F
Faith1960
Guest
I have one and it’s over my head. What part says that? Because I don’t see it. it says without error. #107.
- Status
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
F
Faith1960
Guest
Thanks.
A
AKDee
Guest
Summarizing is hard but here goes. Note that my first two Bible’s are both Catholic study Bibles and their interpretations disagree but neither try to gloss over the historical difficulty this passage poses.
My St Benedict Press NABRE version says that such a universal census under Caesar Augustus is unknown outside of Luke 2 and that there are numerous historical problems with Luke’s dating of the census. Various attempts to resolve the difficulties have been unsuccessful. It goes over a few of the historical problems, and ends with “Luke may simply be combining Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem with his vague recollection of a census under Quirinius to underline the significance of this birth for the whole Roman world; through this child born in Bethlehem peace and salvation come to the empire.”
My Ignatius Catholic Study Bible is the one that devotes an entire page to it. It begins with, “The opening verses of Luke 2 have long baffled interpreters of the Bible. Despite Luke’s intention to set the birth of Jesus on the timeline of world history, many scholars claim that Lk 2:1-2 are the most historically inaccurate verses of the entire Gospel!” It goes on to defend Luke’s dating by laying out a case for why Jesus probably was born slightly earlier than some people think (based on the fact that Herod died in 4BC but was alive when Jesus was born), that Caesar might well have ordered a census as part of a broader requirement for the entire Roman empire to take an oath of loyalty in 3 BC (recorded outside the Bible by the historian Josephus) and that the enrollment wasn’t for taxation purposes but rather to swear loyalty to the emperor, and finally dealing with Quirinius and gets into the greek work Luke used to describe Quirinius’ role which means “governed” but not necessarily as anything more (at the time) than an administrator which could then fit the historical timeline we know of Quirinius. (the whole page is worth a read- I’d be glad to scan a copy of it and email it to you if you wanted to pm me your email address.) It finishes with, “The cumulative force of the evidence is significant. Herod’s death, Caesar’s decree, and the governing position of Quirinius are all historical factors that, when reconsidered, yield a more coherent portrait of the events surrounding the nativity. This would mean that Jesus was born between 3 and 2 BC, the enrollment of Joseph and Mary was a registration of their loyalty to Caesar, and the documentation of this oath was organized and implemented in Judea by Quirinius several years before he was made governor of Syria. This reconstruction no only eases the chronological tensions in Lk 2:1-2, it helps to confirm Luke’s reliability as a historial as well as the early Church’s reliability as a channel of historical traditions.”
My Zondervan TNIV (protestant) study Bible has only a brief footnote: “Quirinius: this official appears to have been in office for two terms, first 6-4 BC and then AD 6-9. A census is associated with each term. This is the first. AC 5:37 refers to the second.”
It’d be interesting to see what the MacArthur Study Bible says, if anyone has a copy. I don’t, it’s on my list to get someday. I find that study Bible’s really help me to understand certain passages. If I find myself really stuck, I’ll refer to several of them to get the broadest point of view.
F
Faith1960
Guest
Thank! I’m getting a study Bible for Christmas and it’s an Ignatious.
F
frangiuliano115
Guest
Hi MS,
Just to let you know that I take the bible VERY seriously! I teach the bible! We’re doing Mathew right now. It’s taken from March 2015 to last week (once a week) to get to Mathew 6.
I like how you would choose Mathew and John. I agree fully. Romans next.
Anyway, yes, the bible is the Word of God. If people don’t have a little help they might have a little problem with some passages. I’ve found that the Holy Spirit will always guide us if we allow Him. The CCC helps too, like you said. I think it would be good for the O.P. to also read the CCC.
And I’d like to stress to the O.P. once again, to trust in the resurrection.
Fran
E
ericc
Guest
Registration of oath taking commemorating Caesar Augustus as Father of the Nation. Pater Patriae. Josephus in his Antiquities :
Code:
“When therefore the whole Jewish nation TOOK AN OATH to be faithful to Caesar and to the interests of the king [Herod] ... above six thousand Pharisees refused to swear.”2/3BC to 6BC. Depending on whether 15th year of Tiberius is 26 or 29 AD.
No. From the perspective of the writers. Other examples, the mustard seed is not the smallest of seed nor the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. The context being from the viewpoint of the writers. But regardless of yes or no, how is that going to impact your belief? Either you take the Bible to be wholly the Word of God or you don’t.
But you have been persistent on this topic multiple times. Many proposals have been given. What are you searching for? Which proposals have you eliminated from consideration? Why don’ t you publish those that you have already eliminated so that the same proposals are not repeated. At the same time, provide your reasoning for those rejected.
C
Cyberseeker
Guest
5 BC is widely accepted as the year of Jesus’ birth, and I agree with it.
Now, concerning the problem of Quirinius. Luke 2:1-3 says,
“In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration when Quirinius was governor of Syria. And all went to be registered, each to his own town.”
If we date the birth of Jesus in 5 BC, then Varus - not Quirinius - was the civil governor of Syria. Skeptics make much of this and some Christian are cowered by their loud mockery. I dont think we should be. It is quite well known that Quirinius was a high ranking official in Syria during these years, exercising a 2nd-in-command governing office.
Im not sure how you do things in your country, but in mine (New Zealand) the minister of Finance brings the national budget, and it is said to be his budget - not the Prime Minister’s. So, I think it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to say that Quirinius was acting in the capacity of a ‘governor’ when he ordered the census in 5 BC.
Moreover, it fits the other chronological data provided by the other gospel writers.
F
frangiuliano115
Guest
Hi Faith,
I’d like to say that the bible, either the O.T. or the N.T., was not written as a history book.
The bible contains historical facts. Some used to be contested until real scientific proof was found. For instance, it was doubted that the city of Jericho ever existed, until it was discovered by archeologists. Peter’s home was discovered in Capernaum very recently, I think within the last 10 years (not sure).
Jesus spoke of the Gates of Hades (Hell) not prevailing against the church. This is a real place that could be visited. It was in Caesarea Philippi, It’s about 30 miles north of the sea of Galilee.
However, the only reason the O. T. was written was to let future generations know the story of the Hebrew people and how God was made present to them and how He guided them.
The same is true of the N.T. It was written because the apostles realized they would all be dead one day and they wanted to let future generations know about Jesus and WHY He came to earth and lived among us. in fact, there is nothing written about Him between the time He was born, a small story of when He was 12 and was lost to his parents and found teaching in the temple in Jerusalem, and then when He started His ministry at the age of about 30. His ministry lasted about 3 years.
So, I’d say it’s kind of wrong to view the bible in this way and it should not be argued in this way with anyone.
The bible is a holy book to make us know the Lord so we could follow Him. The ONLY important fact in the entire N.T. is the resurrection of Jesus.
I would recommend that you read a book called: Who Moved the Stone by Morrison and to stop worrying about how literal everything in the bible is. It’s VERY literal, but was not written for that purpose. There might be some historical fact that is not 100% correct due to memory loss or due to the timing of the biblical stories. We’re not even sure of when Jesus was born. Maybe 6 BC, maybe 4 BC. What difference does it make? He was born and that’s what’s important.
The problem with stating that each and every minute statement is 100% correct is that if one then finds that it isn’t all kinds of doubts come to mind. The bible is the story of God’s interaction with man. It should be read like that. Does God exist? Did Jesus exist? Did He die on a cross? Did he come back to life? Did He say He would never leave us? Did He send the Holy Spirit to be with us and guide us? If you answered Yes to the questions, just proceed with your relationship with Him and you’ll be good.
Don’t sweat the details. We had gone over this with the nativity story, if you remember. Also, those who wrote the gospels might remember things a bit differently. But it’s all stuff that, in the end, doesn’t really matter.
Fran
I’d like to say that the bible, either the O.T. or the N.T., was not written as a history book.
The bible contains historical facts. Some used to be contested until real scientific proof was found. For instance, it was doubted that the city of Jericho ever existed, until it was discovered by archeologists. Peter’s home was discovered in Capernaum very recently, I think within the last 10 years (not sure).
Jesus spoke of the Gates of Hades (Hell) not prevailing against the church. This is a real place that could be visited. It was in Caesarea Philippi, It’s about 30 miles north of the sea of Galilee.
However, the only reason the O. T. was written was to let future generations know the story of the Hebrew people and how God was made present to them and how He guided them.
The same is true of the N.T. It was written because the apostles realized they would all be dead one day and they wanted to let future generations know about Jesus and WHY He came to earth and lived among us. in fact, there is nothing written about Him between the time He was born, a small story of when He was 12 and was lost to his parents and found teaching in the temple in Jerusalem, and then when He started His ministry at the age of about 30. His ministry lasted about 3 years.
So, I’d say it’s kind of wrong to view the bible in this way and it should not be argued in this way with anyone.
The bible is a holy book to make us know the Lord so we could follow Him. The ONLY important fact in the entire N.T. is the resurrection of Jesus.
I would recommend that you read a book called: Who Moved the Stone by Morrison and to stop worrying about how literal everything in the bible is. It’s VERY literal, but was not written for that purpose. There might be some historical fact that is not 100% correct due to memory loss or due to the timing of the biblical stories. We’re not even sure of when Jesus was born. Maybe 6 BC, maybe 4 BC. What difference does it make? He was born and that’s what’s important.
The problem with stating that each and every minute statement is 100% correct is that if one then finds that it isn’t all kinds of doubts come to mind. The bible is the story of God’s interaction with man. It should be read like that. Does God exist? Did Jesus exist? Did He die on a cross? Did he come back to life? Did He say He would never leave us? Did He send the Holy Spirit to be with us and guide us? If you answered Yes to the questions, just proceed with your relationship with Him and you’ll be good.
Don’t sweat the details. We had gone over this with the nativity story, if you remember. Also, those who wrote the gospels might remember things a bit differently. But it’s all stuff that, in the end, doesn’t really matter.
Fran
C
Cyberseeker
Guest
frangiuliano:
How to upset your history teacher. Tell him “it a whole lot of diddilysquat. All that matters is if you pass your math test.”
F
frangiuliano115
Guest
Passing your math test is what counts.
Being saved is what counts.
Whether or not there was a census is irrelevant to me.
I think you didn’t understand my post.
Fran
E
ericc
Guest
The Greek word “hēgemoneuontos” means to rule, govern or command can apply to a governor as well as a proconsul or as procurator such as Pontius Pilate Luke 3:1. Quirinius could be acting in other commanding capacities other than governor proper. It is unfortunate that the translation gives one possible meaning only.
P
pianistclare
Guest
Well, it’s written for the average lay person, but take note:
The Bible isn’t a book. It’s a library. The Bible is a collection of 73 books written over the course of many centuries. The books include royal history, prophecy, poetry, challenging letters to struggling new faith communities, and believers’ accounts of the preaching and passion of Jesus. Knowing the genre of the book you are reading will help you understand the literary tools the author is using and the meaning the author is trying to convey.
On other words, the Bible contains universal truth. HOW it is related can vary: allegory, history, song, parable, etc.
Question:
Do you believe everything we profess in the Creed every Sunday?
Of the answer is YES, then stop with this constant doubting.
It’s great to ask questions about the faith, but I get the feeling you think it’s all a big scam put forth by the Church and a lot of us.
It’s not.
You know this.
Right?
F
frangiuliano115
Guest
Very good!
Couple this with my post no. 29 and Faith should know pretty much all there is to know, unless she’s planning on becoming a theologist!
And maybe she will after all her threads…!
Fran
A
AKDee
Guest
I agree 100%. Sometimes I think people get too caught up in minutia. That the Bible might have the odd historical fact wrong (or possibly not) or have a copyists error or insertion that has come down to us through the ages should not matter if it does not affect the theological message. The inerrant nature of the Bible that I feel we are guaranteed is one of theology, not one of historicity. That’s not to say that the Bible isn’t full of historical facts- as another member pointed out, the Bible has told us about historical locations that were initially denied by skeptics that archaeology later verified.
M
MiserableSinner
Guest
**The Bible was written by the Infinite and Eternal God. I can not explain every detail.
We are just human. It is a book written by God.**
If you join the heretics in the UCC, you will put your soul in danger. Why would you do that over simply not understanding something?
Do you think you have to understand everything in order to get to Heaven?
You don’t. You only have to do the will of God.
His Will is Love and Mercy itself.
He established the Catholic Church and gave the Keys to the Kingdom to the Church. He guided us into all truth. The Catholic Church has the fullness of God’s Revelation to Mankind. The Catholic Church is the only Church that has a person who holds the office of St. Peter and goes back to the original 12 Apostles, with Holy Orders going back to the original 12 apostles. If you leave the Catholic Church because you don’t understand something and join heretics, you will put your soul in danger.
There are no inconsistencies in the Word of God. Only what can appear, to a finite human mind, to be inconsistencies.
You are not going to figure this out. You need to ask God to help you. Persist in prayer and He will come to your assistance.
Pride is what stops people from cooperating with God’s grace. Be humble and acknowledge the truth. You need divine intervention to help you believe.
I love you. I will pray for you.
M
MiserableSinner
Guest
The Church infallibly teaches that the Bible was written by the Holy Spirit. It is without error. Any kind of error. If an archaeologist were to tell me that the Bible got something wrong, even if the whole “scientific community” of the world were to say it, I would say that they are wrong and God is right.
It is the Holy Book, the Only Real One, Written by God.
Humans should recognize that we are just humans. The “scientific community at large” could all agree on something, in fact every scientist in the world could agree on something, and use a bunch of big high-sounding words to describe it, and be completely wrong.
Pride was the sin of the Devil. It was the first sin. All other sins come from pride.
F
Faith1960
Guest
I know I just worry.
T
TMC
Guest
What do you mean by “any kind of error”? For example, do you believe that the creation accounts in Genesis are literal and historical? Do you acknowledge that the Church does not teach that?
A
AKDee
Guest
I don’t think that’s actually the case. I think the Church teaches that it is without theological error. Otherwise I find it fascinating that both my Catholic Bibles have no problem pointing out passages in the Bible that are copyist errors, copyist insertions, and - such as with this Quirinius issue- outright in conflict with historical documentation. It is an outright fact that our modern Bibles contain passages that the oldest copies did not. The passage in John 8 where they bring the prostitute to Jesus and he sits there writing on the ground and tells them “He who is without sin should cast the first stone” and then ultimately everyone goes away and Jesus tells her to “Go and sin no more?” - that is not in the earliest versions of the Bible and in some later versions that story is located in a different place. The passage in Mark 16 that says that Christians will be protected from the bite of a viper and on which the Christian cults that play with snakes are based? Not in the earliest copies of the Bible.
If you have a study Bible and you read the notes on every passage, you’ll see this happen. It’s not frequent, and in no instance does it affect the theological message, but there are errors in the Bible, mostly by copyist insertions or errors as they have copied the Bible through the ages. Many modern Bibles will put these passages in italics or brackets to bring your attention to the fact that you should look at the notes re that passage.
It’s somewhat similar to the Pope making a statement on Global Warming. Catholics are free to listen or ignore what he says, because the Pope is our leader on theological issues, not scientific ones. The Holy Spirit will keep the Pope error free on how he guides our Church and won’t let him lead us astray theologically. That doesn’t mean that every word out of his mouth is without error.
- Status