Metmom, you know that I respect you. I hope you know that. But do you have the slightest idea of how fallacious your reasoning is?
In an argument such as this, there are two points: the antecedent and the consequent. Our argument is yes or no, given A, therefore B. A is the Hebrew Bible/"old testament" (specifically the Torah). B is the "new testament." A was already around. A was already known to be the Word of G-d. You and I both agree on A. B is new. B is an innovation. The burden is on the innovation to justify itself. Your claim that I am obligated to prove that the "new testament" isn't the fulfillment of the old is no different from the claim that the burden is on chrstians "prove" that the koran or the "book of mormon" aren't true. There is absolutely no difference. I'm sorry, but if all you can say is "prove that it isn't what it says it is," then you have shown the utter bankruptcy of your position. You are implying that every new claim of any kind must be accepted at face value unless proven otherwise!
There are many places, as you probably well know, where the writers of the NT and Jesus Himself, stated that certain events are/were fulfillment of OT prophecies.
As you know, there are many places in the koran where it claims to be the fulfillment of all the "old" and "new testament" prophecies. Wow. It says that about itself? I guess we all have to believe it then, unless we can prove otherwise! Because that's your argument for the "new testament."
I have yet to see a single argument for chrstianity that doesn't simply assume its truth from the outset . . . kinda like so many arguments for evolution.
I don't think you WANT to see any. I asked you before and you haven't answered. Who is Jesus?
You make the SAME assumptions for your religion, ZC. If, as you say, it is all based on "facts" and not faith, then EVERYONE would be Noahides, but they aren't. NOWHERE in the Hebrew scriptures are these 7 laws of Noah asserted by God to be observed by all. You can't point them out. Why not admit it.