[_ Old Earth _] Arguments Creationists should Not use

[Wertbag]

Alot of tricky ones to know for sure. One I've seen often repeated is Isaiah 7 = virgin birth of Jesus:
14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Yet it clearly states his name is Immanuel not Jesus.

#2 Out of Egypt I called my Son: Hosea 11:1:
1 When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt

Clearly this is referring to the nation of israel as a child and Israel is being called out of Egypt. No mention of Jesus or the messiah.

#3 Messiah to be betrayed by one of His followers: Psalm 41:9
9 Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me. 10 But thou, O LORD, be merciful unto me, and raise me up, that I may requite them. 11 By this I know that thou favourest me, because mine enemy doth not triumph over me.

This is simply a prayer, reading before and after line 9 you see the writer talks about disease, war and other problems. No mention of Jesus or the messiah.

#4 Thirty pieces of silver: Zechariah 11:12
12 And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my price; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver. 13 And the LORD said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the LORD.

Not related to the money paid for Jesus.

I could muck around reading them all but it looks like my thoughts of tentitive connections was right. Most of the time the verses are not discussing the messiah, but the link is made for no valid reason.
A prophesy that would impress would state an event before its time, a person who will do something impressive or other major happening.
I'm not seeing that with the text on that site. Are there any big, clear prophesies that you can point to? Any that actually tell us something in advance?

The reason the Jews do not believe in Jesus is that he failed to fulfill the prophesies. There were several listed as things the messiah would do, which Jesus did not.

 

[Heidi]

Alot of tricky ones to know for sure. One I've seen often repeated is Isaiah 7 = virgin birth of Jesus:
14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Yet it clearly states his name is Immanuel not Jesus.

#2 Out of Egypt I called my Son: Hosea 11:1:
1 When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt

Clearly this is referring to the nation of israel as a child and Israel is being called out of Egypt. No mention of Jesus or the messiah.

#3 Messiah to be betrayed by one of His followers: Psalm 41:9
9 Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me. 10 But thou, O LORD, be merciful unto me, and raise me up, that I may requite them. 11 By this I know that thou favourest me, because mine enemy doth not triumph over me.

This is simply a prayer, reading before and after line 9 you see the writer talks about disease, war and other problems. No mention of Jesus or the messiah.

#4 Thirty pieces of silver: Zechariah 11:12
12 And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my price; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver. 13 And the LORD said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the LORD.

Not related to the money paid for Jesus.

I could muck around reading them all but it looks like my thoughts of tentitive connections was right. Most of the time the verses are not discussing the messiah, but the link is made for no valid reason.
A prophesy that would impress would state an event before its time, a person who will do something impressive or other major happening.
I'm not seeing that with the text on that site. Are there any big, clear prophesies that you can point to? Any that actually tell us something in advance?

The reason the Jews do not believe in Jesus is that he failed to fulfill the prophesies. There were several listed as things the messiah would do, which Jesus did not.

So you think that when someone prophesied that a person would be born of a virgin, then that's not as important as what his name was? :o Jesus and Immanuel mean the same thing. often referred to as Immanuel.

Did jesus not triumph over death? :o How does that not refer to Jesus?

The 30 pieces of silver that betrayed Jesus were used to buy a field called the "potter's" field which still exists today. So the prophesy is accurate. But you think saying " no it's not" makes it not accurate? :o Sorry, but you need evidence for your statements, not just vaccuous statements.

The Jews were not looking for a spiritual messiah but an earthly messiah who would rescue them from their enemies. They're still looking for him today. In addition, the bible said that God will blind their eyes for a while, which is also happeneing to this day.

It seems that you are mucking around because you haven't given one valid reason why these aren't prophesies. "Because I say so" doesn't mean a thing. But...if you think you know better than Jesus what the truth is, then by all means, pass your wisdom along to others, But you will also be hled accountable for the lives you affect in doing so. God will not be mocked, my friend. And that is a guarantee. :wink:

 

[armed2010]

Heidi, "because I say so" doesn't make the prophecies real either. Metaphors that can be stretched to fit future events doesn't neccisarily make a prophecy.

 

[Wertbag]

Of course there is a more indepth reason why we shouldn't accept a prophecy where the name given is completely different to the person you are trying to apply it to.
Isaiah's prophecy was that the child Immanuel was to have been born in 742 BC, the first year of King Ahaz's reign. Ahaz, the king of Judah, faced the combined armies of Syria and Israel. Isaiah explained to Ahaz that he should not form an alliance with Assyria. In support of this advice, God would provide a sign: a young woman would conceive and bear a child who would be named Immanuel. The sign would have only have been effective if it happened almost immediately. It would not have given a lot of support to Isaiah's prophecy if more than seven centuries passed before it was fulfilled, over 700 years after King Ahaz' death.
Luke 1 states that Mary would call her son Yeshua (Jesus in Greek). He is called Yeshua throughout the Christian Scriptures -- not Immanuel.
Immanuel means "God is with us" while Jesus means "God saves". The two names are not the same.

It is simply wishful thinking to link such a statement with Jesus centuries later.

 

[Heidi]

Heidi, "because I say so" doesn't make the prophecies real either. Metaphors that can be stretched to fit future events doesn't neccisarily make a prophecy.

The fact of the matter is that Jesus was born of a virgin which was prophesied thousands of years before he walked on the earth. It's also true that Jesus was betrayed for 30 pieces of silver and the Jews used it to buy the Potter's field which still exists today. Jesus did triumph over death and the Jews are still looking for someone to rescue them.

So the prophecies are all true, friend. And again, saying that the bible is lying is simply a lie. It's all done to try to get rid of Christ just as the Jews tried to. But he only came back stronger which he always does.

 

[reznwerks]

prophet

Heidi, "because I say so" doesn't make the prophecies real either. Metaphors that can be stretched to fit future events doesn't neccisarily make a prophecy.

The fact of the matter is that Jesus was born of a virgin which was prophesied thousands of years before he walked on the earth.
Please cite the prophecy and also consider that if true Joseph was not the father which means Jesus did not fulfill the Messianic prophecy of being decended from David. You can't have it both ways.

It's also true that Jesus was betrayed for 30 pieces of silver and the Jews used it to buy the Potter's field which still exists today.
This story is in the bible only and there is no "potters field". Potters field are all over the world and are used to bury undesirables and unknowns.

Jesus did triumph over death and the Jews are still looking for someone to rescue them.
The Jews don't accept Jesus because he fulfilled none of the Messianic prophecies and that is why they are still waiting for a savior. In reality I think they have found several in every American president since FDR.

So the prophecies are all true, friend.
Those prophecies you refer to are not and were not prophecies at the time and if you did you homework and read the chapter in full you would understand this. If they were prophecied they would be included in the Messianic prophecies don't you think. The Messianic prophecies are well known. So why don't you think the prophecies you refer too aren't included in these? Could it be that the passages were "pulled" out at a later date to make it look like prophecy? If Jesus was who he is claimed to be the Jews could not deny it. After all the scribes would be hanging on his coattails for attention and special favor if not everlasting life itself. How could they deny the miracles if they occurred? You would have to be nuts to ignore the fantastic events if they really occurred. So not only do you want us to believe a few people rejected Jesus but the whole Hebrew nation. Christianity didn't become popular by converting Jews to Christianity but by convincing the pagans outside to convert which Jesus plainly said he did not come for.


And again, saying that the bible is lying is simply a lie. It's all done to try to get rid of Christ just as the Jews tried to.
Outside of the bible there is no evidence the Jews did any such thing.

 

[Heidi]

Re: prophet

Heidi, "because I say so" doesn't make the prophecies real either. Metaphors that can be stretched to fit future events doesn't neccisarily make a prophecy.

The fact of the matter is that Jesus was born of a virgin which was prophesied thousands of years before he walked on the earth.
Please cite the prophecy and also consider that if true Joseph was not the father which means Jesus did not fulfill the Messianic prophecy of being decended from David. You can't have it both ways.

It's also true that Jesus was betrayed for 30 pieces of silver and the Jews used it to buy the Potter's field which still exists today.
This story is in the bible only and there is no "potters field". Potters field are all over the world and are used to bury undesirables and unknowns.

Jesus did triumph over death and the Jews are still looking for someone to rescue them.
The Jews don't accept Jesus because he fulfilled none of the Messianic prophecies and that is why they are still waiting for a savior. In reality I think they have found several in every American president since FDR.

So the prophecies are all true, friend.
Those prophecies you refer to are not and were not prophecies at the time and if you did you homework and read the chapter in full you would understand this. If they were prophecied they would be included in the Messianic prophecies don't you think. The Messianic prophecies are well known. So why don't you think the prophecies you refer too aren't included in these? Could it be that the passages were "pulled" out at a later date to make it look like prophecy? If Jesus was who he is claimed to be the Jews could not deny it. After all the scribes would be hanging on his coattails for attention and special favor if not everlasting life itself. How could they deny the miracles if they occurred? You would have to be nuts to ignore the fantastic events if they really occurred. So not only do you want us to believe a few people rejected Jesus but the whole Hebrew nation. Christianity didn't become popular by converting Jews to Christianity but by convincing the pagans outside to convert which Jesus plainly said he did not come for.


And again, saying that the bible is lying is simply a lie. It's all done to try to get rid of Christ just as the Jews tried to.
Outside of the bible there is no evidence the Jews did any such thing.

8-) Then what did happen in Jerusalem during the time that Jesus would have lived? :o Please show some credibility for your statements.

 

[reznwerks]

Re: prophet

Heidi, "because I say so" doesn't make the prophecies real either. Metaphors that can be stretched to fit future events doesn't neccisarily make a prophecy.

The fact of the matter is that Jesus was born of a virgin which was prophesied thousands of years before he walked on the earth.
Please cite the prophecy and also consider that if true Joseph was not the father which means Jesus did not fulfill the Messianic prophecy of being decended from David. You can't have it both ways.

It's also true that Jesus was betrayed for 30 pieces of silver and the Jews used it to buy the Potter's field which still exists today.
This story is in the bible only and there is no "potters field". Potters field are all over the world and are used to bury undesirables and unknowns.

Jesus did triumph over death and the Jews are still looking for someone to rescue them.
The Jews don't accept Jesus because he fulfilled none of the Messianic prophecies and that is why they are still waiting for a savior. In reality I think they have found several in every American president since FDR.

So the prophecies are all true, friend.
Those prophecies you refer to are not and were not prophecies at the time and if you did you homework and read the chapter in full you would understand this. If they were prophecied they would be included in the Messianic prophecies don't you think. The Messianic prophecies are well known. So why don't you think the prophecies you refer too aren't included in these? Could it be that the passages were "pulled" out at a later date to make it look like prophecy? If Jesus was who he is claimed to be the Jews could not deny it. After all the scribes would be hanging on his coattails for attention and special favor if not everlasting life itself. How could they deny the miracles if they occurred? You would have to be nuts to ignore the fantastic events if they really occurred. So not only do you want us to believe a few people rejected Jesus but the whole Hebrew nation. Christianity didn't become popular by converting Jews to Christianity but by convincing the pagans outside to convert which Jesus plainly said he did not come for.


And again, saying that the bible is lying is simply a lie. It's all done to try to get rid of Christ just as the Jews tried to.
Outside of the bible there is no evidence the Jews did any such thing.

8-) Then what did happen in Jerusalem during the time that Jesus would have lived? :o Please show some credibility for your statements.

I haven't a clue. Why did something have to happen? Outside the bible, history records nothing special happened. Maybe this is a good sign. You are finally asking some questions. Maybe you have the answer to the question you posted. (without using the bible)

 

[Heidi]

If you have no clue what did happen, then where's your proof that the authors of the bible are liars? :o Since you claim facts are paramount to you beliefs, then please provide some.

 

[Frost Giant]

Why do we have to know exactly what happened in place of the Bible?

 

[Heidi]

Why do we have to know exactly what happened in place of the Bible?

Why would you claim someone is lying if you have no facts to prove he is? :o Do you like to go around and call people liars even though you have no proof of it? If so, why? That's called slander. I don't have the audacity to call people liars, nor the inclination to do so unless I have facts first. Otherwise it's nothing but malicious slander.

 

[WillyGilligan]

Well, to be totally accurate, you have been claiming that everyone who disagrees with your particular beliefs knows the truth but is lying out of rebelliousness. Isn't that slander, by the same token?

 

[Heidi]

Well, to be totally accurate, you have been claiming that everyone who disagrees with your particular beliefs knows the truth but is lying out of rebelliousness. Isn't that slander, by the same token?

No, only those who disagree with reality. :wink: Reality shows that each animal breeds its own kind unless they have the capacity to mate with other animals, and that humans rule over the animals. But evolutionists contradict that reality so I will not agree with them. :wink:

Slander is only possible when one has no prrof that others are lying. But again, reality proves that evolutionists are lying so that is not slander. It is the truth that evolutionists are lying, which I have proven by reality. The truth can only be found in reality, my friend, not in the imaginations of men. :wink:

 

[WillyGilligan]

Actually, that wasn't about evolution. You make that claim whenever talking about people disagreeing with Christianity or your interpretation of the bible. You say that they know the truth, but are choosing to ignore it. Without actually readinng someone's mind you can't know what they "know". Therefore, your claim is without foundation. As I said, just to be technically accurate.

And you still haven't answered the fact that miraculous claims require miraculous proof.

 

[Frost Giant]

Why would you claim someone is lying if you have no facts to prove he is? :o Do you like to go around and call people liars even though you have no proof of it? If so, why? That's called slander. I don't have the audacity to call people liars, nor the inclination to do so unless I have facts first. Otherwise it's nothing but malicious slander.

It's called "Burden of Proof". You find evidence to support the Bible or the default position is that it is wrong.

 

[reznwerks]

what happened

If you have no clue what did happen, then where's your proof that the authors of the bible are liars? :o Since you claim facts are paramount to you beliefs, then please provide some.

Do you know everything that happened in every nook and cranny in the world? There are days when nothing earth shattering took place. If no one recorded anything then nothing earth shattering took place. That in itself should be a wake up call for you and something I have been trying to get across to you. Outside the bible NO ONE records anything at the time you are referencing.

 

[reznwerks]

proof

Why do we have to know exactly what happened in place of the Bible?

Why would you claim someone is lying if you have no facts to prove he is? :o Do you like to go around and call people liars even though you have no proof of it? If so, why?
You are the one who is making claims of certain events and certain persons. It is up to YOU to back it up and not me to disprove it. Sooner or later you will understand what proving a negative is.


That's called slander.
No , get a dictionary. Slander is when you damage anothers character by spreading falsehoods.

I don't have the audacity to call people liars, nor the inclination to do so unless I have facts first. Otherwise it's nothing but malicious slander.
Are you still in school or did you skip a lot of classes. No one is calling you a liar. We are only asking you to back your claims with first hand evidence that doesn't include the bible. If these fantastic events occurred it should be a piece of cake.

 

[reznwerks]

reality

Well, to be totally accurate, you have been claiming that everyone who disagrees with your particular beliefs knows the truth but is lying out of rebelliousness. Isn't that slander, by the same token?

No, only those who disagree with reality.
How would you categorize this statement? Faith is the evidence of things NOT SEEN.

:wink: Reality shows that each animal breeds its own kind unless they have the capacity to mate with other animals, and that humans rule over the animals.
A better statement is that each animal breed its own kind and will evolve to suit its environment which man has done.


But evolutionists contradict that reality so I will not agree with them. :wink:
[/color=blue] No. evolutionists only support that reality. They have observed through the mountains of evidence and testing how certain primates have evolved throughout the ages confirming what you have said.[/color]

Slander is only possible when one has no prrof that others are lying.
You really need to get back to class. The dictionary is the BIG book on the shelf.

But again, reality proves that evolutionists are lying so that is not slander.
No. reality is the evidence that evolutionists have found that prove they are not the ones lying.

It is the truth that evolutionists are lying, which I have proven by reality.
Is this real reality or your own reality?

The truth can only be found in reality, my friend, not in the imaginations of men. :wink:
Then why does all the evidence say evolutionists are right?

 

[Wertbag]

Why would you claim someone is lying if you have no facts to prove he is?

You should be saying this the other way around. Why would you believe someone is telling the truth if they can't prove it?
If someone comes upto you and said "I rode a unicorn this morning!", you have no way to prove him wrong, but logically would jump to the conclusion that hes A - lying, B - confused, or C - insane.
Do not blindly accept ridiculous claims. If the claim breaks the natural laws and makes no sense then it should make you think "Hang on this doesn't sound right". Apply that thinking to the Bible and you will understand the atheist viewpoint.

 

[armed2010]

Why would you claim someone is lying if you have no facts to prove he is?

You should be saying this the other way around. Why would you believe someone is telling the truth if they can't prove it?
If someone comes upto you and said "I rode a unicorn this morning!", you have no way to prove him wrong, but logically would jump to the conclusion that hes A - lying, B - confused, or C - insane.
Do not blindly accept ridiculous claims. If the claim breaks the natural laws and makes no sense then it should make you think "Hang on this doesn't sound right". Apply that thinking to the Bible and you will understand the atheist viewpoint.

But he said that he rode a unicorn this morning. Do you have any different accounts of what he did that morning? If this is the only account that you have of what he did, then clearly he must have rode a unicorn this morning. Are you saying that he is a liar? That is libel and slander my good sir, and he is innocent until proven guilty.