Lautermilich Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Anyone have a web page that explains these claims as in this out of print Chick track? The entire track is here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedPillAddict Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Why does this look like a chinese restaraunt menu? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 I take combo # 5. Same old "he fulfilled the prophesies", and the answer is so simple: They wrote the stories about Jesus to fit into the prophesies. Btw, he didn't fulfill riding into Jerusalem on an ass, I think he used two. Was he hated? Secular and religious writers, living at the same time as Jesus, didn't mention him. So I don't think they even knew him well enough to hate him. "Declared to be son of God": By his own words only. Anyone can do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 You know what these "prophecies" are? Marketing! The early Christians were looking for ways to validate their mystery religion from the sacred texts of a popular religion. Amazingly, there are equally as many "prophesies" for Christ in the Greek philosophers and religions of the day also. These are proofs, not of a Christ, but of the ability of these folks to craft a creative sales angle. Just don't examine it too closely or you'll see all the glue in the jagged seams. When will these people give it up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Glue? I think I see some scotch tape and gum to keep some parts together! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted May 17, 2006 Share Posted May 17, 2006 Genesis 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." Ummm...not a prophesy. God could be speaking to the "heavenly host" of angels (Satan even). He could be using the "royal" 3rd person (no one argues the queen is three people in one). He could be referring to the fact that he used to be part of the Ugartitic pantheon. mwc Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel." Applies to every person ever born. What? People and snakes don't get along? Oh my. Quite a fulfullment there jesus. mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted May 17, 2006 Share Posted May 17, 2006 I'm not doing all of these but in Matthew 2 the claim is: 4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born. 5 And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet, 6 And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel. Micah 5 (KJV) 2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. We need to be sure about this so let's look at Young's: 2 And thou, Beth-Lehem Ephratah, Little to be among the chiefs of Judah! From thee to Me he cometh forth -- to be ruler in Israel, And his comings forth [are] of old, From the days of antiquity. And the JPS Bible (Micah 5:1): But thou, "Beth-lehem Ephrathah, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from ancient days. In every case "Beth-lehem Ephrathah" is a reference to a clan and not a city. Matthew did not understand this and created a whole story about taxes to support the city of Bethlehem birth (and makes Herod's Jewish priests look like total idiots since they also missed this vital point...oh well...so did god I guess when you think about it). I could be mistaken but I'm pretty sure that jesus cannot trace his lineage to the clan of Beth-lehem Ephrathah and so this is also something he did not fulfill. mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted May 17, 2006 Share Posted May 17, 2006 Last one (I've typed up a number of things about these stupid prophecies so I'm just tracking those down...I'll just quote the whole thing): 8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. Now the KJV gets the translation wrong here since it's really more like "It is said" so we can't pin that on Paul (except that Paul is using this as if it is a prophect which I will *PROVE* is no such thing).9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? However, his usage of the "borrowed" passage and how it pertains to jesus is, well, dishonest. This is propaganda at it's finest and things like this allowed many a bad guy (I hate to say Hitler but the bible enabled him exact a lot of control over the people using the *exact* same methods that Paul employs). Anyhow, Paul is refering to Psalm 68: 18 Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men Hmmm...okay. Let's read the next couple of verses of Paul's just to see where he's going. 9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) Alright, he draws the parallel of the ascension in Psalm to jesus descending to earth and then back to heaven. He shows how jesus was to essentially rid us of our captivity in sin. Sounds good...until... I cheated just like Paul did. I didn't quote all of Psalm 18. Let's try again (I separated the verse where Paul leaves off): 18 Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them. Uh oh. This doesn't fit Paul's theology. Why would god want to live among the rebellious? This is *after* the ascension mind you so what's really going on here? It makes no sense with the complete verse used. Is this really a fulfillment of prophecy as Paul seems to imply? There's only one way to find out and that is to look at Psalm 68 a little closer: So from verse 1-14 there are the usual praises that are everywhere in Psalms. Feel free to read that on your own since it doesn't impact on what Paul was writing about. 15 The hill of God is as the hill of Bashan; an high hill as the hill of Bashan. 16 Why leap ye, ye high hills? this is the hill which God desireth to dwell in; yea, the LORD will dwell in it for ever. The above two verses speak of the hill or mountain of Bashan. It tells how the mountain is jealous of the hill/mountain where god chooses to now live. The original hill of god is Mt. Sinai and Bashan is one of its eight names (according to Jewish midrash): (Understanding these names while reading the passage is important) Har Sinai - from the word sneh - "bush." This refers to the burning bush on Har Sinai. Also, Sinai is related to the word sinah - "hatred" and "rejection." By giving the Torah to human beings instead of to the angels, G-d thereby rejected the angels. Har Ha-Elokim - "G-d's Mountain," because G-d revealed His Torah there to the Jewish people. Through the Torah, the Jews become a G-dly people. Beit Imi - "My Mother's House." By accepting the Torah the Jews were born as a nation. Har Chorev, from the word "cherev" - "sword." The Torah invests special Torah courts, sanhedrin, with authority to try capital cases. Har Chemed - "Desirable Mountain." G-d desired Mount Sinai as the place from which to give the most desirable of treasures, the Torah. Har Bashan from the word "shen" - "tooth." Sustenance and blessing come to the world in the merit of Torah study and observance. Just as teeth prepare the food for digestion, so too the Torah brings nourishment to the world. Har Gavnonim, from the word "gevina" - "cheese." Cheese is a metaphor for purity, probably because it's made from pure white milk. Har Moriah - "Mountain of Teaching," where G-d taught Moses the Torah. It would, in context, appear to be jealous of the temple mount where it is known god made his home in the temple. 17 The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels: the Lord is among them, as in Sinai, in the holy place. 18 Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them. This is about how god came from Sinai into the "holy place" (which appears to be the temple there as it is commonly referred to as the holy place and we know god lives in the Holy of Holies in the temple). People brought his "captives" (the Israelites) with him and received gifts from those people as well as people who were against them. This has also been translated as "gifts for men" and it's easy to see what those gifts are based on the names of Mt. Sinai (the Torah and all the knowledge having to do with it). The above two verses are the key to once again exposing the deception that Paul so frequently employs. This isn't about jesus going up from the earth (or an underworld even) into heaven. It is only about god moving from atop Mt. Sinai into his "permanent" home in the temple. The mountains should not be jealous that god no longer chooses to live upon them even though they are majestic. This verse also proves that this god was a mountain god (more than likely a volcano god based on other references in the bible especially those concerning Mt. Sinai. In fact, this would be the pillars of smoke and fire observed by the Hebrews as they sought out their god since it states here that god lived *in* the mountain and he would forever but that didn't stop him from going with the Jews to his new home). 19 Blessed be the Lord, who daily loadeth us with benefits, even the God of our salvation. Selah. 20 He that is our God is the God of salvation; and unto GOD the Lord belong the issues from death. 21 But God shall wound the head of his enemies, and the hairy scalp of such an one as goeth on still in his trespasses. These three verses basically tell how god takes care of his chosen ones (the Jews obviously) by tending to their needs and how he will brutally take care of the rest. 22 The Lord said, I will bring again from Bashan, I will bring my people again from the depths of the sea: 23 That thy foot may be dipped in the blood of thine enemies, and the tongue of thy dogs in the same. God then shows his "love" of all mankind. The blood of the enemies of Israel will be basically running in the streets so that the Jews will step in in and dogs will lick it. His endless mercy and compassion are evident. 24 They have seen thy goings, O God; even the goings of my God, my King, in the sanctuary. 25 The singers went before, the players on instruments followed after; among them were the damsels playing with timbrels. David speaks of people actually seeing god in the temple and then as you can see David is changing focus away from the part we care about. Now I've read quite a bit on this passage and I couldn't find a single apologist that hasn't bastardized the absolute *written* words to suit their jesus agenda. I defy you to point out any reference to jesus or any prophecy at all in this passage. The story is written in past and present tense. God came from Mt. Sinai, with his chosen people, and went up into his new home on the temple mount. Nothing more is written here. To create a parallel to anything is simply rediculous and unreasonable. David knew of no jesus so this must be a prophecy, right? However, this isn't in the form of prophecy and as I just pointed out, is a retelling of events that have already occured except for the promise to smite the enemies of the Jews (that's been on-going for some time now). We can quickly review Paul again: 8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. --- omitted section of verse 18 --- yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them. 9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) Where did these ideas come from? Are they in the Psalm? No they aren't. He uses his trick of chopping of parts of verses that don't agree with his theology and then uses that bastardized verse to build his false argument that the Psalm was speaking of jesus when it is quite evident that the passage was about no such thing and could not be in relation to any assumed "but he descended first" nonsense. The captivity was in relation to the Jews (they are his captives...other translations have "taking your prisoners with you," "leading captives in your train," "led captive Your captives" and "You have led captive {Your} captives" - see Judges 5:12 for a similar verse) and not from sin. In addition there is absolutely *NO* mention of heaven in the text. Not even *GOD* lived in heaven but on a mountain in the passage. Paul once again lies outright to trick people into believing him and his doctrine. Are you really surprised the Jews wanted nothing to do with this man? mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Gods Fail Posted May 17, 2006 Share Posted May 17, 2006 Here's an even better refutation: who gives a shit whether Jebus fulfilled a bunch of vague prophecies in a book of stone-age fairy tales? You can choose to believe in talking snakes and angels on horseback, but why would anyone believe you? Xtianity is like a suit stitched together by one single thread (infallibility). Pull it once, and the whole thing falls apart. If there's just one untruth in the bible, it's pretty much crap. Dinosaurs? Age of the world is 10,000 years? Stars are meteors? The Earth is a giant square supported by pillars? Pick your thread and pull it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Gods Fail Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 PS: Sorry, just had to rant there for a second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skankboy Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Why would Jews believe he was in heaven? Jews don't believe in heaven! How could a Rabbi NOT know the apporpriate answers to these challenges? Over a thousand years not long enough to come up w/an appropriate response? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Friendly Misanthrope Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 I just love those cartoons! Better than the Sunday Funnies, they are! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. XC Posted May 23, 2006 Share Posted May 23, 2006 Anyone have a web page that explains these claims as in this out of print Chick track? The entire track is here I keep a few links handy for the Christianity vs. Judaism thing. I find them handy because I would trust Judaism before I trust Christianity due to Judaism's age and originality (not copying from paganism, for example). In that track, they show their lack of understanding of Judaism. It is quite sad really. http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/ http://www.messiahtruth.com/response.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duderonomy Posted May 25, 2006 Share Posted May 25, 2006 Sorry, I don't have anything that explains that Chick track, or any other. They aren't Christian according to any Bible I've ever read (except in their hatred of humanity), and they sure aren't non-Christian in scope. My thought would be that they are the product of a sick and hateful mind, and have no place in any argument, for or against Christianity. The claims of any Jack Chick tract are just moot. No Christian, no non-Christian, and certainly no Devil worth his salt would hold such an untenable position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. XC Posted May 25, 2006 Share Posted May 25, 2006 Sorry, I don't have anything that explains that Chick track, or any other. They aren't Christian according to any Bible I've ever read (except in their hatred of humanity), and they sure aren't non-Christian in scope. My thought would be that they are the product of a sick and hateful mind, and have no place in any argument, for or against Christianity. The claims of any Jack Chick tract are just moot. No Christian, no non-Christian, and certainly no Devil worth his salt would hold such an untenable position. I agree with the point of this. This is not officially taught in the bible (although I can see their attempts at "connecting the dots"), but if you run one of these by most Christians, they will probably say "yeah, I agree with that." So while it is not Christian in theological context, I would say it is accepted by most Christians, which is quite scary. I suppose what I said under General Theological Issues / Quite A Guilt Trip applies here as well. Just another mind trying to propagate their own religious views regardless of if they are doing it the right way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BradtheImpaler Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 I like the part where the kid shows the Rabbi the list of "Messianic Prophecies" in the Old Testament and the Rabbi says... "Gasp! I've never seen these scriptures before!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 I like the part where the kid shows the Rabbi the list of "Messianic Prophecies" in the Old Testament and the Rabbi says... "Gasp! I've never seen these scriptures before!" Yeah. It's like showing E=mc^2 to Einstein and he shouts "wow, I've never seen this formula before!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgnosticBob AtheistPants Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 I like the part where the kid shows the Rabbi the list of "Messianic Prophecies" in the Old Testament and the Rabbi says... "Gasp! I've never seen these scriptures before!" Not to play the devil's advocate or anything, but actually, he says "Gasp! I've SEEN these scriptures before! If I accept them, my people will disown me!" In my opinion, this makes it even more ludicrous. It's as if he's seen them, they make sense to him, but becuase the Jewish community would disown him if he accepted them as truth, he refuses to. In other words, all of us are lemmings following our specific cultural or societal biases and beliefs unless we believe the contrived HORSESHIT the Christians base their philosophy on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japedo Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 Anyone have a web page that explains these claims as in this out of print Chick track? The best way to dispute this Bullshit is hit them with an education and correct their misinterpretations of Jewish laws and learning. They don't even have the basics right, to no surprise I guess. This track is a shinning example of how Christians prove they are retarded, lazy and incapable of studying their 'founding' religion. Christians are completely ignorant about the Jewish concept of the Messiah. The JEWISH MESSIAH is not and never will be a godman, it's just a man. The Jewish Messiah will never ever be worshiped, just as Moses was never worshiped. It is said that one walks the earth every generation but it is up to him if he wants to take the challenge. In Jewish belief, it's better to doubt god exists then to worship another god. Let me also stress that it is also a belief that converting a Jew is equivalent to raping their soul. The fact that they have a rabbi looking as if he's fkn clueless shows that their ultimate goal is to convert every Jew to their pagan blood cult. This scenario would NEVER happen to an educated Jew. Never!! A Jew is Required to know the torah by heart. A Jew doesn't need to ask a godman for forgiveness, they suffer for their own sins during Yom Kippur, and make right wrongs they've made. The Jewish God never has required blood to give forgiveness, only pagan evil gods do that. One would have to get in touch with a Rabbi and have some serious lessons in order to deprogram what the xtain church has taught. A lesson in the Jewish Concept of Sacrifice can be found here for aguments sake: Vayikra (Leviticus 1-5) The Mystery of the Sacrifices Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts