Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

I could help you write the part about the Passion being 21 CE. No one will be convinced by a strained interpretation of Daniel.

Next rule - avoid referring to wacko birds like Eisenman (who mentions 21 CE in all his books). You may like them. But it prejudices the reader against you. Like saying you were gay but were "cured" with gay aversion treatment

As I said before you found something which is very significant. It will change the way we read the gospel if it is dressed up in a tuxedo. I have already put a brief summary in the conclusion to my new book which will be reviewed by one potential publisher. But you should and could get this published. Why not start by taking the image to the official Australian astronomical society and see what their computers come up with?

On the Marcionites "timing" Jesus's descent from heaven to the Zodiac Tertullian 1.18

Stephan Huller wrote:There is much that can be said (and has been said) about this but it all starts with this http://st-takla.org/books/en/ecf/201/2010036.html

The official documents of the Roman government said 21 CE. The date has scholarly support cf. Vardaman. Also Schwartz's reconstruction of Josephus

That site does not state that Jesus began his ministry in 21 CE. It does note that "Josephus reckons here from the death of Augustus (14 a.d.), when Tiberius became sole emperor. Pilate was appointed procurator in 26 a.d. and was recalled in 36." Luke 3:1 puts the baptism of Christ in the fifteenth year of Tiberius when Pilate was Governor of Judaea.

My use of Daniel is solely to point out that Babylonian astronomers could have predicted hundreds of years in advance that the equinox would precess into Pisces in the decade of the 20s. They certainly had the knowledge and data and ability to achieve this prediction, given the use of their data by Hipparchus in 134 BC. Therefore we have grounds to consider this cosmic event would have been much anticipated. A shift of zodiac ages only occurs every two millennia, and the apparent Aries-Pisces shift is the most definite, due to the thread of stars in Pisces forming a near-perpendicular line to the path of the sun.

I don't see any evidence for the placement of the Christ story at 21 AD, given Luke's definite statement of dating, which also aligns (perhaps intentionally given the astral correlation) with the conventional reading of the Daniel prophecy.

Oh come on stop defending weak inventions of a personal nature. The date in Eusebius is 21 CE. That doesn't need to be debated. If you "prefer" self-created nonsense then fine, onwards and upwards. I am trying to rehabilitate you. But as I've said you guys really amount to a creative thinking workshop and not serious scholarship

The fact that ideas come to a particular person doesn't mean it's "their idea." We are merely conditioned to open ourselves up to certain pieces of evidence. Its intellectual determinism. The pure soul just happens to be more open to truth. It just comes down to not being personally attached to your ideas and making yourself accessible to the greatest amount of knowledge on a subject. There's no reason to get attached to a particular idea or theory. You formerly thought this or that because at that time that's all you knew. Now you know better. Only fools are married to a particular POV

Schwartz on 21 CE = "the seventh year" of Tiberius

http://books.google.com/books?id=rd5OB4 ... CCYQ6AEwAA

Our very own DCH
http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/220859788?width=360

Robert Tulip wrote: My use of Daniel is solely to point out that Babylonian astronomers could have predicted hundreds of years in advance that the equinox would precess into Pisces in the decade of the 20s. They certainly had the knowledge and data and ability to achieve this prediction, given the use of their data by Hipparchus in 134 BC. Therefore we have grounds to consider this cosmic event would have been much anticipated. A shift of zodiac ages only occurs every two millennia, and the apparent Aries-Pisces shift is the most definite, due to the thread of stars in Pisces forming a near-perpendicular line to the path of the sun.

Yes, the shift happens over a period of just over 2000 years, but the shift occurs in increments, 1/2000th each year, and an astronomer will only observe perhaps 50 of those incremental movements.

The shift into Pisces, if important, could be heralded in periods as much as 100 years in error.

That's why we got the song, "Age of Acquarius" in the 60s, decades before the exact date of the new age. With modern methods, despite the fact that we can read the exact moment of change for any spot on earth, the excitement and sensationalism of the event trumped the astronomer in popular culture. There's no reason to believe this didn't happen 2000 years ago as well, hence the appearance of messiahs in every decade from Maccabbean times to 70 AD.

(That's assuming the Babylonian resident astronomers didn't read into the stars their own mythical culture and showed a preference for Jewish scripture.)