Most people who claim to be atheists aren’t actually atheists. Most of them have a downer on God, and feel as though they deserve more than they’ve got or that God owes them something. Is that you? Honestly? You can’t be an atheist and hate God. We’ve never met a real atheist.
The extent of the atheist’s claims is that he doesn’t know that there’s a God, because there is no proof to suggest that he doesn’t exist. A person can believe that there isn’t a God, but he can’t prove that there isn’t.
To the layman, it might seem that evolution is as difficult to believe in as biblical Christianity; however if we look closer at the claims of Christianity, we can see that it actually makes more sense to plump for Christianity. For example, a quarter of the Bible is predictive prophecy which means history written in advance. Much of that has now been fulfilled literally (the bits that haven’t are to do with the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, and therefore due soon). Because biblical prophecy is detailed and specific and because it gets fulfilled literally (and there are many cases of this) it makes most sense to believe that God is who he says he is rather than that the laws of probability are at work (because that would involve astronomical numbers due to the hundreds of prophecies that have been literally fulfilled). Occam’s razor is a theory that claims that the simplest solution to a problem is generally the correct one – and it definitely isn’t simple to suggest that all these prophecies have been fulfilled by the god of probability. Have a look at Josh MacDowell’s book ‘Evidence that Demands a Verdict’ which details many of these prophecies and their fulfillments with sources and evidence.
There’s no reason to absolutely plump for the ‘no-God’ universe. It doesn’t make you any better off in life, or after death. However, sticking with Jesus Christ stands to get you the greatest gain ever – and what is there to lose? At least find out for yourself.
SqueakyJesus 
“A person can believe that there isn’t a God, but he can’t prove that there isn’t.”
This is true. One cannot disprove a negative. You, however, appear certain your particular god exists, so please tell me precisely what method you use to dismiss Veles, the Slavic god of wealth, trickery and musicians. Show me this fool proof method you use to dash Him to the obscurity of human invention and I’ll promise to replicate it and then use that EXACT SAME METHOD to dash your particular god.
Could you also tell me what biblical prophecies have come to pass? Please be specific (with dates where possible) because I can’t recall a single one.
Thank you in advance.
John
Hello John,
Thanks for your comment, it’s good to hear from you and I really mean that!
One of the reasons I believe the God of the Bible is who is says he is is down to prophecy. My work on measuring God’s claims have led me to dismiss the claims of Veles, Zebauti, Janguli, Rongo and others; partly this is because as far as I’m aware the majority of other philosophies and mythologies make no claims but rather present a deity as something to be believed in or not. That to me is too much of a leap of faith.
Unfortunately prophecy has had bad press over the years with all sorts of people having a go at it – just look at the vague notions of Nostradamus. Some of these are so vague you’d have no idea not only whether they’d been fulfilled or not, but what they’re actually alluding to!
Prophecy that is specific and is fulfilled literally is something to take notice of, I think.
As far as I can tell the God of the Bible is unique in the extent of prophetic claims both fulfilled and as yet unfulfilled (an interesting example of an unfulfilled one is the Isaiah 17 prophecy that Damascus will be reduced to a heap of ruins. You may already know that Damascus is one of the longest continually inhabited settlements, so its destruction seems unlikely, particularly the completeness of it described in Isaiah – however, when it happens, we will know – whenever that will be!)
Because I can trust what God says because of the fulfilment of prophecy,I believe him when he says that he is the one true God, and for that reason I reject the claims or even non-claims of other deities. One of the other ways I trust the Bible is because of the way it is constructed. I don’t know if you’re familiar with the Bible, but if you’ve ever read Revelation (the bit right at the end) you will notice that everything seems to be in groups of seven. Actually the ‘sevenishness’ runs deeper than Revelation. A couple of quick examples are the genealogy in the front of Matthew and the passage Mark 16:9-20. Genealogies are always pretty dull, but a chap called Dr Ivan Panin (I think he was a mathematician) discovered that in this genealogy: the number of words used is divisible by seven, the number of letters used is divisible by seven, the number of vowels used is divisible by seven, the number of words used which begin with a vowel is divisible by seven, the number of words that occur more than once is divisible by seven, the number of words occurring in more than one form is divisible by seven, the number of nouns is divisible by seven, the number of names is divisible by seven. Only 7 other types of nouns are permitted, the number of male names is divisible by seven, the number of generations is divisible by seven.
The second passage I mentioned, Mark 16:9-20 contains the following features: the number of words is divisible by seven, the number of letters is divisible by seven, the consonants are divisible by seven, the vowels are divisible by seven, the vocabulary used includes 98 words (divisible by seven), 84 of these are found elsewhere in Mark (divisible by seven), 14 are found only in this passage (divisible by seven), 42 are used in Jesus’ address (divisible by seven), 56 are not (divisible by seven). I think it was Chuck Missler who calculated that the odds that this was a massive coincidence was roughly 1 in more than 40 million. You could try constructing a paragraph using the same rules just to see how hard it would be – but it seems pretty impossible, so why bother?!
I’m not aware of any other holy writing that is constructed in this manner, but I must confess I know far more about the Bible than any other writing, so you may be able to prove me wrong.
You asked about dates for fulfilled prophecies. I have included some prophecies fulfilled by Jesus, but I know you might not be too keen on these as you may see them as ‘in-house’ fulfilments; what I mean is you may reject the existence of the Jesus as he is portrayed in the Bible. There are other writings which corroborate this Jesus, such as Josephus, and there are many thousands more early manuscripts of the New Testament than there are of Homer’s Iliad or even Shakespeare’s plays.
Micah 5:1-2 – Messiah would be born in Bethlehem – fulfilled about 5BC
Isaiah 7:14 – Virgin birth of Jesus – fulfilled about 5BC
Daniel 9:24-26 – When the Messiah would be rejected – 31AD – If you read this passage you will notice this features those sevens again – this time groups of seven years. Daniel’s prophecy gave people the landmarks they would need to see when the Messiah would come.
There are many MANY more prophecies about Jesus, and this last one warrants going into detail, but this might not be something that you are interested in, and that’s fine, there are plenty more prophecies.
Daniel 9:24-26 – Destruction of the Temple – 70AD (well-documented because the Romans did it and they’re super-organised!)
Here are some other non-Jesus prophecies:
Nahum 3:15 – destruction of Nineveh by fire – fulfilled 612 BC – the ruins were dug up in the 1800s and it was discovered that it had indeed been destroyed by fire. Bear in mind that there other ways to destroy a settlement.
Ezekiel 26:12 – Tyre’s stones would be cast into the sea – fulfilled 333-332 BC – Alexander the Great built a land bridge from the mainland to the island of Tyre.
Ezekiel 26:14 – what was Tyre would become a bare rock where fishermen would dry their nets – 332 BC onwards. This is a pretty specific prophecy, but yes, it was the ideal place for a spot of net-drying. Did it need to be this specific? Possibly not – perhaps God was showboating a bit here.
There’s the bit in Daniel 2:32-33 which details various empires that would arise in the Middle East. What is interesting is it refers to Alexander the Great and what would happen after his as his empire gets carved up into four bits – there’s another bit later on in Daniel which refers to the same episode with a symbolic ram. It’s pretty interesting stuff.
There are hundreds more prophecies, these are just a sample from the top of my head, I could go into detail, but I’m not sure how much detail you want. There’s a good website which has dates of fulfillment called 100prophecies.org you might want to look at, or books such as ‘Evidence that demands a verdict’ (it comes in two volumes, probably the first is the most interesting – it’s not massively readable, it’s just lists and details of fulfillment, but it’s definitely worth reading), and there’s also Walvoord’s book ‘Every prophecy of the Bible’, but I’m not sure if that’s got dates in it or not.
I’d like to thank you again for commenting on the above post. Thankyou for asking an honest question, and please be assured that I’m not trying to convince you at all. These are just a very small number of the things I looked into when measuring God’s claims for myself.
Thanks for your detailed reply. To be honest I wasn’t expecting one, and I salute you for putting time into your response.
I have to say right off the bat that if you’ve gone to this much effort to find the things you so desperately want to find in the bible then there’s sadly absolutely nothing I can say to convince you that you’re making causal associations where there simply are none. This is simple confirmation bias. You are seeing what you want to see. If it weren’t the case I’m sure bible prophecy fulfilment would be taught in universities. It isn’t, and that’s for a very good reason.
The prediction about tyre is interesting, though, as it’s a classic case of confirmation bias.
“Tyre’s stones would be cast into the sea”… well, Alexander built his causeway from the mainland out, not Tyre in, so no, this “prophecy” is dead wrong.
“Tyre would become a bare rock where fishermen would dry their nets.” Well, an island is technically a rock, so that doesn’t apply. I believe Ezekiel was referring here to the destruction of the city. Yes, it was ransacked, but not razed, and was rebuilt soon after anyway by Alexander’s own engineers. You can visit it today if you like. That, however, is not what Ezekiel was writing about. From 586 until 573 BCE the city was under siege by Nebuchadnezzar II. If you notice, those dates they coincide with the Babylonian captivity and the supposed writings of Ezekiel. Coincidence?
It’s clear you place a lot of faith in the Old Testament. Tell me, are you aware that even conservative Jewish rabbis today dismiss the entire Pentateuch as a geopolitical work of fiction commissioned to justify a northern land grab after the fall of Mamlekhet Yisra’el (Kingdom of Israel) in 722 BCE? This admission is the result of 75 years of extensive archeology that has proved beyond doubt that the patriarchs (Abraham, Jacob, Isaac) and Moses never existed, the Exodus never happened, there was no conquest of the Land of Israel, and there was never a 10th Century United Kingdom.
• “There is no archaeological evidence for any of it. This is something unexampled in history. They [Judah] wanted to seize control of the territories of the kingdom of Israel and annex them, because, they said, `These territories are actually ours and if you have a minute, we´ll tell you how that´s so.’” (Israel Finkelstein, professor of archaeology, Tel Aviv University)
• “The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. Most of those who are engaged in scientific work in the interlocking spheres of the Bible, archaeology and the history of the Jewish people and who once went into the field looking for proof to corroborate the Bible story now agree that the historic events relating to the stages of the Jewish people’s emergence are radically different from what that story tells.” (Prof. Ze’ev Herzog, Tel Aviv University)
• “I think there is no serious scholar in Israel or in the world who does not accept this position. Herzog represents a large group of Israeli scholars, and he stands squarely within the consensus. Twenty years ago even I wrote of the same matters and I was not an innovator. Archaeologists simply do not take the trouble of bringing their discoveries to public attention.” (Professor Magen Broshi, Head of Archaeology at the Israel Museum)
The evidence is in fact so conclusive that even Christianity Today’s Kevin D. Miller conceded: “The fact is that not one shred of direct archaeological evidence has been found for Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob or the 400-plus years the children of Israel sojourned in Egypt. The same is true for their miraculous exodus from slavery.”
If you’re not aware of this I’d urge you to read the Etz Hayim: Torah and Commentary; the first authorised commentary on the Torah since 1936. Published in 2001 by the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism (in collaboration with the Rabbinical Assembly and the Jewish Publication Society) the 1,559 page long Etz Hayim concludes with 41 essays written by prominent rabbis and scholars who admit the Pentateuch is little more than a self-serving myth rife with anachronisms and un-ignorable archaeological inconsistencies, and rather than triumphant conquest, Israel instead emerged slowly and relatively peacefully out of the general Canaanite population with monotheism only appearing in the post-Exilic period, 5th Century BCE.
• “Defending a rabbi in the 21st century for saying the Exodus story isn’t factual is like defending him for saying the Earth isn’t flat. It’s neither new nor shocking to most of us that the Earth is round or that the Torah isn’t a history book dictated to Moses by God on Mount Sinai.” Rabbi Steven Leder of the Wilshire Boulevard Temple.
• “The rejection of the Bible as literally true is more or less settled and understood among most Conservative rabbis.” Rabbi David Wolpe
As a final note, you mention Josephus. I’m sorry, but it’s been known for well over 200 years that Josephus’s TM is a 4th century forgery attributed to Eusebius. The simple fact is not a single contemporary historian, court record keeper, social commentator, curious onlooker or graffiti artist along the entire eastern Mediterranean seaboard noticed Jesus during his supposed life. Perhaps not so surprisingly, the deliberate (secret) tampering of Josephus’s work coincided with the secret addition of the longer ending to the oldest synoptic gospel of Mark, which didn’t originally mention a resurrection… not until after the 4th Century, that is.
You took the trouble to write a comment, it deserved a reply.
You are assuming that I found what I wanted to find. Actually the reverse is the case, I DIDN’T want to find what I found, I didn’t want it to be true. I was actually trying to prove it wrong, and just didn’t find what I was looking for, which is why I am where I am now.
The Tyre thing is interesting – there were actually TWO places known as Tyre, one of them on the mainland. That’s why it’s an interesting fulfillment. The were several bites to the Tyre ‘cherry’, as you may be aware, so no, it wasn’t a coincidence.
I concentrated on the Old Testament because I was pretty sure you wouldn’t be at all interested in Jesus, and yes, I’m aware of conservative AND liberal rabbis having all sorts of different interpretations and explanations for aspects of the Old Testament. Many of these are in line with present political machinations, as I’m sure you’d agree. It may be a bias (it probably is by now), but I’m disappointed by the way research and research post are funded and have seen first-hand that only ‘correct’ hypotheses will be receive funding for testing. That isn’t in the true spirit of academia – and I suspect you also have discovered this for yourself. You will find all sorts of people saying all sorts of things, and their job title or position isn’t a guarantee of their academic rigour.
Regarding the longer ending of Mark, both Irenaeus and Hippolatus quoted from it in the second century, so it can’t be the late addition it is sometimes claimed to be. And the heptads – have you actually tried writing that stuff?
And know, there’s unlikely to be anything you can say to convince me, because like you, I’ve done quite a bit of homework.
But thanks very VERY much for being in touch.
True, not the 4th Century, my bad. Still, Mark (the oldest synoptic work) never had a resurrection. It was secretly added generations later. That is fact.
Sorry, one more point… you may choose to doubt Jewish Rabbis (which is odd as they’re the custodians of the fables), but you cannot question the academic integrity of the leading Jewish archaeologists. They are merely writing on what is known. You can have your own beliefs, but you cannot have your own facts.
Thanks again.
I don’t have my own facts. But where there is a lack of consensus I reserve judgment, particularly when there are political motives. And sometimes I draw conclusions with the best information I have to hand. And no, they’re not the custodians.
In that case you’re simply choosing to ignore the overwhelming archaeological consensus. I can understand you wanting to, it doesn’t fit in with your beliefs, but that doesn’t change the fact that not a single shred of evidence has been found for anything in Pentateuch. This doesn’t mean people haven’t tried to find proof, they have…. And they’ve tried very, very hard. As Herzog wrote: “…Most of those who are engaged in scientific work in the interlocking spheres of the Bible, archaeology and the history of the Jewish people and WHO ONCE WENT INTO THE FIELD LOOKING FOR PROOF TO CORROBORATE THE BIBLE STORY now agree that the historic events relating to the stages of the Jewish people’s emergence are radically different from what that story tells.”
The Jewish Rabbis who have owned up to the farce are just being intellectually honest. They have chosen not to furnish a delusion, and for that they should be honoured.
I’m not choosing to ignore anything; just measuring what I find with other things I’ve found. I have nothing invested in this at all. I have no problem being proven wrong, were that to happen.