Ugggg, anyone out there that digs for truth?
What I am currently trying to figure out something....
Even though the virgin birth never happened, putting aside the solid proofs to this fact....
...despite the two very different accounts of Matthew and Luke...
Was the source of Matthew's account actually rooted in historical fact about someone else and other historical facts,
though not tied to Jesus at all?
1) this is a historical fact I already gave in my paper here:
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2309459449193449&id=100003882502448
Halley's comet was known by the ancients and Jewish people because we wrote about it in the oral law.
Not just by scientific math, but by observation as noted in historical texts.... mankind has observed Halley's comet and wrote about it in
466 BCE, 239 BCE, 164 BCE, 87 BCE, and 66 BCE. And others.
So it was known. By math, it came in 12 BCE and this is time frame Matthew is referring to....
HOWEVERRRRRR, the unknown author of Matthew might be twisting another or several historical facts and tying them to Jesus.
We know by scientific math that Halleys comet came in 66. Well, something else happened that year which is historical fact.
According to the ancient writings of "Pliny the Elder," called....
"The Natural History," by Pliny is divided into 37 libri, or “books,” was completed, except for finishing touches, in 77 CE.
In these writings we find an Armenian ruler/king named Tiridates.
He was a priest in the Zorasterianism religion, thus being a "magus," this is where the word "magi" comes from.
In the year 66, the same year of Halley's comet mind you..... though Pliny doesn't mention the comet, Matthew does.
The Magus/priest and king comes from the East (namely the Armenian Empire) with others with him and he bows before a greater ruler. Which in this case is Nero. And he then goes back home.
Who were the others that were with him? Legit princes, not just of his own country but neighboring ones....
Here is a quote,
"Tiridates presented himself in Rome, bringing with him not only his own sons but also those of Vologases, of Pacorus, and of Monobazus."
Soooooo, it seems apparent that Matthew is throwing several things unto Jesus, total inventions, just so that he can be legitimate with star gazers, kings, and royalty according to "scripture" since Matthew likes to focus a lot on how Jesus supposedly "fulfilled" scripture; And, lastly.... dealing with Paul's and Paul's alone doctrine of the "sinful nature," thus Jesus was born from a virgin.
I dont think the virgin births of other gods played any role in Matthew's script, but only dealing with the issue of Paul's sinful nature doctrine.
So, the development of the magi story had to come after 77 AD when "The Natural History" came out. Thus.... it didn't exist before this!!!!
Thoughts?
Maregaal
3:17 am
1/4/2022
No comments:
Post a Comment