Tart wrote:Absolutely there is a lot hanging on whether Jesus existed or not... When studying the evidence, if they actually take the subject seriously, His existence itself is testimony to God... It is hard to get around it without seriously deluding yourself... This is probably why some people flat out deny His existence, like Dr. Richard Carrier for example. He is so convinced that the Gospels have such a deeper meaning then the surface, that it has to be a myth... He builds his entire argument on that focus... But that is the claim of the Gospels.. That the message Jesus brought indeed has a deeper message, that he fulfilled a destiny of God to establish that deeper message...
If we allow Jesus to be historical. His existence itself, his trail, his death, is a fulfillment of a divine plan... And being the fact that it is irrational to deny that there is a huge magnitude of historical evidence, so much so that no fictional person ever has had this amount of evidence. Period...
Jesus existence itself establishes an All Powerful, and All Knowing God exists. And therefor give evidence to the Resurrection.
Bold added by me.
Question for debate: If the statement “Jesus existed� is true, does that necessarily establish that an all powerful, all knowing God exists?
I didn't watch it in full at the time. I did this time.
---
About Zechariah 9:9 and the donkey.
As DI said, the NT authors could just write that Jesus rode in on a donkey. Did he actually? Who knows. Who cares.
The reason I say who cares is because, as riku said, it's about the least impressive fulfillment of a prophecy imaginable. Just about anyone could do it if they felt so inclined, and the prophecy was public knowledge.
A complete joke of an argument.
---
About Micah 5:2 and Jesus's birthplace.
The video talks about how remarkable it was that the timing of the census managed to ensure that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, away from where his family was from; and implied that this amazing coincidence is evidence of divine prophecy. Indeed it is quite remarkable, especially because no census actually occurred at that time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_of_Quirinius
So then why does this story appear in Gospel Luke? The simple answer is that author Luke made an error regarding the timing of the census. But if he got the circumstances of Jesus's birth so wrong, then why should we accept his claim that Mary ever set foot in Bethlehem at all?
Far from being evidence for the divinity of Jesus, this is evidence that author Luke lacks credibility.
Again, a joke.
---
About Daniel's 70 sevens prophecy.
The main focus of the video. This is not a surprise; I suspected that this would be the favorite prophecy from the very beginning, being as there is enough in it to warrant a thoughtful response.
Here are the verses (New International Version translation):
24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.
25 “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out 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.
26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.
27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.�
I can't read ancient Hebrew, but I have researched what a number of sources say about the grammar and context of this passage. Biblical Hebrew contains no punctuation (though later Hebrew does). There are no capital letters or periods or commas and so forth. Thus, how these words appear to us is heavily filtered through a translator's interpretation.
Daniel 9:25.
Here's the NIV again. 25 “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out 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.
And here it is according to the Jewish Publication Society version (1917) 25 Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks; and for threescore and two weeks, it shall be built again, with broad place and moat, but in troublous times.
Bold added, of course.
You will notice the punctuation of the NIV translation leads the reader to combine the 62 weeks and 7 weeks into a sum, while the JPS keeps them distinct. My understanding is that the NIV interpretation is not "impossible" but, if you compare the two, the JPS one speaks much more clearly. It is quite apparent to me that the Christian translation is forced. Indeed, I contend that any neutral observer would agree.
Daniel 9:26
NIV 26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.
JPS 26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off, and be no more; and the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; but his end shall be with a flood; and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
9:26 opens with "after the 62 sevens". This is really strange under the Christian interpretation where the 62 and 7 are supposed to be summed as 69. Why are they grouped in 9:25 but then made distinct in 9:26 with no explanation as to what actually distinguishes them from on another? The JPS version does not have this problem, as in the JPS version the two time periods are distinct, with the 7 sevens referring to the time from the decree to the "one anointed" and the 62 sevens being the time in which Jerusalem stands rebuilt. What this implies, however, is that the JPS translation recognizes the "anointed" in 9:25 and the "anointed" in 9:26 as distinct entities (i.e. anointed appears after the 7 sevens, and a different anointed appear after the 62 sevens). Additionally, we have the difference in translation between "the Anointed One" (NIV) and "an anointed one" (JPS). I am not sure where the NIV translation's "the" comes from, because the original Hebrew does not have a definite article there. Inserting the definite article "the" makes it sound like the two occurrences of the word "anointed" refer to the same entity, but as far as I can tell the syntax just doesn't justify it.
Daniel 9:27
27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.�
(No comments about translation differences.)
In the video they took the portion "In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering." as prophetic of Jesus. This is ridiculous. The very next line of the verse has a "he" setting up an abomination. Obviously Jesus wouldn't do that. If context means anything, all the various "he"s of 9:27 are referring to the "ruler" in 9:26 whose people will destroy Jerusalem.
Which is probably the same 'abomination of desolation' person and event referred to throughout Daniel, such as in Daniel 12:11.
Daniel 9:27 New International Version
He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the templehe will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him." Daniel 7:25 New International Version
He will speak against the Most High and oppress his holy people and try to change the set times and the laws. The holy people will be delivered into his hands for a time, times and half a time. Daniel 12:7 New International Version
The man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, lifted his right hand and his left hand toward heaven, and I heard him swear by him who lives forever, saying, “It will be for a time, times and half a time. When the power of the holy people has been finally broken, all these things will be completed.� Daniel 12:11 New International Version
From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days.
Lets not separate the life of Jesus, from the fulfillment of a Messiah. That is the entire point of the topic...
Judaism has never accepted any of the claimed fulfillment of prophecy that Christianity attributes to Jesus. Given the source of the prophesies, are they not in the best position to make that determination? Why don't they see Jesus as the fulfillment of messianic prophesy?
You are suggesting that Judaism as a whole doesnt not believe Jesus was the Messiah. But Jews were the ones who recognized Jesus was the Messiah... All the first believing Disciples were Jews.
A fraction of Jews believed, and a fraction of Jews didnt believe...
Why didnt all the Jews believe? This is actually a common theme in scripture, throughout its entirety... Ever since the Israelite's left Egypt, many of them have been falling away from Judaism itself... Throughout the entire Old Testament, many Jews basically turn their backs on Judaism! Start worshiping false god, and not retaining the truth of God, who called them out of Egypt.... This led to events such as, the wondering for 40 years in the desert before coming into the land of Israel, to the fall of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, the deconstruction of the first temple, and likewise the destruction of the second temple in 70AD...
The fraction of Jewish believers, and nonbelievers for Christianity, is illustrated by Saint Stephan in the book of acts, the first Christian martyr...
As Stephan noted before they killed him for testifying so. 51 “You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit! 52 Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him— 53 you who have received the law that was given through angels but have not obeyed it.�
54 When the members of the Sanhedrin heard this, they were furious and gnashed their teeth at him. 55 But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56 “Look,� he said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.�
57 At this they covered their ears and, yelling at the top of their voices, they all rushed at him, 58 dragged him out of the city and began to stone him.
I think this illustration depicts the situation perfectly...
"they covered their ears and, yelling at the top of their voices..."
Tart wrote:
The fraction of Jewish believers, and nonbelievers for Christianity, is illustrated by Saint Stephan in the book of acts, the first Christian martyr...
His name was Stephen. It's hard to take a post seriously when it doesn't even get the obvious details correct.
For those wondering, the passage quoted and not referenced properly, is from Acts chapter 7.
Tart wrote:
The fraction of Jewish believers, and nonbelievers for Christianity, is illustrated by Saint Stephan in the book of acts, the first Christian martyr...
His name was Stephen. It's hard to take a post seriously when it doesn't even get the obvious details correct.
For those wondering, the passage quoted and not referenced properly, is from Acts chapter 7.
I didn't watch it in full at the time. I did this time.
---
About Zechariah 9:9 and the donkey.
As DI said, the NT authors could just write that Jesus rode in on a donkey. Did he actually? Who knows. Who cares.
The reason I say who cares is because, as riku said, it's about the least impressive fulfillment of a prophecy imaginable. Just about anyone could do it if they felt so inclined, and the prophecy was public knowledge.
A complete joke of an argument.
---
About Micah 5:2 and Jesus's birthplace.
The video talks about how remarkable it was that the timing of the census managed to ensure that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, away from where his family was from; and implied that this amazing coincidence is evidence of divine prophecy. Indeed it is quite remarkable, especially because no census actually occurred at that time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_of_Quirinius
So then why does this story appear in Gospel Luke? The simple answer is that author Luke made an error regarding the timing of the census. But if he got the circumstances of Jesus's birth so wrong, then why should we accept his claim that Mary ever set foot in Bethlehem at all?
Far from being evidence for the divinity of Jesus, this is evidence that author Luke lacks credibility.
Again, a joke.
---
About Daniel's 70 sevens prophecy.
The main focus of the video. This is not a surprise; I suspected that this would be the favorite prophecy from the very beginning, being as there is enough in it to warrant a thoughtful response.
Here are the verses (New International Version translation):
24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.
25 “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out 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.
26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.
27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.�
I can't read ancient Hebrew, but I have researched what a number of sources say about the grammar and context of this passage. Biblical Hebrew contains no punctuation (though later Hebrew does). There are no capital letters or periods or commas and so forth. Thus, how these words appear to us is heavily filtered through a translator's interpretation.
Daniel 9:25.
Here's the NIV again. 25 “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out 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.
And here it is according to the Jewish Publication Society version (1917) 25 Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks; and for threescore and two weeks, it shall be built again, with broad place and moat, but in troublous times.
Bold added, of course.
You will notice the punctuation of the NIV translation leads the reader to combine the 62 weeks and 7 weeks into a sum, while the JPS keeps them distinct. My understanding is that the NIV interpretation is not "impossible" but, if you compare the two, the JPS one speaks much more clearly. It is quite apparent to me that the Christian translation is forced. Indeed, I contend that any neutral observer would agree.
Daniel 9:26
NIV 26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.
JPS 26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off, and be no more; and the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; but his end shall be with a flood; and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
9:26 opens with "after the 62 sevens". This is really strange under the Christian interpretation where the 62 and 7 are supposed to be summed as 69. Why are they grouped in 9:25 but then made distinct in 9:26 with no explanation as to what actually distinguishes them from on another? The JPS version does not have this problem, as in the JPS version the two time periods are distinct, with the 7 sevens referring to the time from the decree to the "one anointed" and the 62 sevens being the time in which Jerusalem stands rebuilt. What this implies, however, is that the JPS translation recognizes the "anointed" in 9:25 and the "anointed" in 9:26 as distinct entities (i.e. anointed appears after the 7 sevens, and a different anointed appear after the 62 sevens). Additionally, we have the difference in translation between "the Anointed One" (NIV) and "an anointed one" (JPS). I am not sure where the NIV translation's "the" comes from, because the original Hebrew does not have a definite article there. Inserting the definite article "the" makes it sound like the two occurrences of the word "anointed" refer to the same entity, but as far as I can tell the syntax just doesn't justify it.
Daniel 9:27
27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.�
(No comments about translation differences.)
In the video they took the portion "In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering." as prophetic of Jesus. This is ridiculous. The very next line of the verse has a "he" setting up an abomination. Obviously Jesus wouldn't do that. If context means anything, all the various "he"s of 9:27 are referring to the "ruler" in 9:26 whose people will destroy Jerusalem.
Which is probably the same 'abomination of desolation' person and event referred to throughout Daniel, such as in Daniel 12:11.
Daniel 9:27 New International Version
He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the templehe will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him." Daniel 7:25 New International Version
He will speak against the Most High and oppress his holy people and try to change the set times and the laws. The holy people will be delivered into his hands for a time, times and half a time. Daniel 12:7 New International Version
The man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, lifted his right hand and his left hand toward heaven, and I heard him swear by him who lives forever, saying, “It will be for a time, times and half a time. When the power of the holy people has been finally broken, all these things will be completed.� Daniel 12:11 New International Version
From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days.
Thanks for the reply FarWanderer
You have some interesting points that ill have to think about... Although the riding on a donkey prophecy, can certainly be a legit prophecy, no matter how mundane it may be... And the Daniel 9 prophecy, in its translations, id have to request a source for your interpretation, because you are specifically pointing out passive words in translations who's original languages you dont read (i assume)... We can certainly take a look at the original Hebrew, here:
But making such specific claims like "he" or "an" have specific meaning to it, would have to be supported by an original transcript (being one way or the other)...
I however am not an expert in Ancient Hebrew... And personally I feel the prophecy in Daniel 9 is difficult to interpret, even in English, even the major parts (let alone small words like "he" "an")... Id just have to reserve my judgement when it comes to these interpretation problems you talk about... (that is, its not very convincing for me either way)
Did you get that from any source? Or did you come up with it on your own accord?
As far as the census, i never heard that before, id have to research it further.
Lets not separate the life of Jesus, from the fulfillment of a Messiah. That is the entire point of the topic...
Judaism has never accepted any of the claimed fulfillment of prophecy that Christianity attributes to Jesus. Given the source of the prophesies, are they not in the best position to make that determination? Why don't they see Jesus as the fulfillment of messianic prophesy?
You are suggesting that Judaism as a whole doesnt not believe Jesus was the Messiah. But Jews were the ones who recognized Jesus was the Messiah... All the first believing Disciples were Jews.
A fraction of Jews believed, and a fraction of Jews didnt believe...
Why didnt all the Jews believe? This is actually a common theme in scripture, throughout its entirety... Ever since the Israelite's left Egypt, many of them have been falling away from Judaism itself... Throughout the entire Old Testament, many Jews basically turn their backs on Judaism! Start worshiping false god, and not retaining the truth of God, who called them out of Egypt.... This led to events such as, the wondering for 40 years in the desert before coming into the land of Israel, to the fall of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, the deconstruction of the first temple, and likewise the destruction of the second temple in 70AD...
The fraction of Jewish believers, and nonbelievers for Christianity, is illustrated by Saint Stephan in the book of acts, the first Christian martyr...
As Stephan noted before they killed him for testifying so. 51 “You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit! 52 Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him— 53 you who have received the law that was given through angels but have not obeyed it.�
54 When the members of the Sanhedrin heard this, they were furious and gnashed their teeth at him. 55 But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56 “Look,� he said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.�
57 At this they covered their ears and, yelling at the top of their voices, they all rushed at him, 58 dragged him out of the city and began to stone him.
I think this illustration depicts the situation perfectly...
"they covered their ears and, yelling at the top of their voices..."
The concept in Judaism of 'what is the messiah' is much different. The concept was 'the messiah is a human being that does extraordinary stuff', and who gets anointed in the temple to be the King of Israel. If you look at the sects that came from Judaism, they did not think Jesus was God. That was added on when Paul was trying to get the Gentiles to convert.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Lets not separate the life of Jesus, from the fulfillment of a Messiah. That is the entire point of the topic...
Judaism has never accepted any of the claimed fulfillment of prophecy that Christianity attributes to Jesus. Given the source of the prophesies, are they not in the best position to make that determination? Why don't they see Jesus as the fulfillment of messianic prophesy?
You are suggesting that Judaism as a whole doesnt not believe Jesus was the Messiah. But Jews were the ones who recognized Jesus was the Messiah... All the first believing Disciples were Jews.
A fraction of Jews believed, and a fraction of Jews didnt believe...
Why didnt all the Jews believe? This is actually a common theme in scripture, throughout its entirety... Ever since the Israelite's left Egypt, many of them have been falling away from Judaism itself... Throughout the entire Old Testament, many Jews basically turn their backs on Judaism! Start worshiping false god, and not retaining the truth of God, who called them out of Egypt.... This led to events such as, the wondering for 40 years in the desert before coming into the land of Israel, to the fall of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, the deconstruction of the first temple, and likewise the destruction of the second temple in 70AD...
The fraction of Jewish believers, and nonbelievers for Christianity, is illustrated by Saint Stephan in the book of acts, the first Christian martyr...
As Stephan noted before they killed him for testifying so. 51 “You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit! 52 Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him— 53 you who have received the law that was given through angels but have not obeyed it.�
54 When the members of the Sanhedrin heard this, they were furious and gnashed their teeth at him. 55 But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56 “Look,� he said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.�
57 At this they covered their ears and, yelling at the top of their voices, they all rushed at him, 58 dragged him out of the city and began to stone him.
I think this illustration depicts the situation perfectly...
"they covered their ears and, yelling at the top of their voices..."
The concept in Judaism of 'what is the messiah' is much different. The concept was 'the messiah is a human being that does extraordinary stuff', and who gets anointed in the temple to be the King of Israel. If you look at the sects that came from Judaism, they did not think Jesus was God. That was added on when Paul was trying to get the Gentiles to convert.
Ya I think the reason some Jews deny Jesus, is similar to the reasons they denied God in the Old Testament, they are falling away...
And im not quite sure what you mean by Paul inventing Jesus is "God"... Becuase, saying Jesus is "God" isnt really accurate, the "Son of God" would be more aligned with what the first disciples believed... Or they also called Jesus Christ "Lord"... And we have references to these titles in every book in the New Testament (that im aware of)... Not just Paul's like you are suggesting.
Ya I think the reason some Jews deny Jesus, is similar to the reasons they denied God in the Old Testament, they are falling away...
And im not quite sure what you mean by Paul inventing Jesus is "God"... Becuase, saying Jesus is "God" isnt really accurate, the "Son of God" would be more aligned with what the first disciples believed... Or they also called Jesus Christ "Lord"... And we have references to these titles in every book in the New Testament (that im aware of)... Not just Paul's like you are suggesting.
Well, you have to look at idioms and how they were used at the time. In the Jewish faith, the term 'Son of God' means someone who was especially righteous. Psalm 2 had David becoming the Son of God when he was anointed to be king. it didn't mean he was god, but he was exulted by God.
And, the Jewish people are quite happy not having Christian beliefs imposed on them.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Ya I think the reason some Jews deny Jesus, is similar to the reasons they denied God in the Old Testament, they are falling away...
And im not quite sure what you mean by Paul inventing Jesus is "God"... Becuase, saying Jesus is "God" isnt really accurate, the "Son of God" would be more aligned with what the first disciples believed... Or they also called Jesus Christ "Lord"... And we have references to these titles in every book in the New Testament (that im aware of)... Not just Paul's like you are suggesting.
Well, you have to look at idioms and how they were used at the time. In the Jewish faith, the term 'Son of God' means someone who was especially righteous. Psalm 2 had David becoming the Son of God when he was anointed to be king. it didn't mean he was god, but he was exulted by God.
And, the Jewish people are quite happy not having Christian beliefs imposed on them.
Well Jewish people are Messianic Jews as well as non believers... Lets not group them all one way or the other...
