10 prophecies predicted in the Bible & fulfilled in history

You don't understand how Biblical "prophecy" works. You've mistakenly assumed that the authors of the various books of the Tanakh were writing contemporaneously with the events that they recorded -- they were not. Prophecy in the Jewish tradition is not a practice in which the various Jewish "prophets" (e.g., Elijah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, etc.) actually made predictions before events occurred, an author wrote it down, the prophesied events occurred, and then were faithfully recorded by the aforementioned author. Instead, Jewish "prophecy" is a retrospective theologizing of events by the author of the story in question, which is to say that the authors of the Hebrew Bible rationalized events that had happened in Jewish history (some of which were not even historical events, but instead were simply culture myths) by claiming that they had been pre-ordained by god (and predicted by prophets) so as to create the appearance that the events were supposed to have happened. It was a literary method that was designed to provide Jews with a way of reconciling their belief in an omnibenevolent god with the fact that sometimes very bad things happened to otherwise good people (and also, sometimes to very bad people who were supposed to have deserved it). This kind of literary technique is known as postdiction, or "prophecy after the fact", and it is merely intended to create the illusion that history has proceeded according to some kind of divinely ordained plan.

That said, we can look more specifically at the "prophecies" you list and begin to understand why they are not, in fact, actual prophecies:

Predicted ca. 855 BC: The prophet Elijah predicts Jezebel would be eaten by dogs upon her death in Jezreel. (1 Kings 21:23)– Fulfilled ca. 841 BC: Jezebel is killed in Jezreel and dogs eat her body (2 Kings 9:36).

The events you describe, which are supposed to have happened in the mid-ninth century BCE, are recorded in a book (which has been split into two books) that was written, at the earliest, sometime between 561 and 538 BCE, a full four centuries after the events they describe. The problem with this "prophecy" is really two-fold: 1) we can't actually ascertain the historicity the event itself (i.e., it could be completely fictional, which would render its prophetic element a moot point), and; 2) even if the event could be shown to be historical, it still would be more likely that the author simply invented the prophecy and placed it into the mouth of Elijah so as to make it appear that he had the gift of prophecy (and for that matter, it should also be pointed out that there's no historical evidence that Elijah actually existed).

Predicted ca. 760 BC: Amos predicts Israel would be restored as a nation and would never be uprooted again (Amos 9:15)–Fulfilled in 1948.

This one is pretty silly, and for a number of reasons. Firstly, the context in which Amos ostensibly makes this claim (around 750 BCE) is a purely messianic one. As such, the prophecy is, in fact, not actually fulfilled by the mere modern recreation of the nation of Israel, since the prophecy Amos was making was that the Davidic messiah would appear, vanquish Israel's enemies (at that time, the Assyrian Empire), and reinstate the Jewish monarchy by sitting upon the throne. Clearly, none of that has happened. The united Jewish monarchy hasn't existed for 2,900 years, and no Davidic messiah appeared and subsequently vanquished Israel's foreign occupiers. Secondly, a general principle has to be remembered when considering the accuracy of a prophecy: If you wait long enough, all reasonable predictions will eventually come true. The supposed 2,700 years that separated the making of this "prophecy" and its lackluster fulfillment should hardly come as a surprise. As an example, I bet you I can make a successful prophecy: One day, the state of California will lie in ruin subsequent to an earthquake. Sadly enough, I can guarantee you that it will one day happen. Does that make me a prophet?

Predicted ca 732 BC: Isaiah predicts the Medo-Persian empire will conquer Babylon [Isaiah 13:17-18] and Babylon would become a wasteland.–Fulfilled in 538 BC when the Medes took over Babylon and 275 BC when the Seleucids forced all of the inhabitants to leave.

Firstly, while some modern scholars do place the authorship of proto-Isaiah (i.e., chapters 1-39) some time during the 8th century BCE, many others place it much later (i.e., late seventh century). In either case, however, it would still appear that the author was making a prediction about an event that still occurred nearly a hundred years later. The problem with that simplistic assumption, though, is that it conveniently overlooks the effect of later editors who added to the text in light of later historical events. Regardless of which school of thought you side with regarding the date of authorship of the first 39 chapters of the text, scholars from both sides admit that the text has been heavily altered subsequent to later events, including the Babylonian exile and the subsequent defeat of the Babylonians at the hands of the Medo-Persian alliance. As a Bible-believer, you may want to hold to the belief that Isaiah simply made a real prophecy, but in the absence of any evidence that people can supernaturally predict future events, we're obliged to consider the simpler explanation that this is just another example of postdiction -- prophecy after the fact.

That said, there are also still some serious problems with this "prophecy" which betray its inauthenticity. Firstly, despite the fact that, as alluded to above, it's traditionally supposed that Isaiah prophesied in the mid-to-late eighth century BCE, there did not exist a unified Median state until the seventh century BCE, which would necessitate that Isaiah actually made two successful prophecies, not just one (i.e., the creation of a Median state and its subsequent victory over the Babylonians, which makes the whole thing twice as difficult to believe). It's also useful to point out that, once again, the prophecy is not accurately fulfilled, since part and parcel of it was that Babylon would never again be inhabited (and I notice you conveniently chose to leave off these additional verses):

¹⁹And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the splendor and pride of the Chalde'ans, will be like Sodom and Gomor'rah when God overthrew them. ²⁰It will never be inhabited or dwelt in for all generations; no Arab will pitch his tent there, no shepherds will make their flocks lie down there. ²¹But wild beasts will lie down there, and its houses will be full of howling creatures; there ostriches will dwell, and there satyrs will dance. ²²Hyenas will cry in its towers, and jackals in the pleasant palaces; its time is close at hand and its days will not be prolonged. -- Isaiah 13:19-22 (RSV)

Babylon is located in modern-day Iraq, a region that has been inhabited continually for as long as we can tell. It has not become a uninhabited. (I also don't recall any satyrs ever living in Babylon.) Ergo, the prophecy is clearly not fulfilled.

Predicted ca. 732 BC: Isaiah says Egypt and Ethiopia would be conquered by Assyria (Isaiah 20:3-5).–Fulfilled ca. 673-670 BC when Assyria conquers the northeast African nations.

As with the previous response, the most reasonable explanation for the inclusion of this relatively short chapter of Isaiah (it's only six verses long) was to add to the text a brief mention of Sargon II's military campaigns against the Philistine city of Ashdod and the nations of Ethiopa and Egypt in the late 8th century BCE, which a later editor during the exilic or post-exilic priod (i.e., the 6th century BCE) would have been fully informed about. As such, it's not reasonable to think that Isaiah actually made successful prophecies about these specific events prior to them happening, but rather that a later editor -- acting essentially as a historian and theologian -- added them to the text and gave the whole account a theological twist to emphasize the supposed divine nature of the occurrences (i.e., "This was all a part of god's holy plan"). That said, according to Jewish tradition, Isaiah was active through the reign of Hezekiah (715-686 BCE), which would at least make it possible that an author writing even contemporaneously with Isaiah's activity would have been able to witness the military campaign against Ethiopia and Egypt by the Assyrians first-hand. Once again, we needn't invoke "prophecy" as an explanation for these stories; we merely need to recognize that the author was recording events that he knew had already occurred.

Predicted ca. 701 BC: Isaiah claims Israel will be taken captive by the Babylonian empire (Isaiah 39).–Fulfilled ca. 597 & 586 BC: Babylon takes captives and sacks Jerusalem the first time then totally destroys Jerusalem about 10 years later.

Ditto. More postdiction. Most of Proto-Isaiah is written after the fact, so once again, this is not a prophecy.

Predicted ca. 589 BC: Ezekiel tells about the fall of the great city Tyre, claiming that the Lord "will cause many nations to come up against thee," (Ezekiel 26, 27).–Fulfilled in 586-573 BC: Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon lays siege against the city. Fulfilled in 370s BC: a king of Cyprus conquers the city. Fulfilled in 332 BC: Alexander the Great conquers the city. Fulfilled in 315-316 BC: Antigonus, who served under Alexander, attacks and conquers the city. Fulfilled in 1124: The city falls to the Crusaders. Fulfilled in 1291: The city falls to the Muslim armies of the Mameluks.

Sorry to sound like a broken record, but this is more postdiction. Although Ezekiel is traditionally thought to have been active in the early 6th century BCE, the Book of Ezekiel is the product of a later generation (see Joseph Blenkinsopp's book A History of Prophecy in Israel, or any scholarly work on the Nevi'im, for more information). This is exactly what I was trying to explain in my introduction to this post, which is that these "prophecies" are not actual prophecies in the tradition sense. Jewish prophecy is about theologizing past events to give them the appearance of having been caused by god in reaction to either his pleasure or displeasure with the various peoples of the ancient world, particularly the Jews. It's a way of explaining, in religious terms, why things have happened in the hope that it will convince the Jewish people that they need to stay on the straight and narrow path if they wish to be in god's favor. "Prophecies" are also often used to assuage Jewish concerns over disastrous events (e.g., the Babylonian exile, the persecutions under Antiochus Epiphanes, etc.), in that if you convince people that the event was prophesied and simply had to happen, it has the effect of making them feel more optimistic about the future despite whatever tragic conditions they may currently find themselves living through. (Jesus' supposed prophecies in the gospels about the destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 CE are a perfect example of this, as the gospels were written shortly after the temple was destroyed and in direct response to the need of the Jewish people to have their minds put at ease over this critical defeat.)

Predicted ca. 543 BC: Daniel tells of a great Grecian king who would conquer the Persian empire but would have his kingdom divided four ways after his death (Daniel 8).–Fulfilled in 330 BC when Alexander the Great defeats Persia and 281 BC after the Greek generals who succeed Alexander reach an agreement after years of war to split the kingdom four ways.

Again, postdiction. But in the case of the Book of Daniel, the situation is even more historically egregious, since scholars know for a fact that the book was written during the Maccabean Revolt (circa 165 BCE) in direct response to the persecution of the Jews under the Seleucid ruler Antiochus Epiphanes, whom I mentioned above. The reasons why we know this are too numerous to list, but it suffices to say that the case on the authorship of Daniel is shut -- it was written long after the events it describes. I would point you to any scholarly work on Daniel for more information (even the Wikipedia article on the Book of Daniel is sufficient to explain the problems with its authorship).

Predicted ca. 536 BC: Daniel prophesies that the Greek empire would not go to Alexander the Great's heirs (Daniel 11).–Fulfilled ca. 323-281 BC after Alexander's death when his generals fight over the kingdom while shutting out (and killing) his heirs.

See above.

Predicted ca. 430 BC: Malachi prophesies that Yahweh's name would be honored by the Gentiles (pagans) (Malachi 1:11).–Fulfilled 1st century AD to the present: Pagans worldwide have forsaken their paganism and have confessed that Jesus is Lord to the glory of God the Father.

It had, since the post-exilic period, been a messianic aim of Judaism that the Gentiles would eventually convert to Judaism (just like Christians today hope everyone will eventually become Christian, and Muslims hope everyone will eventually become Islamic). As such, we should not be surprised to see any religious author betraying his hope for such massive conversions. Regardless, the text of Malachi 1:11 doesn't make any specific claim about gentile conversions to Judaism:

For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the LORD of hosts. -- Malachi 1:11 (RSV)

You'll notice that there's nothing in the above passage that demonstrably suggests that anyone has forsaken his or her non-Yahweh worship of other gods. It's merely a boast placed in the mouth of a jealous god as to his greatness. The point of the Book of Malachi was to lament that the Jews had become so lax in their devotion to Yahweh (the first chapter makes this unambiguously clear). As such, it was the author's intention to create a hypothetical literary dialog between Yahweh and the Jews in which Yahweh lays out his argument for why the Jews should revere him. In reality, this is simply the author venting his own frustrations with his Jewish countrymen and what he sees as a relaxing of priestly duties and the slipshod devotion that the Jewish people exercised with regard to Yahweh. As such, Malachi 1:11 doesn't even profess to be a prophecy, since it's not making any testable claim about future events (i.e., it doesn't say "The gentiles will begin revering me at some unspecified point in the future"). As I stated before, it's merely a superficial boast placed into the mouth of god in an attempt to demonstrate god's greatness. As well, it's also useful to point out that of the roughly 6.5 billion people on the planet, only about 30% of them are Jewish or Christian, so it's pretty clear that the gentiles (i.e., non-Jews) didn't come to revere Yahweh in the way you suppose the passage "prophesies" that they would.

Predicted ca. 30 AD: Jesus tells his disciples that they will be persecuted and hated by the majority of the people on the earth because they follow him (Matthew 24:9).–Fulfilled 1st century AD to the present: Ever since the gospel of Jesus Christ has been preached, millions of true Christians worldwide have been mistreated or killed for the faith.

Firstly, since the gospels were all written after 70 CE, at a time when the proto-Christian church (i.e., the Pauline, Hellenistic branch of Christianity) was coming into conflict with both the Jewish establishment and the Roman occupation in Palestine, this isn't so much a prophecy as it was a reflection of the actual socio-political condition at the time. You have to understand that most of the Christian authors (and presumably Christians, in general) at that time believed that Jesus' return to earth was imminent -- that it was going to happen in their own lifetime (and just read the earliest gospels and Pauline epistles for proof of that) -- and so whatever claims they made about Christian persecutions were limited to that period alone. The notion that the world was going to persist for another 1,900 years was a foreign concept to first century Christians. Consequently, there's no intended "prophecy" to be found in any such passage New Testament passage concerning Christian persecutions, but merely a reflection of the sad state of affairs that both Jews and Christians found themselves living in.

Secondly, the myth of widespread Christian persecutions and martyrdoms in the ancient world is just that -- largely a myth. While there are to be found in the works of Tacitus and Suetonius some inferences to fairly limited events in which the Romans took action against Christian uprisings (e.g., when Claudius supposedly expelled Jewish Christians from Rome around 50 CE), the stories of continuous persecutions under Roman emperors is seriously overstated. As well, the accounts of martyrdoms for various leading Christian figures (e.g., Stephen, Paul, James, etc.) are not historically verifiable, and often don't stand up to closer scrutiny. While it's certainly possible that some Christians were executed by the Roman authorities for anti-state activities, we can't say to what degree this is true since the claims made by the early church historians are not backed up by any other piece of external evidence. It's just as likely that these martyrdoms were invented by Christian authors for the purpose of glorifying the deaths of Christian evangelists in order to stir up the emotions of later Christian generations (after all, the theological "Christianity is true" proposition is largely predicated on the argument that martyrdom, by itself, proves the truth of Christian faith, which betrays an ulterior motive for spreading martyrdom legends).

Lastly, I can't abide Christians who actually think that they are especially subject to persecution, much less in the modern era, since it is historically demonstrable that Christianity has held sway over all areas of politics in the Western world for the last 1600 years. Christians know virtually nothing of the role of the persecuted, but have clearly amassed a great deal of experience playing the role of the persecutors.

In the end, I would urge you to purchase an introductory text book on the study of Biblical history and criticism. It would do wonders to make the scales fall from your eyes as to the historical and theological meaning of the Biblical texts.