Symph
Active Member
- Jul 6, 2017
- 313
- 303
- 41
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
I'm just confused why you don't find the bible itself and it's preservation of existence more convincing, it makes me feel like you haven't seen a good presentation of all the factors involved that couldn't be coincidence. Like "It amazes me that a fiction book's prophesies being fulfilled by it's fictional squeal" If you can take a sentence like that seriously, you don't know anything about the origins of the bible.I am well aware of the prophesies Jesus fulfilled, but I am looking for evidence that can't have alternative explanations. In the words of some atheist person I don't remember (and again not my words) "It amazes me that a fiction book's prophesies being fulfilled by it's fictional squeal amazes people."
You see I looked to the Bible to see what kind of evidence God might present. God didn't tell the rich man "you should have just known" or "you should have asked for a sign" he said "you should have believed the prophets". What I am doing is asking the prophets, weighing the odds of lying, self delusion/exaggerated stories etc. vs it simply being the truth.
We're not talking about one book with one author that wrote things that can only be fulfilled in that book. No we can look through history and see that everything we find DOES correlate with the bible, but usually the bible gives the details that seem real, and the outside sources seem biased (making it sound like the pharoah or king at that time could do no wrong etc) There are texts from the early AD centuries from theologians trying to debunk Christ, but what they gave us is more evidence he existed, cause it just showed at that time even the opponents of this faith couldn't deny Jesus was real they just tried to prove he didn't rise from the dead.
We have historians like Josephus, who also corroborate with the texts, it's a history book no one can debunk and there's alot of bad history out there that's EASILY debunked, it's not easy to make a fake water tight historical account, and CERTAINLY not one written by different people who couldn't ensure it would stay untainted and pure over 1500 years but here it is, still changing lives, still not debunked, still the most talked about book on the planet.
I just feel like if this isn't hitting you as really compelling evidence, you're not thinking about it realistically. Can you think up a viable way they would have pulled off such a hoax? I made a joke in another thread like, "maybe it was time capsules, they finished one book then left a time capsule for a far of person 100 years from now to find that said "ok you gotta make it look like the assyrians took over this city ok? So make it real convincing we need proof for archaeologists to dig up years from now, but after that you're gonna need to leave another time capsule to keep this story going"
It just makes no sense. Can you think of a plausible way to do it? To not only make sure your books get written at the right time, in the right place, continue the right story, confirm each other, and on top of that leave behind all the physical evidence on the planet needed to confirm the stories with reality? How would they do that? Anyway, I just find it odd you say you've looked into but find it to be weak evidence, I'm gonna try to find a video.
Ok this may not be the best I don't have time to go through the whole thing but I THINK I've seen this series before and it's good, give it a shot!
Upvote
0