Dexter, you’re right. Like I mentioned in another post we’ve recently found reference to King David for the first time. Many critics had pointed to this gap in our knowlege as one of the “proofs” that the Bible was a bunch of fairly tales.
Another example is a “golden calf” unearthed.
But all this is getting away from the initital argument.
The census mentioned in Luke does not have to be a Quirinius census. It is NOT necessarilly implied.
The word for “first” can be translated “before” or “first of two”, so it could easily refer to a census other than the one that occured after Herod died. Especially since Luke later refers to the same census Josephus refers to in his writings.
A census was ordered by Caesar around 8 BC that could easily be the reference by Luke.
The idea that Quirinius could have served two terms as governor was not seriously considered by the Straight Dope writer. But in fact a tablet (with the name of the person missing) was found that mentions a certain person as having served two terms as governor!
And also, the word for “governor” as used by Luke does not have to mean “Governor” in the sense we think it should mean. Since Quirinius served as a leader down in this area before he was governor, the reference could easily be referring to him during that period.
All other discussions about Christian references, Sir W.H. Ramsay’s credentials, etc are nothing but SMOKE AND MIRRORS to muddy the discussion.
And I stick by my accusation. The Straight Dope article was disengenuous. The author exercised poor judgement in writing off other very reasonable explanations.
Which is why I posted this here instead of in the original thread. If you had come back with some sort of rebuttal, telling us about Ramsay, telling us about his credentials AND showing us how his work was accepted and built upon by archaeologists of his time, or showing us how independant scholars rely on his work : i.e. giving us some practical reason to trust his work besides the fact that he was knighted and that conservative Christian apologists like to quote him, I would have had no problem. But you went off on a high horse accusing anyone that questioned his credentials of having some anti-Christian bias, calling us “unbelievably stupid” and of behaving like “narrow minded bigots.” That is what I am so pissed off about.
Sorry, I’m not buying it. It is a common tactic to attack the source. Whether the source is good or not, that is irrelevent. It is insincere and dishonest.
The arguments against the Straight Dope article STILL STAND. I haven’t read where ONE PERSON HAS TRIED TO REFUTE THE REASONING other than to dismiss it as “silly”. THAT is not refutation. That’s intellectual immaturity and not dealing with the facts.
I’ve read the thread linked in the OP a number of times (even posted there early on), and what disturbs me is this tendency on the part of johnnygeneric’s thinking:
[ul]
*Those who accept the Lukan version of events as factual and free of error=respectable and credible
*Those who dispute that that the Lukan versian of events is factual and and free of error=narrowminded, unbelievably stupid, bigoted.
[/ul]
This is precisely the kind of behavior I would expect from a Christian fundamentalist who is wedded to the idea of an inerrant Bible, instead of recognizing that the Bible contains portions that were–for lack of a better expression–made up.
You’ve behaved very badly in that thread, jg. Instead of simply referring to the disputants as unbelievably stupid narrowminded bigots, you need to explain WHY you believe that the Lukan account is 100% accurate, despite significant evidence to the contrary. So far you have utterly failed in this task, relying only upon the outdated work of a researcher whose connections to Christian fundamentalism seems to be clear. Instead, you’ve shown that you to hurl insults. A person who relies upon insults for the purpose of debating has lost all credibility in a debate, in my opinion, for to me that kind of behavior means that they have nothing to back up their arguments except invective, gall, and spleen.
Is your faith really so fragile as to be threatened by the concept that the Lukan account (or any other gospel’s account) is not 100% accurate? If the census didn’t happen (and I think Dex outlined some fairly compelling arguments that it didn’t), it doesn’t mean that Jesus never existed.
Get a grip, will ya? Didja ever think that perhaps the Tower of Bable story is analogus what happened to The Bible? That the Word got confused so as to fit into God’s Divine Plan (whatever that Plan may be)?
You do realize that you have just condemned yourself with your own words? Your entire set of diatribes in the original thread were filled with irrelevant attacks against “athiests” (of whom no one you opposed was) and other minor libels. You made enormous leaps in judgement regarding the opinions, sources, and facts presented, all in a shrill and hateful tone of voice that made Jesus weep.
I’m glad that you condemn that approach; I am sorry that you have condemned yourelf.
Um…while your syntax is certainly creative, I’m not sure I’m following you…
Are you saying that THE Golden Calf has been unearthed?
I think I’m not alone (I hope I’m not alone!) when I say: cite?
Or is this one of those deals where someone found a lump of gold and says “See! This is a fragment of The Golden Calf!” just like they do with phony Noah’s ark fragments every few years?
The argument in a nutshell:
“Ramsay is a highly respected arachaelogist, so you should believe what he says.”
“No, actually, he’s not highly respected.”
“How dare you stoop to ad hominem attacks!”
Look, if you present someone’s credentials as evidence that they’re right, then there’s nothing dishonest about questioning their credentials.
IIRC, there wasn’t a reference to King David actually, but rather a reference to the House of David. That’s an entirely different thing. There’s currently a modern nation, a particular monarchy, whose royal house claims descent from the Sun Goddess, so I guess going by that same “logic,” we should all bow down and worship said goddess.
You’re slaying me, hawthorne! I completely forgot that when we heathens (as determined by sanctimonious offal such as jg {an aside: “jg” means “junior grade” to us Navy types} do it, it’s wrong; however, when the santimonious offal do it, it’s “God’s will.”
