Talk:Unfulfilled historical predictions by Christians/Archive 1

message: I have looked briefly at some of these items.  Most of those cases the "prophet" would be considered (at the time) a heretic, rather than a member of a mainstream church.  I think a little more disclaimer is needed at the top, or a lot of deleteing. :) Also refs to the actual words of the "prophets", where possible. Rich Farmbrough 20:01, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the above, and noticed a few more problems with this page that put it in significant NPOV danger.  A number of the "prophecys" (for example all of the ones by Hal Lindsey) are not claimed to be prophecys by the people who gave them.  Instead they are usually represented as  opnions/intrpratations/guesses of the individual inquestion.  Including them under the heading of prophecy especially unfulfilled prophecy, while removing any disclaimer that came with them, makes me rather uncomfortable in terms of NPOV.  Saying, "I think this event is very likley to happen by the end of the decade", seems to count as giving prophecy here.  I think this page would be a decent cantidate for deletion and/or massive change W.R.T. what is included and what critera must be meet for inclusion. Dalf | Talk 08:18, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Disclaimer required

message: I let this comment stay until I realised that there was a problem with it - the contributor stated that the prophecy could be considered fulfilled due to the creation of the EU in 1992. However, Lindsay pointed out that this would occur in the 1980s. While this may seem like nitpicking, it is nevertheless important to recognise that Lindsay's specific prophecy was not fulfilled because it did not occur in the timeframe he predicted. It's like someone predicting in 1970 that the Red Sox would win the world series again in 2003. The fact that they won in 2004 and not 2003 does not make the supposed prophecy correct because it was "nearly right". One Salient Oversight 14:00, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  United States of Europe a realised prophecy because of European Union? 

message: I have requested comment from a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Jehovah's Witnesses. You can find my request at User_talk:Hawstom#Your_opinion_at_this_talk_page_is_sought --One Salient Oversight 03:36, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Just so this is all above board

message: I am researching this and will eventually produce a believable external link to prove that he did make this prophecy. One Salient Oversight 09:49, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pat Robertson prediction about Bush landslide victory in 2000 

message: This part of the article has been changed by "someone" eager to prove that the 1914 prophecy actually came true.
The fact is that this article concerns prophecy which went unfulfilled. If a person believes that the 1914 prophecy WAS fulfilled, then remove it from the article and argue your point here in the discussion page.
--One Salient Oversight 12:56, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  1914 Jehovah's Witnesses prophecy 

message: This item should be removed. At the time Bohemia was in extremely cruel and long civil war where apocalyptic sects were created and exterminated regularly. It was quite similar to recent Afghanistan, only w/o AK47. 
There was no widely influencial religious person claming end of world. The sects were small in numbers and none enjoyed long-term political or military influence.
Pavel Vozenilek 02:05, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  15th Century Taborites 

message: --Now before anyone starts with the accusations of POV against me, let me just point out that this addition as nothing to do with the resurrection story of Jesus in the Gospels, but merely refers to the fact that virtually all of the original christians were firmly convinced that the return of their messiah, and the ensuing apocalypse, were going to occur within their own lifetimes. --Jleon 13:05, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There is only one reason why I had to remove this, and it wasn't because of any POV from you. The writings and prophecies of the disciples are found in the New Testament. Since this is included in the Bible, it does not fit the criteria of this article: Prophecy that is direct from the Bible is not included on this page. Problems with Biblical prophecy are dealt with in separate articles. --One Salient Oversight 06:15, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

text: I am talking about the entire New Testament here - the epistles as well. Who do you define as Jesus' 1st century disciples? One Salient Oversight 02:36, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  1st Century 

message: It's hard to follow U.S. presidential elections sometimes, so I undersand where the confusion can come in, but let me try to untangle a recent edit that claimed that the prophesy involving Bush's win in the Presidential campaign was by a large margin (this is untrue):
* The Electoral College – Once the voting in a state is counted, the electoral college for that state will generally put all of their votes behind the winning candidate. As a result, a candidate who wins by 51% to 48% (which was the popular vote outcome in 2004) might win by 286 EC votes to 252 EC votes (a larger margin). Comparisons of the magnitude of a win, are almost always done on the basis of the popular vote, not the EC vote.
* The number of votes – As the baby-boomers hit the age where americans tend to vote in larger numbers (just past retirement age), the electorate is swelling. The fact that both candidates recieved record numbers of votes for first and second place in a U.S. presidential campaign is not surprising.
I hope that this helps to explain why I would revert the anon edit which claimed that Bush won the recent election by a large margin. 3% is considered a moderate margin (not the tiny fraction it sounds like, though). 10% would be a "landslide" by just about anyone's defintion, and in order to claim a definitive margin, I would think you would need at least 5%. That last is personal opinion, but I'm sure presidential election scholars would at least agree that 3% would be a difficult claim to a large margin win at the very least. -Harmil 10:32, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular vs electoral vote in U.S. 

message: This page can be considered very offensive to Christians, listing things like this. It is a lapse in neutriallity and should either be deleted or sections of it should just be metioned in other articles.
Thank you.
:Only Christians that stated unfulfilled prophecies, or the bozos that continue to believe them. And we don't really care what liars and conmen think about being exposed.Tommstein 11:58, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I am an evangelical Christian and I created the article! I don't find the article's existance offensive, I find the fact that so-called Christian leaders can predict things that go wrong to be offensive. They insult my faith. --One Salient Oversight 11:41, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lapse in neutriallity 

message: This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Splashtalk 20:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for Deletion debate