Does BC/AD confirm the existence of Jesus Christ?

I googled "when did we first start using AD", which means Anno Domini ("In the year of our Lord"), and found very little about it.

The best answer I could find was this;

The AD system was developed by a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (a Scythian) in Rome in 525, as an outcome of his work on calculating the date of Easter.

www2.answerbag.com...

So, I wonder, did someone in 525 believe in the story of Jesus, if he didn't exist?

Josephus Flavius mentioned him in 37AD.

"Josephus, the renowned Jewish historian, was a native of Judea. He was born in 37 A. D., and was a contemporary of the Apostles. He was, for a time, Governor of Galilee, the province in which Christ lived and taught. He traversed every part of this province and visited the places where but a generation before Christ had performed his prodigies. He resided in Cana, the very city in which Christ is said to have wrought his first miracle. He mentions every noted personage of Palestine and describes every important event which occurred there during the first seventy years of the Christian era. But Christ was of too little consequence and his deeds too trivial to merit a line from this historian's pen." (Remsberg, Ibid.)

www.godlessgeeks.com...

And I found potential mention of Jesus and his Disciple in the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius in 167 A.C.E. Not sure what A.C.E. means, but is coincides with 167 A.D. so there is further proof that even Roman Emporers where basing their calender on the birth of Christ.

Here is what Aurelius said;

From Diognetus, not to busy myself about trifling things, and not to give credit to what was said by miracle-workers and jugglers about incantations and the driving away of daemons and such things

classics.mit.edu...

What was a miracle worker? Where did the word miracle come from?

How does the whole world agree that it is 2009 AD?

i was wondering, did you forget about the B.C.side of this coin ?or did i miss something? what up?

[edit on 5-7-2009 by randyvs]

Dude, I think you answered your own question...

The AD system was developed by a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (a Scythian) in Rome in 525, as an outcome of his work on calculating the date of Easter.

You understand that Christianity was the new religion that the Roman Empire operated under.

It was only natural for them to mark the "birth of Christ" as a significant event, if not the most significant event.

I would say it prooves nothing, but actually aids in the argument the story of Jesus Christ is one that has been manipulated and interfered with by those wishing to invoke their own special interests through the millenia.

[edit on 5-7-2009 by open_eyeballs]

Originally posted by randyvs
i was wondering, did you forget about the B.C.side of this coin ?or did i miss something? what up?

[edit on 5-7-2009 by randyvs]

B.C. means "before Christ", further emphasizing my point.

I see much more evidence towards the fact the Jesus did exist, as the bible said he did, than evidence proving he didn't exist.

I think the BC/AD thing is the smoking gun.

reply to post by Udontknowme

So, I wonder, did someone in 525 believe in the story of Jesus, if he didn't exist?

There were millions of people who never even heard the words Jesus Christ. All through Asia, to Africa, to the Americas.

How does the whole world agree that it is 2009 AD?

It is called the most powerful man on earth at the time made the AD/ BC version of measuring and identifying time the commonly accepted form.

The most powerful man being head of the most powerul religion the world has ever seen was the Pope, by far.

edit: spelling

[edit on 5-7-2009 by open_eyeballs]

reply to post by open_eyeballs


Even BCE "before common era" coincides with the BC "before Christ" system

The Gregorian calendar, and the year numbering system associated with it, is the calendar system with the most widespread usage in the world today. For decades, it has been the unofficial global standard, recognized by international institutions such as the United Nations and the Universal Postal Union. It is also a basis of scholarly dating, though some people adopt the Common Era labels, retaining the same numeric values but using the label "CE" (Common Era) instead of "AD", and "BCE" (Before the Common Era) instead of "BC".

en.wikipedia.org...

The pope didn't adopt the calender until 1000 yrs after BC/AD was supposedly developed. Somehow, the farce managed to magically live on for 1000 yrs?

reply to post by Udontknowme

I see much more evidence towards the fact the Jesus did exist, as the bible said he did, than evidence proving he didn't exist.

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people (just hearsay)



There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. There occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus.

That means that not a single historian, philosopher, scribe or follower who lived before or during the alleged time of Jesus ever mentions him! And this is supposed to be a man that gathered so many people, it was impossible to count them:



The gospels mention, countless times, the great multitude that followed Jesus and crowds of people who congregated to hear him. So crowded had some of these gatherings grown, that Luke 12:1 alleges that an "innumberable multitude of people... trode one upon another."

Luke 5:15 says that there grew "a fame abroad of him: and great multitudes came together to hear..." The persecution of Jesus in Jerusalem drew so much attention that all the chief priests and scribes, including the high priest Caiaphas, not only knew about him but helped in his alleged crucifixion. (see Matt 21:15-23, 26:3, Luke 19:47, 23:13).

The multitude of people thought of Jesus, not only as a teacher and a miracle healer, but a prophet (see Matt:14:5).




So here we have the gospels portraying Jesus as famous far and wide, a prophet and healer, with great multitudes of people who knew about him, including the greatest Jewish high priests and the Roman authorities of the area, and not one person records his existence during his lifetime?

If the poor, the rich, the rulers, the highest priests, and the scribes knew about Jesus, who would not have heard of him?



I wouldnt believe this even if i wanted to, lol. Its just rumors and hearsay thats most likely untrue or blowned out of proportion to the extreme.

[edit on 5-7-2009 by Daniem]

No one knows for sure when Jesus was born. The whole BC/AD system is just a convenient convention and no-one assumes it proves the existence of Christ any more than having Christmas on the 25th December proves he was born on that day.

BCE is simply a non religious way of say BC.

I'm really not sure about the point of the thread? The wikipedia entry is pretty emphatic

en.wikipedia.org...

The BC/AD system is just a bit easier that the old idea of refering to the year of the king's reign. Which makes this year 57

reply to post by Essan

The whole BC/AD system is just a convenient convention

Heheh yeah, it would be kinda weird saying we're in the year 4,5 billion, or worse, the year 14 billion

reply to post by Daniem


Actually it's year 4,607,003,567. Although some maverick geologists claim it's really year 4,607,002,885. But they can't prove it

Hate to tell you...but AD or BC proves jesus existed about as much as ABM...after biscuit man,i hope you worship the biscuit man too with this startling evidence he existed.All bad sarcasm aside...you must realise how AD or BC proves nothing?

So, every time you sign a check, say the date, you give a little nod to the fact that Jesus Christ existed.

Originally posted by open_eyeballs
reply to post by Udontknowme

 

So, I wonder, did someone in 525 believe in the story of Jesus, if he didn't exist?

There were millions of people who never even heard the words Jesus Christ. All through Asia, to Africa, to the Americas

How does the whole world agree that it is 2009 AD?

It is called the most powerful man on earth at the time made the AD/ BC version of measuring and identifying time the commonly accepted form.

The most powerful man being head of the most powerul religion the world has ever scene was the Pope, by far.

You say there 'were' millions, I dont know if you are refering to newer times or to the time in question, but :

Israelites enter Canaan (1000 BC) = 4,600 people.
The destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon (586 BC) = 32,380 people
Time of Jesus (30 AD) = 590,681 people.
Year 2005 = 6.5 billion (the correct current world population).

At lesat tousands back then...
Now there are pretty much more people around and alot less believers.
Funny how we dont pay attantion to important details like this..

reply to post by Daniem


Cant we just look at the monkies calendar, I bet those smart animals have it hidden some place so we dont discover how smart they realy are !!

reply to post by Essan


And the proof of this 4,607,003,567. is where ??
Is it from he secret monkey calendar ?

I think that AD/BC doesnt confirm the existence of "jesus" but it is circumstantial. Also someone said there are no records of jesus... well, his real name wasnt jesus and there is no hebrew translation of his true name to jesus.

His name was Yehoshua, or Yeshua , which translates to Joshua today(they shortened the character "ha" from some names back then) Sorry if im off on anything, this is just off the top of my head.

Also, if they wanted him dead so bad, does anyone think they would keep records around of his existence? Just something to think about.

**Im not Christian FYI, just trying to state some facts**

[edit on 5-7-2009 by BlurryEye]

Hehe, humurous thread. No offense to the OP, but the question is indicative of narrow thinking or simply just a lack of information from which to make a sound decision on the facts.

Here is my take on this:

Before the whole AD/BC convention, most of the world used the "5th year of the Reign of King Puff N Stuff" sort of convention. This was fine until you went to some country where you had no historical knowledge.

The Romans began a serious conversion to Christianity near what we would called year 100. At that time, Christian has converted the Emporer and he decided that all of these time systems across all of these regions was making it impossible to track anything. They needed a standard. Seeing as how he was a new convert and a bit zealous because of it, he determined that the birth of Jesus was a good bench mark.

This system didn't really take off for a while, though (kind of like the metric system in the U.S.). Eventually, though, the rapidly growing church we now know as the Catholic church recognized it as official and bread it into western culture.

Fast forward to the 20th century. Secular is growing fast and people no longer want to use a naming convention that is christian based. So they change the name to Before Current Events and Current Events. They didn't change the 0 year because that would really screw with poeple.

As for other cultures sharing the year count, I beg to differ. Officially, the hebrew calendar shows the year as 5768. The classic Chinese Lunar calendar shows the year to be 4706 or something like that. African tribes use a differant system as do native amricans, although I can't find details on that, so it's hear say.

We all use the international system because it enables commerce.

reply to post by ChemBreather

You say there 'were' millions, I dont know if you are refering to newer times or to the time in question

There is an estimated poppulation of near 200 million people in 500 AD.

So, yes, tens of millions were unaware of a figure named Jesus Christ in those times.

www.census.gov...

Gday,

Originally posted by Udontknowme
How does the whole world agree that it is 2009 AD?

They don't.
Various cultures have different dating systems.

It was just the month of June - named after the Goddess Juno.
Do you think she existed, Udontknowme ?

What about Thursday, named after the God THOR.
Do you think he existed, Udontknowme ?


No?
Because calendar words and names don't prove anything at all.


K.

Gday,

Originally posted by Udontknowme
I see much more evidence towards the fact the Jesus did exist, as the bible said he did, than evidence proving he didn't exist.

There is no contemporary historical evidence for Jesus at all.
Not one identifiable person ever claimed to have met Jesus.

Originally posted by Udontknowme
I think the BC/AD thing is the smoking gun.

Like Thursday and June are the smoking gun for the existence of Juno and Thor ?


K.