The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, Vol. 04 (of 12): Dresden Edition—LecturesIngersoll, Robert Green
Religion
The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, Vol. 04 (of 12): Dresden Edition—Lectures
Ingersoll, Robert Green
Free thought
Luke also gives an account of the birth of Christ. He says that there
went out a decree from Cæsar Augustus that all the world should be
taxed; that this was when Cyrenius was governor of Syria; that in
accordance with this decree, Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem to be
taxed; that at that place Christ was born and laid in a manger. He also
says that shepherds, in the neighborhood, were told of the birth by
an angel, with whom was a multitude of the heavenly host; that these
shepherds visited Mary and the child, and told others what they had seen
and heard.
He tells us that after eight days the child was named, Jesus; that forty
days after his birth he was taken by Joseph and Mary to Jerusalem,
and that after they had performed all things according to the law they
returned to Nazareth. Luke also says that the child grew and waxed
strong in spirit, and that his parents went every year to Jerusalem.
Do the accounts in Matthew and Luke agree? Can both accounts be true?
Luke never heard of the star, and Matthew knew nothing of the heavenly
host. Luke never heard of the wise men, nor Matthew of the shepherds.
Luke knew nothing of the hatred of Herod, the murder of the babes or
the flight into Egypt. According to Matthew, Joseph, warned by an angel,
took Mary and the child and fled into Egypt. According to Luke they all
went to Jerusalem, and from there back to Nazareth.
Both of these accounts cannot be true. Will some Christian scholar tell
us which to believe?
When was Christ born?
Luke says that it took place when Cyrenius was governor. Here is another
mistake. Cyrenius was not appointed governor until after the death of
Herod, and the taxing could not have taken place until ten years after
the alleged birth of Christ.
According to Luke, Joseph and Mary lived in Nazareth, and for the
purpose of getting them to Bethlehem, so that the child could be born
in the right place, the taxing under Cyrenius was used, but the writer,
being "inspired" made a mistake of about ten years as to the time of the
taxing and of the birth.
Matthew says nothing about the date of the birth, except that he was
born when Herod was king. It is now known that Herod had been dead ten
years before the taxing under Cyrenius. So, if Luke tells the truth,
Joseph, being warned by an angel, fled from the hatred of Herod ten
years after Herod was dead. If Matthew and Luke are both right Christ
was taken to Egypt ten years before he was born, and Herod killed the
babes ten years after he was dead.
Will some Christian scholar have the goodness to harmonize these
"inspired" accounts?
There is another thing.
Matthew and Luke both try to show that Christ was of the blood of David,
that he was a descendant of that virtuous king.
As both of these writers were inspired and as both received their
information from God, they ought to agree.
According to Matthew there was between David and Jesus twenty-seven
generations, and he gives all the names.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account