To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (152530 ) 1/23/2009 4:47:34 PM From: one_less 1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) | Respond to Two of the three make no claim to be scholars of that period in history and didn't make any such references. The third had quite a bit to say, and I have to admit it was an interesting overview but he exposed him self as a fraud repeatedly so it's hard to consider him as a serious scholar. making spurious claims about the work other people have done while exposing himself as a spinner of falsehood in the process. "If Jesus lived, he must have been born. When was he born? Matthew says he was born when Herod was King of Judea. Luke says he was born when Cyrenius was Governor of Syria. He could not have been born during the administration of these tow rulers for Herod died in the year 4 B.C., and Cyrenius, who, in Roman history is Quirinius, did not become Governor of Syria until ten years later. Herod and Quirinius are separated by the whole reign of Archelaus, Herod's son. Between Matthew and Luke, there is, therefore, a contradiction of at least ten years, as to the time of Christ's birth. The fact is that the early Christians had absolutely no knowledge as to when Christ was born. The Encyclopaedia Britannica says: "Christians count one hundred and thirty-three contrary opinions of different authorities concerning the year the Messiah appeared on earth." Think of it--one hundred and thirty-three different years, each one of which is held to be the year in which Christ came into the world. What magnificent certainty! " "0ne hundred and thirty-three contrary opinions about the year, adds up to 133 different years." Had he said the scholars disagree on the year, it could have been a partucular year, the previous year, or the following year but the historical record resulted in contradictions so that none of their claims can be authenticated, would have been reasonable. No intelligent person would conclude from that statement that they were claiming 133 different years with a certainty, yet your 'scholar' the expert did do that. He did what even the most novice on looker would not do? Why? Because he was not objective. There may have lived in Palestine, nineteen centuries ago, a man whose name was Jesus, who went about doing good, who was followed by admiring associates, and who in the end met a violent death.
