A Question About The Crucifixion

[BluePhantom]

"The Gospel of Luke account appears to describe the event as an eclipse, and some non-Christian writers dismissed it in these terms. However, the biblical details do not accord with an eclipse: a solar eclipse could not have occurred on or near the Passover, when Jesus was crucified, and would have been too brief to account for three hours of darkness. The maximum possible duration of a total solar eclipse is seven minutes and 31.1 seconds.[35] A total eclipse on 24 November 29 CE was visible slightly north of Jerusalem at 11:05 AM.[36] The period of totality in Nazareth and Galilee was one minute and forty-nine seconds, and the level of darkness would have been unnoticeable for people outdoors."
Crucifixion darkness - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

As with most religious things, you either take it on faith or ya don't.

Well I generally don't take Wiki as a very reliable source, but because my interest is now piqued I looked at the NASA database (which can be found here Catalog of Solar Eclipses 0001 to 0100) and the only one I found that comes close to matching the time frame and the area is this one (NASA - Total Solar Eclipse of 29 November 24) but the epicenter is nowhere near Jerusalem. The shadow does move in the general vicinity, but boy it would be slight if even noticeable.

I think the best case scenario to argue for a historical event would be to suggest that stories of an eclipse that hit the Arabian Peninsula and the crucifixion account were linked together through oral tradition, exaggerated, and eventually recorded by the author of Mark as occurring simultaneously at Jerusalem when, in fact, they didn't. The Mark account was later copied by the authors of Matthew and Luke, and in the case of Matthew exaggerated again or perhaps linked to a separate tectonic event that also took place somewhere else at a completely different time and was again spliced into the story. That would actually fit very well with how stories developed through oral tradition in ancient times. That's the best case that I think can be made.

Or you can believe it was a divinely inspired event.

Wiki isn't the source but the compiler of the source(s) like Drudge isn't the source of news but compiles various conservative sources in one place.

Yes I know what Wiki is, Delta

 

[Delta4Embassy]

"The Gospel of Luke account appears to describe the event as an eclipse, and some non-Christian writers dismissed it in these terms. However, the biblical details do not accord with an eclipse: a solar eclipse could not have occurred on or near the Passover, when Jesus was crucified, and would have been too brief to account for three hours of darkness. The maximum possible duration of a total solar eclipse is seven minutes and 31.1 seconds.[35] A total eclipse on 24 November 29 CE was visible slightly north of Jerusalem at 11:05 AM.[36] The period of totality in Nazareth and Galilee was one minute and forty-nine seconds, and the level of darkness would have been unnoticeable for people outdoors."
Crucifixion darkness - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

As with most religious things, you either take it on faith or ya don't.

Well I generally don't take Wiki as a very reliable source, but because my interest is now piqued I looked at the NASA database (which can be found here Catalog of Solar Eclipses 0001 to 0100) and the only one I found that comes close to matching the time frame and the area is this one (NASA - Total Solar Eclipse of 29 November 24) but the epicenter is nowhere near Jerusalem. The shadow does move in the general vicinity, but boy it would be slight if even noticeable.

I think the best case scenario to argue for a historical event would be to suggest that stories of an eclipse that hit the Arabian Peninsula and the crucifixion account were linked together through oral tradition, exaggerated, and eventually recorded by the author of Mark as occurring simultaneously at Jerusalem when, in fact, they didn't. The Mark account was later copied by the authors of Matthew and Luke, and in the case of Matthew exaggerated again or perhaps linked to a separate tectonic event that also took place somewhere else at a completely different time and was again spliced into the story. That would actually fit very well with how stories developed through oral tradition in ancient times. That's the best case that I think can be made.

Or you can believe it was a divinely inspired event.

Wiki isn't the source but the compiler of the source(s) like Drudge isn't the source of news but compiles various conservative sources in one place.

Yes I know what Wiki is, Delta

Oh, gee how could I have thought otherwise?

"Well I generally don't take Wiki as a very reliable source,"

 

[BluePhantom]

Yes, if you look at it properly. The account of the darkness is found in the Synoptic Gospels (Mark, Matthew,and Luke). Matthew and Luke almost certainly copied it from Mark (Matthew in fact quotes the Mark account nearly verbatim). Mark was written 30 years or so after the death of Jesus and probably based largely upon oral tradition. When things like that occur in the Bible there are five possible explanations

a) The event happened and was divinely inspired by God

b) The event happened as a natural phenomenon by some coincidence

c) The event did not happen and the author is using metaphoric symbolism

d) The event did not happen but was added in oral tradition to enhance the story

e) A similar event took place that was exaggerated over time

In reference to the darkness I would make the following points:

- astronomers could very easily use computer models to determine whether there was an eclipse in Judea around the time when Jesus died. I have never looked, myself. As a Christian it's not something I feel is terribly important. Besides, eclipses don't last three hours so if one did occur it would fit the explanation of e better than b.

-It's hard to imagine a three hour period of darkness being symbolic of anything. I could see "Jesus died and the world slipped into darkness" meaning the 'light of the world has been taken away', or 'hope has been lost' or something poetic and symbolic like that. But one that only last for three hours is tough for my to find symbolism in. Three is a very important number in the Bible and is used a lot of ways, but it doesn't mesh well with its traditional symbolic use in this account.

- With doubt cast on a natural phenomenon, little to no historical accounting of the event, and difficult symbolic meaning, the most likely scenario is that the event was added through oral tradition and recorded by the author of Mark when he wrote his gospel. The authors of Matthew and Luke copied the account and (at least in the case of Matthew) added to it to make it even more spectacular and more representative of the apocalyptic nature of early Christian doctrine.

Yes. Of the three you mention, I lean towards c (metaphor); and/or e (exaggeration of a cloudy day).

Perhaps Mark had Isaiah 60:2 in mind:

For behold, darkness will cover the earth And deep darkness the peoples; But the Lord will rise upon you and His glory will appear upon you.

A cloudy day or a haboob crossed my mind as well. From my experience living in Arizona, I can assure you that a haboob will black out the sun completely and can last for hours.





It's probably just a case of simple exaggeration though

 

[zaangalewa]

From my recollection when Jesus was crucified, when he died, the world was shrouded in darkness. However, astronomers in China and the Americas recorded no such event (nor did chroniclers in Rome or Judea). So if the event actually happened, why didn't it show up anywhere else?

So Jesus died for everyone, but the darkness associated with the event was only seen in Jerusalem and was barely noted at the time?

I'm a doubter, but even for believers, does that make sense?

First: I doubt about that "doubter" and "believer" are indeed opposites.

Second - for "doubters" maybe something what they can believe in context with the word "dark": 95% of the universe are dark matter and dark energy. Why do we call it "dark"`? Because we have to enlighten our minds about the reality behind this darkness. The people who saw the first time the "darkness" of the dark matter and/or dark energy were extraordinary enlightened, isn't it?

 

[BluePhantom]

Yes, if you look at it properly. The account of the darkness is found in the Synoptic Gospels (Mark, Matthew,and Luke). Matthew and Luke almost certainly copied it from Mark (Matthew in fact quotes the Mark account nearly verbatim). Mark was written 30 years or so after the death of Jesus and probably based largely upon oral tradition. When things like that occur in the Bible there are five possible explanations

a) The event happened and was divinely inspired by God

b) The event happened as a natural phenomenon by some coincidence

c) The event did not happen and the author is using metaphoric symbolism

d) The event did not happen but was added in oral tradition to enhance the story

e) A similar event took place that was exaggerated over time

In reference to the darkness I would make the following points:

- astronomers could very easily use computer models to determine whether there was an eclipse in Judea around the time when Jesus died. I have never looked, myself. As a Christian it's not something I feel is terribly important. Besides, eclipses don't last three hours so if one did occur it would fit the explanation of e better than b.

-It's hard to imagine a three hour period of darkness being symbolic of anything. I could see "Jesus died and the world slipped into darkness" meaning the 'light of the world has been taken away', or 'hope has been lost' or something poetic and symbolic like that. But one that only last for three hours is tough for my to find symbolism in. Three is a very important number in the Bible and is used a lot of ways, but it doesn't mesh well with its traditional symbolic use in this account.

- With doubt cast on a natural phenomenon, little to no historical accounting of the event, and difficult symbolic meaning, the most likely scenario is that the event was added through oral tradition and recorded by the author of Mark when he wrote his gospel. The authors of Matthew and Luke copied the account and (at least in the case of Matthew) added to it to make it even more spectacular and more representative of the apocalyptic nature of early Christian doctrine.

Yes. Of the three you mention, I lean towards c (metaphor); and/or e (exaggeration of a cloudy day).

Perhaps Mark had Isaiah 60:2 in mind:

For behold, darkness will cover the earth And deep darkness the peoples; But the Lord will rise upon you and His glory will appear upon you.

A cloudy day or a haboob crossed my mind as well. From my experience living in Arizona, I can assure you that a haboob will black out the sun completely and can last for hours.





It's probably just a case of simple exaggeration though

Of course the problem with the haboob idea is that there is nothing particularly miraculous about a massive sand storm in the desert. It's a pretty common event...well, at least not terribly uncommon...so if that's all it was, the authors would have probably just said that right after Jesus died Jerusalem was hit by a massive haboob (which sounds kind of dirty actually). I believe we are starting to grasp at straws here....it's probably just an exaggerated account that was tossed in to enhance the story. That will piss off literal interpreters of the Bible, but it's the most reasonable explanation.

 

[Meriweather]

Of course the problem with the haboob idea is that there is nothing particularly miraculous about a massive sand storm in the desert. It's a pretty common event...well, at least not terribly uncommon...so if that's all it was, the authors would have probably just said that right after Jesus died Jerusalem was hit by a massive haboob (which sounds kind of dirty actually). I believe we are starting to grasp at straws here....it's probably just an exaggerated account that was tossed in to enhance the story. That will piss off literal interpreters of the Bible, but it's the most reasonable explanation.

In those days, time and writing materials were at a premium. The authors wouldn't pause their narration for a weather report unless the weather was crucial in underscoring a point they wished to make. In Judaism, darkness covering the land was often used to indicate dark tidings--but this was invariably followed by the encouragement God was still shining above all this. In more modern parlance we might say, "It's always darkest before the dawn."

 

[haissem123]

In Luke 23:44-46 there is the record of darkness falling upon the land during Christ's crucifixion. "And it was now about the sixth hour, and darkness fell over the whole land until the ninth hour, the sun being obscured; and the veil of the temple was torn in two. And Jesus, crying out with a loud voice, said, 'Father, into Thy hands I commit My spirit.' And having said this, He breathed His last." Is there any non-biblical evidence of the day of darkness mentioned at Christ's death? The answer is yes, there is.

"Circa AD 52, Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time. This work itself has been lost and only fragments of it exist in the citations of others. One such scholar who knew and spoke of it was Julius Africanus, who wrote about AD 221. In speaking of Jesus’ crucifixion and the darkness that covered the land during this event, Africanus found a reference in the writings of Thallus that dealt with this cosmic report. Africanus asserts: 'On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.'"1

One might wonder why other historians of the time did not also mention the darkness. First of all, the darkness was localized, so it would not be a widespread phenomena that other historians would naturally record. Second, other historians like Pliny, Tacitus, and Josephus generally were focusing on events that could be verified and were not based in the miraculous. The fact that Thallus mentions the darkness tells us that something did happen, and that there is extrabiblical citation for the event.

Is There Non-Biblical Evidence of a Day of Darkness at Christ s Death Luke 23 44-46 Historians

"The fact that Thallus mentions the darkness tells us that something did happen, and that there is extrabiblical citation for the event."

Umm... sorry but Thallus did NOT mention any event. Some guy named Africanus 200 years later mentioned it. So a guy, 1800 years ago, wrote about a passage, which he read about in a book that is lost to history, that maybe might have been talking about Jesus... PROOF!!!

cant we dial back the sun and see when the solar eclipses happened in time? would take much to figure out the exact date they all occured. so go on and do some astrology or is it astronomy home work?

 

[BluePhantom]

Of course the problem with the haboob idea is that there is nothing particularly miraculous about a massive sand storm in the desert. It's a pretty common event...well, at least not terribly uncommon...so if that's all it was, the authors would have probably just said that right after Jesus died Jerusalem was hit by a massive haboob (which sounds kind of dirty actually). I believe we are starting to grasp at straws here....it's probably just an exaggerated account that was tossed in to enhance the story. That will piss off literal interpreters of the Bible, but it's the most reasonable explanation.

In those days, time and writing materials were at a premium. The authors wouldn't pause their narration for a weather report unless the weather was crucial in underscoring a point they wished to make. In Judaism, darkness covering the land was often used to indicate dark tidings--but this was invariably followed by the encouragement God was still shining above all this. In more modern parlance we might say, "It's always darkest before the dawn."

Yeah I get that and alluded to it earlier. An allegorical reading is a very reasonable explanation. Stuff like dust storms and such are possible, but I agree that trying to use things like that or forcing an eclipse in an area that doesn't seem to work is a hell of a reach. To me, it's forcing an explanation out of....oh....desperation to make it all work in order to preserve a literal reading, perhaps. I agree that it's allegorical or simply some poetic license taken by the author to underscore a point.

 

[BluePhantom]

In Luke 23:44-46 there is the record of darkness falling upon the land during Christ's crucifixion. "And it was now about the sixth hour, and darkness fell over the whole land until the ninth hour, the sun being obscured; and the veil of the temple was torn in two. And Jesus, crying out with a loud voice, said, 'Father, into Thy hands I commit My spirit.' And having said this, He breathed His last." Is there any non-biblical evidence of the day of darkness mentioned at Christ's death? The answer is yes, there is.

"Circa AD 52, Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time. This work itself has been lost and only fragments of it exist in the citations of others. One such scholar who knew and spoke of it was Julius Africanus, who wrote about AD 221. In speaking of Jesus’ crucifixion and the darkness that covered the land during this event, Africanus found a reference in the writings of Thallus that dealt with this cosmic report. Africanus asserts: 'On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.'"1

One might wonder why other historians of the time did not also mention the darkness. First of all, the darkness was localized, so it would not be a widespread phenomena that other historians would naturally record. Second, other historians like Pliny, Tacitus, and Josephus generally were focusing on events that could be verified and were not based in the miraculous. The fact that Thallus mentions the darkness tells us that something did happen, and that there is extrabiblical citation for the event.

Is There Non-Biblical Evidence of a Day of Darkness at Christ s Death Luke 23 44-46 Historians

"The fact that Thallus mentions the darkness tells us that something did happen, and that there is extrabiblical citation for the event."

Umm... sorry but Thallus did NOT mention any event. Some guy named Africanus 200 years later mentioned it. So a guy, 1800 years ago, wrote about a passage, which he read about in a book that is lost to history, that maybe might have been talking about Jesus... PROOF!!!

cant we dial back the sun and see when the solar eclipses happened in time? would take much to figure out the exact date they all occured. so go on and do some astrology or is it astronomy home work?

This is why I try to always read the entire thread before responding.

 

[haissem123]

In Luke 23:44-46 there is the record of darkness falling upon the land during Christ's crucifixion. "And it was now about the sixth hour, and darkness fell over the whole land until the ninth hour, the sun being obscured; and the veil of the temple was torn in two. And Jesus, crying out with a loud voice, said, 'Father, into Thy hands I commit My spirit.' And having said this, He breathed His last." Is there any non-biblical evidence of the day of darkness mentioned at Christ's death? The answer is yes, there is.

"Circa AD 52, Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time. This work itself has been lost and only fragments of it exist in the citations of others. One such scholar who knew and spoke of it was Julius Africanus, who wrote about AD 221. In speaking of Jesus’ crucifixion and the darkness that covered the land during this event, Africanus found a reference in the writings of Thallus that dealt with this cosmic report. Africanus asserts: 'On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.'"1

One might wonder why other historians of the time did not also mention the darkness. First of all, the darkness was localized, so it would not be a widespread phenomena that other historians would naturally record. Second, other historians like Pliny, Tacitus, and Josephus generally were focusing on events that could be verified and were not based in the miraculous. The fact that Thallus mentions the darkness tells us that something did happen, and that there is extrabiblical citation for the event.

Is There Non-Biblical Evidence of a Day of Darkness at Christ s Death Luke 23 44-46 Historians

"The fact that Thallus mentions the darkness tells us that something did happen, and that there is extrabiblical citation for the event."

Umm... sorry but Thallus did NOT mention any event. Some guy named Africanus 200 years later mentioned it. So a guy, 1800 years ago, wrote about a passage, which he read about in a book that is lost to history, that maybe might have been talking about Jesus... PROOF!!!

cant we dial back the sun and see when the solar eclipses happened in time? would take much to figure out the exact date they all occured. so go on and do some astrology or is it astronomy home work?

This is why I try to always read the entire thread before responding.

why's that?

 

[BluePhantom]

In Luke 23:44-46 there is the record of darkness falling upon the land during Christ's crucifixion. "And it was now about the sixth hour, and darkness fell over the whole land until the ninth hour, the sun being obscured; and the veil of the temple was torn in two. And Jesus, crying out with a loud voice, said, 'Father, into Thy hands I commit My spirit.' And having said this, He breathed His last." Is there any non-biblical evidence of the day of darkness mentioned at Christ's death? The answer is yes, there is.

"Circa AD 52, Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time. This work itself has been lost and only fragments of it exist in the citations of others. One such scholar who knew and spoke of it was Julius Africanus, who wrote about AD 221. In speaking of Jesus’ crucifixion and the darkness that covered the land during this event, Africanus found a reference in the writings of Thallus that dealt with this cosmic report. Africanus asserts: 'On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.'"1

One might wonder why other historians of the time did not also mention the darkness. First of all, the darkness was localized, so it would not be a widespread phenomena that other historians would naturally record. Second, other historians like Pliny, Tacitus, and Josephus generally were focusing on events that could be verified and were not based in the miraculous. The fact that Thallus mentions the darkness tells us that something did happen, and that there is extrabiblical citation for the event.

Is There Non-Biblical Evidence of a Day of Darkness at Christ s Death Luke 23 44-46 Historians

"The fact that Thallus mentions the darkness tells us that something did happen, and that there is extrabiblical citation for the event."

Umm... sorry but Thallus did NOT mention any event. Some guy named Africanus 200 years later mentioned it. So a guy, 1800 years ago, wrote about a passage, which he read about in a book that is lost to history, that maybe might have been talking about Jesus... PROOF!!!

cant we dial back the sun and see when the solar eclipses happened in time? would take much to figure out the exact date they all occured. so go on and do some astrology or is it astronomy home work?

This is why I try to always read the entire thread before responding.

why's that?

Because we have already researched and discussed your suggestion at length. Relax, I am just busting your balls.

 

[haissem123]

In Luke 23:44-46 there is the record of darkness falling upon the land during Christ's crucifixion. "And it was now about the sixth hour, and darkness fell over the whole land until the ninth hour, the sun being obscured; and the veil of the temple was torn in two. And Jesus, crying out with a loud voice, said, 'Father, into Thy hands I commit My spirit.' And having said this, He breathed His last." Is there any non-biblical evidence of the day of darkness mentioned at Christ's death? The answer is yes, there is.

"Circa AD 52, Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time. This work itself has been lost and only fragments of it exist in the citations of others. One such scholar who knew and spoke of it was Julius Africanus, who wrote about AD 221. In speaking of Jesus’ crucifixion and the darkness that covered the land during this event, Africanus found a reference in the writings of Thallus that dealt with this cosmic report. Africanus asserts: 'On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.'"1

One might wonder why other historians of the time did not also mention the darkness. First of all, the darkness was localized, so it would not be a widespread phenomena that other historians would naturally record. Second, other historians like Pliny, Tacitus, and Josephus generally were focusing on events that could be verified and were not based in the miraculous. The fact that Thallus mentions the darkness tells us that something did happen, and that there is extrabiblical citation for the event.

Is There Non-Biblical Evidence of a Day of Darkness at Christ s Death Luke 23 44-46 Historians

"The fact that Thallus mentions the darkness tells us that something did happen, and that there is extrabiblical citation for the event."

Umm... sorry but Thallus did NOT mention any event. Some guy named Africanus 200 years later mentioned it. So a guy, 1800 years ago, wrote about a passage, which he read about in a book that is lost to history, that maybe might have been talking about Jesus... PROOF!!!

cant we dial back the sun and see when the solar eclipses happened in time? would take much to figure out the exact date they all occured. so go on and do some astrology or is it astronomy home work?

This is why I try to always read the entire thread before responding.

why's that?

Because we have already researched and discussed your suggestion at length. Relax, I am just busting your balls.

that's cool. sorry i'm not gonna go through all your musings. maybe some smart person will set up an program to shorten threads with an algorythm or however you spell it so we don't have to search for the best ideas or opposing thoughts .

 

[hadit]

So Jesus died for everyone, but the darkness associated with the event was only seen in Jerusalem and was barely noted at the time?

I'm a doubter, but even for believers, does that make sense?

Of course it does. Jesus came first for the Jews, THEN for the Gentiles.

 

[peach174]

Geological evidence says it did happen.
An earthquake and would have also darkened the skies for 3 hours. So it was not a solar eclipse.
Solar eclipses do not last 3 hours.
The Great Earthquake of 3 04 33 AD Global Warming And The Bible Redskynews.com
Jesus Crucifixion Date Possibly Friday April 3 33 A.D. According To Earthquake Study

 

[koshergrl]

"Phlegon was a Greek historian who wrote an extensive chronology around AD 137: In the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad (i.e., AD 33) there was ‘the greatest eclipse of the sun’ and that ‘it became night in the sixth hour of the day [i.e., noon] so that stars even appeared in the heavens. There was a great earthquake in Bithynia, and many things were overturned in Nicaea.’7 "

Per Africanus: "On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down....
Africanus writes of the darkness as a global event. Tertullian, the famous second century apologist, also hails the darkness as a ‘cosmic’ or ‘world event’. Appealing to skeptics, he wrote: At the moment of Christ’s death, the light departed from the sun, and the land was darkened at noonday, which wonder is related in your own annals, and is preserved in your archives to this day.10
"Apparently, Tertullian could state with confidence that documentation of the darkness could be found in legitimate historical archives."

With things so far back in antiquity, we have very few original accounts. What you have are translations of the original accounts that are passed down. Only plebes and know-nothings assume that this means they can't be *accurate*. Among scholars, it is accepted that this is the nature of ancient historical verification.

Darkness at the crucifixion metaphor or real history - creation.com

 

[BluePhantom]

Geological evidence says it did happen.
An earthquake and would have also darkened the skies for 3 hours. So it was not a solar eclipse.
Solar eclipses do not last 3 hours.
The Great Earthquake of 3 04 33 AD Global Warming And The Bible Redskynews.com
Jesus Crucifixion Date Possibly Friday April 3 33 A.D. According To Earthquake Study

Hate to be a drag, Peach but it appears that according to Dr. Jefferson Williams, who was the geologist who did the study the story is referring to, the reports have been sensationalized.

"There is no way I can date the exact day this seismite was formed using technology currently available (sorry Discovery “News” Channel)."
03 Dating the Crucifixion Dead Sea Quake.info

"Along with some German colleagues, I published this research in 2011...So, the earthquake in the sediments appears to have occurred more or less during the same time period when Jesus of Nazareth died but we still don’t know if the earthquake in the sediments is the same earthquake reported in Matthew. In fact, we still don’t know if Matthew’s earthquake is an accurate report of an actual geologic event. The description in Matthew could also be pure allegory."
06 Varves Dead Sea Quake.info

"This article examines a report in the 27th chapter of the Gospel of Matthew in the New Testament that an earthquake was felt in Jerusalem on the day of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth. We have tabulated a varved chronology from a core from Ein Gedi on the western shore of the Dead Sea between deformed sediments due to a widespread earthquake in 31 BC and deformed sediments due to an early first-century earthquake. The early first-century seismic event has been tentatively assigned a date of 31 AD with an accuracy of ±5 years. Plausible candidates include the earthquake reported in the Gospel of Matthew, an earthquake that occurred sometime before or after the crucifixion and was in effect ‘borrowed’ by the author of the Gospel of Matthew, and a local earthquake between 26 and 36 AD that was sufficiently energetic to deform the sediments at Ein Gedi but not energetic enough to produce a still extant and extra-biblical historical record. If the last possibility is true, this would mean that the report of an earthquake in the Gospel of Matthew is a type of allegory."
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Bummer, but from the geologist's own abstract, it appears that the story is exaggerated.

 

[mudwhistle]

I wasn't there......so I have no comment.....

 

[peach174]

Geological evidence says it did happen.
An earthquake and would have also darkened the skies for 3 hours. So it was not a solar eclipse.
Solar eclipses do not last 3 hours.
The Great Earthquake of 3 04 33 AD Global Warming And The Bible Redskynews.com
Jesus Crucifixion Date Possibly Friday April 3 33 A.D. According To Earthquake Study

Hate to be a drag, Peach but it appears that according to Dr. Jefferson Williams, who was the geologist who did the study the story is referring to, the reports have been sensationalized.

"There is no way I can date the exact day this seismite was formed using technology currently available (sorry Discovery “News” Channel)."
03 Dating the Crucifixion Dead Sea Quake.info

"Along with some German colleagues, I published this research in 2011...So, the earthquake in the sediments appears to have occurred more or less during the same time period when Jesus of Nazareth died but we still don’t know if the earthquake in the sediments is the same earthquake reported in Matthew. In fact, we still don’t know if Matthew’s earthquake is an accurate report of an actual geologic event. The description in Matthew could also be pure allegory."
06 Varves Dead Sea Quake.info

"This article examines a report in the 27th chapter of the Gospel of Matthew in the New Testament that an earthquake was felt in Jerusalem on the day of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth. We have tabulated a varved chronology from a core from Ein Gedi on the western shore of the Dead Sea between deformed sediments due to a widespread earthquake in 31 BC and deformed sediments due to an early first-century earthquake. The early first-century seismic event has been tentatively assigned a date of 31 AD with an accuracy of ±5 years. Plausible candidates include the earthquake reported in the Gospel of Matthew, an earthquake that occurred sometime before or after the crucifixion and was in effect ‘borrowed’ by the author of the Gospel of Matthew, and a local earthquake between 26 and 36 AD that was sufficiently energetic to deform the sediments at Ein Gedi but not energetic enough to produce a still extant and extra-biblical historical record. If the last possibility is true, this would mean that the report of an earthquake in the Gospel of Matthew is a type of allegory."
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Bummer, but from the geologist's own abstract, it appears that the story is exaggerated.

There is no set time of when the crucifixion or his birth was.
No matter what is found there will always be the debunkers.
They existed then just as they do now.

 

[koshergrl]

Geological evidence says it did happen.
An earthquake and would have also darkened the skies for 3 hours. So it was not a solar eclipse.
Solar eclipses do not last 3 hours.
The Great Earthquake of 3 04 33 AD Global Warming And The Bible Redskynews.com
Jesus Crucifixion Date Possibly Friday April 3 33 A.D. According To Earthquake Study

Hate to be a drag, Peach but it appears that according to Dr. Jefferson Williams, who was the geologist who did the study the story is referring to, the reports have been sensationalized.

"There is no way I can date the exact day this seismite was formed using technology currently available (sorry Discovery “News” Channel)."
03 Dating the Crucifixion Dead Sea Quake.info

"Along with some German colleagues, I published this research in 2011...So, the earthquake in the sediments appears to have occurred more or less during the same time period when Jesus of Nazareth died but we still don’t know if the earthquake in the sediments is the same earthquake reported in Matthew. In fact, we still don’t know if Matthew’s earthquake is an accurate report of an actual geologic event. The description in Matthew could also be pure allegory."
06 Varves Dead Sea Quake.info

"This article examines a report in the 27th chapter of the Gospel of Matthew in the New Testament that an earthquake was felt in Jerusalem on the day of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth. We have tabulated a varved chronology from a core from Ein Gedi on the western shore of the Dead Sea between deformed sediments due to a widespread earthquake in 31 BC and deformed sediments due to an early first-century earthquake. The early first-century seismic event has been tentatively assigned a date of 31 AD with an accuracy of ±5 years. Plausible candidates include the earthquake reported in the Gospel of Matthew, an earthquake that occurred sometime before or after the crucifixion and was in effect ‘borrowed’ by the author of the Gospel of Matthew, and a local earthquake between 26 and 36 AD that was sufficiently energetic to deform the sediments at Ein Gedi but not energetic enough to produce a still extant and extra-biblical historical record. If the last possibility is true, this would mean that the report of an earthquake in the Gospel of Matthew is a type of allegory."
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Bummer, but from the geologist's own abstract, it appears that the story is exaggerated.

Enter atheist hysteric who objects to people daring to get excited over scientific evidence, lol. The whole homosexual culture is built on less scientific evidence than this.

 

[BluePhantom]

Geological evidence says it did happen.
An earthquake and would have also darkened the skies for 3 hours. So it was not a solar eclipse.
Solar eclipses do not last 3 hours.
The Great Earthquake of 3 04 33 AD Global Warming And The Bible Redskynews.com
Jesus Crucifixion Date Possibly Friday April 3 33 A.D. According To Earthquake Study

Hate to be a drag, Peach but it appears that according to Dr. Jefferson Williams, who was the geologist who did the study the story is referring to, the reports have been sensationalized.

"There is no way I can date the exact day this seismite was formed using technology currently available (sorry Discovery “News” Channel)."
03 Dating the Crucifixion Dead Sea Quake.info

"Along with some German colleagues, I published this research in 2011...So, the earthquake in the sediments appears to have occurred more or less during the same time period when Jesus of Nazareth died but we still don’t know if the earthquake in the sediments is the same earthquake reported in Matthew. In fact, we still don’t know if Matthew’s earthquake is an accurate report of an actual geologic event. The description in Matthew could also be pure allegory."
06 Varves Dead Sea Quake.info

"This article examines a report in the 27th chapter of the Gospel of Matthew in the New Testament that an earthquake was felt in Jerusalem on the day of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth. We have tabulated a varved chronology from a core from Ein Gedi on the western shore of the Dead Sea between deformed sediments due to a widespread earthquake in 31 BC and deformed sediments due to an early first-century earthquake. The early first-century seismic event has been tentatively assigned a date of 31 AD with an accuracy of ±5 years. Plausible candidates include the earthquake reported in the Gospel of Matthew, an earthquake that occurred sometime before or after the crucifixion and was in effect ‘borrowed’ by the author of the Gospel of Matthew, and a local earthquake between 26 and 36 AD that was sufficiently energetic to deform the sediments at Ein Gedi but not energetic enough to produce a still extant and extra-biblical historical record. If the last possibility is true, this would mean that the report of an earthquake in the Gospel of Matthew is a type of allegory."
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Bummer, but from the geologist's own abstract, it appears that the story is exaggerated.

Enter atheist hysteric who objects to people daring to get excited over scientific evidence, lol. The whole homosexual culture is built on less scientific evidence than this.

Scientific evidence is fine. I find the Tel Dan Stele and the James Ossuary quite exciting, indeed. However, when one sees a headline that claims that a geological study has nailed down the exact date of the crucifixion, and then when you read that study it doesn't say that at all...you should probably go with the study itself and the scientist who conducted the study over the media headline that was designed to sell newspapers and get ratings.

BTW...only you can link a first century earthquake to homosexuality.