I am an atheist

[Socrates4Jesus]

Before i go into the prediction of the future i find most compelling in the Old Testament, i want to give some background (in one brief post). This fantastic claim that the writers of the Bible are required to predict the future is not something i dreamed up. It is a litmus test that originated with Moses, as this quote by him demonstrates:

17 The LORD said to me: “What they say is good. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account. 20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death.” 21 You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?” 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

(Deuteronomy, chapter 18)

The quote in bold text clearly states that anyone who claims to speak for this omniscient being must do what only an omniscient being can do – predict the future without error. There is no other religious texts besides those of the Bible that dare to put such a requirement on its authors.

The effect is that if any atheist wants to prove any book of the Bible as a fraud, all he has to do is find a prediction the author of that book made that has been proven false. With this in mind, lets look at the prediction that the so-called prophet Ezekiel made about the ancient city of Tyre.

 

[_A]

The “Chad” i know understands that people like myself need to be convinced before i will trust him. He understands that faith is not a blind leap into a dark chasm; it is a step into the light of sound evidence, reason and truth.

“Come now, let us reason together,” says the LORD.
(Isaiah, chapter 1)

Perhaps Chad will show himself to you. When he is done emptying the trash and mopping the 'ladies.

 

[_A]

LOL!

OK, lets do this. I’ll try to make it brief.

looking forward to it!

 

[_A]

Hello, A.

  I am a cradle Catholic who struggles with her faith every day (here lately, anyway.)  I think it's fine to be any religion or lack thereof as long as the religion does not dictate the harm, abuse, neglect, disrespect, or what have you of anyone else.  (See Satanism, (maybe) Wiccanism, (sorry folks) Islam, to a degree, and Nazism, although that's more a political party or something.)  So I guess as long as a person is an atheist and they aren't hurting anybody then it's okay.  Although, I must say that by being an atheist you miss out on some pretty amazing benefits that Christians experience.  The love of God is a love that no human can match.  I try to tell myself this every day in my current struggles and difficulties; maybe one day when things are better I can appreciate that love more fully.

  Look at it this way:  If I can still believe, even a little bit that God has a plan for me even in the face of difficulty, I can only imagine my joy when that plan is finally realized by myself and God's joy when I waited patiently for Him to show me at the right time - like a parent's joy when they can finally give their children their gifts on Christmas Day.  Yep, it ain't just the kids who are happy!  

  Please consider God.  He considers you every day.  Also, a great philosopher said that it actually makes more sense to believe in God because when you die, you've lost nothing except maybe a mild feeling of disappointment in the rare event that you were wrong and there actually is no God.  I'd much rather say, "Oh, shucks," than "Oh no!", wouldn't you?

Tracy

If I believed without reason I couldn’t face myself. If I died and found out that Yahweh was right, St. Peter was at the gate welcoming me, I would ask for the elevator down. This is because eternal punishment for temporary evils is not up to my moral standards.
The Yahweh of the bible is a genocidal horror who I would not wish on my worst enemy. Remember the great love described in the various old testament stories. Yahweh has another name. It is not ‘god’, it is Jealous. Also not up to my moral standards. I have every reason to reject Yahweh/Jesus (they are the same guy, as far as I can tell), and no reason to think well of them.

 

[_A]

Before i go into the prediction of the future i find most compelling in the Old Testament, i want to give some background (in one brief post). This fantastic claim that the writers of the Bible are required to predict the future is not something i dreamed up. It is a litmus test that originated with Moses, as this quote by him demonstrates:

17 The LORD said to me: “What they say is good. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account. 20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death.” 21 You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?” 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

(Deuteronomy, chapter 18)

The quote in bold text clearly states that anyone who claims to speak for this omniscient being must do what only an omniscient being can do – predict the future without error. There is no other religious texts besides those of the Bible that dare to put such a requirement on its authors.

The effect is that if any atheist wants to prove any book of the Bible as a fraud, all he has to do is find a prediction the author of that book made that has been proven false. With this in mind, lets look at the prediction that the so-called prophet Ezekiel made about the ancient city of Tyre.

…?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

PLEASE SEE MY CHANGE TO THE LINK​

What i’d like to do is to examine the predictions made by the so-called prophet of God Ezekiel between 592 B.C. and 570 B.C. I’d like us to compare what he wrote with the actual events of history that you or i can verify from any number of encyclopedias.

Specifically, i’d like to compare the Ezekiel’s written text here:

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel%2026;&version=31;

with that of the apparently unbiased and accurate account of history here:

middleeast.com/tyre.htm

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

…?

I’m just curious: Why the question mark?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Sorry, but please see my change to the link in the previous post.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

The prediction Ezekiel claims that the omniscient being who calls itself Lord (more accurately YHVH) is remarkable, as it has only happened once in history as far as i know:

… therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves. 4 They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers; I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock. 5 Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets, for I have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD. She will become plunder for the nations, 6 and her settlements on the mainland will be ravaged by the sword. Then they will know that I am the LORD.

(Ezekiel, chapter 26)

I know of no other time in history when an ancient city, after being destroyed, has had all of its rubble, and even the dirt of its streets, thrown into a sea so that all that remains is a vast bare rock where the ancient city once stood.

Do you think A that this sounds like a rare event in history (if not an outright outrageous one) that no one could predict beforehand?

 

[Tracyms1974]

If I believed without reason I couldn’t face myself. If I died and found out that Yahweh was right, St. Peter was at the gate welcoming me, I would ask for the elevator down. This is because eternal punishment for temporary evils is not up to my moral standards.
The Yahweh of the bible is a genocidal horror who I would not wish on my worst enemy. Remember the great love described in the various old testament stories. Yahweh has another name. It is not ‘god’, it is Jealous. Also not up to my moral standards. I have every reason to reject Yahweh/Jesus (they are the same guy, as far as I can tell), and no reason to think well of them.

You are a little misinformed about God and who He is. Besides, the God of the Old Testament was a little more harsh because the people were a little more sinful. He had to show more “tough love,” if you will. When Jesus came along, He tried to soften things up a little and focus more on love of neighbor and self-sacrifice rather than eternal punishment.

I don’t think God normally sends people to Hell for one or two “occurrences.” It matters to Him more what is in a person’s heart and soul. If a person is persistent in his sin and general “rottenness”, then he would be a good candidate for Hell. For those who are struggling to be good who are honestly having a hard time with it, He offers the Holy Sacrament of Reconcilliation. For non-Catholics, I guess they can ask God for forgiveness and hope that it works. Depending on how sorry they are, it may work, but there is no guarantee as in the confessional with a priest.

When you say, “jealous,” you assume that it’s in a bad way. God is jealous in the best way that there is to be jealous. God is jealous in the way that a husband would be jealous if his wife were flirting with another man, or vice versa. He CARES whether or not we care for Him or not. If we start to follow a false god of some sort or start a blatant life of sin, that’s like adultery to Him, as if you were "cheating’ on Him in some way. Wouldn’t it be nice to know that somebody cared about you enough that He didn’t want you to do anything to separate you from His friendship? To you that may seem creepy, but you can get used to it really quick. The nice thing about God is that although He does exert and use His power sometimes, He does not abuse it. Contrast that with every human who has ever been in a position of absolute power (like Hitler). We can’t handle it. That’s why He is in charge because He knows how to use His power very wisely.

I have to go for now, but I’ll be glad to talk to you later.

Tracy

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

You and i can compare these predictions of Ezekiel made between 592 B.C. and 570 B.C. with the events that transpired more than 200 years later:

Founded at the start of the third millennium B.C., Tyre originally consisted of a mainland settlement and a modest island city that lay a short distance off shore. … In 332 B.C. Alexander the Great set out to conquer this strategic coastal base in the war between the Greeks and the Persians. Unable to storm the city, he blockaded Tyre for seven months. Again Tyre held on. But the conqueror used the debris of the abandoned mainland city to build a causeway and once within reach of the city walls, Alexander used his siege engines to batter and finally breach the fortifications. It is said that Alexander was so enraged at the Tyrians’ defense and the loss of his men that he destroyed half the city. The town’s 30,000 residents were massacred or sold into slavery.

These words of the Middleeast.com Web site agree with those of other online encyclopedias. Alexander the great, in order to conquer the island fortress, had slaves take all of the debris of the ruined city of Tyre on the mainland and shovel it into the Mediterranean Sea. They built a causeway out to the island so that his massive siege engine could be used to tear down the fortress walls.

Today, nothing is left of the ancient city Ezekiel knew. All of its remains are under the sea, as Ezekiel predicted more than 200 years earlier. Today the place where the powerful city of Tyre once stood is a fishing village, just as Ezekiel also predicted.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

There are other predictions about Tyre made by Ezekiel and other so-called prophets, but i do not think it necessary to delve into these.

What do you think, A?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

A:

The only explanation that makes sense to me is that some being who knew the future of the ancient city revealed the specific events surrounding its incredible demise. I can see no way Ezekiel might have guessed these historical events.

Not only was the method of its destruction uncanny, but the prophecy that it would be destroyed at all was outrageous. The ancient city of Tyre had stood, according the the ancient historian Herodotus, since 2700 B.C. In Ezekiel’s day, Tyre was a mighty military power (its navy, for example, was unmatched by any nation of its time) and incredibly wealthy. The men of the city had founded Carthage as a colony, and Tyre had withstood many wars. There was no reason to think it would not withstand many more.

Maybe you have another plausible reason for the fulfillment of Ezekiel’s wild claims that amazingly came true?

 

[BCH]

Symmetry is no more evidence of a god than a lack of symmetry would be. (there is lack of symmetry, by the way, only one liver, heart, appendix and spleen - none centered)

I cant’ quite agree here. Symmetry can certainly indicate an intelligent design pattern. And, an intelligent design pattern indicates a designer. It may not be evidence for you but I don’t think that it is much of a leap in logic to make that connection.

 

[Valke2]

You are a little misinformed about God and who He is.

Aren’t we all?

Besides, the God of the Old Testament was a little more harsh because the people were a little more sinful.

Is there any evidence that people in 33 CE were less sinful than their ancestors? Or that we are any less sinful?

He had to show more “tough love,” if you will. When Jesus came along, He tried to soften things up a little and focus more on love of neighbor and self-sacrifice rather than eternal punishment.

That is an interesting statement. From my persepective, Christianity historically hass focused more on the aspect of eternal punishment, as well as eternal reward, then Judaism. I do agree that Jesus widened the teaching of loving your neighbor, as did other Jewish teachers, then and now.

For non-Catholics, I guess they can ask God for forgiveness and hope that it works. Depending on how sorry they are, it may work, but there is no guarantee as in the confessional with a priest.

Forgivness is guaranteed with confession? Is there an element of intent involved, or is it simply the action of confession that suffices? If a non-christian is truly sorry and asks God for fogivness, and a Christian confessess sin but is not sorry in their heart, who has a better chance at salvation, according to Catholicism?

 

[awfulthings9]

Water can rise above it’s source (evaporation, shuttle launches). Just what is ‘non-rational matter’?

You’ve attacked the analogy here, but not the concept. “Non-rational” means matter which is not capable of rational thought. Try again.

Irreducible complexity? I say show it! There was a charlatan named Behe pushing this awhile ago, but I didn’t know anyone still believed him.

I thought the same thing until I listened to debates between Behe and some of his major critics. It wasn’t even close to a tie or a win on their part. While they were able to show techniques, other than random mutation, by which a particular organism might have come by a feature or even duplicated a function of one feature through another, they were not able to demonstrate reducible complexity and explain the genesis of such features in the first place without the act of some consciousness. If you want me to “show it”, I would simply throw the example of the eyeball at you and ask you to explain it in the same simple language (without links) that you’ve demanded of me.

Appearance of design (to your eyes) does not prove design.

No but it highly suggests it. And while science can explain the mechanisms by which systems operate, they cannot explain the reason for their needing to exist as such in the first place. And evidence of sharp bursts of evolution, such as the pre-cambrium period appear to preclude the random nature that science proposes for such beautifully “designed” organisms, such as the birds of paradise flower.

Saying this first cause is your god just raises the question about what caused your god. If complex things require a designer, the designer of complex things would be very complex indeed. So who designed your god then? Swing and a miss!

Only if that first cause was within the bounds of physics. As the creator of physics, time, and space, he is outside of it and has revealed himself as such.

The existence of the universe indicates only that the universe exists. You have not demonstrated anything else here.Why would that have anything to do with a god? A universe that ends, or one that does not are each equally evidence of gods and of no gods.

Not only have you displayed, in earlier posts, your ignorance of modern scientific theory with regard to the universe (such as your suggestion of a Big Crunch), but you fail to realize that the modern scientific consensus of a finite universe means the universe came into being. Had it been otherwise, I would concede the point. Anything which comes into being needs a catalyst for its movement and existance. Ultimately there must be a catalyst which, itself, did not come into being because there cannot be an infinite line of finite things. That’s a paradox.

None of that is evidence.Random preserved corpses like some old Buddists or your examples are perhaps evidence of corpse preservation, but it doesn’t point at a god.

So … you don’t know much about the incorruptables, I take it. Your example of “Random preserved corpses” ignores the fact that the incorruptables are overwhelmingly Christian and science has thrown up its hands at the cause of the preservation, especially in the cases where everything with the corpse decomposed and lime had been placed to eat at the body.

Perhaps if ALL of his followers were preserved in such a fashion it would indicate a god or gods, but another miss, I am afraid.

This supposes that all of the followers are equally as holy. Who said that was the case?

Testimony is suspect because you are required by holy law to testimony at people.

Huh?

As to the prophesies of that Jesus character, he told Peter he would be back before Peter died…Peter died knowing that he was lied to.

Yes, this sure explains why Peter not only allowed himself to be martyred, but requested to do so upside down because he was not worthy of the execution of his Lord. It also demonstrates your lack of understanding of the Greek at work here, the Second Aorist Active, which indicates that Jesus was saying that the conditions for his return will begin to happen during that generation, but not necessarily complete. Incidentally, he did come back before Peter died. He came back body, blood, humanity and divinity in the Eucharist.

The church survived…does that mean if scientology survives, you would believe their story?

It would be one indication. As I said, though, no one indication was enough for me. All of them together was overwhelming. Scientology fails on the other fronts.

 

[notself]

I thought the same thing until I listened to debates between Behe and some of his major critics. It wasn’t even close to a tie or a win on their part. While they were able to show techniques, other than random mutation, by which a particular organism might have come by a feature or even duplicated a function of one feature through another, they were not able to demonstrate reducible complexity and explain the genesis of such features in the first place without the act of some consciousness. If you want me to “show it”, I would simply throw the example of the eyeball at you and ask you to explain it in the same simple language (without links) that you’ve demanded of me.

This and all of the other drivel by Behe was completely refuted during the Kitzmiller v Dover School Board trial in Pennsylvania. Here is the link to the judge’s opinion.

pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf

It is a darn shame that it is against forum rules to post a link to YouTube, but just put in Ken Miller in the search function of YouTube. You will pull up a 1 1/2 hour long discussion of the testimony from the trial. Mr. Miller is a devout Roman Catholic scientist who was the lead witness in the trial. Ken Miller discusses the real science and completely refutes the made up science of Behe regarding the eye and the “motor” of bacterial flagellum being irreducibly complex. Miller also presents many examples of transition fossils.

The Judge, after hearing Behe and others on the ID side, and hearing true science on the plaintiff’s side, ruled that ID was not science but religious faith and as such could not be taught in public schools. By the way, the Judge was nominated for his post by DeLay and was appointed by George W. Bush as one of his most conservative judges. I guess it proves that Conservatives aren’t all brain dead idiots. Who knew?

Intelligent Design is Creationism in a new coat. It is anti-science as well as being anti-intelligence.

 

[Jacafamala]

If your god is really good, why did he do so much genocide in the OT? Why did he kill everyone on earth in the (imaginary) great flood? The bible is full of stories that would have Yahweh arrested and jailed today.

In order to save a remnant of people who hadn’t as yet been completely corrupted.

 

[awfulthings9]

This and all of the other drivel by Behe was completely refuted during the Kitzmiller v Dover School Board trial in Pennsylvania. Here is the link to the judge’s opinion.

pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf

It is a darn shame that it is against forum rules to post a link to YouTube, but just put in Ken Miller in the search function of YouTube. You will pull up a 1 1/2 hour long discussion of the testimony from the trial. Mr. Miller is a devout Roman Catholic scientist who was the lead witness in the trial. Ken Miller discusses the real science and completely refutes the made up science of Behe regarding the eye and the “motor” of bacterial flagellum being irreducibly complex. Miller also presents many examples of transition fossils.

The Judge, after hearing Behe and others on the ID side, and hearing true science on the plaintiff’s side, ruled that ID was not science but religious faith and as such could not be taught in public schools. By the way, the Judge was nominated for his post by DeLay and was appointed by George W. Bush as one of his most conservative judges. I guess it proves that Conservatives aren’t all brain dead idiots. Who knew?

Intelligent Design is Creationism in a new coat. It is anti-science as well as being anti-intelligence.

And since we’re making outside references, here is a point-by-point, detailed rebuttal to Miller.

 

[_A]

The prediction Ezekiel claims that the omniscient being who calls itself Lord (more accurately YHVH) is remarkable, as it has only happened once in history as far as i know:

… therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves. 4 They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers; I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock. 5 Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets, for I have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD. She will become plunder for the nations, 6 and her settlements on the mainland will be ravaged by the sword. Then they will know that I am the LORD.

(Ezekiel, chapter 26)
​

Ezekiel’s prophecy took place in about 587 BC. The king of Babylon was already planning on punishing Tyre for plotting against him with the Egyptians. In that year, Nebuchadnezzar took Jerusalem and that freed up his troops to go after Tyre and lay siege against it. The prophecy did not actually come true as Ezekiel had said. In 573 BC (13 years later) Nebuchadnezzer and Tyre came to a compromise and he did not destroy the city. It was actually Alexander the Great who destroyed the city in about 332 BC, about 240 years later.

Ezekiel even had to acknowledge that Nebuchadnezzer was not going to destroy Tyre:

Ezekiel 29:17-19 ~ And it came to pass in the seventh month and twentieth year, in the first month, in the first day of the month, the word of the Lord came unto me saying, Son of man, Nebechadnezzer king of Babylon caused his army to serve a great service against Tyrus: every head was made bald, and every shoulder was peeled, yet he had no wages, nor his army, for Tyrus, for the service he had served against it. Therefore, thus saith the Lord God; Behold I will give the land of Egypt unto Nebechadnezzer king of Babylon, and he shall take her multitude, and take her spoil, and take her prey; and it shall be the wages for his army.

The king did not get his “wages” in Tyre because he was forced to come to a compromise with the city and did not loot and destroy it. A failed prophecy.

The prophecy could not have been about Alexander the Great, who was Greek, because it specifically says “the king of Babylon”.

Do you think A that this sounds like a rare event in history (if not an outright outrageous one) that no one could predict beforehand?

No, I have shown here, I think that it wasn’t an accurate prophesy. With all the false prophecies in the bible, one or two being right (or interpreted as right) would not be evidence of anything but a lucky writer.​