this is a theory
my understanding of spirits
spirits to me equate to them being characteristics and the attitudes ascribed to them characteristics wether good bad or indifferent.- does anyone concur?

KABOOM!!

Maybe some think Islam produces fruits of the spirit too?

Theres also more than just fellowshipping or not with those who have an appearance of the fruits of the spirits.

Its funny that just like the million and one times God said he is One God and there is no other and the amount of times that Israel went and worshiped false Gods to their own detriments (maybe they were also practised the appearance of fruits of the spirits with these false gods - still didnt save them then)

And just as consistently the scripture continues to point out that foundational beliefs are extremely important People still like to show their own blatant ignorance and pretend no such guidance exists in scripture - Often I wonder why God puts up with us species lol

It is human nature to have selective thinking, selective beliefs, selective understanding (often to appease our own selves, lifestyles or those of people we know) etc but the fact is non of that changes who God is, what he wants and expects and what he teaches us and guides us to do and believe. I'd rather appease God any day then misrepresent his word to appease myself or someone else as I have often seen heretics do and the poor suckers that follow them.

Ephesians 4 points out to be like minded in beliefs as a key to being one with God and Christ amongst a million other chapters and verses that provide us with what to believe - how to believe, examples of believers lives etc, the only way out is to do what some heretics do and claim its just a book and let the "spirit" guide you. Good luck with that.

Hebrews 11

By Faith We Understand

1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

sorry guys, my bad

Ok soz, context helps - Discussing with a person who 'speaks in tongues' Ill ask them what they mean by the phrase.

Is this statement True?

Baptism by Christ Jesus with holy spirit is essential to gain this eternal life.

Dave already answered you

Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said to her, "holy spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God. (debiased NKJV)

Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name.
Your Kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as in heaven
Give us today our daily bread.
Forgive us our sins,
as we forgive those who sin against us.
Lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil.
For the kingdom, the power and the glory are yours.
Now and for ever. Amen

Heres some 3D reconstructions http://www.theage.co...selectedImage=2

Dockter Phil Yes, a bit hard for me to accept 'facts' without evidence of which you've bought none at all the entire discussion.

So obviously you should not surprised that I'm not going to swallow it whole either.

Yes I was rather long, supplying a lot of facts and evidence. I have never done professional debating, so fairly amateurish - so Ill take into account your request for structure in future. I did stop short as I mentioned earlier due to not wanting to give information overload.

At the same time lack of structure nor copying and pasting does not take away facts and evidence of facts which I have supplied a lot of, which your not willing to address.- I discount poor structure as an invalid form of dismissing facts.

Just because you choose to deny something does not mean its not true. Thats irrational and unreasoning Arab/Islam style of tactics, hope you don't continue to swoop so low.

Regarding
..'As for Daniel, I talked to my current Hebrew Bible prof (not the same as mentioned above). He said that there is no evidence for it being written any earlier than 164 BCE.''

One thing I would really like would be evidence for this date. Could you ask your Professor what evidence he does have for that 164 BCE date.

Cheers.

I also look forward to seeing his debunking evidence of literary comparison.

Mikey Tsav Normally, I am happy to respond thoroly to any debate. However, what you have posted is a convoluted, incoherent mess. Also, it is primarily copypasta/plagiarism. You need to state your arguement clearly and concisely and provide whatever sources you deem appropriate.

As for Daniel, I talked to my current Hebrew Bible prof (not the same as mentioned above). He said that there is no evidence for it being written any earlier than 164 BCE. And any evidence to the contrary presented so far is selective and unscientific/unhistorical. Now this doesnt deny that some parts may have earlier origins, but that does mean that alleged prophecies are unverifiable and very easily could have been added in post hoc in order to show they were real.

Itd be like if I wrote how George Washington predicted American victory in the Revolution back in 1775 and 500 or 2000 years later, people took it as seriously Georges prophecy.

Also, none of it is prophecy anyway. It is all vague exhortations that could be anything or nothing. Some books, such as Isaiah, have been distorted to predict a messiah today. In reality, Isaiah or his followers were expecting a more contemporary messiah.

BTW! Messiah is not some guy who delivers us. The messiah is just the annointed King of Israel, and really it is just the first king of a line of new kings. So Jesus need not apply.

For further sources:
--VanderKam & Flint 2004, pp. 137–8
--Brown, Raymond E.; Fitzmyer, Joseph A.; Murphy, Roland E., eds (1999). The New Jerome Biblical Commentary.

He also said the alleged literary comparison evidence has long been debunked and will send me information about that shortly.

Now if you can provide your own written coherent argument for me to respond to I can.

Ultimately I cant make you accept any of this, but these are the facts.

http://books.google....f Moses&f=false

Because if heaven and earth are to join together. Its not a matter of leaving earth and going to heaven. Its heaven and earth joined together.

Outstanding.

Like

Dockter Phil So much for something referred to as, cough cough '..no real debate'

Lets get back to Daniel 2 and the image'

Lets once again go along with your unsupported theory that the written date for Daniel is 165BCE

Does that effect or image prophecy - not entirely, surely not as much as the likes of Porphyry would like.

The question arises:

Now, how did the writer of the book, if it was written "after the fact" in 164 B.C., know that the Greeks were going to fall before it happened? [from here on of course Daniel would be an excellent example of pure prophecy..

http://www.666man.ne...nklin.html#DPEE


Daniel 2 - Expositors Agree Historicists expound the passage
http://www.btdf.org/...?showtopic=5565


Introduction To Daniel And Revelation Common agreement through the ages
http://www.btdf.org/...p?showtopic=290

Dockter Phil The other two are here:
http://www.harvardho...inst_Daniel.htm

Also you requested sources for the linguistic analysis:

THE LINGUISTIC ARGUMENT FOR THE DATE OF DANIEL
by
W.D. Jeffcoat, M.A.
http://www.apologeti...for-the-Dat.pdf

The Aramaic of Daniel
K. A. Kitchen
http://www.biblicals...iel_kitchen.pdf

Other Factors



71) The famous British scholar Sir G. R. Driver has pointed out that a later date than what is generally accepted for the Qumran scrolls, 3rd century B.C. to A.D. 67, in general "would force an *earlier* dating for Daniel than the Maccabean period." Note that no one has followed his suggested late dating for the Qumran scrolls. [Hasel, 88; Wegner, 116: Driver's work is The Hebrew Scrolls from the Neighborhood of Jericho and the Dead Sea. (Oxford, 1951): 9 note 5]




72) The presence of a copy of Daniel (4QDanC) inscribed in an archaic script of the late 2nd century B.C. among the Qumran scrolls (8 separate Daniel scrolls from there) makes it highly unlikely that Daniel was written during the Maccabean era given that such a recent work would have required more time for copying, distribution and to have been assimulated into the Qumran community. [See Frank M. Cross, Jr., The Ancient Library of Qumran. Revised Edition, (1961) page 43. Frank Cross is an authority on Qumran materials and was in charge of publishing the materials found in Cave 4.]




73) The various time periods of Daniel do not coincide with the with 3 year period mentioned in Maccabees for the desecration of the temple. This "error" would be unimaginable if the book was in fact written during this time frame.




74) Vasholz points out that the evidence suggests "that there was more than one Hebrew recension of Daniel prior to the LXX translation [which is "usually dated as early as the third century B.C." Walton in Hill and Walton, 350; about 285/2 to 246 B.C.--Coogan, 686 and Brock, 752].




This is more than just a little strange if the date of the composition of Daniel is held to be in the middle of the second century B.C.." [page 321] (i.e., how could the Septuagint translators translate a book that had not YET been written!).




75) In 1 Maccabees 2:59-60 Mattathias on his deathbed (d. 166 B.C.; i.e., before Daniel was supposedly written!) counseled his sons to emulate the deeds of Biblical heroes, one of which he names: Daniel. [Eissfeldt, 521; Heuvel, 3 -- both try to escape the dilemma by saying that 1 Maccabees was "compiled probably in about 100 B.C.."] The context of the passage also indicates that Mattathias was referring to events in the distant past. Also the author of 1 Maccabees also "shows familiarity with the Septuagint version of Daniel." [McDowell, 29; see Joseph D. Wilson, Did Daniel Write Daniel? (Cook, n.d.) pages 98-100] These facts demonstrate that the book of Daniel had canonical status and that it was regarded as *past history* before it was supposedly written! [Barnes, 55]




76) We should also note that 1 Baruch 1:15-3:3 (a 4th century B.C. work) and the Sibylline Oracles (III, 379ff. -- from the 2nd century B.C.; Heuvel, 3 cites Weiser (Einleitung in Das Alte Testament (1961): 315) in dating this work about 140 B.C.) are all familiar with the book of Daniel. [Harrison (1969): 1124; Moore looks at the correspondence between Bar. 1:15-2:19 compared with Dan. 9:4-19]




77) According to J. E. H. Thomson [in the Pulpit Commentary. (dated 1896), vol 13 ("Daniel"): page xxxi] the Book of Enoch dated 210 B.C. "is full of evidences of the influence of Daniel." [compare 1 Enoch 14:18-22 with Dan 7:9-10] How could this be if the book of Daniel had not been written yet? Harrison states that this section of 1 Enoch "was probably written prior to 150 B.C."; if we use this date and a Maccabean date for the composition of Daniel it means that Daniel was canonized within 14 years of having been composed! [Harrison (1969): 1107]

Event No. 4
Foretold Event: Messiah to appear before the foretold events of the destruction of the Jewish temple and Jerusalem, which happened to occur in 70 CE

When Foretold: 165 BCE

When Fulfilled: 30 to 33 CE

Time passed from prophecy to fulfillment: 195 Years

Can We Confirm it?: Yes

According to Gabriel’s words given to Daniel, the time of the Messiah's appearing is sequential. Gabriel foretells that the Messiah had to appear before Jerusalem and the temple would be destroyed (happened in 70 CE). This means the Jewish Messiah had to appear before 70 CE. Jesus became a public figure about 40 years earlier, which meets Gabriel's timing for the Messiah. This event is recorded in verse 26 as follows:

"the Messiah will be cut off [killed 30 - 33 CE] and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come [Romans, who destroyed Jerusalem in 70 CE] will destroy the city and the sanctuary. " (Daniel 9:26)

Jesus' death on the cross in either 30, 32, or 33 CE aligns with Jerusalem's destruction in 70 CE. This is the time sequence for the Messiah to appear based on Gabriel's words. For Christians, the time of Jesus appearing supports his claim to being the Messiah.

Based on this time sequence, any person claiming to being the Messiah after Jerusalem’s destruction in 70 CE does not meet the requirement. If Gabriel's words are from outside time-space (true), then such a person would be a false Messiah.

Event No. 3
Foretold Event: Messiah will be killed

When Foretold: 165 BCE

When Fulfilled: 30 to 33 CE

Time passed from prophecy to fulfillment: 195 Years

Can We Confirm it?: Yes

Gabriel's words to Daniel foretell that the Messiah would be killed. According to Christians, Jesus' crucifixion fulfilled this event. Although open to debate as to the year of Jesus' crucifixion, evidence supports that Jesus was crucified in either the year 30, 32 or 33 CE. This event is recorded twice in verses Daniel 9:24 and Daniel 9:26 as follows:

"...to make atonement for iniquity,..." (Daniel 9:24c: NASB / Interlinear Bible).

"the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing" (Daniel 9:26a: NASB / Interlinear Bible).
For Daniel 9:24, the Hebrew word translated to English as "make atonement" has significant meaning as the Hebrew word relates to the life of Jesus and the Christian faith. The Hebrew definition for the word "Kaphar" which is number 3722 in Strong's concordance shows that it means " to cover (specifically with bitumen); figuratively, to expiate or condone, to placate or cancel:-- appease, make an atonement, cleanse, disannul, forgive, be merciful, pacify, pardon, purge (away), put off, (make) reconcile(-liation)," which are terms used for sacrificial offerings. [For example, click on the following links to see how atonement is used in Ezekiel 45:15 and 45:17]

For Daniel 9:26, the Hebrew word translated to English as "cut off" has significant meaning as the Hebrew word relates to the life of Jesus and the Christian faith. The Hebrew definition for the word "Karath" which is number 3772 in Strong's concordance shows that it means "to perish" as well as "to covenant," a term used for sacrificial offerings. Due to these Scriptures, it is a small jump to the fact of the New Covenant of the Messiah.

The majority of people agree that Jesus was crucified during the Passover in the year 30, 32 or 33 CE.

Event No. 2

Foretold Event: Jerusalem would be destroyed

When Foretold: 165 BCE

When Fulfilled: 70 CE

Time passed from prophecy to fulfillment: 235 Years

Can We Confirm it?: Yes

Gabriel's words to Daniel foretold that Jerusalem would be destroyed. History verifies that Jerusalem was destroyed in the year 70 CE. Since the latest date possible for Daniel is 165 BCE, the prophecy occurred 235 years after it was written down. The Roman Army directed by the Roman General Titus destroyed Jerusalem. This event is recorded in verse 26 as follows:

"the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city [Jerusalem]." (Daniel 9:26)

All people agree that Jerusalem was destroyed in the year 70 CE. There are multiple sources that document the destruction that occurred in 70 CE listed below:

Does this foretold event meet the seven Einstein Method Guidelines? On the left side of the web page, all items read "YES". Place your mouse over the item to view the graphic window in the upper left corner or click to learn more with a quick pop-up file.

Supporting Evidence

Item No. 1: You can visit Rome and see the Arch of Titus, which was constructed by the Romans about 81 CE.

Item No. 2: You can visit Jerusalem and see the remains of ancient "Jerusalem" around the Temple Mount area.

Item No. 3: The Jewish historian named Flavius Josephus [who changed his views during the Jewish war with Rome and joined the enemy] witnessed the destruction of Jerusalem and recorded the event. Modern scholars have discovered that Josephus wrote, "the Jewish War" shortly after Jerusalem destruction with memories fresh in his mind. Scientific dating the date for Jerusalem's destruction based on Josephus words supports that this event appears to have been completed on September 2, 70 CE.

Jesus prophesied the same Event in Luke
19:41-44 and added detail!

"As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city,
he wept over it and said: "If you, even you, had only
known on this day what would bring you peace - but
now it is hidden from your eyes. The days will come
upon you when your enemies will build an embankment
against you and encircle you and hem you in on
every side. They will dash you to the ground, you and
your children within your walls. They will not leave
one stone on another, because you did not recognize
the time of God's coming to you."

Josephus writes:
"When the embankments were finished, they
brought forward the battering rams " . . . "Titus (the
commander of the Roman army) realized that it
would be a waste of time to fight against hopeless
men who would soon destroy themselves . . . So he
decided to block every possible exit out of the city by
building a wall completely around it, in order to force
the Jews to surrender or to starve to death.". . . .
"After capturing the city wall, the Romans planted
their standards on the towers . . . Pouring into the
streets, they massacred whoever they came across .
. . The Romans set fire to the outside wall of the city
and leveled it to the ground."

http://en.wikipedia....f_Jerusalem_(70)

Anyway - regardless of that, the theory 165BCE date is still of no use to you regarding prophecy.

Let me demonstrate.

You mentioned in an earlier post a control test for testing the validity of a prophecy ...'Unless you can show an interpretation for a future event and that future event occurs, none of it is valid proof.'

I'll go further and apply the Einstein Method:

Guideline #1: Be written down.

Guideline #2: Precede the foretold event.

Guideline #3: Not have been changed.

Guideline #4: Not be fulfilled by the telling Prophet.

Guideline #5: Not be fulfilled by followers.

Guideline #6: Be fulfilled after Death.

Guideline #7: Be verified to occur.

Ok lets have a look at 6 events prophesied in the book of Daniel:

Event 1

Foretold Event: The Jewish Temple would be destroyed

When Foretold: 165 BCE

When Fulfilled: 70 CE

Time passed from foretold event to fulfillment: 235 Years

Can We Confirm it?: Yes

Gabriel's words to Daniel foretold that the Jewish temple would be destroyed. Historians have verified that the temple was destroyed in 70 CE. Since the latest date possible for writing Daniel is 165 BCE, the foretold event occurred 235 years after it was recorded. The Roman Army directed by Titus destroyed the Jewish temple. This event is recorded in verse 26 as follows:

"the people of the prince who is to come will destroy . . . the sanctuary [holy, temple]." (Daniel 9:26)

All people agree that the temple was destroyed in the year 70 CE. There are multiple sources that document the destruction that occurred in 70 CE:

Does this foretold event meet the seven Einstein Method Guidelines? On the left side of the web page, all items read "YES". Place your mouse over the item to view the graphic window in the upper left corner or click to learn more with a quick pop-up file.

Supporting Evidence

Item No. 1: You can visit Rome and see the Arch of Titus, which was constructed by the Romans about 81 CE. At the linked web site, pictures of the Arch of Titus show the temple treasures being carried away by the Romans.

Item No. 2: You can visit Jerusalem and see the remains of the "Western Wall" which was a supporting wall for the Temple Mount area.

Item No. 3: The Jewish historian named Flavius Josephus [who changed his views during the Jewish war with Rome and joined the enemy] witnessed the destruction of the temple and recorded this event. Modern scholars have discovered that Josephus wrote, "the Jewish War" shortly after the temple's destruction with memories fresh in his mind. Scientific dating the date for the temple’s destruction based on Josephus words supports that this event appears to have occurred on Sunday, August 5, 70 CE.

Analysis:

Einstein Method Guideline
Guideline #1: Written code foretelling the future?
Physical Evidence:

The Dead Sea Scrolls have eight copies of Daniel that predate the foretold event. The oldest copy has been scientifically dated using carbon dating techniques to have been copied by Scribes about 125 BCE.
Naturalists accept 165 BCE as the latest date possible for authorship.
Purpose of Daniel's Words:

To foretell when the Messiah will appear and events related to the Messiah's appearing.

Guideline #2: Recorded before event occurred?
Physical Evidence: The Dead Sea Scrolls with eight copies of Daniel predate the foretold event.

Guideline #3: Are Daniel's words unchanged?
Physical Evidence: The Dead Sea Scrolls with eight copies of Daniel predate the foretold event and verify the words have not been changed.

Since one copy of Daniel has been dated to 125 BCE, in theory, changing words is a non-issue since the foretold event occurs about 195 years later than the oldest known copy of Daniel.

Chronological Evidence: If Daniel was authored in 165 BCE, the oldest known copy of Daniel found in the Dead Sea Scrolls was done only 40 years after the original.

Conclusions:

Daniel's words predate the foretold event.
No meaningful changes to the text have been found between the Dead Sea Scrolls copies and modern copies.

Guideline #4: Did Daniel self-fulfill the foretold event?
Historic Evidence:

The oldest Dead Sea Scrolls copy of Daniel has been scientifically dated to 125 BCE using carbon dating techniques.
Naturalists accept 165 BCE as the latest date possible authorship.
Conclusion: Daniel could not self-fulfill the event since he was dead centuries before the temple was destroyed in the year 70 CE.

Guideline #5: Did Daniel's followers self-fulfill the foretold event?
Historic Evidence:

Romans destroyed the temple.
Daniel's followers were devout Jews who would never have destroyed their beautiful temple.

Guideline #6: Foretold event fulfilled after Daniel died?
Historic Evidence:

The oldest Dead Sea Scrolls copy of Daniel has been scientifically dated to 125 BCE using carbon dating techniques.
Naturalists accept 165 BCE as the latest date possible authorship.
Conclusion: Daniel was dead centuries before the temple was destroyed in the year 70 CE.

Guideline #7: Is the foretold event factual? Do people other than devout followers accept it as fact?
Historic Evidence: Several archaeological artifacts support the Temple of Herod was destroyed by Rome in 70 CE.

Eyewitness Account: The Jewish historian named Flavius Josephus witnessed the destruction of the temple and wrote about its destruction in "The Jewish War", which was published about 75 CE.

No real debate??

There wasnt any Debate over Daniel being written in 165 BCE until the pagan neo-Platonic philosopher, Porphyry, who
died about A.D. 304 and then again with rise of higher criticism in the seventeenth century:

PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
The first heterodox view was that propounded by the pagan neo-Platonic philosopher, Porphyry, who
died about A.D. 304 (see McNamara, 1969, p. 651). On a visit to Sicily, Porphyry produced a series of
fifteen books titled, Against the Christians. Parts of the twelfth book, in which he attacked Daniel, have
been preserved in Jerome’s commentary on Daniel. Porphyry denied that Daniel, in the sixth century B.C.,
was the author of the book that bears his name, and asserted that the book was written around 175-164
B.C. by an anonymous scribe who lived in Judea during the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. <b> Porphyry came
to this conclusion because the book of Daniel speaks so accurately about the times of Antiochus, which,
of course, would give credence to predictive prophecy had it been written earlier. Porphyry’s criticism,
therefore, was based on his anti-prophetic philosophical presuppositions.</b>
Porphyry’s theory met with little favor from the outset. It was refuted before the time of Jerome by
Methodius, Eusebius of Caesarea, and Apollinarius, and appeared to have been rejected for all time.
However, such was not the case.
Except for the attack of Porphyry, no question was raised concerning the traditional sixth century
B.C. date of Daniel until the rise of higher criticism in the seventeenth century—more than two thousand
years after the book was written (see Walvoord, 1971, p. 11). The German literary critical movement began to
advance Porphyry’s supposition that the book contained no predictive element, despite the arguments
of various conservative scholars. R.K. Harrison stated:
Objections to the historicity of Daniel were copied uncritically from book to book, and by the second
decade of the twentieth century no scholar of general liberal background who wished to preserve his academic
reputation either dared or desired to challenge the current critical trend (1969, p. 1111).
Arguing against the conservative view, Otto Eissfeldt stated that the more liberal approach became
the “assured position of scholarship” (1966, p. 517). Edward J. Young observed that “It is probably not an
exaggeration to say that most scholars now believe that the book of Daniel, as we have it, comes from the
days of the Maccabees” (1949, p. 25). Despite the insistence of modern critical scholarship for a late date,
able and learned men still advocate the conservative view. Interestingly, the critical scholars’ tendency to
admit the antiquity of some of the underlying material of the book actually has strengthened the conservatives’
position.

http://www.apologeti...for-the-Dat.pdf

'Simply put, there is no evidence whatsoever that the book was written in 164/5 B. C.'

Evidences Relating to the Date of the Book of Daniel
by David Conklin
© (3/13/2004)
http://www.biblicals...iel_kitchen.pdf

Mikey, You have stated the date 165 BC for the writing of book of Daniel.

Could I request of you a more substantial and scholarly evidence for it being that date rather than it merely being Porphyry’s 'anti-prophetic philosophical presuppositions, really as there is no evidence for this theory, the owness is on you to prove it.

(Could this lack of evidence have be why you or your source was so hasty to assert that there is no debate?)




Ok lets have a look at 6 events prophesied in the book of Daniel:


Event 1

Foretold Event: The Jewish Temple would be destroyed

When Foretold: 165 BCE

When Fulfilled: 70 CE

Time passed from foretold event to fulfillment: 235 Years

Can We Confirm it?: Yes

Gabriel's words to Daniel foretold that the Jewish temple would be destroyed. Historians have verified that the temple was destroyed in 70 CE. Since the latest date possible for writing Daniel is 165 BCE, the foretold event occurred 235 years after it was recorded. The Roman Army directed by Titus destroyed the Jewish temple. This event is recorded in verse 26 as follows:

"the people of the prince who is to come will destroy . . . the sanctuary [holy, temple]." (Daniel 9:26)

All people agree that the temple was destroyed in the year 70 CE. There are multiple sources that document the destruction that occurred in 70 CE:

Does this foretold event meet the seven Einstein Method Guidelines? On the left side of the web page, all items read "YES". Place your mouse over the item to view the graphic window in the upper left corner or click to learn more with a quick pop-up file.

Supporting Evidence

Item No. 1: You can visit Rome and see the Arch of Titus, which was constructed by the Romans about 81 CE. At the linked web site, pictures of the Arch of Titus show the temple treasures being carried away by the Romans.

Item No. 2: You can visit Jerusalem and see the remains of the "Western Wall" which was a supporting wall for the Temple Mount area.

Item No. 3: The Jewish historian named Flavius Josephus [who changed his views during the Jewish war with Rome and joined the enemy] witnessed the destruction of the temple and recorded this event. Modern scholars have discovered that Josephus wrote, "the Jewish War" shortly after the temple's destruction with memories fresh in his mind. Scientific dating the date for the temple’s destruction based on Josephus words supports that this event appears to have occurred on Sunday, August 5, 70 CE.

Analysis:

Einstein Method Guideline
Guideline #1: Written code foretelling the future?
Physical Evidence:

The Dead Sea Scrolls have eight copies of Daniel that predate the foretold event. The oldest copy has been scientifically dated using carbon dating techniques to have been copied by Scribes about 125 BCE.
Naturalists accept 165 BCE as the latest date possible for authorship.
Purpose of Daniel's Words:

To foretell when the Messiah will appear and events related to the Messiah's appearing.

Guideline #2: Recorded before event occurred?
Physical Evidence: The Dead Sea Scrolls with eight copies of Daniel predate the foretold event.

Guideline #3: Are Daniel's words unchanged?
Physical Evidence: The Dead Sea Scrolls with eight copies of Daniel predate the foretold event and verify the words have not been changed.

Since one copy of Daniel has been dated to 125 BCE, in theory, changing words is a non-issue since the foretold event occurs about 195 years later than the oldest known copy of Daniel.

Chronological Evidence: If Daniel was authored in 165 BCE, the oldest known copy of Daniel found in the Dead Sea Scrolls was done only 40 years after the original.

Conclusions:

Daniel's words predate the foretold event.
No meaningful changes to the text have been found between the Dead Sea Scrolls copies and modern copies.

Guideline #4: Did Daniel self-fulfill the foretold event?
Historic Evidence:

The oldest Dead Sea Scrolls copy of Daniel has been scientifically dated to 125 BCE using carbon dating techniques.
Naturalists accept 165 BCE as the latest date possible authorship.
Conclusion: Daniel could not self-fulfill the event since he was dead centuries before the temple was destroyed in the year 70 CE.

Guideline #5: Did Daniel's followers self-fulfill the foretold event?
Historic Evidence:

Romans destroyed the temple.
Daniel's followers were devout Jews who would never have destroyed their beautiful temple.

Guideline #6: Foretold event fulfilled after Daniel died?
Historic Evidence:

The oldest Dead Sea Scrolls copy of Daniel has been scientifically dated to 125 BCE using carbon dating techniques.
Naturalists accept 165 BCE as the latest date possible authorship.
Conclusion: Daniel was dead centuries before the temple was destroyed in the year 70 CE.

Guideline #7: Is the foretold event factual? Do people other than devout followers accept it as fact?
Historic Evidence: Several archaeological artifacts support the Temple of Herod was destroyed by Rome in 70 CE.

Eyewitness Account: The Jewish historian named Flavius Josephus witnessed the destruction of the temple and wrote about its destruction in "The Jewish War", which was published about 75 CE.

Mikey Tsav There really is no debate over Daniel being written in 165 BCE. Just like there really is no debate that Jewish slaves didnt build the pyramids.

Certainly it could have been composed earlier and only written down in 165 (this is probably true of the Pentateuch), but the "prophecies" could have also been added in afterwords to make it seem like he made prophecies. The final redactor knew the end of the story and put it in there. Theres actually a lot of literary proof in the books that they were written long after they happened.

Comparative prose is a good forensic concept (it was used to discover the identity of the Unabomber). Its a valiant effort on your (and presumably others) parts, but its not necessarily valid. (Id like a reliable source arguing this btw, but Ill assume its true for now) I can easily write in Chaucer prose if I want and make it look 100% authentic. Cleaves translation of the Secret History of the Mongols is written in King James English, but it was written in the 50s (published in 82 I think).

Now, you argue back "But what the heck motive would they have in fabricating the prose?" Well, first its not necessarily intentional. Look at your examples. The letters were written around 500 BCE. Daniel was written about 165 BCE. The letters are just ordinary writing. The book of Daniel is very important and so it very well could have been written in the spiritual prose, which was nearly identical to natural/living prose of 350 years earlier. Meanwhile, contemporary writings were written in a more evolutionary manner.

Even today we write formal documents in different prose than the natural living prose. You write do not instead of don't. I go as far as omitting the apostrophe (it serves no purpose). I also omit the -ugh in words it doesnt (<--) serve any purpose in. Further, I frequently write things in a manner different from most people.

The Dead Sea Scrolls were written by a minor cult that was not even among the mainstream and very probably was written in a different from contemporary prose. If my professor wasnt on sabbatical, I actually could ask him about this, but I doubt he checks his email now. I think hes in Israel or UK atm, but I can give it a shot if youd like...

/Since we can verify Daniel's prophetic ideas came true, then Daniel's words appear to come from outside time-space./
We really cant. They are too vague and can be applied to anything. The actual kingdom identities are disputed beyond the first two.

/The date for writing the book of Daniel must be pushed back to match the text and linguistic style of the 5th century BCE./
Where do you get this conclusion from? It doesnt follow from anything you said.

Josephus: He lived well after either author, so he cant be used as any sort of proof, even if he is closer than we. Also, appeal to authority. Further, he was like Herodotus, mixing mythology with facts.

/Since the study of Daniel shows that modern scholars are biased against the reality of prophecy at the 98.5% confidence level, Josephus' view of Daniel appears to be correct./
What the hell? Do you even know what confidence testing is? You have given no statistical analysis at all or anything for that statistic. Bunch of nonsequitors up in here, yall.

/Putting Daniel In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim BC 606 - big difference from the biased untenable Naturalists view of 165BCE/
This "inconsistency" can be resolved when you realize that someone else wrote it.

Compare: The Pentateuch is thought to have been written by Moses. Moses is not attested in history (he should be in Egyptian records), but would have been around 1300-1200 BCE. We now know that the books were written and compiled by separate people much later. Although some of the writings did exist since 1000-900 BCE. The legends themselves are definitely much much older and of Mesopotamian origin (although some are original). But we know that they were written later and by several people thru (<--) similar to the methods youve described, but misused.
1. There are several distinct tones in the entire Torah.
2. Some areas call God by his name יהוה (Yahweh: Jehovah) Others use his "title" אלוהים (Elohim: God). (related to tone) This is also useful to date the texts. Jews didnt originally adhere to the 3rd commandment (uttering Gods name in vain). That was a later development around 500 BCE.
3. There are tons of doublets, which indicate two texts were merged together. Examples: The 10 commandments are listed twice. Joshua (iirc) is shown to be floating up and down Sinai with no continuity at all.

Heres a nice view of it all:
http://upload.wikime...ion_English.png

http://en.wikipedia....tary_hypothesis
3 minutes ago · Like

Ok, I'll get back to you on that. Theres going to be a substantial amount of material so it may take a day or two, I appreciate your time and critical analysis. Though i do ask you also to attempt to be open minded as preconceived ideals can blind one to truths. For example taking the Naturalists biased dating of the Book in 165 BCE is easy to debunk.

Conservative scholars take the position that the book of Daniel was written centuries before 165 BCE. The evidence is very sound. Let's review the evidence.

ocuments written in 5th century BCE Egypt (~495 BCE TO ~402 BCE) reveal unique textual and linguistic styles from that era. These documents are called the Elephantine Papyri. By comparing the texts of the Elephantine Papyri to the texts of Daniel, scholars have concluded that the textual style of Daniel places the book within the era of the 5th century BCE. Even Naturalists accept that the style of writing would place the book of Daniel centuries earlier than the 2nd century BCE. However, Naturalists favor the 165 BCE date due to their bias.

Common Sense Placement for Daniel

Perhaps the easiest way of understanding why Daniel was written about 530 BCE is by using the English language from another era. Have you ever read Chaucerian English (14th century - 700 years ago) or Miltonian English (17th century - 300 years ago)? Consider the following example from the 14th century written by Chaucer:

But for to tellen yow of his array,
His hors were goode, but he was nat gay.
Of fustian he wered a gypon
Al bismotered with his habergeon,
For he was late ycome from his viage,
And wente for to doon his pilgrymage.

Language changes over time. This is a true statement for English as it is for Aramaic and Hebrew. The style of writing and word usage date when the literature was written. Consider the following example from the 17th century written by Milton:

When such musick sweet
Their hearts and ears did greet,
As never was by mortall finger strook,
Divinely-warbled voice
Answering the stringed noise,
As all their souls in blisfull rapture took:
The Air such pleasure loth to lose,
With thousand echo's still prolongs each heav'nly close.

Many of the words take time to decipher for someone used to reading 21st century English. In the same way, the Aramaic found in the book of Daniel does not fit the era of 165 BCE.

Another textual evidence that Daniel was written centuries before 165 BCE are the texts of the Dead Sea Scrolls (written from 150 BCE to 50 CE). Scholarly comparison of the unique textual and linguistic styles support that Daniel was written centuries before the Dead Sea Scrolls. Dating Daniel to 165 BCE is not credible.

Naturalist's views for dating the book of Daniel are based on false assumptions about prophecy. Since we can verify Daniel's prophetic ideas came true, then Daniel's words appear to come from outside time-space. The date for writing the book of Daniel must be pushed back to match the text and linguistic style of the 5th century BCE.


Josephus called Daniel, ". . . one of the greatest of the prophets [Antiquities Book 10, Chapter 11, paragraph 7 Search for "GREATEST OF THE PROPHETS on the linked site"] because Daniel's prophecies are "time-oriented" and reveal "WHEN" future events would occur. Why did Josephus hold such a high view of Daniel?

Since Josephus lived in the years 37 to 100 CE, he is closer to reality than modern scholars, who are more than 2,000 years removed from the biblical culture. Since the study of Daniel shows that modern scholars are biased against the reality of prophecy at the 98.5% confidence level, Josephus' view of Daniel appears to be correct.

So real unbiased evidence supports the account of Daniel 2.1 Daniel 1 (New International Version)

Daniel 1

Daniel’s Training in Babylon

1 In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and besieged it.

Putting Daniel In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim BC 606 - big difference from the biased untenable Naturalists view of 165BCE

Revelation 11:13 — First off again, this passage doesnt really say anything at all and could be interpreted to be anything you want it to be. Again, post hoc.

However! You did provide a source of someone using it to prophesize a future event. This is key and makes it testable. However, its more Goodwin, Moore, and Phillipotts prophecies than Jesuss prophecy. They took a passage and said "oh it must be this. They have no reason really to say it was going to be that. Rev 11:13 just speaks of a city, "Sodom and Egypt". (I havent read all of Revelations yet, but it appears to be one of my favorites for all the crazy within it. I did read Rev 11 tho for context) There is simply no reason for this to refer to Rome or Earth or anything, but some city, possibly a capital city. 7000 people died? Thats a lot less than in France.

Of course, these could be metaphors and the six days of creation could be eras, but at that point you are stretching the texts to fit YOUR view.

So, no, there are no prophecies of Jesus that have been proven. Jews and Muslims make the same claims about their texts predicting the future. Its all based on post-hoc analysis. There is some bit about Gog and Magog being ascribed to Germany or Russia and Iran, etc etc. This is again good because we are not doing post hoc. But the problem is, the texts said one thing and we are interpreting them as something else that we want it to be. Thats not and never will be proof. Even if there arises a country called Gog, Magog or Gog and Magog, that STILL would not necessarily be the same.

You can really take any text and use it to prophesize whatever you want. Have you heard of the Bible Code? People use gematria (Hebrew letters represent numbers) and can be added up in various manners to create dates and whatever. You can do the same with Moby Dick if you wanted.

Now its more difficult with modern fiction because its not as vague, BUT we have Nostradamus. He has followers, like you follow Jesus, who claim he prophesized this and that. But in the end, its all post hoc or impossible to determine what the hell, if anything, he was talking about. Unless the prophet says "America will invade Iraq in 2003 on the basis of blahblahblah", its meaningless. If it were to say "And the Great Emperi will subjugate Babylon in two thousand years", that says absolutely nothing whatsoever.

Ultimately I cant really change your beliefs, but this is what it is, whether you accept it or not.

Mikey Tsav Daniel 2 — Well first off, you are relying on post hoc analysis and possibly the post hoc fallacy. "Hindsight is 20/20" We can easily ascribe the prophesized kingdoms to whatever we feel fits our worldview, but that doesnt prove anything because they are quite vague.

However, there are commonly accepted interpretations of most of the kingdoms. Why? The book was written in 165 BCE. The author knew of Medo-Persia, of the Greek Empire, of Rome (to some degree). More plausible is this interpretation: Babylon, Media, Persia, Greece, Seleucids/Ptolemies. Suddenly these prophecies make much more sense. The author DID actually know what he was writing about.

Regardless though, you cant say this prophesized anything more than Nostradamus did. Its all post hoc. Unless you can show an interpretation for a future event and that future event occurs, none of it is valid proof.
13 minutes ago · Like