Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 46

Thread: Which makes the most sense?

  1. #1
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,762

    Which makes the most sense?

    Which is more (or less) silly?

    The early Greek poets posited various cosmogonies. The best-preserved is Hesiod's Theogony. In this hymn, out of the primordial chaos came the earliest divinities, including Gaia (mother earth). Gaia created Uranus, the sky, to cover herself. They spawned a bizarre menagerie of gods and monsters, including the Hecatonchires, monsters with 50 heads and a hundred hands, and the Cyclopes, the "wheel-eyed," later forgers of Zeus's thunderbolts. Next came the gods known as the Titans, 6 sons and 6 daughters. Uranus, despising his monstrous children, imprisoned them in Tartarus, the earth's bowels. Enraged, Gaia made an enormous sickle and gave it to her youngest son, Cronus, with instructions. When next Uranus appeared to copulate with Gaia, Cronus sprang out and hacked off his father's genitals! Where Uranus's blood and naughty bits fell, there sprang forth more monsters, the Giants and Furies. From the sea foam churned up by the the holy testicles came the goddess Aphrodite. Later, Cronus fathered the next generation of gods, Zeus and the Olympians.

    Or:

    The Hindu cosmology contains many myths of creation, and the principal players have risen and fallen in importance over the centuries. The earliest Vedic text, the Rig Veda, tells of a gigantic being, Purusha, possessing a thousand heads, eyes, and feet. He enveloped the earth, extending beyond it by the space of ten fingers. When the gods sacrificed Purusha, his body produced clarified butter, which engendered the birds and animals. His body parts transformed into the world's elements, and the gods Agni, Vayu, and Indra. Also, the four castes of Hindu society were created from his body: the priests, warriors, general populace, and the servants. Historically later, the trinity of Brahma (the creator), Vishnu (the preserver), and Shiva (the destroyer) gained prominence. Brahma appears in a lotus sprouting from the navel of the sleeping Vishnu. Brahma creates the universe, which lasts for one of his days, or 4.32 billion years. Then Shiva destroys the universe and the cycle restarts.

    Or:

    A cosmic egg floated within the timeless void, containing the opposing forces of yin and yang. After eons of incubation, the first being, Pan-gu emerged. The heavy parts (yin) of the egg drifted downwards, forming the earth. The lighter parts (yang) rose to form the sky. Pan-gu, fearing the parts might re-form, stood upon the earth and held up the sky. He grew 10 feet per day for 18,000 years, until the sky was 30,000 miles high. His work completed, he died. His parts transformed into elements of the universe, whether animals, weather phenomena, or celestial bodies. Some say the fleas on him became humans, but there is another explanation. The goddess Nuwa was lonely, so she fashioned men out of mud from the Yellow River. These first humans delighted her, but took long to make, so she flung muddy droplets over the earth, each one becoming a new person. These hastily-made people became the commoners, with the earlier ones being the nobles the first example of mass-production!

    Or:

    The ancient Egyptians had several creation myths. All begin with the swirling, chaotic waters of Nu (or Nun). Atum willed himself into being, and then created a hill, otherwise there'd be no place for him to stand. Atum was genderless and possessed an all-seeing eye. He/she spat out a son, Shu, god of the air. Atum then vomited up a daughter, Tefnut, goddess of moisture. These two were charged with the task of creating order out of chaos. Shu and Tefnut generated Geb, the earth, and Nut, the sky. First they were entwined, but Geb lifted Nut above him. Gradually the world's order formed, but Shu and Tefnut became lost in the remaining darkness. Atum removed his/her all-seeing eye and sent it in search of them. (Just how all-seeing it was, and what did Atum do without, remains a mystery.) When Shu and Tefnut returned, thanks to the eye, Atum wept with joy. (Presumably he/she re-inserted the eye first.) Where the tears struck the earth, men sprang up.

    Or:

    The Babylonian creation myth, the Enuma Elish, begins with the gods of water, Apsu (fresh), and Tiamat (salt), spawning several generations of gods, leading to Ea and his many brothers. However, these younger gods made so much noise that Apsu and Tiamat could not sleep (a complaint still common today amongst apartment-dwellers). Apsu plotted to kill them, but Ea killed him first. Tiamat vowed revenge and created many monsters, including the Mad Dog and Scorpion Man. Ea and the goddess Damkina created Marduk, a giant god with four eyes and four ears, as their protector. In tangling with Tiamat, Marduk, bearing the winds as weapons, hurled an evil wind down her gullet, incapacitating her, and then killed her with a single arrow to her heart. He then split her body in half and used it to create the heavens and the earth. Later he created man to do the drudge work that the gods refused to do, like farming, telemarketing and accounting. (Marduk currently appears on Cartoon Network's Sealab 2020!)

    Or:

    With its bounty of brawny, barrel-chested gods and buxom goddesses, the ancient Norse religion of the Scandinavian and Germanic countries is truly the creation myth for fans of both pro wrestling and heavy metal music. According to Norse lore, before there was Earth (Midgard), there was Muspell, a fiery land guarded by the fire sword-wielding Surt; Ginnungagap, a great void, and Niflheim, a frozen ice-covered land. When the cold of Niflheim touched the fires of Muspell, the giant Ymir and a behemothic cow, Auđhumla, emerged from the thaw. Then, the cow licked the god Bor and his wife into being. The couple gave birth to Buri, who fathered three sons, Odin, Vili, and Vé. The sons rose up and killed Ymir and from his corpse created from his flesh, the Earth; the mountains from his bones, trees with his hair and rivers, and the seas and lakes with his blood. Within Ymir?s hollowed-out skull, the gods created the starry heavens. What can we say: Pure metal magic!!

    Or (wait for it):

    The Genesis of the Judeo-Christian and Islamic Faiths:

    Genesis, the first book of the Jewish Torah and the Christian Bible, contains two origin stories, both of which are accepted as the creation of the world by today's Jewish, Christian and Islamic faiths. In the first, God says, "Let there be light," and light appears. In six days, he creates the sky, the land, plants, the sun and moon, animals, and all creatures, including humans. To all he says, "Be fruitful and multiply," which they do. On the seventh day God rests, contemplates his handiwork, and gives himself a good evaluation. In the second story, God creates the first man, Adam, from the earth. He makes a garden in Eden for Adam, but forbids him to eat fruit from the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil." Adam names the animals but remains lonely. God anesthetizes Adam and makes one of his ribs into the first woman, Eve. A talking serpent persuades her to eat the forbidden fruit, and she convinces Adam to do likewise. When God finds out, he drives them from the garden and makes man mortal.




  2. #2
    ColleenC1
    Guest

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    the difference in all the stories of the gods and God, is the 61 prophesies foretold regarding the coming of the Lord, that all 61 were fullfilled in one man Jesus of Nazereth. The mathematical probabilities of all 61 coming true in one person would be 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000 or 10 to the 17th power.

    As Josh McDowel writes in his book Evidence that Demands a Verdict, That would be like taking 10 to the 17th power of silver dollars and lay them the on the face of the state of Texas. Now mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whold mass thouroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man and tell him that he can travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick up one silver dollar and say that this is the one with the mark.

    Also, no other "good" man or prophet has ever claimed to be God, also, no other prophet or good man in any religion around the world has been resurrected or claims of resurrection. The historical probalitiy that this event took place is greater than if it didn't.

    I have heard the argument that it can't be proven, but at that time there were many eye witnesses. There were not only eye witnesses but they were willing to testify in writing to the truths that they witnessed. In a court of law there words would be accepted.

    The argument that you can't talk to the people so it is only "mass hysteria" is deflective in that you cannot interview people who knew Aristotle, Socrates, Ghengas Khan, or anyother historical figures, but we say with certainty (as well as teach) what we know about their lives and contributions to the world.

  3. #3
    DonTom
    Guest

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    but at that time there were many eye witnesses.

    Since when do courts of law allow dead witnesses? Think there might be a reason?

    It's all a bunch of nonsense. There were millions of witnesses who said do back then.

    -Don-

  4. #4
    ColleenC1
    Guest

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    Since when do courts of law allow dead witnesses

    You know or at least I think you know that I was not talking about "dead" witnesses.

    The mere fact that someone is willing to put in writing what they witnessed and sign the document is accepted in a court of law. Or for that matter a "will" is accepted after the death of a person.

  5. #5
    DonTom
    Guest

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    "The mere fact that someone is willing to put in writing want they witnessed and sign the document is accepted in a court of law. "

    As evidence, but not as a witness.


    Or for that matter a "will" is accepted after the death of a person.

    Not always. Wills get successfully contested every day.

    -Don-

  6. #6
    ColleenC1
    Guest

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    As evidence

    Exactly, now add that number to the others who put in writing what they saw.

  7. #7
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,762

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    That argument -"prophecies fulfilled" - has also been more shot through with holes than the Bismarck...

    Here's a quick sampling:

    Prophecies to Identify the Messiah, Which Jesus Does Not Fulfill:

    1) Matthew 1:23 says that Jesus (the messiah) would be called Immanuel, which means "God with us." Yet no one, not even his parents, call him Immanuel at any point in the bible.

    2) The Messiah must be a physical descendant of David (Romans 1:3 & Acts 2:30). Yet, how could Jesus meet this requirement since his genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 show he descended from David through Joseph, who was not his natural father because of the Virgin Birth. Hence, this prophecy could not have been fulfilled.

    3) Isaiah 7:16 seems to say that before Jesus had reached the age of maturity, both of the Jewish countries would be destroyed. Yet there is no mention of this prophecy being fulfilled in the New Testament with the coming of Jesus, hence this is another Messiah prophecy not fulfilled.


    Prophecies Christians Use to Verify Jesus as the Messiah, Yet Clearly Fail:

    4) The gospels (especially Matthew 21:4 and John 12:14-15) claim that Jesus fulfills the prophecy of Zechariah 9:9. But the next few verses (Zechariah 9:10-13) show that the person referred to in this verse is a military king that would rule "from sea to sea". Since Jesus had neither an army nor a kingdom, he could not have fulfilled this prophecy.

    5) Matthew (Matthew 2:17-18) quotes Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:15), claiming that it was a prophecy of King Herod?s alleged slaughter of the children in and around Bethlehem after the birth of Jesus. But this passage refers to the Babylonian captivity, as is clear by reading the next two verses (Jeremiah 31:16-17), and, thus, has nothing to do with Herod?s massacre.

    6) John 19:33 says that during Jesus? crucifixion, the soldiers didn?t break his legs because he was already dead. Verse John 19:36 claims that this fulfilled a prophecy: "Not a bone of him shall be broken." But there is no such prophecy. It is sometimes said that the prophecy appears in Exodus 12:46, Numbers 9:12 & Psalm 34:20. This is not correct. Exodus 12:46 & Numbers 9:12 are not prophecies, they are commandments. The Israelites are told not to break the bones of the Passover lamb, and this is all it is about. And Psalm 34:20 seems to refer to righteous people in general (see verse Psalm 34:19, where a plural is used), not to make a prophecy about a specific person.

    7) "When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." Hosea 11:1. Matthew (Matthew 2:15) claims that the flight of Jesus? family to Egypt is a fulfillment of this verse. But Hosea 11:1 is not a prophecy at all. It is a reference to the Hebrew exodus from Egypt and has nothing to do with Jesus. Matthew tries to hide this fact by quoting only the last part of the verse ("Out of Egypt I have called my son").

    8) "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." Micah 5:2 The gospel of Matthew (Matthew 2:5-6) claims that Jesus? birth in Bethlehem fulfils this prophecy. But this is unlikely for two reasons.

    A) "Bethlehem Ephratah" in Micah 5:2 refers not to a town, but to a clan: the clan of Bethlehem, who was the son of Caleb?s second wife, Ephrathah (1 Chronicles 2:18, 2:50-52 & 4:4).

    B) The prophecy (if that is what it is) does not refer to the Messiah, but rather to a military leader, as can be seen from Micah 5:6. This leader is supposed to defeat the Assyrians, which, of course, Jesus never did. It should also be noted that Matthew altered the text of Micah 5:2 by saying: "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Judah" rather than "Bethlehem Ephratah" as is said in Micah 5:2. He did this, intentionally no doubt, to make this verse appear to refer to the town of Bethlehem rather than the family clan.

    Statements Jesus Made Which Are False:

    9) Jesus in John 14:12 & Mark 16:17-18 said: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth in me, the works that I do shall he also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father." This implies that Jesus? true followers should be able to routinely perform the following tricks: 1) cast out devils, 2) speak in tongues, 3) take up serpents, 4) drink poisons without harm, and 5) cure the sick by touching them and MANY other of Jesus? "works". Curiously I have yet to see a Christian that can do any of the above on demand.

    10) In John 14:13-14 Jesus stated: "And whatsoever ye ask in my name I do, that the Father may be glorified in the son. If ye ask any thing in my name, I will do it." In reality, millions of people have made millions of requests in Jesus? name and failed to receive satisfaction. This promise or prophecy has failed completely.

    11) Paul says Christianity lives or dies on the Resurrection (1 Corinthian 15:14-17). Yet Jesus said in Matthew 12:40 that he would be buried three days and three nights as Jonah was in the whale three days and three nights. Friday afternoon to early Sunday morning is only one and a half days, so he could not have been the messiah by his own and Paul?s admission.

    12) Jesus? prophecy in John 13:38 ("The cock shall not crow, till thou [Peter] hast denied me three times") is false. Mark 14:66-68 shows the cock crowed after the first denial, not the third.

    13) In Mark 10:19 Jesus said: "Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother." Jesus needs to re-read the Ten Commandments. There is no Old Testament commandment against defrauding. The only relevant statement about defrauding is in Leviticus 19:13 , which says : "Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbor." This is an OT law, but is not listed with the Ten Commandments. Surely, if Jesus was god incarnate he would know the commandments.

    14) "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven" (John 3:13). If Jesus is in heaven, how can he be down on earth speaking? Moreover, according to 2 Kings 2:11 ("and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven") Jesus was not the only person to ascend into heaven, nor was he the first. Elijah preceded him and apparently Enoch did also ("And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him"--Genesis 5:24).

    15) In Luke 23:43 Jesus said to the thief on the cross, "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise." This obviously has to be false, for Jesus was supposed to lay dead in the tomb for three days following his crucifixion.

    1 6) Jesus says : "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy" (Matthew 5:43). This statement does not exist in the OT either. In fact, Proverbs 24:17 says, "Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth?"

    17) Jesus is reported to say: "The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it" (Luke 16:16). Certainly every man is not pressing to enter the kingdom of God. The very fact that I am an atheist (one third of the world?s population does not believe in a god) proves this verse to be false.

    18) "Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the Sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless?" (Matthew 12:5) Nowhere does the OT state that the priests in the temple profaned the Sabbath and were considered blameless.

    19) "Yea; have ye never read, 'Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise'" (Matthew 21:16). Jesus is quoting Psalm 8:2, which says, "Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies?". "Perfect praise" has little to do with "ordaining strength because of thine enemies." Another misquotation!

    20) "But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him" (Mark 9:13). There are no prophecies in the OT of things that were to happen to Elijah.

    Jesus, in all his "God incarnate" wisdom, contradicts himself:

    21) Jesus consistently contradicts himself concerning his Godly status. "I and my father are one." (John 14:28) Also see Philippians 2:5-6 Those verses lead us to believe that he is a part of the trinity and equal to his father being a manifestation of him. Yet, Jesus also made many statements that deny he is the perfect men, much less God incarnate. Take the following for example: "Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God" (Matthew 19:17). "My father if greater then I." (John 14:28) Also see Matthew 24:26 Clearly, Jesus is denouncing the possibility of him being the Messiah in those three verses.

    22) Jesus said, "whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire" (Matthew 5:22). Yet, he himself did so repeatedly, as Matthew 23:17-19 and Luke 11:40 & 12:20 show. Clearly Jesus should be in danger of hell too?

    23) Does Jesus support peace, or war? Matthew 5:39 "Resist not evil, but whoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." Also note Matthew 6:38-42 & 26:52 where Jesus teaches non-resistance, Non-violence. Now read (Luke 22:36-37) Where Jesus commands people to take arms for a coming conflict. (John 2:15) Jesus uses a whip to physically drive people out of the temple.

    24) Matthew 15:24 Jesus said, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of lsrael,". This would of course mean that he is here only to save the Jews. The scriptures repeatedly back up this notion that Christ is savior to the Jews and not the gentiles (see Romans 16:17, Revelations 14:3-4 & John 10). The contradiction lies in what Jesus later tells his followers: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations" (Matthew 28:19).

    25) Can we hate our kindred? Luke 14:26 Jesus says "If any man come unto me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brother, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he can not be my disciple." John 3:15 "Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer." Also see Ephesians 6:22, 5:25, & Matthew 15:4

    26) Even many of the staunchest defenders of Jesus admit that his comment in Matthew 10:34 ("I came not to send peace but a sword") contradicts verses such as Matthew 26:52 ("Put up again thy sword into his place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword").

    27) Deuteronomy 24:1 & 21:10-14 all say that divorce is allowed for the simple reason if a "man no longer delighteth in his wife". Yet Jesus comes along and breaks his father?s law by saying in Matthew 5:32 that adultery is the only way one can be divorced.

    28) In Mark 8:35 Jesus said: "...but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel?s the same shall save it." How could Jesus have said this when there was no gospel when he lived? The gospel did not appear until after his death.

    29) Matthew 6:13 Jesus recites a revised prayer and states, "Don?t bring us into temptation." God is the cause of everything, even Satan. God has been leading people into temptation since the Garden of Eden. Otherwise, the trees of life and knowledge would have never been there.

    30) Matthew 12:1-8 Jesus thinks it?s okay to break his father?s laws, by breaking the Sabbath day. He states that he is basically exempt for such fiascoes and that he is Master of the Sabbath.

    31) John 3:17 Jesus contradicts himself when he says, "God didn?t send his son into the world to condemn it, but to save it." Jesus seems to forget his own stories.

    32) James 4:3 If your prayers are not answered, it?s your own damned fault. This is in direct contradiction to where Jesus says "seek and ye shall find, ask and it shall be known to you".

    33) "If Jesus bears witness of himself his witness is true" John 8:14, "If I bear witness of myself it is not true." John 5:31

    34) "I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" (Matthew 28:20), versus "For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always" (Matthew 26:11 , Mark 14:7, John 12:8) and "Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am thither ye cannot come" (John 7:34). Is this the kind of friend one can rely on?

    35) "And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her" (Mark 10:11 & Luke 6:18), versus "And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery" (Matthew 19:9). In the book of Matthew, Jesus said a man could put away his wife if one factor-- fornication--is involved. In Mark and Luke he allowed no exceptions.

    36) Jesus is quoted: "Judge not, and ye shall be not judged; condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven" (Luke 6:37 & Matthew 7:1), versus "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment" (John 7:24). Jesus stated men are not to judge but, then, allowed it under certain conditions. As in the case of divorce, he can?t seem to formulate a consistent policy.

    37) "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Matthew 27:46, (also note the time before crucification where Jesus prays for the "cup to passeth over me") versus "Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? ?Father, save me from this hour?? No, for this purpose I have come to this hour" (John 12:27 RSV). Jesus can?t seem to decide whether or not he wants to die. One moment he is willing; the next he isn?t.

    38) In Luke 23:30 ("Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, fall on us, and to the hills, cover us") Jesus quoted Hosea 10:8 ("...and they shall say to the mountains, cover us; and to the hills, fall on us"). And, like Paul, he often quoted inaccurately. In this instance, he confused mountains with hills.

    39) "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they know him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist" (Matthew 17:11-13). John the Baptist was beheaded, but Jesus was not. And what did John the Baptist restore? Nothing!

    40) We are told salvation is obtained by faith alone (John 3:18 & 36) yet Jesus told a man to follow the Commandments-Matthew 19:16-18 (saving by works)-if he wanted eternal life.

    41) In Luke 12:4 Jesus told his followers to "Be not afraid of them that kill the body." But Matthew 12:14-16, John 7:1, 8:59, 10:39, 11:53-54, & Mark 1:45 show that Jesus consistently feared death. Jesus went out of his way to hide, run, and attempt escape from the Roman and Jewish authorities.

    42) Matthew 5:28 says to sin in "your heart" is considered a sin in itself. The messiah is supposed to be God incarnate, not able to sin, yet in Matthew 4:5 & Luke 4:5-9, Jesus was tempted by Satan in the desert, which is sinning in his heart. Jesus also took upon all the sins of the world during his crucifixion, so how can it be said that "Jesus was the perfect man without sin"? This would lead one to believe he was not the Messiah.

    43) Jesus told us to "Love your enemies; bless them that curse you," but ignored his own advice by repeatedly denouncing his opposition. Matthew 23:17 ("Ye fools and blind"), Matthew 12:34 ("0 generation of vipers"), and Matthew 23:27 (". . . hypocrites . . . ye are like unto whited sepulchres. . .") are excellent examples of hypocrisy.

    44) Did the people of Jesus? generation see any signs? (Matthew 12:38-40) Jesus announced that no signs would be given to that generation except the Resurrection itself. (Mark 8:12-13) Jesus announced that no signs would be given to that generation. (Mark 16:20) They went out preaching, and the Lord confirmed the word through accompanying signs. (John 20:30) Jesus provided many wonders and signs. (Acts 2:22) Jesus provided many wonders and signs. (Acts 5:12 & 8:13) many signs and wonders were done through the apostles.

    45) Jesus commands the disciples to go into Galilee immediately after the resurrection. Matthew 28:10 Jesus commands the disciples to "tarry in Jerusalem" immediately after the resurrection.

    46) Matthew 28:18 & John 3:35 both tell that Jesus said he could do anything. Yet Mark 6:5 says Jesus was not all powerful.

    47) Jesus says in Luke 2:13-14 that he came to bring peace on earth. Matthew 10:34 Jesus back peddles and says he did not come to bring peace on earth.

    48) Did Christ receive testimony from man? "Ye sent unto John and he bare witness unto the truth. But I receive not testimony from man." John 5:33-34 "And ye shall also bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning." John 15:27

    49) Christ laid down his life for his friends. John 15:13 & 10:11 Christ laid down his life for his enemies. Romans 5:10

    50) Deuteronomy 23:2 says that bastards can not attend church unto the tenth generation. If Jesus was spawned by Mary and Jehovah as the Bible claims then he is technically a bastard and should not be the leader of the church.

  8. #8
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,762

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    Quote Originally Posted by ColleenC1
    As evidence

    Exactly, now add that number to the others who put in writing what they saw.
    Hmmm.. how about all those "witnesses" to the mass resurrections spoken of in the bible? Strange that such an amazing event (let alone the supposed "resurrection" of Jesus) was left unmentioned/uncommented upon by Roman historians of the time - who were scrupulous in their record-keeping and surely would have made at least passing mention of dead folks coming back to life, en mass. Eh? (Christians love to point to secular Roman mentions of Pilate, etc. but are strangely silent on the Romans' odd silence about the earthshaking events that supposedly took place...)

    The fact that an alleged event was written down and "witnessed" is not by any means proof the event happened. And when an extraordinary claim is made, extraordinary proof is required. Not just the say-so of a musty old tome like the bible, especially when other evidence is not merely lacking - but tends to suggest the claims made are false.

  9. #9
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,762

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    "Also, no other "good" man or prophet has ever claimed to be God, also, no other prophet or good man in any religion around the world has been resurrected or claims of resurrection. The historical probalitiy that this event took place is greater than if it didn't."

    Hate to break the news to you but have you ever heard of Sun Myung Moon? How about Do and Ti? And if you desire older god/resurrection stories, how about Set and Isis? Etc.

    There's nothing new or special about the silly claims made by Christianity.

  10. #10
    DonTom
    Guest

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    Quote Originally Posted by ColleenC1
    As evidence

    Exactly, now add that number to the others who put in writing what they saw.

    Can it be proven that the signatures are really theirs? How do we know somebody didn't simply claim a million people in the past saw something?

    In fact, can we prove any of the people even existed?

    But in any case, obvious nonsense is still obvious nonsense. I don't believe nonsense claims by anybody, regardless of how many people signed they saw something that could not have really happened.

    -Don-

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,635

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    >>Hmmm.. how about all those "witnesses" to the mass resurrections spoken of in the bible?<<

    I was asked that question one evening by an old friend who had flipped and became a born again-- I told him that more people claim to have seen Elvis every day than the total who claim to have seen Jesus---

  12. #12
    DonTom
    Guest

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    I was asked that question one evening by an old friend who had flipped and became a born again-

    I had a high school friend (Screwie Louie) who did that too. I stayed away from him when he started doing drugs with some of his other friends. But when he got off of illegal drugs and went to booze, that was when his BIG problems really started. When he was at a all time low, after almost killing himself from his booze addiction, a close friend of his (Rob) got out of jail (for drugs) and came out of jail as a Jesus Freak. That rubbed off on Scewie Louie and now they are both getting high off their religious nonsense.

    Did your "old friend" have such a life too, before getting hooked on the religious nonsense?

    Screwie Louie went from a normal person to illegal drugs, then to booze and than to the religious drug. He was easier to deal with when he was on drugs than he is now. His mind is totally blown with the religious nonsense. He lives in a religious commune near Twain Heart, CA. He's been there for many, many years. That is the "Word of Life Fellowship" in Mi-Wuk Village, CA. A nice place in the mountains away from everything.


    -Don-



  13. #13
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,762

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    "I had a high school friend (Screwie Louie) who did that too. I stayed away from him when he started doing drugs with some of his other friends. But when he got off of illegal drugs and went to booze, that was when his BIG problems really started. When he was at a all time low, after almost killing himself from his booze addiction, a close friend of his (Rob) got out of jail (for drugs) and came out of jail as a Jesus Freak. That rubbed off on Scewie Louie and now they are both getting high off their religious nonsense.

    Did your "old friend" have such a life too, before getting hooked on the religious nonsense?"

    My condolences to both of you!

    I have a very good friend who is similar; we've known each other since we were teenagers. His mom got into this character named RB Thieme. Ever hear of this guy? A real whack job and Kool Aid distiller... anyway, my friends is into him (Thieme) now also - and listens to tapes every week and gets these little pamphlets filled with (Say it LOUD) "bible doctrine" - and lots of little diagrams and so on Thieme uses to parse the Holy Writ....

  14. #14
    ColleenC1
    Guest

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    The allegations of error in the Bible are usually based on a failure to recognize basic principles of interpreting ancient literature. The following principles can help one discern whether there is a true error or a contradiction in literature
    Principle # The unexplained is not necessarily unexplainable. When a scientist comes upon an anomaly in nature, he does not give up further scientific exploration. Rather, he uses the unexplained as a motivation to fine an explanation.

    Some critics have argued against the historical accuracy of the birth narratives in Matthew and Luke, raising what they think are clear factual mistakes or unresolvable contradictions. the most frequently cited objections concern the genealogies of the two gospels and Luke's mention of Quirinius and a certain census.

    Concerning contradictory genealogies, Matthew records the "genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David "(Matt. 1:1) and Luke provides another genealogy of Jesus, "being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph" (Luke 3:23). James Montgomery Boice explains the problem well:

    Matthew's genealogy begins with Abraham and moves forward in history to Christ. It traces Abraham's descendants through fourteen generations to David, David's descendants through fourteen more generations to the Babylonian captivity, then the later descendants through fourteen more generations up to "Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ." Luke, on the other hand, moves backward. He begins with Joseph and goes back through David, to Abraham - and then even back beyond Abraham to Adam, who, he says, was the son of God.

    Two of Luke's sections present no problem. His final section--from Abraham to Adam does not occur in Matthew. So there is no basis for comparison. His second section -- from David to Abraham -- is also free of problems because it corresponds to the genealogy we find in Matthew.

    The difficulty comes in Luke's first section. For Luke traces Joseph's descendants back to David through Nathan, one of David's sons, while Matthew traces what is apparently the same line of descent through Solomon, another of David's sons. Consequently, in this section of the genealogies all the names are different.

    The fact that these are two separate lines is no problem. We can understand how two different sons of David would give birth to two diffent family trees. The difficulty is that Matthew and Luke both claim Joseph as decendant of their particular trees. Luke says that Joseph was the son of Heli (Luke 3:23), Matthew says that Joseph was the son of Jacob(Matt.1:16) and both apparently cannot be true. (Boice, The Christ of Christmas. Chicago, Ill:Moody Press 1983)

    The oldest answer to this question, "since at least the time of Annius of Viterbo in A.D. 1490, B. Witherington writes in the :Birth of Jesus," Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels "it has been traditional to assume that Matthew's genealogy traces Jesus' lineage through Joseph (his legal genealogy) whereas Luke's genealogy traces his lineage through Mary (his natural genealogy). {This solutions finds} support from the fact that the Matthean birth narrative focuses more on the role of Joseph than of Mary the more central figure in the drama. It also comports with the ancient conjecture that Joseph is ultimately the source of much of the Matthean birth narratives, while Mary is the source for most of Luke's material. (Witheringrton III, BJ, 65)

    The genealogies in Matthew and Luke are two different lines of ancestors, one traced through His (Jesus') legal father
    Joseph and the other through His actual mother, Mary. Matthew gives the official line, since he addresses Jesus' genealogy to Jewish concerns for the Jewish Messiah's credentials which required that Messiah come from the seed of Abraham and the line of David (Matt. 1:1), Luke, with a broader Greek audience in view, addresses himself to their interest in Jesus as the Perfect Man(which was the quest of Greek thought). thus, he traces Jesus back to the first man, Adam (Luke 3:38)

    That Matthew gives Jesus' paternal genealogy and Luke his maternal genealogy is further supported by several facts. First of all, while both lines trace Jesus back to David, each is through a diffent son of David. Matthew traces Jesus through Joseph (his legal father) to David's son Solomon the king, by whom Jesus rightfully inherited the throne of David (2 Sam. 7:12). Luke's purpose, on the other hand is to show Jesus as an actual human. So he traces Jesus to David's son, Natham, through his actual mother, Mary, through whom He can rightfully claim to be fully human, the redeemer of humanity.

    Further, Luke does not say that he is giving Jesus' genealogy through Joseph. Rather, he notes that Jesus was "as was supposed" (Luke 3:23) the son of Joseph, while He was actually the son of Mary. Also, that Luke would record Mary's genealogy fits with his interest as a doctor in mothers and birth and with his emphasis on women in his Gospel which has been called "the Gospel for Women."

    Finally, the fact that the two genealogies have some names in common (such as Shealtiel and Zerubbabel, Matt. 1:12; Luke 3:27) does not prove they are the same genealogy for two reasons. One, these are not uncommon names. Further, even the same genealogy (Luke's) has a repeat of the names Joseph and Judah (3:26,30). (Geisler, Norman L and Ron Rhodes. When Cultists Ask: A Popular handbook on Cultic Misinterpretations, Grand Rapids:Baker Books, 1997)

    Biblical scholar Gleason Archer writes, Matthew 1:1-16 gives the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph, who was himself a descendat of King David. As Joseph's adopted Son Jesus became his legal heir, so far as his inheritance was concerned. Notice carefully the wording of v.16: "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of who was born Jesus, who is called Christ"(NASB). This stands in contrast to the format followed in the preceding verses of the succession of Joseph's ancestors: "abraham begat (egenn'sen) Isaac, and Issac begat Jacob, etc." Joseph is not said to have begotten Jesus; rather he is referred to as the "husband of Mary, of whom (feminine genitive) Jesus was born."

    Luke 3:23-38, on the other hand, seems to record the genealogical line of Mary herself, carried all the way back beyond the time of Abraham to Adam and the commencement of the human race. This seems to be implied by the wording of v.23: "Jesus ...being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph." This "as was supposed" indicates that Jesus was not really the biological son of Joseph, evn though this was commonly assumed by the public. it further calls attention to the mother, Mary, who must of necessity have been the sole human parent through whom Jesus could have descended from a line of ancestors. her genealogy is therupon listed, starting with Heli, who was actually Joseph's father in-law, in contradistinction to Joseph's own father, Jacob (Matt. 1:16). Mary's line of descent came through Nathan, a son of Bathsheba ("Bathshua," according to 1 Chron. 3:5), the wife of David naturally through Nathan and legally through Solomon. (Archer, Gleason L., Jr. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids: Zondervan 1982).

    As already mentioned, Luke's genealogy is that of Mary to David and Matthew's genealogy is that of Joseph to David. The whole point of the difference is that Solomon's line was the royal line and Nathan's line was the legal line.

    But the greatest proof of all, is in one of the names in the account of Matthew: The name Jechonias. it is that name that furnishes the reason for the inclusion of the genealogy of Jesus' step-father, for it proves that Joseph could not have been the father of Jesus, or if he had been, that Jesus could not have been the Messiah. In the use of that name is conclusive evidence that Jesus is the son of Mary and not the son of Joseph. Jechonias was accursed of God with a curse that took the throne away from any of his descendants.
    "Thus saith the Lord," we read in Jeremiah 22:30 "write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah." not one of the seven sons (I Chron.3:17,18) of this man ever possessed the throne. No carnal son of this man could have been king because of the curse of God. If Jesus had been the son of Joseph, He would have been accursed and could never have been the Messiah.

    On the other hand, the line of Nathan was not the royal line. A son of Heli would have faced the fact that there was a regal line that would have contested any claim that came from the line of Nathan. How was the dilemma solved? It was sloved in a manner that is so simple that it is the utter confusion of the agnostics who seek to tear the Bible to pieces. The answer is this: The line that had no curse upon it produced Heli and his daughter the Virgin Mary and her Son Jesus Christ.He is therfore eligible by the line of Nathan and exhausts that line. The line that had a curse on it produced Joseph, exhausts the line of Solomon, for Joseph's other children now have an older brother who, legally, by adoption, is the royal heir. How can the title be free in any case? Acurse on one line and the lack of reigning royalty on the other.(Barnhouse, donald Grey. Man's Ruin Vol.1, Expositions of Bible Doctrines. Grand Rapids: Wm B. Eerdmans, 1952

    Liefeld concludes: "... There may not be enough information yet to resolve with certainty the differeces between Matthew's genealogy and Luke's but there certainly enough information to know the differences are not insoluble, therfore they do not pose a genuine contradiction to the biblical account of Jesus's virgin birth (Liefeld, Walter L. "Luke," in The Expositor's Bible Commentary, ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein, vol.8. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984)



    The rest of the so-called errors, contradiction, discrepancies etc. I will attend to at another time. Some of them are easier than others. i.e Immanuel is simple, this is not difficult to expound , although it will have to wait, as it is already 11:00p.m.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,635

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    >>Did your "old friend" have such a life too, before getting hooked on the religious nonsense?"<<

    He did-- he was a news anchorman on a TV station in Lubbock. Ate hinself out of a job--- got divorced-- remarried sold everything-- bought a trailer and traveled for a few years and got nailed at some damn trailer park in the boonies.
    I had him working as one of my sales reps in NY city during the 1991 emission program-- he was a great salesman-- He also was huge! about 6' 4 and 400 pounds---
    He wound up in Austin and bought a fleet of taxi cabs and was their cheif mechanic and owner-- He sold the operation after about 4 years and was going back on the road with a snack wagon type trailer-- found him dead in that one day of a heart attack. His wife died recently also-- I guess all that born again stuff didn't help much, huh?
    It's hell to get old-- all your friends either die or become disabled.


  16. #16
    DonTom
    Guest

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    It's hell to get old--


    "Old age isn't so bad when you consider the alternative."
    --Maurice Chevalier


    -Don Quoteman

  17. #17
    ColleenC1
    Guest

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    6) John 19:33 says that during Jesus? crucifixion, the soldiers didn?t break his legs because he was already dead. Verse John 19:36 claims that this fulfilled a prophecy: "Not a bone of him shall be broken." But there is no such prophecy. It is sometimes said that the prophecy appears in Exodus 12:46, Numbers 9:12 & Psalm 34:20. This is not correct. Exodus 12:46 & Numbers 9:12 are not prophecies, they are commandments. The Israelites are told not to break the bones of the Passover lamb, and this is all it is about. And Psalm 34:20 seems to refer to righteous people in general (see verse Psalm 34:19, where a plural is used), not to make a prophecy about a specific person.

    In Response to Eric assertion:

    The Prophecy: "He guards all his bones; not one of them is broken." Psalms 34:20
    Fullfillment: " But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break his legs."
    John 19:33

    Although not stated in Scripture, there are two other prophecies that concern His bones that undoubtedly had an exact fullfillment.
    1. "And all My bones are out of joint." (Ps. 22:14). The disjointing of bones while hanging on the cross by the hands and feet could easily come about, expecially when we note that His body was attached to the cross while it was lyng on the ground.
    2. "I can count all My bones. The look and stare at me" (Ps. 22:17). All His bones could be seen while He left hanging on the cross. The extension of His body during crucifision would tend to make the bones more prominent than usual.

    The following 61 prophecies and scripture references are including so that it is clear what was denoted as prophecy.

    Prophecies concerning His birth:
    Born of the seed of a woman: Genesis 3:15
    Born of a Virgin: Isaiah 7:14
    Son of God Psalm 2:7 (see also I Chr. 17:11-14; 2 Sam. 7:12-16)
    Seed of Abraham: Genesis 22:18 (see also Gen 12:2,3)
    Son Issac: Genesis 21:12
    Son of Jacob: Nubers 24:17 (see also Gen. 35:10-12)
    Tribe of Judah: Genesis 49:10 (see also Mic. 5:2)
    Family line of Jesse: Issiah 11:1 (see also Is. 1:10)
    House of David: Jeremiah 23:5
    Born at Bethlehem Michah 5:2
    Presented with gifts Psalm 72:10 (see also Is. 60:6)
    Heod Kills children: Jeremiah 31:15
    The dispersion and extermination of Israel is spoken of in Jeremiah 31:17, 18. What does Herod murdering the infants of Bethlem have to do with the deportation? Was Matthew mistaken when he viewed Jeremiah's prophecy as fulfilled in Herond's atrocities (Matt. 2:17,18) or the murder of the innocents as a type of destructin of Israel or Judah? Laetsch says
    No certainly not. The entire context of ch.31, beginning ch.30:20 and continuing to ch.33:26, is Messianic. The four chapters speak of the approach of the Lord's salvation, of the coming of Messiah to re-establish the Kingdom of David in the form of a new convenant, of which forgiveness of sins is to be the foundation (ch.31:31-34); a kingdom in which every weary and sorrowful soul shall be fully comforted (vv.12-14,25). As an example of this comfort the Lord introduces the consolation to be extended to mothers who had suffered great loss for the sake of Christ, the cruel murder of their infant sons. (Laetsch, Theodore. Bible Commentary: Jeremiah, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1953 ).

    Prophecies concerning His nature:
    His Pre-Existence: Micah 5:2
    He shall be called Lord: Psalm 110:1 (see also Jer.23:6)
    Shall be Immanuel: Isaiah 7:14
    Shall be a Prophet: Deuteronomy 18:18
    Priest: Psalm 110: 4
    Judge: Isaiah 33:22
    King: Psalm 2:6
    Special anointing of Holy Spirit Isaiah 11:2 (see also Ps.45:7; Is.42:1;6:1,2)
    His Zeal for God Psalm 69:9

    Prophecies concerning His ministry:
    Preceded by Messenger: Isaiah 40:3 (see also Mal.3:1
    Ministry to begin in Galilee: Isaiah 9:1
    Ministry of Miracles: Isaiah 35:5,6(see also Is 32:3,4)
    Teacher of Parables Psalm 78:2
    He was to enter the temple Malachi 3:1
    He was to enter Jerusalem
    on a donkey: Zechariah 9:9
    "Stone of Stumbling" to Jews: Psalm 118:22 (see also Is. 8:14,28:1)
    Light to Gentiles: Isaiah 60;3 (see also Is 49:6)

    Prophecies concerning events after his burial:
    Resurrection; Psalm 16:10
    Ascension: Psalm 68:18
    Seated at the right hand of God: Psalm 110:1

    Prophecies Fullfilled in One day:
    Betrayed by a friend: Psalm 41:9 (see also 55:12-14)
    Sold for thirty pieces of silver Zechariah 11:12
    Money to be thrown into
    God's house: Zechariah 11:13
    Price given for potter's field Zechriah 11:13
    Forsaken by His disciples: Zechariah 13:7
    Accused by false witnesses: Psalm 35:11
    Silent before accusers: Isaiah 53:7
    wounded & bruised: Isaiah 53:5
    smitten and spit upon: Isaiah 50:6
    mocked: Psalm 22:7,8
    fell under the cross Psalm 109:24,25
    hands and feet pierced: Psalm 22:16 (see also Zech.12:10)
    crucified with thieves: Isaiah 53:12
    Made intercession for His
    persecutors: Isaiah 53:12
    Rejected by his own people Isaiah 53:3 (see also Pss.69:8, 118:22)
    hated without cause: Psalm 69:4 (see also Is.49:7)
    friends stood afar off: Psalm 38:11
    people shook their heads Psalm 109:25(see also Ps.22:7)
    stared upon: Psalm 22:17
    garments parted & lots cast: Psalm 22:18
    suffer thirst: Psalm 69:21
    gall & vinegar offered to him Psalm 69:21
    his forsaken cry: Psalm 22:1
    committed Himself to God Psalm 31:5
    Bones not broken: Psalm 34:20
    heartbroken: Psalm 22:14
    his side pierced: Zechariah 12:10
    darkness over the land: Amos 8:9
    buried in a rich man's tomb: Isaiah 53:9

    When you look over the list, your claims that most of these have been disproven seems kind of riduculous.

    There are 8 prophecies that could not have been manufactured by men: Place of birth,(Mic. 5:2) time of birth(Dan. 9:25;Gen.49:10), manner of birth(Is. 7:14), betrayal(Pss. 41:9;55:12-14), manner of death(Ps. 22;16),People's reactions(mocking, spitting, staring etc.) Piercing, burial

    I correct myself on the mathematical probabilities as I misquoted H. Harold Hartzler, of the American Scientific Affiliation, Goshen College, The manuscript for Science Speaks has been carefully reviewed by a committee of the American Scientific Affliation members and by the Executive Council of the same group and has been found, in general to be dependable and accurate in regard to the scientific material presented. "The mathematical analysis included is based upon principles of probability which are thoroughly sound and Professor Stoner has applied these principles in a proper and convincing way."

    The modern science of probability was in reference to eight (8) prophecies not sixty-one (61) as I previously spoke. Again, the mathematical probability of 8 prophecies coming true in one person would be that of 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000 or 10 to the 17th power.






  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,614

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    Quote Originally Posted by DonTom
    It's hell to get old--
    Not really, at least one can let the occasional fart without need to apologize.

  19. #19
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,762

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    You can spend your life parsing your supposedly "holy" and "inerrant" book; the fact is the bible is laden with obvious errors and contradications - whitout even getting into the absurdity of the basic theological/religious tenets.

    "The allegations of error in the Bible"

    Not "allegations" - demonstrable factual errors.

    "...are usually based on a failure to recognize basic principles of interpreting ancient literature. "


    Here comes the pseudo- intellectual jargon! (" The following principles can help one discern whether there is a true error or a contradiction in literature.")

    "Principle # The unexplained is not necessarily unexplainable. When a scientist comes upon an anomaly in nature, he does not give up further scientific exploration. Rather, he uses the unexplained as a motivation to fine an explanation."

    That part is perfectly valid, of course... however, the problem is we are not dealing with, say, Quantum theory - or the question: What killed the dinosaurs? One does not apply the scientific method to a fairy tale!

    "Some critics have argued against the historical accuracy of the birth narratives in Matthew and Luke, raising what they think are clear factual mistakes or unresolvable contradictions. the most frequently cited objections concern the genealogies of the two gospels and Luke's mention of Quirinius and a certain census."

    Concerning contradictory genealogies, Matthew records the "genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David "(Matt. 1:1) and Luke provides another genealogy of Jesus, "being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph" (Luke 3:23). "

    Now comes the "scholar" and parser of fairy tales:

    " James Montgomery Boice explains the problem well:"

    "Matthew's genealogy begins with Abraham and moves forward in history to Christ. It traces Abraham's descendants through fourteen generations to David, David's descendants through fourteen more generations to the Babylonian captivity, then the later descendants through fourteen more generations up to "Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ." Luke, on the other hand, moves backward. He begins with Joseph and goes back through David, to Abraham - and then even back beyond Abraham to Adam, who, he says, was the son of God.

    " Two of Luke's sections present no problem. His final section--from Abraham to Adam does not occur in Matthew. So there is no basis for comparison. His second section -- from David to Abraham -- is also free of problems because it corresponds to the genealogy we find in Matthew.

    " The difficulty comes in Luke's first section. For Luke traces Joseph's descendants back to David through Nathan, one of David's sons, while Matthew traces what is apparently the same line of descent through Solomon, another of David's sons. Consequently, in this section of the genealogies all the names are different.

    " The fact that these are two separate lines is no problem."


    It's a problem if you don't accept at face value the claims made in the bible! A problem you refuse to acknowledge because you are a "believer" - and to you, the bible is the inspired word of god. But it's just an old book - chock full of recondite, tortured passages that one could spend a lifetime parsing for "meaning" and "interpreting" - just as you and your source seem determined to do. But the holy book won't become more lucid, no matter how long you stare at the text!


  20. #20
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,762

    Re: Which makes the most sense?

    More holy nonsense!

    You ascribe meaning to the "prophecies" - because you "believe" - not because they are factual.

    But because you "believe" you'll parse this nonsense all the rest of your days, searching for nuances of meaning, what "Jesus really meant" - etc. (See below for more debating points on this potentially endless "jesus said" - no, wait, he really meant this" - back-and-forthing.)

    Sometimes the best explanations are the most obvious ones. The bible is a compilation of selectively edited and regurgitated Bronze Age myths and allegories sprinkled with tribal religious injunctions and ukase.

    You may find all this impenetrable, inscrutable stuff inspired and enlightening. I find it tortured, unlikely - and often, outright simple-minded.


    Meanwhile, here's another Jesus chew toy for you:

    1) How many generations were there between Abraham to David? Matthew 1:17 lists fourteen generations. Matthew 1:2 lists thirteen generations.

    2) Is Paul lying? In Acts 20:35 Paul told people "to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.'" Since Jesus never made such a biblical statement, isn?t Paul guilty of deception?

    3) When did the leper become not a leper? (Matthew 8:13 & 8:14) Jesus healed the leper before visiting the house. (Mark 1:29-30 & 1:40-42) Jesus healed the leper after visiting Simon Peter?s house.

    4) Who approached Jesus? (Matthew 8:5-7) The Centurion approached Jesus, beseeching help for a sick servant. (Luke 7:3 & 7:6-7) The Centurion did not approach Jesus. He sent friends and elders of the Jews.

    5) Was she dead or just dying? (Matthew 9:18) He asked for help, saying his daughter was already dead. (Luke 8:41-42) Jairus approached Jesus for help, because his daughter was dying.

    6) Just what did Jesus instruct them to take? (Matthew 10:10) Jesus instructed them not to take a staff, not to wear sandals. (Mark 6:8-9) Jesus instructed his disciples to wear sandals and take a staff on their journey.

    7) When did John find out Jesus was the Messiah? (Matthew 11:2-3) While imprisoned. John the Baptist sent followers to Jesus to inquire if Jesus was the messiah. (Luke 7:18-22) While imprisoned. John the Baptist sent followers to Jesus to inquire if Jesus was the Messiah. (John 1 :29-34,36) John already knew Jesus was the Messiah.

    8) Who made the request? (Matthew 20:20-21) Their mother requested that James and John, Zebedee?s children, should sit beside Jesus in his Kingdom. (Mark 10:35-37) James and John, Zebedee?s children, requested that they should sit beside Jesus in his Kingdom.

    9) What animals were brought to Jesus? (Matthew 21:2-7) two of the disciples brought Jesus an ass and a colt from the village of Bethphage. (Mark 11:2-7) They brought him only a colt.

    10) When did the fig tree hear of its doom? (Matthew 21:17-19) Jesus cursed the fig tree after purging the temple. (Mark 11:14-15 & 20) He cursed it before the purging.

    11) When did the fig tree keel? (Matthew 21:9) The fig tree withered immediately. and the disciples registered surprise then and there. (Mark 11:12-14 & 20) The morning after Jesus cursed the fig tree, the disciples noticed it had withered and expressed astonishment.

    12) Was John the Baptist Elias? "This is Elias which was to come." Matthew 11:14 "And they asked him, what then? Art thou Elias? And he said I am not." John l:21

    13) Who was the father of Joseph? Matthew 1:16 The father of Joseph was Jacob. Luke 3 :23 The father of Joseph was Heli. Christians shall try to LIE and tell you that one is the heritage of Mary and the other Joseph. This is utter bullshit, the Hebrew and Greek cultures NEVER regarded the bloodline of the mother. They were patriarchal societies which only concerned themselves with paternal lineage.

    14) How many generations were there from the Babylon captivity to Christ? Matthew 1:17 Fourteen generations, Matthew 1:12-16 Thirteen generations.

    15) Matthew 2:15, 19 & 21-23 The infant Christ was taken into Egypt. Luke 2:22 & 39 The infant Christ was NOT taken to Egypt.

    16) Matthew 5:1-2 Christ preached his first sermon on the mount. Luke 6:17 & 20 Christ preached his first sermon in the plain.

    17) John was in prison when Jesus went into Galilee. Mark 1:14 John was not in prison when Jesus went into Galilee. John 1:43 & 3:22-24

    18) What was the nationality of the woman who besought Jesus? Matthew 15:22 "And behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, Have mercy on me, 0 Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil." Mark 7:26 "The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by nation, and she besought him that he would cast forth the devil out of her daughter."

    19) How many blind men besought Jesus? Matthew 20:30 Two blind men. Luke 18:35-38 Only one blind man.

    20) Where did the devil take Jesus first? (Matthew 4:5-8) The Devil took Jesus first to the parapet of the temple, then to a high place to view all the Kingdoms of the world. (Luke 4:5-9) The Devil took Jesus first to a high place to view the kingdoms, then to the parapet of the temple.

    21) Can one pray in public? (Matthew 6:5-6) Jesus condemned public prayer. (1 Timothy 2:8) Paul encouraged public prayer.

    22) If we decide to do good works, should those works be seen? Matthew 5:16 "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works." 1 Peter 2:12 "Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that ... they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation." This contradicts: Matthew 6:1-4 "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them?that thine alms may be in secret." Matthew 23:3-5 "Do not ye after their [Pharisees'] works ... all their works they do for to be seen of men."

    23) Who did Jesus tell the Lord?s Prayer to? (Matthew 5:1, 6:9-13 & 7:28) Jesus delivered the Lord?s Prayer during the Sermon on the Mount before the multitudes. (Luke 11:1-4) He delivered it before the disciples alone, and not as part of the Sermon on the Mount.

    24) When was Christ crucified? Mark 15:25 "And it was the third hour and they crucified him." John 19:14-15 "And it was the preparation of the Passover, and about the sixth hour; and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your king?Shall I crucify your king?" John 19:14-15.

    25) The two thieves reviled Christ. (Matthew 27:44 & Mark 15:32) Only one of the thieves reviled Christ. Luke 23:39-40.

    26) In 1 Corinthians 1:17 ("For Christ sent me [Paul] not to baptize but to preach the gospel") Paul said Jesus was wrong when he said in Matthew 28:19 "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them?" Clearly one of these people is wrong, either way, it?s a contradiction.

    27) When did Satan enter Judas? Satan entered into Judas while at the supper. John 13:27 Satan entered Judas before the supper. Luke 23:3-4 & 7

    28) How many women came to the sepulcher? John 20:1 Only one woman went, Mary Magdalene. Matthew 28:1 Mary Magdalene and the "other Mary" (Jesus? mother) went.

    29) Mark 16:2 It was sunrise when the two women went to the sepulcher. John 20:1 It was still dark (before sunrise) when Mary Magdalene went alone to the sepulcher.

    30) There were two angels seen by the women at the sepulcher and they were standing up. Luke 24:4 There was only one angel seen and he was sitting down. Mark 28:2-5

    31) How many angels were within the sepulcher? John 20:11-12 two, Mark 16:5 one.

    32) The Holy Ghost bestowed at Pentecost. Acts 1:5-8 & 2:1-4 The holy Ghost bestowed before Pentecost. John 20:22

    33) Where did Jesus first appear to the eleven disciples? In a room in Jerusalem. Luke 24:32-37 On a mountain in Galilee. Matthew 28:15-17

    34) Where did Christ ascend from? From Mount Olivet. Acts 1:9-12 From Bethany. Luke 24:50-51

    35) Can all sins be forgiven? (Acts 13:39) All sins can be forgiven. Great, I?m happy to know God is so merciful, but wait (Mark 3:29) Cursing or blaspheming the Holy Spirit is unforgivable.

    36) The Elijah mystery: (Malachi 4:5) Elijah must return before the final days of the world. (Matthew 11:12-14) Jesus said that John the Baptist was Elijah. (Matthew 17:12- 13) Jesus insists that Elijah has already come, and everyone understood him to mean John the Baptist. (Mark 9:13) Jesus insists that Elijah has already come. (John 1:21) John the Baptist maintained that he was not Elijah.

    37) Who purchased the potter?s field? Acts 1:18 The field was purchased by Judas. John 20:1 The potter?s field was purchased by the chief priests.

    38) Paul?s attendants heard the miraculous voice and stood speechless. Acts 9:7 Paul?s attendants did not hear the voice and were prostrate. Acts 22:9 & 26:14

    39) Who bought the Sepulcher? Jacob, Josh 24:32 Abraham, Acts 7:16

    40) Was it lawful for the Jews to put Christ to death? "The Jews answered him, we have a law, and by our law he ought to die." John 19:7 "The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death." John 18:31

    41) Has anyone ascended up to heaven? Elijah went up to heaven: "And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." 2 Kings 2:11 "No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man." John 3:13

    42) Is scripture inspired by God? "all scripture is given by inspiration of God." 2 Timothy 3:16 compared to: "But I speak this by permission and not by commandment." 1 Corinthians 7:6 "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord." 1 Corinthians 7:12 "That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord" 2 Corinthians.

Similar Threads

  1. What makes more sense? mpg or gpm
    By tcolby in forum Motor Mouth
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-15-2010, 08:15 PM
  2. Hatchet Annie Finally Makes Some Sense
    By Jim Rose in forum Motor Mouth
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-24-2008, 02:02 PM
  3. makes perfect sense...
    By misterdecibel in forum Motor Mouth
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-02-2008, 05:07 AM
  4. Why Don't Speed Limits Make Sense
    By gail in forum Fight Traffic Tickets/Driving Issues
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-19-2007, 10:39 AM
  5. Passion vs. Common-Sense
    By chiph in forum Motor Mouth
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 06-21-2007, 01:39 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •