Had my first look at an infidels.org page.

[Magnetic]

Well, I finally read most of a page from the infidels.org website. I'm about half way through it (very long). It has to do with bible prophecy. I found it to be fascinating. . . . .yet sobering. Part of me wonders if the writer is overly biased against christianity, thus going 'out of his way' to discredit it, . . . . . but then the other part of me sees the logic behind his arguments, . . . the "fullfillment of prophecy" to Matthew who uses the Old Testiment out of context, and/or embellishes those stories to show that the OT prophet was prophecying the coming Messiah.

One section that left me a bit dumbfound for a few moments was concerning "Jesus coming from Nazareth, in fullfillment of prophecy...", even though that city is not mentioned anywhere in the Old Testiment. I did a word search for "Nazareth" and "Nazarene" and sure enough, . . . . .not it the OT.

Well, when I get the chance, I plan on finishing the article. As a life long member of a christian church, . . . . . . I feel a bit . . . .duped.

My question is, . . . am I being gullible in believing the article from infidels.org, or should I de-convert?

[Frank Hipper]

Never de-convert because of *one* article; that's little or no better than converting simply because someone says to.

Use your own head; let others give you information, and get as much information as you can, but judge for yourself.

[Vendetta]

The bit about Jesus fulfilling the messiah prophecy is inescapably bunk.

In order to fulful the prophecy, the candidate messiah needs to be descended in male lineage from King David.

Which is hard, if you have no father.

The only organised church that appears to have noticed this slip up is the Eastern Orthodox, who don't accept the virgin birth thing.

[Magnetic]

Never de-convert because of *one* article; that's little or no better than converting simply because someone says to.

Use your own head; let others give you information, and get as much information as you can, but judge for yourself.

Yeah, . . . . . .but it's a REALLY long article!!

[Magnetic]

The bit about Jesus fulfilling the messiah prophecy is inescapably bunk.

In order to fulful the prophecy, the candidate messiah needs to be descended in male lineage from King David.

Which is hard, if you have no father.

The only organised church that appears to have noticed this slip up is the Eastern Orthodox, who don't accept the virgin birth thing.

I've heard this one (about Joseph not being Jesus's real father yet being of the line of David). Something about even being an adopted son is the same thing. . . . . . . . . of course, there would be no actual BLOOD from the "blood line of David" to preserve the bloodline. So, you make a good point.

[Mange]

Well, I finally read most of a page from the infidels.org website. I'm about half way through it (very long). It has to do with bible prophecy. I found it to be fascinating. . . . .yet sobering. Part of me wonders if the writer is overly biased against christianity, thus going 'out of his way' to discredit it, . . . . . but then the other part of me sees the logic behind his arguments, . . . the "fullfillment of prophecy" to Matthew who uses the Old Testiment out of context, and/or embellishes those stories to show that the OT prophet was prophecying the coming Messiah.

One section that left me a bit dumbfound for a few moments was concerning "Jesus coming from Nazareth, in fullfillment of prophecy...", even though that city is not mentioned anywhere in the Old Testiment. I did a word search for "Nazareth" and "Nazarene" and sure enough, . . . . .not it the OT.

Well, when I get the chance, I plan on finishing the article. As a life long member of a christian church, . . . . . . I feel a bit . . . .duped.

My question is, . . . am I being gullible in believing the article from infidels.org, or should I de-convert?

I can't answer the question for you as that is up to you. This isn't the only example of the gospel authors cheating/misrepresenting or misunderstanding prophecies from the OT. One of the more "famous" one seems to be Matthew 1:23 in which the Hebrew word Almah (=young woman) in Isaiah 7:14 was mistranslated to the greek word for virgin by whomever wrote the Gospel of Matthew. I don't know about the newer English translations of the Bible (I do know that the KJA retains the word "virgin"), but the newest Swedish translation of Jesaja 7:14 is correct and says "Den unga kvinnan är havande..." (="The young woman is pregnant..."). Besides, where in the NT is Jesus referred to as "Immanuel"?

There are plenty of other prophecies attributed to Jesus that aren't prophecies at all. If we stay with Matthew, "Matthew" claimed in 2:15 that the flight to Egypt fulfilled the prophecy which said: "Out of Egypt have I called my son". This is from Hosea 11:1 which isn't a prophecy at all, but a reference to the Exodus.

If we look at Jesus, he didn't seem to be knowledgeable about the Scripture as the NT claims. In Matthew 12:5, he says that:

Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?

The problem is that there isn't such a passage. The prophecies made by Jesus were also flat out wrong:

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.

Hmm... the apostles have been dead quite some time now, but still no Jesus in sight.

These are just a miniscule of examples, but the point is that most prophecies about Jesus and by Jesus are bunk. They're the inventions of common human beings trapped in their age and I think it's sad that they still hold such a power over man.

[Ariphaos]

Well, when I get the chance, I plan on finishing the article. As a life long member of a christian church, . . . . . . I feel a bit . . . .duped. :(

My question is, . . . am I being gullible in believing the article from infidels.org, or should I de-convert?

Heh, well what did it for me was the rank hypocrisy of my 'Christian' friends, combined with an attempt to read the Bible as an outsider would, from the beginning.

It was the second time I'd done this, so it shocked me. "This is a virgin sacrifice... I know I read this before, but how did I justify it?" I had no answer for that and many similar questions, and left the faith for that.

[Darth RyanKCR]

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.

Hmm... the apostles have been dead quite some time now, but still no Jesus in sight.

Actually since John wrote Revelation he did see the Son of man comming in His Kingdom. I was in a vision but Christ did not say how it would be seen.

Just a possible rationalization that is accepted by many.

[Ariphaos]

Actually since John wrote Revelation he did see the Son of man comming in His Kingdom. I was in a vision but Christ did not say how it would be seen.

Just a possible rationalization that is accepted by many.

Only it's not confirmed to be the apostle John. Indeed, it's suggestive that whoever wrote it did not personally meet Jesus.

It's also a cop-out.

[Imperial Overlord]

It is extremely unlikely that it was Apostle John who wrote Revelations, but a crazy man, sorry enlightened reciever of prophecy, who happened to be named John (usually refered to a John of Patmos, because that's where he claimed to have recieved visions). The Book of Revelations was extremely controversial in its time and was nearly rejected from the canon. The confusion over its authorship is common place.

[Mange]

It is extremely unlikely that it was Apostle John who wrote Revelations, but a crazy man, sorry enlightened reciever of prophecy, who happened to be named John (usually refered to a John of Patmos, because that's where he claimed to have recieved visions). The Book of Revelations was extremely controversial in its time and was nearly rejected from the canon. The confusion over its authorship is common place.

As the former President Jefferson wrote in a letter to General Smyth in 1825 about the Book of Revelation:

It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it, and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams

.

Oh, the word in Revelation is that "I come quickly". It's has soon been 2,000 years and the clock is ticking...

[Mange]

Edit: Sorry about the grammar in the last sentence there.

[God Fearing Atheist]

I can't answer the question for you as that is up to you. This isn't the only example of the gospel authors cheating/misrepresenting or misunderstanding prophecies from the OT. One of the more "famous" one seems to be Matthew 1:23 in which the Hebrew word Almah (=young woman) in Isaiah 7:14 was mistranslated to the greek word for virgin by whomever wrote the Gospel of Matthew. I don't know about the newer English translations of the Bible (I do know that the KJA retains the word "virgin"), but the newest Swedish translation of Jesaja 7:14 is correct and says "Den unga kvinnan är havande..." (="The young woman is pregnant..."). Besides, where in the NT is Jesus referred to as "Immanuel"?

Not exactly.

παρθενoς is not a translation by the Evangelist. His use of Isaiah here is citation from the (Greek language) LXX.

[Lord Zentei]

<snippa>One section that left me a bit dumbfound for a few moments was concerning "Jesus coming from Nazareth, in fullfillment of prophecy...", even though that city is not mentioned anywhere in the Old Testiment. I did a word search for "Nazareth" and "Nazarene" and sure enough, . . . . .not it the OT.

Well, when I get the chance, I plan on finishing the article. As a life long member of a christian church, . . . . . . I feel a bit . . . .duped.

My question is, . . . am I being gullible in believing the article from infidels.org, or should I de-convert?

Though as has already been pointed out, you should not convert or de-convert due to a single article, it is true that at least quite a bit of theological doctrine - and certainly fundamentalist doctrine - can be shown to be bunkum with basic research once the discrepancies have been pointed out, as you have done.

(Of course, I might also point out that you can also accept the article as an epiphany if you have been having doubts for some time, with many questions being asked and no answers forthcoming).

Oh, the word in Revelation is that "I come quickly". It's has soon been 2,000 years and the clock is ticking...

Hell, he claimed himself that the end of the world would occour within the lifetimes of his audience.

[Rye]

I also wrote a page about Jesus not fulfilling messianic prophecy, and according to NT geneaology, actually being cursed to never sit on the throne of David, which I've also heard is thematic.

http://www.morticide.com/messiah.html

Various shit, anyway, shows he's really not the messiah.

[Mange]

Oh, the word in Revelation is that "I come quickly". It's has soon been 2,000 years and the clock is ticking...

Hell, he claimed himself that the end of the world would occour within the lifetimes of his audience.

I know, I pointed to one such quotes in my post (Matt 16:28 where he spoke to the apostles. Matt 23:36, Matt 24:34, Mark 9:1, Mark 13:30 and Luke 9:27 are other good examples in which Jesus says that the end will come in "this generation" or that the people he spoke to would still be alive.).

[Mange]

I also wrote a page about Jesus not fulfilling messianic prophecy, and according to NT geneaology, actually being cursed to never sit on the throne of David, which I've also heard is thematic.

http://www.morticide.com/messiah.html

Various shit, anyway, shows he's really not the messiah.

I really enjoyed your site, Rye! It was stylish and the articles were quite informative (I particulary liked the illustration of one of the most prominent geographical geographical errors in the Gospel of Mark). I hope you finishes the other articles. Great job!

[Magnetic]

I also wrote a page about Jesus not fulfilling messianic prophecy, and according to NT geneaology, actually being cursed to never sit on the throne of David, which I've also heard is thematic.

http://www.morticide.com/messiah.html

Various shit, anyway, shows he's really not the messiah.

Thanks. . .I'll take a look at your site when I have free time at home.

[Vehrec]

Never de-convert because of *one* article; that's little or no better than converting simply because someone says to.

Use your own head; let others give you information, and get as much information as you can, but judge for yourself.

Yeah, . . . . . .but it's a REALLY long article!!

A long arguement is no more convincing than a short one. It just makes you nod your head and say 'yes, yes, whats the point, can we get done here?' I found the shortness of the points in both The Prince and The Art of War to make them much easier, more convincing and better reading.

[Darth Wong]

The Bible is like a quilt that's not properly knitted together. As soon as you start pulling on it, the whole thing comes apart and you realize that it was never a solid article in the first place. But most people never reach the point where they would dare start pulling on anything. They put it up on a pedestal and don't let anyone touch it.

To a certain extent, it doesn't even matter exactly how good a particular argument against the Bible is, as long as it makes the person start criticizing the Bible rather than mindlessly accepting everything it says.

[K. A. Pital]

Never de-convert because of *one* article

That's right. Deconvert if you see that your life positions have changed. Do not deconvert because you see that Creationism is bull, or something else. However anti-religion I may be, I certainly believe that it's better to make up your own mind than just follow someone's lead.

[Lord Zentei]

Oh, the word in Revelation is that "I come quickly". It's has soon been 2,000 years and the clock is ticking...

Hell, he claimed himself that the end of the world would occour within the lifetimes of his audience.

I know, I pointed to one such quotes in my post (Matt 16:28 where he spoke to the apostles. Matt 23:36, Matt 24:34, Mark 9:1, Mark 13:30 and Luke 9:27 are other good examples in which Jesus says that the end will come in "this generation" or that the people he spoke to would still be alive.).

Ah, sorry, seems I missed that part of your earlier post. He also said "O Lord, why have you abandoned me?" when nailed to the cross, or words to that effect.

[Ryushikaze]

Then again, he also said "Forgive them father, they know not what they do" at the same exact time in another telling.

[Darth Wong]

Then again, he also said "Forgive them father, they know not what they do" at the same exact time in another telling.

And he said "It is done" in yet another telling. It's always amazed me that the most pivotal moment in all of Christian theology is not consistent between the Gospels and yet millions of Christians persist in assuming that every Gospel is accurate.

[Magnetic]

Then again, he also said "Forgive them father, they know not what they do" at the same exact time in another telling.

And he said "It is done" in yet another telling. It's always amazed me that the most pivotal moment in all of Christian theology is not consistent between the Gospels and yet millions of Christians persist in assuming that every Gospel is accurate.

Simple (to them). One writer was at a different reference point and may not have seen when Jesus spoke certain phrases. What they wrote was what they saw, . . and putting them together gives us the entire scenario.

Yeah, seems unlikely. Same as who actually showed up at the tomb the first time.