The Incredible odds of fulfilled bible prophecy

[welshdean]

It's not odd at all. The people who made up the words for the mythical Jesus to say were copying them from the older sources to make it look like the old prophecies were coming true.





And you know this how? Because that's what it says in the Bible?





That's the way the inerrant word of teh LAWD works, is it? Change a phrase here and there to make things match up?





Balderdash. It couldn't be any more straightforward.

Which bit of it are you having trouble understanding?





If it's good enough for some 2000-year-old mythical character to believe in then it's good enough for you, eh DOC?

This whole ridiculous post is just one long the-bible-is-true-because-it-says-it-is load of drivel.

Erm ...

 

[Craig B]

Odd the book of Isaiah never seemed to bother Jesus who quoted it several times. It also didn't seem to bother the Jews or their copyists for the 800 years before Christ came. You'd think if they thought the prophecy failed they wouldn't have held Isaiah in high regard or at least they would have had the copyists change the verse. It's a difficult verse from our view but if Jesus and the Jews for 800 years didn't seem to have a problem with Isaiah, then I really don't either (for that reason and for the multiple other reasons I gave in my post above).

That is the most bizarre argument I have ever encountered. Here's a problem with Isaiah. He famously prophesies that the enemies of Ahaz, king of Judah, will not prevail against him: Isaiah 7

4 And say unto him, Take heed, and be quiet; fear not, neither be fainthearted for the two tails of these smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin with Syria, and of the son of Remaliah ... 7 Thus saith the Lord GOD, It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass ... 14 ... Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. 15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. 16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.

But here is the account of the outcome of that war as related in 2 Chronicles 28

5 Wherefore the LORD his God delivered him into the hand of the king of Syria; and they smote him, and carried away a great multitude of them captives, and brought them to Damascus. And he was also delivered into the hand of the king of Israel, who smote him with a great slaughter. ... 8 And the children of Israel carried away captive of their brethren two hundred thousand, women, sons, and daughters, and took also away much spoil from them, and brought the spoil to Samaria.

So either Isaiah was prophesying tosh, or the story as given in Chronicles is balderdash. Maybe you're happy with that, and maybe the ancient Jews weren't concerned with such contradictions, but that doesn't mean modern readers have to accept them.

 

[Elizabeth I]

"If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle."
- carlito's dear papa

"If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry Christmas."
- "Dandy" Don Meredith, who is not an ordained minister in Canada, but did go to Southern Methodist University

"If a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump its ass on the ground."
- Elizabeth I's wonderful husband


If wishes were horses,
Beggars would ride.
If turnips were watches,
I would wear one by my side.

And if "ifs" and "ands" were pots and pans,
there'd be no work for tinkers.
- Mother Goose

 

[DOC]

Consider the pageant of Palm Sunday. What do have to believe to accept it as true? We have to believe that the Romans, who had already put down a number of Jewish revolts, would stand idly by while some guy enters Jerusalem and is treated like a king, with crowds throwing down their garments so his donkey didn't have to walk on bare earth. These same crowds are crying out, "Hosannah!" which means, "Save us!" Yet the Romans seem utterly unconcerned by this.

What Jewish revolts occurred in Jerusalem (during the Roman occupation) before 33 AD (about the time of Palm Sunday)?

And letting them have the parade would show the Romans just how much support Jesus had, and who were his big supporters. Better for everything to be out in the open so you can get easy and free information than to not know what's going on in secret. They could always bring him in at anytime. Also, preventing it might have caused more ill-will than allowing it. And there doesn't seem to be any writings of people saying, "Hey, wait a minute, I'd don't remember any big parade in Jerusalem 35 years ago." Or even "Hey wait a minute, I don't remember any guy name Jesus raising the dead or doing over 30 other miracles".

 

[Craig B]

And there doesn't seem to be any writings of people saying, "Hey, wait a minute, I'd don't remember any big parade in Jerusalem 35 years ago." Or even "Hey wait a minute, I don't remember any guy name Jesus raising the dead or doing over 30 other miracles".

There are no secular writings of any sort making the least mention of Jesus for many decades after the alleged date of his death. This suggests the stories about him are false - nobody confirms them. To use this as an argument that they are true - nobody denies them - is very strange reasoning, to put it mildly.

In any case, the works of anti Christian writers were suppressed following the adoption of Christianity as the state religion of the Roman Empire and, much later, hostile references to Jesus were removed even from the Talmud by order of the Pope, contained in a Bull published in 1554.

 

[pakeha]

Ah, always good to have some DOC posts to remind us why he's failed to convince a single person (so far) of the truth he so ably advocates.

... You'd think if they thought the prophecy failed they wouldn't have held Isaiah in high regard or at least they would have had the copyists change the verse. ...

.... And there doesn't seem to be any writings of people saying, "Hey, wait a minute, I'd don't remember any big parade in Jerusalem 35 years ago." Or even "Hey wait a minute, I don't remember any guy name Jesus raising the dead or doing over 30 other miracles".

And that tells you what?

 

[tsig]

Re: the highlighted area - even when I was still a believer, and as a small child, this bothered me. I mean, the Romans never displayed much cultural sensitivity - or any other kind of sensitivity - at the best of times.

The Romans in the NT are portrayed as a sort of impersonal force of nature, it's the Jews and the Jewish leaders who are shown as being contorted with rage and determined to kill Jesus.

Of course, the belief that the Jews rejected Jesus is central to Christianity so it's no surprise that the central myths support that belief.

 

[dafydd]

The Romans in the NT are portrayed as a sort of impersonal force of nature, it's the Jews and the Jewish leaders who are shown as being contorted with rage and determined to kill Jesus.

Why? He was a good Jewish boy who went into his father's business.

 

[GrandMasterFox]

Balderdash. It couldn't be any more straightforward.

Which bit of it are you having trouble understanding?

Why the part that conflicts with reality of course

It's the same tired crap:
1)If something in the bible can't be verified then it's literally true
2)If something in the bible can be verified and it's true then it's literally true
3)If something in the bible can be verified and it's false then it's a metaphor, non-literal, different language, hard to understand crap etc

funny how that works only for #3...

 

[Akhenaten]

What Jewish revolts occurred in Jerusalem (during the Roman occupation) before 33 AD (about the time of Palm Sunday)?

How about the revolt led by Judas of Galilee as a reaction to the census imposed for taxation purposes by Quirinius in Iudæa Province around 6 CE?

There were of course a great many other minor revolts during the Roman occupation, but this one stands out as an obvious answer for your question for two reasons:

1. This particular revolt was discussed at length by one of your erstwhile heroes -Titus Flavius Josephus - in both Jewish Wars and Antiquities of the Jews so there surely can be no questioning by you of the veracity of the story; and
   
   
2. The sect founded by Judas the Gallilean was at first known as 'the fourth sect' but later became known by a name much more familiar to the participants in this Forum - the Zealots. Yep, the very same group that numbered the famous Simon amongst its members. By the way, DOC, speaking of Simon . . .

And letting them have the parade would show the Romans just how much support Jesus had, and who were his big supporters. Better for everything to be out in the open so you can get easy and free information than to not know what's going on in secret. They could always bring him in at anytime. Also, preventing it might have caused more ill-will than allowing it. And there doesn't seem to be any writings of people saying, "Hey, wait a minute, I'd don't remember any big parade in Jerusalem 35 years ago." Or even "Hey wait a minute, I don't remember any guy name Jesus raising the dead or doing over 30 other miracles".

Tell the truth, DOC. This response is just a paraphrase of the plot synopsis of the appropriate section of The Life of Brian, isn't it?

Did you really think nobody here, of all places, would spot it for what it is?

 

[Akhenaten]

.... And there doesn't seem to be any writings of people saying, "Hey, wait a minute, I'd don't remember any big parade in Jerusalem 35 years ago." Or even "Hey wait a minute, I don't remember any guy name Jesus raising the dead or doing over 30 other miracles".

And that tells you what?

That there was no such thing as paper in 1st century Judea and therefore the Bible is true.

 

[Akhenaten]

Why? He was a good Jewish boy who went into his father's business.

 

[dafydd]

[qimg]http://www.yvonneclaireadams.com/HostedStuff/GodBusinessCard.jpg[/qimg]​

Once again the Pharaoh hits the nail on the head.

 

[Mudcat]

That there was no such thing as paper in 1st century Judea and therefore the Bible is true.

Is DOC still asserting that ********? According to the history of paper, that while paper might not have been around in Jesus' time papyrus and parchment was. No doubt he's been explained this before, but the history of paper is an interesting one and vitally important to understand.

 

[TimCallahan]

What Jewish revolts occurred in Jerusalem (during the Roman occupation) before 33 AD (about the time of Palm Sunday)?

And letting them have the parade would show the Romans just how much support Jesus had, and who were his big supporters. Better for everything to be out in the open so you can get easy and free information than to not know what's going on in secret. They could always bring him in at anytime. Also, preventing it might have caused more ill-will than allowing it. And there doesn't seem to be any writings of people saying, "Hey, wait a minute, I'd don't remember any big parade in Jerusalem 35 years ago." Or even "Hey wait a minute, I don't remember any guy name Jesus raising the dead or doing over 30 other miracles".

Akhenaten has already mentioned Judas the Galilean. Here's another uprising. In Antiquities of the Jews, Book 18, Chapter 3, item 2, Josephus tells us that Pilate used temple funds to build an aqueduct to bring water to Jerusalem. A number of Jews - Josephus says many ten thousands - massed and protested the appropriation of temple funds for a secular project. Pilate told them to disperse. When they refused to do so, he gave a signal to Roman soldiers dressed as Jews and mixed into the crowd, who were carrying concealed weapons, and these soldiers killed and wounded many of the protesters.

Antiquities Book 18, Chapter 4, item 1 tells of another potential uprising, this time among the Samaritans. when an armed multitude of them gathered in a village at the base of Mt. Gerrizim, Pilate sent troops of cavalry and foot soldiers to attack them. Yet, according to the gospels, we are supposed to believe that this brutal man was cowed by a mob demanding that Barabbas be released and Jesus be crucified.

BTW, you still haven't explained why, in a few short days, the crowds welcoming Jesus had dissipated and another mob had assembled to demand his death. It's also odd, in the incident of Jesus blasting the fig tree and his driving the money changers out of the Temple, that he seems to be coming from Bethany to Jerusalem and back again on a regular basis without attracting any attention, either from crowds crying out, "Hosannah," or from the Romans. The Palm Sunday crowds seem to have forgotten Jesus rather quickly.

As to people writing about Jesus, denying what was written in the gospels, you must remember that supernatural claims were quite common in hose days and likely to be shrugged off - just as Justin Martyr shrugged off those who claimed to have seen deceased emperors ascending to heaven in the smoke of the funeral pyres. You also have to remember that, at the time the gospels were written, between the years 70 and 90, nobody but the Christians were interested in such claims. Others would not be reading the gospels and wouldn't have bothered with the claims of a small heretical sect. Finally, you must remember that the gospels and other books of the New Testament were written in Greek for a culturally Greek audience. Paul's epistles, which antedate the gospels, were written to congregations in western Asia Minor (Galatians), in Greek cites around the Aegean Sea and in Rome. This audience would have been largely ignorant of the laws and customs of Judea (as the author of Mark was), as well as being ignorant of what did or did not happen to a minor messianic pretender - one who was scarcely mentioned (if at all) by Josephus.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Why? He was a good Jewish boy who went into his father's business.

...and his mother thought he was God.

Is DOC still asserting that ********? According to the history of paper, that while paper might not have been around in Jesus' time papyrus and parchment was. No doubt he's been explained this before, but the history of paper is an interesting one and vitally important to understand.

No, to my knowledge doc hasn't said anything about paper this time - it's just become a meme in his threads.

 

[DOC]

... In Antiquities of the Jews, Book 18, Chapter 3, item 2, Josephus tells us that Pilate used temple funds to build an aqueduct to bring water to Jerusalem. A number of Jews - Josephus says many ten thousands - massed and protested the appropriation of temple funds for a secular project. Pilate told them to disperse. When they refused to do so, he gave a signal to Roman soldiers dressed as Jews and mixed into the crowd, who were carrying concealed weapons, and these soldiers killed and wounded many of the protesters...

Here is item 2

2. But Pilate undertook to bring a current of water to Jerusalem, and did it with the sacred money, and derived the origin of the stream from the distance of two hundred furlongs. However, the Jews (8) were not pleased with what had been done about this water; and many ten thousands of the people got together, and made a clamor against him, and insisted that he should leave off that design. Some of them also used reproaches, and abused the man, as crowds of such people usually do. So he habited a great number of his soldiers in their habit, who carried daggers under their garments, and sent them to a place where they might surround them. So he bid the Jews himself go away; but they boldly casting reproaches upon him, he gave the soldiers that signal which had been beforehand agreed on; who laid upon them much greater blows than Pilate had commanded them, and equally punished those that were tumultuous, and those that were not; nor did they spare them in the least: and since the people were unarmed, and were caught by men prepared for what they were about, there were a great number of them slain by this means, and others of them ran away wounded. And thus an end was put to this sedition.

But you left out item 3, the next paragraph:

3. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, (9) those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; (10) as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.

http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-18.htm

_____

I see no problem with Pilate not finding any guilt with Jesus. Item 2 above portrays the Romans and Jews as enemies. There is a saying that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". And Jesus was definitely an enemy of many of Jewish religious leaders of the day.

 

[Akhenaten]

Here is item 2

<repeat of what Tim already posted>

But you left out item 3, the next paragraph:

<off-topic, irrelevant tosh>

Tim left it out because it has absolutely nothing to do with the question that you asked, namely:

What Jewish revolts occurred in Jerusalem (during the Roman occupation) before 33 AD (about the time of Palm Sunday)?

And now you're flailing about wildly in a transparent attempt to distract from the fact that the answer that was given shows that you are, as always, completely at a loss when it comes to actual history.

Pathetic.

 

[joobz]

I see know problem with Pilate not finding any guilt with Jesus. Item 2 above portrays the Romans and Jews as enemies. There is a saying that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". And Jesus was definitely an enemy of many of Jewish religious leaders of the day.

This story even makes the bible story make less sense and supports Tim's point.
It helps support the point that it is completely insane that the jews would first welcome jesus by a parade, and then a week later call for his head.

Thank you for helping show just how illogical the bible story is.

 

[Akhenaten]

<stuff>

And Jesus was definitely an enemy of many of Jewish religious leaders of the day.

According to which extra-biblical source(s), exactly?