Mexi-Melt... Dar helps a fundie with his Bible

[Dardedar]

I have been having an extensive exchange with an evangelical Christian over on Phil's Skeptic Money for several weeks now. This fellow popped in with some standard Christian material and I decided to give it a good unpack. My posts are 15,200 words so far. It's a little muddled the way his pages work over there and a bunch of the earlier posts seem to be gone (I have backup copies). I don't like that.

I see now that everything before January 31 isn't there or can't be found (actually, I see that after doing another post, the earlier ones are visible again).

Anyway, this exchange includes a lot of data, and good information about the Bible so I am going to cross post all of my responses to him, from the beginning, over here on our bullet proof, works every goddamn time, site. He calls himself "Mexseiko" but I call him "MEX" for shorthand. I've invited him over here.

From: "Johnny Depp’s New Xmas Song Makes Fun Of Jesus – “jesus Stag Night Club” (although these exchanges have nothing to do with the topic of the post)

***
I think Mex needs a little instruction. I'll abide.

MEX: "Now, Christianity,... founders are inspired and quote material mostly written 400, 500, and 700 BC.">>

Christianity is a Jewish heresy, just like Mormons and countless other sects borrow from Christianity as it suits them. Standard religion recycling. Christianity now has about 30,000 divisions. This is what religions do.

MEX: "Jesus story is full of facts that were foretold in these quoted material known as the Old Testament.">>

There are no references to Jesus or prophecies of him in the Hebrew Scriptures. These are made up by zealous Christians who can't read their Bibles right and are lied to by fundie preachers. These prophecy claims are not taken seriously by Jews or Bible scholars (including Christian ones). We do know however that these NT writers had the Hebrew Scriptures before them and tried to write their Jesus story to fulfill certain things. But since they made mistakes (examples upon request), we know they were fudging it, repeatedly.

MEX: "The Bible uses prophesy or foretelling mostly as proof of it coming from God">>

There are no supernaturally fulfilled Bible prophecies, not one (there are however many false and failed prophecies). None of your examples can withstand examination. Present them in our forum, or here, and I'll roast them, as time allows.

index.php

MEX: "Jesus fulfills around 300 Messianic references.">>

Rubbish, he fulfilled none. Funny how Jews, (who wrote your book from beginning to end), think he fulfilled zero.

MEX: "A calculation of probabilities to meet just 2 of those prophesies is astronomical">>

Even if you could verify a fulfilled prophecy, and you can't, there are no astronomical odds when the people spinning your Jesus story have access to data mine the Hebrew Scriptures. Your problem is there is not a single contemporary testimony from anyone outside your anonymous, hearsay gospels stories written expressly for the purpose that "you might believe." That's not a fulfilled prophecy, that's cooking the books.

MEX: "The description in Isaiah 53 alone is met by only one person, Jesus.">>

Your understanding of Is. 53 is based upon your untenable fundamentalist misreading of scripture. Try that one and I'll rip it to shreds.

MEX: "nowhere in any of the books considered part of the Bible is the date of Jesus’ birth explicitly revealed.">>

Oh it's far worse than that. Not only do you not know the day, month, year he was born, you don't even know the decade (or should I say century?).

MEX: "There is internal information that has been used to reach to an October 10th">>

Pure nonsense.

MEX: "December 25th may’ve been a later development, perhaps to drawn pagan...">>

Of course it was. Son god on solstice, how quaint. And predictable.

MEX: "The Bible was written by 40 men in a span of 1,600 years.">>

All of the authors are unknown except for Paul, and he never met Jesus, except in a dream and dreams don't count.

MEX: "All the books are knit together with references that tie it all together.">>

It's called editing, and we know the different sources and how they stitched it all together (See "Who Wrote the Bible" by Richard Elliot Friedman for an excellent introduction to this). It was nice of them to leave all of those contradictions in there. Reveals its purely human origin. I would think a God might have been able to get his story straight. The Bible doesn't.

MEX: "Compare Scripture with Scripture.">>

That actually is my specialty. When I compare scripture to scripture, I find contradictions. I even wrote a book about it. Let me know if you would like some examples.

collector of fine Bible errors and contradictions,

Darrel

***

MEX: "Isaiah 53 not only prophesies Jesus, but the perspective is one of Jewish repentance for their rejection of the true Messiah.">>

You can demonstrate no supernaturally fulfilled prophecies because you can confirm not a single event of Jesus' life outside of the anonymous, second hand, hearsay gospels. So you can't get any fulfillment off the ground. That these unknown gospel writers, who admittedly never met Jesus, were writing their stories to echo stories they read in the Hebrew Scriptures is certain (Matt. was especially fond of this). This is known as Jewish midrash. The Bible is filled with rewriting, midrash, of earlier stories and legends. Learn about midrash here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash

For years our skeptic group the Fayetteville Freethinkers have offered a challenge for someone to establish an example of a supernaturally fulfilled Bible prophecy. You can read about this here:
http://fayfreethinkers.com/tracts/bible ... ward.shtml

MEX: "Isaiah 53, written in the 700s, prophesies Jesus while at the same time shows that the Jews will eventually acknowledge Him">>

Which the Jews obviously didn't. Nor do they acknowledge that this verse is fulfilled by Jesus. They know that The "servant" of Isaiah 53 is the same figure presented in terms of "suffering and glorification" throughout Isaiah 40-55: and that is... Israel.

MEX: "Ezekiel 37 was fulfilled in 1948 with the reconstitution of the Jewish state of Israel.">>

As wiki notes, with reference: "Jewish scholars maintain that these passages are not messianic prophecies and are based on mistranslations/misunderstanding of the Hebrew texts."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_ ... te_note-38

And this is simply cherrypicking, data mining. Is Israel to rise again? The Bible say yes:

Virgin Israel is to rise again:
Again I will build thee, and thou shalt be built, O
virgin of Israel: thou shalt again be adorned with thy
tabrets, and shalt go forth in the dances of them that
make merry. Jer. 31:4

Oh wait, the Bible also says no:

The virgin Israel is to rise no more.
Hear ye this word which I take up against you, even
a lamentation, O house of Israel. The virgin of Israel
is fallen; she shall no more rise: she is forsaken upon
her land; there is none to raise her up. Amos. 5:1, 2

Note how:
a) one of these prophecies must be fulfilled.
b) one of them also must be a false prophecy.

What are the odds of you happening to pick the one that fits your agenda?

MEX: "Ezekiel 38 is as real as it gets... This prophesy required the existence of Israel,...">>

Which reminds me of another problem, they picked the wrong name. As my Jewish friend who grew up in Israel, taught English there and was a Christian missionary (now atheist) once explained:

***
"Christians are always bringing up the Israel prophecy, but here is just part of where the prophecy failed.
For prophecy fulfillment, the modern Jewish state should have been called
Judah, NOT Israel. The prestate Zionist council considered Judah and
rejected it for Israel. Solomon's royal line, ruled Judah, NOT
Israel. And I can off the top of my head think of a few prophecies
concerning Judah, which messianics are fond of quoting. Messianics are fond
of using the two interchangeably, but they are not. The Jewish kingdom of
Israel was short-lived, but Judah lasted longer than Israel as a sovereign
state, and it was Judah which was exiled to Babylon and reestablished. If
the modern state of Israel was formed by God's own hand and shows prophecy
fulfillment- why didn't God lead the Nation's founders to name the state
Judah?"
***

MEX: "Not one prophesy fulfilled?">>

That's right. You can't demonstrate one. See the straightforward common sense rules here: http://fayfreethinkers.com/tracts/bible ... ward.shtml

MEX: "Daniel (500 BC) described world political events all the way through this day.">>

Wrong, you are way off. The Oxford Companion to the Bible, which represents standard mainstream Christian scholarship notes:

"The book of Daniel is one of the few books of the Bible that can be dated with precision. That dating makes it the latest of all the books of the Hebrew Bible..." "...the book reached its present canonical form approximately in the middle of 164 BCE." (pg. 151)

MEX: "There are several movements towards rebuilding the Temple:... A lot of research has gone into it.">>

That's nice. Hal Lindsey has made a mint selling a new scary prophecy book to gullible Christians about twice a decade since the 70's. Then the Left Behind series picked it up and kept it going. The one thing we know for certain is the Christians have been falsely prophesying since day one that Jesus is coming soon, and they have been 100% wrong for 1,900 years.

MEX: "You can do a real study of Scripture instead of following this...">>

I was memorizing verses in the 1960's. If you would like to go into detail in defending one of your assertions about fulfilled prophecy, make your case with something beyond mere assertion. I can also bury you in specific examples of failed Bible prophecies.

D.
***
MEX: "Foxes Book of Martyrs records the deaths of many Christians">>

Fox's book is entirely unscholarly, but it hardly matters anyway, people die for false beliefs all the time. A person dying for something they believe in, but is false, is a favorite pastime of humans. Note:

"As to martyrdom, it is rather easier to die for a false idea
than the apologists argue. Peregrinus, in the account of his
life by Lucian, got arrested as a Christian, and wished to
pay the ultimate penalty. His death wish was frustrated by
the Roman magistrate, who recognized the selfish desire
for attention by Peregrinus, and freed his prisoner instead.
Martyrdom is the ultimate narcissism.
In Lucian's story, Peregrinus finally dies by flinging himself
in a pagan god's fire, seeking immortality, with narration
of his glory supplied by one of his bootlicking followers." --Jeff L.

"As late as about 240/250 AD, Origen in Contra Celsum Book 3 Chapter 8
admits that the number of Christian marytrs was 'few' and 'easily
numbered'. This is after more than 2 centuries of persecution.
'For in order to remind others, that by seeing a few engaged in a
struggle for their religion, they also might be better fitted to
despise death, some, on special occasions, and these individuals who
can be easily numbered, have endured death for the sake of Christianity..."

As Schweitzer pointed out: "Martyrdom has always been a proof of the intensity, never the correctness, of a belief." --Albert Schweitzer (1875-1965) theologian

These fellows, if they existed, were relying upon stories they heard. Just like you are, except your stories are 2,000 years old. Yet you still believe them and perhaps would die for them. Thousands of Jehovah's Witnesses died for their beliefs in WWII, does that suggest that the Jehovah's Witness religion is true? No. This is just evidence of the gullibility of humans, not the truth of the stories people that people happen to be able to convince themselves to die for. But again, with few exceptions, the stories of martyrdom that Christians pass around are almost without exception, bogus, legends, myths. One reason we know this is because we have multiple stories of the sam

MEX: "you make a sport out of your nonsensical debate of such precious faith.">>

Faith isn't "precious" it's just a bad habit of believing something without good reason. That's what the word "faith," when applied to religion, means.

MEX: "Even to this day, people continue to suffer just for being Christians in China, the Middle-East, and India.">>

And this proves nothing except people are convinced of their religious beliefs. This doesn't suggest in any way that those beliefs are true.

MEX: "Here in America, find ourselves more frequently in court defending our right to be Christians.">>

More often people are in court defending their right to not have Christians use the government to push their beliefs on everyone else.

MEX: "I will only respond to a respectful posting.">>

I will roast you with great respect.

D.
--------------
"In any case, both the Jewish and Christian disapproval of suicide
dates from the fourth century AD, late in the development of both
religions, and does not derive directly from scripture. Ironically,
the Christian Church, encouraged by the arguments of St Augustine,
adopted a strict prohibition against suicide precisely because it had
become so popular among Christians. A vogue for martyrdom, and even
collective suicide, had by then begun to threaten the Church. Any
religion which preaches that life on earth is a vale of tears, a mere
prelude to a better after-life, would seem to be inviting its
adherents to kill themselves, unless it can offer a good reason for
them to delay their departure for paradise. Declaring suicide a mortal
sin was the Church's solution. Islam took the same path, forbidding it
outright. Other religions, such as Buddhism and Hinduism, are less
condemnatory." -- editorial in 10/17/99 Economist magazine, "Let death be my dominion,"
***
MEX: " Isaiah 53 not only prophesies Jesus, but...">>

Ah, found it. A debate exchange I read almost nine years ago which completely and utterly *demolishes* the notion that Isaiah 40-53 has anything whatsoever to do with Jesus.

Very scholarly, well referenced. Read it if you have the courage to consider whether your claim is true:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showt ... aiah-40-55

D.
***
MEX: "To say that the guiltless man of Isaiah 53 personifies the collective nation of Israel is delusional at best.">>

Mere assertion. The only people fooled by this prophecy ruse are fundamentalist Xtians who don't know how to read their Bible. Mainstream standard Christian Bible scholarship understands there is no prophecy here.

As even the introductory wiki blurb on this points out:

"Citing a number of Biblical verses that refer to Israel as the "servant", many of them from the Book of Isaiah such as 49:3 He said to me, "You are My servant, Israel, in whom I will display My splendor."[14]

Jewish scholars, and several Christian scholarly books, like Revised Standard Version Oxford Study Edition Bible, The Revised Standard Version tell us that Isaiah 53 is about national Israel and the New English Bible echo this analysis.[15] Judaism, teaches that the "servant" in question is actually the nation of Israel.[1] These scholars also argue that verse 10 cannot be describing Jesus. The verse states:

"10 he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong [his] days"

Taken literally, this description, is inconsistent with the short, childless life of Jesus.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaiah_53

Etc. There are no end of problems with your prophecy claim and the extensive article I've given you details them nicely. You've responded to none of it.

Your biggest problem is you can confirm not a single act of Jesus outside of your anonymous gospels, so you can show no confirmed prophecy.

MEX: "God says He’s up to His Eyeballs with the blood of sacrifices for sins.">>

Then maybe he should have known better than to come up with the barbaric requirement of blood sacrifices. It was his idea.

MEX: "I... understand the Jewish people not accepting Jesus...">>

Which flattens your prophecy.

MEX: "The parallelism between this this passage and the Passion of Jesus are clear.">>

Then you should be able to defend them and substantiate your prophecy. When are you going to begin? All standard Bible scholarship is against you. And all of the Jews of course. But what would Jews know about their own book and language without Fundamentalist Christians coming along and explaining to them what it really means?

MEX: "Jesus is the One the Jews will collectively acknowledge,...">>

Ah, promises promises. How many more millenia are you and yours going to bow and scrape waiting for that one? Probably several. Pitiful. Jesus ain't coming back. It was a ruse. You got took.

MEX: "Isaiah was a prophet and he foretold...">>

For him to be a successful prophet he would need to have landed some successful prophecies. And you can't demonstrate any of those without begging questions and assuming the Bible is true, and we know it isn't.

MEX: "Israel’s... repentance of having prosecuted and innocent man.">>

What makes you think he was innocent? We know he was a liar. Just like his Papa:

"And if the prophet be deceived when he hath
spoken a thing, I the LORD have deceived that
prophet..." Ezekiel 14:9

"Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a
lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and
the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee."
1 Kings 22:23 also 2 Chron. 18:22

"...Ah, Lord God! surely thou hast greatly
deceived this people and Jerusalem..." Jer. 4:10

"O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived..." Jer 20:7

"...God shall send them strong delusion, that they
should believe a lie..." 2 Thess. 2:11

Since your God is an admitted liar Mr. Mex, why should anyone believe him?

Jesus was liar too:

During his hearing before the high priest, Jesus says, "I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing" (John 18:20 (NKJ)). Here Jesus is shown making two claims:

(a) Jesus always taught in the synagogues and in the temple, and
(b) Jesus shared all of his teachings with his public audiences; he never kept important parts of his teachings a secret.

Are the claims (a) and (b), true? Of course not. Jesus taught in lots of other places and he had scores of secret teachings that he taught... in secret.

How can we believe these guys, and their book, when we know they are liars?

***

Darrel says:
January 25, 2012 at 2:04 AM
Hey Mex, a link is not an argument. If you think you can provide an example of a prophecy that can hold up, let’s see you attempt to make a case for it. So far you’ve got nothing, and this has been very easy to show.

And you forgot to answer my question. Why should anyone believe these Gods in your book when your very book says they are liars? I understand why this would be an uncomfortable question for you.

I know you like to pretend that the end is near, but as this list below shows, this is a childs game of false prophecy Christians have been peddling for about 2,000 years. You guys really aren’t in a position to be talking about fulfilled prophecy:

The END was nigh:

Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. Matt. 16:28

But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God. Luke 9:27

But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none; 1 Cor. 7:29

Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand. Phil. 4:5

For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven… Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds… 1 Thess. 4:15-16

God…Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son… Heb. 1:1-2

For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. Heb. 9:26

For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry. Heb. 10:37

Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord… stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh…behold, the judge standeth before the door. James 5:7-9

But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer. 1 Peter 4:7

Christ…was manifest in these last times for you,… 1 Peter 1:19-20

Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 1 John 2:18

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass;… Rev. 1:1

Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand. Rev. 1:3

Behold, I come quickly. Rev. 3:11

And he said unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand… He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. Rev. 22:10, 20.

But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come. Matt 10:23

Etc.

***
Darrel says:
January 25, 2012 at 12:05 PM

MEX: “Isaiah 53… you have to shut down your brain to overlook the parallelism with Jesus.”>>

There is nothing to do with Jesus in Isaiah or the rest of the Hebrew Scriptures. That’s just Xtians data mining and showing they have an active imaginations. And again, you can confirm nothing of Jesus life beyond the assertion that he may have, probably, existed.

MEX: “Antiochus Epiphanes… enters the Holy of Hollies and defiles it by offering a pig fulfilling prophesy. But the prophecy remains unfulfilled because that desecration did not cause desolation.”>>

Gibberish. When you have a few thousand pages of Hebrew Scriptures, it’s easy to data mine things and pretend they align with later events. For prophecy, you need to know something in *advance,* not cherry pick post hoc and try to make things fit. That’s easy and demonstrates nothing.

MEX: “it doesn’t deny the fact that Isaiah is heavily messianic,”>>

Actually, that’s controversial.

MEX: “speaking about the Virgin Birth,”>>

A Christian distortion. The reference is to a young woman, not a virgin and has nothing to do with anything in the NT whatsoever. And Paul didn’t even believe in the virgin birth claim anyway.

MEX: “Jesus as King,”>>

Jesus was never a king.

MEX: “No scholar can erase the extreme parallels with Jesus.”>>

No scholar would be fooled by lame fundie attempts take literally the attempts by Matthew et al, to make Jesus jump through the hoops necessary to make it look like he fulfilled things. You can demonstrate no fulfilled prophecies. Not one.

We know these guys were fudging their stories because the writer of Matthew made mistakes like adding and extra donkey to his story so he could try and fulfill what he thought was a prophecy in Zechariah 9:9. But he goofed and didn’t his verse straight, and he flatly contradicts the versions in Mark and Luke which have one animal. Etc.

MEX: “Either way you’re arguing a point you don’t even believe. You’re not a Christian,”>>

One hardly needs to be a Christian to point out your errors.

MEX: “You’re just trying to win an argument by cutting and pasting stuff you don’t believe.”>>

No, I am winning an argument by knowing what I am talking about.

MEX: “someday the world will reconcile with itself that Jews are are the apple of God’s Eye and that one day…”>>

Your “someday” might have been interesting 1,900 years ago. Now it it’s boring.

MEX: “final judgment because there will be no peace until Jesus establishes His Millennial Kingdom.”>>

Jesus died 1,980 years ago. He may have been a nice guy (except for that lying bit and a few other errors he made) but he’s not coming back. You guys really need to get some therapy and get over this.

D.
————-
“[The gospel accounts] are a poetic rendering of a devout wish but certainly not an authentic record… since the Crucifixion was conducted by Roman soldiers,… Jesus’ body was most likely left on the Cross or tossed into a shallow grave to be eaten by scavenger dogs, crows or other wild beasts. As for Jesus’ family and followers, depicted in the Bible as conducting a decent burial of the body according to Jewish law, “as far as I can see, they ran. They lost their nerve, though not their faith.” –TIME mag., 4/10/95, pg. 70, Bible scholars Robert W. Funk and Dominic Crossan.

“If the resurrection of Jesus cannot be believed except by assenting to the fantastic descriptions included in the Gospels, then Christianity is doomed. For that view of resurrection is not believable, and if that is all there is, then Christianity, which depends upon the truth and authenticity of Jesus’ resurrection, also is not believable. If that were the requirement of belief as a Christian, then I would sadly leave my house of faith. With me in that exodus from the Christian church, however, would be **every ranking New Testament scholar in the world–Catholic and Protestant alike**: E. C. Hoskyns, C. H. Dodd, Rudolf Bultmann, Reginald Fuller, Joseph Fitzmyer, W. E. Albright, Ray-mond Brown, Paul Minear, R. H. Lightfoot, Herman Hendrickx, Edward Schillebeeckx, Hans Kung, Karl Rahner, Phyllis Trible, Jane Schaberg, D. H. Nineham, Maurice Goguel, and countless others.”
–Bishop John Shelby Spong, John Shelby Spong, Resurrection: Myth or Reality? (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1994), p. 238.

Modern Christianity doesn’t believe in your resurrection anymore.

***

MEX: "that web page listed prophesy after prophesy">>

If you think you can defend one, give it a try. I am not interested in piles of vapid assertions. I am well aware Christians pretend they have a few thousand examples of fulfilled prophecy. I am also aware that not one of them holds up to examination.

MEX: "you will probably... that non of the apostles existed,">>

Some of them probably did, but because the Bible can't get it's story straight and has several contradictory lists of them, we really have no idea who was who. And curiously, they wrote nothing about their Jesus.

MEX: "[you will probably claim] there were no Christian churches in the first century,">>

Lots of religions have "churches." It doesn't mean that the claims in those building are true. In fact, usually they aren't.

MEX: "Christian Entertainment in the Colosseum onley happened in movies,">>

I am well aware that some lions were fed with Christians. As the to impropriety of such an action, I'm, like those Christians, torn.

MEX: "don’t expect a thick paragraph of cut and paste from me.">>

What I expect, should you rise to have the courage to defend your extraordinary religious assertions, is an argument presenting your case. You haven't done that yet.

D.
---------------
Virgin birth:

"The Old Testament says nothing about Mary. Isaiah 7:14 speaks of a
young woman of the time the "a young woman shall conceive" statement was
made. In Hebrew it simply says that a young woman shall become/is
pregnant and will give birth to a child. One need not quibble over the
meaning of 'almah/bethulah in order to point out that it happens every
day. Many young women become pregnant. They are virgins before (some of
them) but not after. The OT says nothing about the young woman being a
virgin at the time of giving birth. And of course the quote was lifted
out of context and applied to Jesus. That is why Jews do not and never have read it as
having anything to do with a "virgin birth."

As to whether the Mother of Jesus was a virgin or not, we really have no
evidence at all. Both birth stories in the gospels appear to be later
additions tacked onto the basic story that begins at the baptism of
Jesus. Two gospels say nothing of a virgin birth. Paul says nothing of
a virgin birth--in fact he speaks of Jesus being of the "seed of David"
according to the flesh, meaning a descendant of David. If we accept the
genealogies in the NT (which of course we should not), then Joseph is the
genetic descendant of David--and of course he is supposed not to have had
any physical part in the birth of Christ at all."
--David C.

***


MEX: "I don’t have to prove anything.">>

Oh yes you do. You have the burden of supporting your extraordinary claims with extraordinary evidence. Your problem is, you don't even have ordinary evidence.

MEX: "each prophecy referenced in the NT on Jesus reinforces the other 100, 200 whatever...">>

But you need to start with having one established before you can count your number. And you don't have one. Which is rather pitiful really.

MEX: "the complexity of the “apostolic conspiracy” to create a bogus religion is so immense">>

It's not immense at all. Jesus had some followers and they were sad when he died. Then they told some others about it, they added to the stories, and decades to a century later they started writing this nonsense down. Now fools like you, 1,900 years later, actually believe this crap. It's embarrassing. You are an intellectual embarrassment to humanity.

MEX: "to pull this kind of historic prank, at least without any kind of benefit.">>

All religions are founded upon this method. The benefit is you get to pretend to believe that you will live after you die, and the bad people will be punished by your spook. But there is no reason to believe that beyond wishful thinking.

MEX: "Not even Constantine needed to pull it,">>

Why would he need to use it when it is much more advantageous to use your religion for political means? You believers have been getting yanked around since day one.

MEX: "4 coincidences is one too many. The odds are astronomical.">>

What are the odds that fellows reading old religious literature could appeal to information in it and incorporate some of the vague poetry to fit the new story they are spinning about a guy their heard about but no one wrote a word about during his life? The odds are 100%. That's pretty good odds.

MEX: "I don’t think is worth it to continue paying this game.">>

I understand perfectly.

MEX: "Not a game for me. Go back to your Nintendo.">>

I have a Playstation 3 actually, but none of my games can compete with how fun it is to wipe the floor with biblical fundamentalists. And I have some really good games.

***


Mex has a few more points. Let's give them a poke:

MEX: "you come up with a laughable little scenario about grown men concocting an elaborate story which turned into the biggest religion...">>

Wrong. No need to appeal to dishonesty. All religions are founded upon similar hand-me-down, typically anonymous, unverifiable, stories. People make mistakes and misapprehend nature all the time. Eyewitness testimony is *notoriously* inaccurate, and we don't even have that with the Jesus stories.

A religious leader, Sai Baba (died last April) was claimed to have magical powers and to be born of a virgin etc.,. When he held a birthday party over one million people showed up. How many followers did your Jesus assemble? According to the Gospels, Jesus raised the dead, fed 5,000, walked on water, preached for 3 years, there were earthquakes, eclipses and saints being raised when he died, and there were 120 believers by the time of Acts 1:15. Not very effective, was he? If we are to pretend that the size of a religion or how fast it grows has anything to do with it being true (which is absurd), then there no end of examples of religions that kick Christianity's behind.

MEX: "What are you, 11 years old?">>

I'm 45 actually.

MEX: "How childish can anyone be?">>

You are the one that believes in a book that has talking animals in it, so you tell us.

MEX: "You actually think that you can put Christianity on trial and prove it’s false on a mere speculation?">>

Christianity's case is so weak it wouldn't make it past the hearing stage. If you were to attempt to make a case for it you would quickly find how easy it is to demolish your assertions, as you are observing now. Also, it is not anyone's responsibility to prove your outlandish claims false. It's your burden to support your own claims with good evidence. As you have shown in this thread, you can't do that.

MEX: "The gospels are written by eye witnesses.">>

Thank you for revealing just how deep your biblical ignorance is. Had you taken the time to read your holy book carefully you would have noticed that your own gospels openly admit they are *not* eyewitness reports but rather hearsay. What you have is second hand hearsay evidence that wouldn't be allowed in Judge Judy's courtroom to confirm a broken window. Yet you want to use it to confirm the existence of mass resurrections, zombies, etc.

MEX: "In the case of Luke, he investigated the claims he heard and read about, and eventually joined the movement himself.

Right, Luke wasn't buying the other stories either. Luke never claims to be an eyewitness to anything. As my Bible scholar friend once put it:

"Please read the first four verses of the Gospel of Luke. The author says that there are various gospel stories floating around, but he doesn't care for any of them, so he's going to tell us what really happened. He dismisses the gospels of Mark, Matthew, and many others, which had already been written, as unreliable. One of Luke's "eyewitnesses" is Paul. Read all about it in chapters 9 and 22 of Luke's continuing narrative, the Acts of the Apostles. But Paul had never met Jesus in the flesh; he saw him only in visions afer he (Jesus) was dead.

Now please read what Paul, the earliest writer in the entire New Testament, says: " The gospel you heard me preach is no human invention, I did not take it over from any man; no man taught it to me; I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ" (Galatians 1:11-12).
So the only "eyewitness" record we have of Jesus comes from a man who did not see him in the flesh, but only in visions after he was dead. And Paul doesn't tell us a single detail about the life of Jesus, only that he was crucified, buried, and "risen again" (1 Cor. 15:3-4). Paul disappears from history around the year 62, when he was a prisoner in Rome.
The author of Luke/Acts had never met either Jesus or Paul personally; neither had any other gospel writer. So the Gospel according to Luke, which was supposed to be more correct than all other gospels, is itself based on nothing but hearsay and dreams." --Ralph N.

MEX: "You’ll have to do better than that.">>

I just did. You have no eyewitness reports. The only NT author that can be confirmed is Paul, and he never met Jesus except in a dream, and dreams don't count.

MEX: "Your accusation of a conspiracy or imaginary events is without any merit.">>

I don't need to appeal to a conspiracy, but that would be far more likely than that these events actually happened. You have second hand hearsay anonymous accounts written decades later and your stories are filled with extraordinary miraculous claims. You reject this when other religions make such claims, but you blindly accept your religious traditions because you have been programmed to believe them. You have no evidence to support your claims as has been easy to show.

MEX: "Speculations prove nothing.">>

Right. So let us know when you have something beyond speculation in support of your faith based religious claims.

MEX: "Even if there were a few errors on the writings, the narrative, chronology, doctrinal content, even the doctrinal connection to Judaism is consistent.">>

The Bible is filled with contradictions and errors both minor and major. That it has much in common with Judaism is to be expected since Christianity is a Jewish heresy (sect).

MEX: "the plethora of OT parallels to Jesus life narrative, too many to ignore.">>

See Jewish midrash. This is what Jews do. They take old stories and re-write them with new characters. It's called recycling. See: "Gospel Fictions"

http://www.amazon.com/Gospel-Fictions-R ... 283&sr=8-1

And "Who Wrote the Bible"
http://www.amazon.com/Wrote-Bible-Richa ... 350&sr=8-1

MEX: "The Christian religion is based on a promise...">>

Talk is cheap and that promise, which was to be fulfilled "soon" is now 1,900 years old.

MEX: "backed by openly witnessed demonstrations of the power to deliver on the promise.">>

You have no witnesses, not one. The only power that has been demonstrated is the lack of power to deliver on the promise.

MEX: "What was witnessed? Signs, miracles, and the Resurrection.">>

None of the people supposedly claimed to have witnessed these things wrote a single word. If they did, your all powerful God didn't see fit to have it preserved. Sorry about that.

MEX: "Without the witnessed resurrection of Jesus there wouldn’t be any Christianity.">>

I'll get over it.

MEX: "the NT declares the fulfillment of all the Messianic prophecies,">>

a) you don't have a single example that can withstand examination.
b) you can't confirm a single action of Jesus life beyond what some unknowns, who never met him, say he did (while at the same time they were looking to the OT for guidance to write their story).

MEX: "the restoration Israel which wasn’t even on the map">>

When Israel was destroyed in 587 BCE, the twelve tribes were scattered to the winds, never to be gathered together again. The present occupiers who are borrowing the name can trace no lineage to any one. The use of the name is purely window dressing. There is no connection to the biblical Israel except these loosely based religious descendants who happen to share a similar religion. That someone someday would come along and name a certain area the same name it had long ago, is rather mundane and to be expected. It also run contrary to Bible prophecy which says Israel is to rise no more:

"Hear ye this word which I take up against you, even
a lamentation, O house of Israel. The virgin of Israel
is fallen; she shall no more rise: she is forsaken upon
her land; there is none to raise her up." Amos. 5:1, 2

MEX: "They say the Ark is in a system of tunnels under the Temple platform.">>

Now you are just being silly.

MEX: "I personally believe the rebuilding of the Temple will from a negotiation...">>

No one is interested in what you are able to "personally believe." Your claims are based upon wishful thinking and extreme naivety.

MEX: "as the US weakens, Iran is embolden,">>

The US has a GDP 35x that of Iran. Iran has the GDP of Georgia.

MEX: "Bush and Obama allowed the Persian nuke program to reach almost completion stages.">>

Let's ask someone who knows what they are talking about:

"Panetta: Iran cannot develop nukes"
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162-57 ... ck-strait/

D.
***
Dear Mexseiko, I am sorry you are so misinformed about your own religion. I hope you have learned a bit about it in this exchange. I have been studying these issues for decades and I don't hold views about the Bible that are not supported by mainstream, peer-reviewed, Christian, Bible scholarship taught in every non-fundie university and seminary in the land. Twenty years ago I wrote the following book about the doctrine of biblical inerrancy:

http://fayfreethinkers.com/ourbooks/mirrorsample.shtml

M: "What you call “notoriously inaccurate” is a detailed and consistent account of events.">>

The Biblical accounts are notoriously inaccurate and inconsistent. That's why we have 30,000 divisions of Christianity. See the examples given in that sample of my book. The Bible has been heavily edited of course, so this explains the degree to which it is "consistent." This has been known for centuries.

MEX: "John and Matthew walked and talked with Jesus for about 3 years.">>

The writer of Matthew never refers to themselves in the first person and in fact refers to Matthew in the third person. At no time do they claim to have walked or talked with Jesus. This would be easy for you refute, simply give me chapter and verse showing I am wrong. Course, even if the writer did make this claim, it wouldn't follow that it is true. We know the book of Matthew was written decades after Paul (he had no knowledge of any gospels), and we know that the names were added about a century later for convenience and to add prestige.

MEX: "They got busy with the gospel and eventually wrote their gospels.">>

Where does the Bible say this?

MEX: "They saw Jesus die on the cross and later had fish with Him.">>

No one who met Jesus wrote a single word of the New Testament. Get informed and stop making such a fool of yourself.

MEX: "You site Sai Baba’s success as Jesus failure,...>>

I cite Sai Baba as an example of how gullible humans are and to make the point that just because a religion grows large or fast, it doesn't follow that it is true. You can simply look to any religion other than your own, including sects of your own, to see that this is true. People are extraordinarily gullible so there are no shortage of examples.

MEX: "it is Sai Baba and his followers who failed.">>

Sai Baba and Jesus are both equally dead and gone. Both have followers, but this doesn't prove anything other than that there are lots of gullible people.

MEX: "Christians and Jews died for our faiths.">>

Millions die for false beliefs. It's rather common and quite popular.

MEX: "you have a very youthful spirit, cause you can sound very childish.">>

Pointing out that it is childish to believe a book that has talking animals in it is not childish, it's just common sense.

MEX: "You’re great at googling, cutting&pasting.">>

I wrote my book about the Bible before the internet existed (started it in 1990). I am used to getting my knowledge the old fashioned way, going to the library and studying books. If you don't have a library card, I recommend you get one.

MEX: "cutting&pasting Atheist propaganda without actual personal study and research?">>

My book and beliefs about the Bible have nothing to do with atheism. Again, my beliefs and claims about the Bible are supported by mainstream, peer-reviewed, Christian, Bible scholarship and taught in every non-fundamentalist university and seminary in the land. You don't know what you are talking about.

MEX: "Matthew and John are commonly accepted as the wwriters of, well, Matthew and John.">>

No they aren't. From the "Oxford Companion to the Bible," Metzger and Coogan eds., Oxford
1993:

Mark, The Gospel According to. The ascription of the gospel of Mark goes
back to at least Papias...who in about 130 CE reported that he had been told
that it was written by Mark "the interpreter of Peter"... (page 493)

Matthew, The Gospel According to. It is commonly held that Matthew was
written in about 85, or 90 CE by an unknown Christian...the apostle
Matthew...is unlikely...the story's author. On the contrary, the author
exhibits a theological outlook, command of Greek, and rabbinic training that
suggests he was a Jewish Christian of the second rather than the first
generation...(of Antioch). (Page 502)

Luke, The Gospel According to. ...the third gospel is anonymous, as are the
other gospels. Ancient church tradiciton attributed...(it)...to Luke who
appears in Philemon 24 as Paul's "fellow worker" and is called the
"beloved physician" in Collossians 4:14....Most modern commentators on the
Lucan gospel, however, are skeptical about the validity of this traditional
attribution. (page 470)

John, The Gospel According to. ...the work may be regarded as apostolic in
character, even though it did not in the end come (as some would argue) from
the hand of John the apostle himself....written at the very latest by the
beginning of the second century CE... (page 375)

Also: From "Who Wrote the New Testament?" Burton Mack, 1995, Harper Collins.

The Gospel of Mark. As for the author, we know only that we do not know who
he was. The Mark to whom the gospel was attributed is a legendary figure of
the second century. Papias...(ca. 130), named Mark as the author of the
gospel... (page 153)

The Gospel of Matthew. I will refer to the author of this gospel as Matthew,
in keeping with the gospel's later attribution to one of the named disciples.
In fact, however, all we know about the person who wrote this gospel is that
he thought of himself as a "scribe trained for the kingdom" (Matt 13:52).
(page 162)

The Gospel According to Luke. ...around the year 120
C.E....[Luke]...appeared.... As with the other narrative gospels, we do not
know anything about the author except what can be inferred form the writing
itself. Later in the second century, the work was attributed to Luke...just
as other anonymous literature from earlier times was attributed to either the
apostles or their companions in order to validate their truth. It has become
customary to refer to the author as Luke, even though the Luke mentioned by
Paul cannot have been the one who wrote this work." (page 167)

Every encyclopedia, every standard mainstream scholarly, non-fundie, reference will say the same. The gospels are anonymous, the names were added later. We know this because church fathers had these works in front of them almost 100 years after Jesus didn't know who wrote them. The names were added later.

continued...

MEX: "These were eye witnesses of Jesus miraculous deeds, His death, and His resurrection.">>

No one who wrote a word of the NT met Jesus or witnessed anything. No one in Matt. Mark, or Luke even claims to be an eyewitness. Get informed, learn the difference between an eyewitness report, and hearsay.

MEX: "The Canon demands that for a book to be included in the Bible it must be by an eye witness, or someone who knew an eye witness.">>

Which means, someone who claimed to have known someone who claimed to have been an eyewitness. This is second hand hearsay that Judge Judy throws out of court every day over a $50 claim. Worthless. And your hearsay is 1,900 years old, anonymous, and filled with whoppers, contradictions and extraordinary claims.

MEX: "Paul, not an eye witnesses?">>

Hallucinations don't count. Paul clearly had a hallucination because he saw and heard things those with him did not (according to one contradictory version of the story).

MEX: "a vision that ended in his conversion.">>

People convert to religions for lots of bizarre and false reasons.

MEX: "Well, Paul’s vision was real...">>

Why should anyone believe that? People in mental institutions have visions that are real to them, all the time.

MEX: "Peter, James, and John were eye witnesses of Jesus transfiguration...">>

Let's check your claim:

PETER:
"In The New Jerusalem Bible, an excellent British Catholic translation, the notes to 2 Peter point out that the epistle refers to events that are clearly later than could have been known by Peter, the vocabulary is notably different from that of 1 Peter,the whole of ch. 2 is obviously a free repetition of Jude, and there is no assurance that the letter was accepted at all until the 3rd cent., and some, according to Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome, refused to accept it. Most critics nowadays also reject the Petrine authorship. It is what we would call a forgery,..."

First and Second Peter, the epistles allegedly written by the great apostle, are recognized forgeries. According to Burton L. Mack (*Who Wrote the New Testament*, pages 207-213) both epistles bear the unmistakable marks of second century authorship and erudition. Mack points out that these epistles fit well with other Christian literature of the mid-second century, and scholars have traditionally assigned them a date of between 124 CE and 150 CE. Peter is believed to have died about 67 CE (*Encyclopaedia Britannica*). --Louis Cable

JAMES
"Of authorship and date not much is known. The tradition that it was written by James the brother of the Lord has little support from ancient times. The indication of the letter itself--its excellent Greek with vivid metaphor and facile use of idiom, its apparent knowledge of 1 Peter and of certain letters of Paul--suggest a Hellenistic Christian as its autoer and a date toward the end of the first century." -New Oxford Annotated RSV (pg. 1469)

The works attributed to John came later and are also, anonymous.

MEX: "the NT is specifically a testimony of Jesus.">>

No, not only do we not have any testimony or writing from Jesus, we don't have testimony or writing from anyone who met Jesus in the flesh.

MEX: "The main purpose of it being written is as a testimony.">>

Then it failed, because there is no first hand testimony in the anonymous NT.

MEX: "No eye witnesses?">>

Correct, none, not one. Get informed. Your minister has been lying to you. Hence the emphasis on the importance of "faith."

MEX: "You mean, they [Jews] died in Nazi camps for nothing? Wow!">>

People die for false beliefs all the time. Over 5,000 Jehovah's Witnesses died for their specific religious beliefs in the Nazi camps. Does this make the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses correct? No. It just means people have strong beliefs.

MEX: "[Panetta is] Obama puppet.">>

Leon Panetta is the Secretary of defense. I have reason to believe that he has greater understanding and knowledge of what is going on in Iran, than you. Sorry.

MEX: This is my last reply... Go ahead with your little celebration. Declare yourself the winner.">>

There is no need for victory dances or to declare the winner. I am confident that those have read this exchange are quite aware of the situation.

I'll leave you with an article by a minister who refers to why you are so confused about your Bible and basic scholarship.

D.
--------------------
"The Sin of Silence
There is a sin among a large segment of the Christian clergy that I find despicable. It is the sin of omission, the sin of silence. It is the sin of promoting falsehoods in order to hold your job. It is the sin of not sharing with a congregation what you know to be true about the bible and Christianity.

Those graduating in religious studies from every major university in America, as well as every major theological seminary that is independent of Christian financial pressure, know certain facts to be true. They know that:

1. The entire bible is saturated with common mythological themes, from the creation and flood myth to virgin birth and resurrected hero mythology.

2. The stories of the patriarchs in the Old Testament are known as 'temple legends' to enhance the history of the Hebrew people and are mostly fictional.

3. The gospels were not written by anyone who knew Jesus personally.

4. The 'Christ' myths and formulas are direct copies of Zoroastrian myths adopted by the Jesus sect.

5. These facts, with others, have been known for years, and taught by internationally respected scholars from major universities world wide.

Religiously educated clergy, through the sin of omission and silence, continue to promote superstition."
--William Edelen. An active ordained Presbyterian and Congregational minister for 30 years. Adjunct professor of Religious Studies and Anthropology, University of Puget Sound Tacoma, Washington

http://www.infidels.org/kiosk/article723.html

***

cont...

[Dardedar]

More Mexi-melt...

***
MEX: "one thing you can’t argue against is personal experience.">>

Better than that, I can point out that even you aren't persuaded by the argument from personal religious experience. A few billion people have religious experiences that contradict your own and you dismiss them for the exact same reason I dismiss yours: because claims of "personal experience" are worthless. And you know it.

MEX: "My wife and I had encounters you can’t argue against.">>

There is nothing to argue against. The claim is vapid. You dismiss everyone else's "encounter" that doesn't agree with yours, for the very same reason I dismiss yours. I am consistent, you are not.

MEX: "one of Yasser Arafat’s killers is today a missionary,">>

That's nice. Christianity is in a century long decline. Atheism and non-belief has already taken over Europe and it is snowballing in the US right now. Just ask if you want the stats. Note:

"A new nationwide survey conducted by The [Christian] Barna Group... explored how many have what might be considered a “biblical worldview.” ...
National Results
Overall, the current research revealed that only 9% of all American adults have a biblical worldview." http://tinyurl.com/ckqa68

MEX: "pray intensely for answers and find Jesus.">>

Except for all of the times they don't.

MEX: "but during intense prayer, she experienced the calming presence of Jesus.">>

The cemeteries are filled with people who pray, feel that and then die. Stress makes people even more gullible than they normally are.

MEX: "This is not a spectacular testimony.">>

I agree.

MEX: "the Scriptures cannot have been written by men including the prophesies,">>

Already covered. You have no fulfilled prophecies.

MEX: "We are reading today on the newspapers what prophesied in Ezekiel 37,">>

Like all Christian prophecy sleuths before you, you're wasting your time with nonsense. Have fun. It's a fools errand.

D.
----------------
"It does not pay a prophet to be too specific." --L. Sprague de Camp
***
MEX: "These testimonies from so many Muslims...">>

Muslims testify to lots of things. You dismiss it all, except for the little bits that you cherry pick and accept, solely because you think it supports your own personal superstition.

MEX: "along with prophesies about the fact that events like these would take place,">>

You have no fulfilled prophecies, but you do have lots of failed prophecies. Hunting through a book filled with vague poetry and whacked out insane imagery (see Revelations) and finding correlations after the fact is easy to do and has nothing to do with prophecy. Nostradamus left us hundreds of quatrains filled with gibberish and there are no end of books pretending to find fulfilled prophecies in them, always, *after the fact.* After the fact is never a prophecy, it's data mining.

MEX: "also prophesied fact that Christianity would diminish in the last days">>

As we already covered, your last days were supposed to be about 1900 years ago. Belief in the Xtian superstition goes up, goes down. Over the last century it has been going down because of more information, the enlightenment, more competition with other superstitions on the market and I think people are just getting bored with bronze age absurdities. But not you!

MEX: "Israel has been again added to the map...">>

There is no connection between the modern Israel and the biblical twelve tribes of Judah. It's just a title, and some people who happen to follow a similar religion.

MEX: "the Bible, the way it is knit together,">>

Of course it is knit together. We know who did the knitting. The Catholic church knitted it together hundreds of years after Jesus. They edited it as they wished and added and removed what they liked and got rid of the originals. And it's all anonymous except for Paul, so says... the Catholic church.

MEX: "the way the writings is intertwined with history,">>

There are no end of examples of the Bible contradicting established history. You do need to get that library card.

MEX: "how its fantastic stories take you to real sites,">>

Actually, last I checked, there are no known Christian monuments from the first century. Want to go to see the Jesus tomb? You in luck, they have three of them! And none of them are considered authentic by scholars. Israel is a tourist trap for gullible Christians.

MEX: "its teachings, wisdom, and truths,"

Yes, let's review some of the wisdom and truths in your Bible. It tells us about talking animals (Num 22:27), demon possessed people and pigs (Luke 8:26-39) and a pack of dead who rise from their tombs like zombies and walk around town (Matt 27:52-53). It goes on about how putting a drop of goats blood on your right big toe cures leprosy (Leviticus 14) and that laying sticks in front of a pregnant animal can change the color of its offspring (Genesis 30:37). That's all very scientific. Then to top it off, God becomes his own son, so he can sacrifice himself, to himself, so he will be appeased for a transgression committed thousands of years ago by a man that ate an apple he was not supposed to eat, because, as the story goes, he didn't yet know the difference between good and evil.

Is that the wisdom and truth you are referring to Mexseiko? Is there anything so stupid that you would actually go: "you know, I don't think I am going to believe that, it's just too stupid." Apparently not.

MEX: "its uniqueness, the dating, the Scientific content,">>

Lot's of false claims are "unique." Perhaps even most of them. Truth has nothing to do with being unique. Most of the Bible is pinched from previous superstitions so very little is unique anyway. For example you probably mistakenly think Jesus came up with the "golden rule." In fact it was mentioned by nine philosophers before him.
As to the "scientific content," this just shows your ignorance of science.

MEX: "the depths and width, the many internal word and number mechanics that make it a human impossibility,">>

Let's see your evidence that it was impossible for humans to write your book. If you are talking about the Bible Code nonsense, I have given lectures on that issue and did a radio interview for our local NPR affiliate. But that was years ago. The Bible Code claims where thoroughly debunked.

MEX: "I think the whole thing combined is irresistible.">>

Of course you do. At a primitive and fundamental level you are terrified of eternal death and will believe anything, no matter how absurd, in order to avoid that reality. And you will devote a great portion of your time feeding yourself carefully selected and filtered lies in order to help keep this comforting illusion alive. It's one of mans greatest pastimes.

D.
--------------
"The most common of all follies is to believe passionately in the palpably not true.
It is the chief occupation of mankind." --H.L. Mencken

***

MEX: "You say that the Jews in Israel today have nothing to do with the 12 tribes,">>

No, I said: "There is no connection between the modern Israel and the biblical twelve tribes of Judah. It's just a title, and some people who happen to follow a similar religion."

I say similar because most Jews are not theist (about 90% of rabbis) and very very few are orthodox and follow anything like the Jews of the Bible 3,000 years ago anyway.
The twelve tribes were "cast to the wind" as you say 2,500 years ago and they have been interbreeding with locals throughout their history (see the Bible). There is now category of "Jewish" "DNA" or "race." It's ethnic, cultural with some religion on the side.

MEX; "yet no one in the world can stop calling them Jews.">>

Anyone can call themselves anything they like. They are no doubt largely descendants of Jews, but so is nearly everyone in the middle east.

MEX: "Hitler was killing them because they were Jews.">>

Hitler was killing them for your God:

"...I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jews, I am fighting for the Lord." --Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

"Christ was the greatest early fighter in the battle against the world enemy, the Jews.... The work that Christ started but could not finish, I -- Adolf Hitler -- will conclude." --Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

The only person that liked killing Jews more than Hitler, was Yahweh himself. I can bury you in examples. See your Bible.

MEX: "They are convinced they are Jews, live in Israel because they are Jews,">>

That's nice. Then they are Jews. None of them can trace themselves to any of the 12 tribes in the Bible.

MEX: "Further, if that is the argument you present to disprove a prophesy, I’d say your creative juices have ran out.">>

I have no burden to disprove your extraordinary prophecy claims, you have the burden of demonstrating them. And you have failed. Cherry picking vague poetry out of the vast data in the Hebrew Scriptures, after the fact, doesn't count.
Besides, you have consistently ignored the fact the Bible specifically prophecies that Israel will *not* rise again:

"Hear ye this word which I take up against you, even
a lamentation, O house of Israel. The virgin of Israel
is fallen; she shall no more rise: she is forsaken upon
her land; there is none to raise her up. Amos. 5:1, 2

MEX: "The prophesy states they will rise from dead bones, they will come from all four winds and reconstitute the country again.">>

a) Amos, in your Bible say it wouldn't.
b) the modern "Israel" just uses the name traditionally. It has no relation to the biblical Israel supposedly established by Yahweh

MEX: "That’s a 100% batting average.">>

Prophecies need be made in advance, not cherry picked after the fact. Show me someone who predicted 150 years ago that Israel would be reconstituted. Then you would at least have something to talk about. Right now you just have a bunch of evangelicals making shit up after the fact. That's easy to do. See all of the supposed Nostradamus "prophecies."

MEX: "people from all over the world, make them believe they are Jews,">>

They are Jews. Are we to be amazed that after 3,000 years, there still are Jews? People make babies and keep religious traditions. It happens. No big deal. Sometimes they even like to name their countries after old names used thousands of years ago. This is to be expected and is not extraordinary in the least.

MEX: "You say to yourself “I’m fine. Not going to hell, because it doesn’t exist.”>>

See the book "The History of Hell." Hell was made up to scare the children and simpletons. We know when it was made up and we know why. And we know there is no good reason to believe it exists.
The Jews did not believe in an afterlife. As my friend once put it:

"The truth is that when we die our bodies return to the dust from
which they were made, and the breath of life returns to the air
around us (Genesis 3:19, 22-24; Ecclesiastes 3:16-22; etc.). Any
honest physician or veterinarian will tell you the same thing. This is
what God promised to Adam and all his descendants (Genesis 2:7;
3:19). God made it clear that he does not want us to have eternal
life (Genesis 3:22-24). That explains why in the entire Hebrew Bible
(OT) not a single person dies and goes to heaven." –Ralph Nielsen

MEX: "Well, here’s the Bible and there are the Jews...">>

That's great! There are Jews? I am very impressed.

MEX: "and everything the Bible said that would happen to them BEFORE it happened,">>

Well,
a) except for that bit about it saying Israel would rise no more.
b) the fact that you didn't predict this beforehand and are data mining after the fact

MEX: "Why should I doubt what the Bible says about the Jews AFTER it happened?">>

Because you are making stuff up, cherry picking verses and avoiding the ones that contradict what you want to believe. It's a child's game. Grow up.

MEX: "trying to annihilate the Jews that according to your school of thought are not the real ones.">>

I didn't say they weren't real Jews. Jewish is used to refer to ethnic, cultural and religious behavior. If you think some of your ancestors were Jews, or practiced the religion, kinda, or you convert to believing some of the religion... then you are a real Jew. Madonna's a real Jew, I think.

MEX: "a guy called Jacob usurped the birth rights of his older brother, Esau who...>>

That's all mythology. Not even the conservative branch of Judaism believes that anymore. Likewise, all of the Exodus stories, all made up. Crap. But don't ask me, as the Jews:

***
New Torah For Modern Minds

By MICHAEL MASSING (NYT)
Section B , Page 7 , Column 4 ABSTRACT - United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism issues new Torah and commentary called Etaz Hayim (Tree of Life), which offers interpretation of Bible as human rather than divine document; book, incorporating latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and study of ancient cultures, proposes that Abraham never existed, that entire Exodus story as recounted in Bible probably never occurred, that Jericho was unwalled and uninhabitated, and that David was not fearless king who built Jerusalem into might capital but more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide rallying point for fledgling nation;"
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/09/books ... all&src=pm

MEX: "Where’d do I personally fit in the story?">>

You're just a little bug on a speck of sand flying through space. You've used the crutch of religion to pretend that it was all created for you and you've swallowed this story that you have sins to feel guilty and but don't worry, they have been paid for because a Jewish guy got strung up on a tree 2,000 years ago. It's all nonsense on stilts. Embarrassing.

D.
-----------------
"If a man can't believe that Jesus arose from the dead he should say so frankly and have it done. It is not only foolish but also dishonest for him to pretend to accept all the implications of Christianity without admitting the basic postulate. In this field the Catholic Church, as usual, has been enormously more intelligent than the Protestant. It has rejected so-called Modernism in toto and refuses any compromise with it. The Protestants' attempts to compromise have simply made Protestantism ludicrous. No man of any intellectual dignity can accept it, or even discuss it seriously. The only really respectable Protestants are the Fundamentalists. Unfortunately, they are also palpable idiots, and so Christianity gains nothing by their adherence -- in fact, it is gravely injured by their adherence, just as spiritualism would be made preposterous, even if it were not so intrinsically, by the frowsy old imbeciles who believe in it." --H.L. Mencken

***

MEX: "The prophet Samuel had a conversation with King Saul after he had died,">>

No he didn't, he went to a psychic and the psychic said she could see Saul. A standard parlor trick, still used to fool silly people today. The trouble with claims regarding supposed interaction with the "supernatural" is that besides the fact they can never confirm that they aren't hallucinating or tricking themselves, they can never confirm that they aren't being tricked by a demon.
Most Christians know better than to claim that God would use a spirit medium. (Deut 18:10-12), and the Hebrew scriptures clearly state that dead persons are not conscious. (Ecc 9:5)

"In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." Gen. 3:19

"As the cloud is consumed and vanisheth away: so he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more." Job 7:9

"Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish." Psalm 146:3,4

Etc. What part of "his thoughts perish" is giving you difficulty?

MEX: "...others had encounters with The Angel of The Lord which were Jesus pre-incarnate visits to them.">>

Nonsense. There is no Jesus or anything to do with Jesus in the Hebrew Scriptures.

MEX: "The prophet Samuel had a conversation with King Saul after he had died,">>

No he didn't, he went to a psychic and the psychic said she could see Saul. A standard parlor trick, still used to fool silly people today. The trouble with claims regarding supposed interaction with the "supernatural" is that besides the fact they can never confirm that they aren't hallucinating or tricking themselves, they can never confirm that they aren't being tricked by a demon.
Most Christians know better than to claim that God would use a spirit medium. (Deut 18:10-12), and the Hebrew scriptures clearly state that dead persons are not conscious. (Ecc 9:5)

"In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." Gen. 3:19

"As the cloud is consumed and vanisheth away: so he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more." Job 7:9

"Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish." Psalm 146:3,4

Etc. What part of "his thoughts perish" is giving you difficulty?

MEX: "...others had encounters with The Angel of The Lord which were Jesus pre-incarnate visits to them.">>

Nonsense. There is no Jesus or anything to do with Jesus in the Hebrew Scriptures.

MEX: "So, Messiah... is eternal...">>

More baseless assertions piled on top of each other.

MEX: "Death is not annihilation, only liberation from the body.">>

Wrong. The idea of a soul was a later invention Christians stole from the Zoroastrians. No one dies and goes to heaven in the Hebrew Scriptures. One is hard pressed to think of a clearer more exact way of explicitly stating that death is a *complete* cessation of existence or consciousness than this verse:

"For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun... Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest. Ecclesiastes 9:5, 6, 10.

Again: There is no work, device, knowledge or wisdom, in the grave, where *you* are going. That's what your Bible says.

"For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again." Ecclesiastes 3:19-20

What scholars say:
"There is no dichotomy of body and soul in the OT. The Israelite saw things concretely, in their totality, and thus he considered men as persons and not as composites. The term nepes, though translated by our word soul, never means soul as distinct from the body or the individual person..." (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. XIII, p. 449)

MEX: "Josephus explains hell in detail.">>

I don't give a flip what Josephus, in the mid-first century, babbled about a supernatural realm that neither he nor anyone else could know anything about. Josephus lived in superstitious times and believed all sorts of nonsense. Do you also believe:

1) a heifer being led to the altar in the temple gave birth to a lamb?
2) an altar glowed with such brightness the ninth hour of one night that it gave the appearance of daylight for about 30 minutes?
3) a gate to the temple, which was so heavy that 20 men were needed to open and close it, opened of its own accord one night?
4) Do you believe that the people of Jerusalem saw in the clouds at sunset soldiers and chariots
surrounding the city?

Josephus said that all of these things happened (*Wars of the Jews,* 6:5.3). Is there anything so stupid and absurd that you won't believe it if you think it will help you from accepting the reality of your death?

MEX: "Proof of life after death.">>

This is proof that when people come near death, oxygen deprivation causes them to see funny lights and have altered states of consciousness. This was an interesting topic in the 80's with Raymond Moody but it's all been debunked now. Begin here:

http://www.skepdic.com/nde.html

If you have the courage to consider the case against immortality, see here: "The Case Against Immortality"

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ ... ality.html

MEX: "...the Jews had great misconceptions about their religion and Messiah.">>

But thank goodness they have you, a Christian, to come along and tell the Jews about what their Jewish religion "really" means. Once again we see that the arrogance of Christians is truly boundless.

Continued...

MEX: "In Ezekiel 18:4, God straightened up the misconception of sins of the fathers being paid by their children.">>

Wrong (and one of my favorite contradictions). God gave flatly contradictory rules about this. Observe:

God does not punish children for the sins of their fathers.
The fathers shall not be put to death for the children,
neither shall the children be put to death for the
fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own
sin. Deut. 24:16
Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity
of the father? When the son hath done that which is
lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and
hath done them, he shall surely live. The soul that
sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the
iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the
iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous
shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked
shall be upon him. Ezek. 18:19, 20.

Vs.

God punishes children for the sins of their fathers.

... I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting
the iniquity of the fathers upon the children... Exod. 20:5

Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity
and transgression and sin, and that will by no means
clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers
upon the children, and upon the children's
children, unto the third and to the fourth
generation. Exod. 34:7 also Num. 14:18, Deut. 5:9

Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given
great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to
blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee
shall surely die. 2 Sam. 12:14

And the word of the LORD came to Elijah... Seest
thou how Ahab humbleth himself before me? because
he humbleth himself before me, I will not bring the
evil in his days: but in his son's days will I bring the
evil upon his house. 1 Kings 21:28, 29

Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity
of their fathers... Isaiah. 14:21

Thou shewest lovingkindness unto thousands, and
recompensest the iniquity of the fathers into the
bosom of their children after them... Jer. 32:18

MEX: "God explains each one responds for their own sins.">>

As I show with the above examples, your God is very confused on that issue.

MEX: "The Jews of Jesus time had 2 or 3 “denominations,”... they all had many differences among them.">>

That's what happens when you make claims based upon faith rather than reason. Everyone makes up their own versions. Just like you like to do.

MEX: "Daniel’s prophesies were on the money 100%.">>

Then present one you think you can defend. The fact that modern Christian scholarship understands that Daniel was still being fiddled with in 164BC, gets rid of most of your claims to prophecy.

MEX: "the reestablishment of the nation of Israel.">>

Your Bible says Israel was to rise no more. Either way, you have a false prophecy.

MEX: "Israel uses names like Arrow and Chariot for their missiles and tanks.">>

That's nice. Do try to not be so gullible.

***
MEX: Isn’t it a sad commentary... to have a favorite contradiaction?">>

I am a collector of the finest Bible contradictions. Each on is precious in mine eyes.

Mex: "Is this what you call intellect?">>

It's called scholarship. The contradictions I refer to have been well known among scholars and the biblical informed, for centuries.

MEX: "The verse in Exodus 20:5 talks about the effects of unbelief.">>

Nice try. If you would like me to walk you through the Hebrew here, we can do that. Rest assured, when Yahweh "visits" later generations with punishment for the sins of the ancestors, it's not "about the effects of unbelief." Perhaps the NIV is more clear for you:

"...he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.” Exod. 43:7 (NIV)

MEX: "Romans 1 expands talking about the social decay that occurs...">>

Sorry, your Bible is much too explicit for your warmed over apologetics. I gave you eight clear examples of your God punishing people for the sins of their ancestors, often with the death penalty That's what your book says, black and white, plain as day.

MEX: "Exodus 20:5 contains a side comment of the consequences on those who hate Him.">>

No, Exodus 20:5 says, and means:

"...I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,"

MEX: "In Deutoronomy, God lays the law of the land and in this particular verse...">>

Deuteronomy 5:9 is identical: "I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,..."

MEX: "Ezekiel does not contradict Deutoronomy or Exodus,">>

Of course it does, quite perfectly. This is called the evolution of morals. The Bible is a Jewish record of humans slowly working out moral issues pretending it has something to do with a God. Standard anthropology.

MEX: "Each accusation of contradiction can be answered.">>

Some can, most can't. Bible contradictions are my specialty. Here's a simple one that only requires you having the ability to count to two:

a) In Mark and Luke, we have nine references to Jesus asking for and receiving a single donkey (Mark 11:1-4, 7 and Luke 19:28-40).

b) In the Matthew version of the same event we have seven references to Jesus asking for and receiving TWO animals (Matt 21:1-3, 5-7).

We know why the Matthew version added a donkey, the author wanted to fulfill a non-existent prophecy at Zach. 9:9 (a verse the author clearly misread, the author not understanding the Hebrew Parallelism). At least one of these versions is not true. The accounts are contradictory. Jesus either asked for and received one animal, or he asked for and received two animals. This is just one example of more than a hundred that can easily be provided. No Bible scholar takes the notion seriously that the Bible doesn't contain a multitude of contradictions.

MEX: "you rejoice at any apparent contradiction and rush to point it out without thought...">>

No, I rejoice in holding beliefs that are true. You rejoice in embracing falsehoods that provide you emotional comfort and fit with your beliefs based on faith.

MEX: "read detailed, long, and huge, boring explanations of why the attempt to redate Daniel is wrong.">>

Regardless. As usual, I refer to the established, mainstream, peer reviewed, Christian Bible scholarship and you go with fundamentalist assertions that have nothing to do with actual scholarship. The date of Daniel is well known as is the fact that you can't squeeze any fulfilled prophecies out of it.

MEX: "Daniel... was written in BC and contains a more important prophesy which is the birth of the Christ,">>

Show this.

MEX: "I’ve proven you read out of context and with malice.">>

You've shown no such thing. And accordingly, you provide no example to support your charge. This is not by accident.

MEX: "Ezekiel wrote Israel will be reestablished and it was in 1947.">>

The book of Amos says that can't happen: " The virgin of Israel is fallen; she shall no more rise:"
Other than a similar religious heritage, there is no demonstrable connection between the Jews of the Bible and the people who started modern Israel. Not that it would matter if there was. The Bible is filled with plainly false and failed prophecies. See Tyre for instance.

MEX: "a number of end-time prophesies yet to be fulfilled,">>

In fact all of them, and they were supposed to happen soon, 1,900 years ago. That means they failed. All of them.

MEX: "You have a personal interest in the whole Bible being false because you’ve bet your soul it’s false.">>

The "whole Bible" isn't false, just a very large portion of it. I have a personal interest in believing things that are true. You have a personal interest in massaging your fear based, faith based, emotion based superstitions. There is no evidence for a soul. Death is the end just as your Bible clearly says, over and over, as I have already shown.

MEX: "Loosing your gamble means eternal hell fire for you.">>

I am as afraid of burning in a Christian hell, as you are of burning in a Muslim hell. They have one too. It's a favorite for scaring the kiddies and gullible but it doesn't work on people who've seen behind the curtain and know precisely how silly your religion is. Note:

"They who believe not shall have garments of fire fitted unto them; boiling water shall be poured on their heads; their bowels shall be dissolved thereby, and also their skins, and they shall be beaten with maces of iron." -Qur'an, 22:19-21

"The disbelievers say: "Do not listen to this Qur'an, and shout away; you may haply prevail."
We shall make the disbelievers taste the severest punishment, and retribute them for the worst that they had done. This is the requital for God's enemies: Hell, where they will have their lasting home, as punishment for denying Our revelations. --Qur'an, Ha Mim As-Sajdah 26-28.

That's right Mexi, you'll be roasting in a Muslim hell when you're wrong because you've bet your imaginary soul that you've latched on to the right fear based superstition. Oldest trick in the book. And you fell for it.

MEX: "Jesus paid your gambling debt,">>

I don't need him to be my scapegoat. I have six goats in my backyard right now and any time I feel sinful I can go back there and put my sins on a goat. Just like in the good old days, the way Yahweh likes it. I could even offer up a burnt sacrifice, because as everyone knows, there is nothing the creator of the universe likes more than the smell of burning goat flesh. Why would we need Jesus when we have all of these goats?

MEX: "you’d rather die... than admit... you’re wrong.">>

I'll gladly admit I am wrong. I've done it before. After all, I was a Christian, and I was wrong. All you have to do is provide good reasons showing I am wrong. And you can't do that, because you don't have good reasons. If there were good reasons, I'd still be a Christian.

D.
------------
Men have feverishly conceived a heaven only to find it insipid, and a hell to find it ridiculous. -- George Santayana

***
MEX: "the donkey(s) issue is such petty nonsense.">>

Excellent, then you won't have any trouble answering the two questions presented:

1) How many animals did Jesus ask for?
2) How many animals did Jesus receive?

Mark and Luke have nine references to Jesus asking for, and receiving, one donkey (Mark 11:1-4, 7 and Luke 19:28-40).

Matthew's version of the same event has seven references to Jesus asking, for and receiving, TWO animals (Matt 21:1-3, 5-7).

Unless 1 = 2, you have a problem. Guess what, 1 doesn't equal 2, and you have a problem. Your God can't get his story straight. This is one problem of hundreds like it. But you won't know these problems are there, unless you read your Bible with your brain turned on. Fundie Christians don't do that.

MEX: "Jesus didn’t ride the two donkeys at the same time,">>

Whether he wrote one or two at a time, was not the question. But nice attempt at evasion.

MEX: "When Matt says “them” he may’ve been speaking about the garments that were put on the donkeys.">>

Let's open the good book and see if your claim could possible make any sense:

"And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem,... then
sent Jesus two disciples, Saying unto them, Go into
the village over against you, and straightway ye shall
find an ass tied, AND A COLT with her: loose THEM, and
bring THEM unto me. And if any man say ought unto
you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of THEM, and
straightway he well send THEM... And the disciples
went, and did as Jesus commanded them, And brought
the ass, AND THE COLT, and put on THEM their clothes,
and they set him thereon." Matt 21:1-3, 5-7

Nope. Your claim doesn't possibly make any sense.

MEX: "Mark and Luke were not present, but Matt may’ve had more details because he was of the twelve and surely an eye witness,">>

Nonsense. The gospels are anonymous second hand hearsay. They don't even pretend to be first hand accounts. The names were added over a century later. But this is all irrelevant anyway. Why? Because one does not equal two. That's why. *Why* your Bible contradicts itself is an interesting question but entirely different from the fact that it does. And this example is one where we have a good understanding of how it happened. The author of Matthew didn't know his Hebrew well and misunderstood the parallelism in Zech 9:9. He and the other gospelers made these errors over and over. I'll provide several examples in a post below this one.

MEX: "whereas Mark and Luke were told or read about it second hand.">>

All of the gospels are second hand. Perhaps you should read your Bible with a little more discernment.

MEX: "this is totally insignificant considering Jesus fulfilled 100% of all Messianic prophesies,">>

I've challenged you to demonstrate one, and you can't demonstrate one. There's a good reason for that.

MEX: "regardless of scholar peer review.">>

Of course you aren't interested in actual Bible scholarship, it doesn't agree with your faith based religious beliefs. This is cowardice.

MEX: "You squeeze the pages of the Bible like pimples looking for some dirt without the deeper study.">>

As I've shown, my study goes a lot deeper than yours. And I've only scratched the surface.

MEX: "If small things like these shook your faith,...">>

What shook my faith was learning that "faith" is never a reason to believe something. In fact, it's the opposite of a good reason. When you have good reasons, you never appeal to faith. People only appeal to faith, when they don't have any good reason to believe something. That's what the word actually means:

faith n.
1. unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence
-- Webster's New World Dictionary -- Third College Edition

MEX: "There are really no contradictions. None.">>

Now you're just being obtuse. Again:

1) How many animals did Jesus ask for?
2) How many animals did Jesus receive?

Is the Mark/Luke version correct, or the Matthew version? You can't have both, and you need both to have an inerrant Bible.

MEX: "the promised land has its proper name again. This was prophesied...">>

I've already shown you where your Bible prophesied that Israel was to rise no more. Oops.
You've consistently ducked and ran from this problem. Typical.

MEX: "which sets the stage to end-time prohecy.">>

Your end time prophecies were supposed to happen nearly 2,000 years. That's a really big miss. Utter failure.

D.
--------------------
Further explanation of Matthew's blunder provided in post below.
***
Further explanation on gospel writers making boo boo's as they misread their Hebrew (a common problem among Christians even today... sigh):

***
"In talking about two donkeys, Matthew clearly misapplied the Hebrew parallelism in Zechariah Chapter 9. That is why he introduced two donkeys, not because he knew of a second donkey being ridden into Jerusalem by 'disciples' (which may or may not be the case).

- the original "prophecy" (in Zechariah) refers to synonymously paralleled animals ("a donkey, and a colt" - Matt 21:5). This is a Hebraism (a Hebrew figure of speech) which actually refers to a single animal. It is very common, and occurs right throughout the poetic and prophetic books.

- whereas the 'fulfillment' is literal in having "a donkey" AND "a colt" as two *separate* animals (Matt 21:7).

Therefore, there is no fulfillment at all. Matthew's rendition of a "donkey AND a colt" is a clear reference, albeit mistakenly, to Zechariah's single donkey.

Synonymous parallelism is a constant feature of Hebrew poetry. And Zechariah's reference to "riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey" is a typical example of this particular feature of Hebrew Poetry.

Yet, the writer of Matthew fails to appreciate that Zechariah originally referred to "one animal" utilising poetic parallel designations. Matthew misinterpreted Zechariah. And in misinterpreting Zechariah, Matthew revealed that he had CREATED this account of Jesus entering into Jerusalem. Matthew's error reveals not only Matthew's ignorance of Hebrew, but that this is not a 'fulfilment' of prophecy. This is merely one writer's creative telling of a story by using / misinterpreting prophecy.

The failure to recognise synonymous parallelism is actually fairly frequent in the New Testament, and therefore provides contextual support for this interpretation of Matthew. Here's another couple of examples:

1. In John 19:23-24 "garments" (himatia) and "clothing" (himatismon) are taken as two different items. The "clothing" (himatismon) is narrated as being divided into four parts - one for each soldier. YET, the "garments" (himatia) are narrated as being apportioned by taking lots.

The 'prophecy' is taken from Psalm 22 (an infamously miscontrued Psalm by many Christians, since the days of the 4 Evangelists). Psalm 22:18 (being a poem) is a clear example of parallelism. Psalm 22:18 reads "they divide my clothes among themselves, and for my clothing they cast lots". Each of the two parallel descriptions tells EXACTLY THE SAME THING: The enemies:
(a) took the Psalmist's clothes, and
(b) divided them between them.

Yet, 'John' failed to realise this fact. So, he narrates the taking of clothes and dividing of them between them TWICE!

2. In Acts 4:25-27 "kings" and "rulers" are treated as different people! The "king" is named as "Herod", and the "ruler" as Pontius Pilate. Yet, the 'prophecy' turns out to be another piece of Hebrew parallelism, this time in Psalm 2:1.

Parallelism runs right the way through the Psalms, yet both the writer of Acts, and 'John' simply fail to appreciate this.And, in their ignorance, they misinterpret the Psalms by making a literal translation out of a poetic trope." --Brendon J.

This is how we know these gospel stories aren't history, they are religious fictions created... "so you might believe."

***
February 20, 2012 at 11:49 PM
http://www.skepticmoney.com/johnny-depp ... ment-49912

***

[Dardedar]

***
Mexseiko says:
February 21, 2012 at 4:58 AM
I’ve read the answers to the donkey “problem” and they’re perfectly plausible to me.">>

Well, I am sure that others, like me, aren't interested in what you are capable of bringing yourself to believe, but rather what you can show. After all, you believe in talking donkeys (and snakes). If you can't figure out that donkeys can't talk, why would anyone trust you could know the difference between one or two of them?

MEX: "You’re hell-bent on disproving the Bible...">>

No, I am hell bent on discovering the truth about such matters. You are hell bent on being intellectually dishonest in order to protect false beliefs that give you emotional comfort.

MEX: "You treat different points of view and expressions as a catastrophic event destroying the truth of God and gospels.">>

As one fundie apologist correctly put it:
"...if the Biblical record can be proved fallible in areas of fact that can be verified, then it is hardly to be trusted in areas where it cannot be tested."
--Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, Gleason L. Archer (pg. 23)

That's your problem. We are to believe this book is accurate on all of these extraordinary claims that no one can check, yet as anyone can see, it can't even get its ordinary claims right on things we CAN check. That's a fail. I would expect more from inspiration from an almighty God. Your donkey math doesn't add up.

MEX: "Jesus asked for a specific donkey, the disciples went a got, and He rode the animal in the procession.">>

Except Matthew, while spinning his tale, in order to fulfill a non-existent prophecy he was too stupid to understand, added another donkey to his yarn. And he got busted. And this isn't the only time.

MEX: "What Matthew wrote does not in any way contradicts the account offered by the other gospels.">>

If that were true, and you know it isn't true, then you should be able to provide the following information (which is included in the accounts) for these two questions:

1) How many animals did Jesus ask for?
2) How many animals did Jesus receive?

MEX: "Even if it did, you still have 3 accounts that do agree,">>

If you had been reading your Bible with your brain on, you would know that your gospels are filled with such examples, and many of them are on important doctrinal issues. See below.

MEX: "A quick glance at all 4 account does not produce a controversy as to how many donkeys were involved.">>

Of course it does. That's why you can't answer my two questions. Matthew contradicts Mark/Luke.

MEX: "Adam and Even believed a lie about God and mistrusted Him.">>

Really? What was this lie? You really don't know anything about your Bible.
"Adam and Eve," as the story goes, weren't given the ability to know the difference between right and wrong or good and evil, so why should they (and all of their descendants, talk about punishing the children for the sins of their fathers...) be judged on something they couldn't possibly have knowledge of? The entire foundation of your religion makes no sense.

MEX: "Trust and believe is the whole theme of the whole Bible.">>

No, being asked to believe extraordinary nonsensical claims, without good reasons (faith), is the whole theme of the Bible.

MEX: "God pulls a man he judged that would Trust Him and tested Him by promising him a son, delaying the delivery,">>

Why would your God need to "test" someone? He knows the future and he knows what is in the heart:

God knows the hearts of all men:

...for he knoweth the secrets of the heart. Psalm 44:21

O LORD, thou hast searched me, and known me...
thou understand my thought afar off... and art
acquainted with all my ways. Psalm 139:1-3

And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which
knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen, Acts 1:24

Except that he doesn't:

God does not know (without testing) the hearts of all.

...for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou
hast not witheld thy son, thine only son from me. Gen. 22:12

...the LORD thy God led thee these forty years in the
wilderness, to humble thee, and to prove thee, to
know what was in thine heart... Deut. 8:2

When you take another group's religious tales and literalize them, you get nonsense.

MEX: "in the end He offers His own Son to demonstrate His side of the relationship.">>

Yes, God becomes himself, so he can make a sacrifice to himself, to appease himself, and keep him from punishing all of humanity for all time because someone who couldn't know any better ate an apple 6,000 years ago from the wrong tree. That makes sense.

You appear to have given up on the donkey problem. That was predictable. It can't be solved. Let's consider something else that has modern day effects: Divorce.

The Bible has about six different positions on divorce:

1) Deuteronomy 24:1-2: A man can divorce a woman if "she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her." She can go remarry.

2) Mark 10:2-12: Jesus states that, while Moses said you can divorce, he says you cannot. So anyone who divorces and remarries is committing adultery. No exceptions.

3) Luke 16:18: Anyone who divorces a spouse and remarries commits adultery. No exceptions.

4) Matthew 5:31-32: Jesus says that you can divorce on the grounds of "fornication," and those who do may remarry.

5) Romans 7:2-3: St. Paul says a woman can remarry only after her husband is dead.

6) 1 Corinthians: 7:10-11: A woman who leaves her husband must remain unmarried.

So what is THE rule about divorce and remarriage?

No one may ever divorce.

Couples may only divorce on the grounds of fornication.

A man may divorce his wife if she is "unclean."

Neither party of a divorced couple may remarry.

Either party of a divorced couple may remarry.

A woman who divorces cannot remarry.

A woman who divorces can remarry once her ex-husband is dead.

It must be so nice to have an instruction book from God and have clear answers to these pressing moral questions.

And Mexi tells us there are no Bible contradictions!

***

[Dardedar]

Darrel says:
February 23, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Poor Mexseiko, he gives up and reveals he can't compete in a market place of ideas. In the above he responds to no points and answers not a single question. He has no defense. He is reduced to waving his Bible in one hand and shaking a scary puppet of his God in the other. He has nothing but musty and dusty old threats to throw as he pitifully bows and scrapes before a spook he has created in his own terrified mind. This is truly humanity at it's lowest. The one animal that at least has the ability of abstract thought, contemplation and reason, and Mexseiko throws it away because he is too busy wetting his pants in fear of a 2,000 year old apparition he read about in a book full of absurdities and childish myths. And the more absurd the better! Because as everyone knows, it takes more faith to believe absurdities, and as his myth goes, that's the only thing his God is interested: people believing things without good reasons! It's not in God's plan that people should actually believe things based upon good reasons. No, that would make too much sense.

I'll give his sermon a few pokes, but really, he doesn't leave much to chew on. He's just regurgitating slogans he heard in church now.

MEX: "I was looking for silver bullet of proof.">>

I've never asked for proof, just evidence. And you don't have any.

MEX: "I found that the perfection of the Bible is such that proof would be a defect.">>

So if the Bible had even more errors, more mistakes, more lies, more absurdities, then you could even demonstrate greater faith by believing it. That makes sense if you live on planet fundie and will believe anything to protect your faith based beliefs. The more ridiculous the claim, the greater the faith required, and the greater reward your sky god gives you for believing it. Makes sense eh?

ME: "Because God requires faith.">>

You have been programmed to say that, because you don't have good reasons for your beliefs. If you had good reasons, and you've shown that you don't, you would use those and you wouldn't speak so foolishly.

Let's have a quick lesson on "faith."

***
APPEALS TO FAITH

"By appealing to faith, the Christian wishes to claim the status of
knowledge for beliefs that have not fulfilled the minimum requirements of
knowledge. Indeed, this is the only context in which the appeal to faith
makes sense. But to label as "knowledge" that which has not been rationally
demonstrated is a contradiction, because reason demands that nothing be
designated as knowledge except that which can fulfill its fundamental
requirements.

This is the essence of faith: to consider an idea as true even though it
cannot meet the test of truth, to consider an idea as having a referent in
reality while rejecting the process by which man knows reality. Regardless
of the particular manner in which the Christian characterizes his version
of faith, he cannot escape its irrational bias. His only chance of escape,
to claim that articles of faith can also meet the requirements of reason,
is a dead end, because it renders the concept of faith inapplicable. Faith
is possible only in the case of beliefs that lack rational demonstration.
Since faith must entail belief in the absence of rational demonstration,
all propositions of faith--regardless of their specific content--are
irrational. To believe on faith is to believe in defiance of rational
guidelines, and this is the essence of irrationalism.

Because of this inherent irrationalism, faith can never rescue the
concept of God or the truth of Christian dogmas. Faith is required only for
those beliefs that cannot be defended. Only if one's beliefs are
indefensible--and only if one wishes to retain these beliefs in spite of
their indefensibility--is the appeal to faith necessary. If the Christian
wishes to argue for the rationality of his convictions, he should stick
with presenting evidence and arguments, and he should never appeal to faith
in the first place. The Christian who calls upon faith has already admitted
the irrationality of his belief; he has already conceded that his beliefs
cannot be defended through reason.

If we cannot understand the concept of God, we do not come closer to
understanding it through faith. If the doctrines of Christianity are
absurd, they do not lose their absurdity through faith. If there are no
reasons to believe in Christianity, we do not gain reasons through faith.
Faith does not erase contradictions and absurdities; it merely allows one
to believe in spite of contradictions and absurdities.

The appeal to faith solves nothing and explains nothing; it merely
diverts attention away from the crucial issue of truth. In the final
analysis, not only is the concept of faith irreconcilably opposed to
reason, but it is evasive and quite useless as well."
--George H. Smith, (Atheism: The Case Against God, Prometheus Books 1989, pp. 123-124)

MEX: "No one can prove the Bible, but no one can disprove it either.">>

A book doesn't get "proven." The Bible is quite useful as a record of the barbaric development and religious morals of a small portion of humanity, but aside from that, it's not literally true, is not history, and is filled will howling mistakes that have been known for centuries. You don't know this because like most Christians, you are profoundly ignorant of your Bible. Even worse, you've studied it in such a way to make yourself in more unaware of what it actually says. It's called "studied stupid."

MEX: "Jesus gave proof to Thomas,...">>

That's what the story says, but this only reveals that Jesus is unfair in providing equal evidence to everyone else. As Thomas Paine pointed out 217 years ago:

"...Thomas did not believe the resurrection [John 20:25], and, as they say, would not believe without having ocular and manual demonstration himself. So neither will I, and the reason is equally as good for me, and for every other person, as for Thomas." --Age of Reason, pg. 54

MEX: "blessed are those who believe without seeing.">>

But if people believe in things without seeing evidence for them, they will believe anything. They'll even fly planes into buildings and claim it is the will of their God. We call these people idiots. Some of them are dangerous and get locked up. As one person put it:
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." [Nietzsche]

MEX: "The Pharisees asked for a signs and although he had given many signs, he said there’d will be no sign given this generation except His death, burial, and resurrection.">>

Several problems here, so let's expose them. In Mark, Jesus says there will be "NO" sign given to that generation:

"No sign was to be given to Jesus's generation."

And the Pharisees came forth, and began to question
with him, seeking of him a sign from heaven, tempting
him. And he sighed deeply in his spirit, and saith, Why
doth this generation seek after a sign? verily I say unto
you, There shall no sign be given unto this
generation. And he left them,... Mark 8-11-13

But wait, is that true? Or was Jesus lying yet again? Matthew and Luke change the story...

a) There was the sign of the prophet Jonah.

Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees
answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from
thee. But he answered and said unto them, An evil and
adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there
shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the
prophet Jonas:... Matt. 12:38-39; also 16:4 and Luke 11:29

b) There were many signs given to that generation:

And many other signs truly did Jesus in the
presence of his disciples, which are not written in this
book: But these are written, that ye might believe that
Jesus is the Christ,... John 20:30-31

And a great multitude followed him, because they
saw his miracles which he did on them that were diseased. John 6:2

And they went forth, and preached every where, the
Lord working with them, and confirming the word
with signs following. Amen. Mark 16:20

...Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among
you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God
did by him in the midst of you, as you yourselves
also know. Acts 2:22

And by the hands of the apostles were many signs
and wonders wrought among the people... Acts 5:12

And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great
wonders and miracles among the people. Acts 6:8 also Acts 8:13

So we see, Mexseikio reveals even more errors in the Bible. Jesus can't get his story straight. Thanks for the assist.

MEX: "our relationship with God was broken when Adam and Eve believed a lie...">>

What was that lie? Why are you afraid to answer this question?

MEX: "whoever is incapable of trust and faith, is equally disqualified to enter... His kingdom.">>

Yes, God can't have people around him that actually believe things based upon evidence, he needs imbeciles that only believe things without good reasons. That makes sense, on planet fundie.

MEX: "There is plenty of evidence but the proof will be shown at a time...">>

How convenient. You have plenty of evidence but you just can't remember where you laid it. You have plenty of evidence, but it conveniently just can't be revealed until after you're dead and you have pissed away your life trembling before shadows. You've traded real "milk" in this life, for the baseless promise of "cream" after death. As Ingersoll put it:

"I have little confidence in any enterprise or business or investment that promises dividends only after the death of the stockholders." [Robert G. Ingersoll]

MEX: "In God’s plan trusting and believing in God’s prosecutor... will redeem our debt and set us free.">>

You can show no plan, no God, and I have no debt and am already free. One who is not sick, needs no physician. You pretend that your imaginary God has cut you, and then you let him sell you an imaginary band-aid. It's a child's game you were sold as a child, and you fell for it.

MEX: There’s plenty of evidence, but no proof.">>

I haven't asked for proof, only evidence. And not only do you not have it, you are proud of not having it and say that this is even more reason to believe because your sky God especially loves irrational faith based belief!

MEX: "I choose... to humble... before... Him who humbled Himself and allowed to be butchered by us for my own personal guilt.">>

What a savage tale, only believed by idiots.

"...an absurd problem comes to the surface: How could God permit that [crucifixion of J.C.]!...the deranged reason of the little community found quite a frightfully absurd answer: God gave his Son for forgiveness, as a sacrifice... The sacrifice for guilt, and the just in its most repugnant and barbarous form... the sacrifice of the innocent for the sins of the guilty. What horrifying heathenism!" --Friedrich Nietzsche

MEX: "I choose the foolishness of the gospel.">>

Yes, I know: "We are fools for Christ's sake..." - 1 Cor.4:10

And you are proud of your foolishness. That's when you know you've really been sold a bill of goods. You are actually proud of being a fool.

D.
---------------
"Tell a devout Christian man that by eating frozen yogurt, he can become invisible - he requires evidence as much as anyone else" - but tell him that a certain book he keeps by his bed is written by an invisible deity who will punish him with fire for an eternity if he fails to accept its every incredible claim about the universe, and he requires no evidence whatsoever."
--Sam Harris, "The End of Faith"

***

[Dardedar]

Again Mexseiko is reduced to not responding to a single question or a single point. And that's unfortunate. Perhaps he is trying to bore us to death?

***
Mexseiko says:
February 24, 2012 at 5:13 AM
Your little childish victory dance and you taunting do not change the fact...">>

Change the "fact?" Why would you now refer to "fact." You live by faith Mexseiko. As has been shown, you have no use for "facts." They are useless to you and only get in the way. Facts are rather hurtful to your faith based hopes. Best for you to avoid facts all together.
I have done a victory dance but considering the shellacking your claims have received, I can see how you might think I have.

MEX: "The Scriptures are true even in a personal way...">>

No, your scriptures are either true or false in a real way, and in most instances, as I have shown, they are false. The law of non-contradiction is a real bugger.

MEX: "You received the gospel for a while,...">>

It was forced on me by my parents, but I saw through it early on. I have managed to help a father, two sisters, a brother and many others leave your superstition.

MEX: "Regardless of whether you think I’m conceding,...>>

I don't give a flip what you do. But you do know you have been put over the knee and spanked here. But don't take it personally. Your God just didn't give you anything to work with. It's all part of his plan. I am sure your nonsense works in forums where there aren't informed skeptics around to grind it to dust.

MEX: "you can’t erase the Scriptures,...">>

You can make them irrelevant, as our secular society largely has since the enlightenment. As I told you earlier in this exchange. Christianity is in a century long decline. Atheism and non-belief has already taken over Europe and it is snowballing in the US right now. Note:

"A new nationwide survey conducted by The [Christian] Barna Group... explored how many have what might be considered a “biblical worldview.” ... Overall, the current research revealed that only 9% of all American adults have a biblical worldview."

And that's the US which is far more religious than our secular peers in Europe, Canada, Australia etc.

MEX: "and you can’t prove them false.">>

I have, over and over. And you have been found entirely incapable of dealing with my examples.

How many times have you ducked and ignored the fact that your Bible says Israel "shall rise no more?" At least half a dozen times.

How many donkeys did Jesus ask for and receive? You can't answer that question because Mark/Luke say one thing, and Matthew says they are both liars.

What are the rules for divorce? When is it allowed, or is it allowed at all? You can't respond to that because your Bible has five different, contradictory, answers for that question. Just as we would expect from a book written by different men who can't agree on such matters.

Next time you come into a forum shooting you mouth off about your Bible, perhaps it would be better if your knew a little about the subject before you began.

MEX: "Satan has been trying to prove [the scriptures] them false forever.">>

There is not a drop of evidence for a "satan" (incidentally, he wasn't even invented until about half way through your Bible, but you don't know this because you have no knowledge of modern scholarship). No one is needed to prove your scriptures false. They fall by their own dead weight. As I have shown, all you have to do is read them with your brain turned on. You haven't tried that method, because you are too busy pissing yourself while being afraid a sky god will roast you in hell for eternity if you do. It's pathetic.

MEX: "If the Scriptures were false, people on your side would not need to resort to such microscopic detail...">>

The truth is in the details, no microscopes needed. As even a child knows, for something to be true, you need at *minimum,* consistency. You don't have that. Your anonymous stories written decades and a century after the fact by people who never met Jesus are filled with holes, errors, inconsistencies, and lets speak plainly, bullshit. You can't fix these problems, you can't make them consistent. So far I haven't touched on 1% of the problems you have. You are no doubt blissfully unaware of all of this because you make sure and only read material that tickles your ears and agrees with your faith based emotions.

MEX: "you must demand more than perfection to invalidate the claim of inerrancy.">>

The claim of inerrancy, is a claim of perfection. Your book is far from it as is easy to show. That your scriptures are filled with errors and inconsistencies shows your book has nothing to do with a god but rather was patched together by bronze age goat herders. Not that there is anything wrong with goat herders, I have goats myself. How else would I get rid of my sins?

MEX: "Every claim of error is... an mere appearance of contradiction which upon examination we find a great number of possibilities.">>

Excellent. Then put on your big boy pants and tell us how many donkeys Jesus asked for and received. Then tell us, based upon the scriptures, if divorce and remarriage is allowed, or not (you can go with Mark/Luke or Matthew but you can't have both). And while you are at it, tell us why you are so stupid you keep trying to pretend that Israel has risen again even though your own Bible specifically say that it would never, rise, again.

MEX: "Proof would insert a defect to a call for faith and trust.">>

What a lame and transparent excuse for why you don't have good reasons for your claims. Far short of proof, you don't have evidence. And you are proud of this fact and even admit you are a "fool" for believing this!

MEX:" Peter said he was an eye witness...">>

We haven't the foggiest idea of what Peter may have said or not said because we have no authentic writings of Peter. Get a library card and stop making a fool of yourself.

MEX: "if you’re right and I’m wrong you loose having lived a life without faith...">>

a) A life lived based upon false promises is foolish and wasteful. Faith if never a reason to believe something.
b) the word "lose" has one "o," please make a note of it.

MEX: "I pray your followers would wake up...">>

Prayer has been thoroughly tested. It fails ever test. It doesn't work. You Bible says:

"And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive" Matt. 21:22

But that's not true, and you know it's not true. It's a lie.

MEX: "You think you won the “debate?”>>

You've consistently ducked my questions so you are in no position to ask me questions. I am pleased to let the readers decide who has been spanked in this exchange.

MEX: "Go on with your celebration.">>

Actually I will. Tomorrow at our freethinker meeting I will be giving a public lecture at our library about how to address fundie arguments and I will be using many of your comments as specific examples. I will set them up and then teach them how to knock them down. Easy, as, pie.

MEX: "Ezekiel’s prophecies are being...>>

Blah blah blah.

MEX: "Israel has become a country again...">>

Too bad your Bible prophesied that it wouldn't. You know, I think an all knowing God would know better than to put that in his book.

MEX: "keep this in mind: You got nothing. Nothing at all.">>

As the foolish superstitious man said as he typed away on his scientific computer that actually works. I have reality baby, and science. You are the one wasting your time with superstitious nonsense, but you do like to use science and the luxury it provides as you peddle your contradictions and faith based absurdities.

D.
-----------------
"If all the achievements of scientists were wiped out tomorrow, there would be no doctors but witchdoctors, no transport faster than a horse, no computers, no printed books, no agriculture beyond subsistence peasant farming. If all the achievements of theologians were wiped out tomorrow, would anyone notice the smallest difference?" --Richard Dawkins

[Dardedar]

Darrel says:
February 24, 2012 at 1:51 PM
If the fundie doesn’t get a whack when they stick their head up and pretend their beliefs can withstand reasoned examination, then how are they going to learn? Mexi probably thought his beliefs were defensible upon their merits when he came in here, now everyone knows they are not. Fundies will say that they don’t care that their beliefs aren’t defensible, but that is only a last resort, a reflexive twitch they they toss out after they have been flattened. Fundies do care and do wish they had reasonable beliefs that could withstand examination. Look how desperately Mexi has struggled to defend his claims and patch something together that could be believable by readers. All to no avail.

D.
—————-
“Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.” –Frank Zappa

***

Darrel says:
February 24, 2012 at 11:36 PM
I was working on my presentation tomorrow about Mexseiko’s apologetics and came across this Ingersoll quote. Thought I would share it:

“Suppose, however, that God did give this law to the Jews, and did tell them that whenever a man preached a heresy, or proposed to worship any other God that they should kill him; and suppose that afterward this same God took upon himself flesh, and came to this very chosen people and taught a different religion, and that thereupon the Jews crucified him; I ask you, did he not reap exactly what he had sown? What right would this god have to complain of a crucifixion suffered in accordance with his own command?”
[Ingersoll's Works, Vol. 2, p. 259]

***

Darrel says:
February 25, 2012 at 12:33 AM
MEX: “Did Jesus complain about the crucifixion?”>>

Yes.
“…Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away
this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but
what thou wilt. Mark 14:36 also John 5:30

And then, pathetically, he realizes it was all for naught, there is no God to rescue him, and he promptly becomes an atheist, and dies.

“My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Matt. 27:46

The body is probably left in a shallow grave, or fed to dogs. The disciples ran. Decades later, stories were told. Some people even still believe these stories.

MEX: It was te plan all along.”>>

Sure it was. Good plan. Go to earth, get killed. Makes sense.

MEX: “He said, “Not my will, but thine be done.”>>

Which means he had a different will than the father. So much for your Trinity.

MEX: “and He said He could call His angels if He wanted.”>>

Delusions of a man on his deathbed. Turned out he was powerless.

MEX: “Remember, 2 angels pulverized 2 entire cities.”>>

No, I don’t remember that. Do tell.

MEX: “Jesus was mocked and laughed at too.”>>

And with good reason. He had some pretty silly ideas, but not nearly as silly as some of his followers.

D.
—————-
A few things Jesus didn’t know:

He didn’t know that his disciples would die before his second coming. Matt. 16:28.

He didn’t know that the mustard seed is not the “smallest of all seeds.” Matt. 13:32.

He didn’t know that salt doesn’t “lose its savour”. Matt. 5:13

He didn’t know that hypocrisy is unbecoming when he said that whoever calls somebody a “fool” shall be in danger of hell fire (Matt. 5:22) but later called people “fools” (Matt. 23:17).

He didn’t know when the end would be (Mark 13:32). Such ignorance is perfectly acceptable for a man but hardly to be expected from a supposed God.

***

Darrel says:
February 25, 2012 at 10:46 AM
MEX: “All your comments are out of context…”>>

When you make a charge like this, you have a burden of providing examples and supporting them with evidence. You haven’t even attempted to do this, not once. The reason is, you cannot.

If I was to charge that you had taken something (never mind everything) out of context, I would give examples, provide the necessary context and then show how your failing to provide the context changed the meaning. That’s what it means to “take something out of context.” You need to show that I have done this. You have work to do. You need to:

a) provide the context that can change two donkeys into one.

b) provide the context that can make five different rules about divorce into one consistent rule.

c) provide the context that changes Israel “shall rise no more” into Israel “shall rise again.”

d) provide the context that allows a God to kill children for the sins of their ancestors while at the same time being against punishing children for the sins of their ancestors.

e) provide the context that allows “No signs shall be given to this generation,” to be consistent with… many signs were given to that generation.

f) provide the context that allows a soul and a busy afterlife to be consistent with: “there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.”

Now I am going to go and do something useful. You have work to do. Get to it.

D.
——————
A single, self contradictory verse:

“And the sons of Shechaniah; Shemaiah: and the sons of Shemaiah; Hattush, and Igeal, and Bariah, and Neariah, and Shaphat, six. 1 Chron. 3:22

Here it is with numbers inserted:
And the sons of Shechaniah; Shemaiah: and the sons of Shemaiah; [1]Hattush, and [2]Igeal, and [3]Bariah, and [4]Neariah, and [5]Shaphat, six. 1 Chron. 3:22

But the Bible doesn’t have any contradictions….

***

Looks like Mexi is about done:

Mexseiko says:
February 25, 2012 at 11:26 AM
You are correct. I do not burden myself with the task as others have done the job so well. So I refer you to them. Google the truth and truth shall set you free. I don’t have the time or energy nor the desire, specially as you obviously do not care. It is a strenuous exercise in futility. I am not indebted to you.

I can tell you why I believe and you can go where ever you want with it.

I believe because the Bible is true. The credibility of the Bible with me is such that when it says a man saw a donkey speak, i have no reason to doubt it. I believe, because you cannot convince me that there is error in the Bible. You cannot convince me that men from different ages, different regions conspired to write such an amazing book that matches history so perfectly and matches a philosophy just to play a hoax to humanity.

The wars that we’re fighting today, that were fought during the crusades, and before that were fought because of the hatred for the Jews. The reason for the intensification of tensions and wars today is because of the Jews and the scenes we read about in the newspapers are nothing but the setting of the stages for the prophesied end time events.
So, you can debate with yourself.
My ideas are not for sale, so I don’t need to expose them in any market.
There is only one Name on the earth by which man can be saved, the Name of Jesus s the only one that can save us from God’s judgment.

Now I'm bored with Mexi. This fundie doesn't have any kick left in him.