I hear people.claim they have "researched" a concept time and time again when their knowledge of the subject tells me that they used incredibly poor resources. A person may believe that they went through due diligence, but their work often tells us that they did not do so. But Luke was so wrong on his nativity story that it looks like he had to make part of that up. People will often lie for what they think is a greater cause and then believe those lies.
Look....it takes me time to type this stuff out, please respect my time.
I asked you a question.
Why would luke make up trivial natural stuff to promote supernatural stuff? Like a census, if there wasnt one, whats the big deal of him saying so or saying something else happened?
If i wanted to make up supernatural things, i would make sure my natural stuff was correct first. That would make SENSE.
Plus, why would luke make up this lie to a people who at that time period would have easily known he was wrong? It just dont make sense.
You really should not rely on dishonest sources.
How do you know there dishonest sources? You got evidence for that?
What you do not seem to realize that that was an event that was to happen a long.long.time ago. In the time frame of the person being spoken to. It was not a prophesy of the messiah. Also, don't you think that the author, who had used the Hebrew word for virgin elsewhere, would have used that word of he meant an actual virgin? You are not thinking rationally here, you are trying to make excuses.
The hebrew lexicon shows the word almah can be translated as virgin or young lady. It also says theres no proof that it cannot be translated as virgin. Thats comming from the hebrew lexicon now. How do you know its being dishonest? What, more conspiracy i suppose, right? One giant *** conspiracy.
And what about the scholars points about you being wrong about the census?
I have gone over this enough times. All you are doing is clutching at straws. Once again, no excuses allowed, you need to think rationally. First there never was an empire side census. That would be an extraordinary event and there would be a record of it.
Define extrordinary, because you used that word for the resurrection. A census is not supernatural, so why would it be extrordinary? And if it didnt happen, why does luke need to have it happen? Whats the point in making it up?
Instead we have records of smaller censuses. A greater one would definitely have been recorded. That is strikes one. Second we know where Quirinius was at that time. He was in central and North central Turkey. He was nowhere near Syria. Strike two. There would not have been a census when Herod was king, it was not a part of the empire proper at that time. We know when Quirinius had his census. It did not include Galilee. No census required people that lived elsewhere to return to their ancestral homes, that would be counted productive (and please don't use the sad example of nomadic people returning to their base). How many strikes is that? At least six.
How do you know all these details?
