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.
Now you're just pumping me for more information. Why don't you try asking the way a normal human being would?
I'm not asking you for anything. I'm commenting on what you have already posted and which has pretty much been sunk at the sten, despit all the pumping yu can do.
..yes...what is it, BF Minor?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie
Great. Maybe you can get together with the guy that thinks he has the date of his return figured out and put that on your wiki.
Why not? A bit more misinformation won't do any extra harm.
Isaiah 11:6 (KJV)
The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
According to your dating system Jesus was only 16 when he was executed. Also, Herod, who played such a dramatic role in the Gospel Matthew narrative, had been dead for seventeen years in 13 AD. And Joseph was five years late for the census of Cyrenius, which was the whole point of going to Bethlehem in the first place.
Augustus ordered a census in
29/28 BC
9/8 BC
13/14 AD
As many writers have pointed out, there is no logical reason for them to travel to Beth-le-hem even if there was a taxation. But being Passover it would have been logical for them to travel to Jerusalem. Perhaps a suburb of Jerusalem was called Beth-le-hem (if only informally)
There is no way to know for sure but if I was going to guess wildly then my guess would be that Herod constructed some sort of Palace in Gaulinitis (Golan) and in 6 AD voluntarily moved many of his family members and Close Associates to that Palace. He himself stayed in Jerusalem.
Then after the massacre of the Innocents there must have been some sort of outcry and Herod was exiled to Gaulinitis probably in 16 AD.
After that Judea became a proper Roman province and the Romans decided to cover the whole thing up because it reflected poorly on Augustus who put Herod in charge.
Augustus ordered a census in
29/28 BC
9/8 BC
13/14 AD
As many writers have pointed out, there is no logical reason for them to travel to Beth-le-hem even if there was a taxation. But being Passover it would have been logical for them to travel to Jerusalem. Perhaps a suburb of Jerusalem was called Beth-le-hem (if only informally)
But Matthew makes it clear that they lived there. The didn't live in Nazareth.
And Luke makes it clear that they did live in Nazareth and they travelled to Judea for the Roman 6 AD (1) tax - census, not passover. You can't just rewrite the Bible so blatantly to make it work.
(1) so all the various censuses ordered by Augustus make no odds. In Luke it is clearly the 6 AD census (read Luke 2. 1-5 in combination with Acts 5 37) that is the one he has in mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by granpa
Herod Archelaus not Herod the great.
If anyone was going to commit a massacre it would clearly be Herod Archelaus
Sorry Grandpa. Matthew makes it clear that the Massacre has to be Herod, father of Archelaus, because (2.19 -23) after fleeing Judea to escape Herod, Joseph returned when he heard that Herod was dead, but moved to Nazareth because Herod's son, Archelaus, now ruled Judea. It is always a good idea to start with what the Bible says rather than think up a theory and try to fit the Bible to it.
Now I quite agree that the two accounts are quite irreconcilable and for all we know quite made up. So we really have no idea other than to abandon the fiddled history of Luke and the fairy tale in Matthew and note that Mark has no birth in Bethlehem (we can manage to read it without the hyphens) and John (7.41,42) make it clear that, so far as he knew, Jesus ought to have been born in Bethlehem to fulfill scripture, but wasn't. That is why those two stories were made up.
No, Jesus was not born in Bethlehem, but in Galilee. Probably Capernaum, if Nazareth didn't even exist at that time. No, the best clues are I think in Josephus, who in broad terms gets the people and events of his time are correct as we can get.
As I say, we can date Jesus' death broadly as it must be after John the baptists' death - which cannot be too much before the Nabatean defeat of Antipas which was put down to Antipas killing the Baptist, and must of course be before Aretas capturing Damascus, from which Paul says he escaped. It must also be before Pilate was recalled to Rome.
So as I recall,
we have
Pilate recalled to Rome 36 AD
Nabateans capture Damascus 36/37 AD.
so AD 35 is the latest possible date for the crucifixion, and the earlier one puts it, the harder it is to blame the Nabatean war on the execution of the baptist. 33 AD at the earliest? That pretty much put the "ministry" of Jesus in c 34 AD. Maybe late 33 or early 35.How old he was at the time is anyone' guess. And Luke's 'about 30' is a guess, you can bet. But earlier than late 20's or later than 40 or fifty is not the time for leading followers in a mission, so a birth around 5- 10 B.C would seem more probable, with the date around Herod's death (1) pointing an age of around 30 for Jesus' mission, which fits pretty nicely with the general story.
But you can forget teenage crucifixions. That just will not wash.
(1) generally put at 4 BC but the discussion with Pneuma produced a possibility that it could be 3 BC, depending on which king was involved in the refusal of the 6,000 Pharisees to swear an oath to Augustus.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 12-15-2017 at 07:50 AM..
Which might be why Pilate refused to execute him. You think?
Not according to the Gospels. Pilate wanted to let Jesus off because he did not think that he was guilty of anything. He asked the judgement of the Jews on whether to execute their king or not. There is no whisper of Jesus being excused because he was just a kid. There is no mention anywhere in the Gospels of Jesus being a teenager. You really have to stop pulling supportive evidence out of your ass.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 12-15-2017 at 07:43 AM..
There is no way to know for sure but if I was going to guess wildly then my guess would be that Herod constructed some sort of Palace in Gaulinitis (Golan) and in 6 AD voluntarily moved many of his family members and Close Associates to that Palace. He himself stayed in Jerusalem.
Then after the massacre of the Innocents there must have been some sort of outcry and Herod was exiled to Gaulinitis probably in 16 AD.
After that Judea became a proper Roman province and the Romans decided to cover the whole thing up because it reflected poorly on Augustus who put Herod in charge.
The sequence of events is pretty clearly set out in Josephus (1). So your wild guesses are not required. In any case, we can probably forget Archelaus and the Roman census as the date of Jesus' birth, which we can probably put in the last years' of King Herod's life.
(1) This is off the top of my head, so I may have misremembered a few things. Sue me. After Herod's death Archelaus made some promises to the people to secure his throne, killed a few rebels and deposed a High Priest before travelling to Rome to ask to be confirmed by Augustus, since Antipas was saying that He, not Archelaus, should have been given Judea. Then Varus (de facto governor in those mysterious years before the governorship of Qurinus) wrote to report revolts in Judea. Archelaus was confirmed as king of Judea and hurried back to participate in putting down the revolt of Simon and Athronges the Shepherd and a couple of others. Then he ruled until persistent reports of bad rule caused Augustus to remove him and banish him to Gaul and have Quirinus (6 AD) take over Judea as a Roman province, sending Coponius to carry out the necessary tax census. Which is the one that Luke (being familiar with Josephus) jumps on an a mechanism to have Joseph travel to 'his own city' to sign on.
But that's nonsense as the census didn't apply to Galilee, and even if it did, the requirement to go back to your own city to register applies to where you lived and worked - not some city of a distant ancestor. And as we see - it is surely far too late.
It is time these attempts to make the nativity Work with conjuctions of planets and arguing about what Augustus' duties as a Consul were and Qurinus serving an unknown and really impossible Governership in the days of Herod, were put to bed. Luke's Nativity account is ingenious, but historicaly doesn't work. Matthew's account is a fantasy, and not his only one. The two nativities conflict fatally and the birth in bethlehem never happened. Time this was put in the same category as Noah's Ark - a fairy story.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 12-15-2017 at 07:41 AM..
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.
