The Incredible odds of fulfilled bible prophecy

nodoubt said:
The life of Jesus is well documented.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Spiderman is more well documented than Jesus. Not one contemporary historian (or other author for that matter) wrote of Jesus Christ.

Are you saying he never lived?
Click to expand...

Certainly not your imaginary one. Josephus writes of dozens named Jesus. One led a band of fishermen and other tough guys on guerilla attacks against Roman soldiers. One was the son of the high priest. Etc. But no Jesus of the gospels. That's why it was so important for Christians to forge the Testimonium Flavianum. Looks like Eusebius did that.

My favorite Jesus was the one running around yelling "woe unto Israel". Pilate tortured him and let him go because he was a harmless kook. He was killed by a stone from a Roman Seige engine in the Battle of Jerusalem in 70 CE.
 
joobz said:
nodoubt,
the problems with your first points have been effectively addressed by Zooketerin and ddt. I would like to focus on the follow issue.

You have assumed so much:
1.) he hung himself inside the city (not specified in text)
2.) That this happened during passover (not specified in text)
3.) That he hung himself immediately (in specified in text)
4.) That they bought the field in his name posthumously (Not specified in text)
5.) That he was tossed over a wall into the field (not specified in text)
6.) That significant time passed between purchasing a field and falling dead (not specified in the compound sentence of the text)
7.) That the person falling in the acts text is already dead (not specified in text)

There are so many assumptions that you are making to gel these accounts that it is simply impossible to imagine that it would be convincing to anyone who didn't already want to believe that the accounts were consistent.

As I asked previously, and which you avoided, Would you accept a similar level of assumptions needed to explain away inconsistencies in other holy texts?
Click to expand...

I have not "assumed" anything as you have proposed. A straightforward reading of the accounts of the crucifiction and these two passages eliminate almost every point that you have listed. Here are you points, not necessarily in the order that you had them

2.) That this happened during passover (not specified in text)

Yes it is:
Matt 27:1 The decision is made to put Jesus to death
Matt 27:15 It was the governors custom to release a prisoner at the Passover Feast (also corobroated in Mark 6:6 and John 18:39)

3.) That he hung himself immediately (in specified in text)

Yes it is
Matt 27:5 Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself. NKJ, Biblegateway

4.) That they bought the field in his name posthumously (Not specified in text)

Yes it is.

First we have the Matthew passage which tells us that the priests bought the field:
6 But the chief priests took the silver pieces and said, “It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, because they are the price of blood.” 7 And they consulted together and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in. 8 Therefore that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day (NKJ Biblegateway)

the Acts 1:18 passage follows up on that and tells us:
"With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field." NIV

Judas was already dead. The passages tell us that the field was purchased with the reward Judas received, posthumously in his name.

1.) he hung himself inside the city (not specified in text)

True, but it doesn't contradict the Matthew account, and if he didn't, you would have a problem with him falling "headlong" into the field. See next point.

5.) That he was tossed over a wall into the field (not specified in text)

True, but it in no way contradicts the Matthew account. It tells us that Judas fell "headlong" into the Field of Blood that his reward had purchased" (NKJ Acts 1:18) Had he rotted on the rope (as you mentioned) until his body was ripened by sun and time, he would have fallen feetfirst into whatever field was under him and his head would have popped off. That makes no sense in light of the Acts passage. But, it makes complete sense if you understand the context of the Jewish law, understanding that the body would need to be removed from the city to cleanse it by pushing it over the way. It would be nearly impossible to push a body over a wall feet first. I cited my reference on this point who is an expert in Jewish law and history.


6.) That significant time passed between purchasing a field and falling dead (not specified in the compound sentence of the text)

Not sure what your issue is with this but it doesn't take long to die by hanging, and the field was purchased after he left the temple.

7.) That the person falling in the acts text is already dead (not specified in text)

The text does not indicate he is alive, or dead. Matthew tells us how Judas killed himself, Acts tells us what happened to his body.

God bless
 
nodoubt said:
I have not "assumed" anything as you have proposed. A straightforward reading of the accounts of the crucifiction and these two passages eliminate almost every point that you have listed.
Click to expand...
Even taking your argument at face value, you admit to making assumptions not available in the text.
nodoubt said:
[1.) he hung himself inside the city (not specified in text)

True,...

5.) That he was tossed over a wall into the field (not specified in text)

True, ...

7.) That the person falling in the acts text is already dead (not specified in text)

The text does not indicate he is alive, or dead....
Click to expand...

I could end here, as you admit to making assumptions to try and gel the two accounts. But I'll go forward a bit more,

Let's remember you are trying to convince me that the account in acts is the same story as in matthew.

nodoubt said:
3.) That he hung himself immediately (in specified in text)

Yes it is
Matt 27:5 Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself. NKJ, Biblegateway
Click to expand...
This is bootstrapping. To say that Judas hung himself in the acts story is pure assertion and to use Matthew as evidence otherwise doesn't help your case. You are trying to convince me that acts story describes the same story as in Matthew.


nodoubt said:
4.) That they bought the field in his name posthumously (Not specified in text)

Yes it is.
...
the Acts 1:18 passage follows up on that and tells us:
"With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field." NIV
Click to expand...
As you can see in your own text, acts does not say it was purchased posthumously. You are merely asserting it is so to gel the stories. Hence it is an assumption.

nodoubt said:
Judas was already dead.
Click to expand...
another assumption not suggested in the 2-3 sentence lines of acts.


nodoubt said:
6.) That significant time passed between purchasing a field and falling dead (not specified in the compound sentence of the text)

Not sure what your issue is with this but it doesn't take long to die by hanging, and the field was purchased after he left the temple.
Click to expand...
The amount of events to transpire for your story to gel is simply not suggested in the Single compound sentence joined by a semicolon and an and.
So you are assuming there is significant time to permit the events to transpire.



Once again, I will ask you the question you previously avoided.
Would you accept so many assumptions in order to gel stories in the koran/bhagavad gita/etc. as non contradictory and true?
 
Last edited:
nodoubt said:
I have not "assumed" anything as you have proposed. A straightforward reading of the accounts of the crucifiction and these two passages eliminate almost every point that you have listed.
Click to expand...


Thanks for pointing it out, Mr. Biblical scholar.
 
Outside of the N/T, there is no evidence whatsoever that a Jeebus of Nazareth ever existed. The few references that do exist are nothing but hearsay at best, outright forgeries at worst.
 
zooterkin said:
Nice try at equivocation, but the quote just says "own home", not "ancestral homes".
Click to expand...
So far from being Joseph's own home, Bethlehem was a place where he had to find an inn, and failing this, shack up in a stable.

As to own homes, that was the practice in the UK up to the last few years. The enumerator visited the respondent in the latter's main residence, if at all possible.
 
DOC said:
This PHD, astrophysicist, says the odds of all the bible prophecy that has been fulfilled occurring by chance is 1 in [1^ 2000]
Click to expand...
Not just an astrophysicist! You've left out one of his more important credentials: Dr Hugh Ross is a creationist theologian (albeit an "old earth" one) with a "world wide ministry". Here are his ideas on human evolution, from
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=dr+hugh+ross+leaflet+#8909&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari
As to man he says (Leaflet #8909), "Starting about 2 to 4 million years ago, God began to create man-like mammals or 'hominids.' These creatures stood on two feet, had large brains, and used tools. Some even buried their dead and painted on cave walls. However, they were very different from us. They had no spirit. They did not have a conscience like we do. They did not worship God or establish religious practices. In time, all these man-like creatures went extinct. Then about 10 or 25 thousand years ago, God replaced them with Adam and Eve."
Click to expand...
Perhaps he could put his PhD in Astrophysics hat back on and tell us what the odds of Adam and Eve occurring by chance following the extinction of the Neandertals might be. And what archaeological or palaentological evidence is there for the poor old Neandertals having no spirit or conscience? Maybe God tells us in Genesis, which Ross believes to be literally true, but if He has, I've missed it.
 
Last edited:
nodoubt said:
The life of Jesus is well documented. Are you saying he never lived?
Click to expand...
As others have already argued, there is no extrabiblical evidence of his life. The documentation in the bible of his life - only in the gospels - is also scant.

Mark only tells of his ministry, the last year or so of his life. John ditto.

Matthew and Luke both added a birth story (incompatible with each other, I might add), and then fast forward to his baptism by John and his ministry.

So we're missing documentation of 30-odd years of Jesus life, that is, assuming he ever actually lived.
 
nodoubt

What documents are you referring to, that attest to the details of Jesus' biography? There is a huge literature on the subject of whether there was ever a Jesus of Nazareth. Those who deny this are called "mythicists". Lots and lots of people say Jesus never lived, and have been doing so since the late nineteenth century. Personally, I haven't made up my mind on this.
 
19th century nothing. It's been going on since the year dot.
 
As to man he says (Leaflet #8909), "Starting about 2 to 4 million years ago, God began to create man-like mammals or 'hominids.' These creatures stood on two feet, had large brains, and used tools. Some even buried their dead and painted on cave walls. However, they were very different from us. They had no spirit. They did not have a conscience like we do. They did not worship God or establish religious practices. In time, all these man-like creatures went extinct. Then about 10 or 25 thousand years ago, God replaced them with Adam and Eve
Click to expand...

Sounds like God was "practicing".

Anyone else spot the inconsistency of God needing to "work up to" man? or that prior versions went extinct because of their "deficiencies"?

It really is quite silly.
 
Last edited:
AlaskaBushPilot said:
...Not one contemporary historian (or other author for that matter) wrote of Jesus Christ,,.
Click to expand...
How do you know? That's like saying Julius Caesar never signed a piece of paper because we have no evidence of any signature of his.

We have no contemporary writings about Alexander the Great, do you believe he existed? In fact we get almost all of our info about him from writers writing over 300 years after his death.
 
DOC said:
AlaskaBushPilot said:
...Not one contemporary historian (or other author for that matter) wrote of Jesus Christ,,.
Click to expand...


How do you know? That's like saying Julius Caesar never signed a piece of paper because we have no evidence of any signature of his.
Click to expand...


A lack of evidence that Julius Cæsar ever signed a piece of paper is nothing like being a lack of evidence that he existed.*

What is the nature of the problem that causes you to forget that you've already been told this scores of times?


DOC said:
We have no contemporary writings about Alexander the Great, do you believe he existed?
Click to expand...


Yes. Do you?

Perhaps you could read this and tell us which bits seem to be made up and your reasons for thinking so.


DOC said:
In fact we get almost all of our info about him from writers writing over 300 years after his death.
Click to expand...


This is simply untrue, DOC.

Read this and report back to us.



* Maybe it's just evidence that there was no such thing as paper in Julius Cæsar's time.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom