Amaleq13

That should be a "q" not a "g" in the screen name.

It is not an "assumption" but an observation of the real world. Magic does not exist. Magical predictions about the future do not happen. You don't have to try to destroy any evidence supporting magical precognition but you do have to make an effort to believe that such evidence exists.

The assumption is yours and it involves faith in the existence of magic. Can I assume you only make this assumption for your own special texts as opposed to the religious texts of others?

When Daniel is treated like any other ancient text, nobody reaches your conclusion. That requires a healthy dose of special pleading and that is precisely what you are doing.

Do you really consider the respected commentaries of Harper and Jerome to be driven by the anti-bible agenda you describe? How absurd.

Jack the Bodiless

A non-Christian example of prophecy might help to put this in perspective. How about Oedipus?

It is prophesied that Oedipus would kill his own father and marry his own mother. And, lo, it came to pass!

Now, this is actually a more specific and unusual prophecy than anything in the Bible. And, as far as I'm aware, it doesn't suffer from the historical inaccuracies that are problematic for Daniel. If we apply similar criteria to those insisted on by mdd344, then we shouldn't dismiss it due to any pre-existing bias against the validity of Greek myth, and we shouldn't doubt the integrity of the author for no discernible reason. We should assume that the prophecy was made before the event (despite the lack of evidence for this), and that the event actually happened as predicted (despite the lack of evidence for this too: if it's in the story, then it happened).

So, this is apparently "proof" that Greek myth is true. Therefore we should fall on our knees and worship Zeus?

mdd344

Gamera,
I would really like to discuss the things you asked. Would you consider starting a thread in General Bible discussion and posting your comments (the latest ones, and recap if you want) there?

That way this thread stays on topic.
Thanks,
Mdd

mdd344

Jack,
You did not use the terms even remotely in line with what the Bible teaches. Your concept of "kingdom" is just bizarre. When you determine that you would like to use them the way the Bible does, let me know. I'll be glad to point you to the Scripture that helps you see it. Until then, you have my two posts. If you don't like them, or want to believe them, or want to ignore them, that is your choice.

mdd344

Amaleq13,
So your entire foundation is that the miracles, prophecy, etc., given in the Bible does not exist. Well, little good it will do to even discuss books of the Bible, right? I mean after all, the men who wrote them were not only liars but intentional ones at that. I believe both my posts demonstrate what I said it did. You don't have to believe it. But arguing from the foundation that such is not possible because prophecy etc doesn't exist doesn't make much logical sense to me.

Amaleq13

I'm not sure what you mean by "entire foundation". I have concluded, after rather lengthy consideration of the available evidence, that magic does not exist. Stories about magical events must, therefore, be considered fiction and interpretations of stories that requires belief in magic must be rejected.

In a rational manner whereby it is treated like any other collection of ancient texts? Yes.

What will do little good are efforts to apply special pleading so as to allow magical thinking to determine one's interpretation.

It is less a question of the authors being liars as it is a question of certain readers relying on logical fallacies (eg special pleading) and magical thinking to interpret their efforts.

I question your grasp of logic. Your entire argument, after all, is based on the logical error of special pleading.

IndigoDad

Daniel 1:20 states, "And in all matters of wisdom and understanding, that the king enquired of them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers that were in all his realm."

Nope Amaleq. He would need to assume that the magic of other faiths is about 10% as good as that of Daniel's God.

David B

As a matter of fact, lots of people write about all sorts of paranormal alleged phenomena without being liars.

Conan Doyle was a very clever man, but he wrote about, and believed in, the Cottingly Fairies.

My belief that the supernatural does not happen does not entail a belief that those who write about alleged supernatural events are liars.

Lots of people are mistaken about alleged supernatural events. Bloody hell, there are loads of people who believe that John Edwards, Sylvia Browne, Uri Geller.....are genuine.

David B (Sees no good reason to believe the Biblical supernatural stories as more or less credible than those of Edwards, Browne, Geller....)

spin

You seem to have very big presumptions about bible terms, as though you have keys to the kingdom or something..

Presumption number one against what I have said. You are willfully injecting new testament into Hebrew bible, showing your unwillingness to read the Hebrew bible.

Presumption number two. You want the Hebrew bible to conform to the new testament. You certainly don't want to read the Hebrew bible.

You haven't shown a single misunderstanding. You have shown bad procedure when dealing with a text. Rule one: read the text for what it says, not what someone else in another time thinks it should say.

You haven't shown that you have any means of estimating anything.

You have shown no ability to make such a call. You haven't shown an ability to read as yet.

A bunch of incoherent unsupported presumptions are not reasons fit for discussion.

I understand that. You seem not to care about what Daniel actually says. I did do my duty in trying to apprize you of your erroneous ways. You're too busy auto-stimulating your religious zeal. When you want to discuss Daniel and what it actually says and not use the text as a pretext for your religious sermons, you might start showing some awareness of the text. Until then, run along, little starling. :wave:


spin

Gamera

The topic states that Daniel's prophesies prove that God exists -- I'm asserting that not only don't they prove that God exists, they never intended to prove that.

Seems on topic to me.

But if you don't want to discuss that, it's OK with me.