Johnny Skeptic

So what? Many other bogus attempts were made to connect Jesus to the Old Testament, such as Matthew's bogus attempt to connect the birthplace of Jesus with Bethlehem since Matthew wanted to "fulfill" Micah 5:2.

A God who wanted to reveal himself would not need to use the silly games that Christians play to try to reasonably prove that he exists. He could do a much better job of accomplishing that himself.

Bible prophecy is one of the best reasons why people should reject the Bible. One reason is because a rational God would inspire prophecies that are difficult to dispute, not prophecies that needlessly cause doubt, dissent, and confusion.

Are you aware that more people would have accepted Jesus if Micah had made better predictions?

Surely many of your beliefs would have been different if you had been born in other centuries. What kind of God would allow chance and circumstance to determine what people believe instead of a desire to know the truth? Don't you believe that most skeptics want to know the truth?

Zenaphobe

I vowed a while back that I would no longer enter discussions with arnoldo because he dismisses difficult arguments as unworthy of consideration, but I looked into the Epistle of Barnabas to see what he was referring to.

It turns out that Barnabas is chocked full of the type of willy nilly grabbing of OT verses and making them say what one likes.

Here were a few I found interesting

Seems like an arbitrary way to interpret a dietary restriction, who would have guessed? :huh:


Bunny rabbits that live to be 9 have 9 orifices?

I had no idea that hyenas changed sexes every year. Maybe that is why they laugh? "He he he, now I got a willy!"

I wonder what Banabas's history of the world time line would look like if he is shooting for Armageddon 6 thousand years after creation?

Finally, someone who admits that if bad things happen to you, God meant for it to happen.

I am not sure that quoting Barnabas as an example of willy nilly hermeneutics really helps build a case for the correctness of cherry picking verses from the OT to support the NT, but it shows people in that time had no qualms about ignoring context and making it up as they went along.

arnoldo

Your opinion, and what the Epistle of Barnabas illustrates are two different matters. Not surprisingly, you overlooked the Epistles' references to the Book of Mark, Matthew, as well as possible references to the destruction of the temple of Jerusalem and instead focused on the verses you picked out. A more scholarly interpretation on the meaning of the Epistle of Barnabas can be found in the following book entitled, Early Christian Writings: The Apostolic Fathers (Penguin Classics) (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Zenaphobe

I know I will probably regret this, but the quotes I made from Barnabas illustrate exactly what is being discussed in this thread.

I don't care if he quotes every alleged writer of the NT, the fact still remains that the technique of picking a sentence or three out of the middle of a chapter and claiming it supports a radically new understanding of the whole OT is quite odd.

Observe

Yahweh is one among many other gods that inhabit the universe.

See, I just proved henotheism from the Old Testament.

You have no grounds to claim I am wrong because God just gave me a true understanding of what Christians have failed to discern from the OT.

The commandment "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." makes perfect sense now doesn't it?

Either you see my point or you don't. If the past is any indication, you won't.