Deutro-Isaiah. Credible or Incredible...?

[_Buffalo]

No, but when (if) you do become a mature Christian you'll learn to see scripture in more shades than black and white.

I rather enjoy my black and white world. When everything is gray things have no edges and it hard to see clearly.

It's an imaginary world, Frank. All aspects of life can best be described in shades of gray. I hope someday you realize that.

[_Buffalo]

I don't think even the most fundamentalist Christians would deny that the stories of Jesus were passed on orally before they were written down.

Well, I guess it is all a question of how you like your mushy peas? Are these first-hand accounts or as I best understand it, 2nd and 3rd or 4th-hand or even further on down the chain accounts? So far, the prevailing theory I'm hearing is that John wasn't written by John, Luke wasn't written by Luke, and so on. It was written by other people who had no direct knowledge or even access to the people that took part in the actual events. I think it is one thing to state that the authors of the books were the authors themselves and they were relaying first-hand accounts of the people involved (say Luke asking Mary about the early life of Jesus) vs yeah, mushy peas.

Welcome to the real world. Mature Christians deal with these issues just fine. It's nothing to lose your faith over.

[_Tobin]

Welcome to the real world. Mature Christians deal with these issues just fine. It's nothing to lose your faith over.

I'll add that to the list. Mature Christians don't believe the Bible was written by the actual people that claim to have written it. That is quite a statement. So what is the difference betweena Mature Christian and an atheist again?

[_Runtu]

I'll add that to the list. Mature Christians don't believe the Bible was written by the actual people that claim to have written it. That is quite a statement. So what is the difference betweena Mature Christian and an atheist again?

I'd say generally it's a matter of believing in Christ. Christians generally do; atheists generally don't.

It really is fascinating to meet someone with such rigid, black-and-white notions. Most people I know like that are setting themselves up for a disappointment. Life isn't bad because it's imperfect; on the contrary, it is the imperfections of life that make it beautiful.

THE WINDOWS.

LORD, how can man preach thy eternall word ?
He is a brittle crazie glasse :
Yet in thy temple thou dost him afford
This glorious and transcendent place,
To be a window, through thy grace.

But when thou dost anneal in glasse thy storie,
Making thy life to shine within
The holy Preachers, then the light and glorie
More rev'rend grows, and more doth win ;
Which else shows watrish, bleak, and thin.

Doctrine and life, colours and light, in one
When they combine and mingle, bring
A strong regard and aw : but speech alone
Doth vanish like a flaring thing,
And in the eare, not conscience ring.

[_Buffalo]

Welcome to the real world. Mature Christians deal with these issues just fine. It's nothing to lose your faith over.

I'll add that to the list. Mature Christians don't believe the Bible was written by the actual people that claim to have written it. That is quite a statement. So what is the difference betweena Mature Christian and an atheist again?

Mature Christians accept the facts - that many of the books of the Bible were written by the stated authors (example: Romans really was written by Paul), but many were not. This is common practice in old world scriptures. This says nothing about whether the scriptures were inspired by God or not.

[_Tobin]

Mature Christians accept the facts - that many of the books of the Bible were written by the stated authors (example: Romans really was written by Paul), but many were not. This is common practice in old world scriptures. This says nothing about whether the scriptures were inspired by God or not.

And you people have a problem with the Book of Mormon exactly why then? Let's suppose for fun that it was written by Joseph Smith and maybe God just inspired him to write it. Using your logic, it is just as inspired as any other scripture. And we'll call the Mormons that believe that - Mature Mormons.

[_Buffalo]

Mature Christians accept the facts - that many of the books of the Bible were written by the stated authors (example: Romans really was written by Paul), but many were not. This is common practice in old world scriptures. This says nothing about whether the scriptures were inspired by God or not.

And you people have a problem with the Book of Mormon exactly why then? Let's suppose for fun that it was written by Joseph Smith and maybe God just inspired him to write it. Using your logic, it is just as inspired as any other scripture. And we'll call the Mormons that believe that - Mature Mormons.

Oh, the doctrine in the Book of Mormon may well have been inspired. That's a matter of opinion. But the book originated in the early 19th century, that much is certain. And while there is a historical Isaiah, there were no historical Nephites. Fair's fair though, - there probably is no historical Moses or Abraham either. But the Hebrews were and are real enough.

But let's look at Deutero-Isaiah, whoever he was. He was writing about real events - Cyrus was a real person, Babylon really did sack Jerusalem. The Book of Mormon is entirely fictional, from start to finish.

[_Runtu]

And you people have a problem with the Book of Mormon exactly why then? Let's suppose for fun that it was written by Joseph Smith and maybe God just inspired him to write it. Using your logic, it is just as inspired as any other scripture. And we'll call the Mormons that believe that - Mature Mormons.

I happen to know Mormons like that, and I have no problem with them believing that the Book of Mormon is ahistorical but inspired, just as I have no problem with Christians who acknowledge that much of the Bible is pseudepigrapha.

[_Franktalk]

I think we should test God. He has said that only He can tell His prophets the future. So can we test Him? I think so.

Let us take a little scripture.

Daniel 9
23At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.
24Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Before going into this let me give some other data.

" The earliest copies of the Book of Daniel in our possession today were found at Qumran."

http://markhaughwout.com/Bible/Dating_Daniel.html

Dated around late second century BC. Mentioned in earlier documents.

I will translate the prophecy into terms most will understand.

This prophecy is for 70 weeks of years. The prophecy starts when a decree goes out to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem. (There were four but only one talked about the walls) From that starting point exactly 69 weeks of years the Messiah will announce Himself as King. Then the Messiah will be killed. Then the city will be destroyed by the Roman empire. The 70th week has not happened yet. We are living in the gap between the 69th and 70th week.

Is it coincidence that billions of people believe in this predicted Messiah that happened to come exactly as predicted by Daniel? Is it a coincidence that the Messiah was killed just as predicted? Is it yet another coincidence that the city was destroyed by Rome after the Messiah had come.

Either it was a prophecy or Daniel was a lucky guesser and a manipulator of billions of people.

[_Tobin]

Oh, the doctrine in the Book of Mormon may well have been inspired. That's a matter of opinion. But the book originated in the early 19th century, that much is certain. And while there is a historical Isaiah, there were no historical Nephites. Fair's fair though, - there probably is no historical Moses or Abraham either. But the Hebrews were and are real enough.

But let's look at Deutero-Isaiah, whoever he was. He was writing about real events - Cyrus was a real person, Babylon really did sack Jerusalem. The Book of Mormon is entirely fictional, from start to finish.

Since when did adding real people, places, and events into a fictional account start transforming it from fictional account an actual historical account? Isn't ficition still fiction no matter how many real people, places or events is mentioned in passing?