Re: [OT] The dumb and the guilty (Was Re: How many ....)

The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:

In article <uvjf54$bboo$1@dont-email.me>,
The Last Doctor  <mike@xenocyte.com> wrote:

solar penguin <solar.penguin@gmail.com> wrote:

 
The idiot inquired:
 

In article <uviv1g$7nij$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70  <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 14/4/24 9:25 pm:

In article <uvgbnc$3jerc$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel65  <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

The Doctor wrote on 14/4/24 9:05 am:

 
31 Dec 1 B.C. + 1 day = 1 Jan 1 A.D.
 

YEAH!! Especially considering Christ was born 25th Dec .... so those
last few days of 1 B.C. WEREN'T anything B.C.!! ;-P

 
But there were those Gregorian correction to the Julian Calendar!

 
Ah!! So are YOU, asswipe, now claiming that 25th Dec 1 B.C. (Gregorian
Calendar) was equivalent to 1st Jan 1 A.D. (Julian Calendar), asswipe??
Or the other way around, Calendar wise!!
 
Might it be out of place for me to state "I DON'T THINK SO, asswipe!!"

 
And when did the Gregorian calender come into effect
Idlehands Paedo-mouth Redbeard?
 

 
Where? It was introduced in different countries in different years.
 

 
I’m not sure what all this focus on calendars has to do with anything
anyway. The setting of the beginning of 1 AD is arbitrary.
 
If the Biblical Jesus even existed, the only available evidence on the YEAR
of his birth is contradictory even within the Bible and the closest guess
scholars make is “somewhere between 4 and 6 BC”.
 
Let alone the month or day of it, which is a complete unknown as the
writers of the Gospels didn’t bother to include any such information and
there are no external records to cover it.
 

 
The bible Jesus exist!

A dissident called Jeshua ben Joseph probably did exist and was the origin
of the stories told in the Gospels.

Whether he was immaculately conceived, was the son of Jehovah, was the
prophesied Messiah, was resurrected - is much less probable.

That he would have been appalled at the sects and cults that have grown out
and away from his teachings and are now just about every single variety of
“Christian” church, and would be a rebel against them every bit as much as
he was against the established Jewish at the time - seems to me to be a
certainty.

But really, you’re focusing on the wrong thing. WHEN was this person born?

Luke and Matthew say it was during the rule of Herod, which in itself
doesn’t help much as there were loads of kings called Herod. However
Matthew narrows it down when after the slaughter of the innocents (an event
which, considering what a horrendous act of mass murder it would have been,
seems oddly absent from the historical record), Joseph wants to return to
Israel but is nervous because Herod’s son Archelaus is on the throne. Herod
Archelaus was the son of Herod the Great so that must be the Herod we want.
Archelaus ruled from 4 BC to 6 AD so Jesus’ birth must be before that.

But wait - Archelaus’ reign ended at about the same time that the great
census of Quirinius took place, in 6 AD. But that’s the census used by
Matthew as the reason Joseph went from Nazareth to Bethlehem before Jesus
was born. So Jesus must have been born in 6 or 7 AD.

But are the Gospels reliable on any of these things? Luke says Joseph came
from Nazareth to Bethlehem and then went back there.

But Matthew doesn’t. Matthew says that after the flight to Egypt (which is
too trivial a thing for Luke to mention) Joseph and Mary went to live in
Nazareth rather than return to their home in Judea - because Joseph wanted
to make a prophecy about the Messiah being a Nazarene come true. Weird, eh?

So we have definite proof from the Bible that Joseph was a man from
Nazareth who wasn’t a man from Nazareth, and that his wife gave birth to
Jesus in about 5 BC and in about 7 AD, which seems a bit unlikely.

Of course, counting the other way, the Bible tells us that Jesus started
teaching when he was about 30. Jesus was baptised by John the Baptist, who
started doing that in the 15th year of Tiberius (28 or 29 AD). So assuming
he hadn’t been doing it for too long Jesus was born between say, 2 BC and 2
AD. So that clears that up.

So if we can’t even get that part down to closer than about a decade, what
chance is there that 25th December is the right day, when no one even
mentions the time of year for any of this stuff in the Bible?

--
“The timelines and … canon … are rupturing” - the Doctor