Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Ancient Sources: History and Theology.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • tabibito
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post


    That the census covered the whole of Syria is further attested by the inscription of Aemilius Secundus, who took the census in Apamea on Quirinius's order (iussu Quirini censum egi Apamenae civitatis millium homin(um) civium CXVII). The year AD 6/7 in which the census was undertaken in Judaea coincides approximately with the fourteen-year population-count cycle in Egypt. [...] objections to the Lucan narrative would still remain in full force, for a population count in the Roman province of Syria would not prove that a similar count took place in King Herod's territory, and in any case, a population count in the year 9/8 BC. would in no circumstances have occurred in the time of Quirinius, but in that of Sentius Saturninus. [...] the census of Quirinius was not based on a fixed cycle, but was a special mission, as Josephus's statements clearly show..

    Josephus gives the precise date for this event and tells us it was 37 years after Actium, which places it [using our chronology] in 6 CE. Josephus also notes that this was a new and hitherto unknown procedure in that new province. We also know that Varus was governor of Syria at the end of the reign of Herod the Great. He put down the rebellion of Judas of Gamala [Galilee] and would die some three years later in the terrible military disaster in the Teutoburger Wald.

    With regard to your apparent amusement over the Greek term ηγεμονευοντος [of being governor] I suggest you consult a Greek lexicon. You will find detailed information on this term in Liddell Scott. However, with regard to linguistic definitions, the Greek word ήγεμων used by Luke to describe Roman Legates, Procurators and Proconsuls, is a general term having a military connotation.

    Josephus, however, is somewhat more precise, employing the words, πιτροπος for the Latin Procurator, andδικαιοδοτης and πρεσβευτης for the Latin Legatus. Josephus also uses ήγεμων and both Matthew [20:8] and Luke [8:3] employ επιτροπος.


    The correct Roman title of Consular Governors of Imperial Provinces garrisoned by more than one legion [as was Syria] was Legatus Augusti Pro Praetore.

    As you appear somewhat uninformed as to how Rome governed its empire I recommend you seek out a paper by Eric Burley “Senators in the Emperor’s Service”. In: Proceedings of the British Academy, Vol. 39. 1953. pp.197-214.

    I would further remark that the early Christian writers were not overly au fait with history as evinced by Justin Martyr [c.100-165 CE] who regarded King Ptolemy, at whose insistence the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek, to be a contemporary of King Herod. [Apol.1: 31].[/I]
    Whatever else might be said, when he wrote of a census at the time of Christ's birth, Luke was not referring to the census of 6CE.

    Luke 3:23 When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli...

    Pretending that Luke was referring to the census of 6CE would have Jesus starting his ministry in the final year of Pilate's tenure.

    Luke 3:1 Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene [(John the Baptist began his ministry)]

    According to Luke, John the Baptist began his ministry in 29CE, the fifteenth year of Tiberius' reign. Had Luke been referring to the census of 6CE as the time of Jesus' birth, that would have put Jesus in his early twenties, not in his thirties.


    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    From post #164 June 26:


    From Schürer Vol 1 “Excursus I The Census of Quirinius Luke 2:1-5” which starts at p 399 with a detailed bibliography of related academic works.

    On p.400 he writes “After the banishment of Archelaus, the imperial legate Quirinius went to Judaea and in AD 6 or 7 conducted a census, i.e. registration, of the inhabitants and their property for taxation purposes. The evangelist Luke (2:1-5) writes of a valuation census such as that made by Quirinius, but he appears to date it near the end of the reign of Herod the Great, some ten or twelve years earlier (the preceding story of the birth of John begins, 1:5: Ἐγένετο ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις Ἡρῴδου βασιλέως τῆς Ἰουδαίας [...] The question is, how is this report related to the similar one presented by Josephus? Were two different censuses conducted in Judaea by Quirinius, or has Luke mistakenly placed the census of A.D. 6/7 in the last two years of Herod the Great?

    He then offers several pages explaining how Rome taxed its empire.

    [pp.405-406]The task of Quirinius in AD 6/7 concerned not only Judaea but the whole of Syria. But in Judaea, a Roman 'valuation' [ άποτίμησις] was necessary at precisely that time because it was then, following the deposition of Archelaus, that the territory was transferred for the first time to direct Roman administration.2 2 That the census covered the whole of Syria is further attested by the inscription of Aemilius Secundus, who took the census in Apamea on Quirinius's order (iussu Quirini censum egi Apamenae civitatis millium homin(um) civium CXVII). The year AD 6/7 in which the census was undertaken in Judaea coincides approximately with the fourteen-year population-count cycle in Egypt. [...] objections to the Lucan narrative would still remain in full force, for a population count in the Roman province of Syria would not prove that a similar count took place in King Herod's territory, and in any case, a population count in the year 9/8 BC. would in no circumstances have occurred in the time of Quirinius, but in that of Sentius Saturninus. [...] the census of Quirinius was not based on a fixed cycle, but was a special mission, as Josephus's statements clearly show..

    Josephus gives the precise date for this event and tells us it was 37 years after Actium, which places it [using our chronology] in 6 CE. Josephus also notes that this was a new and hitherto unknown procedure in that new province. We also know that Varus was governor of Syria at the end of the reign of Herod the Great. He put down the rebellion of Judas of Gamala [Galilee] and would die some three years later in the terrible military disaster in the Teutoburger Wald.

    With regard to your apparent amusement over the Greek term ηγεμονευοντος [of being governor] I suggest you consult a Greek lexicon. You will find detailed information on this term in Liddell Scott. However, with regard to linguistic definitions, the Greek word ήγεμων used by Luke to describe Roman Legates, Procurators and Proconsuls, is a general term having a military connotation.

    Josephus, however, is somewhat more precise, employing the words, πιτροπος for the Latin Procurator, andδικαιοδοτης and πρεσβευτης for the Latin Legatus. Josephus also uses ήγεμων and both Matthew [20:8] and Luke [8:3] employ επιτροπος.


    The correct Roman title of Consular Governors of Imperial Provinces garrisoned by more than one legion [as was Syria] was Legatus Augusti Pro Praetore.

    As you appear somewhat uninformed as to how Rome governed its empire I recommend you seek out a paper by Eric Burley “Senators in the Emperor’s Service”. In: Proceedings of the British Academy, Vol. 39. 1953. pp.197-214.

    I would further remark that the early Christian writers were not overly au fait with history as evinced by Justin Martyr [c.100-165 CE] who regarded King Ptolemy, at whose insistence the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek, to be a contemporary of King Herod. [Apol.1: 31].

    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    Originally posted by hypatia_alexandria View Post

    as previously noted no historical or linguistic evidence [see josephus] will dissuade you from your preconceived notions. L leave you to them.


    [/quote]
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    the word, ηγεμονευοντος, used by luke when referring to quirinius, is not restricted to the meaning of "governor," but can apply to anyone in a command position


    Originally posted by hypatia_alexandria View Post
    the greek ηγεμονευοντος [of being governor] means exactly what it says and the word carries a strong military connotation.


    "when i use a word," humpty dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what i choose it to mean—neither more nor less."


    Originally posted by hypatia_alexandria View Post
    the verb ἡγεμονεύω is a general military term. Consult your complete liddell scott.

    quirinius was not a ”prefect”. He was ex consular [a very senior position] not a praefectus[/color]
    Last edited by tabibito; 07-13-2021, 11:43 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    As previously noted no historical or linguistic evidence [see Josephus] will dissuade you from your preconceived notions. l leave you to them.
    Last edited by rogue06; 07-14-2021, 07:10 PM. Reason: Looked like Tab had said it

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    [QUOTE=tabibito;n1281953]
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post



    Luke 2:3-8 does not declare who actually conducted was charged with getting the census conducted in Judaea.



    There is no textual evidence to demonstrate that "governor" is Luke's intended meaning.



    Not in Herod the Great's time, to the best of my knowledge.
    As previously noted no historical or linguistic evidence [see Josephus] will dissuade you from your preconceived notions. l leave you to them.

    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    [QUOTE=Hypatia_Alexandria;n1281943]

    Well Quirinius was not the scribe taking down all the information from every individual.

    However, as governor it was carried under his authority.
    Luke 2:3-8 does not declare who actually conducted was charged with getting the census conducted in Judaea.

    Luke 2:2 This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria.
    There is no textual evidence to demonstrate that "governor" is Luke's intended meaning.

    I suppose you do know that Judaea as a province was included within the larger province of Syria?
    Not in Herod the Great's time, to the best of my knowledge.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    I bumped "send" by mistake and had to edit ... so while I was editing ---

    Luke 2:3-8 does not declare who actually conducted the census in Judaea.

    AFTER reading comprehension test - then interpret.
    Well Quirinius was not the scribe taking down all the information from every individual.

    However, as governor it was carried under his authority.

    Luke 2:2 This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria.

    I suppose you do know that Judaea as a province was included within the larger province of Syria?

    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    You wrote at post #237



    I am waiting for you to tell me how you interpret Luke 2:1-8.

    I bumped "send" by mistake and had to edit ... so while I was editing ---

    Luke 2:3-8 does not declare who actually conducted the census in Judaea.

    AFTER reading comprehension test - then interpret.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied

    You wrote at post #237

    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    Who says anything about the census of 6CE? Who says anything about Quirinius actually conducting the census in Judaea at the time of Christ's birth? Luke doesn't.
    I am waiting for you to tell me how you interpret Luke 2:1-8.


    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    How do you interpret Luke 2:1-8?
    Reading Comprehension Test.
    Cut and paste answers from the text as it is written.

    Luke 2:1 Now in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that a census be taken of all the inhabited earth. 2 This was the first census taken while Quirinius was governing in Syria.

    1/ What happened "in those days?" - a decree went out.
    2/ Who issued that decree? - Caesar Augustus.
    3/ What did the decree require? - a census (to be taken of all the earth.)
    4/ When did the census take place? - while Quirinius was governing in Syria.
    5/ What was particular about this census? - it was the first while Quirinius was governing.

    Additional:
    5/ Examine "governing" for its possible connotations.
    Last edited by tabibito; 07-13-2021, 03:19 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    (though there are some discrepancies, and perhaps a couple of outright contradictions)

    NOT ALWAYS

    Source: Bart D. Ehrman. Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible And Why We Don't Know About Them



    … And we are told exactly when Pilate pronounces the sentence: “It was the Day of Preparation for the Passover; and it was about noon. (John 19:14)

    Noon? On the Day of Preparation for the Passover? The day the lambs were slaughtered? How can that be? In Mark’s Gospel, Jesus lived through that day, had his disciples prepare the Passover meal, and ate it before being arrested, taken to jail for the night, tried the next morning and executed at nine o’clock A.M. on the Passover Day. But not in John. In John, Jesus dies a day earlier, on the Day of Preparation for the Passover, sometime after noon.

    © Copyright Original Source



    So Ehrman claims that

    According to Mark, Jesus was executed on the day of Passover, which in the temple calendar is 15/01, a Sabbath regardless of the day of the week on which it falls.
    And, if Ehrman's assessment is to be believed, having been executed on the day of Passover, Jesus will be dead and buried on the day before his execution. (Mark 15:42)


    Mark 15:42 When evening had already come,because it was the preparation day, that is, the day before the Sabbath … 44 Pilate … questioned him (a centurion) as to whether He was already dead. 45 And ascertaining this from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph
    According to Mark – Jesus died on the day of preparation, which by Ehrman’s account of Mark was the day before Jesus was executed.

    John 19:31 Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

    Here, Ehrman has made a glaringly obvious mistake.
    I'd like you tell me how you interpret Luke 2:1-8.

    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post


    If you read the texts of the Synoptics and John critically side by side you can see quite plainly they contradict one another.

    (though there are some discrepancies, and perhaps a couple of outright contradictions)

    NOT ALWAYS

    Source: Bart D. Ehrman. Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible And Why We Don't Know About Them



    … And we are told exactly when Pilate pronounces the sentence: “It was the Day of Preparation for the Passover; and it was about noon. (John 19:14)

    Noon? On the Day of Preparation for the Passover? The day the lambs were slaughtered? How can that be? In Mark’s Gospel, Jesus lived through that day, had his disciples prepare the Passover meal, and ate it before being arrested, taken to jail for the night, tried the next morning and executed at nine o’clock A.M. on the Passover Day. But not in John. In John, Jesus dies a day earlier, on the Day of Preparation for the Passover, sometime after noon.

    © Copyright Original Source



    So Ehrman claims that

    According to Mark, Jesus was executed on the day of Passover, which in the temple calendar is 15/01, a Sabbath regardless of the day of the week on which it falls.
    And, if Ehrman's assessment is to be believed, having been executed on the day of Passover, Jesus will be dead and buried on the day before his execution. (Mark 15:42)


    Mark 15:42 When evening had already come,because it was the preparation day, that is, the day before the Sabbath … 44 Pilate … questioned him (a centurion) as to whether He was already dead. 45 And ascertaining this from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph
    According to Mark – Jesus died on the day of preparation, which by Ehrman’s account of Mark was the day before Jesus was executed.

    John 19:31 Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

    Here, Ehrman has made a glaringly obvious mistake.
    Last edited by tabibito; 07-13-2021, 02:47 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    Who says anything about the census of 6CE? Who says anything about Quirinius actually conducting the census in Judaea at the time of Christ's birth? Luke doesn't.
    How do you interpret Luke 2:1-8?


    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    Once more stating the patently obvious; any that I might offer, now or future, you have already rejected.
    If you offer sources from accredited academics I will certainly read them.

    Originally posted by tabibito View Post
    However:
    Source: https://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1432


    Ehrman writes in; "Jesus, Interrupted" that gMark and gJohn have two different dates for the crucifixion of Jesus based on the date of Passover and he uses it as a "textbook case" with his students. Here are some excerpts from the chapter titled; The Death of Jesus, In Mark and John"....(Mark 15:25). Jesus, then, dies on the day of Passover, the morning after the Passover meal was eaten."...pg 26, Ehrman compares that to John 19:14 were he points out..."And we are told exactly when Pilate pronounces the sentence: "It was the Day of Preparation for the Passover; and it was about noon"....bid.

    However, Geza Vermes in his book titled: "The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls In English", points out the Qumran community, a.k.a. the Essenes had a different yearly calendar than the Temple Priests and thus had a different day for Passover. "..."Passover, the fifteenth day of the first month, was always celebrated on a Wednesday;"...pg79.

    © Copyright Original Source


    And that reply continues:

    However, Geza Vermes in his book titled: "The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls In English", points out the Qumran community, a.k.a. the Essenes had a different yearly calendar than the Temple Priests and thus had a different day for Passover. "..."Passover, the fifteenth day of the first month, was always celebrated on a Wednesday;"...pg79.

    Which gives support to the my theory that Jesus was probably an Essene. Meaning, the year of the crucifixion was 30 A.D. and the day he died was Wednesday, which if you do the math gives us a full 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb, just as Jesus prophesied in Matthew 12:38-40 and reconciles Ehrman's "textbook case".

    Then again, perhaps Geza Vermes got the Essene calendar all wrong.


    Hmmm.

    I will take the findings of a reputable scholar like Geza Vermes over the ramblings of some contributor putting forward his unsupported and speculative ideas on an internet discussion board. Clearly his respondents took issue with some of his theories And whomsoever John T is he never responded to Rabbi Milton on page 2 of that thread where Milton wrote:

    These are the wrong questions entirely. As John is presumed from Rev. to have been a
    prophet, and not just an apostle, the questions should be:

    What do you do about the violation of the prohibition against doing ordinary work by the
    chief priests (going to Pilate, entering his domain, submitting pleadings before a pagan
    overlord on an ordinary matter so as to neglect overriding duties at the Temple in going to the
    sepulchre & sealing it)? How could the day after the Crucifixion have been on a Saturday, let
    alone on the 15th?.




    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    A substantial number (at least) have originated with theologians - including the story that John's gospel and the synoptics conflict WRT the date of Christ's execution.
    If you read the texts of the Synoptics and John critically side by side you can see quite plainly they contradict one another.


    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    If Luke's account is correct, Matthew's account is wrong. And vice versa. Jesus could not have been born during the 6 CE census and also born pre 4 BCE while Herod the Great was still King of Judaea. Unless you are contending that he was born twice which is what Theodore, bishop of Mopsuestia suggested, namely that Jesus had been conceived twice, once in a divine form and once in a human form, aka the so-called Two Sons formula.
    Who says anything about the census of 6CE? Who says anything about Quirinius actually conducting the census in Judaea at the time of Christ's birth? Luke doesn't.

    I would like some accredited academic sources that support your contentions.
    Once more stating the patently obvious; any that I might offer, now or future, you have already rejected.

    However:
    Source: https://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1432


    Ehrman writes in; "Jesus, Interrupted" that gMark and gJohn have two different dates for the crucifixion of Jesus based on the date of Passover and he uses it as a "textbook case" with his students. Here are some excerpts from the chapter titled; The Death of Jesus, In Mark and John"....(Mark 15:25). Jesus, then, dies on the day of Passover, the morning after the Passover meal was eaten."...pg 26, Ehrman compares that to John 19:14 were he points out..."And we are told exactly when Pilate pronounces the sentence: "It was the Day of Preparation for the Passover; and it was about noon"....bid.

    However, Geza Vermes in his book titled: "The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls In English", points out the Qumran community, a.k.a. the Essenes had a different yearly calendar than the Temple Priests and thus had a different day for Passover. "..."Passover, the fifteenth day of the first month, was always celebrated on a Wednesday;"...pg79.

    © Copyright Original Source



    Are you suggesting that false claims originate among believers?
    A substantial number (at least) have originated with theologians - including the story that John's gospel and the synoptics conflict WRT the date of Christ's execution. The story originates with a theologian in the late 19th century. (or at least, that is the earliest trace I have been able to find.)

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    You cannot afford to believe otherwise. If you did, you would have to admit that Luke might not be in error.
    If Luke's account is correct, Matthew's account is wrong. And vice versa. Jesus could not have been born during the 6 CE census and also born pre 4 BCE while Herod the Great was still King of Judaea. Unless you are contending that he was born twice which is what Theodore, bishop of Mopsuestia suggested, namely that Jesus had been conceived twice, once in a divine form and once in a human form, aka the so-called Two Sons formula.

    Originally posted by tabibito View Post
    The question was answered with adequate detail.
    I would like some accredited academic sources that support your contentions.

    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    On this you are correct.
    For the most part, my focus has been on false claims about the Biblical record. Scant few of those claims originate with secular scholarship,.
    Are you suggesting that false claims originate among believers?

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
14 responses
43 views
0 likes
Last Post tabibito  
Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
21 responses
129 views
0 likes
Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
78 responses
411 views
0 likes
Last Post tabibito  
Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
45 responses
303 views
1 like
Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
Working...
X