If you love the bible help me with this please

by skyman 18 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  skyman

  Luke say’s that Jesus was baptized when he was 30 years old account. Luke 3:1-2 3 In the fifteenth year of the reign of Ti·be´ri·us Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Ju·de´a, and Herod *[Antipus Grand son of King Herod the Great] ruler of Gal´i·lee, but Philip his brother was district ruler of the country of It·u·rae´a and Trach·o·ni´tis, and Ly·sa´ni·as was district ruler of Ab·i·le´ne, 2

  (Matthew 2:1-4) 2 After Jesus had been born in Beth´le·hem of Ju·de´a in the days of Herod the king,

  The Gospels of Matthew and Luke do not agree about the time line of Jesus Birth. Historical records say the King Herod died 4years before our common era or 4 BCE this is in agreement with the account of LUKE but not in agreement with the account found at Matthew.

  Luke’s account say’s in the 15th year of Tiberius, which puts Jesus birth at 2/1 BCE. Tiberius reign started in 14AD and ended in 37AD add 15 years to 14AD and you get 28/29AD now minus 30years for the age at baptism you come up with 1/2BCE which is in agreement with Historical Records. That makes Jesus birth two years after King Herod’s death in agreement with historical records. The problem is the Matthew account of Jesus birth and everything that goes with it does not agree with Luke or recorded History, which squarely puts Matthew’s account into question. Both Luke and Matthew cannot be correct.

  *
• 

  skyman

  Maybe I need to ask this How come is the bible not in harmony. Bible supporter please respond. especially
• 

  Narkissos

  This is not unsuperable but on the other hand it is not the biggest problem.

  Luke actually says that Jesus was about thirty years old when he was baptised (3:23), an explicitly approximate statement from which no chronological indication can be strictly inferred. Btw he seems to date Jesus' birth from Herod's time (1:5), just as Matthew does.

  A more serious problem comes from Luke's referring Jesus' birth to the well-known census under Quirinius (2:2; cf. Acts 5:37), which actually occurred in 6 AD, i.e. 10 years after Herod's death. Here Bible apologists have to invent another census at least 10 years earlier, for which there is, of course, no evidence.

  But the biggest contradiction between Matthew and Luke is narrative rather than chronological. If you follow Matthew's account, Joseph and Mary lived in Judea and only moved to Galilee after Jesus' birth and the flight to Egypt, because they were afraid to come back to their original place. According to Luke, they lived in Galilee and moved to Judea because of the census, then naturally came back to their original place in Nazareth. I think there is no valid way around this one.
• 

  LittleToe

  Actually it says that he was about 30.
• 

  LittleToe

  Didier:
  There's no direct referrence to Quirinius, is there? I know that there is an issue over the alleged census, but there's no certainty that this is the one referred to, or that the peiod of "taxing" mentioned in Acts is attributed to any particular such census.

  Besides, doesn't the word "census" imply something that takens place at ten-yearly intervals? That's certainly the modern-day practice in this country, and is how I would attempt to parse it

  Luke's evidence seems too detailed to insist on an intentional bluff, though I grant that is circumstantial.
• 

  skyman

  Narrisso I was hoping that leolaia would say just what you did, about Luke saying about 30 because it would add on about four years so he died at about 37 years of age because he was about two years old or less when Herod killed the babies which is a difference of four years. Then I was going to bring out the other things you said about the differences in LUKE and Mathew I have a list from a local Bible scholar that tells me most of the problems between all the Gospels and it lead to only one conclusion at least for me the Gospels are only 18% in agreement between them when it comes to Jesus Christ
• 

  LittleToe

  Skyman:
  What do you see as a difficulty with him being crucified at age 37?

  It would potentially seem that he may have been older still, if you weave in John 8:57.
• 

  Narkissos

  There's no direct referrence to Quirinius, is there?

  This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. (Luke 2:2)

  Quirinius was appointed as governor of Syria in 6 AD.

  I know that there is an issue over the alleged census, but there's no certainty that this is the one referred to, or that the peiod of "taxing" mentioned in Acts is attributed to any particular such census. Besides, doesn't the word "census" imply something that takens place at ten-yearly intervals? That's certainly the modern-day practice in this country, and is how I would attempt to parse it

  This is definitely not the case. The unprecedented 6 AD census is connected to the revolt of Judas the Galilean by Josephus, who also mentions the insurrection of Theudas under Cuspius Fadus (44-46 AD). Note that Acts 5:36f (which is most probably based on loose reminiscences from Josephus) has them in the wrong order, with an additional anachronism since Theudas' revolt occurred after Gamaliel's time.
• 

  skyman

  Littletoe No problem just want people to open their mind. Personally I do not believe any of the biblical record about Jesus . I believed HE lived and died but not like the Bible say's. The Gosples are not in agreement within their own pages. I find it almost impossible. The Romans document a man by a different name that lived at the as time as the Bible Jesus. The Romans historical records do not mention Jesus but mentions in great detail the other man and how the other man was a great leader and was to be king if the Romans were not there. So I have started to study in great detail the bible and what it say's about Jesus. I nolonger believe the differences between the writers can be ignored by the fact that he saw it this way so wrote it down the way he saw it to exsplain the differences.
• 

  LittleToe

  Didier: Apologies - on the first point the translation I had to hand called him "Cyrenius", and on the second, I was yanking your chain Skyman:
  It should certainly make a JW think about how accurate the WTS is in stating his ministry as ages 30 - 33. If they are inaccurate about that, what else are they inaccurate about