PDA

View Full Version : Jesus was born years earlier than thought, claims Pope



Rockntractor
11-21-2012, 10:07 PM
The 'mistake' was made by a sixth century monk known as Dionysius Exiguus or in English Dennis the Small, the 85-year-old pontiff claims in the book 'Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives', published on Wednesday.

"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."
Read More>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/the-pope/9693576/Jesus-was-born-years-earlier-than-thought-claims-Pope.html

Which Popes were infallible, the Pope now or the Popes that agreed with the later birth date?http://www.picgifs.com/smileys/smileys-and-emoticons/thinking/smileys-thinking-371439.gif (http://www.picgifs.com/smileys/)

Odysseus
11-22-2012, 12:03 PM
Which Popes were infallible, the Pope now or the Popes that agreed with the later birth date?http://www.picgifs.com/smileys/smileys-and-emoticons/thinking/smileys-thinking-371439.gif (http://www.picgifs.com/smileys/)

My money's on John Paul, although even he was better when he was still with George and Ringo. :friendly_wink:

Rightwing Patriot
11-22-2012, 12:23 PM
I have read from many sources that Christ was actually born around 4 A.D. and so that's what I believe also. If that's true, then the Julian calendar is screwed up too, right?

Unreconstructed Reb
11-22-2012, 01:59 PM
I have read from many sources that Christ was actually born around 4 A.D. and so that's what I believe also. If that's true, then the Julian calendar is screwed up too, right?

Why is everybody all spun up? It's not going to matter after December 21st.

Lanie
11-22-2012, 11:18 PM
I don't think it matters that much *when* he was born. We already celebrate his birthday on a day that probably isn't close to when he was acutally born.

NJCardFan
11-23-2012, 01:14 AM
I don't think it matters that much *when* he was born. We already celebrate his birthday on a day that probably isn't close to when he was acutally born.

This. One of the earliest marketing moves.

Novaheart
11-23-2012, 12:39 PM
Well there you have the difference between Roman justice and American justice. In America, Jesus would have had a lawyer who pointed out the error on the execution order related to an error on the birth certificate and ipso fatso the judge would have dismissed the case. Romans were like, "Meh, it's close enough for government work."

txradioguy
11-23-2012, 02:06 PM
I don't think it matters that much *when* he was born. We already celebrate his birthday on a day that probably isn't close to when he was acutally born.

And you care why exactly?

marv
11-23-2012, 02:06 PM
Well there you have the difference between Roman justice and American justice. In America, Jesus would have had a lawyer who pointed out the error on the execution order related to an error on the birth certificate and ipso fatso the judge would have dismissed the case. Romans were like, "Meh, it's close enough for government work."

Hmmmm, reminds me of another "birth certificate"..........http://members.socket.net/~mcruzan/avatars/scratchhead.gif

txradioguy
11-23-2012, 02:06 PM
Well there you have the difference between Roman justice and American justice. In America, Jesus would have had a lawyer who pointed out the error on the execution order related to an error on the birth certificate and ipso fatso the judge would have dismissed the case. Romans were like, "Meh, it's close enough for government work."

Says the nonbeliever who could really care less.

Novaheart
11-23-2012, 03:10 PM
Says the nonbeliever who could really care less.

You probably don't believe that Mohammed was a prophet or Sidhartha Gautama was enlightened but it doesn't preclude you from discussing them as historical figures, does it?

AmPat
11-23-2012, 03:15 PM
Well there you have the difference between Roman justice and American justice. In America, Jesus would have had a lawyer who pointed out the error on the execution order related to an error on the birth certificate and ipso fatso the judge would have dismissed the case. Romans were like, "Meh, it's close enough for government work."
"Ipso FATSO?"

Novaheart
11-23-2012, 03:18 PM
"Ipso FATSO?"

It's an Archie Bunkerism

Wibbins
11-24-2012, 12:23 PM
Why do I not care what the pope thinks?

noonwitch
11-26-2012, 10:41 AM
It doesn't matter to me. I've managed to reconcile evolution with Genesis in my head, so this is not much of a challenge to my faith.


The Bible gives no dates, one has to turn to outside sources like Josephus to put the events of Jesus life in a time frame more specific than that laid out in the gospels-Luke mentions that Augustus was Caesar at the time of Jesus' birth, for example.

marv
11-26-2012, 12:27 PM
The 'mistake' was made by a sixth century monk known as Dionysius Exiguus or in English Dennis the Small, the 85-year-old pontiff claims in the book 'Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives', published on Wednesday.

"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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_of_Jesus#Date_of_birth
(snip)

But both Luke and Matthew associate Jesus' birth with the time of King Herod. Most scholars generally assume a date of birth between 6 and 4 BC.

However, many scholars see a contradiction, in that while the Gospel of Matthew places Jesus' birth under the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 BC, the Gospel of Luke also dates the birth ten years after Herod's death during the census of Quirinius, described by the historian Josephus.

(snip)

...whatever. It's still my favorite time of the year...

Novaheart
11-26-2012, 12:51 PM
It doesn't matter to me. I've managed to reconcile evolution with Genesis in my head, so this is not much of a challenge to my faith.


The Bible gives no dates, one has to turn to outside sources like Josephus to put the events of Jesus life in a time frame more specific than that laid out in the gospels-Luke mentions that Augustus was Caesar at the time of Jesus' birth, for example.

Exactly. The Bible contains some verified mileposts which give us an idea of when other undocumented and divine things allegedly happened, and some people think that those historically recorded mileposts make the whole thing a history book. It's not a history book, it's literature with some history, some geography, some philosophy, some folklore, some fairy tales. And a whole lot of murder and sex.

noonwitch
11-26-2012, 05:02 PM
Exactly. The Bible contains some verified mileposts which give us an idea of when other undocumented and divine things allegedly happened, and some people think that those historically recorded mileposts make the whole thing a history book. It's not a history book, it's literature with some history, some geography, some philosophy, some folklore, some fairy tales. And a whole lot of murder and sex.


There's even bathroom humor in it-look up 1 Samuel 24 and see how David humiliates Saul.

Zeus
11-26-2012, 06:57 PM
Exactly. The Bible contains some verified mileposts which give us an idea of when other undocumented and divine things allegedly happened, and some people think that those historically recorded mileposts make the whole thing a history book. It's not a history book, it's literature with some history, some geography, some philosophy, some folklore, some fairy tales. And a whole lot of murder and sex.


The Bible has proven to be more historically and archaeologically accurate than any other ancient book. It has been subjected to the minutest scientific textual analysis possible to humanity and has been proven to be authentic in every way.


The Bible has become a significant source book for secular archaeology, helping to identify such ancient figures as Sargon (Isaiah 20:1 (http://www.icr.org/bible/Isaiah/20:1)); Sennacherib (Isaiah 37:37 (http://www.icr.org/bible/Isaiah/37:37)); Horam of Gazer (Joshua 10:33 (http://www.icr.org/bible/Joshua/10:33)); Hazar (Joshua 15:27 (http://www.icr.org/bible/Joshua/15:27)); and the nation of the Hittites (Genesis 15:20 (http://www.icr.org/bible/Genesis/15:20)). The biblical record, unlike other “scriptures,” is historically set, opening itself up for testing and verification.

Two of the greatest 20th-century archaeologists, William F. Albright and Nelson Glueck, both lauded the Bible (even though they were non-Christian and secular in their training and personal beliefs) as being the single most accurate source document from history. Over and over again, the Bible has been found to be accurate in its places, dates, and records of events. No other “religious” document comes even close.

The 19th-century critics used to deny the historicity of the Hittites, the Horites, the Edomites, and various other peoples, nations, and cities mentioned in the Bible. Those critics have long been silenced by the archaeologist’s spade, and few critics dare to question the geographical and ethnological reliability of the Bible.

The names of over 40 different kings of various countries mentioned in the Bible have all been found in contemporary documents and inscriptions outside of the Old Testament, and are always consistent with the times and places associated with them in the Bible. Nothing exists in ancient literature that has been even remotely as well-confirmed in accuracy as has the Bible.
...

Novaheart
11-26-2012, 07:28 PM
...

Historical figures in the Bible no more confirm Christian mythology than the known location of Mt Olympus confirms Greek Mythology. Moreover, dreaming up fantastic ways that might explain why the earth is only 6000 years old is not science, it's desperation.

Zeus
11-26-2012, 07:58 PM
Historical figures in the Bible no more confirm Christian mythology than the known location of Mt Olympus confirms Greek Mythology. Moreover, dreaming up fantastic ways that might explain why the earth is only 6000 years old is not science, it's desperation.


The Bible has proven to be more historically and archaeologically accurate than any other ancient book. It has been subjected to the minutest scientific textual analysis possible to humanity and has been proven to be authentic in every way.

To off handily reject the findings of the most studied and found to be accurate book in all of human history displays a total lack of objectivity and honest recognition of fact.

Rockntractor
11-26-2012, 08:08 PM
To off handily reject the findings of the most studied and found to be accurate book in all of human history displays a total lack of objectivity and honest recognition of fact.

He has too much at stake to admit to the truth of the bible, pretending it doesn't exist will not get him off the hook though.
Me thinks he doth protest too much.

djones520
11-26-2012, 08:08 PM
To off handily reject the findings of the most studied and found to be accurate book in all of human history displays a total lack of objectivity and honest recognition of fact.

He's not off handedly rejecting it. He stated that there has been verification of things that are in the bible. That does not mean that the rest of it is correct.

Such as the great flood. Geologists have completely debunked the possibility of that ever having occured. That is unless you want to attribute all evidence of it being erased by the divine will of God.

Rockntractor
11-26-2012, 08:14 PM
He's not off handedly rejecting it. He stated that there has been verification of things that are in the bible. That does not mean that the rest of it is correct.

Such as the great flood. Geologists have completely debunked the possibility of that ever having occured. That is unless you want to attribute all evidence of it being erased by the divine will of God.

Marine Team Finds Surprising Evidence Supporting A Great Biblical Flood
ScienceDaily (Sep. 10, 2007) — Did the great flood of Noah's generation really occur thousands of years ago? Was the Roman city of Caesarea destroyed by an ancient tsunami? Will pollution levels in our deep seas remain forever a mystery?
These are just a few of the questions that are being addressed by a new environmental marine research team from Tel Aviv University and the non-profit research and education organization, EcoOcean.

The team, headed by EcoOcean's Andreas Weil and Prof. Sven Beer of Tel Aviv University, are working to uncover new secrets about civilization and climate change from the depths of the sea floor. They are also a conducting a large-scale study on the health of the Mediterranean Sea with Ph.D. students they sponsor. The work is being done aboard "Mediterranean Explorer", a floating marine vessel.

"When I was looking for a partner, I needed to find a team of marine scientists who were leaders in their fields," says Weil, a Swedish environmental philanthropist who helped conceive and fund the idea of giving a free, floating marine research lab to any scientist who needed it. "I didn't want us to be just another Greenpeace group of environmental activists. My dream was to build the foremost research vessel for high-level scientific marine research.
Read More>http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070907150931.htm

djones520
11-26-2012, 08:18 PM
There are a ton of area's that have been buried by flood waters over the year. The entire northern coast of the black sea is riddled with communities that were drowned by the great deluge when the Mediterranean and the Black Sea linked together.

As the bible stated though, that flood never occured. There is no geological record of it. No displaced sediment layers, no mass extinction fossil layers, nothing like that has been found. The Bible stated that god wiped out the human race, covering the the globe in water, burying the tallest mountains by as much as 45 feet.

There would be clear evidence of this in the ground. Yet there isn't. Pointing to a drowned city here, another there, it does not verify the biblical account.

Rockntractor
11-26-2012, 08:26 PM
There are a ton of area's that have been buried by flood waters over the year. The entire northern coast of the black sea is riddled with communities that were drowned by the great deluge when the Mediterranean and the Black Sea linked together.

As the bible stated though, that flood never occured. There is no geological record of it. No displaced sediment layers, no mass extinction fossil layers, nothing like that has been found. The Bible stated that god wiped out the human race, covering the the globe in water, burying the tallest mountains by as much as 45 feet.

There would be clear evidence of this in the ground. Yet there isn't. Pointing to a drowned city here, another there, it does not verify the biblical account.

The grand Canyon. was formed fast by a lot of water fast, not the slow trickle of a river. you have no more proof that there wasn't a flood than believers in God have that there was, but I guess you have your faith to fall back on.

djones520
11-26-2012, 08:36 PM
The grand Canyon. was formed fast by a lot of water fast, not the slow trickle of a river. you have no more proof that there wasn't a flood than believers in God have that there was, but I guess you have your faith to fall back on.

I'm not getting your reasoning. Clearly established scientific markers do not exist, so that means I have no evidence that there was not a flood?

Floods displace sediments. You have clear distinctive layers in geological strata that show where and when flooding occured. You'd also have a layer of fossil remains from the mass extinction that would have occured with this. But it just does not exist.

For a world wide global flood to have occured these two things would have to exist, but they don't.

Look, I'm not saying there wasn't a flood that inspired the story. The Black Sea deluge is a popular candidate, given the time frame that it happened in. As the bible stated though, it didn't happen. The only way it did was if God waved his hands afterwards and made the evidence dissapear, which just ends up bringing up the problem of arguing the Bible from a scientific point of view.

Rockntractor
11-26-2012, 08:40 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aNlb3lFhFM

Lanie
11-27-2012, 01:19 AM
And you care why exactly?

That's my point. I don't care. If we're going to celebrate Christ's birthday on a day that probably wasn't his birthday, then what difference does the year make? The important thing was that he was born, not when.

Novaheart
11-27-2012, 03:10 AM
The grand Canyon. was formed fast by a lot of water fast, not the slow trickle of a river. you have no more proof that there wasn't a flood than believers in God have that there was, but I guess you have your faith to fall back on.

I have seen that piece on EWTN and it's quite interesting. However, even if we allow that the Grand Canyon was created by a freak event less than 6,000 years ago, it still doesn't support the literal read of the Biblical tale of Noah's flood. There is no middle ground here. If you are arguing that the Bible is factual, then the only thing you have to do is prove that what is stated in the Bible is not supported. A flood as described in the Bible is not supported by any science. What is supported by science are various hypothesis of regional floods which might be the basis for the story. Even then, the idea that the only animals and people to survive were those on a large boat is unsupported and implausible. Every explanation for how it was possible to put all the animals on the boat, and every explanation for how all of humanity descends from Noah's family, requires "reason" outside of the written word of the Bible.

Moreover, if they find "the ark" then you will know it's a lie. They would not leave the only finished lumber in the world in a boat which would now be on dry land. They would have torn it apart and built houses out of it.

Generation Why?
11-27-2012, 02:41 PM
I don't think this is that big of an issue. Non-theists will continue to not believe in a higher power and theists, in this case Christians, will continue to believe in God and his son Jesus Christ. The birth date and year really are not that big of a deal.

Odysseus
11-27-2012, 06:40 PM
Why do I not care what the pope thinks?

You should not underestimate the power of the force.
http://www.newsbiscuit.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/367-benedict-palpatine.jpg

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/9/23/1253720273461/Pope-Benedict-XVI--002.jpg
I find your lack of faith... disturbing.

djones520
11-27-2012, 06:42 PM
He is very photogenic.

*is perturbed by the inability to show a photo of him seemingly about to choke some children*

Zeus
11-27-2012, 08:50 PM
Jesus Christ Remains the Greatest Enigma in History to Believers and Skeptics Alike (http://roberthutchinson.com/spirituality/bible/jesus-christ-remains-the-greatest-enigma-in-history-to-believers-and-skeptics-alike/)



The simple truth is that the New Testament claims that Jesus of Nazareth is Lord of heaven and earth… the ultimate revelation of who God is and what he wants from his creates… and about one third of the planet’s population finds it credible. The snide put-downs, sophomoric arguments and thinly veiled threats of people like Richard Dawkins (http://roberthutchinson.com/tag/richard-dawkins/), Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and Penn and Teller do not impress them. Forced to choose between what the cynical media say is plausible and “scientific,” and what the Bible says about Jesus, billions prefer the Bible. They know Jesus, and trust him – more than all the scholars in the Jesus Seminar.

Generation Why?
11-28-2012, 01:05 PM
Jesus Christ Remains the Greatest Enigma in History to Believers and Skeptics Alike (http://roberthutchinson.com/spirituality/bible/jesus-christ-remains-the-greatest-enigma-in-history-to-believers-and-skeptics-alike/)


We can disagree about this all day but I don't care what anyone's religious beliefs are so long as they are not harming anyone, or pushing them on me. I will simply say Richard Dawkins is an idiot hated by most atheists. At least the ones I know.

JB
11-28-2012, 09:25 PM
Why do I not care what the pope thinks?You just asked us why you do not care for something.

I can give you 100 reasons off the top of my head if you'd like. You can apply them to anything too, not just that reply.