http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPF-jXwZXZs

If I on the other hand have no faith of any sort in Zeus, I will choose to believe that urinating in my gas tank is a bad idea. I realize my ‘illustration’ may sound absurd to some. But clearly it’s less absurd that the child (adult) sacrifice required of Abraham by asking him to present his son, Isaac.

And if a god can predict the future he can certainly change my urine into gasoline. So I guess you are right without ‘hard evidence’ I am not going to believe in Zeus, or Allah or any other god. Doing so requires faith. Not the faith described in Hebrews chapter 11’s definition, but faith in the commonly accepted religious form.

“History has helped me to understand that for thousands of years humans have tried every possible way to govern themselves and have ultimately failed.” This is true I agree.

“The Bible explains that real happiness comes only from knowing the truth about God”
This is true, it certainly does claim that. But just because humans have been unable to do something and a book suggests it has all the answers, this does not make the book right.

For instance you present fact ‘A’. ‘No Government if perfect’. Then you present ‘B’ ‘the Bibles solution to happiness’. Having a perfect government and happiness are really not related. Granted if you government is horrible it might affect your happiness. But there have been and will continue to be many happy people under imperfect governments.

For example the US Government is very good. It’s also far from perfect. That said I am a very, very happy humanist living under this government. I do not believe in God yet I am far happier than when I did. So the Bibles claim that happiness only comes from knowing/serving God is a lie. Yes this is a bold statement. I state it not in an effort to affront those millions who hold it dear; I state it in defense of truth.

If you are happy and follow the Bible that’s great, I have no problem with that. But claiming that everyone needs your book to be happy is simply not true.

I guess what I am ‘sad’ about is that I was hoping for a scholarly discussion about the defense of one author Isaiah and then support for the opposing views. I did not want to digress into who is right and wrong. Just a friendly presentation of scholarly works presenting a viewpoint. Then we can all take home something and hold whatever views we want.

Dan, it would seem that you don’t want to do this since you feel that I am inconvincible. So therefore presenting support and evidence for a view is a waste since you don’t think you can convert me to your way of thinking.

So all that said I am going to diverge for a minute into what will probably be my final bit of personal thought sharing.

Dan I have entered into this discussion for three reasons.

First of all I think you’re are a really great person and I enjoying visiting with you. Although I can’t say I enjoy this back and forth discussion that digresses into who’s right and who’s wrong. That is a pointless waste of time, I think you’ll agree.

Two, Jerry also is a great guy and I didn’t want him to get sucked into the JW mindset.

Three, having been in much the same position as you I know that nothing is likely to change your mind. However in my own personal experience learning that you don’t have all the answers and that your ‘book’ has holes in it is a good start towards thinking for yourself.

So I was hoping that you if you hadn’t already, you would start to see some of the huge issues with the JWs and some of the smaller issues with the Bible. That way if you ever get to see that dark side of the organization you might look back on these discussions and it would motivate you to do a bit of deep research both of the Bible and your religion.

Fourth it is not my goal at all to get you to give up the Bible or Christianity. Granted I personally think both the Bible and Christianity have the potential to cause great harm. But everything is relative. Automobiles also have the potential to cause great harm, as do horses and motorcycles. But I am not outside picketing people who drive or ride horses.

So although it may seem that I was trying to attack you faith. I merely wanted you to think for yourself. I would love to see you gain the happiness and freedom that is open to you. If you get married to a JW it’s going to be a lot tougher for you when you realize that you were raised in a cult. Now is the time to think deeply and do the research. Don’t let the humdrum of daily life prevent you from looking outside your worldview and your ‘secure zone’. There are plenty of good people out there; the world is not the entirely evil place Watchtower paints it to be. Yes there are bad people out there and bad things do happen. But you have one life, and that life is now. Don’t waste it away for nothing only to wake up one day wishing you have the last 30, 40 or 70 years back.

My door is always open and I am always willing to extend kindness to you no matter what path you life takes. -jp

“I will be disappointed if you cease discussion without presenting evidence.”

You imply I brought up no evidence. I did, and I will summarize and append to it a bit:

1. The Bible book of Isaiah named Cyrus as the one would carry out God’s will and restore the Jews to Jerusalem.

2. The prophet Isaiah lived during the 8th century B.C.E., two hundred years before Cyrus would arrive to liberate the Jews, and before the Jews even went into captivity to the Babylonians.

3. Jesus and some NT authors referred to later writings in Isaiah as though they were written by the prophet, indicating that Jews at the time were not of the impression that the book was actually a composite by multiple writers living hundreds of years apart.

4. Had Isaiah been appended to at a much later time with writings about the future captivity and liberation of the Jews, when these were in fact past events, this would have been clearly understood as fraudulent by contemporary Jews.

5. The writings of Herodotus provide details which corroborate the Biblical account, and the prophecy in Isaiah, about the nature of the fall of Babylon. This doesn’t really affect the matter of the timing of the prophecy’s writing, so it’s more just an ancillary point which adds credibility to the Bible’s presentation of how it all went down.

I stated “Given that the oldest extant manuscripts, the Dead Sea Scrolls, are dated to several hundred years after the fall of Babylon, I suppose there’s no hard, indisputable evidence for the prophetic veracity of the Cyrus prophecy.”

Since such indisputable evidence is apparently the only thing you would consider as relevant, and I already stated I don’t have it to present, I don’t see our conversation moving forward on this topic.

The ‘jealousy trial’ you mention in Numbers may bear some similarity to the trials by ordeal common to so-called Christian religions in the Dark Ages (I’m thinking of Monty Python … “We found a witch! Can we burn her? … Does she float?”) and many other tribal religions throughout history, even today. However, a key difference is that the woman was only required to drink water with a little dust in it, something which certainly would not have harmed her. In order for the trial to have had any meaning, the effect would have had to come from a supernatural source. If the nation was in fact chosen by God, as the scriptures claim, and this was expressed in supernatural ways through the priests and appointed leaders and judges (Moses, Joshua, Jepthah, Gideon, etc.), then why should I think this matter would be an example of superstitious belief in “crazy magic of the priest?” To me it is nothing more than a law which had the potential to provide evidence of God’s involvement in judging, thus reinforcing that nothing could be hidden from their Creator, thereby resulting in a cleaner, more honest people. Of course I wouldn’t expect you or any non-believer to arrive at the same conclusion; I’m just explaining how our different vantage points influence our perceptions.

You said “the dark ages are a perfect example of what sort of world we would have if everyone was a Christian.”

That’s interesting, because hundreds of millions of people who claim to be Christian today completely reject the notion that ‘ignorance is from God and reason is from Satan.’ You certainly don’t find that idea in the words of Jesus or anywhere else in the Bible. So were the dark ages really the result of Christianity? To the contrary, if everyone were a Christian, in the sense that they followed the teachings of Jesus, there were be no war, and kindness, compassion, forgiveness, mercy, and love would be the dominant qualities of human society. The major churches which formed alliances with governments of the day and used propaganda, ignorance, fear, and force to stamp out resistance and maintain power were anything but Christian.

I certainly do agree with you that studying history is valuable, and it can help us to avoid mistakes, but as long as you’re going to make blanket statements about what we should learn from it, I hope you don’t mind if I do the same. ^^

History has helped me to understand that for thousands of years humans have tried every possible way to govern themselves and have ultimately failed. They cannot solve mankind’s real problems. Thousands of different religions have failed to bring peace or any lasting solutions, and have given people hope or fear of the future, but with no substance, and they have often been the source of hate and suffering. The Bible explains that real happiness comes only from knowing the truth about God and worshiping him, and that all human wisdom which fails to acknowledge our maker is foolishness. I feel that an examination of history bears eloquent witness to these truths. I understand that you feel otherwise, and that’s OK.

The dark ages are a perfect example of what sort of world we would have if everyone was a Christian. Fortunately for us today, while the Christians were off at church believing that ignorance was from God and that reason was from Satan, the Muslims were saving the only remaining classical knowledge of the world.

It is important to remember that this ‘life is a vale of tears’ thing is simply not true. Thanks to the Renaissance we now have humanism. Something that is good, without the evil.

Fortunately the human race does not need Mithra, Osiris, Zeus, Apollo or YAWH to be happy. Nor do we need to worship anyone born of a virgin or offer blood sacrifices to gods.

I think the best thing to do is to study history. It may not always prevent bad things from happening, but it may at least help us avoid some mistakes. It will help us realize that true happiness does not come from worshiping a god or man. Quite to the contrary it will help us make wise use of our time on this earth finding true happiness in the priceless life we have.

You make this logical suggestion that to write something post event as a prophesy is a bit over the top, after all who would believe such a thing?

Although a reasonable and logical thought it does not hold total water. History shows us that just such a thing can happen both indirectly and directly.

First indirect. Back to the Greeks, did they really believe their myths really happened? Or where they just stories handed down. Perhaps no one living at the time misunderstood the writing. Perhaps they knew there was a prophesy and it seemed logical to them to add Cyrus name in. They may have not viewed the writing in the same light many Christians do today. That would be the indirect possibility. A possibility that played out with Greek myth.

Now on to the direct approach. Many Jehovah’s Witnesses today are told and even some that were around in 1975 actually believe that their leadership did not predict 1975 as the end of the world. Granted there is plenty to evidence to show they did predict such an event. There are people alive that were then and heard it, there is written, and recorded evidence that they did predict such. Still many believe something quite opposite to history/reality simply because they are currently told the said event never happened.

This is not something limited to JW’s or even religion. History is a story, often the story of the victor. People have been writing and re-writing history for years. I just learned in history class last week that Egyptians were changed from black to white people in history books around the 1300 to 1400’s because they were making slaves of Africans. They didn’t want the race they looked up to and the race they made slaves to be the same skin color.

So to suggest that history could not be re-written because the masses wouldn’t bear it, is sadly wrong. Again I am not saying that this is what happened.

You make a good point about the ‘Atheist’ mentality as you call it. Of course not having an answer does not give one logical reason to accept something since nothing better is available.

I may know that a spray can is a bad way to paint my Kegerator but that does not mean that I have to know what DuPont clear coat is the best. I may have to just accept I don’t know or ask someone who does. Unfortunately when it comes to unanswered questions in history there is no one to just ask.

That said all I am asking for are some secular reference works supporting Issiah’s prophesy. I am not trying to argue against it. I have not seen any evidence. That certainly does not mean none exists. I would like to see some strong evidence or references I can read and consider.

It’s not my goal to just go round and round with meaningless words.

I will try to do research as well. As of yet I have not done much on this particular subject.

You state “Therefore, all I can do is encourage objective and open-minded evaluation of the available evidence. If you are not convinced, that’s your choice”

Open minded consideration is very important. I am open to this. But so far you have presented no evidence to support your claim.

You make it sound as though you are presenting evidence and we (I) are just throwing it out without consideration.

But this is simply not the case. With creation you make a good point. I agree there could have been some intelligent design at work in the universe.

But back to Cyrus and the Bible. Intelligent design or not that has little to do with Cyrus and the Bible.

The existence of a being in outer space doesn’t magically make every book someone claims is inspired of God inspired of anything.

I can say that Bob is my God and all the evidence I need for Bob is creation. Bob wrote a book so clearly it is inspired of the creator, Bob.

Somehow we need something tying Bob to the actual creation, then we need something tying creation and Bob to ‘his’ book.

I am not ruling out that there could have been a prophesy. It’s just that no one makes accurate prophesies today. As of yet I have seen no evidence to a prophesy coming true that was so great it needed to be inspired of God.

So back to where we started. Where is the evidence? I have suggested a motive, and a means for the books alteration.

We don’t have the book in it’s original form. All we have are copies made centuries after Cyrus death correct?

So I will be disappointed if you cease discussion without presenting evidence. If you are correct it would seem that it would be worth the effort to present the evidence. If I or anyone else choose to dismiss it fine. That’s not your fault. But to assume ahead of time that we will dismiss it, and the use this as an excuse to avoid presenting any seems very weak indeed.

Heh. There are reams of scholarly debate over the authorship of Isaiah, and discussion generally revolves around whether there were one, two, or three authors. I’ve only just skimmed the surface via google (not just now — I’ve looked into this before as well). While there are secular arguments in favor of single authorship based on diachronic analysis (i.e., the use of language was consistent with a single dating for the whole book), the majority of critics still disagree with that conclusion, so I’m not going to try to convince you on that basis. Given that the oldest extant manuscripts, the Dead Sea Scrolls, are dated to several hundred years after the fall of Babylon, I suppose there’s no hard, indisputable evidence for the prophetic veracity of the Cyrus prophecy. One could choose to believe that, after the restoration of the Jews from Babylonish captivity to their homeland in Israel, some scribes decided to write a lengthy prophetic work (not limited to the Cyrus prophecy — much of the latter third of Isaiah was devoted to Israel’s ‘future’ restoration from captivity) and the Jewish people readily accepted this as God’s Word, despite the fact that, to anyone living at the time, it would clearly have been fraudulent. I guess that’s the logical secular interpretation, in lieu of hard and fast evidence that there was supernatural revelation.

And that, I suppose, is the crux of the matter. How you go about assessing the relative merit of various lines of evidence clearly depends on your starting point. It’s rather similar to a debate a theist might have with an atheist regarding the origin of life. The atheist asks “How does it help to posit some supernatural being to explain life? That just leaves you with another, even bigger quandary.” The theist says “Science has provided no plausible explanation for spontaneous origination of organized complexity. Rather, life has the appearance of intelligent design. Where’s your evidence that such a phenomenon can just happen?” As a theist, my observations regarding the world I live in, such as human intelligence, language, and love, lead me to conclude that there is likely a higher power. So, when I approach the topic of the origin of life, I don’t take the existence of God off the table. The naturalist, however, imposes the scientific method upon the interpretation of all evidence, which by design doesn’t allow for God to even enter the picture. Rather than genuinely considering whether the evidence supports random happenstance as a better explanation than an intelligent designer, the atheist insists “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” and eliminates God from the start, as though their own lack of explanation is not implicitly making a similarly extraordinary claim.

My point with this lengthy diversion is simply that consideration of the evidence clearly depends on your starting frame of reference. If you insist from square one that there is no God, and that any line of reasoning which might possibly support supernatural inspiration of scripture must be proven beyond any conceivable doubt, then it’s very likely you will remain unconvinced, because there will always be something which you can doubt. I could argue that Isaiah 53, describing the suffering of God’s Servant, is undeniably a Messianic prophecy (in this case, dating is not the issue, because all of Isaiah was dated prior to Jesus), but you could conclude that the authors of the Gospel totally altered the story of Jesus’ persecution and death to appear to fulfill this prophecy (and dozens of others), so as to provide credibility to their message. I could point out how Isaiah foretold the eventual desolation of Babylon, saying that it would become uninhabited indefinitely, and you could argue that there were other cities and nations for which eternal ruination was foretold, and there are people living in those places today. I’d say that the names of the places and the races of people living in those locations are different, and thus the prophecies were actually fulfilled, and you’d say I was just equivocating, that if it were actually God’s word, we should be able to expect the same results from similar wording. And the debate could continue like this, with neither side being convinced of anything.

Therefore, all I can do is encourage objective and open-minded evaluation of the available evidence. If you are not convinced, that’s your choice. If I am convinced, perhaps it makes me foolish. I don’t believe it does, because I’ve found that the pieces all fit together in an astounding manner. When I’ve studied the Bible and see how the underlying themes span hundreds of years and numerous writers, how it all forms a coherent whole, and how this in turn provides surprising insight into human activity both in the past and today, and how it improves people’s lives with invaluable wisdom that transcends short-sighted human thinking, I’ve become convinced that it makes sense to interpret prophecy as something that strengthens faith in God’s promises for the future, rather than requiring overwhelming evidence to substantiate every claim. Perhaps it’s nothing more than a house of cards, entirely contrived like an elaborate conspiracy theory, but you’d have to provide some pretty convincing evidence to convince me of that. I would find that to be an extraordinary claim.

Sorry for all the rambling, but I just feel like this is heading into the same unproductive type of debate that I’ve experienced so many times before, and I don’t have time or interest for that.

This is an interesting perspective. It would seem that the burden of proof would always lie with the one making the claim. Granted this is a feature of western society. I realize in other countries it is viewed differently.

Without proof that Isaiah was not ‘tweaked’ later it would seem quite reasonable to conclude that it was not a detailed prophesy.

The only was to substantiate a prophecy is with supporting evidence that it was made prior to the event. I think the question under consideration here is: Was Cyrus name added later? The rest of the prediction is no great thing. I have predicted many things in advance with common sense. I am sure we all have.

So to answer what ‘proof’ do I have that Cyrus name was added later. The absence of any proof to show otherwise is a start. (unless you have something)

In addition if one reads the rest of scripture it clearly has no great superhuman insight. So I see no reason to just assume it was a prophesy. It would be most logical to think that Isaiah would have been altered later when one considers the great popularity of Cyrus. He was one of the most respected and popular rulers in all history.

Without proof it’s just a claim. Granted if you want to believe such a wild claim without supporting evidence that’s your choice. I don’t have a problem with that. But personally I don’t believe wild over the top claims without proof.

Many of the events in Greek Myth actually happened to a degree. That is they a core truth. For instance the Iliad, and the Odyssey report on the Trojan war, an actual event. But the Greeks liked to ’spice’ it up and add some fun stuff.

Isaiah is no different. The events happened as we know but why would he have not added the whole ‘cyrus’ bit later to make it more interesting. Perhaps a scribe just thought since we now know this guys name let’s just add it.