Why I’m no longer a Christian

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#455160 Mar 27, 2013
duststorm wrote:
<quoted text>1.The Messiah will be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2).
The average population of Bethlehem from the time of Micah to the present (1958) divided by the average population of the earth during the same period = 7,150/2,000,000,000 or 2.8x105.
....
"Your", and I use that term loosely, probability analysis is nonsense.

First, cite your sources. Your source, either directly or indirectly, is a summary by David Reagan of chapter 2 of Peter Stoner's book, Science Speaks: Scientific Proof of the Accuracy of Prophecy and the Bible.

Interestingly enough, Stoner appears to have been a thief, too, having used the work, also without attribution, of George Davis in his book, Fulfilled Prophecies that Prove the Bible. Being a professor at a minor college, he *had* to know better.

Regardless, fulfilling prophesy works only if the events really happened and the prophesy is accurateely interpreted. With respect to the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, it is a late addition to the gospel narrative designed to allow Jesus to be born in Bethlehem.

The first canonical gospel, Mark, is silent about that dubious story. Matthew's and Luke's authors added it decades later. As Raymond Brown notes with respect to Luke's account:

Minor difficulties [with Luke’s narrative] are that there was no single census of the whole Roman Empire under Augustus, and that there is no evidence that the Roman censuses required one to go to one's place of ancestry (unless one had property there). More serious is Luke's connection between the reign of Herod the Great (1:5)[See also Matthew 2] and the census under Quirinius. Herod died in 4.B.C.; Quirinius became governor in Syria and conducted the first roman census in Judea in A.D. 6-7 - and notice it was a census of Judea not of Galilee as Luke assumes.[Also note in] Acts 5:37, Luke mistakenly mentions the revolt of Judas the Galilean (provoked by the census of Quirinius) after the revolt of Theudas which occurred in A.D. 44-46.

-- Raymond E. Brown, Christ in the Gospels of the Liturgical Year (Liturgical Press, 2008), p. 119, n. 2.

Brown was a Catholic priest and a professor at Union Theological Seminary. You can imagine non-believing scholars are even less gentle when it comes to that story. And even the earliest Christian commentators have struggled to make the claims in it fit historical reality.

But forget the historical problems for a moment, the notion that Augustus ordered the mass migration of a whole people for a census and that was follow by Herod's mass slaughter of those folks' toddlers but no historian -- only NT fiction writers -- noticed those events is beyond the pale.

Your other claims fare no better.

So what do you have when you got a false claim Jesus fulfilled prophesy and a claim that that falsity proves something statistically?

You have a high probability that lying (and in this case thieving) Christians were involved.
Huh

Franklin, NC

#455161 Mar 27, 2013
I'm Sorry if my big Boner offends any one. It's just all this gay talk on this gay thread.

Loosen up fer Gawd's sake!

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#455162 Mar 27, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
The Universe? Don't you mean men?
Even then, only the deceived.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#455163 Mar 27, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
Great - we can see you can add, subtract, multiply and divide.
*applauds*
What is your point?
Where is your support to this "mathematical theory"?
Who really cares?
The proof is a myth, wrapped in lies, inside a work of fiction, to borrow loosely from Churchill.

“FAITH IN MANKIND”

Since: Mar 13

AT PEACE WITH NATURE

#455164 Mar 27, 2013
Huh wrote:
I'm Sorry if my big Boner offends any one. It's just all this gay talk on this gay thread.
Loosen up fer Gawd's sake!
LOL As long as you keep it in your pants you should be good to go. If you pull it out then you might need to worry. Someone might panic and shoot it off.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#455166 Mar 27, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
Even then, only the deceived.
.....or the uninformed.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#455167 Mar 27, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
The proof is a myth, wrapped in lies, inside a work of fiction, to borrow loosely from Churchill.
Or.....

"It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham. "
- Groucho Marx

:o)

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#455168 Mar 27, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
.....or the uninformed.
True.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#455169 Mar 27, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
Or.....
"It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham. "
- Groucho Marx
:o)
That works too.
Huh

Franklin, NC

#455170 Mar 27, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
"Your", and I use that term loosely, probability analysis is nonsense.
First, cite your sources. Your source, either directly or indirectly, is a summary by David Reagan of chapter 2 of Peter Stoner's book, Science Speaks: Scientific Proof of the Accuracy of Prophecy and the Bible.
Interestingly enough, Stoner appears to have been a thief, too, having used the work, also without attribution, of George Davis in his book, Fulfilled Prophecies that Prove the Bible. Being a professor at a minor college, he *had* to know better.
Regardless, fulfilling prophesy works only if the events really happened and the prophesy is accurateely interpreted. With respect to the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, it is a late addition to the gospel narrative designed to allow Jesus to be born in Bethlehem.
The first canonical gospel, Mark, is silent about that dubious story. Matthew's and Luke's authors added it decades later. As Raymond Brown notes with respect to Luke's account:
Minor difficulties [with Luke’s narrative] are that there was no single census of the whole Roman Empire under Augustus, and that there is no evidence that the Roman censuses required one to go to one's place of ancestry (unless one had property there). More serious is Luke's connection between the reign of Herod the Great (1:5)[See also Matthew 2] and the census under Quirinius. Herod died in 4.B.C.; Quirinius became governor in Syria and conducted the first roman census in Judea in A.D. 6-7 - and notice it was a census of Judea not of Galilee as Luke assumes.[Also note in] Acts 5:37, Luke mistakenly mentions the revolt of Judas the Galilean (provoked by the census of Quirinius) after the revolt of Theudas which occurred in A.D. 44-46.
-- Raymond E. Brown, Christ in the Gospels of the Liturgical Year (Liturgical Press, 2008), p. 119, n. 2.
Brown was a Catholic priest and a professor at Union Theological Seminary. You can imagine non-believing scholars are even less gentle when it comes to that story. And even the earliest Christian commentators have struggled to make the claims in it fit historical reality.
But forget the historical problems for a moment, the notion that Augustus ordered the mass migration of a whole people for a census and that was follow by Herod's mass slaughter of those folks' toddlers but no historian -- only NT fiction writers -- noticed those events is beyond the pale.
Your other claims fare no better.
So what do you have when you got a false claim Jesus fulfilled prophesy and a claim that that falsity proves something statistically?
You have a high probability that lying (and in this case thieving) Christians were involved.
Translation: I got no rebuttal.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#455171 Mar 27, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
True.
When posts like Huh show up - referencing a "statistical universe", just makes me think of how fractals have played such a large part into those statistics.

;o)
Huh

Franklin, NC

#455172 Mar 27, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
When posts like Huh show up - referencing a "statistical universe", just makes me think of how fractals have played such a large part into those statistics.
;o)
Fcuk. Another Google physicist.
mac

Franklin, NC

#455173 Mar 27, 2013
Brownian motion.

Yukkity-yuk!

Snort! LOL!

*doink*

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#455174 Mar 27, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>
Fcuk. Another Google physicist.
Fractals are a part of statistical models, well, more the result of them, but they are part of the models. Fractal formulas are now incorporated into pretty much every branch of science, chaos theory is not longer a theory either, it is now a mathematical system.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#455175 Mar 27, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
When posts like Huh show up - referencing a "statistical universe", just makes me think of how fractals have played such a large part into those statistics.
;o)
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Fractals are a part of statistical models, well, more the result of them, but they are part of the models. Fractal formulas are now incorporated into pretty much every branch of science, chaos theory is not longer a theory either, it is now a mathematical system.
Please tell me that's not where I'm going wrong trying to balance my checkbook.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#455176 Mar 27, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Please tell me that's not where I'm going wrong trying to balance my checkbook.
Use the Mandelbrot, it works best for that.:P

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#455177 Mar 27, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>
Fcuk. Another Google physicist.
Aaaww....I hurt your feelings?

Maybe if you start researching things on your own, you would have to eat crow.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#455178 Mar 27, 2013
**typo - should be:

"you wouldn't have to...."

My apologies.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#455179 Mar 27, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Please tell me that's not where I'm going wrong trying to balance my checkbook.
LOL

Brilliant!!

Very funny CJ!

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#455180 Mar 27, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Fractals are a part of statistical models, well, more the result of them, but they are part of the models. Fractal formulas are now incorporated into pretty much every branch of science, chaos theory is not longer a theory either, it is now a mathematical system.
Fractals are FUN!!

:o)

And quite extraordinary in their designs and configurations.

I can see why people like to use them within designs that they create and produce.

http://www.bing.com/images/search...

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 3 min Bongo 119,205
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 1 hr Vlad 2,630
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 hr Trump Worshiper 679,123
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 6 hr Holy Jehowa Witness 46,214
What Your Church Won't Tell You by Dave and Gar... (Apr '10) 6 hr Trumps worshiper 33,216
Melania Trump's hair shines in Saudi sun 6 hr Trumps worshiper 5
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 9 hr Rider on the Storm 184,831
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) Thu UMAKEWORLDPEACEUM... 982,141
More from around the web