A very simple question.

[rain292]

How is that even possible?

It's not possible. And I don't recall seeing anything remotely resembling so much as an attempt at "mathematically proving the Bible is the only true scripture."

 

[AV1611VET]

It's not possible. And I don't recall seeing anything remotely resembling so much as an attempt at "mathematically proving the Bible is the only true scripture."

​

 

[lemmings]

​

​

You mean that time that Jesus got a F on his prophecy test?



To everyone who does not wish to read the thread.

According to AV, Jesus passed only 109 out of his 333 prophecies listed in the Bible. Assuming that the odds of passing any individual prophecy was 50%, Jesus would be nearly 10 points below average.

 

[thaumaturgy]

Well, I stand in awe.

Who would have thought that 109 was a mathematical proof! But there it is!

I like how his name, Emmanuel, matches up without error! Oh I can't count the number of times the KJV refers to him by that name in the New Testament--what like ONE TIME?

And then that part about him being from Nazareth! That's awe inspiring too! Who cares about subtleties like "nazarite" vs "nazarene"?

109, 109, that's the number that's so divine!

Did you know that he also fulfilled the prophecy

[bible]Psalm 15:1[/bible]

Clearly!

And, not to mention

[bible]Proverbs 8:1-3[/bible]

And then there's

[bible]Proverbs 11:1[/bible]

Ooops, that's not a prophecy. That's just God's Declaration of ISO 9000 Certification.

But you get the point. I bet there's over a billion prophecies Jesus fulfilled. You could probably even go through and randomly grab every 3rd word from every Book of the O.T. and there'd be ANOTHER prophecy! And it would be fulfilled!

Selah.

Thanks for the link!

 

[automan]

I remember reading how a Muslim was asked how old he had been when he decided to become a Muslim,
he said he had chosen Islam when he was sixteen, he was then asked if he had any knowledge of other religions,
and he said that he hadn't but also said he would have chosen Islam even if he had been brought up a Catholic
because Islam is the 'One true Faith'.

A sane mind 'Boggles' then blows apart at the sheer stupidity of this nonsense but I have a feeling this would
apply to every religion in the world and believers believe they would somehow find their way to the religion they have now no matter what religion they had been brought up in.

So everyone who is not captured by a religion should be afraid, be very afraid.

 

[AV1611VET]

So everyone who is not captured by a religion should be afraid, be very afraid.

Here is one of the most well-known portions of Scripture --- quoted from Joshua's farewell address:

[bible]Joshua 24:15[/bible]

 

[automan]

AV1611VET,
If you had been brought up a Muslim do you think you would have found your way to Christianity?

 

[Beastt]

Garnett,

I may I suggest you take a look at some of my past postings before you make a statement like this?

If you don't want to, that's fine.

I've handled this subject --- in depth.

Suffice it to say I have shown mathematically how the Bible is THE ONLY true Scriptures today.

And even though those I showed it to didn't agree with me - (which I didn't think they would) - I have nevertheless covered this more than once.

And don't wish to do it again right now.

Since you're being a bit vague and understandably showing some reluctance to post the same thing over and over, I can't be certain but I think I remember what it is to which you're referring. If I'm wrong I'll issue you a full apology but if I'm right, what you're talking about here is a post where you present a number of numerical facts/assertions about the Bible, and then proclaim that this somehow proves the Bible is the word of God or at least, correct in its assertions.

I don't recall all of the exact information but I do remember that you talked about the number of individual books in the Bible, the number of authors, the time span over which it was written, the number of languages employed, the number of continents and countries involved and other similar data.

If this is what you're referring to as mathematical proof that the Bible is the only true scripture today, I have to point out to you that it's nothing of the sort. It's simply a collection of bits of information about the Bible, each with a numerical parameter, gathered into one post and presented. There isn't any math involved and it says absolutely zero about whether the Bible contains valid scripture or whether any other book does or doesn't contain valid scripture.

In fact, still working under the assumption that I know what it is you're claiming as "mathematical proof", I can do the same kind of thing to prove that Lance Armstrong, (an atheist), is actually the Messiah. Just look at the facts. He's the only man ever to win the Tour de France seven times and he did so consecutively. He dropped out of the Tour three of the first four times he rode it and two months after the last of those, he was diagnosed with testicular cancer. His X-Rays showed that he had 12-14 golf ball sized tumors in his lungs and 2 more in his brain. His chances of survival were less than 20% and his chance of winning the Tour around 0%. But Lance overcame those odds and went on to dominate what many consider to be the most difficult sporting event in the world.

Have I mathematically demonstrated anything here? Not really, unless you count that seven is a greater number than five which is the most Tours ever won by any other single rider. All I've done is take a series of numerically significant facts involving Lance and tied them all together in one post. This, like your post to which I refer, doesn't even involve math. It's just numbers. And it says nothing about why one might believe Lance is the Messiah or why they might believe he isn't, just as your posts demonstrate nothing about the value of the scripture in the Bible.

If one takes an honest approach, it would seem that having multiple authors not only doesn't add to the credibility of the Bible, but detracts from it. And that is especially true when those authors don't even agree on several points. Being assembled into one book from a series of texts doesn't exactly help its case either. It was written by many men (no women -- I guess God doesn't like women), over a long period of time and from a number of cultural backgrounds. And those cultural backgrounds come through in the vast differences between the God of the OT and the God of the NT who are supposed to be the same unchanging God.

Anyone could take any series of facts concerning the writing, editing and publishing of any book and try to assert that the numerically significant portion of those facts indicates anything they might wish to claim that it indicates. But any such assertion would be as quick to fail as is yours in this instance.

 

[Beastt]

There is a large group of us called Theistic evolutionists who recognize that Genesis is not meant to be taken entirely literally.

Then how is it to be taken? I'm forever seeing this non-literalist claim but so far, no one has presented any credible interpretation of the Bible which does anything other than avoid what the Bible says in favor of what they wish it said.

The fact is that the Bible says what it says and you simply can't defend against that. You can tell me what you think it's trying to say but you can't do so without changing what it says. When you do that, you're no longer defending the Bible; you're just defending yourself.

The Bible most clearly asserts each and every point I've presented and the only way to avoid that is to continually play word-substitution games, ignore entire parts of the scripture and exchange what the Bible actually says for things it doesn't say. But none-the-less, go ahead and give this your best shot. In fact, if you like you can just stick to the four major failings in the first 15-verses of Genesis. Open a new thread if you like or I can do it for you. If you want to assert that Genesis isn't to be taken literally, then you must present a non-literal interpretation which works in order for your claim to hold any credibility. Are you up to that?

You should put aside the interpretations others have given you and actually read what the book says someday. You just might be very surprised at how completely indefensible much of what you've been told actually is.

 

[Garnett]

In light of the responses AV1611VET, I can see why you were reluctant to post direct links to your "proofs" and it appears it's for exactly the same reasons other Creationists come on here and try to tell us about the latest Creationist book which contains watertight proofs for Creationism, but then can never cite any of those proofs – there aren't any. I think your posts and the replies they have generated – especially Beastt's – show this very clearly.

In light of the abject failure of all of your arguments in this debate I think it is fair to say that religion is a culturally indoctrinated phenomenon, and that the God worshipped by any religious follower is far more likely to be the concept chosen by their parents and peers, rather than any supernaturally ascribed belief.

Religion is a mundane cultural oddity infinitely more related to societal conventions – fitting in with your neighbours, getting along in your local business affairs - and mutually reassuring self-perpetuation and reinforcement of common views and perceptions rather than anything supernatural.

 

[flatworm]

I'm just wondering, AV1611VET- do you know what a mathematical proof looks like? There are many here who could explain it to you, myself among them.

 

[AV1611VET]

AV1611VET,
If you had been brought up a Muslim do you think you would have found your way to Christianity?

In view of the fact that Muslims find their way to Christianity all the time, I'll give Christianity credit and say YES to that.

 

[Pesto]

In view of the fact that Muslims find their way to Christianity all the time, I'll give Christianity credit and say YES to that.

So what? It happens the other way around, too.

 

[Pesto]

BTW, AV, your mathematical "proof" is one of the funniest things I've seen in a long time.

Anyone know if it's been "submitted"?

 

[automan]

AV1611VET, my heart goes out to you,
If I was thinking about becoming a Christian, an hour or so with you and your logic would most certainly
turn me off, I can understand why you will deny everything from here on in, you have invested a lot of
time and energy in your religion and the last thing you could ever bring yourself to do would be to see
it for what it is, but your ego will stop you from ever doing that, (imagine the kick in the teeth that would be)
so like it or not you are stuck with your religion until you die, I only hope you don't have second thoughts
just before you do, or worse, see it for the lie it is, your whole life would have been a waste of time,
you would have been just another sucker taken in by a promise.

So keep reading and quoting and blocking out anything that might make you think, and all you can do is hope you never see the light and never find out the truth and can go to your grave well and truly blinkered.

Good luck to you, I expect you are a nice person.

 

[automan]

AV1611VET,
If you had been brought up a Muslim do you think you would have found your way to Christianity?

I will ask the question again.

 

[AV1611VET]

I will ask the question again.

I will answer the question again --- yes.

 

[automan]

Then you are much further gone than I thought,
so much so you even defy logic in your denial of the truth, I find it so very sad, never mind,
Good luck to you.

 

[XTE]

[bible]Mark 11:22[/bible]

My dad took me to an American Baptist church when I was young. Later, when I turned 16, I chose to quit going to church altogether.

In the Navy, I married a Catholic girl.

Later, while contemplating becoming a Hare Krishna, my wife and I were led to the Lord, got saved, and have been serving Him ever since.

We are now both Independent Fundamental Baptists.

You are both now Walking Contradictions.

 

[RichardT]

You are both now Walking Contradictions.

how?