DOC, that kind of article is embarrassing to those of us who know a little about probability, not to mention a smattering of biblical history. You are revealing a severe ignorance in both fields if you think there is the slightest validity to it.
Example: the author repeatedly refers to probability as something like 10
5, which has no meaning in mathematics. He most likely means 1:10
5, but since he gives not a single formula or computation, he might has well have made it up. I'd say the probability that he did is 1:10
0.
And we all know that many of the "fulfilled" prophecies were fulfilled in this manner. Imagine "John" writing about someone he heard about (because none of the Matthew, Mark, Luke & John books were written by the apostles of that name). Along comes a prophecy from Daniel, "The King shall enter the city on a white horse..." Since there is no record of that happening, no eyewitnesses, there is nothing to draw upon at all, but John, being the pious redactor he is,
wants it to happen, so he writes thus:
"So Jesus entered the city on a white horse. This was done to fulfill the prophecy in Daniel."
Then 2000 years later, some sucker, the kind who was elevated by the patron saint of suckers, P.T. Barnum, puts the two parts of the bible together and says, "See! The prophecy was fulfilled; Part 2 proves Part 1, and God is great!" Never mind that the two don't even seem to refer to the same event or person -- you have to believe it to see it.
It's a little like sending an urban legend to a friend and appending the statement "Snopes says it's true!" Only a sucker believes without checking for himself. Unfortunately there are very few ways of checking biblical statements, and most that can be checked come up false, casting doubt on the rest.
