FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-26-2006, 10:59 AM   #21
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenroad View Post
How did Jesus manage to fulfill all those Jewish prophecies? To see jsut a few of them read Isaiah 53 and consider it with an open mind. The prophecies weren't just broad general statements that could apply to anyone...they were specific identifiers that could not be fulfilled by anyone but the Jewish Messiah.
I think you should have a talk with the Jewish people so that they can explain to you why Jesus Christ is not the Messiah. I hope you realise that the wrings of the OT were copied from their manuscripts and that they have vehemently denied for the last 2000 years that Jesus Christ was not, and is not the Messiah, nor could He be.

The lives of Jesus Christ, as described in the NT, are not found anywhere in the OT, that is,no book of the OT or chapter of any book deals specifically with a person who will come back to earth in the second coming.

The stories of the characters called Jesus Christ are not credible, Jesus Christ cannot be placed in history during the 1st century, nor can his followers, see all the writings of Flavius Joseph, 'Wars of the Jews', 'Antiquities of the Jews', The Life of Flavius Josephus, and'Against Apion' .
aa5874 is offline  
Old 12-26-2006, 03:18 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rockford, IL
Posts: 740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenroad View Post
Let me ask you a question; Have you actually studied the prophecies any? Have you studied their context? Before saying they are "cherry-picked" read some. As for the gospels being written by people who never new Jesus that is false. Luke is thought to have been Peter's "sidekick", Matthew and John were two of Jesus's twelve. John refers to himself in his gospel as "the belove disciple". There is speculation about Mark but if it is true that the other gospels were written after Mark then its safe to say that Mark probably was an eyewitness. As for the date of Mark, don't have time to go back and review the facts (i'll try to come back tomorrow night with an argument) but 20 years is hardly relevant. Supposedly it takes more than 2 generations for a document to be subject to legendary and speculative decay and all the gospels are within 1 generation.
I have read more on the subject than most Christians, I'd imagine--which isn't saying much, incidentally. I have looked at a great many claims of prophetic fullfulment, both within the Bible and by other nutball authors (such as Nostr. or E. Cayce). They are notoriously ludicrous, or at best unimpressive. Finally, you seem to have been duped into believing a bunch of falsehoods. For example, never does the author of John refer to himself as the beloved disciple. And the Apostle Matthew did not write the Gospel of Matthew.

Again, please drop the instructional attitude. This is a place for you to learn, not teach. You obviously have a very poor understanding of these things--which is fine, because you're only fifteen. But if you keep pretending you're an expert instead of a dead-rank beginner, you're going to elicit a great deal of negative feedback.
hatsoff is offline  
Old 12-26-2006, 05:05 PM   #23
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Palm Springs, California
Posts: 10,955
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenroad View Post
Let me ask you a question; Have you actually studied the prophecies any? Have you studied their context? Before saying they are "cherry-picked" read some. As for the gospels being written by people who never new Jesus that is false. Luke is thought to have been Peter's "sidekick", Matthew and John were two of Jesus's twelve. John refers to himself in his gospel as "the belove disciple". There is speculation about Mark but if it is true that the other gospels were written after Mark then its safe to say that Mark probably was an eyewitness. As for the date of Mark, don't have time to go back and review the facts (i'll try to come back tomorrow night with an argument) but 20 years is hardly relevant. Supposedly it takes more than 2 generations for a document to be subject to legendary and speculative decay and all the gospels are within 1 generation.
Goldenrod, I'm glad you find solace in the texts that claim Jesus fulfilled various OT prophesies. But what does that have to do with Christianity?

If you review the Christian scriptures, you won't find any incidences of Paul or Peter trying to convince anybody about the gospel by going through prophetic literature (except arguably Philip's encounter with the Ethiopian eunuch). So, what is the relevance of the prophesies? The gospel isn't an argument about prophesies being fulfilled. Near as I can tell Paul never mentions any and he did pretty well convincing people of the gospel.
Gamera is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:54 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.