FatherMithras

Here's another biblical fuck up... Herod's slaughter of babies. Never happened, even Josephus never mentions it, and he was writing about that time with regard to leadership and history.

I Love Jesus

Yours is an argument from silence. Because Josephus mentioned it, it never happened? Josephus says that Herod committed many atrocities, must all of them be listed? Also, not to take away from the innocents that did die, but a decree to kill all boys 2 and under in the tiny hamlet of Bethlehem... how many could there have been? Would it necessarily have to be included in Josephus to be true?

Steven Avery

Estimates are a couple of dozen children lost their life to Herod's murderous rage. I have always been bemused by this argument from silence. With Josephus, there is an emphasis is on the big names, Herod and the various court intriques, there were a lot of People/Enquirer Magazine types of headlines to work with, rather bloody.

As if Herod would have noted in his official papers "today I sent out my gestapo to murder some infants and 1-year-olds". One doesn't have to be a historical rocket scientist to figger that mum was the word, in Roman historical records.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
Queens, NY
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

darstec

Who gives those estimates? What was the population of Bethlehem at the time? What was the average number of children in any family of that era? What percentage of the population would be begetting children every year? I think you will see when you honestly answer those questions that the number of children two years of age and younger (not one year of age as you so graciously downgraded the number) would number more than a couple of dozen especially since you conveniently ignore the correction that all the coastal cities were included in the massacre. Exactlly how many coastal cities were there? Were not several of them populated by citizens in decades of thousands? That type of murder, especially in the larger, more famous cities would hardly have occurred unnoticed.

And try reading Josephus, all of his writings. It is obvious that he really disliked Herod, so much so in fact that he would have made mention that Herod urinated on his right hand had any such fact been known to him. Silence in this case could only be a result of no known massacre, hardly a reality if any such thing occurred in the large populated coastal cities.

Kosh

Actually, the term is "Quote Mining", a technique usually employed by YECs and ID'ers attempting to discredit evolution.

Thanks for pointing that out though, I was reading it going "something is wrong here"...

Steven Avery

Hi, darstec, I think you are unfamiliar with the language usage and the terrain..

Matthew 2:16
Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men.

Coasts here has the meaning of borders, or of the region. It would likely include what we now call the villages of Beit Sahour and Beit Jalla. It would most certainly not extend to Jerusalem less than five miles aways, it might go partways to Hebron in the other direction. And it would not remotely extend to populous "coastal cities" which are about forty miles from Bethleham way down the mountains from Jerusalem. Maybe you should review the sources you use for accuracy.

Now, what the usage of "from two years old and under" meant in the Greek language, and/or a Hebrew idiomatic usage is a good question. Here is one quote, from another context.

http://www.360calendar.com/Y2K_5b_re...-calendar.html
(The Greek language, as our own, can take "two years old and under" to mean either 'not yet three years old,' or '2 years or less,' ...

I'm open to hearing all sides, but my gut sense is that the meaning was more "up to two years old" than our current English usage of a 2-yr-old being everyone one minute short of three.

With these items in mind, let's say the region had 5,000 inhabitants, and 2,500 males, then Herod may have tried to murder about 100 children. Likely many were spirited away as soon as word got out.

Stephen Carlsen and others discuss this on Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ma..._the_Innocents
Some art, too
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_the_Innocents

Holding's view is sensible here.
http://www.tektonics.org/qt/slaughtinn.html

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

Orthodox_Freethinker

Irenaeus was a second century writer whose theology insisted that Jesus reach old age before being crucified in order to sanctify the entirety of man.

Roland

One of the most common motifs in all of mythology is that of the "king" figure who, as a baby, has his life threatened by a current king who fears the child will grow up to usurp his throne and power.

Moses and Oedipus are just two of the figures of myth who fit this basic scheme. Jesus is no different.

Kosh

Not to mention Luke Skywalker...

I Love Jesus

He is not saying that Jesus was crucified as an old man. His main point is that Jesus had the "teaching status" of an old man. He was arguing against people who said that Jesus taught for only one year.