Embellishments in the Gospel of Mark.

[Succubus]

It was about that same time that...

"And in this time there shall be a great rubbing of parts"!

[Jehanne]

Did you even read the Wikipedia article?  The author of the Gospel of Luke made an historical blunder.  It would like someone claiming that Woodrow Wilson was President prior to Teddy Roosevelt.

That is the perception yes, but I showed you how it is not a blunder but a miss reading and mis conception of what the passage is describing.

Again chapter 1 describes John birth which includes herod the great. John was born first and could be between 4 and 6 years old. Chapter two descibes the birth of jesus some time later.

How does any of this address Quirinius' governorship of Syria:

Wikipedia -- Quirinius

[Drich]

That is the perception yes, but I showed you how it is not a blunder but a miss reading and mis conception of what the passage is describing.

Again chapter 1 describes John birth which includes herod the great. John was born first and could be between 4 and 6 years old. Chapter two descibes the birth of jesus some time later.

How does any of this address Quirinius' governorship of Syria:

Wikipedia -- Quirinius

John was not even conceived let alone born at the time of Herod's reign... Just the prophesy of his birth from an angel to his old man/father was given under herod's rule. note the actual passage does not say herod the great just herod/could have been his son which rule in his father's stead, which was eventually superseded by quintus which is the time Jesus was born.

John again is a few years older than Jesus.

where is the problem with that?

read chapter 1 (not a commentary but luke chapter one, john is only fore told by an angel under 'herod.' to the Father and his voice was taken... Then SOME TIME LATER John was conceived.. 
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=ERV
There is no time line between the time herod died and when john was born. over anxious atheist force a time line byomitting what is clearly time breaks in the actual passage.

There is no discrepancy here as as the birth of John could have clearly happened after herod pass judea to quintus of rome. which again John came first some say by a few years before christ. but again no direct time line. it just shows when John the baptist birth was fore told and when Jesus was born by the mark of the census.

Read chapter 1 and chapter 2 for yourself, than think for yourself. do not allow hate and anger of others cloud your own judgement. there is no discrepency if you read what is written and not a commentary that tells you what to think.

The only mention of Herod is to make the prediction of John's birth and to mark the angel taking john's father's voice which came back to him after the birth. the passage clearly says after some time or some time later (after the prediction of john's birth) elizibeth/john's mother get pregnant. this some time later could very well put john's birth at the end of the reign of herod or even in the reign of quintus... Then 6 months after john s conceived mary visits not even pregnant her self yet. this puts jesus over a year to some speculate up to 6 years after john. which again is well into the reign of quintius.

Do you see now?

[The Grand Nudger]

What I see, is that you aren't interested in the historicity of jesus or the history of the new testament whatsoever.

[Drich]

What I see, is that you aren't interested in the historicity of jesus or the history of the new testament whatsoever.

how so?

I just reconciled a historical paradox that has been plaguing the 'minds of thinkers' the world round!

Maybe you should define historicity before you go any deeper because everything I have said clicks with history and to the very word of the bible aligning both with one another.

[The Grand Nudger]

It's hardly paradoxical when magic book fails to live up to your fantasies regarding it's construction.

[Jehanne]

How does any of this address Quirinius' governorship of Syria:

Wikipedia -- Quirinius

Do you see now?

When was Jesus born?  Please give a range of dates.

[Drich]

Do you see now?

When was Jesus born?  Please give a range of dates.

off the cuff most people say between 4bc to 6 ad and some even go as late as 8AD because of certain celestial events that could be identified as a star of david.

The AD system of trying to start at Jesus birth was done sometime in the late 6th century I believe and the monk simply got the math wrong when converting from jewish calendar to roman/gregorian

[Jehanne]

When was Jesus born?  Please give a range of dates.

off the cuff most people say between 4bc to 6 ad and some even go as late as 8AD because of certain celestial events that could be identified as a star of david.

The AD system of trying to start at Jesus birth was done sometime in the late 6th century I believe and the monk simply got the math wrong when converting from jewish calendar to roman/gregorian

Quite a range.

When did Herod die?

Wikipedia -- Herod the Great

[Drich]

off the cuff most people say between 4bc to 6 ad and some even go as late as 8AD because of certain celestial events that could be identified as a star of david.

The AD system of trying to start at Jesus birth was done sometime in the late 6th century I believe and the monk simply got the math wrong when converting from jewish calendar to roman/gregorian

Quite a range.

When did Herod die?

Wikipedia -- Herod the Great

he lived from 73 bc to 4 bc which is why christ birth starts as early as 4 bc in some circles. You do understand the numbers work backwards in BC time? the bigger the number the longer ago it was.. meaning herod was born in 73 lived 69 years and died in 4bc. and again the birth of Christ can go as late as 8 AD because again of celestial events that could have been identified as the star of David.