JC was born years before what is commonly thought

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Wow. Now I am going to get it in the neck. From Muslims and Christians. Just hope there are no Jews on here too.

LOL.. Classic. Half, my dad married a Shiksa. Never understood til I was older why my Gramps knew God but laughed at my dad for being a Christian.. ;D

Great post above first off, and instead of getting into another debate about the past at this point. Let's analyse history from current events. As we both know current events are an extension of the past.

Nina Grewal on Religious Freedom
openparliament.ca/debates/2012/12/12/nina-grewal-1/only/

Mr. Speaker, religious and ethnic communities from around the world come to Canada to find freedom, peace and a better way of life.

Canada has a long tradition of pluralism, tolerance and respect for the traditions of others. It is truly wonderful that all faiths can celebrate openly here in Canada.

However, political correctness is diluting Christmas in a well-intentioned but unnecessary attempt to be inclusive. How can we as a society join together to celebrate Diwali, the Chinese New Year, Hanukkah or Vaisakhi but, at the same time, rob Christians of the true meaning of Christmas?

As a Sikh, I am not offended when Christians celebrate Christmas in a traditional way. Rather, I am pleased to celebrate with my Christian friends. True diversity means respecting the traditions of all Canadians, including those of the Christian majority.

I ask all members to please join with me in wishing everyone a very merry Christmas.

People have moved to Canada(and the US) for freedom, peace, and a better way of life. Freedom and peace is exactly what Christ wanted, I think we can both agree on that, no?

How did this come about? With a TON of atrocities in thy name. I think we can both agree on that, no?

So without the war side of Christ there is no Peace and Freedom for us to work on today.

Without the Romans changing yule to Christmas we wouldn't celebrate the birth of a 2000+ yr old man, and counting, every year. Regardless of if it's his birthday in December, the fact is whatever he did when he was here set this into action and that is the starting point to this next chapter, how.

Regardless of if this book by the pope is fact or fiction the debate on JC is about to get red hot again over the next few years because of current events. How much longer can the Muslims get away with people not finding out the truth about their views on Christ (messiah)?

How a man made himself front and center of the Roman war machine, was able to get them to adopt his form of Judaism, while ensuring there would be a force strong enough to compete with it on the other side of the argument, is going to be the plot of this debate I'm guessing.

The reality of the situation is that the archaeological evidence supports the facts that Christ was born around the same time that Herod the Greats sons were being born. It makes sense too, as his heir were being born he would want to make sure no males from Judea would grow up to challenge his families rule.

Plus, if you "shift" the biblical account a bit(leaving the story intact) it fits into why we have Peace and freedom to work on toady.

A lot of that peace and freedom on earth has to do with... and of course JC and God.

It's just all one big loop my friend. To infinity and beyond! ;D

[trevorw2539]

The reality of the situation is that the archaeological evidence supports the facts that Christ was born around the same time that Herod the Greats sons were being born. It makes sense too, as his heir were being born he would want to make sure no males from Judea would grow up to challenge his families rule.

Problem with the above is that we have no historical evidence for the above. Indeed the only person around to mention it is 'Matthew'.
Even Josephus doesn't, and he mentions that type of thing. Did it occur? It's possible. Herod was mentally unstable at this time. He killed 2 sons, their mother and some of her relatives. (He had as many as 10 wives).
If it did then 'Matthew' used it as a fulfilment of OT passages and presenting Jesus as the Messiah, a theme of 'Matthew'.
The tragedy in the US shows that these things happen.
In the Bible instance there would only have been a handful of children killed. Bethlehem had about a 1000 population.

It is interesting to compare the story with that of Moses and the Exodus. The killing of the Hebrew children, and the escape of Moses - the Hebrew 'Redeemer'?

[Reckless Roselia]

Not to cut into the conversation here, however, this is exactly what I’m saying Roselia. (Sorry for the late response things have been insane around here, hope you are still well

Not a problem, Aham. I am slightly busy of late myself with the mock exams for my kids at school. I hope things aren't overly insane around your neck of the woods. Anyway, I have enjoyed my conversation with Trevor and I'm sure you've enjoyed the conversation too. Also I'm enjoying the read so thank you for that, Trevor and Aham.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Nah, not too insane, just right.. ;D The roads are really icy and there is tons of snow so it takes 20 mins extra both ways when you go somewhere it seems like.. Good thing we have winter tires. I think it's great that you nurture young minds my dad was a teacher for many years. Glad you're enjoying the conversation, I always have a good time chatting with trevor.

The reality of the situation is that the archaeological evidence supports the facts that Christ was born around the same time that Herod the Greats sons were being born. It makes sense too, as his heir were being born he would want to make sure no males from Judea would grow up to challenge his families rule.

Problem with the above is that we have no historical evidence for the above. Indeed the only person around to mention it is 'Matthew'.

Maybe not of the actually event, however, what we do know is the surrounding information again. For Jewish people to deny that JC is the messiah, he had to be viewed as a messiah at one point.

The Koran states that JC could talk when he was born, now regardless of if he could have talked, or if Herod killed babies by the age of 4-6 he would have been recognized as what he was. (Hebrew school by 10 you have you're trade. Rabbi was what they called JC so....) Now if we are talking about my timeline here, this is about 16-14 BC that JC is around 4-6.

So when Herod died in 4 BCE and his son declared incompetent by Augustus in 6 CE (by this time JC is about 26) you can see how it's possible that JC would have fulfilled this part of the Torah....

"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty, Judge, Everlasting, Father, Prince, and Peace. [Sanhedrin 94a]

Especially since it was about this time that a system was put in place that would result in "Peace", by a man that would eventually tax Judea, and when he died, he was to be worshiped throughout the kingdom as God.

[trevorw2539]

Dec 21, 2012 1:24:13 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Nah, not too insane, just right.. ;D The roads are really icy and there is tons of snow so it takes 20 mins extra both ways when you go somewhere it seems like.. Good thing we have winter tires. I think it's great that you nurture young minds my dad was a teacher for many years. Glad you're enjoying the conversation, I always have a good time chatting with trevor.

The reality of the situation is that the archaeological evidence supports the facts that Christ was born around the same time that Herod the Greats sons were being born. It makes sense too, as his heir were being born he would want to make sure no males from Judea would grow up to challenge his families rule.

Problem with the above is that we have no historical evidence for the above. Indeed the only person around to mention it is 'Matthew'.

Maybe not of the actually event, however, what we do know is the surrounding information again. For Jewish people to deny that JC is the messiah, he had to be viewed as a messiah at one point.

The Koran states that JC could talk when he was born, now regardless of if he could have talked, or if Herod killed babies by the age of 4-6 he would have been recognized as what he was. (Hebrew school by 10 you have you're trade. Rabbi was what they called JC so....) Now if we are talking about my timeline here, this is about 16-14 BC that JC is around 4-6.

So when Herod died in 4 BCE and his son declared incompetent by Augustus in 6 CE (by this time JC is about 26) you can see how it's possible that JC would have fulfilled this part of the Torah....

"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty, Judge, Everlasting, Father, Prince, and Peace. [Sanhedrin 94a]

Especially since it was about this time that a system was put in place that would result in "Peace", by a man that would eventually tax Judea, and when he died, he was to be worshiped throughout the kingdom as God.

I don't believe the Jews ever 'believed' that Jesus was the Messiah. They would have considered the facts that were being revealed by his teaching and life. They decided - the religious decided - as a Nation he was not. Some believed, but for most that dissipated when Jesus apparently died.

As to your figures. It has been considered that Herod died in 4BC. That has been challenged in the 20th century. An eclipse occurred in that year and has been used for dating his death. However total eclipses occured in 5BC and 1BC. There are other reasons to exclude 4BC . They depend on Josephus and his account of the fall of Jerusalem to Herod. It is a long and complicated process involving the month of Tishri 10 in September, sabbatical years, lunar eclipses and other recorded Roman events. These can give us the death of Herod 8/9BCE.

This of course affects the birth of Jesus. Nor do we have any evidence for the Massacre of the Innocents.

I believe we are too far removed from these events without firm contemporary documentation.

Herod was a 'client' king of Rome and as such had more freedom than subject kings. But when he died he would have no say in who ran his kingdom.Herods fear was from his own deranged mind.
The Romans would, and did, split his kingdom. None of the sons were ever given the title of King/Herod by the Romans, though we read of them as 'herods'. Neither had they the same power as their father.


The Jewish education system was made of:

Beit Safar - 5-10 year olds learning by heart the Torah.
Beit Talmud - 10-14 year olds learning the Oral Torah (OT)
Beit Midrash - 14+ studying the Mishnah, writings on Jewishscriptures, practising halahkha and other studies.

Beit Midrash only applied to those who were adjuged bright enough to pursue these studies by examination by a Rabbi. And boy, did they have to be bright. This led eventually to becoming a Rabbi.
The rest learnt a trade from the age of 12, though often they had already watched and helped their father in his trade. They probably still studied, but just for knowledge.

All this leaves us with a quandary.

Was Jesus a carpenter in the silent years (12-30) or was he learning to be a Rabbi. He had the potential, as he proved in the Temple at the age of 12, to become a Rabbi. And he was called such by many because of his teaching.

Another interesting point. Jewish belief was that, at the age of 30 you had reached 'full vigour'. (Prime of Life).
Was that why Jesus appeared at the age of 30 - as a recognised Rabbi?

Note Numbers chapter 4. Those chosen to serve the Tabernacle had to be between 30 and 50. None outside those years.



Archelaus was removed as said but this would not have had any effect on Jesus at that time. He lived under the rule of Antipas. That 30 years later Pilate the Governor allowed Jesus to be crucified has little bearing on it. He was the Roman procurator or prefect over the area, though subject to the Syrian Governor. Antipas was simply a minor ruler of the district of Galilee.



The verse quoted has been used by Christians for the coming of Jesus. But we have to take the whole passage in context.



By the way, believe it or not, the above is all 'in brief'.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

By the way, believe it or not, the above is all 'in brief'.

I believe it, it's better that way..

As to your figures. It has been considered that Herod died in 4BC. That has been challenged in the 20th century. An eclipse occurred in that year and has been used for dating his death. However total eclipses occured in 5BC and 1BC. There are other reasons to exclude 4BC . They depend on Josephus and his account of the fall of Jerusalem to Herod. It is a long and complicated process involving the month of Tishri 10 in September, sabbatical years, lunar eclipses and other recorded Roman events. These can give us the death of Herod 8/9BCE.

This of course affects the birth of Jesus. Nor do we have any evidence for the Massacre of the Innocents.

I believe we are too far removed from these events without firm contemporary documentation.

How can we be too far removed, when at the start of this quote above you're talking about documentation of solar events? If Heord died in 8 BC that's even more to my point. That would make his sons almost 30 by the time he died.

That is my point with Herod the Greats death, that by the time he died his sons were already into their marriage cycles and since we know that Antipas apparently wanted John the Baptist dead this makes John, JC and the gang grown men by the time Herod the Great died in 4, 8, or 9 BC, not little babies or even teenagers.

I don't believe the Jews ever 'believed' that Jesus was the Messiah. They would have considered the facts that were being revealed by his teaching and life. They decided - the religious decided - as a Nation he was not. Some believed, but for most that dissipated when Jesus apparently died.

Jewish Christianity is where Christianity started, some absolutely believed he was the Messiah, the nation decided after Rome brought the hammer down that JC didn't bring peace. This didn't stop Jewish people from converting or the message from spreading throughout the Empire(mostly through the slaves).

This same kind of thing happen quite a few times over the years, for instance....

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_Jew

Due to the precarious position of Jews, some nobles could ignore their debts. If the sponsoring noble died, his Jewish financier could face exile or execution. A famous example of this process occurred in the 1100s, after the death of Aaron of Lincoln (1125–1186), who had been wealthiest man of 12th century Britain, his wealth exceeding even the King's.[4] After his death, King Henry II requisitioned Aaron's assets over a number of decades, setting up a court for the purpose known as "Aaron's Exchequer".[5]

The Jewish education system was made of:

Beit Safar - 5-10 year olds learning by heart the Torah.
Beit Talmud - 10-14 year olds learning the Oral Torah (OT)
Beit Midrash - 14+ studying the Mishnah, writings on Jewishscriptures, practising halahkha and other studies.

Beit Midrash only applied to those who were adjuged bright enough to pursue these studies by examination by a Rabbi. And boy, did they have to be bright. This led eventually to becoming a Rabbi.
The rest learnt a trade from the age of 12, though often they had already watched and helped their father in his trade. They probably still studied, but just for knowledge.

All this leaves us with a quandary.

Was Jesus a carpenter in the silent years (12-30) or was he learning to be a Rabbi. He had the potential, as he proved in the Temple at the age of 12, to become a Rabbi. And he was called such by many because of his teaching.

Bingo on the bold part, which fits right into Hebrew school as you have pointed out in the quote above here.

Archelaus was removed as said but this would not have had any effect on Jesus at that time. He lived under the rule of Antipas. That 30 years later Pilate the Governor allowed Jesus to be crucified has little bearing on it. He was the Roman procurator or prefect over the area, though subject to the Syrian Governor. Antipas was simply a minor ruler of the district of Galilee.

Ah, except for if JC and John were older at this time, then there is a whole different aspect to this time frame. For instance around 5 AD( Herods Death) is when the Zealots started to revolt in Judea. Again, JC had zealots for apostles. By the time Augustus died in Rome, Cesar worship had started and the riots keep growing in Judea.

If you keep in mind the court jew entry from above and the fact that Augustus brought "peace" to the empire, which he created BTW, and the quote about how the son will have the weight of the government placed on him(that is in the Torah); it's more than just a coincidence that all of this happened at the same time as far as I'm concerned. The reality of situation is that there is a precedent being set for something....

3,000-year-old murder solved
www.tgdaily.com/general-sciences-features/68159-3000-year-old-murder-solved

[trevorw2539]

Dec 23, 2012 2:11:23 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

By the way, believe it or not, the above is all 'in brief'.

I believe it, it's better that way..



How can we be too far removed, when at the start of this quote above you're talking about documentation of solar events? If Heord died in 8 BC that's even more to my point. That would make his sons almost 30 by the time he died.

That is my point with Herod the Greats death, that by the time he died his sons were already into their marriage cycles and since we know that Antipas apparently wanted John the Baptist dead this makes John, JC and the gang grown men by the time Herod the Great died in 4, 8, or 9 BC, not little babies or even teenagers.



Jewish Christianity is where Christianity started, some absolutely believed he was the Messiah, the nation decided after Rome brought the hammer down that JC didn't bring peace. This didn't stop Jewish people from converting or the message from spreading throughout the Empire(mostly through the slaves).

This same kind of thing happen quite a few times over the years, for instance....

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_Jew





Bingo on the bold part, which fits right into Hebrew school as you have pointed out in the quote above here.

Archelaus was removed as said but this would not have had any effect on Jesus at that time. He lived under the rule of Antipas. That 30 years later Pilate the Governor allowed Jesus to be crucified has little bearing on it. He was the Roman procurator or prefect over the area, though subject to the Syrian Governor. Antipas was simply a minor ruler of the district of Galilee.

Ah, except for if JC and John were older at this time, then there is a whole different aspect to this time frame. For instance around 5 AD( Herods Death) is when the Zealots started to revolt in Judea. Again, JC had zealots for apostles. By the time Augustus died in Rome, Cesar worship had started and the riots keep growing in Judea.

If you keep in mind the court jew entry from above and the fact that Augustus brought "peace" to the empire, which he created BTW, and the quote about how the son will have the weight of the government placed on him(that is in the Torah); it's more than just a coincidence that all of this happened at the same time as far as I'm concerned. The reality of situation is that there is a precedent being set for something....

3,000-year-old murder solved
www.tgdaily.com/general-sciences-features/68159-3000-year-old-murder-solved

We're actually talking about things we have no facts for.

What we do know is that Herod died 4 BCE according to many, and 'possibly' 8 BCE according to new ideas (like the Pope).

We do not know when John the Baptist was beheaded. It must have been somewhere around 27 CE, so he and Jesus would have been men by that time, and not when Herod the Great died.
Antipas and Herodias married around 27 CE according to Josephus. And it was that marriage that caused the death of John the Baptist according to the Bible.

Again, if Jesus had been a man at the death of Herod, say even 12, the age of'manhood' in Judaism, that would make him 42 when Pilate became Governor of Judea in 26CE. Yet he was executed by Pilate at the age of 33.

As I say, we can often only speculate on these things. History at the time often 'differs' from history at a distance of 2000 years.

One thing I see in a newspaper that the Pope says is that Jesus was not born surrounded by animals.
There I disagree. Many poor houses of the time had just one room in which they lived. Often part of that room was given over to their livestock. The 'manger' being a shelf where straw etc was kept, and where a baby could lie in an emergency. I suggest that many babies of poor families slept in/on a 'manger'.

But then a Pope would not have experienced that poverty.




As to the acceptance by the Jews of Jesus as the Messiah.
Yes, individual Jews became 'Christian Jews'. The nation - represented by the 'religious government' - rejected the idea.

Quote. How can we be too far removed, when at the start of this quote above you're talking about documentation of solar events? If Heord died in 8 BC that's even more to my point. That would make his sons almost 30 by the time he died.

While we have some documented solar events, we can now calculate way back into the past when other events occurred simple by watching over a period of time current events and 'projecting' them back in time.


Hope you and your family are well. Christmas greetings to you all.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Again, if Jesus had been a man at the death of Herod, say even 12, the age of'manhood' in Judaism, that would make him 42 when Pilate became Governor of Judea in 26CE. Yet he was executed by Pilate at the age of 33.

It's told right now 33 anyway. Just consider what we talked about regarding the debate over JC, and how it's about to heat up. This is a theory that I have had for years and years my friend.

There're many threads that I have started around this place that analysis the different aspects of all of this in different ways, and lot of them are based on current events and how they tie into the past.

Whither the birthplace of Jesus? O little town of Bethlehem vs. the littler village of Bethlehem of the Galilee(bold by me)
news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/whither-birthplace-jesus-o-little-town-bethlehem-vs-184009556.html

For centuries, Christians have been making the pilgrimage to Bethlehem to pay their respects to Jesus — except they may have been making a wrong turn.

According to NPR and the London Times, the son of Mary wasn't born in the little town of Bethlehem in Palestine's West Bank area. Instead, archaeologists think it's the little village called Bethlehem of the Galilee, about 100 miles north.

As if shifting a well-traveled holy route wouldn't be awkward enough, the United Nations just designated Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in November — the first for Palestine. This year, AFP reported that an estimated 15,000 are visiting Bethlehem. People even pay homage online: Searches on Yahoo! have rise for "bethlehem" (+109%), "o little town of bethelem lyrics" (+50%), and "bethlehem israel" (off the charts) in the past day.

The hypothesis isn't a new one among scholars, and the Israeli Antiques Authority (IAA) has been talking about evidence unearthed in an excavation that may point to where the real manger lies.

"It makes much more sense that Mary rode on a donkey, while she was at the end of the pregnancy, from Nazareth to Bethlehem of Galilee which is only 7 kilometers rather then the other Bethlehem which is 150 kilometers," IAA senior archaeologist Aviram Oshri explained to NPR, adding that West Bank's Bethlehem (also called Judea) didn't even have residents back in the first century.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Hope your Christmas was good Trevor, forgot that at the start.

[trevorw2539]

Dec 26, 2012 1:24:05 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Again, if Jesus had been a man at the death of Herod, say even 12, the age of'manhood' in Judaism, that would make him 42 when Pilate became Governor of Judea in 26CE. Yet he was executed by Pilate at the age of 33.

It's told right now 33 anyway. Just consider what we talked about regarding the debate over JC, and how it's about to heat up. This is a theory that I have had for years and years my friend.

There're many threads that I have started around this place that analysis the different aspects of all of this in different ways, and lot of them are based on current events and how they tie into the past.

Whither the birthplace of Jesus? O little town of Bethlehem vs. the littler village of Bethlehem of the Galilee(bold by me)
news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/whither-birthplace-jesus-o-little-town-bethlehem-vs-184009556.html

For centuries, Christians have been making the pilgrimage to Bethlehem to pay their respects to Jesus — except they may have been making a wrong turn.

According to NPR and the London Times, the son of Mary wasn't born in the little town of Bethlehem in Palestine's West Bank area. Instead, archaeologists think it's the little village called Bethlehem of the Galilee, about 100 miles north.

As if shifting a well-traveled holy route wouldn't be awkward enough, the United Nations just designated Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in November — the first for Palestine. This year, AFP reported that an estimated 15,000 are visiting Bethlehem. People even pay homage online: Searches on Yahoo! have rise for "bethlehem" (+109%), "o little town of bethelem lyrics" (+50%), and "bethlehem israel" (off the charts) in the past day.

The hypothesis isn't a new one among scholars, and the Israeli Antiques Authority (IAA) has been talking about evidence unearthed in an excavation that may point to where the real manger lies.

"It makes much more sense that Mary rode on a donkey, while she was at the end of the pregnancy, from Nazareth to Bethlehem of Galilee which is only 7 kilometers rather then the other Bethlehem which is 150 kilometers," IAA senior archaeologist Aviram Oshri explained to NPR, adding that West Bank's Bethlehem (also called Judea) didn't even have residents back in the first century.

I agree it makes more sense but doesn't fit the 'facts' as we know them.

Jesus was of the House of David. David was of the tribe of Judah. Judah was the tribe which occupied the southern area of Israel during their time in the Promised land. It was also the area ruled by Archelaus during Jesus birth. This is Bethlehem - near Jerusalem.

Jesus returned from Egypt to Nazareth in Galilee, we are told, to escape Archelaus. This area was ruled by Antipas. This was close to the Bethlehem of the north.

Bethlehem near where Jacob buried Rachel - Ephrath - thus Bethlehem Ephrata. Where David was born and later anointed king by Samuel, called City of David.

None of this would have been in the northern Bethlehem.

Now I know that after the exile only the tribe of Judah returned to Palestine. They occupied much of Palestine but the Samaritans -people taken from other parts of the Assyrian| Empire had occupied parts of Palestine in their abscence. In fact Palestine was virtually cut in three. Galilee to the north, Samaria in the middle and Judea to the south.

Exra and Nehemiah, of the tribe of Judah were instrumental in leading Judeans back to Jerusalem and rebuilding the Temple and city with the permission of the Persians.

If one accepts the Biblical 'facts' and teaching then everything points to the southern Bethlehem.

Jesus is the culmination of circumstances concerned with Judah, and therefore one could suppose that the Bethlehem concerned should be in Judea.

Oshri talks about 'no Herodian artifacts'. Why should there be. Herod is associated with building in Jerusalem and Jericho and other places in Palestine. Also a retreat/fortress 15 km from Jerusalem, 5km S.E of Bethlehem. None I'm aware of in Bethlehem.
Jews in Bethlehem would have kept their own way of life, using the own utensils etc.

It would be unlikely any soldiers would be stationed in a small place like Bethlehem, particularly because there was a Roman garrison at Jerusalem, 7 km away. Just an hours march for a fully fit Roman group of soldiers.

Have any 'Herodian artifacts' been found in Bethlehem of the north?

As to Bethlehem having no inhabitants at that time. That's not what history says. But that's another story.

As I say we have all sorts of 'theories' going about.

The above are simply my thoughts based on what I have read and considered over the years.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Are there any artifacts?

Israeli Antiques Authority (IAA) has been talking about evidence unearthed in an excavation that may point to where the real manger lies.

The House of David started in Judea, but it could have moved around, there could have been the bloodline of David living in Galilee very easy, as you said there was a "dispersal" going on.

Plus when I search where was Jesus from... the answer seems to be that Jesus was from Galilee. So why would he be born in Judea and live in Galilee?

There is also this....

John: 7:41-43

41 Others said, “He is the Messiah.”

Still others asked, “How can the Messiah come from Galilee? 42 Does not Scripture say that the Messiah will come from David’s descendants and from Bethlehem, the town where David lived?” 43 Thus the people were divided because of Jesus.

But like you said, after exile only the tribe of Judea returned, and were subsequently dispersed, as mentioned above.

What it seems to me is that Half the story ain't never been told.

[trevorw2539]

Jan 5, 2013 2:30:06 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Are there any artifacts?

Israeli Antiques Authority (IAA) has been talking about evidence unearthed in an excavation that may point to where the real manger lies.

The House of David started in Judea, but it could have moved around, there could have been the bloodline of David living in Galilee very easy, as you said there was a "dispersal" going on.

Plus when I search where was Jesus from... the answer seems to be that Jesus was from Galilee. So why would he be born in Judea and live in Galilee?

There is also this....

John: 7:41-43

41 Others said, “He is the Messiah.”

Still others asked, “How can the Messiah come from Galilee? 42 Does not Scripture say that the Messiah will come from David’s descendants and from Bethlehem, the town where David lived?” 43 Thus the people were divided because of Jesus.

But like you said, after exile only the tribe of Judea returned, and were subsequently dispersed, as mentioned above.

What it seems to me is that Half the story ain't never been told.

Mangers. BETHLEHEM HOUSE AND MANGER The humble scene of the birthplace of the Baby JESUS is so often interpreted with Occidental instead of Oriental flavor that it would be well for Westerners to have the description of the kind of a Bethlehem house in which the Saviour was doubtless born, as given by John D. Whiting.40 Entering the door of this one-room Bethlehem dwelling one sees that two-thirds of the space is given over to a "raised masonry platform, some eight to ten feet above the ground and supported by low-domed arches." This space that is raised is occupied by the members of the family, and the lower part of the house is for the cattle and flocks. Narrow stone steps lead up to where the family lives, and there are only two small windows in the room and these are high up from the ground. In winter weather the sheep and goats are kept inside the house, also a few work cattle, and perhaps a donkey. Primitive mangers for the cattle are to be seen around the walls, and these are built of rough slabs of stone placed on edge and plastered up with mortar." The owner of the animals often sleeps on a small raised place, where he can keep watch over newly born lambs. To know the heart of the land, to have learned the hospitality of its people, which is always offered, no matter how primitive or simple, makes it easy to picture Mary and Joseph returning from the inn, already filled with guests, and turning aside into a home such as we have described, the regular dwelling portion of which may have been none too large for the family which occupied it. It may have been crowded with other guests, but they find a welcome and a resting-place for the babe in a manger. [Manners And Customs of Bible Lands]

The 'stable' is the western idea. The 'manger' the eastern. This is where it pays to understand the eastern ways. Too often in translation we have interpreted eastern ways to fit western ideas.

What will archaeologists find? Will it say 'Jesus was born here'?



Still others asked, “How can the Messiah come from Galilee? 42 Does not Scripture say that the Messiah will come from David’s descendants and from Bethlehem, the town where David lived?” 43 Thus the people were divided because of Jesus.[/size][/quote]

Jesus was born in Judean Bethlehem, David's city. Moving to Nazareth as a precaution against Archelaus. It did not make him a Galilean except in name.

One little point for which I apologise. I slightly misled you by saying that only the tribe of Judah returned from exile. The 'minor' tribe of Simeon was tied in with Judah in the area allocated to each tribe. Many theories as to what actually happened to the Simeon tribe abound. What is evident is that they went into captivity with Judah. On the return to Jerusalem the term 'Jews' is used rather than individual tribal names.

It's interesting to talk to you and get your ideas.

Best wishes to your family for 2013

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

It's interesting to talk to you and get your ideas.

Best wishes to your family for 2013

I agree 110% Trevor. I have a feeling that we could spend countless hours chatting.. I hope that 2013 has been good to you so far, and best wishes back to you and yours sir. Sorry for the delay, but we just welcomed out 4th boy into our house!!

This made made me lol...

What will archaeologists find? Will it say 'Jesus was born here'?

Can you imagine if that is exactly what happens??..

Seriously though, I'm glad you brought up ideas. An idea is the most important part to this whole conversation that we are having on all these different threads. I have believed for over 15 years that JC had to have some type of important role in role in Rome's history, more important than we are lead to believe currently. I have believed that JC was instrumental in setting up the economics of free enterprise this entire time as well. I also have believed this whole time that JC had to strategically develop a plan for a war that would lead to love (economics) not war, being the main driver in our society.

This whole time I have held onto my idea and based my outlook on life on what my view of reality is. There are people on this board that have listen to me talk about this for years now, and I'm sure more than one of them has thought I was nuts.

The bottom line is this. I believe that Einstein's theory of relativity plays into things even more than he imagined. Basically time moves at different velocities on the individual level; so, time is relative to an individuals reality and the more people that accept an individuals realty, the more time and space it will consume.

For me in the last 15 yrs I have gone from being nuts because of history based on the gospel of Thomas and Islam, Emperor Constantine and Augustus, archaeology in Rome, and logic...

To watching an early Christian church being discovered in 2005. To secret caves being discovered with the earliest "catholic" writings in them in 2010. To the POPE writing a book about the central tendency of my theory (JC being born years before commonly thought) in 2012. To people claiming they have found the true birthplace of JC aslo in 2012.

The way I see it, the story of JC is gravitating more and more towards the reality that I have held onto. I find that very interesting because when it comes right down to it, the idea that I have heal onto is steeped in logic, not the belief in a supernatural force.

¹⁴"You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden."
¹⁵"Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house."
¹⁶"In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven."

-Matthew 5:14-16

[trevorw2539]

Ahamburger. Congratulations of the birth of your son.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Thank you sir they are all blessings that is for sure.  I thank God everyday that he created JC and gave him the ability to do what he needed to do to bring balance to the world. 

There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known.

-Luke 12:2

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

I wrote this in response to a conversation I was having with a good poster, I realized the other day that it's a nice summary to this thread.  Economics IS the "holy grail" JC understood economics very well and 2000 ys ago he was not only a Rabbi, but was instrumental in the Roman empire.  JC set up the economic cycles that we are on today using all the things that us humans take part in, and that is why the entire world is heading towards a consumer based economic cycle.  This cycle when you think about it at its core is based on HIS gospel.(LOVE not war).  The meek are in control, but it's still up to us with our free will to make the right decisions in life, which can be the hardest part.

As discussed in this thread current events are happening that are going to bring up some very important questions, aside from the war in the middle east every year on Christmas day Jewish people get together to debate if Most Great Rabbis Were Completely Opposed to Political Zionism, Because of the Three Oaths.  My take on it is that they are about to come to the conclusion that JC was the messiah because there was no where else to go. 

Also interesting to note that the Illuminate, and to and extent the revolutions of the 1700's that lead to the creation on the USA, was started because of the suppression of a Jesuit group.(Society of Jesus)  As most have seen for the first time in history the new pope is now a Jesuit and his task is to clean up the Church.  Stay tuned. 

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Just a thought, the bold part above can be linked to sayings like in Mathew 10:34.  However, I like how the gospel of Thomas has it..

Jesus said, "Perhaps people think that I have come to bring peace to the world, and they do not know that I have come to bring division to the earth - fire, a sword, war. For there will be five in a house; three will be against two and two against three, the father against the son and the son against the father. And the unified ones will rise up."

They will rise up and live in Balance! 

[roxanne]

Historians have sufficient evidence to state with some degree of certainty that Jesus existed, if you are going to fabricate a mythological hero then the NT is not the way to go about it.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Nothing but facts surrounding this historical documentation of JC's life. Judge me all you want but the fact is that his life runs through history in many different books, and chances are since you have two posts I have found a quote in the NT that doesn't fit YOUR reality of who JC was. You see my reality continues to grow with current events, for instance, more current events that will lead to a NEW discussion... The new Pope urges dialogue with Islam.. I wonder what they could talk about, who the messiah in the Abrahamic religion is maybe? Perhaps where Zionism really started??

Look at life through one angle and you'll never see the truth that will set you free. 

[roxanne]

Jesus was born on December 25 th in the year 0, this is not disputed by any historian or scientist.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

  Did you miss the first post?  Pope Benedict wrote a book about it so I'm not sure where you're getting your "facts" from and honestly it's already been pointed out the year 0 doesn't truly exists in the history books.

Here's something to consider Herod the Great was tyrant that was killing off anyone that threatened his rule and legacy.  A 12 yr old JC walks into the Temple in Jerusalem, Herod's Temple, stuns all the Rabbis and on lookers with his knowledge and understanding; then just walks out and lives without problems for like 20 yrs?  Ya, right, that's exactly what happened, makes sense.

"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

 -Abraham Lincoln 

"Preacher man, don't tell me, 
Heaven is under the earth. 
I know you don't know 
What life is really worth. 
It's not all that glitters is gold; 
'Alf the story has never been told: 
So now you see the light, eh! 
Stand up for your rights. come on! 

We sick an' tired of-a your ism-skism game - Dyin' 'n' goin' to heaven in-a Jesus' name, lord.
 We know when we understand: Almighty god is a living man.
 You can fool some people sometimes, But you can't fool all the people all the time.
 So now we see the light (what you gonna do?), 
We gonna stand up for our rights! (yeah, yeah, yeah! ) "

-Bob Marley Get Up, Stand Up

[roxanne]

  Did you miss the first post?  Pope Benedict wrote a book about it so I'm not sure where you're getting your "facts" from and honestly it's already been pointed out the year 0 doesn't truly exists in the history books.

You are stating time had no beginning which is obviously a false claim, the Big Bang began time and Jesus was born from the Big Bang, this is an undisputed fact.

You are obviously not a scholar like I is.

[Wisconsin Beth]

I've enjoyed a lot of the posts here.  Thanks for writing them. 

[ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ]

You are stating time had no beginning which is obviously a false claim, the Big Bang began time and Jesus was born from the Big Bang, this is an undisputed fact.

You are obviously not a scholar like I is.

Scholars usually have much better grammar.


Jesus was born several million years after the Big Bang. Have you never heard of dinosaurs? Paleontology? Some fossils found are over 225 million years old.



link

Small excerpt from the link:

Paleontology lies on the border between biology and geology, and shares with archaeology a border that is difficult to define. It now uses techniques drawn from a wide range of sciences, including biochemistry, mathematics and engineering. Use of all these techniques has enabled paleontologists to discover much of the evolutionary history of life, almost all the way back to when Earth became capable of supporting life, about 3,800 million years ago

[Wisconsin Beth]

SL, you're forgetting those tracks down in Texas that show dinosaur and people footprints laid down in the same mud and overlapping each other.  Proof that dinos and man lived together.   

[roxanne]

Jesus was born several million years after the Big Bang. Have you never heard of dinosaurs? Paleontology? Some fossils found are over 225 million years old.

Jesus, the dinosaurs and all matter were born with the Big Bang 13.77 BILLION years ago, and the oldest dinosaur fossil dates back 245 million years ago, me very clever, you speak with forked tongue.

Jesus was born in the year zero as I claim, and I am never wrong.

[roxanne]

SL, you're forgetting those tracks down in Texas that show dinosaur and people footprints laid down in the same mud and overlapping each other.  Proof that dinos and man lived together.   

Watch the documentary " The Flintstones ", all the proof one needs is contained within.

Elohim abides.

[ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ]

Yes, but the earliest (known) dinosaurs were roaming the Earth before humans - and even smaller organisms existed before that. Still, it was millions of years BC (Before Christ).

And there was no year zero. The years BC count backwards, from several million BC to the year 1BC. Then the next year after 1BC was 1AD.

[Wisconsin Beth]

I know, SL.  I'm teasing.  Or trying to. 

[roxanne]

And there was no year zero. The years BC count backwards, from several million BC to the year 1BC. Then the next year after 1BC was 1AD.

You are suggesting a time before time began, in my book this is sorcery, zero is the creation of time, there is no before creation( B.C).