If Evolution were true...

[Tim the Plumber]

88 pages of coversation and still no communication. There are some very closed minds here.

 

[Cabal]

And still ... This did not happen because the people believed in David Koresh (although in a round about way it did)

Cheers

and they were being persecuted but rather because the law was broken and children were being raped and an FBI agent was killed, etc.

And Jesus and his followers were arrested for lawbreaking too - so again, what's the difference between their claims and the Davidians?

This is nothing like men and women being thrown to the lions or boiled in oil or hung on a cross for faith in Jesus. Not even close.

In your opinion, but we've seen how you automatically think your beliefs are the most sensible thing ever and other people's beliefs are silly; reverse the roles and those people would be saying the same thing about yours (and likely do), so so much for opinion....

Nope... I am saying they died because they were murdered by men because they didn't like them believing in and living for Jesus.... sort of like you guys.

No, not even close, but don't stop assuming.

Below is the reason for persecution and martyrdom.

*snip*

Thanks, so in other words, circular logic exactly as I laid out.

And really, it's quite naive to assume persecution arose because a belief is objectively true - people oppose all sorts of beliefs for all sorts of reasons, so merely opposing a belief is not sufficient to show it's correct - "they hate me, ergo I have the truth" is simply fallacious, no matter which group claims it. Besides there are usually other reasons for these things than mere dislike.

 

[AV1611VET]

And Jesus and his followers were arrested for lawbreaking too - so again, what's the difference between their claims and the Davidians?

30 pieces of silver.

 

[Cabal]

30 pieces of silver.

Right, I'm sure no-one informed the authorities at any point about Koresh

 

[AV1611VET]

Right, I'm sure no-one informed the authorities at any point about Koresh

You mean illegally covenated with the authorities to arrest Mr. Howell?

 

[Cabal]

You mean illegally covenated with the authorities to arrest Mr. Howell?

Oh, I'm sorry, did I miss the illegal part? Clearly the fact that someone broke the law means that your claims of your messiah's divinity are unquestionably true, but the Davidian's messiah can't be divine because...well, it's just different, that's why!

Pitiful, even by your standards. (And don't pretend that civil law is means anything here - Christians are the first to whine if they think it's "opposing" them).

 

[AV1611VET]

Oh, I'm sorry, did I miss the illegal part? Clearly the fact that someone broke the law means that your claims of your messiah's divinity are unquestionably true, but the Davidian's messiah can't be divine because...well, it's just different, that's why!

If you don't know why the Davidian's messiah can't be divine, I'd say the problem is on your end.

Jesus didn't break any laws, He fulfilled them -- they were His in the first place.*

Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

* You do know He instituted them, don't you?

 

[Cabal]

If you don't know why the Davidian's messiah can't be divine, I'd say the problem is on your end.

No problem here - I don't think either messiah was divine. My point is that Christian standards for thinking Jesus and only Jesus to be the only messiah are flimsy, especially when viewed in light of similar claims.

Jesus didn't break any laws, He fulfilled them -- they were His in the first place.

Now you are being obtuse. Jesus and his followers frequently delineated between laws of God and laws of state.

 

[AV1611VET]

No problem here - I don't think either messiah was divine. My point is that Christian standards for thinking Jesus and only Jesus to be the only messiah are flimsy, especially when viewed in light of similar claims.

Ya -- we call that diabolical mimicry.

What breaks the tie is fulfilled prophecies.

And just so you won't understand even further, the Law called for select men of the tribe of Levi to be anointed with oil. At this point, he technically was a "messiah" -- meaning he was an anointed person, specifically set aside to perform the duties of a priest.

These "messiahs" performed their duties in expectation of THE MESSIAH, Who was to come from:

1. the seed of a [virgin] woman
2. the family of Abraham
3. the tribe of Judah
4. Bethlehem

Prophecies Jesus fulfilled to the letter.

Now, look a little closer at the four above. Any man born in Bethlehem, of the tribe of Judah could technically claim he was THE MESSIAH -- (assuming his mother's virginity could not have been disputed); but those who knew their Scriptures would know better, as there were many other prophecies that would have to be fulfilled as well, including:

1. a visit by the wise men
2. born in a stable

As I said before, there are 333 prophecies concerning Jesus the Messiah, of which 109 pertain to His first advent.

It would be mathematically improbable -- (if not mathematically impossible) -- for someone to fake this and get away with it.

 

[Nathan Poe]

These "messiahs" performed their duties in expectation of THE MESSIAH, Who was to come from:

1. the seed of a [virgin] woman
2. the family of Abraham
3. the tribe of Judah
4. Bethlehem

Prophecies Jesus fulfilled to the letter.

Q.V. Please: 360, 380, and 459.

You might also want to Q.V. this thread, which is what those posts eventually spun off to.

Of course, a few folks who know the Bible better than you have already addressed (or attempted to address) a couple of these points, but there's still plenty of meat on the bone.

Of course, knowing you, if you attempt to address it at all, you probably won't get nearly as close as they did.

 

[Cabal]

there were many other prophecies that would have to be fulfilled as well, including:

1. a visit by the wise men
2. born in a stable

Those were prophesied? References please.

 

[Deaver]

I agree that these things have been discussed alot. Having said that, I am not sure science and the bible disagree. You have to keep in mind some things can be taken literally, for example "The Flood", "Adam and Eve" and others "talking animals" may be more allegorical in nature.

With regard to "spiritual health", I am not sure what your point is. I don't like to avoid discussion, but I really am missing your point on "spiritual health".

I need to clear up this post. I believe that "The Flood" and "Adam & Eve" and many other things are literal events recorded in the Bible, and that "talking animals"and other things are allegorical. However, because God is Soveriegn and Omnipotent, if He wanted He could cause there to be "talking animals".

 

[AV1611VET]

Q.V. Please: 360, 380, and 459.

Let's put Jesus' early life into perspective:

1. Jesus is born in Bethlehem.

Matthew 2:1 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
Matthew 2:2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.

In verse one, stop at the first comma: everything to the left of that comma took place one year, and everything to the right of that comma took place two years later.

2. The baby Jesus is taken to Jerusalem, according to the Law.

Now let's go to the book of Luke.

Remember Luke? as in Doctor Luke?

Like a good doctor, he is going to give us some medical information:

Luke 2:21 And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.
Luke 2:22 And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;

You probably didn't look at it this way, since you were probably busy laughing at this cutsie remark: 877

In any event, let's move on:

1. Jesus is born in Bethlehem.
2. He is taken to Jerusalem according to the Law.
3. Joseph & Mary return to Nazareth (Luke 2:39).
4. Two years later, the wise men show up, while Joseph & Mary are in a house in Jerusalem (probably for the Passover).
5. Herod loses it -- Joseph & Mary are told to flee to Egypt.

Now -- if there's still 'plenty of meat on this bone' -- let's see it.

Your turn.

 

[AV1611VET]

Those were prophesied? References please.

Isaiah 60: 1-7 on the wise men -- I [apparently] am wrong about the stable -- I can't find it, anyway.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Let's put Jesus' early life into perspective:

1. Jesus is born in Bethlehem.

Matthew 2:1 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
Matthew 2:2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.

In verse one, stop at the first comma: everything to the left of that comma took place one year, and everything to the right of that comma took place two years later.

Source, please?

2. The baby Jesus is taken to Jerusalem, according to the Law.

Now let's go to the book of Luke.

Remember Luke? as in Doctor Luke?

Which Luke is that?

Like a good doctor, he is going to give us some medical information:

Luke 2:21 And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.
Luke 2:22 And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;

You probably didn't look at it this way, since you were probably busy laughing at this cutsie remark: 877

And what exactly is there to see, AV? The Bible says it -- history and common sense disagree -- so history and common snese take a hike.

Any other non-answers you want to spout off as long as you're here?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Isaiah 60: 1-7 on the wise men -- I [apparently] am wrong about the stable -- I can't find it, anyway.

Well, it must be in there somewhere -- otherwise there'd have been no reason for Luke to have written it in.

Keep looking.

 

[OllieFranz]

Well, it must be in there somewhere -- otherwise there'd have been no reason for Luke to have written it in.

Keep looking.

Luke didn't. He wrote about the Magi visiting the house where Jesus lived. Matthew was the one who wrote about both fulfilled prophesy and the manger (but not about a stable).

BTW, love the Beta Ray Bill musing in your sig

 

[VehementiDominus]

Ya -- we call that diabolical mimicry.

What breaks the tie is fulfilled prophecies.

And just so you won't understand even further, the Law called for select men of the tribe of Levi to be anointed with oil. At this point, he technically was a "messiah" -- meaning he was an anointed person, specifically set aside to perform the duties of a priest.

These "messiahs" performed their duties in expectation of THE MESSIAH, Who was to come from:

1. the seed of a [virgin] woman
2. the family of Abraham
3. the tribe of Judah
4. Bethlehem

Prophecies Jesus fulfilled to the letter.

Now, look a little closer at the four above. Any man born in Bethlehem, of the tribe of Judah could technically claim he was THE MESSIAH -- (assuming his mother's virginity could not have been disputed); but those who knew their Scriptures would know better, as there were many other prophecies that would have to be fulfilled as well, including:

1. a visit by the wise men
2. born in a stable

As I said before, there are 333 prophecies concerning Jesus the Messiah, of which 109 pertain to His first advent.

It would be mathematically improbable -- (if not mathematically impossible) -- for someone to fake this and get away with it.

You're missing one important detail...


THEY ALL HAPPENED ONLY IN THE BIBLE.

It's no use claiming a prophecy is fulfilled if the only record of it being fulfilled is in the same piece of text that the prophecy was made - then claiming it means that the text is 100% truth, it's absurd.

Like said in another thread:

Not to mention the vast majority of "passed" prophecies written about in the Bible can only shown to've happened within the fictitious constraints of the Bible, anyway.

It's like in Star Wars, when Obi and Qui gon keep saying that Anakin is the chosen one who will bring balance to the force. That prophecy is only fulfilled in Star Wars, just as most of the Biblical prophecies are only fulfilled in the Bible.

Or in the Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. It's phophecised that when Ganon comes, the Hero of Time will save Hyrule - lo and behold, Link is the Hero of Time and saves Hyrule. Prophecy fulfilled! That makes the Legend of Zelda just as real as the Bible, by your standards.

What you're suggesting is really, really stupid.

Do you not see the gaping holes in your logic? Do you not see how ridiculous what you're claiming is?

Because if not, then you need help, seriously.

 

[Greg1234]

What you're suggesting is really, really stupid.

Do you not see the gaping holes in your logic? Do you not see how ridiculous what you're claiming is?

Because if not, then you need help, seriously.

He doesn't actually. What you don't seem to understand is that recitals about ignorance formulating the bible are confined to your own personal beliefs. In short, your quotes where you say that the bible writers were writing fiction, is fictional.

 

[VehementiDominus]

He doesn't actually. What you don't seem to understand is that recitals about ignorance formulating the bible are confined to your own personal beliefs. In short, your quotes where you say that the bible writers were writing fiction, is fictional.

Missed the point completely.

Go back, re-read and address what I was saying.

Why do you post so many strawmen? Seriously? Do you have a problem with reading comprehension, or something? Do you just pick a word out of the posts you comment on at random and say something nonsensical about that word?

It's gotta be one of those, unless I'm missing something.

Why can you never actually address the point made in a post?