Timeline for Is Jesus Christ's birthday March 28th?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
26 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 2, 2019 at 15:11 | comment | added | phoog | @Matt it would be possible to pin down a day but not a year if there were a reliable source mentioning a (Roman calendar) day but not a year. We could also get pretty close if there were a source mentioning a Hebrew calendar date, or a solstice or an equinox, or some similar phenomenon that had some relationship to the solar cycle. | |
| May 2, 2019 at 6:45 | comment | added | Sebastian Redl | @AnthonyX The Julian calendar was developed before the epoch we currently used, and didn't describe any epoch (the Romans didn't number years this way). According to Wikipedia, the AD epoch wasn't used until 525 AD. Many other epochs have been used with the Julian year organization in various parts of the world. Again going only by Wikipedia, it appears that the monk who invented AD mostly went by numerical neatness to come up with the particular epoch year, though no hard evidence exists for his methods. | |
| S Apr 30, 2019 at 13:22 | history | suggested | Ken Graham | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Improved fomatting.
|
| Apr 30, 2019 at 13:00 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Apr 30, 2019 at 13:22 | |||||
| Apr 30, 2019 at 12:52 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Apr 30, 2019 at 12:55 | |||||
| Dec 17, 2017 at 22:32 | comment | added | Anthony X | Raises a confounding point: Jesus' year of birth is uncertain, yet it is (or said to be) the epoch chosen for both the Gregorian and Julian calendars. When the epoch for the Julian calendar was chosen, it must have been based on some claim. | |
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:46 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/ with https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Dec 25, 2015 at 2:05 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Dec 25, 2015 at 3:25 | |||||
| Dec 7, 2015 at 15:50 | comment | added | called2voyage | While I agree that this answer is good for the purpose of this site, it might be worthwhile to at least mention that the New Testament doesn't even provide a plain justification for a December 25 date, and that there is some debate in the Christian community as to what time frame has the best biblical support. | |
| Feb 15, 2015 at 20:33 | comment | added | matt_black | @LarianLeQuella Actually no. The evidence for the existence of a person called Jesus isn't circular and isn't bad .My actual point was that the church never claimed christmas as his birthday: the date of the festival was chosen with no consideration at all about the date of the birth. This leaves us fairly sure it wasn't December 25 but with no enlightenment at all on the actual date, which is irrelevant whether you are religiously inclined or not. | |
| Dec 19, 2013 at 19:37 | vote | accept | Shawn Holmes | ||
| Dec 18, 2013 at 17:47 | comment | added | Matt | What is fascinating is that we don't even know what year he was born (if he existed). How could we possibly pin down a day. | |
| Dec 18, 2013 at 3:52 | comment | added | Larian LeQuella | I would assume that matt_black meant the bible as the only (circular) primary source for the whole Jesus myth. ;) | |
| Dec 17, 2013 at 18:34 | comment | added | Sklivvz | what primary sources? | |
| Dec 17, 2013 at 18:24 | comment | added | matt_black | When the primary sources make no claim about the birthday, it is unlikely we will find strong evidence about an exact date. No mainstream religious authority ever though December 25 was it (the date is arbitrary and designed to hijack the date of an older festival for christian purposes). | |
| Dec 17, 2013 at 17:56 | history | edited | Sklivvz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 characters in body
|
| Dec 17, 2013 at 17:14 | history | edited | Sklivvz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1014 characters in body
|
| Dec 17, 2013 at 16:42 | history | edited | Jaydles | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Cleaned up contentious stuff while (hopefully) retaining all of OPs key points in answering the question.
|
| Dec 17, 2013 at 15:03 | comment | added | Flimzy | I think this is the best answer that can be expected on this site. A discussion of the various theories of the date of Christ's birth would be a better fit for History.SE. A discussion of the theological reasons for various dates would be a better fit for Christianity.SE or Hermeneutics.SE. | |
| Dec 17, 2013 at 10:20 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Dec 17, 2013 at 10:20 | |||||
| Dec 17, 2013 at 9:51 | history | edited | Sklivvz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 145 characters in body
|
| Dec 15, 2013 at 11:40 | comment | added | SIMEL | I think that putting those sources here should suffice as an answer, together with the clarification that we don't know if Jesus was a real historical figure, so we can't say anything about his birthday and that all the sources are theological and do not hold up under scientific scrutiny. | |
| Dec 15, 2013 at 11:32 | comment | added | Oddthinking♦ | @Ilya: This is where it gets confusing. I can provide references to show that the March 28 is notable, but that's very different to showing it definitely was that date. | |
| Dec 15, 2013 at 10:58 | comment | added | SIMEL | Can you maybe show (theological) sources that claim that his birthday was March 28th, so that to show that Matt Groening is basing his claim on something "real"? | |
| Dec 15, 2013 at 10:56 | history | edited | SIMEL | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 2 characters in body
|
| Dec 14, 2013 at 22:10 | history | answered | Sklivvz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |