There have been a lot of papers on the date of birth of Jesus Christ.
We now celebrate Christmas, the Birth Day of Jesus on 24 December.
New Research indicates that Jesus was born on 24 December between 5 and early 4 Centuries BC.
This has been arrived at by calculating date on the basis of an eclipse of the moon just before Herod passed on. This occurred on March 12th or 13th in 4 B.C. Josephus also tells us that Herod expired just before Passover. This feast took place on April 11th, in the same year, 4 B.C.
The Bible was compiled later, about 500 later by Constantine, with the help of a Conclave of Cardinals.
While it seems alright to accept the date of Birth of Christ as authentic as this was compiled later,some 300 versions were prepared before one version was adopted.
“Emperor Constantine, who was Roman Emperor from 306 CE until his death in 337 CE, used what motivates many to action – MONEY! He offered the various Church leaders money to agree upon a single canon that would be used by all Christians as the word of God. The Church leaders gathered together at the Council of Nicaea and voted the “word of God” into existence. (I wish to thank Brian Show for pointing out in his rebuttal to this article that the final version of the Christian Bible was not voted on at the Council of Nicaea, per se. The Church leaders didn’t finish editing the “holy” scriptures until the Council of Trent when the Catholic Church pronounced the Canon closed. However, it seems the real approving editor of the Bible was not God but Constantine! This fact is revealed in the second counter-rebuttal to Brian Show’s first rebuttal to this article. This counter-rebuttal makes the following important statement and backs it up with FACTS – “Therefore, one can easily argue that the first Christian Bible was commissioned, paid for, inspected and approved by a pagan emperor for church use.” Of course, I’d like to express my deep appreciation to fellow Deist Peter Murphy for the great research work he did in order to write such a great counter-rebuttal!(deism.com)
Constantine requests for The Bible.
Jesus Christ.
‘have thought it expedient to instruct your Prudence to order fifty copies of the sacred Scriptures, the provision and use of which you know to be most needful for the instruction of the Church, to be written on prepared parchment in a legible manner, and in a convenient, portable form, by professional transcribers thoroughly practised in their art.[3]
About accomplishing the Emperor’s demand:
Such were the emperor’s commands, which were followed by the immediate execution of the work itself, which we sent him in magnificent and elaborately bound volumes of a threefold and fourfold form.[4]’
(Bibles of Constantine)
Related:
Birth date of Pord Rama.
As for as The Ramayana goes, external evidence is provided in the Puranas(means ‘ very old’) , Eighteen in Number( in Sanskrit) and in regional Languages of India, be it Tamil,Telugu,Kannada, Malayalam,Hindi,Bengali,Oriya,other languages .
In addition Dialects of India have this spread through word of mouth.
Though the versions vary in embellishments, the basic fact that there was a King called Rama , he had been sent to forest with his wife called Sita by his father who wanted to appease his wife(not Rama’s mother),she was abducted by a Chieftain called Ravana of Sri Lanka and he was killed by Rama , never varies.(History of The Tamils by P.T.Srinivasa Iyengar)
Reference to the Ramayana has been made in Mahabharata, which is posterior to The Ramayana.
One of the characters in The Mahabharata is Lord Krishna, whose palace has been unearthed off Gujarat coast , India.(please see my blog filed under(‘Videos)
On Evangelists who are supposed to have gone ‘beyond lust’?
Or how they look at the lighter side of Life, which is ought to be?
Or the prudish Book Stores who sell Porn Books occupying a Moral High Ground?
The insensitivity of the Evangelists?
Story:
‘A Year of Biblical Womanhood: How a Liberated Woman Found Herself Sitting on Her Roof, Covering Her Head, and Calling Her Husband “Master”’ by Rachel Held Evans.
Just ahead of the book’s release Oct. 30, evangelical author Rachel Held Evans announced that LifeWay Christian Resources had refused to stock her second work, A Year of Biblical Womanhood, which describes her humorous year-long attempt to follow the Bible’s rules for women. LifeWay, which is operated by the Southern Baptist Convention, gave no official reason for the censorship, but it wasn’t difficult to guess. Just a few months earlier, Evans had revealed a tangle with her publisher over the word “vagina,” the inclusion of which they feared would be too offensive for Christian bookstores. Evans had allowed other mild profanities (“damn,” “kick-ass”) to be stripped from her manuscript, but she drew the line at “vagina.” Her publisher, Thomas Nelson, allowed her to keep it in, but their fears proved correct.
Ask almost any evangelical writer, musician, or artist who came of age in the past two decades, and he or she will have a similar story. Thanks to a combination of evangelical prudery and corporate anxiety, popular Christian books, music and films have been part of a totally sterilized landscape. Curse words or mentions of female genitalia weren’t the only things off limits: so was any serious portrayal of evil, suffering, anxiety, or doubt that wasn’t presented in a carefully-calculated formula where good and bad were always clearly distinguishable, where pain was always resolved in redemption and hope.
Countless evangelical artists have chafed at the sanitized version of reality imposed by recording and publishing gatekeepers who seemed to live in fear of the waves of Victorian outrage they imagined would come hurtling their way if a single “damn” slipped through the cracks. (LifeWay immediately pulled the 2009 film version of Michael Lewis’ The Blind Side, a hit with evangelicals, when a lone Florida pastor complained about its vulgar language. Other authors faced questions over “masturbation” and “crapshoot.”) To many Christian writers and musicians, this extreme sensitivity seemed like a capitulation to a few overwrought objectors. But with very few exceptions, evangelical cultural producers had no choice but to surrender their creative vision to the censors and conservatives if they wanted to reach a significant audience.
Des dix qu’il a utilisé pour s’émerveiller de la complexité de la nature nd express awe t la réalité ou ce que beaucoup de s appeler Dieu.
Encore Einstein vues sur Dieu ne sont pas vraiment connus.
Il est également perçu comme un agnostique.
Maintenant une note écrite à la main par Einstein avait surface où il dit explicitement “le mot Dieu est “rien de plus que l’expression des faiblesses humaines”.
Einstein Letter..
“Une lettre manuscrite par Albert Einstein dans laquelle il appelle la religion ‘enfantin’ est d’être vendus aux enchères, avec un prix de départ de £ 1,85 millions de dollars.
Le lauréat du Prix Nobel scientifique questions l’existence de Dieu dans une lettre écrite au philosophe Eric Gutkind en 1954.
Les agnostiques juif va sur pour dire que la Bible est un “recueil d’honorable, mais encore les légendes primitives qui sont néanmoins assez puériles”.
Il ajoute: “Pour moi, la religion juive comme toutes les autres religions est l’incarnation des plus puériles superstitions.
“Et le peuple juif à qui j’ai volontiers appartenir et avec dont la mentalité J’ai une profonde affinité n’ont aucune qualité différente pour moi que toutes les autres personnes.
Il a ajouté: “En ce qui concerne mon expérience, ils sont aussi le meilleur que les autres groupes humains, bien qu’ils sont protégés des pires cancers par un manque de puissance.
“Sinon, je ne vois rien “choisi” à leur sujet.”
La Science vs le divin : Malgré bien être agnostique, Einstein a estimé une ” d’affinité” au peuple juif
la lettre, écrite un an avant l’allemand est mort en 1955, est communément appelé “le Dieu lettre”.
Now a hand written note by Einstein had surface where he explicitly says “the word God is ‘nothing more than the expression of human weaknesses’.
Einstein
A handwritten letter by Albert Einstein in which he calls religion ‘childish’ is to be sold at auction – with a starting price of £1.85million.
The Nobel Prize-winning scientist questions the existence of God in a letter penned to philosopher Eric Gutkind in 1954.
The agnostic Jew goes on to say the Bible is a ‘collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish’.
He adds: ‘For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions.
Einstein Letter..
‘And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people.
He added: ‘As far as my experience goes, they are also no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power.
‘Otherwise I cannot see anything ‘chosen’ about them.’
Science vs the divine: Despite being agnostic, Einstein felt an ‘affinity’ to the Jewish people
The letter, written one year before the German’s death in 1955, is commonly known as ‘The God Letter’.
When it was offered by Bloomsbury Auctions in 2008 it had an estimate of just £8,000. But a bidding frenzy resulted in one anonymous person eventually paying a staggering £170,000.
The letter has been stored in a temperature-controlled vault and will be sold through LA-based Auction Cause with a starting bid of $3 million (£1.85million). However, it has been estimated the letter could fetch as much as twice this figure.
Eric Gazin, president of Auction Cause, said: ‘This letter, in my opinion, is really of historical and cultural significance as these are the personal and private thoughts of arguably the smartest man of the 20th century.
‘The letter was written near the end of his life, after a lifetime of learning and thought.’
Einstein is regarded as one of the greatest thinkers of all time.
His quotes on some subjects are provided here.
Because he was a Great Scientist does not mean that he is a Master of all Subjects and his views are Gospel!
(Like In India where Gandhi can speak on any topic and non should question it!)
I do not agree.
It is a matter of personal experience.
That’s all.
Einstein On Religion.
‘God does not play dice with the universe.” – Albert Einstein”Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” – Albert Einstein
“I want to know God’s thoughts…the rest are details.” – Albert Einstein
“I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. [He was speaking of Quantum Mechanics and the breaking down of determinism.] My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance — but for us, not for God.” – Albert Einstein ‘The Human Side’, 1954
“Subtle is the Lord, but malicious He is not.” – Albert Einstein
“Strange is our situation here upon this earth. Each of us comes for a short visit, not knowing why, yet sometimes seeming to a divine purpose.” – Albert Einstein
“There remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion.” – Albert Einstein
“Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune intoned in the distance by an invisible player.” – Albert Einstein
“Do you believe in immortality? No, and one life is enough for me.” – Albert Einstein
“Scientists were rated as great heretics by the church, but they were truly religious men because of their faith in the orderliness of the universe.” – Albert Einstein
“I do not believe that the Good Lord plays dice.” – Albert Einstein”
You may note the Contradictions, at times he seems to agree on the Existence of God , at others ambivalent!
So let’s leave him at that, thinking along for clarity>
Is the author saying that the Gay Marriage is to be sanctified by the Church?
He does not seem o believe in The Old Testament.
Stained glass at St John the Baptist’s Anglican Church http://www.stjohnsashfield.org.au, Ashfield, New South Wales. Illustrates Jesus’ description of himself “I am the Good Shepherd” (from the Gospel of John, chapter 10, verse 11). This version of the image shows the detail of his face. The memorial window is also captioned: “To the Glory of God and in Loving Memory of William Wright. Died 6th November, 1932. Aged 70 Yrs.” (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
If The Old Testament is to be questioned, The New Testament has no place , as The Old Testament is Primary.
The question of a Religion sanctifying Gay marriage does not arise.
None of the World Religions approve of Gay Relationship.
Gay relationship is not normal human behavior.
There is evidence that animals, like Chimpanzees engage themselves in Homosexual activity.
But to quote this o justify Human Gay activity as normal is incorrect.
If we were to accept this logic, we are none he better than the animals.
Religion, apart from ennobling the soul, is an instrument of Social Order.
Some behaviors in the Society are harmful to the Structure of society.
Therefore Society has called them Taboos.
People can also justify incest, by quoting Oedipus!
How absurd!
If Gay and Lesbian marriages are to be given Religious sanction, these behaviours, which are not normal, become rampant.
In a Society, an order has to be maintained.
(For further reading please read my blog on ‘Gay Marriages Legalised’
Human instinct if followed unchecked by Reason, will create problems at some stage for those who indulge in it and destabilize the Society in the long run.
Gays and Lesbians must realise that they have a problem and learn to live with it.
You can not force others to approve of it.
It is their prerogative.
Note: The Church itself is not beyond reproach, we have Gay priests, Lesbian Nuns and Paedophiles among them.
It is not to be taken as an example, but rather as a warning.
If one were to question the Origin of The Bible, the entire Bible can be discarded as the Bible was compiled by Constantine nearly 300 years after the Death of Jesus Christ.
Faith is something one should accept with heart,.
We know we can not control the Future and Death, this is Logic.
Do we accept it whole-heartedly ?
“Why do some people who would recognize gay civil unions oppose gay marriage? Certain religious groups want to deny gays the sacredeness of what they take to be a sacrament. But marriage is no sacrament.
Some of my fellow Catholics even think that “true marriage” was instituted by Christ. It wasn’t. Marriage is prescribed in Eden by YHWH (Yahweh) at Genesis 2.24: man and wife shall “become one flesh.” When Jesus is asked about marriage, he simply quotes that passage from Genesis (Mark 10.8). He nowhere claims to be laying a new foundation for a “Christian marriage” to replace the Yahwist institution.
Some try to make the wedding at Cana (John 1.1-11) somehow sacramental because Jesus worked his first miracle there. But that was clearly a Jewish wedding, like any other Jesus might have attended, and the miracle, by its superabundance of wine, is meant to show the disciples that the Messianic time has come. The great Johannine scholar Father Raymond Brown emphasizes this, and concludes of the passage: “Neither the external nor the internal evidence for a symbolic reference to matrimony is strong. The wedding is only the backdrop and occasion for the story, and the joining of the man and woman does not have any direct role in the narrative.”
The early church had no specific rite for marriage. This was left up to the secular authorities of the Roman Empire, since marriage is a legal concern for the legitimacy of heirs. When the Empire became Christian under Constantine, Christian emperors continued the imperial control of marriage, as the Code of Justinian makes clear. When the Empire faltered in the West, church courts took up the role of legal adjudicator of valid marriages. But there was still no special religious meaning to the institution. As the best scholar of sacramental history, Joseph Martos, puts it: “Before the eleventh century there was no such thing as a Christian wedding ceremony in the Latin church, and throughout the Middle Ages there was no single church ritual for solemnizing marriage between Christians.”
Only in the twelfth century was a claim made for some supernatural favor (grace) bestowed on marriage as a sacrament. By the next century marriage had been added to the biblically sacred number of seven sacraments. Since Thomas Aquinas argued that the spouses’ consent is the efficient cause of marriage and the seal of intercourse was the final cause, it is hard to see what a priest’s blessing could add to the reality of the bond. And bad effects followed. This sacralizing of the natural reality led to a demoting of Yahwist marriage, the only kind Jesus recognized, as inferior to “true marriage” in a church.
In the 1930s, my parents had a civil marriage, but my Catholic mother did not think she was truly married if not by a priest. My non-Catholic father went along with a church wedding (but in the sacristy, not the sanctuary) by promising to raise his children as Catholic. My mother thought she had received the sacrament, but had she? Since mutual consent is the essence of marriage, one would think that the sacrament would have to be bestowed on both partners; but my non-Catholic father could not receive the sacrament. Later, when my father left and married another, my mother was told she could not remarry because she was still married to my father in the “true marriage.” When he returned to my mother, and became a Catholic, a priest performed again the sacramental marriage. Since my father’s intervening marriage was “outside the church,” it did not count. What nonsense.
Those who do not want to let gay partners have the sacredness of sacramental marriage are relying on a Scholastic fiction of the thirteenth century to play with people’s lives, as the church has done ever since the time of Aquinas. The myth of the sacrament should not let people deprive gays of the right to natural marriage, whether blessed by Yahweh or not. They surely do not need—since no one does—the blessing of Saint Thomas.”
Genesis 2:23-24 The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones,
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man,”
For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother,
and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.
Genesis 3:16 To the woman he said,
“I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
with pain you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you.”
1 Corinthians 13:1-13 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels,
but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.
If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge,
and if I have a faith that can move mountains,
but have not love, I am nothing.
If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames,
but have not love, I gain nothing.
Love is patient,
love is kind.
It does not envy,
it does not boast,
it is not proud.
It is not rude,
it is not self-seeking,
it is not easily angered,
it keeps no record of wrongs.
Love does not delight in evil
but rejoices with the truth.
It always protects,
always trusts,
always hopes,
always perseveres.
Love never fails.
But where there are prophecies,
they will cease;
where there are tongues,
they will be stilled;
where there is knowledge,
it will pass away.
For we know in part and we prophesy in part,
but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.
When I was a child, I talked like a child,
I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child.
When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.
Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror;
then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully,
even as I am fully known.
And now these three remain: faith, hope and love.
But the greatest of these is love.
1 Corinthians 7:3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband.
You must be logged in to post a comment.