Over dat werk van E.L. Martin vond ik nog het volgende:
quote:
c)There is no record of such a census, or of Quirinius being governor at the time. --- Reply: A recent study, E. L. Martin, The Star that Astonished the World (ASK Publications, Portland, Or. 25000, 1991) shows that Jesus was born in 3 B. C. . probably in the fall. The time hinges on one thing, the fact that Josephus puts the death of Herod just after a lunar eclipse. Martin shows we must pick the eclipse of Jan. 10, 1 B. C. because all the events that Josephus says took place between Herod's death and the next Passover would take about 12 weeks. The only other eclipse that gave enough time would be that of Sept 15, 5 BC. But since Herod then was very sick, and in Jericho at the time of the eclipse, he would not have stayed in Jericho - extremely hot at that season, while Jerusalem would have been comfortable. But Jan 10 would be comfortable in Jericho. Further, there are secular sources that show there was an enrollment in 3 B. C. to take an oath of allegiance to Augustus (cf. Lewis & Reinhold, Roman Civilization, Source Books II, pp. 34-35 , since in 2 B. C. he was to receive the great title of Father of His Country.
The real governor of Palestine would have gone to Rome for the great celebration. He needed someone to take care of the country in his absence. Since Augustus got the honor on Feb. 5, 2 BC, the governor would have to leave before Nov 1 of 3 BC- Mediterranean was dangerous for sailing after Nov 1. But Quirinius had just completed a successful war to the north, in Cilicia, against the Homonadenses. So he could be an ideal man to put in charge. Luke does not use the noun governor, but a verbal form, governing. Still further, there has been an obscure decade 6 B. C. to 4 A. D. whose events were hard to fit in if we took the birth of Christ to have been in the range 4 to 6 B. C. But with the new dating all these fall into place easily. E. g. Augustus in 1 AD received his 15th acclamation for a victory in 1 AD. If we picked 4 BC for birth of Christ, we cannot find such a victory, but if birth of Christ is 3 BC, then the war would b e running at about the right time and finished in 1 AD.
Martin's work has received fine reviews from astronomers ( his work is based on astronomy, and over 600 planetariums have modified their Christmas star show to fit with his findings) and from Classicists, who were concerned about the obscure decade.
bronMeer:
quote:
The census (apographe) was a registration to take an oath of allegiance to Augustus - as we learn from an inscription from Paphlagonia of 3 BC., corroborated by texts of ancient historians. (Secondary calculations in Martin's work seem to show the Magi came in December of 2 B.C).
Classicists have welcomed the new work, since it solves some insuperable problems in the chronology of secular events. Only Scriptural scholars have largely ignored it - it does not fit with favorite preconceptions of theirs. . .
bronAanvullend:
quote:
We summarize Martin's
work:
(1).The date of the birth of Christ hinges on just one
thing,the statement of Josephus (Antiquities 17.6-8) that Herod
died shortly after an eclipse of the moon. Astronomers supply the
dates for such eclipses around those years: None in 7 or 6 BC. In
5 BC, March 23, 29 days to Passover. Also in 5 BC. Sept 15,7
months to Passover. In 4 BC.March 13, 29 days to Passover.3 and 2
BC.no eclipses. In 1 BC. January 10, 12 1/2 weeks to Passover.
(2).Josephus also tells what events happened between the
Eclipse and the Passover (cf.Martin pp.85-87).They would occupy
probably about 12 weeks. Martin also,pp. 99-101 shows that the
eclipse of Sept 15,5 BC could not fit with known data,especially
the fact that Herod was seriously ill in Jericho (over 800 feet
below sea level) when the eclipse happened - but Jericho was a
furnace of heat at that time,Sept 15. Herod would not have stayed
there when he could have had the much better climate of
Jerusalem. But if the eclipse was in midwinter - Jan 10-- Herod
would find Jericho comfortable.
(3).We know from an inscription from Paphlagonia in Asia
Minor - cf.Lewis and Reinhold, Roman Civilization, Source Book
II,pp.34-35 - that in 3 BC all the people took an oath of
allegiance to Augustus.The same oath is also reported by the
Armenian historian Moses of Khorene, and by the later historian
Orosius.
(4).Augustus was to receive the great title of Pater Patriae
on Feb.5,2 BC. So the actual governor of Palestine, probably
Varus,would have had to go to Rome for the festivities,and since
sailing on the Mediterranean stopped about Nov.1,and did not
resume until Spring, he must have gone in the early fall of 3 BC.
But Quirinius was nearby, had just finished a successful war
against the Homonadenses. So he was left as acting Governor. Luke
does not use the noun governor,but the participle, "governing".
(5).There is an obscure decade in history, 6 BC to 4 AD, as
Classicists readily recognize. Yet this period is
important,including the time when Tiberius was absent from
political life at Rome, being at Capri. It is hard to fit the
events of this period into place if we make the birth of Christ
early as is commonly done. But if we put it in 3 BC the
difficulties are over.For example, we know Augustus received his
15th acclamation for a major victory,won by one of his generals,
around this time. If we pick 4 BC for the death of Herod,we
cannot find a victory to warrant the acclamation, which came in 1
AD. But if we put the birth of Christ in 3 BC,then the war would
be running at about the needed time,and finished in 1 AD.
bronNu blijkt dus kennelijk dat het woord apographe een veel bredere betekenis kan hebben:
quote:
But first, we follow up: If it was the eclipse of 1 B.C., then the difficulty about the census vanishes. For we know that there was an enrollment-Luke's apographe is broad enough to cover that easily-to take an oath of allegiance to Augustus before he received the prestigious title of Father of his Country in 2 B.C. A Greek inscription has been found in Paphlagonia (N. Asia Minor) which tells us that in 3 B.C. all the people in the land took an oath of loyalty to Augustus.336 Further, the Armenian historian Moses of Khorene reports that in 3 B.C. such an oath was taken there.337 Also, the 4th century A.D. historian Orosius reports that in 3 B.C. "all the peoples of the great nations took oath in this one name of Caesar."338 So the lost "census" has been found, and turns out to be a different kind of enrollment, independently attested by several ancient sources, as taking place in 3 B.C. Jesus then would have been born in 3 B.C.
Tertullian in his Adversus Iudaeos also tells us that Jesus was born in the 41st year of the empire of Augustus.339 Some have been puzzled over this method of dating. But there were several ways of dating the power of Augustus. Tertullian seems to date it from 43 B.C., the time when Augustus, along with Anthony and Lepidus, received supreme power by a special grant as the Second Triumvirate. This is a less usual way of counting, but it gives us the right date, 3 B.C. We can see Tertullian means that year because in the same passage he adds that Augustus had power 28 years after the death of Cleopatra, who died in 30 B.C., which would give 2 B.C. as the birth of Jesus. Further, Tertullian says Augustus lived 15 years after the birth of Christ. Augustus died in 14 A.D. So, if Tertullian subtracted 15 from 14 A.D. (neglecting the fact that there would have been two years 1 B.C. and A.D.), he would reach 2 B.C. So we get 3 or 2 B.C. as the date of the birth of Christ.
Also, Classicists have had great difficulty with the events of an obscure decade, 6 B.C. to 4 A.D.340 The chief problem is that we know Augustus received his 15th acclamation for a major victory, achieved by one of his generals, around this time. If we pick 4 B.C. for the War of Varus in Palestine, which came after the death of Herod, we cannot find a victory to warrant the acclamation, which came in 1 A.D. But if we make the birth of Christ 3 B.C., then the war would be running at about the needed time, and finished in 1 A.D.
One difficulty remains: Luke says Quirinius was in charge at the time of the enrollment. But we know the governors of Judea during the period, and Quirinius is not listed. Again a very plausible solution is at hand. Quirinius fought an important war against the Homonadenses, in Cilicla, north of Judea. The probable date of the war is about 5-3 B.C.341 Now if the regular governor of Judea, whoever he may have been, knew in advance-everyone did-of the coming great honor to Augustus, probably early in 2 B.C., he would likely have gone to Rome for obvious reasons. He would then need someone to mind the store for him in his absence. Quirinius, a very competent general, was at hand, as we have seen. So he conducted the enrollment for the regular governor. Luke uses the word hegemoneuein for the role of Quirinius. It is not the noun governor, but a verb which can mean to be governor, but is really a generic word, capable of meaning a different kind of leader. And of course, Quirinius, in our reconstruction, would really be acting governor.
The honor to Augustus was a very great one. Suetonius tells us that there was first "a universal movement" by the people to give him that honor.342 The people sent a deputation to him at Antium. He at first declined. Then a crowd again offered it to him outside the Theater. Finally the Senate followed suit. Augustus was deeply moved: "Weeping, Augustus answered-I quote his exact words as I did for Messala-Fathers of the Senate, finally I have achieved my highest amibition."343 With a "universal movement" of the people starting the process, the coming of the honor must have been widely known long in advance, long enough to induce the governor of Judaea to come to Rome to take part in the festivities, and, of course, to strengthen his own situation.
Over de reden dat Jozef naar Bethlehem ging:
quote:
OBJECTION 3: Joseph would have been enrolled where he lived, not sent back to his birthplace.
REPLY: This is by no means certain, or even probable. In the first place, we have papyrus records of the Roman census in Egypt, and there people were explicitly required to return to the villages of their birth to be registered -- not just the heads of families, but everyone. Now it is possible that the Egyptian rules were special. It has been suggested, for example, that Egyptian peasants had a tendency to leave the farms and migrate to the cities, and that the Romans, who depended on Egyptian grain, were determined to get them back to the farms. We do not know whether the Egyptian rules were applied to the census in Syria and Palestine. But even if they were not, there is another reason why Joseph may have thought himself bound to make the journey. If Joseph's family had come from Bethlehem, he may very well have been owner or part owner of some small bit of land thereabouts, not necessarily of great commercial value, but of great value to him as representing his ancestral inheritance. When the census takers were working at Bethlehem, that land would be surveyed and registered, and any owner or part owner not presenting his claims in person stood to lose them. Now the Jews believed that their land was sacred, that God had given it to his people, and that it had been divided among the 12 tribes and, within each tribe, among families, when the Israelites first entered the land around 1200 BC. The land was not to be sold, but was to pass down from father to son forever. We may doubt that Joseph's little plot of ground had belonged to his family for 12 centuries, or even for five (since the return from the Babylonian captivity). But if it had been in his family for several generations, and if he believed that probably it had once belonged to his remote ancestors, perhaps to David himself, family honor might seem to demand that the land, given to Salmon in the days of the Conquest, passed on to Boaz, Obed, Jesse, and David, later lost to strangers, and finally recovered by Joseph's own great-great-grandfather, should not be lost again simply because the journey to Nazareth would be a hardship
bronDat komt dan min of meer neer op de stam theorie.
Ok, nu ga ik nog proberen om m'n deadline te halen.
