stephan huller

When Eusebius disputes the pagan Acts of Pilate he makes reference to a claim by pagans that the actual dates for Pilate's authority in Judaea were earlier than Josephus allows. Of course scholarship stubbornly clings to the accuracy of Josephus. Yet two more pieces of evidence have to considered. First, coins of Pilate under the temple wall usually dated to the reign of Herod the Great and this very curious statement in the second century Epistles of the Apostles:
Herod Archelaus only governed until 18 CE a historical framework which agrees with the pagan Acts of Archelaus

outhouse

false

http://www.numismalink.com/fontanille1.html

1 - The temporal proximity : Most modern experts agree in recognising that the year now designated 30 C.E. marked the trial and the death of Jesus. Given that time-frame, Pilate's coins were minted in 29, 30 and 31 C.E.


And another cource [better]

http://www.forumancientcoins.com/cat...s.asp?vpar=932

stephan huller

i'm on vacation but where's the proof of the dating and why under the wall built by Herod the Great?

outhouse

Because the walls fell when the temple was destroyed, thus the coins ended up under them.

stephan huller

That's not possible. The coins were found in a well under an intact part of the wall as I remember it. There are enough little bits of information to raise questions about Josephus and Luke's dating. Luke was specifically reactionary

outhouse

I'm sorry bud, but there are many years here, and not all of them were found in the same place.

Please be more specific on exactly which coin was found where. [if you can]


Id like to research this if correct.

outhouse

Oh!!!!

I forgot.

The temple was still under construction during that period, duh.

brain is getting tired and old lol

outhouse

Here is where the mistake possibly lies on Archelaus

http://coinsoftime.com/Articles/The_...us_Pilate.html


The coins of Pontius Pilate come in two styles. On the front (obverse) of the 1st type is the symbol of the simpulum which was a Roman wine container used in Roman religious ceremonies. This symbol would probably have offended the local Jewish population and this coin was only produced in 29 AD at which time Pilate's coinage was redesigned. The Greek inscription on the front is TIBEPIOY KAICAPOC which means [coin] of Emperor Tiberius. The reverse inscription is IOYLIA KAICAPOC which translates to Empress Julia, mother of Tiberius. The reverse symbol is three stalks of grain and appears to have no special meaning. Although hard to see on this coin, there is a date in Greek on the obverse, LIς = Year 16, referring to the 16th year of Tiberius' rule as Emperor of Rome. The second type of coin of Pontius Pilate, with the symbol on the front being a lituus, or curved wooden staff, is traditionally attributed to having been produced in 30 and 31 AD only. However, some scholars believe it was first produced in 29 AD as there are several specimens that have LIς which would equate to Year 16. As the first type with the grain stalks was not produced after Year 16, it is quite plausible the coins of the second type with the lituus staff were first produced towards the end of Year 16 to replace the first type. The second type then would have continued on for Year 17 & Year 18. The lituus staff was used in Roman ceremonies related to astrology but it is conceivable to pass it off as shepherd's staff. The inscription again was TIBEPIOY KAICAPOC which means [coin] of Emperor Tiberius. The reverse symbol was a laurel wreath with an inscription listing the date of the coin in Greek, either LIZ ( L = Year, I = 10 + Z = 7) for Year 17 = 30 AD or LIH for Year 18 = Year 31 AD. There are other well documented inscription errors on some coins which either would be a sign of carelessness or ignorance on the part of the coin engraver. Therefore, the coin with LIZ for Year 17 = 30 AD is taken to be the year of crucifixion.

stephan huller

I don't have access to books but my original point was the apparent agreement between the pagan Acts of Pilate and the Epistle of the Apostles

Diogenes the Cynic

Pilate and Archelaus could not have both been in Judea at the same time. Judea did not get annexed by Rome until after Archelaus was gone - in fact Archelaus' incompetence was WHY the Romans annexed Judea.