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.
It does bear weight and answers the questions from most of the angles that were posed in this thread.
It actually ignores them. It does not deal with the real questions but just trots out bits of really irrelevant information that can be made to look as though it validates the nativity tale.
Perhaps I may post the problems. (from my own computer notes)
Before 6. B. C.
Joseph and mary in Judea. Jesus born (according to Matthew) Joseph warned to go to Egypt (Matthew)
King Herod warned by the magi about a 'king of the jews'. If any kind of stellar event can be imagined that would make some wise men go on a trek, who would ever have seen a comet of nova or conjuction of Jupter with Mars and thought 'Jewish king!'? In any case, the star has to be a moving one stopping over a particular roof like it was a fairy light dangling from a crane.
Herod instigates a massacre in Bethlehem (known to none of the other gospel -writers nor to any contemprary historian)
King Herod dies 4 B. C. Herod Archelaus tetrarch of Judea. Herod Antipas tetrarch of Galilee. Joseph and family return because it is now safe.
Actually not. Heaven changes its mind and instructs Joseph to relocate to Galilee. Not because Galilee is any safer for Jesus under Antipas but to explain why Jesus is called the Nazorene.
6 A. D. Archelaus is deposed and Judea (but not Galilee - still ruled by Antipas) becomes a Roman province. First Tax Census of Judea (but not Galilee) carried out by Quirinus (Luke). For this purpose, Joseph (who wasn't obliged to pay the tax anyway) takes his wife to Bethlehem in Judea (as though she couldn't have stayed at home) and Jesus is born there - more than ten years after he was born there according to Matthew.
This is why the nativity accounts don't work. The historicity of the census is ok, but Luke's use of it is not. The site you mention does a clever but essentially evasive bit of apologetics and is typical in coming across as deliberate dishonesty in order to get or keep people in belief.
It's sad that people are always wanting to question the bible, and when they do, they make assumptions that just are not true. This question was answered in 1994, and the document can be found on my web site.
[url=http://www.living4thee.com/docs/CensusUnderQuirinius.pdf]Powered by: Doteasy - Bannerless Free Web Hosting and Email for Small Business and Individual[/url]
Enjoy your reading... it also answers when Jesus was born, which was NOT in December. I have other documents online which answer that question also.
In recent threads a few asked "What issues are there in the bible if any?"
I've responded with the example of Caesar Augustus's census. The question has yet to be answered. So I'll bring it up again.
I would like to have a well thought out discussion on this. Thank you.
To begin with, the census was not intended for the entire Roman Empire, which would (as you suggested) have been a tremendous and time-consuming project. It was intended for Judea, and for one very good and simple reason: there had been uprisings against the Roman Empire in the decade or two preceding Jesus. Not overly surprising, since Judea was under Roman occupation at the time.
The Romans' intention was to keep a count of Jewish males, who would of course have been the recruits in whatever guerrilla actions took place. (One group in particular, the Zealots, were notoriously violent in their anti-Roman stance. They went so far as to designate their leader as "Messiah," knowing full well that it was considered blasphemy against the Emperor).
And so Rome decreed that there should be an annual census, for no other reason than to keep their troublesome little occupied territory in line.
To begin with, the census was not intended for the entire Roman Empire, which would (as you suggested) have been a tremendous and time-consuming project. It was intended for Judea, and for one very good and simple reason: there had been uprisings against the Roman Empire in the decade or two preceding Jesus. Not overly surprising, since Judea was under Roman occupation at the time.
The Romans' intention was to keep a count of Jewish males, who would of course have been the recruits in whatever guerrilla actions took place. (One group in particular, the Zealots, were notoriously violent in their anti-Roman stance. They went so far as to designate their leader as "Messiah," knowing full well that it was considered blasphemy against the Emperor).
And so Rome decreed that there should be an annual census, for no other reason than to keep their troublesome little occupied territory in line.
No discrepancy at all.
Not there, because you are not addressing the actual problem, which is not whether there was a tax census or not in Judea - there is good reason to believe that there was, and not that it was carried out after the rest of the Augustan 'world' was taxed. It could not be done by Rome until Judea became a Roman province. That is not the discrepancy
It is that Matthew places the event in the time of king Herod which it cannot be if we believe Luke's dating to the census of Quirinus,which was carried out after Herod died and his son was deposed.
There is no way around this other than to try to argue that somehow Quirinus carries out a 'secret' census in Herodian Judea and Galilee (which would solve the question of Galillee not being subject to the tax).
It's persuasive but it won't really do. It's the old problem. Luke's account looks like the Quirinus tax carried out in 6 A.D and links it with the Augustan general tax, not some tax imposed (secretly) by Augustus and arranged by Herod and carried out (secretly) by a Roman governor. It clearly couldn't be secret.
It really doesn't work. And Luke also doesn't mention the Herodian massacre and flight to Egypt nor that remakable star that caused some astrologers to up sticks and follow it to udea to worship some foregn pretender to the long defunct Judean throne.
No. There are so many discrepancies and problems that are to be addressed and no -one has adequately addressed them. The best we get is the addressing of problems that really are not problems and then apparently pretending that the problems are answered. The apologists Really must Do Better.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 01-31-2010 at 07:46 AM..
What amazes me is the apparently lack of understanding of Luke's stated purpose and the process he claims to have used in formulating his book. I suggest that any discussion of discrepancies in this book needs to start with Chapter 1 vss 1-4. The intent appears to be to establish certainty for what an important man (possibly gov. official) believes (vs 4). The process was not claiming to deal with gov. documents, but eye witnesses (vs 2).
Recently I have run into a relavant situation where family members of a recently deceased person claimed a position of rank in an organization and this claim will be posted in the paper. However, while doing some prep work for the funeral I contacted this organization's leader and found that he had no such position. Official documents are wonderful things but they fail to establish 100% accuracy. On the other hand, one must admit that eyewitness accounts may also be faulty--for it would appear that this family would be the best source of accurate information on their loved one, yet they were not.
Questions for the detractors of the Biblical record of Luke:
How much news has ever been officially recorded from first century Bethlehem?
How much officially recorded information do we have directly about Judea in the span of years of 6 B.C. and 6 A.D.?
What solid evidence do you have to say there 100% could not have been a apographe during this time?
Was Caesar Augustus Julius Caesar's son or his great nephew? and Was it Caesar Augustus or Gaius Octavius?
These may seem like obscure questions, but the answers I believe make an important point about what we know and how humble we should be about asserting disagreement based on lack of information.
And there you have your answer given by your own hand. What you believe is always a choice. Anyone with ANY intelligence is aware that most if not all recorded history is flawed. I am glad to see that there are those with interest in what the Bible proclaims seeking to confirm or reject it with other written sources. The fact is it all boils down to belief as none of us were present to witness any history past 100 years ago. There are those who are claiming the USA never landed on the moon and that is in my lifetime and I think I saw it. Others claim the Holocaust never happened though I believe it did. Look at creation and know there is a Creator and choose you this day whom you will serve.
Wow guys I just discovered this part of the forums today and I have to say this is some of the most interesting material I have read in some time. Also very well thought out and not just ad hominem attacks.
In recent threads a few asked "What issues are there in the bible if any?"
I've responded with the example of Caesar Augustus's census. The question has yet to be answered. So I'll bring it up again.
I would like to have a well thought out discussion on this. Thank you.
Taking into consideration that very few records survived 2000 years, the problem may not be as big as you might imagine. However, in the writings of Tertullian, he stated that Roman records supported the fact that (censuses) were conducted in Palestine at the time of Jesus birth. Consider the link below.
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.
