. Some might call theses verses anomalies. The Jews of the past were very familiar with them.


"You can't look at the prophecies individually, because they do not apply to what you are talking about."

-No, they do apply to what I am talking about, they do not apply to what you are talking about.You said, I don't see anything about betrayal in Zech 11:13. Which is true. You will not find the entire life of Jesus Christ in one verse, nor would one expect to. This is why there are three hundred anomalies, which were written hundreds of years before Christ was even born. Once they are assembled, you have the entire life of Christ. You said a congresswoman was payed thirty pieces of silver to pass a law. And then stated maybe she was the Messiah? Well she would have to fulfill three hundred more prophecies to qualify. First, she would have to of been born in Bethlehem.(Micah 5:2) Second, she would have to be born of a virgin. (Isaiah 7:14) Third, she would need a messenger going before her, saying. "Prepare ye the way of the Lord"(Isaiah 40:3) Fourth, she would have to be a Nazarene. (Judges 13:5 Amos 2:11; Lam. 4:7) Fifth, she would have to be rejected by her own people. (Isaiah 53:3) Sixth, she would have to enter Jerusalem as a king riding on an ass. Seventh, she would have to be betrayed by a friend. (Psalms 41:9) Eighth, she would have to heal the blind/deaf/lame/dumb. (Isaiah 35:5-6; Isaiah 29;18) Ninth, she would have to be Crucified with criminals.(Isaiah 53:12). There are hundreds of these verses, and when you finish reading them all, you know who the bible is talking about. Remember, these verses are found in the Old Testament, which was completed hundreds of years before the birth of Christ. I almost forgot, she would have to be Resurrected from the dead. (Psalm16:10-11; 49;15). Fulfilling one prophecy is amazing. Fulfilling three hundred prophecies, that is Divine.

 

I still don't think you address the fact that you claim God is speaking to Zechariah ("...and the lord said unto me...") and then claim that in the same set of passages God is later referring to himself ("...goodly price I was prised at...") instead of Zechariah. Why would anyone (yourself included) assume that someone writing in the first person like this would change the me's and I's to mean different things. "Someone said something to me, and I told them price I was prised" Wouldn't it be confusing if I meant Jesus when I said 'I' in that statement but myself when I said 'me'? Who would assume form that statement that I was talkign about two different people? Unless of course I was just recanting what I had heard INSTEAD of actually READING the text.

Many christians claim Zechariah 11:12 prophecies that jesus will be betrayed for thrity peices of silver. Here is an example of such a site...(http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/prophmessiah.html)
If there is nothing about betrayal then the only coincidence is 30 peices of silver. This becomes no prophecy at all aside from the convenient (and not rare) amount of 30 peices of silver. 30 Peices of silver was the standard price for a slave at the time.

I do not beleive this is a prophecy at all. This biblical website agrees with me:
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/zechariah/zechariah11.htm

My point is only that I have been unable to find a single (one, uno , 1) prophecy in the bible that has not been stretched to these great lengths to support to ideas they want to spread (ie: Jesus is the one and only Lord of the bible).

We can argue about each and every one if you would like. I am not at all trying to focus on this single verse we just happen to be analyzing this one. Any prophetic verse you can come up with in support for Jesus' validity I feel I can adequately refute. You have already conceeded this one... this so-called prophecy does NOT in ANY way say that ANYONE will be betrayed for thrity peices of silver. Case closed. Regardless of the fact that it is not a prophecy and biblical scholars agree Zechariah the prophet didn't write it.

 

If I can generalise for a minute, there is a peculiar logic problem which seems shared by both PoPThree and LuciferSam and it needs to be dealt with before you start wrangling with anything further...


Both of you have a strange rationalisation when it comes to 'mitigating' or 'explaining away' the signifigance of fulfilled prophecy which seems to follow along these lines.

- A Prophecy has been made. (You/We all agree so far)

- The Prophecy was fulfilled somewhere along the lines of history (This you agree with too)

Then.. wierdly... You insist that because the prophecy was fulfilled by forces other than Jews/Christians - therefore - (You 'reason') it has 'Nothing to Do' with the The Original Prophecy (HuH?) and 'Therefore' it (somehow?) removes credibility and validity from the prophecies accuracy.

Further to this bizarre mislogic - You give as some 'example' the complete opposite of what you just claimed to have railed against.
Example: You draw a comparison to YOU fulfilling a Prophecy YOURSELF.

Just what are you trying to have both ways anyway??

Forces 'outside' the Biblical text (and centuries later) should (by your standards) validate and give credibility to the Prophecy.
In any case - The Prophecy fulfilled is still a Prophecy Fulfilled is it not?

So here is an example you are really looking for:

-YOU predict the liquor store will be burned to the ground and rebuilt.

-Thugs from another city, with no relation to you or your relation to the Liquor store, burn down the store...
..ten years later its rebuilt..

That is what your looking for as an example.
-The prophecy is 100% accurate.
-The prophecy is NOT less accurate because forces having nothing to do with you carried it out.
-IF ANYTHING - The Prophecy is more impressive because outside forces carried it out.

In anycase, the Prophecy IS 100% accurate.

Please get back to me if you continue have trouble thinking this fundamental premise through.
I hope that explained whats gone wrong.. but if not we can go over it again.
Then..
You can go onto happy discussion about the finer things of prophecy fulfillment

 

What I say is that the prophecies are not necessarily the cause of their fulfillment, and just like most things involved with religion, are a matter of faith and not of concrete logic. Prophecies tend to be vague enough that people who want to perpetuate faith in them will find some way to insist they are still valid. Many prophecies seem to go like this, in my view: If they're not fulfilled, the faithful will insist that they will be in time, mark their words, and woe upon the doubters. If they do happen to be fulfilled, then the faithful will hop and skip about it and claim it as a validation of their faith. The best-constructed prophecies are made in a way so that people can find a way to claim either of the two above scenarios. Even if it become very difficult to do so, people will then start to look beyond literal meanings and say the prophecy must have some true meaning that hadn't been interpreted yet.

If I'm reading you correctly, you find it perplexing that I say that prophecies are fulfilled by "forces other than Jews/Christians," taking the case of the Jews returning to Israel, the UN and the Western Powers, right? I say so because the concrete fact is that those powers were the reason why the Jews were able to come back to Israel. Fact. Ah, but the prophecy! The prophecy is just a prophecy, it played no concrete part in the Jews' return, and its only validity is founded upon peoples' will to believe in it. The faithful might cry "Ooh! Well that's what God meant to happen!" Go on saying that, but I don't consider that as legitimate proof of anything about your faith, except that it's opportunistic, something successful religions thrive upon.

Is the fulfillment of those prophecies supposed to mean that your faith is correct? Only if you will yourself to believe in it, and thus it cannot be used for objective reasoning. I look at history to see why events have happened in the past, not prophecies, and I consider them irrelevant. Prophecies come and go. Many more of them than anyone probably ever knows have been made in ancient times, and whether they were fulfilled or not they've been forgotten and whatever relevance anyone believed they had is gone. Christianity happened to be a fortunate religion that gained the ear of a massive power (the Roman Empire), and maneuvered itself into a position of power so that it could try to realize its goals, for better or worse. Had that not happened, no one would be caring about Christian prophecies today.

History > Prophecy = (In my view) Shrewd people making predictable or vague prophecies = (In the eyes of the faithful) The Bible must be divinely inspired! Praise da Lawd!

Once again, it all boils down to faith.

I think Popthree's little mock prophecies are meant to portray the triviality of prophecies, and how easy it can be to claim a fulfilled prophecy. We're arguing that prophecies aren't such a remarkable feat as you claim. The only reason you guys think these fulfilled prophecies are so amazing are because they're in your faith's holy book

Ok, and then...? The fact is the prophecy still isn't remarkable by any sort of objective standard. The only thing that validates prophecy as a legit "prophecy" and not just making vague/predictable predictions is the faith in the people who made them.

 

Lucifersam,

"Give me sources from sites that aren't blatantly fundamentalist if you want me to pay any attention to them."

Many who were taught the theory of evolution, believed it was fact. After one hundred years, evolutionist could never prove their theory by the fossil record. Now, scientist in growing numbers are finding the courage to finally speak out against this failed theory. It is apparent to many, the only thing changing with evolution, is the theory itself. To add insult to injury, at the same time the theory is faltering, Christian archaeologist are discovering ancient artifacts that are confirming what Christians had believe all the time. Simply put, those old Bible stories really happen, and were not just simple allegory. Now we will get to see the die hard evolutionist, who have always postured themselves as the voice of reason, go nuts. When Christians present archaeological facts that support the bible, the evolutionist are now screaming. "It's not true. Those are Christians that found those chariot wheels in the Red Sea, I'm not listening to them. It was the Christians that found those ancient pillars on both sides of the Red Sea crossing site. It was Christians that pointed out the chiseled names of Egypt, Death, Pharaoh, Moses, Yahweh, in the ancient stone. It was Christians that discovered at the Red Sea crossing site, the coral incrusted chariot parts, and dead mens bones. Don't believe them, why they are fundamentalist Christians. Why this evidence is not worthy of out scientific review."
Evolution is dying, because there is no evidence to keep it alive, and the Bible is passing it by, because the evidence is there. Evolutionist have said that Christians only have blind faith. The real blind faith believers, are those who worship the dying religion of evolution, who's priest are now losing their faith.
Right now if I was an Evolutionist, I think I would go to the nearest Natural History Museum and say five Charles Darwins, and ask God Darwin to quickly send me fossils showing obvious trans-species in the fossils record before my religion crashes. You know, I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

"Now, scientist in growing numbers are finding the courage to finally speak out against this failed theory. It is apparent to many, the only thing changing with evolution, is the theory itself. "

Okey, firstly, I'd like to see some names and the credentials of said scientists. Secondly, since when is changing a theory to include new data bad??? Why do people think that the world is fucking static???? Listen, theories, like everything else in the universe, change. It's the only fucking constent in the universe!! AHHHHHHHHH!(Head a-splodes due to hurtness in brain)

 

I think there is a stumbling block to this discussion when several of the posters will not simply acknowledge facts clearly observable to all.

For example: Tyre was prophecied to be destroyed and never rebuilt to more than a fishermans village.
This prophecy did indeed come true.

Im not asking you to accept it 'Proves Christianity' or even insisting it could be something coincidental or not -

However...

You have to agree that - in this case- YES .. that was prediction DID come true.
If you insist on denying something as straightforward as that or pretending that your opinions on its signifigance or intention can somehow 'nullify' the basic facts......
...Then there is not much point in going further is there?

After all.. even if 140 Prophecies are found to have 'born out' - you will be able to systematically 'Nullify' everyone with your opinion they are coincidental.
Thats too bad.

Now this has suddenly swerved into a discussion on Evolutionism?!

Can I suggest that be moved to its own thread somewhere.. it really doesnt have a lot to do with the Eastern Gate Prophecy (which, although shown to have been fulfilled - will be 'nullified' by the two critics because 'it happened' and therefore doesnt 'count' even if it was predicted by a Biblical author)

 

Ok... opinions make things ugly. I agree with you on that. Believing in something is not hard to do. Anyone can believe in something. I am not impressed with faith. I am not impressed with faith in an opinion. I am however impressed with truth and acknowledgement of that truth. If someone just flat out says, "I believe a lie because the truth is not convenient for me at the moment." Well... the truth is not bent. It does not change. It stands firm. So opinions move me not. They can change day to day. They can change by feelings and emotions. They are easily tainted by popular-opinion of the public. But truth... it is an absolute and is independant of thought or opinion. It does not need someone to believe in it to stand. It does not need a follower to remain truth. It is true whether one chooses to put faith in it or not. It will always win. That is why the only thing I strive to do in life is to know the truth and live according to it, because even my own opinion of it will be worth nothing. Only what it really is matters.

Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life.

 

I guess what Im saying is that we must have some standard of rational sequence before anyone can move on to deeper levels of discourse like 'The object of the betrayal' in the 30 pieces of silver Prophecy.


A good example would be this 'Tyre Prophecy'.

LuciferSam and PopThree have a peculiar way of jumping over step one 'because' they imagine it nullified by a 'step two' they have waiting.. and therefore step one is 'null' in 'the first place.

Crazytalk.

We really should start by agreeing on only one thing: The Tyre Prophecy was fulfilled.

The...(and only then)...

We can debate whether or not it was sheer coincidence, that it was predictable based on informed intuition, that it was 'probably' going to happen in x-amount of years anyway, etc, etc.

Now that LUciferSam, PopThree and Campbell and myself ALL agree that the Tyre prediction was fulfilled - NOW we can debate these issues rationally.

In this case, Tyre's destruction came about mostly by 'outside of the Bible' forces, who had no interest in the Prophets, The Jews and their reasons for destroying Tyre were essentially 'Their own business'.

LuciferSam insists this 'explains away' the credibility of the possibility of divine inspiration of the Prophecy.

I suggest that it is the very thing that lends credibility to the Prophecy - after all, had Jewish Armies raized the city, a good argument could be made that they were 'self-fulfilling' their own prophecy.

The last poster has made a very good point - True is true and in this case, Tyre was demolished and never rebuilt. Indeed, it is, to this day 'A place for fishermen to cast their nets'.
(it really is a fishing village now).

This is true. Period.
No, LuciferSam, it does not become more or less true based on who is putting 'faith' into the prophecy.
Tyre is now a fishing village whether you, me, Campbell or Anton Lavey jr want to 'put faith' in the Tyre Prophecy or not.

See what Im saying.

 

Try reading it

• "So when they had come together, they asked Him, "Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or seasons which The Father [see also The Logos] has fixed by His own authority. But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth."
  
  And when He had said this, as they were looking on, He was lifted up, and a cloud took Him out of their sight. And while they were gazing into heaven as He went, behold, two men stood by them in white robes, and said, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, Who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw Him go into heaven." Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem." (Acts 1:6-12 RSV)
  
• "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 [see Signs In The Heavens]; then will appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory; and He will send out His angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other" (Matthew 24:29-31 RSV)
  
• "Then The Lord will go forth and fight against those nations as when He fights on a day of battle. On that day His feet shall stand on The Mount Of Olives which lies before Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley; so that one half of the Mount shall withdraw northward, and the other half southward [see Earthquake!]. And the valley of my mountains shall be stopped up, for the valley of the mountains shall touch the side of it; and you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then The Lord your God will come, and all the holy ones with Him." (Zechariah 14:3-5)
  
• "For The Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel's call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet The Lord in the air." (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 RSV) [see The Last Day]
  
• "And The Lord will become king over all the earth; on that day The Lord will be one and His Name one." (Zechariah 14:9 RSV) [see King Of The Mountain]
  
• "It shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain of the house of The Lord shall be established as the highest of the mountains, and shall be raised up above the hills; and peoples shall flow to it, and many nations shall come, and say: "Come, let us go up to the mountain of The Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; that He may teach us His ways and we may walk in His paths." For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of The Lord from Jerusalem. He shall judge between many peoples, and shall decide for strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more; but they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree, and none shall make them afraid; for the mouth of The Lord of hosts has spoken." (Micah 4:1-4 RSV) [see The Kingdom of God]
  
• "And he said to me, "These words are trustworthy and true. And The Lord, the God of the spirits of the Prophets, has sent His angel to show His servants what must soon take place. And behold, I am coming soon." Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book." (Revelation 22:6-7 RSV)

Info pulled from http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/theretrn.htm

 

Firstly I'll second Brocktoon on keeping this from going into evolutionism. We've enough to banter about in this thread already Frankly I'm not that staunch of an evolutionist anyway, not that I buy creationism either.

*Yawn* Okay, so Tyre's a fishing village. Tell ya the truth I'm not really that familiar with that prophecy or the story so I'll have a looksee at it sometime.

Taking this example anyway, sure, the Tyre prophecy has been fulfilled... I am not arguing whether if something has happened is true or not.

I meant it is the "divine inspiration" part of the prophecy that becomes more or less true based on who puts faith into the prophets' divine vision. That is what is in question, that is your whole basis for saying the Bible is the absolute truth and all that good stuff. And as I said, to you, those prophets must have been inspired by God. To me, they needn't be, and I doubt it just as much as any religious doctrine. And I don't even chalk all these fulfillments to a completely-random sort of coincidence, as if all they did was shake a Magic 8-Ball. As I said many prophecies that hold tend to be vague, predictable, and/or calculated.

And who says this Eastern Gate prophecy has been fulfilled for good? I know this won't be done but I'd really love to see someone take a wrecking ball or some dynamite to this gate. I would if I was given the means. I would only accept your prophecy if it came through undamaged and people could still not go through it, etc etc. IF someone happened to blow a hole in the Gate, and shimmied on through it, would you then say the prophecy was... not fulfilled?