Is Science getting closer to God and the Bible?

[kmortis]

Why do I get the feeling that this post will be convieniently ignored?

Um, because you have a short term memory?

 

[Tanstaafl]

What were we talking about?

 

[joobz]

Um, because you have a short term memory?

What's happening to me? I used the word post instead of thread. what's next?!?

 

[Frozenwolf150]

Here's a thought.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/

When DOC can make a coherent argument that doesn't commit any of these, I'll consider a direct response to his posts. As it stands right now though, I have no reason to think I won't be ignored if I point out that his "proof" for the resurrection is as circular as using DC Comics to prove the existence (and resurrection) of Superman, or that most if not all of the "prophecies" Jesus fulfilled have already been disproven.

I probably won't get anywhere either by pointing out that it's the task of modern day Christians not to focus on the literal words of the gospels, but to contemplate and share in the experience that lead the authors to write as they did about the figure of Jesus. People have used symbolic and hyperbolic language to express feelings or sentiments that they would otherwise lack the means to communicate. The so-called miracles or fulfilled prophecies are not literal events, but interpretive signs.

 

[articulett]

Here's a thought.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/

When DOC can make a coherent argument that doesn't commit any of these, I'll consider a direct response to his posts.

As a skeptic, I temper my expectations of "miracles"--hence I think "if" is more appropriate than "when" in the above sentence.

 

[DOC]

I am asking for evidence not opinion. I am sorry to inform you that even Jesus's opinion is not evidence.

I would also point out that even if their was evidence for the resurrection that would still not be evidence for the God of the bible; your claim.

I gave "some" evidence for both the Resurrection and for the God of the Bible.

"Evidence for the Resurrection" by Josh McDowell:

http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html


God of the Bible:

Fulfilled Prophecy - by Dr. Hugh Ross

http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/prophecy.shtml

 

[DOC]

And anyone can read your threads and see it for themselves. In fact, I invite any lurkers to do so, you'll get a very good insight into the mind of DOC.

I invite them also. They can just go to my "profile page" by hitting "DOC", and find a link to all my threads there.

 

[Fitter]

I gave "some" evidence for both the Resurrection and for the God of the Bible.

And Woollery explained to you how your "evidence" isn't really evidence. For you to repeat it provides evidence that you are
A LIAR.

 

[joobz]

Hmm, You challenged Wollery with:

Your post has a lot of generalized statements with no post numbers to back them up. Please say what exactly was refuted and either how it was refuted or in what post number it was refuted. Anybody can say we did this and we did that.

And how come its OK for atheists to accept that some unusual Energy exploded and formed the matter to make 10 billion trillion stars simply because many scientists they don't know theorized it happened. Isn't that an appeal to authority. The scientists can't explain the laws of physics that made this happen and yet many in here accept it because others say so.

To which I replied, quite clearly...

Well you asked.
You gave an appeal to authority which provided no evidence simply some other guys assertion. This man is a christian looking for confirmation of his belief and is unlikely to be truly honest about such matters. Especially considering that his language is such hyperbole.

The posts that refuted this claim for pretty much these reasons are
Thread: Most atheists do not know what science says about our origins post:373
Thread: Most atheists do not know what science says about our origins post:379
Thread: Most atheists do not know what science says about our origins post:380
Thread: Most atheists do not know what science says about our origins post:392
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:142
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:143
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:144
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:145
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:148
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:151
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:152
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:154
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:169
Thread: It is quite certain Peter spent his last years in Rome post:232
Thread: Who was Jesus? Post:21
Thread: Who was Jesus? Post:22
Thread: Who was Jesus? Post:26
Thread: Who was Jesus? Post:27

Not once, in any of these posts have you actually presented ANY OF THE EVIDENCE that Thomas Arnold claims is so convincing. Knowing you, you would have presented it if it existed. The fact that you fail to do so is clear enough admission to me that you do not have such evidence and neither did Thomas Arnold.

And then you say...

I invite them also. They can just go to my "profile page" by hitting "DOC", and find a link to all my threads there.

Interesting. I can't help but notice that you completely avoided my rebuttal of your challenge. I would expect that if someone was truly serious about making a claim, they would directly address any argument made against them. Especially one that clearly demonstrates the weakness of your claims.

 

[H3LL]

I gave "some" evidence for both the Resurrection and for the God of the Bible.

"Evidence for the Resurrection" by Josh McDowell:

http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html


God of the Bible:

Fulfilled Prophecy - by Dr. Hugh Ross

http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/prophecy.shtml

I'm astounded by what you consider evidence.

I have lots and lots and lots of things for you to buy. Please get in touch.

How do you actually manage to function on a daily basis?



I liked this bit:

one of the most wicked, vicious, heartless hoaxes ever foisted on the minds of human beings

It went downhill from there on.

Also:

Abundant documentation shows that these prophecies were perfectly fulfilled in the life (and crucifixion) of Jesus Christ

That are so abundant that he can't cite any of them.

Can we have some more Lies for Jesus. I haven't seen anything new recently.

(Probability of DOC not using a logical fallacy = 1 in 10²⁵⁶)



If it is a logical fallacy... It in nonesense... Not worth anything... Not an argument... Useless... Wrong... Faulty... Incorrect...

DOC, you have been repeatedly asked to read up on logical fallacies.

Most people here are very familiar with most, if not all logical fallacies.

You have been given links to concise definitions and explanations of logical fallacies.

You are not going to slip a logical fallacy past anyone here.

You use a logical fallacy and it destroys your argument..immediately.

Repeating logical fallacies doesn't make them true...however many times you repeat them.

You keep on using logical fallacies in almost every post.

Why is that?


.

 

[Frozenwolf150]

You know, I'm rather familiar with most of the so-called prophecies that apologists claim Jesus fulfilled, and I can say with a fair degree of certainty that practically all of them are BS. If DOC wants to bring them up, or whichever ones he thinks are the most compelling, I'll gladly shoot them down one by one. Posting a link to some apologetics site and saying, "Hurrr, read it and you'll be convinced!" isn't going to work, because I could easily do the same in reverse, which would just be plain laziness.

But this is for another topic altogether. Go ahead, start a thread on "fulfilled prophecies" if you feel so inclined. I'll get my gaso-- I mean logical rebuttals ready.

 

[six7s]

If DOC wants to bring them up, or whichever ones he thinks are the most compelling, I'll gladly shoot them down one by one. Posting a link to some apologetics site and saying, "Hurrr, read it and you'll be convinced!" isn't going to work, because I could easily do the same in reverse, which would just be plain laziness

I assume, by your join-date and post-count, that you are not yet familiar with the pet trolls and their immunity to truth

Although DOC does believe (as opposed to think) that its his task to make an endless succession of unsubstantiated claims in favour of his mythical sky-daddy - for which he (again) believes he has more than enough compelling points - he does not want anyone to threaten his delusion

Makes me wonder why he is here on forums.randi.org... but there are plenty of other mysteries to investigate - some of which I might one day understand...

Go ahead, start a thread on "fulfilled prophecies" if you feel so inclined. I'll get my gaso-- I mean logical rebuttals ready.

I suggest you save your arsenal of woo-busters for other targets... DOC is so scarred that even the sharpest retort simply bounces off his thick hide

However, although incendiaries serve to fuel his ignorance, it can make for a fascinating display as yet another of his myths crashes and burns

 

[joobz]

Hmm, You challenged Wollery with:

To which I replied, quite clearly...


And then you say...


Interesting. I can't help but notice that you completely avoided my rebuttal of your challenge. I would expect that if someone was truly serious about making a claim, they would directly address any argument made against them. Especially one that clearly demonstrates the weakness of your claims.

*crickets*
DOC??
*crickets*
Are you there?
*crickets*
Do you wish to respond to this point?
*crickets*

 

[DOC]

You know, I'm rather familiar with most of the so-called prophecies that apologists claim Jesus fulfilled, and I can say with a fair degree of certainty that practically all of them are BS. If DOC wants to bring them up, or whichever ones he thinks are the most compelling, I'll gladly shoot them down one by one.

Well Dr. Hugh Ross claims there are about 2000 fulfilled prophesies in the bible. I won't ask you to comment on all 2000 but you could start with these two from his article entitled "Fulfilled Prophesies":

In approximately 700 B.C. the prophet Micah named the tiny village of Bethlehem as the birthplace of Israel's Messiah (Micah 5:2). The fulfillment of this prophecy in the birth of Christ is one of the most widely known and widely celebrated facts in history.

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 105.)

In the fifth century B.C. a prophet named Zechariah declared that the Messiah would be betrayed for the price of a slave—thirty pieces of silver, according to Jewish law-and also that this money would be used to buy a burial ground for Jerusalem's poor foreigners (Zechariah 11:12-13). Bible writers and secular historians both record thirty pieces of silver as the sum paid to Judas Iscariot for betraying Jesus, and they indicate that the money went to purchase a "potter's field," used—just as predicted—for the burial of poor aliens (Matthew 27:3-10).

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 1011.)


http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/prophecy.shtml

Also from the above article by Dr. Hugh Ross is this statement:


Given that the Bible proves so reliable a document, there is every reason to expect that the remaining 500 prophecies, those slated for the "time of the end," also will be fulfilled to the last letter. Who can afford to ignore these coming events, much less miss out on the immeasurable blessings offered to anyone and everyone who submits to the control of the Bible's author, Jesus Christ? Would a reasonable person take lightly God's warning of judgment for those who reject what they know to be true about Jesus Christ and the Bible, or who reject Jesus' claim on their lives?

 

[six7s]

In approximately 700 B.C. the prophet Micah named the tiny village of Bethlehem as the birthplace of Israel's Messiah (Micah 5:2). The fulfillment of this prophecy in the birth of Christ is one of the most widely known and widely celebrated facts in history

Ermmm.... DOC... on a sceptics forum, a fact is something that was observed in reality... not in a fairy tale


The Skeptical Review Online: Print Edition: 1990-2002
Prophecy Fulfillment: An Unprovable Claim
by Farrell Till 1996 / January-February

Many people who cite Micah 5:2 as a case of amazing prophecy fulfillment don't realize that a person named Bethlehem was an Old Testament character who had descended from Caleb through Hur, the firstborn son of Caleb's second wife, Ephrathah ( 1 Chron. 2:18; 2:50- 52; 4:4). Young's Analytical Concordance, p. 92, identifies Bethlehem as the name of this person as well as the name of two different villages.

The NIV translates the relevant part of Micah 5:2 like this: "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah...." A clan, of course, is not a town, so if this translation is accurate, the prophet was speaking not of a place but a tribal family that would give rise to a ruler. The RSV, NRSV, NAS, NAB, NEB, REB, the Amplified Bible, the Jerusalem Bible, and others give similar renditions that agree that Micah was referring to a family clan rather than a town.

(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 105.)

I'm sincerely intrigued. Please do describe how you calculate these odd

 

[joobz]

So, going back to the OP, it seems that the answer is
No, Science has not gotten any closer to the bible.
As for getting closer to God, we must first establish that there is a god. As such, the only answer we can give for this question is mu.

 

[Hokulele]

This Dr. Hugh Ross' predictions?

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/10/hugh_rosss_testable_scientific.php

 

[joobz]

This Dr. Hugh Ross' predictions?

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/10/hugh_rosss_testable_scientific.php

So it seems.

I wonder why we haven't started worshiping William Gibson. After all, Neuromancer has had quite a number of prophetic predictions come to pass. http://www.oreillynet.com/etel/blog/2005/03/neuromancers_predictions_21_ye.html


And those only had a 1 in 1023051.23 chance of occuring.

 

[DOC]

Originally Posted by DOC
(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 105.)

I'm sincerely intrigued. Please do describe how you calculate these odd

Actually, that probability about the Bethlehem prophecy, was made by Dr. Hugh Ross in the article Fulfilled Prophecies.


http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/prophecy.shtml

He also said the chance of "all" 13 of the prophecies he listed in the article of being accurate (according to his estimate)
would be 1 to 10 to the 138 power or

1 to
1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

 

[six7s]

Actually, that probability about the Bethlehem prophecy, was made by Dr. Hugh Ross in the article Fulfilled Prophecies.


http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/prophecy.shtml

He also said the chance of "all" 13 of the prophecies he listed in the article of being accurate (according to his estimate)
would be 1 to 10 to the 138 power or

1 to
1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Thanks DOC, but I can count up to 138

OK... hmmm... here's your good Dr's methodology:

The estimates of probability included herein come from a group of secular research scientists. As an example of their method of estimation, consider their calculations for this first prophecy cited:

• Since the Messiah's ministry could conceivably begin in any one of about 5000 years, there is, then, one chance in about 5000 that his ministry could begin in 26 A.D.

• Since the Messiah is God in human form, the possibility of his being killed is considerably low, say less than one chance in 10.

• Relative to the second destruction of Jerusalem, this execution has roughly an even chance of occurring before or after that event, that is, one chance in 2.

Hence, the probability of chance fulfillment for this prophecy is 1 in 5000 x 10 x 2, which is 1 in 100,000, or 1 in 10⁵

Yeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeah

That's concatenate(('Y' + ('e'¹³⁸) + 'ah'));

I'm curious how a man awarded a Ph. D in astronomy by the University of Toronto in 1973 could be so mind-numbingly, galactically vague (i.e WRONG!) in his methodology two years later (in 1975)

Unless...

No, surely DOC would never resort to a misplaced 'appeal to authority' in order to promote a particular brand of woo

Silly me