I answer christiananswers.net "Questions for Skeptics."

Todd Pence
Todd Pence's picture
Posts: 9
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
I answer christiananswers.net "Questions for Skeptics."

Here's the source site for these:

 

http://christiananswers.net/q-aila/questions-for-skeptics.html

 

How do you explain the high degree of design and order in the universe?

 

Maybe Odin or Zeus or Allah did it.

How do you account for the vast archaeological documentation of Biblical stories, places, and people?

 

Provide some examples, please. While archeology confirms the existence of places the Bible mentions, this does not give credence to many of the mythological stories that are set in those places. Indeed, archeology disproves many Bible myths.

Since absolutely no Bible prophecy has ever failed (and there are hundreds), how can one realistically remain unconvinced that the Bible is of Divine origin?

 

Wrong. Dozens of Biblical prophecies have failed, including Jesus' that he would return to establish God's Kingdom on Earth within the time of their generation.

How do you explain David's graphic portrayal of Jesus' death by crucifixion (Psalm 22) 1000 years before Christ lived?

 

I have no idea what you think you are talking about. Psalm 22 says nothing about Jesus or about anyone dying by crucifixion.

How do you explain that the prophet Daniel prophesied the exact YEAR when the Christ would come and prophesied that the temple would be destroyed afterward 500 years in advance? (Daniel 9:24-27)

 

The figures given by Daniel from his time do not correspond with the time Jesus was supposed to have been born or the destruction of the temple. They’re not even close.

How could any mere human pinpoint the birth town of the Messiah seven full centuries before the fact, as did the prophet Micah?

 

The individual being spoken of in Micah chapter 5 was supposed to have spurred a revolt against the Assyrians. Since the Assyrians relinquished power 600 years before Christ was born, and if the passage in Micah is indeed a prophecy of Jesus, isn’t it a stark failure?

Account for the odds (1 in 10 to the 157th power) that even just 48 (of 300) Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in one person, i.e Jesus.

 

Odds are irrelevant, since Jesus fulfilled not one of them, and in most cases they were not even prophecies to begin with. By the way, where did you learn math? 48 out of 300 equates to odds of 1 to 10 to the 157th power???

How was it possible for the Old Testament prophet Isaiah to have predicted the virgin birth of Jesus (Isaiah 7:14) 700 years before it occurred?

 

The verse in question was not intended as a prophecy, it was speaking about events completely unrelated to Messianic speculation, and there is no mention of a "virgin" in the original Hebrew.

How can anyone doubt the reliability of Scripture considering the number and proximity to originals of its many copied manuscripts?

 

How can anyone trust the reliability of scripture considering the lack of those primary sources, and the evidence of interpolation in the copied manuscripts?

Are you able to live consistently with your present worldview?

 

Yes. I would not be able to say the same if I was a Christian.

Wouldn't it make better sense, even pragmatically, to live as though the God of the Bible does exist than as though He doesn't?

 

This is a pretty empty theology - to believe in God just to be on the "safe side". It indicates both a lack of conviction and a selfish, opportunistic nature. Besides, just in case the Muslim religion is true, wouldn't it be even safer to live as though Allah existed?

In what sense was Jesus a 'Good Man' if He was lying in His claim to be God?

 

Jesus actually denied that he was God several times in the New Testament. The verses cited in which he is supposed to have claimed to be God are very ambiguous, and in any case are in the minority.

Do you think that Jesus was misguided in affirming the truthfulness of Scripture, i.e. John 10:35, Matthew 24, Luke 24:44?

 

Of course. But I'm not the one claiming that Jesus was infallible.

If the Bible is not true, why is it so universally regarded as the 'Good Book'?

 

Because of a centuries-long campaign of mass propaganda and of vicious suppression of viewpoints to the contrary.

Are you aware that the Old Testament alone claims to be God's inspired word at least 2600 times?

 

If I claimed to be the mouthpiece of God 2601 times, does that make my claim more true?

Did you know that the Bible has been the number one best-seller every year since the 1436 invention of the Gutenberg printing press?

 

Most best-sellers are fiction. What's your point?

From whence comes humanity's universal moral sense?

 

Obviously not from a belief in God, as there are far less atheists in prison then there are in the general population. Constantine, Christianity's first great champion, chose the religion specifically because it required no moral accountability for the believer.

If man is nothing but the random arrangement of molecules, what motivates you to care and to live honorably in the world?

 

The knowledge that I am answerable to my behavior to fellow human beings, not to some invisible man up in the sky.

Explain how personality could have ever evolved from the impersonal, or how order could have ever resulted from chaos.

 

Explain how the specific God of the Bible is the only possible answer to this all-encompassing question.

If Jesus' resurrection was faked, why would twelve intelligent men (Jesus' >disciples) have died for what they knew to be a lie

 

If Mohammed was a fake, why would two dozen intelligent men hijack airplanes and fly them into skyscrapers for what they knew to be a lie?

How do you explain the fact that a single, relatively uneducated and virtually untraveled man, dead at age 33, radically changed lives and society to this day?

 

Lots of totally mythical people, or real people whose lives have been mythicized beyond recognition, have had an impact upon culture today.

Why have so many of history's greatest thinkers been believers? Have you ever wondered why thousands of intelligent scientists, living and dead, have been men and women of great faith?

 

Many more of history's greatest thinkers and scientists have been non-believers. Please try to refrain from using the argument from authority.

Isn't it somewhat arrogant to suggest that countless churches and people(including men like Abraham Lincoln) are all radically in error in their view of the Bible?

 

Abraham Lincoln thought the Bible was myth. So answer your own question. How arrogant is it for countless churches and people to claim they have all the answers?

How do you account for the origin of life considering the irreducible complexity of its essential components?

 

Again, what does this have to do with Christianity being the one true religion? With all the possible Gods out there, you hurt your case more than you help it with abstract arguments like this.

How can the Second Law of Thermodynamics be reconciled with progressive, naturalistic evolutionary theory?

 

Another completely irrelevant question. I seriously doubt, based on the low level of intellect and education you've shown so far in these questions, that you even know what the Second Law of Thermodynamics is.

How do you reconcile the existence of human intelligence with naturalism and the Law of Entropy?

 

Now you're just throwing around random phrases you read in your Freshman Physics text.

Why does the Bible alone, of all of the world's 'holy' books, contain such detailed prophecies of future events?

 

You'd better have someone read these answers to you V-E-R-Y S-L-O-W-L-Y.

Is it absolutely true that "truth is not absolute" or only relatively true that "all things are relative?"

 

It is absolutely true that everything I say is the absolute truth. That's a lie by the way.

Is it possible that your unbelief in God is actually an unwillingness to submit to Him?

 

Damn, you're right! That's exactly it! I don't believe in God because I actually DO believe in him! That makes perfect sense! How about you? Is your unwillingness to believe in Allah actually an unwillingness to submit to him?

Does your present worldview provide you with an adequate sense of meaning and purpose?

 

Sure. My current purpose in life seems to be showing up the efforts of Christian apologists as the nonsense that it is. It's a worthy one.

How do you explain the radically changed lives of so many Christian believers down through history?

 

Self-delusion. Next question.

Are you aware that every alleged Bible contradiction has been answered in an intelligible and credible manner?

 

Please don't make me laugh.

What do you say about the hundreds of scholarly books that carefully document the veracity and reliability of the Bible?

 

I'd say stop throwing around vague generalities and start providing some specific examples.

Why and how has the Bible survived and even flourished in spite of centuries of worldwide attempts to destroy and ban its message?

 

Please take a history course before you ask any more imbicelic questions like this.

Have you ever considered the fact that Christianity is the only religion whose leader is said to have risen from the dead?

 

No, because that's patently untrue. Scores of ancient religions have leaders who rose from the dead. Is it possible that you are this ignorant, or are you hoping that your readers will be?

How do you explain the empty tomb of Jesus in light of all the evidence that has now proven essentially irrefutable for twenty centuries?

 

If the story of Perseus is just a myth, how do you explain away the dead body of the Gorgon?

If Jesus did not actually die and rise from the dead, how could He (in His >condition) have circumvented all of the security measures in place at His tomb?

 

Well, gee, I thought he was the son of God, gifted with divine powers. Surely making himself invisible wouldn’t be too hard?

If the authorities stole Jesus' body, why? Why would they have perpetrated the very scenario that they most wanted to prevent?

 

Ask the guy who made up the story.

If Jesus merely resuscitated in the tomb, how did He deal with the Roman guard posted just outside its entrance?

 

Jijitsu.

How can one realistically discount the testimony of over 500 witnesses to a living Jesus following His crucifixion (see 1 Corinthians 15:6)?

 

What fucking testimony? All we have is that one account in Corinthians of 500 supposed witnesses which in itself is not corroborated by anything. None of those 500 gave any of their own testimony. We don't even know who they are. So the Corinthians passage is worthless in terms of evidence.

If all of Jesus' claims to be God were the result of His own self-delusion, why didn't He evidence lunacy in any other areas of His life?

 

Do you consider someone cursing a fig tree because it won't bear fruit out of season to be a sane act?

If God is unchanging, wouldn't it be true that one who changes by suddenly “realizing” that he/she is “God” therefore isn't God?

 

If God is unchanging, would he wish that he had never created mankind, as he is said to do in the Bible?

Is your unbelief in a perfect God possibly the result of a bad experience with an imperfect Church or a misunderstanding of the facts, and therefore an unfair rejection of God Himself?

 

Do you know what a straw man argument is?

How did 35-40 men, spanning 1500 years and living on three separate continents, ever manage to author one unified message, i.e. the Bible?

 

Some college-level education might help answer these questions for you. You really think the Bible, taken as a whole, is “unified”? Have you even read it?

Would you charge the Declaration of Independence with error in affirming that "all men are endowed by their Creator..."?

 

Sure. This archaic phraseology doesn't detract from the value of the DI as a political document.

Because life origins are not observable, verifiable, or falsifiable, how does historical 'science' amount to anything more than just another faith system?

 

Science doesn't make a pretense of being dogmatic.

What do you make of all the anthropological studies indicating that even the most remote tribes show some sort of theological awareness?

 

What do you make of the fact that none of them have any awareness of Christianity?

If every effect has a cause, and if God Himself is the universe (i.e. is one with the universe, as some non-Christians suggest), what or who then caused the universe?

 

It was Zoroaster.

How do you explain the thousands of people who have experienced heaven or hell and have come back to tell us about it?

 

Show me one Muslim who claimed to have experienced the Christian heaven or the Christian hell, and who then converted from Islam to Christianity. Come on, there’s “thousands” of people who experienced the afterlife, surely one of them must have been a Muslim who converted as a result? No?

How do you explain the countless people who have received miracles from God?

 

They were the bounties of a merciful Odin.

What would be required to persuade you to become a believer?

 

A hell of a lot more than what you've offered up, my friend.

 


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Tell ya what... if your

Tell ya what... if your "God" can kill my god "Khorne" in a fight, ill convert, 100%.

Until then, Skull for the Skull Throne!

 

I love annoying websites

(Wonder what the Vegas odds would be?

What Would Kharn Do?


DaMooksta (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
 woww way 2 waste 1 hr

 woww way 2 waste 1 hr typing up a half a page showing how ignorant u are about the bible...


Todd Pence
Todd Pence's picture
Posts: 9
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
DaMooksta wrote: woww way 2

DaMooksta wrote:

 woww way 2 waste 1 hr typing up a half a page showing how ignorant u are about the bible...

Wow, way to demonstrate in just twenty words that you are a complete functional illiterate.


StrawberryJam
atheist
Posts: 54
Joined: 2010-01-22
User is offlineOffline
DaMooksta wrote: woww way 2

DaMooksta wrote:

 woww way 2 waste 1 hr typing up a half a page showing how ignorant u are about the bible...

What makes anyone's interpretation over another's valid or not valid?


fcaustic
fcaustic's picture
Posts: 13
Joined: 2010-01-24
User is offlineOffline
Todd Pence wrote:DaMooksta

Todd Pence wrote:

DaMooksta wrote:

 woww way 2 waste 1 hr typing up a half a page showing how ignorant u are about the bible...

Wow, way to demonstrate in just twenty words that you are a complete functional illiterate.

What interests me is the fact that they've been a member of this site for longer than the Internet's been around.


stuntgibbon
Moderator
stuntgibbon's picture
Posts: 699
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
fcaustic wrote:Todd Pence

fcaustic wrote:

Todd Pence wrote:

DaMooksta wrote:

 woww way 2 waste 1 hr typing up a half a page showing how ignorant u are about the bible...

Wow, way to demonstrate in just twenty words that you are a complete functional illiterate.

What interests me is the fact that they've been a member of this site for longer than the Internet's been around.

 

Maybe it's Al Gore?


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3193
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
stuntgibbon wrote:fcaustic

stuntgibbon wrote:

fcaustic wrote:

Todd Pence wrote:

DaMooksta wrote:

 woww way 2 waste 1 hr typing up a half a page showing how ignorant u are about the bible...

Wow, way to demonstrate in just twenty words that you are a complete functional illiterate.

What interests me is the fact that they've been a member of this site for longer than the Internet's been around.

 

Maybe it's Al Gore?

 

wooow.  got any jokes about hanging chads or monica lewinski or kato kaelin to follow up with?  or maybe you should just close with "where's the beef." 

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
Todd Pence wrote:I have no

Todd Pence wrote:

I have no idea what you think you are talking about. Psalm 22 says nothing about Jesus or about anyone dying by crucifixion.

Bible Prophecy: Psalm 22:1-2 says, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, so far from the words of my groaning? O my God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer, by night, and am not silent."

Fulfillment: Matthew 27:46 says, "About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, 'Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?' - which means, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?'"

 


Bible Prophecy: Psalm 22:7-8 says, "All who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads: 'He trusts in the LORD; let the LORD rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him.'"

Fulfillment: Matthew 27:41-44 says, "In the same way the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders mocked him. 'He saved others,' they said, 'but he can't save himself! He's the King of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, I am the Son of God.' In the same way the robbers who were crucified with him also heaped insults on him."

 


Bible Prophecy: Psalm 22:15 says, "My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth; you lay me in the dust of death."

Fulfillment: Matthew 27:48 says, "Immediately one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink."

 


Bible Prophecy
: Psalm 22:17-18 says, "I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me. They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing."

Fulfillment: John 19:23 says, "When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom."

 

http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/prophecies-fulfilled-by-the-crucifixion-of-jesus-christ-faq.htm

 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
In other words, there is no

In other words, there is no connection to Jesus except for the ones imposed by the Gospel writers decades after the fact.

You realize that the writer of the Psalms (commonly assumed to be David) was writing about himself and his life, right?

Oh, wait. I guess you don't.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3193
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son wrote:Todd

Fortunate_Son wrote:

Todd Pence wrote:

I have no idea what you think you are talking about. Psalm 22 says nothing about Jesus or about anyone dying by crucifixion.

Bible Prophecy: Psalm 22:1-2 says, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, so far from the words of my groaning? O my God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer, by night, and am not silent."

Fulfillment: Matthew 27:46 says, "About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, 'Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?' - which means, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?'"

 


Bible Prophecy: Psalm 22:7-8 says, "All who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads: 'He trusts in the LORD; let the LORD rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him.'"

Fulfillment: Matthew 27:41-44 says, "In the same way the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders mocked him. 'He saved others,' they said, 'but he can't save himself! He's the King of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, I am the Son of God.' In the same way the robbers who were crucified with him also heaped insults on him."

 


Bible Prophecy: Psalm 22:15 says, "My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth; you lay me in the dust of death."

Fulfillment: Matthew 27:48 says, "Immediately one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink."

 


Bible Prophecy
: Psalm 22:17-18 says, "I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me. They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing."

Fulfillment: John 19:23 says, "When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom."

 

http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/prophecies-fulfilled-by-the-crucifixion-of-jesus-christ-faq.htm

 

 

and we all know for a fact that the gospel writers had no access to the psalms...

 

 

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


marshalltenbears
marshalltenbears's picture
Posts: 223
Joined: 2009-02-19
User is offlineOffline
 Either this part of the

 Either this part of the site is down, or they removed it. The link isn't working and I can't find a link from the homepage. 

"Take all the heads of the people
and hang them up before the Lord
against the sun.” -- Numbers 25:4


StrawberryJam
atheist
Posts: 54
Joined: 2010-01-22
User is offlineOffline
marshalltenbears

marshalltenbears wrote:

 Either this part of the site is down, or they removed it. The link isn't working and I can't find a link from the homepage. 

Just go to the main site, and look for the thread that way. I think you will find it in there. I did last night, but have not checked it since.

That site is hillarious! I found so many funny and silly things in it.


KSMB
Scientist
KSMB's picture
Posts: 702
Joined: 2006-08-03
User is offlineOffline
Holy crap, those are some

Holy crap, those are some pathetic examples of "prophecy". The rest aren't any better either. At best they indicate that the gospel writers had copies of Psalms in front of them when they each constructed their own Jesus story.


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:Fortunate_Son

iwbiek wrote:

Fortunate_Son wrote:

Todd Pence wrote:

I have no idea what you think you are talking about. Psalm 22 says nothing about Jesus or about anyone dying by crucifixion.

Bible Prophecy: Psalm 22:1-2 says, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, so far from the words of my groaning? O my God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer, by night, and am not silent."

Fulfillment: Matthew 27:46 says, "About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, 'Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?' - which means, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?'"

 


Bible Prophecy: Psalm 22:7-8 says, "All who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads: 'He trusts in the LORD; let the LORD rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him.'"

Fulfillment: Matthew 27:41-44 says, "In the same way the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders mocked him. 'He saved others,' they said, 'but he can't save himself! He's the King of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, I am the Son of God.' In the same way the robbers who were crucified with him also heaped insults on him."

 


Bible Prophecy: Psalm 22:15 says, "My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth; you lay me in the dust of death."

Fulfillment: Matthew 27:48 says, "Immediately one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink."

 


Bible Prophecy
: Psalm 22:17-18 says, "I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me. They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing."

Fulfillment: John 19:23 says, "When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom."

 

http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/prophecies-fulfilled-by-the-crucifixion-of-jesus-christ-faq.htm

 

 

and we all know for a fact that the gospel writers had no access to the psalms...


Did they also force the Persians to invent crucifixion in 300 BC so that they could concoct some story that would fulfill the prophecy of the Psalms which were written approximately 500 years prior to that?

 

Dogs have surrounded me;
a band of evil men has encircled me,
they have pierced my hands and my feet.
   

                                                   --Psalm 22:16

 

What other punishments at the time of Psalms involved the piercing of hands and feet?


Waiting for Oblivion
Waiting for Oblivion's picture
Posts: 229
Joined: 2007-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son wrote:What

Fortunate_Son wrote:

What other punishments at the time of Psalms involved the piercing of hands and feet?

Certainly not crucifixion, given that those crucified were tied to the cross, not nailed.


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
Waiting for Oblivion

Waiting for Oblivion wrote:

Certainly not crucifixion, given that those crucified were tied to the cross, not nailed.

 

Once the victim arrived at the execution site, the patibulum was put on the ground and the victim was forced to lie upon it. Spikes about 7 inches long and 3/8 of an inch in diameter were driven into the wrists. The spikes would hit the area of the median nerve, causing shocks of pain up the arms to the shoulders and neck. Already standing at the crucifixion site would be the 7-foot-tall post, called a stipes.


http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/crucifixion.htm

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13410
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:How do you explain the

Quote:
How do you explain the high degree of design and order in the universe?

Oh, you mean like the design of cancer and ecoli? It certainly has to be due to the fall of Adam and Eve. It couldn't be evolution.

I am quite sure God intended us to take Space shuttles to orbit the earth only to have SCIENTISTS tell the astronauts not to take their helmets off.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


tantric1967 (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
          I love

 

         I love the answers he gave,  I was a devout christian for over 25 years, and I even studied at the seminary level(Concordia seminary St. Louis).  There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE for the christian faith at all.  The more I studied the more faith I LOST, now, I am convinced of only ONE thing:  If god exists, he is IRRELEVENT.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3193
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son wrote:iwbiek

Fortunate_Son wrote:

iwbiek wrote:

Fortunate_Son wrote:

Todd Pence wrote:

I have no idea what you think you are talking about. Psalm 22 says nothing about Jesus or about anyone dying by crucifixion.

Bible Prophecy: Psalm 22:1-2 says, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, so far from the words of my groaning? O my God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer, by night, and am not silent."

Fulfillment: Matthew 27:46 says, "About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, 'Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?' - which means, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?'"

 


Bible Prophecy: Psalm 22:7-8 says, "All who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads: 'He trusts in the LORD; let the LORD rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him.'"

Fulfillment: Matthew 27:41-44 says, "In the same way the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders mocked him. 'He saved others,' they said, 'but he can't save himself! He's the King of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, I am the Son of God.' In the same way the robbers who were crucified with him also heaped insults on him."

 


Bible Prophecy: Psalm 22:15 says, "My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth; you lay me in the dust of death."

Fulfillment: Matthew 27:48 says, "Immediately one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink."

 


Bible Prophecy
: Psalm 22:17-18 says, "I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me. They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing."

Fulfillment: John 19:23 says, "When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom."

 

http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/prophecies-fulfilled-by-the-crucifixion-of-jesus-christ-faq.htm

 

 

and we all know for a fact that the gospel writers had no access to the psalms...


Did they also force the Persians to invent crucifixion in 300 BC so that they could concoct some story that would fulfill the prophecy of the Psalms which were written approximately 500 years prior to that?

 

Dogs have surrounded me;
a band of evil men has encircled me,
they have pierced my hands and my feet.
   

                                                   --Psalm 22:16

 

What other punishments at the time of Psalms involved the piercing of hands and feet?

 

i don't know...how about simply stabbing them with a knife?  this is just an argument from ignorance, pal, and it's thin enough to read a magazine through.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3563
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son

Fortunate_Son wrote:

 

 Spikes about 7 inches long and 3/8 of an inch in diameter were driven into the wrists. The spikes would hit the area of the median nerve, causing shocks of pain up the arms to the shoulders and neck. 


http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/crucifixion.htm

 

   Perhaps Jesus was confused about where the spikes were actually inserted ? He apparently instructed "doubting" Thomas to examine the wounds in his hands

  http://bible.cc/john/20-27.htm

  http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/doubting-thomas-faq.htm

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


tantric1967 (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Psalms

  All Jewish hebrew authorities insist that christian translaters have falsified psalm 22, and it means something else, check out jews for judaism for the exact translation from the people who know the language best.  Also read Thomas Paines "Age of Reason" for 200+ year old critique of the bible THAT HAS NEVER BEEN REFUTED.


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Perhaps Jesus was confused about where the spikes were actually inserted ? He apparently instructed "doubting" Thomas to examine the wounds in his hands

 

Once at the execution site, the victim would be nailed through the hands (or wrists) and feet.

http://atheism.about.com/od/biblegospels/a/crucifixion.htm

 

And this information comes from an atheist website.  Talk about being hoisted by your own petard!

 


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:i don't

iwbiek wrote:

i don't know...how about simply stabbing them with a knife?  this is just an argument from ignorance, pal, and it's thin enough to read a magazine through.

It's not an argument from ignorance... it's an inference to the best explanation.  In philosophy, this is known as abductive reasoning

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoning

So I will ask you once again, what other civil punishments in antiquity can you name that involved the piercing of hands and feet?


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
tantric1967 wrote:  All

tantric1967 wrote:

  All Jewish hebrew authorities insist that christian translaters have falsified psalm 22, and it means something else, check out jews for judaism for the exact translation from the people who know the language best.  Also read Thomas Paines "Age of Reason" for 200+ year old critique of the bible THAT HAS NEVER BEEN REFUTED.

 

Surely you jest!  Jews are insisting that Christian prophecy was never fulfilled?!  Who'da thunk it?


 


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3193
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son wrote:iwbiek

Fortunate_Son wrote:

iwbiek wrote:

i don't know...how about simply stabbing them with a knife?  this is just an argument from ignorance, pal, and it's thin enough to read a magazine through.

It's not an argument from ignorance... it's an inference to the best explanation.  In philosophy, this is known as abductive reasoning

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoning

So I will ask you once again, what other civil punishments in antiquity can you name that involved the piercing of hands and feet?

will you quit with the fucking wikipedia links?  it's irritating.

and no, it's not an inference to the best explanation.  it's claiming that the psalmist could see into the fucking future.  that's hardly abductive reasoning.

it's an argument from ignorance because no one knows what "civil punishments" existed during the time psalm 22 was written.  therefore either your source is wrong and crucifixion did exist during the time of the psalmist, in which case the connection is nothing amazing, or else the psalmist had something else in mind (and there's nothing in the text to lead us to believe he's even talking about "civil punishment" at all).

making a naked assertion that someone could see into the future isn't reasoning of any stripe. 

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3193
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:So I will ask

iwbiek wrote:

So I will ask you once again, what other civil punishments in antiquity can you name that involved the piercing of hands and feet?

oh, and just to be clear, i will answer you.

none.

but that doesn't mean there weren't any and that doesn't mean someone else couldn't "name" them.

"iwbiek doesn't know the answer to fundy's question" does not equal "ancient hebrew writer saw centuries into the fucking future," m'kay?

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


theotherguy
theotherguy's picture
Posts: 294
Joined: 2007-01-07
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son wrote:iwbiek

Fortunate_Son wrote:

iwbiek wrote:

i don't know...how about simply stabbing them with a knife?  this is just an argument from ignorance, pal, and it's thin enough to read a magazine through.

It's not an argument from ignorance... it's an inference to the best explanation.  In philosophy, this is known as abductive reasoning

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoning

So I will ask you once again, what other civil punishments in antiquity can you name that involved the piercing of hands and feet?

 

Okay, let's abduct then.

Observation: An older part of a book references piercing of hands and feet. A later part of the book also mentions piercings of hands and feet.

Here are some hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1: The older part of the book is actually a prophecy, which somehow, through magical means, accurately predicted the later part of the book.

Hypothesis 2: The older part of the book is coincidentally linked to the events in the later part of the book, but is not a prophecy.

Hypothesis 3: The newer part of the book was deliberatley written to fulfill the prophecy of the older part.

 

Now, let's abduct, which hypothesis do you find the most likely?


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:will you quit

iwbiek wrote:

will you quit with the fucking wikipedia links?  it's irritating.

I know.  How dare someone actually back up what they say with sources.

Quote:
and no, it's not an inference to the best explanation.  it's claiming that the psalmist could see into the fucking future.  that's hardly abductive reasoning.

Obviously you are making a presupposition that prophecies are impossible and assuming that everything is going to correspond with your presupposition.  The prediction in Psalms disproves your presupposition.

It would be like if I presupposed that it was impossible for people to invent vehicles that fly and despite all of the evidence that is presented to me, I still deny that it's plausible on the basis of my presupposition.

Quote:
it's an argument from ignorance because no one knows what "civil punishments" existed during the time psalm 22 was written.  

Actually, we do know.  (Sorry, I'm going to cite more sources!)


Assyrian Death Penalty This sketch represents the usual death penalty given by the Assyrians which was hoisting on poles. The victims were tied with their stomachs or throats on the point of a stake so that their own weight thrust them downwards.
http://www.bible-history.com/past/assyrian_death_penalty.html

Assyrian Fetters Pairs of bronze fetters were used to fasten prisoners. They were made of various shapes and materials. The ones that were put on Zedekiah and Samson were made of brass or copper. The sketch on top is from a pair of Fetters found in Nineveh, currently in the British Museum. They weigh 8 lbs. 11 oz. and are 16 ½ inches long. The part which enclosed the ankles is thinner so that they could be hammered small after the feet were placed in them. The Egyptians enclosed the hands of their prisoners in an elongated shackle of wood, made of two opposite segments nailed together at each end.
http://www.bible-history.com/past/assyrian_fetters.html

Assyrian Hooking the Lips This sketch is an archaeological discovery from the ruins of Ancient Assyria. It reveals an Assyrian king blinding a captive king while holding his head still with a hook in his lips. The other kings are waiting for the same fate. The Bible reveals accounts of prisoners being blinded and this metaphor is used of God leading rebellious people and nations.
http://www.bible-history.com/sketches/ancient/assyrian-king-lips-eyes.html

Assyrians Blinding Their Prisoners This sketch represents part of a scene from a marble slab discovered at Khorsabad. The Assyrian king is using a spear to blind one of his many prisoners. In his left hand he holds a cord with a hook attached at the opposite end which are inserted into the prisoners lips. The Assyrians would thrust the point of a dagger or spear into the eye. Their are many representations that have been discovered revealing that the Babylonians, Assyrians and Persians made use of the same cruel punishment.
http://www.bible-history.com/past/blinding_prisoners.html

Counting Dead Men's Hands This sketch represents how the Egyptians would count the severed hands of enemy corpses after a battle. They would usually cut off the hands or the genitals of the dead and make a heap before their king. In one case 12,535 of these "battle trophies" were counted and assembled into a mound after a victory of Ramsees III over the Libyans.
http://www.bible-history.com/past/egyptians_counting_hands.html

Israelites Forced to Labor This sketch is taken from a marble relief found in the palace of Sennacherib. It illustrates how the Israelite prisoners were assembled into gangs and forced to perform heavy labor. They are clothed in short skirted garments and are carrying heavy loads of rocks.
http://www.bible-history.com/past/israelite_forced_labor.html

Roman Scourging The Romans would, according to custom, scourge a condemned criminal before he was put to death. The Roman scourge, also called the "flagrum" or "flagellum" was a short whip made of two or three leather (ox-hide) thongs or ropes connected to a handle as in the sketch above. The leather thongs were knotted with a number of small pieces of metal, usually zinc and iron, attached at various intervals. Scourging would quickly remove the skin.
http://www.bible-history.com/past/flagrum.html

Many of these predated the Persians creation of crucifixion.

Quote:
therefore either your source is wrong and crucifixion did exist during the time of the psalmist, in which case the connection is nothing amazing, or else the psalmist had something else in mind (and there's nothing in the text to lead us to believe he's even talking about "civil punishment" at all).

Or it was actually a prophecy.  Are you going to disavow any evidence that is presented to you?

Quote:
making a naked assertion that someone could see into the future isn't reasoning of any stripe. 

I've cited numerous pieces of evidence, all of which you reject.  Just because you reject evidence does not make something naked or an assertion.


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:none.but that

iwbiek wrote:

none.

but that doesn't mean there weren't any and that doesn't mean someone else couldn't "name" them.

So you admit that you do not have the data, and yet there is still reason to believe what you say?

 


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
theotherguy wrote:Okay,

theotherguy wrote:

Okay, let's abduct then.

Observation: An older part of a book references piercing of hands and feet. A later part of the book also mentions piercings of hands and feet.

Actually, the Bible isn't just one book.  It is a collection of 66 books.

If you can't even get the basics down, how can we trust that you are qualified to address the actual issues?

Quote:
Here are some hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1: The older part of the book is actually a prophecy, which somehow, through magical means, accurately predicted the later part of the book.

That seems to be the best explanation. 

Quote:
Hypothesis 2: The older part of the book is coincidentally linked to the events in the later part of the book, but is not a prophecy.

That would be tenable if we were talking about one passage, but we are talking about many passages in Psalms reflected in the events described in Matthew. 

Quote:
Hypothesis 3: The newer part of the book was deliberatley written to fulfill the prophecy of the older part.

So how did the author of Psalm 22 know about crucifixion before it was even invented?

 


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3563
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son wrote: Once

Fortunate_Son wrote:

 

Once at the execution site, the victim would be nailed through the hands (or wrists) and feet.

http://atheism.about.com/od/biblegospels/a/crucifixion.htm

 

And this information comes from an atheist website.  Talk about being hoisted by your own petard!

 

   Romans favored the wrists ?     http://the-crucifixion.org/crucifixion.htm  ( a Christian web-site )

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:  

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

   Romans favored the wrists ?     http://the-crucifixion.org/crucifixion.htm  ( a Christian web-site )

Many of the painters and most of the sculptors of crucifixion, also show the nails through the palms. Historical Roman accounts and experimental work have established that the nails were driven between the small bones of the wrists (radial and ulna) and not through the palms. Nails driven through the palms will strip out between the fingers when made to support the weight of the human body. The misconception may have come about through a misunderstanding of Jesus' words to Thomas, "Observe my hands." Anatomists, both modern and ancient, have always considered the wrist as part of the hand

http://www.konnections.com/kcundick/crucifix.html

 


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3563
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son

Fortunate_Son wrote:

Historical Roman accounts and experimental work have established that the nails were driven between the small bones of the wrists    .... (radial and ulna)....      Anatomists, both modern and ancient, have always considered the wrist as part of the hand


 

   

  Sorry, my bad.  I didn't realize that the "wrist" ( ie, the radial and the ulna ) extended all the way to the elbow.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
If what you are saying is true, Fortunate

 

Why do stigmata always appear in the palm of the hand? Is that the work of satan?

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:Sorry,

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Sorry, my bad.  I didn't realize that the "wrist" ( ie, the radial and the ulna ) extended all the way to the elbow.

Evidently, you also didn't realize that the article never defined the wrist as the radial and the ulna, but referred to them as the small bones of the wrist.  Read it again, out loud:

Historical Roman accounts and experimental work have established that the nails were driven between the small bones of the wrists (radial and ulna)

Every word counts.

The radial and ulna bones extend all the way up to the hand. 

 

In human anatomy, the wrist is variously defined as (1) the carpus or carpal bones, the complex of eight bones forming the proximal skeletal segment of the hand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrist

 

Not even the atheist website distinguished between the hand and the wrist.  They used the words interchangeably.  Plus, the bible was translated from a language which more than likely used a word which encompassed both "hand" and "wrist". 

 

Seriously, do you think this discrepancy somehow went unnoticed by biblical scholars for all these years?

 


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:Why

Atheistextremist wrote:

Why do stigmata always appear in the palm of the hand?

Because it's an unbiblical doctrine and the result of people mutilating themselves in whatever manner they choose?


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3193
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son

Fortunate_Son wrote:

 

Obviously you are making a presupposition that prophecies are impossible and assuming that everything is going to correspond with your presupposition.  The prediction in Psalms disproves your presupposition.

no, it doesn't.  once again, you haven't even demonstrated that the psalmist is talking about "civil punishment."  i raised that objection and i notice you sidestepped it nicely.  i addressed your concern directly, now i expect the same courtesy, especially since your whole argument hinges on the presupposition that the psalmist is talking about civil punishment.

even if it could be clearly established that he was, the simplest explanation is not "the psalmist predicted a form of execution that lay centuries in the future."  the simplest explanation is "the psalmist was talking about a form of execution we're unaware of."  despite your copied-and-pasted block of text (and i noticed only one of the examples described an actual civil death penalty), our knowledge of ancient forms of punishment is nowhere near exhaustive.  

extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  the claim "the psalmist foresaw crucifixion centuries before its invention" would at least require:

1. conclusive proof that in fact the persians did invent crucifixion.  this is impossible to prove, since it would require exhaustive knowledge of the ancient near east.  when we say "invented" in ancient history what we usually mean is "were the first to mention."

but very well, i'm even willing to take that for granted, but that still leaves:

2. the psalmist would have to give a detailed description of the punishment (once again, it's not conclusive that he's actually talking about a form of punishment).  i'm afraid a vague reference to piercing hands and feet may be good enough for josh mcdowell, but it is not good enough for the scholarly community. 

although, even if he did give such a description (and he doesn't), without exhaustive knowledge of the time period in which psalm 22 was written (which, once again, it is impossible to have), ockham's razor would require us to make the assumption that crucifixion was known and practised at the time.

 

Fortunate_Son wrote:

I've cited numerous pieces of evidence

no, you haven't.  you've cited psalm 22's vague reference to "piercing hands and feet."  that's it.  all your copy and pasting of ancient forms of torture only prove, at best, that those forms of torture existed.  they do not prove, in any way shape or form according to any of the commonly held rules of logic, that crucifixion was the only ancient form of punishment that involved piercing of the hands and feet, that the psalmist was explicitly talking about crucifixion, and they certainly don't prove that the psalmist saw into the future

in fact, for all its pseudo-scholarly glitz and glamor, the wall of text you copied and pasted was one big non sequitur designed to dazzle me with your supposed intellectual prowess and knowledge of history.  it failed.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3563
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son

Fortunate_Son wrote:

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Sorry, my bad.  I didn't realize that the "wrist" ( ie, the radial and the ulna ) extended all the way to the elbow.

Evidently, you also didn't realize that the article never defined the wrist as the radial and the ulna, but referred to them as the small bones of the wrist.  Read it again, out loud:

Historical Roman accounts and experimental work have established that the nails were driven between the small bones of the wrists (radial and ulna)

Every word counts.

The radial and ulna bones extend all the way up to the hand. 

 

In human anatomy, the wrist is variously defined as (1) the carpus or carpal bones, the complex of eight bones forming the proximal skeletal segment of the hand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrist

 

Not even the atheist website distinguished between the hand and the wrist.  They used the words interchangeably.  Plus, the bible was translated from a language which more than likely used a word which encompassed both "hand" and "wrist". 

 

Seriously, do you think this discrepancy somehow went unnoticed by biblical scholars for all these years?

 

  Holy crap !! Then why bother mentioning the radial and ulna ( arm bones ) at all ?  

  The space between the radial and ulna ( where the nail went ) have nothing to do any structure of the hand ( hence my graphic ) the fact that carpals butt against the radial and ulna does not make the R@U a part of the wrist / hand.

  Btw,  neck vertebrae "extend"  all the way to the skull..... but they are not considered to be a part of the skull.

  God is not the author of confusion ?   Hee Hee!  Thanks for the anatomy lesson.

 

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10365
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I scan this thread, and see

I scan this thread, and see ownage.

 

#1:

Todd Pence wrote:

DaMooksta wrote:

 woww way 2 waste 1 hr typing up a half a page showing how ignorant u are about the bible...

Wow, way to demonstrate in just twenty words that you are a complete functional illiterate.

Lol.

#2:

jcgadfly wrote:

In other words, there is no connection to Jesus except for the ones imposed by the Gospel writers decades after the fact.

You realize that the writer of the Psalms (commonly assumed to be David) was writing about himself and his life, right?

Oh, wait. I guess you don't.

Rofl.

#3, 4, 5 and the rest were great too. This topic makes me smile. Smiling

 

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:no, it

iwbiek wrote:

no, it doesn't.  once again, you haven't even demonstrated that the psalmist is talking about "civil punishment." i raised that objection and i notice you sidestepped it nicely.  i addressed your concern directly, now i expect the same courtesy, especially since your whole argument hinges on the presupposition that the psalmist is talking about civil punishment.

You are now changing the scope of what it is that you call into question.  That is the sign of desperation.  What you called into question initially was whether or not this was a crucifixion.  Now you are extending the scope to question whether or not this was a civil punishment because you have come to the realization that, despite your pretense to the contrary, we do know what civil punishments were around in antiquity.

The fact that I am forcing you to change the goal posts so much, I consider a real victory.

Quote:
even if it could be clearly established that he was, the simplest explanation is not "the psalmist predicted a form of execution that lay centuries in the future."  the simplest explanation is "the psalmist was talking about a form of execution we're unaware of." 

That's not a simple explanation.  That's an ad hoc fallacy whereby you get to discount all of the evidence presented by the people you oppose. 

Quote:
despite your copied-and-pasted block of text (and i noticed only one of the examples described an actual civil death penalty), our knowledge of ancient forms of punishment is nowhere near exhaustive.  

How do you know that?

Furthermore, who said anything about civil death penalties?  That is another one of your attempts to extend the scope far enough that you can say I haven't established my claim.

Quote:
extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. 

The problem is that ECREE was disregarded as a reliable means towards truth from the moment it was presented to an actual historian.  You can make "extraordinary" mean anything that you want it to mean.  It is entirely subjective.

What is an extraordinary claim? An extraordinary claim is a claim that contradicts strongly held beliefs. What any one person considers an extraordinary claim is therefore subjective. Science cannot objectively determine whether or not a claim is extraordinary.

http://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/skeptical_fallacies#skeptical_fallacies_extraordinary_claims

Quote:
the claim "the psalmist foresaw crucifixion centuries before its invention" would at least require:

1. conclusive proof that in fact the persians did invent crucifixion. 

I love how you continually change the scope of your questioniong. 

The general consensus among historians (you know, people who actually study these things) is that the Persians invented crucifixion.  But even if there was not enough evidence to establish that with 100% certainty, we can establish that crucifixion was not around when the Psalms were written.  There are no accounts in any historical documents or archaeological evidence that we've discovered from this time period which mentions or depicts crucifixion. 

Quote:
this is impossible to prove, since it would require exhaustive knowledge of the ancient near east.  when we say "invented" in ancient history what we usually mean is "were the first to mention."

In order for you to know that the Persians didn't invent crucifixion, you would have to have exhaustive knowledge.  And in order for you to assert that we do not have exhaustive knowledge, you need some underlying basis.  Otherwise, that is no different from me saying, "Yes, the biological evidence suggests evolution, but that's only based on the limited evidence that we have.  Our knowledge is by no means exhaustive, therefore we should not accept evolution!"  You are just special pleading because you do not like Christianity.

Can I ask you what your credentials are as a historian and why I should take your word over what they say?

Quote:
2. the psalmist would have to give a detailed description of the punishment

He did.

It mentions the piercing of hands and feet, the dividing of the garments, the mocking by onlookers, the words said by the victim, the dry mouth.  Read the entire passage.

Quote:
(once again, it's not conclusive that he's actually talking about a form of punishment).  i'm afraid a vague reference to piercing hands and feet may be good enough for josh mcdowell, but it is not good enough for the scholarly community. 

So you speak for the "scholarly community" now?  LOL.

Quote:
although, even if he did give su[ch a description (and he doesn't), without exhaustive knowledge of the time period in which psalm 22 was written (which, once again, it is impossible to have), ockham's razor would require us to make the assumption that crucifixion was known and practised at the time.

The problem is that Ockham's Razor works only if the person applying it actually knows what they are talking about.

Did you know that William of Ockham was a theist?

Quote:
no, you haven't.  you've cited psalm 22's vague reference to "piercing hands and feet."  that's it.  all your copy and pasting of ancient forms of torture only prove, at best, that those forms of torture existed.  they do not prove, in any way shape or form according to any of the commonly held rules of logic, that crucifixion was the only ancient form of punishment that involved piercing of the hands and feet

And yet you cannot give me an example to the contrary nor can you give me any basis for propagating that other sorts of punishments existed.  You can only assert the possibility on the grounds that prophecy is impossible, which is begging the question.

(1) A man mentioned piercing of hands and feet before the established date, agreed upon by historians, of the invention of crucifixion

(2) Nobody has established that any other punishments involved the piercing of hands and feet.

(3) Prophecies are impossible

:. Therefore, there were punishments involving the piercing of hands and feet or crucifixion existed at that time.


(3) is begging the question.  You are assuming to be true what I am denying.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
It's all a question of

It's all a question of plausibility.

Which is more plausible?

1. An author needed to establish the credibility of a character that he created based on a person who was crucified (to help form a new religion). He found a passage in Psalms where the psalmist was writing about himself and called it a "messianic prophecy" and attached it to the character he created.

2. The Psalmist was swept up in a divine fervor and prophesied about a being he didn't know existed or even believed in himself (the son of God) who really lived die and was resurrected 200 years after the writing.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3193
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son wrote:...How

Fortunate_Son wrote:

...

How do you know that?

...

(you know, people who actually study these things)

...

Can I ask you what your credentials are as a historian and why I should take your word over what they say?

...

So you speak for the "scholarly community" now?  LOL.

...

 

 

well, i do hold a BA in religion and classical studies from centre college in danville, ky.  granted it isn't a postgraduate degree, but i'm willing to bet it's one more degree than what you hold in either field.  that's one reason why i don't constantly go quote-mining on websites--i have actual training from an accredited and prestigious institution.  i offer this merely because you asked.

for what it's worth, i was accepted to the mdiv program at yale divinity with a $10,000 scholarship but ended up not going because i stayed in central europe and got married.  i do what i can to continue my education under my own steam; i have over a hundred books on religion in my study, particularly the abrahamic religions, ranging from hans kung to martin buber to g.k. chesterton, all of which i've read at least once.  so i'm at least aware of what the scholarly community is saying.  i would never presume to speak for them.  i doubt even huston smith would ever do that.

i absolutely never would call myself a historian.  that's an honorary title that can only be granted by one's peers as a sign of deep respect.  anyone who refers to himself as a historian needs to stick a "pseudo-" in front of it.

 

 

as for the rest of your bullshit, just to be clear, i'll set the goalposts once and for all, and i invite anyone mad enough to follow our exchange to cry foul if i ever move them again.  you have made two positive assertions that you have yet to prove:

1. psalm 22 is talking about crucifixion.  your only argument for this is that i personally can't offer any other ancient punishment that involved piercing the hands and feet (the other details you referred to in this post--dividing the garments, etc.--only parallel events surrounding the account of jesus's crucifixion in the gospels and do not in any way objectively support that the psalm is talking about crucifixion in general).  i really don't think this argument would fly anywhere outside a sunday school classroom.  if any third parties think this is a good argument, please speak up and tell me why.  let's get a little peer review going.

2. psalm 22 specifically predicts jesus's crucifixion as narrated in the gospels.  your only argument for this is that details match, therefore prophecy.  you have basically dismissed out of hand the argument that the gospel writers copied the details from the psalm as justification for their religious agenda, which is perfectly plausible and even likely.  prophecy, however, is scientifically implausible.

there are the goalposts.  kick a fieldgoal, hoss.

 

btw, i know ockham was a theist.  what the fuck does that have to do with anything?  did you know martin luther had his big epiphany about grace while on the shitter?  did you know i ate a chicken kebab today? 

 

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:It's all a

jcgadfly wrote:

It's all a question of plausibility.

Which is more plausible?

1. An author needed to establish the credibility of a character that he created based on a person who was crucified (to help form a new religion). He found a passage in Psalms where the psalmist was writing about himself and called it a "messianic prophecy" and attached it to the character he created.

Nice try, but the idea that the authors of the New Testament knew that the things they wrote about Jesus were not true but desperately sought ways to propagate the belief anyway has already been disavowed by credible historians.  It holds absolutely no explanatory power, especially considering the ramifications of heresy during that time period.  The most plausible explanation for the behavior of early Christians was that the truly believed these things to be so. 


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:well, i do

iwbiek wrote:

well, i do hold a BA in religion and classical studies from centre college in danville, ky.  granted it isn't a postgraduate degree, but i'm willing to bet it's one more degree than what you hold in either field.  that's one reason why i don't constantly go quote-mining on websites--i have actual training from an accredited and prestigious institution.  i offer this merely because you asked.

I have an undergraduate degree as well, but that does not preclude me from backing up what I say.  I'm sorry that my citing of sources bothers you, but the truth hurts, doesn't it?

Quote:
1. psalm 22 is talking about crucifixion.  your only argument for this is that i personally can't offer any other ancient punishment that involved piercing the hands and feet (the other details you referred to in this post--dividing the garments, etc.--only parallel events surrounding the account of jesus's crucifixion in the gospels and do not in any way objectively support that the psalm is talking about crucifixion in general).  i really don't think this argument would fly anywhere outside a sunday school classroom.  if any third parties think this is a good argument, please speak up and tell me why.  let's get a little peer review going.

It was not talking about crucifixion in general.  It was talking about that specific instance of crucifixion, right down to the words that Jesus said while he was on the cross.

Quote:
2. psalm 22 specifically predicts jesus's crucifixion as narrated in the gospels.  your only argument for this is that details match, therefore prophecy.  you have basically dismissed out of hand the argument that the gospel writers copied the details from the psalm as justification for their religious agenda, which is perfectly plausible and even likely. 

No, because that would require that the authors knew this stuff to be false.  Therefore, you would need a motive for promulgation.  There is absolutely no motive you can give that would make any sense other than that these guys truly believed that things that they say, given the consequences for heresy.  Paul especially had no reason to lie about Jesus.   

Quote:
prophecy, however, is scientifically implausible.

It's not meant to be a scientific claim.  Miracles, by definition, do not happen that often, which precludes them from repeatability and testability.

 


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3193
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son wrote:I have

Fortunate_Son wrote:

I have an undergraduate degree as well

in what, exactly?  i know of several christian apologists--among them bill bright--who proudly display "dr." in front of their name, clearly implying credentials in religion, when it turned out later their doctorate was in civil engineering or just honorary.

btw, i would offer sources if i were making any positive assertions.  but i'm not, hoss.  you are.  and so far the "sources" you've offered me, which have been a., a wikipedia article on abductive reasoning, and b., a random list of examples of ancient forms of torture, have been irrelevant and have in no way proved any of the assertions you're making.

you see, one benefit of having a degree in religion and classical studies is it gives one the ability to immediately recognize a pedant in said fields.  however, i don't think i would grant you even that distinction. 

Fortunate_Son wrote:

It was not talking about crucifixion in general.  It was talking about that specific instance of crucifixion, right down to the words that Jesus said while he was on the cross.

no, you said the psalmist predicted "crucifixion," not the crucifixion of jesus.  i've shown this is not at all conclusive if we look at psalm 22 inductively.  if you want to look deductively, go to theologyweb or someplace like that.

Fortunate_Son wrote:

No, because that would require that the authors knew this stuff to be false. 

jesus, i've never heard this argument before...  this is on the same logical level as "lord, liar, or lunatic."  there are many other possibilities besides the dichotomy you offer.  one very likely possibility is that, like many religious people today, the gospel writers were subject to compartmentalization.  when one has a cherished faith, it's very easy to justify fudging the facts until on some level we're no longer aware of the fudging at all.  "i think jesus said that" can very easily become "i'm pretty sure jesus said that" which can more easily become "jesus definitely said that."  this process can take as little as days and is a phenomenon verified by elementary psychology, not to mention a decade's worth of my own personal experience as an evangelical.

i'm sure many others here have had the same experience.  

Fortunate_Son wrote:

It's not meant to be a scientific claim.  Miracles, by definition, do not happen that often, which precludes them from repeatability and testability.

 

and thus also precludes them from rational consideration, as well as plausibility.

which also goes to show that your whole pompous, passive-aggressive "abductive reasoning" spiel was a crock of shit.

thanks, i think we're done here.

 

 

 

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


theotherguy
theotherguy's picture
Posts: 294
Joined: 2007-01-07
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son

Fortunate_Son wrote:

theotherguy wrote:

Okay, let's abduct then.

Observation: An older part of a book references piercing of hands and feet. A later part of the book also mentions piercings of hands and feet.

Actually, the Bible isn't just one book.  It is a collection of 66 books.

If you can't even get the basics down, how can we trust that you are qualified to address the actual issues?

I don't pretend to have any such qualification. I was merely pointing out that if you choose to use abduction, the conclusions you reach depend on your interpretation of a set of differing hypotheses. If you must be so pendantic, the hypothesis becomes "an earlier writing mentions piercings of hands and feet. A later writing also mentions piercings of hands and feet."

Fortunate_Son wrote:

Quote:
Here are some hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1: The older part of the book is actually a prophecy, which somehow, through magical means, accurately predicted the later part of the book.

That seems to be the best explanation. 

 

Why?

 

Fortunate_Son wrote:

Quote:
Hypothesis 2: The older part of the book is coincidentally linked to the events in the later part of the book, but is not a prophecy.

That would be tenable if we were talking about one passage, but we are talking about many passages in Psalms reflected in the events described in Matthew. 

You referred specifically to psalm 22.

Fortunate_Son wrote:

Quote:
Hypothesis 3: The newer part of the book was deliberatley written to fulfill the prophecy of the older part.

So how did the author of Psalm 22 know about crucifixion before it was even invented?

Where does Psalm 22 talk about crucifixion? All I see is stuff about the piercings of hands and feet. Don't you think if he were talking about crucifixion, he would mention -- oh, I don't know -- a CROSS perhaps? For all we know, the author of Psalm 22 could have been uttering a turn of phrase for effect, or had some metaphorical meaning. He could have been describing something else which involved the piercing of hands and feet. How do we make the leap from piercing of hands and feet to crucifixion? How do we even make the leap from piercings of hands and feet to punishment, or even a physical event of any kind?

 

Oh, by the way, I have some more hypotheses for you:

 

Hypothesis 4: Jesus himself knew about Psalm 22, and while being crucified saw a similarity to his own position with the one described in the Psalm, and alluded to the passage. (After all, Jesus is pretty well known for quoting Old Testament verses in his sermons).

 

Hypothesis 5: Matthew, having written the story of Jesus' crucifixion, alluded to Psalm 22 as a literary technique. "Jesus has to say something here. Ah! How about that passage from Psalm 22?"

 

 

EDIT:
 

Another thing, you've stated that you don't think that Prophecy is an "extraordinary claim."

Fine, let's throw off the notions of extraordinary and ordinary claims for a moment, and just look at it as a claim, like any other.

 

In order for us to accept your claim, you're going to have to provide us with some more solid evidence than Psalm 22. You have to show us a fulfilled prophecy which indisputably, beyond reasonable doubt, was an accurate prediction by the seer. As I have shown Psalm 22 has numerous reasonable explanations which do not require us to accept that prophecies are true. The simple fact that the psalms were widely known and read in Jesus' day, and the actors in the prophecy were people who had most likely read Psalm 22 is enough to make us skeptical of the claim that Psalm 22 is a prophecy.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3193
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
theotherguy wrote: Where

theotherguy wrote:

 

Where does Psalm 22 talk about crucifixion? All I see is stuff about the piercings of hands and feet. Don't you think if he were talking about crucifixion, he would mention -- oh, I don't know -- a CROSS perhaps? For all we know, the author of Psalm 22 could have been uttering a turn of phrase for effect, or had some metaphorical meaning. He could have been describing something else which involved the piercing of hands and feet. How do we make the leap from piercing of hands and feet to crucifixion? How do we even make the leap from piercings of hands and feet to punishment, or even a physical event of any kind?

..........................


In order for us to accept your claim, you're going to have to provide us with some more solid evidence than Psalm 22. You have to show us a fulfilled prophecy which indisputably, beyond reasonable doubt, was an accurate prediction by the seer. As I have shown Psalm 22 has numerous reasonable explanations which do not require us to accept that prophecies are true. The simple fact that the psalms were widely known and read in Jesus' day, and the actors in the prophecy were people who had most likely read Psalm 22 is enough to make us skeptical of the claim that Psalm 22 is a prophecy.

 

 

hear, hear!  these are both excellent and concise renderings of precisely the arguments i'm making.

there are limitless possibilities as to the meanings of psalm 22 and the allusion to psalm 22 in the gospels that do not require any supernatural phenomena.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Fortunate_Son wrote:jcgadfly

Fortunate_Son wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

It's all a question of plausibility.

Which is more plausible?

1. An author needed to establish the credibility of a character that he created based on a person who was crucified (to help form a new religion). He found a passage in Psalms where the psalmist was writing about himself and called it a "messianic prophecy" and attached it to the character he created.

Nice try, but the idea that the authors of the New Testament knew that the things they wrote about Jesus were not true but desperately sought ways to propagate the belief anyway has already been disavowed by credible historians.  It holds absolutely no explanatory power, especially considering the ramifications of heresy during that time period.  The most plausible explanation for the behavior of early Christians was that the truly believed these things to be so. 

I never said that they knew it wasn't true so way to knock down that strawman.

I don't think they had an opinion on the truth of Jesus at all s truth doesn't have anything to do with faith or belief. It just has to make sense or bring comfort to the intended audience.

That's why myths held such power before people knew where/how to look for answers.

Remember why John said his work was written? John 20:31 states "But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name."

No mention of truth wanted or needed. If there is knowledge, there is no need for belief or faith.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
Quote:in what, exactly?  i

Quote:
in what, exactly?  i know of several christian apologists--among them bill bright--who proudly display "dr." in front of their name, clearly implying credentials in religion, when it turned out later their doctorate was in civil engineering or just honorary.

Stick to the subject, please.  I asked about your credentials because you are making sweeping generalizations that you are not even backing up (i.e. "our knowledge of ancient punishments is no exhaustive", "people in antiquity had access to psalms", etc.)

Quote:
btw, i would offer sources if i were making any positive assertions.  but i'm not, hoss. 

You've made numerous assertions, both positive and negative.  Let me quote them back to you:

"this is just an argument from ignorance" 

"it's claiming that the psalmist could see into the fucking future.  that's hardly abductive reasoning"

"no one knows what "civil punishments" existed during the time psalm 22 was written"

"either your source is wrong and crucifixion did exist during the time of the psalmist"

"or else the psalmist had something else in mind (and there's nothing in the text to lead us to believe he's even talking about "civil punishment" at all"

"the simplest explanation is "the psalmist was talking about a form of execution we're unaware of."

And I could keep on going.

You have to back up negative assetions to.  For example, if you assert, "God does not exist", then you have to back that up.

Quote:
you are.  and so far the "sources" you've offered me, which have been a., a wikipedia article on abductive reasoning, and b., a random list of examples of ancient forms of torture, have been irrelevant and have in no way proved any of the assertions you're making.

They are relevant because (a) you said that this was an argument from ignorance and it is not, and (b) you said that we do not know what civil punishments existed in antiquity and we do.

Quote:
no, you said the psalmist predicted "crucifixion," not the crucifixion of jesus.

Where did I say that?

Quote:
jesus, i've never heard this argument before

Atheist tactic #425:  Declare that you are familiar with the argument that the theist is making, mock it, and create the illusion that it has already been dealt with and debunked.

Quote:
one very likely possibility is that, like many religious people today, the gospel writers were subject to compartmentalization.  when one has a cherished faith, it's very easy to justify fudging the facts until on some level we're no longer aware of the fudging at all.  "i think jesus said that" can very easily become "i'm pretty sure jesus said that" which can more easily become "jesus definitely said that."  this process can take as little as days and is a phenomenon verified by elementary psychology, not to mention a decade's worth of my own personal experience as an evangelical.

The process of compartmentalization still requires a predisposition towards a particular belief.  It requires a thinker to, first of all, have the belief and then deliberately section off parts of the intellect in order to prevent the belief from coming under any kind of scrutiny.  This itself necessitates a motive.  You would have to establish a sufficient reason for why the author would want to propagate the belief to begin with if they knew that it was not completely true. 

They did not make any money from the Bible.  The Bible was not sold in bookstores at that point.  They did not have any longing for power since Christianity at that point was an underground sect and there was no potential for Rome to be overthrown, at least in the lifetime of the authors.  So, what was it?

You cannot use your own experience in this case because unlike the authors of the New Testament, you were not an eyewitness to the events and your beliefs do not have the potential to result in your execution. 

At the end of the day, you are attacking the integrity of the authors.  Please tell me what CORI check you've done on them which would lead you to presume that they would plagiarize from other books to promote something which they know is not true. 

Quote:
and thus also precludes them from rational consideration, as well as plausibility.

which also goes to show that your whole pompous, passive-aggressive "abductive reasoning" spiel was a crock of shit.

thanks, i think we're done here.

Abductive reasoning is not science.  Science presupposes logic. 

Do you believe any historical claims?  If so, have you verified them using the scientific method?

 


Fortunate_Son
TheistTroll
Posts: 262
Joined: 2009-12-24
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:I don't think

jcgadfly wrote:

I don't think they had an opinion on the truth of Jesus at all s truth doesn't have anything to do with faith or belief. It just has to make sense or bring comfort to the intended audience.

Bring comfort to the intended audience? 

That statement alone demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of the entire faith.

Christianity is not about making people comfortable.  It's about waking people up to the realization that they are not good.  It's like taking someone who thinks he is a great singer, slapping him across the face, and telling him, "You are terrible!  You need to take up a new hobby."  In Christianity, the message is, "You are a terrible person.  You need to be saved."  Basically, Christianity is saying, "Hey, you think you are worthy of everlasting life?  You're not.  And nothing you can do will change that.  Only by God's mercy are you allowed into Heaven."

The other religions will tell you, "You are a great person!  You have the power to attain eternal fulfillment.  Just follow these steps."  Christianity says the complete opposite.  How could that message make anyone comfortable? 

Furthermore, the New Testament is not meant to be midrash.  It is meant to be a historical document.

So I ask you again, why would the authors write a story that they know is going to piss people off and possibly result in their own death?