Archeologly proves the Bible?

[Phase Inverter]

Matthew 2
Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,

No mention of Nazareth.

Since you didn't use the

function I don't know if this is a response to my post or not.

Assuming it is, you are right, Matthew places the whole birth narrative in Bethlehem. Apparently that's where Joseph and Mary live. That's where they had Jesus. The story says the Magi came to a house in Bethlehem. They don't get to Nazareth until after the flight to Egypt. This is why Fr. O'Connor says "Jesus is born in Bethlehem because that is the residence of his parents. They have a house, according to the text. They end up in Nazareth as refugees."

 

[Akhenaten]

For those who have expressed interest of what I have on the Valley of the Kings, here are the books I have from the Theban Mapping Project

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/338944a87f9901583b.jpg[/qimg] [qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/338944a87f9c9cc5a4.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/338944a84aa90d2878.png[/qimg]

Show off!


Geez you're good at this mate. Have you discovered some extra days in the week or something? Keep it up, whatever it is. Yourself and GreNME are making me feel like a complete ignoramus. About time I reckon!


Cheers,

Dave

 

[Lord Emsworth]

It's funny how the Romans [...] never said, "Hey Luke was wrong -- there was no taxation or census done by us around the time of Christ's birth in that area.

For you and anybody. There was a census.

• In 6AD.
  
• Conducted by Quirinius, the governor of Syria.
  
• In Judaea.
  Which was assigned to Syria after Archlaus' deposal. (And where Bethlehem is.)
  
• And yes, taxation/tribute had something to do with this census.
  
• And one more yes. Yes, this census in 6AD therefore is when Luke dates Jesus birth.

In fact, we have a nigh perfect hit. Problems arise if you want to square this nearly undoubtful census in 6AD (Josephus) with

• the necessity of Mary's and Joseph's transfer from Galilee (Nazareth) to Judaea (Bethlehem) in Luke
• Matthew's dating of Jesus' birth to the time before Herod's death in 4BC.

Luke accurately records:
[snip]
Facts 27 to 84 can be read in the rest of the article.

I wonder if your apologist has Quirinius' census in 6 AD on his list. Somehow I have my doubts ... Or does he?

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Is this another variant of the argumentum ad populum?
Or challenging us to prove a negative?
And ending the post with a non-sequitur, always so convincing.
In any case, I'm not sure why DOC has convinced him/herself that 'the Romans' would have given any importance to the gospels whatsoever.

Or that showing anything would have had some sort of impact. So, some Roman has a motive to rebut some Christian and tries to do so by showing something or other. And so he does. And now what?

It is not as if people were more rational in ancient times than they are now.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Odd you should post that up, amb, as there is a thread somewhere abouts in which the OP apparently recommends looking at and touching others' genitals as a way to understand the certainty of God's existence.
On the serious side, kiddy diddlers are out there: priests, pastors, preachers, gym coaches, music teachers, babysitters, neighbors, rellies, are just some examples.
Fortunately, these issues are being treated much more openly than before. I look forward to studies and research on the subject, as I'd like to know just what makes a gym teacher/priest/relly think kiddy diddling is something he/she can allow themselves.

Just curious, what is a relly?

Then who put all this information in the Book of Acts and for what reason:

From the Theology Web: FEATURED ARTICLE: I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist by Frank Turek.


"Classical scholar and historian Colin Hemer chronicles Luke's accuracy in the book of Acts verse by verse. With painstaking detail, Hemer identifies 84 facts in the last 16 chapters of Acts that have been confirmed by historical and archaeological research.

As you read the following list, keep in mind that Luke did not have access to modern-day maps or nautical charts.

Luke accurately records:
1. the natural crossing between correctly named ports (Acts 13:4-5)

2. the proper port (Perga) along the direct destination of a ship crossing from Cyprus (13:13)

3. the proper location of Lycaonia (14:6)

4. the unusual but correct declension of the name Lystra (14:6)

5. the correct language spoken in LystraCLycaonian (14:11)

6. two gods known to be so associatedCZeus and Hermes (14:12)

7. the proper port, Attalia, which returning travelers would use (14:25)

8. the correct order of approach to Derbe and then Lystra from the Cilician Gates (16:1; cf. 15:41)

9. the proper form of the name Troas (16:8)

10. the place of a conspicuous sailors' landmark, Samothrace (16:11)

11. the proper description of Philippi as a Roman colony (16:12)

12. the right location for the river (Gangites) near Philippi (16:13)

13. the proper association of Thyatira as a center of dyeing (16:14)

14. correct designations for the magistrates of the colony (16:22)

15. the proper locations (Amphipolis and Apollonia) where travelers would spend successive nights on this journey (17:1)

16. the presence of a synagogue in Thessalonica (17:1)

17. the proper term (Apolitarchs') used of the magistrates there (17:6)

18. the correct implication that sea travel is the most convenient way of reaching Athens, with the favoring east winds of summer sailing (17:14-15)

19. the abundant presence of images in Athens (17:16)

20. the reference to a synagogue in Athens (17:17)

21. the depiction of the Athenian life of philosophical debate in the Agora (17:17)

22. the use of the correct Athenian slang word for Paul (spermologos, 17:18) as well as for the court (Areios pagos, 17:19)

23. the proper characterization of the Athenian character (17:21)

24. an altar to an "unknown god" (17:23)

25. the proper reaction of Greek philosophers, who denied the bodily resurrection (17:32)

26. Areopagites as the correct title for a member of the court (17:34)

Facts 27 to 84 can be read in the rest of the article.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=51643

Let's try this again with another book (since Harry Potter doesn't seem to penetrate):

There were cotton plantations worked by slaves in the ante-bellum South.

There is a state called Georgia in the southern United States.

There is a city called Atlanta in the state of Georgia.

Atlanta was burned during the American Civil War.

Does that mean Gone with the Wind is an accurate history?

 

[I Ratant]

J
Let's try this again with another book (since Harry Potter doesn't seem to penetrate):

There were cotton plantations worked by slaves in the ante-bellum South.

There is a state called Georgia in the southern United States.

There is a city called Atlanta in the state of Georgia.

Atlanta was burned during the American Civil War.

Does that mean Gone with the Wind is an accurate history?

.
Frankly, Liz, I don't give a .... yes I do.
Try to find Sherlock Holmes at 221B Baker Street, same thing.
All that having place names in a novel does is flesh out a ripping good yarn.

 

[Akhenaten]

Just curious, what is a relly?



Let's try this again with another book (since Harry Potter doesn't seem to penetrate):

There were cotton plantations worked by slaves in the ante-bellum South.

There is a state called Georgia in the southern United States.

There is a city called Atlanta in the state of Georgia.

Atlanta was burned during the American Civil War.

Does that mean Gone with the Wind is an accurate history?

I might be mis-reading your post, but are you implying that Harry Potter isn't real? That can't be right because there's archeologlical evidence for it.

Wiki

 

[Elizabeth I]

I might be mis-reading your post, but are you implying that Harry Potter isn't real? That can't be right because there's archeologlical evidence for it.


[qimg]http://www.yvonneclaireadams.com/HostedStuff/KingsCrossStation.jpg[/qimg]
Wiki

I wonder who the poor soul is that got stuck three-quarters of the way into the gate?

 

[eccles]

I might be mis-reading your post, but are you implying that Harry Potter isn't real? That can't be right because there's archeologlical evidence for it.

UNBELIEVERS. Here is your proof. Hogwart:



What more do you want. It is a few miles West of Loch Ness.

 

[Elizabeth I]

I might be mis-reading your post, but are you implying that Harry Potter isn't real? That can't be right because there's archeologlical evidence for it.

UNBELIEVERS. Here is your proof. Hogwarts:

[snipped because the images won't reproduce in the reply.]

What more do you want. It is a few miles West of Loch Ness.

[snipped because the images won't reproduce in the reply.]

Heretic! Apostate! I saw the real Hogwarts in the recently released series of theatrical documentaries and it looks nothing like that.

 

[boloboffin]

It's funny how the Romans (for whom the Christians were causing all kinds of problems for almost 300 years) never said, "Hey Luke was wrong -- there was no taxation or census done by us around the time of Christ's birth in that area. You've got to ask yourself, why not. Surely the Romans took the time to read the most popular gospels circulating around -- they had about 240 years to do it. Why didn't they just say, Luke made that up?

The most obvious answer would be that man who has been called one of the world's great historians didn't make it up.

Have you ever read Dianetics? Or The Book of Mormon?

Have you ever read the Vedas?

Or did you pass those opportunities by because you know they're simply full of "depraved, excessive superstition"?

You recognize the quote, don't you? That's what Pliny the Younger called the information about Christian beliefs he got from torturing two deaconesses early in the second century. Why would any Roman care to read anything produced by a Christian once he understood the "depraved, excessive superstition" they believed?

 

[Wolrab]

It's not a typo, it's standard English. If the quote is being cut into two paragraphs, the quote at the end of the first one is omitted.



It's just marking the beginning of a new paragraph in the quotation.

Even I know that!
I'll even provide a source:
Writing Dialogue

Write each person's spoken words, however brief, as a separate paragraph. Use commas to set off dialogue tags such as "she said" or "he explained." If one person's speech goes on for more than one paragraph, use quotation marks to open the dialogue at the beginning of each paragraph. However, do not use closing quotation marks until the end of the final paragraph where that character is speaking.
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/577/04/

DOC's flailing about is pretty funny!

 

[TimCallahan]

It's funny how the Romans (for whom the Christians were causing all kinds of problems for almost 300 years) never said, "Hey Luke was wrong -- there was no taxation or census done by us around the time of Christ's birth in that area. You've got to ask yourself, why not. Surely the Romans took the time to read the most popular gospels circulating around -- they had about 240 years to do it. Why didn't they just say, Luke made that up?

The most obvious answer would be that man who has been called one of the world's great historians didn't make it up.

First of all, the Romans initially regarded Christianity as an eastern superstition. Pliny the Younger, for example, didn't even regard itas a religion. It's doubtful that he and his contemporary Tacitus even bothered to read any ofthe Christian scriptures. However, Porphyry (sp.?) did read their writings and gave rather a detailed critique of Christian belief.

Second, as others have already asked, according to whom was Luke one of the world's great historians?

Third, Doc, you still haven't responed to my points about the inconsistensies in the two Nativity stories, those of Matthew and Luke. So, here are the questions again:

Were Joseph and Mary originally living in Nazareth, as Luke says, or in Bethlehem, as Matthew says?

Why didn't Luke mention the magi, the slaughter of the innocents or the flight to Egypt?

Why didn't Matthew mention the Roman census?

Since Galilee, where Joseph and Mary are living according to Luke, was still a tributary kingdom under the rule of Herod Antipas at the time of the Judean census, why would Joseph be required to go to Judea to be enrolled?

Was Jesus born when Herod the Great was king, as Matthew has it, or when his son, Herod Antipas was king of Galilee and Herod Archelaus had been deposed? That's when the Judean census was taken, thus when Luke would have placed the birth of Jesus.

 

[pakeha]

Or that showing anything would have had some sort of impact. So, some Roman has a motive to rebut some Christian and tries to do so by showing something or other. And so he does. And now what?

It is not as if people were more rational in ancient times than they are now.

Very true, Lord Emsworth. Or not.
I've just read some rather unpleasant news of an exorcism which took place back home and has curdled my world-view for the moment.

Elizabeth I- may it please your majesty's grace to know relly is relative, or family.

Why would any Roman care to read anything produced by a Christian once he understood the "depraved, excessive superstition" they believed?

Nice one, boloboffin.

 

[Akhenaten]

I wonder who the poor soul is that got stuck three-quarters of the way into the gate?

D . . . D . . . Do . . .


No, I'd better not.

UNBELIEVERS. Here is your proof. Hogwarts:




What more do you want. It is a few miles West of Loch Ness.

This thread seems to be showing up a lot more archeologlical evidence for Harry Potter than it does for that other book.

 

[DOC]

, Who says that 'Luke' was one of the world's great historians?
I'd like to think this statement isn't based on a misquoted and outdated academic with the initials WR.

As has already been verified by someone else in this thread, the former skeptic and archaeologist Sir William Mitchell Ramsay, who spent 15 years doing research in the biblical lands, said it.

 

[boloboffin]

As has already been verified by someone else in this thread, the former skeptic and archaeologist Sir William Mitchell Ramsay, who spent 15 years doing research in the biblical lands, said it.

What makes Sir William Mitchell Ramsey an authority on who's a stellar historian and who's not?

Is it appeal to authority all the way down with you?

 

[Hokulele]

As has already been verified by someone else in this thread, the former skeptic and archaeologist Sir William Mitchell Ramsay, who spent 15 years doing research in the biblical lands, said it.

Which, of course, doesn't make it true.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Elizabeth I- may it please your majesty's grace to know relly is relative, or family.

We thank you and hereby grant you a "get-out-of-a-beheading free" card, good for the next fortnight.

 

[DOC]

Have you ever read Dianetics? Or The Book of Mormon?

Have you ever read the Vedas?

Or did you pass those opportunities by because you know they're simply full of "depraved, excessive superstition"?

You recognize the quote, don't you? That's what Pliny the Younger called the information about Christian beliefs he got from torturing two deaconesses early in the second century. Why would any Roman care to read anything produced by a Christian once he understood the "depraved, excessive superstition" they believed?

Well I have read some of the book of Mormon, and if I was the governor of a land where I was executing thousands of Mormons I would read much more or at least assign people to read it.

And if I was the Roman emperor and there were thousands and thousands of people causing all kind problems to the point I was executing them by the thousands like one emperor did, I believe it was Hadrian, wouldn't it seem likely that you would have your people read their literature (by the way there are about 25,000 ancient manuscripts of the NT out there and there were likely thousands more destroyed since at least one emperor ordered Christian literature destroyed).

Don't you think with thousands of manuscripts circulating around at least one Roman official read this by Luke:

Luke 2:1

And it came to pass in those days {the time around Jesus' birth}, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed.

Surely the Romans or even non-believing Jews could of found out if that statement was true or not. And if it wasn't true they could have wrote about it and said, Hey this is not true, it never happened. They had hundreds of years to do that and yet there is no evidence that anybody did.