Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spin · 01-23-2008, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mg01

It is surprising to see that no one has mentioned the fact that the Hebrew of Daniel is recognized to be from a latter stage of development than from the time it is supposed to have been written, at least by comparision to other Biblical texts. It also uses many words derived from Aramaic, not Hebrew, that appear nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible, incuding the word used for God, (strong 426 rather than 433).

Half the book is in Aramaic, starting from 2:4b, "O king..." to the end of ch.7. It's not that it is influenced by Aramaic: it's been translated into Aramaic.

spin

arnoldo · 01-23-2008, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

I do not find a God who must depend primarily or largely upon copies of copies of questionable ancient texts to reveal himself to people to be appealing.

No, what I meant was the only kind of God who I am interesting in is a God who cares enough about me

God cared enough about you to send his Son into the earth, provide for salvation, and establish his church ( yes, we are imperfect) to spread the gospel to all the world.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

to provide me with the kinds of evidence that I need to accept him.

Go look at the stars, God made the heaven and the earth, isn't that a sign? If not where did the universe come from?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Consider the following Scriptures:

John 2:23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did.

John 3:2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

John 6:2 And a great multitude followed him, because they saw his miracles which he did on them that were diseased.

John 10:37-38 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

In those cases, Jesus' words alone, meaning faith alone, was not enough to convince people to become Jesus' followers, so Jesus provide them with the tangible, firsthand evidence that they needed.

In the NIV, the book of Acts basically says that the disciples when about confirming the message of his grace by performing miracles. It is quite odd that with all of the miracles that Jesus had performed, and with his post-Resurrection appearances, and the presence of the Holy Spirit, that there was a need for even more confirmations? Obviously, you faith argument does not work. If anything, believers would need LESS confirmations than unbelievers would. "O ye of little faith" contradicts the many miracles that Jesus and the disciples supposedly performed. Jesus supposedly criticized Thomas for wanting tangible evidence that he had risen from the dead, but yet Jesus was perfectly content to perform miracles before some stubborn skeptics who were not convinced by his words alone.

Miracles hapen every single day, all of the time, primarily manifested through Christians. Just as miracles occurred in the book of Acts, through believers, to this very day believers are the manifestations of the body of christ on earth. However we are not to follow after signs and wonders, sign and wonders follow us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

I would never accept a God who played favorites, and refused to do everything that he could do to help ensure that as many people as possible go to heaven, and as few people as possible go to hell.

Believers are spreading the gospel into all the earth. Right now the gospel is being sent via internet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Consider the following post from another thread:

If so, the Partition of Palestine did not fulfill the requirement in Genesis 17:8 that says that God would give Abraham and his descendants ALL of the land of Canaan.

No, it hasn't been fulfilled, we are living in the age of the gentiles at the moment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnySkeptic

Today, Jews do not occupy nearly ALL of the land of Canaan. Following your same line of reasoning, if Jews occupied one square mile of Palestine, that would be a fulfillment of prophecy.

As far as I can tell the Jews have never occupied all of the land, thus it remains a prophecy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnySkeptic

If the God of the Bible does not exist, it is reasonable to conclude that the Partition of Palestine would have happened anyway. Whether or not a prophecy is true or not does not make any difference. All that makes a difference is whether or not people who have enough military power BELIEVE that it is true.

There is a prophecy that the third jewish temple will be built. When you see the event happen will you proclaim it a bona-fide self fulfilled prophecy?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

In the NASB, 2 Samuel 7:10 says "I will fix a place for my people Israel; I will plant them so that they may dwell in their place without further disturbance. Neither shall the wicked continue to afflict them as they did of old." The Partition of Palestine most certainly did not fulfill that prophecy, and it never will since the Jews are surrounded by hostile neighbors, not to mention terrorists who live in Israel, and some Muslim countries that are developing nuclear weapons. Since 2 Samuel 7:10 can never be fulfilled in this life, and since it refers to this life, that is a false prophecy.

Since it is not humanly possible that is why Yeshua said he would return again to restore the Kingdom of Israel. This will also serve to end "the time of the gentiles"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

At any rate, you did not answer my question. Please do so. Hypothetical arguments are frequently useful tools for revealing bad arguments. Christians frequently use hypothetical arguments when they feel that it suits their purposes to do so. C.S. Lewis' 'Lord, Liar, or Lunatic' is a good example. In addition, since hypothetical arguments are frequently useful, they are sometimes of great value in court trials.

Any man who is afraid to discuss a hypothetical argument has revealed that he is not confident of his arguments, and, if he has ever used hypothetical arguments himself, that he is a hypocrite.

I am not afraid to discuss hypothetical arguments. Why are you afraid to discuss them? Haven't you ever used hypothetical arguments?

Last but not least, no rational God would inspire disputable prophecies when he could easily inspire indisputable prophecies.

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the sign that the things not seen are true

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

You conveniently refused to reply to those arguments. Why is that?

Sorry.

spin · 01-24-2008, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

God cared enough about you to send his Son into the earth, provide for salvation, and establish his church ( yes, we are imperfect) to spread the gospel to all the world.

It's a bit like Xenu, such an outlandish idea that only those people who have been so sucked in would ever believe it.

God did not need to send his son. By definition he is omnipotent and doesn't need to do anything. Therefore he didn't need to sacrifice his son. This is all vain and useless stage-dressing from an ancient piece of religious drama. Think about it. There is simply no need. This idea of salvation is unnecessary. For you, if you believe in god, it's all up him and he doesn't need it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Go look at the stars, God made the heaven and the earth, isn't that a sign? If not where did the universe come from?

Now don't get all Thomas Aquinus. He's dead and his ideas have been surpassed. When you wet your pants over stars and heaven and all those simply wonderful things, think about star death, cannibal stars, asteroid collisions, dying planets and a host of other things.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

If not where did the universe come from?

Boom... the first one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Miracles hapen every single day, all of the time, primarily manifested through Christians.

Yeah, how many limbs have ever grown back at Lourdes. Confidence tricks work on believing dupes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Just as miracles occurred in the book of Acts, through believers, to this very day believers are the manifestations of the body of christ on earth. However we are not to follow after signs and wonders, sign and wonders follow us.

It was christians who brought slaves to America. It was christians who put Jews in ghettos. It was christians who were responsible for the basic gross social inequalities in Latin America. Get a balanced view of the world, not a lop-sided one like the one you were sold.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Believers are spreading the gospel into all the earth.

There are fewer believers in the "western world" than any time before.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Right now the gospel is being sent via internet.

And you are here partaking in an infidel site: the net shall set you free.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

No, it hasn't been fulfilled, we are living in the age of the gentiles at the moment. As far as I can tell the Jews have never occupied all of the land, thus it remains a prophecy.

Nice excuse for no fulfillment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

There is a prophecy that the third jewish temple will be built. When you see the event happen will you proclaim it a bona-fide self fulfilled prophecy?

When we actually have a bona fide fulfilled prophecy then we can talk. Too bad you haven't got even one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Since it is not humanly possible that is why Yeshua said he would return again to restore the Kingdom of Israel. This will also serve to end "the time of the gentiles"

But god is sufficient, according to your beliefs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the sign that the things not seen are true

Dreams of fulfilled prophecies are an attempt to do away with faith. Either you have faith, or you pretend you've got proof prophecies instead.

spin

schilling.klaus · 01-24-2008, 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Obviously the Jewish temple was destroyed in 70 AD and the gospels were written after that. Yeshua states in Matthew 24 that the Jewish temple will be defiled and afterward he will return to establish himself as King of Israel, consider the following scripture:

Quote:

Therefore when you see the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), 16 then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains.

Either this is more proof the Yeshua is a false prophet (or never existed) because he didn't establish his kingdom after the 2nd Jewish was destroyed or that there will be a third jewish temple built in which an individual will defile the temple. In any event is anyone aware if the temple was defiled by the Romans in 70 A.D.?

Yeshua is ahistorical fiction, and thus no prophet at all.
Anyways the prophecy was correct, alas made after the events,
as usual: The Roman Catholic Church is the Second coming of the Lord,
and it is the ultimative temple and the kingdom of God on earth.

The hard work of the Roman Catholic scribes since Justin martyr
was the justification of the Roman Catholic Church as the true temple
and God's reign on earth in accordance with the Law and the Prophets.

The abominable defilation is the construction of a heathen idol
by Emperor Hadrian after the defeat of the last false Messiah,
Shymeon bar Kohba.

When Pseudo-Daniel wrote the whole thing he referred to the plans
of Antiochos Epiphanes who attempted to establish idolatry in the
temple of Zion, but certainly also remembering what the Babylonians
were thought to have made with the first temple (and got 'punished'
for this by God's wrath through his agent Cyrus, the Messiah.

Klaus Schilling

Jack the Bodiless · 01-24-2008, 02:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

"The golden head of the image is identical with the lioness, by which the Babylonians were represented.
The golden shoulders and the arms of silver are the same with the bear, by which the Persians and Medes are meant.
The belly and thighs of brass are the leopard, by which the Greeks who ruled from Alexander onwards are intended.
The legs of iron are the dreadful and terrible beast, by which the Romans who hold the empire now are meant.
The toes of clay and iron are the ten horns which are to be.
The one other little horn springing up in their midst is the antichrist.
The stone that smites the image and breaks it in pieces, and that filled the whole earth, is Christ, who comes from heaven and brings judgment on the world."

Arnoldo, you still haven't grasped the fact that you can't just quote the personal beliefs of some random fundie at us.

The "golden head" is the Babylonians.

The "silver arms" are the Medes (Daniel admits to using Jeremiah as a source, and Jeremiah was a false prophet: he prophesied that the Medes would take Babylon, but they did not).

The "belly and thighs of brass" are the Persians.

The "legs of iron" are the Greeks. Alexander was the greatest conqueror the world had known, hence "dreadful and terrible". But his empire broke up: hence the "toes".

As for sources: I've already pointed out several that confirm aspects of this, and Spin has recommended a commentary on Daniel. So why are you still asking for sources?

arnoldo · 01-24-2008, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

Arnoldo, you still haven't grasped the fact that you can't just quote the personal beliefs of some random fundie at us.

Yeah, except the random fundie is Hyppolytus( 170-236 AD).

The "legs of iron" are the Greeks. Alexander was the greatest conqueror the world had known, hence "dreadful and terrible". But his empire broke up: hence the "toes".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

As for sources: I've already pointed out several that confirm aspects of this, and Spin has recommended a commentary on Daniel. So why are you still asking for sources?

Sorry, I won't ask for sources anymore. In any event the following never happened:

Quote:

The stone that smites the image and breaks it in pieces, and that filled the whole earth, is Christ, who comes from heaven and brings judgment on the world."

Thus the prophecy has proved itself to be false, right?

makerowner · 01-24-2008, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Sorry, I won't ask for sources anymore. In any event the following never happened:

Quote:

The stone that smites the image and breaks it in pieces, and that filled the whole earth, is Christ, who comes from heaven and brings judgment on the world."

Thus the prophecy has proved itself to be false, right?

Yep. What's the problem? You interpret the legs as the Romans right? This never happened to them either.

Johnny Skeptic · 01-24-2008, 07:42 AM

Message to arnoldo: Why would God want to make disputable predictions when he could easily make indisuptable predictions? If the Bible had contained lots of accurate predictions regarding when and where some natural disasters occurred, by "when," meaning month day, and year, which would have been indisputable predictions, there would not have been any need for debates about whether or not God can predict the future. Why would a loving God invite dissent when he could easily discourage dissent?

Why would God be so interested in prophecies about Jews? Doesn't he care about the rest of the people in the world?

arnoldo · 01-24-2008, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Why would God be so interested in prophecies about Jews? Doesn't he care about the rest of the people in the world?

Yes that's why Yeshua told his disciples to spread the gospel "good news" into all of the world two thousand years ago. The following link is an excellent scholarly resource on the book of daniel.

STUDIES IN THE BOOK OF DANIEL: A DISCUSSION OF THE HISTORICAL QUESTIONS by ROBERT DICK WILSON, PH.D., D. D., WM. H. GREEN PROFESSOR OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES AND OLD TESTAMENT CRITICISM, PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, 1917

makerowner · 01-24-2008, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Why would God be so interested in prophecies about Jews? Doesn't he care about the rest of the people in the world?

Yes that's why Yeshua told his disciples to spread the gospel "good news" into all of the world two thousand years ago.

Matthew 10:5 (RSV): "These twelve Jesus sent out, charging them, 'Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans,"

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

01-24-2008, 07:42 AM	#68
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	Message to arnoldo: Why would God want to make disputable predictions when he could easily make indisuptable predictions? If the Bible had contained lots of accurate predictions regarding when and where some natural disasters occurred, by "when," meaning month day, and year, which would have been indisputable predictions, there would not have been any need for debates about whether or not God can predict the future. Why would a loving God invite dissent when he could easily discourage dissent? Why would God be so interested in prophecies about Jews? Doesn't he care about the rest of the people in the world?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.