The testimony of the NT writers

[lukethethird]

Please confirm how you know that he got it from there and it isn't that Jesus, who fulfilled the Old Testament, simply was reiterating what was from the beginning and Matthew reported it.

Seriously? Have you thought this through?

I already provided a link to confirm how I know this. Here it is again:

The Old Testament Background of the Beatitudes


The Old Testament Background of the Beatitudes
3 “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Isaiah 61:1
1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me to bring good news to the poor; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound;



4 “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.

Isaiah 61:2
2 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn;



5 “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.

Psalm 37:11
11 But the meek shall inherit the land and delight themselves in abundant peace.



6 “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.

Isaiah 55:1–3
1 “Come, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters; and he who has no money, come, buy and eat! Come, buy wine and milk without money and without price. 2 Why do you spend your money for that which is not bread, and your labor for that which does not satisfy? Listen diligently to me, and eat what is good, and delight yourselves in rich food. 3 Incline your ear, and come to me; hear, that your soul may live; and I will make with you an everlasting covenant, my steadfast, sure love for David.



7 “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.

Exodus 34:6
6 The Lord passed before him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness,



8 “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.

Psalm 24:3–5
3 Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? 4 He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false and does not swear deceitfully. 5 He will receive blessing from the Lord and righteousness from the God of his salvation.



9 “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.




Psalm 34:14


14 Turn away from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it.



10 “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.


11 “Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. 12 Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

2 Chronicles 24:21


21 But they conspired against him [Zechariah, son of Jehoiada], and by command of the king they stoned him with stones in the court of the house of the Lord.

Nehemiah 9:26

26 “Nevertheless, they were disobedient and rebelled against you and cast your law behind their back and killed your prophets, who had warned them in order to turn them back to you, and they committed great blasphemies.

Jeremiah 20:2

2 Then Pashhur beat Jeremiah the prophet, and put him in the stocks that were in the upper Benjamin Gate of the house of the Lord.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I love the noise of bias

So that is why you talk so much.

Too bad that you also hate the sound of logic.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What can I do against flat-earth thinking?

Have you regressed to that now? I don't think anyone can help you here.

 

[Subduction Zone]

OK, can you please at least clarify the 10-year difference you speak of between the account in Matthew and Luke about Jesus' birth? Thank you.

No problem. By the way, this is something that any real Bible scholar knows. In the Gospel of Matthew Jesus's birth is during the reign of Herod the Great. He died in 4 BCE , So that is the year that they have his birth. Luke on the other hand has him born after that. After Herod the Great died the kingdom was split and Judea was given to his son Herod Archelaus. Archelaus did not do so well as a ruler. He caused his own people to rebel against him and Rome took over and kicked him out. The man that took over was the recently appointed governor of Syria, Quirinius. He was specifically name by the author of Luke when it came to his census. And the year of the census of Quirinius is well known,. As is when he became governor of Syria. Deniers of history try to make up excuses but none of them are supported by history, or do they make any sense.,

 

[YoursTrue]

No problem. By the way, this is something that any real Bible scholar knows.

LOL, I thought that was an interesting putdown. Still smiling here. So what? Do I need to be a "scholar" to talk with you, or ask you questions especially to explain yourself? (You're funny- sometimes.)

In the Gospel of Matthew Jesus's birth is during the reign of Herod the Great. He died in 4 BCE , So that is the year that they have his birth. Luke on the other hand has him born after that. After Herod the Great died the kingdom was split and Judea was given to his son Herod Archelaus. Archelaus did not do so well as a ruler. He caused his own people to rebel against him and Rome took over and kicked him out. The man that took over was the recently appointed governor of Syria, Quirinius. He was specifically name by the author of Luke when it came to his census. And the year of the census of Quirinius is well known,. As is when he became governor of Syria. Deniers of history try to make up excuses but none of them are supported by history, or do they make any sense.,

I'll keep your contentions in mind, however -- you might want to show the scriptures you're referring to, otherwise -- pleeze -- have a good day. You're the one that says an assertion or claim needs to be backed up with reason, and frankly you are not doing well in this particular area since -- you do not show the particular scriptures you count on here for your assertion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

LOL, I thought that was an interesting putdown. Still smiling here. So what? Do I need to be a "scholar" to talk with you, or ask you questions especially to explain yourself? (You're funny- sometimes.)

No, the problem is that there are a lot of Christian apologists out there. They are not scholars.

I'll keep your contentions in mind, however -- you might want to show the scriptures you're referring to, otherwise -- pleeze -- have a good day. You're the one that says an assertion or claim needs to be backed up with reason, and frankly you are not doing well in this particular area since -- you do not show the particular scriptures you count on here for your assertion.

Sure no problem. Here is Luke 2 1-3:

"
The Birth of Jesus
2 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 2 (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register."

There is more than one problem with this. Roman censuses were well recorded. There is no record at all of Augustus performing an Empire wide census. Roman properties did regularly undergo censuses, but if I remember correctly the first empire wide one was about 75CE. Nor would it be productive for people to return to their "historical home". There were Jews all throughout the empire. It would not only be a logistical nightmare, the question is what good would that do? The censuses was done for the purpose of taxation. It makes not sense at all to count the people in Bethlehem when you want to get tax from people in Nazareth. For taxation purposes one counts the people where they live and make their money.

And we do know the date of the Census of Quirinius:

Census of Quirinius - Wikipedia

The Gospel of Matthew on the other hand has the birth when Herod the Great is still alive.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 1:18-2:23 - English Standard Version

"2 Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem, "

Herod died in about 4 BCE:

Herod | Biography, Facts, Reign, Temple, & Jesus

That is at least a ten year difference between the two.

 

[lukethethird]

At least that is your viewpoint. But you are still in Western Thought as you read a 2000 year old Eastern Culture. You might want to read up on it. Wrong court of law too

You have your directions crossed. Christianity derived from a western culture and is now the single greatest influence on western thought.

 

[Kenny]

You have your directions crossed. Christianity derived from a western culture and is now the single greatest influence on western thought.

Support for your position please... or is this your personal viewpoint.

 

[YoursTrue]

No, the problem is that there are a lot of Christian apologists out there. They are not scholars.



Sure no problem. Here is Luke 2 1-3:

"
The Birth of Jesus
2 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 2 (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register."

There is more than one problem with this. Roman censuses were well recorded. There is no record at all of Augustus performing an Empire wide census. Roman properties did regularly undergo censuses, but if I remember correctly the first empire wide one was about 75CE. Nor would it be productive for people to return to their "historical home". There were Jews all throughout the empire. It would not only be a logistical nightmare, the question is what good would that do? The censuses was done for the purpose of taxation. It makes not sense at all to count the people in Bethlehem when you want to get tax from people in Nazareth. For taxation purposes one counts the people where they live and make their money.

And we do know the date of the Census of Quirinius:

Census of Quirinius - Wikipedia

The Gospel of Matthew on the other hand has the birth when Herod the Great is still alive.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 1:18-2:23 - English Standard Version

"2 Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem, "

Herod died in about 4 BCE:

Herod | Biography, Facts, Reign, Temple, & Jesus

That is at least a ten year difference between the two.

According to what I have read, scholars are out on the exact year of Herod's death.

 

[Subduction Zone]

According to what I have read, scholars are out on the exact year of Herod's death.

True, but the closest they can get is a seven year error. Ten is the most likely one. It could be a bit larger or smaller.

You see Herod died and his kingdom was split between his three sons. Archylaus messed up so badly that the Romans took over and turned Judea into a client state. Before that they were technically not part of the empire and were not taxed directly. There wouldn't have been a census under Herod.

 

[lukethethird]

Support for your position please... or is this your personal viewpoint.

How do you not know this? Christianity dominates western thought as in all of Europe, North and South America, and Australia. Koine Greek was the common language of the earliest Christians. The entire NT was originally written in Greek. Even the Hebrew scripture we find in the gospels was from a Greek translation, the Septuagint, translated hundreds of years before Christianity began.

 

[YoursTrue]

True, but the closest they can get is a seven year error. Ten is the most likely one. It could be a bit larger or smaller.

You see Herod died and his kingdom was split between his three sons. Archylaus messed up so badly that the Romans took over and turned Judea into a client state. Before that they were technically not part of the empire and were not taxed directly. There wouldn't have been a census under Herod.

I'm not sure what you mean, really. On the seven or ten year error you talk about. I did a little research about this, I believe (for me) these things have to be done slowly and carefully -- and I see the following in Luke chapter 2: "Now in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that a census should be taken of the whole empire.a 2This was the first census to take place while Quirinius was governor of Syria. 3And everyone went to his own town to register."
So what are you saying about this?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm not sure what you mean, really. On the seven or ten year error you talk about. I did a little research about this, I believe (for me) these things have to be done slowly and carefully -- and I see the following in Luke chapter 2: "Now in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that a census should be taken of the whole empire.a 2This was the first census to take place while Quirinius was governor of Syria. 3And everyone went to his own town to register."
So what are you saying about this?

The Romans kept good records of their censuses. They would definitely keep good records of their largest census ever, but there is no record of an Empire wide census at that time. I can't find the source right now, but I do believe the first empire-wide census was done about 70 years later.

Second who crazy person would require people to go to their ancestral homes for a census? How would that allow them to be taxed?

Just as today censuses count people where they live. To tax a person you need to know where they live and work. Where they came from has no effect on that.

Worse yet, at that time Nazareth was not in Judea. Judea was in effect part of the Roman Empire. Nazareth was not. Joseph would not have been under Roman law.

This story fails on several levels. Matthew's fails too but not quite as badly. It appears that both did it to make it look as if Jesus fulfilled a prophecy when he did not.

 

[YoursTrue]

How do you not know this? Christianity dominates western thought as in all of Europe, North and South America, and Australia. Koine Greek was the common language of the earliest Christians. The entire NT was originally written in Greek. Even the Hebrew scripture we find in the gospels was from a Greek translation, the Septuagint, translated hundreds of years before Christianity began.

I think the domination you're talking about started with the conflict of Arians and trinitarians as well as kind of cementing it with Constantine and his vision.

 

[YoursTrue]

The Romans kept good records of their censuses. They would definitely keep good records of their largest census ever, but there is no record of an Empire wide census at that time. I can't find the source right now, but I do believe the first empire-wide census was done about 70 years later.

Second who crazy person would require people to go to their ancestral homes for a census? How would that allow them to be taxed?

Just as today censuses count people where they live. To tax a person you need to know where they live and work. Where they came from has no effect on that.

Worse yet, at that time Nazareth was not in Judea. Judea was in effect part of the Roman Empire. Nazareth was not. Joseph would not have been under Roman law.

This story fails on several levels. Matthew's fails too but not quite as badly. It appears that both did it to make it look as if Jesus fulfilled a prophecy when he did not.

OK, I'll have to do more research, I've been looking at information about Herod and Quirinius*.. oh well, I'll get back to this. I hope.
*and what scholars say.

 

[lukethethird]

I'm not sure what you mean, really. On the seven or ten year error you talk about. I did a little research about this, I believe (for me) these things have to be done slowly and carefully -- and I see the following in Luke chapter 2: "Now in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that a census should be taken of the whole empire.a 2This was the first census to take place while Quirinius was governor of Syria. 3And everyone went to his own town to register."
So what are you saying about this?

Publius Sulpicius Quirinius (c. 51 BC – AD 21), also translated as Cyrenius,[1] was a Roman aristocrat. After the banishment of the ethnarch Herod Archelaus from the tetrarchy of Judea in AD 6, Quirinius was appointed legate governor of Syria, to which the province of Judaea had been added for the purpose of a census. wiki

Matthew has Jesus born in Herod's time, Herod died in 4BCE
Luke has Jesus born when Quirinius became governor in 6CE

 

[Subduction Zone]

OK, I'll have to do more research, I've been looking at information about Herod and Quirinius*.. oh well, I'll get back to this. I hope.
*and what scholars say.

Just make sure that you go with the scholars. Apologists tend to be liars for Jesus. Historians are like scientists. They want to know without an agenda. This is not at all controversial unless one is a biblical literalist.

 

[Kenny]

How do you not know this? Christianity dominates western thought as in all of Europe, North and South America, and Australia. Koine Greek was the common language of the earliest Christians. The entire NT was originally written in Greek. Even the Hebrew scripture we find in the gospels was from a Greek translation, the Septuagint, translated hundreds of years before Christianity began.

How is that western thought? The Hebrew scriptures are still found... in Hebrew. (Dead Sea Scrolls) - and found that the translations were quite accurate.

 

[Subduction Zone]

How is that western thought? The Hebrew scriptures are still found... in Hebrew. (Dead Sea Scrolls) - and found that the translations were quite accurate.

Do you have a valid source that supports that? I have heard the claim from believers but I have never seen it confirmed.

 

[Kenny]

Do you have a valid source that supports that? I have heard the claim from believers but I have never seen it confirmed.

Thanks for asking:

"After years of careful study, it has been concluded that the Dead Sea Scrolls give substantial confirmation that our Old Testament has been accurately preserved. The scrolls were found to be almost identical with the Masoretic text. Hebrew Scholar Millar Burrows writes, “It is a matter of wonder that through something like one thousand years the text underwent so little alteration. As I said in my first article on the scroll, ‘Herein lies its chief importance, supporting the fidelity of the Masoretic tradition.'”{6}"

The Dead Sea Scrolls Shed Light on the Accuracy of our Bible