for example
For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder, and His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." isaiah 9
I will however be surprised if I can see a counter example.
本帖最後由 deusnonest 於 4-11-2010 16:18 編輯
for example
For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder, and His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince  ...
hkau 發表於 3-11-2010 22:52
Your example requires several conditions to be valid:

1. That the bible is a book to be relied on for truth to be found.

2. That the figure of Jesus was historical.

3. That Jesus is God.

Firstly, I do not wish to debate the reliability of the bible. There are many publications regarding this. While the followers of Christianity certainly believe that the bible is the true word of their god, it is no more than a collection of ancient middle-easten myths and stories, punctuated with a certain amount of unclear history. These studies nevertheless indicate that, without its religious context, the bible is no more than an interesting collection of books written by ancient men. (You can refer to 11# and 57# above.)

Secondly, historical reference to the figure known as Jesus is only found in one instance, i.e. that of Josephus, centuries after the purported appearance of Jesus. I cannot say that Jesus did not exist, except that his existence is not substantiated objectively or widely in the historical record.

Finally, please look at this line of logic:

  (i) the bible is the word of God;
  (ii) the word of God predicted that there would be a Son of God who would be wonderful etc. etc.;
  (iii) Jesus claims to be Son of God;
  (iv)the Son of God is God, therefore Jesus is God;
  (v) {back to (i)}

This is blatant circular logic. Even if you allow such logic, the only "proof" of fulfillment of the prophecy lies in (iii). However, a claim is not evidence. Apart from tons of theology written by men in the first centuries, there is no objective evidence to substantiate this claim. The fulfillment of your quoted prophecy is founded on faith, not on objectivity.

Maybe you have a better example.

I did not expect you to believe this simple example.
However, I am expecting that someone will give me a counter example which shows that one of the prophecies seems failed . I will not challenge it if it is right. In fact, I may even be unable to challenge it.
Then I will put up the second example.
No worry as I am not doing preaching. I just want to see what counter-examples are?
At the end of the day, I will like to see if those I have believed are outnumbered by those I did not know before.
I am also very happy to present the second example if you could not figure out any counter example at all or for the moment.

It is unfair to challenge anyone to come up with a counter example in which a prophecy (I suppose biblical prophecy) is proven to have failed. Although it is simple to prove that a prophecy has been fulfilled by demonstrating clearly and objectively its prediction and its outcome, it is not possible to prove that any prophecy which is not specific (as almost all religious prophecies are) has failed simply because there is an infinite scope and future for the prophecy to be exhaustively tested.

Throughout history people have believed that certain things or beings exist but which have never been found, for example bigfoot, ufo's, unicorns, dragons etc. It is not possible to say that these things definitely do not exist, although one can be quite confident that they don't. However, if you can produce a dragon tomorrow, show it to the world and allow it to be objectively studied and examined, you would have proven its existence. To ask for negative proof is onerous, but positive proof is not.

To be fair, the burden of proof is upon the one who raises the argument, not on the one who objects to it. One only needs to look at how the communists treat people accused of wrongdoing (and particularly political ones). They never lay out any substantial evidence to prove the accusation, but require the accused to prove that he or she has not committed any crime.

If I am not mistaken, I think that it is not the intention of the owner of this thread that we debate religious dogma here. I think we should confine any discussion to the ORIGINS, the HISTORY and the DEVELOPMENT of religion including Christianity.

I have responded in the same language in which your two replies have been written. I think that we should resume any debate (if you wish) in Chinese so that a wider audience can share our thoughts.

閣下提出 是否有人可以指出一個不實現的預言(本人估計你說的是聖經預言);我認為這是一個不公平的挑戰。要證明預言是否實現十分簡單,只要指出預言預測了什麼可以客觀審定的結果,然後觀察實際結果就可以。但是提出一個不確定的預言(所有宗教預言如同一轍),要證明他不實現是沒有可能的;原因很簡單,這樣的預言有無限可能發生的結果,也有無窮盡的時間去接受考驗。

歷史上不時有人相信某些事情或事物存在,例如 大足怪、不明飛行物體、獨角獸、龍 等。這些東西從來未有實實在在地現身,但是我們卻不能說他們絕對不存在。要是你明天帶來一條龍讓人們仔細客觀觀察和研究,你馬上就可以證明龍的存在。要求找到不存在的證據十分困難,但找到存在的證據卻十分容易。





  • 212770




我再聲明,小弟不是傳導人,也只是看過一,二遍聖經,也不敢說是practising christian,更不是regular church goer.





本帖最後由 deusnonest 於 5-11-2010 06:45 編輯
... 總之,基督教能有百年盛業,絕非偶然. ...



... 我們可用創世紀一,二章來談談基督教的理論基礎 ...

deusnonest 發表於 5-11-2010 01:21 [/quote]
You know I won't.
I will be back after I get back the writing pad.