Izmir Stinger

I am currently involved in a prolonged e-mail conversation with a non-denominational, generic Protestant who broke off contact with me shortly after I came out as an atheist. I have little hope of any kind of true reconciliation. This is not due to failings on my part; I have reason to believe that the person contacting me is being disingenuous. My goal is to simply win all these arguments she has started with me so soundly that plaster on the wall she has constructed around her rationality starts to crack.

Anyhoo, most of the stuff we have discussed has been generic and informal enough for me to address adequately on my own. However, she recently escalated the tone to that of a rational debate, and has made a few claims (specifically about the Bible) that are outside my ability to address formally without a good dose of research. Not wanting to waste such effort on her, but also not wanting to ignore her claims, I have found myself in a bit of a pickle. However, I know there are a bunch of people in here that get their jollies diving into the Bible and ripping it into such shreds that it wouldn't even be suitable as toilet paper, so humbly I come to you for help.

I want to address the following claims, some of which I know to be partly accurate, some of which are bull. The parts about the Bible's superiority to other religious texts due to the accuracy of its prophecies are the key points I wish to address, but all inaccuracies are fair game.

Thank you in advance for all of your help. Here is the text:

Koyaanisqatsi

All I see to her "argument" is:

Before challenging her on anything further, ask her for specific quotes proving the Jesus' birth was predicted (the time, the city and the "nature"). Pin her down to specifics first, then come back and let us know what she said.

hatsoff

Well, I'd respond to her simply by agreeing that the Bible is certainly a unique animal, but that she is badly mistaken on two points: Firstly, the Bible is not perfectly harmonious, and what consistency exists is certainly no surprise, given its evolution. Second, the Bible contains no accurate predictions of the future; the perceived accuracy is the result of various flawed interpretations of the texts.

There is no need to explain yourself further, as she has not provided any evidence or arguments. At this stage, it seems like an exchange of worldviews. If she demands to see your evidence, then you can proceed to dive into greater detail. Right now, I wouldn't bother.

Zelc

I'm not a biblical scholar, but from everything I've read here, the authors of the Bible aren't known and it was written a few decades after the events they describe supposedly happened.

Weren't the languages the Bible was written in one of the clues that those who wrote the Bible weren't the people they claimed they were?

As well as slavery (it's OK), women's rights (they don't have much), working on Sunday (you can't or you go to Hell), and what to do with your enemies when you defeat them (kill the men and violate the women). Also talk about how people selected which books to include in the Bible, throwing out the ones that didn't agree too well with the rest (Nicene creed, was it?). Not to mention some of what the Bible says on those controversial subjects listed is absolutely insensitive and/or stupid. What happens when the Nazis knock on your door to ask you where you hid the Jewish refugees? Thou shalt not lie?

Mention how it's a logical falacy (argumentum ad populum). Oh, and some of the greatest books ever written are fiction .

Mention Tyre.

Niall Armstrong

Of course the moslems disagree. The following website has countless prophesies: http://aaiil.org/text/books/others/a...iptures2.shtml

It might seem like they're engaged in some kind of competiton, doesn't it?

ModernHeretic

Yes, and what wonderful treatments of homosexuality we get. The bible tells us to kill homosexuals (at least male homosexuals, Leviticus doesn't mention female homosexuality, although it is mentioned in Romans), stone adulterers, stone disobedient children at the gate of the city, it says that a woman who is not a virgin on her wedding night should be killed, and that if the daughter of a priest commits fornication that she should be burned to death.

Further, in the story of Abraham we see that it is apparently a good thing to be willing to kill your own son if you hear a voice in your head that tells you to do so. Fuck the psychiatrists, just have faith. As for lying, you might mention the Hebrew midwives that blatantly lied to the Pharoah when they were commanded to kill the hebrew first born children, saying something to the effect that "the women are lively."

As far as murder, you could mention the fact that Moses killed an Egyptian and was considered a righteous man. You might also mention the genocide of entire nations, such as the Ammonites, the Amalekites, the Hittites, the Jebusites, etc. Note that according to the Bible God commanded that these people be utterly destroyed, including the men, women, children, and even the cattle. Of course, at one point, Moses disagreed, and decided that any woman who had not known a man should be allowed to live so that the men who just murdered their families and destroyed their homes could take them as their wives.

As for the so-called harmony in the Bible, this is not a belief that is based on evidence, but rather religious indoctrination. The easiest place to see the inconsistencies in the Bible is in the four canonical gospels, as these are supposed to be stories about the life and teachings of the same person, and yet they differ in many details. I would suggest asking your friend to take the "Easter Challenge", which can be found here:

http://ffrf.org/books/lfif/?t=stone


My book sold a lot of copies, therefore it must be the inspired word of God. Do I detect a logical fallacy? I think I do.

There are multiple problems with citing prophecy as evidence. The first problem is that most biblical prophecy is exceedingly vauge. This is especially true of the book of Revelation, which uses a lot of symbolic imagery, probably because the author, generally known as St. John of Patmos, or John the Revelator, was likely tripping on magic mushrooms while he was having his visions. When the bible tells us something to the effect of "a dragon will knock a third of the stars out of the sky with it's tail", how are we supposed to know what is being predicted here?

I'm assuming most Christians don't take this literally, so it would seem to follow that they must have some sort of historical method for determining the author's original intent. For most Christians, however, this is simply not the case, as the vast majority of Christians know little or nothing about the historical context in which these works were written, and hence interpret them to mean whatever the hell they feel like. Not surprisingly, there are many different interpretations of such verses, most of which are not based on any sort of evidence or employing any sort of reasonable exegetical method.

Basically, most "prophecies" (and many things that Christians consider prophecies are not considered prophecies by the Jews, whose book the OT actually is), are generally taken out of context and misinterpreted. Of course some times the words are mistranslated as well, as is the case with the following two prophecies:

Notice that the verse in question says "young woman", not virgin. The idea of the virgin birth was borrowed from "pagan" traditions, such as the myths of Attis and Adonis.

Also notice that Jesus name was not Immanuel ("God with us"), it was Jesus (or perhaps Yeshua, which means "God saves"). That alone makes it fairly obvious that this verse is not referring to him, but Christians generally filter out such things.

For more, see below:

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/virgin.html


Another mistranslation is Psalm 22:16, which is not even a prophecy at all, much less a messianic prophecy. The Christian version says "they pierced my hands and feet". There is some debate over the correct translation of this passage, suggesting this verse should read "like a lion, my hands and my feet", or "they dug my hands and my feet". For more, see here:

http://www.torahresource.com/Newsletter/Ps22.16.pdf


As suggested above, ask specifically which prophecies your friend finds so compelling, and do a google search on said verses. Chances are, you'll find someone who disagrees with the translation or interpretation of that passage. Jews are particularly good for this, because, as mentioned, they're the ones who wrote the OT in the first place.

jakejonesiv

This is simply incorrect. Muslims claim that Isaiah 21:7 prophesied the coming of Muhammed. Muslims also claim that the Paraclete of GJohn was fulfilled by Prophet Muhammed.

jakejonesiv

Hi Niall,

I didn't see this before I made my post above.

Wow, I wonder by what methodlogy Christians believe that prophecy applies to their religion but does not apply to other religions? If there are any members of the Christian CADRE lurking about, maybe they could explain the reasoning.

Diogenes the Cynic

I'd write her back with a list of ethical contradictions (supplemented with a few choice, divinely sanctioned Biblical atrocities) and I'd ask her to provide a single instance of verifiable Biblical prophecy.

Mythra

The whole concept of Jesus fulfilling prophecy is dependent on the gospel events actually occurring.

And, there are some pretty good reasons to believe that the old testament scriptures were consulted in order to make the jesus story work as prophecy fulfillment.

A pretty good example would be Matthew 21, where Matthew has Jesus summoning an ass AND a colt. From all appearances, he misread Zechariah 9:9, and made the Jesus story fit. Perhaps there is a better explanation. But, I'm not aware of it.

If the gospel writers had the old testament in their hands as they were writing the gospel story, it would be quite amazing if there was no fullfillment of "prophecy". The whole excercise becomes a research project which translated into a creative writing project.

No miracles required.