A question for believers - why the Bible?

Hi Mike, Of course I realise this, but this doesn't mean that Jesus fulfilled anything.You do know what circular reasoning is?Cheers.Brian.

No, we cannot demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus fulfilled any prophecy. But there are many pointers.E.g. the tabernacle and the sacrificial system. Before Christ came the Jewish people were clearly expecting a Messiah. They even agreed on many details about his coming: born of a virgin in Bethelehem of the line of David, etc. and so forth. Daniel's prophecy of the interruption at the 69th week occured when Jesus came riding in on the donkey. There is even prophecy of his suffering and death for the forgiveness of sins in Isaiah.Taken on the whole, the message is quite powerful, though weak enough to allow rationalization for those who wish to deny it.

Hi HD, The Jewish people are still awaiting the messiah. Sorry?The Jews were expecting the messiah to be born of a virgin? I was under the impression that the messiah would not have a special birth at all.I hope you aren't making the mistake of confusing Isaiah 7:14 as a messianic prophecy. Bethlehem the city?Not according to Micah 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
'Thousands of Judah' certainly cannot relate to the city of Bethlehem as there has never been thousands of settlements in Judah. This verse is talking about a clan and not a place.Maybe I am mistaken and you have another verse that mentions the messiah being born in Bethlehem? Jesus wasn't born of the line of David, so that sorta ejects him from the messiah stakes. Yes, it is pretty easy to claim that someone fulfiled this and that when you are sitting with the Tanakh on you knee and essentially making things up. Where is this in the Tanakh HD? No, there is an allusion to the suffering servant in Isaiah, but this looks more as if Isaiah is talking about the remnant of Israel and not an idividual. The details of the suffering servant contain several items that nullify the possibility of Jesus being that person, if it is an individual that is. For example, the suffering servant will have a long life and father children, Jesus did not have any of these two. I honestly think that you have this the wrong way round. I think that the links between the old and new testaments are incredibly weak, but that some people see a powerful connection that just isn't there.Brian.

I'm not going to debate biblical prophecy again. I'm not an OT scholar and I'm not sure that you are (even though you speak with all the authority of a great pharisee). You clearly will accept ANY doctrine or interpretation of a passage that is diverted from Christ and in the end you will always point out that we cannot even prove Christ was a real person. It is really fruitless to argue with this kind of skepticism.

Not at all, I love the OT and it has been mutilated many times by the Church. I am pretty convinced that jesus was a real person, he definately wasn't the messiah tough. Roughly translated this means that you cannot refute the points I made.This is to be expected of course, no point in having an open mind is there HD?Brian.

This is what circular reasoning looks like:
The state can not exist without the individuals.
Individuals can not have rights protected without the state.
Individual over state.
State over individual.
...(It goes around and around, just like a circle)I don't get how this is circular reasoning. Jesus came long after the prophets, so it's not like they could have collaborated while Jesus was living and make sure everything was consistent.edit: Also, you said in another post that Jesus was not of the line of David. It looks like somebody hasn't read the (patriarchal) genealogy of Christ. Matthew 1:6a "and Jesse the father of King David." Perhaps you looked at only the matriarchal genealogy.This message has been edited by commike37, 01-02-2005 16:07 AM

Hi mike, But, the people who wrote the Gospels, whoever they were, obviously familiar with the Tanakh. It wasn't the prophets that collaborated, it was the authors of the New Testament. They knew the prophecies and just made up stories to try and make Jesus fit them, there is nothing impressive here at all.As for circular reasoning, how do you know that the messiah was to be born in bethlehem, the bible says so, how do you know Jesus was born in Bethlehem, the Bible says so. It is nonsense. (Note, I do not believe that the OT says that the messiah will be born in Bethlehem but you get the idea I hope) The patriarchal geneaology is pointless as Joseph was not Jesus' father, there is no direct bloodline through the father here.Also, Mary's genealogy is irrelevant as bloodline always goes through the father. Anyway, Mary's genealogy isnt in the Bible at all. Finally, IF Mary is linked to Nathan then this is also negated through the fact that the bloodline was to go through David's son Solomon.Jesus could not be the messiah, no big deal really, but an entertaining read.Brian.

You're getting off topic here. If you want to argue that only the Old Testament is true, then you would be Jewish, and this question applies to Christians. If you want to debate this, then you should go to the forum "The Bible: Inaccuracy and Inerrancy." This topic is about why Christians believe in the Bible. It is not about disproving the New Testament. While I could see an argument as to what's the best way to believe the Bible, I don't see an argument saying we shouldn't believe to be topical.

No translation is necessary. I meant what I said, it is pointless to debate this with you. I have an open mind. In the past few months as a result of my debating here I have rejected everything I was ever taught about Christianity and doubted the existence of God, but after examining all my doubts and the scriptures again, my faith has returned and I am rationally satisfied with my position.

Hi, Why is it pointless, is it because I am not gullible enough to blindly accept your unsupported claims? But unable to rationally defend it to anyone other than yourself.Excellent.CheersBrian.

Hello asciikerr. Thanks for your lengthy response. I appreciate that your are trying to do what you see as right by your religion. I am fortunate in that my life is pretty dam good. Besides being sometimes bored with work, working through sports injuries and occasionally dealing with difficult people, my life as an atheist is well sorted, financially, emotionally and, dare I say it, spiritually. I am well placed to cope with "real problems" because I realise they arise merely out of cause and effect, unpredictable complexity and in complete compliance with the purposeless laws of physics in our universe. I don't labor over pointless rationalisations over the input of imaginary deities and whether I have appeased them or not. If something "bad" happens I try to do what I can to mitigate it's effects and avoid it in the future, but also acknowledge that some things just happen and are outside our sphere of influence (eg: natural disasters).Responses to your Q+A:1) Challenger disaster.asciikerr responded: And they would have still burned up. I'd wager that some of them may have prayed and received the usual success rate that theists achieve when praying.The liquid rocket fuel of the shuttle boosters is way below freezing, and this created the ice which damaged the wing during take off. Your Bible quote about winter is not applicable.It was a long shot expecting a 2000 year old religious text written by bronze age goat herders to provide much insight into a tragic present day technological disaster. No supernatural or profound insight provided.I had hoped for an amusing Tower of Babel reference!2) Epilepsy The Bible isn't real good on medicine. The Biblical cause of epilepsy is "demons" and the cure exorcisism. In this case, I actually provided you with the cause of the epilepsy: an accidental blow to the head. Claiming that someone's sin caused the condition has no explantory value whatsoever. Unfortunately we don't have your mythical Messiah walking around healing people or a God providing testable and documentable healing. Modern medicine based on science is the only hope for successful diagnosis and treatment.I refer you to James Randi's "The Faith Healers' for research on the dismal phenomenom of US faith healers.Or likewise my eldest sibling's devoutly fundamentalist family provides me with great faith healing data: tragically, one of my nephews is a insulin dependent diabetic since the age of 10, another spent this very Christmas is hospital having his appendix removed. My sister-in-law suffered from severe post natal depression for years. The list is much longer, but in their case modern medicine has sustained two of their lives, and faith healing provided nothing.3) Risk of shark attack I understand the message of Matt 10:28. It amazes me actually how paranoid Christians actually are of death: most try to live very safely and preserve their lives using all means provided by modern science. Seems a bit strange when their is a supposed enternity of heaven awaiting: it is almost like than don't really believe or trust their own message.Muslim fundamentalist nutcases demonstrate their conviction much more convincingly, readily and regularly!As an atheist I work to preserve my healthy life, but do not fear the inevitability of oblivion for my mortal consciousness. If I did I wouldn't swim with the friggin' sharks now, would I?Proverbs 27:12 is good sensible advice, but I do not desire to closet myself away from all danger. There are too many fun dangerous experiences to be had in life!I was hoping for some insight into the predatory habits of the shark, but the Bible isn't real good on biology, is it?4) Witches Not suprisingly the Bible provides us with little of value on this subject, and instead provides us with some scary incorrect stuff. In this modern day and age where we no longer believe in nonsense like "the evil eye", we realise that witches don't actually exist and magic and sorcery are fictional. Would-be witches are merely playing make believe and engaging in relatively harmless fantasy. Such make-believe is not evil and is certainly a lot less evil than the evil that has often been embodied in religions throughout history. It is horrifying to suggest that such individuals (or others that aren't even pretending to be witches) should be subject to the sort of punshment that the Christian church once handed out in compliance with absurd and inapplicable Biblical nonsense.The Bible cannot provide consistent and good advice about critical thinking because such thinking is contrary to the mindset required for religious belief. Indeed, the very first chapter starts off by telling us how we shouldn't eat from the tree of knowledge.You also failed to explain why, as a Christian, witches should now be suffered to live in contravention of the Bible.5) Same sex relationships, de-facto relationships. Thanks for suggesting that my partner seek harlots and prostitutes. She actually has a preference for young well spoken and educated professional women. She does seek a relationship afterall. I didn't think the Bible would have much insight about modern/unconventional relationships, but then at least I avoided what I figured was going to be the unavoidable plethora of Biblical quotes from you about fornication and same sex relationships.6) Cults This was going to be a pickle for you, given that the Bible can be a great tool for creating a cult. It provides a few vague and non-specific warnings about avoiding false prophets, but otherwise completely fails to protect it's believers from cult abuse.You are right though: even though you can demonstrate that just about all cultist beliefs are false through scientific testing of the material claims, free will (as you label it) causes them to follow blindly.How does Luke 15:11-31 assist with avoiding false prophets? Heb 13:5? A cultist already believes that they are on the right path to God: how does Heb 13:5 assist?7) Modern technology/transport Does a Christian honestly have to pray to God for answers about turbo-charged engines... !I appreciate your lengthy and detailed response, asciikerr, but I suspect that you have referred to the same God of knowledge available to me. We both call this "God", the Internet!You have demonstrated how modern knowledge has supplanted the ancient and marginally intruiging insights of bronze age philosophers. Whilst I had a little fun, I did take this opportunity very seriously. The Bible provides some reasonably sensible, and mostly obvious insights for pleasant living but it also includes a stack of obsolete nonsense and obviously excludes much stuff necessary for the modern age. This much has been demonstrated above.What has the wisdom of men given us? Christianity had alomst 2000 years at the reigns of European society, but since it's fall from power we have:- Modern medicine and lower infant mortality/greater life expectency etc
- Space travel and knowledge of solar system and universe beyond.
- Modern transport.
- Telecommunications.
- Modern contruction.
- Computers and the Internet (which you have to use just to answer questions about your "supernatural book")
- Understanding of the natural universe: physics, chemistry, biology, earth sciences, natural history.etc etc.I challenge you to spend one entire day relying on nothing but the wisdom your find in the Bible: you cannot live in a modern house made of modern constructions materials/methods, can't wear modern fibres, can't eat any foods derived from modern agricultural techniques, can't use electricity, can only walk or ride animals, can't use water from a tap (except where sourced from a Roman or Greek aqueduct!), can't use any phone/tv/computer, cannot enter modern buildings cross modern bridges, and can't use medical aid. Sounds like the Amish!This message has been edited by Gilgamesh, 01-04-2005 00:20 AM

At least two prayed for the mission before the Columbia took off.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Purpledawn wrote: Thanks for your input, Purple. I would have figured as much.It's always bewildered me how black and white examples of the failure of prayer often do not compromise the faith of those involved. This is mostly because of the bullshit coverall church assessment of prayer response: "The answer will be Yes, No or Later", which basically covers every contigent from a fairly useless, unpredictable and indifferent Christian God, to no God/randomn chance, to Pretty Pick Pixies. It evidences the fact the faith has very little to do with rationale thought and a lot to do with an emotive need.No disrespect intended to those who perished in this tragedy, or their families.

minor nitpick for both you and asciiker: it was a chunk of insulating foam, not ice that caused the damage to the Challenger.

DrJones wrote: Oh ta. My bad. Am I right in that ice forms on the booster engines because of the fuel temp?