Christian book of Daniel - prophecy 2.0

Addressing the debate guidelines: It would seem my opponent has failed to understand my simple guidelines in this debate. First of all, ive noted THREE points in which he should start to address. Ive made it very clear that if we desire our points to be debated, we should make it very clear what they are. As ive listed THREE and he has yet to list any at all, only a comment asking me to go first, when i already have, then it seems i cannot find anything he's to offer. I could be a simply mind game to him, but as of yet ive got nothing to defend. Since this isnt about the debate topic, rather about the guidelines of the debate itself, i shall label them using alphabetical rather then numerical so it's easier for others and ourselves to see. A) This isnt a debate about the existence of factual prophecy in history, this is about WHEN they HAVE occurred. B) This is a debate that prophetic visions and word from the Lord ARE real. C) As in the title of the debate - Against - Will need to provide strong relation to directly link Daniel to 'apocalyptic' events, which would refers to future (aka 2012+ events). D) Also since i made it clear that using logic based words and reasoning is key, yet he enforces hardcore proof, I shall accept and now write a 8,000 worded reply. --- Debate topics - Since ive been giving nothing to work with, apart from AceViper2011 stating that prophecy doesn't exist, i cannot continue the actual debate. Therefore, i can respectfully wait for him to look at my three opening statement in which he should address. 1) If the explanation given to Daniel is that his vision is for the "time of the end" and that vision which is Persia's defeat to Alexander the Great, how can this vision be used again for end time anti-Christ times? 2) Also it's clear the term "end time" isnt always for anti-Christ times. 3) I would like my opponent to show the first vision which can be directly linked to apocalyptic era. --- External view on the debate - Since AceViper2011 decided to change the debate into something else, i shall ask him to address a few questions and topics to disprove his idea that prophecy doesn't, and cannot exist. Prophecy into todays wording is more like 'future telling' but from the bible it's far more then that. If we were to future tell that a bird was to fall from the sky, it's very general, but the bible is far more complex. In biblical future telling we have detailed specific events based within a very tightly marked area which cannot be generalized. For example, God said the king of GREECE will attack the king of PERSIA. This isnt generalized future telling such as a bird falling from the sky. Also the fact the type of king and ruler of Greece is mentioned, also the fall of the king and the extremely detailed mention of how many kingdoms will be left after the first king is also mentioned. You mentioned Nostradamus. Something interesting to note, is how extremely general and vague his words are compared to Daniel. Example, 9/11 is foretold as Volcanic fire from the center of the earth will cause trembling around the new city: Two great rocks will make war for a long time. Then Arethusa will redden a new river. or Hitler, where Hister is a reference to the Danube river. In the place very near not far from Venus, The two greatest ones of Asia and of Africa, From the Rhine and Hister they will be said to have come, Cries, tears at Malta and the Ligurian side. Few interesting additions I will mention. Hilter, like Alexander the Great were great rulers. Yet from the bible we're given very clear references, and even a reference in how the Alexander will progress. -The angel named Greece and Persia -He's said to "trample the king of Persia" and no one will save him. -The horn will become very great -At the height of it's power it will be broken off, and four new horns shall arise in it's place. Nostradamus can -never- be considered to resemble biblical prophecy. Further more, biblical prophecy in the Old Testament is always based around one specific around on earth, Israel - so the case of generalization is further reduced. If we continue. Daniel chapter 11:6 - 6 After some years, they(King of the North and South) will become allies. The daughter of the king of the South will go to the king of the North to make an alliance, but she will not retain her power, and he and his power[a] will not last. In those days she will be betrayed, together with her royal escort and her father[b] and the one who supported her. http://en.wikipedia.org...(Seleucid_queen) Chapter 11:7 7 "One from her family line will arise to take her place. He will attack the forces of the king of the North and enter his fortress; he will fight against them and be victorious. 8 He will also seize their gods, their metal images and their valuable articles of silver and gold and carry them off to Egypt. http://en.wikipedia.org... (copy from the link above) **Due to a falling out at the Seleucid court, his eldest sister Berenice Phernophorus- was murdered along with her infant son. In response Ptolemy III invaded Syria.[6] During this war, the Third Syrian War, **he occupied Antioch and even reached Babylon.[7] In exchange for a peace in 241 BC, Ptolemy was awarded new territories on the northern coast of Syria, including Seleucia Pieria, the port of Antioch. The Ptolemaic kingdom reached the height of its power. Chapter 11:19-21 These next three are highly detailed, and cannot be generalized at all. In summary it speaks about three kings, back-to-back, and very risky thing for any fortune teller to predict, yet God through Daniel does. verse 19 King 1 - dies suddenly- Antiochus III verse 20 King 2: Kingdom is in debt and immediately sends out tax collectors, but he will die not of anger or battle (aka assassination) - Seleucus IV Philopater verse 21 - 33 King 3: A vial man shall rise and take power without honor of royalty, and shall win great war against the King of the South and persecute the Jews heavily. Antiochus IV: Took power before his allotted time, it was his elder brother who should have taken the throne, not him - which lines with Daniel correctly. He also removed the current High Priest Onias III and replaced him with Joshua, who changed his name to Jason. Later he invaded Egypt and won great battles which resulted in the height of the Kingdoms power. He ruled Egypt as mentioned in Daniel. 19 After this, he will turn back toward the fortresses of his own country but will stumble and fall, to be seen no more. 20 "His successor will send out a tax collector to maintain the royal splendor. In a few years, however, he will be destroyed, yet not in anger or in battle. 21 "He will be succeeded by a contemptible person who has not been given the honor of royalty. He will invade the kingdom when its people feel secure, and he will seize it through intrigue. To simply say these 'future telling' words are based of chance and fluke, may i remind you of something a maths teaches us. A number which has 10 to the power 60 zeros before it, such as 0.00001 etc, is considered absoult zero. Meaning, that even though it's still holds numeric value, the value is so small it's considered absolute, as in, ZERO, and no more. Or, 0% chance. So when a man named Peter W. Stoner wrote Science Speaks, and explained how the chance of Jesus fulfilling biblical prophecy is 1 chance to 10 to the power 17. Which is the same chance as the state of Texas covered with so many gold coins it's 3 feet up to your knees, that you have one chance to pick that one single coin first time over the entire state of Texas! You have to conclude, that biblical prophecy is FAR difference then any Nostradamus, or any chance based general comment of 'future telling.' http://www.amazon.com... -- I'm still waiting for his reply about my three questions and for him to directly approach the debate.