Christianity Debate (spliced from Scientology debate)

[Colton]

Nicely said ^_^

[Kieltyka]

Good points, Lois.

I sorta want to see what Constino or whatever his name is has to say. And then perhaps we should start someone else with this?

[n3M351s]

I was raised that God forgives everyone no matter what. This seems like a clean slate regardless of what you do in life, mother Theresa and Gandhi are due the same consideration in God's eyes as Adolf Hitler and Stalin? Don't think there are many people too impressed with that idea.

God will forgive anyone no matter what they've done if they repent with all their heart.

Saul of Tarsus brutalized, persecuted, and executed Christians. He was the 'Hitler' of his time. While on the Road to Damascus, God appeared to him in a flash of light and and asked, "why do you persecute me?". Saul was blinded and instructed to continue on to Damascus and meet a man called Ananias. Saul went three days with no food or drink before he arrived at Damascus. Ananias was called by the Lord to the place where Saul was staying. Ananias said, "Brother Saul, receive your sight!" and his vision was restored. He added, "Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name." Saul was baptized and became known as Paul the Apostle; one of the greatest advocates to Christianity the world has ever seen.

[n3M351s]

You cannot invent a superlative form of logic which God adheres to, since logic requires knowledge. A God who goes above and beyond the call of logic is unimaginable (although describable since there is a discrepancy between language and reality)

We cannot expect to comprehend such things when our minds are built on logic.

Omnipotence is not bound in action as we are in thought by the laws of logic.

[Fear Of The Duck]

You cannot invent a superlative form of logic which God adheres to, since logic requires knowledge. A God who goes above and beyond the call of logic is unimaginable (although describable since there is a discrepancy between language and reality)

We cannot expect to comprehend such things when our minds are built on logic.

Omnipotence is not bound in action as we are in thought by the laws of logic.

aye. that's my point exactly. i'll write more about the omnipotence thingy when i have a bit more time.

[Elongar]

The words 'omnipotent', 'omniscient' and 'omnipresent' are logical terms indicating unlimited power, knowledge and presence. The terms are bound by logic. Anything you summarily describe using the above terms is thus bound by logic.

You cannot invent a superlative form of logic which God adheres to, since logic requires knowledge. A God who goes above and beyond the call of logic is unimaginable (although describable since there is a discrepancy between language and reality), and as a result, nothing of value can be deduced from the statements regarding said superlogical God.

The words "omnipotent", "omniscient", and "omnipresent" indicate limitlessness. They are not "bound by logic" in the way that you think - they mean limitless power, limitless knowledge and limitless presence. We humans are incapable of comprehending limitless power, knowledge and presence, therefore God is incomprehensible, however we are capable of labelling this limitlessness. We can't accurately pin down its significance and its consequences, but we can refer to it in our language.

:P

I still think 'powerful enough', 'knowing enough' and 'present enough' is sufficient to adequately describe God without it resulting in innumerable differences between the logical truth and the actual reality.

And yet, "powerful enough", "knowing enough" and "present enough" are constantly changing variables. If you believe that God has a direct impact on your life, then He is making promises on a daily basis, to millions, if not billions of devout believers. To say that God's power depends on our faith, or depends on His promises is, in my opinion, a limiting factor. God is certainly not bound by humanity. He is above and beyond humanity in every concievable manner.

An absolute God with his attributes of omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence, I cannot accept. Funny thing is that no one in their right mind could accept such a God.

well.. i could... as stated above...

Not really.. you have created your own definition of God, the traditional (logical) definition of God is something you reject as well. That is what your first paragraph said.. Or at least, it is what I interpreted it to say.

Science has to follow logic, naturally. Since God cannot adequately be described in logical absolutes, God cannot be a part of science. As a result, all statements regarding faith cannot be of scientific value save in psychological research. Or do I step wrong here? Please do correct me where I made errors. I am here to learn.

I completely agree that God cannot be put under the scientific lens for analysis (coming from a would-be-mathematician). That's not to say that the attributes of God cannot be disputed (as we are doing here). Science, if you will, is a subset of logic in the sense that it has its basis in logic to form deductions, but equally it is independent of logic in its adherence to the scientific method and proof by observation. You cannot argue that because God is supernatural, and thus independent of science, logic does not apply. Logic can still be used to discern various truths about God from scripture and from theology (though to what extent is debatable).

Also, I'd be interested in hearing the "traditional (logical) definition of God".

[semper]

I am glad you added to what extent is debatable, as obviously using human sources to find truth about god...is a no no. LOGICALLY...that would be impossible as you stated yourself, God is beyond our comprehension (if it exist's) no matter to what extent we exhaust our reason trying to discover it.

I do enjoy reading your post's.

[Mister Sandman]

Also, I'd be interested in hearing the "traditional (logical) definition of God".

You cannot define God with mere mortal words.

However, it is logical to have a belief in God.

[semper]

However, it is logical to have a belief in God.[/color]

No it is not.

It is not logical to believe in something you cannot comprehend, experience or perceive. There is no solid proof of God in the physical world.

[Elongar]

Arguably, the most logical belief is neither theism, atheism or agnosticism, but ignosticism.

[Mister Sandman]

However, it is logical to have a belief in God.[/color]

No it is not.

It is not logical to believe in something you cannot comprehend, experience or perceive. There is no solid proof of God in the physical world.

There is no proof that God doesn't exist. Added, there is scientific proof to disprove most beliefs based on science. In addition, you dont have to comprehend the nature of God to know he exists. (You can experience and perceive God.

Arguably, the most logical belief is neither theism, atheism or agnosticism, but ignosticism.

Lets not forget that nature cannot brake the laws of science. Only God can.

[Elongar]

However, it is logical to have a belief in God.[/color]

No it is not.

It is not logical to believe in something you cannot comprehend, experience or perceive. There is no solid proof of God in the physical world.

There is no proof that God doesn't exist. Added, there is scientific proof to disprove most beliefs based on science. In addition, you dont have to comprehend the nature of God to know he exists. (You can experience and perceive God.

That there is no proof for God's nonexistence is not a proof for God's existence. Hence, ignosticism (ignostics demand a tangible, logical definition of God before deciding on whether one exists or not, and dismiss the question as irrelevant otherwise).

Experience and perception only really influence one's belief in God after a significant spiritual encounter. The only other people who tend to "experience" and "percieve" God are theists already. Thus this is a rather personal reason for faith, and doesn't really have any bearing on the logic of belief in God.

Arguably, the most logical belief is neither theism, atheism or agnosticism, but ignosticism.

Lets not forget that nature cannot brake the laws of science. Only God can.

I think you've got it upside down. It's not so much that Nature can't break the laws of Science as it is the fact that the laws of Science are modelled on Nature. Often, Nature breaks the laws of Science as we know them, and as a result, we have to alter our "Laws" in order to accomodate Nature.

God, as a supernatural entity is obviously not restricted by Nature, and I would never claim Him to be.

EDIT: Also, I should add that if it were logical to believe in God, then all logicians would be theists...

[Gigs]

Im just gonna go on and say evolution and creationists don't really matter in the great scheme of things.
The debate here is God real or not...

Hebrews 11 is not a chapter about believing God "for" things. "For" is an inappropriate preposition in this context; "about" would be more nearly accurate. Hebrews 11 properly deals with believing God about the present world and what we see in it not being the real thing.

Yes, faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen (verse 1). But the rest of the chapter repeatedly and forcefully clarifies that the "things hoped for" are not things of this world, and the "things not seen" are spiritual things more real than any physical thing we desire here. Thus, it is by faith that we understand that the world we see was made by (or, "through," or "from") God's words, so that God's invisible Word is the reality behind what we see. Compare verse 3 with Col. 1:16-17 and John 1:1-3. For the same reason, it is impossible to please God without faith — if we are so captivated by our own needs and by what we see around us that we can't see God as the reality behind it, we can't believe God (who tells us that He, not what we see, is real) or believe that He rewards us in a reality we can't yet see. Verse 6. And as verse 2 says, it is by faith, faith that God and His unseen reward are more real than what we see, that the ancients obtained approval.

The rest of the chapter discusses how a list of ancients who obtained approval by faith showed that faith to the world. Abel gave a pleasing sacrifice — blood rather than the fruit of his own efforts. Noah, though he had never seen rain, believed God's warning about a flood and built an ark. Abraham left his own country in obedience to God, then wandered in the land of promise as a stranger (as did Isaac and Jacob), "because he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God," verse 10, another reference to the unseen reward. Likewise, in verse 16, it is said he was desiring "a better country, that is, a heavenly one." Sarah believed God's word to her about having a child when she was past childbearing age. Abraham then obediently offered God that son, believing that God could raise him from the dead, thus demonstrating his belief that God's word is more real than anything we see — even death. Likewise, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses and his parents, Rahab and those listed in verses 32 through the first part of verse 35, accomplished great things because something they did declared to the world their belief that God was more real than the things they could see and the he would reward them. This point is summarized again in the discussion about Moses in verses 26 and 27, when it says that he considered the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking to the reward. "By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king, for he endured, as seeing him who is unseen."

On the other hand, those mentioned in the last half of verse 35 through verse 37 are also commended for their faith ("of whom the world was not worthy"), even though they "believed the Lord for" persecution, poverty, exile, imprisonment and martyrdom. God and His reward are real, in a way that my bank account, my worldly goods and even my body aren't.

So just read this chapter, and for me the reason I picked this is because these are people that totally trusted God and it paid of for them... there is nothing I can do to logically prove God is real.. But I can show you how others Faith proved that something supernatural was going on...


+ with jesus prophesies thing.. I found this at a site... thing above me I wrote though.. took me awhile -_- If your gonna tell me there is no proof anything happened like this whatever... but just check it out.



Predictions About Messiah

1. Virgin woman becomes pregnant without sexual relations.

(Isaiah 7:14) "All right then, the Lord himself will choose the sign. Look! The virgin will conceive a child! She will give birth to a son and will call him Immanuel -- 'God is with us.' " Emmanuel. It of course is no sign if a virgin gets pregnant and gives birth by sexual relations. Therefore that is not what Isaish is talking about. He is talking about a pregnancy not from man but from God. In this day and age when fertilizing an egg and placing it back in the womb is possible, consider what a small thing it would be for God to fertilize an egg in utero. The fact that this baby within her did not come from relations with a man is clear from the Bible and from her fiance’s reaction. For example, when the angel tells Mary that she is to have a baby, Mary asks how can this be, since she has never had sex: Luke 1:34 "Mary asked the angel, 'But how can I have a baby? I am a virgin.' " That this baby was not from her fiance' is clear by Joseph’s reaction to the news from Mary that she is pregnant. Matt. 1:18-19 "Now this is how Jesus the Messiah was born. His mother, Mary, was engaged to be married to Joseph. But while she was still a virgin, she became pregnant by the Holy Spirit. Joseph, her fiance', being a just man, decided to break the engagement quietly, so as not to disgrace her publicly." This was kind of Joseph, as the usual penalty for sex out of wedlock, which Mary did not do, but would be accused of, was stoning. God had to speak to him in a dream to convince him to marry Mary.

Matt. 1:20 "As he (Joseph) considered this, he fell asleep, and an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream. 'Joseph, son of David,' the angel said, 'do not be afraid to go ahead with your marriage to Mary. For the child within her has been conceived by the Holy Spirit.' "

The chances for a virgin birth in that age was zero. However for purposes of this discussion, lets just consider the chances that a single Jewish girl with marked chaperoning would allow herself to be inseminated by someone else other than her fiance', which would clearly put her at high risk for stoning. That probability is reasonably less than 1% at that time in history.

2. The first child of this unmarried pregnant girl will be a boy. 50%.

(Isaiah 7:14) "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel (meaning 'God with us')."

3. The Messiah should be born in Bethlehem.

Micah 5:2 "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."

That this is not just any ruler or leader is spoken of as seen in the statement "whose goings forth have been spoken from of old, from everlasting." King David’s coming was not spoken of beforehand, and he was the arguably the greatest king in the history of Israel. The probability of Jesus being born in Bethlehem, a city of less than 20,000 in a nation of millions at the time is estimated as 20,000/2,000,000 or 1 in 100.

4. The Messiah will come when the Jewish temple is intact.

Malachi 3:1 "Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in."

Daniel 9:26 "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary."

Given that Daniel prophesied this in about 580 BC, and noting the temple was intact only from 540 BC through 70 AD, (610 years out of 2578 years since the prophecy), the chance that Jesus could fulfill this criteria given approximately an even Jewish birth rate over the years would be 610/2578.

5. The messiah will be from the tribe of Judah and line of David.

Many references. One example is in Jeremiah 23:5 "Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment on the earth".

Probability of being from any of the 12 tribes is 1 in 12, but David is 11 generations removed from Judah. Assuming only 2 male offspring at every generation, each with their own lineage, the probability of any Jew being from the line of David would be 1/12 (tribe of Judah) X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ or 1/ 49152 or .0000203 or .00203 %. Lets assume generously that the line of David was much more favorable for survival, and it relatively over represented. If was assumed the line of David was 100 times more productive than other genealogies. That still leaves a probability of being from the line of David of 100/49152 or 1 in 500.

Combined probability of prophecies that Jesus had no control over:

1/100 (Unmarried mother pregnant) X ½ (Firstborn son) X 1/100(Bethlehem birth) X 1/4 (Jewish Temple Intact) X 1/500 Tribe of Judah& Line of David = 1/40,000,000



Prophecies that Jesus could have some degree of control over.

"A child will be born that will be called Wonderful, counselor, mighty God, everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. He will be ruler forever." Isaiah 9:7 This verse clearly speaks of a child, that eventually will be called mighty God and Prince of Peace. To understand this is to understand the virgin birth of Jesus that God came in the form of Jesus born of a woman. It also speaks of him being ruler forever, so it must be speaking of a spiritual kingdom, as no king or family line of kings can rule forever. The history of Israel also indicates that in a line of kings, many are wicked. If we consider the probability only that Jesus would eventually be called the Prince of Peace and mighty God and not forgotten after so many years we can generously say the probability would be 1 in 1,000,000.

The power of the messiah will be through his words, not military action: He will not be a zealot in the sense of advocating overthrow of Rome. Isaiah 11:4-5. "He shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked" Jesus clearly avoided any connection or identification with the Zealots. He told his followers to put away their swords when he was captured before crucifixion. At this point in the history of Israel to have a leader arouse the people and not be a zealot is inconceivable with the harshness of Roman rule, but lets generally say the probability of Jesus being a non-zealot leader is .2.

The messiah will not be from the usual priestly tribe of Israel but will be considered a priest. (Psalm 110:1-7) "The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.. The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek." (Melchizedek was a great priest in the past for Israel, but was not of the usual priestly line) Jesus was from the tribe of Judah, not the priestly tribe. To be considered priest and not be from the priestly tribe has almost never occurred in the history of Israel. EP = .2

The joint probability of fulfilling just the last 3 prophecies would be .000001 X .2 X 2 = .00000004 or 1 in every 25,000,000 times.

Now consider the probability of Jesus both fulfilling 5 prophecies he could not control (1/40,000,000) X the probability of fulfilling 3 of the prophecies he could not control (1/25,000,000). This equals 1/1,000,000,000,000. Consider that over 6,000 or so years of recorded history an estimated 2,000,000,000 Jews have lived, and there is a 1 in 1,000,000,000,000.000 chance that any Jewish boy would be able to fulfill the 8 prophecies. (There are more than 50 prophecies that Jesus fulfilled)

[semper]

However, it is logical to have a belief in God.[/color]

No it is not.

It is not logical to believe in something you cannot comprehend, experience or perceive. There is no solid proof of God in the physical world.

There is no proof that God doesn't exist. Added, there is scientific proof to disprove most beliefs based on science. In addition, you dont have to comprehend the nature of God to know he exists. (You can experience and perceive God.

You cannot percieve and experience God, be definition. It is a contradiction of your own terms. God cannot be all the things you think it is and still be perceivable to man.

That is irrelevant. I did not argue about the existence of god, merely the fact whether it is logical to believe in it or not, which it is not. It is not logical to believe in something you cannot perceive or comprehend. If you want to start saying that, it is equally as logical to believe in the force from star wars. George Lucas at any point never diretly states that his stories are fiction.

[semper]

Im just gonna go on and say evolution and creationists don't really matter in the great scheme of things.
The debate here is God real or not...

Hebrews 11 is not a chapter about believing God "for" things. "For" is an inappropriate preposition in this context; "about" would be more nearly accurate. Hebrews 11 properly deals with believing God about the present world and what we see in it not being the real thing.

Yes, faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen (verse 1). But the rest of the chapter repeatedly and forcefully clarifies that the "things hoped for" are not things of this world, and the "things not seen" are spiritual things more real than any physical thing we desire here. Thus, it is by faith that we understand that the world we see was made by (or, "through," or "from") God's words, so that God's invisible Word is the reality behind what we see. Compare verse 3 with Col. 1:16-17 and John 1:1-3. For the same reason, it is impossible to please God without faith — if we are so captivated by our own needs and by what we see around us that we can't see God as the reality behind it, we can't believe God (who tells us that He, not what we see, is real) or believe that He rewards us in a reality we can't yet see. Verse 6. And as verse 2 says, it is by faith, faith that God and His unseen reward are more real than what we see, that the ancients obtained approval.

The rest of the chapter discusses how a list of ancients who obtained approval by faith showed that faith to the world. Abel gave a pleasing sacrifice — blood rather than the fruit of his own efforts. Noah, though he had never seen rain, believed God's warning about a flood and built an ark. Abraham left his own country in obedience to God, then wandered in the land of promise as a stranger (as did Isaac and Jacob), "because he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God," verse 10, another reference to the unseen reward. Likewise, in verse 16, it is said he was desiring "a better country, that is, a heavenly one." Sarah believed God's word to her about having a child when she was past childbearing age. Abraham then obediently offered God that son, believing that God could raise him from the dead, thus demonstrating his belief that God's word is more real than anything we see — even death. Likewise, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses and his parents, Rahab and those listed in verses 32 through the first part of verse 35, accomplished great things because something they did declared to the world their belief that God was more real than the things they could see and the he would reward them. This point is summarized again in the discussion about Moses in verses 26 and 27, when it says that he considered the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking to the reward. "By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king, for he endured, as seeing him who is unseen."

On the other hand, those mentioned in the last half of verse 35 through verse 37 are also commended for their faith ("of whom the world was not worthy"), even though they "believed the Lord for" persecution, poverty, exile, imprisonment and martyrdom. God and His reward are real, in a way that my bank account, my worldly goods and even my body aren't.

So just read this chapter, and for me the reason I picked this is because these are people that totally trusted God and it paid of for them... there is nothing I can do to logically prove God is real.. But I can show you how others Faith proved that something supernatural was going on...


+ with jesus prophesies thing.. I found this at a site... thing above me I wrote though.. took me awhile -_- If your gonna tell me there is no proof anything happened like this whatever... but just check it out.



Predictions About Messiah

1. Virgin woman becomes pregnant without sexual relations.

(Isaiah 7:14) "All right then, the Lord himself will choose the sign. Look! The virgin will conceive a child! She will give birth to a son and will call him Immanuel -- 'God is with us.' " Emmanuel. It of course is no sign if a virgin gets pregnant and gives birth by sexual relations. Therefore that is not what Isaish is talking about. He is talking about a pregnancy not from man but from God. In this day and age when fertilizing an egg and placing it back in the womb is possible, consider what a small thing it would be for God to fertilize an egg in utero. The fact that this baby within her did not come from relations with a man is clear from the Bible and from her fiance’s reaction. For example, when the angel tells Mary that she is to have a baby, Mary asks how can this be, since she has never had sex: Luke 1:34 "Mary asked the angel, 'But how can I have a baby? I am a virgin.' " That this baby was not from her fiance' is clear by Joseph’s reaction to the news from Mary that she is pregnant. Matt. 1:18-19 "Now this is how Jesus the Messiah was born. His mother, Mary, was engaged to be married to Joseph. But while she was still a virgin, she became pregnant by the Holy Spirit. Joseph, her fiance', being a just man, decided to break the engagement quietly, so as not to disgrace her publicly." This was kind of Joseph, as the usual penalty for sex out of wedlock, which Mary did not do, but would be accused of, was stoning. God had to speak to him in a dream to convince him to marry Mary.

Matt. 1:20 "As he (Joseph) considered this, he fell asleep, and an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream. 'Joseph, son of David,' the angel said, 'do not be afraid to go ahead with your marriage to Mary. For the child within her has been conceived by the Holy Spirit.' "

The chances for a virgin birth in that age was zero. However for purposes of this discussion, lets just consider the chances that a single Jewish girl with marked chaperoning would allow herself to be inseminated by someone else other than her fiance', which would clearly put her at high risk for stoning. That probability is reasonably less than 1% at that time in history.

2. The first child of this unmarried pregnant girl will be a boy. 50%.

(Isaiah 7:14) "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel (meaning 'God with us')."

3. The Messiah should be born in Bethlehem.

Micah 5:2 "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."

That this is not just any ruler or leader is spoken of as seen in the statement "whose goings forth have been spoken from of old, from everlasting." King David’s coming was not spoken of beforehand, and he was the arguably the greatest king in the history of Israel. The probability of Jesus being born in Bethlehem, a city of less than 20,000 in a nation of millions at the time is estimated as 20,000/2,000,000 or 1 in 100.

4. The Messiah will come when the Jewish temple is intact.

Malachi 3:1 "Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in."

Daniel 9:26 "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary."

Given that Daniel prophesied this in about 580 BC, and noting the temple was intact only from 540 BC through 70 AD, (610 years out of 2578 years since the prophecy), the chance that Jesus could fulfill this criteria given approximately an even Jewish birth rate over the years would be 610/2578.

5. The messiah will be from the tribe of Judah and line of David.

Many references. One example is in Jeremiah 23:5 "Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment on the earth".

Probability of being from any of the 12 tribes is 1 in 12, but David is 11 generations removed from Judah. Assuming only 2 male offspring at every generation, each with their own lineage, the probability of any Jew being from the line of David would be 1/12 (tribe of Judah) X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ X ½ or 1/ 49152 or .0000203 or .00203 %. Lets assume generously that the line of David was much more favorable for survival, and it relatively over represented. If was assumed the line of David was 100 times more productive than other genealogies. That still leaves a probability of being from the line of David of 100/49152 or 1 in 500.

Combined probability of prophecies that Jesus had no control over:

1/100 (Unmarried mother pregnant) X ½ (Firstborn son) X 1/100(Bethlehem birth) X 1/4 (Jewish Temple Intact) X 1/500 Tribe of Judah& Line of David = 1/40,000,000



Prophecies that Jesus could have some degree of control over.

"A child will be born that will be called Wonderful, counselor, mighty God, everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. He will be ruler forever." Isaiah 9:7 This verse clearly speaks of a child, that eventually will be called mighty God and Prince of Peace. To understand this is to understand the virgin birth of Jesus that God came in the form of Jesus born of a woman. It also speaks of him being ruler forever, so it must be speaking of a spiritual kingdom, as no king or family line of kings can rule forever. The history of Israel also indicates that in a line of kings, many are wicked. If we consider the probability only that Jesus would eventually be called the Prince of Peace and mighty God and not forgotten after so many years we can generously say the probability would be 1 in 1,000,000.

The power of the messiah will be through his words, not military action: He will not be a zealot in the sense of advocating overthrow of Rome. Isaiah 11:4-5. "He shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked" Jesus clearly avoided any connection or identification with the Zealots. He told his followers to put away their swords when he was captured before crucifixion. At this point in the history of Israel to have a leader arouse the people and not be a zealot is inconceivable with the harshness of Roman rule, but lets generally say the probability of Jesus being a non-zealot leader is .2.

The messiah will not be from the usual priestly tribe of Israel but will be considered a priest. (Psalm 110:1-7) "The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.. The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek." (Melchizedek was a great priest in the past for Israel, but was not of the usual priestly line) Jesus was from the tribe of Judah, not the priestly tribe. To be considered priest and not be from the priestly tribe has almost never occurred in the history of Israel. EP = .2

The joint probability of fulfilling just the last 3 prophecies would be .000001 X .2 X 2 = .00000004 or 1 in every 25,000,000 times.

Now consider the probability of Jesus both fulfilling 5 prophecies he could not control (1/40,000,000) X the probability of fulfilling 3 of the prophecies he could not control (1/25,000,000). This equals 1/1,000,000,000,000. Consider that over 6,000 or so years of recorded history an estimated 2,000,000,000 Jews have lived, and there is a 1 in 1,000,000,000,000.000 chance that any Jewish boy would be able to fulfill the 8 prophecies. (There are more than 50 prophecies that Jesus fulfilled)

Sorry to say this. The Bible is not a creditable source. It was written by man and where as soooo many of you religious people would like to turn around and say science is wrong because God did all these things, both principles, their concepts, ideas all of it are based on the psyche of mortal man, not God.

The Bible was written over a period of 600 years if memory serves by different monks, priest's and holy men. It has been translated and transcribed so many times...with different interpretations. It is easily altered even slightly on any of these occasions.

You and anyone else can sit there and spout these things in the bible.. how faith in God brings about rewards and tell me all these wonderful stories that any old fart could have made up and thrown in there and then let all the billions of people that have read the bible since get that tale into their head and know it as fiction because apparently the bible says so.

I am 19 years of age, but already I have seen very good, disgustingly faithful people get hurt and make ultimate sacrifices in the name of good and god and all they have received for it is misery and hardship their entire lifes.

I know not whether it exist's...but truly, I have no doubt that God is lost to humanity, and we to it. The ones that believe in God, very rarely have a choice in their belief or they do it out of fear or a coping method.