Did the sky really go dark as biblical inerrantists insist?

Another point is that the geography in the Gospel of Mark is incorrect, which indicates that the author of the Gospel of Mark did not know Jerusalum and the surrounding areas. This would rule out his being one of the apostles.

Those must be the words of Thallus otherwise how would Africanus know how it happened??? You can say, 'well, I don't believe it. That's just a Christian insertion." First of all, if that were an insertion, why not just make up whatever ancient historian? Why just one? Probably because Africanus was legitimately quoting Thallus. Now, if you don't want to believe that, then don't. But at the same time, call all of antiquity into question, don't just single out anything just might point to the fact that gospel is an actual histrocal accounting. That's just bad buisness. A christian who was quoting Thallus! That means you have to question every single person that ever makes a quote. You'd be utterly exhausted. And yes, I believe that Thallus believed it was an eclipse, however, the way it was described and during the time it happened, it is impossible for it to be an eclipse. An eclipse cannot last for 3 hours, not on your life, nor can it occur during the Passover. Secondly, Thallus records an earthquake during the eclipse. Mighty big coincidence that all of this happens while a Judean man claiming to be the Son of God just so happens to be crucified on the single greatest day that mankind will ever know. How would you know? You don't trust that Africanus could actually have quoted Thallus, so in effect, you just bastardized your own argument. The evidence is in the man's words and the fact that it was also recorded in the gospels. See, you are assuming guilt before innocence when it comes to the Bible. If you want to bring the Bible into disreptue, let it be on your own head. But please don't piously sit there and act like you are pragmatic or are the pinnacle of objectivity when your bias blinds you. Because I've actually read the Bible and know what circumstances and what pretenses it was written under. I haven't drawn an a priori conclusion based upon an irrational loathing of that which I claim doesn't exist. Okay, then you are a pagan. Same difference in this particular scenario. The point is, you want to call into question the authenticity of the Bible, and any extra-biblical referrences that might insinuate that Jesus was a real figure in human history is immediately met with suspicion and hostility. Go figure. Really? I have never seen hundreds upon hundreds of websites and books using denuncitory remarks or any kind of special scrutiny applied to any other ancient document. I don't need any extra-biblical evidence in order to believe. However, I also believe that the account of Thallus is legitimate. I have no more reason to question that than I would of questioning the authenticity of Plato. It doesn't really matter either way. So what kind of egregious offense does cause you to think Thallus wrote it that you would spend all this time trying to refute it? If you don't believe it then be happy in your skepticism. I do believe it. What of it? Those are not original copies. Or are they? How would any of us really know? Do you care enough to find out? You should the way you take matters of historicity to heart.

quote:

---

:All of the works are copies made by other peolpe.

---

That's right. I don't have the original Bible, especially when the Bible is a collection of 66 books garnered over centuries of time. I suppose you want to call into question the Massoretic text, the Dead Sea Scrolls, or any other document that destroys the ridiculous notion that the Bible was written by King James to 'control' the people. Sure you have. I'm sure you've written a lengthy treatise on the historicity of Plato or Aristotle. How would you know if we don't have an original or even a copy of Thallus' works? That's called a "self-pwn." What, pray tell, makes it so apparent in your mind? Again, I don't doubt that Thallus considered what he saw on that day to be an eclipse. Neither do I doubt his sincerity on the matter. But according to Africanus, who should be presumed innocent before guiltly, Thallus' description doesn't make sense to be an actual eclipse. What is unnatural is having an eclipse last 3 hours wrong (musta been a real slow rotation that day) or that eclipses can occur doing the month of Passover. So much for fantasy. Yes, it was. It was recorded by Phlegon, Thallus, Mark, Luke, and Matthew. And what makes you not question the authenticity of any other documents??-- because it runs counter to what you want to believe, which is that no such person named Jesus Christ existed? No, I'm not a pantheist. Oh I see. So luke was just cribbing off Mark. And you have what to validate your claims? LOL! And what would you have differently? Rhetoric? Meaningless banter? Conjecture? Assertions? Baseless and erroneous points of incredulity?Well, I think this thread is done. Look, if you don't want to believe the accounts, then don't. Its as simple as that. But I do. And my believing or disbelieving in the Divinity of Yeshua bears no relevance to Thallus. So, if you don't want to believe in the testimony of Thallus or Africanus, or the Gospels, then don't. Let it be on your own head.

---

“It is in vain, O' man, that you seek within yourselves the cure for all your miseries. All your insight has led you to the knowledge that it is not in yourselves that you will discover the true and the good.” -Blaise Pascal

Greetings,

quote:

---

Those must be the words of Thallus otherwise how would Africanus know how it happened???

---

Africanus merely repeats Christian legends.
He then CLAIMS Thallus mentions the fantasy event.

quote:

---

You can say, 'well, I don't believe it. That's just a Christian insertion."

---

I said nothing of the sort.
You just cannot understand my argument.Let me say it again:* Thallus mentioned an eclipse - a real and normal eclipse that really happened in 29 AD
* CENTURIES later, Africanus claims Thallus mention of an eclipse is about the Christian fantasy event.There is no evidence that Thallus said anything more than refer to an eclipse.

quote:

---

First of all, if that were an insertion, why not just make up whatever ancient historian?

---

I NEVER said it was an insertion.
Why can't you understand what I write?

quote:

---

Why just one? Probably because Africanus was legitimately quoting Thallus.

---

No he didn't.
Where does Africanus indicate a QUOTE?He does not quote Thallus at all.He merely says "this darkness Thallus calls an eclipse".NOWHERE are the exact words of Thallus quoted.The ONLY thing he says about Thallus is : "...calls an eclipse"No-one believes Africanus quotes the exact words of Thallus - except you.
You are the only person I have ever encountered anywhere, ever, who thinks this.

quote:

---

But at the same time, call all of antiquity into question, don't just single out anything just might point to the fact that gospel is an actual histrocal accounting. That's just bad buisness.

---

You don't actually READ what I write, do you?We DO call all of antiquity into question.
ALL ancient writings are questioned.You are totally wrong about this.
Once more you sure complete inability to grasp the facts.
You totally ignore it when proved wrong.We DO question all of antiquity.
Sadly, YOU cannot grasp this.Please actually READ what I write.
Please actually try and respond to the arguments I produce.So far, you just ignore it when proved wrong, then repeat the same old false claims.Iasion

What in the world does that mean? You keep throwing in comments like that as though they had any meaning, anything to do with the conversation or any value in the debate or reality.We are on the science side of the aisle. To support something over here you really need to bring some verifiable info.Here is the assertion as I understand it.At sometime in the spring of a year likely between 30AD and 35AD, there was an earthquake in the area around Jerusalem at about 3PM. In addition, on the very same day the sky was darkened significantly from around 3PM to 6PM.Okay, earthquakes are pretty common in the area so the earthquake is the kind of thing that likely no one would record. I am not at all surprised that what is described as a very small, minor earthquake went unnoticed and unrecorded.However, the sky darkening for a three hour period should not just have been noticed, it would have been front page news.I can understand there not being any record of Jesus crucifixion, it was no big deal at the time, certainly not the kind of thing anyone would note, not news.But the sky darkening would. It should have been not just page one, but above the fold. That would be news. We should have reports from Greece, Rome, Egypt, Tarsus, Tyre, Cana, Bethlehem, Ahwaz and Ahbadan, literally hundreds and hundreds of reports on something like that.They don't seem to exist.If it happened, there should be records, lots and lots of contemporary records. That is the kind of thing that drives calendars, that leads to myth, that is memorable.Where is that evidence?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Not to mention the fact that he was describing an event the best he could. Probably very scard seeing whatever he saw too. I was 13 years old and seen a tornado about a half mile to a mile from me at best. I can tell you seeing it up close was scary and it did appear quite gigantic-regardless of how "big" it REALLY was. I have also seen storms that blackened the sky about as far as I could see.Not to mention, just because it is referenced as covering the entire earth, doesn't mean it did. From THEIR perspective it could have been perceived as such. It is simply words used to describe an event. Think about it. How could any of them really know for sure it covered all the earth? Apparently, they either believed that or they used an illustration that allows the mind to see a picture of alot of darkness.xXGEARXxEdited by xXGEARXx, : No reason given.Edited by xXGEARXx, : My spelling stinks today.....

quote:

---

And yes, I believe that Thallus believed it was an eclipse,

---

Great.
We agree.Thallus refered to a normal eclipse, which we know happened in 29CE.

quote:

---

however, the way it was described and during the time it happened, it is impossible for it to be an eclipse.

---

The way the STORY is told - it's an impossible event.
There is no records, no evidence, NOTHING from "during the time it happened".

quote:

---

An eclipse cannot last for 3 hours, not on your life, nor can it occur during the Passover.

---

Great.
We agree.
The story as told in the Gospel, is impossible.

quote:

---

Secondly, Thallus records an earthquake during the eclipse.

---

No he didn't.
Africanus wrote those words.But we have seen you refuse to budge on this issue.
Every scholar, every reader here, every commentary on Africanus agrees with me.
Not one single person in the world AFAIK, agrees with you that they are the words of Thallus.
I have a copy of Africanus here in my hand.
What is YOUR source ?Can you please explain WHY you think they are the words of Thallus?
The surface reading shows plainly they are the words of Africanus.

quote:

---

How would you know? You don't trust that Africanus could actually have quoted Thallus, so in effect, you just bastardized your own argument.

---

Wake up!
We know an eclipse took place in 29, it is mentioned by others, and simulations show it took place 24th November 29CE.
Do you even know what you are arguing anymore?Africanus did not quote Thallus.

quote:

---

The evidence is in the man's words and the fact that it was also recorded in the gospels.

---

Whose words?
Thallus wrote about a real eclipse - so what?
The Gospels include some fantasy stories, unsupported by history.
CENTURIES later the Christian Africanus repeated the stories and made some CLAIMS - so what?

quote:

---

See, you are assuming guilt before innocence when it comes to the Bible. If you want to bring the Bible into disreptue, let it be on your own head. But please don't piously sit there and act like you are pragmatic or are the pinnacle of objectivity when your bias blinds you.

---

Purest preaching. No content.
On and on it goes ...

quote:

---

What, pray tell, makes it so apparent in your mind? Again, I don't doubt that Thallus considered what he saw on that day to be an eclipse. Neither do I doubt his sincerity on the matter.

---

Solar system simulations confirm reports of an eclipse in 29AD.

quote:

---

But according to Africanus, who should be presumed innocent before guiltly, Thallus' description doesn't make sense to be an actual eclipse.

---

CENTURIES later, Africanus CLAIMED that Thallus' mention of a real ecplise was actually about the Christian fantasy event - so what?

quote:

---

What is unnatural is having an eclipse last 3 hours wrong (musta been a real slow rotation that day) or that eclipses can occur doing the month of Passover. So much for fantasy.

---

Great.
We agree.
The Christian fantasy event is not natural.

quote:

---

It was recorded by Phlegon,

---

Phlegon wrote during the 140s - his works are lost. Later, Origen, Eusebius, and Julianus Africanus (as quoted by George Syncellus) refer to him, but quote differently his reference to an eclipse. There is no evidence Phlegon actually said anything about Gospel events, he was merely talking about an eclipse (they DO happen) which LATER Christians argued was the "darkness" in their stories.Phlegon did NOT record the Christian fantasy event.He recorded an eclipse.
Later Christians claimed he meant their fantasy event.

quote:

---

Mark, Luke, and Matthew.

---

Religious legends.

quote:

---

And what makes you not question the authenticity of any other documents??-- because it runs counter to what you want to believe, which is that no such person named Jesus Christ existed?

---

Sadly,
it is clear you cannot grasp this concept.ALL ancient works are subject to question.
We DO question ALL other documents.But you refuse to accept this.Your mind is so closed you refuse to understand a basic concept that almost every person I know understands -
ALL ancient works should be questioned.But YOU want the Bible to be IMMUNE from question.
YOU want the Bible and Christian legends to be accepted without question.Or else we will be damned to eternal hellfire.A few centuries ago, you would have been calling for me to be burnt at the stake.
Fortunately, the Church lost.
We know theor stories are nonsense now.Your fire and brimstone speeches are WORTHLESS.
Your beliefs are NONSENSE.Iasion

Which chapter and verse.ThanksBrian.

Could you give me the context in which this claim is written. THe paragraph before and after?? A lot of times people take words out of context to make a point that is not true (not always intentionally)> This is known as 'quote mining'.Unfortunately, you can't. There are not extant works of Thallus. You don't know what Thallus really said, you only know what Africanus said Thallus said, and Africanus had a political point to make.

Greetings,The works of Julius Africanus can be found here:Bible History Tools and Resources - AD and BCIasion

Yet, that does not give us the works of Thallus.. just a biased reference to them.

Its easy to show that no solar eclipse matches up with passover anytime near 30 CE. Here is a list of eclipses (note that one must ignore the partials and annulars, since only total eclipses make it dark):http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEcat/SEcatalog.htmlyes, there was a really cool total eclipse that went right through Jerusalem in 29 CE! AH, but it did that in November, not anywhere near passover, and certainly didn't last for three hours.This is really very simple. That eclipse was clearly a memorable event. The writer of "Mt" wasn't born yet. He heard stories from his grampa or whoever, figured it was somewhere around the same time, and put 2 and 2 together to get 5. In the same way, he exaggerated the eclipse to last 3 hours, added an earthquake, and added a big group of walking zombies wandering around for two days, then storming Jerusalem, just to spice it up.Of course, even if such a packet of godly signs occured, it has to be pretty amazing that none of it is mentioned in any non-biblical source - not Josephus, not nothin'. It's almost as if it didn't happen.Just for our reference, here is the whole thing, from Mt 27 in the NIV:

quote:

---

From the sixth hour until the ninth hour darkness came over all the land. About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"”which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"
When some of those standing there heard this, they said, "He's calling Elijah."

​

Immediately one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink. The rest said, "Now leave him alone. Let's see if Elijah comes to save him."

​

And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.

​

At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split. The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus' resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

---

Have a fun day-

yes a christian from the 9th century! this is just wrong, claiming someone said something doesn't make it true, i mean there isn't even any documents to prove he said it! this is an argument from athority umm what? people have pointed out that there was one in 29 ad, theres a page that shows it, how has he bastardized his own arguement? he just don't understand him ok by your logic, if someone finds someone quoting paul as saying he likes teh buttsekz 600 years from now in a document then its right? i question the bible because so much of it is unverifible other than the places its stories take place insecond hand quotes are useless and not verifible oh rrrriigght, sure you aren't.. you are making a priori conclusion - that someones quote of a quote is right because it verifies your book if you don't why are you defending it as if its right? you have no way to virify it as authentic. what of it?! its important to find the truth in the matter. you think history only is right if it agrees with your views, this is not how historic science works. we are out to find if he really said this or not, not look at it and go "wow this reinforces my beliefs already!" then you don't bother to read anything else, people question works by many people including greeks romans and the egyptian writers - history was pretty questionable it still is they are religious documents not historic ones, the bible is full of myths and legends - the stuff about king james is nonsense he did it to put his name in history as one of the first english bibles dude, this is nonsense, YOU don't know if its true eather, the default is that he didn't since there is no proof he did oh come on there was a real eclipse in 29 ad, all the bible does is add a dramatic effect by making a 6 min long eclipse into a 3 hour one proof that phelgon wrote about christ? his works we have arn't about christ, and anything else is just attributed to him which is not very believible do you even read the bible? luke said he was writing down stuff he learned from others. which could mean he wrote down what christians believed about christ which included the writings of the author of mark! for someone who claims he knows his bible you don't know much if you have to ask this i guess willful ignorance is your lot then? and from your hardline posts you do think thallus is relevent since it reflects your fragal beliefs. nice ending threat by the way..

Greetings,

quote:

---

Yet, that does not give us the works of Thallus.. just a biased reference to them.

---

Hmmm..
Do you really still not get it?
The works of Thallus do NOT EXIST anymore!
A very simple concept, but causing so much argument.And what on earth do you mean by "biased?
What is your point?Iasion

That was my point.You can't say 'thallus said' xxx. You can only say that 'Africanus claimed that thallus said'. Since , from a historical point of view, an eclipse did not happen during the time that Africanus said thallus said happen, we can be sure that Africanus was wrong about his interpretation of Thallus.

Greetings,

quote:

---

You can't say 'thallus said' xxx. You can only say that 'Africanus claimed that thallus said'.

---

Correct.
If I have used the phrase "Thallus said..." it means "according to Africanus".

quote:

---

Since , from a historical point of view, an eclipse did not happen during the time that Africanus said thallus said happen,

---

Doh.
First you state "you can't say Thallus said xxx"
Then you state "when Thallus said [it] happen[ed]"Did you really not realise you contradicted yourself?Which is it?
Do we know what Thallus said or not?
You can't seem to make up your mind.Anyway,
There WAS an eclipse in 29CE.When do YOU claim Thallus said the eclipse happened?
Because there is no evidence at all for that.

quote:

---

we can be sure that Africanus was wrong about his interpretation of Thallus.

---

What?
How?We DO know there WAS an eclipse in 29CE,
all the evidence suggests he refered to that.Iasion