Bible Prophecy: Iran and the Gog Coalition

Hello All-

I recently found an interesting website regarding Bible prophecy. I thought I'd share one of the many articles contained therein; it reads:

"Ezekiel 38-39 is the famous biblical prophecy that predicts an end time war commonly known as the Battle of Gog and Magog. Ezekiel 38:5 says that Iran will be part of this end time coalition of nations that will invade Israel and 'cover the land like a cloud.' Current developments in Iran and its neighboring nations indicate that the Gog coalition could be forming before our eyes. Three recent developments in Iran point toward the biblical scenario described in Ezekiel 38-39.

First, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is touring Central Asia and spoke at a meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in the capital city of Kazakhstan. The SCO membership is currently Russia, China, and four ex-Soviet countries in Central Asia. Iran appears to by vying for admission to the group. Ezekiel 38:1-6 predicts that in the end times Rosh (Russia), Persia (Iran), and Magog (Central Asia) will form a confederation of nations that will invade Israel. The nations of Central Asia, that were formerly a part of the Soviet Union, have a current Muslim population of about 60 million. The growing alliances between Russia, Iran, and these Central Asian nations could be a precursor to the last days Gog coalition. During a speech at the SCO summit, Ahmadinejad fired another verbal shot against Israel when he said that Israel is the 'standard bearer of invasion, occupation and Satan' and will soon fall apart. The gathering of these nations, and Ahadinejad’s verbal salvo against Israel foreshadow the Ezekiel prophecy.

Second, it was reported last week that the Bush administration is considering blacklisting Iran’s elite Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) as a foreign terrorist organization. This is viewed in the U.S. as a very wise political move that puts Iran and its mullah regime on the defensive. The IRGC was founded in 1979 as part of the Islamic Revolution. Its primary function is to protect the Iranian regime. To fulfill this purpose it carries out military and political missions for the Islamic Republic both inside and outside the country. Interestingly, Ahmadinejad is a former member of the IRGC. In response to the Bush administration’s statements about the IRGC, General Yahya Rahim Safari, the leader of the IRGC, said, 'America will receive a heavier punch from the guards in the future.' This threat will probably be carried out by increased Iranian involvement and covert operations against U.S. troops in Iraq. That brings us to the third development we’re seeing in Iran.

Third, according to Major General Rick Lynch, whose command includes territory south of Baghdad, about 50 members of the elite IRGC are working in southern Iraq. Lynch says they are training Shiite militias south of Baghdad. This is the first specific accusation and claim that Iranians are training militias inside Iraq. Lynch also says that Shiite militias and extremists are behind the increase in attacks using explosive devices with parts smuggled in from Iran. He further noted that there’s been an increase in Iranian rockets that have been effective against U.S. bases.

While no one knows exactly how or when the Gog coalition will come together, what we see in today’s headlines could be the genesis of this coming event that will shake the world."

Article provided by: www.prophecyhotline.com.

Like no one could have figure out where Iran's headed without you...

Originally posted by ushomefree
Hello All-

I recently found an interesting website regarding Bible prophecy. I thought I'd share one of the many articles contained therein; it reads:

"Ezekiel 38-39 is the famous biblical prophecy that predicts an end time war commonly known as the Battle of Gog and Magog. Ezekiel 38:5 says that Iran will be part of this end time coalition of nations that will invade Israel and 'cover the land like a cloud.' Current developments in Iran and its neighboring nations indicate that the Gog coalition could be forming before our eyes. Three recent developments in Iran point toward the biblical scenario described in Ezekiel 38-39.

First, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is touring Central Asia and spoke at a meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in the capital city of Kazakhstan. The SCO membership is currently Russia, China, and four ex-Soviet countries in Central Asia. Iran appears to by vying for admission to the group. Ezekiel 38:1-6 predicts that in the end times Rosh (Russia), Persia (Iran), and Magog (Central Asia) will form a confederation of nations that will invade Israel. The nations of Central Asia, that were formerly a part of the Soviet Union, have a current Muslim population of about 60 million. The growing alliances between Russia, Iran, and these Central Asian nations could be a precursor to the last days Gog coalition. During a speech at the SCO summit, Ahmadinejad fired another verbal shot against Israel when he said that Israel is the 'standard bearer of invasion, occupation and Satan' and will soon fall apart. The gathering of these nations, and Ahadinejad’s verbal salvo against Israel foreshadow the Ezekiel prophecy.

Second, it was reported last week that the Bush administration is considering blacklisting Iran’s elite Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) as a foreign terrorist organization. This is viewed in the U.S. as a very wise political move that puts Iran and its mullah regime on the defensive. The IRGC was founded in 1979 as part of the Islamic Revolution. Its primary function is to protect the Iranian regime. To fulfill this purpose it carries out military and political missions for the Islamic Republic both inside and outside the country. Interestingly, Ahmadinejad is a former member of the IRGC. In response to the Bush administration’s statements about the IRGC, General Yahya Rahim Safari, the leader of the IRGC, said, 'America will receive a heavier punch from the guards in the future.' This threat will probably be carried out by increased Iranian involvement and covert operations against U.S. troops in Iraq. That brings us to the third development we’re seeing in Iran.

Third, according to Major General Rick Lynch, whose command includes territory south of Baghdad, about 50 members of the elite IRGC are working in southern Iraq. Lynch says they are training Shiite militias south of Baghdad. This is the first specific accusation and claim that Iranians are training militias inside Iraq. Lynch also says that Shiite militias and extremists are behind the increase in attacks using explosive devices with parts smuggled in from Iran. He further noted that there’s been an increase in Iranian rockets that have been effective against U.S. bases.

While no one knows exactly how or when the Gog coalition will come together, what we see in today’s headlines could be the genesis of this coming event that will shake the world."

Article provided by: www.prophecyhotline.com.

ushomefree, do you ready believe this? No one can know the future, including the people who wrote the bible.

That website also tells us how and where to expect the anti-Christ in the coming months/years.

I desperately wish someone would keep tabs on every "prophecy" that site has, then keep track of hits and misses. I hope anyone with a brain can guess which one wins in a landslide.

Be careful where you get your info from ushome....I don't know if you're just curious but still skeptical (hopefully), if you were raised with such beliefs, or if you're just gullible, but this sort of prophetic nonsense really has little, if any, rational value.

DigiMark007—

Regarding any source, I utilize caution in determining its validity; not doing so, would only amount to ignorant and/or insufficient views, and I wish not to betray myself, not to mention others. Genuine effort is afforded on my part to remain unbiased—to remain neutral and allow truth to reveal itself (by scientific and/or historical means); we all—the majority anyway—yearn for the truth in any given topic, and I am no exception.

With this standard in tow, I am able to have faith—not "blind" faith—in Jesus Christ; I am Christian, and I have confidence in my decision in accepting Jesus Christ as "our" Lord and Savior. I was not raised in a Christian home. In fact, my childhood was virtually void of religious thought and understanding. It was only after my honorable discharge from the Army did I begin to consider religious belief systems; I referenced countless websites and forums, listened to audio presentations, bought books and DVD materials—whatever I could get my hands on! My studies primarily focused on "monotheistic" religions, because they have more influence than all other religions in the world: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. And oddly enough, they are all based on the Torah (the Hebrew Bible).

I must stress, even though my studies "primarily" focused on monotheistic religions, I did study polytheistic and pantheistic religions, not to mention mythology; I even watched Joseph Campbell's DVD presentation of the book entitled, "The Power of Myth." In the end, I embraced Christianity (without committing intellectual suicide). My faith is based on facts, not emotion. Like the Apostle Paul once said, "And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith." Paul the Apostle was absolutely right!

And my point: despite everything, as I learn, my faith is challenged, but I—as in the beginning—remain unbiased. I am skeptical regarding Bible prophecy, but I study and give the Bible a fair inquiry, not a knee-jerk reaction. I am no expert, and my knowledge concerning Biblical prophecy is premature at this juncture; nonetheless, prophetic Scripture is interesting, especially concerning the coming Messiah i.e., Isaiah 53, Psalm 22 and hundreds more! Bible theologians claim that the Bible is 30% prophetic. I have much work ahead.

As you stated, "this sort of prophetic nonsense really has little, if any, rational value," lacks persuasive power in my opinion! You made a mighty claim, but on what is it based?! I infer, that if the efforts of persons studying Biblical prophecy are genuine—at minimum—they will conclude (despite a difference of opinion) that prophecy demands respect—if simply from a literary sense. Use caution DigiMark007; the article I provided had an important disclaimer at the end: "While no one knows exactly how or when the Gog coalition will come together, what we see in today’s headlines could be the genesis of this coming event that will shake the world," (emphasis added in bold).

who needs glasses? And would the ones that do need glasses please put them on so ushomefree can write normal sized letters, oh and that means you to ushomefree put on your glasses

Well, besides this:

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
ushomefree, do you ready believe this? No one can know the future, including the people who wrote the bible.

...it's obvious that the site is just in the business of finding Bible passages and attempting to fit them to world events. Judging from the 5-6 articles I browsed through, I'd be shocked if they manage to get 2-3% correct. It plays upon the credulous without offering evidence or even plausibility....they just say a bunch of Bibically conspiratorial stuff and trust that people will buy into it, thus gaining noteriety for their site.

And disclaimers like the one you mentioned are in place so they don't need to "stick their necks out" too far with predictions. But I'll bet my house that if they get one right, they play it up like everything they say is God's truth, and legitimate prophecy. Psychics are fond of disclaimers like that too....it's the same principle, and just as false.

...

Just use your reason for a bit. I can't possibly see how articles like this have any value for you or anyone. And I'm also unsure how anyone could be familiar with the works of Joseph Campbell and still believe the factual divinity of Jesus. I haven't heard the tapes you refer to, but I've read most of his other stuff and it's the world's best example of how religion is metaphor, not literal truth.

DigiMark007—

ProphecyHotline—as you plainly stated—having "business of finding Bible passages and attempting to fit them to world events," is an unfair assessment in my opinion; after all, ProphecyHotline provides disclaimers attached to articles, not to mention the website as a whole (on the home page). And it reads:

"The news and commentary links below are not endorsed by ProphecyHotline. They are listed because they relate current events which may have prophetic significance."

You further stated:

"Disclaimers like the one you mentioned are in place so they don't need to 'stick their necks out' too far with predictions."

In my view, the disclaimers were provided to ensure that readers are not mislead; fanatics only care about their agenda and would not bother with such information, and the disclaimers were not provided to serve as a scapegoat. I think *gasp* honesty was the driving force.

ProphecyHotline has presented articles (focused on current events), that "may have prophetic significance." Never—absolutely never—did ProphecyHotline claim that the articles therein have come to pass, aside from which is historically verifiable i.e., when Israel became a Jewish state in 1948! Why must you complicate such a simple issue?

And in the latter portion of the post, you state:

"I'm also unsure how anyone could be familiar with the works of Joseph Campbell and still believe the factual divinity of Jesus. I haven't heard the tapes you refer to, but I've read most of his other stuff and it's the world's best example of how religion is metaphor, not literal truth."

You—and Joseph Campbell—completely ignore the case for the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Perhaps the video below—a debate between Gary Habermas and Tim Callahan—will provide insight to the problem?

YouTube video

YouTube video

Originally posted by ushomefree
ProphecyHotline has presented articles (focused on current events), that [b]"may have prophetic significance." Never—absolutely never—did ProphecyHotline claim that the articles therein have come to pass, aside from which is historically verifiable i.e., when Israel became a Jewish state in 1948! Why must you complicate such a simple issue?[/B]

If they've never claimed such hits, why are we paying attention to anything posted there? My point is that any bible passage could easily be applied to any number of events if you search hard enough, but that doesn't mean there's a link...they were written thousands of years ago about those places and times.

...

As for the videos, I'm fully aware of the case for Christ, and how it falls well short of the mark. Take the initial gap between his life and anyone's writings (even generous estimates put the Gospels at least 40 years after his death), mix in some conflicting stories (there's contradicting facts even within the accepted Gospels, not to mention those they threw out because it didn't fit their image of Jesus), and sprinkle a geneous portion of preceding mythologies to match each and every story in the New Testament (and most in the Old Testament as well) and you have a man that most assuredly existed, but just as surely was grossly misrepresented. This doesn't even begin to touch on the scientific nonexistence of evidence to support the paranormal, which could easily strengthen the argument, since one doesn't really even need to leave Bible scholarship to debunk the religion.

Tim Callahan is a horrible debator, and he focuses on the wrong myths. Habermas crucifies him in the debate (pun intended). The "mystery religions" are easily debunked as influences on Christianity because they occurred around the same time. They actually influenced one another somewhat (Mithraism and Christianity competed for followers early on and borrowed motifs and themes to try to undermine the others' credibility....the Mithraic wise men at the birth of Christ (Magi) is an example of this. Habermas rightly focuses on them because some actually occurred after Christianity's inception (though the Church was hardly coherent in the early centuries, so practices like drinking the blood of the god, of Dionysian origin, were assimilated). But we have resurrection myths that far predate any of that (Krshna, Horus, Odin, etc.) as well as predecessors for every story in the Bible, from each of the miracles to his temptation in the desert, to his teachings and ministry, and finally his crucifixtion. I could continue with examples from all sections of the Bible, but you get the point.

Joe Campbell was the world's foremost expert on comparative mythology during his lifetime. To say he ignored some scholarship on the matters he spoke about is a blatent assumption, and almost surely false. Even you and I are aware of them, and he dedicated a lifetime to such accounts.

The biggest flaw in all of this is not that you believe in Jesus. At least you're trying to do so on rational grounds. But you're finding blatently one-sided materials (whether articles, prophecies, or videos) that endorse your view without actually seeking out the best case against them. It's a horrible confirmation bias toward your beliefs, and doesn't actually include all opinions.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
If they've never claimed such hits, why are we paying attention to anything posted there?

The Bible contains short and long term prophecies regarding people, places, and events; prophecy awaiting fulfillment pertain to the End Times.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
My point is that any bible passage could easily be applied to any number of events if you search hard enough, but that doesn't mean there's a link...they were written thousands of years ago about those places and times.

Bible prophecy needs to be interpreted with care; failing to do so does not imply that the Bible is false.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
As for the videos, I'm fully aware of the case for Christ, and how it falls well short of the mark. Take the initial gap between his life and anyone's writings (even generous estimates put the Gospels at least 40 years after his death)

Evidence confirms belief in the risen Jesus prior to the Gospel accounts; in any case, the Gospels was written while eye witnesses were still alive.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
mix in some conflicting stories (there's contradicting facts even within the accepted Gospels

The Gospels do not contradict one another; some simply provide more information than others. The Gospels are "independent" accounts; small variations are expected in light of this fact.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
not to mention those they threw out because it didn't fit their image of Jesus)

The Gnostic Gospels were written much later--some even centuries--after the Gospels were already in circulation. The early church discarded them for obvious reasons.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
and sprinkle a geneous portion of preceding mythologies to match each and every story in the New Testament (and most in the Old Testament as well)

Anthony Flew and Tim Callahan were completely silent on these issues; they should have been at the tips of their tongues!

Originally posted by DigiMark007
and you have a man that most assuredly existed, but just as surely was grossly misrepresented.

You are correct; Dan Brown is one of many culprits committing such acts.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
This doesn't even begin to touch on the scientific nonexistence of evidence to support the paranormal, which could easily strengthen the argument, since one doesn't really even need to leave Bible scholarship to debunk the religion.

Example?

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Tim Callahan is a horrible debator, and he focuses on the wrong myths.

Wrong myths? That is precisely why Christianity must be false, right?

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Habermas crucifies him in the debate (pun intended).

Gary Habermas voiced a stronger argument; does that warrant unfairness?

Originally posted by DigiMark007
The "mystery religions" are easily debunked as influences on Christianity because they occurred around the same time. Mystery religions began reflecting Christianity 100 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. They actually influenced one another somewhat (Mithraism and Christianity competed for followers early on and borrowed motifs and themes to try to undermine the others' credibility....the Mithraic wise men at the birth of Christ (Magi) is an example of this. Habermas rightly focuses on them because some actually occurred after Christianity's inception (though the Church was hardly coherent in the early centuries, so practices like drinking the blood of the god, of Dionysian origin, were assimilated). But we have resurrection myths that far predate any of that (Krshna, Horus, Odin, etc.) as well as predecessors for every story in the Bible, from each of the miracles to his temptation in the desert, to his teachings and ministry, and finally his crucifixtion.

And these truths you propose were never introduced into the discussion because Anthony Flew and Tim Callahan are horrible debaters, right? You overlook the obvious for the unobvious.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
I could continue with examples from all sections of the Bible, but you get the point.

You have no point. Pun intended.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Joe Campbell was the world's foremost expert on comparative mythology during his lifetime.

I agree; he was an brilliant man--with "one" opinion.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
To say he ignored some scholarship on the matters he spoke about is a blatent assumption, and almost surely false. Even you and I are aware of them, and he dedicated a lifetime to such accounts.

Joseph Campbell "forces" Christianity into a mold that completely ignores the origins of the faith. This is not a blatant assumption; it is the truth.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
The biggest flaw in all of this is not that you believe in Jesus. At least you're trying to do so on rational grounds. But you're finding blatently one-sided materials (whether articles, prophecies, or videos) that endorse your view without actually seeking out the best case against them. It's a horrible confirmation bias toward your beliefs, and doesn't actually include all opinions.

How arrogant you are! How much research do you think I've conducted, and how much research do you think you've conducted? I'm reading a book entitled, "The Resurrection of Jesus"--a debate between John Dominic Crossan and N. T. Wright. And John Dominic Crossan remains silent on Mythology and Mystery religions; one of us is wrong. How much do you think you know?

so where is your glasses, your letters are so ****ed up big we aint all little stevie here

Arrogance, no. I only speak what I know I can be confident in. If you're espousing viewpoints such as ID (in past threads) or the utter infallibility of the resurrection myth, then it's obvious to me that your vaunted research is lacking. Mine may not be perfect either, but tenets that are just flat-out false (ID) or heavily disputed (the resurrection) can't be seen as unquestioned truths if one views it objectively.

You still do nothing to debunk the preceding and parellel myths. For evidence, since you like Joe Campbell, I'd reccommend Thou Art That or The Hero With a Thousand Faces. The former actually breaks down resurrection myths throughout time and discusses about a dozen common motifs throughout them all, and gives examples of each. He forces nothing upon Christianity, and actually speaks to the differences in religions on many occasions (he makes a strong disclaimer to this affect in the preface to "Hero...", among others). But he's also able to cut through the dogma to see the common metaphors in various cultures, and how this should bring a unity of purpose rather than archaic attempts to prove one or the other true and the others false.

Callahan's book, though he's a shite debator, does a commendable job showing the problems with the actual compilation of the Bible, and the conflicting stories. And yeah, there's inconsistencies in the Gospels. Off the top of my head, one of the main 4 has Mary and Joseph going to Bethlehem for a Roman census, which we have confirmed to be completely false using Roman records. Not only would they not have been made to travel to another city (this is probably just for dramatic affect with the pregnancy) but the only census in the era happened somewhere around 50 years prior to the earliest estimates of Jesus' birth. Other Gospels nix the census (wisely) but posit some other reason for the move. If memory serves, another Gospel doesn't even deal with the birth (Mark?). And the manger birth is, of course, a common motif in the hero myth. I think Horus tried it first (they'd parade toy mangers around the streets on his birthday in Egypt).

That's one example. If I need to, there's others, but you'd be better served finding them for yourself since it's obvious we're at a stage where we find it hard to objectively view the others' posts.

You also asked for evidence of the scientific lack of evidence for God. I've tried to stick to Bible critique, but if you insist:
The evidence is literally everywhere (or nowhere, if you're searching for reasons to believe). The laws of chemistry, physics, evolution, etc. got the universe to this point, and all are observable and documented. The formation of the planets and galaxies, the rise of life and sentience, and so forth. There's no need in any of it for a divine creator, nor evidence to suggest divine manipulation to an otherwise deterministic universe. At best, He got to create the whole thing at the beginning then do nothing else, but there's both plausible explanations for the scientific formation of the universe as well as logical problems with a complex creator that has no prior cause.

The other bastion of hope is paranormal phenomenon, which would suggest something outside of materiality. But most mainstream attempts to verify or even produce evidence of the paranormal have been soundly debunked by numerous credible sources. The lone area that science has yet to fully pierce is consciousness, but it is a tenuous ledge, at best, to cling to if you're trying to find evidence for the Christian faith....even if it does suggest non-materiality. Through it all, the burden of proof (or even just evidence) lies with the religious, not with the scientists whose theories and opinions are observable and verifiable.

With luck, we can lay this to rest. I always feel the need to explain myself, but it's becoming clear that we're on such different wavelengths that the only thing we're good at is getting on each other's nerves. I regret this, but won't relent on my opinions even if that's the end result, however unfortunate or unintended.

...

{edit} Also, I just checked your last post more closely. You edited some of my comments on the mystery religions to make my argument seem less solid. Are we really coming to this?

Simply because details don't appear in one Gospel doesn't mean that they didn't occur.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Simply because details don't appear in one Gospel doesn't mean that they didn't occur.

simply because you can not see the invisible purple unicorn doesnt mean it doesnt exist.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
simply because you can not see the invisible purple unicorn doesnt mean it doesnt exist.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
ushomefree, do you ready believe this? No one can know the future, including the people who wrote the bible.

But if one is a believer then he believes that the Bible was influenced by God, and he probably can tell whats going to happen in the future.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
simply because you can not see the invisible purple unicorn doesnt mean it doesnt exist.

You can't see it?

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Arrogance, no. I only speak what I know I can be confident in. If you're espousing viewpoints such as ID (in past threads) or the utter infallibility of the resurrection myth, then it's obvious to me that your vaunted research is lacking. Mine may not be perfect either, but tenets that are just flat-out false (ID) or heavily disputed (the resurrection) can't be seen as unquestioned truths if one views it objectively.

You still do nothing to debunk the preceding and parellel myths. For evidence, since you like Joe Campbell, I'd reccommend Thou Art That or The Hero With a Thousand Faces. The former actually breaks down resurrection myths throughout time and discusses about a dozen common motifs throughout them all, and gives examples of each. He forces nothing upon Christianity, and actually speaks to the differences in religions on many occasions (he makes a strong disclaimer to this affect in the preface to "Hero...", among others). But he's also able to cut through the dogma to see the common metaphors in various cultures, and how this should bring a unity of purpose rather than archaic attempts to prove one or the other true and the others false.

Callahan's book, though he's a shite debator, does a commendable job showing the problems with the actual compilation of the Bible, and the conflicting stories. And yeah, there's inconsistencies in the Gospels. Off the top of my head, one of the main 4 has Mary and Joseph going to Bethlehem for a Roman census, which we have confirmed to be completely false using Roman records. Not only would they not have been made to travel to another city (this is probably just for dramatic affect with the pregnancy) but the only census in the era happened somewhere around 50 years prior to the earliest estimates of Jesus' birth. Other Gospels nix the census (wisely) but posit some other reason for the move. If memory serves, another Gospel doesn't even deal with the birth (Mark?). And the manger birth is, of course, a common motif in the hero myth. I think Horus tried it first (they'd parade toy mangers around the streets on his birthday in Egypt).

That's one example. If I need to, there's others, but you'd be better served finding them for yourself since it's obvious we're at a stage where we find it hard to objectively view the others' posts.

My patience has expired over this discussion; I thoroughly enjoyed it nonetheless. I read the book "The Power of Myth" by Joseph Campbell, but I will purchase "The Hero with a Thousand Faces." For you, I recommend "Who Moved the Stone?" authored by Frank Morison.

It is quite possible that your knowledge regarding Mythology and/or Mystery religions is broader than mine. Still, I'm not completely in the dark; resurrection accounts within Mythology and Mystery religions are figurative or spiritual, which apply to fictional characters. The Gospels claim the "bodily" resurrection of a historical figure, whom the Apostles knew personally. In my view, it all boils down to is this: If a bodily resurrection had not occurred, it is hard to fathom the origin of the Christian faith.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
You also asked for evidence of the scientific lack of evidence for God. I've tried to stick to Bible critique, but if you insist:

The evidence is literally everywhere (or nowhere, if you're searching for reasons to believe). The laws of chemistry, physics, evolution, etc. got the universe to this point, and all are observable and documented. The formation of the planets and galaxies, the rise of life and sentience, and so forth. There's no need in any of it for a divine creator, nor evidence to suggest divine manipulation to an otherwise deterministic universe. At best, He got to create the whole thing at the beginning then do nothing else, but there's both plausible explanations for the scientific formation of the universe as well as logical problems with a complex creator that has no prior cause.

The other bastion of hope is paranormal phenomenon, which would suggest something outside of materiality. But most mainstream attempts to verify or even produce evidence of the paranormal have been soundly debunked by numerous credible sources. The lone area that science has yet to fully pierce is consciousness, but it is a tenuous ledge, at best, to cling to if you're trying to find evidence for the Christian faith....even if it does suggest non-materiality. Through it all, the burden of proof (or even just evidence) lies with the religious, not with the scientists whose theories and opinions are observable and verifiable.

I believe that "something" produces something, whereas you believe "nothing" produces something. Where do you suppose "biological" information derived from?

Originally posted by DigiMark007
With luck, we can lay this to rest. I always feel the need to explain myself, but it's becoming clear that we're on such different wavelengths that the only thing we're good at is getting on each other's nerves. I regret this, but won't relent on my opinions even if that's the end result, however unfortunate or unintended.

You do not get on my nerves; you do, however, at times, frustrate me. That's not to imply that I do not enjoy our discussions, because I do. Bravo DigiMark007!

Originally posted by DigiMark007
{edit} Also, I just checked your last post more closely. You edited some of my comments on the mystery religions to make my argument seem less solid. Are we really coming to this?

I have no idea what you are referring to. What do you mean?

Originally posted by ushomefree
My patience has expired over this discussion; I thoroughly enjoyed it nonetheless. I read the book "The Power of Myth" by Joseph Campbell, but I will purchase "The Hero with a Thousand Faces." For you, I recommend "Who Moved the Stone?" authored by Frank Morison.

It is quite possible that your knowledge regarding Mythology and/or Mystery religions is broader than mine. Still, I'm not completely in the dark; resurrection accounts within Mythology and Mystery religions are figurative or spiritual, which apply to fictional characters. The Gospels claim the "bodily" resurrection of a historical figure, whom the Apostles knew personally. In my view, it all boils down to is this: If a bodily resurrection had not occurred, it is hard to fathom the origin of the Christian faith.

I'll find the book and see what it's primary arguments are. If it seems worthwhile, I'll check into it and read it. No one's ever verified Jesus' tomb, however, though many have claimed to have found it but failed to produce evidence....so hopefully it doesn't deal with that issue, as the title seems to suggest, because verifiable evidence is completely missing and all that remains is vague speculation.

And lumping every single other resurrection myth into "spiritual" rather than bodily is simply false. We even see similar means of bodily ressurrection, as crucifixtion on a tree is used more than once. Some go even further. Odin's mortal sojourn to Earth, for example, actually involves him being wounded by a spear as well beore being nailed to a tree. He then becomes "one" with his divine self in the heavens upon the death of his mortal avatar. As before, this predates Jesus by several centuries.

Originally posted by ushomefree
I believe that "something" produces something, whereas you believe "nothing" produces something. Where do you suppose "biological" information derived from?

Which still begs the infinite regress question. Something created something, but what created the first something? It's a logical fallacy to make a complex creator with no prior cause.

But even if I grant you the creation point (I'm not) there's still no evidence of any supernatural influence on the universe....so you have a Creator who did nothing but create, and can't possibly be the Christian God who performs miracles, listen to prayers, answers them, influences evolution, etc.

And like I said, energy/matter is created all the time at the quantum level from nothing. It's a proven phenomenon, and the likliest origin of the universe....though still only 1 of various plausible explanations for our universe's existence that doesn't require an infinitely complex divine being.

Originally posted by ushomefree
I have no idea what you are referring to. What do you mean?

The following sentence was added to my comments:
Mystery religions began reflecting Christianity 100 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
...which implies that I am admitting that they came well after Christianity, which they did not. Most occurred in the same period, shortly before or after Christianity's inception. Mithraism was actually Christianity's rival in its earliest days, and they borrow stories and motifs from one another.

No one else could have added it. It's your post.

Originally posted by Digimark007
Which still begs the infinite regress question. Something created something, but what created the first something? It's a logical fallacy to make a complex creator with no prior cause.

Something must have been eternal; otherwise, you run into an absurdity. To be put into mathematical terms, you end of with a repeating number. The Bible states that God is transcendent of His created order. If this is in fact true, God--God Himself--would not require a Creator; God is not subjected to the laws of physics He created (as you and I).

Originally posted by Digimark007
But even if I grant you the creation point (I'm not) there's still no evidence of any supernatural influence on the universe....so you have a Creator who did nothing but create, and can't possibly be the Christian God who performs miracles, listen to prayers, answers them, influences evolution, etc.

So what? That is a different issue. On thing at a time please.

Originally posted by Digimark007
And like I said, energy/matter is created all the time at the quantum level from nothing. It's a proven phenomenon, and the likliest origin of the universe....though still only 1 of various plausible explanations for our universe's existence that doesn't require an infinitely complex divine being.

Peanut Butter and Jelly sandwiches do not make themselves, but you think the universe has this potential. Where is your logic?

Originally posted by DigiMark007
The following sentence was added to my comments:

Mystery religions began reflecting Christianity 100 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

...which implies that I am admitting that they came well after Christianity, which they did not. Most occurred in the same period, shortly before or after Christianity's inception. Mithraism was actually Christianity's rival in its earliest days, and they borrow stories and motifs from one another.

No one else could have added it. It's your post.

Fair enough; it must have been an accident. I apologize.