Uggh--Another Issue To Work Through-- Crucifixion Issue

[Kris]

I guess perhaps I am not eplaining myself well enough when it comes to explaining why when I read this information, it caused me concern and that I needed to find a way to reconcile it in my head. Let me try to explain a little better.  When I first deconverted, I really wanted to validate that I was on the right path.  A number of you know that I have a huge fear of the endtimes and so quitting church and not believing in god was very difficult for me when so much endtimes stuff was out there--seemingly pointing to the accuracy of the bible.  I got on sites like this to help me, and read a lot of material on how the bible is inaccurate, that archeology doesn't always validate what the bible says, that evolution explains how man got here without a god and all kinds of other stuff.  Every once in a while, I would run across an argument that was more difficult to reconcile and these would be problematic for me, because I like to think in the most logical of ways-- what makes the most sense.

 

So, when I originally read this information about a possible darkness in China during the time of the crucifixion, I was concerned-- as this seemed to validate that the bible was possibly correct in this area.  It was always huge to me that nobody other than the gospel writers accounted for this darkness.  Even when you went to the apologetics, they would cite early christian fathers who seemed to be repeating the gospels or Thallus and Phlegon, who I believe were reporting on the 29ad eclipse and not the darkness of jesus.  I ended up running accross the Chinese darkness allegation while doing some research on Phlegon and at that time, I was going on what Ashely Sykes reported the Jesuit Priests in China were saying.  He only mentioned that they thought there was some sort of unexplained darkness in 32ad-- they mentioned that this occured at the "end of the third moon".  We went through the exercise of figuring out that the end of the third moon could not be during the full moon.  I felt good in finding a way to reconcile that this Chinese information was not valid because it clearly happened at the end of a moon cycle and not actually during a full moon. 

 

Then, unfortunately, I ran across the lastest information and there was some new quotes from priest not mentioned in the prior article, along with some pretty crazy stuff from the author about pole-shifting etc. to make the darkness plausible.  The only thing that freaked me out was that there were some arguments that the chinese did not say that this darkness was on the last day due to the term po-che being mentioned in their annals.  One of the priests stated that this meant that the eclipse was not on either the first or last day.  I am not sure where he got that.  The same text also says that po-che means an eclipse that this outside the normal boundries of the ecliptic.  Another priest, Gaubin, however, seems to be the most pragmatic of the bunch and says that this entry is regarding the Chinese eclipse that happened in 31 ad on the last day of the moon in the 3rd month of the 7th year reign of Guang-Wu.  He also goes on to state that the astrologers interepeted this as a strange elipse because most of the eclipses occured on the first day of the new moon but lately they had been falling on the last day of the old moon, thus out of order.  This was interepeted as Ying and Yang being out of order.  The emperor seemed to think that this was because of him.  He pardoned the sins of everyone and didn't want to be called holy, as there was also an interpetation that this eclipse could mean that a
"Heavenly man falls dead".   This all seems logical if you simply use the date of 31 and ignore all the others who are trying to retrofit it to 33 or 32 ad, and during the full moon, so as to match the gospels.  The author of the article i mentioned does not like the 31 ad date because it doesn't fit in with his premise but I think that date is the most logical, and since there is an actual eclipse in that year, it makes sense that it would be in the Chinese annals.   I would be more concerned if there was nothing that this information in the annals could be linked to because that would have made it more mysterious.

 

Kei Thong Chan also equates the eclipse with 31ad, even though he seems to want to link it with the gospels.  And the last link I posted where a gentleman went through the annals and matched up what was said in them with recorded NASA eclipses also shows a solar eclipsse in 31 ad-- and even states how accurate the record-keeping was in the Guang-Wu years.  This is all good to me in that I can find a logical reason why the Chinese would even have such a quote in their annals that doesn't have to have anything to do with Jesus.  It would be more disconcerting to me if there was nothing to link it to, because in my mind that might be "too coincidental".  It was facts that led us away from believing in Christianity, so if new facts presented them to lead us to christianity being factual, we would have to explore them as well, correct?  You can't just say-- the gospels are a bunch of crap, so I don't believe this.

 

In my mind, there is logic that associates this Chinese eclipse in the annals to one that can be verified through NASA to be at the end of a third moon in the 7th year of Guang-Wu's reign.  Therefore, people can try to change the facts to suit their purposes to try to tie it to the crucifixion, but, in truth, the Chinese had totally different reasons for entering their data.  I think that same can be said of the information from Thallus and Phlegon, who reported a big eclipse that took place around noon-- but was a reference to an eclipse in Bythnia and Nicea-- and was probably the one that occurred in 29ad.  A lot of embellishment has been created regarding these quotes, and since we don't have their original material, we have to look at what was said by the apologists.  In this case, Eusibus is the most credible because he quotes Phlegon verbatim, and he does not indicate that Phlegon even indicated that the solar eclipse he was reporting was during a full moon, although Africanus relates this per George Syncellus.  Arthur Sykes also supported my theory that neither Thallus nor Phlegon were reporting anything other than the 29ad eclipse.

 

For me, the darkness was a miracle as described in the bible as fact.  I do not believe in what the bible says-- but if things come up that make the miracle appear to be true, I need to investigate.  I suspect that in truth the crucifixion could have been anytime-- if Jesus actually existed.  In the development of the legend, his crucifixion may have been moved to the passover time, but there is so much confusion over that, as pointed out by Overcame Faith-- that it appears that this story was made up to show Jesus as the passover sacrifice.  Then people trying to prove the gospels true poured over anything that would validate what was written-- so eclipses probably were scrutinized that were close to the time of Pilate-- hence the 29ad and 31ad eclipses.  They, in truth, may not have had anything at all to do with Jesus, but they were interpolated in as evidence.  At least that is what I am choosing to believe.  I need to have logical reasons for these particular writings because if I am to NOT believe the other things in the bible, I don't want to have to believe this either.  If that makes sense.  I am not the type of person who just can say-- I don't believe any of this because I don't believe in the bible.  I want to have a logical reason for not believing-- otherwise I could be ignoring evidence to suit my belief system.  In this case, I don't believe the evidence adds up to verification of said darkness, however.

 

Overcame, if you have some free time, would you be willing to run your eclipse model for China during the years 31 and 33?  Just so I can know when the new moons and last day moons were for those years?  Perhaps just the months of Jan through Jun if it is a lot of trouble?  I would like to confirm that the Alexander Hamilton who wrote about the Hindus was incorrect when he stated that May 2nd was the last day of the seventh moon.   I believe that it would be around the 17th of May in that year, if I am calculating correctly.

 

Anyway, I am just trying to explain myself so everyone understands me better.  I am sorry if I seem to not grasp that the bible is just plain wrong-- i do-- but I want to be able to effective address and discount information that is presented to me by christians that seem to support their viewpoint with a good arguement-- rather than just saying I don't believe, or this is just false and then not having a good explanation to validate why I feel the way I do. 

[mymistake]

Anyway, I am just trying to explain myself so everyone understands me better.  I am sorry if I seem to not grasp that the bible is just plain wrong-- i do-- but I want to be able to effective address and discount information that is presented to me by christians that seem to support their viewpoint with a good arguement-- rather than just saying I don't believe, or this is just false and then not having a good explanation to validate why I feel the way I do. 

 

Oh Kris you have the right to feel whatever you feel.  It is valid to experience emotions.  This is part of the human experience.  I gave you my best shot because I remember living with those fears and I would give anything to help.  If my experience doesn't relate to yours then I'm sorry I fell short.  Maybe you need more time.  Maybe somebody else has the angle or idea that will unlock your cure.  We probably all need time to work through it.  I know I did.  I want you to get comfortable about this stuff.  So ask anything and anytime.  We will be with you for as long as it takes.  If you are still afraid and all we can do is give you hugs then hugs you shall have.

[mwc]

     It's like you didn't even check.  You mentioned the May 10, 31 eclipse and in Lanzhou, China it looked like:
 
          31-May-10: Start:07:59:54 - Peak:09:07:30 (the interesting part of the eclipse actually happens) - End:10:23:12
 
     Since Jerusalem is roughly six hours earlier that means it started around 2am, peaked just after 3am and ended at 4ish am.  No one was on a cross.  And if this was meant to be seen worldwide then all those people sitting in the dark, since it was night time, did not see this Chinese eclipse.  It ended before daylight came to their area.  It's certainly nowhere near noon.  It doesn't matter.  You can forget about it.  It doesn't matter how sure these guys were in their old books.  They are wrong.  Totally wrong.  No eclipse happened in Jerusalem that day or plus or minus a day or so.  These events are not related.
 
          mwc

[Kris]

Not to be disrespectful--- I never said there was an eclipse in Jerusalem. As I have stated all along--- I was simply trying to find a logical reason that the Chinese might have an entry about a strange eclipse that occurred during Guang Wu's reign. I was simply looking for a logical reason why this entry was in the Chinese annals that had nothing to do with the crucifixion as reported by the Jesuits.

[mwc]

Not to be disrespectful--- I never said there was an eclipse in Jerusalem. As I have stated all along--- I was simply trying to find a logical reason that the Chinese might have an entry about a strange eclipse that occurred during Guang Wu's reign. I was simply looking for a logical reason why this entry was in the Chinese annals that had nothing to do with the crucifixion as reported by the Jesuits.

 

 

For me, the darkness was a miracle as described in the bible as fact.  I do not believe in what the bible says-- but if things come up that make the miracle appear to be true, I need to investigate.  I suspect that in truth the crucifixion could have been anytime-- if Jesus actually existed.  In the development of the legend, his crucifixion may have been moved to the passover time, but there is so much confusion over that, as pointed out by Overcame Faith-- that it appears that this story was made up to show Jesus as the passover sacrifice.  Then people trying to prove the gospels true poured over anything that would validate what was written-- so eclipses probably were scrutinized that were close to the time of Pilate-- hence the 29ad and 31ad eclipses.  They, in truth, may not have had anything at all to do with Jesus, but they were interpolated in as evidence.  At least that is what I am choosing to believe.  I need to have logical reasons for these particular writings because if I am to NOT believe the other things in the bible, I don't want to have to believe this either.  If that makes sense.  I am not the type of person who just can say-- I don't believe any of this because I don't believe in the bible.  I want to have a logical reason for not believing-- otherwise I could be ignoring evidence to suit my belief system.  In this case, I don't believe the evidence adds up to verification of said darkness, however.

     This may be what tripped me up.  It looks like this "darkness" and how it relates to the gospels is what concerns you.  But it's just plain dark at night.  Always.

 

     I'm not sure what the problem is since it doesn't matter that any Chinese saw/didn't see anything.  Maybe some Polynesians saw something?  Is that an issue to be connected to a story thousands of miles away on entirely different dates?

 

          mwc

[Margee]

Kris my darling.....I don't know you but I have great feelings for my friends here on the board and that includes you my friend. I'm not a bible scholar like all the rest but I love to sit here and try to take in some of this stuff. I get so pissed off when I see how this stuff tortures you. Even if I gave you the right detail, it wouldn't satisfy you because this is about PTSD. I know because I suffer from it. I am getting help for mine and I hope you will also. When my mind gets set on a detail, I have to catch myself and say out loud; ''STOP"    I hold up my hand like a stop sign and remind myself that it is an intrusive thought coming from my brain. Please hon, don't let these intrusive thoughts kill you. The brainwashing you got from those people are NOT WORTH IT!!! Life can be real good again but we who have been brainwashed need to be in full control of it at all times. We need to take charge and be the masters of our brain.

 

I wish so much I could answer the right question to help end all this, but it wouldn't work anyway. I suffer in a different way then you. NOBODY can ever answer all the questions I have. There isn't enough information on the internet when I'm in one of my obsessive moods. There could be 1,000 pages of information and it won't satisfy me. I have to get up from the computer and go dance in my kitchen. I hope you do the same today hon.  I give you a big hug cause I know how much this stuff hurts us!!!

 

Now go dance in the kitchen today and celebrate life!! And I sincerely, from the bottom of my heart hope that I haven't offended you because that is not my intent. I care for you as an EX-c friend.

[Kris]

Thanks Margee. I believe you are right about the PSTD. I have said that I suffer from this myself!! I am trying to relax, but it is hard.

 

When I read through this thread, I still am not sure people understand my issue.

[Kris]

MWC. For me, the allegatation that the Chinese reported some sort of strange darkness in their annals is the crux of my concern. If you read the original post I made on Friday, the author tried to tie pole shifting and the loss of an hour to show how the Chinese would see something weird during the middle of the month of a moon cycle in April 33ad. He also tries to explain that one of the Jesuits thought that this eclipse was po-Che and said this meant it was an eclipse that was neither on the first or last day. That is the crux of what bothered me. I am trying to provide good answers to rebut his allegations so I can stop worrying about them.

 

With regard to the po-Che. All throughout the first article I posted, all indications were that the eclipse in question was on the last day of the moon cycle--- whether it be the last day if the third month of the moon cycle or the. Last day if the seventh month. The author himself stated that po-Che also meant an eclipse outside the bounds of the ecliptic. He also states that there were Chinese official missives addressing rhus eclipse and the fact that the Chinese felt it occurred on the last day of the moon and not the first day of the new moon and that this had been happening lately--- ting and tan were out if balance. The emperor was upset over this. The author of the article also states that this type of occurrence means that a heavenly man falls dead--- I think the emperor thought this may have meant him and put a stop to being referred to as holy so that he might live. Anyway, I think this is why the eclipse was reported. I think that the Jesuit Gaubin also believed what I just explained and disagreed with the other Jesuits who tried to tie this eclipse to the crucifixion. He thought this eclipse was the on they occurred in 31 ad.

 

NASA shows the May 10, 31 eclipse as happening on the first day if a new moon-- but perhaps the Chinese miscalculated a bit and thought this was the last day of the former month--- or they just didn't know this eclipse was even going to happen and the scrambled when it did.

 

I think the fact that throughout the thread of this story, the eclipse was identified as being on the last day of a month and the Chinese used moon cycles for their months that no matter what the author of the article says-- the last days of the month would not be during a full moon. The author makes some inferences that aren't supported by the text. So, I think that is ultimately the answer. But his argument threw me off a bit. Mix have to hang my hat on the eclipse being on the last day and the emperor being upset about this because he thought it might be a sign he could die

[Overcame Faith]

Thanks Margee. I believe you are right about the PSTD. I have said that I suffer from this myself!! I am trying to relax, but it is hard.

 

When I read through this thread, I still am not sure people understand my issue.

 

Kris, I think what Margee wrote is very wise and I think you understood her message.  I'm glad you did.

 

From my experience with working with you over the last several years, what I see is that you get fixated on particular and precise points and what you need is help getting past those particular points that are bothering you.  The problem for people who are trying to help you is that they (and I) try to offer you a larger perspective which logically dispels the particular point which is bothering you.

 

Take, for example, the issue of an eclipse in China.  If, as I explained a few posts back, the Gospel of John contradicts the synoptic Gospels about there having been darkness while Jesus was crucified, then the logical conclusion is either that the synoptic Gospels were wrong about there having been darkness or John was wrong with its timeline of events and the lack of darkness.  Or, most importantly, they were both wrong.  If only one was wrong, which is logically the minimum necessary conclusion, then that proves that the four Gospels are not reliable.  Since they are not reliable, there is no basis to believe that there was darkness in Jerusalem while Jesus (if he existed) was being crucified.  This is especially so since the synoptic Gospels say the darkness lasted for three hours!  As others have pointed out, there is no solar eclipse which lasts for three hours because it is physically impossible.

 

So, let's say, as you seem worried about, that the darkness caused by an eclipse was a miracle of God.  For God to perform this miracle of a three hour total eclipse of the sun, he would have to synchronize the motions of the earth and moon in such a way that the moon stayed in front of the sun in relation to Jerusalem for three solid hours.  That means he would have to adjust the speed of the earth's rotation as well as the revolution of the moon around the earth.  Imagine what that would have caused.  There would be tidal waves of enormous proportions, the lunar calendar would have been thrown off, the tides on earth would be changed, daylight in Jerusalem would have been three hours longer and the nighttime on the other side of the earth would also have been longer that day.  No one reported such catestrophic events.  The only response would be that somehow God's miracle cured all of those problems.  Think about that, Kris.  Not only would God have to prevent the catastrophies that would have followed the original miracle, but he would also have to return the earth and moon to their respective positions as if the original miracle had not occurred.  Then he would have had to perform another miracle to have prevented the catastrophies that would have ensued by his placing the earth and moon back to where they should have been.  The miracles must go on and on until the very thought is ridiculous.

 

Let's say that the alleged three hour period of darkness in Jerusalem was a very local event.  For example, if we assume it actually happened, it might be something as simple as a very thick cloud cover.  If that is the case, then what happened in China has no significance at all.  What is more, such a local event would not be a miracle but a very explainable phenomenon.  Even so, we still have the contradictions between the synoptic Gospels and John with their important logical implications.

 

Now, let's take it a step further.  Let us assume that somehow we could prove that there was a three hour period of darkness in Jerusalem on whatever date you want to insert.  Just because that happened does not prove that it was while Jesus was being crucified (assuming the crucifixion actually occurred).  In order to connect the events in time, one must know the precise date and time of Jesus' crucifixion and that date and time must coincide exactly with this period of darkness.  This is impossible because, if we assume Jesus was actually crucified, NO ONE knows exactly when that event occured.  NO ONE!!  These dates people give are nothing but conjecture without reliable proof to back up their claims.

 

Now, let's take the final step.  Let's assume that Jesus was actually crucified during the exact time of a three hour period of darkness in Jerusalem and it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.  All that would do is to make a connection in time but would not prove a cause and effect association.  In other words, it would not prove that it was because Jesus was being crucified that there was darkness.  I'll give you an example of what I am getting at.

 

Let's assume that someone wrote a book about the events surrounding 911.  In the book, the author wrote that America had been a sinful nation and God decided to punish America for its sinfulness.  So God arranged for 19 terrorists to fly planes into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon and destroy those buildings and kill some 3,000 people.  Now assume that 2,000 years pass and archaeologists discover this book which was somehow preserved for all those years.  They read it and for the first time they learn about 911.  They get curious and do further excavations and they discover that there really was an attack on 911.  What is more, they do very indepth and detailed research and learn that America was, indeed, a sinful nation (whatever that means) prior to the events of 911.

 

My question for you to ponder is would the discovery of the book and proof that there really was a 911 and that America was a "sinful" nation make the claims of the book's author that the attack was a judgment from God true?

[slave2six]

Good stuff OF. 

 

For me, the entire narrative is extremely suspect:

1. Jesus was born in Bethlehem, five miles away from Jerusalem, and a "multitude of the heavenly host" showed up and sang but no one saw them except a few shepherds? Very bad marketing on god's part, that.
    
2. Herod ordered the slaughter of the innocents and there is no record of this outside the Bible?
    
3. Jesus magically disappears and escapes a crowd of people who are trying to heave him off a cliff?
    
4. There's a storm so powerful that experienced fishermen are terrified for their lives but Jesus was asleep through the whole thing? Forget about faith, how about the physics of it all. Who can sleep when a boat is tossing your body around like a rag doll?
    
5. There was sudden darkness during Jesus' crucifixion but there is no record of this except in the Bible?
    
6. Jesus came back to life but didn't show himself to, say, Pilat or Caiaphas or any of the other people who allegedly had him crucified? What sense does that make?
    
7. A bunch of dead people came to life at the resurrection of Christ and no one unaffiliated with the writers of the NT bothered to make note of this? 
    
8. Jesus disappears into the sky, rather than hanging around to make sure that his church gets off on the right foot?
    
9. One of god's first acts after whisking Jesus away was to kill a couple of people who lied to Peter about their income? ("Jesus loves you and died for your sins. What do you mean you didn't give us all your money? You're dead sucka!")

It's all far too ridiculous to take seriously.

[Overcame Faith]

Kris,

 

In an earlier post you asked me to look at my computer astronomy program and let you know the dates of the new moon and the last day of that moon for the months of January through June in the years 31 a.d. and 33 a.d.  I have finally had a chance to look at 31 a.d. and the results are set forth below.  I will post the same thing for 33 a.d. as soon as I find the time to get to it.  Bear in mind, that using this program, I must look at the moon as the program shows it and determine when the new moon began and when was the last phase of the moon for each moon period.  That is not exactly scientifically accurate so the actual dates may be off by a day or two, but should be close enough for your purposes.

 

31 a.d.

 

Jan 11 (new moon); Feb 8 (last day of this moon cycle).

Feb 9 (new moon); Mar 10 (last day of this moon cycle)

Mar 11 (new moon); Apr 8 (last day of this moon cycle)

Apr 9 (new moon); May 8 (last day of this moon cycle)

May 9 (new moon); Jun 6 (last day of this moon cycle)

Jun 7 (new moon); Jul 6 (last day of this moon cycle)

[Kris]

Thanks for doing this OF!!

[mwc]

MWC. For me, the allegatation that the Chinese reported some sort of strange darkness in their annals is the crux of my concern. If you read the original post I made on Friday, the author tried to tie pole shifting and the loss of an hour to show how the Chinese would see something weird during the middle of the month of a moon cycle in April 33ad. He also tries to explain that one of the Jesuits thought that this eclipse was po-Che and said this meant it was an eclipse that was neither on the first or last day. That is the crux of what bothered me. I am trying to provide good answers to rebut his allegations so I can stop worrying about them.

     You want to rebut some silly earth-tilting theory?  How about the fact that he didn't actually demonstrate that the earth tilted?  It kind of rebuts itself.

 

With regard to the po-Che. All throughout the first article I posted, all indications were that the eclipse in question was on the last day of the moon cycle--- whether it be the last day if the third month of the moon cycle or the. Last day if the seventh month. The author himself stated that po-Che also meant an eclipse outside the bounds of the ecliptic. He also states that there were Chinese official missives addressing rhus eclipse and the fact that the Chinese felt it occurred on the last day of the moon and not the first day of the new moon and that this had been happening lately--- ting and tan were out if balance. The emperor was upset over this. The author of the article also states that this type of occurrence means that a heavenly man falls dead--- I think the emperor thought this may have meant him and put a stop to being referred to as holy so that he might live. Anyway, I think this is why the eclipse was reported. I think that the Jesuit Gaubin also believed what I just explained and disagreed with the other Jesuits who tried to tie this eclipse to the crucifixion. He thought this eclipse was the on they occurred in 31 ad.

     Here's how all this actually works.  People like to think the Chinese were infallible...they were not.  They had a job to do just like anyone else and among those jobs they had to predict these various cosmic goings ons which include the eclipses.  Often times they simply hedged their bets by predicting more than they needed (ie. they knew, by and large, how to calculate when they would occur but better safe than sorry if there was some doubt).  But now and again they blew it.  They didn't have computers and they'd mess up even though it could mean dire consequences.  If this happens they go into "cover your ass" mode like everyone else.  This could likely be one of those times.  Something happened and they had to explain it then when it was recorded they recorded it however they wanted it recorded.  Or it's possible that nothing happened and some "prophecy" was recorded by some pro-/anti- king guy hoping it would come true and he could show his worth when the next guys came on the scene (or any number of possibilities along these lines where the story was purpose written).

 

NASA shows the May 10, 31 eclipse as happening on the first day if a new moon-- but perhaps the Chinese miscalculated a bit and thought this was the last day of the former month--- or they just didn't know this eclipse was even going to happen and the scrambled when it did.

     I would hope so.  Most all ancients reckoned things differently than we do (all that I'm aware of offhand).  We count the dark moon as the first day of a new month while they included it in the prior month (and started the new month at the sliver of new light).

 

I think the fact that throughout the thread of this story, the eclipse was identified as being on the last day of a month and the Chinese used moon cycles for their months that no matter what the author of the article says-- the last days of the month would not be during a full moon. The author makes some inferences that aren't supported by the text. So, I think that is ultimately the answer. But his argument threw me off a bit. Mix have to hang my hat on the eclipse being on the last day and the emperor being upset about this because he thought it might be a sign he could die

     My understanding is this emperor was considered a usurper and so the story could have been written to make it look as-if he had no control over things and would soon go away which would restore things to their proper order.  But he didn't die.  The story stuck around though even though it had zero basis in reality but now people are trying, very hard, to insert it into reality and since it has no place there it requires all sorts of strange explanations like "earth-tilting" (although I could accept simple miscalculation since it did happen).  Omens have nothing to do with reality so don't require explanations.

 

          mwc

[mymistake]

Thanks for doing this OF!!

 

So are you feeling better?  I do hope so.

[Kris]

I am really working on feeling better. I am really trying to stake everything that has been said and really think it over.

 

I agree that no body seems to be able to agree when Jesus was crucified. If you click on this in google, you will get eblaborative arguments for just about every year from 30 to 36ad. And they all have done sort of evidence to back them up. 30 ad people have the Yoma stuff (40 years of weird stuff in the temple), the 31ad people could use this eclipse info along with the three days and nights in the grave because he was crucified on Wedbesday, the 32ad people use Daniel, the 33ad people use the lunar eclipse and so on.

 

Like I said, I was just thrown off by it-- I don't like when things like this come up around Jesus alleged death, just because people will try to tie it to him. I do think that the Chinese were referring to the 31 ad eclipse. I also think that the heavenly man who falls dead was an omen for the emperor and that is why he was so upset--he thought he might die!! Emperors were considered sons if heaven.

 

I also think it is likely that Jesus may have been crucified but not necessarily during Passover and that is why the dates are so off in the bible. That story line may have been developed later. Originally, the study may have been that Jesus was killed in Pilates time and then over time Pilate became more of the story. Then Jesus became the the lamb of sacrifice so his killing was placed during Passover. Although I do wonder why he wasn't the atonement sacrifice!