Johnny Skeptic

Message to arnoldo: Why hasn't God ever told anyone about the Gospel message himself?

arnoldo

The fact is that the Jewish people began to return to Israel partly as a result of the attempt of Hitler to destroy the Jews in Germany, unless you believe the holocaust is a hoax also. Anyway since the Jews have been back in Israel they have been attacked militarily by neighboring Arab states several times however miraculously Israel has won every single war. This fact also is a testament that Israel is proof of God's existence. If Israel would one day be totally nuked and wiped off the face of the earth basically this would prove the Judaism and Christianity is false. So far that hasn't happened, nor will it ever happen.

spin

You too should learn about the real history, rather than slavishly kowtowing to propaganda. The Arab states started one war, 1973, in an effort to regain possessions taken by Israel in the previous war. All other wars were started by Zionists and then Israelis. Israel was humiliated in the recent second war in Lebanon by a few thousand irregulars.

There is nothing miraculous in Israel's run of victories: its armies are far better trained and far better armed, receiving billions of American dollars in aid for offensive weaponry.

Lies, propaganda and American dollars? God must truly exist!

We should hope not. Israeli have a right to survive just like the Palestinians.


spin

Johnny Skeptic

I agree, but what does that prove?

No, the Jews have been back in PART of the ancient land of Canaan, which they wrongfully stole from the Canaanites.

It is difficult to have discussions with you because you frequently refuse to reply to my arguments, and quite conveniently I might add. The undecided crowd are not impressed with evasiveness. They interpret evasiveness as a sign of weakness. You said:

I replied:

Please reply to that argument.

You said:

[quote=arnoldo]

I replied:

Please reply to those arguments.

No it isn't. All that is takes to occupy land is military power. Any who has enough military power can occupy any land that they want to occupy.

Better stated, if Jews were able to occupy ALL of the land of ancient Canaan like God promised, while that would not prove that Judaism and Christianity are true, plausible arguments could be made that Judaism and Christianity are true.

What you tried to do is to change the widely accepted burden of proof into the burden of disproof. That is not the way that it works. In court trials, he who asserts first must prove his assertions beyond a reasonable doubt. Non-Christians are not obligated to get rid of all of the Jews in Palestine in order to disprove the Bible. Rather, God is obligated to keep his as yet unkept promises that Jews would occupy ALL of the land of ancient Canaan, and that the ancient land of Canaan would an EVERLASTING possession. The word "everlasting" easily discredits God's supposed land promise to Abraham and his descendants. What do you have to say about that?

Are you suggesting that people should love God because he helped Abraham steal land from the Canaanites, and because he turned his back on everyone in the world during Old Testament times except for Jews? Well actually God did sometimes turn his back on Jews during Old Testament times when he chose to injure and kill them with hurricanes and plagues, but to God's credit he made sure that he injured and killed lots of Gentiles too in order not to show preference towards Jews.

It is worth noting that Exodus 4:11 says that God makes people blind, deaf, and dumb. Is also worth noting that Exodus 20:5 says that God punishes people for sins that their ancestors.

Anyway, since God told a lie regarding his promise to give Egypt to Nebuchadnezzar as a compensation for his failure to conquer Tyre, and since the Bible contains many more lies, why are you interested in debating the history of the Jewish people? Is it your position that two true claims negate the wrongfullness of one lie?

Please be advised that I will continue to repost any arguments that you refuse to reply to.

martini

maybe those are not True Jews (tm)? :Cheeky:

neither Sugarhitman nor Arnoldo have dealt with the meat of these objections nor responded to many of the posts over the few pages that i have been reading through. that is certainly unfortunate for their cause.

Johnny Skeptic

Message to arnoldo: Genesis 17:8 says "And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God."

How do you interpret the word "all"?

How do you interpret the word "everlasting"? Logically, the word "everlasting" implies that the writer of Genesis 17:8 intended for his audience to believe that Jews would always occupy the land of ancient Canaan starting from when they first possessed it, which would have been thousands of years ago. No other explanation makes sense. Regarding Scriptures that deal with the scattering of Jews, and the restoration of their homeland, that was a neccessary coverup when Abraham's group was kicked out of Palestine contrary to expectations.

Another coverup regards the Tyre prophecy. In Ezekiel 26, Ezekiel calls Nebuchadnezzar "a king of kings," and he said that this kings of kings would come "from the north, with horses, and with chariots, and with horsemen, and companies, and much people," that he would "shall slay with the sword thy daughters in the field: and he shall make a fort against thee, and cast a mount against thee, and lift up the buckler against thee," that he would "set engines of war against thy walls, and with his axes he shall break down thy towers," that he would "By reason of the abundance of his horses their dust shall cover thee: thy walls shall shake at the noise of the horsemen, and of the wheels, and of the chariots, when he shall enter into thy gates, as men enter into a city wherein is made a breach," and that he would "With the hoofs of his horses.......tread down all thy streets: he shall slay thy people by the sword, and thy strong garrisons shall go down to the ground."

When it became apparent that this "king of kings" was not able to defeat Tyre contrary to expectations, the necessary coverup was "Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Tyrus, and will cause many nations to come up against thee, as the sea causeth his waves to come up." If you are able to predict the future, you most certainly would never claim that a "king of kings" would invade a kingdom and later, in Ezekiel 29, make a false claim that God would give Egypt to Nebuchadnezzar because he FAILED to conquer Tyre. The term "a king of kings" is reasonable proof that Ezekiel expected Nebuchadnezzar to defeat Tyre. A king of kings does not get a reputation like that by failing to conquer kingdoms.

It is up to you to reasonably prove that neither of those coverups took place. It is also up to you to explain why God did not make any indisputable prophecies, such as predicting when and where some natural disasters would occur. By "when," I mean month, day, and year. If as you claim God predicted future events to strengthen the faith of Jews, why didn't he tell Ezekiel about Alexander? No Jew who lived during Ezekiel's time saw the Tyre prophecy fulfilled, nor did any Jew for several more generations until Alexander conquered Tyre. How did the Tyre prophecy strengthen the faith of those Jews? If anything, the Tyre prophecy weakened the faith of many of those Jews, and caused some Jews to give up Judaism, not to mention strenghthened the faith of generations of Tyrians who saw God, and a king of kings (Nebuchadnezzar), and many nations, all fail to defeat Tyre.

arnoldo

Ok, if the Palestinians are given their own State do you think this will establish peace in the middle east? Probably not, since radical Palestinians are not interested in living peacefully with Israel and instead want to destroy it. Besides if the radicals succeed in throwing Israel into the sea they probably wont stop there. The goal of these radical Islamists is to overthrow Western Civilization and convert the world to Islam. At the same time I feel most muslims are peace loving people however there is no question there is a radical element with Islam (or was 9-11 a hoax?)

makerowner

There's a radical element in Christianity too (or was Waco a hoax?). I guess the only solution is to expel all the Christians from the country and settle it with nice, reasonable atheists.

Sheshonq

The reason it won't lead to peace is because radical Jewish sects will never accept a West Bank Palestinian state.

Radical Islam is not the same thing as Palestinian nationalism. If you don't understand events in that part of the world, best to just keep your mouth shut.

Which has nothing to do with what we're talking about. Congratulations.

arnoldo

Yes there are radical elements in Judaism, Christianity, Islam and even Secular Humanism which complicates the peace process. As far as Israel is concerned I feel they have a right to live in their homeland for purely historical reasons. The Romans drove them out of their land in 70 A.D. and after what happened to them in Germany they deserve to live in relative safety in their homeland.