Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8926 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-21-2019 8:10 PM
35 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,199 Year: 15,235/19,786 Month: 1,958/3,058 Week: 332/404 Day: 50/96 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Would Mary Have Been In Bethlehem?
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3112
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 43 of 156 (508584)
05-14-2009 10:08 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by bluescat48
05-12-2009 1:31 PM


In addition, part of the problem with Luke's account is that Nazareth was in Galilee, which was not part of the providence of Syria where the census was ordered.

Galilee was ruled by Herod Antipas as a separate entity from Judah, and was not under the census that was ordered in 6 c.e.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by bluescat48, posted 05-12-2009 1:31 PM bluescat48 has not yet responded

  
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3112
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 64 of 156 (509432)
05-21-2009 4:07 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Asteragros
05-12-2009 12:59 PM


There are a number of mistakes in your recitation.

First, there is no evidence that Quintarsis was a governor of Syria more than once. The entire argument is a 'well maybe' , based on an inscription that had the person it was referring to totally erased by time.

The next big problem with the entire story of Luke is that Galilee was not part of the Kingdom of Judah, but was being ruled by Antipas. It was not subject to taxes at the time. Judah was, because it's ruler was just replaced, and put under direct roman control.

So, Luke's entire story , with Joesph and Mary coming from Nazareth, and Mary being that close to labor is unlikely to the extreme.

It is, however, some bit of evidence that the writer of the Gospel of Luke/Acts did use Joesphus as a historical source.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Asteragros, posted 05-12-2009 12:59 PM Asteragros has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by kbertsche, posted 05-21-2009 10:19 PM ramoss has responded

  
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3112
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 68 of 156 (509457)
05-21-2009 10:36 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by kbertsche
05-21-2009 10:19 PM


Well, that is the story in Matthew. However, the census that is talked about in Luke happened in 6 c.e., a full 10 years after the death of Herod the King.

This is what is known as a 'contradiction'.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by kbertsche, posted 05-21-2009 10:19 PM kbertsche has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 12:13 AM ramoss has not yet responded

  
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3112
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 98 of 156 (509950)
05-26-2009 9:45 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by PaulK
05-23-2009 2:27 AM


I would also point out that the census being mentioned by Luke is just one bit of evidence that Luke used Josephus as a historical reference.
The fact Josephus has John the Baptist being executed in 36 c.e. and Jesus starting his ministry that same year is another clue, since at that point, Jesus would have been 30, as described by the gospels.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by PaulK, posted 05-23-2009 2:27 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by PaulK, posted 05-27-2009 1:54 AM ramoss has not yet responded
 Message 102 by Peg, posted 05-27-2009 3:16 AM ramoss has not yet responded

  
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3112
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 141 of 156 (510686)
06-02-2009 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by Asteragros
06-01-2009 4:30 PM


I have seen this line of reasoning.. about 'before'. However, there are a number of problems with it. The first one, there is no historical record of any census of Judah happening by the Roman empire before 6 c.e.

Before 6 c.e. , Judah was a country that paid tribute to Rome, but was not taxed directly. The census was for tax purposes, and Rome did not directly tax Judah until 6 c.e.

That is trying to distort the words written down to a large degree, and then ignore the history, laws and structure of Rome at that time to try to make an excuse.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by Asteragros, posted 06-01-2009 4:30 PM Asteragros has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by ochaye, posted 06-14-2009 6:01 AM ramoss has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019