Creation vs. Evolution

[H2Andy]

lol

of course, you leave off the key to the whole thing, which is the second clause:

(from the Greek)

"and behold, magi from the east arrived at Jerusalem"

the entire thing:

"And Jesus was born in the town of Bethlehem in Judea during the time when Herod was king, and behold, magi from the east arrived at Jerusalem."

another translation is:

"Now, Jesus having been born in the town of Bethlehem in Judea, during the time when Herod was king, behold, magi from the east arrived at Jerusalem."

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

again, no span of time is indicated. Jesus is born, Magi arrive.

again, they couldn't have taken too long or they would have found the baby back in Nazareth, were Joseph and Mary came from, and where they would have returned once the census was over, which couldn't take long.

 

[Uncle Pug]

again, no span of time is indicated. Jesus is born, Magi arrive.

Exactly! No span of time is indicated... because, as you say, the arrival of the Magi seeking Messiah is a secondary clause. The timing of the birth and the arrival of Magi is not in view. What is in view is the fact of the birth, that it was during Herod's reign and that Magi came looking for the King who had been born.

again, they couldn't have taken too long or they would have found the baby back in Nazareth, were Joseph and Mary came from, and where they would have returned once the census was over, which couldn't take long.

Not necessarily. You are surmising that that is the case but nothing in the narrative warrants such multiple assumptions.

 

[bwerb]

Then Andy...why did Herod look to kill all the infants under the age of 2? Wouldn't it make more sense to kill all the newborns?

 

[H2Andy]

Not necessarily. You are surmising that that is the case but nothing in the narrative warrants such multiple assumptions.

really?

we are told Joseph and Mary go from Nazareth to take part in the census (correct?)

and we are never told they decide to stay in Bethlehem AFTER the census (correct?)

thus, the internal logic of the narrative indicates that they would return to Nazareth once the census is over.

the internal logic of the narrative dictates that consideration. otherwise, the narrative is broken.

Then Andy...why did Herod look to kill all the infants under the age of 2? Wouldn't it make more sense to kill all the newborns?

it would have taken the Magi a while to get from their land to Jerusalem. They would have had to set out for Jerusalem some time before Jesus was actually born to arrive there upon his birth.

Herod asks them about this (it's in the same passage), and does some calculations: it must have taken them a year to a year and a half to get there, thus, to be safe, he's going to kill everybody under two years old.

by the way, no record from ANYBODY, including Josephus, records a massacre of infants around Bethlehem by King Herod. somethign that big would have certainly be noted by someone, or at least it would have lived in the oral history of the region.

No one but Matthew mentions this. no one. in the whole world. ever. Matthew is the single source.

also, no one but Matthew mentions the star. no one. in the whole world, ever. Matthew is the single source.

curiouser and curioser

:huh:

 

[AXL72]

'Vengeance is mine", sayeth the Lord. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.

ha! I would sayeth I cast the first marshmellow, not the first stone.

 

[Bryan]

Then Andy...why did Herod look to kill all the infants under the age of 2? Wouldn't it make more sense to kill all the newborns?

Good point... I hadn't considered that before.

 

[bwerb]

Andy, you're logic is killing me

On one response you use Matthew as your total source documentation for your reply.

On the next you're referencing outside sources as being definitive and able to complete the picture.

Now you're saying that since Matthew was the only source it isn't likely.

Dude, pick a frame of reference and go with it.

 

[bwerb]

it would have taken the Magi a while to get from their land to Jerusalem. They would have had to set out for Jerusalem some time before Jesus was actually born to arrive there upon his birth.

Herod asks them about this (it's in the same passage), and does some calculations: it must have taken them a year to a year and a half to get there, thus, to be safe, he's going to kill everybody under two years old.

So in one passage/response you're saying that Jesus was born when the Magi arrived to Herod but now you're saying that since the "star" appeared at least a year and a half earlier, that he could have been born anytime from then to "sometime soon" and Herod recognizing that there was a range of times decided to kill all the kids under two...

Hmm...seems Herod knew the child wasn't about to be born as he could be UP TO TWO...wouldn't the internal logic then leave the time of his birth open to a significantly greater window then your earlier assertion that he was born when the star stopped? The text itself expresses something which you seem to be arguing both for and against.

 

[AXL72]

Gosh golly,

We should just all go on a nice warm dive trip to a carribean island and do some team building through some awesome diving.

Or, just continue to beat the dog and kick the wife.

 

[Bryan]

Gosh golly,

We should just all go on a nice warm dive trip to a carribean island and do some team building through some awesome diving.

Or, just continue to beat the dog and kick the wife.

Dude, I'm with you on the nice warm dive trip. When can we go?

Beating the dog and your wife is wrong, mmmkay?