• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

The Incredible odds of fulfilled bible prophecy

I thought this was interesting.

http://www.lebanonembassyus.org/tourism/tyre.html



Tyre

Tyre(83 km)
This phoenician city survived a 13-year siege by Nebuchadnezzar but fell before the military ingenuity of Alexander the Great who literally bridged the gap between the fortified island city and its mainland sector. By building a causeway, Alexander was able to forward his siege machines and bring the city to its knees.

...

Three areas of ruins beckon the visitor. The first is located on what was the ancient walled island city. Colonnades, mosaic streets, Roman baths, and a rectangular arena occupy this seaside site. The ruins of a Crusader church dominate the second site. The third and most extensive area of ruins includes a Roman-Byzantine necropolis and the largest Roman hippodrome ever found. Uniquely built of stone, not brick, it hosted chariot races in its heyday.

I am so glad that I no longer believe in this nonsense, and don't have to do the pretzel logic exercises that would be necessary to believe that prophecy of the utter, eternal destruction of a place was "fulfilled" when I can go drink cocktails at a beach resort there. Heck, you can order a Domino's Pizza for delivery there. DOC's God sucks at smiting cities, it seems.

ETA - thanks dafyyd for the article on the Hoff. I go to Berlin a lot and like knowing these kids of things.
 
The very last line of that article kinda relates to this thread!

Oops: carlitos is too quick for me. I was referring to dafyyd's article on Hassle.
 
Last edited:
I thank you for bringing this in; as stated, it is logical to assume someone making up a story about their long awaited great Messiah would never make up a verse like this -- thus it is logical to assume it wasn't made up but true.

And are you saying there aren't good looking, tan, in shape, gardeners out there?

Against my better judgment I'm making another post on this thread. DOC, please explain the following discrepencies in the New Testament accounts ofthe Resurrection, if they were not in fact, made up:

Mark: Jesus appeared to nobody after the Resurrection. It's only evidence was the empty tomb.

Matthew: At the empty tomb an angel tells Mary Magdalene and "the other Mary" that Jesus is risen and to tell the disciples he will meet them in Galilee. Then Jesus appears to the two women and tells them to tell the disciples to go to Galilee to meet him. The 11 disciples go to Galilee and meet Jesus on a mountain there, where he gives them the great commission.

Luke: Mary Magdalene, Joanna and Mary the mother of James, along with other women go to the empty tomb and are told by two angels that Jesus has risen. The disciples don't believe them. Then Jesus appears to two unnamed disciples on the road to Emmaus. They return to Jerusalem, and, as they are telling the other disciples Jesus is risen, Jesus appears in the room with them. He leaves them at Bethany after telling them not to leave Jerusalem.

John: Mary Magdalene goes to the tomb alone and is the first to meet Jesus, alone. After that Jesus appears to the disciples twice in Jerusalem. Then, inexplicably, the disciples seem to have returned to Galilee and have taken up their old trade as fishermen. Jesus appears to them there, at Lake Tiberius, where he tells Peter to feed his sheep.

Paul (or possibly a forger), in 1 Corinthians 15: Jesus appears first to Cephas (Peter), then to the 12 (Judas, too?), then to more than 500 brethren at one time [the gospel writers don't appear to have heard of these 500], then to "all the apostles," then to Paul.

So, tell me, DOC:

1) Did the resurrected Jesus appear first to Mary alone (John), first the Mary and some other women (Matthew), first to two unnamed disciples on the raod to Emmaus (Luke), first to Cephas (1 Corinthians), or to nobody at all (Mark)? These accounts are mutually contradictory. So, only one of them can possibly be true, though they all could be false.

2) Did he tell the disciples to go to Galilee, and did he meet them there (as Matthew has it); or did he meet them in Jerusalem and explicitly tell them not to leave the city (as Luke has it); or did he meet them in Jerusalem, but apparently not tell them to stay in the city, and later meet them in Galilee (as John has it)? As with question #1, these accounts are mutually contradictory. So, only one of them can possibly be true, though they all could be false.

3) Why, if Jesus appeared to 500+ brethren at one time, according to 1 Corinthians, did all the gospel writers leave this important even out of their accounts of the Resurrection? Here are two possible answers to this:

a) The account of the 500+ in 1 Corinthians was truly from the hand of Paul, but not considered valid by the authors of any of the four canonical gospels.

b) The account of the 500+ was added to 1 Corinthians by a forger after the canonical gospels had been written.
 
Against my better judgment I'm making another post on this thread.


Tim, as much as I'm in awe of your scholarship and enjoy immensely learning from you, this is exactly the kind of post that DOC will seize upon when he next drives by precisely because it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic.

We're in for another series of Thomas Jefferson, difficult sayings, inconsistency-proves-authenticity, the peaceful spread of Christianity despite the tyranny of Rome and a load of codswallop about "Christians exist therefore the Bible is true". Then we'll have to go through another ten pages of nailing DOC back to the topic.

This discussion of the veracity of the Gospels belongs squarely in TTTWND.
 
Last edited:
Tim, as much as I'm in awe of your scholarship and enjoy immensely learning from you, this is exactly the kind of post that DOC will seize upon when he next drives by precisely because it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic.

We're in for another series of Thomas Jefferson, difficult sayings, inconsistency-proves-authenticity, the peaceful spread of Christianity despite the tyranny of Rome and a load of codswallop about "Christians exist therefore the Bible is true". Then we'll have to go through another ten pages of nailing DOC back to the topic.

This discussion of the veracity of the Gospels belongs squarely in TTTWND.

Yeah, I knew even as I wrote it that I was being sucked in. Responding to and desiring to refute DOC's nonsense is something of an addiction. Perhaps I need a 12 step program.

All the same, the disparities one finds in the gospels do illustrate one point: Evangelicals, for all that they go on about the Bible being the Word, seldom actually read it in any depth. When they do, the reading is often guided by an authority who will tell them in soothing tones that there are no inconsistencies and will explain contradictions away via mental gymnastics.

As to TTTWND, I'm afraid I don't know that acronym.
 
The Thread That Will Never Die, also known as "evidence the NT writers told the truth" over in History.
 
Yeah, I knew even as I wrote it that I was being sucked in. Responding to and desiring to refute DOC's nonsense is something of an addiction. Perhaps I need a 12 step program.


I have it far worse than you do. I'm going to need 24 steps, at least.

:)


All the same, the disparities one finds in the gospels do illustrate one point: Evangelicals, for all that they go on about the Bible being the Word, seldom actually read it in any depth. When they do, the reading is often guided by an authority who will tell them in soothing tones that there are no inconsistencies and will explain contradictions away via mental gymnastics.


Absolutely. DOC appears to seek out this questionable guidance during his frequent absences from the discussion and every time he comes back the apologetics are just a little bit more bizarre.


As to TTTWND, I'm afraid I don't know that acronym.


As the nice lady said, but be warned, that way lies madness.




Make sure you let someone know you're going in there so they can organise a rescue if you're not back out in a week or so.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I knew even as I wrote it that I was being sucked in. Responding to and desiring to refute DOC's nonsense is something of an addiction. Perhaps I need a 12 step program.
I thought you were atheist? And you want to declare you need a "higher power" to overcome this addiction? (there's a thread on that too :)) ;);)

And I second Pharaoh's words, I look forward to reading your posts. And tread carefully when entering TTTWND.
 
I thought you were atheist? And you want to declare you need a "higher power" to overcome this addiction? (there's a thread on that too :)) ;);)
Maybe he's talking about Aberhaten?

And I second Pharaoh's words, I look forward to reading your posts. And tread carefully when entering TTTWND.

And whatever you do, don't follow any signposts pointing to Heidelberg.
 
Maybe he's talking about Aberhaten?


I certainly can't think of any higher power.


And whatever you do, don't follow any signposts pointing to Heidelberg.


3WiseMen03.gif
 
I thought you were atheist? And you want to declare you need a "higher power" to overcome this addiction? (there's a thread on that too :)) ;);)

And I second Pharaoh's words, I look forward to reading your posts. And tread carefully when entering TTTWND.

I see my higher power as being within. In other words a voice in my head that says, "No! Don't take the DOC-bait! No, don't take it, really! No, don't -- oh hell, too late!"
 
Maybe he's talking about Aberhaten?
Could be. Or Thor. Where's the next Thor's Thursday pillaging party heading? :)
And whatever you do, don't follow any signposts pointing to Heidelberg.
The penny doesn't drop about Heidelberg. Or it must be that Heidelberg - contrary to Tyre - was razed to the ground by a mighty king, i.c., Louis XIV.
 
And whatever you do, don't follow any signposts pointing to Heidelberg.


The penny doesn't drop about Heidelberg. Or it must be that Heidelberg - contrary to Tyre - was razed to the ground by a mighty king, i.c., Louis XIV.


From TTTWND - the thread that just keeps on giving . . .


I doubt you own or read the whole book but aren't you curious what Geisler has to say about Steven Hawkings Imaginary time, Heidelberger's Uncertainty Principle, NASA's Robert Jastrow's writings, the Law of Causation etc.


I'm not sure, i could be wrong, but I think the chap you mean is Heisenberg...


Heidelberg is a town in Germany Doc,with a university.



Heidelberg.jpg


The Heidelberg Uncertainty Principle.


Doubters!
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom