Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Ask God -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Stan who wrote (32925)	10/2/2001 2:28:04 AM
From: Mitch Blevins	Respond to of 39621

Hi Stan, Your point is well taken that my stories don't prove anything. I prefer to think of it as "pre-conditioning the conclusions" rather than "poisoning the well", but I enjoyed the metaphor. I also take your point that Luke and Matthew are describing events separated by about two years. But I also think that you are not appreciating how suspicious it is that they do describe only the differing events, while leaving out most of the commonalities. For instance, why wouldn't Luke say anything about fleeing to Egypt and being hunted down the King? This seems to be an important event. Did Luke not know of it? He seems to be aware of Jesus' parents trip back to Jerusalem every year, which would have spanned the same time period as Matthew's story. But no mention of a two year hiding in Egypt? Why does Matthew tell the story in such a way as to imply that Nazareth is a new place they settled in after Herod died, instead of mentioning that this was their original homeland? Of course this doesn't prove anything, but it is awful coincidental that they don't even accidentally have some overlap. >>A critical point is currently under serious question from your vaunted historical records: Quirinius may have been a legate of Syria not once but twice.<< I feel like we are finally getting some traction now. Let me state your objection so that I understand it: 1) Jesus was born before the death of Herod by approximately 2 years. 2) Although Quirinius was Governor of Syria 11 years after Herod's death, he might have also been Governor or Legate of Syria during the time period about 2 years before Herod's death. 3) Therefore, we can believe both Matthew's account of Herod, and Luke's account of Quirinius and the census. Although this objection seems ad-hoc, I'll try to answer it. Firstly, we have no records of any Roman governor serving twice in the same territory. Secondly, we already know who the Governors were during that time period. Sentius Saturninus and Quintilius Varas were governors during that time period. religion.rutgers.edu Also, be aware that Judaea did not come under direct Roman control until after the death of Herod, when it was annexed by Syria. As such, there would be no need or authority for a Roman-called census prior to 4BC.