Day of Jesus’ crucifixion nailed down. Is all a bit shaky.

Quake Reveals Day of Jesus’ Crucifixion : Discovery News.

Jesus, as described in the New Testament, was most likely crucified on Friday April 3, 33 A.D.

The latest investigation, reported in the journal International Geology Review, focused on earthquake activity at the Dead Sea, located 13 miles from Jerusalem. The Gospel of Matthew, Chapter 27, mentions that an earthquake coincided with the crucifixion:

β€œAnd 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, the rocks split and the tombs broke open.”

Along with other evidence that narrows down the time frame, a handful of possible dates result, with Friday April 3, 33 A.D. being the best match, according to the researchers.

Tip: Strange Times

Uhmmm… The primary problem with this whole scenario is that they rely on a literal interpretation of the Bible. The whole thing is a bit of “house of cards” after that. I’m not buying this at all.

  18 comments for “Day of Jesus’ crucifixion nailed down. Is all a bit shaky.

  1. May 25, 2012 at 6:58 PM

    The four canonical gospels disagree as to when the supposed crucifiction occurred.

    These clowns don’t possess basic bible literacy and somehow I have doubts about their status as geologists.

  2. F89
    May 25, 2012 at 7:39 PM

    Nice headline pun….Always look on the bright side of life.

  3. Daran
    May 25, 2012 at 8:15 PM

    A literal interpretation of the Bible is the only way to go.
    God says what he means and means what He says πŸ™‚
    The Bible is more believable than the fairy story of evolution.

  4. May 25, 2012 at 8:33 PM

    Sorry Daran. We do not subscribe to a literal interpretation of the Bible. It’s a book, nothing more. Nothing supernatural.

  5. F89
    May 25, 2012 at 8:36 PM

    Daran-The Bible is the “word of God” written down, translated, and edited…BY MAN. It has been edited, expurgated, and changed to suit the political and social tastes of the times.
    And if it is so..which one is the “Literal Word?” The King James? The English or American standard?
    See why a lot of us have a problem taking it literally?

  6. Massachusetts
    May 25, 2012 at 9:21 PM

    Not to mention the part in the old testament where Moses orders his men to kill all the women and children in a village, and executes the men who refuse. That passage isn’t read much, and it’s often interpreted allegorically when it is, but literally? No thank you.

  7. Massachusetts
    May 25, 2012 at 9:27 PM

    Here’s the specific passage. Most disturbing. It’s highlighted but I believe it’s right out of King James:

    http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/num/31.html

  8. Madmanintheattic
    May 26, 2012 at 2:29 AM

    I’m just thinking that before one settles on the date of the crusifixion, one might come up with some evidence that this particular Holy (cheese) Doodle actually existed. There have been almost twenty crucified saviours in various religions through history including the story of Joshua (variant of Jesus) in the Old Testament. The story of the crucifixion is MYTHOLOGY which has been taken literally by people scared S***less by psychopath, baby-raping priests talking about hell and damnation.

    Crucifixion date? Good Joke!

  9. Madmanintheattic
    May 26, 2012 at 2:33 AM

    Hey Daran,
    I especially like the Biblical Commandments we can distill from the Old Testament. 1-Kill the men; 2-Rape the women; 3-enslave the children; 4-Burn the village; 6-Steal the food stores and livestock; 7-Poison the well; 8-Salt the fields; 9-In the Name of God; 10-Feel really good about yourself because you were just taking orders. Who else said that, by the way?

  10. PeteChapman
    May 26, 2012 at 8:56 AM

    So wouldn’t the test on this date be to line it up against the date of Passover in the Jewish calendar? It’s probably the most easily obtainable date in the entire book and all they’d have to do is ask a rabbi. That might narrow it down a bit provided of course that it ever happened or that J.C. really was 33 at the time of his “death”.

  11. May 26, 2012 at 10:23 AM

    “Clowns”, not helpful.

  12. May 26, 2012 at 10:27 AM

    The point of this article was not to bust on Christianity. I won’t allow that to continue in the comments. It was to show there is no basis to the claim they are making in a scientific journal.

    People can subscribe to whatever faith they wish, it is just when it crosses over to science and claims put out there as having a basis in reality that I feel it is appropriate to call those claims out.

    I’d like to keep to facts and reasonable discourse, not telling people to go to hell.

  13. May 26, 2012 at 11:01 AM

    Sorry, I’m used to sites where that would have almost been considered a compliment. I’ll do better.

  14. May 26, 2012 at 11:08 AM

    I understand. πŸ™‚

  15. Massachusetts
    May 26, 2012 at 11:14 AM

    Good point! We should all try to respect each other’s beliefs, for sure.

  16. Massachusetts
    May 26, 2012 at 11:25 AM

    We should also remember a quote from the original article lest we judge these researchers too harshly:

    “Scientists acknowledge that natural events described in the Bible could be allegorical.”

  17. May 26, 2012 at 4:54 PM

    Commentators: Please note. Proselytizing about Christianity is not allowed on this site. That’s why your comments are not being shown.

    If you wish to talk about religion in terms of your personal experiences, the rest of the web is available. Not here. Sorry.

  18. LedHead4Life
    May 30, 2012 at 7:16 PM

    I’ve always believed that much of the Bible-mostly the Old Testament-was not to be taken literally. Some of the stories maybe never even happened; God didn’t appear to some prophets and scribes to say, “Hey document this event that happened a long time ago-.” The stories in the Bible themselves were not necessarily what God wanted us to learn- most of it was the lessons learned and the metaphorical symbolism that the Lord wanted us to see. Its not the story; its the moral of the story that is the “true” word of God.

    Sorry for talking about my personal religion, but in this case I found it relevant enough to be acceptable. These geologists take some passages in the Bible quite literally; maybe the earth shaking was meant to explain or picture how the death of Jesus impacted the world. Its all interpretation for me.

    Block if you wish, but I found it pertinent to the article.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *