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.
Also...if anybody here has directly conflicting evidence to what I've written here, PLEASE DO state it. If you have a link or bibliography (always better--a published book v. the internet) I would love to see it. I am very interested in this. I'm actually very sad about this in general and would love to see any contemporary evidence at all that Jesus was here at least. I don't even care any more about the miracles--it's a matter of faith and that's okay. But just something saying he was here at all.
Also...if anybody here has directly conflicting evidence to what I've written here, PLEASE DO state it. If you have a link or bibliography (always better--a published book v. the internet) I would love to see it. I am very interested in this. I'm actually very sad about this in general and would love to see any contemporary evidence at all that Jesus was here at least. I don't even care any more about the miracles--it's a matter of faith and that's okay. But just something saying he was here at all.
Well, I think I read somewhere else that you have a copy of Evidence That Demands a Verdict and apparently found a website or some other source to debunk most, if not all of it. I think I've also sent you the http://www.carm.org link.
Here's the thing....it was 2000 years ago. I know I've stated that when I was where you are, I looked and looked.....and what I found was...there's as much or more evidence for Jesus was there is against Him. Someone may say "No, I took apart all your evidence."
Well, you took it apart for you...not for me. When I look at everything I know, I use the same standard. I've never known an atheist that does the same. Agnostic...maybe....that's why they are agnostic....but not an atheist.
In other words, you argue with an atheist on evolution and they'll say "Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence" but if I try and use that in your prompt dismissal of biblical occurances, and you won't care for it too much.
So, as a believer, I reach a point where I say "Look, there's what I have. Not good enough? Not my problem. Was good enough for me. I'm not God and I know my responsibility to you. Love you, respect you, tell you, show you with my life, let you make your conclusions."
So, just because something isn't good enough to meet your standard, doesn't mean it's not good enough.<-----that's a period, right there.
Well, you took it apart for you...not for me. When I look at everything I know, I use the same standard. I've never known an atheist that does the same. Agnostic...maybe....that's why they are agnostic....but not an atheist.
In other words, you argue with an atheist on evolution and they'll say "Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence" but if I try and use that in your prompt dismissal of biblical occurances, and you won't care for it too much.
Well, I actually agree with this. As basically a non-believer it would be a whole lot more comfortable for me to *only* look for evidence that supports my own view. But that would only be comfortable. It would in no way guarantee the truth. It would be dishonest. I don't think I did see that link before. I'm going to click it right now. Thanks, Alpha.
"And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This census first took place while Quirinius was governing Syria. So all went to be registered."
Joseph also went up from Galilee out of the city of Nazareth in to Judea to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was with child."
Historically, during the time of Christ's birth, Quirinius was the governor or administrator of a major census organized to begin the process of collecting taxes for the roman government. Records indicate that there was a census in A.D. 6 but this census most likely refers to the one taken from the time of Varus through the time of Quirinius.
There were a lot of people who were part of that census taken during this period of time. Are any of their names to be found anywhere in records? None that we have found yet historically this census was taken. Jump forward to the 1800 - 1900's. Even with advanced record taking (compared to Jesus's time) many people who came from Europe were never listed as potential residents. I know of some from my family who were never recorded. Due to the war in Europe, my grandparents names and records of their existence were obliterated during WWI yet my mom is proof that they existed. There are children today who are born in backwoods areas who are non-existent because they are born at home and remain so even until death.
Two thousand years has a way of covering up many documents and records that have yet to be discovered. Archeology is a very time consuming effort and much of past civilizations still lie buried under centuries of dust, dirt, war, development, etc. So to say that because we do not have any documented proof of Jesus does not necessarily suggest that He never existed. We would have to say then that most of the people in ancient history never existed in we want to take that route.
There are children today who are born in backwoods areas who are non-existent because they are born at home and remain so even until death.
I have to clarify this statement by saying that since they are born at home, many children are never reported to the county enabling them to receive birth records and some families never report accurately for census recording either.
"And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This census first took place while Quirinius was governing Syria. So all went to be registered."
Joseph also went up from Galilee out of the city of Nazareth in to Judea to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was with child."
I don't think it's the fact that you don't see Jesus' name that's recorded here, but rather that, in fact, Caesar Augustus didn't decree even the census you're referring to (the governor himself did)...which, btw, gives no indication that anyone must travel to the place of his or her birth, ancestors or anything else. Like any other census of the time, people were to stay put in order to be accurately counted.
Nobody "went" to be registered at a census.
Also, Quirinius didn't become governor until A.D. 6.
Which is even leaving aside that while this one NT book states Quirinius as the governor at the time of Jesus' book, read the other books to discover Herod reigned at the time of Jesus' birth. But Herod was dead ten years before Quirinius was governor.
According to Jewish customs originated in the OT, a census was to be taken at the ancestral home of the people being counted. This is why Joseph had to go to Bethlehem for the census to be taken.
Which is even leaving aside that while this one NT book states Quirinius as the governor at the time of Jesus' book, read the other books to discover Herod reigned at the time of Jesus' birth. But Herod was dead ten years before Quirinius was governor.
Who took the census is not the important issue but that the census was taken and is historically recorded.
And again I refer to the situation with my grandparents and people today to explain discrepancies.
According to Jewish customs originated in the OT, a census was to be taken at the ancestral home of the people being counted.
How does Jewish custom from the OT verify that Romans did things in the same way several thousand years later? Did the Romans also lay off pork and only wear clothing cut from one cloth? Did the Romans circumcise? We do know how Romans took a census because this is recorded in hundreds of other census-es. (What's the plural of census? Censae? ) We do know that Romans are never recorded as instructing any people, including people in the Jewish provinces, to travel to their ancestral home. That would have been chaos. Can you even imagine, in an empire as huge as the Roman empire, trying to count people when literally thousands could easily still be stuck in transit trying to cross the desert? For *the ancient Hebrews*, a vastly smaller population as compared to the provinces, countries and occupied areas of Rome, this would probably not have been as much of a problem...but it doesn't matter because it's for darned sure the Romans didn't base their system of government and ways of accounting on the Hebrew ways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlemur
Who took the census is not the important issue but that the census was taken and is historically recorded.
Who took the census is important because you are trying to prove that the Bible is without flaw. Period. This is obviously a flaw. One backed in written records.
I wonder if you might also tackle the question as to how Herod and Quirinius could both have been in power at the time of Jesus' birth when their respective offices were separated by ten full years, during which time Herod was dead, so it couldn't be a case of him having no longer been officially in power but hanging out in the wings or something. They were not in power at the same time, and that's that, and it is recorded, and there were contemporary eyewitnesses, not after-the-fact ones...it is a fact. Therefore, either Luke or Matthew has to be wrong. They can't both be right. And there is an error, a factual, historical, evidence-based error.
Taking it a step further then, I assume it's safe to say then that all the history books ever written are false?
Oh I don't know about false Just not nessesarily completely true
I don't think the Bible is false
Just not completely ACCURATE
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.
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.
