In what year and what month was Jesus Christ born?
crunch
wrote:
> In article <97f9af47-b609-4dc3-b724-c4ba84acf...@z10g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> <<Kelly>> <<Kelly> wrote:
> >On Dec 21, 2:46 pm, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>http://www.kansas.com/news/breaking/story/1077491.html
>
> >> This is entirely appopriate at Friends University
> >> but does the reader know that many, many
> >> Friends worldwide do not celebrate Christmas?
>
> >> Personally, I do not celebrate Christmas because
> >> I know Jesus Christ was born in the springtime,
> >> not Dec. 25.
>
> >> Peace,
> >> David Christainsen
>
> >Jesus was born at the time of Sukkot, not in the spring.
>
> It would be useful if you would both provide actual citations to
> back up your own convictions. That would show that you had both
> researched the issue enough to know where to find sources that
> agreed with your claims. Arguing about what month Jesus was
> born but not citing a year of birth seems to be missing a major
> part of the puzzle.
>
> Ian
It is socially appropriate for me to reply to you here
because you are addressing me.
So, you are unaware that I have already covered this
ground thoroughly on several occasions. It is available
in the SRQ Archives.
Nonetheless, I feel boxed in because either you or a
chorus of other SRQers have objected to my extracts
of Dr. Thiering's articles on such narrow topics that are
still clearly relevant to what some modern Quakers believe
because they were once Universalist-Unitarian (crossover).
But, once again I will let Dr. Thiering do the heavy lifting
on the 2 precisions you raise here. Please read it carefully now
to comprehend exactly her meaning; we SRQers can disagree
later whether it is true.
A young Messiah sees the failure of warfare
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1877
"The census of Quirinius is directly referred to in both Acts 5:37 and
Lk 2:1-2. Josephus shows that it took place in AD 6 (Ant. 18, 1, 26).
At the dismissal of Archelaus, the Romans took over direct rule of the
country, through a procurator under the direction of Quirinius
governor of Syria.
Lk 2: 1-7 seems to say that Jesus was born in that year. It has been a
staple of biblical criticism that this passage is one of Luke’s
errors, if not fabrications. If Jesus had been born in AD 6, he would
have been 23 years old in AD 29, the year that Luke says began his
ministry (Lk 3:1, the 15th year of Tiberius, who acceded in AD 14).
Luke’s ‘error’ even goes as far as stating that Jesus was ‘about 30
years old’ at the outset of his ministry (Lk 3:23). Poor maths.
An ‘error’ like this is an open invitation to the pesharist, who
assumes the absolute reliability and accuracy of every word of the
text – once his special knowledge is applied. The meaning of ‘birth’,
like the meaning of ‘death’ belongs in the context of initiation and
excommunication. Jesus in AD 6 was undergoing the first of his many
‘births’, his first initiation at the age of 12. The occasion was his
Bar Mitzvah, with the additional significance given to it by the
ascetics. When a later story in Lk 2: 42-50 seems to deal with him at
the age of 12, it actually means AD 17, which was ‘year 12’ of a
dating method in force at that time (drawn on also in Lk 8:42, 43 and
Lk 13:10). In AD 17 Jesus was 23 years old, and the story concerns his
decisive initiation at that age.
Since he was 12 years old in AD 6, Jesus was born in 7 BC. In Lk 1:56
the exact date in that year is given: March 1. The term mēnas treis,
‘three months’, is to be read ‘month 3’, as always for nouns with
numbers. Mēn indicates the Julian month 3, March, the 1st of March.
The same phrase means March 1 in Acts 7:20; 19:8; 28:11. (Similarly
month 6, June 1, in Lk 4:25, Acts 18:11, and month 5, May 1, in Rev
9:5, 10). The 1st of the Julian month was made the official birthday
of a king or priest born in that month.
According to Lk 2:1-2, a decree (dogma) went forth from Caesar
Augustus that ‘all the world should be enrolled’. ‘All the world’ pas
hē oikoumenē, has the precise meaning of the Herodian mission
organisation. It owned considerable property, including Qumran where
its money was stored in vaults. With typical Roman efficiency, it was
now required that the ownership of all property should be registered
for legal purposes. When the zealot counter-government was set up,
they made their own legal records in the same way, as shown in the
documents found at Murabbaat and other sites near the Dead Sea.
A Roman decree was issued in accordance with the dates of the Julian
calendar, the 1st of the month. It was at midnight beginning Monday
March 1, AD 6, that Roman law came into force. The same day was the
official 12th birthday of Jesus."
"About a kilometre south of Qumran stood some small buildings that may
be identified as the ‘queen’s house’ of the Copper Scroll 6:11 (29).
SeeHumbert and Chambon Fouilles de Khirbet Qumran et de Ain Feshkha,
plates 532-538. The distance of this outpost from Qumran, at 2000
cubits or 5 stadia, about a kilometre, indicates that it was the
‘unclean’ place that must be separated from the ‘camp’ by 2000 cubits,
according to 1QM 7: 8-9. One of its purposes was to act as a literal
manger for animals, including those used for transport. Kings and
priests rode on an ass or colt from here, up the sloping chasm on the
west side of the esplanade, in order to reach the plateau with
dignity. One of them, used by Jesus in the episode of Jn 12: 12-15 and
parallels, reproduced the mule used for the coronation of the Davids
(1 Kings 1:38 , Zech 9:9).
As an ‘unclean’ place, this building represented a refuge for
foundlings, where orphans and illegitimate children were born or left,
to be taken in by the compassionate Essenes and brought up as acolytes
in their monasteries. This practice is attested by Pliny in his
description of the area in Nat.Hist. 5, 73. At the time of Jesus’
actual birth, the country was under the Pharisee high priest Simon
Boethus (23 – 5 BC), which meant that Jesus on Pharisee views was
deemed illegitimate, for he had been conceived before the wedding of
Joseph and Mary. Mary had had to go to this building to give birth to
him, and the ceremony for his twefth birthday took place in this
building."
-----
Israel: First Jesus-era house found in Nazareth
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-12-21-jesus-house-nazareth_N.htm?csp=34&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-TechTopStories+(Tech+-+Top+Stories)
Please see in the article the quotes of -
Yardenna Alexandre
excavations director at the Israel Antiquities Authority
Jodi Magness
professor of archaeology and early Judaism at the University of North
Carolina-Chapel Hill
Stephen Chapman
associate professor of the Old Testament at Duke Divinity School
-----
What does 'secret' moral 'leadership' look like?
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/religion/index?loc=interstitialskip
David Christainsen
Sir David
litany:
> Nonetheless, I feel boxed in because either you or a
> chorus of other SRQers have objected to my extracts
Carl rides his hobbyhorse!
Agamemnon
"crunch" <pchris...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:64784bee-ca5a-456c...@m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 22, 12:28 am, ijda...@softbase.cs.uwaterloo.ca (Ian Davis)
wrote:
> In article
> <97f9af47-b609-4dc3-b724-c4ba84acf...@z10g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>
<<<Since he was 12 years old in AD 6, Jesus was born in 7 BC. In Lk 1:56
the exact date in that year is given: March 1. The term mēnas treis,
‘three months’, is to be read ‘month 3’, as always for nouns with
numbers. Mēn indicates the Julian month 3, March, the 1st of March.>>>
Says who? Do you actually have any clue about how the Roman calendar was
counted?
The first month of the Roman year was MARCH, and the tenth month December.
Do you understand Latin?
The third month of the Roman calendar was therefore May. So was Jesus born
in May?
Since Luke was a Jewish Greek were are probably dealing with either the
Jewish or Greek calendars and the Jewish year began around September or
October because it was based on the cycles of the moon and the Greek year
began around about June or July and was also lunar based.
So Jesus was more likely born in September/October time or June/July time
and this assumes that Mary stayed with her sister until she gave birth,
which obviously she didn't since he had to go to Bethlehem with Joseph.
Going by the Jewish calendar and assuming that it took 2 months for a
pregnancy woman to get to Bethlehem by foot, then Jesus would have been born
in December. But it more likely would have taken 2 weeks not 2 months to get
there.
Jack Linthicum
Drags in Aggie the Greek for whom all events and people are Hellene.
crunch
> "crunch" <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:64784bee-ca5a-456c...@m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 22, 12:28 am, ijda...@softbase.cs.uwaterloo.ca (Ian Davis)
> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <97f9af47-b609-4dc3-b724-c4ba84acf...@z10g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>
> <<<Since he was 12 years old in AD 6, Jesus was born in 7 BC. In Lk 1:56
> the exact date in that year is given: March 1. The term mēnas treis,
> ‘three months’, is to be read ‘month 3’, as always for nouns with
> numbers. Mēn indicates the Julian month 3, March, the 1st of March.>>>
>
> Says who? Do you actually have any clue about how the Roman calendar was
> counted?
Yet, Dr. Thiering is dealing here with the Julian calendar
as embedded into (Thiering) pesher beneath the surface
level of the New Testament. Please see -
Learning about the Calendar
http://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/index_Calendar.html
"The months were numbered I to XII beginning at approximately the
March equinox as month I. Only the Julian calendar started month 1,
January, in the middle of winter- an affront to the sun, which should
dominate all numbering."
-----
The foundation century of Christianity
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1859
"Herod established a palace at Jericho, eight miles north of Qumran,
and since it was in the tribal territory of Benjamin he allowed Hillel
to teach there, and was initiated himself into the ‘tribe’, or ascetic
order, of Benjamin. Herod had now incorporated the Julian calendar,
beginning the year January 1, with months starting on the 1st rather
than the equinox or solstice, and days at midnight rather than 6 am.
His millennium began January 1, 41 BC, year 40 since the non-
fulfilment of 81 BC."
-----
Christmas
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1709
"Christmas came to be observed at the December solstice because the
Gentiles [among the First Christians] preferred for their sacred drama
a season that was not used for one of the traditional Jewish feasts -
Passover, Pentecost, Atonement-Tabernacles. They had adopted the
Julian calendar of the Roman world, with its New Year January 1. The
religious feast some days before it was originally at the pentecontad
29/IX, at a varying date in December according to the position of the
solar calendar, then under later Roman influences it was fixed at Dec
25."
David Christainsen
crunch
>
> Jewish or Greek calendars and the Jewish year began around September or
> October because it was based on the cycles of the moon and the Greek year
> began around about June or July and was also lunar based.
Yet, Luke was not Jewish Greek; instead, Luke was
Roman. So, who was Luke?
Luke the perfectly accurate historian
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1373
Luke's wild exaggerations
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1398
Luke's life story
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1410
Peace,
David Christainsen
(<<Kelly>>)
> Yet, Luke was not Jewish Greek; instead, Luke was
> Roman.
Wrong again, Soggy. Luke was a Greek.
> So, who was Luke?
Guy: Hey, Uncle Bob?... When are we gonna get these records?
Uncle Bob: Ah... Luke 21:19
The Bass Player: Let your patience possess ye your souls.
Lenny: Luke? Who's Luke? ...When are we gettin the records?
Uncle Bob: Wednesday.
--That Thing You Do!, 1996
Steve Hayes
wrote:
>Since Luke was a Jewish Greek were are probably dealing with either the
>Jewish or Greek calendars and the Jewish year began around September or
>October because it was based on the cycles of the moon and the Greek year
>began around about June or July and was also lunar based.
Assuming that Luke was aware of the Jewish calendar, he tells us that the
Annunciation took place in the 6th month. He could have been referring to the
sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy, or the sixth calender month, or both.
The Church takes it to be both, vecause it celebrates the nativity of St John
the Forerunner on 24 June.
If the annunciation was on 25 March, then you add the normal human gestation
period of 9 months, and the nativity of Christ is on 25 December.
QED
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
(<<Kelly>>)
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 15:54:47 -0000, "Agamemnon" <agamem...@hello.to.NO_SPAM>
> wrote:
>
> >Since Luke was a Jewish Greek were are probably dealing with either the
> >Jewish or Greek calendars and the Jewish year began around September or
> >October because it was based on the cycles of the moon and the Greek year
> >began around about June or July and was also lunar based.
>
> Assuming that Luke was aware of the Jewish calendar, he tells us that the
> Annunciation took place in the 6th month. He could have been referring to the
> sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy, or the sixth calender month, or both.
> The Church takes it to be both, vecause it celebrates the nativity of St John
> the Forerunner on 24 June.
>
> If the annunciation was on 25 March, then you add the normal human gestation
> period of 9 months, and the nativity of Christ is on 25 December.
>
> QED
Shepherds did not keep their sheep in the fields at night in December
- especially in the cold, higher mountain region on Bethlehem. Sheep
were kept in the fields at night in the warmer months before the
weather turned cold. You've proven nothing.
Steve Hayes
Nor have you "proven" anything (what happened to good old "proved"?)
And I wasn't trying to prove anything, simply to make a contribution to a
discussion. Can you "prove" any of your assertions about sheep and shepherds?
(<<Kelly>>)
> >> Assuming that Luke was aware of the Jewish calendar, he tells us that the
> >> Annunciation took place in the 6th month. He could have been referring to the
> >> sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy, or the sixth calender month, or both.
> >> The Church takes it to be both, vecause it celebrates the nativity of St John
> >> the Forerunner on 24 June.
>
> >> If the annunciation was on 25 March, then you add the normal human gestation
> >> period of 9 months, and the nativity of Christ is on 25 December.
>
> >> QED
> >Shepherds did not keep their sheep in the fields at night in December
> >- especially in the cold, higher mountain region on Bethlehem. Sheep
> >were kept in the fields at night in the warmer months before the
> >weather turned cold. You've proven nothing.
> Nor have you "proven" anything (what happened to good old "proved"?)
I didn't use, "QED", did I?
> And I wasn't trying to prove anything, simply to make a contribution to a
> discussion.
That's not completely honest is it, Steve? Your use of QED indicates
you were, indeed, thinking you had proven something. After all, that
is exactly why "quod erat demonstrandum" is used at the end of a
statement - in order to signal the completion of the proof.
> Can you "prove" any of your assertions about sheep and shepherds?
Yep.
George
> Nor have you "proven" anything (what happened to good old "proved"?)
>
> And I wasn't trying to prove anything, simply to make a contribution to a
> discussion. Can you "prove" any of your assertions about sheep and shepherds?
>
Sheep were kept in buildings during winter throughout The Middle East
and Europe.
No doubt 5 seconds on Google should give you sufficient proof of such
a fact
crunch
> On Dec 22, 5:48 pm, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Yet, Luke was not Jewish Greek; instead, Luke was
> > Roman.
>
> Wrong again, Soggy. Luke was a Greek.
Wrong again, Lazy. Luke was a Roman and the Beloved
Physician.
Luke The Beloved Physician
http://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/index_Lukebio.html
"Cornelius was, then, a highly placed Roman, entrusted by the emperor
with a diplomatic task. As may be seen, he had become an initiate of
the ascetic mission in Judea and had taken a new name, as was
customary at baptism. It was the Roman name Luke, showing that he was
retaining his ethnic identity. He was a 'centurion' because he was in
charge of 100 initiates using Roman military terminology in their
symbolic Holy War of evangelism."
David Christainsen
Newton, Mass. USA
(<<Kelly>>)
> Wrong again, Lazy. Luke was a Roman and the Beloved
> Physician.
More Thiering revisionism. IOW, more confused garbage.
Why should I believe anything BT says? She doesn't understand the
difference emetics and purgatives and she doesn't get that if she
takes something from the Torah and compares it with something from the
New Testament that she needs to consider the Hebrew of the Scripture
from the Torah first. Apparently, she's not very bright.
"Scholar"...? Not even close.
duke
wrote:
>On Dec 22, 10:54�am, "Agamemnon" <agamem...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>>
>> Since Luke was a Jewish Greek were are probably dealing with either the
>> Jewish or Greek calendars and the Jewish year began around September or
>> October because it was based on the cycles of the moon and the Greek year
>> began around about June or July and was also lunar based.
>>...
>
>Yet, Luke was not Jewish Greek; instead, Luke was
>Roman. So, who was Luke?
Unclear. Variations range to Gentile Christian, Greek, convert for Judaism,
Syrian of Antioch.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
duke
<rosie...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 23, 8:50�am, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Wrong again, Lazy. �Luke was a Roman and the Beloved
>> Physician.
Both of you are wrong.
Sir David
> Wrong again, Lazy. Luke was a Roman and the Beloved
> Physician.
>
Carl the Kook, you're having a kooky meltdown! Sucks to be you!
duke
wrote:
Probably in the year that we would currently call 4BC, and in the spring in a
cave when the new lambs were birthing. He was wrapped in swaddling clothes,
which are the rags used to wipe up the baby lamb mess on the cave floor.
(<<Kelly>>)
> Both of you are wrong.
Well, Earl...according to you, anything that doesn't follow the
Catholic line of thought is wrong, so I guess that eliminates pretty
much everything, right?
(<<Kelly>>)
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:18:24 -0800 (PST), crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> Probably in the year that we would currently call 4BC, and in the spring in a
> cave when the new lambs were birthing. He was wrapped in swaddling clothes,
> which are the rags used to wipe up the baby lamb mess on the cave floor.
"Baby lamb mess"? Is that part of the Catechism?
AGG
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 15:54:47 -0000, "Agamemnon"
> <agam...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>
> > Since Luke was a Jewish Greek were are probably dealing with either
> > the Jewish or Greek calendars and the Jewish year began around
> > September or October because it was based on the cycles of the moon
> > and the Greek year began around about June or July and was also
> > lunar based.
>
> Assuming that Luke was aware of the Jewish calendar, he tells us that
> the Annunciation took place in the 6th month. He could have been
> referring to the sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy, or the sixth
> calender month, or both. The Church takes it to be both, vecause it
> celebrates the nativity of St John the Forerunner on 24 June.
>
> If the annunciation was on 25 March, then you add the normal human
> gestation period of 9 months, and the nativity of Christ is on 25
> December.
>
> QED
***I think it's the other way around. December 25 was chosen for the
celebration and then the date of the Annunciation was set.
--
George
Wiping up sheep afterbirth?
George
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:18:24 -0800 (PST), crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> Probably in the year that we would currently call 4BC, and in the spring in a
> cave when the new lambs were birthing. He was wrapped in swaddling clothes,
> which are the rags used to wipe up the baby lamb mess on the cave floor.
Wiping up sheep afterbirth?
Or the accumulated manure on the floor
You obviously have never seen (or smelt) a barnyard let alone done
much thinking about what the mother of a newborn would subject her
infant to.
It's all a load of nonsense based on older Jewish and Greek myths
crunch
On the contrary and to review -
Luke the perfectly accurate historian
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1373
Luke's wild exaggerations
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1398
Luke's life story
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1410
-----
Luke was a Roman and the Beloved Physician.
Luke The Beloved Physician
http://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/index_Lukebio.html
"Cornelius was, then, a highly placed Roman, entrusted by the emperor
with a diplomatic task. As may be seen, he had become an initiate of
the ascetic mission in Judea and had taken a new name, as was
customary at baptism. It was the Roman name Luke, showing that he was
retaining his ethnic identity. He was a 'centurion' because he was in
charge of 100 initiates using Roman military terminology in their
symbolic Holy War of evangelism."
-----
Dr. Thiering has already demonstrated that Jesus Christ
was born March 1, 7 BC.
David Christainsen
Newton, Mass. USA
Sir David
> On the contrary and to review <FLUSH>
Carl, I flushed for you, now please wipe yourself.
Whiskers
Swaddling of infants is 'standard operating procedure' in many cultures,
and has nothing at all to do with lambs or messy floors
<http://www.babycentre.co.uk/baby/sleep/swaddlingexpert/>.
Matthew makes no mention of the sort of place Jesus was born in.
Luke says that he was "laid in a manger", which suggests that farm
livestock weren't a million miles away. That English has a word ("crib")
that is applied both to a piece of furniture for a baby to sleep in and
to a container from which cattle can feed, is a clue that the actual form
of both items can be somewhat similar - they may even have been portable
and dual-purpose, depending on demand.
Luke is also responsible for the "because there was no room in the inn"
part of the story (but 'inn' is a rather poor translation of the original
Greek word which is a loose term meaning something like 'guest quarters
[of the house or place]').
Mark and John don't mention the birth at all.
A very early "tradition" has it that He was born in a "cave"; I see no
reason why that couldn't have been an integral and comfortable part of a
house or canp-site. There are still caves around Bethlehem, now used as
stables.
This page is a longer consideration of the story
<http://www.btinternet.com/~prgreetham/Wisemen/ana3.html>.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
Martin Edwards
--
As through this world I've rambled, I've met plenty of funny men,
Some rob you with a sixgun, some with a fountain pen.
Woody Guthrie
George
> On Dec 23, 2:35 pm, George <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
> > Wiping up sheep afterbirth?
> > Or the accumulated manure on the floor
> > You obviously have never seen (or smelt) a barnyard let alone done
> > much thinking about what the mother of a newborn would subject her
> > infant to.
> > It's all a load of nonsense based on older Jewish and Greek myths
>
> On the contrary and to review -
>
You're full of it crunchy thing!
Which may account for your brown eyes
Its evident that you've never mucked out or had a lot to do with
animals in stalls or styes or stables.
And 'swaddling' clothes being used to mop up a stable floor?
Yeah Riiiight.
I suggest you watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaOu1KAepAg which
may be an illumination to you as to how babies are swaddled in the
real world.
I'm using a video link because a literal article may be to much for
you to asimilate
Elijahovah
The year 1 AD is not ordinal, it is not the 1st year of Lord
it is one year of Lord from what we now call Jan 1 of 1 BC
to Jan 1 of 1 AD. This is proven by the fact that 532 AD
is not the 532nd year but is 532 years
(19x 28 years of 52 weeks = 28x 19 Julian year moon )
from 1 BC Jan 1 to 532 AD Jan 1 thus choosing January 1
as the date between Magi christening of the child Jesus
on Dec 25 of 2 BC or on Jan 6 of 1 BC.
Jesus said I am the morningstar during his 3.5 years which
for 1000 years the Catholic Church had said was on 6 months
baptized at 30 and dying at 30 to be reborn Osiris.
Osiris means reborn and its 30 is symbolic of 30 day moon
while the planet Saturn has a 30-year orbit. More precise,
29.5 day and 29.5 year so that six are 177 days and 177 years.
This morningstar is Venus which must occur 1800 years after
1770 BC July 10. If calendrical then it would seem to be
31 AD July 10 but Venus is 365-day without leap days so that its
cycle is 1770 BC July 10 (Leo sun) to 1170 BC (Jan 11 sun) to
571 BC July 15 (Leo sun), to 30 AD to 30 AD (Jan 16 sun).
Thus to denounce the Venus morningstar his 3.5 years must include
this date.
In his days he believed that he was the 69 weeks (483 years) of
Daniel which Adventists say uses an Ezra in year 7 as 457 BC
to 27 AD. This is not correct because year 7 as 457 BC is 13 years
before year 20 as 444 BC. But it is correctly 468 BC being 13 years
before year 20 in 455 BC. Not the difference is 11 years yet records
claim a debate of 10 years 468 BC or 458 BC and 455 BC or 445 BC.
Further, there are lunar dates that match. If using the Persian
calendar
pre-Zoroastrian era 388 BC, the difference is 9 years being
Babylonian lunar dates on Persian dates are 9 years (less 5 days)
before Jewish lunar dates on Egyptian dates. Thus the matches are
468 BC versus 459 BC, and 455 BC versus 446 BC where
455 BC counts Daniel to 29 AD before Jan 1 of
30 years of our Lord (not Year 30 of our Lord) AD.
While 459 BC counts to 25 AD not 27 AD, using ascension method
you can make this 26 AD and it still doesnt match. So the 4 BC birth
and the 27 AD baptism cant match lunar dates in Egypt the way
2 BC and 29 AD match the lunar dates of Zoroaster.
All ancient writers debate between 4 BC to 2 BC, none do this modern
crap of 7 BC which out-numbers those who dare go there these days
as know-it-alls.
As for the 70 weeks it can be used as Jubilees and it thus places
Artaxerxes
year 32 as Nehemiahs year 12 in 2009 AD with a possible extension of
40
days past Dec 25 Egyptian Julian or Dec 30 Persian Julian for
Armageddon.
The error is not in the AD calendar but in those who created BC. One
of the interesting factors is that 60 orbits of Saturn are not 1770
years from Adams year 2256 (4025-1770 BC) which marks Noahs Flood star
as 600-year half-cycle of the rotating Venus pentacle. Instead 60
orbits are 1768 years from 1770 BC to 2 BC, BINGO. A Saturnalia.
But THE STAR does not mean one planet, THE STAR means the crossing,
and even includes three witnesses such as Venus and Jupiter an Mars of
1770 BC July 10 in absent conjunction by sun, or as in Venus and
Jupiter and Saturn rising on 2369 BC Jan 6 in Capricorn above the
Aquraius sun. THE STAR meaning the crossing is proven by the asterik
reduced to a cross in Sumerian handwriting. So the best definition for
astar or a star would be THE ASTRAL CONFIGURATION. This is why the
three easily represented a different planet such as myrh Mars and gold
Venus and frankincense Jupiter. They didnt have to agree on the star,
they agreed it was Christ and it was Jewish. They were wrong, it was
not Year 6000, and Jesus knew that. His baptism is to denounce his
christened birth by pagans, and he even avoided his birthday doing so
before he turned 30 and allowing 40 days too. Traditions give an
August baptism, the 15th year was John, not Jesus who was baptized
then in the 16th year, the summer of 29 AD.
Martin Edwards
George
> On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:32:28 +0000, Martin Edwards <big_mart...@Yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Elijahovah wrote:
> >> Jesus was born between August and October of 2 BC.
>
>
> He was almost certainly born in the spring,
> and was the posterchild for Pisces.
>
> He COULD have been born in 5, 6, or even 7bc, but we will NEVER know for
> sure, and it doesn't make one WHIT of difference in anything anyway.
Inventions are not born.
They are created.
Just like all the other religions and gods.
zayton
They were briefly grazed in the "agricola" (planted fields) in the fall
after the harvest.
pyotr filipivich
about Wed, 23 Dec 2009 11:26:10 -0600 did write/type or cause to
appear in alt.religion.christian.episcopal the following:
>On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:18:24 -0800 (PST), crunch <pchris...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>Probably in the year that we would currently call 4BC, and in the spring in a
>cave when the new lambs were birthing. He was wrapped in swaddling clothes,
>which are the rags used to wipe up the baby lamb mess on the cave floor.
Bzzt, - "swaddling cloths" were the cultural equivalent of
Huggies. Didn't matter if you were born in a barn or in the guest
room,or in the bedroom, you got swaddled. They weren't primitive
barbarians!
-
pyotr filipivich
Monotheism, someone has said, offers two simple axioms:
1) There is a God.
2) It's not you.
crunch
> [Default]Let the Record show that duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> on or
> about Wed, 23 Dec 2009 11:26:10 -0600 did write/type or cause to
> appear in alt.religion.christian.episcopal the following:
>
> >wrote:
>
> >Probably in the year that we would currently call 4BC, and in the spring in a
> >cave when the new lambs were birthing. He was wrapped in swaddling clothes,
> >which are the rags used to wipe up the baby lamb mess on the cave floor.
>
> Bzzt, - "swaddling cloths" were the cultural equivalent of
> Huggies. Didn't matter if you were born in a barn or in the guest
> room,or in the bedroom, you got swaddled. They weren't primitive
> barbarians!
Contrary to your opinion, "swaddling cloths" has
a different meaning; warning! change of context -
Christmas
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1709
"Going back, as is always necessary, to the pre-Christian institution.
Monasteries had begun by serving the necessary social purpose of
giving a home and new hope to alienated people. Among such people were
illegitimates, alienated from normal society through no fault of their
own. In the Israelite tradition and doubtless elsewhere, the newborn
babies were rescued from being exposed, brought into the monastey and
kept there as acolytes, servers in worship, being given some of the
learning of the priests (Ezek 16). Their educational advantages made
them so privileged that the monasteries were asked to accept children
at the opposite end of the social scale, the sons and daughters of
kings and social leaders. The story of the child Samuel, from this
class, shows that when they served as acolytes they were given a linen
garment, called an ephod in 1 Sam 2:18 . I am suggesting that when
Jesus was ‘wrapped in cloths’ (esparganosen, Lk 2:7, translated
‘swaddling cloths’) he was being given this first vestment at the age
of 12."
"He was born, I believe, in an outpost of Qumran, the building a
kilometre down from the plateau, used for ‘unclean’ purposes. It was a
latrine, a place for the sick, and for menstruating women. It is
called ‘the queen’s house’ in the Copper Scroll 6:29. It was the
equivalent of the location in the Wilderness of Judea, at the wady
(described in # 1648 ) to which young girls made their way to give
birth to unwanted children. Further, since Qumran was the temporary
‘Jerusalem’, it was the equivalent of the building on the Mount of
Olives where the royal mule was kept, the animal used for the
coronation ceremony described in 1 Kings 1:38-40. That purpose made it
also a ‘manger’.
Mary had had to go to that building because at the time of the birth,
in March 7 BC, they were currently under a Pharisee high priest, Simon
Boethus, so Jesus would be born illegitimate, an extra-nuptial child
of Joseph. His presence there was to be kept a secret, and the Magi,
the ‘wise men’ were led there quietly by Joseph, who used the emblem
of the Star of David. There was no astronomical event, only a group of
men disguised in monastic garments making their way to the outbuilding
under cover of darkness.
In March AD 6, a momentous political change coincided with Jesus’
twelfth birthday. Herod Archelaus was dismissed, the country was
occupied by the Romans, a census of property was declared, and a pro-
Roman Sadducee high priest, Ananus the Elder, was appointed in place
of the Pharisee Joazar Boethus. Sadducees stood for political peace,
‘peace on earth and goodwill to all men’. They also held liberal views
on morality. Jesus at once became legitimate, and at the ceremonies
for his twelfth birthday, his Bar Mitzvah, he was proclaimed the
prince in succession to Joseph, who was at that time the David crown
prince. The ‘shepherds’ who were at the building at Ain Feshkha, two
hours further down the coast, acknowledged the change of political
regime by going up to the queen’s house and greeting the boy as a
royal prince."
Peace (after the Quaker fashion),
George
>
> Contrary to your opinion, "swaddling cloths" has
> a different meaning; warning! change of context -
Lying for your 'god' isn't very nice especially when you're
demonstrably wrong .
And
Misquoting chunks of the bible when you have no argument and
reinterpreting your inane claims as gospel does you no good.
Now be a good boy and go away.
Sir David
> Contrary to your opinion, "swaddling cloths" has
> a different meaning; warning! change of context -
Warning! Non-sequitur shift to Carl's obsessive fantasy world, where
he will babble about Babs. After all, it's been, what, almost an hour
since he rode the hobbyhorse, and like a junkie, he can't live without
his fix.
Sucks to be you, Carl.
crunch
I challenge you to treat usenet on this subject as
an academic seminar. Please note the subject line.
Peter Alaca
> On Dec 27, 2:31 pm, George<gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
>> On Dec 28, 8:22 am, crunch<pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Contrary to your opinion, "swaddling cloths" has
>>> a different meaning; warning! change of context -
>>
>> Lying for your 'god' isn't very nice especially when you're
>> demonstrably wrong .
>> And
>> Misquoting chunks of the bible when you have no argument and
>> reinterpreting your inane claims as gospel does you no good.
>> Now be a good boy and go away.
>
> I challenge you to treat usenet on this subject as
> an academic seminar. Please note the subject line.
Please note the charter of sci.archaeology
>
crunch
I am well within the charter of sci.archaeology
and you misobserve my usenet behaviour.
Peter Alaca
Translation of ""swaddling cloths" and the year and month
of birth of one "Jesus" are not archaeology, so fuck off.
George
What?
Making claims as to what swaddling clothes are and how they're used to
mop up sheep afterbirth?
Not archaeology
> and you misobserve my usenet behaviour.
C'mon little crunchy thing.
You are pulled up for your usernet behaviour every day of the week.
RVG
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 15:54:47 -0000, "Agamemnon"<agam...@hello.to.NO_SPAM>
> wrote:
>
>> Since Luke was a Jewish Greek were are probably dealing with either the
>> Jewish or Greek calendars and the Jewish year began around September or
>> October because it was based on the cycles of the moon and the Greek year
>> began around about June or July and was also lunar based.
>
> Assuming that Luke was aware of the Jewish calendar, he tells us that the
> Annunciation took place in the 6th month. He could have been referring to the
> sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy, or the sixth calender month, or both.
> The Church takes it to be both, vecause it celebrates the nativity of St John
> the Forerunner on 24 June.
>
> If the annunciation was on 25 March, then you add the normal human gestation
> period of 9 months, and the nativity of Christ is on 25 December.
>
> QED
Hardly: the Gospel says that when Jesus was born the shepherds had their
sheep grazing on high pastures, ie in Spring or Summer.
Anyway, there's not even one unbiased evidence that Jesus even ever
existed at all. The whole New Testament may be entirely fictional.
--
New piano music:
Berceuse d'Hiver en R�:
http://www.jamendo.com/en/album/56233
Echo d'un murmure:
http://www.jamendo.com/en/album/56983
"La premi�re arme de la R�sistance c'est l'information." Lucie Aubrac
crunch
> Steve Hayes a crit :
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
>
> >> Since Luke was a Jewish Greek were are probably dealing with either the
> >> Jewish or Greek calendars and the Jewish year began around September or
> >> October because it was based on the cycles of the moon and the Greek year
> >> began around about June or July and was also lunar based.
>
> > Assuming that Luke was aware of the Jewish calendar, he tells us that the
> > Annunciation took place in the 6th month. He could have been referring to the
> > sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy, or the sixth calender month, or both.
> > The Church takes it to be both, vecause it celebrates the nativity of St John
> > the Forerunner on 24 June.
>
> > If the annunciation was on 25 March, then you add the normal human gestation
> > period of 9 months, and the nativity of Christ is on 25 December.
>
> > QED
>
> Hardly: the Gospel says that when Jesus was born the shepherds had their
> sheep grazing on high pastures, ie in Spring or Summer.
>
> Anyway, there's not even one unbiased evidence that Jesus even ever
> existed at all. The whole New Testament may be entirely fictional.
Any historian with a sincere interest in the Historical
Jesus would investigate the Letter of Jesus.
My former Christian Origins yahoo forum
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/3816
"By the way, you will be pleased to know that my article
on the Abgar legend ... will appear in an electronic version
soon, on the internet. Volume 11, number 1, of the Journal
of Higher Criticism."
S. 67-82: Thiering, Barbara E.: Authenticity of the Abgar
documents and the letter of Jesus / Barbara Thiering
---
My Christian Origins yahoo forum
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/3346
"You will have noticed that the recent correspondence
between Sergey and myself, in #3334,3336,3338,3341,
3342, led to a positive conclusion about the authenticity
of the Abgar documents, in particular of the letter of Jesus
quoted by Eusebius. Sergey supplied a missing link, with
the '343rd year' in a document in an 1876 book, not
published in AN-F."
---
For calendar experts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/3522
----------
So, Luke does not show that Jesus was born Spring or
Summer.
Sir David
> Any historian with a sincere interest in the Historical
> Jesus would investigate the Letter of Jesus.
>
You mean the forum that you destroyed, by being an obsessive troll.
The forum that Thiering left because she could not stand your
obsessive ignorance on the subject of her writings. The obsessive
ignorance that you wear like a badge of honor on usenet.
crunch
Liar!
Peter Alaca
Liar!
vjp...@at.biostrategist.dot.dot.com
p26 When Pharisaic Judaism became dominant following the disastrous
revolts of AD 66-70 and 130-135, Jewish expectations of Messiah and
the Kingdom of God were recrast, and the apocalypses were excluded
from the Jewish canon, except for Daniel. Originally working
independently of each other, Johannes Weis (1827-1918) and Albert
Schweitzer (1875-1965) reached the conclusion that apocalypticism was
the primary source for understanding the ministry and teaching of
Jesus.
p30 how deeply Jewish life and thought in Syria and Palestine was
penetrated by Hellenization, even among those who were consciously
resistant to the attempts of Heelnistic rulers to force their culture
on the Jews [Hengel, Judaism & Hellenism, 1974] Remains of ancient
synangogues with Greek inscriptions, representational art
(theoretically forbidden by the Mosaic law against graven images),
including portaits of the deity and the signs of the zodiac, show how
thoroughly imbued with Hellenistic culture were the most pious
Jews. The dostinction between "Palestinian" and "Hellenistic" is
useless
p47 Tacitus mentions that "Christus" was executed during the reign of
Tiberius, probably around 29, having been sentenced by the procurator
Pontius Pilate. Tacitus' account is the most precise and extensive
information that the pagan authors provide about Jesus. Although his
details match exactly what is known from Christian accounts, Tacitus,
like Pliny and Seutonius, provides us with nothing that supplements
what we know of Jesus from the gospels. The writings of the Roman
historians are, however, important evidence for Jesus' existence as a
historical person
p53 Later on, Jewish polemic went to even greater lengths to discredit
Jesus, but it never denied his existence or the basic facts of a
ministry of teaching and healing and of his execution
p123 in The Apostolic Preaching and Its Development in the New
Testament [1951] C H Dodd lists certain propositions about Jesus that
he claims all New Testament writers affirm desoite the difference
between them.. Others think that the messages of Jesus in the
synoptics does not go beyond the categories of Judaism, and they
consider Paul the source of the essential Christian message
p138 Plato's portrayla of Socrates is considered by some
scholars. most notably Moses Hadas and Morton Smith [Heroes & Gods
1965], "the source for all subsequent aretologies, pagan and
Christian"
p171 Jewish Law, as analyzed by modern scholarship, falls into two
categories: (1) apodictic laws, which ar ebased solely on God's decree
("Thou shalt. . . thou shalt not . . .") and (2) casuistic laws, which
state the consequences of obeying or disobeying ("Honor they father
. . .that thy days may be long . . ."). The apodictic form of ethics
that Matthew attributes to Jesus, perticularly in the Sermon on the
Mount, seems to be a conscious paralleling of the giving of the Law
through moses on Mount Sinai
p175 A still more remarkable expansion in Matthews's version of
Peter's confession is the response of Jesus to Peter, in which Peter's
blessedness is asserted to be that of one who has received a divine
revalation (16:17), and he is promised both a foundational role in the
establishment of Christ's church (a word used only by Matthew among
the evangelists) and an authoritative function in its
administration. Whatever the origins of this passage added by Matthew
may ahve been, he used the pericope to assert unequivocally the
messiahship of Jesus and his central place in God's plan as one
assigned to establish the new poeple of God. The Greek word for
church, ekklesia, has long been recognized as a translation of the
Semitic word used in the Old Testament for the covenant community of
Israel, qahal [Theol Dict Eerdmans 1965 pp487-536]
p179 [Mt] the rigor of the moral requirement of the Law is not to be
relaxed in the slightest degree.. God requires more that abstention
from the act of killing; he rquires the positive act of reconciliation
(5:21-26). Similarly, it is not enough for Matthew's Jesus that a man
refrain from committing adultery. He is to exercise such self-control
that he avoids even lustful looks.. standard for man's behavior is
noting less than the perfect character of God himself
(5:48).. Almsgiving and prayer are purely private matters, not
occasions for religios ostentation (6:1-8) Likewise, fasting is to be
practiced in secret
p184 Mattehw could have been written in any Greek-speaking Jewish
center, although it likely came from a city with close ties to
Palestine, since the rabbinic decisions at Jamnia seem to have exerted
so great an influence
p243 In the late biblical tradition, as well as in Jewish writings of
the Hellenistic period, there is another figure in addition to the Son
of Man who is depicted as preexistent: Wisdom (Prov. 8:22-23; Sir
24:9; Wisd of Sol 6:22). Wisdom not only preexists but has a role in
the creation of the world (Prov 8:23-31), since she serves as God's
companion in the bringing of the wrold into existence (Wisd of Sol
8:4-6,Sir 1). As R E Brown [Gosp John I-XII, pp cxxii-cxxv] has shown,
Wisdom is portrayed in this literature as the effulgence of divine
glory
p244 However, instead of identifying Jesus with the feminine figure
Wisdom (=Sophia, in Greek), John links Jesus with the masculine figure
Logos (=Word)
p253 [Wayne Meeks, J Bibl Lit 1972 91:52-65] characterized the gospel
of John as "book for insiders"
p259 Irenaeus noted that each of four different heretical groups of
his day had selected one of the gospels to justify its position. THose
who considered Christianity a special form of Judaism, and accordingly
laid heavy stress on the Law, chose Matthew. The second-century church
leader Marcion, who denied that the God and Father of Jesus was the
creator and who sought to rid Christianity of all its Jewish elements,
settled on the gospel of Luke, although he had to expurgate it in
order to render it non-Jewish. Another ehretical group, called by
their opponents the "Docetists" - the "Seemists," who denied the true
humanity of Jesus Christ by claiming he only "seemed" to have a body -
urged the gospel of mark as the basis for their distinction between
the heavenly Christ and the earthly Jesus, who was no more than a
phantasm. The gospel of John who was the favorite of Valentinus, one
of the early Gnostics, whos eelaboration on and speculative additions
to the Christian faith are documented in the Gospel of Truth
- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://www.panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Phooey on GUI: Windows for subprime Bimbos]
Steve Hayes
wrote:
>crunch <pchris...@yahoo.com> 28/12/2009 18:54 wrote:
>> Liar!
>Liar!
What an edifying conversation!
Another thread to mark "Ignore".
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Day Brown
> Hardly: the Gospel says that when Jesus was born the shepherds had their
> sheep grazing on high pastures, ie in Spring or Summer.
>
> Anyway, there's not even one unbiased evidence that Jesus even ever
> existed at all. The whole New Testament may be entirely fictional.
>
>
born, "The angels of the Lord came down blowing trumpets and singing
hosannahs while the shepherds watched their flocks by nite."
That was about 300 BC.
Peter Alaca
Any archaeological evidence?
George
Shrines and statues :-)
Steve Hayes
wrote:
>Day Brown <dayh...@gmail.com> 29/12/2009 23:14 wrote:
There's a picture of the event on Mithras's tombstone.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://khanya.wordpress.com
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
The instruments of the churl are evil: he deviseth
wicked devices to destroy the poor with lying words,
even when the needy speaketh right.
But the liberal deviseth liberal things;
and by liberal things shall he stand (Isaiah 32:7-8).
Roger Pearse
> Joseph Campbell, "Occidental Mythology"
Campbell was not a Mithras scholar. His books seem to be a mine of
hearsay.
> reports that whenMithraswas
> born, "The angels of the Lord came down blowing trumpets and singing
> hosannahs while the shepherds watched their flocks by nite."
No ancient source records any such thing, so I guess this is a
falsehood.
Did you check this? Which page of Campbell's book says it? And what
reference does he give?
> That was about 300 BC.
Since the cult of Mithras didn't exist -- according to archaeology --
before the mid-first century AD, we can see something is really, badly
wrong here.
Don't be fooled by this "Mithras=Jesus" crap. It's purely designed to
sucker the uneducated.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
crunch
> Jesus in History Kee HBJ 1977
>
> p26 When Pharisaic Judaism became dominant following the disastrous
> revolts of AD 66-70 and 130-135, Jewish expectations of Messiah and
> the Kingdom of God were recrast, and the apocalypses were excluded
> from the Jewish canon, except for Daniel. Originally working
> independently of each other, Johannes Weis (1827-1918) and Albert
> Schweitzer (1875-1965) reached the conclusion that apocalypticism was
> the primary source for understanding the ministry and teaching of
> Jesus.
AFAIK this is accurate.
> p30 how deeply Jewish life and thought in Syria and Palestine was
> penetrated by Hellenization, even among those who were consciously
> resistant to the attempts of Heelnistic rulers to force their culture
> on the Jews [Hengel, Judaism & Hellenism, 1974] Remains of ancient
> synangogues with Greek inscriptions, representational art
> (theoretically forbidden by the Mosaic law against graven images),
> including portaits of the deity and the signs of the zodiac, show how
> thoroughly imbued with Hellenistic culture were the most pious
> Jews. The dostinction between "Palestinian" and "Hellenistic" is
> useless
I add that the Essenes followed the life of Pythagoras, according
to Josephus.
> p47 Tacitus mentions that "Christus" was executed during the reign of
> Tiberius, probably around 29, having been sentenced by the procurator
> Pontius Pilate. Tacitus' account is the most precise and extensive
> information that the pagan authors provide about Jesus. Although his
> details match exactly what is known from Christian accounts, Tacitus,
> like Pliny and Seutonius, provides us with nothing that supplements
> what we know of Jesus from the gospels. The writings of the Roman
> historians are, however, important evidence for Jesus' existence as a
> historical person
Ahem!
Paul in a dither
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/2566
"All very confusing, until you work out what was happening behind the
scenes, with the aid of the pesher. In early AD 49 Jesus with others
had been expelled from Rome. It was the occasion described by
Suetonius, when Jews were expelled by Claudius "for rioting in the
name of Chrestus."(Life of Claudius, 25, 4). Jesus came first to
Ephesus, in the province of Asia (on the Turkish coast) where he took
part in the canonisation of the gospels described in Revelation 4-6,
when "the Lamb opened the seven seals". Then he went across to
Philippi in Macedonia, then to Corinth, where he lived in the
monastery at the foot of the sharp mountain peak that shelters
Corinth. Paul spent the period March 52 to September 53 in Corinth,
meeting at times with Jesus, as we have seen."
> p53 Later on, Jewish polemic went to even greater lengths to discredit
> Jesus, but it never denied his existence or the basic facts of a
> ministry of teaching and healing and of his execution
Interesting.
> p123 in The Apostolic Preaching and Its Development in the New
> Testament [1951] C H Dodd lists certain propositions about Jesus that
> he claims all New Testament writers affirm desoite the difference
> between them.. Others think that the messages of Jesus in the
> synoptics does not go beyond the categories of Judaism, and they
> consider Paul the source of the essential Christian message
Deep confusion here; please let Dr. Thiering clear
it up on her official website -
Pesher of Christ
http://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/
To avoid lustful looks betrays an Essenic attitude
on the part of Historical Christ IMHO.
> p184 Mattehw could have been written in any Greek-speaking Jewish
> center, although it likely came from a city with close ties to
> Palestine, since the rabbinic decisions at Jamnia seem to have exerted
> so great an influence
IMHO Matthew was Matthew Annas, high priest
along with 4 other brothers who were also high priest
at other times, according to Josephus.
The Gospel of John was authored by Jesus Christ,
who did not die on the cross, just before 37 AD,
according to Dr. Barbara Thiering.
- = -
> Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
> http://www.panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
> ---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
> [Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
> [Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Phooey on GUI: Windows for subprime Bimbos]
Peace (after the Quaker fashion),
David Christainsen
(<<Kelly>>)
> Deep confusion here; please let Dr. Thiering clear
> it up on her official website -
Deep confusion from Soggy here: please let Dr. Thiering clear up any
misconceptions from her own words:
"I am prepared to say that David Christainsen does indeed have a
problem of obsessiveness, and in fact is not a fully reliable source
on the detail of the pesher. You may quote my opinion." -- Barbara
Thiering, Ph.D.
> Peace (after the Quaker fashion),
You mean: Confusion (after the Soggy fashion)
> David Christainsen
Yes - the same David Christainsen that Thiering proclaimed obsessive
and unreliable regarding her work.
Glad we got that cleared up.
;-)
Matt Giwer
Every time I have looked into one of these too good to be true narratives
they have turned out to be nonsense. There are near identities in the "died
and born again" characters of mythology. But the peripheral material to the
most important part of the story is so different you would never think them
the same story without knowing the central "most important" part of them.
If you can produce a proper citation for that Campbell thing I will be very
interested. But messengers (angels) and trumpets and shepherds and hosannahs
(an Aramaic word) are very much of the bibleland persuasion. Mithras is from a
land with a ranching tradition. Yes he died, went to the underworld and was
born again but the rest of the mythos fits a ranching not shepherding
tradition. The Isis/Osiris died and born again tradition fits a stable society
that has no idea what unstable means. Pardon if I cannot exactly explain why I
say those things. I appeal to creative tradition and poetic license as to what
would appeal. If you are interested I can only suggest you look into them,
think about them and then post your ideas. It is damned hard to get anyone
interested enough to take a look and post ideas here.
--
If a man criticizes Israel he will be condemned as antisemitic.
What does a comdemned man gain from restraint?
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4213
http://www.giwersworld.org a1
Wed Dec 30 21:12:50 EST 2009
Matt Giwer
According to any rational definition of born this Jesus character was not
born as he was never conceived despite the ignorant word used by illiterates
such as yourself.
How is that pain in your wrist doing? Growing up you arm I hope -- we all
hope. We are all wishing for it to incapacitate you. So many people wishing
the same pain upon you. You are cursed.
--
The conundrum of Judaism, Christianity and Islam is simple to state.
Is God circumcised?
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4201
http://www.giwersworld.org/palestine/answers.phtml a9
Wed Dec 30 21:59:41 EST 2009
crunch
Grow up, kid.
crunch
> ["Followup-To:" header set to soc.religion.quaker.]
> On 2009-12-23, George <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 24, 6:38 am, "(<<Kelly>>)" <rosie_be...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Dec 23, 9:26 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> > Probably in the year that we would currently call 4BC, and in the
> >> > spring in a cave when the new lambs were birthing. He was wrapped in
> >> > swaddling clothes, which are the rags used to wipe up the baby lamb
> >> > mess on the cave floor.
>
>
> > Wiping up sheep afterbirth?
>
> Swaddling of infants is 'standard operating procedure' in many cultures,
> and has nothing at all to do with lambs or messy floors
> <http://www.babycentre.co.uk/baby/sleep/swaddlingexpert/>.
Yet, "swaddling cloths" in Luke 2 is a mistranslation.
> Matthew makes no mention of the sort of place Jesus was born in.
>
> Luke says that he was "laid in a manger", which suggests that farm
> livestock weren't a million miles away. That English has a word ("crib")
> that is applied both to a piece of furniture for a baby to sleep in and
> to a container from which cattle can feed, is a clue that the actual form
> of both items can be somewhat similar - they may even have been portable
> and dual-purpose, depending on demand.
>...
THE MANGER
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/831
"I said that the 'Manger' was the building a kilometre south of
Qumran, where
the pack animals were kept. The donkeys - still to be seen plentifully
in
the area as the favoured Bedouin method of transport - were used by
the
leaders for the climb up the 'chasm' and on to the Qumran plateau.
This was
the practical purpose, but the pattern also came from the building in
Jerusalem where 'king Solomon's mule' was kept. The animal was used
for the
coronation ceremony of the Davids - as shown in 1 Kings 1:38-40. The
passage
in Zech 9:9, written 3rd century BCE, anticipates a resumption of the
ceremony for the restored Davids.
The building was literally a manger, and at the same time it was an
unclean
place for other purposes, at the required 2000 cubits or 5 stadia
away. One
of these purposes was the birth of illegitimate children. The
unfortunate
girl who had become pregnant before marriage had to go to such places,
as a
foundling hospital, to give birth to her child in shame. Jesus was
conceived
before the marriage of Mary and Joseph, and at the time of his birth a
Pharisee high priest was in power, so he was deemed illegitimate. Mary
was
obliged to go there for his birth, so Jesus was literally born in the
Manger. But at the time he was 12 years old, in the episode in Lk
2:1-7
(which concerns his Bar Mitzvah in March 6 CE, not his birth in March
7 BCE)
the Sadducee Ananus the Elder had gained power, and his more liberal
views
made Jesus legitimate, hence the celebrations of Lk 2:8-20."
Peace (after the Quaker fashion),
(<<Kelly>>)
> Yet, "swaddling cloths" in Luke 2 is a mistranslation.
No, it's not.
The Greek used here is "sparganoō" - and that translates directly as
1) to wrap in swaddling clothes; of an infant just born. The root of
the word is "sparganon" (a strip, from a derivative of the base of
sparassō -
to convulse, tear), meaning to strap or wrap with strips.
Wrong again, Soggy.
> > Matthew makes no mention of the sort of place Jesus was born in.
So what? You were talking about Luke.
I can now see why it's important for you to use other people's words
other than your own. You have no clue and that fact becomes painfully
clear when you use your own thoughts.
Problem is, you choose the words of those who also have no clue (as
evidenced by Thiering's claim that Aloe is an emetic and her
comparison of Deuteronomy with Revelation without taking the Hebrew of
Deuteronomy into account.
Her words or your words...you lose either way, Soggy.
Roger Pearse
Yeah? Where?
Roger Pearse
> On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 23:34:31 +0100, Peter Alaca <p.al...@invallid.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >Day Brown <dayhbr...@gmail.com> 29/12/2009 23:14 wrote:
> >> RVG wrote:
> >>> Hardly: the Gospel says that when Jesus was born the shepherds had their
> >>> sheep grazing on high pastures, ie in Spring or Summer.
>
> >>> Anyway, there's not even one unbiased evidence that Jesus even ever
> >>> existed at all. The whole New Testament may be entirely fictional.
>
> >> Joseph Campbell, "Occidental Mythology" reports that whenMithraswas
> >> born, "The angels of the Lord came down blowing trumpets and singing
> >> hosannahs while the shepherds watched their flocks by nite."
>
> >> That was about 300 BC.
>
> >Any archaeological evidence?
>
> There's a picture of the event onMithras'stombstone.
Where?
crunch
> On Dec 31, 7:09 am, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Yet, "swaddling cloths" in Luke 2 is a mistranslation.
>
> No, it's not.
>
> The Greek used here is "sparganoō" - and that translates directly as
> 1) to wrap in swaddling clothes; of an infant just born. The root of
> the word is "sparganon" (a strip, from a derivative of the base of
> sparassō -
> to convulse, tear), meaning to strap or wrap with strips.
>
> Wrong again, Soggy.
Right again, Lazy. You fail to inquire what
I am talking about; you are clueless.
Christmas
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1709
"I am suggesting that when Jesus was ‘wrapped in
cloths’ (esparganosen, Lk 2:7, translated ‘swaddling cloths’) he was
being given this first vestment at the age of 12."
Also -
"He was born, I believe, in an outpost of Qumran, the building a
kilometre down from the plateau, used for ‘unclean’ purposes. It was a
latrine, a place for the sick, and for menstruating women. It is
called ‘the queen’s house’ in the Copper Scroll 6:29. It was the
equivalent of the location in the Wilderness of Judea, at the wady
(described in # 1648 ) to which young girls made their way to give
birth to unwanted children. Further, since Qumran was the temporary
‘Jerusalem’, it was the equivalent of the building on the Mount of
Olives where the royal mule was kept, the animal used for the
coronation ceremony described in 1 Kings 1:38-40. That purpose made it
also a ‘manger’."
> > > Matthew makes no mention of the sort of place Jesus was born in.
>
> So what? You were talking about Luke.
You are a disruption because you seize on trivia.
> I can now see why it's important for you to use other people's words
> other than your own.
You see nothing; you are blind.
> You have no clue and that fact becomes painfully
> clear when you use your own thoughts.
The reverse is true; your own words are laughable.
> Problem is, you choose the words of those who also have no clue (as
> evidenced by Thiering's claim that Aloe is an emetic and her
> comparison of Deuteronomy with Revelation without taking the Hebrew of
> Deuteronomy into account.
You fail to understand the Hellenic influence
upon Essene thinking - the Essenes followed
the life of Pythagoras, according to Josephus.
Further, the writer of Rev 22:15 was an Asher
Gentile who shared the Essene prejudice that
sex is defiling. So, the Hebrew of Deuteronomy
has nothing to do with it because of the writer's
"prism" and the Septuagint he used.
Further, on the other matter, Dr. Thiering
called the aloes a purgative. Can't you read?
> Her words or your words...you lose either way, Soggy.
Your outpouring of bunk has been massive, Lazy.
Peter Alaca
Cut sci.archaeology, you insane troll.
(<<Kelly>>)
> > > Yet, "swaddling cloths" in Luke 2 is a mistranslation.
> > No, it's not.
>
> > The Greek used here is "sparganoō" - and that translates directly as
> > 1) to wrap in swaddling clothes; of an infant just born. The root of
> > the word is "sparganon" (a strip, from a derivative of the base of
> > sparassō -
> > to convulse, tear), meaning to strap or wrap with strips.
>
> > Wrong again, Soggy.
> Right again, Lazy. You fail to inquire what
> I am talking about; you are clueless.
I don't need to "inquire" - you already stated your premise. The only
reason why you are saying I didn't "inquire" is because I was able to
handily prove you wrong directly from the Greek.
> "I am suggesting that when Jesus was ‘wrapped in
> cloths’ (esparganosen, Lk 2:7, translated ‘swaddling cloths’) he was
> being given this first vestment at the age of 12."
I see...she's incorrectly referring to His Tallit as a "vestment"?
That would be correct if she's referring to age 12 being around the
time of His Bar Mitzvah - but very incorrect to refer to the Tallit as
a "vestment" (which is a Christian term - Jesus was Jewish) and also
incorrect to state that He wasn't wearing Tzitzit at all until age
12. He was likely wearing Tzitzit since about age three.
When it comes to Jewish Scripture, Jewish practice, and Jewish
culture, BT is very obviously clueless.
> Also -
>
> "He was born, I believe, in an outpost of Qumran, the building a
> kilometre down from the plateau, used for ‘unclean’ purposes. It was a
> latrine, a place for the sick, and for menstruating women. It is
> called ‘the queen’s house’ in the Copper Scroll 6:29. It was the
> equivalent of the location in the Wilderness of Judea, at the wady
> (described in # 1648 ) to which young girls made their way to give
> birth to unwanted children. Further, since Qumran was the temporary
> ‘Jerusalem’, it was the equivalent of the building on the Mount of
> Olives where the royal mule was kept, the animal used for the
> coronation ceremony described in 1 Kings 1:38-40. That purpose made it
> also a ‘manger’."
Garbage. Garbage and fantasy.
> > > > Matthew makes no mention of the sort of place Jesus was born in.
> > So what? You were talking about Luke.
> You are a disruption because you seize on trivia.
Oh...so, I'm a "disruption" when I point out your obvious errors and
non-sequitur, eh?
Riiiight...
> > I can now see why it's important for you to use other people's words
> > other than your own.
> You see nothing; you are blind.
Wrong again, boyo.
> > You have no clue and that fact becomes painfully
> > clear when you use your own thoughts.
> The reverse is true; your own words are laughable.
Nope. And I'm not the only one here who has observed this.
> > Problem is, you choose the words of those who also have no clue (as
> > evidenced by Thiering's claim that Aloe is an emetic and her
> > comparison of Deuteronomy with Revelation without taking the Hebrew of
> > Deuteronomy into account.
> You fail to understand the Hellenic influence
> upon Essene thinking - the Essenes followed
> the life of Pythagoras, according to Josephus.
> Further, the writer of Rev 22:15 was an Asher
> Gentile who shared the Essene prejudice that
> sex is defiling. So, the Hebrew of Deuteronomy
> has nothing to do with it because of the writer's
> "prism" and the Septuagint he used.
Wrong again, doofus.
She said that as in Deuteronomy, Revelation referred to "dogs" as
homosexuals. Not. In Deuteronomy, the "dogs" she is referencing were
loosely referring to "male temple prostitution" - sorry, but by no
stretch of the imagination is that homosexuality across the board.
She failed to use the correct Hebrew translation of Deuteronomy.
Once again, BT shows herself to be a hack.
> Further, on the other matter, Dr. Thiering
> called the aloes a purgative. Can't you read?
Oops...yes, correct. She called Aloes a purgative when it is actually
an emetic. A simple mistake on my part. A major blunder on hers.
Matt Giwer
> On Dec 30, 10:10 pm, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>> crunch wrote:
>> According to any rational definition of born this Jesus character was not
>> born as he was never conceived despite the ignorant word used by illiterates
>> such as yourself.
>> How is that pain in your wrist doing? Growing up you arm I hope -- we all
>> hope. We are all wishing for it to incapacitate you. So many people wishing
>> the same pain upon you. You are cursed.
> Grow up, kid.
You are cursed by one and all. Hatred is directed towards you. Constant agony
is wished upon you.
--
Happiness is simple. Do not compare yourself to others.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4205
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo/ a8
Fri Jan 1 00:24:47 EST 2010
Steve Hayes
I was hoping you wouldn't ask.
I was merely suggesting that asking for archaeological evidence was a stupid
question. What kind of archaeological evidence could you expect to find for
angels singing?
I bet you couldn't find any for Elvis Presley singing. A fossilised guitar
with his fingerprints on it, perhaps.
crunch
wrote:>...
> Once again, BT shows herself to be a hack.
>
> > Further, on the other matter, Dr. Thiering
> > called the aloes a purgative. Can't you read?
>
> Oops...yes, correct. She called Aloes a purgative when it is actually
> an emetic. A simple mistake on my part. A major blunder on hers.
On the contrary -
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/purgative
"(Medicine) a drug or agent for purging the bowels"
"aloes, bitter aloes - a purgative made from the leaves of aloe"
Peace,
Bob Young
On 12/27/09 2:35 AM, in article 6mlcj5dt2hq80ctj7...@4ax.com,
"The Other Guy" <knews...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:32:28 +0000, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Elijahovah wrote:
>>> Jesus was born between August and October of 2 BC.
>
> Jesus could NOT have been born later than 4bc, when Herod died.
>
> He was almost certainly born in the spring,
> and was the posterchild for Pisces.
>
> He COULD have been born in 5, 6, or even 7bc, but we will NEVER know for
> sure, and it doesn't make one WHIT of difference in anything anyway.
>
>
Brilliant - an obscure son of a god we never see and never hear from !
And his birthday is just as obscure - what lunacy.
The Jesus story was probably borne in the mid of some myth writer between
the year 500 - 600 AD. He was in such a rush to write his yarn he forgot to
cover the first twenty years of his life from the cradle - The son of a god
that created the entire universe lives in obscurity for all of his formative
years ? ! What nonsense
Bob
Humanist, atheist, realist, sentimentalist Brit.
Man creates his gods in his own image,
then spends the rest of his life
manipulating them to his heart's content
R E L I G I O N � it is all in the mind,
an escape from life�s realities and hardships,
sixty percent ritual, forty percent fantasy
Oh how I wish there were a loving god. A god that would take care of man�s
ills and fulfill his desires and dreams. But I have the common sense and
intelligence to know that this is simply the way man desires things to be.
Bob Young
On 12/27/09 2:58 PM, in article dh0ej5lf20rdr7vrg...@4ax.com,
"pyotr filipivich" <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> [Default]Let the Record show that duke <duckg...@cox.net> on or
> about Wed, 23 Dec 2009 11:26:10 -0600 did write/type or cause to
> appear in alt.religion.christian.episcopal the following:
>> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:18:24 -0800 (PST), crunch <pchris...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Probably in the year that we would currently call 4BC, and in the spring in a
>> cave when the new lambs were birthing. He was wrapped in swaddling clothes,
>> which are the rags used to wipe up the baby lamb mess on the cave floor.
>
> Bzzt, - "swaddling cloths" were the cultural equivalent of
> Huggies. Didn't matter if you were born in a barn or in the guest
> room,or in the bedroom, you got swaddled. They weren't primitive
> barbarians!
Wrong again.. Remove your blinders there's a real world out there.
"And when the Lord thy God hath delivered [a city] into thine hands, thou
shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: But the women,
and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all
the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself" (Deuteronomy 20:13-14).
"And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and
they slew all the males. . . . And the children of Israel took all the
women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all
their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods" (Numbers 31:7-9).
> -
> pyotr filipivich
> Monotheism, someone has said, offers two simple axioms:
> 1) There is a God.
> 2) It's not you.
Bob Young
On 12/30/09 6:14 AM, in article
4b3a7c77$0$16256$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com, "Day Brown"
<dayh...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hardly - possibly dreamed up around 450 AD. But we will ever know for sure
Jack Linthicum
> On 5 Jan 2010 22:47:01 -0600, Bob Young <alaspect...@netvigator.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Brilliant - an obscure son of a god we never see and never hear from !
>
> >And his birthday is just as obscure - what lunacy.
>
> OR Judaism. OR any other organized religion.
Cargo Cults based on reality.