Ivan Panin's "Proof".
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-01-2013, 11:39 PM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(31-01-2013 01:57 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:I would try a slightly different tactic than what these guys have suggested... not that they're wrong, because they're not. But I would suggest just giving him the Bible Code. Accept it. Say, "I'm fine with you believing that the bible includes codes that prophecy things that will happen in the future. Now, how does prophecy prove that God exists?" Because, as we all know here, that's an argument from ignorance. You could personally predict a disastrous event happening in the future. If it came true, would that mean that Christians (by their standard used here) would have to accept your atheism as true?
Is that the stakes? Really? You think Christians claim one disastrous event was predicted by the scriptures rather than hundreds of details from the life of Jesus Christ?
If I told you one fact about your future for 100 days running, you would conclude I had some inside information and would not dismiss 100 coincidences.

These "100 coincidences" of yours... have you ever considered how they look from the eyes of an unbeliever? Is there even one single prophesy in the bible that sounds like the product of omniscience? They're all vague, with no timescale and usually not even any details. That makes most of them "postdictions" rather than predictions -- people don't see them coming, but rather say "that was fulfillment of prohecy" after the fact.

Worse, to believe that the bible predicts future events is the result of cherry-picking, because you're ignoring or rationalizing the prophecies that don't come true. Consider prophecies like those found in Isaiah 13:19-22, 17:1, and 19:5. These verses prophesied that Babylon would become uninhabitable, as would Damascus, and that the Nile River would dry up respectively. None of these things have come true. In fact, with no time scale given, it's rather remarkable that they haven't coincidentally come true, because cities do tend to become destroyed and replaced and rivers do dry up, and these things have stood the test of time. And there are other prophecies that don't even come true if you accept the bible as evidence, such as Isaiah 7:3-4.

I've seen more important examples when discussing whether Jesus was the Messiah. For example, Matthew cites Micah 5:2 as a messiah prophecy, but he failed to notice that verses 5 and 6 labeled the Messiah as a king and war leader who would conquer the Assyrians. We see this happen again in Zechariah 9:9, a verse that both Matthew and John said was fulfilled by Jesus, though verse 10 again makes the messiah a leader who rules from sea to sea.

You see a whole bunch of coincidences and think it's supernatural. We see a whole bunch of contradictions and say it's just like every other religion that thinks its holy book contains prophecy.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Starcrash's post
01-02-2013, 07:12 AM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
This last post seems most thoughtful.
The New Testament would be suspect if it didn't already tackle yours and other issues. The parsing of prophecies into first and second comings is Hermeneutics 101 and hardly bears repeating. There must be 100 threads around here where Christians discuss it? Jesus Himself specifically divided an Isaiah prophecy and stopped in the middle of His reading in the synagogue.
A question: If everyone is certain the NT is classic postdiction, why per the Law didn't the Jews utterly burn the NT scriptures since THEY were contemporaneous to the events and knew the events were postdicted and redacted lies? The Tanakh demands authenticity for new "revelations".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes PleaseJesus's post
01-02-2013, 07:16 AM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(01-02-2013 07:12 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  This last post seems most thoughtful.
The New Testament would be suspect if it didn't already tackle yours and other issues. The parsing of prophecies into first and second comings is Hermeneutics 101 and hardly bears repeating. There must be 100 threads around here where Christians discuss it? Jesus Himself specifically divided an Isaiah prophecy and stopped in the middle of His reading in the synagogue.
A question: If everyone is certain the NT is classic postdiction, why per the Law didn't the Jews utterly burn the NT scriptures since THEY were contemporaneous to the events and knew the events were postdicted and redacted lies? The Tanakh demands authenticity for new "revelations".
Maybe they did burn some, who knows? But how would they get their hands on them?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2013, 12:25 PM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(01-02-2013 07:16 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(01-02-2013 07:12 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  This last post seems most thoughtful.
The New Testament would be suspect if it didn't already tackle yours and other issues. The parsing of prophecies into first and second comings is Hermeneutics 101 and hardly bears repeating. There must be 100 threads around here where Christians discuss it? Jesus Himself specifically divided an Isaiah prophecy and stopped in the middle of His reading in the synagogue.
A question: If everyone is certain the NT is classic postdiction, why per the Law didn't the Jews utterly burn the NT scriptures since THEY were contemporaneous to the events and knew the events were postdicted and redacted lies? The Tanakh demands authenticity for new "revelations".
Maybe they did burn some, who knows? But how would they get their hands on them?



Also, there is kind of one of the central ideas of Christianity that separated it from earlier Judaism, and that was proselytization. Christianity wanted to spread, or at least Saul of Tarsis did his best to make that the objective of the early church; their focus was outward and inclusive. Conversely the Jews were more insular, with many of the hard-liners rebelling against the 'Hellenization' carried out by the more progressive and accommodating members of the community. Those that sought integration into Roman culture, not separation from it. Those that still embraced the earlier polytheism worship of Baal, Ashera, and El-Elyoin; and wanted them meshed with other faiths. In the same way that the Roman and Egyptian faiths overlapped, with the belief that they all worshiped the same gods, they just had different aspects with different rituals (Ra = Helios = Apollo = Mithras = Shemesh, etc).


But ultimately the strict Yahwhist came to power and pushed their culture and religion away from cultural integration, putting them in a poor position to exercise their will or power outside their small territory. They were mostly marginalized within greater Roman culture, and a lot of that was their own doing. Granted Christianity had it's own troubles too, including being labeled as 'atheists' by the then dominant polytheistic pagans who were in power. However they probably would have never been able to get an Emperor to join their faith had the early Christians acted just like their contemporary Jewish neighbors. Christians wanted you to join and be saved. Jews wanted to be left to their own devices because they already knew they were God's chosen people, and they wanted it to remain an 'exclusive club'.


So even before Emperor Constantine, the Jews wouldn't of had the political capitol to move so unilaterally against the early Christians, who were in fact just another sect of Judaism at first. After Constantine, their chances were slimmer still. Notice how Saul of Tarsus was never indicted by a Roman court or authorities, all of his troubles came from disputes with the Sanhedrin.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2013, 01:22 PM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
There are innaccuracies in your post. A minority sought integration into Roman culture (the Romans were currently crucifying thousands of Jews). A minority sought the pagan cults (the Romans were abhorred at the Jews' lack of polytheist and pagan beliefts).
In wasn't just Saul of Tarsus, Jesus had commanded His disciples to proselytize (Matthew 28:18-20) and elsewhere in dozens of verses.
Chas is equally off base, these were Jewish documents circulated among Jews. The Messianic Jews were integrated in the synagogues until the times of second diaspora and Masada--my question still stands.
Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-02-2013, 01:30 PM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(01-02-2013 01:22 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  There are innaccuracies in your post. A minority sought integration into Roman culture (the Romans were currently crucifying thousands of Jews). A minority sought the pagan cults (the Romans were abhorred at the Jews' lack of polytheist and pagan beliefts).
In wasn't just Saul of Tarsus, Jesus had commanded His disciples to proselytize (Matthew 28:18-20) and elsewhere in dozens of verses.
Chas is equally off base, these were Jewish documents circulated among Jews. The Messianic Jews were integrated in the synagogues until the times of second diaspora and Masada--my question still stands.
Thank you.


And the messianic Jews would have protected their messianic documents.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2013, 09:30 AM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(01-02-2013 01:30 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(01-02-2013 01:22 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  There are innaccuracies in your post. A minority sought integration into Roman culture (the Romans were currently crucifying thousands of Jews). A minority sought the pagan cults (the Romans were abhorred at the Jews' lack of polytheist and pagan beliefts).
In wasn't just Saul of Tarsus, Jesus had commanded His disciples to proselytize (Matthew 28:18-20) and elsewhere in dozens of verses.
Chas is equally off base, these were Jewish documents circulated among Jews. The Messianic Jews were integrated in the synagogues until the times of second diaspora and Masada--my question still stands.
Thank you.


And the messianic Jews would have protected their messianic documents.
You're begging the question IMO. Against whom?! The Rabbis were putting out the Messianics from the synagogues. The non-Messianics were telling Nero and others "the Christian Jews are the troublemakers." Paul said, "The king is familiar with these things, and I can speak freely to him. I am convinced that none of this has escaped his notice, because it was not done in a corner." - Acts 26:26. John the Baptist moved his operation to the river Jordan because there was MUCH WATER there. Jesus is commented upon negatively in the Talmud over and again including specifics that verify His life and ministry.

No, the Jewish people were aware of Jesus and Paul and the proliferation of the New Testament is reasonable evidence that there were tens of thousands of eyewitnesses of the miracles and teachings of Jesus. The fact that Jesus said such marvelous things that have inspired us today is icing on our cake.

Jesus quoted a fragment of the Tanakh when He said loving our neighbor is the highest principle of the Law. (Before you quote to me other ancient source texts that bastardize this idea) I ask you, Chas, do you disagree? Do you avoid treating others they way you want to be treated? Darwin and Herbert Spencer teach us to kill and rape if it gets the fittest to survive and propagate. Do you treat others the way Darwin invited us to or Jesus Christ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2013, 09:51 AM (This post was last modified: 04-02-2013 10:09 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(31-01-2013 02:50 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:That depends on what you are telling the future about. If it were specific, and came true, then you'd have something. If there were as vague as horoscope then you'd merely prove that you have knowledge about barnum statements.
Born in Bethlehem.
Died with wrists and feet pierced.
Rose from the dead.
Of the line of David.
Of the line of David not through Solomon/Jechoniah but with the titular rights to kingship from that line via adoption.
Sold for thirty silver pieces.
Betrayed by a close associate with a kiss.
Having brothers who reject but later bow to Him.
Called Y'shua. Called God with us. Called the Prince of Peace.
Being a Jew who would be revered worldwide as Messiah, God and King.
Etc.
By contrast, read today's horoscope for your sign then read three others. All four will vaguely apply.
The context for the extraordinary claim is 1) We know the prophecies of the OT predate the NT 2) We are now left to argue the reliability and accuracy of the NT.
Soothsaying and fortune telling were forbidden by Leviticus. There were/are no exceptions. A prophet was sent to speak to the people of their own day, (the word means "mouthpiece), not to tell the future. The office was an ancient one in Hebrew culture, and most did not speak about the future. Sorry. Take a course on Biblical Scholarship from a qualified, (non-fundie) professor. Madame Zelda and her crystal ball are Hollywood Bible, not Hebrew Bible. Sorry. Common street level misconceptiion, is that "prophecy" is telling the future. It's the FIRST thing that gets debunked in OT class. No OT scholar talks about "prophecy" in that way. So Sad. Too bad. Many people, such as Nostradamus are seen to make predictions, and not be prophets. Doesn't take a prophet to predict shit, or is Nostradamus "inspired" also ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist and Levitating yogi, CAAT-LY.
Yeah, for verily I say unto thee, and this we know : Jebus no likey that which doth tickle thee unto thy nether regions.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2013, 09:59 AM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
(04-02-2013 09:30 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
(01-02-2013 01:30 PM)Chas Wrote:  And the messianic Jews would have protected their messianic documents.
You're begging the question IMO. Against whom?! The Rabbis were putting out the Messianics from the synagogues. The non-Messianics were telling Nero and others "the Christian Jews are the troublemakers." Paul said, "The king is familiar with these things, and I can speak freely to him. I am convinced that none of this has escaped his notice, because it was not done in a corner." - Acts 26:26. John the Baptist moved his operation to the river Jordan because there was MUCH WATER there. Jesus is commented upon negatively in the Talmud over and again including specifics that verify His life and ministry.

No, the Jewish people were aware of Jesus and Paul and the proliferation of the New Testament is reasonable evidence that there were tens of thousands of eyewitnesses of the miracles and teachings of Jesus. The fact that Jesus said such marvelous things that have inspired us today is icing on our cake.

Jesus quoted a fragment of the Tanakh when He said loving our neighbor is the highest principle of the Law. (Before you quote to me other ancient source texts that bastardize this idea) I ask you, Chas, do you disagree? Do you avoid treating others they way you want to be treated? Darwin and Herbert Spencer teach us to kill and rape if it gets the fittest to survive and propagate. Do you treat others the way Darwin invited us to or Jesus Christ?


You asked why the Jews would not have destroyed the documents.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-02-2013, 07:35 AM
RE: Ivan Panin's "Proof".
Sounds good, but I have a Bachelor's of Religion from a secular university and the assumption that I am an ignoramus about these matters is way off base. And the non-fundie professors would agree. Jeremiah and Isaiah and other prophets, for one example, predicted a 70-year captivity in Babylon. Read this carefully from Daniel 9:
In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of Median descent, who was made king over the kingdom of the Chaldeans— 2 in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, observed in the books the number of the years which was revealed as the word of the Lord to Jeremiah the prophet for the completion of the desolations of Jerusalem, namely, seventy years. 3 So I gave my attention to the Lord God to seek Him by prayer and supplications, with fasting, sackcloth and ashes.
The diaspora is a prototypical example of prophets who writings were held in check until the prediction came true to verify the speaker. Daniel knew the 70 years predicted by prophets and written in the Tanakh were drawing to a close. Next, I'm sure you'll tell me that Daniel wrote post-exilic "prophecies" that were written in hindsight only. Yawn. non-fundies HAVE to say that to invalidate the prophecies.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: