(October 31, 2018 at 3:22 am)CDF47 Wrote:

(October 30, 2018 at 11:18 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote: That's interesting. You think Daniel was accurate despite getting everything wrong. How do you reconcile that?

His statue dream and his prophecy of the Lord are two of his greatest prophecies that came to light hundreds (I think around 600 years) in advance.

The statue nonsense is a postdiction and jebus is not prophesied by Daniel.

Once again you are lying.

(October 30, 2018 at 11:06 pm)CDF47 Wrote:

(October 30, 2018 at 10:30 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote: LOL. 
You are not exactly a "technical" person. You don't even get the science of the flood.


Actually it isn't. You just never studied religions.


The role of a prophet was not to tell the future. This is the ignorance of Fundamentalism. Omen reading was forbidden.


You also know no basic chemistry. You see things that are not there, due to your complete ignorance.
You can repeat this shit until kingdom come, it won't be true then either. It's nonsense. Nothing but rubbish.

That's your opinion.

The prophet predicted the future at times when interpreting dreams and visions.  Jesus was predicted.  The Book of Daniel has much prophecy in it about future kingdoms using symbolic language.  It is really interesting and cool to read and understand the prophecies.

Actually Jesus was NEVER "predicted".
The role of a messiah was to restore the kingdom, and re-establish Israel. Jesus got none of that done. None. Therefore it could not possibly be him that was predicted. Jews were still waiting for a messiah LONG after Jesus. Sorry. You fail.

The Book of Daniel got a lot wrong. https://infidels.org/library/modern/chri...aniel.html

Daniel is a great example of : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaticinium_ex_eventu
Daniel was NOT written 600 years before the events.
"Further evidence of the book's date is in the fact that Daniel is excluded from the Hebrew Bible's canon of the prophets, which was closed around 200 BC, and the Wisdom of Sirach, a work dating from around 180 BC, draws on almost every book of the Old Testament except Daniel, leading scholars to suppose that its author ..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Daniel

One of the most famous "non-prophecies" which Christians drove over a cliff, was the (supposed) "virgin-birth" prophecy.
Isaiah 7 talks about the history of King Ahaz, son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, who was king of Judah. At the time, King Rezin of Aram and Pekah, son of Remaliah, King of Israel, marched up to fight against Jerusalem, and the campaign was long and protracted. See the Syro-Ephraimite War, (Wikipedia :  ), and it happened in the 8th Century (734) BC. When Ahaz was loosing faith, Isaiah went to visit him, and told him to "buck up", keep the faith, and continue the war, and told him that the SIGN from god, that they were favored, was that one of his wives, (a "woman of marriageable age") would be found to be with child. The SIGN was the CHILD, (and NOT the manner of the birth). ...."And they shall name him Emmanuel" which means "god is with us". The CHILD was the SIGN. Not a "future" messiah, or a future Jesus. AT THE TIME, the child was to be a sign.


Any devout Jew in the time of the Roman occupation, (around 60 AD), would know that story, from Isaiah, and when they heard the words "a woman, (of marriageable age) will be found to be with child" they would connect the stories in their brains, and recognize that the gospel text's intention was to remind them of the Isaiah story, and would "harken" back to it, and realize the intent of the author was to claim that THIS child also was a sign. The general intent of the Gospel of Matthew was to claim the fulfillment of the various prophesies regarding the messiah, and this one was another one of those claims/stories of fulfillment. 


b. The word "virgin" is a mistranslation, of a translation. So WE have a translation, of a mis-translation, of a translation. Matthew, writing in Greek about the "virgin birth" of Jesus, quotes the Septuagint text of Isaiah 7:14-16, which uses the Greek word "παρθένος" (parthenos,), (we still use the term "parthenogenesis") while the original Hebrew text has "עלמה" (almah), which has the slightly wider meaning of an unmarried, betrothed or newly wed woman such as in the case of Ahaz' betrothed Abijah, daughter of Zechariah. He NEVER meant to imply that he was asserting "gynecological" claims, and THAT whole business was "off-the-wall", a mistranslation, taken to ridiculous extremes, by interpreters who missed the point. THE CHILD was the sign. At the time.

You're wasting your time. It's been pointed out to him that the Tyre prophecy was not fulfilled, and he obstinately maintains that it was and that Tyre in fact "is no more."

Arguing with this dolt is a waste of time.

Having said that this thread has been a great learning resource, just not the way the O.P. intended.

I always write with guests in mind. There are far more guests reading than members.

(October 30, 2018 at 7:10 pm)CDF47 Wrote: The Son of God broke the rules of physics.  He did this to show he was God (the Son).

So did Superman. Do you know what else they have in common? They're both fictional (though you have to admit that Clark Kent is a role model to look up to far more regularly than Jesus).

If he broke the rules, then clearly they are not the rules. Equivocation fallacy.

(October 31, 2018 at 4:09 am)downbeatplumb Wrote:

(October 31, 2018 at 3:22 am)CDF47 Wrote: How do you determine a genetic bottle neck for the flood?

How accurate do you think mitochondrial Eve and Y Chromosome Adam genetic dates actually are?  We are talking about ancestors of the human race that existed 50,000 - 450,000 years ago.

I believe in OEC and day-age interpretation which dates the universe as 13.8 billion years old and the Earth 4.54 billion years old.

But creationism doesn't tally with the way living things developed. We know the process that allows for the development of complex life and god is not part of the process at any stage.
What you believe is patently wrong.

We see God's hand when new functional information is interjected into the world.  There wasn't just the Cambrian explosion of life but there were many explosions of life.

---

(October 31, 2018 at 10:41 am)Bucky Ball Wrote:

(October 30, 2018 at 11:06 pm)CDF47 Wrote: That's your opinion.

The prophet predicted the future at times when interpreting dreams and visions.  Jesus was predicted.  The Book of Daniel has much prophecy in it about future kingdoms using symbolic language.  It is really interesting and cool to read and understand the prophecies.

Actually Jesus was NEVER "predicted".
The role of a messiah was to restore the kingdom, and re-establish Israel. Jesus got none of that done. None. Therefore it could not possibly be him that was predicted. Jews were still waiting for a messiah LONG after Jesus. Sorry. You fail.

The Book of Daniel got a lot wrong. https://infidels.org/library/modern/chri...aniel.html

Daniel is a great example of : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaticinium_ex_eventu
Daniel was NOT written 600 years before the events.
"Further evidence of the book's date is in the fact that Daniel is excluded from the Hebrew Bible's canon of the prophets, which was closed around 200 BC, and the Wisdom of Sirach, a work dating from around 180 BC, draws on almost every book of the Old Testament except Daniel, leading scholars to suppose that its author ..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Daniel

The Book of Daniel is one of the great books of the Bible.  Yes, the Messiah is predicted in Daniel.

https://carm.org/does-daniel-9-24-27-predict-jesus

(October 31, 2018 at 6:06 pm)robvalue Wrote: If he broke the rules, then clearly they are not the rules. Equivocation fallacy.

Another problem with that is the Pauli Exclusion Principle. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_exclusion_principle
"Breaking the laws" of physics" isn't that simple ... a small local change in effect can effect the quantum states of the entire universe. 
Conclusion : it never happened. 

Next to Prophecy in Bible 101, (which these fake preachers never took at an accredited university), the second lesson is what a miracle is. 
It is a "perfectly natural event" in which the "hand of good is seen acting' ... BY A BELIEVER. A non-believer would see the same event, and see no miracle.