Massacre of the Innocents

[robvalue]

White: R - Q8 ++

Black: Q x Everything ++++++

[Succubus]

...God had plan thousands of years prior to the event. You have no concept of the knowledge or power of our living God...

Omniscience eh?

And yet...
Gen 6:5. And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth...

Gen 6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

Grief and repentance from an omnipotent omniscient god? He knew nicely what tricks the fuckers would get up too, so what's with the anxiety attack?

Musht be shome mishtake.

[Minimalist]

So much for inerrancy then, eh?  I imagine Huggy and a few others on here will insist to their dying breath that the star took the reins of the horses and led them right to the fucking manger.

I won't tar you with that brush.

I don't think anyone with half a brain would suggest anything of the sort seeing how it took the wise men 2 years to make the journey,  making Jesus a toddler by the time they reached him.

You think Jesus was in a manger for two years?

Huggy, I think "jesus" is a fictional character in a story which was invented in the 2d century.  Fictional characters can do anything their creators want them to do.  The little fucker could have filled his diaper with silver denarius coins and it would make as much sense as your fucking star story.

[Huggy Bear]

I don't think anyone with half a brain would suggest anything of the sort seeing how it took the wise men 2 years to make the journey,  making Jesus a toddler by the time they reached him.

You think Jesus was in a manger for two years?

Huggy, I think "jesus" is a fictional character in a story which was invented in the 2d century.

Except no real historians think the same as you do... 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Virtually all New Testament scholars and Near East historians, applying the standard criteria of historical investigation, find that the historicity of Jesus is effectively certain although they differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the details of his life that have been described in the gospels. While scholars have criticized Jesus scholarship for religious bias and lack of methodological soundness, with very few exceptions such critics generally do support the historicity of Jesus and reject the Christ myth theory that Jesus never existed.

You know, more and more your posts tend to resemble the ravings of a lunatic...

Fictional characters can do anything their creators want them to do.  The little fucker could have filled his diaper with silver denarius coins and it would make as much sense as your fucking star story.

Through simple reading comprehension one would realize that the Magi were the only ones to witness the "star". If anyone was capable of seeing it, why did Herod need directions to where Jesus was, when he could of just simply followed the star?

[The Grand Nudger]

Do you imagine that a mystical star that can only be seen by two people rescues the story from being discarded as a myth? Or do you think that it bolsters it;s historicity, lol?

[Minimalist]

Except no real historians think the same as you do... 

Huggy, you can trot out as many jesus freak idiots as you like and it does not convince me at all.  These people's rice bowls comes from continuing to support the notion of your fairy tales.

I have repeatedly asked for "the evidence."  In other words, I want to know what they base their conclusions on.  The only historian ( someone with a degree in history - not fucking theology which is as worthless as tits on a bull - who met the challenge is Richard Carrier.  His conclusion is that your jesus is bullshit.

[Huggy Bear]

Do you imagine that a mystical star that can only be seen by two people rescues the story from being discarded as a myth?  Or do you think that it bolsters it;s historicity, lol?

The point is, who are you to judge someones own personal experience? Whether or not you want to believe their testimony of a seeing star, they obviously saw something profound enough to lead them on a 2 year journey.

[Crossless2.0]

Do you imagine that a mystical star that can only be seen by two people rescues the story from being discarded as a myth?  Or do you think that it bolsters it;s historicity, lol?

The point is, who are you to judge someones own personal experience? Whether or not you want to believe their testimony of a seeing star, they obviously saw something profound enough to lead them on a 2 year journey.

Their testimony?!? You mean Matthew’s uncorroborated story. Try to keep things straight, Huggy. It considerably cuts down on the nonsense you will believe.

[Huggy Bear]

Except no real historians think the same as you do... 

Huggy, you can trot out as many jesus freak idiots as you like and it does not convince me at all.  These people's rice bowls comes from continuing to support the notion of your fairy tales.

I have repeatedly asked for "the evidence."  In other words, I want to know what they base their conclusions on.  The only historian ( someone with a degree in history - not fucking theology which is as worthless as tits on a bull - who met the challenge is Richard Carrier.  His conclusion is that your jesus is bullshit.

What about your boy Bart Ehrman?

[Chad32]

As I just pointed out, they showed up two years after the birth...

I've never heard of this being two years, nor have I seen a nativity where Jesus was a two year old. Maybe they traveled two years, and made it there a few days after the birth?