FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-05-2005, 09:28 AM   #21
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless
What evidence?
Astronomical.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless
And this would be incompatible with both Matthew and Luke (too late for Herod, too early for Quirinus). It would also require a Passover in November...
Why would it require a Passover in November?

TC
TruthCounsellor is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 09:35 AM   #22
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 5,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruthCounsellor
Astronomical.
The Star of Bethlehem? Please explain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TruthCounsellor
Why would it require a Passover in November?
Because the eclipse was in November, and Jesus was supposedly crucified at Passover. Are you arguing that the gospels recorded the wrong time of year?
Jack the Bodiless is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 09:37 AM   #23
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin
As Herod died in 4 BCE and according to Matt. the magic family went off to Egypt to avoid Herod's wrath, then obvious Jesus according to Matt. was born in 4 BCE or earlier. Herod we are told ordered the deaths of all the male children around Bethlehem that were two years or younger, suggesting that Jesus could have been born as early as 6 BCE. 3 BCE is right out.
Some date Herod's death later, in 1 BC. (After the eclipse of Jan.9, 1 BC.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin
Also, John has Jesus going up to Jerusalem three times for the passover, ie three different passovers, so his ministry according to that gospel was at least two years long, assuming the minimal case of starting on a passover.
I'm not convinced that anyone has yet produced a good (i.e., accurate) harmony of the gospels, or that there were three passovers.

TC
TruthCounsellor is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 09:47 AM   #24
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless
The Star of Bethlehem? Please explain.
Try this:
http://www.redbay.com/ekklesia/birth.htm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless
Because the eclipse was in November, and Jesus was supposedly crucified at Passover. Are you arguing that the gospels recorded the wrong time of year?
No. Quite frankly, I haven't examined certain parts of this carefully enough to make any firm determination as to which was the more likely.

TC
TruthCounsellor is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 03:38 PM   #25
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 45
Default

There was a partial lunar eclipse as the moon rose over Jerusalem on the evening of Friday, April 3, A.D. 33. If Thallus really did admit to a eclipse at the death of Jesus perhaps he got a lunar eclipse confused with a solar eclipse since there was the story about the period of darkness that accompanied the crucifixion. It would be an easy mistake to make. Or, Thallus just thought that the period of darkness was a solar eclipse since he did not know it was during Passover and he was unaware it was a 3 hour period so he attributed the period of darkness to a solar eclipse that happened during the reign of Tiberius. Africanus may have just passed on what Thallus thought would have explained the darkness.
David Mooney is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 06:22 PM   #26
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruthCounsellor
Some date Herod's death later, in 1 BC. (After the eclipse of Jan.9, 1 BC.)
Historians don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruthCounsellor
I'm not convinced that anyone has yet produced a good (i.e., accurate) harmony of the gospels, or that there were three passovers.
This doesn't need to be harminized. The synoptics are silent on the subject, while John gives three passovers. The synoptics don't contradict John.


spin
spin is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 06:49 PM   #27
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: 152° 50' 15" E by 31° 5' 17" S
Posts: 2,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruthCounsellor
I recently read the suggestion that there might have been massive sun spots, attributing not only to the extended length of time the sun was darkened, but also to what would have appeared as a "blood red" moon.
That's rubbish. Sunspots last for days, not mere hours.
Agemegos is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 06:52 PM   #28
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: 152° 50' 15" E by 31° 5' 17" S
Posts: 2,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar
(how many three hour long eclipses have been recorded in human history?)
None. No flying pigs, either.
Agemegos is offline  
Old 04-05-2005, 06:58 PM   #29
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agemegos
None. No flying pigs, either.
Whaddabout the shrub on Air Force One?


spin
spin is offline  
Old 04-07-2005, 08:52 AM   #30
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin
Historians don't.
That's debatable. A quick search turned this up (but there's probably more out there.):

HEROD DATE

Herod is usually thought to have dies in 4 B.C., thus pushing the date of the birth of Christ back beyond this time. A careful analysis of Josephus, however, indicates that Herod actually lived until 1 B.C., making the 2B.C. nativity date of Luke plausible enough:

"Josephus improperly counted Herod's 37th year from 40 BC instead of 37 BC, concluding incorrectly as a result of his miscalculation that Herod had reigned but "34" years from 37 BC [Antiq. XIVxvi4; XVIIvi4,viii1,xiii2; XVIIIii1,iv6; Wars IIvii3]. And yet all other evidences cited -- and the bulk of Josephus' own meticulous research -- confirm that king Herod did in fact reign for 37 years, but counting from 37 BC which was Herod's first regnal year. Making 1 BC his 37th and final year of reign, in which Herod died after the "blood red" full lunar eclipse of January 10th. So poor king Herod's final year wasn't much of a year at all, but was cut short by the end of January 1 BC." Min's Historical Calendar Of Jesus - Chapter 4
Josephus tells us that an eclipse happened just before Herod's death. There was one in 4 B.C., the traditional death date of Herod, but it was only 37% eclipsed, not enough to create the red color which Josephus says was identified with the one just before Herod's death. The total eclipse just before Herod's death started occurring at midnight on the 10th of January 1 BC. Josephus stated that Herod died shortly after this blood red eclipse, and that he was buried before the Passover of the same year which occurred on Wednesday April 7, 1 BC. Jewish tradition has it that Herod died in the month of Shebat — January/February. If Matthew is to be believed, Yeshu was born during the reign of this Herod, thus before April 7, 1 B.C. In 525 AD the monk Dionysius Exiguus (died 556 AD) calculated Jesus was born in 1 BC. His date became the basis for the Christian division of history into BC and AD.. This date is a bit late, however.

(from http://essenes.net/deathdates.html )


Quote:
Originally Posted by spin
The synoptics are silent on the subject, while John gives three passovers.
He missed the last one (as he was the passover lamb that year.) Now it's down to two, at the most. So, like I said, I'm not convinced.

Hmmm... how about this for starters?
http://www.scripturescholar.com/Jesus2YearMinistry.htm

TC
TruthCounsellor is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:14 PM.

Top

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