Do you know what year Jesus was born?

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Here is the fly in the ointment...... it goes beyond what year, was there even a Jesus?

No, the Bible is not evidence. Why is it the “greatest person who ever lived,” did not leave a single footprint? Nada, zippo, none. No one at the time reported one single miracle. Feeding thousands using a couple fish, walking on water, healing, turning water into wine? Why is it there are no contemporary reports of any of these events?

Pretty simple, they never happened and Jesus was every bit as real as Hercules. Total scam.

DaCook

April ...the only time that shepherds were out with the lambs born.....they only have the little ones in the Spring.....4 BC maybe huh

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: visitedbythem

minor problem - there was no cencus - oops

So...the Romans didn’t take censuses?
Are you really advocating that
The Romans didn’t tax people either? the Romans never conquered around the Mediterranean, no? No Roman armies, no Roman authorities?
Seriously, no censuses

I not so sure you put much thought into those comments

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

The Christian story is not about birthdates, colour of skin or looks, the Christ story is all about love and forgiveness
Jesus was God on Earth, actually the real image of the Father, came down to earth to show the Fathers love, worked among us humanity, showing how we should live, loving, caring and helping, then was executed for questioning the religious authority of the day.
Jesus was killed because He condemned the religious people, those in His own faith and it was His own faith who killed Him. Probably if Jesus returned today, Christians would want Him dead

He didn’t question the secular authority, didn’t force His faith, just loved and cared and showed a better way

Birthdate, speculative
Looks, speculative
Skin Colour is speculative as well.

He existed, only a fool would argue that
Was He a madman
A liar
Or
Was He who He said He was, asked CS Lewis

This is a little pointless to argue over, worth asking but there is no answer

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: visitedbythem

minor problem - there was no cencus - oops

Really?

In 6 CE Rome set up the province of Judea and placed it under the newly appointed Legate, Publius Sulpicius Quirinius, who implemented several regional censuses, for the purpose of taxation, which was very unpopular amongst the Jewish populace, according to the nearly contemporary Jewish Historian, Josephus.

However, the census in Luke in the Bible was called while Quirinius was governor of Syria, not Judea. In 6CE, when he was governor of Judea, Herod the Great had been dead for 9 years, so this census must have been before that, while Herod was alive and Quirinius was governor in Syria. Caesar Augustus was implementing significant changes to the way far flung provinces were administered and a series of regional censuses makes enormous practical sense in light of those changes. The absence of a specific historical secular record for the census in no way says that it didn't occur.

originally posted by: visitedbythem
remember that King Herod had called for a census at the time, and that's why Mary and Joseph were in Bethlehem at the time. You could go back and see when they had the census

Caesar Augustus called for the census according to the Gospel of Luke.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Out6of9Balance

The Christian story is not about birthdates, colour of skin or looks, the Christ story is all about love and forgiveness
Jesus was God on Earth, actually the real image of the Father, came down to earth to show the Fathers love, worked among us humanity, showing how we should live, loving, caring and helping, then was executed for questioning the religious authority of the day.
Jesus was killed because He condemned the religious people, those in His own faith and it was His own faith who killed Him. Probably if Jesus returned today, Christians would want Him dead

He didn’t question the secular authority, didn’t force His faith, just loved and cared and showed a better way

Okay... sure.

Matthew 10:

[34] Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. [35] For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law— [36] a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.

Luke 12:

[49] I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! [50] But I have a baptism to undergo, and what constraint I am under until it is completed! [51]Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. [52] From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. [53] They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”

And, IMHO, the Church(es) has done fine job of fulfilling that promise.

I read the ? of the OP and then the answers and had to make an account to give an accurate answer here.

For starters, whoever said there was a year 0 is wrong. Not bonkers, it is understandable why he'd think such. Most people don't think about ancient history and years and such.

Between the year 1 B. C. E. and 1 C. E. there is a lapse of 1 year. Again there is no year 0. Actually, the Romans didn't even have a number for 0 or a concept for it. As 0 is nothing. And it is not a real number.

Anyhooo. If you noticed I used the terminology B. C. E. instead of B. C. and C. E. instead of A. D.

B. C. E. is "Before Common Era," and C. E. is "Common Era." These are more accurate terms date-wise to the commonly used B. C. and A. D. in Christendom, because Jesus was not born in the year 1 AD, when it was presumed he was when the Georgian calendar was introduced.

Looking to Biblical chronology we can see that Jesus was 33 1/2 years old when he died. And he was baptized when he turned 30. He died in the year 33 C. E. He died on the day of Passover, that is in the spring during the months of March/April on the Gregorian calendar, usually during the full moon, in Nisan 14.

So if he was 33 1/2 years old at his death if you count backwards 33 1/2 years from the spring of 33 C. E. you come to the autumn of 2 B. C. E.

So Jesus was probably born around September/October of 2 B. C. E give or take. We don't know if he was exactly 33 1/2 years old, he could have been a little older or a little younger. But we do know he was 30 years old at his baptism. Luke 3:23. And he preached the good news for 3 1/2 years before being put to death.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: visitedbythem
remember that King Herod had called for a census at the time, and that's why Mary and Joseph were in Bethlehem at the time. You could go back and see when they had the census

Caesar Augustus called for the census according to the Gospel of Luke.

I looked into it after reading this thread. Yeah, Caesar sent another guy to do the census there twice, but I also they believe there were multiple census taken

originally posted by: Theli93

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Out6of9Balance

The Christian story is not about birthdates, colour of skin or looks, the Christ story is all about love and forgiveness
Jesus was God on Earth, actually the real image of the Father, came down to earth to show the Fathers love, worked among us humanity, showing how we should live, loving, caring and helping, then was executed for questioning the religious authority of the day.
Jesus was killed because He condemned the religious people, those in His own faith and it was His own faith who killed Him. Probably if Jesus returned today, Christians would want Him dead

He didn’t question the secular authority, didn’t force His faith, just loved and cared and showed a better way

Okay... sure.

Matthew 10:

[34] Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. [35] For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law— [36] a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.

Luke 12:

[49] I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! [50] But I have a baptism to undergo, and what constraint I am under until it is completed! [51]Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. [52] From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. [53] They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”

And, IMHO, the Church(es) has done fine job of fulfilling that promise.

That’s beautiful but a blatant lie
You have taken scripture and only shown what suits your lying narrative

What is said before those verses
Leave that out because you are ignorant or because you want hate?
In Mathew 10, before your verse
Quote mining, lying, ignorance

".........
16 “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. 17 Be on your guard; you will be handed over to the local councils and be flogged in the synagogues. 18 On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles. 19 But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, 20 for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.

21 “Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 22 You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the "...........

Indicating Christians are to cause no harm

According to astronomer date was June 17 2BC

LINK

a reply to: dollukka

That's approximately according to the calendar we know which starts at the birth of this man.

originally posted by: dollukka
According to astronomer date was June 17 2BC

LINK

I concur, June 17th, 2 BC, according to a theory on celestial conjunctions that explain the Star of Bethlehem and how it relates to astrology.

on 17 June 2 BC, as Venus and Jupiter joined up again in the constellation Leo. This time the two planets were so close that, without the use of our modern optical aids, they would have looked like one single, brilliant star. According to Dave’s research, Jupiter was known as the “planet of Kings” and Saturn as the “Protector of the Jews”. This could easily have been interpreted as a sign that the Jewish Messiah had been, or was about to be, born. Also, Leo was thought to denote royalty and power.

Astrology Explored

That can work if Herod hadn't died in 4 BC as is popularly believed.

Reason to think Herod died in 1 B.C. based on the amount of time he served after being appointed king by the Romans.
Reason to think Herod died in either 2 or 1 B.C. based on the amount of time he served after conquering Jerusalem.
Reason to think Herod died in 1 B.C. because of the lunar eclipse that occurred before Passover.

Jesus’ birth and when Herod the Great *really* died

1972, bitch!

originally posted by: Raggedyman
That’s beautiful but a blatant lie
You have taken scripture and only shown what suits your lying narrative

What is said before those verses
Leave that out because you are ignorant or because you want hate?
In Mathew 10, before your verse
Quote mining, lying, ignorance...

Okay, if you say so, pet.

However, quote mining is

the fallacious tactic of taking quotes out of context in order to make them seemingly agree with the quote miner's viewpoint or to make the comments of an opponent seem more extreme or to make it seem that the opponent holds positions they don't in order to make their positions easier to refute or demonize.

let me point out

• I gave entire paragraphs, not single lines
  
• There is nothing in your selections, let alone those entire chapters, that contradicts the points previously made. [ref: Matthew 10 & Luke 12]

I would, however, like to point out that the first line of Luke 12 begins a quote from Jesus, rendered as"

First of all, be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.

I will also point out that the only reference to love in either of those chapters is in Matthew 10, wherein the entire paragraph reads:

[37] “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. [38] Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. [39] Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it.

Now, as far as your implication to me that, "you want hate": That could not be further from the Truth. I will gladly stand with any "man" in his Right to believe as he will. That, however, does not mean that I will not challenge their "convictions" try their demonstrations of hypocrisy, and/or be first in line to oppose them if/when they attempt to impose or coerce their beliefs upon another.

Though I despise the enslavers, it would be exceedingly arrogant to attempt imply I hate their slaves (i.e. victims).

I tend to hold that:

All words are sacred and all prophets true; save only that they understand a little...

Any earnest pursuit of Truth will always have my respect, their expressed conclusions may, however, be of a different species.

a reply to: Theli93

It is a blatant lie and you know it

Mathew 10

Jesus warns His disciples what is ahead of them

“16 “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. 17 Be on your guard; you will be handed over to the local councils and be flogged in the synagogues. 18 On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles. 19 But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, 20 for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.

21 “Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 22 You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 23 When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.”

As for Luke
Again Christ is not addressing you, Jesus addresses Christians and warns them that families will be divided over His message
Jesus warns His followers what is to come is going to be hard and painful, costing friends and family, costing beyond what a persons would consider acceptable
You seem to think the message is to you, it’s not
You are not a Christian so it’s irrelevant to you.
God promises to one day ease our pain

You read the bible as if it’s addressed to you, to everyone, it’s not

I don’t think you are lying, just ignorant

First off, to: Out6of9Balance

My apologies for contributing to a side track that was leading so far from your OP.


Second, a reply to: Raggedyman, [and any others interested in Raggedyman's and my off-track discussion]

I believe we have gone too far off topic to pursue our discussion further on this thread. If you wish to continue it further and/or see my reply to the your last post, please go to the thread, Is, "the Christ story is all about love and forgiveness" [a continued discussion].

The subject of the OP,

Do you know what year Jesus was born?

remains here.
Hopefully without further derailment.

originally posted by: DaCook
Here is the fly in the ointment...... it goes beyond what year, was there even a Jesus?

There is plenty of historical evidence that Jesus existed, including contemporary references.

JC was born around 4 BC if the most common dating estimates are used alongside historical record. In fact, whether it's true or not the 4 BC birth year seems to be well established.

Of course BC is a Western thing, so when was Jesus born when considering the age of the Earth. contrary to what some people believe the earth was not created 60K years ago. In fact, the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years (4.54 × 109 years ± 1%) old. So Jesus was born 2,000 years ago against this age, upon which I would struggle to work out the zeros.

a reply to: Raggedyman

es i have thought about this

and yes there were - various cencuses - BUT any random cencus will not do

the alledged birth of jesus - has to have :

cencus

herod still alive - how dare he die prematurely

" teh star "

and others

can you beat ALL the events into one year ???

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Could have called a census and then died, still Herods census, no big drama there. Guessing it takes a while to set up a census

Teh Star, what star, what wise men, what’s the story?
Do you think the wise men (guess how many?) arrived the day Christ was born, why?
No biblical evidence suggests the wise men arrived the day Jesus was born, in fact, evidence suggests the opposite. Evidence suggests some years latter

So please, continue.