Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aza wood · 05-14-2002, 09:16 AM

Jesus Was a False Prophet
by Donald Morgan

DETECTING A FALSE PROPHET

Quote:

The Bible provides a very simple method for determining whether a prophet is--or is not--a false prophet. The Bible says that Moses said that God said: "When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come about or come true, that is a word which the Lord did not speak; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously" (Deuteronomy 18:22). <>

Don, your title is "Jesus Is a false Prophet". From your first paragraph, it would appear, that the best you could hope for, is to prove that according to the Bible,( known to be ridden with errors) , "Jesus is a false prophet".

Quote:

DEATH FOR A FALSE PROPHET
The Bible also makes it very clear that it was no laughing matter to be guilty of having uttered a false prophecy--it was, in fact, such a serious crime against God that the DEATH PENALTY was REQUIRED! The Bible says that Moses said that God said: "The prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name which I did not command him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die" (Deuteronomy 18:20). <>

Again Don, you are referring to a book, that is known to be wrong, and giving credence to the words of Moses.(A confessed murderer) I would also like to mention, that you are using hear-say of the most suspicious manor. Listen to yourself, The (flawed) Bible said, that (The murderer) Moses said, That the (questionable) God said. Are you just making a joke here Don Morgan. So far you have proven nothing about "Jesus" but much about your aptitude, unless of course, your real name is Joe King.

Quote:

JESUS CLAIMED TO BE A PROPHET
The Bible makes it clear, too, that Jesus claimed to be speaking for God--thereby making himself out to be a prophet of God. The Bible says that Jesus made this claim on a number of occasions, and in many different ways. He said, for example: " I do nothing on my own authority, but speak as the Father taught me" (John 8:28), <>and "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30). <>[

Again "The Bible" this and "The Bible" that, Don you (should) know, as well as we, that, the Bible is wrong, so how can we trust the only evidence, that you have (so far) given us?

Quote:

JESUS UTTERS A FALSE PROPHECY
The Bible makes it equally clear that Jesus said that the coming of the kingdom of God was imminent. ['imminent' means "about to happen; impending"--not in the distant future, as the Church is so fond of teaching--but soon!] As a matter of fact, Jesus said that it would occur within the span of his own generation, during the lifetime(s) of one or more of his listeners: "Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power" (MK 9:1), <>"Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom" (Matthew 16:28), <>and "If I choose that he [John] remain until I come [again], what is that to you?" (John 21:22).

I have made the point, that you have no leg to stand on, when using the Bible for evidence, but since, you, believe that it is except able evidence, then , here is where you have misread this flawed book. All that is needed, to have a kingdom is to have a king, and subjects. You above, have acknowledged "God" when you used His words as evidence, saying "The Bible said, that Moses said that, God said" Since the kingdom is called "The Kingdom of God", all that is yet needed, are people who except "God" as a king, and twa-la. "The Kingdom of God has come." This happened in the apostle's life time, as predicted by "Jesus". As for your Bible verse, Mark 9:1. Don, all that needs to be done, to disprove your statement, is to read the very next few verses. Here they are, from Webster's Bible.

Mar 9:1 And he said to them, Verily I say to you, that there are some of them that stand here who shall not taste death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.Mar 9:2 And after six days, Jesus taketh [with him] Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth them up upon a high mountain apart by themselves; and he was transfigured before them. Mar 9:4 And there appeared to them Elijah, with Moses: and they were talking with Jesus. Mar 9:5 And Peter answered and said to Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah. Mar 9:6 For he knew not what to say: for they were greatly terrified. Mar 9:7 And there was a cloud that overshadowed them: and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him. As for your quote of Matt.16:28, IF is a BIG word!

Quote:

JESUS WAS A FALSE PROPHET
John has been dead, of course, for about 1900 years--as have all those who heard the words of Jesus--yet the kingdom of God has NOT come as Jesus promised that it would. Though he claimed to be speaking for God, the words of Jesus have NOT come true! Jesus was speaking presumptuously. He was, therefore--according to the Bible--a false prophet who deserved to die!

As stated before, all that is needed to have a kingdom, is a king and subjects, The one Whom you quoted above, "GOD is King, and the millions of subjects are well characterized by the 2000 year old Church/Kingdom.

Quote:

Note: there are many other examples of false statements which (according to the Bible) Jesus made. "Ask and it will be given you; seek and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened" (Matthew 7:7-8) <>is an obvious oversimplification, if not an outright falsehood.

Don,if you are going to use the error ridden Bible for examples, then use the whole statement. Again, all that is needed to explain what "jesus" was saying, is to read the remainder of his statement, found in the next few verses. Are you skipping these on purpose, Don? Is the 2000 year old "Jesus", the one that we have to worry about, being false here?

Quote:

"If you have the faith of a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move. And nothing will be impossible for you" (Matthew 17:20) <>is obviously an untrue exaggeration. "All things are possible to him who believes" (Mark 9:23) <>is in a similar category

Again, IF, is a big word. Faith does not have size. Remember Don, that you chose to use the flawed Bible, for your evidence. In the which "jesus" has given his followers eternal life. With infinite time, everything is possible.

Quote:

"He who believes in me will also do the works I do, and do greater things than these, because I go to the Father. Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it, that the Father may be glorified in the Son; if you ask anything in my name, I will do it" (John 14:12-14) <>are additional examples of promises (or prophetic remarks) which are very obviously untrue!

The flawed Bible that you are using for evidence, is full of places where all "Jesus's predictions" came true. The men that he was talking to, when he said all of these things, did just that, which "Jesus predicted." (according to your Bible)

Quote:

Not one believer yet has been able, for example, to walk on water, or change water to wine. And certainly no believer is so foolish to believe that whatever he asks in Jesus' name will be done for him--the excuses and explanations given by the average believer (and the Church) for unanswered prayer are ample proof of the untruth of Jesus' statements.

Don, if you interpret the bible any way that you want, then you can, of corse disprove what you claim that it means. That would be easy, and is what you are doing here. (1) The Bible says that Peter did walk on water, (2) but the statement that "Jesus" made was that those there that day hearing him, would do grater things than he had done, and not the same old things, like making wine out of water. Your Bible is full of such things, done by those that heard him say this.(3) You are claiming that he was talking to everyone. It does not say that. He was plainly talking, only, to those that head him.

Quote:

"These signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will expel demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will take up serpents [or snakes] and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not harm them" (Mark 16:17-18) <>are words that have attributed to Jesus (although many scholars consider these verses to be a late interpolation) and, tragically, have sometimes been taken so seriously by some believers that death (by snakebite or by poison) has been the result!

"Jesus" , the one that you are claiming was a false prophet, did not write the bible, as you say yourself, it may have been added to later. So how can you use this book as evidence to prove anything, against him.

Quote:

Fortunately, not many believers are willing to put these words to the test. If Jesus did, in fact, make this statement, he was obviously incorrect--and guilty, therefore, of still another false "prophecy." On the other hand, if Jesus did not utter these words, then the Bible is not trustworthy, and we cannot believe, with any certainty, anything else which the Bible purports to tell us about the life and teachings of Jesus!

With your own last statement Don, I rest my case!!!

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: aza wood ]

Liquidrage · 05-14-2002, 09:24 AM

Basically you seem to be saying that since the Bible is not the world of God that it can't be used to test whether or not Jesus was really the Son of God?

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Cause I don't disagree with that nor do I believe the original author does either.

aza wood · 05-14-2002, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Liquidrage:
Basically you seem to be saying that since the Bible is not the world of God that it can't be used to test whether or not Jesus was really the Son of God?

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Cause I don't disagree with that nor do I believe the original author does either.

What I'm saying is that, Mr. Morgan can not use a flawed book to prove anything, and sense that is all that he has tried to do. He has said/proven nothing of any importance to anyone. "Jesus" is unscaved by his post! That is unless, Mr. Morgon is just joking around. Which must be the case.

sidewinder · 05-14-2002, 09:47 AM

I think I agree with Aza. Why even bother referring to a statement attributed to Moses? It's almost as if Don is arguing as a religious Jew who believes in the divine inspiration of the Hebrew Bible and he's just trying to prove that Jesus wasn't the Jewish Messiah. Why not just judge Jesus by the words attributed to him in the canonical gospels? That's enough to show that, if Jesus did speak the verses referenced, that he was indeed wrong about the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of Yahweh.

Rational Ag · 05-14-2002, 10:06 AM

I think you guys are missing the point entirely.

From what I can tell, Don is writing that essay to the Christian, not to the atheist.

Many Christians cannot hold a conversation without referring to the bible. They hold the bible to be the inspired, inerrant word of god. To be able to speak with Christians on the issue, Don has given the Christian the benefit of the doubt that they bible is the word of God, and then goes on to show that Jesus was a false prophet. He is using biblical criteria to show Jesus and the New Testament stories concerning him to be bunk.

Don agrees with you that the bible is not historically reliable. His point in this essay is to show exactly that it is unreliable, by turning the criteria of the Bible back on itself to show that the Old Testament contradicts the New Testament.

-Rational Ag

Fastfalcon · 05-14-2002, 10:09 AM

Edited to remove unnecessary invective - Wizardry

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: Wizardry ]

Veil of Fire · 05-14-2002, 10:10 AM

Well shit, Clancy... if the Bible is such a horrible source...

JESUS NEVER EXISTED ANYWAY! So you're STILL wrong!

For crying out loud...

scombrid · 05-14-2002, 12:10 PM

Quote:

I have made the point, that you have no leg to stand on, when using the Bible for evidence, but since, you, believe that it is except able evidence, then , here is where you have misread this flawed book. All that is needed, to have a kingdom is to have a king, and subjects. You above, have acknowledged "God" when you used His words as evidence, saying "The Bible said, that Moses said that, God said" Since the kingdom is called "The Kingdom of God", all that is yet needed, are people who except "God" as a king, and twa-la. "The Kingdom of God has come." This happened in the apostle's life time, as predicted by "Jesus". As for your Bible verse, Mark 9:1. Don, all that needs to be done, to disprove your statement, is to read the very next few verses. Here they are, from Webster's Bible.

Goddamn, learn how to use a comma properly. Reading your post taught me what it must be like to be William Shatner when trying to speak. Your writing reads something like this. You used (pause) a flawed (pause) argument (pause) so you are (pause) wrong.

I ordinarily do not complain about grammar or spelling as I tend to be colloquial in style myself. However, I could hardly read your post for the excessive misplacment of commas.

Eventually I got your point and partially agree. It sucks to have to concede bullshit to make your point. However, keep in mind that the article is written for true believers. The first step in getting them to question their belief is to get them to recognize flaws in their dogma, even if that requires that you argue from the standpoint of the veracity of their text.

aza wood · 05-14-2002, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sidewinder:
I think I agree with Aza. Why even bother referring to a statement attributed to Moses? It's almost as if Don is arguing as a religious Jew who believes in the divine inspiration of the Hebrew Bible and he's just trying to prove that Jesus wasn't the Jewish Messiah. Why not just judge Jesus by the words attributed to him in the canonical gospels? That's enough to show that, if Jesus did speak the verses referenced, that he was indeed wrong about the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of Yahweh.

The point that i tried to make, was that Don himself says that, "Jesus" possibly did not make the N.T. statements, that he(Don)is using, as the only bases for his argument. He gives no evidence other than, what he himself shoots down. Don's case would only hold-up in an arena such as this, where most want it to prevail.

aza wood · 05-14-2002, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rational Ag:
I think you guys are missing the point entirely. From what I can tell, Don is writing that essay to the Christian, not to the atheist.

Many Christians cannot hold a conversation without referring to the bible. They hold the bible to be the inspired, inerrant word of god. To be able to speak with Christians on the issue, Don has given the Christian the benefit of the doubt that they bible is the word of God, and then goes on to show that Jesus was a false prophet. He is using biblical criteria to show Jesus and the New Testament stories concerning him to be bunk.

I'm sure that is how Don sees his effort, but according to the Bible he has proven nothing. You will notice that i have proven him wrong on every verse that he tries to use in this manor. The problem is the hypocritical nature of Mr. Morgan's documents. I have read maybe twenty of them and they all have this save duplicity. Xians are not allowed to say, " the bible says it, and that is evidence enough", so why should a well meaning atheist be allowed to do it. Fare is fare, or is it?

Quote:

Don agrees with you that the bible is not historically reliable. His point in this essay is to show exactly that it is unreliable, by turning the criteria of the Bible back on itself to show that the Old Testament contradicts the New Testament.-Rational Ag[/qb]

Where has Don done this here in this document?

[ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: aza wood ]

05-14-2002, 10:09 AM	#6
Fastfalcon Regular Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bermuda Posts: 114	Edited to remove unnecessary invective - Wizardry [ May 14, 2002: Message edited by: Wizardry ]</p>

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

05-14-2002, 09:24 AM	#2
Liquidrage Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Tallahassee Posts: 1,301	Basically you seem to be saying that since the Bible is not the world of God that it can't be used to test whether or not Jesus was really the Son of God? Please correct me if I'm wrong. Cause I don't disagree with that nor do I believe the original author does either.

05-14-2002, 09:47 AM	#4
sidewinder Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: omnipresent Posts: 234	I think I agree with Aza. Why even bother referring to a statement attributed to Moses? It's almost as if Don is arguing as a religious Jew who believes in the divine inspiration of the Hebrew Bible and he's just trying to prove that Jesus wasn't the Jewish Messiah. Why not just judge Jesus by the words attributed to him in the canonical gospels? That's enough to show that, if Jesus did speak the verses referenced, that he was indeed wrong about the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of Yahweh.

05-14-2002, 10:06 AM	#5
Rational Ag Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Houston Posts: 136	I think you guys are missing the point entirely. From what I can tell, Don is writing that essay to the Christian, not to the atheist. Many Christians cannot hold a conversation without referring to the bible. They hold the bible to be the inspired, inerrant word of god. To be able to speak with Christians on the issue, Don has given the Christian the benefit of the doubt that they bible is the word of God, and then goes on to show that Jesus was a false prophet. He is using biblical criteria to show Jesus and the New Testament stories concerning him to be bunk. Don agrees with you that the bible is not historically reliable. His point in this essay is to show exactly that it is unreliable, by turning the criteria of the Bible back on itself to show that the Old Testament contradicts the New Testament. -Rational Ag

05-14-2002, 10:10 AM	#7
Veil of Fire Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: South Carolina Posts: 451	Well shit, Clancy... if the Bible is such a horrible source... JESUS NEVER EXISTED ANYWAY! So you're STILL wrong! For crying out loud...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.