The Incredible odds of fulfilled bible prophecy

[joobz]

Really all of this is just another attack the messenger in anyway possible (and in the above case even if it doesn't make sense). Your statements add no new information to the thread. Its just a lot of mumbo jumbo, throw in a derogatory attack word every now and then, and hope you can derail the thread in anyway possible.

In a way though I glad your doing it, because it is slowly but surely eroding any credibility you have.

Are you truly willing to test this claim?
If my credibility is in such question as you claim it is, you should be able to find other forum members who would agree with you. Indeed, the majority of individuals here would be more than happy to honestly critique my level of credibility.

DOC, I shall assume your reluctance to take my challenge is an admission of guilt on your part. I will accept an apology any time you wish to offer one.

I know it will not stop, and you will continue to post "long" non-informative mumbo jumbo attack posts that make little sense. I guess I'll have to just ignore them and only respond to the few that make sense.

Please do no pretend that my posts don't make sense and use that lame excuse as a reason to ignore the facts I speak.

I challenge you to find a single post of mine (related to your arguments) that didn't make sense. I would be more than happy to explain it.

 

[Ocelot]

Posted by DOC:

Absolutely no bearing whatsoever on his supposed miracles and god status??

For argument sake, if there was a Son of God who performed miracles and was raised from the dead, would he more likely to be the best ethical teacher of all time or just a good Jew who followed the accepted Jewish laws of the Day.

The fallacy you're making is affirming the consequent.

In fact the presumption you're making in doing so are invalid also.

There is not reason to believe either that the son of God would be the best ethical teacher of all time, (after all his dad was a genocidal rapist) nor that Chirst was the best ethical teacher of all time. (after all he wasn't very hot on slavery or womens rights)

 

[Nogbad]

Christians perform all kinds of mental gymnastics to reconcile their views of a just god and a man they claim is the only route to salvation. What about the people born in 300 BCE, who never heard of Christ, how are they saved? What about the baby who dies in the womb, how is he saved? What about the child who grows up in the jungles of Brazil and never even suspects that the Bible exists? Does it make sense to condemn any of those souls for being innocent victims of circumstance? Conversely, if those souls can, by some divine loophole yet to be revealed, be saved in spite of the fact that they never accepted Jesus as their personal savior, does it make sense to condemn an ethical Muslim who thinks Jesus was a fine guy, but no finer than Moses? Or an ethical Buddhist, or an ethical atheist?

Most of them just shove questions like these into the "through a glass darkly" drawer, so they don't have to question their beliefs.

To be fair many theologians do not see this as a problem because they do not adhere to the rather narrow interpretation of who is in and who is out adopted by some. They do get lambasted as evil liberals by those who hold to rather specific points of order though

 

[DOC]

In Mathew Judas feels guilty, gives the 30 peices of silver back to the priests and hangs himself. The priests buy the field to bury strangers and that's why it is called "The field of blood". In Acts Judas himself buys a field with the 30 peices of silver and he falls and "bursts asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out". He dies in a fall. The field is then called the field of blood.

So which account is correct? Paul the Apostles (writer of Acts)?


Did Judas hang himself? Or did Judas die in a "headlong" fall? Before it's brought up a "headlong" fall cannot be construed as hanging yourself in any way. It says he was in the midst of his field not under, around, in, on top of or near a tree which they could easily have said if it were the case.

Did Judas keep the money and buy himself a field? Or did he "cast down" the 30 pieces of silver in the temple and fulfill Zecharia's (supposed) prophecy even though Mathew says it was fulfiling a prophecy by Jeremiah which was actually never made?

Once again we have the same thing as with the after the Resurrection minor inconsistencies as was pointed out in this post -- the major facts are the same.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3354084#post3354084


Yes, the major facts were similar in both accounts.

Judas died in a horrible way in both accounts and Judas' money was used for the buying of the field (field of blood) in both accounts.

Also this site gives a good explanation as why both accounts of Judas' death can legitimately be true.

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2846

And once again these minor differences show that the books of the New Testament are not merely copies of each other but independently written.

 

[fuelair]

Ah, but that article also states:

Well that's laughable enough on the surface. I would like Ms. Pagels to identify even one corner of the universe. Since the universe is three-dimensional, then the universe (in her view) must be like a triangular pyramid or tetrahedron. That's the only regular three-dimensional shape with four corners. And there are only four principle winds? I'm sure that navigators would gladly have their workload decreased by this marvelous discovery.

But then she goes on to admit:

So we don't know who they were but we trust that these unknown people were transcribing the literal word of God? So unless God himself did the editing during the fourth-century meetings, the validity of the various gospels (of which there were many) were indeed determined by committee. No amount of library research is going to change that fact. You have given this fourth-century committee the authority to decide what you belive is true. How does it feel having someone else in charge of your thoughts?

Actually, for DUK I feel certain he feels just fine having, let's say, someTHING in charge of his thoughts (even though it is clearly some random guys).

 

[Lothian]

Once again we have the same thing as with the after the Resurrection minor inconsistencies as was pointed out in this post -- the major facts are the same.

No, the stories have similarities unless you have evidence that Judas existed and evidence that this Judas got 30 pieces of silver and evidence that the money was spent on a field, etc.

 

[joobz]

And once again these minor differences show that the books of the New Testament are not merely copies of each other but independently written.

note to self: When making a story up, make sure to include various inconsistencies so that people will believe it better......

 

[JoeEllison]

Wait, he's claiming that the consistency counts as proof... and so does the inconsistency? Really?!?!

 

[nodoubt]

Now let’s look at the actual facts:

------------------------

1. At no time did Ceasar Augustus declare that the entire Roman empire should be counted. Augustus came into power on January 16, 27 BC and reigned for forty years dying on August 19, AD 14. Three Census' were performed at his command during his reign and counted Roman citizens only.

* In 28 BC the citizen population was 4,063,000 (including both men and women)
* In 8 BC - 4,233,000
* In AD 14 - 4,937,000

The population at around 4,000,000 seems very small but estimates put the world population that time at somewhere over 200,000,000 putting Romans at about 2-3% of the world population.

-----------------------------

2. Publius Sulpicius Quirinius was appointed governer of Syria in 6 AD and performed a census of the new Roman provinces of Syria and Iudaea for the purpose of taxation in 6/7 AD. Iudaea province was formed in 6 AD by combining Judea with Samaria and Idumea. It did not include the surrounding separate provinces of Galilee, Gaulanitis (the Golan), Peraea or the Decapolis. The capital was at Caesarea.

So now we see some more problems. Though the bible is correct in naming Quirinius as governor of Syria. He did perform a census it was not covering the entire Roman Empire as the bible claims. It covered only the provinces of Syria and Iudaea. It did NOT include the province of Galilee where Joseph and Mary came from and so not only were they exempt from taking part in the census they would not have been permitted to take part even if they wanted to (that would be like me as a Canadian trying to take part in a New York city Census).

2a. This claim comes with a bonus debunking as well! We know that Quirinius became governor in 6 AD. Well remember Herod the Great? He is the one who killed all the babies after Jesus was born (which was during the census)



Well… He died in 4 BC. A full 10 years BEFORE the census during which Jesus was supposed to be born. Isn’t history great?

--------------------------------

3. It states that “And everyone went to his own town to register”. And that Joseph had to go to Bethlehem as he was from the House of David (notice it does NOT say it was his home town or his father’s home town). As stated above this indicates the census was conducted based on Jewish tribal affiliation. Roman Census’ were not conducted based on local custom but the entire local taxable population. The census was actually conducted for the purpose of properly levying and enforcing taxes.

Also there are 12 tribes of Israel. That means if everyone had to return to the town his tribe originated from then the ENTIRE population of Israel would abandon most of the towns and return en masse to a total of 12 locations. This would not only be ruinous to the abandoned towns but also to the ones where everyone went. No census could possibly be conducted in such a fashion.

--------------------------------

4. Was Joseph from Galilee? There is no extrabiblical evidence for it but ALL of the gospels agree that is where he was from. As already stated above Galilee was not included in the census. Joseph would not have taken part.

---------------------------------

So not only is no prophecy fulfilled, your book is shown to be very inaccurate historically and impossible from a social/economic stand point. I look forward to your rebuttal and hope that you provide some compelling information rather than made up numbers and a made up book. Everyone please feel free to comment, let me know if I have missed anything or left anything else out.

Source Links:

Abe,

I'm a little late to the party, hope it's no over.....

Herod the Great died in 1 BC, not 4 BC. Every manuscript of Josephus before 1544 had Herod's death listed as 1 BC, but everything subsequent to 1544 lists his date of death as 4 BC. No issue with the Biblical text here.....

(See Andrew Steinmann, "When Did Herod the Great Reign?" Novum Testamentum Volume 51, Number 1, 2009 , pp. 1-29)


I think the census/registration/taxation was beat to death in later posts but let me know if you're unclear on that. Once again, no issue with the Biblical here.

You asked why Joseph of Galilee would go to Bethlehem for the census. Luke 2:4 says "Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David," (New King James). David's father was Jesse of Bethlehem, giving us the precise reason Joseph went to Bethlehem.

In later posts you bring up the so called disparity or contradiction of the two references to the death of Judas:

Matthew 27:5 Judas hung himself
Acts 1:18 His body burst open

There's no contradiction here if you understand the Jewish law at the time. A death during Passover would defile the entire city, preventing the offerings from going on. Since Judas hung himself within the city walls, the city was defiled. The law called for the corpse to be taken and cast into the Valley of Hinnom. Once that was done the city was considered cleansed and the sacrifices could again occur. So they hoisted the dead body of Judas up over the wall where it fell onto some rocks and burst forth. So there is no contradiction in the Biblical text here. After Passover was completed, the body would be buried properly.

When Judas returned the silver to the temple, the priests could not accept it as a normal offering since it was "lood money." They either had to return the money to the previous owner (Judas) or had to use the money for something that would benefit the community. So they ended up buying the potters field, aka, The Field of Blood, where they buried Judas and gave him credit posthumously for the purchase.

(Taken from "Messianic Christology" by Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, pages 153-154)

Let me know if you have questions and God bless.

 

[Mudcat]

*snip

You know, that's why they have exponents for, right? Makes representing such large numbers with so many zeros that much easier to relate.

Edit: All that aside... wasn't this covered at some point in you're inaccurately named 'evidence' thread?

 

[Kopji]

About four years late to the party.

You asked why Joseph of Galilee would go to Bethlehem for the census. Luke 2:4 says "Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David," (New King James). David's father was Jesse of Bethlehem, giving us the precise reason Joseph went to Bethlehem.

Except that there was no city named Nazareth.

There's no contradiction here if you understand the Jewish law at the time. A death during Passover would defile the entire city, preventing the offerings from going on. Since Judas hung himself within the city walls, the city was defiled. The law called for the corpse to be taken and cast into the Valley of Hinnom. Once that was done the city was considered cleansed and the sacrifices could again occur. So they hoisted the dead body of Judas up over the wall where it fell onto some rocks and burst forth. So there is no contradiction in the Biblical text here. After Passover was completed, the body would be buried properly.

Sorry, this sounds like complete nonsense. If there is controversy over whether or not Jesus even existed, how much more so this complete fabrication about Judas?

 

[MRC_Hans]

ETA: Oh, zombie thread. Didn't notice. Still ..... :

Abe,

I'm a little late to the party, hope it's no over.....

These parties never stop.

Herod the Great died in 1 BC, not 4 BC. Every manuscript of Josephus before 1544 had Herod's death listed as 1 BC, but everything subsequent to 1544 lists his date of death as 4 BC. No issue with the Biblical text here.....

So the historical part of the bible appears to be correct. Well, fine.

I think the census/registration/taxation was beat to death in later posts but let me know if you're unclear on that. Once again, no issue with the Biblical here.

Ehr, yes, there seem to be several issues.

You asked why Joseph of Galilee would go to Bethlehem for the census. Luke 2:4 says "Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David," (New King James). David's father was Jesse of Bethlehem, giving us the precise reason Joseph went to Bethlehem.

All of which may well be fiction, since we have no independent evidence that these persons existed at all.

In later posts you bring up the so called disparity or contradiction of the two references to the death of Judas:

Matthew 27:5 Judas hung himself
Acts 1:18 His body burst open

Much as I hate to delve into such details, if a hung body is left for sufficient time in the heat, it will burst open.

There's no contradiction here if you understand the Jewish law at the time. A death during Passover would defile the entire city, preventing the offerings from going on. Since Judas hung himself within the city walls, the city was defiled. The law called for the corpse to be taken and cast into the Valley of Hinnom. Once that was done the city was considered cleansed and the sacrifices could again occur. So they hoisted the dead body of Judas up over the wall where it fell onto some rocks and burst forth. So there is no contradiction in the Biblical text here. After Passover was completed, the body would be buried properly.

There is, however, the problem that we have no real knowledge whether Judas died that way. In fact, we cannot know if he existed at all.

When Judas returned the silver to the temple, the priests could not accept it as a normal offering since it was "lood money." They either had to return the money to the previous owner (Judas) or had to use the money for something that would benefit the community. So they ended up buying the potters field, aka, The Field of Blood, where they buried Judas and gave him credit posthumously for the purchase.

I especially like this part, because it is obviously fiction:

- Who told us Judas got any money, in the first place? Certainly not Judas, and whoever gave it to him would also be silent about it, for obvious reasons.

- Who told us he gave them to the temple? Not Judas (he died). Not the priest, since these were dirty money.

- Who told us what they used them for? For the same reasons as above, obviously nobody.

..... So how did the biblical authors get the story? Well obviously, they simply read Jeremiah's prophecy. Thus are prophecies fulfilled.

Let me know if you have questions and God bless.

No, I have no questions. Thanks for the blessing, sorry I can't return the favour.

Hans

 

[DC]

No the word of God was determined by God. How some of that word of God eventually gets to us is a process. And nobody is stopping anyone from reading the Gnostic Gospels if you wish. Get out your library card.

Or if you choose you can pray to God directly and He might speak to you that way.

hey cool, i just did that and indeed i heard god talking to me, he said, cmon guy, grow up, there is no such thing as gods, how old are you?

 

[Mojo]

Herod the Great died in 1 BC, not 4 BC.

In other words, He only died 7 years before Quirinius became governor in 6 AD, not 10 years before. That makes a zombie Herod killing babies after Quirinius became governor so much more likely.

 

[Akhenaten]

That makes a zombie Herod killing babies after Quirinius became governor so much more likely.

It's all coming together nicely.

 

[DOC]

It's all coming together nicely.

And all based on the writing of a Jewish traitor, Josephus, whom many skeptics believe when he writes about a census (that occurred 90 years earlier) but don't believe when he writes about Moses.

From Wiki on Josephus:

Before the nineteenth century, the scholar Nitsa Ben-Ari notes that {Josephus'}work was shunned like that of converts, then banned as those of a traitor, whose work was not to be studied or translated into Hebrew.[15] His critics were never satisfied as to why he failed to commit suicide in Galilee and, after his capture, accepted the patronage of Romans.
The historian E. Mary Smallwood wrote:
(Josephus) was conceited, not only about his own learning but also about the opinions held of him as commander both by the Galileans and by the Romans; he was guilty of shocking duplicity at Jotapata, saving himself by sacrifice of his companions; he was too naive to see how he stood condemned out of his own mouth for his conduct, and yet no words were too harsh when he was blackening his opponents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus

Sounds like a guy who would do anything to benefit himself, even lie, if it could make a Christian look bad and thus make his new bosses, the Romans, happy. He even took on the name of a Roman emperor "Flavius", as did his children.

But even if he didn't lie, there is always the possibility there was another census that occurred, around 95 years before Josephus started to write about that time. I doubt he had perfect knowledge of everything that happened 30 years before he was born.

 

[dafydd]

Only one problem for Doc. No bible prophecy has ever come true.

 

[Akhenaten]

It's all coming together nicely.

And all based on the writing of a Jewish traitor, Josephus, whom many skeptics believe when he writes about a census (that occurred 90 years earlier) but don't believe when he writes about Moses.

<snip>

You've had the business about the obvious forgeries/alterations to Josephus' accounts explained to you more times than I've had a hot breakfast, DOC. Do you really think feigning ignorance about it is the way to go?

In any case, what does your post have to do with the post of mine that you quoted which was discussing zombie Herod?

 

[joobz]

Abe,

I'm a little late to the party, hope it's no over.....

Herod the Great died in 1 BC, not 4 BC. Every manuscript of Josephus before 1544 had Herod's death listed as 1 BC, but everything subsequent to 1544 lists his date of death as 4 BC. No issue with the Biblical text here.....

(See Andrew Steinmann, "When Did Herod the Great Reign?" Novum Testamentum Volume 51, Number 1, 2009 , pp. 1-29)

Interesting article. But it still doesn't make the story Jive with the census date. Are you saying being 7 years off is better than being 10 years off? Wrong is still wrong.

I think the census/registration/taxation was beat to death in later posts but let me know if you're unclear on that. Once again, no issue with the Biblical here.

You asked why Joseph of Galilee would go to Bethlehem for the census. Luke 2:4 says "Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David," (New King James). David's father was Jesse of Bethlehem, giving us the precise reason Joseph went to Bethlehem.

Except that there was no Roman Census that would have applied to Galilee.
Furthermore, there was No known Roman practice of requiring people to return to ancestral cities for census.

In later posts you bring up the so called disparity or contradiction of the two references to the death of Judas:

Matthew 27:5 Judas hung himself
Acts 1:18 His body burst open


There's no contradiction here if you understand the Jewish law at the time. A death during Passover would defile the entire city, preventing the offerings from going on. Since Judas hung himself within the city walls, the city was defiled. The law called for the corpse to be taken and cast into the Valley of Hinnom. Once that was done the city was considered cleansed and the sacrifices could again occur. So they hoisted the dead body of Judas up over the wall where it fell onto some rocks and burst forth. So there is no contradiction in the Biblical text here. After Passover was completed, the body would be buried properly.

When Judas returned the silver to the temple, the priests could not accept it as a normal offering since it was "lood money." They either had to return the money to the previous owner (Judas) or had to use the money for something that would benefit the community. So they ended up buying the potters field, aka, The Field of Blood, where they buried Judas and gave him credit posthumously for the purchase.

(Taken from "Messianic Christology" by Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, pages 153-154)

let's use the full acts line:
"Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out."

This line goes from him buying a field to him falling and bursting open.
Even if you added "yadda, yadda, yadda" in the middle of it, you would be shocked to think that there was a hanging, waiting multiple days and then tossing over a wall into a field. And then you have a story of a posthumous purchase of the field to make it all work.

This is an inordinate amount of supposition attempting to marry these stories together.

I do not doubt you can add elements to a story to make things jive better. But you must ask your self if you would accept the same level of retconning to make the Quran more accurate?

Let me know if you have questions and God bless.

Welcome to the forum and thank you for your post!

 

[Ladewig]

But you must ask your self if you would accept the same level of retconning to make the Quran more accurate?

An insightful and relevant question.