Oh but there are no contradictions, some passages are just expanding on other passages. I love that claim.

I really think I need to write an article about the ways bible apologists twist logic to claim that there are no errors in the bible.

(May 14, 2011 at 10:18 am)Doubting Thomas Wrote: I really think I need to write an article about the ways bible apologists twist logic to claim that there are no errors in the bible.

I did that one time as sort of a mental exercise. A believing friend (a former agnostic, figure that one out) handed me "Handbook of Christian Apologetics" after we had talked about my reasons for unbelief. As I read through, I wrote a seven part refutation as I progressed through the book. It was kind of fun.

The NT starts off with a lie. Never in Roman history were people required to return to their ancestral hometown to be counted in the census. They just wanted to explain why a guy living in the south of Palestine could claim David's bloodline.

(May 11, 2011 at 12:18 pm)Doubting Thomas Wrote: A bunch of lame claims of prophecy and biblical accuracy. "They shall look upon him whom they have pierced" does not necessarily describe a crucifixion. Sounds more like someone being stabbed.

And what about all of Jesus' failed prophecies of the end of the world and returning in his listeners' lifetimes? What about the fact that the messiah was supposed to be a military leader with an earthly kingdom, which Jesus never was? What about "he shall be called Immanuel" which Jesus never was in the New Testament?

Jesus was stabbed, wasn't he?

I think we'd all agree that the end of the world hasn't happened yet, so Jesus could still be right. And Jesus was right, the generation He was talking to saw the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, the question they were asking about.

I agree that the Messiah was predicted to be a military leader with an earthly kingdom, and I still think He will be. I know you might view this as a complete copout, but I'm agreeing with you that this is what was promised so one should expect it to be so.

I'm sure you know that Immanuel literally means "God with us" which is what many viewed Jesus as.

I'm posting this not really to start a fight or to disrespect. To be honest, I'm not sure what to expect.

Just 2 quick things:

"and he shall be known as emanuel"

This is obviously a decision that Joseph took. Manny Christ is just too Jewish but he knew that Jesus would be popular with Hispanics.

Jesus bloodline:

If Jesus is the son of Joseph then the claim he is part of David's bloodline could stand. If he is the son of God it can't - he is not a descendent of Joseph.

However:

Here we see how this was all written by people who weren't all that bright and didn't have access to the information we have today:

David preceded Joseph and Mary by around 40-50 generations. If we assume David's line survived at all (not unreasonable- he was a king afterall) and do a simple - each generation has 2 surviving children we see that the numbers become enormous. By the time of Joseph it would be almost impossible for a member of a self isolating small group like the Jewish population to not be a descendant of David.

In other words - Mary must have been a descendant of David. Now I would not expect Matthew to understand this - but God should. All he had to add after the lineage was "so Joseph was a descendent of David, as was Mary" and everything would have been covered.

That this was not written shows us that there was no divine inspiration in the writing of the gospels (or that the intelligent God isn't actually all that bright).

Game over.

Holy necropost batman!

(September 25, 2013 at 4:19 am)konroh Wrote: I think we'd all agree that the end of the world hasn't happened yet, so Jesus could still be right.

"Missed it by that much!"

(September 25, 2013 at 4:19 am)konroh Wrote:

(May 11, 2011 at 12:18 pm)Doubting Thomas Wrote: A bunch of lame claims of prophecy and biblical accuracy. "They shall look upon him whom they have pierced" does not necessarily describe a crucifixion. Sounds more like someone being stabbed.

And what about all of Jesus' failed prophecies of the end of the world and returning in his listeners' lifetimes? What about the fact that the messiah was supposed to be a military leader with an earthly kingdom, which Jesus never was? What about "he shall be called Immanuel" which Jesus never was in the New Testament?

Jesus was stabbed, wasn't he?

I think we'd all agree that the end of the world hasn't happened yet, so Jesus could still be right. And Jesus was right, the generation He was talking to saw the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, the question they were asking about.

I agree that the Messiah was predicted to be a military leader with an earthly kingdom, and I still think He will be. I know you might view this as a complete copout, but I'm agreeing with you that this is what was promised so one should expect it to be so.

I'm sure you know that Immanuel literally means "God with us" which is what many viewed Jesus as.

I'm posting this not really to start a fight or to disrespect. To be honest, I'm not sure what to expect.

Could you try not to capitalise the word 'he' as it constantly makes me think you are starting a new sentence and makes your post annoying to read.

I'm sure Jesus wouldn't mind

"They shall look upon him whom they have pierced"...wow, how specific! Anyone who gets stabbed fits the description. Since swords and spears were the weapons of choice, makes this one rather vague. As all prophecies are.

Religions are all "what if" scenarios. You can see it in konroh's post, everything is based on "he could" or "I think". Yes, yes, we know what you believe, but sometimes we as non-believers need a bit more to work with than mostly ambiguous hypotheticals. We might as well be talking about aliens and fairies.

"They shall look upon him whom they have pierced"

So.....Jesus had a Prince Albert?