David's prophecy

[VeganIncubus]

LoveLoud837

XxTheVeganVampirexX

Yeah, because David (if he was a real person) did not totally make s**t up after the alleged event and try to pass it off as him having predicted it.

Yeah, because King David (a real person) LIVED 1000 YEARS BEFORE CHRIST.

Did he? Or was he also made up and whomever made him up also made up the stuff he wrote later than either both of them were said to have lived?

[Rumblestiltskin]

LoveLoud837

XxTheVeganVampirexX

Yeah, because David (if he was a real person) did not totally make s**t up after the alleged event and try to pass it off as him having predicted it.

Yeah, because King David (a real person) LIVED 1000 YEARS BEFORE CHRIST.

Abraham Lincoln was also real...that doesn't mean Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is an accurate account of his life....

[SparkyKid3000]

Rumblestiltskin

LoveLoud837

XxTheVeganVampirexX

Yeah, because David (if he was a real person) did not totally make s**t up after the alleged event and try to pass it off as him having predicted it.

Yeah, because King David (a real person) LIVED 1000 YEARS BEFORE CHRIST.

Abraham Lincoln was also real...that doesn't mean Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is an accurate account of his life....

It's not?! eek Everything I know is a lie! dramallama

[Sugarbeary]

XxTheVeganVampirexX

LoveLoud837

XxTheVeganVampirexX

Yeah, because David (if he was a real person) did not totally make s**t up after the alleged event and try to pass it off as him having predicted it.

Yeah, because King David (a real person) LIVED 1000 YEARS BEFORE CHRIST.

Did he? Or was he also made up and whomever made him up also made up the stuff he wrote later than either both of them were said to have lived?

evidence for King David.

[Sugarbeary]

Rumblestiltskin

LoveLoud837

XxTheVeganVampirexX

Yeah, because David (if he was a real person) did not totally make s**t up after the alleged event and try to pass it off as him having predicted it.

Yeah, because King David (a real person) LIVED 1000 YEARS BEFORE CHRIST.

Abraham Lincoln was also real...that doesn't mean Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is an accurate account of his life....

David is the one that WROTE THE PSALM rofl rofl rofl

[Rumblestiltskin]

LoveLoud837

XxTheVeganVampirexX

LoveLoud837

XxTheVeganVampirexX

Yeah, because David (if he was a real person) did not totally make s**t up after the alleged event and try to pass it off as him having predicted it.

Yeah, because King David (a real person) LIVED 1000 YEARS BEFORE CHRIST.

Did he? Or was he also made up and whomever made him up also made up the stuff he wrote later than either both of them were said to have lived?

evidence for King David.

...I'm not saying David didn't exist. I'm saying that not all the claims about him are necessarily true. How do you not understand that...

Edit: Whoops...sorry, quoted the wrong one...

[Rumblestiltskin]

LoveLoud837

Rumblestiltskin

LoveLoud837

XxTheVeganVampirexX

Yeah, because David (if he was a real person) did not totally make s**t up after the alleged event and try to pass it off as him having predicted it.

Yeah, because King David (a real person) LIVED 1000 YEARS BEFORE CHRIST.

Abraham Lincoln was also real...that doesn't mean Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is an accurate account of his life....

David is the one that WROTE THE PSALM rofl rofl rofl

Which makes it even more invalid of a claim. It'd be like me writing an autobiography of my life, claiming that I can fly and have mind powers...and that's even assuming that you're right in your assertion that David did write the psalm. And even if he didn't, it still does nothing to verify the claims.

[VeganIncubus]

LoveLoud837

evidence for King David.

Ah, yes, Biblical Archaeology. Unless it's inaccurate, and not proof that David was a real person.

Quote:

There are a few possible extra-biblical sources, such as the Tel Dan Stele. This Aramean victory stele contains the phrase ביתדוד this translates to "House of the beloved", "House of the uncle" or "House of David". [3] As the stele dexcribes a victory over Israel and an unspecified allied kingdom it isn't unreasonable to suppose they refer to Judah and its David. However, the "city of David" section of Jerusalem lacks convincing evidence for a circa 1000 BCE city, though the ruins are difficult to date accurately. [4] Most scholars hold the position that the Histories (Nevi'im) describe real people, in a fictionalized account. Therefore, it's likely the King David existed, and he was, for Judah, the most powerful or important King, but since no one else mentions him, he's probably not a major player in the greater middle east region of the time. [5]

If he did exist, he's not the David that wrote that prophecy, or he just didn't figure into history at all...or they just picked a random dude named David and said: "Just say you're a king. K?"

[Sugarbeary]

Rumblestiltskin

LoveLoud837

Rumblestiltskin

LoveLoud837

XxTheVeganVampirexX

Yeah, because David (if he was a real person) did not totally make s**t up after the alleged event and try to pass it off as him having predicted it.

Yeah, because King David (a real person) LIVED 1000 YEARS BEFORE CHRIST.

Abraham Lincoln was also real...that doesn't mean Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is an accurate account of his life....

David is the one that WROTE THE PSALM rofl rofl rofl

Which makes it even more invalid of a claim. It'd be like me writing an autobiography of my life, claiming that I can fly and have mind powers...and that's even assuming that you're right in your assertion that David did write the psalm. And even if he didn't, it still does nothing to verify the claims.

HOW?!?

David, 1,000 years before Christ (rounded for significant figures of course) gave an account for the Messiah's death. The death that has been common knowledge all around the world, that you wouldn't cry foul over if Jerusalem wasn't destroyed a few years later by Nero because you need exact evidence. You can't predict with that much precision a person's death without divine knowledge.

[VeganIncubus]

LoveLoud837

David, 1,000 years before Christ (rounded for significant figures of course) gave an account for the Messiah's death. The death that has been common knowledge all around the world, that you wouldn't cry foul over if Jerusalem wasn't destroyed a few years later by Nero because you need exact evidence. You can't predict with that much precision a person's death without divine knowledge.

arrow The death that has been common knowledge? What if someone doesn't know about it?

arrow Where does it say that Nero destroyed Jerusalem?

arrow Or that alleged person's death was also made up, and the 'prediction' written after the fact to make it seem like they coincide.

[Rumblestiltskin]

LoveLoud837

HOW?!?

I'm fairly certain I've already explained this, and yet, I have a feeling I'm going to have to keep explaining it. There is no validity to the character of christ existing...and even if he did, it seems most of the stories about him are grossly exaggerated, if not plagiarized from other mythological figures. Also, it isn't specific enough to be a prophecy, which I'll get into when I refute your other ridiculous claims.

Quote:

David, 1,000 years before Christ (rounded for significant figures of course) gave an account for the Messiah's death.

Crucifixions were a common practice in that day and age. It has no more prophetic power than me claiming that someone is going to get shot tomorrow.

Quote:

The death that has been common knowledge all around the world,

Yes, christians have done a remarkable job at pushing their religion into every corner of the world...congrats...but that does NOTHING to validate the claim that it actually happened. At one point, it was common knowledge that the earth is flat...and look how that turned out. Popular opinion does not necessarily make it fact, sport...evidence does. Not to mention, you still have to prove that Jesus even existed in the first place.

Quote:

that you wouldn't cry foul over if Jerusalem wasn't destroyed a few years later by Nero because you need exact evidence.

Here's an idea...don't assume my position for me...cause you sound like an idiot when I then have to correct you and tell you that I never said anything about "exact evidence." And, as I've already explained, claims are not created equally. Claims that are relatively small do not need nearly as much evidence as large claims...and accounts of the supernatural go in the "******** GIGANTIC" category.

Quote:

You can't predict with that much precision a person's death without divine knowledge.

Except, it's not a prediction. First off, it is not specific enough to be a prediction. At best, you have a guy claiming that someone is going to die in a rather common way for the time period. Secondly, the bible is not evidence for the bible...it is the claim. You need to provide actual evidence to substantiate the claim.

[Nerdologist]

Rumblestiltskin

Quote:

David, 1,000 years before Christ (rounded for significant figures of course) gave an account for the Messiah's death.

Crucifixions were a common practice in that day and age. It has no more prophetic power than me claiming that someone is going to get shot tomorrow.

Crucifixion was introduced as a form of capital punishment in the 6th century BCE, it seems. However, the prophecy still wouldn't be very impressive if the writings attributed to David were actually written long after David's supposed lifetime. I'd have to research that a bit more.

Additionally, it's arguable that the original text read "like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet," not "they pierced my hands and my feet." But I don't know if there's any scholarly consensus on which interpretation is more appropriate. Here's a pretty good case for the lion interpretation.

[Sugarbeary]

Nerdologist

Rumblestiltskin

Quote:

David, 1,000 years before Christ (rounded for significant figures of course) gave an account for the Messiah's death.

Crucifixions were a common practice in that day and age. It has no more prophetic power than me claiming that someone is going to get shot tomorrow.

Crucifixion was introduced as a form of capital punishment in the 6th century BCE, it seems. However, the prophecy still wouldn't be very impressive if the writings attributed to David were actually written long after David's supposed lifetime. I'd have to research that a bit more.

Additionally, it's arguable that the original text read "like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet," not "they pierced my hands and my feet." But I don't know if there's any scholarly consensus on which interpretation is more appropriate.

And who is the 'roaring lion' in the bible?

[Nerdologist]

LoveLoud837

Nerdologist

Rumblestiltskin

Quote:

David, 1,000 years before Christ (rounded for significant figures of course) gave an account for the Messiah's death.

Crucifixions were a common practice in that day and age. It has no more prophetic power than me claiming that someone is going to get shot tomorrow.

Crucifixion was introduced as a form of capital punishment in the 6th century BCE, it seems. However, the prophecy still wouldn't be very impressive if the writings attributed to David were actually written long after David's supposed lifetime. I'd have to research that a bit more.

Additionally, it's arguable that the original text read "like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet," not "they pierced my hands and my feet." But I don't know if there's any scholarly consensus on which interpretation is more appropriate.

And who is the 'roaring lion' in the bible?

The devil/enemy.

[Nerdologist]

LoveLoud837

Nerdologist

Rumblestiltskin

Quote:

David, 1,000 years before Christ (rounded for significant figures of course) gave an account for the Messiah's death.

Crucifixions were a common practice in that day and age. It has no more prophetic power than me claiming that someone is going to get shot tomorrow.

Crucifixion was introduced as a form of capital punishment in the 6th century BCE, it seems. However, the prophecy still wouldn't be very impressive if the writings attributed to David were actually written long after David's supposed lifetime. I'd have to research that a bit more.

Additionally, it's arguable that the original text read "like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet," not "they pierced my hands and my feet." But I don't know if there's any scholarly consensus on which interpretation is more appropriate.

And who is the 'roaring lion' in the bible?

Your point?