So I was debating with my friend over religion...

And he brought up Isaiah 44:28, which states:

"who says of Cyrus, 'He is my shepherd
and will accomplish all that I please;
he will say of Jerusalem, "Let it be rebuilt,"
and of the temple, "Let its foundations be laid." '

Now he wants me to refute that, and I can't find anything against it. I'm not sure if a single correct prophecy would be compelling evidence for religion, but the fact that even the name is correct is surprising. Any refutations? lol

say something about dinosaurs ... sorry I have nothing else for ya.:P

Wait, what are you debating?

Is this friend really a friend....or is it really you! *gasp*Dylan_11

Wait, what are you debating?

Snipes_2

What's the fulfilled prophecy here? That Jerusalem was rebuilt? I'm not sure I follow.

What's the fulfilled prophecy here? That Jerusalem was rebuilt? I'm not sure I follow.

GabuEx

And he brought up Isaiah 44:28, which states:

"who says of Cyrus, 'He is my shepherd
and will accomplish all that I please;
he will say of Jerusalem, "Let it be rebuilt,"
and of the temple, "Let its foundations be laid." '

Now he wants me to refute that, and I can't find anything against it. I'm not sure if a single correct prophecy would be compelling evidence for religion, but the fact that even the name is correct is surprising. Any refutations? lol

dk00111

There were many things taken out and many things added to the bible.

Emporer constantine revised the bible as it is today almost like congress would revise laws. They took only what benefited them at that current point in time and removed anything else.

The reason being at the time so many sects of christianity were bearing their fangs at one another this was done to unify the people and avoid a civil war.

Hence.. I don't take a lot of stock in the bible. Among many MANY other reasons.

What's the fulfilled prophecy here? That Jerusalem was rebuilt? I'm not sure I follow.

GabuEx

the bible has been butchered over the years through various rewritings and translations, at one point in time it was mainly told orally and the people telling the story may forget certain things or add them for their own gain. it is very possible that the verse was created orally after Jerusalem had already been rebuilt and it became eventually integrated. The bible you see today i have no doubt is extremely different from the original story and draft, works that pass orally through hundereds years scarcely resemble their origin and even after they are written they still spawn a multitude of differences.ferret-gamer

the bible has been butchered over the years through various rewritings and translations, at one point in time it was mainly told orally and the people telling the story may forget certain things or add them for their own gain. it is very possible that the verse was created orally after Jerusalem had already been rebuilt and it became eventually integrated. The bible you see today i have no doubt is extremely different from the original story and draft, works that pass orally through hundereds years scarcely resemble their origin and even after they are written they still spawn a multitude of differences.ferret-gamer

This prophecy about Cyrus was made before Cyrus even existed.mindstorm

Well, then it seems to me that the real question is, "When was that verse written?" If one believes in divine inspiration, one will obviously have no problem ascribing it and anything else to Isaiah; if one does not, then obviously one will believe - as many scholars do - that it is part of a passage that was written later, after the events that it describes.

tell him what does cyrus of the spill crew have anything to do with the bible

:P

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]the bible has been butchered over the years through various rewritings and translations, at one point in time it was mainly told orally and the people telling the story may forget certain things or add them for their own gain. it is very possible that the verse was created orally after Jerusalem had already been rebuilt and it became eventually integrated. The bible you see today i have no doubt is extremely different from the original story and draft, works that pass orally through hundereds years scarcely resemble their origin and even after they are written they still spawn a multitude of differences.mindstorm

I just provided proof. Look up a bit.

The dead sea scrolls are an excellent example of exactly what im speaking of.

the dead sea scrolls were "gnostic" texts. A sect of christianity that had a more materilistic view on the world.

The "gnostic" texts were hidden because all other versions of books in the bible needed to be gotten rid of in order for our current version of the bible to prevail.

The "gnostics" were entrusted to guard those texts and when told to destroy what they had spent a considerable amount of time protecting they couldn't do it and instead hid them.

The dead sea scrolls are not anywhere in our current bible for this very reason.

[QUOTE="mindstorm"][QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]the bible has been butchered over the years through various rewritings and translations, at one point in time it was mainly told orally and the people telling the story may forget certain things or add them for their own gain. it is very possible that the verse was created orally after Jerusalem had already been rebuilt and it became eventually integrated. The bible you see today i have no doubt is extremely different from the original story and draft, works that pass orally through hundereds years scarcely resemble their origin and even after they are written they still spawn a multitude of differences.kosmosfreak2

I just provided proof. Look up a bit.

The dead sea scrolls are an excellent example of exactly what im speaking of.

the dead sea scrolls were "gnostic" texts. A sect of christianity that had a more materilistic view on the world.

The "gnostic" texts were hidden because all other versions of books in the bible needed to be gotten rid of in order for our current version of the bible to prevail.

The "gnostics" were entrusted to guard those texts and when told to destroy what they had spent a considerable amount of time protecting they couldn't do it and instead hid them.

The dead sea scrolls are not anywhere in our current bible for this very reason.

The Dead Sea Scrolls don't consist entirely of Gnostic texts (there were also manuscripts of other books), and the Gnostic Gospels aren't in the Bible because the Gnostics contradicted pretty much everything else in the Bible and had some way-out-there beliefs, not the least of which being the belief that the God that created the world was evil.

[QUOTE="kosmosfreak2"]

[QUOTE="mindstorm"] I see many argue this... but I have ever seen anything other than claims. Never have I actually seen any evidence outside of speculation that this is true. If anything, we can be certain that the Hebrew text has not be changed since the days of Jesus because of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Perhaps it is possible that the text had been remained unchanged another several hundred years to the time of the writing. Perhaps, just perhaps, the book of Isaiah was actually written by Isaiah. :PTheokhoth

I just provided proof. Look up a bit.

The dead sea scrolls are an excellent example of exactly what im speaking of.

the dead sea scrolls were "gnostic" texts. A sect of christianity that had a more materilistic view on the world.

The "gnostic" texts were hidden because all other versions of books in the bible needed to be gotten rid of in order for our current version of the bible to prevail.

The "gnostics" were entrusted to guard those texts and when told to destroy what they had spent a considerable amount of time protecting they couldn't do it and instead hid them.

The dead sea scrolls are not anywhere in our current bible for this very reason.

The Dead Sea Scrolls don't consist entirely of Gnostic texts (there were also manuscripts of other books), and the Gnostic Gospels aren't in the Bible because the Gnostics contradicted pretty much everything else in the Bible and had some way-out-there beliefs, not the least of which being the belief that the God that created the world was evil.

Its just an example of many. Someone brought up dead sea scrolls so I thought id just go with it.

And yeah they were way out there but regardless they were excluded from the bible as well as many others and thats the point.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="kosmosfreak2"]

I just provided proof. Look up a bit.

The dead sea scrolls are an excellent example of exactly what im speaking of.

the dead sea scrolls were "gnostic" texts. A sect of christianity that had a more materilistic view on the world.

The "gnostic" texts were hidden because all other versions of books in the bible needed to be gotten rid of in order for our current version of the bible to prevail.

The "gnostics" were entrusted to guard those texts and when told to destroy what they had spent a considerable amount of time protecting they couldn't do it and instead hid them.

The dead sea scrolls are not anywhere in our current bible for this very reason.

kosmosfreak2

The Dead Sea Scrolls don't consist entirely of Gnostic texts (there were also manuscripts of other books), and the Gnostic Gospels aren't in the Bible because the Gnostics contradicted pretty much everything else in the Bible and had some way-out-there beliefs, not the least of which being the belief that the God that created the world was evil.

Its just an example of many. Someone brought up dead sea scrolls so I thought id just go with it.

And yeah they were way out there but regardless they were excluded from the bible as well as many others and thats the point.

They were excluded because they made no connection with the rest of the Bible. If it contradicts everything from Genesis 1:1 onward then the guys compiling the Bible are probably gonna go "Hey, wait a minute. . . ."

Even if everything you have said was completely true, that doesn't say anything about the Book of Isaiah. The fact that some books didn't get in the Bible doesn't say a thing about the accuracy of the things that did.

[QUOTE="mindstorm"][QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]the bible has been butchered over the years through various rewritings and translations, at one point in time it was mainly told orally and the people telling the story may forget certain things or add them for their own gain. it is very possible that the verse was created orally after Jerusalem had already been rebuilt and it became eventually integrated. The bible you see today i have no doubt is extremely different from the original story and draft, works that pass orally through hundereds years scarcely resemble their origin and even after they are written they still spawn a multitude of differences.kosmosfreak2

I just provided proof. Look up a bit.

The dead sea scrolls are an excellent example of exactly what im speaking of.

the dead sea scrolls were "gnostic" texts. A sect of christianity that had a more materilistic view on the world.

The "gnostic" texts were hidden because all other versions of books in the bible needed to be gotten rid of in order for our current version of the bible to prevail.

The "gnostics" were entrusted to guard those texts and when told to destroy what they had spent a considerable amount of time protecting they couldn't do it and instead hid them.

The dead sea scrolls are not anywhere in our current bible for this very reason.

My rule when it comes to friends and religion/politics: don't debate, discuss.