Rachel weeping for her children!

Then Herod seeing he had been outwitted by the astrologers fell into a great rage, and he sent out and had all the boys in Bethlehem and all its districts done away with from two years of age and under,according to the time he had ascertained from the astrologers ...then that what was fulfilled which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet saying...A voice was heard in Ramah weeping and much wailing it was Rachel weeping for her children ,and she could not be comforted because they were no more.

Is there any historical proof that this actually happened,or is this prophecy not proven and unable to be substantiated.I would really like to know !!!

There is no evidence to support that claim.
He did however kill three of his own sons, and a wife or two.
herod the nutbar

reply to post by illece


there is no historical evidence for this happening. herod was a roman subject and there is no way the romans would have tolerated such nuttiness.

like much of the bible it is a story with hidden esoteric meanings.
not actually historical.

Like heyo and TheRepublice say, no evidence

www.rejectionofpascalswager.net...

Historically, Herod, to put it mildly, did not have a peaceful reign. His many sons and wives were involved in bitter rivalry for his throne. Herod was not a man to hold family relation sacred. He had three of his sons executed for conspiracy. He executed his brother-in-law, Joseph. At the urging of Joseph's widow, Salome, he murdered his own wife, Mariamme. If he treated his own family badly, his opponents and enemies were given even more ferocious handling. He murdered the Jewish High Priest, Aristobolus III and forty five members of the Sanhedrin for their support of the Hasmoneans. These are just samplings of Herod's atrocities. He was therefore a kind of man that could have committed the crime Matthew attributed to him.

The atrocities listed above are taken from Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews. From Josephus' own writings, we can tell that he hated Herod, for he obviously took pleasure in noting down every crime and atrocities that was attributed to the Idumean king. Many of the crimes described by Josephus were far less "wicked" than the slaughter of the innocents described by Matthew. Now Josephus' list was very detailed. Had the slaughter actually occurred it would have been an event well known enough for the Jewish historian to have heard of it. Yet the silence of Josephus and the absence of any reference to it in any contemporary secular writings (Jewish, Greek or Roman) cannot be explained if the event was historical. The conclusion forces itself on us, it never happened.

reply to post by Pauligirl

The conclusion forces itself on us, it never happened.

It could of very well have happened. First off, Herod wasn't such a nice guy.

It would have been nothing for him to order the deaths of probably not more than a few baby boys at most. In that time, Bethlehem was only a tiny town with maybe five, or ten, Twenty Children.

For Josephus to overlook this would not be that unusual. Josephus says that Herod murdered a lot of people, and was so cruel to those he didn't kill that the living considered the dead to be fortunate.

This slaughter wouldn't have meant anything to anyone but the people who lived there and or witnessed it.

I know this doesn't prove anything However, isn't the original recording of the account proof enough?

Thanks to heyo,therepublican ,pauligirl and oliveoil,for your replies i really appreciate them thanks.It seems there is more against it happening then for !