Mageth

Wow. You go to sleep and miss everything.

Don't worry, you seem to miss quite a bit when awake as well.

lpetrich - no the Gospel records are not fiction - Explain to me how prophets 500-1000 years before Jesus was even born states exactly how, where and under what conditions Jesus would be born, die and be ressurected?

In the first place, the prophets most certainly did not state "exactly how, where and under what conditions Jesus would be born, die and be ressurected", even if the gospel accounts of Jesus' life are accurate accounts.

No the Apostles can't have made it up to make Jesus seem to fulfill all the prophecies since he fulfilled many of them BEFORE he even met the apostles - sorry flawed logic on your part.

Speaking of flawed logic. The Gospels were written DECADES AFTER the events portrayed therein. It is patently obvious that the writers (and no one knows for certain who they were, BTW) could have made up embellishments for the stories. To think otherwise is worse than flawed logic; it's blind ignorance. They could do it just like some writers made up embellishments to, for example, George Washington's life story (e.g. the cherry tree episode), even though the events purportedly occurred before the writers met Washington (if they ever met him at all).

For the apostles to have made up all the prophecies ( to which they didn't even prophecise - most prophecies were made hundreds and hundreds of years before the Apostles were even born), they would have had to known Jesus from Birth.

This doesn't even make sense. To make up something about Jesus, they would have had to know him from birth? Do you read what you write? Further, many of the OT "prophecies" that Jesus purportedly fulfilled weren't, and aren't considered prophecies, Messianic or otherwise, by Jewish scholars.

A more sensible, yet itself flawed, argument would be to claim that to accurately portray the events in young Jesus' life (e.g. the virgin birth), the writers would have had to know him from birth.

Which still doesn't explain how Jesus fulfilled numerous prophecies at his birth.

If the Gospel accounts of his birth were fabricated or embellished, as they could have been and appear to have been, it would definitely explain how Jesus' birth was able to fulfill the alleged prophecies.

How do you explain King David giving a detailed description of how Jesus would be executed, before Crucifixition was even invented?

Well, the writer of the Psalm in question didn't give a "detailed description" of how Jesus would be executed; he never mentions crucifixion, or Jesus, at all. Further, once again, the crucifixion accounts were likely embellished with certain details to make the accounts "fit" the alleged prophecies.

Its impossible to make up all of those prophecies to make Jesus seem like he fulfilled them - The apostles didn't write the prophecies, only recorded them taking place ( after they met Jesus).

Actually, one or more unknown authors, more than likely not eyewitnesses to any of the events they portray, recorded the accounts decades after the fact. It is quite possible for them to have embellished the accounts with a little extra juice to back their preferred position - that Jesus was the messiah. Just look at all these cool prophecies he fulfilled! (And isn't it nice that there are no recordings, or even eyewitnesses, that can contradict what we've written?)

As I think someone else noted, it's interesting that the majority of Jews, during Jesus' life, did not recognize Jesus as fulfilling any of the supposed prophecies, or fitting the OT messianic references.

Gooch's Dad, read above - I understand the complete lame argument you are writing, but they are true accounts. While were at it ill play this game too. Do you understand - the accounts of Ceasar, Cleopatra, Columbus, Napolean etc. were all made up to seem like they actually made a difference on the world! They were only stories written by followers.

With each line you type, your arguments descend further into absurdity. Ever seen Napoleon's Tomb? Coins with Caesar's face on them? Columbus' personal writings?

To those saying you've shown scripture that is false and the promises are lies - think again - you just have no clue how to read scripture.

In other words, you're too smart to take the Bible as literal truth.

Iv'e already refuted the points before showing what it actually means - lets take one example of the claims listed.

I have yet to see you significantly refute anything.

God says that if Adam eats from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, then the day that he does so, he will die. But later Adam eats the forbidden fruit (3:6) and yet lives for another 930 years (5:5). 2:17

That has aboslutely nothing to do with God saying Adam will die the second he eats the tree - all your doing is looking at the line and claiming its inaccurate - yet you have the presupposition that most scripture is false - therefore you can't look at it without automatically assuming methods of speaking and explaining things were different whent the Bible was written.

Ah, there it is again. Instead, you should presuppose that most if not all scripture is true! Then it will all make sense to you.

God is saying when he eats the tree - he will no longer live for eternity ( as in be immortal)

I hate to tell you this (actually, I don't), but there is no Biblical basis on which to base the assertion that A&E would have lived forever if only they had not eaten the apple. In fact, there is a Biblical reference which seems to refute this assertion. Note that a reason God gives for casting A&E out of heaven is to prevent them from eating of the Tree of Eternal Life, thus gaining immortality and becoming "like us."

- He is saying when you eat from the tree, you bring in the first sin and your body will now age and die.

Most Biblical apologists I've heard instead point to the "die" passage as referring to spiritual death. IMO, that's easier to defend, and better matches the rest of scripture, than your rather feeble "body will age and die" bit.

But Adam had alot of procreation to do...

Lucky bastard. Who said nothing good came of eating the fruit?

...to populate the earth and people lived a long time in the beginning of the Bible.

Allegedly. Our bodies are quite simply not constructed with the capability of living to the fantastical ages reported in Genesis, nor or bearing children at the advanced ages reported. Another fine myth the bible has gotten us into.

So no its not inaccurate - every scriptural passage you claim to be wrong can easily be explained by some one who can understand scripture.

Sure, one can always contrive, using a hammer, axle grease, and a bit of duct tape, an explanation for just about anything. But the Bible is full, from Genesis to Revelations, of myriad accounts that require constant, and often contorted, explaining to try to get around the logical, physical, and historical problems and contradictions (internal and external) they present. It seems absurd that a god capable of doing the things he allegedly did throughout the bible would have such a hard time generating an accurate, consistent and non-contradictory account of those events. It's the weight of all of these problems, not any one particular problem, that causes many to seriously question the Biblical accounts.

And the claim that the sun standing still is scientifically impossible? Um, assuming it is true - its not exactly difficult for God to stop time - he is omnipotent - thats a really weak claim.

What's weak is the "goddidit" argument.

Umm, technically, in relation to the earth, the sun is standing still. To accomplish the trick as reported in the bible, the earth would have had to stop rotating for a time. This causes a couple of problems: 1) if God is the author of the bible, why didn't he have the event recorded accurately as regards to the true nature of the Solar System (i.e. "the earth stopped revolving")? 2) The earth rotates at @1000 mph at the equator. Needless to say, a sudden stop of this motion would have caused serious problems, such as everything loose on the surface (including people) continuing to move at 1000 mph, at least until they smashed against a nearby tree (if the tree didn't snap off at the base from the sudden deceleration) to massive earthquakes, sloshing of the oceans, and tidal waves. Of course you can always claim "goddidit", but that argument carries no weight around here; we lack belief in god, after all, so goddidit is not exactly an argument we're ready to accept.

And anyone, science is meaningless as is math - you completely deny scientific studies on probability saying they aren't right. Well im sure you guys hav emuch better understanding than those scientists /nod how could i be so foolish to think you don't know everything....

Well, no one here claims to know everything. But many of us can spot flawed arguments a mile off. After all, you have yet to post anything we haven't seen before (outside of the rather humorous account of the Babylonian tablet-maker busily hammering away as the waters rose about him - thanks for the laugh).

What scientists are you referring to here? The ones that grossly misrepresent Hawking's position, and use questionable probability arguments which the majority of scientists don't take seriously, as they know there are counter-arguments that easily refute them? Yes, I definitely think I have a better understanding of the subject than those "scientists", if that's the one you have in mind.

But think i'm done with this thread now - since most of you have said even if God stood before you and said Hi - you would deny it or not believe in him - nothing anyone says will ever get through your thick heads.

I don't recall anyone on this thread saying that. I certainly haven't. I'd be foolish to not believe in a god that actually presented itself to me. I'm definitely not holding my breath, though; 45 years of waiting for any significant evidence of a god's existence were quite enough, thank you. And yet, if new evidence of god's existence ever does present itself, trust me, I'll be one of the first to gladly consider it.

And BTW, apparently nothing anyone's replied to you on this thread has gotten through your head, either. It's time for you to wake up and smell the reason.

But again, when you find out Christians are right and your stupid free-thinking individualism - lets express ourself and deny anything else attitudes are shoved in your face by God himself - try not to kick yourself too hard - there will be enough pain in Hell for you. God has the final say not you - deny Him all you want - you will be judged.

Gloating a bit, aren't you? What do you suppose your god would think of the attitude you've expressed in this paragraph, and the one preceding? From my knowledge of the Bible, esp. the New Testament, you've just expressed a definite lack of understanding of the teachings of Jesus Christ, or at least a lack of proper practice of those teachings. Remember, if what you believe is true, you are also not exempt from judgment.

Further, I don't "deny god." I lack belief in god(s) because of the total lack of evidence therefor.

And think of your own fate if you someday find out that the Moselms are right...

Fr.Andrew

(diana): "You have single-handedly provided the finest example of The Snowstorm Defense I have ever witnessed."
(Fr Andrew): So that's what it's called!

Mageth

I've always liked this sort-of reference to the "snowstorm defense":

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit."

diana

Well, that's what I call it.

I never let the lack of official terms stop me. I suppose we could also call it Argument From Mudslide.

Mageth:I considered it, but didn't want to give the mistaken impression that we're baffled. It's more like when you walk into a stable that hasn't been shoveled out for a month, your initial reaction is to stand there with the shovel, frozen, unsure where to begin. Your lack of movement has nothing to do with a lack of horseshit. And if there's enough horseshit, you consider the rationality of just setting fire to the place instead.

d

Jobar

Bada-bump bump bump
Another one bites the dust!

Infidelettante

The gods do find us Kass, you are right about that. I think of polytheism as more of a social stance than a theological one. Others have the right to their gods just as I have the right to mine. If any of us make claims for those gods [such as"they exist"] I would expect those here to rip new ones for us.

JT

Infidelettante

I had no idea...this is wonderful...I mean I just never...is this true?They found the originals. Both OT and NT or just the NT? Who cares where can I get it? B&N? Amazon? I hope they aren't too, too much I have to pay the rent but still...the originals...oh my
oh my

JT

Magus55

Well, sorry for the anger and frustration. While im a new apologist, i tried my best at it and with being the only Christian making any points here as well as no one here having any desire to even consider the possibility of religion - you're right it probably is a futile and worthless attempt.

And while doing research for it, it only made my faith stronger so while it didn't even shake you guys - it just made me believe that much more.

I can point out errors in alot of scripture and show studies on the accuracy of the Bible compared to other writings and the mathematical probabilities of such claims but i guess it does take an openess and willingness to want to find a reason to believe in God over atheism.

None the less thanks for the discussion, ill try to do some more research and perhaps start another thread on something more specific as oppose to throwing everything in at once - which is too hard to do alone One point at a time probably a better method.

To Mageth: The scripture mentioned on Adam - i meant spiritual death but didn't think mentioning that would be any more meaningful than what I said - that was my intented point though.

And while i'll be judged too - Jesus paid for my sins so ill be judged not guilty when i stand before Him.

And if muslims turn out to be right? As iv'e said i'd rather be in Hell based on their attitudes towards women today, those who oppose Islam and the whore-house they call Paradise. And Islam has even more contradictions than Christianity supposedly does and alot of those iv'e yet to see how to explain rationally.

Anyway, thanks for discussion - ill do some research and approach on a simpler scale next time.

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by Magus55
And if muslims turn out to be right? As iv'e said i'd rather be in Hell based on their attitudes towards women today

Good. Now you understand exactly how I felt when I said (on that thread in GRD) that I'd rather spend eternity in hell than spend it in the presence of self-righteous, intolerant hypocrites.

lpetrich

Magus55:
lpetrich - no the Gospel records are not fiction - Explain to me how prophets 500-1000 years before Jesus was even born states exactly how, where and under what conditions Jesus would be born, die and be ressurected?

Magus55, your comment begs the question. The Gospel writers made him seem to fulfill OT prophecy possibly because they thought that that's what a Messiah is supposed to do -- even if it requires an imaginative stretch in some cases.

No the Apostles can't have made it up to make Jesus seem to fulfill all the prophecies since he fulfilled many of them BEFORE he even met the apostles - sorry flawed logic on your part.

More question-begging.

Gooch's Dad, read above - I understand the complete lame argument you are writing, but they are true accounts. While were at it ill play this game too. Do you understand - the accounts of Ceasar, Cleopatra, Columbus, Napolean etc. were all made up to seem like they actually made a difference on the world! They were only stories written by followers.

However, these accounts are usually not hagiographies intended for religious instruction. Which is why they are more reliable -- consider Richard Carrier on Julius Caesar vs. Jesus Christ. Of the two JC's, Caesar has MUCH higher-quality documentation -- lots of non-hagiographical discussions, lots of inscriptions and coins mentioning him, and even some books purportedly written by him.

And did Jesus Christ ever write any books?