₦airaland Forum

thesilent1:
A very well known biblical record that needs to be considered at this point is the book of Job. In Chapters One and Two, “Satan” is referred to as one of the angels who presented himself before the Lord. In light of the New Testament, we today realize that “Satan” is one of the names Scripture gives to the Devil, but the Hebrew word for “Satan” (as in the book of Job) simply means “accuser.” Those in the Old Testament thought that “Satan” was only an accusing spirit. They had no concept of him as the mighty spiritual enemy he is.

I hope I'm not misinterpreting your post, but the guy that was speaking to Mr. Deity wasn't the devil. That's Larry.

lafile:
@ KAG
You are judging based on the assumption that you are in a position to critically analyse the literary styles and thought patterns of writers who wrote thousands of years before your knowledge base was crystallised.

It's not just me. Scholars who have devoted their lives to the study of theology have come to the same conclusions; sholars who have devoted their lives to the study of the Bible have made assertions that are similar to mine; scholars who have studied the Old Testament/Tanakh extensively have said it as well.

just because stuff was written in poetic literary style doesnt make it untrue. just because some story doesnt comform to reality as you know it (remembering off course that your knowledge is limited - God is not) doesnt make it untrue. If the writers of the bible interwovenly placed truth and untruth in it and then passed it off as divine, then they are not to be trusted. there is no point believeing any story in the bible at all.

I think you're confusing allegory with untruth. Think of it like this, allegories are similar to the parables that were told by Jesus. It would be highly unusual and you probably be missiing the point if decided to read those parables as literal occurences; the same with allegories.

If the writers of the bible actually make a claim that the entire book is divinely inspired, its either they are telling the truth or they are lying. If they are telling the truth, it means all the stories are true. there is no middle ground.

While I don't believe the Bible is i#divinely inspired, I can appreciate the fact that the language used in some narratives show that the authors weren't writing for a literal interpretation and were most likely following the tradition of their times. In any case, feel free to claim all the stories are literal and we as humans can't really be sure about the truth of our world; I, on the otherhand, will stick with what the evidence has shown: that snakes don't talk, that our solar system isn't geocentric, the Earth isn't stationary and flat, the Universe and the Earth are billions of years old, a worldwide flood couldn't have occured, a wooden boat couldn't have held all the various species, etc.

Truth is not subjective. Your idea of truth is dependent on what you want to believe. what you assume is believable. Note that truth remains truth wether you believe it or not.

Which is why many Christians have had to revise their views.

the bottom line is that all of this is a matter of faith.

Not if it is observable and repeatably tested truth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzf8q9QHfhI

thesilent1:
here we go, Kag strikes again. surprised no one has actually just come out with the Nero : Antichrist reference

Good point. I think there's a good possibility that Nero was the Anti-christ in Revelations.

lafile:
So you believe some stories in the bible and you don't believe some. Question is how do you know which one to believe and which one not to? On what basis do you believe and/or disbelieve? your intuition?

Several times, like in the Genesis narrative of the creation and the Adam and Eve story, the language and devices used: poetic language laced with numerous symbolisms, archetypes, and imagery, can give one an inkling. Another way - one fraught with problems though - is to see if the picture it paints contradicts the reality of the Universe and Earth. That method is usually applied to stories that are deemed irrelevant to salvation.

frosbel:
2 Timothy 3
Godlessness in the Last Days
1But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.

6They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. 8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these men oppose the truth—men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. 9But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone.


WHAT DO YOU THINK ??

Sounds like the Roman times, or maybe I mean the time of the Greeks, or do I mean the renaissance period? No, on second thougts it sounds like the French (I keed, I keed, French people)

babyosisi:
Every power waging against my destiny,fall down and die in Jesus name.

Every power drawing powers from the heavenlies against me,fall down and die in Jesus name

any tongue speaking against me--- be silenced now in Jesus name

These are just samples,I am not used to such prayers

Yeah, those sound like MFM prayers. I remember being told a long time ago that they pary violently because "the kingdom of God suffereth violence and the violent take it by force". Dr Olukoya has also used the analogy of the loudest patient in the hospital ward usually gets the Dr's attention. In any case, none of those seem directed at humans specifically.

babyosisi:
If anyone is interested I can begin pasting some writings from that book here for reference.
The words are something else

I'm interested.

ricadelide:
there's no use going back and forth.

Well, it does have its uses, so I won't disparage it.

Poster 1; verse a says this
reply; no this is not what it means, it was just a fabrication of so and so
Poster 1; ok, this is another verse
reply; no, it is vague and does not refer to that.
Poster 1; what of this verse, and this verse, and that
Reply; they are all lies, and ambigous, and vague, and contrived!

LoL, I'm pretty certain the discussion hasn't been that way. In most cases, I have posted the verses and given reasons for any assertion I've made only to be met with the bizzare claim that any interpretation or points I've made can't be right because I'm not a Christian and only True Christians (TM) can undertsand the Bible. Any verse (and this has probably only occured in the rather long copy/paste of "mesianic prophecies" that I didn't given an adequate reason for labelling vague and ambiguous, was probably one that was obviously so.

Finally, have reached Ezekiel 44 yet?

i really don't have the time to go over your flagrant denial of the facts and misinterpretation of scriptures.

I took the time to go over your denial of the facts and your misinterpretations of the Bible, but I guess that's just me.

My goal is not and has never been about winning an argument, its about bringing about knowledge and i must have really thought there was an interest in learning - albeit i was wrong.

Ditto.

You even went as far as accusing the writers of the new testament of lying and manipulating the scriptures just to keep from acknowledging how plainly the word holds true.

When you've found, for example, any historical account of Herod's mass infanticide I'll accept that in instances like that, the Gospel writers - in this case Matthew, a serial offender - didn't apply creativity to shoehorn their candidate. In fact, thinking about it, I don't think any other Gospel writer remembered the attrocity.

Anyways, if you believe that the new testament is a contraption of lies, there is no common ground from which to argue from and we'd just be going back and forth.

I don't believe the New Testament is a contraption of lies, I just hold, based on a close reading of the texts, that parts of it are untrue and even contradict each other.

this is the crux of the matter;

I disagree.

So, best wishes in your chosen course. You make me remeber the parable of the sower - indeed there are different types of soil. I'd stick to the word of GOd, which is able to transform my soul.
At the last day, we'd see who is right; hopefully Baba will rescue you before then. Cheers.

Thank you, best of wishes to you too. I should mention - out of a need to inform - that this discussion has actually done more to reassure me that I am indeed right and that Christianity, with the amount of dishonesty and hypocrisy necessary to keep the faith alive, isn't a path to the God it hopes is alive: the God of love. Maybe we will never find out who's right. Does it matter? I couldn't say. In any case, be'hatzlacha. Shalom.

Crap: This is coming from their Bible:blond hair blues eyes cannot give birth to dark brown people.They cannot reproduce melanin because melanin is not encoded in their DNA.

Actually, white people have melanin too.

ricadelide:
I couldn't agree more. We saw the same words no doubt but read understood different things. So you think God was talking about buildings and measurements of walls? what is the spiritual relevance of that?

No, I saw the text and realised based on the very detailed specifications and measurements, that the author was describing a physical thing. The spiritual relevance, if we are to assume that it has any such component, would be, as I have previously mentioned, a sign of the messiah: "The Temple will be rebuilt, resuming many of the suspended mitzvot".

Incidentally, call me when you get to chapter 44 of the book of Ezekiel.

Read the book of Hebrews. it might help. God did a lot of things in the old testament that are symbols and shadows.

I know a lot of things in the Old Testament are allegorical - I've said as much. This, however, isn't one of them.

the tabernacle was a symbolism. it had different physical objects which illustrate spiritual realities, eg it was three dimensional - the outer court, the inner court and the holy of holies; referring to God's temple which is man having the body, soul and spirit. etc.

You still haven't read the chapter, nor have you read the chapters that follow it. Again, read it: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=33&chapter=40&version=31

I can't wait to find out that the numbers, measurements and the priests actually mean the blood and the cells and the distance between the brain and the soul, or something.

we are children of the Judeo-christian God and we understand these things.

Then it's either you and most Christians aren't children of the Christian God, or you are full of shit (no offence)

people that are not in him don't. i'll keep hammering it.

Feel free to, and I'll keep on politely reminding you that you're being disingenuous.

Cry all you want, LOL. Biblical symbolism is a whole lecture on its own i can't go into now. Symbolism is a way for God to illustrate spiritual things in human figures. However to explain to you what i mean let me quote a scripture. [snip]

You don't have to explain Biblical symbolism to me, I understand it well enough.

that verse in Ezekiel 40 alongside the verses are referring to the church. Again another rule of studying scripture; relating it to other scriptures. what do they teach? We are the temple of the living GOd. GOd does not dwell in temples made with human hands, he dwells in us. Acts 17;24-25 (The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; 25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath). Even in the book of revelations the dimensions of the temple are measured. they have their meaning. the numbers are symbolic.
this is what Paul is referring to when he says 'we speak of God's secret wisdom in a mystery' and 'we speak a message of wisdom among the mature'. Mark 4;28 - first the blade, then the head, then the mature grain, all the while increasing in our revelation knowledge of Him.

Now that you've asserted that Ezekiel 40 (and by default the chapters following it that carry on with the same theme) isn't meant to be taken literally, what are we to do with Ezekiel 44: 1-2? You know, the verses that you used as messianic prophecies. Surely, the gate can't be physical, can it?

All these are things the average christian understands, and the non-christian doesn't. (when i use the term 'christian' i'm not talking generically but of a certain (relative) few - the body of believers who have been ransomed by the Lamb) and when i say christianity, i'm not talking about a religous group or sect or whatever, i'm referring to the spiritual body of Christ;

Ah, so that would be Christianity: those that agree completely with my interpretations.

i just joined that body roughly a mere 10 years ago after a long time in the Roman Catholic religious organization.

I guess it was to be expected that you'd consider Catholics non-Christians, too.

Now i quoted a lot of scriptures relating to understanding the scriptures in my prior post. Now i'd ask you to explain them to me and tell me what they mean.

Just a few verses. Since you claim to know what the Christ should do and not do, explain those scriptures then we'd go on from there. cheers.

Not now, I've just spent too much time trawling the desperate and, frankly, inane apologetics.

ricadelide:
Now, coming to your own posts,,,,,,
Naah, you wont hear me saying that every prophecy in the scripture has been fulfilled, of course not. Every prophecy has its time frame; some pertaining to the end times, some to the second coming, some to Christ's first coming, some to the millenial reign etc.
Let me paste a verse for you,,,,
1Pet.1:10-12
As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that would come to you made careful searches and inquiries, 11 seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow. 12 It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves, but you, in these things which now have been announced to you through those who preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things into which angels long to look.

Then, why bother asking for the unfulfilled prophecies? In any case, I guess my assertion wasn't wrong and we can both agree on the fact that Jesus didn't fulfill all the messianic prophecies - caveats of he'll do it when he comes back are rightly ignored.

If you decide to get all muddled up on this issue that we've tried to explain to you over and over again, then there's little we can do to help.
the word of God is perfect. Another quote [snip]

Uh? My post was: ", Don't forget, the exercise was to show the mesianic prophecies that haven't been fulfilled by Jesus. sure, you could claim he just hasn't done it yet, but it would still be a moot claim." I don't see how I got nuddled up on that issue, especially as it seems we generally agree that Jesus didn't fulfill all of them. Maybe you muddled the posts up? By the way, careful examination of the bible will show that it isn't perfect.

Christ's salvation work. Thats a whole topic entirely. I can't go into it now.

I didn't ask you to - heck, I don't even know why you brought it up.

If i say now that you don't know what you are talking about you'd think am sounding trite.

I wouldn't say that; I'd just put it down to your ineptitude.

However, i really don't get your point. Is your jive that all scriptures have been fulfilled? Or that all prophecies will be fulfilled at the same time? That some prophecies cannot be fulfilled before others? that there is no time frame for a prophecy?

My point was that Jesus failed to fulfill many of the messianic prophecies.

Of course that scripture pertains to the end. If it is meant to be fulfilled at the initial coming of the messiah, then when will you have a church? when will the prophecies pertaining to the church be fulfilled? when will people get to choose to accept him or reject him? If he is to have come as King at his initial coming, how then will the prophecies regarding his suffering be fulfilled? Can you have a reigning king (humanly speaking) being flogged and crucified? If he is to set up a human kingdom for Israel, how then will he have died?

Ergo, put a spin on it and disregard the fact the prophecy wasn't fulfilled. First, I don't know your views of church and why it would be necessary, but you can have a church even and especially because the whole world is exalting YHVH.

Second, the messiah, according to Jewish readings, isn't meant to be flogged and crucified, so that's a moot objection. Finally, since Jesus didn't fulfill the prophecy it's illogical to try to view it from light of his failure.

Any systematic study of biblical prophecy regarding the Christ will show that there are two distinct set of prophecies that are mutually exclusive such that they can't be fulfilled at nor referring to the same time frame. If you don't understand nor acknowledge that, we can't help you.

An a proper study of the Tanakh shows that there is only one set of prophecies to be fulfilled by the messiah; that Christians and the Gospel writers, faced with the reality of unfulfilled prophecies, have chosen the laughable route of hoping that the remaining prophecies will be accomplished at some later future date (maybe a few decades? Maybe a few millennia - it'll happen, trust me) is inconsequential.

Indeed there are many messianic prophecies yet to be fulfilled, that is why we have the blessed hope and long for his appearing.

Glad you finally caught up.

Sorry ma, he 'biologically descended' through his mother. Read Luke 3. Both his parents were descendants of David.

I'm sure you just accidentally missed the part where I mention that he has to be a descendant of Solomon too.

He didn't have a biological father, he is 'the seed of the woman' (Gen. 3;15 - again another fulfilled prophecy), and was to be conceived by a virgin Is. 7;14
there is no condemnation for all. there is retribution for all - each man will get whatever he deserves, whether good or bad. the millenial reign is a futuristic event.

He did have a biological father; he wasn't conceived by a virgin (once again, that was a misiterpretation of the OT verse), and two millennia have already gone.

No, ma, you are wrong they are referring to the Christ. I really hate these back and forth stuffs. Let me just quote a verse in that place for you; verse 12
"Just as many were astonished at you, My people,
So His appearance was marred more than any man
And His form more than the sons of men."
Can you see that verse? there are two objects there. 'You' and 'Him'. 'You' is clearly explained to be Isreal ('my people') but 'He' is reffering to someone other than Isreal, one person rather than many people (hence the comparison, 'more than any man'). Ever seen the passion of the christ? do you see a mental picture of that verse being fulfilled?
I can't go into Isaiah 53 with you for the sake of time. Maybe someone else will do so. But those scriptures are very special scriptures that very literally paint a picture of Christ's suffering and death.

The grammatical structure doesn't actually mean that the verse and the book as whole is referring to someone other than Israel. However, I have no problem accepting the book as a messianic prophecy, because either way Jesus still didn't fulfill the prophecy.

First, Isaiah 53:7 says: "He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. A cursory reading of John shows that wasn't the case.

Second, verse 10 says "he shall see his seed". According to traditional Christian doctrine, Jesus didn't have any offsprings.

i wonder what your point here is again. that verse has been fulfilled. it didnt say i will gather ALL the outcasts of Isreal. If you knew the bible well like you claim you'd have come across verses that said a remnant will return. (Is. 10.22) its only a remnant. and that is very clear now in our day as many jews are still in the US and all over.

My point was that the prophecy hasn't been fulfilled (pointing out the obvious gets old quickly). Also, the verse coupled with the one before it does imply that it will all the remnants that are dispersed around the world.

By the way, you do know what remnant means, right?

And, if you read the Bible in context like you alluded to, you'd have noticed that Isaiah 10:22 wasn't talking about the Israelites being returned to Israel; it was talking about them returning to God

21 The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the mighty God.

22 For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, yet a remnant of them shall return:

LOL, you crack me up. anyways, as always, cheers /quote]

Well, I try.

ricadelide:
@KAG,
i linked a webpage to you. you've not said anything about that. I decided to cut and paste it here. Here goes;

No problem.

Prophecies of the OT Fulfilled in Jesus Christ of Nazareth:

    There have been described in the Old Testament 300 prophecies of the first coming of the Messiah and 500 of the second coming, all of then made hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus and fulfilled to the letter in Jesus Christ, the Messiah.

Most are ridiculously vague and filled with symobolic langauage that can easily be adapted to as many scenarios and people. Furthermore, several of the alledged prophecies aren't even prophecies in the first place.

George Heron, a French mathematician, calculated that the odds of one man fulfilling only 40 of those prophecies are 1 in 10 to the power of 157. That is a 1 followed by 157 zeros. Compare it to this; your odds on winning the state lottery are 14 followed by 6 zeros.

I'd like to see how he worked that out and what factors he implemented in his calculations.

Another mathematician, Dr. Peter S. Ruckman, claims the odds of being fulfilled only 60 of them by the only person who claimed to be the Son of God, and who died on a "tree" on Calvary, and who rose the 3rd day are astronomical!,  not just one in one trillion, but one out of ten to the 895th power. That is a one over a one followed by 895 zeros.

Same applies as above. Also, there's absolutely no evidence, outside of the texts that were approved into the New Testament, to support any of the claims Dr. Ruckman seems to have included.

Finally, by using the same methods of retroactive shoe-horning, the sadly departed Winace has shown, with a very limited time, how Napoleon may have been the messiah: http://www.fstdt.com/winace/napoleon_messiah.htm

I suspect with some collaboration and more time, the number of prophecies that Napoleon fulfilled could have rivalled that of the followers of Jesus. So much for statistics applied wrongly.

 

Here are just 50 of those thousand Prophecies:

Ancestors:

    1- The "seed of a woman": Genesis 3:15,  Galatians 4:4.

Ambiguous and fulfilled by every, Tom, Dick and formerly Harry, who, inspite of what the account suggests, believes in a literal reading of the Eden narrative (the inherent hypocrisy of literal readers is also made apparent in the taking of the verse as anything but literal).

Jesus was born of Virgin Mary without any man involved in His conception (Is.7:14, Mat.1:23, Lk.1:27).
    - Gen.3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.
    - Gal.4:4 But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law. (Luk.2:7; Rev.12:5)

The prophecy which, unless read midrashically, was hardly messianic and wasn't referring to a woman giving birth without the input of a man - Matthew misinterpreted the verse. The verse talked about a maiden, not a virgin, giving birth; however, because of Matthew's less than optimal linguistic skills and the option of creative licence - you know the rest.

2- Descendent of Abraham: Genesis 12:3, 18:18,  Acts 3:25, Matthew 1:1.
    - Gen. 18:18 Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation and all nations on earth will be blessed through him. (Gen. 12:3)
    - Act. 3:25 And you are heirs of the prophets and of the covenant God made with your fathers. He said to Abraham, "Through your offspring all peoples on earth will be blessed." (Mt.1:1; Lk.3:34)

    3- Descendent of Isaac: Gen.17:19, Luc.3:34.
    - Gen.17:19 Then God said, "Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him."
    -Mt.1:2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers. (Lk.3:34)

    4- Descendent of Jacob: Numbers 24:17,  Luke 3:34, Matt.1:2.
    - Num.24:17 I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel. He will crush the foreheads of Moab, the skulls of all the sons of Sheth.
    - Lk.3:34 The son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor. (Mt.1:2)

The first two aren't messianic, and they are easily fulfilled by almost anyone; especially if you decide that the prophecy was referring to the the spiritual children of Abraham - cue the Father Abraham" hymn.

 

5-- From the Tribe of Judah: Genesis 49:10, Luke 3:33.
    - Gen.49:10 The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his.
    - Lk.3:33 The son of Amminadab, the son of Ram, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah. (Mt.1:2-3)

Less ambiguous than the rest.

6- Hair of the Throne of David: Isaiah 9:7,  Luke 1:32-33.
    - Isa.9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the Lord Almighty will accomplish this. (Isa.11:1-5; 2Sam.7:13)
    - Luk.1:32-33: He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end." (Mt.1:1, 1:6)

Jesus didn't fulfill this : "reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever."

If, however, you decide that he somehow fulfilled it spiritually or will fulfill it in some second coming, then the disingenuousness becomes even more apparent.

Birth and Childhood:

    7- Born in Bethlehem: Micah 5:2,    Matthew 2:1,  Luke 2:4-7.
    - Mic.5:2 But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from ancient times.
    - Mt.2:1 After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem. (Lk.2:4-7)

Jesus didn't rule over Israel either.

 

8- To be born of a Virgin: Isaiah 7:14, Matthew 1:18,  Luke 1:26-35.
    - Isa.7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.
    - Mt.1:18 This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: his mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit. (Lk.1:26-35)

Wrong interpretation of a prophecy that was meant for a time before Jesus came.

 

9- Time of his birth: Daniel 9:25,  Luke 2:1:
    - Dan.9:25 Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven "sevens" and sixty two "sevens." It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble.
    - Lk 2:1-2 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was the governor of Syria.) (Lk 2:3-7)
   - Mat.2:1 After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem

Too ambiguous. Also, the evidence for Jesus' birth date is seriously lacking.


 

10- Slaughter of the Innocent children: Jeremiah 31:15,  Matthew 2:16-18.
    - Jer.31:15 This is what the Lord says: "A voice is heard in Ramah, mourning and great weeping, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because her children are no more."
    - Mt.2:16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. (Mt 2:16-18)

There's absolutely no evidence to support the Herod mass infanticide. It's more probable that it was made up by Matthew.

11- Flight to Egypt: Hosea 11:1,  Matthew 2:14-15.
    - Hos.11:1 When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son
    - Mt.2:14 So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt. (Mt 2:15)

Not a messianic prophecy: Israel, clearly the subject of the verse, was supposedly called out of Egypt.

12- He shall be called a Nazarene: Judges 13:5,  Matthew 2:23.
    - Jud.13:5 for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God
    - Mt.2:23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene

HOLY MOTHER OF GOD! It doesn't get any plainer than this. Let's start from the very beginning; a very good place to start:

[center]2 And there was a certain man of Zorah, of the family of the Danites, whose name was Manoah; and his wife was barren, and bare not.

3 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto the woman, and said unto her, Behold now, thou art barren, and bearest not: but thou shalt conceive, and bear a son.

4 Now therefore beware, I pray thee, and drink not wine nor strong drink, and eat not any unclean thing:[/center]

Notice anything familiar yet? Maybe this will help:

[center]24 [size=14pt]And the woman bare a son, and called his name Samson[/size][/center]

Passion:

    13- Triumphal entry in Jerusalem on a donkey: Zechariah 9:9,  John 12:13-14.
    - Zec.9:9 Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey. (Isa.62:11)
    - Jn.12:13-14 They took palm branches and went out to meet him, shouting, "Hosanna!" "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!" "Blessed is the King of Israel!" Jesus found a young donkey and sat upon it, as it is written. (Mt.21:1-11; Jn.12:12, Mk.11:7-9.)

No external evidence that Jesus actually did that. Suggestions of creative licence used by the authors of the Gospels.

 

14- Entry through the "Golden Gate", that shall be shut for ever after his entrance: Ezekiel 44:1-2,  Mark 11:7-8.
    On Palm Sunday Jesus entered Jerusalem through the Golden Gate. When you go to Jerusalem look at the Golden Gate, it is shut with stone and cement, and with a Muslim cemetery in its front, through which a Jewish Messiah will never pass.
   - Ez.44:1-2 Then the man brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary, the one facing east, and it was shut. 2 The LORD said to me, "This gate is to remain shut. It must not be opened; no one may enter through it. It is to remain shut because the LORD , the God of Israel, has entered through it.
    - Mk.11:7-8 When they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their cloaks over it, he sat on it. Many people spread their cloaks on the road, while others spread branches they had cut in the fields.

First, the gates weren't closed just after Jesus' alledged entry into the city, it was closed thousands of years after. Also, according to Jewish tradition, the messiah will still be coming through the gates of Jerusalem and then afterwards - immediately afterwards - the gate will be shut.

15- Betrayed by a friend, for 30 pieces of silver: Zechariah 11:12, Psalm 41:9,  Mark 14:10, Matthew 26:14-15.
    - Ps.41:9 Even my close friend, whom I trusted, he who shared my bread, has lifted up his heel against me.
    - Mk.14:10 Then Judas Iscariot, one of the Twelve, went to the chief priests to betray Jesus to them. (Mt.26:14-16; Mk.14:43-45)
    - Zec.11:12 I told them, "If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it." So they paid me thirty pieces of silver. (Zec.11:13)
    - Mt.26:15 And asked, "What are you willing to give me if I hand him over to you?" So they counted out for him thirty silver coins. (Mt 27:3-10)
    16- Money to be returned for a potter's field: Zechariah 11:13,  Matthew 27:6-7.
    - Zec.11:13 And the Lord said to me, "Throw it to the potter"- the handsome price at which they priced me! So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the Lord to the potter.
    - Mt.27:6-7 The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money." So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners. (Mt.27:3-5,8-10)

All the OT verses have been taken out of context (doesn't that just tickle your sense of irony?). The first, Pslams, isn't a prophecy and the rest of its context show how the pslamist's writings diverges not only from what Christians have tried to fit it into, but also from traditional Christian dogma.

[center]
4 I said, LORD, be merciful unto me: heal my soul; for I have sinned against thee

8 An evil disease, say they, cleaveth fast unto him: and now that he lieth he shall rise up no more.

9 Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me.

10 But thou, O LORD, be merciful unto me, and raise me up, that I may requite them.[/center]

Zeceriah's is also not a prophecy:

[center]11 And it was broken in that day: and so the poor of the flock that waited upon me knew that it was the word of the LORD.

12 And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my price; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver.

13 And the LORD said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the LORD.

14 Then I cut asunder mine other staff, even Bands, that I might break the brotherhood between Judah and Israel.[/center]


Furthermore, the rather laughable attempt to make the verses fit by having Judas have some association with "potter" ( any kind will do. How about potter's field? Genius!) is further unwound by the fact that in the other account of Judas and his potter's field (Acts 1:18) Judas doesn't cast his money in the temple: he, himself, uses the money to buy the fields. Can anyone say artistic licence?

I'm going to stop at this juncture as this exericse which involves checking into so many dishonest claims is rather tiring.[quote][/quote]

BLACK SKIN IS THE GENETIC PARENT


Whites cannot reproduce anything but themselves!

Black girl born to White parents: http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,915475,00.html

All of that. Their melanin deficiency is why their reproduction system does not work as efficiently as it should.

Nonesense. No studies, to my knowledge, have shown that to be true. And, white people have been known to have as many children as other races.

In his book, “The Chemical Key to Black Greatness” American Biochemist, Carol Barnes, described melanin as, “a civilizing chemical that acts as a sedative to help keep the black human calm, relaxed, caring, creative, energetic and civilized”.

I guees that explains the huge amount of violent crimes in Africa (not that other continents don't have their share).

ricadelide:
I'm not impressed. wikipedia is your source.

Considering the topic, it was an apt source.

anyway lets treat those scriptures as they come.Is 1; 26 Then I will restore your judges as at the first, And your counselors as at the beginning; After that you will be called the city of righteousness, A faithful city."
Read Acts3;21 the restoration work is different from the work of salvation. when he comes again, he will restore things to their proper order, and hand over to kingdom. ICor. 15;24

Your words: "when he comes again, he will restore things, etc". Ergo, we agree that Jesus didn't fulfill that prophecy (the Christian's spin is he hasn't done it yet, but it amounts to the same thing).

if you bothered to start from verse one and read it in context, you'd see that it started with "in the last days, " those days are very much around the corner, and indeed he will judge the nations Matt.25;31-33

The messiah, especially according to Jewish scribes, should do that on his first and only showing, so in context Jesus hasn't done this. Don't forget, the exercise was to show the mesianic prophecies that haven't been fulfilled by Jesus. sure, you could claim he just hasn't done it yet, but it would still be a moot claim.

Again, reading in context, a scripture that refers not to christ's salvation work in any way but to the Day of the Lord ie judgement. maybe you should try starting from verse 13 to understand

I didn't say anything about any Christ's salvation work (I can't even be certain where you got that from). The prophecy was: The whole world will worship the One God of Israel" as in, the world will exalt the God of Israel above all else. That hasn't happened.

Is.11.1 if you bothered to read Mathew's account you'd see the royal line; he is indeed descended from king David's royal throne through his step father (Matt 1)
and through his natural lineage from Mary (Luke 3;23-37)

Erm, biologial descendant through the father, not through alledged step-fathers.

Did you see the word 'judge' in that verse; he did not come to condemn the world at this time but that the world through him might be saved. Moreover if you read the chapter all the way to verse 6 and 7 you will see that it is referring to the millenial reign of the Christ; the wolf will lie down with the lamb, verse 9; the earth will be covered with the knowledge of the glory of God as the waters cover the sea. I really can't wait for that day. Before then he will judge the nations and will subdue everything; all dominions, powers and evil tyrannies will not stand. ICor 15;25,26

I did see the word "judge" in the verse - although I'm not quite sure how that matters, and the verse doesn't imply condemnation for all(equity for the meek, etc isn't condemning the world). In any case, you say the verse refers to the "millennial reign of Jesus", I say that prophecy hasn't been fulfilled. We agree on that much. The Jews are rightly waiting for a messiah that doesn't need excuses and second coming to excuse unfulfilled prophecies.

And He will lift up a standard for the nations And assemble the banished ones of Israel, And will gather the dispersed of Judah From the four corners of the earth
Blessed prophecy fulfilled in 1948. See how they distorted that verse, it didnt say 'all' but the mischief makers decided to twist the verse. it has always been clear that its a remnant that will return and they did. Many jews are still in US and many other places.

"and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. Yeah, maybe the mischief makers (including many the Christians - I suppose they must be heretics of some kind) don't have the super magic interpreting power that only true Christians have.

Read 1Corinthians 15; that verse is quoted and explained there.

So it hasn't been fulfilled (yet). Glad we agree.

the blessed hope, ICor 15;52, Jn. 5;28-29, 1Thes 4;13-18

A blessed HOPE indeed. Another one unfulfilled.

1Pet.1;8-9, Rom. 14;7, Luke 2;10, Luke 19;37, Matt. 28.8, Jn. 15.13, John 16;22-23, Jn. 17.13, Acts. 8.8, 12;52, 14.17, 16.34 etc etc Inded we are continually filled with joy in His presence

Dubious, but acceptable.

those verses was referring in a very direct manner to Jesus and he fulfilled them to the letter. If you want an exposition on the prophecies in Is 53 and how they've been fulfilled we can do that later.

No, those prophecise were referring to Israel, the servant of YHVH, and were not fulfilled by Jesus. I don't mind discussing Isaiah 53 with you.

even Jesus quoted this scripture and it has and is being fulfilled. if you read through the book of acts you can see that. see Acts 2;42, 3;1, 6;4, 12;12, 13;1-3 etc

If it has been fulfilled then it isn't being fulfilled. I think the latter agrees more with the position of unfufilled.

again another scripture that has nothing to do with the coming of Jesus as the messiah. anyway, that is a futuristic prophecy. it is being fuliflled in the church (eg Acts. 14; 11-13 etc) We are the spiritual Jews Rom 9;6-8

You're right the verse had nothing to do with the coming of Jesus as the messiah, because he wasn't the messiah. It is, however, a messianic prophecy that the messiah would need to fulfill.

BTW, the jews coming back to Israel was a fulfillment of prophecy, after about 2000 years of being scattered all over the earth. i wonder what your point with that statement is.

Fair enough.

Have you read that verse in context, does have anything to do with the work of salvation but rather judgement and restoration at his second coming.

I have read it in context, have you? Once again, I didn't mention or allude to anything to do with "the work of salvation", so I'll ignore that. Incidentally, I find it interesting that you concede that the prophecy would have to be fulfilled at a second coming of the Christian messiah. In case there are any doubts, that represents another prophecy that the Christian messiah hasn't fulfilled (some Christians say, "he hasn't fulfilled yet"

Very funny. nother contextual error.Go and read the chapter. Ezekiel had a spiritual vision of the church which is the temple of the holy Spirit. 1Cor 6;19

I'm not sure we've both read the same Ezekiel 40. The author describes measurements of the walls like:

"The length of the measuring rod in the man's hand was six long cubits, each of which was a cubit [a] and a handbreadth. He measured the wall; it was one measuring rod thick and one rod high."

describes aspects of the different aspects of the temple with measurements, design features and the types of gates it had. Yet, he/she was somehow describing a spiritual, not to be taken as a physical thing, church? Heck, the author even describes the areas for the priests and the sacrifices that would be [b]in the temple (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=33&chapter=40&version=31).

I can't help but be amazed at the circus tricks some apologists have to perform to keep the compartmentalisation going. I mean, read the bleeding text for Christ's sake! Bah!

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=33&chapter=40&version=31

For then I will purify the lips of the peoples, that they may all call on the name of Yahweh, to serve him shoulder to shoulder.
See misintepretation. i take it you didnt read the verse. First, which people is he referring to. Second what does shoulder to shoulder mean? the same verse in J.N. Darby translation; "For then will I turn to the peoples a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of Jehovah, to serve him with one consent." this has been fulfilled in the church. See Acts2;1, 44, Acts 4;32

Indeed, ask someone who 'delights himself in the Lord' and see if He has not given us the desire of our heart.
fulfilled in the church.

Fair enough.

ricadelide:
can you please let me have the 'many prophecies that weren't fulfilled by Him'.

* The Sanhedrin will be re-established (Isaiah 1:26)
* Once he is King, leaders of other nations will look to him for guidance. (Isaiah 2:4)
* The whole world will worship the One God of Israel (Isaiah 2:17)
* He will be descended from King David (Isaiah 11:1) via King Solomon (1 Chron. 22:8-10)

* Evil and tyranny will not be able to stand before his leadership (Isaiah 11:4)

* All Israelites will be returned to their homeland (Isaiah 11:12)
* Death will be swallowed up forever (Isaiah 25:
* There will be no more hunger or illness, and death will cease (Isaiah 25:
* All of the dead will rise again (Isaiah 26:19)
* The Jewish people will experience eternal joy and gladness (Isaiah 51:11)

* Nations will end up recognizing the wrongs they did to Israel (Isaiah 52:13-53:5)
* For My House shall be called a house of prayer for all nations (Isaiah 56:3-7)
* The peoples of the world will turn to the Jews for spiritual guidance (Zechariah 8:23)
* The ruined cities of Israel will be restored (Ezekiel 16:55)
* Weapons of war will be destroyed (Ezekiel 39:9)
* The Temple will be rebuilt (Ezekiel 40) resuming many of the suspended mitzvot
* He will then perfect the entire world to serve God together (Zephaniah 3:9)
* Jews will know the Torah without Study (Jeremiah 31:33)
* He will give you all the desires of your heart (Psalms 37:4)
* He will take the barren land and make it abundant and fruitful (Isaiah 51:3, Amos 9:13-15, Ezekiel 36:29-30, Isaiah 11:6-9)

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Messiah#Textual_requirements

FYI, I'd keep reminding you, you're not a christian, you don't know anything about the bible. Neither do you know anything about the Lord Jesus Christ. If you want to be educated, we'd try to educate you.

I'd like to inform you that I do know a great deal about the Bible - from its history to the varied forms of hemeneutics that have been employed in the course of exegesis - and Jesus the Nazarene. Also, one doesn't have to be a Christian to know and understand the Bible. In any case, I am open to any new information and any education that may come my way; however, extremely poor apologetics won't do it.

plain and honest reading indeed.

Yes, indeed. The post, complete with the verses, etc., can still be read.

Honestly denying the second coming,

With excellent reason.

honestly denying the agreement of those scriptures with the other scriptures in the bible?

With good hemeneutics.

the bible speaks as one, you know, and it is 'here a little, there a little' Is 28:13. No one verse is isolated, and every teaching in one part agrees with what's in other parts of the bible and it is not subject to human interpretation but to be interpreted by people who have the spirit of God. 2Pet.1:19-21

Once again, fallacious arguments that amount to little more than "Well, the words don't say what they plainly state, but I can decide it means what I want it to mean because -" are, understably, very poor and deserve derision.

LOL, let me let you know that you don't know what you're talking about.

Considering you did exactly what I asserted, it would seem I do in fact know what I'm talking about.

i don't just read the bible, i practice what it teaches and my life has been totally transformed by those spiritual words contained in the book. Jn 5;38-40. Also, Jn 6;63 “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life."

I'm happy for you - even though this is another non-sequitor.

Let me restate, if you have not touched the rhema of God, you are absolute zero in regards to understanding the bible. We are not arguing about a textbook here or about science literature, we are talking about the Word of Life that is ABLE to (and DOES CONTINUALLY) save our souls.

Strange then that I actually understand it. Hmm, maybe I still have some the magic powers from my Christian days left.

If you want to learn about Christianity, ask, seek, knock. Matt. 7:7 If you choose not to be enlightened, your probs.

I have and I am learning about Christianity: that much is certain.

Maybe you are the one to teach us what Jesus was meant to do. Can you help? LOL

Maybe.

sorry again ma, i didnt intend to be silly. I intended to show you that you do not know (nor understand) the scriptures, nor the power of God.

You've done a poor job of it, then. Once again, for the sake of posterity if nothing else, "understanding th Bible has little to do with believeing it is inspired and infallible (which it isn't as a cursory read through the Bible and comparing it with reality should show)."

Matt. 12.24 with all i've read from you, there is nothing you can say that can be of surprise. However, let me indulge you with an answer, FYI, Matt. 4 took place when there were as yet no christians.

The book of Matthew was most likely written by a Christian, and since there is no Devil -

If you choose to reject Christ, that's your problem; each person has his choice. But don't be so pompous as to think that you understand the scriptures, you don't. If you understood the scriptures, you'd be a christian and you'd be saved; the reverse also holds true. Its because you don't that you're an atheist. Thank God He has revealed His Word unto us, and we have been included in Him.

First, rejecting the Christian doctrine is as much of a choice as the choice to reject the belief that Atlas is holding the sky in place.

Second, knowing that I understand aspects of the Bible is hardly hubris, it's just stating a fact and backing it up with both the verses and how they should be viewed honestly. Moreover, I have no problem admitting when I can't understand a Biblical text (I did so about a month or two on this forum)

Third, to quote Asimov, "properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." Becoming an atheist didn't make me lose my "special magical abilities" to understand the Bible: I also read the Bible as a Christian and understood it then and understand it still.

the Jews are not christians because they don't have understanding. If the jews understood (likewise the princes of this world), they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Oh dear! I think that's perhaps one of the most simplistic and myopic views on the subject of the Jews rejection of Christianity and their alledged crucifixion of Jesus the Nazarene.

babyosisi:
Biko for anyone who is in the know,tell more more on this new wave that is sweeping across Naija,whose wind have blown into the USA.
I recently got a book from a Christian written by one Odukoya of the Mountain of Fire Ministries and some of the prayers about my enemies falling down and dying made be shiver.
I put the heavy book on my shelf and have not read it since.

Olukoya? *shrugs* MFM, it's what it is. Incidentally, I like Dr. Olukoya - his heart is in the right place, for what it's worth

^{Lord Jesus,it is not my desire to talk ill of any servants of yours that are truly in your will}

I'm pretty sure Jesus doesn't mind you questioning the messages of churches and preachers - remember the Bereans. In any case, they (he: Dr Olukoya) has said that the enemies they are praying against aren't the physical ones, but the spiritual enemies: the principalities, powers and princes of the air that either use human agents or block and/or change the destiny of the anointed

ricadelide:
wrong. the faith was started by Jews, Paul was a jew (he was a pharisee), the apostles were jews. the pharisees are a hypocritical religious sect who rejected Christ because he condemned and exposed their hypocrisy. If you need knowledge, read Rom 10 - 11. the Christ fulfilled all the prophecies required for his first coming; those pertaining to his second coming he will fulfill when He returns.

Which part was wrong? That the majority of Jews can show messianic prophecies that weren't fulfilled by the Christians' Christ or that many Christians dubiously claim he will fulfill them at a later date? Because, apart from the "the faith was started by Jews" and "the pharisees are a hypocritical " non-sequitors, you haven't made any points that differ significanty from the ones I raised.

as regards the verses you misinterpreted,

I didn't misinterprete them: I've shown, with as much clarity as possible and with the verses to wit, what a plain and honest reading of the texts reveal. Anything else, done without similar candour, is disingenuous.

let me cite the statement in 1Cor 2;12-14, coupled with that in Eph 1;17 & 18,

i've explained the correct interpretation of those verses to you. if you think otherwise, that's your business.

Those would be the verses that inept Christian apologists use as excuses to practise and push their faulty, unreasonable readings as gospel truth. In any case, I've shown you what those verses say and mean. To think otherwise is foolishness.

what are you talking about?

Typo. That should read: Well, that's one person that alledgedly tried to claim the title. Didn't do what he was meant to, though. That is, Jesus, the Christian messiah, was alledgedly one of the many that claimed to be the promised christ.

sorry ma, i'm not being silly. i'm letting you know what you don't know. even Jesus' disciples had to have their minds opened so they could understand the scriptures. Luke 24; 30,31 & 45. Again, 1Cor 2.12-14. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those (words) taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.

No, you're still being silly.

misinterpreting the bible isn't new. the devil started it. you are in 'good' company.

I'm pretty sure Christians, not the Devil, started the misinterpretation of the Bible.

indeed, there is hardly anything that the bible can't be misinterpreted to teach. false teachers and heretics have done that time and again.

Well, from what I've observed, they are only false teachers and heretics when their interpretation of ambiguously worded sections of the Bible differs from whoever is doing the labelling.

if you bring me the verses that predict their leaders, i'd engage you with them.

Here's a webpage with a host of them concerning the Bahai faith:
http://www.bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/

Interesting ones include: 11th Chapter of the Book of Revelation and prophecies concerning the coming of Bab: http://bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/time.htm

The Muslim ones can be found somewhere on this forum, IIRC (I'd provide some - through the help of google, of course - but that could make this longer).

Huh?

You claimed the odds of the prophecies happening as exactly as they were written (even though it is my contention, through studying the prophecies, that many are ridiculously vague and several aren't even prophecies!) are impossible at best. I disagreed.

Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done Rev. 22:12

There is a history in all men's lives,
Figuring the nature of the times deceased;
The which observed, a man may prophesy,
With a near aim, of the main chance of things
As yet not come to life, which in their seeds
And weak beginnings lie intreasured.
Such things become the hatch and brood of time

- Billy Shakespeare

I-man:
The GSS study is for the US.I have seen a couple other similar studies before, but not online,coming to the same conclusion.I will try and find them so I can post them here

No problem.

tuneri:
really really,let's face it some parts of the bible do sound just like the history of a group of
people?

Some of it is, some aren't.

if the story of the how the yoruba cxame to be or the greek stories can be described as mytrhologies,why can't the old testament be said to be the jewish mythology?

A lot of it [B]IS[/B] Jewish mythology.

why is that judaism is the jewish religion now?

Now? When did it stop being the Jewish religion?

why is that we blivd jesus was GOD's son as he claimed,n we don't bliv people who claim sop now?

Because not enough time has passed and we have better ways of keeping and passing information.

I-man:
@KAG

The bewildering thing is that the study you posted asks whether a person has been divorced,without asking whether they have ever been married.

I have never been divorced but I have never been married either.Given that atheists/agnostics are less likely to marry,its hardly surprising.

That is bewildering, if it is true.

General Social Survey (GSS, 2000-2004)—one of the best known sources of sociological data. “Frequent” is attending church about once a week or more.

58%, non-frequent Black Protestants
54%, non-frequent Evangelicals
51%, no religion (e.g., atheists & agnostics)
48%, ALL NON-CHRISTIANS
48%, non-frequent, other religions
47%, frequent Black Protestants
42%, non-frequent, mainline Protestants
41%, ALL CHRISTIANS
41%, non-frequent Catholics
39%, Jews
38%, frequent other religions
34%, frequent Evangelicals
32%, ALL FREQUENT CHRISTIANS
32%, frequent mainline Protestants
23%, frequent Catholics

http://brewright..com/2006/12/christian-divorce-rates.html

Fair enough. Not that it matters, but are the stats. are for the US?

I-man:
Ron Barrier, Spokespersonn for American Atheists remarked on these findings with some rather caustic comments against organized religion. He said:

@KAG

Should i also find links on sites run by the Christian Right about studies on the divorce rates of religious people vis-a-vis the non religious

If you want, but be sure to make sure they include references and independent sources. By the way, if you bothered to read most of the page, you'd have noticed that they included quotes from Christian spokespeople too, not just from an atheist spokesperson.

I-man:
I just decided to google this point.I came up with this article,not much I admit- http://www.pobronson.com/blog/2006/06/will-this-marriage-last-religions.html

I agree it's not much; although, it's enjoyable rhetoric laced with probable hypotheses, it doesn't do much to dent the findings I posted.

If i find something,I will paste it tommorow

No problem.

From the articleStudies have repeatedly found that increased religiosity increases marital stability. Those without any religious affiliation have a higher divorce rate than those who are religious, no matter what religion it is we're talking about. Religious affiliation also seems to be a general indicator of increased marital satisfaction.

[quote][/quote]Any sources or references posted so we can check out the stats.?

I-man:
I didn't arrive at the results myself.I am only referencing 2 studies I have come across

Could you post them please.

I-man:
Is it really difficult to believe that the average religious person has a longer marriage than the average non-religious person?I would think its obvious why that is the case.Whether they have "happier marriages",I have never seen anything in that regard

Why do you suppose that the average religious person would have a longer marriage than the average non-religious person? It really isn't obvious, at leat to me.

I-man:
@KAG

Statistically,religious people, from surveys in the US and the UK,have lower rates of divorce

US stats.
Religion % have been divorced
Jews 30%
Born-again Christians 27%
Other Christians 24%
Atheists, Agnostics 21%

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm

and claim to be happier.

I don't think I've seen any statistics for that.

Are You A Christian If You Don't Believe Every Bible Story?

If you don't believe the earth was created in seven days;
If you don't believe Jesus literally rose from the dead;
If you don't genuinely believe that an omniscient God implanted
a divine foetus in the womb of a virgin human woman, are you really a Christian?

Yes; yes; iffy, but still probable; possibly. The main critereon is accepting Jesus as your saviour, no?

aumefa:
The Bible was inspired by the Spirit of God. Contradictions in the Bible are assumptions of those that have little knowledge of it.

That's untrue. Claims of inerrancy are asumptions by those, usually fundamentalists, who have little knowledge of the Bible.

obabs:
Hello Nairaland users,

I'm new to this site So I dey greet all of una
I wan to know if it is christians, muslims or atheists that keep matrimonial home best.

Atheists

jerrymania:
[font=Lucida Sans Unicode]Was There Two Types Of Creation? Every one that believes in the bible creation should discuss about this.

While I don't believe in the Bible's creation acccount, I'd like to add my two cents. I don't think the second account was written to be taken literally. The first was written to credit the existence of humans, the world and the Universe to the God of the Israelites as opposed to the other Gods around them, while the second is an allegorical narrative. Otherwise they contradict each other.