|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
 Posted - 02/04/2003 : 20:26:53 [Permalink]
|
This cite answers McKensey's objections walt: quote:
http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/bethlehem.htm
 |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 02/04/2003 20:27:45 |
 |
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2003 : 23:10:02 [Permalink]
|
| One other prophcey yet to be fulfilled(completely although the ground work is being laid before our very eyes) is Zechariah 12:1-5,c.f.Ezk.38/39.This future time will most likely see the fulfillment of the "Assyrian" Micah 5:4 .(a type of the anti-christ).http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/zechariah_12_1.htm |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 02/06/2003 23:11:48 |
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2003 : 06:36:27 [Permalink]
|
Ah, DA, I respect all the work that must have gone into the Matthew/Luke, Joseph/Mary geneology apologetic. That is one amazing peice of work. I'm proud to say that it totally confused me from the get-go.
I also find it to be one of the best examples of wishful thinking that I have ever seen. Most of this apologetic is built on assumptions. If the bible does not say it, or it is not corroborated by contemporary sources, then all you have is meaningless speculation.
Plus, I would still like to know where else Greek, or Hebrew tradition treats any woman with enough importance to even consider her geneology. Let's not forget that women in biblical times were no more than the earth in which a man sowed his seed. The man's seed was the vehicle that carried the bloodline.
I realize that there were a few women treated with some measure of importance within the pages of the bible, but they never acheived the significance of a man in their paternalistic society.
As for Zech. 12:1-5, I will claim ignorance. I'm no seer. If someone else can see the future, please enlighten me.
I'm kinda lost with the Micah 5:4 Assyrian anti-christ thing. The Assyrians fell to the Babylonians 2,600 years ago. For the next couple of hundred years they tried to hang on and retain their ethnicity, but eventually the Persians pretty much negated that, too. I'm wondering where we're going to find a real Assyrian for the End Times. If this is not a true Assyrian, but a mataphor, then you would have to show where the bible establishes this mataphor.
|
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2003 : 14:39:23 [Permalink]
|
Tim: quote:
Ah, DA, I respect all the work that must have gone into the Matthew/Luke, Joseph/Mary geneology apologetic. That is
one amazing peice of work. I'm proud to say that it totally confused me from the get-go.
Could you a little more specific,I can't answer tou otherwise.Unless you are referring to this objection: [Tim]I would still like to know where else Greek, or Hebrew tradition treats any woman with enough importance to even
consider her geneology. Given the claim that both Mary and Joseph were of Davidic ancestry it certainly doesn't seem unreasonable that both would have access to their geneologys (the Jews were big on that issue) as far as Mary's womanhood being an issue she still had a father and perhaps brothers that Dr. Luke would used in his record. |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 02/08/2003 14:41:10 |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2003 : 15:24:31 [Permalink]
|
Well that's simple.
First we ignore the fact that the Jews never traced decent through the mother.
Then we ignore the fact that the bible doesn't say that this is what it's doing.
And that allows us to ignore the fact that the genealogies don't match.
LOL, how pathetic. |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2003 : 15:55:33 [Permalink]
|
Slater: quote:
First we ignore the fact that the Jews never traced decent through the mother.
Slater you nitwit read again what I wrote as far as Mary's
womanhood being an issue she still had a father and perhaps brothers that Dr. Luke would used in his recordTry at least to be critical to the points made. |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2003 : 17:04:17 [Permalink]
|
DA read again if you want to be critical. You are making things up that aren't in the bible or in Jewish custom. All in a pathetic attempt to try to cover a bible contradiction.
Or does Miss "Doctor" Luke trace decent through uncles, or maybe second cousins twice removed? ROTFLOL
Keep it up. I couldn't dp a better job portraying creationists as fools who will grasp at any straw to try and hold on to their superstitions, than you are doing. |
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 02/09/2003 : 00:35:06 [Permalink]
|
DA, let me begin by saying that you have earned my respect. You have survived longer than any other dissenting voice in this forum. I commend you for your persistence, and your strong arguments, especially considering the nature of your arguments, and the caliber of the people you are confronting. I hold out hope that you will leave the world of superstition behind. You would be a valued ally in the pursuit of reason. Unfortunately, you are still not very convincing.
quote:
Most scholars today agree that Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph and Luke gives that of Mary, making
Jacob the father of Joseph and Heli the father of Mary.
By “most scholars,” I trust you are referring to Christian biblical apologists. For these apologists to make their case, they need to present some evidence that the genealogy of Mary is what is being recorded in the book of Luke. There is nothing in the writing style, traditional society or in the actual words of bible to come to this conclusion.
quote:
Luke follows strict Hebrew tradition in mentioning only males.
Therefore, in this case, Mary is designated by her husband's name.
I am afraid if this were the case, then I think that the unique circumstances should have, and would have been recorded, especially within the pages of a divinely inspired chronicle set down to guide us through the complexities of life. It is not now, nor has it been in the past within the nature of humans to know what is not revealed. You said yourself that, “Luke follows strict Hebrew tradition in mentioning only males.” Where does the bible tell us that this tradition is to be set aside this one time, and the genealogy of the mother should be considered, even if it is through her husband's name?
Claiming that a “definite article” is not used in one instance is evidence of the author's intentions to stray from tradition is pure guesswork, especially if you consider the original problem of women not being the seed, but the earth. In Hebrew science, the woman did not pass on the bloodline. Furthermore, a perfect document, created by an omniscient being should be above something as inane as translation problems. If translation is not perfect, then I could think of several other rational reasons why the “definite article” was omitted.
quote:
the Jerusalem Talmud, a Jewish source. This recognizes the genealogy to be that of Mary, referring to her as the daughter of Heli (Hagigah
2:4).
(Fruchtenbaum 1993:10-13)
I cannot comment directly on this claim, because I have no access to the Talmud, and have done no research, except attempting to find an online English version. In this I failed, and would like to know, DA, how you acquired a copy. I would be very interested. However, I can say that it is not out of the question for two sources to be incorrect, especially if one is based on knowledge of the other. Plus, there are other arguments that I would like to make here, but cannot without being able to reference the original source material. I have run into problems before with internet sources.
quote:
Matthew's telescoping of Joseph's genealogy is quite acceptable, as his purpose is simply to show the route of descent
Again, assumptions are not evidence. W |
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 02/09/2003 : 09:39:23 [Permalink]
|
Slater: quote:
DA read again if you want to be critical. You are making things up that aren't in the bible or in Jewish custom. All in a pathetic attempt to try to cover a bible contradiction.
Slater we go back a long time,I'm sorry I called you a Nitwit,but you really need to pay a little closer attention to details. I said assuming the claim to be accurate that both Mary and Joe were of "Davidic ancestry" it seems VERY REASONABLEto conclude (given the Jews penchent for genologies) that theyBOTH HAD ACCESS TO EACH OF THEIR OWN FAMILY TREES. Now as far as the objection as to[Slater:] "First we ignore the fact that the Jews never traced decent through the mother Pay close attention Mary had a father to which the writer of Luke could use to compile her geneology through her FATHER Not Her Mother's Family Tree.Whats really "pathetic" here is that you somehow "think" you've accomplished something EVEN IF THERE WERE A LIGITIMIT CONTRADICTION HERE(WHICH THERE ISN'T) ,as I've said before historians are concered with primary details ,in this case the historians would ask "What' the claim here? That Jesus is in the 'Davivdic line'"(c.f.Masada,and Aopllonius at http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1378&whichpage=9) Even if a few "secondary details" were mistaken,this applies to the details of his death and the accounts of his resurrection as well.So I'm on solid historical ground when it comes to accepting the accounts of the birth,life,death ,and resurrection of Jesus and can sit back and watch you "skeptics" spin your wheels down dead end roads and ACCEPT ANY LAME EXCUSE RATHER THAN THE OBVIOUS. |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 02/09/2003 09:40:24 |
|
|
|
walt fristoe
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2003 : 11:23:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boron10
This is a place to discuss various prophecies.
Let's see if we can get to the crux of this matter.
A genuine prophecy, whether biblical or otherwise, must meet these 5 criteria:
1. The prophecy must be clear, and it must contain sufficient detail to make its fulfillment by a wide variety of possible events unlikely.
2. The event that can fulfill prophecy must be unusual or unique.
3. The prophecy must be known to have been made before the event that is supposed to be its fulfillment.
4. The event foretold must not be of the sort that could be the result of an educated guess.
5. The event that fulfills a prophecy cannot be staged, or the relevant circumstances manipulated, by those aware of the prophecy in such a way as to intentionally cause the prophecy to be fulfilled.
Now, can any supposed prophecies, Biblical or otherwise, (except for scientific ones, that is) satisfy these 5 criteria? I don't think so. |
"If God chose George Bus of all the people in the world, how good could God be?"
Bill Maher |
| Edited by - walt fristoe on 02/14/2003 11:58:58 |
|
|
|
walt fristoe
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2003 : 11:55:36 [Permalink]
|
"Think how many religions attempt to validate themselves with prophecy. Think how many people rely on these prophecies, however vague, however unfulfilled, to support or prop up their beliefs. Yet, has there ever been a religion with the prophetic accuracy and reliability of science?...no other human institution comes close."
Carl Sagan |
"If God chose George Bus of all the people in the world, how good could God be?"
Bill Maher |
| Edited by - walt fristoe on 02/14/2003 11:57:16 |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2003 : 13:38:59 [Permalink]
|
waltfristoe: quote:
A genuine prophecy, whether biblical or otherwise, must meet these 5 criteria:
1. The prophecy must be clear, and it must contain sufficient detail to make its fulfillment by a wide variety of possible events unlikely.
I can't believe that someone who on another thread stated that he(walt) believes "events happen without causes" is giving definitions of events ,oh that's right your one of those who also believe "that you don't haveuse logic in order to deny it. That explains it. |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
|
walt fristoe
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2003 : 15:49:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
waltfristoe: quote:
A genuine prophecy, whether biblical or otherwise, must meet these 5 criteria:
1. The prophecy must be clear, and it must contain sufficient detail to make its fulfillment by a wide variety of possible events unlikely.
I can't believe that someone who on another thread stated that he(walt) believes "events happen without causes" is giving definitions of events ,oh that's right your one of those who also believe "that you don't haveuse logic in order to deny it. That explains it.
That's all well and good, DA, but do you agree that the criteria are valid? |
"If God chose George Bus of all the people in the world, how good could God be?"
Bill Maher |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2003 : 19:02:18 [Permalink]
|
waltfristoe: quote:
That's all well and good, DA, but do you agree that the criteria are valid?
Not a problem |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
|
walt fristoe
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2003 : 11:48:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
waltfristoe: quote:
A genuine prophecy, whether biblical or otherwise, must meet these 5 criteria:
1. The prophecy must be clear, and it must contain sufficient detail to make its fulfillment by a wide variety of possible events unlikely.
I can't believe that someone who on another thread stated that he(walt) believes "events happen without causes" is giving definitions of events ,oh that's right your one of those who also believe "that you don't haveuse logic in order to deny it. That explains it.
What the bejeezus does the causality of quantum events have to do with the question at hand, anyway? Are you just trying to confuse the issue? Should I have used the word "occurences"? Nowhere in my post did I even attempt to define "events". |
"If God chose George Bus of all the people in the world, how good could God be?"
Bill Maher |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
