Originally Posted by Animal Mother
You're just going to ignore the problems with these claims that have already been pointed out? My psychic powers are proven real again!!
Now you're going to depend on Jerry Vardaman and his "microletters" as filtered through an anonymous author? You've truly gone off the deep end here. Who was this other Quirinius? What other offices did he hold? Which gens did he belong to? Why is he absent from the list of known legates of Syria (which is the proper title for the time under discussion, not proconsul) ? Your "source" claims this individual held office "from 11 BC until Herod died." yet we have records showing that Marcus Titius, Gaius Sentius Saturninus, Publius Quinctilius Varus were the legates during this period. How do you reconcile these apparent contradictions, or will you simply ignore them in favor of the baseless claims which happen to support your beliefs, as I suspect?
Did you forget the originally asserted contradiction? It was that Luke stated Jesus was born at the time when Cyrenius was governor of Syria, but this is NOT what Luke states.
This is a pure (to put it politely) misinterpretation
, which I suspect was done so as to invent a contradiction in the first place. For the last time on this issue, here is what Luke stated and I do not see how anyone could interpret these words to mean Jesus was born when Cyrenius was governor.
And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. ([And] this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)
And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.
Luke says nothing of the kind and there is no contradiction. Period.