Why does God hate us?

[TinyDave]

The Hebrew and Greek texts are translations from aramaic. 
That is beside the point.

You missed the question again.

Let me rephrase;

Why do you think that the written texts are the word of god?

It's not as though this ignoramus reads Greek or Archaic Hebrew.
The real question is, why didn't this supposed god provide Her word in as many languages as there are, or even the most common ones ?
She must not really care who gets Her word.

The real question is why is this clear nonsense so prevalent in our society?

[Minimalist]

Because, Dave, religion is the most lucrative scam in human history and the purveyors of it will always find willing fools to shell out money to them.

[TinyDave]

It's worked out quite well.

Would you be interested in a multi level marketing scheme?

[Astreja]

Who could debate with an angry name caller? I suggest that you might block me, or simply do not read my posts.

Bluewater, if you don't want to experience an epic fail at literally every atheist forum you visit, please don't mistake exasperation and derisive laughter for anger.  In my experience (covering nearly 20 years as a member of forums like this), the anger is usually on the believer side and tends to be motivated by the fact that the things that convinced *them* don't convince *us*.

[bluewater]

I'm sure that the original Hebrew and Greek texts are the inspired word of God.

The Hebrew and Greek texts are translations from aramaic. 
That is beside the point.

You missed the question again.

Let me rephrase;

Why do you think that the written texts are the word of god?

The Old Testament is mostly Hebrew and some Aramaic.

Believing in God, I am persuaded that what He says is true, that He can not lie or misrepresent Himself.  So I take the following verse to be true. "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;" 2 Tim 3:16.

Also, the OT writers wrote scores of prophecies about Jesus Christ hundreds of years before Christ came; which were fulfilled by Him and recorded in the NT. Even though I take Him at His word, I am aware that it would be statistically impossible for one man to fulfill those prophesies in a lifetime; unless the prophesies we're inspired by God and fulfilled by His Son Jesus Christ.

[Astreja]

Also, the OT writers wrote scores of prophecies about Jesus Christ hundreds of years before Christ came; which were fulfilled by Him and recorded in the NT. Even though I take Him at His word, I am aware that it would be statistically impossible for one man to fulfill those prophesies in a lifetime; unless the prophesies we're inspired by God and fulfilled by His Son Jesus Christ.

Have you ever considered how easy it is for a story-writer to read an old scripture and then create a prophesy-fulfilling fictional character?

[airportkid]

... the OT writers wrote scores of prophecies about Jesus Christ hundreds of years before Christ came, which were fulfilled by Him and recorded in the NT ...

What changes to the world did fulfilling the prophesies accomplish?

Even had prophesied actions actually gotten accomplished, they took place a couple thousand years ago.  Since then life on the planet has been so profoundly altered by humanity most if not all of whatever got prophesied has no relevance to life today.  Our understanding of all aspects of human life, anatomy, affliction, psychiatry, sociology has improved our existence immeasurably.  Would you want to go back 2000 years and live then?  Nothing set forth as "teaching" from so long ago has any but historic curiosity today.

I'm certain the answer to the opening question above, even for the time, is nothing significant.  Rather than croon about how wonderful a god is, get specific and show why.

[Bucky Ball]

The Hebrew and Greek texts are translations from aramaic. 
That is beside the point.

You missed the question again.

Let me rephrase;

Why do you think that the written texts are the word of god?

The Old Testament is mostly Hebrew and some Aramaic.

Believing in God, I am persuaded that what He says is true, that He can not lie or misrepresent Himself.  So I take the following verse to be true. "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;" 2 Tim 3:16.

Also, the OT writers wrote scores of prophecies about Jesus Christ hundreds of years before Christ came; which were fulfilled by Him and recorded in the NT. Even though I take Him at His word, I am aware that it would be statistically impossible for one man to fulfill those prophesies in a lifetime; unless the prophesies we're inspired by God and fulfilled by His Son Jesus Christ.

Nope. They never said it was a "Jesus" AND divination and telling the future was forbidden in Deuteronomy.
The role of a Hebrew prophet was never to tell the future.

What you, an ignorant idiot is persuaded of, is totally irrelevant.
When Timothy said that, (ignorant fool) ... there was no canon of scripture yet established.
"Scripture" at that time just meant "ANYTHING" written. NOT what is now in the Babble.
There were 200 gospels. Are they ALL "scripture" ? LMAO
You've only even ready a few of them.
Your ignorant assertions are worthless.

You can stop your worthless preaching, and get lost.
No one takes anything you say seriously.
Do you plan on getting an education ?
The role of a prophet was never to tell the future.
That's from ignorant fundies with no Biblical education.

"The ancient role of a prophet in Hebrew culture was to interpret the words or will of their god to the people OF THEIR OWN DAY. NOT to predict the future. (That's Hollywood's idea of the role of a prophet).
So you often hear fundies talking about "prophesy", and how various prophesies were a 'foretelling", or prediction of the future, and indeed they count them up as "proof" that Jebus or whatever HAS to be true, as the "prophecy" came true.
In fact Leviticus forbade fortune telling and divination, so we know it was an abomination to even think in these terms for many/most centuries in Hebrew culture. However, with the rise of Apocalypticism, around the turn of the millennium, this changed somewhat, and is evidenced in many Christian writings, including the gospels, as they adopted the notions absent in ancient Israel, but coming into popular view with the Essenes. In terms of Hebrew culture, and the "telling of or prediction of" the future, was unknown, and forbidden, and not at ALL a view of the major prophets themselves. However in the the new view, certain "hidden meanings" or "pesherim" began to be looked for, in the practice of Midrash. The name for this is called "pesher", (or seeking a "hidden meaning"), which was not even known to the original speaker/writer, but only "revealed" later
to certain believers. Originally, the (plural) "pesherim" were only fully revealed to the Son of Righteousness, (the leader of the Essenes), and the idea was first found and fully understood after scholars read the Dead Sea scrolls, and was a sub category of "Midrash", (or study of the texts).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesher
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsou...15650.html
Thus we see that "prophesy" as fortune telling as began to be practiced in Judaism around the First Century, (and picked up by Christians and the gospel writers), really was a very late invention and never a classical part of Hebrew scripture, or understanding, either interpre tation, or intention, and certainly was not the function of the ancient office of "prophet", in Hebrew culture, who was to be a "mouthpiece" to the people of their own day, and not Madame Zelda with her crystal ball "
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/r...html#proof

Most of the "prophesies" are nothing but bullshit, anyway.

From a previous post of mine .... "The so-called "virgin birth" is one of the PRIME examples where there is development of an off-the-wall notion, based on a translation, of a MIS-translation, of a translation, which is then taken out of context, and solidified as doctrine, and driven over the cliff.

To wit :
a. Background :
Isaiah 7 talks about the history of King Ahaz, son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, who was king of Judah. At the time, King Rezin of Aram and Pekah, son of Remaliah, King of Israel, marched up to fight against Jerusalem, and the campaign was long and protracted. See the Syro-Ephraimite War, (Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syro-Ephraimite_War ), and it happened in the 8th Century (734) BC. When Ahaz was loosing faith, Isaiah went to visit him, and told him to "buck up", keep the faith, and continue the war, and told him that the SIGN from god, that they were favored, was that one of his wives, (a "woman of marriageable age") would be found to be with child. The SIGN was the CHILD, (and NOT the manner of the birth). ...."And they shall name him Emmanuel" which means "god is with us". The CHILD was the SIGN.

Any devout Jew in the time of the Roman occupation, (around 60 AD), would know that story, from Isaiah, and when they heard the words "a woman, (of marriageable age) will be found to be with child" they would connect the stories in their brains, and recognize that the gospel text's intention was to remind them of the Isaiah story, and would "harken" back to it, and realize the intent of the author was to claim that THIS child also was a sign. The general intent of the Gospel of Matthew was to claim the fulfillment of the various prophesies regarding the messiah, and this one was another one of those claims/stories of fulfillment.

b. The word "virgin" is a mistranslation, of a translation. So WE have a translation, of a mis-translation, of a translation. Matthew, writing in Greek about the "virgin birth" of Jesus, quotes the Septuagint text of Isaiah 7:14-16, which uses the Greek word "παρθένος" (parthenos,), (we still use the term "parthenogenesis") while the original Hebrew text has "עלמה" (almah), which has the slightly wider meaning of an unmarried, betrothed，or newly wed woman such as in the case of Ahaz' betrothed Abijah, daughter of Zechariah. He NEVER meant to imply that he was asserting "gynecological" claims, and THAT whole business was "off-the-wall", a mistranslation, taken to ridiculous extremes, by interpreters who missed the point. THE CHILD was the sign.

Also interesting that Matthew (1:25) only says that Joseph "knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son". It does NOT say she REMAINED a virgin. (??)

See also : Mother Goddess, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_goddess ) and Joseph Campbell, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goddess ) and Courtly Love, ( http://cla.calpoly.edu/~dschwart/engl513...ourtly.htm ). The business of Mary, and her idealized state, was extremely important in the civilization/culture of the West, and in some circles remains very important today, (Lourdes & claims of "Marian" apparitions" etc., etc.)

Then we have the fact that Matthew quoted the WRONG prophet. Inspired ? LMAO
https://essentialchurch.net/2018/01/30/d...zechariah/

"Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.“ (Matthew 24: 34)
LMFAO

"This generation will not pass away until all these things take place…“ (Mark 13:30)

All sorts of things never happened. LOL
https://blacknonbelievers.org/jesus-fail...is-return/

Deuteronomy 18:22
"When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously; thou shalt not be afraid of him."

[bluewater]

I'm sure that the original Hebrew and Greek texts are the inspired word of God.

None of the original texts exist. As I said, do you plan on taking Babble 101 ?
I get how inconvenient it is for you people to find we know more about your cult than you do.

Some nearly perfect accurate copies of the original texts exist, though some are partial and fragments and a few with minor copying errors; from which the originals can be known with reasonable certainty. Also, early Christians also quoted many Scriptures in their letters and commentary.

I have known several atheist with some knowledge of these matters, who are able to converse with civility if not kindness.

[TheGentlemanBastard]

 
Is it credible though? 
Any claim needs to be cross referenced.
This is peer review.
josepus doesn't mention the resurrection, neither does Tacitus.
Admittedly both Tacitus and josepus wrote a long time after the purported events, But so did John, Luke et al.

Yes, it is credible. Here is some peer review from eyewitnesses to Jesus: Matthew, John, Paul, James - many of whom payed with their lives while maintaining their testimony. You can find a few cross references among or between them.

Using the buy-bull to prove the buy-bull true. 

Typical christer circular thinking.

[TheGentlemanBastard]

Your assertion "truth is circular" is odd, though.  If nothing can be logically demonstrated without committing the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent, it renders the very concept of "truth" impotent and useless.

I didn't say truth was circular reasoning, as you assumed; but I said truth was circular.

At some point, in order for humans to live their lives, we need to be able to decide if something is good, bad, right, wrong, helpful, unhelpful.  Those decisions do seem to work out better in the real world when we can work with observable and testable phenomena rather than uncritically accepting the claims of a scripture.

You say 'we need to be able to decide.' But by what standard do you decide if something is good or bad, right or wrong?

Please provide an objective standard for deciding what is right or wrong.

There is no objective standard. You get your sense of right and wrong, aka morality, from exactly the same place we do. The society you live in.

[Minimalist]

josepus doesn't mention the resurrection, neither does Tacitus.

Tacitus never mentions anyone named "jesus," either.  Neither did Suetonius or Pliny the Younger.  The explanation is simple though.  The fucker hadn't been invented in the early 2d century.

[bluewater]

LOL... this claim is so absolutely idiotic it defies someone living
in a scientifically-enlightened 21st century even thinking it!

Do you know that science doesn't enlighten, but that data gained by scientific methods, when interpreted correctly, may lead to enlightenment. Data is interpreted through a scientist's worldview.

There are many educated doctorate level scientist who are Christian. For instance:

A group of Christian doctorate level astro physicists and scientists predicted the JWST would see fully formed (mature) spiral arm galaxies at it's farthest potential field of view. Why, because God has explained that He created the stars in one day and placed them in the heavens, fully formed throughout the universe. So Christians expected this and made predictions accordingly. Now secular scientists are observing mature galaxies at greater distances than the big-bang theory will allow for; well beyond potentially at red shifts as great 20 or farther.

So you can not speak of scientific enlightenment as if Christians aren't well equipped with data of the natural world, what God created in six days as He explained in the Bible.

Enlightenment from data gained by scientific methods changes. The theory of evolution is being rethought or altogether  abandoned. The big bang theory is being rethought or abandoned by many secular atheist scientists. I'm regularly seeing videos and reading stories of atheists becoming Christians because of scientific discoveries.

[bluewater]

I'm sure that the original Hebrew and Greek texts are the inspired word of God.

How exactly can you justify believing that your god inspired
the Greeks and Hebrews to write down his words?  In what
form, precisely, did he communicate those words?  

And as humans just like you and me, how were they able to
communicate with a supernatural entity?  I certainly cannot,
and I seriously doubt that you can.

And lastly, do you believe in the existence of supernatural
entities existing in the real world?  Modern science with all
its tools has never discovered any.

I most certainly believe God, who exists outside and within His creation, made us capable of communication with Him. You can read historical accounts of God talking with men in the Bible. How He does it ... I don't know. He hasn't told me how.

[bluewater]

The Old Testament is mostly Hebrew and some Aramaic.

Believing in God, I am persuaded that what He says is true, that He can not lie or misrepresent Himself.  So I take the following verse to be true. "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;" 2 Tim 3:16.

Also, the OT writers wrote scores of prophecies about Jesus Christ hundreds of years before Christ came; which were fulfilled by Him and recorded in the NT. Even though I take Him at His word, I am aware that it would be statistically impossible for one man to fulfill those prophesies in a lifetime; unless the prophesies we're inspired by God and fulfilled by His Son Jesus Christ.

Nope. They never said it was a "Jesus" AND divination and telling the future was forbidden in Deuteronomy.
The role of a Hebrew prophet was never to tell the future.

What you, an ignorant idiot is persuaded of, is totally irrelevant.
When Timothy said that, (ignorant fool) ... there was no canon of scripture yet established.
"Scripture" at that time just meant "ANYTHING" written. NOT what is now in the Babble.
There were 200 gospels. Are they ALL "scripture" ? LMAO
You've only even ready a few of them.
Your ignorant assertions are worthless.

You can stop your worthless preaching, and get lost.
No one takes anything you say seriously.
Do you plan on getting an education ?
The role of a prophet was never to tell the future.
That's from ignorant fundies with no Biblical education.

"The ancient role of a prophet in Hebrew culture was to interpret the words or will of their god to the people OF THEIR OWN DAY. NOT to predict the future. (That's Hollywood's idea of the role of a prophet).
So you often hear fundies talking about "prophesy", and how various prophesies were a 'foretelling", or prediction of the future, and indeed they count them up as "proof" that Jebus or whatever HAS to be true, as the "prophecy" came true.
In fact Leviticus forbade fortune telling and divination, so we know it was an abomination to even think in these terms for many/most centuries in Hebrew culture. However, with the rise of Apocalypticism, around the turn of the millennium, this changed somewhat, and is evidenced in many Christian writings, including the gospels, as they adopted the notions absent in ancient Israel, but coming into popular view with the Essenes. In terms of Hebrew culture, and the "telling of or prediction of" the future, was unknown, and forbidden, and not at ALL a view of the major prophets themselves. However in the the new view, certain "hidden meanings" or "pesherim" began to be looked for, in the practice of Midrash. The name for this is called "pesher", (or seeking a "hidden meaning"), which was not even known to the original speaker/writer, but only "revealed" later
to certain believers. Originally, the (plural) "pesherim" were only fully revealed to the Son of Righteousness, (the leader of the Essenes), and the idea was first found and fully understood after scholars read the Dead Sea scrolls, and was a sub category of "Midrash", (or study of the texts).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesher
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsou...15650.html
Thus we see that "prophesy" as fortune telling as began to be practiced in Judaism around the First Century, (and picked up by Christians and the gospel writers), really was a very late invention and never a classical part of Hebrew scripture, or understanding, either interpre tation, or intention, and certainly was not the function of the ancient office of "prophet", in Hebrew culture, who was to be a "mouthpiece" to the people of their own day, and not Madame Zelda with her crystal ball "
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/r...html#proof

Most of the "prophesies" are nothing but bullshit, anyway.

From a previous post of mine .... "The so-called "virgin birth" is one of the PRIME examples where there is development of an off-the-wall notion, based on a translation, of a MIS-translation, of a translation, which is then taken out of context, and solidified as doctrine, and driven over the cliff.

To wit :
a. Background :
Isaiah 7 talks about the history of King Ahaz, son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, who was king of Judah. At the time, King Rezin of Aram and Pekah, son of Remaliah, King of Israel, marched up to fight against Jerusalem, and the campaign was long and protracted. See the Syro-Ephraimite War, (Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syro-Ephraimite_War ), and it happened in the 8th Century (734) BC. When Ahaz was loosing faith, Isaiah went to visit him, and told him to "buck up", keep the faith, and continue the war, and told him that the SIGN from god, that they were favored, was that one of his wives, (a "woman of marriageable age") would be found to be with child. The SIGN was the CHILD, (and NOT the manner of the birth). ...."And they shall name him Emmanuel" which means "god is with us". The CHILD was the SIGN.

Any devout Jew in the time of the Roman occupation, (around 60 AD), would know that story, from Isaiah, and when they heard the words "a woman, (of marriageable age) will be found to be with child" they would connect the stories in their brains, and recognize that the gospel text's intention was to remind them of the Isaiah story, and would "harken" back to it, and realize the intent of the author was to claim that THIS child also was a sign. The general intent of the Gospel of Matthew was to claim the fulfillment of the various prophesies regarding the messiah, and this one was another one of those claims/stories of fulfillment.

b. The word "virgin" is a mistranslation, of a translation. So WE have a translation, of a mis-translation, of a translation. Matthew, writing in Greek about the "virgin birth" of Jesus, quotes the Septuagint text of Isaiah 7:14-16, which uses the Greek word "παρθένος" (parthenos,), (we still use the term "parthenogenesis") while the original Hebrew text has "עלמה" (almah), which has the slightly wider meaning of an unmarried, betrothed，or newly wed woman such as in the case of Ahaz' betrothed Abijah, daughter of Zechariah. He NEVER meant to imply that he was asserting "gynecological" claims, and THAT whole business was "off-the-wall", a mistranslation, taken to ridiculous extremes, by interpreters who missed the point. THE CHILD was the sign.

Also interesting that Matthew (1:25) only says that Joseph "knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son". It does NOT say she REMAINED a virgin. (??)

See also : Mother Goddess, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_goddess ) and Joseph Campbell, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goddess ) and Courtly Love, ( http://cla.calpoly.edu/~dschwart/engl513...ourtly.htm ). The business of Mary, and her idealized state, was extremely important in the civilization/culture of the West, and in some circles remains very important today, (Lourdes & claims of "Marian" apparitions" etc., etc.)

Then we have the fact that Matthew quoted the WRONG prophet. Inspired ? LMAO
https://essentialchurch.net/2018/01/30/d...zechariah/

"Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.“ (Matthew 24: 34)
LMFAO

"This generation will not pass away until all these things take place…“ (Mark 13:30)

All sorts of things never happened. LOL
https://blacknonbelievers.org/jesus-fail...is-return/

Deuteronomy 18:22
"When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously; thou shalt not be afraid of him."

What percentage of that post did you cut and paste?

[bluewater]

Also, the OT writers wrote scores of prophecies about Jesus Christ hundreds of years before Christ came; which were fulfilled by Him and recorded in the NT. Even though I take Him at His word, I am aware that it would be statistically impossible for one man to fulfill those prophesies in a lifetime; unless the prophesies we're inspired by God and fulfilled by His Son Jesus Christ.

Have you ever considered how easy it is for a story-writer to read an old scripture and then create a prophesy-fulfilling fictional character?

And I'm sure that has been done in secular writing.

[Astreja]

Have you ever considered how easy it is for a story-writer to read an old scripture and then create a prophesy-fulfilling fictional character?

And I'm sure that has been done in secular writing.

Yes.  I've been a writer almost all my life, and regularly borrow ideas from other sources.  That's why I'm so sure that the Gospels are essentially Old Testament fan fiction and that Jesus is at least 95% myth.

[Astreja]

Some nearly perfect accurate copies of the original texts exist...

If no complete originals exist, how do you know that any of the copies are "nearly perfect"?  Does. Not. Compute.

[no one]

Magic Astreja, when in doubt, call on magic. Magic explains all the unexplainable.

Like for instance, I'm not really sure how the interwebz work, so therefore, it must be magic.

[Bucky Ball]

Nope. They never said it was a "Jesus" AND divination and telling the future was forbidden in Deuteronomy.
The role of a Hebrew prophet was never to tell the future.

What you, an ignorant idiot is persuaded of, is totally irrelevant.
When Timothy said that, (ignorant fool) ... there was no canon of scripture yet established.
"Scripture" at that time just meant "ANYTHING" written. NOT what is now in the Babble.
There were 200 gospels. Are they ALL "scripture" ? LMAO
You've only even ready a few of them.
Your ignorant assertions are worthless.

You can stop your worthless preaching, and get lost.
No one takes anything you say seriously.
Do you plan on getting an education ?
The role of a prophet was never to tell the future.
That's from ignorant fundies with no Biblical education.

"The ancient role of a prophet in Hebrew culture was to interpret the words or will of their god to the people OF THEIR OWN DAY. NOT to predict the future. (That's Hollywood's idea of the role of a prophet).
So you often hear fundies talking about "prophesy", and how various prophesies were a 'foretelling", or prediction of the future, and indeed they count them up as "proof" that Jebus or whatever HAS to be true, as the "prophecy" came true.
In fact Leviticus forbade fortune telling and divination, so we know it was an abomination to even think in these terms for many/most centuries in Hebrew culture. However, with the rise of Apocalypticism, around the turn of the millennium, this changed somewhat, and is evidenced in many Christian writings, including the gospels, as they adopted the notions absent in ancient Israel, but coming into popular view with the Essenes. In terms of Hebrew culture, and the "telling of or prediction of" the future, was unknown, and forbidden, and not at ALL a view of the major prophets themselves. However in the the new view, certain "hidden meanings" or "pesherim" began to be looked for, in the practice of Midrash. The name for this is called "pesher", (or seeking a "hidden meaning"), which was not even known to the original speaker/writer, but only "revealed" later
to certain believers. Originally, the (plural) "pesherim" were only fully revealed to the Son of Righteousness, (the leader of the Essenes), and the idea was first found and fully understood after scholars read the Dead Sea scrolls, and was a sub category of "Midrash", (or study of the texts).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesher
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsou...15650.html
Thus we see that "prophesy" as fortune telling as began to be practiced in Judaism around the First Century, (and picked up by Christians and the gospel writers), really was a very late invention and never a classical part of Hebrew scripture, or understanding, either interpre tation, or intention, and certainly was not the function of the ancient office of "prophet", in Hebrew culture, who was to be a "mouthpiece" to the people of their own day, and not Madame Zelda with her crystal ball "
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/r...html#proof

Most of the "prophesies" are nothing but bullshit, anyway.

From a previous post of mine .... "The so-called "virgin birth" is one of the PRIME examples where there is development of an off-the-wall notion, based on a translation, of a MIS-translation, of a translation, which is then taken out of context, and solidified as doctrine, and driven over the cliff.

To wit :
a. Background :
Isaiah 7 talks about the history of King Ahaz, son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, who was king of Judah. At the time, King Rezin of Aram and Pekah, son of Remaliah, King of Israel, marched up to fight against Jerusalem, and the campaign was long and protracted. See the Syro-Ephraimite War, (Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syro-Ephraimite_War ), and it happened in the 8th Century (734) BC. When Ahaz was loosing faith, Isaiah went to visit him, and told him to "buck up", keep the faith, and continue the war, and told him that the SIGN from god, that they were favored, was that one of his wives, (a "woman of marriageable age") would be found to be with child. The SIGN was the CHILD, (and NOT the manner of the birth). ...."And they shall name him Emmanuel" which means "god is with us". The CHILD was the SIGN.

Any devout Jew in the time of the Roman occupation, (around 60 AD), would know that story, from Isaiah, and when they heard the words "a woman, (of marriageable age) will be found to be with child" they would connect the stories in their brains, and recognize that the gospel text's intention was to remind them of the Isaiah story, and would "harken" back to it, and realize the intent of the author was to claim that THIS child also was a sign. The general intent of the Gospel of Matthew was to claim the fulfillment of the various prophesies regarding the messiah, and this one was another one of those claims/stories of fulfillment.

b. The word "virgin" is a mistranslation, of a translation. So WE have a translation, of a mis-translation, of a translation. Matthew, writing in Greek about the "virgin birth" of Jesus, quotes the Septuagint text of Isaiah 7:14-16, which uses the Greek word "παρθένος" (parthenos,), (we still use the term "parthenogenesis") while the original Hebrew text has "עלמה" (almah), which has the slightly wider meaning of an unmarried, betrothed，or newly wed woman such as in the case of Ahaz' betrothed Abijah, daughter of Zechariah. He NEVER meant to imply that he was asserting "gynecological" claims, and THAT whole business was "off-the-wall", a mistranslation, taken to ridiculous extremes, by interpreters who missed the point. THE CHILD was the sign.

Also interesting that Matthew (1:25) only says that Joseph "knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son". It does NOT say she REMAINED a virgin. (??)

See also : Mother Goddess, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_goddess ) and Joseph Campbell, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goddess ) and Courtly Love, ( http://cla.calpoly.edu/~dschwart/engl513...ourtly.htm ). The business of Mary, and her idealized state, was extremely important in the civilization/culture of the West, and in some circles remains very important today, (Lourdes & claims of "Marian" apparitions" etc., etc.)

Then we have the fact that Matthew quoted the WRONG prophet. Inspired ? LMAO
https://essentialchurch.net/2018/01/30/d...zechariah/

"Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.“ (Matthew 24: 34)
LMFAO

"This generation will not pass away until all these things take place…“ (Mark 13:30)

All sorts of things never happened. LOL
https://blacknonbelievers.org/jesus-fail...is-return/

Deuteronomy 18:22
"When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously; thou shalt not be afraid of him."

What percentage of that post did you cut and paste?

Nice try there. Fail.
As usual, you are totally unable to reply to the CONTENT or points made.
You have absolutely no education in the tripe you preach about.

The answer to your question is : I copied and pasted every single word of it.
It's a combination of two posts which I wrote quite some time ago, (the general prophesy post and the specific one about the virgin birth), and have posted them here and elsewhere a number of times, and most people here have seen them a few times. I wrote them so as to have them handy when ignorant fundamentalists such as yourself make these bullshit claims about the Bible and prophesy. Basically you know nothing at all about ancient Hebrew culture.

Stop preaching and making a fool of yourself.
Your level of bullshit ignorance is not worth the time it takes to write anything original.
You're not going to convert ANYONE here. You're wasting your time.

I have quite a library both both of my own and another set written by "GoodWithoutGod" that will utterly destroy ANYTHING you can possibly cook up to justify your fantasies about your cult. When I post things from "GoodWithoutGod" I always give him credit as people know here. You've been here ... what, a couple weeks ? Many of us have been posting here and its predecessor for more than 10 years. We've seen the likes of your bullshit many many times. You're not going to convince anyone here of anything.

Yawn.

Deuteronomy 18:10
"Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire", (yes the Hebrews practiced practiced child-sacrifice) "divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft"

We know more about the Bible than you ever will.
Your "prophesy" is nothing but the forbidden divination and omen-reading.
It was forbidden. The prophets were speaking to the people OF THEIR OWN DAY.
Ask yourself "Why is it most Jewish people do NOT accept your Jesus *prophesies* ?
It's not about *faith* ... they know that *prediction* was not the job of the prophets.
Christians pretend it's all about their cult.

Here to BEGIN your Biblical education are 73 posts that pretty much cover every subject you could preach about and prove you wrong at every step.
https://atheistdiscussion.org/forums/sho...0#pid24800

Thanks again to Paleophyte for saving these.
I suppose I should index and save all mine in one place.

[TinyDave]

The Hebrew and Greek texts are translations from aramaic. 
That is beside the point.

You missed the question again.

Let me rephrase;

Why do you think that the written texts are the word of god?

The Old Testament is mostly Hebrew and some Aramaic.

Believing in God, I am persuaded that what He says is true, that He can not lie or misrepresent Himself.  So I take the following verse to be true. "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;" 2 Tim 3:16.

What I take from your reply is that you believe the bible to be true because it says it is true and that you already believe in it.
You have posted about circular reasoning previously. 

Also, the OT writers wrote scores of prophecies about Jesus Christ hundreds of years before Christ came; which were fulfilled by Him and recorded in the NT.

So what?
nostradamus predicted a whole bunch of things.
A stopped clock tells the correct time twice a day.

 Even though I take Him at His word,

This is the question I seek an answer for.
Why do you take this book as the word of god?
What evidence do you have?

 I am aware that it would be statistically impossible for one man to fulfill those prophesies in a lifetime; unless the prophesies we're inspired by God and fulfilled by His Son Jesus Christ.

Statistics bare no relevance here if you are talking about predetermined events. 
That is a poor argument.

[Bucky Ball]

[Gwaithmir]

Enlightenment from data gained by scientific methods changes. The theory of evolution is being rethought or altogether  abandoned. 

Wrong! I have already posted above an excellent text on the science of evolution. Are you intellectually honest enough to educate yourself on the subject, or will you continue to demand evidence and dismiss it with a wave of the hand without giving it fair consideration?

[Alan V]

Enlightenment from data gained by scientific methods changes. The theory of evolution is being rethought or altogether  abandoned. 

Wrong! I have already posted above an excellent text on the science of evolution. Are you intellectually honest enough to educate yourself on the subject, or will you continue to demand evidence and dismiss it with a wave of the hand without giving it fair consideration?

The problem with people who believe they know what God thinks is that they can, with confidence, dismiss whatever they don't want to believe and then rationalize it as God's authority.  They are hopelessly arrogant since they believe they speak for God, even when they have just made stuff up a moment before.  That's the pitfall of believing in the so-called holy spirit.

And that's why so many atheists understand that such people are ridiculous.

[Bucky Ball]

Wrong! I have already posted above an excellent text on the science of evolution. Are you intellectually honest enough to educate yourself on the subject, or will you continue to demand evidence and dismiss it with a wave of the hand without giving it fair consideration?

The problem with people who believe they know what God thinks is that they can, with confidence, dismiss whatever they don't want to believe and then rationalize it as God's authority.  They are hopelessly arrogant since they believe they speak for God, even when they have just made stuff up a moment before.  That's the pitfall of believing in the so-called holy spirit.

And that's why so many atheists understand that such people are ridiculous.

They've also been told by their own "scripture" they cannot know the minds of the gods :
"Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!"
Romans 11:33

The 20 most damning Bible contradictions :
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexami...adictions/