Assuming it is meant to be taken literally, why does it not agree with written history by creating its own?
In Luke 2, it describes Cyrenius being governor of Syria at the time of Jesus' birth. Even with accounting for the miscalculation of what year he was born, there was no governor by that name during that period.
Also, when Herod was threatened by Jesus' birth, he killed off every single baby boy under age 2. Secular history should have a record of that since it would have been a major event, but yet it wasn't. Yet centuries later, there would be a Christmas song written mentioning this same king wanting to worship him?
When Jesus died, one of the events that occured in the Bible was zombies walking the streets. Why is there no written record of that? Surely that is not an everyday occurance and someone would thought it strange and recorded it for posterity.
Pontius Pilate did not have the authority to allow the Jews to make any decision regarding Jesus' fate.
2006-10-02 03:40:33 · 11 answers · asked by Cinnamon 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Also, the star (or whatever celestial body you translate it to be) that the magi saw, that's not part of recorded history either. Something of that magnitude that only they were able to see from far off lands would definitely be noticed by hundreds, if not thousands, of people, both distant and local. Especially a civilization who was into astrology. But yet it wasn't.
2006-10-02 03:54:05 · update #1
the Romans also never bothered to record the eclipse and that is just crazy because they were fanatics about recording stuff like that, they used natural events to check their historical dates for accuracy.
2006-10-02 03:47:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
To those who take it literally, they have a problem. However, and this is from experience, faith overrides logic for some time until the truth can sink in, if allowed to at all. Can you blame these sheep? What would they do if they woke up one day and realized all they are...are specks of dust in a cold, harsh vacuum, with equally disturbing things beyond that.
2006-10-02 11:03:19 · answer #2 · answered by Kali 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Why would you believe history,
especially the history you say wasn't written ,over what the Bible says, which was written by inspired men of God.
History books will never save a person, only the belief and obedience of the word of God.
2006-10-02 10:47:16 · answer #3 · answered by Rhonda 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
it's obvious you haven't done your homework on history. I suggest you dig a little deeper and you will see the bible was correct.
Also you might wanna consider that what we consider major news today was not back then.
2006-10-02 11:03:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I agree with you. Even historian said that there was no global flooding as written in the bible during the time of moses. there are many more error in da bible
2006-10-02 10:46:57 · answer #5 · answered by aa_mohammad 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
The Bible is a book of myth, not of history.
2006-10-02 10:58:04 · answer #6 · answered by AuroraDawn 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Well your first mistake was assuming it should be taken literally...which it shouldn't be. Any intelligent person has to admit that the earth was not created in six days...come on now.
One guy said it: people lie but the Lord doesn't....people wrote the Bible, the Lord didn't. It was written well after the death of Jesus.
2006-10-02 10:44:07 · answer #7 · answered by James P 6 · 2⤊ 7⤋
I would tell you to look first of all what means FAITH; and then Then,Lord NEVER lies, this is something only the humans do.Nice day..........
2006-10-02 10:56:55 · answer #8 · answered by wm 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
You have got some wrong info. It helps to go to the original text for language study.
2006-10-02 10:43:34 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 5⤋
The Bible has been proven correct over secular history in the past-- wait a while-- it will be proven correct again.
You might no approve of this answer --but it is VALID.
2006-10-02 10:43:03 · answer #10 · answered by whynotaskdon 7 · 4⤊ 8⤋