U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-28-2013, 04:11 AM
 
376 posts, read 324,327 times
Reputation: 99

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
And that's the FUNDAMENTAL difference between Christians and fact-finders. Christians OTHER than fundamentalists, view the Bible about faith--and to Christians truth is ONLY in faith.
I think I have to partly disagree with that. Sure it is about faith. But historical facts are facts too. When the Bible write about Egypt that should be accepted as a fact. Not that the Jews possible where in Norway or France. Same with all the dating stuff. It should be correct but what exactly is correct? Many secular events are dated with things that often aren't without dispute. Scholarship advances but doctrines, including atheism, won't let go of the dates they build their faith on.
Some use dates to prove Jesus is a hoax. So demand the dates to remain the same because that means crucifixion no longer could have been on Wednesday, Thursday or Friday.

So I believe in wrong doctrines, scribal errors and flaws in secular dating. That's the perfect mix to prove about every doctrine right. But my belief is that with the correct data aligns perfectly. I've done a lot of work on this sorta stuff and many dates seem to fit with a day accuracy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-28-2013, 05:17 AM
 
5,160 posts, read 2,537,067 times
Reputation: 385
Quote:
Originally Posted by ancient warrior View Post
Since Christmas is approaching, we will be hearing the nativity accounts in Matthew's and Luke's which do not appear elsewhere.
But some questions arise immediately. Is this an historical event or only a story?
Matthew 2 claims that Jesus was born during the life time of King Herod who died about 4 B.C.
Luke 2 claims that Jesus was born during the census of Judea conducted by the Roman governor of Syria, Quirinius (when Herod's son and inheritor Archelaus was exiled) in 6 AD (see Josephus, Antiquities).
Because there is a ten year difference, at least one of these accounts isn't historical.
Which is it? How can we tell?
Please note Luke refers to the ' first ' poll registration.- Luke 2 v 2
No one back then ever challenged Luke's account even early critics such as Celsus.

A first registration implies there was also a later registration. Josephus makes reference to a duel rulership in Syria. That would indicate two persons ruling simultaneously Saturninus and Volumnius which makes it possible that Quirinius served simultaneously either with Saturninus as Volumnius had done or with Varus prior to Herod's death. - Jewish Antiquities XVI, 277, 280 [ix,1] XVI, 344 [ x,8 ]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2013, 07:24 AM
 
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 6,097,410 times
Reputation: 4527
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteWings View Post
I think I have to partly disagree with that. Sure it is about faith. But historical facts are facts too. When the Bible write about Egypt that should be accepted as a fact. Not that the Jews possible where in Norway or France. Same with all the dating stuff. It should be correct but what exactly is correct? Many secular events are dated with things that often aren't without dispute. Scholarship advances but doctrines, including atheism, won't let go of the dates they build their faith on.
Some use dates to prove Jesus is a hoax. So demand the dates to remain the same because that means crucifixion no longer could have been on Wednesday, Thursday or Friday.

So I believe in wrong doctrines, scribal errors and flaws in secular dating. That's the perfect mix to prove about every doctrine right. But my belief is that with the correct data aligns perfectly. I've done a lot of work on this sorta stuff and many dates seem to fit with a day accuracy.
There is no extra biblical evidence a large amount of Jewish people being slaves in Egypt, nor is there any archaeological evidence of a million plus people when camp in the Sinai for 40 years or for any number of years for that matter.

The facts just do not line up with the stories.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2013, 04:49 PM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 3,049,736 times
Reputation: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew 4:4 View Post
>>Please note Luke refers to the ' first ' poll registration.- Luke 2 v 2
No one back then ever challenged Luke's account even early critics such as Celsus.<<

>>A first registration implies there was also a later registration. Josephus makes reference to a duel rulership in Syria. That would indicate two persons ruling simultaneously Saturninus and Volumnius which makes it possible that Quirinius served simultaneously either with Saturninus as Volumnius had done or with Varus prior to Herod's death. - Jewish Antiquities XVI, 277, 280 [ix,1] XVI, 344 [ x,8 ]
RESPONSE:

Nope. Quirinus arrived in 6 AD to become governor of Syria to which Judea had been added after the exile of Archelaus. Your Saturnius and Volumnius are the same man who governed just before Quirinus became governor.

Note:

Roman Governors of Syria:

BC – 4 AD Gaius Julius Caesar Vipsanianus

4 – 5 Lucius Volusius Saturninus

6 – 12 Publius Sulpicius Quirinius

12 – 17 Quintus Caecilius Metellus Creticus Silanus

17 – 19 Gnaeus Calpurnius Piso

19 – 21 Gnaeus Sentius Saturninus

22 – 32 Lucius Aelius Lamia



Following the death of King Herod in 4 BC, his son Archelaus inherited Judea. He proved to be an incompetent ruler as was exiled by the Romans ten years later in 6 AD and Judea was placed under direct Roman control. Replacing Volusius Saturninus, Quirinius was appointed the governor of both and immediately conducted a census to determine the holdings of Archelaus in the former Judea and determine the tax base.

Josephus Antiquities 17:355

“Now the territory subject to Archelaus was added to Syria and Quirinius, a man of consular rank, was sent by Caesar to take a census of the property in Syria and sell the estate of Archelaus.”
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2013, 04:53 PM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 3,049,736 times
Reputation: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteWings View Post
I think I have to partly disagree with that. Sure it is about faith. But historical facts are facts too. When the Bible write about Egypt that should be accepted as a fact. Not that the Jews possible where in Norway or France. Same with all the dating stuff. It should be correct but what exactly is correct? Many secular events are dated with things that often aren't without dispute. Scholarship advances but doctrines, including atheism, won't let go of the dates they build their faith on.
Some use dates to prove Jesus is a hoax. So demand the dates to remain the same because that means crucifixion no longer could have been on Wednesday, Thursday or Friday.

So I believe in wrong doctrines, scribal errors and flaws in secular dating. That's the perfect mix to prove about every doctrine right. But my belief is that with the correct data aligns perfectly. I've done a lot of work on this sorta stuff and many dates seem to fit with a day accuracy.
RESPONSE:

I "believe in" the many errors in scripture, because these can be readily documented.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2013, 05:14 PM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 3,049,736 times
Reputation: 258
Matthew 2 "....he inquired of them where the Messiah* was to be born. They told him, ‘In Bethlehem of Judea; for so it has been written by the prophet:
“And you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for from you shall come a ruler
who is to shepherd* my people Israel.” ’

There is no such passage in the Old Testament.

What is being referred to is Micah 5:

But you, O Bethlehem of Ephrathah,
who are one of the little clans of Judah,
from you shall come forth for me
one who is to rule in Israel,
whose origin is from of old,
from ancient days.

Bethlehem of Ephrathah is a clan or a small tribe, not a place in the land of Judea.

There are actually two Bethlehems mentioned in the bible, a large one in Judea near Jerusalem and a smaller one in Galilee.

"It makes much more sense that Mary rode on a donkey, while she was at the end of the pregnancy, from Nazareth to Bethlehem of Galilee which is only 7 kilometers rather then the other Bethlehem which is 150 kilometers," Oshri says."

"He adds there is evidence the other Bethlehem in the West Bank, or what Israelis call Judea, was not even inhabited in the first century"

Dig Finds Evidence Of Another Bethlehem : NPR

However, the Bethlehem in Galilee would not have been subject to Quirinius' census of Judea in 6 AD because Quirinus ruled only Syria and Judea.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2013, 06:54 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
9,303 posts, read 5,503,380 times
Reputation: 4052
Quote:
Originally Posted by ancient warrior View Post
Matthew 2 "....he inquired of them where the Messiah* was to be born. They told him, ‘In Bethlehem of Judea; for so it has been written by the prophet:
“And you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for from you shall come a ruler
who is to shepherd* my people Israel.” ’

There is no such passage in the Old Testament.

What is being referred to is Micah 5:

But you, O Bethlehem of Ephrathah,
who are one of the little clans of Judah,
from you shall come forth for me
one who is to rule in Israel,
whose origin is from of old,
from ancient days.

Bethlehem of Ephrathah is a clan or a small tribe, not a place in the land of Judea.

There are actually two Bethlehems mentioned in the bible, a large one in Judea near Jerusalem and a smaller one in Galilee.

"It makes much more sense that Mary rode on a donkey, while she was at the end of the pregnancy, from Nazareth to Bethlehem of Galilee which is only 7 kilometers rather then the other Bethlehem which is 150 kilometers," Oshri says."

"He adds there is evidence the other Bethlehem in the West Bank, or what Israelis call Judea, was not even inhabited in the first century"

Dig Finds Evidence Of Another Bethlehem : NPR

However, the Bethlehem in Galilee would not have been subject to Quirinius' census of Judea in 6 AD because Quirinus ruled only Syria and Judea.
I agree with the historical PROBABILITIES and the assessment of OT prophecy that are proposed in this post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2013, 07:37 AM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 3,049,736 times
Reputation: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
I agree with the historical PROBABILITIES and the assessment of OT prophecy that are proposed in this post.
RESPONSE:

I hope you agree with the discrepancy between Matthew's quotation of Micah and the actual OT prophecy itself.

Matthew's reference to prophecies are just about completely flawed. He claims prophecies that do not exist ("He shall be called a Nazorene"), misquotes others ( The messiah will be born in Bethelhem of Judea), and misapplies a few, ( Raphael weeping for her children).

If you like, I can provide a number of examples.

And later interpolations of his gospels to give a scriptural basis to some religious doctrines are significant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2013, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Denver, CO
9,303 posts, read 5,503,380 times
Reputation: 4052
Quote:
Originally Posted by ancient warrior View Post
RESPONSE:

I hope you agree with the discrepancy between Matthew's quotation of Micah and the actual OT prophecy itself.

Matthew's reference to prophecies are just about completely flawed. He claims prophecies that do not exist (&quot;He shall be called a Nazorene&quot, misquotes others ( The messiah will be born in Bethelhem of Judea), and misapplies a few, ( Raphael weeping for her children).

If you like, I can provide a number of examples.

And later interpolations of his gospels to give a scriptural basis to some religious doctrines are significant.
With regard to Jesus being a Nazarene this is not a direct quotation from the Old Testament but is more likely to be an example to the 1st Century Jewish practice of seeking allegorical meaning in Old Testament verses. The problem however is that it is a word play which only works in Hebrew (or Aramaic), which indicates that it was current among the first Christians before Matthew wrote his Gospel in Greek. If the modern Israeli spelling of Nazareth is correct (there is no archeological evidence from before the New Testament to verify this) then the use of the Hebrew letter tsade, “Natsareth”, suggests an Old Testament root with consonants N-TS-R, in which case Matthew’s reference is probably Isaiah 11:1 None of the &quot;facts&quot; make any difference regarding the attempt of early Christians to give meaning to what they had experienced. The failure of modern theology is in the attempt to argue rationally what is experienced spiritually. The modern theology movement went astray when it fell into the trap of rationalists during the Age of Enlightenment and tried to &quot;prove&quot; God using the rationalist's playing field. I accept many rationalist views about history and the Bible, but my personal experience (like the &quot;bewitched&quot; Paul) simply overrules their conclusion--that religion is false (considering from the very earliest human beings we find religious significance in the way they buried their dead) and that it has no meaning for us today. Keep seeking, Ancient, you may yet find.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2013, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Oregon
3,066 posts, read 3,049,736 times
Reputation: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
The problem however is that it is a word play which only works in Hebrew (or Aramaic), which indicates that it was current among the first Christians before Matthew wrote his Gospel in Greek. If the modern Israeli spelling of Nazareth is correct (there is no archeological evidence from before the New Testament to verify this) then the use of the Hebrew letter tsade, “Natsareth”, suggests an Old Testament root with consonants N-TS-R, in which case Matthew’s reference is probably Isaiah 11:1 None of the &quot;facts&quot; make any difference regarding the attempt of early Christians to give meaning to what they had experienced. The failure of modern theology is in the attempt to argue rationally what is experienced spiritually. The modern theology movement went astray when it fell into the trap of rationalists during the Age of Enlightenment and tried to &quot;prove&quot; God using the rationalist's playing field. I accept many rationalist views about history and the Bible, but my personal experience (like the &quot;bewitched&quot; Paul) simply overrules their conclusion--that religion is false (considering from the very earliest human beings we find religious significance in the way they buried their dead) and that it has no meaning for us today. Keep seeking, Ancient, you may yet find.
RESPONSE:

>>With regard to Jesus being a Nazarene this is not a direct quotation from the Old Testament but is more likely to be an example to the 1st Century Jewish practice of seeking allegorical meaning in Old Testament verses.<<

It is always interesting when apologists try to avoid admitting that there are errors in scripture. In this case there is no prophecy or even any mention of Nazareth in the Old Testament.

But it is possible that Matthew confused the term "Nazirite " (a religious practice) with Nazarere when he made up his "prophecy."

>>The modern theology movement went astray when it fell into the trap of rationalists during the Age of Enlightenment<<

Yes. As people become more rational, the acceptance of folklore and just plain yarns decreases. I think that is a rather good thing, don't you?

Last edited by ancient warrior; 10-29-2013 at 11:50 AM.. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top