In news:ohtiovgoc7a4rlonc40q6bledmvfpnmpvq@4ax.com,
John W <john_weatherly47@yahoo.com> slavered, and posted this:

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 23:59:20 -0400, "Doug Semler"
<doug_semler@REMOVEMEwideopenwest.com> wrote:

In news:54dhovo05e6j7509f436r3cbdjscqundmd@4ax.com,
John <john_weatherly47@yahoo.com> slavered, and posted this:

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 12:53:53 GMT,

John W <john_weatherly47@yahoo.com> wrote:

kenny_tm_leong@yahoo.com (Kenny Leong) wrote:

And you will never see any evidence for God because you #1 aren't
looking and #2 you aren't interested.

Be careful, if you look to intently, you may see things that aren't
there. Even honest people are fooled when their desire to see
something exceeds their ability to discern.

There is a bundle of evidence in the Bible, but you just explain it
away. Why?

When the question is whether the contents of a book are accurate, you
cannot seriously present its contents as evidence, can you? If that
were the case, Iraq would indeed have WMD. Claims have to be supported
by evidence. Claims cannot be supported by themselves.

If you were aware of the fulfilled prophesies in the Old Testament,
you would know that you are wrong. For instance, the birthplace of
Christ was prophesied HUNDREDS of years before His birth. How did the
prophet know that? You say: "Well, it was written AFTERWARDS." That is
not proof. That is your opinion.

And if you knew anything of history, you would know that the Gospel
accounts of Jesus' birth are seriously flawed (J&M travelling for the
census, and of Herod's supposed Slaughter of Innocents). Not only were
these events not contemporaneous to each other, but the accounts given
and reasons thereto are plain WRONG.

I know about the Bible's history, and of the MANY attacks on the Bible
by those with no motive OTHER than to "disprove it." Why? Because it's
the most hated book on the planet!

I wasn't talking the Bible's history, I was talking about *ACTUAL* history.
The two accounts of Jesus' birth contradict known history. Herod's reign of
Judah was not contemporaneous with the Roman census under Quirinius, the
census of which the Bible speaks. Also, the reason for Joseph's travel to
Bethlehem is completely misrepresented in the Bible. Roman censuses cared
nothing about purported blood lines. They cared about where property was
held. Joseph would have travelled to the location at which he owned
property. Add that to the fact that Mary would not have been required to
travel with Joseph anyway, and you get a likelyhood that the events as
stated in the Bible did not happen. The two accounts would have had to
occurred at two completely different decades, and one of the accounts gets
the facts plain WRONG. A divinely inspired story WOULD NOT HAVE these
contradictions.

But getting back to the prophecy part. You have to remember that these
supposed prophecies were well known to the authors of the Gospels. You
also have to remember that the Gospels were written not only years after
the death of Jesus, but after the offshoot of Judaism called Christianity
started.

Christianity started with the calling of the 12.

Big deal. I don't care if it started with 12,000. The gospels were written
after some of the Epistles. And because of that, and the fact that they
were written after Jesus' death, the writings could easily have been "tuned"
to make them "fulfill" well known religious prophecies.

Besides which, the prophecies are so vague that they could fit quite a few
different interpretations. I would be more impressed if we found a tablet
in an archeological dig in Judah which explicitly said, "Thomas Jefferson
will write something called a Declaration of Independence about 2300 years
from this date." Assuming of course, that the tablet could be accurately
dated to circa 525 BCE.

Historically speaking, the Gospel accounts of the birth of Jesus

were more likely specifically written in an attempt to fulfill the
"prophecies" of the OT.

Suit yourself. You are one who chooses to not believe. And as I've
said, if there was a knock on your door, and you opened it to find
Jesus levitating 2 feet above the ground, and He showed you His scars,
and suddenly YOU were levitating 2 feet above the ground, YOU would go
back into your house, and slam the door, with a shout of "NOT
INTERESTED! GO AWAY!"

No. I never said such. I said personal "experiences" are not sufficient
proof. Now, if EVERYONE on the PLANET started levetating, I might actually
believe that.

And I am wasting my time.

And yet you continue to respond, albiet with ad hominums, appeals to
authority, and bigoted assumptions.

It is easy to shape current events in order to fulfill "prophecies."
Look what happened after the WTC attacks and how people attempted to
show that Nostradomus "prophecised" the attacks.

No answer here, I see.

We responded to that already sjonny. Try a new line, if you are
mentally capable.

And I am wasting my time.

FINALLY a sensible remark. I guess this belt fed bable gun fires 1
life round in every 250 blanks.

In alt.atheism on 12 Oct 2003 15:41:42 GMT, John W
<john_weatherly47@yahoo.com> let us all know that:

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 12:53:53 GMT,

John W <john_weatherly47@yahoo.com> wrote:

kenny_tm_leong@yahoo.com (Kenny Leong) wrote:

And you will never see any evidence for God because you #1 aren't
looking and #2 you aren't interested.

Be careful, if you look to intently, you may see things that aren't
there. Even honest people are fooled when their desire to see
something exceeds their ability to discern.

There is a bundle of evidence in the Bible, but you just explain it
away. Why?

When the question is whether the contents of a book are accurate, you
cannot seriously present its contents as evidence, can you? If that
were the case, Iraq would indeed have WMD. Claims have to be supported
by evidence. Claims cannot be supported by themselves.

In the matter of internal and external evidences, the Bible is indeed
unique. It contains prophesies that were fulfilled

None.

written. There are end times prophesies that have been being fulfilled
the past 200 years or so.

None.

In fact, if you read Revelation 1:1 and 1:3, you find the key
phrases "the time is at hand" and "things which must shortly come to
pass".

Now I don't know about you, but 1,900 or so years (Rev was
written between 90 and 120CE) is NOT a short time. (no, it's not
"god-time" either, so don't even try that cop-out).

The Bible can and DOES prove itself. Such as Daniel's accurate
prediction of the 3 world kingdoms/powers that would come AFTER his
(Babylon).

No such prophecy exists.

Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"

In article <2ctiov0r5urq630d11h7lcoof68mlabk28@4ax.com>, John W
<john_weatherly47@yahoo.com> wrote:

The Bible can and DOES prove itself. Such as Daniel's accurate
prediction of the 3 world kingdoms/powers that would come AFTER his
(Babylon). The 3 next world kingdoms were listed, in correct order,
and even precise details were given about each kingdom.

What utter garbage!!!!!!!!

All came true, and we KNOW Daniel was written before the events took
place.

Oh and it just kicked around for centuries without anyone except God
knowing what it was about? - Ptah! what NONSENSE

I could go on, but I know I'm wasting my time.

Your LIFE dear boy - you are wasting your LIFE!!!! - on this nonsensical
view of Christianity and of the Old Testament

In news:2ctiov0r5urq630d11h7lcoof68mlabk28@4ax.com,
John W <john_weatherly47@yahoo.com> slavered, and posted this:

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 12:53:53 GMT,

John W <john_weatherly47@yahoo.com> wrote:

kenny_tm_leong@yahoo.com (Kenny Leong) wrote:

And you will never see any evidence for God because you #1 aren't
looking and #2 you aren't interested.

Be careful, if you look to intently, you may see things that aren't
there. Even honest people are fooled when their desire to see
something exceeds their ability to discern.

There is a bundle of evidence in the Bible, but you just explain it
away. Why?

When the question is whether the contents of a book are accurate, you
cannot seriously present its contents as evidence, can you? If that
were the case, Iraq would indeed have WMD. Claims have to be supported
by evidence. Claims cannot be supported by themselves.

In the matter of internal and external evidences, the Bible is indeed
unique. It contains prophesies that were fulfilled while it was being
written. There are end times prophesies that have been being fulfilled
the past 200 years or so.

The Bible can and DOES prove itself. Such as Daniel's accurate
prediction of the 3 world kingdoms/powers that would come AFTER his
(Babylon). The 3 next world kingdoms were listed, in correct order,
and even precise details were given about each kingdom.

All came true, and we KNOW Daniel was written before the events took
place.

Since Daniel was written 2nd century BCE, you are wrong.

I could go on, but I know I'm wasting my time.

Since you are wrong, yes, you are wasting our time.