(July 16, 2012 at 8:14 am)spockrates Wrote: Not sure I understand. Augustus lived until 19 August, AD 14, so Herod was alive during the Emperor's census.

Min already explained it in his original post. Quirinus was made governor in 6AD and Herod died in 4BC. Therefore it couldn't have taken place while both were in power, as those times were mutually exclusive.

(July 16, 2012 at 12:42 am)cato123 Wrote: My feeble attempt to use the English language to describe your pathology didn't work.

Therefore I give you this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFyHTU8tg_0

I'd gladly play Clouseau to your Cato!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IA8QrOAgh...detailpage

---

(July 16, 2012 at 9:58 am)ElDinero Wrote:

(July 16, 2012 at 8:14 am)spockrates Wrote: Not sure I understand. Augustus lived until 19 August, AD 14, so Herod was alive during the Emperor's census.

Min already explained it in his original post. Quirinus was made governor in 6AD and Herod died in 4BC. Therefore it couldn't have taken place while both were in power, as those times were mutually exclusive.

The census would likely have taken several years to complete. Why could it not have taken place during the reign of both governors--beginning with one and ending with the other?

---

(July 16, 2012 at 2:02 am)FallentoReason Wrote: spockrates, how about this one? It's not a contradiction but rather a complete misunderstanding between Gospel authors.

Mark 11 contains the part about Jesus and the fig tree:

Quote:

---

12 The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. 13 Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. 14 Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples heard him say it.

15 On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple area and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves, 16 and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts. 17 And as he taught them, he said, "Is it not written:

"'My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations'? But you have made it 'a den of robbers.'"

18 The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him, because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching.

19 When evening came, they went out of the city.

20 In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. 21 Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!"

---

This all came from Hosea 9 which refers to the destruction of Israel:

Quote:

---

Hosea 9:
1 Do not rejoice, O Israel; do not be jubilant like the other nations. For you have been unfaithful to your God; ...
7 The days of punishment are coming, the days of reckoning are at hand. Let Israel know this. Because your sins are so many and your hostility so great, the prophet is considered a fool, the inspired man a maniac.
8 The prophet, along with my God, is the watchman over Ephraim, yet snares await him on all his paths, and hostility in the house of his God.
9 They have sunk deep into corruption, as in the days of Gibeah. God will remember their wickedness and punish them for their sins.
10 'When I found Israel, it was like finding grapes in the desert; when I saw your fathers, it was like seeing the early fruit on the fig tree. But when they came to Baal Peor, they consecrated themselves to that shameful idol and became as vile as the thing they loved.
11 Ephraim's glory will fly away like a bird—no birth, no pregnancy, no conception.
12 Even if they rear children, I will bereave them of every one. Woe to them when I turn away from them!
13 I have seen Ephraim, like Tyre, planted in a pleasant place. But Ephraim will bring out their children to the slayer."
14 Give them, O LORD—what will you give them? Give them wombs that miscarry and breasts that are dry.
15 "Because of all their wickedness in Gilgal, I hated them there. Because of their sinful deeds, I will drive them out of my house. I will no longer love them; all their leaders are rebellious.
16 Ephraim is blighted, their root is withered, they yield no fruit. Even if they bear children, I will slay their cherished offspring.'
17 My God will reject them because they have not obeyed him;
We can clearly see here that the author of Mark uses Hosea 9 for his motif, because in Mark 11 the fig

---

Matthew then reads this about the fig tree but doesn't understand why Mark wrote about Jesus going to inspect a tree that was out of season. It must have seemed rather absurd. So to fix that up he turns this event into a standard party trick to amaze his 12 zodia--I mean Apostles :

Matthew 21:18,19 Wrote:18 Early in the morning, as he was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. 19 Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" Immediately the tree withered.

As one can see, the allegory is completely lost. From Matthew's account we can no longer make the comparison between Hosea 9 and understand that Mark was referring to the destruction of Israel.

I guess to me this is a contradiction after all. The contradiction being between the authors. Why does it seem like Mark is not writing history but merely referencing the OT but then only to have Matthew write a completely different 'account of history'? Did they believe in the same things here?? Seems to me like they didn't. If my interpretation is right then it can be assumed that Mark knew Jesus wasn't a historical figure and Matthew was once again trying to force Mark into being literal history by writing similar accounts and losing the allegory.

Thanks FTR. I don't yet see the disagreement between the two authors. Both explain that Jesus caused the tree to wither. Neither mentions Hosea, nor explains a symbolic meaning of the miracle, nor even mentions that there is any metaphor to be gleaned from the event. Please explain.

(July 15, 2012 at 11:18 pm)cato123 Wrote:

(July 15, 2012 at 10:17 pm)Undeceived Wrote: How is knowing someone's decision the same as deciding for them?

Your God created me knowing that I would make the decision to deny him, his son, and the ever elusive holy ghost. God knew my punishment and knew my future decisions, but created me anyway. Where exactly was my choice in this scheme?

You say he knew your "decisions". That sounds like a choice to me. Keep this argument on an individual basis. You are not one in a slushpile of social security numbers. There is no other version of you who would choose differently. You are you, God made you, and you make your choice. God did decide the number of people who would ultimately accept or reject him, but he did not decide individually for each person. There's a difference. One is the individual. One is humanity. Humanity did not have free will to determine which individuals make it up--I suppose that is your argument.
Now the question why he chose so many to disbelieve is not ours to answer. Perhaps he created only as far as personalities, letting them run their own course. Perhaps position in life helps determine the choice--in which case it would be impossible to have all believers because there would always be that poor child with neglectful parents. The problem in speculating why is that we do not entirely know what leads a person to choose God or accept him. What are the factors? Is it personality? Social standing? God's sovereign choice? The latter is strongest. Romans 9:19-21:

It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

You might read into the verse and think, "Why shall I try if God has condemned me already?" But in reality you would not believe he has condemned you because you do not believe he exists. If you believed he exists, you would be one of those pottery "for special purposes". And maybe you will be. The moment you believe the verse is the moment you become one of his elect.

(July 16, 2012 at 10:00 am)spockrates Wrote: The census would likely have taken several years to complete. Why could it not have taken place during the reign of both governors--beginning with one and ending with the other?

What's your basis for saying that it would have taken over ten years? Bearing in mind that ten years is the absolute MINIMUM amount of time, if it started just as Herod was about to cark it and ended just as Quirinus came into office.

This strikes at the heart of why people have been reluctant to participate in your thread. You're given an example and instead of thinking about it as a problem, you stick with your original position no matter what and try to find ways to shoehorn it any way you can, making unsupported assertions along the way.

(July 16, 2012 at 12:14 pm)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:

(July 16, 2012 at 7:53 am)spockrates Wrote:

I changed my mind after realizing there are more than vicious knids at this forum!

Let's try a simple one. Who begat Salah?

(July 16, 2012 at 12:15 pm)ElDinero Wrote:

(July 16, 2012 at 10:00 am)spockrates Wrote: The census would likely have taken several years to complete. Why could it not have taken place during the reign of both governors--beginning with one and ending with the other?

What's your basis for saying that it would have taken over ten years? Bearing in mind that ten years is the absolute MINIMUM amount of time, if it started just as Herod was about to cark it and ended just as Quirinus came into office.

This strikes at the heart of why people have been reluctant to participate in your thread. You're given an example and instead of thinking about it as a problem, you stick with your original position no matter what and try to find ways to shoehorn it any way you can, making unsupported assertions along the way.

It would take much time to have everyone in ancient Palestine (men and women) journey to the village or city in which their ancestors were born. The ancient world moved by a slower clock than our world does. We would need some documentation indicating when the census began and when it ended, or some indication of how long each person had to comply. It might have taken place in stages--one tribe of Israel every few years, or one area every few years. Making everyone move at the same time would stop the economy (and taxes paid to Rome). It would defeat the purpose of doing a census--which was to increase the money coming from the Roman occupied territory.

---

(July 16, 2012 at 12:18 pm)ElDinero Wrote: Let's try a simple one. Who begat Salah?

Please be more specific.

(July 16, 2012 at 12:19 pm)spockrates Wrote: It would take much time to have everyone in ancient Palestine (men and women) journey to the village or city in which their ancestors were born. The ancient world moved by a slower clock than our world does. We would need some documentation indicating when the census began and when it ended, or some indication of how long each person had to comply. It might have taken place in stages--one tribe of Israel every few years, or one area every few years. Making everyone move at the same time would stop the economy (and taxes paid to Rome). It would defeat the purpose of doing a census--which was to increase the money coming from the Roman occupied territory.

Look, just because it took the Jews forty years to complete a journey that should have taken six weeks, just how much slower was this fucking ancient clock? Like I said, unsupported assertions. You can't back up any of the above, it's pure conjecture.

With regards Salah, I don't see what's causing you the problem. There is a character named Salah. I want to know who his father was.

(July 16, 2012 at 9:58 am)ElDinero Wrote:

(July 16, 2012 at 8:14 am)spockrates Wrote: Not sure I understand. Augustus lived until 19 August, AD 14, so Herod was alive during the Emperor's census.

Min already explained it in his original post. Quirinus was made governor in 6AD and Herod died in 4BC. Therefore it couldn't have taken place while both were in power, as those times were mutually exclusive.

I thought this was cleared up in the last thread. Quirinius was procurator before he was governor. In the Gospel account, Luke gave Quirinius his higher title.
http://www.sunrise-publications.com/Arti...inius2.pdf