tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post5909947865939757726..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Tyre and Babylon in Bible prophecyRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-31582715423775300822016-06-29T12:52:26.453-04:002016-06-29T12:52:26.453-04:00i) I'd defend it by saying liberal scholars ty...i) I'd defend it by saying liberal scholars typically think Babylon comes into view beginning in chap. 40. That chaps 40-55 are written from an exilic perspective. They reflect the exilic experience.<br /><br />ii) Likewise, I quoted the current standard commentary on 40-55 by a liberal scholar who thinks Babylon is the crosshairs of this verse.<br /><br />iii) Finally, when liberal scholars say the naming of Cyrus is a scribal interpolation, that's a backdoor admission that the body of the text is exilic. The original viewpoint is exilic. The name was (allegedly) added later.<br /><br />Even the postulate of redactional activity takes for granted that the source material is exilic. <br /><br />So it seems to me that I'm operating on liberal assumptions (for the sake of argument). And even on liberal assumptions, my argument goes through. stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-37488228769204642772016-06-29T05:20:58.140-04:002016-06-29T05:20:58.140-04:00Steve,
There a some commentators who try and evad...Steve,<br /><br />There a some commentators who try and evade 44:27 as have any reference to Babylon because it does not come into sight until chapter 47. How would you defend the interpretation that this does refer to Babylonian judgment at the end of chapter 44. <br /><br />God bless,<br /><br />PeterPeterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05993599903032999202noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-72182878522443402762016-06-24T16:44:33.363-04:002016-06-24T16:44:33.363-04:00Here's an index page that links many of our po...<a href="http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2011/03/evidence-of-biblical-prophecy.html" rel="nofollow">Here's</a> an index page that links many of our posts on Biblical prophecy. It includes links to material we've written in defense of the traditional dating of books like Isaiah and Daniel. See my post on Daniel <a href="http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2015/05/daniel-remains-major-problem-for.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>, for instance, which gives some examples of both Messianic and non-Messianic prophecies in that book that have been fulfilled. <br /><br />Keep in mind that Messianic and non-Messianic prophecies are often tied together. Predictions of Abraham and Israel's influence on the world, for example, have been fulfilled largely through Jesus. See <a href="http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/12/light-to-nations.html" rel="nofollow">here</a> and <a href="http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2016/05/the-suffering-servant-prophecy-as.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.<br /><br />An example of modern prophecy fulfillment that could be brought up, though the use of it would vary depending on your eschatological views, is the reemergence of Israel as a nation and the prominence of the city of Jerusalem in world affairs. That situation aligns well with what we see in the closing chapters of Zechariah and other Biblical passages. You don't have to believe that Jesus' second coming is going to occur in your lifetime or any other time soon in order to make such observations. Even if we assumed, for the sake of argument, that Israel will cease being a nation again in, say, fifty years, the survival of the Jewish people this long and the widespread ongoing interest in a Jewish nation and the city of Jerusalem would be significant anyway. Even if the complete fulfillment of eschatological passages won't take place until many years from now, it's significant that some of the steps leading up to that fulfillment have occurred already. And the prominence of Israel and Jerusalem in modern times is relevant to the predictions of Abraham and Israel's influence on the world, as discussed in the paragraph above.<br /><br />Though people tend to focus on the Old Testament when issues of prophecy come up, the New Testament includes some prophecies as well. Both the internal and the external evidence suggest that Luke and Acts <a href="http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2014/07/early-external-evidence-for-early-date.html" rel="nofollow">were written no later than the mid sixties</a>, and Luke seems to have used Mark as a source, so we have good evidence that the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 A.D. was predicted. Critics often argue that the eschatology of the Synoptics contains some false prophecies related to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, which would be difficult to explain if those gospels were written in 70 A.D. or later. I don't think there are any false prophecies in the Synoptics, and we've argued to that effect in previous threads, but the fact that the Synoptic authors didn't present their material as we'd expect somebody writing in 70 A.D. or later to present it is evidence for the earlier dating of the material.Jason Engwerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031011335190895123noreply@blogger.com