125 replies to this topic

[Still Waters]

The entire Christian calendar is based on a miscalculation, the Pope has declared, as he claims in a new book that Jesus was born several years earlier than commonly believed.

"The calculation of the beginning of our calendar – based on the birth of Jesus – was made by Dionysius Exiguus, who made a mistake in his calculations by several years," the Pope writes in the book, which went on sale around the world with an initial print run of a million copies.

"The actual date of Jesus's birth was several years before."

http://www.telegraph...laims-Pope.html

[Timonthy]

Oh for gods sake Dennis the Small, get it right!

Edit: I actually posted this several seconds earlier however Dennis the Small made and error in a script line and it calculated the time wrong.

Edited by Timonthy, 22 November 2012 - 01:26 PM.

[Alienated Being]

And this claim is made with the assumption that Jesus was a real person.

[Mnemonix]

That's a shocker.

[ealdwita]

He's got some pension back-payments to come then.

[dougeaton]

He was born 4BC

Alienated Being, on 22 November 2012 - 02:43 PM, said:

And this claim is made with the assumption that Jesus was a real person.

He was.

ealdwita, on 22 November 2012 - 03:48 PM, said:

He's got some pension back-payments to come then.

Hmmm mabye I can change my name.

doug

[Alienated Being]

dougeaton, on 22 November 2012 - 09:40 PM, said:

He was.

doug

Perhaps since you know this, you can settle the debates amongst theologian scholars. I am sure they would be very interested to see what evidence you bring to the table.

[dougeaton]

Alienated Being, on 22 November 2012 - 10:31 PM, said:

Perhaps since you know this, you can settle the debates amongst theologian scholars. I am sure they would be very interested to see what evidence you bring to the table.

Most scholars, even though who are unbelievers believe that Jesus existed.  Here is a sampleing.


Bultmann (1958): “Of course the doubt as to whether Jesus really existed is unfounded and not worth refutation. No sane person can doubt that Jesus stands as founder behind the historical movement whose first distinct stage is represented by the oldest Palestinian community.”

Bornkamm (I960): “To doubt the historical existence of Jesus at all . . . was reserved for an unrestrained, tendentious criticism of modern times into which it is not worth while to enter here.”

Marxsen (1970): “I am of the opinion (and it is an opinion shared by every serious historian) that the theory ['that Jesus never lived, that he was a purely mythical figure'] is historically untenable.”

Grant (1977): “To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ-myth theory. It has ‘again and again been answered and annihilated by first-rank scholars.’  In recent years ‘no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus’—or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary.”

M. Martin (1991): “Well’s thesis [that Jesus never existed] is controversial and not widely accepted.”
Van Voorst (2000): “Contemporary New Testament scholars have typically viewed their [i.e., Jesus mythers] arguments as so weak or bizarre that they relegate them to footnotes, or often ignore them completely.”
Burridge and Could (2004):  “There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more.”


doug

Edited by dougeaton, 22 November 2012 - 10:39 PM.

[Alienated Being]

dougeaton, on 22 November 2012 - 10:39 PM, said:

Most scholars, even though who are unbelievers believe that Jesus existed.  Here is a sampleing.


Bultmann (1958): “Of course the doubt as to whether Jesus really existed is unfounded and not worth refutation. No sane person can doubt that Jesus stands as founder behind the historical movement whose first distinct stage is represented by the oldest Palestinian community.”

Bornkamm (I960): “To doubt the historical existence of Jesus at all . . . was reserved for an unrestrained, tendentious criticism of modern times into which it is not worth while to enter here.”

Marxsen (1970): “I am of the opinion (and it is an opinion shared by every serious historian) that the theory ['that Jesus never lived, that he was a purely mythical figure'] is historically untenable.”

Grant (1977): “To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ-myth theory. It has ‘again and again been answered and annihilated by first-rank scholars.’  In recent years ‘no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus’—or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary.”

M. Martin (1991): “Well’s thesis [that Jesus never existed] is controversial and not widely accepted.”
Van Voorst (2000): “Contemporary New Testament scholars have typically viewed their [i.e., Jesus mythers] arguments as so weak or bizarre that they relegate them to footnotes, or often ignore them completely.”
Burridge and Could (2004):  “There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more.”


doug

Most scholars? I would not say that most scholars believe that he existed. In fact, a look at the history of debates surrounding the existence of Jesus will reinforce my statement. Many, many scholars believe that so many fantastical claims surrounding Jesus' existence taint the validity and legitimacy of the story, making it appear as being very unlikely that such a man existed.

[Lion6969]

Alienated Being, on 22 November 2012 - 02:43 PM, said:

And this claim is made with the assumption that Jesus was a real person.

Thats gotta be a joke right?.......wait no, it's alien so it's not, you must genuinely believe in the fringe academics who question this.

The fact he is mentioned documented after his death by 1000s, there are more reports that he existed than you there are reports for you, there is oral reporting, reporting from different global regions, different religions, scriptures, historical, philosophical and logical data show he must have existed, yet you assume he did not.

As debatable as it is, the majority of credible academics believe he did, otherwise you have to prove all the oral traditions, historical mentioning, global mentioning, scriptural reference from various religions, etc etc were all a massive global conspiracy stretching over about 2000 years give or take. When you have proof of this conspiracy we will take you seriously

*snip*

Edited by libstaK, 23 November 2012 - 09:55 AM.

[Alienated Being]

Lion6969, on 22 November 2012 - 11:36 PM, said:

Thats gotta be a joke right?.......wait no, it's alien so it's not, you must genuinely believe in the fringe academics who question this.

Nice ad hominem.

Quote

The fact he is mentioned documented after his death by 1000s, there are more reports that he existed than you there are reports for you,

I don't need reports to reinforce my existence... my existence can be proven through the collection of cultures from my body. As for Jesus, no skeletal or DNA remains have been found of him to reinforce his existence. All we have are loose descriptions of him. Secondly, holy books have been written and translated so many times that it is hard to accept them as being credible pieces of evidence.

Quote

there is oral reporting, reporting from different global regions, different religions, scriptures, historical, philosophical and logical data show he must have existed, yet you assume he did not.

Oral reporting? Reporting from different regions? All of what you claim acts as agents in support of Jesus can be used to support Noah's Ark. I guess we can assume Noah's Ark existed, as well...

Quote

As debatable as it is, the majority of credible academics believe he did, otherwise you have to prove all the oral traditions, historical mentioning, global mentioning, scriptural reference from various religions, etc etc were all a massive global conspiracy stretching over about 2000 years give or take. When you have proof of this conspiracy we will take you seriously

So, am I to assume that you are implying that all academics whom dispute the claim that Jesus existed are incredible? The proof is that there are so many vague descriptions of this man claimed to be Jesus that it is hard to accept him as being a real person, hence why so much debate surrounding his existence continue to this day.

[TheMacGuffin]

Augustus reigned from 31 BC to 14 AD, so if there is any accuracy at all in those infancy accounts, Jesus had to have been born sometime between those dates.  Tiberius reigned until 37 AD so Jesus had to have died before then.

Pontius Pilate was governor from 26-36 AD so the mission, trial and execution of Jesus had to have been sometime in there.

Herod the Great was king from 40 BC until his death in 4 BC, so again if there's any truth to those birth narratives at Jesus, Jesus was born during that time, probably closer to the time of Herod's death than the beginning of his rule.

So if the Bible is true, Jesus died at age 33, and giving him a birth date of 4 BC means he was executed in the spring of 29 AD.

Edited by TheMacGuffin, 23 November 2012 - 12:38 AM.

[TheMacGuffin]

There is one problem, though.  Do we have to count the year 0 as one full year or is it just a nothing?

If we count the year 0 as a real year, then Jesus was executed in 28 AD.

Obviously I am making the assumption here that he really existed between these approximate dates, and we cannot have his trial and execution before 26 AD or there would be no Pontius Pilate on the scene there in Judea.

Edited by TheMacGuffin, 23 November 2012 - 12:34 AM.

[freetoroam]

So where does this leave Mary? where was she when he wasn`t born at the time she was supposed to have given birth?
What about his pals, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? when did they exist?
And Herod?
This must mean that the conception time differs too............OMG, god aint the dad!

[Hilander]

I believe Jesus was a real man and it doesn't surprise me they got his birthday wrong.  We celebrate his birth every year on the wrong day.  Considering the bible was written years after the fact I bet part of that is wrong.  Most holly books were written to control.  I also don't think we should literally be following them.  I'm not saying don't be religious, I am but not blindly so but some things that may of been right or accepted in that time isn't today.  Fortunately most of us have grown up.