“Of course it’s true. It’s in the Book”

I found this article rather interesting but not because it talks about the age of the bible. What I found most fascinating was the revelation (to some) that:

… the absolute oldest scrap of Christian writing that has been recovered to date is a fragment of the Gospel of John, written around 125 CE.

The writer goes on to add:

To be clear, this is indeed a “scrap” which is barely as big as a credit card, with text on the front and back.

A scrap. Barely as big as a credit card. Written nearly 100 years after the death of Yeshua.

Yet there are innumerable believers who are certain the scriptures in existence today are the bona fide reports of the life and death of their “Jesus.” Further, they are certain (because their leaders told them so) that the writers were eyewitnesses and wrote down the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And that every word in their holy book is based on irreputable fact.

Wow. It never ceases to amaze me how some people will believe anything that someone tells them and never bother to investigate for themselves. For example, care to take a guess on how many Christians will ever read the referenced article?

 

Advertisements

63 thoughts on ““Of course it’s true. It’s in the Book”

  1. Christians won’t read the article because it was written by demons. (Demon = anything or anyone not agreeing with everything Christians say is true about the Bible.) A perfect circle of thought that maintains the idiocy of the thought without interruption.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. And, it is worse than that. The ms. we do have for the NT contain more discrepancies between and among them than they do words. Which of the fragments that contradict one another are the work of God and which are the work of the Devil? Can anyone tell?

    Liked by 1 person

  3. I’ve been on the stump circuit for the past five years, trying to explain to any and all who would listen, that the Gospel of Mark, the first of the gospels written, was written about 70-72 AD – a full 30-32 years after the death of Yeshua, with Matthew copying Mark around five years later, 75-77 AD, Luke copying from Mark and other oral legends around 85 AD, and John ending the century by writing his gospel sometime between 95 AD and 105.

    Can anyone imagine a man, strolling around the countryside, healing people, raising the dead, dying, resurrecting, and levitating into the clouds, and no one thought to write of him for at least 40 years?

    It wasn’t until Rome had nearly reached its last straw in dealing with the Jews, and was on the verge of tearing Jerusalem to a rubble heap, that someone thought to come out with a book about Yeshua, who had reputedly died 40 years earlier – sounds like a Hail Mary to me —
    (Pun intended)

    Liked by 4 people

    • NONE of the authors of any of the books of the New Testament EVER met Yeahua – THAT, if nothing else, is the main thing that every Christian should know, but very few do.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Part of it will get read, Nan. That part will be condemned as heresy/lies/Satan’s speech. It’ll get mocked, and ignored, and vilified. The authors will be labeled as terrible people with hidden agendas, or they’ll be misguided fools who are silly for not already believing in Jesus. Somewhere, someone’s going to gloat about how the people who like the article are going to burn for an eternity.

    Because that’s fun to think about when loving one’s neighbor as oneself.

    Liked by 2 people

      • A Christian on my blog once told me that believing people who wronged me in life will be punished for an eternity is a totally okay reason to believe in God.

        I don’t think I was able to impress upon her how that belief was incompatible with being a decent human being.

        Like

        • Well, that of course is THE problem, isn’t it? Humanity has forgotten what it means to be a “decent human being.” And that, I think, begins with believing you are something other than a human being. By that I mean many people fundamentally identify with being a Christian, Hindu, Atheist, American, etc. And so we believe our identity to be something that is an idea or label. We’ve forgotten our humanity and our connection with the human family. Perhaps if we view one another as family instead of separated by ideas we’ve attached ourselves to, we will treat each other as “decent human beings.”

          Liked by 1 person

        • Actually, politics does as well. And racism (see my post on white supremacy). And dozens of other things in this world. Unity only happens when the chips are down and everyone is suffering … and then once things are back to normal? Well, you know the answer.

          Maybe someday humans will mentally advance enough to overcome this deficiency. But I’m quite sure I won’t be around to see it happen.

          Liked by 1 person

        • I don’t recall if it was Robert Ardrey, “Territorial Imperative,” or Desmond Morris, “The Naked Ape,” but one spoke of a situation where a group of animals, predator and prey, are marooned on an island in a river, while a forest fire rages – all natural instincts stall out until the danger is over. He even formulized it: Amity = Enmity + Hazard.
          (yes, Grammar Police, I know that ‘formulize’ isn’t a word, but it says what I mean)

          Liked by 1 person

  5. This is just one of the factors that Christians would regard as questionable if they applied to the sacred book of another faith tradition. But for some reason if it is your own tradition then it somehow excused.

    I have been looking in depth at how the New Testament was formed, and looking also at the many texts that were considered and excluded. One factor that any serious scholar cannot avoid are the many variant versions of the New Testament text. At the very least these show evidence that in its transmission the Bible was subject to change (until it got to the inerrant King James Version).

    An interesting fact that Christian scholars tried to dodge around is that Jesus made no impact on the historians of the time who were familiar with Palestine. Although Josephus is often quoted, he did not write until over 50 years later and there is very strong evidence that what he wrote was changed given that the earliest reference by a Christian writer (Origen) to Josephus bemoans the lack of any reference in his writings to Jesus. It was not until Eusebius in the 4th century that Josephus is cited as mentioning Jesus. Eusebius is known as the father as Church History as 50% of the knowledge of the early church comes from his history.However he had admitted to putting a bit of gloss on the history (other say he admitted outright lies).

    It is interesting to read of a slightly later Church father, the Bishop of Constantinople John Chrysostom and his use of Josephus. From Earl Doherty, author of the Jesus Puzzle:

    Frank Zindler has called attention to another Christian commentator who, though versed in Josephus’ writings and employing them in his homilies, nevertheless makes no reference to any version of the Testimonium: St. John Chrysostom, who wrote late in the 4th century. In Homily 76, he subscribes to the by now well-established Christian view that Jerusalem was destroyed because of the crucifixion of Jesus. He appeals to Josephus as evidence that the destruction was indeed horrific, something that could only be explained by a deed as monstrous as deicide. Also, he says, there can be no truth to the fantasy that Josephus was actually a Christian believer, “For he was both a Jew, and a determined Jew, very zealous.” Yet there is no discussion of any Josephan testimony to Jesus himself by Chrysostom, and certainly not to the question of what the historian might have had to say about Jesus’ messianic or ‘more than human’ status. Other homilies by Chrysostom contain other appeals to Josephus, but none to the Testimonium. Most striking is Homily 13. Here he says that Josephus imputes the destructive war to the murder of John the Baptist. Nowhere in the extant texts of Josephus is such an imputation to be found, one which also stands in contradiction to statements by Origen and Eusebius that Josephus regarded the destruction of Jerusalem as punishment by God for the murder of James the Just—an allegation, too, which cannot be found in surviving texts. (Josephus actually implies at one point that the destruction of the war was due to the Zealot’s murder of the former High Priest Ananus.)

    Sorry Nan I am getting carried away, but the circumstantial evidence mounts in my mind of Christianity being based on a creative re-telling of history.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Josephus wasn’t born until two or three years after Yeshua’s reputed death, so one could hardly look to him for eye-witness testimony. He was also a traitor to the Jewish people, to save his own life, he joined forces with the Romans before and during the destruction of Jerusalem.

      Like

  6. This was one of the biggest issues for me when I was wrestling with questions before I ultimately deconverted. It’s incredible to me that I could spend 40+ years in the church, and never hear the history of this supposedly perfect book we held in our hands. An article I read pointed out the long chain: You have the alleged eyewitnesses, the oral repeaters, the writers, the copyists, and the canonizers. The biggest problem for me isn’t the textual variants (from the copyists onward)… it’s the fact that we don’t have the originals, and we have decades from the events to the earliest copies we do have, and we don’t know for sure who wrote them, or how they might have been altered, etc. etc. Look at how far Mormonism has come from Joseph Smith’s alleged experiences to now, less than 200 years… that’s roughly on par with how much time we have between Jesus and our earliest NT copies.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Brent your experience and deconversion probably is testimony as to why Christians do not hear more in Church about the history of the Bible. The impression I get from some fundamentalists is that God zapped the perfect King James Version to earth (not sure what the Christians in the first 1,500 years were meant to use).

      Probably the factor that was most significant in starting me on the path to deconversion was studying Christian history. at first it really puzzled me as it looked so much more like the history of a human movement not the history of a divine movement. Later I came to understand why it appeared this way, becasue that is what it was.

      Liked by 2 people

      • That’s right. I’ve read quite a bit in the last few years about the origins of the Bible. Most Christian theologians and biblical scholars have definitions of “inerrancy” and “inspiration” (“perfect with respect to purpose,” “inerrant in the original manuscripts,” etc.) and a confidence in textual criticism such that their faith isn’t threatened by the history of the biblical manuscripts and the evident errors in them. But that’s not how it’s presented in most churches. Most of the folks in the pew think “inerrancy” means the Bible has no errors in it (and most pastors I’ve known reinforce this in the descriptors they use for the Bible). And they never hear in church about the long gap between the penning of the NT books and the earliest copies we have. For them, knowing the origins of the manuscript and wrestling with what evident errors implies could jeopardize their faith; I think that does incent pastors to steer clear of it.

        And regarding human vs. divine history, the same is true with subjective internal “God speaking to me” experiences, and with perceived miracles/supernatural events. Once you realize that people in all religions have these, you begin to strongly suspect that these are human phenomena.

        Liked by 2 people

        • I remember being quite shocked by hearing of some of the spiritual experiences Mormons claimed. What threw me was I knew that Mormons did not have the truth. Yet their spiritual experiences seemed very similar to ‘proper Christians’.

          Liked by 1 person

      • … it really puzzled me as it looked so much more like the history of a human movement not the history of a divine movement. Later I came to understand why it appeared this way, because that is what it was.

        Absolutely! Glad you made this discovery!

        Like

  7. This is from my former website which, much like Jesus, isn’t dead, but only resting. The OT is, after all, the daddy of the NT, so possibly we should know a bit more about its origins:

    I thought at this time, we might investigate a few Jewish biblical terms. Most of these we’ll likely never use again, but we should at least have a working familiarity with them just in case we ever encounter them in the outside world, wherever that is.
    First, of course, is the term with which we’re already familiar, the Torah, the first five books of both the Jewish and Christian Bibles.
    According to biblical tradition, the region known as Samaria in Northern Israel was captured by the Israelites from the Canaanites and was assigned to the Tribe of Joseph. After the death of King Solomon (c.931 BCE), the northern tribes, including those of Samaria, separated from the southern tribes and established the separate kingdom of Israel. Initially its capital was at Tirzah until the time of King Omri (c.884 BC), who built the city Shomeron (Samaria) and established it as its capital.
    The region was conquered by the Assyrians in c.722 BC, and much of its population was taken into captivity and deported, creating the noted “Ten Lost Tribes of Israel,” and leaving the Southern Kingdom of Judah, at Jerusalem, as the nations only Jewish capitol.
    As we also know, the works of the Yahwist (J) Source and the Elohist (E) Source were written after the nation divided, but before the first conquest, and only combined into JE after refugees from the Northern capital fled south to Jerusalem, carrying with them their E Source version of how the world came to be.
    It was nearly a hundred years later that, during repair work on the Temple of Solomon, the Book of Deuteronomy was miraculously “found” in a rarely-accessed section of the temple.
    The power of the Assyrians waned and King Nebuchadnezzar, of Babylonia, in three efforts, 597, 586 and finally, in 581 BCE, pillaged both the city of Jerusalem and the Temple of Solomon and deported to Babylonia the new king Jeconiah, who was either eight or eighteen at the time (depending on who you ask), and his court and other prominent citizens and craftsmen, along with a sizable portion of the Jewish population of Judah, numbering about 10,000. Among them were Ezekiel and, purportedly, Daniel. A biblical text written in approximately the same time period of the exile reports that “None remained except the poorest people of the land.” Also taken to Babylon were the treasures and furnishings of the Temple, including golden vessels dedicated by King Solomon (2 Kings 24:13-14).
    After the fall of Jerusalem, Nebuchadnezzar installed Jeconiah’s uncle, Zedekiah, as puppet-king of Judah, while Jeconiah was compelled to remain in Babylon, where he was regarded by the Jews in Babylonia as the legitimate king of Judah. It was during this Babylonian exile that the Priestly (P) Sources attempted to rewrite biblical history.
    The Babylonian Empire fell to the conquests of Cyrus the Great in 539. After the overthrow of Babylonia by the Persian (Iranian) Achaemenid Empire, Cyrus the Great allowed the Jews to return to their native land (537 BCE) and even contributed to the rebuilding of the temple. More than forty to fifty thousand were said to have done so, but many chose to remain in Mesopotamia.
    Illiteracy, in Bronze Age Israel, was rampant. In fact, as well as we think of the advanced civilization of Ancient Greece, by comparison, even during the Greek Golden Age, the time of great thinkers such as Aristotle, Socrates and Plato, only about 7% of that civilization was actually literate.
    Priests and Rabbis, of course, studied the Torah, but otherwise, the common people, who were incapable of reading, were out of reach of all religious doctrine. For this reason, and to provide translation facilities of the Hebrew-language Torah to a now-Aramaic speaking populace, the Targum was developed, the oral translations of the Hebrew Torah into the Aramaic of the post exhilic Jews, who no longer spoke Hebrew, which were read aloud to congregations who came to Temple and to Synagogues.
    But even then, the religious establishment felt that there were many parts of the Torah which were beyond the understanding of the common man, upon whose support (and offerings) the religion depended, so various prominent Rabbis would offer their oral explanations of the Torah by Rabbi’s. This process was known as the Midrash (plural, Midrashim), which were eventually written down and preserved.
    The Torah, all five books, were finally redacted (edited) back in Jerusalem around 400 BCE.
    In 332 BCE, Alexander the Great laid siege to Tyre, on the coast of the Levant. Once Tyre capitulated, all the remainder of the Levant accepted Greek dominion without a struggle, and Alexander was free to move on and conquer Egypt in 331 of that era. This regime change proved more beneficial to the Jews of Jerusalem than they could possibly have foreseen. Whereas in the paranoid world of ancient Palestine, people were rarely able to travel freely without encroaching upon the territories of other nations, Alexander conferred automatic Greek citizenships to all of the conquered people, basically granting them passports to travel anywhere within the newly-formed and growing Greek empire. This ease of movement allowed 72 Jewish scholars to travel to Egypt in
    As the language of the Jews had already changed, during the centuries of conflict and exile, from the original Hebrew to Aramaic, so too, Greek was rapidly becoming the lingua franca of the region. It was for this reason that the 72 biblical scholars we’ve already mentioned in 2 Genesis, Chapter 20, convened in Alexandria, Egypt, to translate the Torah into what would become known as the Greek Septuagint.
    But the Torah, or the Septuagint involved only the first five books of what we’ve come to know as the Bible. Gradually, other works were evaluated and ultimately accepted as canonical scripture.
    The word canon as applied to the Scriptures signifies the authoritative list or closed number of the writings composed, presumably, under “Divine inspiration,” and intended for the well-being of the Church.
    In the case of the remainder of the Jewish canonical Bible, these were divided into three categories, the first of which is the Torah, as we’ve already discussed. The second is the Nevlim, or the books of the prophets, in which their god spoke with the “great and holy Prophets and Prophetesses,” and his messages were transmitted by them to the Jewish People. And finally, the Ketuvim, or the Sacred Writings, in which case, great individuals were inspired by “Ruach HaKodesh,” the Holy Spirit, to produce great and holy works.
    These names provided the material for an acronym, based on the first letters, TNK, which came to be known collectively as the TANAKH, encompassing the entire collection of canonical scripture.
    The composition of the “TANAKH” was determined by the “Anshei K’nesset HaGedolah,” the Men of the Great Assembly, under the influence of the “Holy Spirit.” It consists of twenty-four “Books,” where first and second volumes of one work are counted as one, and where all the twelve “Books” of the “Trei Asar,” the Twelve Prophets, are also considered as one.
    The twenty-four “Books” are as follows:

    1-5: The Five Books of Moses:
    •  Bereshit, or Genesis

    •  Shemot, or Exodus
    
 •  VaYikra, or Leviticus
    
 •  BaMidbar, or Numbers

    •  Devarim, or Deuteronomy

    6-9: The “Neviim Rishonim,” the Early Prophets:
    
 •  Yehoshua, or Joshua
    
 •  “Shoftim”/Judges

    •  Shmuel I and II/Samuel I and II

    •  “Melachim”/Kings I and II

    10-13: The “Neviim Acharonim,” the Later Prophets:
    
 •  Yeshayahu, or Isaiah

    •  Yirmiyahu, or Jeremiah

    •  Yechezkel, or Ezekiel


    •  “Trei Asar,” or the Twelve Prophets:
    Books and Prophets within “Trei Asar”:
    
 Hoshea (Hosea),
    Yoel (Joel),
    Amos,
    Ovadiah (Obadiah),
    Yonah (Jonah),
    Michah,
    Nachum (Nahum),
    Chavakuk (Habakkuk),
    Tzefaniah (Zephaniah),
    Chaggai (Haggai),
    Zechariah,
    Malachi

    14-16: The “Sifrei Emet,” “Books of Truth”:
    •  “Tehilim”/Psalms

    •  “Mishlei”/Proverbs
    
 •  “Iyov”/Job

    17-21: The “Five Megilot” or “Five Scrolls”:

    •  “Shir HaShirim”/Song of Songs (Song of Solomon)

    •  Ruth
•  “Eichah”/Lamentations
    
 •  “Kohelet”/Ecclesiastes
    
 •  Esther

    22-24: The “Other Writings”:

    •  Daniel

    •  Ezra-Nechemiah

    •  “Divrei HaYamim”/Chronicles I and II

    
 To date, there is no scholarly consensus as to exactly when the Jewish canon was set.
    Another phrase in which you might have an interest is the Megillah, which was the scroll of Esther, and was (and is) read on the Jewish holiday of Purim, once in the evening immediately following sunset and once in the morning as part of the morning services.
    What’s Purim, you may well ask – it’s a special day in Judaism, celebrating the triumph of the exiled Jews over a plot to have them eradicated.
    The Purim, in a nutshell, from Chabat.org:

    “The Persian empire of the 4th century BCE extended over 127 lands, and all the Jews were its subjects. When King Ahasuerus had his wife, Queen Vashti, executed for failing to follow his orders, he orchestrated a beauty pageant to find a new queen. A Jewish girl, Esther, found favor in his eyes and became the new queen – though she refused to divulge the identity of her nationality.
    “Meanwhile, the anti-Semitic Haman was appointed prime minister of the empire. Mordechai, the leader of the Jews (and Esther’s cousin), defied the king’s orders and refused to bow to Haman. Haman was incensed, and convinced the king to issue a decree ordering the extermination of all the Jews on the 13th of Adar—a date chosen by a lottery Haman made.
    “Mordechai galvanized all the Jews, convincing them to repent, fast and pray to G‑d. Meanwhile, Esther asked the king and Haman to join her for a feast. At the feast, Esther revealed to the king her Jewish identity. Haman was hanged, Mordechai was appointed prime minister in his stead, and a new decree was issued—granting the Jews the right to defend themselves against their enemies.
    “On the 13th of Adar, the Jews mobilized and killed many of their enemies. On the 14th of Adar, they rested and celebrated.”

    Lastly, we come to the Talmud, a book that consists of two parts, the Mishna and the Gemara.
    The Mishna, written in Hebrew, to put it in the simplest terms, is a large collection of writings, containing a full account of the civil and religious laws of the Jews as found in the Torah.
    Smith’s Bible Dictionary elaborates on its origin:

    “The MISHNA…which contains a compendium of the whole ritual law, was reduced to writing in its present form by Rabbi Jehuda, the Holy, a Jew of great wealth and influence, who flourished in the second century of the Christian era. Viewed as a whole, the precepts in the Mishna treated men like children, formalizing and defining the minutest particulars of ritual observances. The expressions of “bondage,” or “weak and beggarly elements,” and of “burdens too heavy for men to bear,” faithfully represent the impression produced by their multiplicity. The Mishna is very concisely written, and requires notes.”

    The Gemara is written entirely in Aramaic, and consists of a collection of discussions and explanations by learned Rabbis, over centuries, concerning the Mishna.
    Of the Gemara, Smith’s has this to say:

    “There are two Gemaras; one of Jerusalem, in which there is said to be no passage which can be proved to be later than the first half of the fourth century; and the other of Babylon, completed about 500 A. D. The latter is the more important and by far the longer.”

    Judaism is without doubt the most strictly regulated religion I have thus far encountered. There is very little human behavior in the life of an orthodox Jew that is not heavily ordered. The Torah alone contains over 600 of these regulations, and interpretations in other Hebrew writings break these down even further. Had I gone into particulars, as to all of the minute rules that an adherent of Judaism has to follow in his life, rather than just offering you a general outline, it would have filled many, many more pages like this.
    The true believer has no doubt that his god personally passed all of these rules and regulations on to Moses, that Moses passed them along to Joshua, and that Joshua dispensed them to the elders of the tribes, who passed them on to the people.
    One thing that can be said of such a regulated life, is that it has the effect of uniting the Jewish people. Unfortunately, it also has the effect of alienating them from others, in a world that no longer operates in a series of closed, societal city-states, like those actual ones of old.
    Such a lifestyle can be, as can also be said of many things, both a blessing and a curse. A curse, because the devout live in the apprehension of accidentally, or neglectfully, or willfully violating one of those myriad rules and regulations.

    (Jew who fears accidentally getting
    evil on him if he flies over a cemetery)

    A blessing, because the follower is secure in the belief that if he adheres to each and every admonition faithfully, he will please his god, thereby relieving him of the burden of having to think for himself. But then again, isn’t that also a curse?

    Liked by 1 person

      • Further, the idea of a life beyond death was never a main feature of Judaism until the Jews began to encounter other cultures, cultures that DID feature an afterlife. The final chapter of the Book of Daniel clearly stated: “Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to everlasting shame and contempt,” thus laying the groundwork upon which Christianity would be built in less than a couple of centuries. One could easily wonder what might have happened to the cult, had its authors not included a resurrection into the story, that struck a universal nerve – no one wants to die – and they had their carrot.

        Like

        • Or more precisely no-one wants to suffer eternal torment after they die, rather a bit of eternal bliss seems so much better.

          Philip Harland documents how the life after death part of the Jewish religion developed as the hopes of a Jewish kingdom of any significance were shattered on the anvil of reality. Thus as their God had been shown to be impotent in reality they could only maintain their faith by posturing some sort of after life where their God could reward them, because the here and now was not working out.

          Like

        • Back when they were up against small Caanite city-states, they could imagine, with their god’s help, that they had a chance to come out on top, but as time passed, and they encountered larger and more sophisticated armies, such as the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Greeks and ultimately the Romans, that dream undoubtedly faded into reality, therefore the ‘land of milk and honey’ promised them, must exist somewhere else. At least for one faction of Judaism, the Pharisees; the Sadducees has no such belief in an afterlife.

          Like

  8. The biblical Book of Daniel is fascinating, in that it’s setting is Babylon, during the captivity – 597 BCE to 539 BCE – but was actually written in layers by several different sources, it opens in Hebrew, reverts to Aramaic, then bounces back to Hebrew again, with the latest having been written in the 160’s BCE, then compiled into a single book and eventually added to the Tanakh.

    Daniel, the book’s hero, is an apocalyptic seer, the recipient of divine revelation, similar to ‘John’ of Revelations fame. There was a ‘Daniel’ who was a hero of legends in Caananite Ugarit in the 2000’s BCE, and the name may well have been chosen because of the heroic reputation of the ‘Daniel’ of those legends.

    As a prophet, Daniel was a far cry from The Mentalist, in that he predicted war between the Syrians and the Egyptians (11:40–43), which never took place, and the prophecy that Antiochus would die in Palestine (11:44–45) was inaccurate (he died in Persia), so when theists try to tell you that all of the miraculous prophecies of the Bible were fulfilled, remind them of Daniel.

    Like

    • Arch, I have been working through Professor Philip Harland’s series on Religions of the Ancient Mediterranean, Here. I was interested to find that there are Zoroastrian prophecy that pre-dates Daniel and sounded very similar to what was written in the Book of Daniel.

      That many Biblical Scholars can argue the fourth kingdom in Daniel is Rome rather than Greece is evidence of letting belief trump a clear interpretation of the text. I don’t think a honest commentator could reach any conclusion other than the four kingdoms being Babylon, Media, Persia and Greece. But this is very inconvenient as all the action in an apocalyptic sense happens in the time of the fourth kingdom. So Christian scholars argue that the four kingdoms are Babylon, Media/Persia Greece and Rome. But this makes no sense as the text says the second kingdom id smaller than the first, but the Persian Kingdom was larger than the Babylonian kingdom. Also it fails to account for the four horns coming from the first horn of the fourth kingdom exactly representing what happened to the Greek empire after the death of Alexander the Great.

      Daniel is such clear evidence of the reality of the Bible as human created fallible prophecy that most scholars who cling to a Christian faith must make unconvincing arguments to try to rescue the failed prophecy.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I was interested to find that there are Zoroastrian prophecy that pre-dates Daniel and sounded very similar to what was written in the Book of Daniel.” – That shouldn’t be surprising, considering it was the liberating Persians were Zoroastrians. The concept, as I’ve mentioned on another blogsite, of a virgin birth began with the Zoroastrians as well, as the one true god, Ahura Mazda, had plans to impregnate a virgin as she came to bathe in a pool.

        The Great Horn was of course Alexander the Great – Rome consisted, at the time, of a bunch of Italians named Vinnie, running around rattling spears at each other – while the four lesser horns represented the Diodochi, the rival generals, families and friends of Alexander who fought for control over his empire after his death in 323 BC.

        Like

  9. From Colorstorm’s blog (in case he deletes it):

    ColorStorm says:
    November 6, 2015 at 6:19 pm

    Yep, women are wonderfully different, and I am so glad. Let’s give a nice shout out to the Creator………………….. pc be da_ned. 😉

    archaeopteryx1 says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    November 6, 2015 at 7:31 pm

    “Let’s give a nice shout out to the Creator………………….”
    RAH, RAH, RAH, SIS BOOM BAH – Yeeeaaaah, Abiogenesis and Evolution!

    Liked by 1 person

Take Some Time To Share Your Thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s