Religion & Spirituality

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Is it logically possible that the Bible is not true with all the fulfilled prophesies? [Spirituality & Religion]

The Bible is God's word and there are so many prophesies that have been fulfilled.

A Statistical Improbability

Some Bible scholars suggest there are more than 300 prophetic Scriptures completed in the life of Jesus. Circumstances such as his birthplace, lineage, and method of execution were beyond his control and could not have been accidentally or deliberately fulfilled.

In the book Science Speaks, Peter Stoner and Robert Newman discuss the statistical improbability of one man, whether accidentally or deliberately, fulfilling just eight of the prophecies Jesus fulfilled. The chance of this happening, they say, is 1 in 1017 power. Stoner gives an illustration that helps visualize the magnitude of such odds:

Suppose that we take 1017 silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas. They will cover all of the state two feet deep. Now mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man and tell him that he can travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick up one silver dollar and say that this is the right one. What chance would he have of getting the right one? Just the same chance that the prophets would have had of writing these eight prophecies and having them all come true in any one man, from their day to the present time, providing they wrote using their own wisdom.

The mathematical improbability of 300, or 44, or even just eight fulfilled prophesies of Jesus stands as evidence to his messiahship.

Prophecies of Jesus

Although this list is not exhaustive, you'll find 44 messianic predictions clearly fulfilled in Jesus Christ, along with supporting references from the Old Testament and New Testament fulfillment.

44 Messianic Prophecies of Jesus

Prophecies of Jesus Old Testament
Scripture New Testament
Fulfillment
1 Messiah would be born of a woman. Genesis 3:15 Matthew 1:20
Galatians 4:4
2 Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. Micah 5:2 Matthew 2:1
Luke 2:4-6
3 Messiah would be born of a virgin. Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:22-23
Luke 1:26-31
4 Messiah would come from the line of Abraham. Genesis 12:3
Genesis 22:18 Matthew 1:1
Romans 9:5
5 Messiah would be a descendant of Isaac. Genesis 17:19
Genesis 21:12 Luke 3:34
6 Messiah would be a descendant of Jacob. Numbers 24:17 Matthew 1:2
7 Messiah would come from the tribe of Judah. Genesis 49:10 Luke 3:33
Hebrews 7:14
8 Messiah would be heir to King David's throne. 2 Samuel 7:12-13
Isaiah 9:7 Luke 1:32-33
Romans 1:3
9 Messiah's throne will be anointed and eternal. Psalm 45:6-7
Daniel 2:44 Luke 1:33
Hebrews 1:8-12
10 Messiah would be called Immanuel. Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:23
11 Messiah would spend a season in Egypt. Hosea 11:1 Matthew 2:14-15
12 A massacre of children would happen at Messiah's birthplace. Jeremiah 31:15 Matthew 2:16-18
13 A messenger would prepare the way for Messiah Isaiah 40:3-5 Luke 3:3-6
14 Messiah would be rejected by his own people. Psalm 69:8
Isaiah 53:3 John 1:11
John 7:5
15 Messiah would be a prophet. Deuteronomy 18:15 Acts 3:20-22
16 Messiah would be preceded by Elijah. Malachi 4:5-6 Matthew 11:13-14
17 Messiah would be declared the Son of God. Psalm 2:7 Matthew 3:16-17
18 Messiah would be called a Nazarene. Isaiah 11:1 Matthew 2:23
19 Messiah would bring light to Galilee. Isaiah 9:1-2 Matthew 4:13-16
20 Messiah would speak in parables. Psalm 78:2-4
Isaiah 6:9-10 Matthew 13:10-15, 34-35
21 Messiah would be sent to heal the brokenhearted. Isaiah 61:1-2 Luke 4:18-19
22 Messiah would be a priest after the order of Melchizedek. Psalm 110:4 Hebrews 5:5-6
23 Messiah would be called King. Psalm 2:6
Zechariah 9:9 Matthew 27:37
Mark 11:7-11
24 Messiah would be praised by little children. Psalm 8:2 Matthew 21:16
25 Messiah would be betrayed. Psalm 41:9
Zechariah 11:12-13 Luke 22:47-48
Matthew 26:14-16
26 Messiah's price money would be used to buy a potter's field. Zechariah 11:12-13 Matthew 27:9-10
27 Messiah would be falsely accused. Psalm 35:11 Mark 14:57-58
28 Messiah would be silent before his accusers. Isaiah 53:7 Mark 15:4-5
29 Messiah would be spat upon and struck. Isaiah 50:6 Matthew 26:67
30 Messiah would be hated without cause. Psalm 35:19
Psalm 69:4 John 15:24-25
31 Messiah would be crucified with criminals. Isaiah 53:12 Matthew 27:38
Mark 15:27-28
32 Messiah would be given vinegar to drink. Psalm 69:21 Matthew 27:34
John 19:28-30
33 Messiah's hands and feet would be pierced. Psalm 22:16
Zechariah 12:10 John 20:25-27
34 Messiah would be mocked and ridiculed. Psalm 22:7-8 Luke 23:35
35 Soldiers would gamble for Messiah's garments. Psalm 22:18 Luke 23:34
Matthew 27:35-36
36 Messiah's bones would not be broken. Exodus 12:46
Psalm 34:20 John 19:33-36
37 Messiah would be forsaken by God. Psalm 22:1 Matthew 27:46
38 Messiah would pray for his enemies. Psalm 109:4 Luke 23:34
39 Soldiers would pierce Messiah's side. Zechariah 12:10 John 19:34
40 Messiah would be buried with the rich. Isaiah 53:9 Matthew 27:57-60
41 Messiah would resurrect from the dead. Psalm 16:10
Psalm 49:15 Matthew 28:2-7
Acts 2:22-32
42 Messiah would ascend to heaven. Psalm 24:7-10 Mark 16:19
Luke 24:51
43 Messiah would be seated at God's right hand. Psalm 68:18
Psalm 110:1 Mark 16:19
Matthew 22:44
44 Messiah would be a sacrifice for sin. Isaiah 53:5-12 Romans 5:6-8

100 Prophecies Fulfilled by Jesus: Messianic Prophecies Made Before the Birth of Christ by

http://www.armageddonbooks.com/jesus.jpg

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

CookieLuvsBunny · 31-35, F

This is just one example of the Gospel writers Inventing a story in order to fulfill prophecy:

Brown, R.E.,[i] The Birth of the Messiah[/i]
[quote]The Gospel of Luke links the birth of Jesus to the census:

In those days a decree went out from Emperor Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. All went to their own towns to be registered. Joseph also went from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to the city of David called Bethlehem, because he was descended from the house and family of David. He went to be registered with Mary, to whom he was engaged and who was expecting a child.
— Luke 2:1–5

There are major difficulties in accepting Luke's account: the gospel links the birth of Jesus to the reign of Herod the Great (Luke 1:5: "In the days of King Herod of Judea there was a priest named Zechariah..."), but the census took place in 6 CE, nine years after Herod's death in 4 BCE; there was no single census of the entire empire under Augustus; no Roman census required people to travel from their own homes to those of distant ancestors; and the census of Judea would not have affected Joseph and his family, living in Galilee.[6] Some conservative scholars have argued that Quirinius may have had an earlier and historically unattested term as governor of Syria, or that he previously held other senior positions which may have led him to be involved in the affairs of Judea during Herod's reign, or that the passage should be interpreted in some other fashion.[9][10][11] Such arguments have been rejected on various grounds, including that there is no time in the known career of Quirinius when he could have served as governor of Syria before 6 CE, that the Romans did not directly tax client kingdoms, and that the hostile reaction of the Jews in 6 CE suggests direct taxation by Rome was new at the time.[12][13] Ralph Martin Novak says that these conservative interpretations spring from the assumption that the Bible is inerrant,[14] and Géza Vermes called such arguments "exegetical acrobatics".[15] Most scholars have concluded that the author of Luke's gospel made an error.[6] [/quote]

1-25 of 60

GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M

@CookieLuvsBunny [quote]This is just one example of the Gospel writers Inventing a story in order to fulfill prophecy[/quote]

Shows how much you know. Both Matthew and Luke wrote down the lineages from Joseph and Mary.

CookieLuvsBunny · 31-35, F

@GodSpeed63
It never mentioned Jesus' Lineage. Can you read?

GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M

@CookieLuvsBunny [quote]This is just one example of the Gospel writers Inventing a story in order to fulfill prophecy[/quote]

Yeah, I can read. Can you? The Gospel of Luke does not link Jesus with Herod.

CookieLuvsBunny · 31-35, F

@GodSpeed63

[quote]There are major difficulties in accepting Luke's account: the gospel links the birth of Jesus to the reign of Herod the Great [b](Luke 1:5: "In the days of King Herod of Judea there was a priest named [/b]Zechariah..."), but the census took place in 6 CE, nine years after Herod's death in 4 BCE;[/quote]

You obviously have never read Luke and don't have a clue what you're talking about.
Elizabeth, mother of John the Baptist, was in her sixth month of Pregnancy when Jesus was conceived.

GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M

@CookieLuvsBunny [quote]You obviously have never read Luke and don't have a clue what you're talking about. Elizabeth, mother of John the Baptist, was in her sixth month of Pregnancy when Jesus was conceived.[/quote]

So?

CookieLuvsBunny · 31-35, F

@GodSpeed63
You said:
[quote] The Gospel of Luke does not link Jesus with Herod.
[/quote]

Provably false. You need to read the book you claim to be God's word

Speedyman · 70-79, M

You are of course totally wrong as usual. It has been discovered that Quirenius was actually governor of Syria twice. Is it likely that the careful historian that Luke was would've made a deliberate error? He has been reckoned to be one of the greatest ancient historians of all time. The problem is yours is typical of the objection raised by tiny minds . The problem is not Saint Luke but your own smallmindedness .it really is pathetic@CookieLuvsBunny

CookieLuvsBunny · 31-35, F

@Speedyman
It has been discovered that both Luke and Quirinius were aliens and not human at all and that Warren G. Harding was a direct descendant of their spawn

Speedyman · 70-79, M

Well at least this statement makes more sense than most of the tripe you write! 😄😄😄@CookieLuvsBunny

CookieLuvsBunny · 31-35, F

@Speedyman
It makes more sense than any of the BS you shovel almost every day😁

Speedyman · 70-79, M

As everything you write is complete nonsense then I can't see how you can tell. Your problem is you live in a dream world of fantasies are not in reality@CookieLuvsBunny

CookieLuvsBunny · 31-35, F

@Speedyman
I can and do cite numerous sources for what I write. You, on the other hand, suffer from chronic diarrhea of the keyboard

Speedyman · 70-79, M

You cite sources but the only problem usthattha they have been super ceded by better and more recent scholarship. Yours is the product of tiny minds who think they know better than eye witnesses.but you obviously prefer ignorance @CookieLuvsBunny

CookieLuvsBunny · 31-35, F

@Speedyman
And you cite no sources whatsoever. Just whatever your tiny mind hatches at any particular moment and not rooted in reality at all

Speedyman · 70-79, M

Eyesight the historian who was actually there at the time. Yours is the tiny mind who us not applying teal orinciples of historical research because of your anti-religious prejudice. The problem is with you atheist you're so gullible you will believe anything that confirms your own anti religious prejudices. @CookieLuvsBunny

CookieLuvsBunny · 31-35, F

@Speedyman

[quote]Eyesight the historian who was actually there at the time. [/quote]

Wow

[quote]. Yours is the tiny mind who us not applying teal orinciples of historical research because of your anti-religious prejudice.[/quote]

Wow

[quote]The problem is with you atheist you're so gullible you will believe anything that confirms your own anti religious prejudices. @CookieLuvsBunny[/quote]

I think I'm gonna let your own "words" speak for you

Carazaa · F

@CookieLuvsBunny "Ralph Martin Novak says that these conservative interpretations spring from the assumption that the Bible is inerrant,[14] and Géza Vermes called such arguments "[i]exegetical acrobatics[/i]".[15] Most scholars have concluded that the author of Luke's gospel made an error.[6]"
I believe that people try to attack the Bible with all kinds of "acrobatics" and there is more than enough proof that Luke's account was correct. He was willing to die for his testimony. Are you willing to die for your testimony?

CookieLuvsBunny · 31-35, F

@Carazaa
What proof do you have that Luke's account of the Quirinius' Census is correct?
What historical proof do you have that Luke was a real person?
What historical proof do you have that Luke died for his testimony?

Speedyman · 70-79, M

You visited the sites Luke describes? @CookieLuvsBunny

CookieLuvsBunny · 31-35, F

@Speedyman
Apparently Luke never visited the sites that Luke describes. Many of Luke's accounts are counter to known historical facts and his Gospel contradicts Matthew's Gospel repeatedly.

James McDonald:[u][i] Beyond Belief[/i][/u]
The Matthew and Luke authors give conflicting versions of Jesus' ancestry (Matthew 1:1-16 and Luke 3:23-38). These versions bear virtually no relationship to each other and are irreconcilable. According to the Luke gospel, Jesus had 41 ancestors since David, according to the Matthew gospel only 26. Nearly all the names in the two lists are different. Even the name of Jesus' paternal grandfather is different. According to Matthew he was called Jacob, while according to Luke he was called Heli.

The rest of the nativity stories in the two gospels bear virtually no resemblance to each other, and contradict each other on a number of points. According to Luke, Jesus' family had to travel to Bethlehem for a tax census that took place when Quirinius or Cyrenius was governor of Syria (Luke 2:1-3). This census is stated to have been the first during his governorship (Luke 2:2). Such a census is an historical reality and is known to have been carried out in AD 6 or 7. Furthermore, we may accept that the census was carried out for taxation purposes, since the Romans carried out such censuses for taxation and conscription, and the Jews were exempt from military service30. But now the problems start. Luke says that the census was the result of a decree from Caesar Augustus to the whole world, but this must be an error. The real census affected Roman Judæa only. Galilee was not part of Roman Judæa, so Joseph, a Galilaean, would not have been affected. Even if he had been affected, he would not have had to travel to another town. Like the tax it was related to, the census was based on property, so people registered where they lived. The Romans did not care about genealogies, and neither did they require mass migrations. Furthermore, such taxes would have required only Joseph to register — even if a census had been carried out in Nazareth, Mary would not have been required to stir herself, heavily pregnant or not. Luke's story does not hold water. Worse, it cannot be squared with that of Matthew. Matthew does not mention the census at all. According to him Jesus was born before the death of Herod. The only possible Herod is Herod I (Herod the Great) and he died in 4 BC31. Thus there is a discrepancy of some ten years between the two stories.

GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M

@CookieLuvsBunny [quote]Apparently Luke never visited the sites that Luke describes. Many of Luke's accounts are counter to known historical facts and his Gospel contradicts Matthew's Gospel repeatedly.[/quote]

You've got it wrong, friend, Luke has visited those sites and it's your interpretation of the gospels that contradicts itself and not the gospels.

CookieLuvsBunny · 31-35, F

@GodSpeed63
First, You have no proof that Luke ever existed.
Second, if one doubts that there are Gospel contradictions one need only read the Jesus' genealogies found in Matthew and Luke. They completely contradict each other

GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M

@CookieLuvsBunny [quote]First, You have no proof that Luke ever existed.[/quote]

Then who wrote the Gospel of Luke?

[quote]Second, if one doubts that there are Gospel contradictions one need only read the Jesus' genealogies found in Matthew and Luke. They completely contradict each other[/quote]

There is only one interpretation of the Word of God and that interpretation belongs to God, Yahweh, Himself. If you had the Spirit of Truth abiding in you, you'd recognized that Matthew's Gospel recorded the lineage of Joseph back to Adam and Eve. Luke's Gospel recorded the lineage of Mary back to the Adam and Eve. There are no contradictions between the two Gospels.

Carazaa · F

Luke wrote the book of Luke. He witnessed the miracles, Jesus death, and resurrection. He died for his witness. It is trustworthy! His manuscript is preserved from generations to generations. There are no contradictions. Each of the Gospels brings their views of the same events!🌷

GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M

@Carazaa [quote]It is trustworthy! His manuscript is preserved from generations to generations. [/quote]

You got that right, Carazaa.

1-25 of 60