FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Biblical Criticism - 2001
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-14-2001, 12:34 PM   #1
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post Matthew Darkness: Solar Eclipse?

I decided to check on that, using some software from http://www.lunar-occultations.com

It's designed to work in DOS, but it works OK in WinNT 4.0; it will probably work in VirtualPC in the MacOS or dosemu or wine in Linux.

I checked every year from 26 to 40, and there was *no* solar eclipse visible in Jerusalem in March or April of those years. So that darkness, if it had happened, was almost certainly not a solar eclipse.
 
Old 05-14-2001, 12:46 PM   #2
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by lpetrich:
I decided to check on that, using some software from

I checked every year from 26 to 40, and there was *no* solar eclipse visible in Jerusalem in March or April of those years. So that darkness, if it had happened, was almost certainly not a solar eclipse.
</font>
We get these really nasty thunderstorms
in the summer.
Baseball sized hail did 4K worth of damage
to my wife's new car (two storms a year
apart).

Sky turns almost black....

BTW - when was the nearest eclipse back then?

 
Old 05-14-2001, 01:03 PM   #3
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

The closest eclipse to Jerusalem in that time was on 29 Nov 24; the totality track passed through the middle of Arabia late in the day, meaning that Jerusalem would have experienced a partial eclipse that day.

And as to weather, it is unlikely that there would have been a thunderstorm at that time of year; also, rain is not common in Jerusalem at that time of year -- URL: http://www.stadtklima.de/webklima/CI.../Jerusalem.htm
 
Old 05-14-2001, 06:33 PM   #4
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Isn't that the night that the "cock crew twice"? It was an intercalation. You know, Spring back (fall ahead). Of course, fundies think that Ben Franklin invented Daylight Savings Time.

thanks, offa
 
Old 05-15-2001, 01:51 AM   #5
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Here's some more solar-eclipse-prediction software, this time, Windows-native:

http://www2c.biglobe.ne.jp/~takesako...n_eng_1.21.htm

And again, I failed to find any solar eclipses near Jerusalem in the springtime of the early 30's.

So that darkness must be pure fiction.

And yes, both that and my previously-mentioned occultation package worked fine in VirtualPC 4 on my home Macintosh.
 
Old 05-15-2001, 03:05 AM   #6
Bede
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Smile

There was a lunar eclipse on Friday 7th April, 33AD. This is one of the dates that Jesus could have been crucified.

Bede
 
Old 05-15-2001, 05:25 AM   #7
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Bede:
There was a lunar eclipse on Friday 7th April, 33AD. This is one of the dates that Jesus could have been crucified.
</font>
If it was in the late afternoon that would be impressive!

Amen-Moses
 
Old 05-15-2001, 06:13 AM   #8
Lance
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Overland Park, KS USA
Posts: 335
Exclamation

Bede... You're stretching it again, big time.

A lunar eclipse would have barely been noticed...not the hyperboled "skies darkening", earth rendering, and dead walking that the gospels preach.

The two possabilities are: 1. The gospels are true and somehow the entire world missed noticing; 2. They lied. (Which has bad implications for the rest of the tale...)
Lance is offline  
Old 05-15-2001, 07:30 AM   #9
Bede
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Amen-Moses:
If it was in the late afternoon that would be impressive! Amen-Moses</font>
Very true. I believe it was early evening low on the horizon but would have been quite impressive as it was a full moon.

As for Lance, I don't believe in the dead men, earthquakes or darkness. The information on the eclipse came with a . We do have to be critical about the Gospels but not stupid. Treat them like other ancient sources. No more and no less. Only a fundie (sceptic or Christian) thinks that if you cast doubt on a few legendary aspects the whole lot is shown to be spurious.

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason
 
Old 05-15-2001, 10:44 AM   #10
Lance
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Overland Park, KS USA
Posts: 335
Question

Bede: I agree with you. Now...is the resurrection a "legendary aspect" or not?? Which is really the whole question.
Lance is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:41 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.