Mary, Joseph, Jesus and the census records

M

Medicine*Woman

Jesus: Mythstory--Not History!
Valued Senior Member
*************
M*W: The NT clearly states that Mary and Joseph were on their way to register for the Roman Census when Jesus was born. Where are those census records today?
 
Though the lack of census records are indeed a problem with the story of Jesus, can we really expect to find specific people in a census document 2000 years old?
 
Prince_James said:
Though the lack of census records are indeed a problem with the story of Jesus, can we really expect to find specific people in a census document 2000 years old?
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: Well, it does state that Mary and Joseph went to Bethlehem, and she was with child, and they traveled there to sign up for the census. Was there a Roman census? Were they registered on that census? Is there any true documentation that Jesus existed? That's what I want to know!
 
The census record might not specify names. It may just contain ages and genders of persons living in the household and other anonymous information like that. What I'd like to see is a DNA sample from the Shroud of Turin, assuming it's genuinely an imprint of a once-living person. If they pull normal DNA off of it, that leaves the church to either A) admit that Jesus was NOT of divine paternity, or B) admit it's not the image of Jesus. (Of course, I think all they'll get is some very old paint and dyes.)
 
Medicine Woman:

Yet if the census record no longer exists, would that prove that Jesus did not? For you will allow, I imagine, that documents can be lost over the expanse of 2,000 years? I mean, we do not even have all of Aristotle's works. His dialogues have been lost to the ages and may only be recovered in fragmentary form in from Pompeii. If such books by one of our greatest thinkers could be lost, why might not one census document amongst tens of thousands be lost?
 
That crops up another question. If Jesus was such a pain in the butt to at least the local governments where he lived, do their public records mention him at all? The only documents I've ever know to mention him are the books of the New Testament. Does he appear elsewhere in any contemporary record?
 
Oxygen:

I do not believe there is any evidence of his social existence until after his death. Joseph Flavius mentions that people believed in him decades later, and some Roman men mention him in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, but no one presents evidence in the form of belongings, records, et cetera, nor are the reports first hand, and many point to simply what Christians believed. It would be rather like saying Hercules must exist because Greek authors wrote about him.
 
Prince_James said:
Medicine Woman:

Yet if the census record no longer exists, would that prove that Jesus did not? For you will allow, I imagine, that documents can be lost over the expanse of 2,000 years? I mean, we do not even have all of Aristotle's works. His dialogues have been lost to the ages and may only be recovered in fragmentary form in from Pompeii. If such books by one of our greatest thinkers could be lost, why might not one census document amongst tens of thousands be lost?
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: Of course, but the problem I have with Jesus' existence is if he were the great man-god who his believers believe he is, then it seems like there should be a sliver of physical evidence somewhere out there. Yet, there is none.
 
Oxygen said:
What I'd like to see is a DNA sample from the Shroud of Turin, assuming it's genuinely an imprint of a once-living person. If they pull normal DNA off of it, that leaves the church to either A) admit that Jesus was NOT of divine paternity, or B) admit it's not the image of Jesus. (Of course, I think all they'll get is some very old paint and dyes.)
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: I believe DNA tests were done, but I don't know the results. I think it is the product of some kind of ingenious photographic dabbling by da Vinci. It's been C-dated to the 1400s, which fits right into the timeframe of da Vinci. He was a genious prankster, and his art form reflected the irony of christian myth. In those days, the RCC forbade the use of cameras by artists calling it magic with the use of mirrors for projection. However, by the mere fact that it could be a work by da Vinci, that's more convincing than a non-existent dying demigod savior.
 
I think while they were there they pre-ordered the Playstation 3. Well maybe not but its just as likley.
 
I understand records of when censuses occurred are available and reliable. There is no record of a census within several years of the alleged birth.
 
The Devil Inside said:
there werent cameras in the 1400's.
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: I'm not talking about Nikon or Minolta. What I meant was a prototype projector with internal mirror(s) to project images onto canvas or a wall which was used (illegally) by artists of the day. If I'm not mistaken, I think Leo may have built such a device behind the back of the RCC.

And, oh, BTW, they didn't have one-hour print shops in the 1400s, either. If the Shroud is a work by da Vinci, it was done in the form of a negative, that's why it could have been an experiment on cloth. If there was blood actually found on the Shroud, and if da Vinci was responsible for its creation, he also experimented with cadavers and easily had access to human blood. I don't remember what blood studies they've done or what they found.
 
Greetings,

Prince_James said:
I mean, we do not even have all of Aristotle's works. His dialogues have been lost to the ages and may only be recovered in fragmentary form in from Pompeii.
Click to expand...

Sorry,
that's not correct.

Aristotle's works were preserved by the Arabs.

The West lost them, but recovered them from the Arabs after the crusades.


Iasion
 
Greetings,

Oxygen said:
That crops up another question. If Jesus was such a pain in the butt to at least the local governments where he lived, do their public records mention him at all? The only documents I've ever know to mention him are the books of the New Testament. Does he appear elsewhere in any contemporary record?
Click to expand...

No.

Jesus is completely absent from the historical record, even where he would be expected (Justus, Philo, Seneca.)

http://members.iinet.net.au/~quentinj/Christianity/EarlyWriters.html

Iasion
 
MW- Are you talking about something like the kind of reflective light tricks they used to use on stage to make ghosts in a play seem more transparent and ethereal? They were "projected" from beneath the stage, I think. I've heard about those, but have never seen one actually done. Must have looked absolutely creepy to the audiences!
 
Iasion:

"Sorry,
that's not correct.

Aristotle's works were preserved by the Arabs.

The West lost them, but recovered them from the Arabs after the crusades"

I am fully aware that the Arabs were instrumental in our keeping of classical knowledge. That being said, I never claimed otherwise, nor did the Arab's, for all their wonderful work, save even one of Aristotle's dialogues. They are -all- lost to the sands of time.
 
Medicine Woman said:
*************
M*W: The NT clearly states that Mary and Joseph were on their way to register for the Roman Census when Jesus was born. Where are those census records today?
Click to expand...

They're archived with the old newpapers and photo journals from 2000 years ago.
 
Prince_James said:
Though the lack of census records are indeed a problem with the story of Jesus, can we really expect to find specific people in a census document 2000 years old?
Click to expand...
Considering that this the anal-retentive Roman Empire we've all come to know and love? Yeah, we can.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top