The Bible

Many before you have made that same prediction.. most of them are unknown and forgotten, while Jesus continues to be the most admired Man in all of history.

Science owes a debt to many christians, who sought to understand the natural world. It is just the phony narrative, promoted by progressive indoctrinees, that say, 'Christians have religion, Atheists have science!' But that is just another absurd narrative, as Christians are not impaired from the scientific method.. they invented it, after all.

This same prediction was made in the 1800s, regarding archaeology. The opposite occurred, as discovery after discovery corroborated the biblical texts. All the hostile accusations of 'error!', 'change!', and other lies about the bible have been debunked. All that is left is unevidenced beliefs and phony narratives, like the ones you so eloquently repeat.

Voltaire once said of Jesus, “Curse the wretch. In 20 years, Christianity will be no more. My single hand will destroy the edifice it took 12 apostles to rear.”

I would venture to guess that more people know of, and can quote and identify Jesus, than Voltaire. And ironically, part of Voltaire's estate became a Bible Society edifice after his death.

 

Well, you have accused and implied plagiarism all along. You have not recognized the uniqueness of His message, life, and teachings, but have dismissed Him as a copier of previous teachers and concepts. This without evidence, as usual.

Even now, after i refuted your claim of Him plagiarizing deuteronomy, you double down with more claims of copy cat religion building, which was NEVER the message He brought.

Ok. You throw out some references, without correlating them, but expect me to sift through your ramblings to find your points and arguments. Its tiring, but I'll look at a couple of them, this time.

Matthew 5:2 and he began to teach them. He said:

Isaiah 57;15 For this is what the high and exalted One says—
he who lives forever, whose name is holy:
“I live in a high and holy place,
but also with the one who is contrite and lowly in spirit,
to revive the spirit of the lowly
and to revive the heart of the contrite.

Matthew 5:4 Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.
Isaiah 61:1The Spirit of the Sovereign Lord is on me,
because the Lord has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners, and 2to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor and the day of vengeance of our God, to comfort all who mourn,

Is there similarity, among some of the biblical themes? Of course. Jesus even quotes OT passages. But to accuse, 'plagiarism!' is hostile and prejudicial, especially when much of Jesus's teachings were very unique and revolutionary, like all of the sermon on the mount references i gave you before. Why did you not show His sources for those passages, but continue with the false accusation of 'plagiarism!'?

Just because some words like, comfort, mourn, contrite, etc, are used in several places, does not indicate plagiarism, as you claim. It indicates internal agreement, and consistency of message. And you ignore or dismiss the many unique and revolutionary concepts that Jesus taught. Why? To promote a narrative?

 

No, you have presented opinions and assertions.

Facts would be,
1. Specific references clearly referencing numbers.
2. Archaeological finds that dispute those numbers.
3. Data or facts showing how the numbers claimed are impossible.

You have done none of this, but just repeated, loudly, your beliefs and hostile interpretations.

Your arguments are based ONLY on incredulity, and YOUR assertion that 'X number of people could not have lived/marched/fought as recorded in the ot manuscripts!'
What 'facts!'? Plains indians in north America numbered in the millions, migrated regularly, took their livestock, tents, and families with them. Monguls and other nomadic tribes have done the same. What basis do you have for declaring this, 'impossible!', other than bias? You do not even quote the passage you charge with 'error!', just make broad brush accusations.

I would easily and quickly refute your accusations, IF.. you referenced the passage, but you don't. Innuendo, vague charges, and propaganda memes are all you have.

..sorry if i seem annoyed about it, but all i do is expose your complete lack of facts and arguments, while you repeat assertions, opinions, and falsehoods. That is not a debate.. it is propaganda.

 

Of course science owes a debt to many christians, though how many were true christians and how many were nominal Christians is debatable. It also owes a debt to agnostics and atheists.

Scientific Method in its basic form was practised from ancient Egypt, ancient Greece and through the Islamic golden age. Wiki.

Voltaire was 300 odd years ago when the Catholic Church had France in its grip. Science and modern knowledge has changed things.

.And Archeaology does not confirm the Bible. It does confirm some things because these things were known at the time of writing. Other things are NOT confirmed but denied.

No comments about the supposed Exodus? That the population of Chicago could wander/march through the desert for 40 years? Christians are told about the Exodus and the miracles that occurred, sermons are preached, but few are told just how many people are supposed to Exodus.
No comment on the OT references you asked for from the OT used by Jesus in the beatitudes? Should IiI withdraw my claims after proving my point.? I could go through most of the Sermon referring to the OT quotes and teachings used by Jesus. Matthew 5:23 see Yom Kippur. which needs forgiveness for your sins and for those you have sinned against, or have sinned against you.

 

If it was a continuous stream of refugees out of Egypt lasting 40 years, it's not so implausible. Now, if any one guy needed 40 friggin' years to walk that far, well, he probably lost his compass.

 

What difference does the number of exiles/wanderers make?

 

That is exactly why the Jews wanted to kill Him, because He claimed to be Divine.

Where is your evidence for this grand conspiracy theory. Why would the disciples knowingly die for a lie?

 

You are the one who mentioned plagiarism? And I haven't ignored the above. They were not in question. Some of the teachings of Jesus were revolutionary in that they took OT Teachings of justice etc. and turned them in teachings of mercy. As I say again I don't believe many of the words of Jesus came from his mouth and some were misinterpreted. As with the Matthew/Luke nativity stories it was all to make Jesus divine. .Even events of the trial and crucifixion are debateable under Jewish religious rituals.

I gave you what you asked now you have some excuses as to what you meant.

Your arguments are based ONLY on incredulity, and YOUR assertion that 'X number of people could not have lived/marched/fought as recorded in the ot manuscripts!'
What 'facts!'? Plains indians in north America numbered in the millions, migrated regularly, took their livestock, tents, and families with them. Monguls and other nomadic tribes have done the same. What basis do you have for declaring this, 'impossible!', other than bias? You do not even quote the passage you charge with 'error!', just make broad brush accusations.

And the Indians of North America wandered in groups of millions together? . They wandered in tribes - even as the nomads of the Sinai did - but the Indians had vast grasslands, wild beasts and fish, woods and forests in places. Mongols and other tribes never wandered in vast numbers. (Ghengis Khan had to bring together his army from outlying tribes). The land could not support them. The same with other tribes. And you compare this with the recorded Exodus of 2.5 - 3 million. Are you real? Do you understand the situation of the Bible Exodus.

No-one knows tha actual total figure of the Plains Indians at its highest. Estimates, before the Europeans, are between 20 - 50 m. Let's take the middle range - 35m

New York had a population of nearly 9 m. Spread that 4 times and there are thousands of square miles for tribes to wander. Food, animals - who they followed on migration - and others necessities all available. The 2 - 3m Hebrews had the Sinai desert to wander in. No food, little water, no animals or grasslands. To compare the 2 is beyond belief.

 

The 'Jews' did not want to kill him. The ordinary people accepted him. The religious leaders wanted him dead because he was drawing attention to their hypocrisy - which the people already knew anyway. Jesus was a threat to their authority as religious leaders. Why do you think Saul persecuted the disciples. They were drawing people from Judaism and promoting the New Way.

They didn't. They died because they believed. But then the Crusaders dies because they believed it was their duty to recapture Christian places - the idea encouraged by the Church. Islamists die for what they believe. Are they right. Many early christians deliberately had themselves massacred because they believed they would get to heaven. Belief is a strong tie, even if it is wrong. Belief isn't a certainty.

 

If that's directed at me it makes a lot of difference when talking about the Exodus.

A small tribe could survive in the Sinai desert by moving about. They even entered the Egyptian Nile Delta at times when things got difficult, to feed and water their flocks.

Large tribes and the numbers mentioned in the Exodus could never have survived 1 year - let alone 40 years. No grassland, food, little water.

 

But that's not what is said. In fact, there is no evidence of the Hebrews as recorded in the Bible, were in Egypt.

 

So you say the part in the NT about Jesus claiming to be God was made up, where is your evidence for that?

Not the same, neither the Crusaders or Muslims died for what they claimed to have personally seen. You're implying many, many people all had the same 'delusion'.

I would say Muslims unknowingly die for a lie.

 

I've been through this before but will do so again.

Making Jesus divine was the object of the Gospel writers, whoever they were. The Gospel Nativity stories are based on dubious grounds. Study of the Tanakh show that all the prophecies used by 'Matthew' have nothing to do with Jesus. They are taken out of the context of the Tanakh pages. One reason the Jews reject Jesus. If Joseph took Jesus to Egypt as Matthew says - using Hosea 11 - then Jesus must be Israel and must have sacrificed to the Baals etc...... Yiou can't take a verse from the context with any meaning. It leaves the whole Bible meaningless.
Bethlehem Ephratah used as the birthplace of Jesus (Micah 5) - but Jesus was never a ruler in Israel and the Assyrians were long gone. Again a verse taken out of context.
There was no massacre of the Innocents. We have a very good record of the deeds of Herod the Great. The Jews had already complained to Augustus about Herod and Herod had been told to reverse his actions by Caesar. Any massacre would have reached Rome woth further consequences. . The reference is to Rachel weeping for her children in Egypt.
Matthew has Jesus in Bethlehem as his home, which we know was in Nazareth (he was a Nazarene). Luke has him in Nazareth and has to go against Roman Laws (censuses were taken where people lived or were at the time). to get Joseph to Bethlehem - where, we are told, there was no room in the Inn. Was there even an 'inn'. Bethlehem was only a small place.
Luke's reason for getting Joseph there was Joseph was 'of the line and lineage of David'. David had been dead 1000 years and Bethlehem had been subject to invasion and many of its people taken to Babylon. We know many stayed there and others had already escaped the Assyrians and Babylonians and gone to places like Egypt, Greece and North Africa (where St Mark was born).
According to the Bible David had 20 sons that we know of, and perhaps more we don't, and daughters not mentioned. In 1000 years his descendants would have been in their hundreds of thousands - all descending on Bethlehem at the same time. Remember Luke says this was a worldwide census. A worldwide census would have included all nations, So all people of the Middle East would have had to go home. Every sailor - the main form of transport being ships - would have to go home. So no public transport. The Middle East would have been in chaos.
Then, to cap it all, Joseph 'in Egypt' is told not to go home to Bethlehem but to go to Nazareth - his home.
So Matthew has Joseph in Egypt and Luke has Jesus in Nazareth 40 days after his birth ( after his circumcision, redemption and after Mary's purification) where he remains with his parents, going to the Temple every year.

And the Gospels are reliable.

Where are the facts? Try studying outside the Bible. I spent years studying the Bible until I learnt that understanding the real bible was understanding the background too.

 

The letter *J* = https://www.etymonline.com/word/j

https://www.quora.com/If-the-letter...600-how-did-Jesus-get-his-name-2013-years-ago

You can not produce clear legible copy of weather one of those codexes because to do so will show that they are hoaxes.

 

You do know that the Egyptian Empire stretched all the way to the Euphrates River? So the Levant and all of its people were in Egypt. They didn't leave Egypt; Egypt left them.

 

We won't argue over that as the Exodus is just a story. If it had have happened we don't know when. The Egyptian lost control of the northern Levant to the Hittites as far as Carcamesh. Thus the Battle of Kadesh.

 

1. What numbers? You provide no references for the numbers you dispute.
2. Your imagery of the 'Sinai desert' is flawed. It is not a wasteland, but contains a wide range of ecosystems.
3. You provide only incredulity for your claims: 'they could not possibly have lived there!', is not backed by any evidence.
4. The exact route of the exodus is unknown, and there are different theories of possiblity.
5. A dogmatic declaration of YOUR theory as 'fact!' is arbitrary and unscholarly.
6. 1.4 million people live there today, and there are still nomadic tribes tending herds and flocks on the forage there.
7. The scarcity of water, and the rigorous conditions are plausible conditions for the miracle of manna and water provided. The conditions there give credence to a supernatural intervention.

From britannica:
The passage of the Israelites through Sinai is undoubted, but the route and the date of their Exodus are still matters of debate. Sinai is likewise famous as the scene of the giving of the Law to Moses, but there is doubt as to which of the mountains of Sinai is the actual site.

You don't believe in the stories of exodus, or perhaps most of the biblical accounts. Fine. That is a rational position, given the claims of supernatural intervention in many of them. But that does NOT imply 'error!', as you claim. It is only your personal skepticism, as you have no evidence of error. Billions of people, over the millennia, disagree with your perspective, and reject your prejudicial claims of 'error!', based only on incredulity.

 

It seems to me that your 'outside' studies are limited to hostile, anti-bible prejudice. Yes, there are THEORIES, disputing any or all of the biblical accounts, but they are not based on facts or compelling evidence, but speculation and guess.

You seem locked in on these 'higher criticism' theories, which were all the rage in the 19th century. But discoveries over the last few centuries have debunked most of those theories, though prejudicial perceptions are hard to break.

I continually ask you for facts and evidence for your claims, and you only reassert the same lame narratives, over and over... like a propagandist, not a scholarly inquirer of truth.

The physical evidence for corroborating biblical accounts is very minimal. In fact, the biblical accounts have been used more by archaeologists and anthropologists to put together their theories about ancient times, than other sources. There is more scholarly credibility and historicity on the biblical manuscripts than ANY other ancient texts. They are the Standard by which all other manuscripts are measured.

It is only hostile prejudice, based on imagined flaws, incredulity, and bigotry. There is no evidence to compel the conclusions of 'error!' that you accuse.

 

John 10:27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all ; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”

31Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

33“We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

Those listening to Jesus understood what He was saying.

..funny how revisionists 2 millennia removed 'know' better..

 

I quoted this passage in the previous post. In context, it seems pretty clear, and the listeners then understood exactly what He was claiming: equality with the Divine.

I hold to the historical, biblical view.. Jesus was very God of very God.. He was uniquely Divine, uncreated, and of the same essence of God. The mystery of the Godhead is beyond human explanation, and the teachings of Jesus about the triune nature of God are accepted as from One Who Knows.. Jesus Himself.

It is not an easy doctrine, and does not fit neatly into the rational mind. But it is something Jesus clearly taught, and is part and parcel of Christianity. It IS Christianity. The Divine, eternal, infinite sacrifice for sin could only be accomplished by a Divine, eternal, infinite Being.

 

? Numbers. I never ceased to be amazed that fior someone who has studied the Bible you still don't these things. The numbers for the Exodus are in the Bible. Numbers 1. while preparing for the journey at Sinai a census of men of the age of 20 is taken. 603.550. Each tribe is numbered except the Levi's. The men over 20 are expected to be fighting men, but the Levi's are Priests. GotQuestions religious website comes up with a total population of 2.4m. Most commentators think that too low considering the large family requirements of the time.

The Sinai desert ecosystem of 3400 years ago was not sufficient to sustain even the smallest tribes. They had to move from place to place.
Duet. 8:15 ' Do not forget that he led you through the great and terrifying wilderness with its poisonous snakes and scorpions, where it was so hot and dry. He gave you water from the rock!'
The Egyptians mined various minerals etc but they used water transport (Red Sea) to the nearest coastal site rather than overland travel through the desert.

6. 1.4 million people live there today, and there are still nomadic tribes tending herds and flocks on the forage there.

6-7m people live in Israel today. We know there were a vast number fewer then. Study ancient history

4. The exact route of the exodus is unknown, and there are different theories of possiblity.

The route is given in the Bible. What is not known is where the places mentioned were. That's why we have many possibilities .Similarly, the area for each tribe in Israel is given in great detail, but many of the places, rivers etc mentioned are not known today.

7. The scarcity of water, and the rigorous conditions are plausible conditions for the miracle of manna and water provided. The conditions there give credence to a supernatural intervention

Only if you believe in miracles. Think about the population of Chicago wandering in the desert, gathering round a rock from which water is flowing. How much water do you think they would need for drinking, washing bodies, clothes etc. How long would it take for the back of the queue/s to reach the water. You could try to make a pond, but wouldn't the water sink into the sand?

 

NO ONE would survive 40 years in that desert let alone even 50.

 

Of course there is confirmed history in the Bible. The writers of the Bible were with a few centuries of that History. The fact that they used that history to write their religious stories seems clear. That the walls of Jericho fell during that period doesn't exclude the probability that an earthquake destroyed them. It had happened before and caused problems for the area several times since. Many episodes in the Bible have happened, but given exaggerated and wrongful interpretation.
2 Chrinicles 14:9 An Ethiopian army marched 1000 miles

You, and we in the UK, have real places and people who area important to out history, but how many apocryphal stories have been written around them. It's happened all through history.

2 Chronicles 14:9. An Ethiopian army of 1 million men and 300 chariots marched 1000 miles through the desert just to conquer part of Palestine. The sheer logistics would defeat even todays army with all it's modern advantages.

800,000 men to fight 500,000 men in a country whose total population totalled about that. Just look at Palestine of the day. There probable was a battle - but the figures are ridiculous.

Alongside scholars who seek to explain that these numbers express actual reality, others have argued that the numbers are purely fictitious, and that any efforts to justify their historicity are vain. If the latter claim is accepted, however, the question already posed by Segal in 1965 immediately arises: “When a writer of the Old Testament had freedom of choice in his use of numerals, what were the motives that prompted him to employ one particular number rather than another?”.And indeed, various explanations have been proffered for the census figures in the book of Numbers, usually involving complicated mathematical calculations, ancient astronomy,and even gematria. The results—perhaps unsurprisingly—are not usually convincing. The most sound and cautious approach, I believe, is represented by Fouts and Davies, who argue that the employment of large, exaggerated numbers should be seen as an accepted, intentional literary convention calculated to achieve a certain effect—for example, in order to glorify the name of some king or god— wherein the actual given numbers lack significance in themselves. In any case, it seems that the debate between the “realistic-historical” approach and the “literary” approach in regard to large numbers in the Bible has yet to be resolved. There is, however, general consensus that the numbers in the book of Chronicles are exaggerated. To illustrate, Ralph Klein notes that the 500,000 warriors who fell in a single day during the battle between Abijah and Jeroboam (2 Chr 13:17) is equivalent to the total number of casualties from both sides during the American Civil War, or the total number of Americans killed during World War Two;while Rudolph has estimated that the 100,000 golden talents David prepared for the construction of the Temple (1 Chr 22:14) is roughly nine times the amount of gold produced all over the world in the year 1900. Some have tried to apply the theory that the term אלף is a military expression representing far fewer than a thousand soldiers to the book of Chronicles as well, thus bringing the numbers into the realm of the feasible and the historical, but Klein convincingly argues that this interpretation is not acceptable and concludes, “Now, as before, the high numbers in Chronicles cannot be taken as reflecting historical reality. Rather, the interpreter’s goal should be to see how these numbers are a part of the Chronicler’s message or of his theological agenda.”

The Chronicler’s Code: The Rise and Fall of Judah’s Army in the Book of Chronicles NERIAH KLEIN.

The Bible has a lot of history onto which religious significance has been added..

 

No funnier than believing that Hosea refers to Jesus Christ - or should I say Jesus Israel.

 

Are we sure that the Sinai was the same now as it was 3000 years ago? Are we sure that it was a desert and not "the wilderness"?

Too much certainty in this thread.