© 1999 VNN
|
EDITORIAL January 3, 2000 VNN5209 Comment on this story Year 2000? BY RAGHUNATHA ANUDASA EDITORIAL, Jan 3 (VNN) — A guru-kuli posted this on the conference. Wanted to know if any devotees had other insight to this-astrological etc. Raghunatha anudasa Hi All, I would like to present the following information merely as a curiosity for those who are interested. My source for all of this is a book called "Asimov's Guide to the Bible: New Testament". It is a very scholarly work and brings together information from many different sources. Matthew 2:1... "Jesus was born ... in the days of Herod the king ..." "The birth of Jesus during the reign of Herod raises an interesting point in chronology. The Romans dated events from the year in which, according to legend, the city of Rome had been founded. That year was 1 A.U.C., where the initials stand for "ab urbe condita" ("from the founding of the city"). According to this scheme, Pompey took Jerusalem in the year 690 A.U.C." "Unfortunately, however, none of the gospels date the birth of Jesus according to this scheme or, for that matter, according to one of the other schemes used in the Bible..." "... Matthew simply says "in the days of Herod the king" and anything closer must be worked out by deduction." "Some five hundred years after the time of Jesus, such deductions were made by a scholarly theologian and astronomer named Dionysius Exiguus, who lived in Rome. He maintained that Jesus had been born in 753 A.U.C., and this date for Jesus' birth was widely accepted." "... It became customary to count the years from the birth of Jesus. That year was A.D. 1, or "Anno Domini" ("the year of our Lord")." "... The entire system of dating used... follows this "Christian Era" or "Dionysian Era" in which A.D. 1 is equated with 753 A.U.C." "... From sources outside the Bible it is quite clear that Herod ascended the throne in 716 A.U.C., that is, 37 B.C. He reigned for thirty-three years, dying in 749 A.U.C. or 4 B.C." "But if that is so, it is impossible for Jesus to have been born in 753 A.U.C. and still have been born "in the days of Herod the king," since Herod had died four years before. If Jesus were born in the time of Herod then he must have been born no later than 4 B.C. (four years "before Christ", which certainly seems paradoxical)." "And even this is merely the latest he could have been born by that verse in Matthew. He could well have been born earlier, and some have suggested dates even as early as 17 B.C." So the second millenium in the "Dionysian Era" ends at the *end* of the year 2000 (N.B. the accepted year for the birth of Jesus is the year A.D. 1). However the second millenium since the birth of Jesus has already passed. I hope this simultaneously clarified and added to the confusion. ;-) Oh, and BTW, we celebrated the new year on Divali November 7. That was the beginning of the year 5,102 since the start of Kali Yuga. By our figuring, the one to worry about is the Y432K bug (also known as Kalki). Take care all, Adam About the Author  Other Stories by this AuthorComment on this story Contact VNN about this storySend this story to a friend
NEWS DESK | EDITORIALS | TOP |
