Calendar Off by 4 Years ??

[joshuadrox]

Is is true that our Western Calendar used in U.S. of A., as produced by some monk way-back-when, is actually off in terms of the birth of Jesus of Nazareth ??

I heard somewhere that 1996 was when the Second Milleneum actually started.

Thanks in advance for the input !

Joshua Michael

[wfaber]

You can blame Dionysius Exiguus for that blunder. He was a 6th century monk who came up with the idea of redefining the year from the birth of Jesus (AD = Anno Domini) instead of the founding of Rome (AUC = Anno Urbis Condita).

He knew that Jesus began His ministry shortly after John began his, in the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius, around 783 AUC. Tiberius began ruling in AD 14, around 768 AUC, and that Jesus was about thirty years old (Luke 3:23) when He began His ministry. That would make Jesus to be born in 753 AUC, which is what Dionysius defined as 1 BC, specifically December 25. The New millennium began a week later, January 1, AD 1.

The only problem is that Herod the Great died four years earlier, around 749 AUC.

Luke says that Jesus was about 30 years old. Estimates are that Jesus was born anywhere from 6 BC to 4 BC. Jesus probably began His ministry around AD28. He would be anywhere from 31-33 years of age.

[Tladatsi]

His exact error was when he read the chronologies he say that Octavian ruled for four years before Augustus. In Luke 2:1 it ties Jesus' birth to a tax under August Ceasar. He then counted back to the begining Augustus' reign. However, the poor fellow did not know that Octavian and Augustus were the same person.


You can blame Dionysius Exiguus for that blunder. He was a 6th century monk who came up with the idea of redefining the year from the birth of Jesus (AD = Anno Domini) instead of the founding of Rome (AUC = Anno Urbis Condita).

He knew that Jesus began His ministry shortly after John began his, in the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius, around 783 AUC. Tiberius began ruling in AD 14, around 768 AUC, and that Jesus was about thirty years old (Luke 3:23) when He began His ministry. That would make Jesus to be born in 753 AUC, which is what Dionysius defined as 1 BC, specifically December 25. The New millennium began a week later, January 1, AD 1.

The only problem is that Herod the Great died four years earlier, around 749 AUC.

Luke says that Jesus was about 30 years old. Estimates are that Jesus was born anywhere from 6 BC to 4 BC. Jesus probably began His ministry around AD28. He would be anywhere from 31-33 years of age.

[joshuadrox]

His exact error was when he read the chronologies he say that Octavian ruled for four years before Augustus. In Luke 2:1 it ties Jesus' birth to a tax under August Ceasar. He then counted back to the begining Augustus' reign. However, the poor fellow did not know that Octavian and Augustus were the same person.

aha, I see now. Thanks!

Hmmm.... so 1996 is it then.

[joshuadrox]

[QUOTE=wfaber].....That would make Jesus to be born in 753 AUC, which is what Dionysius defined as 1 BC, specifically December 25. The New millennium began a week later, January 1, AD 1.....QUOTE]

Why did he pick December 25th ??

[wfaber]

[QUOTE=wfaber].....That would make Jesus to be born in 753 AUC, which is what Dionysius defined as 1 BC, specifically December 25. The New millennium began a week later, January 1, AD 1.....QUOTE]

Why did he pick December 25th ??
My understanding is that that date goes back to Hippolytus (AD170-236), who probably got it from the celebration of the ancient Romand holiday of Saturnalia. Dionysius felt that since Jesus was perfect, that there must be some form of perfection instead of randomness in His life. Having calculated that Jesus was crucified on March 25, He must have been made incarnate (fertilized egg) on March 25 also, making his due date around December 25.

[themuzicman]

Actually, December 25th was picked to coincide with several other religious festivals (from other religions), such as the celebration of lights, the winter solstace and such. It was an "evangelical ploy".

Michael

[Tladatsi]

[QUOTE=wfaber].....That would make Jesus to be born in 753 AUC, which is what Dionysius defined as 1 BC, specifically December 25. The New millennium began a week later, January 1, AD 1.....QUOTE]

Why did he pick December 25th ??

The Romans (and other contemporaneous peoples) believed that 12 / 25 was the shorted day of the year (it was actually really good estimate given the available technology).

All European peoples celebrated the "brithday of the sun" one way or an other. The Romans had a long celebration called the Saturnellia with much merry making and eating. One day was called the Juvenilia when children were given gifts. So it was a convient time of the year to have a birthday celebration for a un-approved religion, no one could tell you were "different".

However many Eastern churches, some western churches, cellebrated Jesus' birthday on Jan 6 for many centuries. It is still celebrated in Ireland as "second" or "little" Christmas.

However, what really sealed the deal the Emporer Constantine. He decided he needed to weld his failing empire together using two new religions, Christianity and Sol Invictus (The Invincible Sun, how the Romans called Mithradism) were the up and comming new religions, sweeping aside the moribund paganism of Roman and Greece (and Egypt). He basically said "I will make Christianityan official religion just like Sol Invictus already is in exchange for your support and a few compromises".

The compromises were adoption of Dec 25 as the "Birthday of the Son (Sun)", (natalis solis invicti) the adoption of the miter (Bishops Cap), addressing priests as "father" (explicitly banned in the NT), and adopting the Sword of the Invincible Sun as the official emplem of Christianity (A sword turned down, with the handle up, which looks like the lower case "t"). It has stuck to this day. Perviously it had been the Chi Rho and the fish Ichthus. This is how the Emporer's mother Elena discovered the "true cross".

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?mode=hybrid&t=67203

In return, priests and bishops became government employees. In order for this to work, there needed to be standardization. So Constantine organized a synod to create one standardized Bible (Council of Nicea). There had been many different "Bibles" before that. One official set of Christian believes were established and all others were declared "heresy".

[joshuadrox]

[QUOTE=joshuadrox]
My understanding is that that date goes back to Hippolytus (AD170-236), who probably got it from the celebration of the ancient Romand holiday of Saturnalia. Dionysius felt that since Jesus was perfect, that there must be some form of perfection instead of randomness in His life. Having calculated that Jesus was crucified on March 25, He must have been made incarnate (fertilized egg) on March 25 also, making his due date around December 25.

Thanks! Good stuff :smile:

[joshuadrox]

[QUOTE=joshuadrox]

The Romans (and other contemporaneous peoples) believed that 12 / 25 was the shorted day of the year (it was actually really good estimate given the available technology).

All European peoples celebrated the "brithday of the sun" one way or an other. The Romans had a long celebration called the Saturnellia with much merry making and eating. One day was called the Juvenilia when children were given gifts. So it was a convient time of the year to have a birthday celebration for a un-approved religion, no one could tell you were "different".

However many Eastern churches, some western churches, cellebrated Jesus' birthday on Jan 6 for many centuries. It is still celebrated in Ireland as "second" or "little" Christmas.

However, what really sealed the deal the Emporer Constantine. He decided he needed to weld his failing empire together using two new religions, Christianity and Sol Invictus (The Invincible Sun, how the Romans called Mithradism) were the up and comming new religions, sweeping aside the moribund paganism of Roman and Greece (and Egypt). He basically said "I will make Christianityan official religion just like Sol Invictus already is in exchange for your support and a few compromises".

The compromises were adoption of Dec 25 as the "Birthday of the Son (Sun)", (natalis solis invicti) the adoption of the miter (Bishops Cap), addressing priests as "father" (explicitly banned in the NT), and adopting the Sword of the Invincible Sun as the official emplem of Christianity (A sword turned down, with the handle up, which looks like the lower case "t"). It has stuck to this day. Perviously it had been the Chi Rho and the fish Ichthus. This is how the Emporer's mother Elena discovered the "true cross".

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?mode=hybrid&t=67203

In return, priests and bishops became government employees. In order for this to work, there needed to be standardization. So Constantine organized a synod to create one standardized Bible (Council of Nicea). There had been many different "Bibles" before that. One official set of Christian believes were established and all others were declared "heresy".

Hmmm.. very interesting.

Lotsa questions.

Do you know anything more about 'Saturnalia' specifically? Didn't the god Saturn eat his children, before finally being overthrown by Jupiter .. What does Saturn have to do with the sun &/or son ?

[Tladatsi]

[QUOTE=Tladatsi]

Hmmm.. very interesting.

Lotsa questions.

Do you know anything more about 'Saturnalia' specifically? Didn't the god Saturn eat his children, before finally being overthrown by Jupiter .. What does Saturn have to do with the sun &/or son ?

Actually it was Chronos who ate his children and he was Greek god. However after Roman conquored Greece, Saturn sort of merged with Chronos and so some of the same stories about Chronos were told about Saturn.

Saturnanlia was just an excuse to have a big party, just like Christmas.

No Saturn has no connection to the son or the sun, it is just the timing around the winter solistice.

[robto]

The Romans (and other contemporaneous peoples) believed that 12 / 25 was the shorted day of the year (it was actually really good estimate given the available technology).



It was more than a good estimate - it was correct, at one point in time.

The Romans used the Julian calendar, named after Julius Caesar, which had a leap year every four years. This was much better than previous calendars, but it still drifted with respect to the "true" (astronomical) year.

We now use the Gregorian calendar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_Calendar) , introduced in 1582 by Pope Gregory. We omit the leap day in years that are multiples of 100, unless they are also divisible by 400, in which case there is still a leap day. (The year 2000 was one of these "double exception" years. There won't be another one for 394 more years!)

You can see from the difference in the calendars that the Julian calendar was off by about 3 days in 400 years. This meant that if the winter solstice was on Dec 25 in Julius Caesar's day (d. 44 BC), then by the time of the council of Nicea (325 AD), the solstice would have moved to about Dec 22. (Mind you, I'm not sure if these are the actual dates of the solstice in those years, but it's something like that.)

When Gregory introduced the reform they set the calendar back to where it was at the council of Nicea by adding 10 to the date (they went from October 4 to October 15). That's why the solstice is now on December 21/22 nowadays.

[Jaltus]

Sol Invictus was actually another god, not Mithras. Mithras later became known as sol, but this was originally a separate god. Sol Invictus was combined with Mithras in 301 AD by Diocletian, when Mithras formally became part of the Roman pantheon. See Gary Lease's article in ANRW 28.2.