A simple case for intelligent design

[SkepticThinker]

That's a final, binding decision, not what you wrote: "...all-supervising, all-deciding person." Plus YOU get to make GOD's decision for Him! (Trust or don't trust Jesus.)

Once again, you've failed to answer the question. What's with that?

 

[SkepticThinker]

A fraction of Christians believe free will doesn't exist. A fraction of humans believe the same.

Most atheists insist it doesn't exist, since they feel this absolves them of moral accountability before God.

Atheists don't believe in God. Get it right.

 

[gnostic]

No problem. We can use "independent texts and archaeological evidence" as you wrote, to verify the Bible.

The only thing that I can find as independent literary sources on Jesus’ existing as a real person in the early 1st century BCE, is from the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews.

But the only thing it has to say about Jesus, is Jesus’ brother, James. But Josephus was more focused on James than on Jesus. The Antiquities say of nothing about his origin (eg nothing Mary’s pregnancy, the magi, angel visitations to Joseph, Mary or the shepherds, and nothing about Egypt or the massacre in Bethlehem), nothing on the nature of Jesus’ works, ministry, miracles, death and resurrection.

Josephus did mention Quirinius’ appointment as governor of Syria and carrying out census in Judaea, BUT that occurred 10 YEARS AFTER HEROD’S DEATH, not before Herod’s death as gospel of Luke’s claim. There is a clash between Josephus’ version and the gospel version; I am more inclined to reject the gospel version, due to the gospel’s details being wrong.

Examples, Joseph living in Galilee, but travelling to register in Bethlehem in Judaea. Also the other version, gospel of Matthew never mentioned anything about any census, as well as Matthew’s never mention any travel from Galilee to Bethlehem; Nazareth and Galilee were never mentioned in Matthew 1, they are only mentioned after Herod’s death and Joseph leaving Egypt. Matthew’s never mentioned anything about Jesus being born in a manger, which is another thing that the two versions can’t agree on.

Josephus also wrote of John the Baptist’s arrest and execution, but it has to do with Herod Antipas fearing unrest, and not because of some promise to the dance on Antipas’ birthday. Such dance and promise to excute John, cannot be verified, so I believe the gospels made it up. Josephus also never connected John the Baptist, and never referred John being a “prophet”.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The only thing that I can find as independent literary sources on Jesus’ existing as a real person in the early 1st century BCE, is from the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews.

But the only thing it has to say about Jesus, is Jesus’ brother, James. But Josephus was more focused on James than on Jesus. The Antiquities say of nothing about his origin (eg nothing Mary’s pregnancy, the magi, angel visitations to Joseph, Mary or the shepherds, and nothing about Egypt or the massacre in Bethlehem), nothing on the nature of Jesus’ works, ministry, miracles, death and resurrection.

Josephus did mention Quirinius’ appointment as governor of Syria and carrying out census in Judaea, BUT that occurred 10 YEARS AFTER HEROD’S DEATH, not before Herod’s death as gospel of Luke’s claim. There is a clash between Josephus’ version and the gospel version; I am more inclined to reject the gospel version, due to the gospel’s details being wrong.

Examples, Joseph living in Galilee, but travelling to register in Bethlehem in Judaea. Also the other version, gospel of Matthew never mentioned anything about any census, as well as Matthew’s never mention any travel from Galilee to Bethlehem; Nazareth and Galilee were never mentioned in Matthew 1, they are only mentioned after Herod’s death and Joseph leaving Egypt. Matthew’s never mentioned anything about Jesus being born in a manger, which is another thing that the two versions can’t agree on.

Josephus also wrote of John the Baptist’s arrest and execution, but it has to do with Herod Antipas fearing unrest, and not because of some promise to the dance on Antipas’ birthday. Such dance and promise to excute John, cannot be verified, so I believe the gospels made it up. Josephus also never connected John the Baptist, and never referred John being a “prophet”.

That Luke made up his nativity is rather clear. Roman records do keep track of Quirinius since he was an important military leader for them. He was nowhere near Syria at the time of Herod. Also that story contradicts itself since the census was to be for taxation purposes the place where he would have been counted was where he lives and worked. And that is problematic because it puts him outside the area of that census. There is more than that,it is one of the very obvious errors in the Bible.

 

[gnostic]

That Luke made up his nativity is rather clear. Roman records do keep track of Quirinius since he was an important military leader for them. He was nowhere near Syria at the time of Herod. Also that story contradicts itself since the census was to be for taxation purposes the place where he would have been counted was where he lives and worked. And that is problematic because it puts him outside the area of that census. There is more than that,it is one of the very obvious errors in the Bible.

Yes, Quirinius was a governor around that time, while Herod was still alive, but as a legate in Galatia, not in Syria.

He was a general of the army that operated in both Galatia and Cilicia, and fought the insurrection of Homonadenses, from 12 - 1 BCE. He was too busy to also govern Syria and hold a census That’s what creationists tends to ignore.

During the last 6 years of Herod’s life, two different governors served in Syria at that time:

1. Gaius Sentius Saturninus (9 - 7/6 BCE)
2. Publius Quinctilius Varus (7/6 - 4 BCE)

Josephus does mention Saturninus and then Varus succeeding Saturninus (AotJ Book 17, chapters 1, 2 & 5). Varus is found in the works of Publius Cornelius Tacitus and of Marcus Velleius Paterculus (Roman History, book II, chapter 117)

But Varus was a son-in-law of Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa (Augustus closest friend), and most famous being general in Germania in 9 CE, where he lost 3 of his legions and his own life in ambush at the Teutoberg Forest.

A Christian historian named Tertullian, on the other hand, say Jesus was born when Saturninus was governor (Against Marcion, 4, 19).

If Jesus was indeed born when Herod was alive, then it would occur when Varus was governor of Syria (7/6- 4 BCE), not Quirinius (AotJ Book 18, chapter 1, Quirinius’ governorship and census held 10 years after Herod’s death and after Archelaus was banished in 6 CE).

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes, Quirinius was a governor around that time, while Herod was still alive, but as a legate in Galatia, not in Syria.

He was a general of the army that operated in both Galatia and Cilicia, and fought the insurrection of Homonadenses, from 12 - 1 BCE. He was too busy to also govern Syria and hold a census That’s what creationists tends to ignore.

During the last 6 years of Herod’s life, two different governors served in Syria at that time:

1. Gaius Sentius Saturninus (9 - 7/6 BCE)
2. Publius Quinctilius Varus (7/6 - 4 BCE)

Josephus does mention Saturninus and then Varus succeeding Saturninus (AotJ Book 17, chapters 1, 2 & 5). Varus is found in the works of Publius Cornelius Tacitus and of Marcus Velleius Paterculus (Roman History, book II, chapter 117)

But Varus was a son-in-law of Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa (Augustus closest friend), and most famous being general in Germania in 9 CE, where he lost 3 of his legions and his own life in ambush at the Teutoberg Forest.

A Christian historian named Tertullian, on the other hand, say Jesus was born when Saturninus was governor (Against Marcion, 4, 19).

If Jesus was indeed born when Herod was alive, then it would occur when Varus was governor of Syria (7/6- 4 BCE), not Quirinius (AotJ Book 18, chapter 1, Quirinius’ governorship and census held 10 years after Herod’s death and after Archelaus was banished in 6 CE).

Maybe Mary got confused by Roman Numerals and had a 520 week gestation period by mistake.

 

[BilliardsBall]

The problem is that if use that phrase there is no "standard criteria of historical evidence" for Jesus that is not crap evidence. Your endlessly repeating a phrase that you did not understand will not help you. You seem to know that my claim is true since you cannot post any reliable evidence for the existence of Jesus.

It's plain to me. 1) You are saying that the near-universal acceptance of Jesus's existence is based on reputable scholars trusting in "garbage" evidence. No.

2) You have not told me why the historical, non-supernatural Jesus is a threat to you.

 

[BilliardsBall]

It fails when that standard is used. Some cities are shown to have possibly existed, but many very important claims, such as the Genesis myths and Exodus are refuted by those standards.

If Genesis and Exodus are myths, your test fails.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Once again, you've failed to answer the question. What's with that?

I was responding regarding the semantic difference excerpted.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Atheists don't believe in God. Get it right.

Sorry, moral accountability to any person or thing but their own selves.

 

[BilliardsBall]

The only thing that I can find as independent literary sources on Jesus’ existing as a real person in the early 1st century BCE, is from the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews.

But the only thing it has to say about Jesus, is Jesus’ brother, James. But Josephus was more focused on James than on Jesus. The Antiquities say of nothing about his origin (eg nothing Mary’s pregnancy, the magi, angel visitations to Joseph, Mary or the shepherds, and nothing about Egypt or the massacre in Bethlehem), nothing on the nature of Jesus’ works, ministry, miracles, death and resurrection.

Josephus did mention Quirinius’ appointment as governor of Syria and carrying out census in Judaea, BUT that occurred 10 YEARS AFTER HEROD’S DEATH, not before Herod’s death as gospel of Luke’s claim. There is a clash between Josephus’ version and the gospel version; I am more inclined to reject the gospel version, due to the gospel’s details being wrong.

Examples, Joseph living in Galilee, but travelling to register in Bethlehem in Judaea. Also the other version, gospel of Matthew never mentioned anything about any census, as well as Matthew’s never mention any travel from Galilee to Bethlehem; Nazareth and Galilee were never mentioned in Matthew 1, they are only mentioned after Herod’s death and Joseph leaving Egypt. Matthew’s never mentioned anything about Jesus being born in a manger, which is another thing that the two versions can’t agree on.

Josephus also wrote of John the Baptist’s arrest and execution, but it has to do with Herod Antipas fearing unrest, and not because of some promise to the dance on Antipas’ birthday. Such dance and promise to excute John, cannot be verified, so I believe the gospels made it up. Josephus also never connected John the Baptist, and never referred John being a “prophet”.

So, for example, a 28-chapter gospel, with over 1,000 verses, giving place names, people names, leader's names, etc. cannot possibly be true because it doesn't contain a census held when Jesus was yet to be born?

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's plain to me. 1) You are saying that the near-universal acceptance of Jesus's existence is based on reputable scholars trusting in "garbage" evidence. No.

As others have pointed out the evidence for Jesus is very poor. You confirm that in your inability to provide any evidence for him that goes beyond the garbage level.

2) You have not told me why the historical, non-supernatural Jesus is a threat to you.

It is un-Christian to make false accusations against others. I have a more valid question in asking you why you can't provide any evidence above the garbage level if I am wrong.

You see a simple way to refute me would be to post such evidence, That you have not speaks volumes.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So, for example, a 28-chapter gospel, with over 1,000 verses, giving place names, people names, leader's names, etc. cannot possibly be true because it doesn't contain a census held when Jesus was yet to be born?

You can't cherry pick. That immediately discredits the work. And you know that is not the only error in the gospels. By your standards Spiderman is factual.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If Genesis and Exodus are myths, your test fails.

One hundred percent wrong. Did you even think when you posted that? You can do better.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Sorry, moral accountability to any person or thing but their own selves.

LOL No to that one as well.

I can't believe you'd honestly say that to me after I've explained to you several times that I believe human beings are morally accountable to every other human on the planet.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I was responding regarding the semantic difference excerpted.

Um, okay.

So, what happens to you if you don't do what the Creator wants of you, after you die?

 

[gnostic]

So, for example, a 28-chapter gospel, with over 1,000 verses, giving place names, people names, leader's names, etc. cannot possibly be true because it doesn't contain a census held when Jesus was yet to be born?

The census was never held while Herod was alive, and while his son Archelaus succeeded him and ruled for 10 years before he was ousted from his throne when Augustus converted Judaea into a Roman province.

The census was instituted because Judaea became a Roman province in 6 CE, 10 years after Herod’s death, so the new subjects living in Judaea must registered for taxing purposes. Herod and Archelaus were client kings to Rome, and client kingdoms would either pay tributes to Rome or troops to Rome’s army, not pay property taxes like Roman provinces do.

If Joseph and Mary’s home were in Nazareth, Galilee, as the gospel of Luke claimed, then Joseph need not register. You would only need to enroll if he was living in Bethlehem, Joseph didn’t. Mary had to give birth in manger, because Joseph had no property in Bethlehem and no inns would accommodate them.

The gospel of Matthew differed from the gospel of Luke.

They weren’t travelling from Nazareth to Bethlehem because of the census, because there were no mentioned of census. Plus, there are no mention of finding manger, because Joseph and Mary were already living in Bethlehem.

Nowhere in Matthew 1 did it ever say they were living in Nazareth. Nazareth was only mentioned at the end of Matthew 2, when Joseph was leaving Egypt, and heard Archelaus was now ruling Judaea. Because with Archelaus in power, Joseph moved his family from Egypt to Nazareth.

It not just Josephus that disagree with census taking place when Herod was alive, but the gospel of Matthew make no mention of census, and there no enrollment for the census in this version of Jesus’ birth.

When the magi found where the star stopped, they entered Joseph’s house, not the manger:

10 When they saw that the star had stopped, they were overwhelmed with joy. 11 On entering the house, they saw the child with Mary his mother; and they knelt down and paid him homage. Then, opening their treasure chests, they offered him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

There are no “inn” and no “manger” in Matthew 1 or 2. If Joseph had house in Bethlehem, then he wouldn’t need to find an inn.

Likewise, the gospel of Luke makes no mention of any magi, no massacre, no Egypt.

 

[BilliardsBall]

LOL No to that one as well.

I can't believe you'd honestly say that to me after I've explained to you several times that I believe human beings are morally accountable to every other human on the planet.

So, you let others (me, a Christian) define morality for you? You are being immoral by disobeying Sabbath.

 

[BilliardsBall]

As others have pointed out the evidence for Jesus is very poor. You confirm that in your inability to provide any evidence for him that goes beyond the garbage level.



It is un-Christian to make false accusations against others. I have a more valid question in asking you why you can't provide any evidence above the garbage level if I am wrong.

You see a simple way to refute me would be to post such evidence, That you have not speaks volumes.

No "others" have pointed out "it's garbage evidence that Jesus existed." Rather, it is near-universal that all scholars accept the historicity of Jesus. You are the one accusing them of being poor scholars, accepting what you called garbage evidence. Therefore, my second point--why are you hostile toward a non-supernatural Jesus actually existing?--stands.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No "others" have pointed out "it's garbage evidence that Jesus existed." Rather, it is near-universal that all scholars accept the historicity of Jesus. You are the one accusing them of being poor scholars, accepting what you called garbage evidence. Therefore, my second point--why are you hostile toward a non-supernatural Jesus actually existing?--stands.

You can keep repeating that ignorant claim, but others here have pointed out that I am right, and your inability to find any reliable evidence confirms my claim.

Why do you keep lying about me? You know that your claim is false.

So one more time, evidence of admit that I am right.