Go to Jesus vs. Christianity
- Add a comment
- Go to HEROD COULD NOT HAVE KILLED THE CHILDREN OF BETHLEHEM
Re: Since the gospel account does not contain a date, I think it's pretty self-
thank you
there is no certain date in the Gospel account
however . . .
the date established some time in the Middle Ages was 4 BC.
recently, dates as early as 8 BC (B.C.E.) have been proposed, mainly on the weight of at least two planetary conjunctions. The 6 BC date I llke -- I have explained that in some of my posts.
posted by
Xeno-x
on December 10, 2008 at 5:58 AM
| link to this | reply
Since the gospel account does not contain a date, I think it's pretty self-
explanatory.
posted by
FineYoungSinger
on December 9, 2008 at 7:08 AM
| link to this | reply
I am not certain, for me it is just important to recognize His birth! sam
posted by
sam444
on December 2, 2008 at 9:49 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Posted by RITE2SPIN
Yes, the greatest possibioilty is that Yeshua was born earlier, and a few recent speculations as to the "Chrismas Star" bolster this -- I have mentioned this before -- a Great Conjunction of three major planets in 8 BC and 6 BC in the constellation Picses, which was considered the sign of the Jews, in the month of September, is one likely that I favor personally; another was around the middle of April in the same era.
I favor the September time because it is close to Yom Kippur, which, as I understand, presages the Advent of the Messiah, which would be apropos. The other reason is that it would bring conception back to around Dec. 25 -- and this would favor the Greek world because that was when the Greek god (in the form of representatives; i.e., priests) mated with virgins.
So this would present Yeshua as Messiah and also son of god to the two cultures.
posted by
Xeno-x
on December 2, 2008 at 9:22 AM
| link to this | reply
http://www.biblicalchronology.com/herod.htm
posted by
RITE2SPIN
on December 2, 2008 at 9:06 AM
| link to this | reply