Astreja

Argument from Baaa Humbug. This is what is known as a self-fulfilling prophesy. The biblical Jesus, allegedly quite knowledgeable in the scriptures, went out of his way to get on the bad side of the authorities and essentially martyred himself.

rlogan

I think we need a name for this sort of thing:

Suicide posting



The would-be antagonist blows himself up in the OP.

Perhaps a detatched arm or leg twitches after the initial blast, but the poster is clinically dead on arrival.

Half-Life

I'm sorry, I thought that since a posted the link in my first part of the post, I didn't have to post it again when copy and pasting from the site. I apologize.

Now, none of you failed to explain how 1,000 years earlier people wrote down Jesus would die by crucifixion. Even if you say that Jesus fulfilled this himself by killing himself, how would people STILL KNOW 1,000 years earlier to write about a crucifixion when this method of death did not exist yet?

Mountain Man

I did. It's a lie. They did not write it down. You are just twisting what is claimed they said to fit what you want to hear.

Apikorus

Job written in 3500 BCE, eh? Um...in what language, if you please?

Diogenes the Cynic

There is no prophecy in the Hebrew Bible that the Messiah or anyone else would be crucified. This actually wouldn't even be a self-fulfilling prophecy (although the authors of the Gospels had no compunctions about pulling OT verses out of context and cutting and pasting them together to fabricate their narratives). There simply WAS no such prophecy. The Hebrew Bible does not mention crucifixion at all, in any context, for any person.

Also, 3500 BCE is an absurdly early dating for Job. The Hebrew language didn't even exist in 3500 BCE. While the date for Job is unknown, the earliest scholarly theories would put it at 700 BCE while some would date it as late as 300 BCE. All of this is moot, though because your amazing piece of Biblical scientific knowledge- this:
is not only incredibly tendentious and specious but is based on a falsehood. It is NOT true that the ancient middle-eastern world though the earth rested on turtles or elephants. The creation myth in Genesis actually describes the typical ME cosmology of the earth as a flat disc with a dome over it and water underneath. In this ancient view, the earth was supported by pillars, and guess what, Job 9:6 claims the earth is ON PILLARS.

What was that about the Bible not getting it's science wrong?

rlogan

I think you misworded that. The initial blast still has you a bit dazed.

When creating the Jesus myth, the storytellers used Hebrew Bible passages to imbue him with "credentials".


Jesus is a suicider? Ahead of his time, I guess.


It never occurs to Christians that this is the very evidence in favor of the myth being written out of HB passages.

Jack the Bodiless

Yes, it's interesting how often this falsehood comes up.

The earliest more-or-less complete copy of the New Testament was written many centuries after Jesus: even the earliest fragment has been dated to the 2nd century IIRC. So, 30,000 is a slight overestimate. Here is the correct figure:

0

...Of course, eventually there were 30,000 copies in circulation: and, now, there are millions of copies in circulation. But the same is true of all the other books on your list.

noah

Book/Chapter/Verse?

noah

The Christian hope that Micah 5:2 is messianic in Christian termes is based on a lazy reading of Matt. 2.6. If Christinas were to actually look up the verses they would see that Matthew misquotes Micah 5:2 (or:1) Matthew deletes Ephratah from Micah in order to make it look like a leader will come from the town of Bethlehem. In fact, Bethlehem Ephratah is a clan, the clan of Bethlehem, who was the son of Caleb's second wife, Ephrathah.
Matt. 2.6: "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel."

Here's what Micah 5.2 actually says:
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

The other problem for Christinas is that JC never fulfills the second part of the verse -- Jesus was never a ruler ("moshel") in Israel.

Also Matthew doesn't seem to understand anything about the texts he is misquoting. How can Jesus be qualified to be the messiah through Davidic lineage, even through Joseph, if Joseph came through the cursed line of Jeconiah? Jer. 22:28-30 makes clear that Jeconiah is cursed:
Is this man Coniah a despised broken idol? is he a vessel wherein is no pleasure? wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into a land which they know not?
O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the LORD.
Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.