Freethought & Rationalism Archive

diana · 02-23-2003, 04:39 PM

Hi, gang.

This popped up in an EoG thread Atheism: Knowing God Doesn't Exist, but it looks more along your lines. We have a new user (Magus55) who believes the Bible proves its own divine origin:

Quote:

Well as iv'e pointed out before - here are a few of the evidences that make the Bible prove its divine origin.

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t003.html

And this..

Since absolutely no Bible prophecy has ever failed (and there are hundreds), how can one realistically remain unconvinced that the Bible is of Divine origin?
>> Read about fulfilled biblical prophecies...

Explain David's graphic portrayal of Jesus' death by crucifixion (Psalm 22) 1000 years previous to crucifixion being established as a form of capital punishment?

How could any mere human pinpoint the birth town of the Messiah seven full centuries before the fact, as did the prophet Micah?
>> Read the "God's Story" account of Micah describing the Messiah...

Account for the odds (1 in 10 to the 157th power) that even just 48 (of 300) Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in one person, i.e Jesus.
>> Prophecies

How was it possible for the Old Testament prophet Isaiah to have predicted the virgin birth of Jesus (Isaiah 7:14) 700 years before it occurred?
>> Read the "God's Story" account of the prophets describing the Savior / Is the virgin birth a myth?

And why Jesus' ressurection most likely couldn't be a myth...

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t009.html

Sorry but considering the odds stated above of Jesus fulfilling 48 prophecies, let alone 300 are greater than the predicted number of stars in the Universe - id say he was God.

Speak to me of prophesies unfulfilled.

Speak to me of the "art" of prophesy....

d

River · 02-23-2003, 05:03 PM

I wouldn't go so far out to say that the Bible is divine. However , the Bible did say that Ishmael shall have a Great Nation ( Islam)....and it was right. Not to mention the Coming of the Comforter ( Prophet Muhammad)....and it was right again...However, I don't believe the Bible was divine. After all, how many people here have read Gospel of Barnabus, the Book of Enoch, the Gospel of Thomas... All these chapters are not included in the Canon. The Bible is a subset of a much larger document that scholars call Q. Some scholars have indicated that the Q is the Tibetan text known as Aramaic Matthew. The Quran also mentions that Christ was given" a" Gospel ( singular) called Al-Injil.

Old Man · 02-23-2003, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by diana
Hi, gang.
Speak to me of prophesies unfulfilled.

Isa 66:24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.

Quote:

Speak to me of the "art" of prophesy....
d

You can't do it unless you are inspired of God. But when you are, its just like you are speaking normally but all your words turn out prophetical:

Cr 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [was made] a quickening spirit.

Bobzammel · 02-23-2003, 08:44 PM

The prophecies and other elements have been debunked repeatedly on this site and others. As for historical accuracy, while the bible contains a fairly accurate(although exaggerated and at points biased) history of Israel, so do the documents of many religions and folktales, such as the works of Homer.

Vandrare · 02-23-2003, 10:41 PM

well, the article seems to say a whole lot... lots of words... but not a whole lot of evidence included from a variety of sources to back it up. and obviously since its trying to prove a certain opinion instead of objectively trying to find the answers by searching through the best arguments on both sides, i definitely feel like the author is trying to brainwash me! its all a little too biased for me to swallow.

Jobar · 02-23-2003, 11:24 PM

As you can see, I moved the thread diana linked to, here to BC&A. So the regulars here get to feast upon it directly.

Bon apetit.

diana · 02-24-2003, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jobar
As you can see, I moved the thread diana linked to, here to BC&A. So the regulars here get to feast upon it directly.

Thank you, mate.

Quote:

Bon apetit.

Indeed.

d

Vorkosigan · 02-24-2003, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jobar
As you can see, I moved the thread diana linked to, here to BC&A. So the regulars here get to feast upon it directly.

Bon apetit.

Alas, it is the same thin soup one always gets from CARM. As bland as fast food, mostly empty calories. One searches in vain for a new apologistic argument.

Vorkosigan

CX · 02-26-2003, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by River
The Bible is a subset of a much larger document that scholars call Q. Some scholars have indicated that the Q is the Tibetan text known as Aramaic Matthew.

1)The Bible is not a subset of "Q". "Q" is a hypothetical document used by scholars to explain the agreement between GMt and GLk when they are not using GMk and consists mostly of saying material found in the synoptic gospels.

2)There is no evidence for an Aramaic GMt apart from one enigmatic comment attributed to Papias by Eusebius. As far as I know the idea that "Q" was an Aramaic GMt has been largely abandoned by the academic community.

Haran · 02-26-2003, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by CX
2)There is no evidence for an Aramaic GMt apart from one enigmatic comment attributed to Papias by Eusebius. As far as I know the idea that "Q" was an Aramaic GMt has been largely abandoned by the academic community.

Hi CX. There is more than just Papias quoted by Eusebius.

There is also Jerome who said the following:

Quote:

De Viris Illustribus 3:
Matthew who is also Levi, ex-publican apostle, composed the Gospel of Christ in Hebrew letters and words first in Judea, on account of those from the circumcision who believed; who later translated it in Greek is not quite certain. Futher, the Hebrew itself is still kept today in the Caesarean library, which Pamphilus the martyr diligently assembled.

I also got the opportunity from the Nazareans to copy this volume, which they use in Borea, a city in Syria. In it, it is noted that whenever the evangelist, either of his person or of the Lord Saviour, made full use of testimonies of the old scriptures, he did not follow the authority of Seventy translators, but the Hebrew. From which, these are two: Out of Egypt I have called my Son [2:15], and, For he shall be called a Nazarean. [2:23]

There may be a consensus of scholars who do not believe in an Aramaic GMt, but I'm not so sure they're right.

02-23-2003, 10:41 PM	#5
Vandrare Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Brisneyland Posts: 854	hmmm, divinely inspired eh? well, the article seems to say a whole lot... lots of words... but not a whole lot of evidence included from a variety of sources to back it up. and obviously since its trying to prove a certain opinion instead of objectively trying to find the answers by searching through the best arguments on both sides, i definitely feel like the author is trying to brainwash me! its all a little too biased for me to swallow.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-23-2003, 05:03 PM	#2
River Banned Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: NY Posts: 3,680	I wouldn't go so far out to say that the Bible is divine. However , the Bible did say that Ishmael shall have a Great Nation ( Islam)....and it was right. Not to mention the Coming of the Comforter ( Prophet Muhammad)....and it was right again...However, I don't believe the Bible was divine. After all, how many people here have read Gospel of Barnabus, the Book of Enoch, the Gospel of Thomas... All these chapters are not included in the Canon. The Bible is a subset of a much larger document that scholars call Q. Some scholars have indicated that the Q is the Tibetan text known as Aramaic Matthew. The Quran also mentions that Christ was given" a" Gospel ( singular) called Al-Injil.

02-23-2003, 08:44 PM	#4
Bobzammel Regular Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Boston Posts: 276	The prophecies and other elements have been debunked repeatedly on this site and others. As for historical accuracy, while the bible contains a fairly accurate(although exaggerated and at points biased) history of Israel, so do the documents of many religions and folktales, such as the works of Homer.

02-23-2003, 11:24 PM	#6
Jobar Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: secularcafe.org Posts: 9,525	As you can see, I moved the thread diana linked to, here to BC&A. So the regulars here get to feast upon it directly. Bon apetit.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.