arnoldo

Post #133 states that the Qumran community accepted Daniel as canon.

makerowner

They also accepted Genesis, Isaiah, etc. as canon, are you arguing that they wrote those too?

arnoldo

No I'm arguing they COPIED the Book of Daniel from earlier texts.

makerowner

OK. So what's your point?

Johnny Skeptic

Message to arnoldo: In another thread, you said:

No, regarding the Partition of Palestine, the governments of 32 Christian nations voted to self-fulfill a Bible prophecy, including one non-Christian government, which was the Russian government, which was joyfully receiving lots of aid from the U.S. for rebuilding purposes. Of the 13 governments that voted against the partition, 12 are non-Christian, and 1, the Greek government, is nominally Christian. If the partition of Palestine was not a fallacious self-fulfilled Bible prophecy, then if Jewish and Palestinian history had been reversed, and Hitler and other parties had persecuted Palestinians instead of Jews, the 32 Christian governments would have granted control of Jerusalem and a grossly disproportionate amount of land per capita to the Palestinians. As you know, that would not have happened. Will you please tell us why that would not have happened?

If the story was true, it was God's fault unless you can provide reasonable proof that it would have been impossible for God to have inspired Old Testament writers to write unmistakable prophecies about the messiah. I am only a mere man and I could easily rewrite Old Testament messianic prophecies in ways that would have left no doubt who Jesus was in most people's opinions.

But what evidence do you have that more than a relative handful of people accepted Jesus during his lifetime?

But Muslim terrorists are willing to sacrifice their lives for their beliefs. So were Japanese Kamikaze pilots. A man can die for a lie just as easily as he can die for the truth.

On the contrary, the vast majority of Jews have always rejected Christianity.

Regarding "Israel exists this very moment in fulfillment of the Abrahamic promise," as I proved previously, the Partition of Palestine was a fallacious self-filled Bible prophecy. In a Hindu book said that a temple would be rebuilt, and the temple was rebuilt, you most certainly would not have called that a fulfilled prophecy.

Since Genesis 17:8 says that God would give Abraham and his descendants ALL of Canaan, and Jews do not currently occupy nearly ALL of Canaan, the Jews could not possibly have restored a nation that they never had since you said that Jews have never occupied all of Canaan. How do you know that Jews have never occupied all of Canaan? Many Christians claim that they did.

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, it is a false prophecy. If you make an uncorroborated guess that Jews and Muslims will make peace, I will remind you that the New Testament says that there will always be wars and rumors of wars in this life, and no exclusion was made for the Middle East. In the NASB, Matthew 24:7 says "For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there will be famines and earthquakes." Does that sound like "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" to you? If the Jews were ever able to live like that, you would say that that was excellent tangible evidence that the Bible is true. I might agree with you except that the more tangible first hand evidence that God provided, the less likely it would be that he wants people to accept him by faith, which would indicate that he does not exist since the New Testament says that "faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not see."

There is no doubt whatsoever that Old Testament Jews believed that one day, IN THIS LIFE, they would "dwell in their place without further disturbance." Obviously, God lied to the Jews.

At any rate, I would never be willing to accept a God who showed favoritism towards Old Testament Jews at the expense of all other groups of people, and made no effort to reveal his specific identity to most other groups of people.

God lied to Old Testament Jews. He told them that the messiah would be a genetic descendant of David. Matthew contradicts that by saying that Jesus would be conceived by the Holy Spirit. Even if Mary and Joseph were genetic descendants of David, Jesus was not a genetic descendant of David.

arnoldo

If i was a flatlander I wouldn't understand a higher dimensional being.

arnoldo

The Original Book of Daniel was written before the 164 BC. The dead sea scrollscopy of the Book of Daniel was copied from an earlier text which was copied from an earlier text,etc. The writers of the dead sea scrolls weren't the authors of the book of Isaiah either, they made of copy of an earlier text which was copied from an earlier text,etc.

Post #133 states that the Qumran community accepted Daniel as canon.

makerowner

First of all, I've said numerous times that the book was written in the three years before 164. What you're trying to prove is that they were written before 167, so that they're actually a prophecy.
The Qumran MSS of Daniel aren't originals, sure. But how does that prove that Daniel was written before 167?

arnoldo

If the Qumran MSS of Daniel isn't an original it was obviously COPIED from a much earlier text. The fact that the book of Daniel was considered CANON and there are numerous copies of the Book of Daniel give evidence that the Book of Daniel was written well before 167.

Sheshbazzar

The word "CANON" has came up several times in this thread, as though using it establishes, proves, or give legitimacy to some particular point, it would be a good idea to look into where and when the term originated, and what it was exactly, that it originally described.