OK, now on to the next batch of crap...
Fulfilled prophecies of the Bible largely rely on obtuse interpretations of cherry picked verses wrenched out of context retrofitted post hoc to historical events (or claimed historical events) under a heavy cover of confirmation bias. If you're not familiar with logical fallacies, I can tell you the same twisted thinking is used in Horoscopes, Nostradamus predictions, the prophecies of other religions and many other forms of woo.
If this were not enough reason to soundly reject Biblical prophecy as proof of the divine origins of the Bible, there are other problems with specific prophecies often cited by apologists:
1. OT Prophecies cited in Matthew often turn out to be gross misrepresentations or distortions of the OT. Most famously, "behold a virgin shall conceive" is a reference to Isaiah, specifically a chapter where the child is born at that time (several hundred years before Jesus) and relates to events of that time. It is NOT a prophecy of Jesus or any later messiah.
2. Many other "fulfilled prophecies" rely on the Bible itself for confirmation. In essence, the Bible predicted X would happen and then reported that X happened. Ta da!
As for the 500 witnesses to the resurrection of Jesus, this is a bold claim by Paul and not one supported elsewhere in the Bible. Acts 1:15 claims there were 120 Christians after Jesus departed from them, some 40 days after preaching to the people. The Gospels themselves depict a Jesus who departed into Heaven in front of the disciples rather than out in public in front of hundreds, and this was done either the day of the resurrection or a week after the resurrection, depending on which version you read.
Regardless, the claim of 500 nameless witnesses is a bare assertion.
Oh, by the way, God just spoke to me today in front of 1,000 witnesses. No, I can't name any names for you. What? You don't believe me?
Finally, there's the "die for a lie" canard. There are two problems with this apology:
1. It uses folklore to prove mythology.
2. Yes, it happens all the time. Don't ask me why but it does.
On the first, one could just as easily "prove" the story of Superman by claiming that Lois Lane was willing to be carried off the top of a building in Superman's arms. Why would she have done this if she didn't think he could fly? Lois Lane was a smart woman and a reporter. Surely she wouldn't have been so foolish to let herself be carried off the top of a building unless she had good reason to think Superman was who he said he was. And wasn't her life transformed by him? Blah blah blah...
The details of early Christian persecution are sketchy, mixed in with a lot of hyperbolic Church propaganda seeking to create a history of martyrs. However, even accepting that early Christians were persecuted, the argument relies on them not just being killed for their beliefs but, in Hollywood form, holding their heads high, refusing to recant, eagerly looking forward to their heavenly union with their Lord.
Outside Hollywood and Christian propaganda, we have no evidence of this. In fact, some of the historical references to Christian persecution, such as the letters of Pliny the Younger to Trajan, suggest that the Christians DID recant and renounce Christ under the lash.
But even if early Christians did walk calmly to their deaths, heads held high and orchestras swelling off camera, does that sort of thing happen often?
All too often. David Koresh. Jim Jones. The Heavens Gate cult.
All these are current examples of stupid cult leaders and followers alike dying for foolish ideas that they should know are lies. And yet they die for them all the same. And these are modern examples in our supposedly more rational society. Imagine how it might have been in a more primitive time. Stupid cultists and their leaders die for lies all the time, throughout history. To suggest either any early Christian persecution or any fanatical resolve on the early Christian's part proves anything is classic special pleading.
Got any other crap for me to shovel?
(June 5, 2013 at 1:26 am)k2490 Wrote: along the same vein I had a friend tell me the Bible is true because of all the fulfilled prophecies,that there were 500 witnesses to Jesus' resurrection. and "Why would Jesus die for a lie?"
Fulfilled prophecies of the Bible largely rely on obtuse interpretations of cherry picked verses wrenched out of context retrofitted post hoc to historical events (or claimed historical events) under a heavy cover of confirmation bias. If you're not familiar with logical fallacies, I can tell you the same twisted thinking is used in Horoscopes, Nostradamus predictions, the prophecies of other religions and many other forms of woo.
If this were not enough reason to soundly reject Biblical prophecy as proof of the divine origins of the Bible, there are other problems with specific prophecies often cited by apologists:
1. OT Prophecies cited in Matthew often turn out to be gross misrepresentations or distortions of the OT. Most famously, "behold a virgin shall conceive" is a reference to Isaiah, specifically a chapter where the child is born at that time (several hundred years before Jesus) and relates to events of that time. It is NOT a prophecy of Jesus or any later messiah.
2. Many other "fulfilled prophecies" rely on the Bible itself for confirmation. In essence, the Bible predicted X would happen and then reported that X happened. Ta da!
As for the 500 witnesses to the resurrection of Jesus, this is a bold claim by Paul and not one supported elsewhere in the Bible. Acts 1:15 claims there were 120 Christians after Jesus departed from them, some 40 days after preaching to the people. The Gospels themselves depict a Jesus who departed into Heaven in front of the disciples rather than out in public in front of hundreds, and this was done either the day of the resurrection or a week after the resurrection, depending on which version you read.
Regardless, the claim of 500 nameless witnesses is a bare assertion.
Oh, by the way, God just spoke to me today in front of 1,000 witnesses. No, I can't name any names for you. What? You don't believe me?
Finally, there's the "die for a lie" canard. There are two problems with this apology:
1. It uses folklore to prove mythology.
2. Yes, it happens all the time. Don't ask me why but it does.
On the first, one could just as easily "prove" the story of Superman by claiming that Lois Lane was willing to be carried off the top of a building in Superman's arms. Why would she have done this if she didn't think he could fly? Lois Lane was a smart woman and a reporter. Surely she wouldn't have been so foolish to let herself be carried off the top of a building unless she had good reason to think Superman was who he said he was. And wasn't her life transformed by him? Blah blah blah...
The details of early Christian persecution are sketchy, mixed in with a lot of hyperbolic Church propaganda seeking to create a history of martyrs. However, even accepting that early Christians were persecuted, the argument relies on them not just being killed for their beliefs but, in Hollywood form, holding their heads high, refusing to recant, eagerly looking forward to their heavenly union with their Lord.
Outside Hollywood and Christian propaganda, we have no evidence of this. In fact, some of the historical references to Christian persecution, such as the letters of Pliny the Younger to Trajan, suggest that the Christians DID recant and renounce Christ under the lash.
But even if early Christians did walk calmly to their deaths, heads held high and orchestras swelling off camera, does that sort of thing happen often?
All too often. David Koresh. Jim Jones. The Heavens Gate cult.
All these are current examples of stupid cult leaders and followers alike dying for foolish ideas that they should know are lies. And yet they die for them all the same. And these are modern examples in our supposedly more rational society. Imagine how it might have been in a more primitive time. Stupid cultists and their leaders die for lies all the time, throughout history. To suggest either any early Christian persecution or any fanatical resolve on the early Christian's part proves anything is classic special pleading.
Got any other crap for me to shovel?
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
