Freethought & Rationalism Archive

show_no_mercy · 12-17-2009, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Irenaeus also reports that Jesus was close to 50 when he was executed.

I don't know what Irenaeus' source is presumed to be, but he wrote circa 180 AD, so the gospel of Luke (circa 70-100 AD) would take precedence in a disagreement like this.

Of course, based on those dates then you might conclude that. But I don't accept those dates and infer that our current Luke is after Justin Martyr. Which would be contemporary with Irenaeus.

aa5874 · 12-17-2009, 12:37 PM

Based on how Jesus was conceived there is hardly any surprise that his date of birth is not known.

Larkin31 · 12-17-2009, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Based on how Jesus was conceived there is hardly any surprise that his date of birth is not known.

You would think that those wise men might have thought the birthing a bit fantastic and noteworthy, seeing as they brought gifts and all. And that bright "star" would have garnered some wider interest. Gestation is always of flexible length of time, so whether there was intercourse or not, the date of birth is much more likely to be fixed.

And could we not check Mary's diary tablet for her entry under "wild dreams to tell Joseph"? :wave:

Kapyong · 12-17-2009, 01:39 PM

Gday,

Quote:

Originally Posted by +or-1

The December date was, as far as I understand it, finally settled on by Constantine and the Council of Nicea in the fourth century

Nope.
The Dec. 25th date was mentioned as early as late 2nd century (Theophilus of Antioch.) Nicea had nothing to do with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by +or-1

although some Christian historians claim that it is nine months after the immaculate conception.

Whoops.
You have confused the Immaculate Conception with the Virgin Birth - two different events :

* Immaculate Conception = Anne conceiving Mary
* Virgin Birth = Mary birthing Jesus.

They are frequently mixed up :-)

K.

aa5874 · 12-17-2009, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapyong

Gday,

Quote:

Originally Posted by +or-1

The December date was, as far as I understand it, finally settled on by Constantine and the Council of Nicea in the fourth century

Nope.
The Dec. 25th date was mentioned as early as late 2nd century (Theophilus of Antioch.) Nicea had nothing to do with it.

Which book by Theophilus of Antioch claimed Jesus was born on the 25th of December?

In Theophilus' "To Autolycus", the name Jesus of Naszareth or Jesus Christ appears to be missing.

Kapyong · 12-17-2009, 07:59 PM

Gday,

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Which book by Theophilus of Antioch claimed Jesus was born on the 25th of December?
In Theophilus' "To Autolycus", the name Jesus of Naszareth or Jesus Christ appears to be missing.

My apologies for inaccurate information.
It's only attributed to Theophilus, by the Magdeburg Centuries.

The date is also mentioned by Hippolytus' commentary on Daniel (c.202)

K.

Toto · 12-17-2009, 08:13 PM

The Hippolytus reference is disputed

Chronology of Christmas

Quote:

Several manuscripts of Hippolytus' Commentary on Daniel, a work of the early third century, state,

For the first appearance of our Lord in the flesh took place in Bethlehem eight days before the Kalends of January [25 December], on the fourth day [Wednesday], under Emperor Augustus, in the year 5500 (30).

But many scholars believe that the reference to 25 December is a late correction of the date actually stated by the author (31). The author's date may be preserved in a single manuscript which curiously contradicts itself by giving two dates: both 25 December and 2 April (32). For two reasons, it is likely that 2 April is the original reading.

A third-century work called De Pascha Computus, which, it is agreed, is based on a lost work of Hippolytus, states that Christ was born on Passover (33). It is therefore probable that Hippolytus himself was of the same opinion. Although the date of Passover Eve varies from year to year, it is never far from 2 April.
In the Lateran Museum at Rome is an ancient statue of Hippolytus which was probably executed shortly after his death (34). This statue bears the dates of Passover for the years 222-333, and next to one date, 2 April of a certain year, is inscribed "genesis ['birth'] of Jesus Christ" (35). No doubt the statue was intended to honor Hippolytus as the one who calculated the dates of future Passovers. We therefore surmise that in the third century, it was believed that Hippolytus set Christ's birth on 2 April, one of the recurring dates in the Passover cycle.

mountainman · 12-17-2009, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Based on how Jesus was conceived there is hardly any surprise that his date of birth is not known.

It is reasonable to at least suspect that Jesus may have been conceived in a fourth century imperial scriptorium in or around the city of Rome, between the years of 312 and 324 CE, as a new non Greek and non Jewish God to be deployed by the Rightful Pontifex Maximus as He saw fit and when he had total and absolute military control/supremacy. Of course if this is the case then Eusebius, possibly a man of Jewish descent, was Jesus' midwife. The entry that appeared at that same period of time in the local Eastern Greek newspapers under births and deaths concerning Jesus was the following:

There was time when He was not.
Before He was born He was not.
He was made out of nothing existing.
He is/was from another subsistence/substance.
He is subject to alteration or change.

This reception of Jesus by the Greeks was "utterly contraversial!.
Why doesn't someone actually read the Nicaean Creed for Christ's sake.
There is a massive black disclaimer clause written in bold anathemas.
But the Pontifex Maximus couldnt give a hoot.
The Greek civilisation was to be plundered from one end to the other.
Under the sword of Christian Soldiers the empire lined up to become Christian with effect from 324 CE.
Sociologically throw-back Draconian Laws swiftly followed with bloodshed, torture and executions.

The Greek academics fled Constantine's stange new fabrication of the Christians and its brand new Christo-Platonic Guardian Class and travelled hundreds of miles up the Nile from the library of Alexandria. One of the texts in the 4th century Nag Hammadi codices declared:

Our generation is fleeing since it does not yet even believe that the Christ is alive … he was nailed so that they might keep him in the Church. [NHC 11.1]

When was Bilbo Baggins actually born?

youngalexander · 12-18-2009, 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deus Ex

He was born at 12:00 am on 000 AD.

It is wonderful to encounter someone who can count. Seriously, I am (most unusually) not being sarcastic.

Only last evening I watched some Xmas TV crap concerning 'The Star of B' and amongst many calumnies it was suggested that Jesus was born in the yr 1CE. Which I suppose would have made him about 1 year old at birth.

Hey, don't knock it! Explains a lot.
Apart from the enormous number of outsize babies in mediaeval Madona & Child art.
He's precocious, unusually prescient, and, above all, lives beyond his time.:notworthy:

TNorthover · 12-18-2009, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngalexander

It is wonderful to encounter someone who can count. Seriously, I am (most unusually) not being sarcastic.

Only last evening I watched some Xmas TV crap concerning 'The Star of B' and amongst many calumnies it was suggested that Jesus was born in the yr 1CE. Which I suppose would have made him about 1 year old at birth.

The problem is more that no-one before about 1200 could count in Europe. The calendar goes 2BCE, 1BCE, 1CE, 2CE, ...

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

12-17-2009, 12:37 PM	#22
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	Based on how Jesus was conceived there is hardly any surprise that his date of birth is not known.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.