Bethlehem

[AV1611VET]

Correct. It's clearly a fabrication added to connect Jesus to David and claim Jesus fulfilled prophecy. After the fact, of course.

Mark probably has the best line on what those at the time knew of Jesus' ancestry: nothing.

Do you mind fixing your quote tags, so it doesn't look like I said that? thank you.

 

[Rilke's Granddaughter]

Do you mind fixing your quote tags, so it doesn't look like I said that? thank you.

vestra es exspectata.

 

[TLK Valentine]

From the article:

Hey, Israeli archaeologists!

You were there [then]?

Were you?

 

[AV1611VET]

Were you?

No, but I know Someone Who was.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You mean, like this one?

Luke 2:4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; ( because he was of the house and lineage of David: )

And what does that have to do with the price of tea?

Luke either wants us to believe that the Roman custom was for every single citizen and subject to travel all the way back to the town of their ancestors every time a census was called -- for what, remains an utter mystery -- or he needs a means to move the story along to get Mary and Joseph into Bethlehem in order to fulfill yet another prophecy.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You have facts on some Bethlehem that Jesus was born in that was not the city of David?

You didn't read-- oh, right, of course you didn't.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Then what's the big deal about it being Bethlehem at all?

Oh, come on, AV -- even you're better than this.

 

[TLK Valentine]

No, but I know Someone Who was.

No, you don't -- and I'll wager that the Israeli archaeologists know Him at least as well as you pretend to.

 

[AV1611VET]

And what does that have to do with the price of tea?

You asked what Joseph & Mary were doing there. I told you.

Luke either wants us to believe that the Roman custom was for every single citizen and subject to travel all the way back to the town of their ancestors every time a census was called -- for what, remains an utter mystery --

Mystery to whom? you?

They traveled 'all the way back' because they were required to.

Luke 2:1a And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus,

... or he needs a means to move the story along to get Mary and Joseph into Bethlehem in order to fulfill yet another prophecy.

I think if he was fabricating the story, he could have done a better job than that.

Remember who he was writing to specifically?

Luke 1:3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

 

[TLK Valentine]

You asked what Joseph & Mary were doing there. I told you.

You quoted the myth. I was hoping for some substance.

As always, you came up short.

Mystery to whom? you?

They traveled 'all the way back' because they were required to.

Ah, but "required" by whom? Augustus or Luke?

Luke 2:1a And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus,

I think if he was fabricating the story, he could have done a better job than that.

Clearly he didn't -- no such decree was ever issued in the history of the Roman Empire.

And even if it had, it would not have applied to Joseph, as Galilee was not a Roman province at the time.

And even if it were, Joseph would have to be a complete moron to bring his 9-month-pregnant wife along for the 100-mile journey when women were not counted in Roman censuses.

So you see, the official story has more than a few holes in it -- as I'm sure the explanation will as well.

Remember who he was writing to specifically?

People not unlike himself: Hellenized Jews long removed from Israel -- possibly even converts.

Luke 1:3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

Ah, but was "Theophilus" a name of a specific person, or does the name's meaning -- "lover of God" -- come into play here in a more literal sense?

Luke may have been writing a sort of primer for Jews removed from the center of Jewish life and culture (Jerusalem) to explain the new "Jesus" mania... a sort of "Christianity for Dummies," as it were.

You might want to go chat with the Person you claim to know -- He seems to have left you high and dry... as He always does for you.

 

[AV1611VET]

So you see, the official story has more than a few holes in it --

I have a feeling that those 'holes' are painted on ... by unbelievers.

 

[Jade Margery]

Then what's the big deal about it being Bethlehem at all? if the Bible doesn't have any data points, then it could have been any city.

Very true. It really doesn't matter at all... except for the thousands of people who spend time and money to visit the site to worship there on the belief that it IS the right place. Which is why the churches aren't going to change the official story no matter how much evidence suggests that if Jesus existed, he wasn't born there at all.

Because truth doesn't matter in religion. Only what you can get other people to believe.

Question: Of the two Bethlehems in question, which one does the Bible say it is? (please answer this, thank you)

It's the one in Judea, I presume. The writers of the bible also thought that the value of pi was three, so I take what they wrote with a large grain of salt.

 

[AV1611VET]

The writers of the bible also thought that the value of pi was three, so I take what they wrote with a large grain of salt.

1

 

[Jade Margery]

1

" He [Solomon] made the Sea of cast metal,
circular in shape, measuring
ten cubits from rim to rim
and five cubits high. It took a line of
thirty cubits to measure around it."

A circle cannot have a diameter of ten and a circumference of three. Even thirty-one cubits would have been more accurate, if they decided to round down for some reason.

Fairly irrelevant to the rest of the thread, and it's notable that you're unable to respond to all the other portions of my past posts. It's easier to take a throw-away one-liner and derail the thread than try to defend an indefensible position against an arsenal of evidence and logic.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

I have a feeling that those 'holes' are painted on ... by unbelievers.

One can only remain blind to the holes if one closes one's eyes and refuses to look at them because one is scared of what one might see, rather like someone covering their eyes in a horror movie.

 

[AV1611VET]

" He [Solomon] made the Sea of cast metal,
circular in shape, measuring
ten cubits from rim to rim
and five cubits high. It took a line of
thirty cubits to measure around it."

A circle cannot have a diameter of ten and a circumference of three. Even thirty-one cubits would have been more accurate, if they decided to round down for some reason.

Fairly irrelevant to the rest of the thread, and it's notable that you're unable to respond to all the other portions of my past posts. It's easier to take a throw-away one-liner and derail the thread than try to defend an indefensible position against an arsenal of evidence and logic.

You're the one who dragged Pi into this thread. Were you meaning to derail?

 

[Jade Margery]

You're the one who dragged Pi into this thread. Were you meaning to derail?

It was relevant in that I was showing that although I can recognize what the bible says, I don't necessarily recognize it as true.

You're the one who keeps dodging the original topic by continuing to focus on what was, I repeat, an off-hand one-liner. You completely ignored my attempt to bring the conversation back to the topic at hand, and also either can't or won't respond to the other points in my post. But that's okay. I understand it's hard to argue with someone who is right, so I'll take your continued avoidance of the real topic as implicit agreement with me.

 

[Steve Petersen]

IIRC, it wasn't that long ago that archaeologists were pretty convinced that Nazareth was uninhabited in Jesus' day.

 

[Papias]

Rilke's Granddaughter wrote:

Papias (not AV - my add) wrote:

Luke's "census" is obviously an inspired fabrication for a number of reasons.

1. First, Romans record censuses. That's why they have them. There is no census recorded when Herod was king near the proposed time.
2. Second, Roman censuses simply count people - we have tons of them recorded, and every time, they simply count the men. They don't require you to travel to former home of your father, grandfather, or g^40th grandfather.
3. third, a little math shows how silly such an idea is in the first place. You have 2 parents, 4 grandparents, etc, or 2^(#generations) ancestors. Taking 25 years as a generation, 1000/25 = ~40 generations. Now, 2^40 = 1,000,000,000,000 people. Since that's more than the whole world population in 1,000 BC (or even today), we can conclude that Joseph was a descendant of most of the people living anywhere near Israel in 1,000 BC, in addition to many others in Babylon, Egypt, and so on. So which of the hundreds of cities should he go to? If that were held today, where would you go?
4. Forth- faced with the above, if everyone had to travel to the city of one of their ancestors, then imagine the huge mass migrations as everyone tried to travel to another city at the same time. Such bedlam would provide a bonanza to thieves and highway robbers, who could alternatively sack people's abandoned houses or the travelers themselves.
5. Fifth - faced with #4, the regional economy would be devasted as everyone stopped working for weeks or months so they could travel. There wouldn't be sufficient travel related supplies, and many people would die of food shortages as everyone who made food was out traveling.
6. Sixth - if such an armageddon as #4 and #5 above (plus all the problems I didn't mention, like disease from travel and conditions, and more) occurred, why do we see nary a peep about it in the normally very meticulous Roman records? If nothing else, we'd certainly see the resulting crash in tax revenues show up, since that was the emperor's main concern anyway, and like other disturbances, would no doubt cause the army to be sent out there.

Anyone who thinks about this for a moment could come up with more reasons. It makes the Holy Word of God look silly to pretend that Luke's story here is in any literal way a real event. God's point - that Jesus was Royalty like David, is clear.

Since the story is obviously an inspired fabrication, arguing about which Bethelhem he went to is like trying to have a serious argument over whether humpty dumpty broke into 362 pieces, 219 pieces or 527 pieces - it misses the whole point of the story and is oblivious to reality. A poll between the literal # of pieces is even more senseless than the literalism itself.

Papias

Correct. It's clearly a fabrication added to connect Jesus to David and claim Jesus fulfilled prophecy. After the fact, of course.

Mark probably has the best line on what those at the time knew of Jesus' ancestry: nothing.

Yes, though we can say one thing about Jesus's ancestry - that Jesus was descended from King David. By inverting point #3 above (to look at descendants), it's clear that everyone in Judea at the time of Jesus' birth, excepting only recent immigrants and their closest descendants, were descendants of King David. Funny how that all comes around - that's the very point Luke wanted to show.

Because of those facts, I'm a descendant of King David (and Cleopatra, and many more), as are you, if you have European or Middle Eastern descent.

Papias

 

[Strathos]

You know that verse doesn't say if they were counting the thickness of the edges or just the space inside, right?