(July 12, 2012 at 12:40 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(July 12, 2012 at 2:33 am)FallentoReason Wrote: How can you guys be so sure that Jesus fulfilled any prophecy if no NT writer saw Jesus for themselves?

You can't prove you assertion. All you care about is trying to show Mark is an allegory, which it is not, listening to unbelieving people did not help you.

You're right, I can't prove it 100% but there's more than enough reason to think that the modern Christian view is off.

I'll be writing up more threads showing where Mark copied the OT. The fact that it's arguably word for word is strong evidence he was deliberately referencing what Jews would have picked up on instantly; the OT.

---

(July 12, 2012 at 12:50 pm)Undeceived Wrote:

(July 12, 2012 at 2:33 am)FallentoReason Wrote: How can you guys be so sure that Jesus fulfilled any prophecy if no NT writer saw Jesus for themselves?

Mark, Matthew and John were eyewitness followers of Jesus.

'Tradition' would disagree with you about Mark. He was a disciple of Peter and NOT Jesus. Matthew and John are written in 3rd person. Please explain.

Quote:We can reasonably conclude this because of the detail of their separate writings

There are considerable differences between all of them. Mark has the least incredible miracles and almost no supernatural content AND not to mention no resurrection accounts. John is the most theologically advanced and in general an outlier.

Quote:and because other 1st and 2nd century writers mention them and/or quote their book, as well as internal agreement (http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6187).

Irrelevant.

Quote: Jews were not known for their myths--they didn't have any (apart from what naysayers allege) and they considered such pagan works blasphemous.

This is most likely why no Jew today would believe in Christ. Jesus and his 12 disciples = sun and the 12 zodiac signs. They most likely know about Christianity's Pagan roots.

Quote:Can you write a book in which your character fulfills several hundred predictions?

But of course. Use the book that has the prophecies as the basis for your writing. Simple.

Quote:And sell it to a rigid, skeptical audience as history from within their lifetime?
FallentoReason, do you believe Jesus was a real man? Why or why not?

I believe Mark wasn't writing history. I'd say it wasn't mostly Jews that converted to the new religion but non-Jew Greeks that didn't get what Mark had done and mistook it for history.

I don't believe Jesus was a man given my interpretation of Mark is correct.

(July 12, 2012 at 1:54 pm)FallentoReason Wrote:

(July 12, 2012 at 12:40 pm)Godschild Wrote: You can't prove you assertion. All you care about is trying to show Mark is an allegory, which it is not, listening to unbelieving people did not help you.

You're right, I can't prove it 100% but there's more than enough reason to think that the modern Christian view is off.

I'll be writing up more threads showing where Mark copied the OT. The fact that it's arguably word for word is strong evidence he was deliberately referencing what Jews would have picked up on instantly; the OT.

Of course it is extremely similar, you would use the prophecies to show Christ fulfilled them. Why would a Jew write about Jesus and show Him in a light that did not meet the expected Jewish Christ, why start trouble for ones self in going against the Jewish belief, it would not benefit yourself. So why do something that you would not know would work and take the abuse that came there way.

After reading your bullshit, Undeceived, I have concluded that you are the worst-named poster on this site. Your detachment from reality is stunning.

(July 12, 2012 at 2:14 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(July 12, 2012 at 1:54 pm)FallentoReason Wrote: You're right, I can't prove it 100% but there's more than enough reason to think that the modern Christian view is off.

I'll be writing up more threads showing where Mark copied the OT. The fact that it's arguably word for word is strong evidence he was deliberately referencing what Jews would have picked up on instantly; the OT.

Of course it is extremely similar, you would use the prophecies to show Christ fulfilled them. Why would a Jew write about Jesus and show Him in a light that did not meet the expected Jewish Christ, why start trouble for ones self in going against the Jewish belief, it would not benefit yourself. So why do something that you would not know would work and take the abuse that came there way.

It cuts both ways the thing about prophecies, but your problem is that the few similarities I have shown so far are not prophecies. They're 'off-shoot' comments about these people's lives. How strange that their lives mirror the OT as if these facts about their lives were hand picked from the OT?

Theologically, why would God send a mediocre Messiah that no one was expecting. Being an all-knowing being he knew that his very own people, the Jews, would reject him. Jews are still not believing in Jesus today. It's all a part of God's plan though right?

(July 12, 2012 at 1:54 pm)FallentoReason Wrote: 'Tradition' would disagree with you about Mark. He was a disciple of Peter and NOT Jesus. Matthew and John are written in 3rd person. Please explain.

All Jewish histories were written in 3rd person. The epistles (letters) of Paul were not histories, but the Gospels were obviously intended to be. A 1st person account of Jesus would be a big red flag.
According to the tradition I know, John Mark/ Mark the Evangelist/ Mark the Writer was one of the "Seventy Disciples" Jesus sent out (Luke 10:1). It probably came from historian Hippolytus, who stated exactly that. Mark is also thought to be the young man who fled from the Garden of Gethsemane ( http://www.gotquestions.org/Mark-fled-naked.html ).
A good article on eyewitnesses:
http://biblocality.com/forums/showthread...-Peter-and-

Quote:Mark has the least incredible miracles and almost no supernatural content AND not to mention no resurrection accounts.

"Least incredible" is a matter of opinion. There are at least nineteen, including feeding five thousand, walking on water, stilling a storm, healing hundreds, raising a dead girl to life, casting out demons, and raising Jesus from the tomb (full list: http://www.bcbsr.com/survey/jmrcls.html ) Jesus clearly dies. Then in 16:5, a “young man dressed in a white robe” tells the two women, “Don’t be alarmed. You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’”
This is before 16:9-20, which skeptics like to argue was added later. How does a missing body and testimony not imply resurrection? Mark had a Roman writing style—state the facts and let the reader interpret the meaning. The fact the stone was rolled away is a miracle in itself ( http://www.bbc.edu/journal/volume6_1/res...omacki.pdf ).

Quote:Jesus and his 12 disciples = sun and the 12 zodiac signs. They most likely know about Christianity's Pagan roots.

The number 12 comes from the Old Testament. 12 patriarchs, 12 tribes of Israel, 12 pillars, ect. Genesis was written around 1000 B.C. The division of the stars/constellations into the 12 zodiacal signs did not occur until the Babylonians made the divisions around the fifth century B.C.

---

(July 12, 2012 at 9:53 pm)FallentoReason Wrote: Theologically, why would God send a mediocre Messiah that no one was expecting?

http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/sbs777/snot...e0602.html
Jesus came with one purpose: to die for our sins and inspire a divine romance between us and Him. Announcing Himself to the world would no more bring love than our becoming a celebrity. When Peter rebuked Jesus for predicting a horrible death, Jesus replied, “Get behind me, Satan! You do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men" (Mark 8:33).

(July 13, 2012 at 3:40 am)Undeceived Wrote: "Least incredible" is a matter of opinion. There are at least nineteen, including feeding five thousand, walking on water, stilling a storm, healing hundreds, raising a dead girl to life, casting out demons, and raising Jesus from the tomb

And yet, there is no evidence whatsoever that any of these alleged "miracles" really took place. Do you believe that Muhammad rode a winged horse up to the seven layers of heaven? If not, why not? This is a tale that is in a "holy book" believed by millions to be true. And this was also supposedly dictated by "God". Why believe one story and not the other?

(July 11, 2012 at 3:19 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: Is there a name for this 'has stood the test of time' fallacy? Appeal to longevity, maybe?

Appeal to Antiquity or Appeal to Tradition.

(July 13, 2012 at 12:58 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(July 11, 2012 at 3:19 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: Is there a name for this 'has stood the test of time' fallacy? Appeal to longevity, maybe?

Appeal to Antiquity or Appeal to Tradition.

Appeal to habitual stupidity, appeal to past ignorance, appeal to lowest common denominator?

(July 13, 2012 at 12:29 pm)Thor Wrote:

(July 13, 2012 at 3:40 am)Undeceived Wrote: "Least incredible" is a matter of opinion. There are at least nineteen, including feeding five thousand, walking on water, stilling a storm, healing hundreds, raising a dead girl to life, casting out demons, and raising Jesus from the tomb

And yet, there is no evidence whatsoever that any of these alleged "miracles" really took place. Do you believe that Muhammad rode a winged horse up to the seven layers of heaven? If not, why not? This is a tale that is in a "holy book" believed by millions to be true. And this was also supposedly dictated by "God". Why believe one story and not the other?

Yes, there's no evidence. That's why my faith is based on reason and not 2000-year old miracles. Once I believe in the divinity Jesus, the miracles teach me about Him. 'Evidence' has no place in history unless the person did something lasting, like constructing a building. God intended the miracles for people in the moment, and to teach us now.

(July 13, 2012 at 1:01 pm)Undeceived Wrote: 'Evidence' has no place in history...

(July 13, 2012 at 1:01 pm)Undeceived Wrote: ...unless the person did something lasting,

So your divine Jesus appearently did nothing ever lasting. So much for divinity

You know, your stupidity astonishes even the most expansive view of christianity stupidty.