Was there a massacre around the time of Jesus birth?

[banjo1973au]

"boo hoo hoo it's not fair it's true, true, true" is not evidence. On what specific evidence is the massacre of the innocents being true based? And simply quoting the bible is not sufficient. What is this "evidence" that scholars have not treated fairly?

[wayinoutreach]

How about if it is written in the stars as God said? Check out the Hebrew Mazzaroth(The true Zodiak) & check out "Archeology: Digging for the Truth of the Bible" video. It is an inconvenient Truth that most of humanity doesn't want to except because it would mean they have to change from self-centeredness, which they have become so good at. The "fallen angels" taught man many lies & evils, but you don't have to swallow them. After all, God did give you FREEWILL! Jesus Saves!!

[CoolBreezeClub]

What people are missing here is this took place what was at the time a very small and rural village. Most historians seriously addressing this event state that the number of Children killed (under 2) were quite possibly in single digits-not the high numbers commonly associated with this event. While a tragic event, with no CNN or Fox News around at the time and people afraid to speak up to the so-called leaders of the day it would not get much attention.

[SpincterManBubba]

The Old Testament Bible is at best 10% factual. It re-writes information from tablets that are thousands of years older than the Bible. The Bible was plagiarized from many other writings then changed to suit the government/religion in power at the time. When are you going to teach the truth? The Bible is one many reference sources. Where is Jesus buried? You can't go to heaven in human form. Your own book says that. Don't use the Bible as your only reference when begging for donations.

[flightkiller09]

religious people defend the bible no matter what. The bible is NOT HISTORY!

It has ridiculous stories, stories not confirmed by any other sources of actual history.

[camelio10]

The silly guy in this video killed his own argument. So here we have a similare event (ordered killing of babies) that happened 63 years??? before the evnts of Jesus, perfectly recorded in roman history. But somehow, the supposedly similar, but more significant event happen 63 years later but not recorded, hmm?...Not to mention the Bible has an agenda to fulfill prophecies so obviously less credible than just a random record of history 63 yrs earlier with no agenda

[KaiseRex42]

Any study of the character of Herod the Great must conclude that he was indeed capable of such a slaughter of innocence. The Gospels account are true to this fact and they themselves remain a source of authentic historical documentation written long before other "histories". Whether he did or did not order the act must eventually, at this time, come down to an act of historical faith. Is it possible verse is it likely verse is it in keeping with other known evidence.

[turtle4aire]

Who do you think is telling the Senate what is going on and giving out order to control the country. Herod probley sent a message to Rome and told them he needed orders to kill all the babys. The Rome will say OK but we will be the ones giving out the orders to do this. Get it on Herod. Then Herod does his wishes. Look at Government to see how buiness is carried out !

[tranceman22]

So you wish to accept a claim for an historical event that has no record elsewhere because it was written in a Gospel nearly a century after the alleged event by an unknown author. This isn't credible. The bible is not a reliable source for historical information. What historians used the Bible? This is just a sales ploy for some Christian's pseudo scientific book!

[jcr4runner]

@tranceman22

I accept the claim because it was written by a Jewish follower of Jesus about 40 to 50 years after the event who would have had access to firsthand testimony.

I also accept the claim because it is consistent with other historical accounts of Herod in Josephus (who wrote later than Matthew) about mass murders of thousands of Jews. The village of Bethlehem was less than 1000 people, therefore males under 2 years old would have been 15 to 30 babies.

[Pilgrimer1]

@jcr4runner A visit to the quaint village of Ein Karem SW of Jerusalem has several archaeological sites. At the site of the summer home of the priestly Zacharias and Elizabeth on the southern hill is a cleft in the rock where Elizabeth hid with the infant John (eight months old at the time of the infant massacre) and saved him from Herod's guard who swept not only Bethlehem, but the entire region. Tradition says Zacharias was killed by the guard when he refused to divulge his son's hiding place.

[xcellken1]

@jcr4runner If Matthew was a follower of Jesus, why did he write in Greek, and quote the GREEK version of the Jewish Old Testament???

BTW, The first mention of the Gospel of Matthew BY NAME was in 180 AD. If it was around when you said it was, why not even one mention of it by other Christian writers, eg, Justin Martyr, who wrote bewteen 150 and 165 AD???

[turtle4aire]

@tranceman22 Son I know of the Middle East and the Study of history of thast area and the way they start a Dig. 90% of the time the people digging will read the Bible and see what they say first and then read others on the area. The ideal of the bible not used in history of a dig very much not true. Sounds good but not true at all. I guess you can pull this one for it does not comply with what the ideal you want to tell.

[Pilgrimer1]

@tranceman22 As an historican and archaeologist I'm afraid your comments prove your bias against these historical documents. It is simply not possible that someone living a century after the Jewish state was thoroughly destroyed could have possibly written with such intimate knowledge about a place and time and way of life that had ceased to exist. The Gospels are first-hand accounts of a world that has lain buried beneath 2000 years of rubble that science is now slowly bringing to light ...

[ELVISCHALLENGE]

@tranceman22 One of the greatest lie-by-omissions. There was a holocaust around the time the Gospels was writen. Over a million perished when the smallest nation challenged Rome - but this is not recorded in the Gospels. This is like the NY Times not mentioning 9/11 on 9/12!

[IExposeMormonism]

@tranceman22 You are so wrong that you need to do some research. Sooooo wrong

[wayinoutreach]

@tranceman22 How about if it is written in the stars as God said? Check out the Hebrew Mazzaroth(The true Zodiak) & you might want to check out "Archeology: Digging for the Truth of the Bible" video. It is an inconvenient Truth that most of humanity doesn't want to except because it would mean they have to change from self-centeredness, which they have become so good at. The "fallen angels" taught man many lies & evils, but you don't have to swalloow them. After all, God did give you FREEWILL!

[BoudiccaBlanc]

1-3) The story of the Magi seeing a star, consulting ancient scriptures, and deciding to "follow" it's path is plausible. We can verify these astronomical conjunctions. (Most planetarians have a show about it on a regular basis).

The scriptures state that Herod back-dated the slaughter to the date (2 yrs or younger) that the Magi reported seeing the first sign (there were two signs in the sky during that period.)

[whomtheSonsetsfree]

The answer is yes. Exactly...sir. You make excellent pints here. It happened. All of it. God aka Jesus the Christ IS REAL. The massacre is REAL...Exactly...they try so very hard 2 disprove God.& that is such a sad thing 4 them. 4 that error they will pay w/ their eternal souls in hell. It's true so I said it. No, I certainly am casting no stones nor am I any 1's judge. They place their hand out n front of their face, so 2 speak. Seeing they do not see...because they choose Satan lies over Truth

[meangreenmeme]

Matthew was not trying to write history - he was trying to legitimize faith in Jesus. He thought there needed to be a symbolic reliving of the Hebrew history in the life of Jesus, The Bethlehem story is fashioned after Micah The escape into Egypt by the holy family from Herod relived the Egyptian phase of Hebrew history. The slaughter of the innocents retold the story of Moses escape at his birth from the wrath of Pharaoh. Rachel weeping for her children echoed the exile.

Literalism fails!

[meangreenmeme]

Matthew thought the new Xian sect needed to relive (symbolically) the history of Israel as a way of theologically legitimizing belief in Jesus as the Messiah. The holy family's flight to Egypt was parallel to the ancient Jewish diaspora into Egypt. Herod's killing of infants in Bethlehem is parallel to Pharaoh's murder of the first born children. That M divided his Gospel into 5 parts in imitation of the Pentateuch attests to his theological intent. Literalise the BIble and you ridicule it!

[jcr4runner]

@meangreenmeme Matthew too speaks of these parallels as literally fulfilled prophecy. He uses a phrase several times "... that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets."

Why would he concoct a story that was not a literal fulfillment? You are saying this is allegory, but that is not the meaning of the words, "it is written ..." or "it was spoken by the prophets."

Your idea has some elegance only if you need to deny the supernatural and still hold to the inspiration of scripture.

[Pilgrimer1]

@jcr4runner The Bible is to be understood both literally and spiritually. Indeed, it is a book about a God, who is spirit, at work in the literal world among real people in real places throughout history. If you strip the Bible of any literal meaning you strip God of any connection with humanity. And who wants a theoretical god that cannot be touched and known and experienced and who has no part in our hearts or our lives or our world? The Bible is the history of God and man.

[mrmeanero]

you guys seem a lot more learned about the historical datings of gospels yada yada yada... i dont think anything in the new testament can be trusted... i have heard a few times from different places that there were over 80 gospels and the oligarchy chose what gospels it wanted... when a lot of people just wrote them up and sold them. like mark was 80% proven to be ummm someone like Marcus from constantinople or some shit. i was wondering what u thought about people who claim shit like this?

[velvetnotes009]

Repent and believe that Jesus came, died and rose again! then you will find out whether Jesus is real or not! Looking forward to hearing from you.  God Blessx

[FlopSideOfLife2009]

And that's where the story came from the killing before agustus in Rome. It did not happen in Israel...

Ceaser was to be made a God and the story of Jesus is a mix of the Roman Empirers and probably some offsring of a man that spoke about getting along.

Wake up people and shed your Roman alligence!!!!!!!

[jcr4runner]

There were thousands of massacres in ancient history.

The one recorded by the Gospel according to Matthew is a minor one in the grand scheme of things except that it was directed at Jesus and it fulfilled an Old Testament prophecy.

[SpringChatty]

It literally has been proven throughout history in several ancient documents, as well as physical earthly proof that the Biblical accounts really happened, Science proves this, men of other nations have proven it, and instead of opening it up to truth, they would rather deny the physical evidence of existence as if they own it, and stay in rebellion to the Law anyway. Nobody  can be forced to believe.

[jehovasinz]

Really, I known scientist say the opposite. Show me some proof or point in the direction where this truth is.

[ReligiousFiction]

This is very interesting. When I looked up julius marathus, however, I wasn't able to find anything except an unreferenced statement that raising a male child was made illegal for one year by the Roman Senate. Are there any sources that you can give us to do more research?

[jcr4runner]

The source is Suetonius.

There isn't ANY extant Roman history from the time of Augustus's birth. We read accounts written decades later from copied manuscripts many hundreds of year later.

All things being equal, the "Massacre of the Innocents" is not a myth.

The point here is that historians accept the history of Julius and Augustus without blinking.

The Gospels, which have much more corroboration closer to the source in the form of extant manuscripts are scrutinized by liberals unfairly.

[jcr4runner]

The following is from Suetonius, The Divine Augustus, 94:

 "Since we are upon this subject, it may not be improper to give an account of the omens, before and at his birth, as well as afterwards, which gave hopes of his future greatness, and the good fortune that constantly attended him. A part of the wall of Velletri having in former times been struck with thunder, the response of the soothsayers was, that a native of that town would some time or other arrive at supreme power...

[jcr4runner]

relying on which prediction, the Velletrians both then, and several times afterwards, made war upon the Roman people, to their own ruin. At last it appeared by the event, that the omen had portended the elevation of Augustus....

[jcr4runner]

"Julius Marathus informs us, that a few months before his birth, there happened at Rome a prodigy, by which was signified that Nature was in travail with a king for the Roman people; and that the senate, in alarm, came to the resolution that no child born that year should be brought up; but that those amongst them, whose wives were pregnant, to secure to themselves a chance of that dignity, took care that the decree of the senate should not be registered in the treasury."

[sebreathnach]

Archaeology is a lot simpler than interactive accounts... everyobody knows that.. the trouble is why this video doesn't know it... and why, in this regard, there is no reference to Joseph Atwill's Caesar's Messiah?

[jcr4runner]

That is because only the most obtuse reader, can possibly fail to appreciate the sublime quality of so much of the New Testament (agree or disagree with it), which is necessary to do if one is to dismiss the whole thing as an elaborate joke on the reader, as Atwill postulates. Rather, the joke is on Atwill, whose great learning has apparently made him stupid.

[sebreathnach]

This is mere abuse ... and the pomposity in which the abuse is couched does not help. Don't be so afraid to lose your chains; read Atwill and then criticise him on what he says, even if it makes the Bibles (and you) appear like one great joke...Remember you are the one who believes that JC walked on water, changed water into wine, resurrected, was born of.... etc, etc,not Atwill...

[jcr4runner]

I am familiar with what Atwill says. It's a spin on the conspiracy theory that says the Roman Emperors invented Christianity to rid themselves of other troublesome sects.

It's pure conjecture not based on any historical evidence and a ludicrous idea to boot.

[sebreathnach]

How could the Gospels be in parallel with the exploits of Titus Flavious (Caesar) be accidental?

[jcr4runner]

Simply there are no parallels.

Jesus lived from B.C. to 30 A.D.

Titus lived from 39 to 81 A.D.

The Gospels were written prior to the time when Titus ruled 69-79.

That the Roman Flavian family wrote the Gospels is a fringe conspiracy theory. It has no antecedent prior to Atwill. It appeared out of thin air in 2004. If it were true, then the enemies of Christianity in the early centuries whould have used this claim to refute Christians.

[jcr4runner]

Atwill's hypothesis is based on his business/sales background.

Virtually everything he postulates is made up out of thin air -- based on his weird interpretation of history.

He has no background in theology, history or textual criticism. But he discovered a thesis that would sell well among conspiracy theorists, atheists and skeptics.

That's the end of it.

[sebreathnach]

Of course you are entitled to your novitiate opinon, but there are others in the world who differ. And you are wrong again in thinking that it has no precedence -- which does not anser the original quesiton of parallels ; for Price's criticism admits of precursers... I think you protest too much, bro...

[jehovasinz]

They couldn't cause constatine was and his concil of 300 voted on what to put on in the bible while on their holy crusades. Theodusis forced people with torture and death to believe.

[Tehvyking]

True

[jcr4runner]

This is such an illiterate comment that I just approved it and thought someone else would explain.

All I get is one response: "True."

Sad.

There was no vote at the Nicene Council as to what books belonged in the Bible. That's Da Vinci Code nonsense.

Thisis not even disputed. We know what happened at the Nicene Council. There was no decision about the canon. There was no vote on the Divinity of Jesus (as Dan Brown says).

There was instead almost a unanimous condemnation of Arianism.

[jehovasinz]

Where did you get your info from? I know an unreliable source.

[HelleFyre]

The African canon wasn't adopted until AD 419 at the Council of Carthage.

[jcr4runner]

The canon was not "adopted" in 419. The Council of Carthage listed the books of the Bible.

That's like saying that since the Westminster Confession lists the books of the Bible that the canon was "adopted" in 1646.

There are complete extant manuscripts of the Bible that were copied in the 300s.

There is also a canonical list from 170 AD that matches our today. It's called the Muratorian Canon.

[jcr4runner]

Emperor Theodosis allowed most pagans to worship in peace. But he removed Arian bishops from Christian churches throughout the eastern empire becasue they hasd been condemend previously by two church councils with an almost unanimous consent of bishops.

There was no "torture and death" involved.

The crusades were fought over a period of nearly 200 years, between 1095 and 1291.

That's 700 years after Theodosis.

[annoyedandroid]

You really need to research your sources better, or at least carefully read your quote in the video. Suetonius actually writes that ,according to Julius Marathus, the senate wanted to kill all babies born that year, but the pregnant wives of the senators kept the decree from being entered into the register or enacted. NO MASSACRE TOOK PLACE. I have never heard of any historian regarding this as anything more than one of the many folktales about the "divine Ceasar" from that place and time.

[jcr4runner]

The record of the decree shows that Matthew's account of an infant massacre in Jesus' day was not without precedent.

Lives of infants were held to be cheap. There is other evidence too.

The Twelve Tables of Roman Law held: "Deformed infants shall be killed" De Legibus, 3.8.

Of course, deformed was broadly construed and often meant no more than the baby appeared "weakly."

The Twelve Tables also explicitly permitted a father to expose any female infant to death. Stark, op. cit., page 118.

[annoyedandroid]

I'm not saying the Romans never killed infants, but that the proposed massacre never occured, even according to the source document. No historian in the world believes any infant massacre took place that year in Rome. Anyone who says differently (like the man in the clip) is dishonest or misinformed. Moreover, this story is generally regarded by historians as a hagiographic fable about the prophecied birth and felicitous salvation of the infant "god-king" Augustus, not historical fact.

[jcr4runner]

Infant massacres took place every day in the ancient world. It was part of warfare.

This wasn't in Rome, it was Judea.

[sebreathnach]

Wrong: Titus reigned from 79 to 81. Titus's father Vespasian ruled (69--79) and his younger brother Domitian from (81--96). Secondly, your bible dating is pure conjecture.. Third... I have forgotten third... but it seems that two is enough to show you talk with rather forked tongue and have never read Atwill....

[opinionhead444]

If Christianity has been in existence for over 20 centuries, why does it have this massive inferiority complex? Why does it need so many defenders and apologists? It has won over and over and over again in debates just because of the sheer passage of time. If the message is so sound, why does it keep needing defense?

[moob744]

Christians could(some do)remain silent,but some wish to show that there can be intellectual integrity in having faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.Faith cannot however be known through reason alone,but experienced.Some non-Christians assume there is zero evidence in history/fact,therefore the apologist replies to these arguments.

[Kenliano]

Everything has apologists; even science has apologists that defend it against the ideas that are put against it. It is because they believe that it is sound that they defend it.

[jonthebaptist666]

This does not prove that there was a massacre in bethlehem. The Bible is a source that certainly is dubious as a historical account, since it was written by people with preconcieved beliefs. Historians must interpret whether the motivation any specific source had for writing what they did. Christians have also been motivated to decieve, and that is all they have ever done.

[jcr4runner]

A writer is generally accepted as historically reliable if the history in their works is corroborated by other historicans.

Can you give me one example of a historian who flatly contradicts the history recorded in the Gospels?

The argument from silence is a fallacy. You can't say a usually reliable historian is wrong simply because he is the only one who records an event.

[jcr4runner]

I'd like ytou to remember that Bethlehem was a small village of a few hundred people. The deaths of a dozen or more babies would have been about as noticeable to the Roman historians as the dozen or more babies that were massacred in you local abortion clinic last week.

Child killing up to that age was as legal as abortion up to nine months of pregnanacy is legal today.

[moob744]

Good grief!yes,the ability to deceive is indeed a widespread HUMAN skill!(latter-day SPIN?)Yes,by all means doubt everything before investigating,but don't assume all witnesses are false until examining the evidence exhaustively?

[Kenliano]

That's a sweeping statement, jon; a logical fallacy. Yes, this doesn't prove there was a massacre. But it's showing that other events are accepted as fact with only one historical witness. Are the early messianic believers to be trusted less that the Romans? Why would they have any greater ulterior motive for wanted to twist history a certain way?

[grnmessiah]

When was Jesus supposed to be born? I find this bit very confusing--he was around 33 at the time of his death, and it was at passover.

Why did no one else record the 3 hours of darkness? Why do the gospel accounts conflict so much?

Where was Jesus last seen on earth?

Is it true that Jesus saw the whole earth from the top of a tall mountain?

[Kenliano]

Mm... when Jesus was born can be ascertained from the Passover that he died. Different ideas place it at different years based on ideas of which day of the week he died, etc.

Bible states that Jesus was last seen on the Mount of Olives where he ascended (Acts 1:11-12). And, clearly he did not literally see the whole earth; it seems to be hyperbole.

Maybe they did record darkness but it was not found. This is clearly a question that no one can answer. It's not really for or against either side.

[samuraizkd]

Great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[Kabane52]

Is this a clip from "The Real Jesus"?

[jcr4runner]

Yes.

[LaneCh]

These videos clips are great. Are these clips from a DVD that someone can purchase?

[jcr4runner]

It will be available in one month. Go to the Forerunner website for more details.

[LaneCh]

Is it called The Real Jesus?

[Kabane52]

Absolutely, terrifically brilliant video.