Oh Christ!!

[Minimalist]

Or, Vercingetorix.

[marduk]

Not at all unlike Mussolini prior to the war or Hitler until the time of his death. The only negative press was coming from their enemies. But both launched major building campaigns and were shrewd politicians.

I don't think its very fair to compare Herod with two of the most evil men of the 20th century by comparing the good ahcievements of the three
when it comes down to it you have to compare the bad things
on that score Hitler and Mussolini resemble YHWH and Jehova far better

they both wanted Global domination and didn't care how many people they killed to achieve it
what did Herod ever do compared to that
and cosidering the trinity claims that Jesus is God
that means we should be comparing his atrocities to Hitler Stalin and Mussolini because he allowed it to happen

face it the only claims that Herod committed any kind of atrocity are biblical ones
this is the same book that claims saviours die from crucifiction after a few hours rather than the prerequisite several days it takes mortal men and then proclaims it a miracle three days later when hes still walking around

so accuracy is not something you can discuss and keep any credibility
if you believe in the teachings of Jesus thats fine
but you should never believe the spin doctoring that goes on in his late in the day biography which wasn't actually sanctioned by an official source
because when you do that you're just buying into a fallacy
Its equivalent to buying Dubyas "George W. Bush on God and Country: The President Speaks Out About Faith, Principle, and Patriotism " and believing its an accurate portrayal of his belief system

True enough. But murdering a potential king who would depose him and his descendants? It was dirty politics not religion.

Herod was an old man who died in 4bce
and if you study his history its quite clear he didn't really care about his descendants

[Minimalist]

Most of Herod's crimes were recorded by Josephus but they tended to be "dynastic" issues. He killed his wives, sons, friends, etc. because they were plotting against him or he believed they were plotting against him.
Caesar Augustus, famously, is reported to have said, "it is safer to be one of Herod's pigs than one of his sons." Josephus reports that Herod did order a general massacre of the Judaean aristocracy upon his death but the order was never carried out so who knows if it actually happened or is simply another story.

[Cognito]

Monk:

True enough. But murdering a potential king who would depose him and his descendants? It was dirty politics not religion.

Marduk:

Herod was an old man who died in 4bce
and if you study his history its quite clear he didn't really care about his descendants

Seems reasonable that if Herod was an old man, he wouldn't give a crap about a super-baby being born to peasants -- myth or not. Yes, Herod was responsible for one helluva building campaign ... can someone tell me who succeeded him?

[Forum Monk]

Herod was an old man who died in 4bce
and if you study his history its quite clear he didn't really care about his descendants

Hmmm...Herod the great:
His father was poisoned - no evidence he did it though
He threw out his wife and son to marry a teenager, Mariamne
Hes accused of killing his brother-in-law - again no evidence
Executes his wife, Mariamne and plots to execute her mother
Executes another brother-in-law
Executes his own sons, the children of Mariamne
Executes his last son

In between all the family killings, he built some buildings and launched a war. I hardly think he would have had a problem taking out anyone who threatened his authority. Except the romans of course. With them, he just bent whichever way the wind blew.



Cogs - succeeded by Archelaus a step son or some thing from one of his many marriages.

[Digit]

What crimes exactly are YHWH/Jehova supposed to have committed Marduk?

[Minimalist]

The kingdom was divided by 4 of his sons...the tetrarchy.

Only two are important. Herod Antipas, who ruled Galilee and Petrea and Archilaus, who was deposed by Augustus on petition from the Judeans to become a Roman Prefecture. It was this action which led to the census under Quirinius....in 6-7 AD.

[Cognito]

Thanks, Min. Nice family.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_Antipas



Of course, as a little snot-nosed creep in Parochial school, I learned all about how horrible Herod Antipas was from the nuns while being rapped on the knuckles with a wooden ruler.

[Minimalist]

(Archelaus was later deemed incompetent by Augustus and replaced with a procurator in AD 6.)

Coponius was a Prefect...as was Pilate...not a Procurator.

[Forum Monk]

Doing some more cursory research on the Quirinius and census 'problem' as detailed in the gospel of Luke, several solutions have been offered but none are satisfactory to me and so I will not give them. The best possible explanation I could find so far is given here:

http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/encyc/ency ... vi.xii.htm

The date of the enrolment and the oath may be the year 6 B.C.; for Herod would have had little difficulty in obtaining leave from Saturninus to postpone the numbering until the embassy, which, after Augustus announced the change of policy toward him, he was sending to Rome to seek a reconciliation with the emperor and a restoration of the old order, should return and report the result of its efforts. Herod was finally obliged to order the census, and it was probably taken in the summer of the year 6 B.C., when Quirinius was a special legatos Aogusti to Syria, invested with the command of the army and entrusted with its foreign affairs, such as the relations between its several states and Rome, particularly where tension existed and military intervention might be necessary. Quirinius stood in exactly the same relation to Varus, the governor of Syria, as at a later time Vespasian did to Mucianus. Vespasian conducted the war in Palestine while Mucianus was governor of Syria; and Vespasian was Legatus Augusti, holding precisely the same title and technical rank as Mucianus. See CENSUS, II., ?? 4-5.

So maybe Luke is somewhat vindicated and we can say he didn't quite understand the roman offices, especially in Cilicia/Syria where Quirinius was serving.

[Minimalist]

http://intranet.dalton.org/groups/Rome/RMap.html


Cilicia #36 is not Syria #46.


Quirinius served as Governor of Pamphylia (#34) prior to Syria.

These people have a tendency to re-write history whenever it suits them to try to make their gospels come out right.

[Beagle]

http://www.bib-arch.org/bswbKCblog.html

You didn’t have to be a genius to know that the television program The Lost Tomb of Jesus would generate boatloads of debate and criticism. The show claims to have identified the ossuary (or bone box) of Jesus and his family; according to the program, the Jesus family tomb was discovered in 1980 in south Jerusalem and then ignored because the archaeologists who discovered it were oblivious to its significance. The show further suggests that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and that they had a son together named Yehuda (Judah or, ironically, Judas); joining Jesus in the tomb, the show continues, are the remains of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and Jose, a brother of Jesus according to the Gospel of Mark. As if those claims were not enough, the program also suggests that a controversial ossuary inscribed “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus,” was a tenth ossuary originally discovered in the tomb but then went missing, only to turn up in the possession of an antiquities collector (the inscription has been branded by some as either a complete or partial modern forgery).

Interjecting a short blog here on the intensity of the debate about "The Lost Tomb of Jesus".
From the Daily Grail

[Minimalist]

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ ... .html#dual

This will take some time.

It is beyond reasonable dispute that Luke dates the birth of Jesus to 6 A.D. It is equally indisputable that Matthew dates the birth of Jesus to 6 B.C. (or some year before 4 B.C.). This becomes an irreconcilable contradiction after an examination of all the relevant facts.

[Minimalist]

I strongly disagree with Hershel Shanks. There most assuredly is a BAR crowd.

[Forum Monk]

I can see cursory is not going to be good enough.

This will take some time.

It is beyond reasonable dispute that Luke dates the birth of Jesus to 6 A.D. It is equally indisputable that Matthew dates the birth of Jesus to 6 B.C. (or some year before 4 B.C.). This becomes an irreconcilable contradiction after an examination of all the relevant facts.

Yeah...it will take a little time to answer this, if there is an answer.