Hay guys

[Ritchie1127]

Hello all my names Ritchie and Ive got a question and would like to get some help.
I was watching the "The atheist experience" on youtube which is apparently popular. One episode in particular, if anyone could help me it would be great.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZo8YUN6MC4


The main argument is the dating in Isaiah and kings ... Nebuchadnezzar vs Nebuchadrezzer which is apparently showing a greek ediitng.
If anyone could help me find some info on the argument in general that would be great.

The argument mainly lasts 21 minutes not 58.

[RBerman]

I'm not going to watch a YouTube video whose goal is to make people disbelieve the Bible. Life is too short, and there are too many such videos out there. Regarding the issue you raise, I can tell you that there's nothing shocking about the idea that the original Bible manuscripts underwent minor spelling corruptions during their many copyings. More generally, are you a member of a church whose leaders are qualified to answer your questions? If so, they should be your first stop, not strangers on the internet. Not that we don't want you here; you are certainly welcome to post and discuss things like this. But the internet is no substitute for local church fellowship.

[Ritchie1127]

Well im watching these videos for truth. I know there goal is to disprove the Bible if they give evidence to the Bible being wrong, especially in the case of prophecy being unfullfileld and made after the fact, then its my duty find out. There is no "local church" that I can find that would even begin to answer any of my questions.I visit the tekon website alot and wanted to see if anyone could give me a quick answer. If thats not the case then I'll keep searching. I dont need the local church to show me what should already be made available to the public Like i said I came here for a "quick" answer.

also is there anyway to contact J.P. Holding?

[RBerman]

Well im watching these videos for truth. I know there goal is to disprove the Bible if they give evidence to the Bible being wrong, especially in the case of prophecy being unfullfileld and made after the fact, then its my duty find out. There is no "local church" that I can find that would even begin to answer any of my questions.I visit the tekon website alot and wanted to see if anyone could give me a quick answer. If thats not the case then I'll keep searching. I dont need the local church to show me what should already be made available to the public Like i said I came here for a "quick" answer.

Don't look to atheists to train you to be a better Christian, my friend. Look to the church. Did my quick answer help concerning "Nebuchadnezzar" vs "Nebuchadrezzer"?

[fm93]

Well im watching these videos for truth. I know there goal is to disprove the Bible if they give evidence to the Bible being wrong, especially in the case of prophecy being unfullfileld and made after the fact, then its my duty find out.

I applaud this sentiment.

There is no "local church" that I can find that would even begin to answer any of my questions.

Yeah, today's churches do often seem unequipped to handle such issues. As part of a personal curiosity, I looked at the websites of a bunch of churches in my area and found that most of them don't seem to have any sort of apologetics programs (or at least links to apologetics websites).

I visit the tekon website alot and wanted to see if anyone could give me a quick answer. If thats not the case then I'll keep searching. I dont need the local church to show me what should already be made available to the public Like i said I came here for a "quick" answer.

Sorry, but I really don't have the time or patience to watch a twenty-minute video of Matt Dillahunty. (I don't even have the patience to watch a two-minute video of him. But seriously, I'm much more comfortable reading an essay, rather than watching a lengthy video.) However, I'm familiar enough with common skeptical objections that I can hazard a guess as to what the arguments were (although I have no clue what you mean by "the dating of Kings"). You say you frequently visit Tektonics, so I'll link you to the relevant articles. If I've identified the wrong argument, please elaborate upon the actual argument. (Come to think of it, this site's moderators generally disapprove of just posting a link--you're technically supposed to summarize what it's about as well/)

Re: Isaiah, I presume he was advancing the idea that the verse containing a reference to Cyrus was written after the fact. JPH has written a response here, basically arguing that the arguments for either side are inconclusive and can't really be proven either way. This, admittedly, isn't exactly the most satisfying response, but it's worth a look nonetheless, and it really does seem to be the most we can say at this point in time. But aside from that, I think that while it is possible that those verses were written much later than the first part of Isaiah (which were probably written ca. 700 BC), that doesn't necessarily mean that they constitute after-the-fact prophecies. Cyrus had a significant influence as a ruler even before he captured Babylon--it's not inconceivable that the prophecies were made in, say, the 540s BC, before he conquered Babylon and while he was prominent enough for Jews to have heard of his name.

Re: the spelling issue, JPH's response is here. There's a linguistic response and also the more intriguing one that the misspelling is a deliberate polemic against Nebuchadnezzar.

also is there anyway to contact J.P. Holding?

Yep. You can email him (he lists his address in the "Contact" section on the left side of each Tektonics article), send him a PM through this site, or ask him your questions in a thread in the Tektonics section. Since only JPH and moderators are allowed to start threads in the Tektonics section, you'll have to ask a moderator to move this thread over there or start a new thread and ask for it to be moved.

[Ritchie1127]

Sorry, but I really don't have the time or patience to watch a twenty-minute video of Matt Dillahunty.

Hahaha! you don't know how many times Ive been told the same thing with any atheist and I agree It just becomes a bore fest after awhile. Alas I believe my time would be spent better becoming more knowledgeable in the old and new testament prophecies.

please elaborate upon the actual argument.

it had something to do with
"Amel Marduk did not ascend to the throne until after 561 or 562 , so we know that portions of II kings had to be edited after that date ,,, they had to be." Its a pain listening to the persons voice

Re: the spelling issue, JPH's response is here. There's a linguistic response and also the more intriguing one that the misspelling is a deliberate polemic against Nebuchadnezzar.

Thank you very much! Yes, this helped alot. I found something similar to this as well. Im trying to understand what they mean by "this shows evidence of greek editing".

[37818]

Richie,

For a scholarly view, which is not one I hold, I recommend as a reference, the Harper Collins Oxford Study Bible (NRSV). These are experts in their field and far as I know are NOT atheists. The I would recommend a NIV Study Bible, which is more in line with what I believe as a Christian. And I personally use a KJV and NKJV. ASV, NASB as well.

I'm willing to look at ONE specific problem at a time. PM me the supposed dilemma.

[Ritchie1127]

Here are the main points


Point 1 - Issiah 39:5-7 . Person claims that its a product of later editing. Before Issiah 36-39 is supposed garbled history. Where the events happened backwards in the bible. Claims getting history wrong which disproved divine authorship. Later editing 560 BCE
Point 2- Issiah copies 2nd kings. Issiah is written in poetic language and kings is written in prose. Issiah's and kings style is the same.
Point 3 - Evil-Marduk (Amel Marduk) didn't ascend to the throne till 561 or 562 therefore showing later editing.
Point 4 - Nebuchadnezzer vs Nebuchadrezzer.showing greek editing with the changing of a letter which is showing later editing as well.