Did the sky really go dark as biblical inerrantists insist?

It has been said that this event was recorded by numerous civilizations, and of those documents, two are said to have survived. One account comes from Thallus, a Grecian historian who wrote the histories from the Trojan War to his own time, the second is Julius Africanus, who is more suspect because he was a Christian in the 3rd century. Both writers come after Jesus' death, so obviously this has been called into question. However, when Thallus wrote his discourse in 52 AD, which is 19 years after the event, means that he once lived contemporaneously with Jesus. That also means he was alive at the time of Jesus' crucifixion and presumably lived through the experience himself described in Luke. What is most interesting about the whole event was that Jesus was crucified on the eve of Passover which would make a solar eclipse impossible because of the positioning of the moon, earth, and sun would not have been aligned to allow for this.If there are any other accounts of this event, they remain undiscovered or time has destroyed them.Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : edit to addEdited by nemesis_juggernaut, : No reason given.

---

“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner

I know that's why I mentioned Julius Africanus. I also said that his works were suspect. I was being objective. Thallus was said to have described it similarly to Luke's gospel, as in what appeared to be an eclipse and an earhtquake that rent the ground. As I mentioned already, its not possible for a solar eclipse to occur on the Eve of Passover. So, nobody knows what darkened the saky so profoundly all over the Meditteranean, and/or what caused a contemporaneous earthquake.

---

“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner

Both Thallus and Luke spoke about 'a strange darkness.' That could be anything really, except an eclipse because its not possible for an eclipse to occur during that time of the year. "On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake." -ThallusApparently he did. Right. And the moon, sun, and earth will not align itself during that time of year. What law did it violate? Thallus recorded it and Luke recorded it. If no one recorded it then we wouldn't arguing about that, now would we? We don't know who else may have recorded it. The scrolls may not have survived. Some bold words. I assume that you have absolute knowledge of the universe then. You know, I was trying to be objective and use candor, but you went straight for the jugular. Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : add italics

---

“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner

First you say he doesn't mention earthquakes, then you say he doesn't mention darkness.

quote:

---

:"On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake." -Thallus

---

\\ If there are no extant works then how is it we know who he is? If historians keep track of people through writings, then doesn't make sense that they paraphrased his writings? I love it how atheists only call into question matters of antiquity when it points to Jesus Christ. But they have no problem with believing Plato's works. Plato's wroks have long since been destroyed by time. All of the works are copies made by other peolpe. You don't call that into question, but you call into question Julianus Africanus who quoted Thallus. Pathetic. That's because it probably wasn't an eclipse. Everyone reading the passage simply assumes that it was an eclipse. You're not very bright are you? If it wasnt recorded, whether it was an actual event in human history or not, we still would not be discussing it. Of course it was recorded. That recording is the very basis of our arguing, the only difference being that I believe it was legitimate and you don't. If NONE of Thallus' works have survived, then how would you know what he mentioned either way? You just want so badly to discredit the Bible that you are contradicting yourself along the way. I know that you eclipses occur and have occured. The only thing I mentioned was that eclipses do not occur on the Passover, hence, the 'fearful darkness' was not due to an eclipse but of something else. Obviously, the two people who recorded it, Luke and Thallus, thought it to be of suoernatural origin. Desperate ploy? Even if I had a million pieces of evidence, you'd ask for a million and one more. If you don't believe in the Deity of Christ then don't. Let it be on your own head. I wouldn't know either way and neither would you. Nor would I care.

---

“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner

I tried to be objective and say that it perhaps was localized in the Med area. The whole world could've meant the Meditteranean to Thallus. But that's not really what the argument is on. The argument is whether this event happened or not. Luke said it did and so did Thallus. Jesus spoke about the "alleged wetting." So if you base your Christainity on the Bible, then you should believe what Jesus says about it. If you malign the Bible in plenary, then what gives you the belief in Jesus to begin with. Its quite the catch-22. Secondly, there were lots of folks around at the time of the Deluge but they all died, save 8 people. Of those 8 people, there are Flood legends all over the world. While its true that their stories have taken on a mind of their own, the fact that they all contain a righteous man, world-wide innundation, a vessel of some kind, its cause was supernatural in origin, etc... Perhaps everyone did write about it and some manuscripts did not survive decay. I actually forgot about Phlegon, who also recorded it.
http://www.oxleigh.freeserve.co.uk/sstb.ch.08.htmListen, if you don't want to believe it then don't. I do though.

---

“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner

In his third issue of his books, entitled, "Histories."

---

“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

Yes, unless those books did not survive decay which is entirely possible. But, again, if you want to remain skeptical and challenge the historicity of the Bible and of certain extra-biblical writ that corroborates the Biblical account, you are more than welcome to that. However, I wonder why it is that no one questions other antiquities that sometimes come to us off of a second or thirdhand testimony. For instance, there is none of Plato's actual handwritting still in existence. Other historians that came after him transposed his documents to preserve his words. How come no one thinks to question the authenticity of his works? Isn't that incredibly biased? If the logic that undermines Thallus' account is to be considered, then all of antiquity should be brought into question in a similar fashion.

---

“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

Perhaps you've never read Plato's works. Much of it is off the wall, as it deals with mythology. But that is realy besides the point. I gave you referrences to the OP's question. There are 2 extra-biblical referrences that corroborate the gospels account. That is all that I can do. You either can believe or not believe. Your disdain tells me that you don't believe. So don't, and be happy with that decision.

---

“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

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