Fact sheet for Christianity

Compare the prophecies regarding Jesus Christ to the odds of winning the average pick six lottery. All the probabilities have been calculated out and are actually an understatement in some cases. If you google "probability 48 prophecies of Jesus" You'll find many good articles on the topic. Learn more about Christ, click here: http://to.ly/8lHf

BTW, this was originally written out, that is where the title comes from

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Fact
• sheet
• for
• Christianity
• prophecy
• probability
• hope
• truth
• Jesus
• Christ
• bible
• atheist
• darwin
• richard
• dawkins
• debate
• creationism
• intelligent
• design
• proof

[totalserenity]

@clivegoodman16

It has been years since I dealt with this subject. Two minutes of research tells me I got them backwards

You can find your answer here(remove spaces, replace dot):

tiny  url(dot) com/ 89x39mt

It is clear you are just here to argue since your questions have been answered hundreds of times and can simply be found by typing them into a google search. So why are you asking these questions when the answers are already out there?

If you have any other questions consult google

[clivegoodman16]

@totalserenity So Matthew's geneology is through Mary? How do you explain Matthew 1:16 which states "and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah" (New International Version), "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ." (King James Version) or " ιακωβ δε εγεννησεν τον ιωσηφ τον ανδρα μαριας εξ ης εγεννηθη ιησους ο λεγομενος χριστος " (Greek Version).

[totalserenity]

That's nice Stan. Have a nice day. I'm not obligated to prove anything to you

[totalserenity]

@clivegoodman16

Luke's is through Joseph, Matthew's is through Mary. These debates are hundreds of years old. Do you think people haven't verified the veracity of them? This is common knowledge among those who have studied the issue

[clivegoodman16]

@totalserenity Where do you get the idea that one of the Gospels' genealogies mentions the ancestry through Mary. Luke does not mention Mary but only Joseph in the genealogy and Matthew mentions the name of Joseph's father.

[StansellJ1983]

@totalserenity no, the burden of proof is not on me, as i am not making any claims. i simply said i reject the claims you have made, because there is not enough evidence to support them. and those prophecies haven't "nailed" anything! they're all based on the vaguest of connections. the problem is, you start with an assumption that your claim is true and try to fill in the blanks from there... this is not critical thinking, it's just poor rationalizing

[totalserenity]

@clivegoodman16

Matthew and Luke talk separately about the genealogy of Mary and Joseph. That is why they are different

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace

When was God, the Father ever a child except in the person of Jesus?

[totalserenity]

@StansellJ1983

The two books were written by two different religious groups. The old testament was completed more than 250 years before the birth of Christ. The burden of proof is on you to show how these prophecies could have nailed the birth, life and death of the Messiah with such high probability, literally the same odds as winning the lottery a half dozen times in a row.

[clivegoodman16]

Jews consider that Jesus did NOT fulfil the messianic prophecies. For example the verse "out of Egypt I called my son" was not a prophecy but a reference to the previous exodus from Egypt. The virgin birth was based on a mistranslation and referred to the time of King Ahaz. The slaughter of the innocents referred to a prophecy that Jews will eventually return from Exile. Further more the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew contradicts both the book of Chronicles AND Luke

[StansellJ1983]

no this is not a miracle of God. i could write a book and claim it was the third testament. all i need do is reference things in the previous versions so that "present day" event coincide with previous "prophecies", and this would become another "miracle of god". i reject your premise that the old testament is true which proves that the new testament is true as well. i reject both as being false, or at the very least, not adequately proven to be true