"Gospel Quest" (or The Jesus Timeline)

[Undeceived]

There was some evidence that first caused the believing scholar to believe, and that particular examining was not dependent on religion.

If so, then their level of what qualifies as evidence is pretty low.

William Lane Craig, for example, has said that 'the witness of the Holy Spirit' is all he needs. Which means he is basing his beliefs on a feeling, not good evidence.

If a student is to learn anything, at some point he needs to stop critiquing his teacher and start listening. What sample size should he take before finally giving himself over to instruction? This crossing-of-the-line is a type of faith. And all the while, the Holy Spirit is communicating with our spirit. We are spiritual beings. We can't do anything without our spirit agreeing. A "feeling" is often a symptom of your spirit. Likewise, we can't do anything unless our feelings agree. In fact, our feelings are the only reason we do anything. If you no longer felt like living, you wouldn't. Think about that. You would never watch TV unless you liked the way it entertained you. You would never get a job unless you thought the money would make you happy. Your quest in life is to be happy, and that is a feeling. So when you talk about basing beliefs on feelings, I think about the deepest longings of my soul--what satisfies and fulfills me, what makes life worth living. God makes like worth living. My spirit, which spills out as "feelings" tell me this is so. It is not wishful thinking. It is my spirit, the immaterial integral part of every person. This is hard to explain. All I can say is, once you realize you have one, you are a believer. That's why it is so obvious to Christians that God is alive and working. He lives in us, we can't miss him. If you suddenly woke up with an extra limb made out of light that only you could see, you couldn't miss it. If you want this, if you really want this, you can ask, seek and knock. Drich has a nice recent thread on the topic.

Luke 11:9-13

“So I say to you: Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.
“Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead? Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!”

---

At this point they are only apparent discrepancies. Any so-called "discrepancy" you find has a Bible scholar's explanation why it is not a discrepancy, but merely a misunderstanding of culture/literature/person ect. The difference between you and I is I believe the scholars. And more importantly, I believe the evidence (scriptural context, historical context, archaeology, ect) that the scholars cite.

Seriously?

Have you bothered to read any part of the first four pages of this thread before you started posting?

I have painstakingly reviewed the timelines proposed by all four Gospels and shown them to be incompatible with each other. I have reviewed the historical landmarks against which the mythology is set. I have reviewed the apologetic ad hoc dismissals of and excuses for all the "apparent" discrepancies. I have done all this for you and your ilk who blithely and flippantly declare your bare assertion that there are no contradictions in the Gospels.

I am sorry. Next time, I will address the thread-starter first. You clearly took the time to research and feel strongly about your findings. But for those reading who are open to it, I have a couple scholars' takes:

http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/onlin...o-to-mark/
http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/onlin...o-matthew/
http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/onlin...ro-to-luke
http://www.biblica.com/en-us/bible/onlin...o-to-john/

Give me time to respond to the rest.

---

So Matt's Jesus was born before 4 BCE. But what about the census in Luke? Apologists like to suggest an earlier census of 9-8 BCE but this would have made Jesus way too old to be "about 30" by the time JtB even started his ministry in 28-29 CE. Additionally, all of Judea was not part of Rome but a client state run by Herod the Great. The citizens of Judea were NOT Roman citizens at that point in history. The entire point of the census under Quirinius and Luke's reference to taxation was because Rome had just acquired new provinces and wanted to know how much tax revenue there was to be gained.

I've read to this point. Two things. Matthew does place Jesus' birth pretty firmly before 4 BC, just before Herod dies. So scholars are left to explain Luke. Here's two:
http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/200...ensus.aspx
http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/2...2_JETS.pdf
The second addresses Herod on p.51. Remember that in Luke 2:2, Luke takes care to note, "This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria." It is quite possible that most Jews remembered the second census in 6CE, so he felt the need to clarify. Also, this date allows for the all-so-interesting celestial dance between 3-2 BC, which may have been what the Magi saw:
http://www.bethlehemstar.net/setting-the...ists-star/