Year of Crucifixion

[CatholicTimmy]

Hi everyone, I am new, but I was wondering about something I found that talks about what years Jesus was baptized and crucified, saying that he would have been baptized in 27 A.D. and Crucified in 36 A.D.

The Gospel of Luke (3:1, 23) states that Jesus was about thirty years old at the time of his baptism by John, and this was after the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius (as calculated in Syria) – A.D. 27. But he was baptized not long before John the Baptist was executed, and after John’s death the Gospel of Matthew (14:13) describes Jesus as seeking refuge in the desert, perhaps fearing for his own life. What then was the date of the execution? It could not have been A.D. 27, for Matthew and Mark report that John the Baptist was arrested by Herod Antipas for criticizing his marriage to Herodias – the wife of his brother, whom she had divorced – a marriage outlawed by Jewish law and also by one of the texts of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Temple Scroll. Following this public criticism, John was executed. So far as can be ascertained, the marriage of Herod Antipas and Herodias took place in A.D. 35. Hence, John the Baptist was executed in A.D. 35. So Jesus must still have been alive at this time.

The last Passover attended by Pilate was A.D. 36. In other words, since Jesus is said in the Gospels to have been executed after John the Baptist’s death and by the decision of Pilate, it must have been the Passover of A.D. 36 during which Jesus was crucified. This is later than most experts have placed the event, but if Jesus was born at the time of the census in A.D. 6, as stated by Luke (2:2), and if he was aged about thirty, A.D. 36 is just about the right time of the crucifixion

The Pilate was the governor of Judea from 26 to 36 A.D., and Jesus was crucified in 36 A.D. John the Baptist was executed by Herod Antipas in 35 A.D. because he criticized his martial practices.

Could this be right? Could Jesus have actually have had a 9 year ministry, or are this guy’s facts wrong?

Thanks,
John

 

[Mumbles140]

I won’t attempt to venture into the facts, but think of it in 2 ways. First, and this is debatable, but there aren’t exactly nailed-down dates for those events, so using one estimate as a frame of reference for another estimate isn’t exactly ‘sturdy’.

The second point, which I find most compelling, is the idea that Christ would have been born in 6 A.D. A.D. means ‘Anno Domini’ - the Year of the Lord. Christ’s birth marks the transition from B.C. (before Christ) to A.D. (the Year of the Lord). So, why would the Lord be born in the 6th year of the Lord, when the time before that would have also been ‘before Christ’?

This isn’t something I have looked into greatly, but hopefuly this gives you something to consider

 

[Barbkw]

In the Star of Bethlehem documentary, he used a NASA computer program based on Kepler’s Laws of Planetary Motion, St. Peter’s first sermon after Pentecost and on the floating date of the Passover landing on a Saturday (Passover is based off the lunar calendar).

According to the documentary, the only date that coincides with those three factors is:

April 3, 33.

bethlehemstar.net/

usccb.org/nab/bible/exodus/exodus12.htm

Exodus 12

1 "This month shall stand at the head of your calendar; you shall reckon it the first month of the year. Tell the whole community of Israel: On the tenth of this month every one of your families must procure for itself a lamb, one apiece for each household…

You shall keep it until the fourteenth day of this month, and then, with the whole assembly of Israel present, it shall be slaughtered during the evening twilight.

1 [2] This month: Abib, the month of “ripe grain.” Cf Exodus 13:4; 23:15; 34:18; Deut 16:1. It occurred near the vernal equinox, March-April. Later it was known by the Babylonian name of Nisan. Cf Nehemiah 2:1; Esther 5:7.

2 [4] Share in the lamb: probably, in the expenses of its purchase. Some explain, “reckon for the lamb the number of persons required to eat it.” Cf Exodus 12:10.

3 [11] Passover: in Hebrew, pesach, in Aramaic, pascha. In the following verses the same root is used in the verb “to pass over.” The word may be originally Egyptian, pesach, “the blow,” i.e., the final plague which destroyed the Egyptian first-born.

 

[Big_Ro]

I won’t attempt to venture into the facts, but think of it in 2 ways. First, and this is debatable, but there aren’t exactly nailed-down dates for those events, so using one estimate as a frame of reference for another estimate isn’t exactly ‘sturdy’.

The second point, which I find most compelling, is the idea that Christ would have been born in 6 A.D. A.D. means ‘Anno Domini’ - the Year of the Lord. Christ’s birth marks the transition from B.C. (before Christ) to A.D. (the Year of the Lord). So, why would the Lord be born in the 6th year of the Lord, when the time before that would have also been ‘before Christ’?

This isn’t something I have looked into greatly, but hopefuly this gives you something to consider

I don’t remember where I heard it or read it, but it seems like I remember something about a miscalculation when they switched to the Gregorian caendar.

 

[steve53]

Hi everyone, I am new, but I was wondering about something I found that talks about what years Jesus was baptized and crucified, saying that he would have been baptized in 27 A.D. and Crucified in 36 A.D.

Could this be right? Could Jesus have actually have had a 9 year ministry, or are this guy’s facts wrong?

Thanks,
John

This guy is absolutely right.
He must have read Hagan’s “Year of the Passover”, which reaches the same conclusion, but with 500 pages and several other lines of evidence.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

. . .

The second point, which I find most compelling, is the idea that Christ would have been born in 6 A.D. A.D. means ‘Anno Domini’ - the Year of the Lord. Christ’s birth marks the transition from B.C. (before Christ) to A.D. (the Year of the Lord). So, why would the Lord be born in the 6th year of the Lord, when the time before that would have also been ‘before Christ’? . . .

I recall reading several years ago that the A.D. calculation was made in the time of Charlemagne. The calculation was doubtful; so the calculator chose the one that put Charlemagne’s coronation as emperor in 800 AD.

Herod died in 4 BC; so Jesus was definitely born before that.

 

[MaryandJoseph]

Is it just curiosity that leads you to wonder this?

Like the exact date of Christmas, its not important so much When it happened, just that it DID happen…

God Bless

 

[Danno2281]

I recall reading several years ago that the A.D. calculation was made in the time of Charlemagne. The calculation was doubtful; so the calculator chose the one that put Charlemagne’s coronation as emperor in 800 AD.

Herod died in 4 BC; so Jesus was definitely born before that.

The calculation was made in the early 6th century by a monk from Scythia called Denis the little (exiguus). There have been many attempts both to discredit his calculations and to support them. Herod’s death in 4 BC is not absolutely certain. It has been found, for example, that Josephus was frequently inexact in terms of dates. Cases can be made for both 30 & 33 for the crucifixion, not the least of which is the destruction of the 2nd temple. The 1st was destroyed 40 yrs after the spilling of the innocent blood by Manassah, the reason that God permitted the temple to be destroyed (2Kgs.24:3-4) The 2nd 40 yrs after the spilling of the blood of the Innocent One (“I have betrayed innocent blood,” cried Judas). Or perhaps that is just wanting too nicely tied a package. There are a great number of variables and we can only make educated guesses.