22 votes

Exactly When Was Jesus Born? Not on December 25.

In all likelihood, He was born in September.

Entire article here: http://wp.me/p13mHb-i1

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

You asked for one now can you humour me

Please can you offer one source that states He never lived that was written closer than the three historians. BTW many "historians" write a century or more after the subject matter on which they write. Doesn't mean they are going on hearsay.

Please quote sources for your rebuttals by the way.

By the way Prefect or Procurator are both correct. When Pilate lived Prefect was the title but after the death of Herod Agrippa 1 in 44ad the title used was Procurator. So the author was using the correct contemporary title. They both are correct in the conveying the role of Pilate.

Look forward to the more recent sources you can share.

peAce

Liberty = Responsibility

"Please can you offer one

"Please can you offer one source that states He never lived that was written closer than the three historians"

Well there is a very silly question. Of course you cannot. No one mentions him prior to Tacitus, and it's quite transparently absurd of you to expect someone to write debunking the myth *before the myth was known* now isnt it?

You can never prove that someone did not exist, you can only look for evidence that they did. If you find absolutely none, and the person in question is supposed to have done things that logically would have resulted in evidence we could find today (and certainly anyone that did half of what is attributed to him in the gospels would have) then we can be reasonably certain he did not.

The closest thing to the *proof* you claim to want here would be the internal evidence in the early Christian writings. A careful examination of the "New Testament" is certainly sufficient to prove that the orthodox tale is a fiction. If you think it is inspired and infallible think again, it's riddled with errors that G_d would never make. Two gospels, for instance, spill a great deal of ink on the 'virgin birth' based on a section of Isaiah. So far so good. But it's based on the Septuagint, the Greek targum, not from the Hebrew Tanakh, and as it happens that particular passage contains a serious mistranslation.

Huge tracts of the NT are premised on that mistranslation. So either G_d did not write it, or he is senile, cannot remember what he told Isaiah, and has to consult a *GREEK* translation to remember?

Now I may be naive at times but I am still never going to buy that second option.

As to sources, I assume you are speaking in regard to Josephus, as what I said with regard to the other two should be trivially confirmed from any source you want to look at.

On Josephus, the best link is probably the following, which is very thorough and cites many more sources for you:

http://www.jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/supp16.htm

If it is such an obvious hoax

Why didn't someone dispute any of the three sources immediately? If someone wrote in 2010 that there first american president was Frank Moorehouse I think very soon someone would refute it quickly.

We are discussing whether there is any proof OUTSIDE of the Bible that Jesus lived and you are the one returning the conversation to the bible by bringing New Testament topics into this conversation. Why the bait and switch?

You wrong about the new testament as you were wrong about "prefect" being an easily verifiable mistake thereby refuting the whole source Tacitus.

The Jesus puzzle? That author did not write about the subject until almost 2000 years after the fact. If 150 years post event script is hearsay (Your words not mine) surely a historical account almost 2000 years later is is as well.

Let me ask a different way.

Please, when was the first documented evidence published that says clearly Jesus did not ever live?

peAce

Liberty = Responsibility

I can see your mind is

I can see your mind is closed. I am not surprised.

"Why didn't someone dispute any of the three sources immediately?"

Lucius and Tacitus? No one would dispute them because they were simply repeating claims that were current, again, MANY decades after the events and long after any witnesses would have been dead. There's nothing to dispute, it's simply hearsay.

In the case of Josephus, it's more complicated, but the article I linked explains it pretty clearly if you can be bothered to read it through. Remember, this is long before the printing press. There were few copies of the works and they were hand copied - preserved by Christian scribes exclusively for a decent period of time. Those scribes naturally followed Eusebius in regards to the Testamonium, and if they were copying an instance that lacked it they would have found it quite natural to simply insert it as they worked.

The two versions of the Testamonium provided at different times by Eusebius alone should spark a strong suspicion that he fabricated it himself.

Did you even try to read the link?

"You wrong about the new testament as you were wrong about "prefect" being an easily verifiable mistake thereby refuting the whole source Tacitus. "

Huh? That's not wrong, it strongly supports the inference that Tacitus is not relying on any sort of written source from the time in question, but rather is repeating hearsay current in his day.

"If 150 years post event script is hearsay (Your words not mine) surely a historical account almost 2000 years later is is as well. "

Huh? No one is claiming he's a witness to events 2000 years ago. I pointed you to his article for a thorough evaluation of the document in question, not for some sort of eyewitness account!

"Please, when was the first documented evidence published that says clearly Jesus did not ever live? "

When did you quit beating your wife? ;)

I did read the link

I did start to read the link. It is very lengthy and i didn't the time to dedicate to it at the moment. If my mind was closed I wouldn't be asking questions.

Isn't asking for more information the response you want in a dialogue?

You asked for one source. I provided three. You have disputed all three based on YOUR opinion. No specific source provided. They didn't claim to be eyewitnesses. You and I are are surely not eyewitnesses. I didn't give an entire essay to you to read for the original response, I gave the specific source. I get back your opinion that they don't muster.

Also, I do find it interesting you point me to an author that published his work 2000 years after the fact. I did start to read it.

When paragraphs end with the statement " That does not seem feasible." forgive me but that is not factual that is opinion. You have great faith in this opinion others may not.
http://www.jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/supp16.htm#Mess
Paragraph "The Term Messiah..."

Can you please just point me to the first published account that you are aware which presents the hypothesis that Jesus never existed? I do not claim to be an expert or knowledgeable on this topic so I am asking for your assistance.
Why does this offend you?

peAce

Liberty = Responsibility

"You have disputed all three

"You have disputed all three based on YOUR opinion."

No. In the first two cases I dismissed the based on their date and what they actually say. The references are correct, but they simply are not what you are claiming them to be - and any standard source you want to consult is going to agree with me both on the date and the words.

The third one bears a deeper examination, so I gave you a link to one.

"Also, I do find it interesting you point me to an author that published his work 2000 years after the fact."

So you think modern scholarship in regards to ancient documents is somehow automatically illegitimate? I wonder if you apply that standard consistently, or only when you dont like their conclusions?

Test ALL things, hold tight what is true.

"When paragraphs end with the statement " That does not seem feasible." forgive me but that is not factual that is opinion."

I told you it was a circumstantial case. How do you think circumstantial cases are made then?

In this case he goes through the known history very carefully and shows that the orthodox position would require, not one, but many, extremely unlikely leaps like that. Individually most of these points can be argued away, but when you pile improbability on top of improbability on top of improbability the credibility of the story rapidly declines.

"You have great faith in this opinion others may not."

No, I have no faith whatsoever in his opinion. I pointed to him because he has taken the time to write a well sourced and fairly thorough examination of the issue you requested a source for.

"Can you please just point me to the first published account that you are aware which presents the hypothesis that Jesus never existed? I do not claim to be an expert or knowledgeable on this topic so I am asking for your assistance.
Why does this offend you? "

Because it's a transparent attempt to derail the conversation onto a topic that has no relevance.

I tried but you are not

I tried but you are not interested in a dialogue. It must be nice to know everything about everyone during every time.

However, on this topic you fail.

peAce

Liberty = Responsibility

You tried nothing

Have a nice day.

For Your Information

Josephus is the basis for Bible Scholar Joseph Atwill's theory "Caesar's Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus."

And you think I have not a clue?:

"Caesar's Messiah, The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus" by internationally known and best-selling Bible scholar Joseph Atwill
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuqwmMpV2oo

Joseph Atwill, 2005, Caesar's Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus. Another take on the Josephus-Gospel similarities. Atwill argues that the 1st century conquerors of Judaea, Vespasian, Titus and Domitian, used Hellenized Jews to manufacture the "Christian" texts in order to establish a peaceful alternative to militant Judaism. Jesus was Titus Flavius? I don't think so.

Have you even read my article?: - http://www.dailypaul.com/241312/sowing-the-seeds-for-a-peace...

- AMAZING PHOTO delineating where UNRESTRAINED CAPITALISM has taken us: http://www.rense.com/general96/whatare.html
- "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."-- Mohandas Gandhi

Some never rest - "particularly" at Christmas

Christmas is to "some" Atheists as holding a cross is to a vampire.
It is torture to them...they begin to writhe and foam at the mouth - it's a wonder some don't have brain aneurysms. I think "Duck Dynasty" was their Christian sacrifice this year.

Not True In This Case

I have many Christian friends including many pastoral friends. We are able to talk freely amongst ourselves. I am merely attempting to help people peel back as many layers of the onion as is necessary to expose where elusive truth apparently resides. I do not like darkness.

It would be wrong for anyone to make negative judgements about me without first reading my article in its entirety in its CURRENT state:

http://www.dailypaul.com/241312/sowing-the-seeds-for-a-peace...

- AMAZING PHOTO delineating where UNRESTRAINED CAPITALISM has taken us: http://www.rense.com/general96/whatare.html
- "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."-- Mohandas Gandhi

YES, it is true in this case...

Stop trying to hide your agenda behind some claims of "caring about others". Sheesh, you sound like Obama.
Spare me all your "historical drivel" from Atwill - he wrote a book - it was his "opinion"...as are all books written by man.
How arrogant of you to claim Atwill (and thus you) have discovered the "truth" of the ages.
I have atheist friends and atheist family members - none so arrogant as to insist on explaining to Christians on Christmas Day - how their beliefs are based on a hoax.
Nor am I responding to an article you wrote months ago - I am responding to what you wrote today - Christmas Day - which illustrate that you are deliberately being a fly in the ointment and you full well know it. Over and out.

My Only Agenda Is Keeping Truth On The Table

I am very sorry you feel the way that you do, but please know that you have misjudged me.

Also, please take notice that I did not post any initial topics today, but rather only responded where it seemed appropriate.

- AMAZING PHOTO delineating where UNRESTRAINED CAPITALISM has taken us: http://www.rense.com/general96/whatare.html
- "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."-- Mohandas Gandhi

What a liar...

Ye protest too much - and your words are dripping with sugary sorrys and pleases indicating you are also an arrogant passive aggressor - and you actually claim to be a carrier of the "truth"? Let's add hypocrite to my perception of you.
I respect others differing opinions - but I have little tolerance for pretenders.
Nontheless, Merry Christmas and God Bless.

Ding Ding

Ding Ding

Like a bright light

It's a cool story.

And one I believed for many years. But unfortunately for historical revisionists there's actually tons of corroborating evidence for Jesus Christ's life. For example:

http://www.cherrydale.org/clientimages/30992/messageresource...

I can already hear the satanists: 'but what about at the time he was alive?' Well there is in fact eyewitness accounts. A dude called John, he was actually there. Oh wait, you're not allowed to listen to that, are you?

Obedience to God is resistance to tyrants.

This is great thanks for posting this on the day millions

Celebrate the birth of who they believe is their savior. Perhaps you have it all figured out....but then again, do you? Seems like you wouldn't be such a snarky jerk on this particular day if you did.

I suggest entertaining a little more discretion on this particular day.

You have to expect on a

You have to expect on a website where people think for themselves, they will question the myths you hold dear as well as the ones you have already learned to see through. There is no point in being upset by this.

Today is the day that so many people are putting themselves through the utter absurdity of celebrating a pagan roman holiday and supposedly doing it in honor of a Jewish preacher who probably never existed, and certainly would not have approved if he did. There is no better time to make a pertinent point or two. Frankly he treated you too gently. He's trying to do you a favor by gently making you aware of the facts, but you are too busy throwing his pearls back in his face to notice.

I would

expect, on a website where people think for themselves, that the non-believers would show some respect for others on their day of celebration.

He wasn't born on Christmas

He wasn't born on Christmas that's for sure, but apparently one of the Roman sun gods was, hence where Christmas came from and why we Gentiles (former pagans) celebrate it.

Matters Not

He was born.

Thats Right ...

Don't attempt to cloud the issue with FACTS !!!

Life is a sexually transmitted disease with a 100% fatality rate.
Don't Give me Liberty, I'll get up and get it myself!

Yes we know today we have me

Yes we know today we have me good facts to work with right?

I mean global warming is a slam dunk... I mean climate change... Or what ever it will be called next to fit the agenda...

No one would ever try to rewrite history!

nice

lmao

Why can't we just realize that the state and the scientists have it all figured out.

We can use any statist history book, but The Bible is verboten.

I know Jesus wasn't born winter solstice. I am not confused.

I attended this solstice event in the late 80's.
Stunning effects.
Very stirring. Made the hair on my neck stand up. But it ain't about Jesus. It's about the creation. Not the Creator.
Paul Winter: Annual winter solstice ritual NYC.


http://youtu.be/xgbq8BITto4


Paul Winter, the saxophonist, composer and bandleader long known for his pioneering work with world music, jazz and the voices of the natural world, returns with this latest solstice offering. The music of Brazil will be a special focus of this year’s event, and feature Ivan Lins, singer and guitarist Renato Braz, a Brazilian chorus, and the 25 dancers and drummers of the Forces of Nature Dance Theatre. The ten-member Paul Winter Consort will also include dynamic gospel singer Theresa Thomason.
http://solsticeconcert.com/

It can be figured out by using the Word of God

If you read about John the Baptist's father Zacharias in the book of Luke, and his priestly duties together with the courses of the priests spoken of in the book of Chronicles, and then put that together with the pregnancy of Elizabeth who was prengant with John the Baptist, and also knowing that Jesus was born 6 months after John the Baptist, you will very clearly find that Christ was born in either the last week in September, or the first week in October.

It would definitely have been during the time of the Feast of Trumpets.

All this pagan celebration is an abhorrance to God!

A lie, is a lie, is a lie, is a lie!

Why would anyone calling themselves a Christian want to take part in a pagan lie!

Do these same people celebrate in their heart that Christ is coming again in judgment?

" In Thee O Lord do I put my trust " ~ Psalm 31:1~

Your analysis is correct as

Your analysis is correct as far as it goes - the Gospel writers clearly lived before the invention of Christmas, and clearly place the birth in the autumn, long before the winter solstice.

That said, it's obvious that these writers were also not attempting to write history, but myth. It's also obvious they were not in any way infallible - there are many proofs but one of the most obvious and easy to explain is the virgin birth.

This is a major theme of Matthew and Luke, though the other writers do not seem to know of it. And where it appears, it is clearly based on a Midrash of Isaiah, which would not be so bad by itself, but the fact is it's a Midrash of a *mistranslation* of Isaiah, specifically it's an error that occured only in the Greek translation.

It's obviously absurd to think that the creator of the universe inspired these books, as he inspired Isaiah, and yet at this later date he could not remember what he told Isaiah? He had to consult the Septuagint, and didnt even notice the mistranslation? Do you believe G_d is senile?

Obvious?

To those with closed minds maybe.

"the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." (1 Corinthians 1:18)

Obedience to God is resistance to tyrants.

The Lord Said,"My People Perish For Lack of Insight" (Knowledge)

We lack the insight/knowledge to know the things that have been kept away from us.

The historians were traitors. They conspired to keep the people away from the "KEY" to the secret of life.

The people who put the bible together purposely, in my opinion, left things out or deleted things out that would have made reading and understanding things better.

The people that did this are the same ones that have created all the misery since the fall in Gods garden..

The Prince and the power of the air waves (Satan) and his minions, including the so called bible scholars.

Turtulian and Emperor Constintin were all a part of this conspriacy.

You must do your own research, unfortunately, to discover the real meanings of the passages in the bible. Not all of them are clear.

Here is an example:

How can God stand at the right side of himself? or how can Jesus stand at the right side of the father?

In the bible / in catholic teachings there is reference where Jesus is the same as God.

We forget that also in the bible there are words from Christ that we don't take to heart.

Example:

Jesus was refered to as a GOOD Sir. Jesus said, 'Why do you call me good sir, there is NO ONE good but God.

When the people tried to make him a God or equal to God, Jesus ran away. He could not allow himself to be the same as God nor allow the people to make him one.

he was not a God, he was an obedient son and did what was commmanded of him..

In the bible do you remember the shout from heaven: "Behold my beloved son, in whom i am will pleased.

jesus was the first order of an new being. he was totally obedient, sinless, untaited by the corruptable seed, the seed that was the product of the "ORIGINAL SIN" of disobedience.