Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 07-23-2008, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vid

My point is simply documenting situation about birth date of jesus, and part of that is history of opinions on that matter.

Most "anti-christian apologetic" someone csan get of this is claiming that even early christians had no idea when he was born, and that 25th december is mostly later 4th century idea. But that, as you have yourself pointed out, is widely accepted even by christians, so I don't see this as some argument, just pure data from history.

Did you find any dates that were supplied by his so-called mother, Mary or even the supposed father, Joseph?

And what about James the so-called brother of the Lord? He should have remembered if he was younger or older than The Lord and his birthday. The so-called Paul could have asked the brother of the Lord for information about the birthday of the Lord.

andrewcriddle · 07-24-2008, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vid

Thank you, even though this is later (600-650 according to tertullian.org), it has some very interesting discussion of various traditions. Too bad all those dates use some ancient calendard, hard to parse to today dates. Also, where can I find Armenian Canon?

I am especially curious about this:

Quote:

The Epiphany, according to the Romans, in the month of January, on the 6th day always.

Is it that Ananias, far from Rome, used outdated sources, or was 6th january still "big" in Rome even two centuries after Constantine? I thought 25 december became popular pretty quickly in Rome in 4th century, as the "merger" of various traditions (invictus, christ). Do you have any info on how long did 6th january tradition remain in western parts of empire, and when did 25 december rule over it?

The Feast of Epiphany is still celebrated in the West on the 6th of January, however it is not now regarded as commemorating the birth of Jesus but either the visit of the magi (wise men) or the baptism of Jesus by John.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphany_(Christian)

The Armenians still regard the feast of Epiphany as a commemoration of (among other things) the birth of Jesus and this may be the original understanding.

Andrew Criddle

vid · 08-03-2008, 12:57 AM

Update on Chrysostom:
He calculated 25th december based on Zecheriah service in temple

Update on "De Pascha Computus":

Quote:

Originally Posted by http://www.skeptictank.org/xmaspage.htm

The author of a Latin tract, called the _De Pascha computus_,
written in Africa in 243, sets it by private revelation, _ab
ipso deo inspirati_, on the 28th of March. He argues that the
world was created perfect, flowers in bloom, and trees in leaf,
therefore in spring; also at the equinox, and when the moon
just created was full. Now the moon and sun were created on a
Wednesday. The 28th of March suits all these considerations.
Christ, therefore, being the Sun of Righteousness, was born
on the 28th of March.

Quote:

Originally Posted by http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03724b.htm

With Clement's evidence may be mentioned the "De paschæ computus",
written in 243 and falsely ascribed to Cyprian (P.L., IV, 963 sqq.),
which places Christ's birth on 28 March, because on that day the
material sun was created.

This article discusses Ambrose as another source of dating:

Quote:

Originally Posted by http://www.skeptictank.org/xmaspage.htm

Ambrose, _On Virgins_, iii. ch. 1, writing to his sister, implies that
as late as the papacy of Liberius 352-356, the Birth from the Virgin
was feasted together with the Marriage of Cana and the Banquet of
the 4000 (Luke ix.13), which were never feasted on any other day
but Jan. 6.

But I myself don't see how that text dates those events together:
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/34073.htm

According to Catholic Encyclopedia also Ephraim Syrus set date of
christmas to 6 january:

Quote:

Originally Posted by http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03724b.htm

Ephraem Syrus (whose hymns belong to Epiphany, not to Christmas) proves
that Mesopotamia still put the birth feast thirteen days after the
winter solstice;

full text here, but again date is inconclusive, according to
editors commentary:
http://www.archive.org/details/selectworksofsep41ephr

My view is that 6th january is more likely here, since dating to 25th
december relies on setting winter solstice to 12 december: (bad OCR)

Quote:

As for the
precise time St. E. refers to, I am
unable to discover what it is, unless, ac-
cording to the computation which was
followed in Syria, the winter solstice was
considered to take place upon the 12th
of December, when the Sun enters Ca-
pricorn : which would give exactly thir-
teen days. Macrob. Sat. i. 21. speaks
of Capricorn as bringing the Sun back
from lower to higher regions,

380 Gregory of Nazianzus, For Gods Appearing

Oration at Christmas time. Most helpful discussion I found online:
http://books.google.com/books?id=7jervOqijlwC (pages 336,337)

Says that in this case it is not clear if author refers to 25 december
or 6th january

385-386 Gregory of Nissa, Homily on Nativity

Clear reference to winter solstice:

"On this day, which the Lord hath made, darkness decreases, light increases,
and night is driven back again. No, brethren, it is not by chance, nor by
any created will, that this natural change begins on the day when He shows
Himself in the brightness of His coming, which is the spiritual Life of the
world. It is Nature revealing, under this symbol, a secret to them whose eye
is quick enough to see it; to them, I mean, who are able to appreciate this
circumstance, of our Savior's coming. Nature seems to me to say: "Know, oh man!
that under the things which I show thee, mysteries lie concealed. Hast thou
not seen the night, that had grown so long, suddenly checked? Learn hence,
that the black night of Sin, which had reached its height, by the accumulation
of every guilty device, is this day, stopped in its course. Yes, from this day
forward, its duration shall be shortened until at length there shall be naught
but Light. Look, I pray thee, on the Sun; and see how his rays are stronger and
his position higher in the heavens: Learn from that how the other Light, the
Light of the Gospel, is now shedding itself over the whole earth".

cited from: http://www.catholicism.org/defense-of-christmas.html

<full text not found>

390+ ? Amphilochius of Iconium, On the Nativity of Our Great God and Savior Jesus Christ

No other info found, just a mention in abstract of this work:
http://escholarship.bc.edu/dissertations/AAI3122121/

Chili · 08-03-2008, 03:39 AM

Jesus never was born but Christ was born and they called him Jesus.
Who was this Jesus?
Obviously the guy unto whom Christ was born.

Chili · 08-03-2008, 10:06 AM

Jan. 6 is confirmation that indeed the Immaculate Conception bore the Christ unto the man instead of Magdalena in her role as temple tramp unto the human [condition].

The difference here is that Magdalene is not our water but Mary is and is needed to get into the promised land. Hence fire and water wherefore now only Catholic water will get us there.

The arrival of the Magi is in evidence of this because the Star of Bethlehem (not Jerusalem) is what guided them (and so 'us') into the promised land = Galilee (and Purgatory for us).

Sorry flolks, no flight into Egypt and no massacre for us.

vid · 08-03-2008, 11:14 AM

Chilli: please, leave theological discussions out of this thread. This is intended to be factual thread about early christian commentaries on jesus/christ birth day, nothing else.

vid · 08-03-2008, 08:02 PM

Sextus Julius Africanus is supposed to have said in his Chronology that imprehnation of mary happened on 25th march, same day as his passion, but I wasn't able to find this anywhere in extant fragments of this book (on CCEL): http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf06.v.v.html

Gregory Thaurmaturgus, Homily on nativity

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf06.iii.iv.v.i.html

Arguably sets holy ghost impregnation at 25th March, and according to commentary at CCEL has been used so, but that is very unsure from text.

Less related to topic: Anatolius talks about sun cycles, mentions 25th december, but doesn't mention anything about birth:

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf0...arch#highlight

vid · 08-03-2008, 08:11 PM

Fix to first post: actual quotation for Clement of Alexandria to date to 6th january is this:

"From the birth of Christ, therefore, to the death of Commodus are, in all, a hundred and ninety-four years, one month, thirteen days. And there are those who have determined not only the year of our Lord’s birth, but also the day; and they say that it took place in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus, and in the twenty-fifth day of Pachon."

mike.davis · 08-04-2008, 06:48 PM

There is a 10-year discrepancy in the year that Jesus was born, if we follow the accounts of Matthew and Luke. So how could anyone possibly give any credence to claims about the exact day?? Matthew says that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 or 5 BC. Luke says Jesus was born during the census of Quirinius which took place in 6 AD. If they can't get the year within a 10-yr range, they might as well give up on the month and day. See Richard Carrier's articlesummarizing the evidence on the discrepancies in the year of JC's birth.

judge · 08-04-2008, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike.davis

There is a 10-year discrepancy in the year that Jesus was born, if we follow the accounts of Matthew and Luke. So how could anyone possibly give any credence to claims about the exact day?? Matthew says that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 or 5 BC. Luke says Jesus was born during the census of Quirinius which took place in 6 AD. If they can't get the year within a 10-yr range, they might as well give up on the month and day. See Richard Carrier's articlesummarizing the evidence on the discrepancies in the year of JC's birth.

Richard carriers article is just not that good. There are a number of problems he needs to address, some of which we looked at in a previous thread.

Luke seems on closer examination to give a birth date of 3 BC.

See here

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-03-2008, 03:39 AM	#14
Chili Banned Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Alberta Posts: 11,885	Jesus never was born but Christ was born and they called him Jesus. Who was this Jesus? Obviously the guy unto whom Christ was born.

08-03-2008, 10:06 AM	#15
Chili Banned Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Alberta Posts: 11,885	Jan. 6 is confirmation that indeed the Immaculate Conception bore the Christ unto the man instead of Magdalena in her role as temple tramp unto the human [condition]. The difference here is that Magdalene is not our water but Mary is and is needed to get into the promised land. Hence fire and water wherefore now only Catholic water will get us there. The arrival of the Magi is in evidence of this because the Star of Bethlehem (not Jerusalem) is what guided them (and so 'us') into the promised land = Galilee (and Purgatory for us). Sorry flolks, no flight into Egypt and no massacre for us.

08-03-2008, 11:14 AM	#16
vid Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Myjava, Slovakia Posts: 384	Chilli: please, leave theological discussions out of this thread. This is intended to be factual thread about early christian commentaries on jesus/christ birth day, nothing else.

08-03-2008, 08:02 PM	#17
vid Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Myjava, Slovakia Posts: 384	Sextus Julius Africanus is supposed to have said in his Chronology that imprehnation of mary happened on 25th march, same day as his passion, but I wasn't able to find this anywhere in extant fragments of this book (on CCEL): http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf06.v.v.html Gregory Thaurmaturgus, Homily on nativity http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf06.iii.iv.v.i.html Arguably sets holy ghost impregnation at 25th March, and according to commentary at CCEL has been used so, but that is very unsure from text. Less related to topic: Anatolius talks about sun cycles, mentions 25th december, but doesn't mention anything about birth: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf0...arch#highlight

08-03-2008, 08:11 PM	#18
vid Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Myjava, Slovakia Posts: 384	Fix to first post: actual quotation for Clement of Alexandria to date to 6th january is this: "From the birth of Christ, therefore, to the death of Commodus are, in all, a hundred and ninety-four years, one month, thirteen days. And there are those who have determined not only the year of our Lord’s birth, but also the day; and they say that it took place in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus, and in the twenty-fifth day of Pachon."

08-04-2008, 06:48 PM	#19
mike.davis Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: St. Paul, MN Posts: 9	There is a 10-year discrepancy in the year that Jesus was born, if we follow the accounts of Matthew and Luke. So how could anyone possibly give any credence to claims about the exact day?? Matthew says that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 or 5 BC. Luke says Jesus was born during the census of Quirinius which took place in 6 AD. If they can't get the year within a 10-yr range, they might as well give up on the month and day. See Richard Carrier's articlesummarizing the evidence on the discrepancies in the year of JC's birth.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.