Does the following pro god argument stand up to scrutiny:?
Does the following pro god argument stand up to scrutiny?
Posts
Total:
20
-->
@TheUnderdog
Trouble is.......What is there to scrutinize.
I do not see or hear any 3000 year old Hebrew songs.
All that I see is Chinese whispers.
Nonetheless:
Do prophecies foretell events.....Or do events befit prophecies?
-->
@TheUnderdog
Does the following pro god argument stand up to scrutiny:?
Hi the Underdog,
thanks for your post. It seems the argument is that an event was prophesied reasonably accurately, therefore God exists.
Let's break that up a little. The argument indicates that humans cannot predict the future specifically and accurately.
This may or may not be the truth. humans predict the future all of the time. this is called cause and effect. Does the Jesus narrative fit within this cause and effect narrative? It is difficult to say. After all, if David existed, and prophesied that someone in the future would be pierced by a sword after being nailed to a cross, it pretty much accounts for half of the Roman slaves who died on the cross. But would David know and understand a cross with its piercings? Good question. Probably unlikely.
The writers of the gospels of course knew the Jewish bibles and would have been able to fit its narrative with whatever story they had in their own time. It is an intriguing thought though - why would David have been thinking about Roman Crosses - when the Romans were not in power then - and the crucifix had not been invented.
The rest of the prophecies mentioned however seemed general - and even though the gospel writers pick up on them - it does not follow that they were not simply added to assist in the building of the story.
What is interesting is the Roman Cross. That is the intriguing part. How can a Jewish King predict and almost provide an emotional experience of the cross?
But this does not prove God. It only proves that David had a vivid imagination. After all, many of our modern day writers - take star wars, star trek, etc, hunger games, have vivid imaginations. Who is to say that our world will not end up in some kind of similar universe? And if we do, does it mean that these guys who wrote these stories were divinely inspired by God? Hardly. We would call it imagination and coincidence.
That is all we can really get from David's writings - vivid imagination and coincidence.
The cross is interesting though.
-->
@TheUnderdog
1. Messianic prophecies
Of course the guy the book is about is going to fulfill the narrative laid out for him earlier in the book.
2. Tyre
All of these "prophecies" lack one crucial thing, an expiration date. So they aren't actually prochecies. Neb did not sack Tyre as you pointed out, he sacked the former city.
Also, suppose all of these are true for a moment, that would only prove the Bible has made predictions without an expiration date, about things that could be vaguely attributed to it's predictions. None of these indicate in any way that a god exists.
-->
@Sum1hugme
@Timid8967
Both of you made good points, I'll think about it.
-->
@Sum1hugme
All of these "prophecies" lack one crucial thing, an expiration date.
I don't think keeping track of time was a big concept when David was around because the calendar was invented after David was alive.
-->
@TheUnderdog
ln order to be a prophecy, it has to have a deadline, otherwise given enough time, anything can happen. The ancients typically used a lunar calendar that they had to readjust every few years or so. So these were not prochecies, just vague predictions. If Tyre had just gotten old after a couple thousand years and crumbled into the sea yesterday, you would draw a bullseye around that and say it was the prophecy being fulfilled.
-->
@Sum1hugme
Good point; I change my religious stance a lot. It's always good to be learning.
-->
@TheUnderdog
In this opening, I have proven that 4 prophecies of the bible have been fulfilled.
This, from your citation. Although I personally believe Christ has fulfilled these OT prophecies, your "proof" fails because we have not one shred of evidence of original text from David, or any other OT writer, so, who's to say that these prophesies are not written after the advent of Christ, and merely composed to bolster his position and purpose? After all, we don't even have the example of a canonized Bible until a mere 1800 years ago; the Muratorian Canon. And certainly not a canon that the ordinary person could hold in his hands until 600 years ago. The point is, there is a better source of the knowledge of Christ than bashing scriptures back and forth. What do you think that more sure knowledge is?
-->
@zedvictor4
Chinese whispers.
Not familiar with that idiom. From whence is it? I think I get the point, but I'd appreciate being enlightened.
Never mind, I forgot, I have the world at my fingertips. Of course, Google must be verified by a few consistent sources to be certain someone does not have a wild hair up the arse...
Wow, that won't fly in today's racially-sensitive society where just about anything is a racial slur. That's a good idiom, though, understandable in its historic context when few outside of China spoke Chinese. For all it matters to us Yanks, who have, historically, thought that no one needed any other language but English, and we even borrowed that! - anybody's whispers would do!
8 days later
-->
@Timid8967
if David existed,
Did he exist though? You can't seem your make up your mind, and you tell us that you don't believe the bible, #18 don't you? Not to mention that you also tell us that ;
"As for the bible - yes I have read it. Not suggesting i know it well and I don't pretend to understand it. It is quite confusing and to me contradictory". #186
and prophesied that someone in the future would be pierced by a sword after being nailed to a cross,
But was it David's prophecy? You haven't established that yet? Nor established if he lived. And are you sure that the prophecy was speaking of Jesus? How do you know? Or are you just relying on what could be a rare coincidence?
it pretty much accounts for half of the Roman slaves who died on the cross. But would David know and understand a cross with its piercings? Good question. Probably unlikely.
So by this are you suggesting that David ( who may or may not have existed)was somehow seeing into the future and referring to Jesus being crucified and speared while hanging there on the cross some 1070 + years in the future?
The writers of the gospels of course knew the Jewish bibles and would have been able to fit its narrative with whatever story they had in their own time.
Yes they certainly would have , wouldn't they? This probably accounts for those contradictions you mentioned here#186
Why would David have been thinking about Roman Crosses - when the Romans were not in power then - and the crucifix had not been invented.
But it is not certain he was thinking "roman" crosses" is it? Crucifixion was by all accounts not a Roman invention, but a Persian invention of torture? But please feel free to correct me on that.
What is interesting is the Roman Cross. That is the intriguing part. How can a Jewish King predict and almost provide an emotional experience of the cross?
I think you are trying to press a point without admitting it. Simply say so. Do you believe the psalm was a "prophesy" pertaining to Jesus in the future or not?
But this does not prove God. It only proves that David had a vivid imagination.
So are you saying that is all it was, "a vivid imagination" on Davids behalf - if he existed of course.
That is all we can really get from David's writings - vivid imagination and coincidence.
Ah there it is. It was all Davids imagination... But do we know for sure that those Psalms were written by King David. You are not even convinced that he even existed are you?
Personally, I find it odd that a once simple "shepherd boy" could read or write in the first place. But that is just me.
-->
@Timid8967
It is an intriguing thought though - why would David have been thinking about Roman Crosses - when the Romans were not in power then - and the crucifix had not been invented.
Why does Psalm 22 make you think the author was thinking about crosses? Just because it says "they pierced my hands and my feet"?
This part of the passage in particular is pretty murky, translation-wise. Apparently, if you translate it literally from Hebrew into English, it comes out like:
- "Like a lion my hands and feet."
This doesn't make much sense as-is, so it's been translated various ways:
- Early Rabbinical paraphrases were something like, "They bite my hands and feet like a lion."
- The Septuagint translated it as, "They dug my hands and my feet."
- The JPS Tanakh has it as, "Like a lion they are at my hands and feet."
- And the NRSV, the version most biblical scholars use, translates it, for some reason, as "My hands and my feet have shriveled." While leaving the footnote: "Textually obscure; Meaning of Heb uncertain."
So, taking this and the entire verse into account, I'm just getting the image of a man being encircled by attackers who assault his hands and feet "like a lion" as they menace him.
This definitely doesn't put me in mind of crosses or crucifixion.
-->
@Castin
It is an intriguing thought though - why would David have been thinking about Roman Crosses - when the Romans were not in power then - and the crucifix had not been invented.Why does Psalm 22 make you think the author was thinking about crosses? Just because it says "they pierced my hands and my feet"?This part of the passage in particular is pretty murky, translation-wise. Apparently, if you translate it literally from Hebrew into English, it comes out like:
- "Like a lion my hands and feet."
This doesn't make much sense as-is, so it's been translated various ways:
- Early Rabbinical paraphrases were something like, "They bite my hands and feet like a lion."
- The Septuagint translated it as, "They dug my hands and my feet."
- The JPS Tanakh has it as, "Like a lion they are at my hands and feet."
- And the NRSV, the version most biblical scholars use, translates it, for some reason, as "My hands and my feet have shriveled." While leaving the footnote: "Textually obscure; Meaning of Heb uncertain."
So, taking this and the entire verse into account, I'm just getting the image of a man being encircled by attackers who assault his hands and feet "like a lion" as they menace him.This definitely doesn't put me in mind of crosses or crucifixion.
Interesting point. Probably, I jumped to a link about crosses that was not there. Not hard to do when you grow up in a country that sings these songs every xmas and easter.
Thanks.
-->
@Stephen
I have nothing to add to your opinion.
You make total sense as always.
-->
@Timid8967
I have nothing to add to your opinion.
Well it appears to me that you were pressing a point with King David and his psalm as if you believe King David had predicted the Christ Jesus' suffering on the Cross?
Is that what you are saying or not?
If you do have reason to believe that then you won't discard what else he says in his psalms will you? Such as the Christ Jesus will never be harmed at all, by anyone or anything. Which could lead one to believe that Jesus didn't die on the cross after all? Couldn't it?
And didn't Satan say to Jesus "it is written that the angels will save you if you toss yourself off a roof or high place"? Matthew 4:6 Well that certainly would fit with what the Psalms of King David says, now wouldn't it?
After all , why would you choose to believe one psalm supposedly written by King David and not believe another? That would-be "cherry picking" wouldn't it?
You do know these psalms don't you? Although you tell us that you only read it once you regard the bible as just another book among many in the world? :
Yes here we are:
Timid8967 wrote: "why you would think I would believe the bible. It is a book,much like many books in the world. It is full of myths and legends.And other stuff." #240
and that you " found it to be unbelievable and contradictory"?#186
Interesting what you said there about it being "contradictory". Because as I have pointed out, one psalm written by king David clearly appears to contradict another psalm said to be written by him doesn't it?
But then you do tell us that you also find the bible "confusing " too, don't you, `Tim `?
-->
@Stephen
There is a difference between believing the bible to be true or false as opposed to understanding what any particular author is attempting to say.
I don't believe the Manifesto Communist by Marx either - yet I can understand what he is attempting to say. I can say that I believe he is trying to say such a thing - without saying I believe it is true.
When I referred to David, who traditionally is the author of the Psalms, as referring to a Roman Cross, it did intrigue me. Yet, Castin informed me that others back in David's time also talked about crosses, not necessarily Roman Crosses. I think Castin makes a valid point. My error in history was revealed to me and now I am less ignorant. I really don't care about the rest of your post.
-->
@Timid8967
There is a difference between believing the bible to be true or false as opposed to understanding what any particular author is attempting to say.
So what is it that you believe King David is trying to convey to his readers?
I don't believe the Manifesto Communist by Marx either - yet I can understand what he is attempting to say.
So you don't find these psalm confusing at all then? That is great news. So explain then what it is you believe that King David IS actually conveying to his readers .
I can say that I believe he is trying to say such a thing - without saying I believe it is true.
Of course you can. But what is it that he says in this psalm that causes you to believe that he is speaking and predicting the Christ Jesus' suffering on the Cross?
When I referred to David, who traditionally is the author of the Psalms, as referring to a Roman Cross, it did intrigue me.
And this "intrigue" caused you to automatically believe King David was talking about the Christ Jesus' suffering on the Cross at the hands of the Romans some 1070 + years in the future?
Yet, Castin informed me that others back in David's time also talked about crosses, not necessarily Roman Crosses.
So did I and before Castin did at post 12. But you ignored my point of crosses and crucifixion ;
I wrote: "But it is not certain he was thinking "roman" crosses" is it? Crucifixion was by all accounts not a Roman invention, but a Persian invention of torture? But please feel free to correct me on that. #11
I think Castin makes a valid point.
As did I and before Castin. The difference is that both Castin and I knew and you didn't. This maybe because of your dismissive attitude towards the scriptures?
I really don't care about the rest of your post. My error in history was revealed to me and now I am less ignorant.
Of course you don't. Because you are still as ignorant. And your "error" was revealed to you by me, sunshine.
-->
@Stephen
The real god is more of a bystander who sometimes intervenes, we are like an enjoyable television show or experiment to them (I don't feel it's appropriate to call god an 'it', I'd say her as I find god to be more feminine than masculine however I would say they/them if we discuss 'sex' as opposed to gender).
The real god(dess) isn't concerned with being evil hut also isn't concerned with being entirely benevolent. I am certain she/they experimented a while back and realise it's boring as fuck to have a world where everyone is always kind and predictably selfless, even for the humans involved.
-->
@Timid8967
The real god is more of a bystander who sometimes intervenes,
What is or who is "the real god"? And do you have any examples of this"real god" intervening in human affairs?
-->
@TheUnderdog
I like the attmept but i'll always find this dumb or short of the point... all these impressive "i'm a debator" good argument stuff sours my taste overall. The best argument to me has always been we are real. Humans, consciousness, intelligence... is real in a seemingly infinite setting. That is insane. It's like asking someone if there are aliens. They will say for sure, at the very least, something even non-intelligent somewhere in the universe bc why? Bc we are real. And the universe is huge... well, infinity is huge, and our minds are real... that is insane to me. We are real, we exists... in infinity. So the god of the Bible is serisoulsy an ant god compared to the other gods/realities that could exist.