messianic prophecies

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the birth was a sign, clearly it must be something extraordinary for it to be considered
a sign, yah think, a normal birth is not that extraordinary, is it, it happens everyday,
therefore it must have been some kind of special birth, mustn't it Sherlock?

Giving birth to Gods son isn't extraordinary enough?

Originally posted by FMF
The author referred to as Matthew, when he wrote his gospel, claimed however many "messianic prophecies" were fulfilled - 37 you say? - what does it matter? He could have claimed that there had been 400 references directly back to 400 "messianic prophecies" in the OT, or he could have claimed that there were 137 or 7 or 3. It doesn't really matter. He was creati ...[text shortened]... rature needed to establish a religion centred on the notion that Jesus was the "Messiah".

how many did he himself create Baldric? You have not said.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The history of Alexander is drawn from five ancient sources written 300 or more years
after he died. Not one eyewitness account of Alexander exists. Do you also assert that
these historical accounts were created, have no validity, are moot as you have stated
about the gospels, no why not?

Did the accounts of Alexander, written hundreds of years after he died, claim he was a "Messiah" using a careful rehashing of thousands of years of regional, tribal folklore? No.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Giving birth to Gods son isn't extraordinary enough?

It was a sign, and yes giving birth to Gods son was awesome, it hardly negates the fact
that it was given as a sign though, does it, neeeeeeeeeet!

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Giving birth to Gods son isn't extraordinary enough?

apparently not, birthing gods is soooooo last year. she's gotta be a virgin to make it exciting for the christians.

how did they even know she was a virgin?

Originally posted by FMF
Did the accounts of Alexander, written hundreds of years after he died, claim he was a "Messiah" using a careful rehashing of thousands of years of regional, tribal folklore? No.

Not one eyewitness account, 300 years after he died, yet you will not dismiss it, the
fact that he did not claim to be the messiah is relevant why? that is correct, its not,
there is far more eyewitness testimony for Christ than there is of Alexander and much
much closer to the time but we dont hear you whining about Alexander, do we.
Prejudiced much?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
It was a sign, and yes giving birth to Gods son was awesome, it hardly negates the fact
that it was given as a sign though, does it, neeeeeeeeeet!

how did they know she was a virgin?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
It was a sign, and yes giving birth to Gods son was awesome, it hardly negates the fact
that it was given as a sign though, does it, neeeeeeeeeet!

what was a sign on the donkey ride?

Originally posted by stellspalfie
how did they know she was a virgin?

How do they know who was a virgin Sherlock? Who are they?

Originally posted by stellspalfie
what was a sign on the donkey ride?

what donkey ride, you have not said?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
how many did he himself create Baldric? You have not said.

You clearly are trying to avoid acknowledging what I am saying. The folklore was already there. The folklore had already been created. Gospel writers, like Matthew, rehashed them and undoubtedly ticked them off carefully - including the 37 that you are talking about. What else would they do when writing material to establish a new religion that was claiming to 'fulfill' and 'culminate' the predecessor religion (Judaism) that it was breaking away from or replacing?

Originally posted by FMF
You clearly are trying to avoid acknowledging what I am saying. The folklore was already there. The folklore had already been created. Gospel writers, like Matthew, rehashed them and undoubtedly ticked them off carefully - including the 37 that you are talking about. What else would they do when writing material to establish a new religion that was claiming to 'fulfill' and 'culminate' the religion (Judaism) that it was breaking away from?

no i simply will not accept your opinion as validation in itself, you have made the most
ludicrous assertions and provided not a single shred of evidence, i dont need to accept
anything without evidence simply because you say it and let it be noted, you have
failed to provide any.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
How do they know who was a virgin Sherlock? Who are they?

Who are they? The men who wrote the gospels.

Originally posted by FMF
Who are they? The men who wrote the gospels.

well gee, thanks.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
How do they know who was a virgin Sherlock? Who are they?

are you getting grumpy robbie? do you need a nap?