azuresky

I believe in Christ for many, many reasons. To keep things short and simple, however, I'll only focus on one or two ideas for now. To begin with, I'd like to point out that most scholars believe that a man named Jesus did walk the earth in the early first century, taught disciples, delivered sermons to the Judean populace, and was crucified under the Roman procurator Pontius Pilate. This assertion is easily proven by simply referring to various encyclopedia's, college textbooks, or scholarly magazines and journals. For example, Encyclopedia Britannica, World Book, and Encarta all present Jesus as a fact of history and not a simple persistent myth. Encarta Encyclopedia insists: "Today, scholars generally agree that Jesus was a historical figure whose existence is authenticated both by Christian writers and by several Roman and Jewish historians." I've had discussions with several atheists on another site who appeared very surprised to learn that "scholars generally agree" Jesus lived and died in Palestine. I've noted that many of my secular college textbooks, from philosophy to art history, mention Jesus of Nazareth. Finally, most of the eminent (secular) scholars featured in magazines such as "Biblical Archaeology Review" or "Bible Review" accept the notion that this historical personage did, in fact, live to pass on his teachings to posterity.

One reason I believe that this man Jesus is actually the Son of God is because of a prediction in Daniel 9. The prophecy declares in v. 24 that: "Seventy sevens are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy. In "Understanding the Old Testament" (a secular text), as well as "Old Testament Survey, the Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament" (a Christian text presenting various dominant theories concerning the O.T.) the authors conclude that the "seventy sevens" of Daniel are equivalent to 490 years. This appears to be a very popular interpretation by both secular and Christian scholars alike. Therefore, this particular text in Daniel appears to be asserting that 490 years from a key event the Jewish people will be finished with transgression, will have wickedness atoned for, and will find themselves forgiven and free from sin. The O.T. consistently delivers a clear message that only the Hebrew God can forgive the sins of His nation.

So, what is the key event that triggers the 490 year countdown toward the expiation of "sin" and "transgression?" Daniel 9:25 declares "Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem..." Therefore, the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild initiates the countdown which culminates in the forgiveness of sin. This decree was issued in the seventh year of Artaxerxes I in 458 B.C. In the decree, Ezra is instructed to deliver religious reform to his homeland and begin reconstruction by making repairs to the Temple. In Ezra 9:9 we find that, "[God] has secured for us the favour of the kings of Persia: they have provided us with the means of renewal, so that we may repair the house of our God and rebuild its ruins...". In fact, if Ezra did not receive official permission from Artaxerxes to begin repairing the Temple he could face several punishments. A lenient punishment might consist of severe scourging, whereas a harsher penalty involved finding oneself skewered alive atop a towering vertical stake.

Now, if we do the calculations (let's not forget that there is no year "0"), we discover that 490 years elapses between 458 B.C. and 33 A.D., which many scholars pinpoint as the date of the crucifixion of Christ. Of course, in Christian theology, we believe that Christ died for the forgiveness of sins. Therefore, Daniel's prediction that sin would be forgiven 490 from the issuing of a decree to begin rebuilding Jerusalem appears to come true in the year 33 A.D. If one decides to argue that the man Jesus never existed, another can simply point out that the majority of biblical scholars would adamantly disagree with him. If one then accepts that a man named Jesus did in fact live, but was not the Son of God and therefore could not forgive sin, another could insist that it is quite a remarkable coincidence that Daniel could anticipate that sin would be forgiven in 33 A.D., the exact same year in which billions believe that the Son of God was crucified to crush sin. Either way, Daniel was quite an amazing forecaster!

1veedo

It would have ben 6 BC. I didn’t read it all but it seems like you’re one of those theists that use prophesies to prove God’s existence.All those prophecies aren't reasons to believe. They had access to the prophecies and would write accordingly to fulfill them. Also, you’re using the Bible too much, it has far too many absurdities and contradictions. Not very many people, if any at all, will agree with you.

– 1veedo

1veedo

Oh, btw, welcome to the forum. I hope you stay.

Javaman

If you're interested in prophecy, I suggest you have a read of Farrel Till's Prophescies: Imaginary and Unfulfilled in the Infidel's library.

Remeber, also, the reason the Jews don't hold Jesus out to be the messiah is that he failed to fulfill all the prophecies that he should have. There is also no OT backing for a "second coming" but you may find this page from Jews for Judaism interesting.

And, welcome.

Javaman

Also, there's a copy of Jim Lippard's essay The Fabulous Prophecies of the Messiah also in the library. About halfway through there is a discussion of your Daniel prophecy.

Asha'man

I’m sorry, proof by encyclopedia is awfully damn weak. You are effectively using the argument by popularity, which is horribly, horribly wrong. If a million people believe a silly thing, it’s still a silly thing.

First, I should point out what a historical Jesus is not: he is not Christ, he is not the Son of God, he is not the Messiah, he did not perform actual miracles, he did not rise from the dead. The historians that believe in a historical Jesus also believe that the gospels are mostly fiction, but that a historical Jesus is the point of origin for that fiction. The historical Jesus is simply a preacher who got in trouble and was killed, an ordinary man, nothing else.

The question you must then ask is why do all these scholars believe in a historical Jesus? It’s not because of evidence. We’ve discussed the evidence over and over again in BC&H, and the clear conclusion is that there isn’t any. Outside of the fictionalized accounts within the Gospels, there is simply no evidence whatsoever to support the existence of a historical Jesus.

So why do the scholars believe he existed? To them, it’s the best explanation available. They can’t imagine a means by which such mythology could have originated without a human starting point. Unfortunately, a strong alternative explanation has recently been presented. That explanation shows how the myth was crafted from scripture and other, non-Jewish, mythology. The idea of a heavenly redeemer slowly transformed itself into a human that walked the earth, not the other way around. If you want to understand the full explanation, try the source: Doherty’s website

azuresky

Hello Javaman and 1veedo,

Thanks for the nice welcome.

First, 1veedo, I'm not sure that I understand what you are attempting to say when you declare "it would have been 6 B.C." Could you clarify for me?

I would like to make an ever so slight distinction between trying to "prove" the existence of God through prophecy and simply using prophecy to show the statistical likelihood that He exists. I honestly can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is a God, however, I feel that there is abundant evidence to credibly make the assertion that He does live.

1veedo, you wrote, "All those prophecies aren't reasons to believe. They had access to the prophecies and would write accordingly to fulfill them. Also, you're using the Bible too much, it has far too many absurdities and contradictions. Not very many people, if any at all, will agree with you."

Prophecies, if correct, are sufficient reasons to believe--but this is simply my opinion. If I explained to you today exactly what would happen tomorrow, would you believe? Probably most people would.

True, the Jews did have access to O.T. prophecies and could concoct a story in which prophecies are fulfilled, but in point of fact we do have independent evidence aside from the Gospels and the letters of Paul to prove Christ was crucified under Pontius Pilate. Again, a few scholars may doubt the existence of Christ, but I believe I have already given sufficient evidence in my other post to demonstrate that the majority of specialists in biblical studies agree Jesus lived.

Javaman, thanks for directing me to the Infidel's library, but wouldn't it be more fun if you sum up the assertions found there in your own words? Also, could we just stick to the topic of this one prophecy for now? I only ask this because we will get sidetracked if we start to discuss other prophecies.

So, what are Javaman's and Iveedo's specific arguments against the possibility that the author of Daniel predicted Christ's death in 33 A.D.? In other words, please demonstrate how, in all probability, the author of Daniel simply screwed up. Thanks.

Asha'man

We do? Could you please provide such evidence, since it's news to me (and the rest of the board). Or are you talking about some of the rejected forgeries that are floating around? (Some Christians are willing to Lie for Jesus, and others don't seem to know when to be skeptical.)

Gawdawful

Even so-called psychics are right now and then but that's no reason to believe them.

Cite, please. Are there any records of that specific Jesus, your Christ, written at the time by independent sources? I want to know.


Warren the Okie

Javaman

Which is?
I'll try if I get a chance to read up some more. Biblical study is new to me.
Again, this is new to me, but... since the oldest of the gospels is thought to have been written about 70 years after the death of Christ, couldn't information about the exact year have been "adjusted" to coincide with OT writings? Recall that the authors of the gospels aren't so good with historical time:

Matthew 12
40 for, as Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights, so shall the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights.