Quake reveals day of Jesus' crucifixion, researchers believe

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fascinating!

How does this fit in with the knowledge that Christian religious holidays were set to coincide with already existing Pagan holidays?

e.g., Christmas is set right after the winter solstice, the Yuletide festival, when days were just starting to get longer again, and Easter, whose date changes yearly, is the 1st Sunday, after the first full moon, after the vernal equinox.

Also, it's interesting that science is being used as a method to verify the Crucifixion. Faith, not science, is the basis of religion.

Faith is required to believe in the resurrection, which defies science.

Easter is set to align with Passover. Passover is aligned with spring, but the NT is pretty clear that Jesus was crucified at Passover.

Also Easter dates change each year and also differ between mainstream churches and orthodox churches.
Christmas is always December 25.

[b]The symbolism of Easter is strongly connected to spring/ regeneration, which is also celebrated by Pagan faiths. [i]Christmas date is unlikely to be actual birthday of Christ in winter (indicated by when Roman census count in Jerusalem took place) . However the symbolism of birth of light in the darkness did pay tribute to pagan winter solstice celebrations.

I believe that much of the symbolism is transcendent.

This is why we have rabbits and eggs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fascinating!

How does this fit in with the knowledge that Christian religious holidays were set to coincide with already existing Pagan holidays?

e.g., Christmas is set right after the winter solstice, the Yuletide festival, when days were just starting to get longer again, and Easter, whose date changes yearly, is the 1st Sunday, after the first full moon, after the vernal equinox.

Also, it's interesting that science is being used as a method to verify the Crucifixion. Faith, not science, is the basis of religion.

Faith is required to believe in the resurrection, which defies science.

The timing of Pascha is convoluted, but has nothing to do with pagan holidays.

https://www.orthodoxwitness.org/how-the-date-of-pascha-is-determined/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^^
Many DCUM posters do not respond to main points but go off on tangents … sigh …

I don’t understand how dating the earthquake pinpoints the date of death. Doesn’t that assume that the accounts of an earthquake happening at that exact moment are accurate?

No, the ancient seismometers are very reliable.

That's not the part I'm questioning. What I'm saying is (1) even if we accept that this earthquake happened on this day, what is (2) the proof that Jesus was crucified on the same day/at the same moment as the earthquake? In order to accept #2, we have to believe that (a) the onlookers are recalling everything exactly as it happened and (b) the story, as handed down, hasn't changed. There is no objective proof of (a) or (b) (I understand that people of faith don't need objective proof, I'm talking about whether pinpointing the date of an earthquake = objective proof of the date and time of the crucifixion).

You only believe science that supports your beliefs?

Do you mean “beliefs” in facts and evidence?

Like the facts and evidence surrounding the assassination of John F Kennedy? Which was caught on film, witnessed by hundreds of people, and still nobody knows exactly what happened?

No one claimed that science always explains everything. From the physical evidence, we can determine that JFK was shot.

In this case, the only thing that science tells us is that there was likely seismic activity in Ein Gedi between the years 26 and 36. That’s it. It doesn’t say anything beyond that.

That’s untrue. People should read the link and decide for themselves.

What else does “science” say from the article? Nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thallus (52AD)
Thallus is perhaps the earliest secular writer to mention Jesus and he is so ancient his writings don’t even exist anymore. But Julius Africanus, writing around 221AD does quote Thallus who previously tried to explain away the darkness occurring at Jesus’ crucifixion:

“On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.” (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

Sometime after 70AD, a Syrian philosopher named Mara Bar-Serapion, writing to encourage his son, compared the life and persecution of Jesus with that of other philosophers who were persecuted for their ideas. The fact Jesus is known to be a real person with this kind of influence is important. Mara Bar-Serapion refers to Jesus as the “Wise King”:

“What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?…After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men…The wise king…Lived on in the teachings he enacted.”

Julius Africanus also mentions a historian named Phlegon who wrote a chronicle of history around 140AD. In this history, Phlegon also mentions the darkness surrounding the crucifixion in an effort to explain it:

“Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth to the ninth hour.” (Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

Phlegon is also mentioned by Origen (an early church theologian and scholar, born in Alexandria):

“Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events . . . but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 14)

And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place … ” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 33)

“Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59)

Suetonius was a Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. His writings about Christians describe their treatment under the Emperor Claudius (41-54AD):

“Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (Christ), he (Claudius) expelled them from the city (Rome).” (Life of Claudius, 25

This expulsion took place in 49AD, and in another work, Suetonius wrote about the fire which destroyed Rome in 64 A.D. under the reign of Nero. Nero blamed the Christians for this fire and he punished Christians severely as a result:

“Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief.” (Lives of the Caesars, 26.2)

There is much we can learn from Suetonius as it is related to the life of early Christians. From this account, we know Jesus had an immediate impact on His followers: They were committed to their belief Jesus was God and withstood the torment and punishment of the Roman Empire. Jesus had a curious and immediate impact on His followers, empowering them to die courageously for what they knew to be true.

Celsus was quite antagonistic to the claims of the Gospels, but in his criticism he unknowingly affirmed and reinforced the Biblical authors and their content. His writing is extensive and he alludes to 80 different Biblical quotes, confirming their early appearance in history. In addition, he admits the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the early 2nd century:

“Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (i.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.”

https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/is-there-any-evidence-for-jesus-outside-the-bible/

The above are hostile, non-Christian accounts, btw.

And you believe it?

Believe what? The writings posted above? They are considered authentic historical accounts.

By wha august academic organization?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thallus (52AD)
Thallus is perhaps the earliest secular writer to mention Jesus and he is so ancient his writings don’t even exist anymore. But Julius Africanus, writing around 221AD does quote Thallus who previously tried to explain away the darkness occurring at Jesus’ crucifixion:

“On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.” (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

Sometime after 70AD, a Syrian philosopher named Mara Bar-Serapion, writing to encourage his son, compared the life and persecution of Jesus with that of other philosophers who were persecuted for their ideas. The fact Jesus is known to be a real person with this kind of influence is important. Mara Bar-Serapion refers to Jesus as the “Wise King”:

“What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?…After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men…The wise king…Lived on in the teachings he enacted.”

Julius Africanus also mentions a historian named Phlegon who wrote a chronicle of history around 140AD. In this history, Phlegon also mentions the darkness surrounding the crucifixion in an effort to explain it:

“Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth to the ninth hour.” (Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

Phlegon is also mentioned by Origen (an early church theologian and scholar, born in Alexandria):

“Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events . . . but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 14)

And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place … ” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 33)

“Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59)

Suetonius was a Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. His writings about Christians describe their treatment under the Emperor Claudius (41-54AD):

“Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (Christ), he (Claudius) expelled them from the city (Rome).” (Life of Claudius, 25

This expulsion took place in 49AD, and in another work, Suetonius wrote about the fire which destroyed Rome in 64 A.D. under the reign of Nero. Nero blamed the Christians for this fire and he punished Christians severely as a result:

“Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief.” (Lives of the Caesars, 26.2)

There is much we can learn from Suetonius as it is related to the life of early Christians. From this account, we know Jesus had an immediate impact on His followers: They were committed to their belief Jesus was God and withstood the torment and punishment of the Roman Empire. Jesus had a curious and immediate impact on His followers, empowering them to die courageously for what they knew to be true.

Celsus was quite antagonistic to the claims of the Gospels, but in his criticism he unknowingly affirmed and reinforced the Biblical authors and their content. His writing is extensive and he alludes to 80 different Biblical quotes, confirming their early appearance in history. In addition, he admits the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the early 2nd century:

“Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (i.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.”

https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/is-there-any-evidence-for-jesus-outside-the-bible/

The above are hostile, non-Christian accounts, btw.

And you believe it?

Believe what? The writings posted above? They are considered authentic historical accounts.

By wha august academic organization?

By WHAT august academic organization?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was also articles about a comet either 2 years before or after 0 AD that was thought to be the star of Bethlehem.

Also if you like this stuff read the great flood about archeological discovery into a major flood in the ancient world (when a river reversed course and flooded a major civilized area) that is thought to give rise to the Noah story.

I believe that the Noah flood myth was connected to other Mesopotamian people’s global flood myths so it makes sense it was based on a cataclysmic flood event on the Mesopotamian river at some point.

Scholars believe that the flood myth originated in Mesopotamia during the Old Babylonian Period (c.1880-1595 BCE) and reached Syro-Palestine in the latter half of the 2nd millennium BCE.[20] Extant texts show three distinct versions, the Sumerian Epic of Ziusudra, (the oldest, found in very fragmentary form on a single tablet dating from about 1600 BCE, although the story itself is older), and as episodes in two Akkadian language epics, the Atrahasis and the Epic of Gilgamesh.[21] The name of the hero, according to the version concerned, was Ziusudra, Atrahasis, or Utnapishtim, all of which are variations of each other, and it is just possible that an abbreviation of Utnapishtim/Utna'ishtim as "na'ish" was pronounced "Noah" in Palestine.

Numerous parallels make clear that the Genesis flood narrative is dependent on the Mesopotamian epics, and particularly on Gilgamesh, which is thought to date from c.1300-1000 BCE

The Hebrew version is clearly rich in symbolism but I don’t think we need to take it literally to appreciate beautiful lessons from it (eg rainbow as sign of God restoring his covenant of faithful relationship with his people).

It's rude to reference someone's religious text like "the Noah's flood myth." or "the Prophet Mohammed myth" etc. Geez

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^^
Many DCUM posters do not respond to main points but go off on tangents … sigh …

I don’t understand how dating the earthquake pinpoints the date of death. Doesn’t that assume that the accounts of an earthquake happening at that exact moment are accurate?

No, the ancient seismometers are very reliable.

That's not the part I'm questioning. What I'm saying is (1) even if we accept that this earthquake happened on this day, what is (2) the proof that Jesus was crucified on the same day/at the same moment as the earthquake? In order to accept #2, we have to believe that (a) the onlookers are recalling everything exactly as it happened and (b) the story, as handed down, hasn't changed. There is no objective proof of (a) or (b) (I understand that people of faith don't need objective proof, I'm talking about whether pinpointing the date of an earthquake = objective proof of the date and time of the crucifixion).

people wrote accounts of it shortly afterward.

if someone wrote about WWII 30 years afterwards for example, particularly someone who lived during WWII, isn't that still an account?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^^
Many DCUM posters do not respond to main points but go off on tangents … sigh …

I don’t understand how dating the earthquake pinpoints the date of death. Doesn’t that assume that the accounts of an earthquake happening at that exact moment are accurate?

No, the ancient seismometers are very reliable.

That's not the part I'm questioning. What I'm saying is (1) even if we accept that this earthquake happened on this day, what is (2) the proof that Jesus was crucified on the same day/at the same moment as the earthquake? In order to accept #2, we have to believe that (a) the onlookers are recalling everything exactly as it happened and (b) the story, as handed down, hasn't changed. There is no objective proof of (a) or (b) (I understand that people of faith don't need objective proof, I'm talking about whether pinpointing the date of an earthquake = objective proof of the date and time of the crucifixion).

Who cares what time or date exactly the earthquake happened? The fact is there is scientific evidence showing a big earthquake happened around the time and location where the Bible said it happened. That's all, nothing more.

[Anonymous]

People conflate witness accounts with: contemporaneous witness accounts.

A history by a witness is usually not contemporaneous. They aren't writing events in real time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^^
Many DCUM posters do not respond to main points but go off on tangents … sigh …

I don’t understand how dating the earthquake pinpoints the date of death. Doesn’t that assume that the accounts of an earthquake happening at that exact moment are accurate?

No, the ancient seismometers are very reliable.

That's not the part I'm questioning. What I'm saying is (1) even if we accept that this earthquake happened on this day, what is (2) the proof that Jesus was crucified on the same day/at the same moment as the earthquake? In order to accept #2, we have to believe that (a) the onlookers are recalling everything exactly as it happened and (b) the story, as handed down, hasn't changed. There is no objective proof of (a) or (b) (I understand that people of faith don't need objective proof, I'm talking about whether pinpointing the date of an earthquake = objective proof of the date and time of the crucifixion).

You only believe science that supports your beliefs?

Do you mean “beliefs” in facts and evidence?

Like the facts and evidence surrounding the assassination of John F Kennedy? Which was caught on film, witnessed by hundreds of people, and still nobody knows exactly what happened?

No one claimed that science always explains everything. From the physical evidence, we can determine that JFK was shot.

In this case, the only thing that science tells us is that there was likely seismic activity in Ein Gedi between the years 26 and 36. That’s it. It doesn’t say anything beyond that.

That’s untrue. People should read the link and decide for themselves.

What else does “science” say from the article? Nothing.

Anything? No, nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^^
Many DCUM posters do not respond to main points but go off on tangents … sigh …

I don’t understand how dating the earthquake pinpoints the date of death. Doesn’t that assume that the accounts of an earthquake happening at that exact moment are accurate?

No, the ancient seismometers are very reliable.

That's not the part I'm questioning. What I'm saying is (1) even if we accept that this earthquake happened on this day, what is (2) the proof that Jesus was crucified on the same day/at the same moment as the earthquake? In order to accept #2, we have to believe that (a) the onlookers are recalling everything exactly as it happened and (b) the story, as handed down, hasn't changed. There is no objective proof of (a) or (b) (I understand that people of faith don't need objective proof, I'm talking about whether pinpointing the date of an earthquake = objective proof of the date and time of the crucifixion).

people wrote accounts of it shortly afterward.

if someone wrote about WWII 30 years afterwards for example, particularly someone who lived during WWII, isn't that still an account?

“Accounts” from third-hand sources aren’t “proof”.

[Anonymous]

The problem is that Matthew wrote his gospel about 50 years after the death of Jesus, and didn't actually have any firsthand knowledge of the events.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^^
Many DCUM posters do not respond to main points but go off on tangents … sigh …

I don’t understand how dating the earthquake pinpoints the date of death. Doesn’t that assume that the accounts of an earthquake happening at that exact moment are accurate?

No, the ancient seismometers are very reliable.

That's not the part I'm questioning. What I'm saying is (1) even if we accept that this earthquake happened on this day, what is (2) the proof that Jesus was crucified on the same day/at the same moment as the earthquake? In order to accept #2, we have to believe that (a) the onlookers are recalling everything exactly as it happened and (b) the story, as handed down, hasn't changed. There is no objective proof of (a) or (b) (I understand that people of faith don't need objective proof, I'm talking about whether pinpointing the date of an earthquake = objective proof of the date and time of the crucifixion).

people wrote accounts of it shortly afterward.

if someone wrote about WWII 30 years afterwards for example, particularly someone who lived during WWII, isn't that still an account?

NP no it's not. Not unless the person was actually there. In this case, the "account" was written by someone who was not there, and wrote it using other sources he found about 50 years after the event occurred. It's technically more like a fictionalized version of a historical event.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^^
Many DCUM posters do not respond to main points but go off on tangents … sigh …

I don’t understand how dating the earthquake pinpoints the date of death. Doesn’t that assume that the accounts of an earthquake happening at that exact moment are accurate?

No, the ancient seismometers are very reliable.

That's not the part I'm questioning. What I'm saying is (1) even if we accept that this earthquake happened on this day, what is (2) the proof that Jesus was crucified on the same day/at the same moment as the earthquake? In order to accept #2, we have to believe that (a) the onlookers are recalling everything exactly as it happened and (b) the story, as handed down, hasn't changed. There is no objective proof of (a) or (b) (I understand that people of faith don't need objective proof, I'm talking about whether pinpointing the date of an earthquake = objective proof of the date and time of the crucifixion).

people wrote accounts of it shortly afterward.


if someone wrote about WWII 30 years afterwards for example, particularly someone who lived during WWII, isn't that still an account?

Sure, it’s an account but I wouldn’t assume they remember it exactly, and if hundreds of years later I’m reading someone’s retelling of what they heard from the person who shared the WWII story, I’m going to be even less inclined to think it’s the exact truth. A million eyewitness studies have shown how faulty people’s memories are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^^
Many DCUM posters do not respond to main points but go off on tangents … sigh …

I don’t understand how dating the earthquake pinpoints the date of death. Doesn’t that assume that the accounts of an earthquake happening at that exact moment are accurate?

No, the ancient seismometers are very reliable.

That's not the part I'm questioning. What I'm saying is (1) even if we accept that this earthquake happened on this day, what is (2) the proof that Jesus was crucified on the same day/at the same moment as the earthquake? In order to accept #2, we have to believe that (a) the onlookers are recalling everything exactly as it happened and (b) the story, as handed down, hasn't changed. There is no objective proof of (a) or (b) (I understand that people of faith don't need objective proof, I'm talking about whether pinpointing the date of an earthquake = objective proof of the date and time of the crucifixion).

people wrote accounts of it shortly afterward.


if someone wrote about WWII 30 years afterwards for example, particularly someone who lived during WWII, isn't that still an account?

Sure, it’s an account but I wouldn’t assume they remember it exactly, and if hundreds of years later I’m reading someone’s retelling of what they heard from the person who shared the WWII story, I’m going to be even less inclined to think it’s the exact truth. A million eyewitness studies have shown how faulty people’s memories are.

And it certainly wouldn’t be “proof” of anything.