Latest Updates

Dating free

Explore dating site and enjoy a global online dating website that offers real adventure.

Online Dating

One of the most popular free dating sites.

Dating in France

Free online dating with profile search and messaging.

Dating in Germany

Dating With Over 110000 Members

Dating love

Welcome to the fastest growing FREE dating site!

Let's get started

In ac libero urna. Suspendisse sed odio ut mi auctor blandit. Duis luctus nulla metus.

Dating my daughter version 015

Dating my daughter version 015

But the main reason historians have accepted the 13 March, 4 B. He said that Herod had a reign of 37 years from the time he was proclaimed king by the Romans and 34 years from the death of Antigonus which occurred after Herod captured Jerusalem.

The nearest eclipse was that of 13 March, 4 B. Since astronomical data are such powerful evidences, many scholars within the last hundred years have felt it necessary to stretch the chronological statements of Josephus to make them fit the time of this eclipse. This is why professors Vermes and Millar acknowledged that Josephus reckoned one year too many.

To mend the disparity, it is assumed that Josephus has adopted a scheme of reckoning parts of one year only the first few days of a year as answering in a legal sense to a whole year. Not everyone, however, buys this explanation.

Professor Barnes will not accept the eclipse of 13 March, 4 B. But this is not so. I have shown previously in this book that David W. These disparities have allowed scholars in the past to accept the eclipse of 13 March, 4 B. They felt justified in stretching the historical records almost beyond recognition to make them fit their chronological interpretations.

But the public has a right to know the facts involving the historical circumstances concerning this important period of time. If scholars would simply state that their appraisals are mere possibilities among other explanations, then their guessing might be acceptable as conjectures to explain the difficulties. But more often than not, this is the time when scholars express their blatant dogmatisms. They do this in spite of the fact that classical historians state that the period from 6 B.

This is where the difficulty arises in evaluating historical events of this obscure period. Still, utter dogmatism prevails. The theologians who make their dogmatic assumptions that they expect the general public to accept have thrown caution to the wind.

It is now time to bring these problems out into the open for all to evaluate. Thankfully, it is gratifying to see that some scholars are now beginning to recognize that their past assumptions are not compatible with the facts of history. This is a welcome trend. When finally all professionals seriously join the quest to attempt to sort out the truth, I have not the slightest doubt that it will be seen that Herod died not long after an eclipse of the Moon on 10 January, 1 B.

The Anomalies of Josephus Josephus is not an easy author to understand relative to his chronological statements regarding earlier historical events of which he was not an eyewitness.

As mentioned in an earlier chapter, besides the clear editing that has happened in the manuscripts that make many of his chronological indications suspect, even the text of Josephus that can be reasonably trusted as being unedited is at times inconsistent in his chronological information.

For certain periods he avoids giving any chronological details at all, often at the very times when the modern historian needs them the most. No one knows why these discrepancies exist in Josephus, but they are there. During the first years of Herod, he buttressed his history with known and reliable chronological eras of time.

He did not resume his normal international cross-references until the tenth year of Archelaus son of Herod in C. From then until the Jewish War of C. This is a mystery. The fact is, some of the most important events in Palestinian history were occurring during that period: For these events, there is not one cross-reference to the Olympiads, the Battle of Actium, or other international benchmarks.

This lack gives the historian a great deal of difficulty in precisely dating the events. Harmonizing the Chronological Difficulties Let us now look at some possible reasons why Josephus in the period of Herod treated chronological matters in the way he did. Josephus tells us that Herod died after a reign of 37 years from the time he was made king by the Romans and 34 years from the death of Antigonus.

On the surface scholars think this leads us to the year 3 B. But other historical data I will show in this book will not allow either 4 or 3 B. I give historical information in Appendix Four that shows the sequence of Sabbatical Years for our period under discussion.

Without doubt, the evidence indicates that Herod captured Jerusalem in the Sabbatical Year ending in late summer of 36 B. As a matter of fact, Antigonus could have been killed a few months after Herod captured Jerusalem in 36 B.

Yet there are problems with these appraisals. The Suggestions of W. Filmer An ingenious solution has been offered. His suggestions can be summarized as follows: This brings us to 3 B. But this is one year beyond the 13 March, 4 B. Most scholars today have failed to take this disparity into account.

This is not the case with Professors Vermes and Millar. The acceptance of that eclipse as the proper one has forced scholars to bend the rules in several ways. That is why that early eclipse deserves no protection. Look at what the retention of this wrong eclipse has done. To accommodate the eclipse of 4 B. This means they are willing to allow a mere two or three days of Nisan in 4 B. Filmer, however, has given good evidence to show that Josephus did not count his years in this inclusive manner.

Furthermore, Filmer also showed reasons that the capture of Jerusalem by Herod was not in 37 B. Filmer showed several reasons for this. Two of them involved sacred seasons of the Jews. When such seasons are mentioned in the historical sources, a greater amount of credibility can be given to the chronological statements in the records because the Jewish authorities would have long remembered important events that occurred on their holy days or sacred seasons.

It was not uncommon for the general populace to place theological or prophetical significance to such occasions. So, what were the two sacred seasons that happened when Herod finally captured Jerusalem? Modern studies of Wacholder and others clearly demonstrate that 36 B.

And, Professor Marcus in his notes to the Loeb edition of Josephus shows that there are very good reasons for believing that the Sabbatical Year under discussion was to be reckoned from October, 37 B. Herod would have captured Jerusalem at the end of that sacred period. And there is one other historical reference involving a Jewish sacred day that substantiates this conclusion even more. E, as a beginning benchmark. This is because Sabbatical Years stood out very remarkably to Jews who lived in Palestine at the time.

This was a time when food was in short supply and when the whole of agricultural activity ceased. When a major event like Herod capturing Jerusalem took place in a, Sabbatical Year, that would have been long remembered. This was especially so because his capture was also on the Day of Atonement. Actually, though, Josephus got even more precise than simply the time Herod captured Jerusalem.

It must be remembered that all priestly years were reckoned from Nisan and not from the autumn month of Tishri. The Hasmoneans who ruled Judaea before Herod and whom Herod succeeded were of priestly origin. It became common under their priestly rule for the kings in Jerusalem to reckon their years from Nisan and not from Tishri.

In the Talmud, the later Jews understood this fact and stated that the later kings of Judah were accustomed to the Nisan to Nisan reckoning. The Jewish people would have long remembered that Sabbatical Year and the holy day season regarding the taking of Jerusalem by Herod. Pressing the siege especially at the very end of a Sabbatical Year and on the Day of Atonement would have made Herod an abominable character as far as the Jews were concerned, and they would never have forgotten the outrage.

Even Josephus remembered it well and he stated that it was precisely 27 years to the day that Pompey previously committed his abominations. There is even more evidence of this. Antipas was deposed by Caligula in C. This evidence also leads one back to 4 B.

The fact that these two sons of Herod Archelaus and Antipas seem to be reigning in 4 B. If Herod died in early 1 B. I have shown how David W. Beyer has made it clear that the early manuscripts of Josephus show Philip to have started his 37 years of rule in 1 B.

But why do the other two sons of Herod seemingly show 4 B. There are historical reasons why this happened. And once they are understood, it shows that Filmer is right after all in his solutions to the problem.

He took over the position from Saturninus. Saturninus was governor the previous two years from early 4 B. Varus had also been governor the first time before the rule of Saturninus from 7 or 6 B. Herod sent a part of his army to Arabia to put an end to the activities of robbers who were hiding in the area and to collect a major debt that was owed him by the Arabian ruler.

And though the governors of Syria had given Herod permission for the action, Augustus was misinformed by Syliaeus the Arabian about the whole affair.

Augustus responded by sending a stinging rebuke to Herod. It had very serious political implications attached to it. To be a friend of Caesar was a title amici Caesaris which was awarded to special individuals by the Roman government to show a close political relationship to the emperor.

So pleased was Herod of Chalcis to have the designation that he had the title stamped on the coins of his realm. But Herod took it even more so.

Obviously, Antipater could not have assumed such authority by himself and Herod was also unable to bestow these honors on any of his sons unless Augustus gave permission.


Dating my daughter version 015

Indeed, at Beirut Augustus ordered a whole battery of important people to judge the case: MrDots v0. Ideas are always flowing whenever we create each update and some of them are just too good not to include. They were considered legal heirs to kingship, Dating my daughter version 015. But what happened to the two Hasmonean sons? Royal descent was looked on as important. Even Dating my daughter version 015 saw the importance of the Hasmoneans in his own time of rulership. Varus had also been governor the first time before the rule of Saturninus from 7 or 6 B. Herod the Great was a commoner. It should also be mentioned that Agrippa I was awarded the government over Palestine by Caligula in C.