'not really a Christian'

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

I have openly said that I think Christianity is harmful to society. It's no secret. Only you seem to have a problem reading plain English.

Thats funny, my Christianity has done nothing but help society.

[Twilight]

OK, here is a short list of failed prophecies and inconsistencies.

FAILED Prophecies

Here is a long list of failed prophecies

FAILED Prophecies Long list

I'll watch where I point my pitchfork if you watch yours. In fact we might want to invest in some safety tips.

Why not start a new thread on the Theology board and we can discuss the "failed prophecies" that you have posted in the links above on a fresh thread. (I can start it if you like).

I suggest one at a time.

A qick glance through the first link assured me that most of the "difficulties" were overly biased objections (burn the bible arguments) that could be dealt with relatively easily...

Of course, you can point your pitchfork at me just as well there as here... :-)

And I will try to refrain from encamping around the castle with loud yokel type exclamations at night time...

[Twilight]

This doesn't negate the Christian lifestyle, but it certainly negates its claim of exclusivity. Christians aren't the only ones capable of love and generosity.

I would doubt any balanced Christian would ever make that claim.

I am sure there will be many well intentioned agnostics in heaven...

...not sure about athiests though. ;-)

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

OK, here is a short list of failed prophecies and inconsistencies.

FAILED Prophecies

Here is a long list of failed prophecies

FAILED Prophecies Long list

I'll watch where I point my pitchfork if you watch yours. In fact we might want to invest in some safety tips.

Why not start a new thread on the Theology board and we can discuss the "failed prophecies" that you have posted in the links above on a fresh thread. (I can start it if you like).

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

This doesn't negate the Christian lifestyle, but it certainly negates its claim of exclusivity. Christians aren't the only ones capable of love and generosity.

I would doubt any balanced Christian would ever make that claim.

[Twilight]

First I don't believe I have access to the Theology board and second I have spent thousands of hours studying all kinds of apologetics with most of that time with the intent of proving the Bible to be true. It has been years since I have encountered anything original.

I have some pretty good arguments for the inspired nature of the Bible. I just came to the point where I realized that people had made this stuff up and that is why it is so difficult to put together into one cohesive message. There isn't some deeply complex hidden message in the Bible that will put it all together.

The most obvious answer to me is that it is iron age ethics trying to make sense of the world and trying to justify the violent actions of individuals in power and a nation by saying god told me to.

It is also the result of a syncretic process of myth building to meet the intellectual and political needs of Christians throughout the last couple thousand years.

Plus if you kill those prophets whose predictions don't come true you are going to weed out all the error after the fact. This is like a particularly famous Stock Market scheme where a con man started with 1200 wealthy investors and sent a letter to 600 that a particular stock would go up and 600 that it would go down. He prefaced his letter that he had a system that was 100 percent accurate. He then divided them in half again and sent 300 that a certain election would go one way and 300 that it would go another. He then had 300 investors that had evidence that his ability to predict outcomes was 100 percent. He then was able to have these investors buy certain stocks in large amounts to manipulate the market. He got 10 percent of their earnings plus what he invested knowing that he could make a single stock go up and then down by having these investors move the market.

So if we have 100 prophets make predictions and we only keep those whose come true and we keep adding prophets this isn't prophecy, it's simply matching events to prophets who happen to come close.

It's a scam.

Originally Posted By: Twilight

A qick glance through the first link assured me that most of the "difficulties" were overly biased objections (burn the bible arguments) that could be dealt with relatively easily...

I'm not wanting to burn any Bibles. I think the Bible is an essential part of western culture. I simply am reframing it as a collection of documents that tell a particular thought history and it's not an infallible revelation of any god. It's a revelation of men's thoughts. It's a window into the ancient mind.

Granted, some on the list are not very well researched and the better apologetics aren't represented, but I think there are enough clear cut discrepancies to show that there is no way that the Bible is internally consistent to a level that would prove that there was a god.

So you want to make claims without actually having to defend those claims?

[Twilight]

Your argument against failed prophecies in the bible actually reveals your deep inconsistencies Cardw...

For you to state that a prophecy is failed, you have to first make an assumption:

1. That the prophecy was written before the event happened.

Do you agree with that?

[cardw]

So you want to make claims without actually having to defend those claims?

Since you are unable to recognize a defense, there is no point.

[cardw]

Your argument against failed prophecies in the bible actually reveals your deep inconsistencies Cardw...

See what I mean. First I don't have a defense, then I do. That's why it's pointless to dialog with you.

And then you add on some claim that I not only have inconsistencies, but I have deep inconsistencies. Your dialog is riddled with exaggeration, false implications, and triumphal claims. It's so cluttered with junk to hide the fact that there is really no substance.

It's interesting that you do the very thing you accuse me of doing.

Making claims with no evidence.

[Bravus]

There are several pre-built defenses against discussion of failed prophecies:

1. The old faithful 'burning the bible' defense: kind of by definition, showing inconsistencies in the Bible is likely to be portrayed as an attack on it, and therefore met with this kind of condemnation, whatever it's truth value.

2. The even older 'prophecy is conditional' defense: if any prophecy is not fulfilled, it is said to have been conditional and the conditions are said to have changed. This is a perfect logical circle that means it is impossible to ever show (to those who hold it) that any prophecy has failed.

The links Rich provided gave a lot of examples. They were rejected wholesale, using one or both of the above. What purpose would be served by going through those examples one by one in the face of further trotting out of the above?

[fccool]

In many ways, I think it's beneficial to be intellectually honest about certain possibilities of our faith when speaking to someone who does not share it. Many Christians are disillusion in their belief so much so, that it in fact becomes the unquestionable reality that everything revolves around.

Yet we must be intellectually honest about certain things that I'd like to point out:

1) I have not heard the voice of God in my head or any other place. So, when people say "God told me" I really do believe that the voice is what Freud would name to be "Ego" that they ascribe the voice of God to. All of us at some point or another have conversations with our own selves.

I really don't believe that God is known through the "voice in our head". If that would be so, then there should never be a doubt on Cardw's side of God's existence.

2) Concerning the Biblical prophecies, if we are completely honest with each other, the only historical record that we have of their making and fulfillment is in fact Bible itself, with many of the prophecies are self-fulfilling by definition.

Likewise, if you have an expectation of prophecy concerning the messiah, then there will be people who would look forward to it's fulfillment, and thus interpret certain events as such. This is a know phenomena.

For a while I've seen so many 11:11 on the clocks, that I though there was something religious behind it. I was sure of it when IX broke off my Gran Prix to make another eleven (it fell as XI), yet I was looking for those, and the more I looked the more I've found. Thus the IX from my car became some sort of message from beyond that seemed strange and incomprehensible.

A great example of such reaching would be E.G.White prophecy about buildings burning in New York. This prophecy is so general, that any skyscraper fire would do.

Likewise, many prophecies concerning our events are not specific. The prophecies are shroud by symbolism, therefore you can fiddle with various attributes and pick your enemy... I.E. Papacy, or China, or Russia... whatever.

3) You can't argue on the neutral and intellectual ground about the existence or non-existence of God using Biblical narrative. It's would be like arguing about existence or non-existence of Zeus using Greek mythology, which is likewise full of prophetic fulfillment and historical accounts that are ascribed to god's doing.

You have to bring the external evidence that is absolutely unbiased and irrefutable. Unfortunately, I will be the first one to admit that I don't have any to make an irrefutable argument... and all of us, if intellectual honest would probably find it to be true.

And that's what bothers me the most about the arguments presented here to "prove" to Cardw that God is in fact real, and that he is mistaken. You can't bring an intellectual argument to the table that would prove to people that God exists. There is no such intellectual argument that would carry the irrefutable proof. None of you can do that right now. If you could, then there would not be agnostics or atheists.

Christianity was never meant to be a systematic theology by which means we "win" the unbelievers with our creeds and dogmas. Christianity is essentially a belief in a potentially better humanity by following the two perhaps obvious ideas - loving God through loving our neighbor as ourselves. That's the idea behind restoring the lost order described in the Biblical narrative and that culminated in Christ's teachings... not merely do or die systematic theology that was built around Biblical narrative (Bible is not a text book on theology)

If not for Christ's teachings, then we would have ended up with a rigid, and very violent religion that likewise reflects the God who is rigid and violent. Christ in fact pointed out that this is not the case, and perhaps there's other dimension behind violence that is unknown to us.

So, how about being intellectually honest for once... huh?

[Bravus]

[fccool]

Here to further illustrate my point ....

[phkrause]

Interesting point fccool. :)

[LifeHiscost]

So, how about being intellectually honest for once... huh?

If a person cannot see God speaking to them through the Word, it is doubtful God is going to perform any little magical tricks that one would feel a need for verification that He is real and willing to speak to anyone willing to pay attention when He does give instruction.

"But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him."

Hebrews 11:6 NKJV

"If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God or whether I speak on My own authority."John 7:17 NKJV

"And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart."Jer 29:13 NKJV

Regards!

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

Your argument against failed prophecies in the bible actually reveals your deep inconsistencies Cardw...

See what I mean. First I don't have a defense, then I do. That's why it's pointless to dialog with you.

And then you add on some claim that I not only have inconsistencies, but I have deep inconsistencies. Your dialog is riddled with exaggeration, false implications, and triumphal claims. It's so cluttered with junk to hide the fact that there is really no substance.

It's interesting that you do the very thing you accuse me of doing.

Making claims with no evidence.

I note you have sidestepped both of my queries Cardw.

You seem to claim to be a champion against false Christian claims, but you do not seem to think that you have to defend your points...

1. Please discuss any of the points on those links that you claim as "proof".

2. Please answer my query about failed prophecy, if you are saying that the prophecy is failed, you are by implication stating that that was written before the event. Which means you have given credence to the date line of those prophetic books, you have established in your own argument they are historically accurately placed in time.

If you do not answer these questions, I will only assume, and hope everyone else here can realise that you are here to make false claims without any proof.

It seems you are here to destroy peoples faith, can be my only conclusion, your arguments rely on you asserting your own intellectual authority, without you actually having to prove anything.

Why should anyone pay you any attention, if your arguments are egocentric in their basis?

[Twilight]

So, how about being intellectually honest for once... huh?

[Twilight]

Bravus, whilst I remember.

You have made the wild claim that gravity did not exist in the "singularity" until such a time as it is convenenient for the Big Bang theory.

Please can you show your evidence that gravity was not in existance, before the expansion of the Universe...

[Bravus]

I could probably do so, though this is the wrong medium for equations. You seem to have obsessed on gravity, but I'm talking electromagnetism, the strong and weak nuclear forces, space and time as well.

Video evidence is clearly a ridiculous demand. The evidence is in the location and red shift of the galaxies, and in the cosmic background radiation. Based on the evidence in this thread so far, you seem not to believe the cosmic background even exists. With that evidentiary arm tied behind my back, no I can't provide evidence for the events of the Big Bang, including the emergence of gravity.

But then, asking me to do so is like asking you to provide evidence for your assertions without using the Bible at all. It's not a sane or sensible way to proceed.

[Twilight]

There are several pre-built defenses against discussion of failed prophecies:

1. The old faithful 'burning the bible' defense: kind of by definition, showing inconsistencies in the Bible is likely to be portrayed as an attack on it, and therefore met with this kind of condemnation, whatever it's truth value.

2. The even older 'prophecy is conditional' defense: if any prophecy is not fulfilled, it is said to have been conditional and the conditions are said to have changed. This is a perfect logical circle that means it is impossible to ever show (to those who hold it) that any prophecy has failed.

The links Rich provided gave a lot of examples. They were rejected wholesale, using one or both of the above. What purpose would be served by going through those examples one by one in the face of further trotting out of the above?

So Cardw can make any old claim and you think he does not have to defend it...

That is not very rational Bravus.

If he wants to make a point, then he should have to defend it like everyone else here.

If I make a point, I have to defend it.

Do I sense an unnatural bias towards the defenders of athiesm here Bravus?

Have you become so absorbed in athiestic doctrine, that you cannot even fault their unsupported arguments now?

Have you become so blind that you champion the self professed destroyers of the Christian faith out of some intellectually confused motive to be "accepted" by them?

[Twilight]

Do you not see how damaging this position is?

This is what it does for Cardw:

"I can attack the bible, and my Christian "friends", allow me to do that and even support me in it."

"Wow, I cannot lose."

"I do not even have to "prove" anything, as they will defend my right to be illogical and make false representations, nodding sagely as they do it."

And I realise that somoeone will devolve at some point into:

"Cardw is right, because you are not a good Christian, because you argue with him."

It is always those that think they are intellectual and "educated" that miss the most painfully obvious truths...

[Twilight]

It is strange to me, how often some "Christians" want to defend those that are openly and actively trying to destroy other Christians Faith...

They can pull down the faith of the frail believer, whilst their "friends" protect their right to do that.

I find it disgusting and contemptible behaviour.

No wonder there is so much disunity amongst the believers.

We keep giving the enemy the highest place to sit at the table, mistakenly thinking we are being "loving and accepting".

[Bravus]

I never said he did not have to defend the claims. I said defending them was pointless and impossible in the face of the irrational arguing tactics that have been the hallmark of all you interactions in this thread. There's a fundamental difference. Once again, try reading what I write and responding to that, rather than to your own mental projections, and we might have the beginnings of a rational debate.

[Bravus]

Try taking just the set of prophecies relating to the Second Coming occurring before those present died. They're right there in the Bible, and the link Rich provided showed chapter and verse. What further defense is required. The Bible prophesied something would happen, and it did not. What more I'd there to say?

[phkrause]

If a person cannot see God speaking to them through the Word, it is doubtful God is going to perform any little magical tricks that one would feel a need for verification that He is real and willing to speak to anyone willing to pay attention when He does give instruction.

"But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him."

Hebrews 11:6 NKJV

"If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God or whether I speak on My own authority."John 7:17 NKJV

"And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart."Jer 29:13 NKJV

Regards!

I believe Herod was looking for this also.