From the date of the cross is what I meant.
Are you saying about 3 years?
Not necessarily...
From the date of the cross is what I meant.
Are you saying about 3 years?
It may seem strange, to those whose minds are being controlled...
And which of the two Christian Laws are we damned for?The rest of us understand that history is rife with examples of invoking the divine to ram laws and agenda driven mandates down the people's throats...
They were paid to do the translation, the 66 books. The preface was a personal message to the readers from the 'authors'. That makes it free from the effects of money.I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here...
Who wrote/received the letters of John I, II, and III?You'd think that John, having written his Revelations shortly after the alleged events, would have warranted some mention in the Epistles of Paul, and likewise John should have given some mention to the strong-arm of the Jesus cult...
If you get sucked into believing a lie from Satan you have been abducted.
The odds are less of winning if you don't purchase a ticket.
I'm pretty sure everybody is quite familiar to some pagan holidays that are celebrated by Christians. Most people would agree that Jesus true birthday is about mid-sept. Count back 9 months and you end up in mid December. So instead of celebration His birth people are actually celebrating His conception. I don't see a great deal wrong with that, other than the people are completely void of that knowledge.
You should try this new thing that the web has, it's called a search engine and it's not all that new.
I'm pretty sure everybody is quite familiar to some pagan holidays that are celebrated by Christians. Most people would agree that Jesus true birthday is about mid-sept. Count back 9 months and you end up in mid December. So instead of celebration His birth people are actually celebrating His conception. I don't see a great deal wrong with that, other than the people are completely void of that knowledge.
Wasn't the Book of Enoch rediscovered in those scrolls? Interesting that they will take bits and pieces and write a 'new bible' around those finds but finding something that pertains to Enoch goes largely ignored.
Vannie would certainly get some perspective on what Angels are SJP would get some idea of what a part of Heaven actually looks like (in that he does not want to go under any circumstance).
Did you have something specific in mind when you say 'trouble'?
What's a google?
Why would it be strange to go to your home-town. People were associated with their city of birth back then, Jesus of Nazareth, Mary of Bethany. Do those things ring a bell. When Joseph was anointed back when he was a baby he would have been registered as 'belonging' to a city. This census was to mesh the two databases, the old one and the one to be created, then Rome would know who was still alive. If Joseph has registered in Nazareth Rome would not know this was a Joseph refistered in Bethlehem. The Romans did things the easy and logical way, you want to mess it up so nobody knows who is who anymore, brilliant.
Wasn't the Book of Enoch rediscovered in those scrolls? Interesting that they will take bits and pieces and write a 'new bible' around those finds but finding something that pertains to Enoch goes largely ignored.
Vannie would certainly get some perspective on what Angels are SJP would get some idea of what a part of Heaven actually looks like (in that he does not want to go under any circumstance).
Did you have something specific in mind when you say 'trouble'?
Are you sure they had the fragments? It would seem that it was the Jews who kept them from being examined (until state approval)The trouble was getting the scrolls content released from the catholic curators, it took more than thirty years for them to be publicly available. They fought every step of the way, no one really knows what they hid or destroyed. The best example of the book of enoch I think was the Ethiopian. The state of the histories is very much scrambled by design. The truth is a dangerous thing in the wrong hands, like those of the public. What enoch described is from the perspective of the unsophisticated ancient, he had no familiarity with technologys he may have witnessed.
Like you would actually know for sure.Nice try...but the truth is that it didn't happen that way at all...
I usually date it back 30 years from when John was first called, Pilate was there in 26AD so that is the earliest.So you're now asserting that Jesus was born in 5 BCE, that's just fine for the purposes of this demonstration.
31 days after Mary gave birth she would have been purified so she could enter the temple in Jerusalem to have Jesus anointed, from there they would have headed straight to Egypt. The slaughter would have been very close to this time, Jesus could have even been getting anointed when that order was given. The order wasn't given 2 years after His birth, Herod gave that number so he could be certain of getting Jesus. How many were killed? Why would the Romans record something like that, Herods men were probably skulking around doing the deed in darkness rather than the town square at high-noon. Why would they write about it?Matthew says that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great, and there was the whole slaughter of the innocents debacle, which cannot bear historical scrutiny...
Maybe they were supposed to gather at the house of the oldest living member of a family.Luke says Mary was pregnant with Jesus while she and Joseph traveled to Bethlehem, and that he was born there. They went to Bethlehem upon the orders of Quirinius the governor of Syria to have their census taken. (it still doesn't make sense that they would go to the city of Joseph's birth, but no matter)
On what day in 4BC. He could have died shortly after he gave that order, he could have been dead by the time Joseph got to Egypt. It doesn't say they stayed in Egypt for years and years, all it says it that Jesus had to be called up out of Egypt, which He was.We know that Herod the Great died in 4 BC, which somewhat supports your earlier dating of Jesus' birth.
Neither one is in error, the scales on your eyes are introducing the error.Hoiwever, we also know with out a doubt that the census that Qurinius took was in the year 6 CE, ten years after the death of Herod.
Any idea why Luke would have Jesus born 10 years after Matthew?
Which one is fabrication, or are they both?
Well Cliffy I'm not trying to do that. I'm not trying to prove hell exists when I quote some verse or passage that mentions that place. I'm only showing what the Bible has to say about hell as not many have a very clear understanding of what is actually in print. The common view (around here)is closer to what some 12 year old under a blanket with a flashlight late at night would come up with rather than what is in the Bible.What I find rather funny is that people who believe the bible is the word of god can only prove it is by using the bible. They fail to see the irony of that. The bible can be proven by many, many sources to be a work of fiction. But to prove their faith, they claim that it is precisely that it is not provable. Their faith is dependent on the fact that it cannot be proven to be true yet they believe. How that makes sense to them is one of life's great mysteries - kind like their god: all merciful and loving unless you don't bow down and kiss his butt every day, then all hell breaks lose.
Neither one is in error, the scales on your eyes are introducing the error.
"[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Sanserif] But recently, confirmation that Quirinius was in Syria during the first Roman census taken between 8 B.C. and 5 B.C. has been found.[/FONT] "
Quirinius and the Census
"[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Sanserif]And as for Quirinius being the governor of Syria during this census, it is worth noting that the Bible never calls him the governor, at least the New King James Version doesn't. It says he was governing in Syria. And we know that Quirinius was indeed governing in some capacity in this region at this time. [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Sanserif] Records also indicate that Quirinius was no minor figure in Roman politics. His name is mentioned in Res Gestae - The Deeds of Augustus by Augustus placing him as consul as early as 12 B.C.[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Sanserif] The Roman historian Tacitus also mentions that Quirinius was appointed by Augustus to be an advisor to his young son Caius Caesar in Armenia well before the census of 6 A.D. - Caius was sent to administer Syria in 1 A.D. and was wounded in nearby Armenia in 3 A.D. Evidently, Augustus wanted someone who was experienced in previously administering the region to advise his son. Who better then Quirinius?[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Sanserif] The first century historian Josephus also mentions that Quirinius became governor later on in 6 A.D.: He wrote: [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Sanserif] "Quirinius, a Roman senator who had gone through other magistracies, and had passed through them all until he had become consul, was appointed governor of Syria by Caesar and was given the task of assessing property there and in Judea." [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Sanserif] So who was in charge as the assessor of property in Judea during the first census? Just as the bible had said all along, Quirinius.
[/FONT]"
Furthermore we know that the two Roman governors of Syria during the last years of Herod's reign was C. Sentius Saturninus who held the post from 9 to 6 BCE and P Quintilius Varus was his successor from 6 to 4 BCE. And it was Quintillus Varus who, as the governor, suppressed the uprising that occurred after the death of Herod. The only years in which we have no record as to who the governor of Syria was in 3 to 2 BCE, by the time which Herod was already dead. [10]