truth-OT, I do not see Biblical prophecy as very convincing to lend itself to the debate of the existence of God or the reliability of the Bible. Others might find it convincing place to start a discussion, but I don't find that it has much convincing power to an agnostic or atheist. NOT that I don't think that prophecies did, in fact, come true, but just that to the skeptic, they can too easily write them off as nothing more than something akin to horoscopes. Eg.: a bunch of general vague allusions, and then dismiss those that didn't coincidentally come true, and latch on to the ones that did. Ie.: Selective memory bias.
But consider this : Let's look at the accusation of "that's too general" or "that was just shoe-horned in to make it fit" or "that's no different than cold-reading". Ok, fair enough. So the only way for the prophet to escape that accusation, would be to make it more specific. So .... instead of vague things, that could-be-said to apply to a myriad of things, they should be SPECIFIC. So that there can be no mistaking that it's 'fulfilled prophecy', eh ?
So for example, I can spin a tale of how you might succeed in business, and marry a nice gal, blah blah. And .... lo & behold, it might all come true ! Does that mean I'm a prophet ? OF COURSE NOT. Since lots of people "succeed in business" and "get married". Doh ! But wait, if I told you her name and phone # and social security # 10 yrs. earlier, then PRESTO : No one could argue and call that "vague" eh ?
However, guess what would happen next, if this had been the level of detail that those old testament prophets had listed ? Sure as heck, someone in 30 AD, would merely "fulfill all those specifics" (get their phone # and social security # assigned) and proclaim : See ? I fulfilled it. In other words, anyone could have simply gone-through the steps of satisfying all-such-specifics, and then proudly proclaim that "a prophecy was fulfilled". When in reality all it was, is someone following a cook-book recipe of what-was-needed to fulfill a prophecy. Doh !
So there's sort of a "durned if you do" and "durned if you don't" element built into this . The accusations will be never-ending. So IMHO, the biblical prophecies were a sort of thing where it WASN'T apparent till AFTER the fulfillment (ie.: not down to phone #'s and addresses, lest someone simply walk-that-route-to-show-it). But yes, I realize this simply lends itself to "too vague".
Thus it's a durned if you do and durned if you don't scenario. So I never rely on fulfilled prophecy to argue for the existence of God.