Why don't atheist and skeptics make a...

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#3383 Dec 31, 2012
servant wrote:
<quoted text>
.
No because as I showed you it has the ability to foretell fututre events.
It has no such ability.

If the god of the Bible existed and wanted to prove it through prophecy, he would have laid out a detailed list of exact dates of natural disasters.

The prophecies of the Bible are all either wrong, vague, obvious, self-fulfilling, or unconfirmable. There isn't a single impressive one.

“Invisible Pink Unicorn”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#3384 Dec 31, 2012
Nettiebelle wrote:
<quoted text>Jammer:
Happy New Year to you and your family!
To you and your family a happy new year as well.

Your family as well Dalai Lama. Happy new year.

Yeah even you and your family servant Happy new year.

Well if you believe in that kind of thing as a happy new year with all the days of the week and the months of the year being named after pagan gods and all.

“Invisible Pink Unicorn”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#3385 Dec 31, 2012
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, by teaching our children critical thinking, logic, and skepticism, we allow them to avoid falling into the trap of superstition and absurdity that is all religions, including yours.
Spot on "The Box"!!! Works too I raised two free thinkers.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#3386 Dec 31, 2012
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, by teaching our children critical thinking, logic, and skepticism, we allow them to avoid falling into the trap of superstition and absurdity that is all religions, including yours.
Nonsense. The Bible has influenced the thinking of people for centuries. Its wisdom unparallelled. Just look at how influential the teachings of Christ are in billions of peoples lives in whom many are way smarter than you. The trap is atheism and skepticism because both offer nothing for the betterment of a person's life.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#3387 Dec 31, 2012
servant wrote:
<quoted text>
And let me guess. And then the Roman Gentile Empire (Beast) and their look-a-like church ( Mother in scarlet) who violently took the kingdom by force then go on to include the last book of coded language by foretelling their eventual demise. That was all their plan, right? Please! No smart Empire would do that unless they had no idea of how the language worked.
Slow down now. Matthew was written about 85, say most modern Bible scholars.

The Temple was sacked in 70.

The Jewish-Christians were living in a devastated culture where there was great upheaval and turmoil in Judaism caused by the fall of the Temple.

You don't think it made sense to the author of Matthew to have Jesus making a dire prediction of the Temple's fall? You don't think that would have made Jesus so much more impressive to the Jews and jewish-Christians of the time?

C'mon, this isn't difficult stuff.:)
servant

Itzincab, Mexico

#3388 Dec 31, 2012
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, by teaching our children critical thinking, logic, and skepticism, we allow them to avoid falling into the trap of superstition and absurdity that is all religions, including yours.
.

But what happens when us parents are dead and gone and our children and future generations run into things like hopelessness, depression, ect, ect... and are tempted by a false preacher who can talk them into joining their own particular brand of Christianity. We all know people run to churches for these reasons and lord knows there are wacky preachers waiting to snatch them up. And don't tell me it's impossible to happen to your future generations. We see the evidence all around us.

All I'm saying is that, whether atheist or not, shouldn't we still at least get a handle on what the Bible is actually saying to protect them from these countless number of interpretations. What makes people think the Bible isn't like any other book that there isn't a narrative thread running through it bringing us to one truth(gospel)-- Galatians 1:6-10.

I mean you believe it's only a book that has no power over you, right? So why not study it. Also, for skeptics claiming to be smarter than believers you'd think they'd dedicate their entire lives to an extensive study of them seeing how it has had so much influence on our civilization for centuries and the controversy surrounding it. I mean when are people (athiest and believer) going to actually start reading it for themselves. Isn't this whats wrong now;

1) the religious willing to accept false doctrines from false preachers without giving them an extensive study in order to hold that guy at the pulpit accountable

2) and the so-called brilliant atheists and skeptics who'd rather not read them but then take what false preachers and opionated books say and use it as their excuse as to why they shouldn read the Scriptures.

.

I think it just comes down to laziness on both sides if you ask me. Somebodies actually got to start reading them to sort out this madness, right?

.

.

.

.
servant

Itzincab, Mexico

#3390 Dec 31, 2012
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
Slow down now. Matthew was written about 85, say most modern Bible scholars.
The Temple was sacked in 70.
The Jewish-Christians were living in a devastated culture where there was great upheaval and turmoil in Judaism caused by the fall of the Temple.
You don't think it made sense to the author of Matthew to have Jesus making a dire prediction of the Temple's fall? You don't think that would have made Jesus so much more impressive to the Jews and jewish-Christians of the time?
C'mon, this isn't difficult stuff.:)
.

Scholars for centuries have been saying the same thing about the book of revelations. It was written in 90 a.d. Wrong! We know that it had be written before 90 a.d. because it tells us about the Holy City being ransacked by Gentiles(Revelation 11:1-2) after the Lamb was slain (Revelation 5). This is the same book that tells us the demise of the Beast (Romes political authority) and the look-a-like church (Mother in scarlet). Now just because Rome was blind to the way these writings were we also know they weren't stupid enough to subliminaly foretellsthe outcome of their own empires demise. What empire would preserve such writings if they knew? Did their empire and political authority not shrink into the abyss and hide itself behind its look-alike church for the second thousand years as told in scripture.

.
servant

Itzincab, Mexico

#3391 Dec 31, 2012
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
Slow down now. Matthew was written about 85, say most modern Bible scholars.
The Temple was sacked in 70.
The Jewish-Christians were living in a devastated culture where there was great upheaval and turmoil in Judaism caused by the fall of the Temple.
You don't think it made sense to the author of Matthew to have Jesus making a dire prediction of the Temple's fall? You don't think that would have made Jesus so much more impressive to the Jews and jewish-Christians of the time?
C'mon, this isn't difficult stuff.:)
.

Oh. and Btw.....this isn't difficult stuff.

.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#3392 Dec 31, 2012
servant wrote:
<quoted text>
.
Scholars for centuries have been saying the same thing about the book of revelations. It was written in 90 a.d. Wrong! We know that it had be written before 90 a.d. because it tells us about the Holy City being ransacked by Gentiles(Revelation 11:1-2) after the Lamb was slain (Revelation 5). This is the same book that tells us the demise of the Beast (Romes political authority) and the look-a-like church (Mother in scarlet). Now just because Rome was blind to the way these writings were we also know they weren't stupid enough to subliminaly foretellsthe outcome of their own empires demise. What empire would preserve such writings if they knew? Did their empire and political authority not shrink into the abyss and hide itself behind its look-alike church for the second thousand years as told in scripture.
Notice how you always shift the discussion to Revelation and will NOT discuss the so-called "prophecy" in Matthew. LOL
Sola Scriptura

United States

#3393 Dec 31, 2012
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
Slow down now. Matthew was written about 85, say most modern Bible scholars.
The Temple was sacked in 70.
The Jewish-Christians were living in a devastated culture where there was great upheaval and turmoil in Judaism caused by the fall of the Temple.
You don't think it made sense to the author of Matthew to have Jesus making a dire prediction of the Temple's fall? You don't think that would have made Jesus so much more impressive to the Jews and jewish-Christians of the time?
C'mon, this isn't difficult stuff.:)
And some scholars say Matthew was written anywhere between AD 50 and AD 100. What ever fits YOUR agenda though, right?
Sola Scriptura

United States

#3394 Dec 31, 2012
Xyzhoturutsmail wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, atheists get pissed when they have to defend their nonsense. For instance, they run like batsheepies when asked, in evolution theory, which came first, the female, male or the fetus.
They hate God, what do you expect? They hate God because He demands a moral life from them and they aren't willing to live one. Unless it's on their terms of course.
Sola Scriptura

United States

#3395 Dec 31, 2012
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
Notice how you always shift the discussion to Revelation and will NOT discuss the so-called "prophecy" in Matthew. LOL
Well, you done screwed the date of authorship of Matthew up so you don't have an argument. It was written BEFORE the temple was destroyed so the prophecy was fulfilled. But, some still say that THAT wasn't the destruction spoken of but either way, you are wrong. Again, As usual. So shut up.
servant

Itzincab, Mexico

#3396 Dec 31, 2012
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
Notice how you always shift the discussion to Revelation and will NOT discuss the so-called "prophecy" in Matthew. LOL
.

Notice how you ignore the fact that the same Empire was responsible for the two books being included into the canons. If they are responsible for including one book showing the Temple being thrown down (Matthew 24:1-2) and the other book showing the Gentile Empire trampling on the Holy City (Revelation 11:1-2) along with the fall of the Empire (Beast ) and it's look-a-like church (mother in scarlet)(Revelation 17) well you do the math. We know that they both had to of been written before 70 a.d.....And again what Empire in their right might mind would subliminaly tell of its own fall. If those foolish teachers at the councils only understood the language used in the books they included...well they probably wouldn't have included the one foretelling their Empire's fall? Well, teachers coming together and ignoring sound doctrine to suite Rome's desire of uniting their crumbling Emprire is another prophecy in itself (2 Timothy 4:3)



.
servant

Itzincab, Mexico

#3397 Dec 31, 2012
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
.

And as you put ....this isn't difficult stuff.

.

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Albuquerque

#3398 Dec 31, 2012
Sola Scriptura wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you done screwed the date of authorship of Matthew up so you don't have an argument. It was written BEFORE the temple was destroyed so the prophecy was fulfilled. But, some still say that THAT wasn't the destruction spoken of but either way, you are wrong. Again, As usual. So shut up.
No, the oldest extant text from Matthew is Papyrus 104, dated to the late second century. Before that you've got nothing but wishful thinking which you somehow promote to fact. This is how we know your IQ is somewhere down near Jeff.

It's not much to look at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_104
servant

Itzincab, Mexico

#3400 Dec 31, 2012
.

The second "Woe" had come and we all know how that turned out for their efforts.

.
servant

Itzincab, Mexico

#3401 Dec 31, 2012
.

BTW... it was the West who came over to the East. This time it will be the East coming over to the West but a few things need to happen before this occurs. Why do you think the East still yells out 'Jihad'. It is a Holy war that goes way back my friend. The third woe is coming quickly. But don't worry, Jesus tells us that floods of war are not the end of his 2,000 year prophecy (Matthew 24:6-7).

.
.
servant

Itzincab, Mexico

#3402 Dec 31, 2012
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
Notice how you always shift the discussion to Revelation and will NOT discuss the so-called "prophecy" in Matthew. LOL
.

Whether you believe this or not but when Jesus' prophecy of the Temple being thrown down ( Matthew 24:1-2 ) happened in 70 A.D., this also tells us that his prophecy in ( Matthew 24 )=( Mark 13 )=( Luke 21 ) started in Jerusalem a little over 2,000 years ago.


This should also tell you that the events that follow in ( Matthew 24 )=( Mark 13 )=( Luke 21 )+( the book of Revelation ) are a 2,000 + year prophecy. In other words the events in ( Matt. 24 , Mark 13, Luke 21 ) and the book of Revelation don't all take place simultaneously at one single time in a distant future like many of today's false preachers would have you believe. Once the Lamb was slain (Revelation 5), it begins with the Roman Gentile Empire trampling on the Holy City (Jerusalem) and tearing down it's Temple (Revelation 11:1-2) and continues over a period of 2,000 + years, in seven dispensations of time. I'm sorry but you can't have one book without the other. And as I showed you earlier tonite one is foretelling the fall of Rome. The same Gentile Empire who takes credit for putting the cannons together. Go figure.

.

.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#3403 Jan 1, 2013
15th Dalai Lama wrote:
<quoted text>
No, the oldest extant text from Matthew is Papyrus 104, dated to the late second century. Before that you've got nothing but wishful thinking which you somehow promote to fact. This is how we know your IQ is somewhere down near Jeff.
It's not much to look at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_104
GoMatthew is quoted in Ignatius who died in 110CE. That means the writings preceed his death and Matthew preceeded Ignatius and were well known.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#3404 Jan 1, 2013
Sola Scriptura wrote:
<quoted text>
And some scholars say Matthew was written anywhere between AD 50 and AD 100. What ever fits YOUR agenda though, right?
Modern scholarship does not believe in predictive prophecy. Since Matthew predicts certain events they late date past 70AD. In other words thy approach it all with built in secular assumptions.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Religion, higher education and critical thinking (Aug '15) 13 min Big Al 9,332
Do you believe in tolerance for Gay Christians? 26 min Allen Richards 303
Jesus did not claim to be God 1 hr Barnsweb 325
Design, Nowhere Evident 3 hr messianic114 268
Scientific Proof Of GOD(for dummies) 3 hr messianic114 1,904
Questions regarding Hebrew 7 4 hr Blodewedd 22
News Mass hunger 'a moral scandal' Bread president t... 4 hr little lamb 1
More from around the web