Trusting The Bible, Prophecy And Probability

[Guest Jenny911]

The Bible is has been the most translated book in the world. The fulfilled prophecies it contains could not have occured randomly... there 2500 prophecies in the Bible 2000 of which have already come to pass!

 

Check out this vid which lists some of the fulfilled Bible prophecies: http://www.proofdirectory.com/videos.htm

 

Isn't this proof?

 

Jenny

[The-Captain]

No offense but this sounds an awful lot like a spoofer.....

 

But in case you are for real I'll address first the points in the first video about Christ's existence.

 

Ok very briefly, scant evidence of the existence of a man named Jesus=Yeshua=Joshua (Josh?) of Nazareth/Bethlehem does not validate the other claims about him. First there were many men named Jesus, we cant always be sure if the records we look at our talking about the itinerant preacher Jesus. And again some simple logic, just because someones past existence can be proven doesnt mean that all claims made about him have creedence.

 

And on the subject of the prophecies concerning Jesus alot of those that theologians like to use for statistics are taken out of context, some arent even prophecies at all but snips of poems or other statements. Now I cant address all of them specifically but if you look around the site they have pretty much all been examined at one point or another.

 

Oh, and a little thing about all the other biblical prophecies, they always taught me in church and school that the test of a prophet is 100% accuracy....well the bible fails in that regard then. If I remember correctly Isaiah prophecied the desolation and destruction of Egypt, not in the far off future, but within a few years. That obviously never happened and its not the only one.

 

Anyway welcome to the site, stick around, have fun , as you either thicken your skull or unstop your ears.

[Guest Jenny911]

No offense but this sounds an awful lot like a spoofer.....

 

But in case you are for real I'll address first the points in the first video about Christ's existence.

 

Ok very briefly, scant evidence of the existence of a man named Jesus=Yeshua=Joshua (Josh?) of Nazareth/Bethlehem does not validate the other claims about him. First there were many men named Jesus, we cant always be sure if the records we look at our talking about the itinerant preacher Jesus. And again some simple logic, just because someones past existence can be proven doesnt mean that all claims made about him have creedence.

 

And on the subject of the prophecies concerning Jesus alot of those that theologians like to use for statistics are taken out of context, some arent even prophecies at all but snips of poems or other statements. Now I cant address all of them specifically but if you look around the site they have pretty much all been examined at one point or another.

 

Oh, and a little thing about all the other biblical prophecies, they always taught me in church and school that the test of a prophet is 100% accuracy....well the bible fails in that regard then. If I remember correctly Isaiah prophecied the desolation and destruction of Egypt, not in the far off future, but within a few years. That obviously never happened and its not the only one.

 

Anyway welcome to the site, stick around, have fun , as you either thicken your skull or unstop your ears.

 

No I'm not a "spoofer" or spammer if that's what you assumed.

 

Could you kindly pass a Bible reference on Isaiah's prophecy concerning Egypt?

 

The man Jesus is really no myth, the concept that there could be many people who were named Jesus does not dismiss the fact that the Jesus of Nazareth, which the Jews rejected and the Romans crucified, stands out to the others.

[The-Captain]

Concerning Jesus, my point was that reference to him or evidence for him does not validate any of the supernatrual claims made about him.

 

And here is a link to the Isaiah reference and several others

 

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/prophecies.html?200524

 

I would also encourage you to read up on the rest of this site alot of interesting info on there.

 

And sorry about the spoofer suspicions, it just seemed that your OP was either highly sarcastic or very convinced, I see it was the latter.

[Jubilant]

Hi Jenny, would you be willing to articles against these so-called "fulfillments"? If not, why not? In case you are willing to look into reasons why those prophecies are not accepted, here are a few links:

 

Ezekiels Tyre Prophecy: Failed

Prophecy in the Bible

The Lowdown on God's Showdown

[Kelli]

I predict that neither Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, nor George Bush will be president of the United States after the upcoming election.

 

There, see, I can make accurate predictions too.

 

Sorry, but I've been there a thousand times over. I lived the born-again Christian life from age 15 until three years ago. I've heard it all, seen it all, through Sunday service, Sunday School, revival meetings, blah blah...

 

BTW, have you ever heard of self-fulfilling prophecy? If any of these alleged prophecies actually "come true" it's quite possible that they "come true" because people who believe in them make them "come true."

 

"Israel will become a nation again..." Ever think that people who believe in these prophecies made sure it happened through religious and political influence?

 

Hmmmm. Maybe I should actually watch this video so I can address more "prophecies" in detail. That's the only one I can think of right now. Once upon a time I was a staunch believer and supporter of this stuff.

[Kelli]

OK. This video is trying to show proof that Jesus existed, which is sketchy at best.

 

Even if the evidence was overwhelming that he did exist, so what? Even Christians and theologians can't agree on the details of his life, and the birth, death and resurrection stories are full of holes.

[crazy-tiger]

The man Jesus is really no myth

Ah, yet another Christian who thinks proof of someone existing is proof that they were the son of God...

 

That standard of proof, and the logic it uses, is useless... For example, L Ron Hubbard existed, therefore the Xenu are real. Joseph Smith existed, therefore the angels visited him and gave him golden plates. Muhhamed existed, therefore the Angel Gabriel came to him and told him the truth about God.

 

See the problem? That standard of proof only proves that all claims are true.

 

 

 

Meanwhile, the video/s you linked to... the very first claim is about Justin Martyr and the "taxing" claim. The fact that there were NO records of any such taxing/census around the time of Jesus's birth, that Herod died 10 years before Cyrenius became govenor, that the only census ordered by Ceaser Augustus was 7AD, that there was no King Herod in Judea at the time of the census, that the death of Herod puts Jesus's birth at 4BC, that Jesus would have been 11 years old at the time of the census...

 

Frankly, the very first claim in the video is simply that Bethlehem existed... which was NEVER in doubt.

 

 

With the complete denial of facts that video shows in it's attempt to prove Jesus existed as the son of god, there's no point continuing with it since it's going to be, at best, a thoughroughly distorted mish-mash of twisted historical claims... and that's me being kind.

[Mythra]

Wow. Even Josh McDowell would be embarrassed by the level of scholarship in this video.

 

There's only one problem with the "125" prophecies of Christ being fulfilled.

 

There's no convincing evidence that they ever were fulfilled, except in story and legend.

 

All accounts of the gospel Jesus (as opposed to Paul's christology) derive from a single account. The one attributed to Mark. The gospel writers had the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) in their hands as they crafted the story lines and developed their themes.

 

It would be phenomenally stupid on the part of the inventors if Jesus didn't fulfill prophecies. And even so, they didn't do a very good job of it. Many of the "prophecies" strain credulity to the breaking point.

 

And there are other difficulties as well. Such as the discussions between Jesus and Pharisees that contain double entendres that only exist in the Greek language. (when the conversation could not have occurred in the Greek language) And the presence of Pharisees and Synagogues in Galilee in the early first century. (a complete anachronism)

 

Kind of tough making the claim that the Testimonium Flavianum testifies to a historical Jesus also - since it is one of the most disputed passages in all antiquity.

[GraphicsGuy]

Considering how hit or miss all "prophecy" throughout history has ever been it is far more likely that the "predictions" in the Bible were written after the events they supposedly predicted.

 

Plus, hindsight is 20/20. You could make almost any event fit any prophecy by putting the right twist on the words.

 

Prophecy is not proof of anything. Not to mention it also suggests that we are pawns in a cosmic game of chess. Our paths irrevocably set by the words of an ancient.

[SWIM]

There is more evidence that "jesus" did not fullfill the coming messiah prophecies.

 

In fact, *if* you dare read this link and think it over for yourself, you will see that jesus was not the biblical messiah at all, according to prophecy:

 

http://skeptically.org/newtestament/id21.html

[Mythra]

And, of course, we always run into the worn out "who would die for a lie" argument (concerning the disciples).

 

I'll just paste my reply from the Colliseum regarding this common apologetic assertion:

 

This argument is based on several assumptions. One is that the book of Acts is an accurate depiction of the early history of the church. And, there are a great many New Testament scholars who don't think it is. They think Acts paints a picture that those who were advancing the faith wanted to paint. And it's highly likely that Acts wasn't even written until sometime in the second century.

 

Basically, there is no evidence, outside of the NT - that there even were twelve disciples.

 

And the accounts of the disciples' martyrdom come hundreds of years after they supposedly happened, placing their martyrdom into the realm of christian legend, not fact.

 

And there are contradictory accounts, at least one of them very early.

 

from HIPPOLYTUS (late 2nd century C.E.):

 

John, again, in Asia, was banished by Domitian the king to the isle of Patmos, in which also he wrote his Gospel and saw the apocalyptic vision; and in Trajan's time he fell asleep at Ephesus, where his remains were sought for, but could not be found.

 

And Matthew wrote the Gospel in the Hebrew tongue, and published it at Jerusalem, and fell asleep at Hierees, a town of Parthia.

 

Jude, who is also called Lebbaeus, preached to the people of Edessa, and to all Mesopotamia, and fell asleep at Berytus, and was buried there.

 

Simon the Zealot, the son of Clopas, who is also called Jude, became bishop of Jerusalem after James the Just, and fell asleep and was buried there at the age of 120 years.

 

And Matthias, who was one of the seventy, was numbered along with the eleven apostles, and preached in Jerusalem, and fell asleep and was buried there.

 

Naturally, most of this is legend, unless you believe that Simon the Zealot lived for 120 years, but not even the early Christians wildest legends say that all the disciples were martyred.

 

And, take a look at this: when the English historian Edwin Gibbon was writing "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", (in the 18th century) he took a look at the legends of the martyrdom of the disciples, and considered it so unreliable (historically speaking) that he declined to put the accounts into his great work.

 

Here is what he had to say on the subject:

 

"In this general view of the persecution which was first authorised by the edicts of Diocletian, I have purposely refrained from describing the particular sufferings and deaths of the Christian martyrs. It would have been an easy task. From the history of Eusebius, from the declamations of Lactantius, to collect a long series of horrid and disgusting pictures ...[snip] But I cannot determine what I ought to transcribe, till I am satisfied how much I ought to believe. The gravest of the ecclesiastical historians, Eusebius himself, indirectly confesses that he has related whatever might redound to the glory, and that he has suppressed all that could tend to the disgrace, of religion. Such an acknowledgement will naturally excite a suspicion that a writer who has so openly violated one of the fundamental laws of history has not paid a very strict regard to the observance of the other; and the suspicion will derive additional credit from the character of Eusebius, which was less tinctured with credulity, and more practised in the arts of courts, than that of almost any of his contemporaries." Vol 1, Chp 16, pg. 232.

 

Such is the fair deduction from two remarkable passages in Eusebius, l. viii. c. 2, and de Martyr. Palestin. c. 12. The prudence of the historian has exposed his own character to censure and suspicion. It was well known that he himself had been thrown into prison; and it was suggested that he had purchased his deliverance by some dishonorable compliance. The reproach was urged in his lifetime, and even in his presence, at the council of Tyre. See Tillemont, Memoires Ecclesiastiques, tom. viii. part i. p. 67 (same reference as above, pg. 736)

 

So, when the christians make the "why would the disciples die for a lie" claim - ask them how they know they did. It's christian legend. Not fact. Not even close.

 

Now, when we get to the second and third century, it is believed that there were christian martyrs for their faith. But, at that point, the WHO WOULD DIE FOR A LIE argument is gone. By that time, the argument becomes WHO WOULD DIE FOR THEIR RELIGION.

 

And history has shown countless times - people who were willing to die for their religion. All different religions.

 

Even in our times, I can think of plenty. Heaven's Gate. David Koresh & Co. Jim Jones & Co. the list is endless of people who were so brainwashed that they died for their faith.

[GraphicsGuy]

Good points, Mythra.

 

There are Muslims dying daily for their faith. Does that make Islam real?

[SWIM]

And, of course, we always run into the worn out "who would die for a lie" argument (concerning the disciples).

 

Good post mythra!

 

Also, "who would die for your sins" can be answered with "Someone who *really* does not have any supernatural powers, and *really* had no way out of getting hung on a cross."

[Mythra]

There are Muslims dying daily for their faith. Does that make Islam real?

 

Exactly.

 

People die for all kinds of stupid shit, once they get sideways in their heads. (something that religion and the promise of future paradise is utterly capable of accomplishing)

 

Hell, guys die because their girlfriends left them, for chrissakes.

 

Once the brain goes on tilt, it doesn't take much to willingly off oneself.

[SWIM]

Once the brain goes on tilt, it doesn't take much to willingly off oneself.

 

Aint that the truth. My sister's boyfriend shot himself in the head for no apparent reason... Hmmm.... Wonder what deep truth that gave to the world?

[Thackerie]

... All accounts of the gospel Jesus (as opposed to Paul's christology) derive from a single account. The one attributed to Mark. The gospel writers had the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) in their hands as they crafted the story lines and developed their themes.

 

It would be phenomenally stupid on the part of the inventors if Jesus didn't fulfill prophecies. And even so, they didn't do a very good job of it. Many of the "prophecies" strain credulity to the breaking point. ...

 

One of my favorite examples of the hilarity that ensues occurs in Matthew 21 where Jesus rides a colt and a donkey at the same time, like a circus stunt rider because the writer had mistranslated a totally unrelated passage from the OT (Zechariah 9:9) and tried to twist it into an omen.

[R. S. Martin]

Once the brain goes on tilt, it doesn't take much to willingly off oneself.

 

Aint that the truth. My sister's boyfriend shot himself in the head for no apparent reason... Hmmm.... Wonder what deep truth that gave to the world?

 

E X C E L L E N T POINT!

 

This argument about "who would die for a lie" came up in one of my seminary classes a few years ago. The man who raised it was an East Asian struggling with faith issues. He had been taught to be very fundamentalist and the classes presented him with very different ideas that caused a faith crisis. I wasn't aware of all of this at the time. So I just informed him of Russian Commies who died for their Cause in the nineteenth century. He did not even acknowledge hearing. I don't know how fundamentalist Christians from East Asia see Russians of the nineteenth century, but I am thinking it was probably too much information for him at the time. The human psyche can only handle so much at one time.

 

For me, however, learning about those political zealots had been quite an eye-opener. Apparently people died for a wide variety of reasons and not all of them for "Christ the Lord." More recently it has occurred to me that people volunteer to die for their country in time of war. Not all of these are religious. That, too, proves that people die for reasons other than the promise of eternal life.

[R. S. Martin]

The man Jesus is really no myth, the concept that there could be many people who were named Jesus does not dismiss the fact that the Jesus of Nazareth, which the Jews rejected and the Romans crucified, stands out to the others.

 

Perhaps there was a Jesus of Nazareth whom the Jews rejected and the Romans crucified (given that Jesus was a very common name), but it wasn't the Jesus of the Bible because Nazareth did not yet exist at the time that story is set for. So I've heard from a variety of sources. I don't know where to find the scholarship on this.

[Grandpa Harley]

WE NEED A SQUIDDIE FITTING TO THIS ONE... just incase it's not a dump and run fundie...

[Neon Genesis]

The Bible is has been the most translated book in the world. The fulfilled prophecies it contains could not have occured randomly... there 2500 prophecies in the Bible 2000 of which have already come to pass!

If the bible contains fulfilled prophechies, then tell me where in the bible is the prophecy in Matthew 2:23 made and who made it (here's a hint, this prophecy does not exist anywhere in the bible and Matthew just pulled it out of his ass)?

[Ouroboros]

The Bible is has been the most translated book in the world. The fulfilled prophecies it contains could not have occured randomly... there 2500 prophecies in the Bible 2000 of which have already come to pass!

You know that this is the criticism of Muslims. They claim (at least the ones I talked to) that the Bible is false because it has so many translations and they're all different. So the argument that it has many translations doesn't make it true, only that organizations have pushed really heard to evangelize everyone and forced their religion on other native religions. Good job! Oppression and intolerance is your proof of it's right. In other words, might makes right, that's the Christian way. (Which we already knew anyway)

 

The Muslims claim the Qu'ran contain 100% actual and correct scientific theories and proofs. They do it the same way as you do your prophecies. You bend the meaning of words and read "between the lines" to fit your intentions, and voila the "prophecy" is fulfilled. You know the 666 number has been fulfilled several hundred times already since 100 AD. I've heard the 666 representing so many different things that I'm not sure what is NOT 666 in our society. Everything from TV to credit cards to bar codes to bank accounts to social security number to zip code to ... you name it. WWW (internet) is also 666, so you are right now in the hands of the beast and serving antichrist. Maybe you should consider disconnecting your computer?

 

Check out this vid which lists some of the fulfilled Bible prophecies: http://www.proofdirectory.com/videos.htm

The video is full of assumptions. If you want to prove a point, stick to facts and not values.

[R. S. Martin]

WE NEED A SQUIDDIE FITTING TO THIS ONE... just incase it's not a dump and run fundie...

 

All the signs are there for being a dump-and-run. By comparing times this person seems to live in my time zone. That being the case, she was up and on the computer at the unearthly hour of 4:00 on a Saturday morning. She joined exC at 4:14 and posted the OP of this thread at 4:32. I know all about sleeping disorders and being up all hours of day or night so I have no right calling her on that...just saying she cannot have put too much thought into that first post.

 

Of course, we have no absolute evidence of how many months she lurked before signing up. It just seems that if she had actually been been reading this site an hour a day for several months she would not have posted such a shallow post.

 

But she definitely belongs in the squiddie thingie group.

[Ouroboros]

Good points, Mythra.

 

There are Muslims dying daily for their faith. Does that make Islam real?

It actually makes it more real (if that can be true of two identical delusions), considering that if someone is caught and sentenced for death for a belief, it doesn't always help to de-convert or admit to a lie at that point. If you faked it, it's too late, and you die a martyr even if you regret it and you just played around. But for a person to intentionally and with dedication go to his own death for what he believes, it requires a lot more faith in your religion. The suicide bombers really, really, do believe what they do is true. To be tried because you believe a little different and such, it happens all the time in the world. Even for political differences. People die because they don't agree to a politician. So to die a martyr is easy compared to offing yourself to prove a point. So in that sense, Islam should be considered a stronger candidate for "true" than Christianity. But what one should of course see from all this is that nothing is proven by someone's death. To die, is not to make true, not even if your name is Joshua.

[crazy-tiger]

... All accounts of the gospel Jesus (as opposed to Paul's christology) derive from a single account. The one attributed to Mark. The gospel writers had the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) in their hands as they crafted the story lines and developed their themes.

 

It would be phenomenally stupid on the part of the inventors if Jesus didn't fulfill prophecies. And even so, they didn't do a very good job of it. Many of the "prophecies" strain credulity to the breaking point. ...

 

One of my favorite examples of the hilarity that ensues occurs in Matthew 21 where Jesus rides a colt and a donkey at the same time, like a circus stunt rider because the writer had mistranslated a totally unrelated passage from the OT (Zechariah 9:9) and tried to twist it into an omen.

Courtesy of our very own Mr. Neil from way back in 2005....