YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
It has been postulated that he had a responsible position before that but no name was mentioned on the stone. Fragment of the sepulchral inscription of Quirinius
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Evolution of what?
- Thread starter Eli G
- Start date
TLK Valentine
Read the books that others would burn.
Interesting, but irrelevant. Quirinius is but a footnote in the long list of historical dealbreakers in Luke's birth narrative.
gnostic
The Lost One
The fact of matter that Judaea wasn’t a Roman province when Herod was still alive, because Judaea was a client kingdom, not a province. Romans don’t do census on client kingdoms, as Judaea was at the time. Census were reserved for provinces.
Second. Quirinius couldn’t have been governor of Syria as Gaius Sentius Saturninus (9 - 7/6 BCE) & Publius Quinctilius Varus (7/6 - 4 BCE) were successively governors during Herod’s last years. Josephus had even mentioned Varus as governor when Herod died.
while Saturninus and Varus were governors, Quirinius was serving as governor (pro praetore legatus) of Galatia (10 - 1 BCE), trying to quell rebellion mountain tribes that were hiding on the mountains of Galatia and Cilicia.
Quirinius only became governor 10 years later, when Augustus turn Judaea into province, after banishing Herod Archelaus. Then, and only then, was census carried out in 6 CE.
Third, the story of census where Joseph must go to Bethlehem, his ancestral home, is a myth. people were only needed to register in census, in their current home, so if Joseph was living in Nazareth, then Joseph didn’t need to register, as Galilee was a client kingdom , not a province at the time.
You don’t understand Roman imperial governing of Roman provinces any more than whoever wrote the gospel of Luke.
unlike ancient Israel, Judah & Judaea, Rome have far more contemporary texts and records, and their records provide insight how the Romans run Rome and the Roman Empire, politically, legally, socially & military.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
For some odd reason these Christians do not like Josephus now, though I am sure that they have referred to his work that mentionedJesus as well as the fake work of his.
Sorry wrong again. Land plants evolved AFTER sea creatures colonized the water. Bible can't get anything right it seems!
Is radiometric dating infallible?
When such processes occur, they can be detected. That is what makes radiometric dating highly accurate, we know which types of rocks, when tested will give us true results and which not.What science says about it: "in some cases, geological processes such as metamorphism or recrystallization can reset the isotopic system, leading to inaccurate results."
Are you a scientist?
It is an interesting read, but what jumped out at me are the use of words like probably, conjecture and if in detailing the review and arguments. Those and related words are consistently vilified in the scientific literature by creationists in their rejection of science due to the use therein. I suppose this is a double standard and is only valid when it is in reference to literature that is in opposition to dogma.
Evolutionists who deny that human beings have only existed for about 6 millennia, want us to believe that ancient civilizations that already had writing, astronomy, architecture, knowledge of mathematics, school education, engineering, arts, etc., suddenly appeared starting from isolated groups of apes that were becoming civilized little by little... but of which they have no evidence.
Do you think that if knowledge of the stars were something that was being known little by little, there would not be much older documents showing that gradual advance, to reach that one the Sumerians already had, for example? Or would there not be evidence of a gradual advance in mathematics, or in written language? ... Obviously, evolutionists have invented a gradual advance of the apes for which they have not the slightest proof.
This lack of feasible evidence of a gradual advance of human intelligence leads them to invent stories that they want to make believe as true, like the one about the apes' brains growing because they learned to cook and had more time to think... How much imagination to cover the lack of real evidence of a gradual advance from apes to humans!!!!
It is obvious that when humans were created and the first families and cities appeared, they already had a developed language and a mind capable of discovering scientific realities in a very short time. That is what is evidenced by the true archaeological documentation we have of the oldest civilizations and human settlements.
Do you think that if knowledge of the stars were something that was being known little by little, there would not be much older documents showing that gradual advance, to reach that one the Sumerians already had, for example? Or would there not be evidence of a gradual advance in mathematics, or in written language? ... Obviously, evolutionists have invented a gradual advance of the apes for which they have not the slightest proof.
This lack of feasible evidence of a gradual advance of human intelligence leads them to invent stories that they want to make believe as true, like the one about the apes' brains growing because they learned to cook and had more time to think... How much imagination to cover the lack of real evidence of a gradual advance from apes to humans!!!!
It is obvious that when humans were created and the first families and cities appeared, they already had a developed language and a mind capable of discovering scientific realities in a very short time. That is what is evidenced by the true archaeological documentation we have of the oldest civilizations and human settlements.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Why do you say "no evidence"? Do you not know that there is quite a bit of evidence? Do you even understand what is and what is not evidence?
What are you nattering about? Our knowledge of stars has improved "little by little". It is still improving that way.
If you want to demand evidence you need to learn what it and what is not evidence. Are you willing?
Empty cans rattle the most I'm told.
I remember the time when Froidian theories connected to sexuality were used to justify all types of behavior... For a long time psychologists maintained this perspective in their medical studies, until they realized that this point of view lacked any objective evidence and that it was only based on speculation and intuition rather than on obvious facts and demonstrations.
Evolutionists assume that apes developed into civilized humans. Not having proof of any kind to demonstrate this gradual development, they invent theories such as the Froidian ones to fill the gaps in evolutionary theory. They don't realize that a human civilization is not based on brain size alone, but on what that brain is capable of...
Did you know that the brain size of ants is larger in relation to their body size than that direct relationship in humans? If human intelligence had only to do with the brain, ants would already dominate us.
Evolutionists assume that apes developed into civilized humans. Not having proof of any kind to demonstrate this gradual development, they invent theories such as the Froidian ones to fill the gaps in evolutionary theory. They don't realize that a human civilization is not based on brain size alone, but on what that brain is capable of...
Did you know that the brain size of ants is larger in relation to their body size than that direct relationship in humans? If human intelligence had only to do with the brain, ants would already dominate us.
Dear evolutionist friend, show us EVIDENCES about when apes started looking at the sky and inventing an astrology like the one the Sumerians had.
Don't be shy, show us some evidences and maybe we'll put faith on you.
You've got some weird ideas about what evolution is meant to demonstrate....
Weird.
Did you know that the brain size of ants is larger in relation to their body size than that direct relationship in humans? If human intelligence had only to do with the brain, ants would already dominate us.
We already know brain size has nothing to do with intelligence. It's actually about the interconnection of neurons.
Human intelligence: it’s how your brain is wired rather than size that matters
Human brains are bigger than those of our primate relatives, but evidence from extinct human ancestors suggests brain size isn't everything.
Evolution has to do with apes becoming intelligent humans. Evidently the evolution theory should show evidences of the transition of those apes in civilized humans.
The Bible clearly states that when the human couple was created 6 millennia ago, they were already intelligent enough to give names to animals.
Gen. 2:19 Now Jehovah God had been forming from the ground every wild animal of the field and every flying creature of the heavens, and he began bringing them to the man to see what he would call each one; and whatever the man would call each living creature, that became its name. 20 So the man named all the domestic animals and the flying creatures of the heavens and every wild animal of the field, but for man there was no helper as a complement of him.
An ape can't give a name to anything, so evolutionists must tell when an ape become that smart like to look at the sky and give names to constellations like Sumerians... If evolutionist can't prove that transition with evidences is because they are inventing stories.
The Bible clearly states that when the human couple was created 6 millennia ago, they were already intelligent enough to give names to animals.
Gen. 2:19 Now Jehovah God had been forming from the ground every wild animal of the field and every flying creature of the heavens, and he began bringing them to the man to see what he would call each one; and whatever the man would call each living creature, that became its name. 20 So the man named all the domestic animals and the flying creatures of the heavens and every wild animal of the field, but for man there was no helper as a complement of him.
An ape can't give a name to anything, so evolutionists must tell when an ape become that smart like to look at the sky and give names to constellations like Sumerians... If evolutionist can't prove that transition with evidences is because they are inventing stories.
Not really no it doesn't.
Evolution is: the theory in biology postulating that the various types of plants, animals, and other living things on Earth have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations.
www.britannica.com
Evolution | Definition, History, Types, & Examples | Britannica
Evolution, theory in biology postulating that the various types of living things on Earth have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations. The theory of evolution is one of the fundamental keystones of...
How long did it take for the apes to learn to plant crops and realize the importance of crop rotation in the field to obtain better harvests, as the Sumerians already knew about this?
Do evolutionists have any evidence to show that apes sowed and expected crops from their sowing?
PS: I don't swallow pre-elaborated schemes as proof of anything, since those schemes belong to specific agendas. Do you really know what evidence is?
Do evolutionists have any evidence to show that apes sowed and expected crops from their sowing?
PS: I don't swallow pre-elaborated schemes as proof of anything, since those schemes belong to specific agendas. Do you really know what evidence is?