Freethought & Rationalism Archive

gregor2 · 01-17-2005, 06:08 PM

Agator is posting here and on the biblical literalist/anti-evolution forum, relying on Kent Hovind and Duane Gish. Reading his posts, I can tell he's a real Renaissance man - by that I mean his opinions are taken from 1500 CE

Diogenes the Cynic · 01-17-2005, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agator

I am in conflict with modern scholars????? Pa lease. How many hundreds of scholars do you want me to provide links to that agree with my timeline. Do a google search for heavens sake.
Now then, I would like to know what you base your timeline by. Do you also subscribe that the book was written in 168 BC? :rolling:

Daniel was absolutely written in 164 BCE (give or take a year). We can tell because the text contains a number of linguistic and historical anachronisms that make it impossible to have been written before the 2nd century BCE. It also shows a poor understanding of Babylonian history (its own fictional setting)and a detailed knowledge of Antiochus and the Seleucid Empire (the historical context in which it was actually written). Lastly, it fails miserably in its only attempts at genuine predictive prophecy..

I assure you this is the consensus of mainstream scholarship.

WinAce · 01-17-2005, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agator

"almah" is the word Isaiah used(H-5959). It means young woman or virgin. Look it up.

I think we're putting the cart before the horse a tad, are we not? I mean, shouldn't we demonstrate a virgin birth occured before using this interpretation to argue a prophecy fulfillment?

Then again, if you could do that, you wouldn't even need a prophecy apologetic.

Quote:

Prophecy for Dummies!

1e. False Fulfillment: Don't let the facts stop you. This refers, of course, to imagining a fulfilled prophecy where there is, in actuality, only a prediction. Do you need to be born in a specific place to fulfill a prophecy? Certainly, you could reinterpret the original to mean something other than a literal birthplace... but why, when a simpler solution presents itself? Just have your followers claim you were born there![7]

The Rev. Sun Myung Moon, founder of the Unification Church. Claims he's endorsed by the ghosts of long-dead religious leaders and heads of state. (More info)

A variation of this is the unfalsifiable prophecy. While you may still be holding out hope that people are reasonable creatures, reality is not as optimistic. Many will see nothing wrong, or circular, with your predicting a conveniently unverifiable war in Heaven, and later saying it happened just as expected!

You can predict any amount of specific things as long as they can't be falsified. Use this to annoy the skeptics by confidently predicting they'll face unpleasant consequences in the afterlife. When any of them die, pretend their spirits call out to you for forgiveness, but too little, too late, and that there's nothing you can do for them anymore. This will have the added benefit of scaring recalcitrant followers back into submission.

And if you don't believe me about unverifiable fulfillment being a useful apologetic, ask those Christians who think well of the Isaiah 7:14 "virgin birth prophecy." You may note that a source arguing for Jesus' divinity, also claiming, without external corroboration, that he fulfilled an unverifiable prophecy, is a circular argument. But most won't notice. Indeed, some consider this a good enough apologetic to bring up in debates with atheists. Do you seriously think your followers will be any less credulous?

Diogenes the Cynic · 01-17-2005, 08:13 PM

Alamah does not mean "young woman or virgin," by the way. It just means "young woman." Some almahs are virgins, of course- just like some young women are virgins- but it doesn't mean virgin.

The context of Isaiah 7:14 makes it clear that it had no Messianic intent anyway. "Emmanuel" was not the Messiah in that quote, just a rugrat who served as a marker of time for the story and had no personal significance at all.

Plus Jesus wasn't born of a virgin.

Mathetes · 01-17-2005, 08:39 PM

I don't know what is more astonishing: the ignorance of some fanatics or their unashamed arrogance.

Is agator talking about the Report of Pilate to Emperor Claudius? I don't think anybody argues for its authenticity these days. (Wasn't Tiberius the emperor in 33 AD, anyway?)

Quote:

I already addressed them, but I suppose the evidence in a musuem isn't good enough for you. It never is. Good luck

If you take a stroll around the British Museum, you will find a room with the metopes of the Doric Frieze of the Parthenon. I guess this is "evidence" that Centaurs exist.

Jack the Bodiless · 01-18-2005, 02:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agator

We even know the exact date of which Babylon fell-October 13, 539 B.C. Furthermore, Nabonidus, who ruled the empire of Babylon from 555-538 B.C., mentions his firstborn son Belshazzar on an inscription found in the city of Ur in 1853.
Even if you were right( which you are certainly not), it would STILL be prophetic.

Yes, I'm right: Daniel was written in the 2nd century BC.

Now please explain how "if I am right", a description of events in the 6th century BC, found in a book written 4 centuries later, would STILL be prophetic.

Maybe you'd like to think about that some more?

You've been given links, but here's a brief summary:

We know that Daniel was written in the 2nd century (but SET centuries earlier) for several reasons. He uses anachronistic phrases. He makes historical mistakes when describing the time of "Daniel" himself, but becomes progressively more accurate until the time of Antiochus II (when the book was actually written), and then "loses it" completely when he tries to actually predict the future (he prophesied a long reign for Antiochus). And the Book of Daniel is never mentioned in lists of prophetic books (or, indeed, anywhere else) prior to the 2nd century BC.

"Almah", as already mentioned, means "young woman". It was mistranslated into Greek as "parthenos" (virgin) in the Septuagint, and this word has been used in most Christian Bibles ever since because they find it ideologically convenient. But this doesn't change the obvious fact that the "prophecy" wasn't intended to be Messianic. Matthew is an example of "midrash": giving a myth more credibility by linking it to existing scripture. An approximate modern equivalent would be fantasy writers setting their stories in Arthurian Britain: or claims that recent events fulfil out-of-context "Biblical prophecies".

So, maybe you could try a little harder to get correct data before spouting off?

River · 01-18-2005, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agator

And you say" There is no confirmation that Jesus was crucified in 33 AD."
I want to know if there is an intelligent poster in this forum. <insult deleted>

Jesus the Christ (pbuh) was a human being, and was NOT crucified. He did NOT die for the Sins of hu-manity. The Cross is meaningless. There is absolutely NO reason to believe that he is Divine.

For something that is ( the Crucifiction) held as the pinnacle and foundation of Christianity.....its Evidence is rather flimsy and nebulous. Heck , even the Bible screwed up the number of witness which vary from the accounts presented by Mark , Matthew and Luke. And the Gnostics see the crucifiction as more or less a hoax.

Jack the Bodiless · 01-19-2005, 04:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agator

The scriptures are about 20% prophesy. That's about the size of the New Covenant(Testament). Yes, some are yet to be fulfilled. Some prophesies represent near and far fulfillment. So scritinize the few left but ignore the hundreds that have been fulfilled.The only ones left will be fulfilled. Bet on it.

Well, there aren't "hundreds that have been fulfilled", but you're also ignoring the FAILED prophecies. This includes prophecies that are NOT "yet to be fulfilled", because their time has passed: they can never be fulfilled anymore.

Some snippets from the SAB's False Prophecies, Broken Promises, and Misquotes in the Bible page:

Quote:

"In the fourth generation they [Abraham's descendants] shall come hither again." But, if we count Abraham, then their return occurred after seven generations: Abraham, Issac (Gen.21:1-3), Jacob (Gen.25:19-26), Levi (Gen.35:22-23), Kohath (Ex.6:16), Amramn (Ex.6:18), and Moses (Ex.6:20). 15:16

The tribe of Judah will reign "until Shiloh," but Israel's first king (Saul) was from the tribe of Benjamin (Acts 13:21), and most of the time after this prophecy there was no king at all. 49:10 God promises to bring Jacob safely back from Egypt, but Jacob dies in Egypt (Gen.47:28-29) 46:3

God says that the Israelites will destroy all of the peoples they encounter. But according to Joshua ( 15:63, 16:10, 17:12-13) and Judges (1:21, 27-36, 3:1-5) there were some people they just couldn't kill. 7:24

This verse says that Ai was never again occupied after it was destroyed by Joshua. But Nehemiah (7:32) lists it among the cities of Israel at the time of the Babylonian captivity. 8:28

"I have sworn unto David my servant, Thy seed will I establish for ever, and build up thy throne to all generations." But the Davidic line of Kings ended with Zedekiah; there were none during the Babylonian captivity, and there are none today. 89:3-4, 34-37

This verse predicts that there shall be five cities in Egypt that speak the Canaanite language. But that language was never spoken in Egypt, and it is extinct now. 19:18

Ezekiel prophesies that Tyrus will be completely destroyed by Nebuchadrezzar and will never be built again. But it wasn't destroyed, as evidenced by the visits to Tyre by Jesus and Paul (Mt.15:21, Mk.7:24, 31, Acts 21:3). 26:14,21

Ezekiel makes another false prophecy: that Egypt would be uninhabited by humans or animals for forty years after being destroyed by Nebuchadrezzar. But there was never a time when Egypt was uninhabited. Humans and animals have lived there continuously since Ezekiel's prophecy. 29:10-13

Jesus predicts the end of the world within the lifetime of his listeners. 23:36

Jesus says the gospel will be preached to all nations "and then shall the end come. Well according to Paul the gospel has been preached to everyone (Rom.10:18) yet the end hasn't come. 24:14

Paul expects Jesus to return within the lifetime of his followers. 3:13

Paul thought he would live to see the rapture. 4:15, 17

John believes "the time is at hand," and that the things that he writes about in Revelation will "shortly come to pass." 1:1, 3

That was just a sample, there are plenty more.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-17-2005, 06:08 PM	#21
gregor2 Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: texas Posts: 86	Agator is posting here and on the biblical literalist/anti-evolution forum, relying on Kent Hovind and Duane Gish. Reading his posts, I can tell he's a real Renaissance man - by that I mean his opinions are taken from 1500 CE

01-17-2005, 08:13 PM	#24
Diogenes the Cynic Moderator - Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 4,639	Alamah does not mean "young woman or virgin," by the way. It just means "young woman." Some almahs are virgins, of course- just like some young women are virgins- but it doesn't mean virgin. The context of Isaiah 7:14 makes it clear that it had no Messianic intent anyway. "Emmanuel" was not the Messiah in that quote, just a rugrat who served as a marker of time for the story and had no personal significance at all. Plus Jesus wasn't born of a virgin.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.